Skip to comments.Tom Hoefling: "Mitt Romney is still a pro-choice democrat, and admits it on his own website"
Posted on 05/02/2012 11:22:53 AM PDT by EternalVigilance
Mitt Romney: Judicial supremacist, anti-republican, pro-choice, democrat.
Here's the proof.
Listen to the eight minute audio HERE .
*Excerpted from May 1, 2012 America's Summit, Restore the Republic call
Thanks for your impeccably-reasoned posts.
As I have pointed out repeatedly, based on the listing of all the polls at Real Clear Politics, there were no polls putting McCain/Palin ahead anywhere near the election, much less "days" before.
There were a total of 7 recognized polls that showed McCain/Palin up over Obama, out of over 130 that were taken from the time Palin was announced.
Of those 7, the last had McCain at +2, and that was 40 days before the election -- weeks, not days.
There was a single outlier poll showing +10, and that was 58 days before the election -- essentially two full months.
Other than the 9/25 outlier, the last poll showing McCain/Palin ahead was 9/11 -- 54 days before the election.
The McCain/Palin poll average was never more than 2.9% ahead of Obama.
The McCain/Palin ticket truly only led Obama in the immediate bounce during and after the convention.
McCain's poll collapse corresponded with his inept handling of the financial crisis.
Frankly, it's sad to see a conservative blaming Palin, even indirectly, for the McCain/Palin ticket problems. Palin was attacked brutally, but she handled it admirably, and it wasn't Palin that pulled down the ticket. It was McCain.
Thanks for the kind words. Maybe down the road I will have the opportunity to win you over.
Much appreciated!!! :) I can remember when Bob Dole carried around a pocket Constitution, he would whip it out to show people the 10th Amendment. This was the real Bob Dole not the guy who ran in 1996 for President
Didn’t think you’d be around long. Good riddance.
Thanks for your reply and I agree with your sentiments.
Another election, another regime, perhaps. But this time the stakes are just too high. This regime *must* be removed from power for the good of the republic.
After that, we’ll see, but this is absolutely necessary, positively the primary mission in this election. To me this is a no-brainer. Others may disagree; however, I don’t cede them higher moral ground or higher principles.
Bye, troll !
So then take me up on my offer. Give Romney a chance. If he's just the same as Obama or worse, then I'll help you get Obama his second term in 2016.
Maybe I wasn't clear in my earlier response. Again - choosing between death by firing squad or electric chair, is NO CHOICE AT ALL.
There is only one real choice for true conservatives and patriots, and that is RESISTANCE. Figure out what that means to you, then do it with every molecule of your heart and soul.
What do you expect to be the outcome of your “resistance”? Who do you expect will be in the White House next year?
Does the “true conservative and patriot” have any responsibility for the outcome of his “resistance?”
Hi. It was TEAM Romney that threw Election 2008
That was TEAM ROMNEY - Legion of Backstabbers and Misogyists.
Not McCain. Romney. Romney the Lying Backstabber.
The true patriot, in the mold of the father of our country, simply does the right thing, and trusts God with the results.
"If, to please the people, we offer what we ourselves disprove, how can we afterwards defend our work? Let us raise a standard to which the wise and the honest can repair. The event is in the hand of God."
I think George Washington would join the right battles and fight to remove the current regime to save the republic - and afterwards be most able to defend his work.
What sort of questions are those? Are you seriously suggesting that we stand pat and do nothing while Socialists on both sides of the aisle systematically dismantle our constitutional republic?
Are you really so well indoctrinated that you can't even think with the idea of fighting back against forces which are attempting to take every freedom away from you?
I can't believe we're even having this conversation.
So, you think George Washington would support a candidate for public office who banned guns, the exact sort of weapons the British were trying to grab at Lexington and Concord.
You think he would support a man who has supported the killing of helpless little babies for more than forty years. More than fifty million so far.
You think he would support a man who violated his own state’s constitution and instituted sodomite “marriage.”
You think he would support a man who completely homosexualized his state’s government and the public schools.
You think he would support a man who thinks government’s legitimate reach is so long that it can control the practice of medicine.
Simply not credible.
I don’t think if the marxist regime wins, Washington would defend his actions with:
“I voted for Tom, Obama was God’s will.”
