Please Mitt, go crawl off somewhere and do not show your two-faced lying liberal a$$ again.
Posted on 12/03/2012 10:26:14 AM PST by Colofornian
You argue like a damn lib or a disgruntled divorcée.... you are being very foolish and exposing yourself. I don’t put any bumper stickers on my vehicles...
Keep it up and I might convert to Mormonism. LOL @ you.
I’ll bet the boat I do own is bigger and faster than any boat that you have... and, it’s caught a lot of fish.... mostly King salmon and Coho salmon. I hope to get into the Halibut this next year.
After a two month stay in a hospital because of heart surgery, a stroke during surgery and contracting MRSA, my Bride and I lived on her for a month while cruising the San Juan Islands... yep, it’s a good life.
Cheers....
#1...anybody with a name of "Combat boots" realizes that opposition occurs internally as well as externally...and that it's not always a "bad thing"...(political primaries, for example)
#2...We are at a pivotal point here...Conservatism almost permanently lost its position of influence by all the catering that went on to RINOism in 2012. Pro-abortion catering. Big govt. catering. Suppressing the truth of Romney's track record; his personal stances; his ongoing flip flops. All in the name of that Dem guy is worse...as if we wanted the GoP to be Democratics Lite.
Truth is truth to truth-tellers.
To spinmeisters, truth is either bashing -- or as you put it, ripping.
The idea is NOT to "rip" posters themselves; the idea that RINO ideas -- and accompanying RINO apologetics aren't worth the effort we see put forth on this thread: As Ansel12 framed it well in post #154: The election is over, you don’t have to keep promoting the liberal, pro-abortion, gays in the military, homosexual scout leaders, anti-gun, Obamacare, Mitt Romney any more.
There is no political reason anymore for supporting Romney. An ABO claim carries zero weight post-election. (That's what political relativism is...quite seasonal...that's what pragmatism as an ethical embracement is...quite seasonal...)
We've moved on to another season: 'Tis overdue for RINO apologists to put their spinmeistering weapons down, or retreat from FR. Because, if not, they will be called on it.
My point is simple, nonetheless. I agree with everything you say. I disagree with having at the other person and hurling insults. When I said ‘ripping,’ I specifically meant into the other person.
The election’s over. RINOs are coming after conservatives. Personally, I’m done with the Republicans and am an enemy of the Dhimsheviks. I’m not done with FReeperdom, though.
The country’s living on fumes. We’re through. DC’s a wasteland of corruption and infiltration by the Ikhwan. Either we are at the point of ‘every man for himself’ or we, as conservatives, band together where and when we can. We’re the last men standing, so make a hole; here comes a Marine.
Oh, and God bless Israel and all who protect and defend her. Get ‘em, guys.
Even beyond wealthy people in CA, will have at some point, start packing.
Well, I'm in full agreement with what you say here.
As a long-time GoP, I said I was "done" with them as of last April.
We are running on fumes...
And we do need to coalesce where possible...
What you see here is kind of like what happened in the early church when the govt leaders' martyrdom of Christians eased up a bit...
Some, rather than facing martyrdom, confessed to various gods than THE God.
These were referenced as the "lapsed" ... and some Christian leaders favored re-accepting them into fellowship upon repentance; others said "no" ... they had denied the Lord (some repeatedly) before men...
I think, yes, let's accept "lapsed conservatives" back into whatever's left of "the fold"...but it'd sure be nice to see some sort of change of mind about RINOism...at least, not see RiNO apologetics in action!
Please remove me from your ping list, as after today, I have no interest in anything you have to say.
Zealot’s aside, nobody is perfect, I don’t believe Mitt was in favor of leaving live babies alive to subsequently die in a trash can.
Sure Mitt isn’t perfect but he certainly doesn’t qualify as Evil as Obama does.
We had 2 candidates for whom to vote. Not voting for Mitt in any way shape or form was a vote for Evil, directly or indirectly.
If Romney supports abortion, faggotry, the destruction of the nuclear family, and depriving citizens of their Natural Right to bear arms and is considered “too decent for the times”..................just imagine the depravity of who is saying it.
You are not on any of my normal "ping lists."
You were included in responses on THIS thread only because you chose -- of your own volition -- to repeatedly comment on it.
If you so choose to not further comment on any thread I post, that, too is your choice.
Just like it is my choice to respond to your general tenor of your comments on this thread...since it is, after all, a free-flowing forum...vs. one where you might be tempted to think you can come on and just eventually make hit & run comments without getting any pushback.
Therefore, if you wish to excuse yourself from this thread, please follow your inclination.
And then I'll refrain from further pinging you on this thread.
