Duhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.................
Ya DON’T vote for the Muslim.
Ya DON’T divert a vote so that the Muslim wins.
Now, is that so hard?
This author presents a straw man argument with a false choice between radical liberal Barack Obama, and strong conservative Mitt Romney, who, except for being Mormon, would be acceptable to reasonable people.
I have never rejected Mitt Romney because he is Mormon. I know some who have that as one of the points against Romney, but they are not the majority.
I can't vote for Romney because I don't believe in his pro-life transformation, especially after he RECENTLY came out in favor of abortion in cases of "health" of the mother in ADDITION TO "life" of the mother. A headache is a "health" issue. Terminal cancer treatment is a "life" issue.
Nor do I like that he came out in April in favor of gay couples, and gay couples being able to adopt, and gay leaders able to guide Boy Scout troops, and gay citizens being able to openly practice in the military.
Nor did I support his statement that bi-partisan gun legislation is the kind of gun legislation he likes.
Now, I really don't like coming to this discussion any more. I do believe that I have both a very dangerous enemy and a lesser dangerous enemy. I am content to fire away at Obama and withhold fire from Romney until after the election. He, too, even though my enemy, is firing at my greater enemy, Barack Obama.
I'll renew my attacks on Romney after the election. However, he will not receive my vote. I will not vote for my enemy, any more than Churchill would have put Stalin on his personal staff, any more than Bush would have given command of US forces Afghanistan to Mullah Omar while Bush was concentrating on Saddam and Iraq.
I proudly support and will vote for Tom Hoefling, a pro-life conservative.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2942748/posts
Mittens, at best is “ehhh...”, but the alternative (and that includes those that live in Candyland with dreams of Virgil Goode or Gary Johnson or the Great Pumpkin winning the presidency), another Obama term will the the official end of the USA. Think CA on a national level.
ABC News scrambles to downplay Obama’s attendance at VP debate moderator’s wedding
Posted By Josh Peterson On 12:10 AM 10/10/2012 @ 12:10 AM In DC Exclusives,DC Exclusives - Original Reporting,Elections,Politics | No Comments
President Barack Obama was a guest at the 1991 wedding of ABC senior foreign correspondent and vice presidential debate moderator Martha Raddatz, The Daily Caller has learned. Obama and groom Julius Genachowski, whom Obama would later tap to head the Federal Communications Commission, were Harvard Law School classmates at the time and members of the Harvard Law Review.
After TheDC made preliminary inquiries Monday to confirm Obama’s attendance at the wedding, ABC leaked a pre-emptive statement to news outlets including Politico and The Daily Beast Tuesday, revealing what may have been internal network pressure felt just days before Raddatz was scheduled to moderate the one and only vice-presidential debate Thursday night....
Mormons have the same concept of right and wrong as Christians and Jews. Liberals-socialists-communists-Marxists believe that the end justifies the means.
A couple of the most active pro-Obama trolls were up late last night on spreading hate and discontent on other threads and obviously haven’t seen this one yet. I expect some major new fireworks starting as the noise from their parents getting ready for work rouses them from their restful slumber.
No true Christian would have to spend a nano second to consider this question.
True, then you say voting for anyone but Romney helps obama win
Wouldn't it just be easy to say I'll tell you what to do, don't follow your convictions.
(the answer being Romney, obviously)
All God fearing Americans should realize it’s a duty to oust OBOZO. If course Romney is not exactly what we wanted, but Obama has got-to-go
Sins of omissions are still sins. By your action evil may prosper. You can explain yourself to God one day, however you will no longer be able to claim you were unaware of what you were doing.