I see Mitt as the last, truly vanilla man to run for POTUS.. Warts and all. He tried to live in the sewers of current politics and made some compromises on his principles. But the man himself is as clean as a whistle. No one could find fault. He really is a nice guy.
But no one wants a nice guy being President anymore. The days of searching for a Ronald Reagan are over, and we asre about to go dark, in the sense of outright evil.
I have great compassion for the man, and yes, I think the election was absolutely stolen. He was up against murderers, who almost got his wife, remember. What is worse, I think he knows the level of corruption and sabotage displayed.
Then again, we cannot continue to kill innocents without expecting God to remove His Almighty Hand of Protection and Grace.
I grieve for my country and have since 2008. These people at the top are monsters. Monsters. The entire country is a FEMA camp.
Please Mitt, go crawl off somewhere and do not show your two-faced lying liberal a$$ again.
Or maybe like any loving, devoted wife who's seen her husband pour everything he had into running for the Presidency a second time, only to fail - is devastated for him.
Who knows. I say leave them be in peace.
Listen...Mitt is a highly intelligent man (who lacks a LOT of discernment)...
...who was "steeled" vs. rejection from all the rejection he got as a Mormon missionary in France...and hence, had a higher level of endurance than your average person...
...And, of course, he's "nice"...any temple Mormon (15-20% of all Lds) are truly auditioning for full-blown "godhood"...so, yeah, "niceness" seems to be one of those "qualifiers"...
He's also an experienced businessman-gov who simply tried to apply some of those same executive moves to the White House.
But no, I don't believe that "compromising on principles" and "clean as a whistle" are mutually exclusive terms. One ventures into the other...
His mom running for Senate as a pro-abort made an impact on him personally...and hence, he came out as a pro-abort politically from the jump-start...it wasn't like Massachusetts politics, being what they are, imposed that on him.
The reason we know how "Committed" Mitt was to abortion in 1994 is his then use of the word "sustain":
"I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country. I have since the time when my Mom took that position when she ran in 1970 as a U.S. Senate candidate. I believe that since Roe v. Wade has been the law for 20 years that we should SUSTAIN and support it, and I SUSTAIN and support that law and the right of a woman to make that choice." (October, 1994 Senatorial debate vs. Ted Kennedy)
Now when an upstanding Mormon uses the term "sustain" he is using one of the most serious & solemn words of support that is even contained in the normal "currency" within the Lds vocabulary. Note this comment from a Mormon who actually took issue with Mitt's past commitment to abortion:
”In the LDS context 'sustain' has a very special meaning. Whenever someone in a congregation gets a new responsibility (a calling), their names are presented in our sacrament meeting along with what they are being asked to do. This is usually presented to the congregation by a member of the local leadership as follows: 'Brother Jones has been asked to serve as the 15 and 16 year-old Sunday School teacher. All that can sustain him in this calling please show by the uplifted hand.' At this point members of the congregation who sustain the calling raise their right hand. The leader than says 'any opposed may manifest it', and anyone who opposes the calling may raise their hand. To me this is one of the greatest things about the Mormon experience, that when we are asked to do something in our local congregation, we can look around us and see that the people around us know what we are being asked to do, and are showing a willingness to help and support us. It is an exceptional sense of community, especially considering that at the local and regional levels there is no paid clergy. Since as a rule everyone has some responsibility in the congregation, and those responsibilities change sometimes every 2-3 years, sometimes more frequently, there is a very egalitarian aspect to how local congregations are run. We are also taught that once we sustain someone we should do all we can to help someone in their calling, and not needlessly tear them down....Everyone in the Church from the highest ranked ecclesiastical official on down, is supported by a sustaining...Current president of the Church Gordon B. Hinckley said: “The procedure of sustaining is much more than a ritualistic raising of the hand. It is a commitment to uphold, to support, to assist those who have been selected” -Ensign, May 1995, p. 51 ...We take the same approach to sustaining other things, such as the law of the land. Our 12th Article of Faith says that we are to sustain the law. What does this mean? The best explanation I have found is when past President of the LDS Church David O. McKay said: “To sustain the law, therefore, is to refrain from saying or doing anything which will weaken it or make it ineffective” -Conference Report, Apr. 1937, p. 28 When we sustain someone or something, and especially when we make that sustaining an overt public act, we take on very specific responsibilities. Support, strength, assistance even when we might personally disagree with something in the person or thing, are all things required of us in 'sustaining'. When Mitt Romney was an LDS bishop he was in charge of the sustaining process every Sunday. On Sundays he didn't officiate in the process, the process was still done under his very close oversight. The LDS concept of 'sustaining' can't be far from his mind when he makes statements saying he 'sustains' a law..." Source: http://massresistance.blogspot.com/2006/12/mormons-against-romney-analyze-romneys.html
Thus, Mitt wandered thru all these years -- from then on -- as a chameleon. Not very honorary. By 2001, when he had returned to Utah to "save" the Olympics, he found it necessary to try to correct his pro-abort image there...he wrote a letter to the editor in July of that year, claiming he wasn't "pro-choice."
Within a year, he was going all out pro-abort in running for gov. Yes, by then, the "political sewer" you referenced had further encouraged an all-out pro-abort approach...where he even initiated contact with two pro-abort voters' guides to ensure pro-abort voters knew how pro-abort he was.
He said he was "pro-life" as of some Nov 2004 "conversion"; but then promised to "maintain the status quo" on abortion in MA May of '05 and passed pro-abortion RomneyCare in 2006.
A "microcosm" of Mitt on the 2007 campaign trail was quite revealing:
Summary Statements:
Example A -
Jan 28, 2007 in South Carolina: “Over the last multiple years, as you know, I have been effectively pro-choice."
Example B -
A little over 6 months later: Aug. 12, 2007 in Fox interview: "I never called myself pro-choice...I wasn't pro-choice..."
Who were we to believe? Mitt the Snake in Choice A? Or Mitt the Serpent in Choice B?
Worse, Ann Romney told Parade Magazine in a November 2011 interview that Mitt had "always been pro-life."
He was somebody who was even able to fool his wife...Sorry, that's not very "whistle-clean..." ... it's actually quite deceptive from the inside-out within the most intimate relationship of one's life!
Whatever......
In all of the years I have been active on FR, I think there has been only one other person that I truly disliked.... and it took a long time before I finally reached that point with him. You, in a very short time, today, have earned my complete disrespect and disgust. Your insults and insinuations were over the top.
I have been in heated debates that have concluded peacefully and with respect. You are beneath anyone I have had exchanges with on FR. I believe you to be mentally ill, a clever wordsmith, but mentally ill just the same.
I may indeed respond to any thread of interest that you may post, but I unless you post your useless tripe to me, see no need to respond ‘directly’ to such a complete ass such as you.
The conservative world does not rotate around you and your
self-righteous self, you just think it does.
Enjoy your dinner, we’re having mex.
Cheers....
The only "over the top" insinuations I have repeatedly sent your way is embracing RINOism and its accompanying pro-abort ways.
You never defended Romney as a non-pro-abort...well, why bother, right?
You never defended Romney as a non-RINO...same thing there.
Well, I won't respond in kind by attempting to psychoanalyze complete strangers as "mentally ill"; nor spiritually analyze complete strangers re: the amount of 'righteousness' one has within them -- whatever its source may or may not be.
May you be physically well and healthy; may any ill health from your past NOT revisit you or your bride; and may you enjoy peace with her for as long as you live here...and then beyond.
That is my blessing and wish for you, and it comes from Christ's righteousness, not mine, for NONE is sourced from me.
(Oh, and one more “wish”: May Louisville upset Florida in the Jan. 2 Sugar Bowl! :) )
Only one dumb ass in this conversation and it isn't me or Finny, we didn't vote for a liberal.
It was beyond rash, it was dumb ass to say that if Obama won, you'd leave the country. Were you better heeled in August when you made the statement? Liberals spout shit like that.
I think it’s shallow, perhaps desperate, for a guy to go mining for such posts, to bring into an unrelated thread for the purposes of bashing a guy who has never shown anything but respect for him.
Obviously I hit a nerve and I wasn’t even aiming at you. Now you can babble on all that you want, but I said what I said... and I meant it.
As for being “better heeled in August”, nope. What I said then... is that I would need to sell everything to pull it off.
Now, is everyone that voted for Romney a “dumb ass”? Is the owner of this forum, likely the truest conservative that exists... is he too a dumb ass? I came out for Romney around the same time that he did.
I am not going to relitigate the issues as to how I ultimately came to vote for Romney, but for me, the choice between Romney vs Obama was a no-brainer and under the same circumstances I would vote for him again tomorrow.
Bottom line, it doesn’t really matter because it’s over. Obama won, the democrats kept the Senate so Reid remains in power and this country, our liberty, our way of life and our treasure is going over the cliff.
LOL... Ok, I think you’re an ass, but that was funny.
Guilt? For not voting for the ultra liberal Romney? Please. Stop calling yourself "conservative". Republican is believable but not conservative.
I only wish that I had my eyes open in 2008 and not voted for the liberal McCain, I said never again after 2008 and I damn sure meant it.
When the G.O.P. elite hands us another liberal in 2016, you are doomed to do it again, I'm not, ever again.
Mitt Romney was, is, always will be a putrid liberal.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.