I don’t think if the marxist regime wins, Washington would defend his actions with:
“I voted for Tom, Obama was God’s will.”
Questions you won't or can't answer, apparently.
Is it really that hard to ask you what the outcome is that you expect from your actions?
Your question is juvenile, but I'll humor you by providing the obvious answer.
The intended result of resistance is survival, in some form or other. In the case of punching a bully in the nose, you gain freedom from his depredations. The expectations of a people who stand together and refuse the depredations of an encroaching, oppressive government, are no different.
It’s impossible to match up what you’re saying with Washington’s words - words that were thoroughly lived out in all his actions throughout his entire public life.
By the way, at this point this isn’t about me, or about Obama, or Romney, per se.
This is now about whether or not those who call themselves conservatives in this country have any principles left that they won’t sacrifice on the altar of perceived political expediency.
I feel the same way about you using his words to support your campaign against the regime's opponent.
Washington would fight against Obama and his regime.
Can't tell that by your recent article posting.
This is now about whether or not those who call themselves conservatives
Horse hockey. It's a fight to determine whether the progressive left remains in power. No matter what you call yourself, you're either joining with others who are in it to win it or out of the fight, playing in some other reality.
But I am fighting against Obama and his regime. Have been for years.
Why can't Romney Republicans type an honest sentence?
Romney, on the other hand, is not fighting Obama, he wants to be Obama. He has no problem with Obama's socialism. He simply thinks he can do socialism better. Which is probably true in many ways.
He's not offering any actual choice for anyone for whom a socialist of any stripe is not acceptable.
Indeed. You simply won't face up to the reality of the fact that Mitt Romney IS the progressive left.
No, you’re fighting Obama’s opponent.
There are two fighters in the ring and you’re here trying to knock one of them down - the wrong one.
If you haven't watched this before, please watch it now. If you have, please watch it again. Particularly the end.
Wow, amazing how blithely you disenfranchise everyone but the supporters of the Democrat and the Republican socialists.
Didn’t you say just a minute ago that we’re fighting progressivism?
Which is it? Is this some sort of a personal duel between two liberal politicians, or an attempt to put America back on its principled, constitutional footings, before it’s too late?
Well, in that particular ring, with Romney and Obama, it's more like professional wrestling. Completely fake.
"Gay" "marriage." Check.
Homosexuality forced into every corner of state government and the public schools. Check.
Socialized medicine. Check.
$50 co-pay abortions. Check.
Permanent gun ban. Check.
Churches forced to accept policies they find abominable. Check.
Left-wing judicial appointments.
What is it that you don't understand about Romney's record?
You know I cannot respond to your litany without risking being banned.
But I can ask you a question:
When do you intend, in your quest for the presidency, to stop campaigning against Romney and start campaigning against Obama?
At least be honest some of the time. No one is being disenfranchised, but one of the two fighters will be the next president.
Or do you think you will?
New tagline ...
I already told you the attitude I strive to emulate.
All I'm doing is raising a standard to which the wise and honest can repair. The event is in the hand of God.
Which of course has absolutely no meaning to you.
New tagline. Call the posse in to see this one. Wow, that’s impressive. What a genius presidential candidate move; why don’t the other candidates just take their clue from you? I’m guessing they don’t even spend half as much time as you posting to internet forums, the fools!
I hope I’ve not taken you away too long from your play-campaign and alternate reality, with dreams of the cheers of the founding fathers ringing in your ears in your dreams.
Your humility overwhelms.
The event is in the hand of God.
An excuse for some to do any idiotic thing they darn well please, if it feels good, and blame God for the outcome.
Sorry, I don't think it's God's will for the current regime to remain in power. And I think He expects me to use my brain and my will to do everything I can to prevent it.
Aspiring to the attitude of George Washington is a bad thing in the Romney Republican universe. I get it.
Back to another tagline, which is fitting.
Right. They're too busy selling their souls to the Left.
There are two sides in this election, one will win. The great majority of conservatives will fight on one side.
I expect you to call them all - Newt, Sarah Palin, Michele Bachman, Rick Perry, Thomas Sowell, Mark Levine, Andrew Breitbart, Rush Limbaugh and most of the members of FreeRepublic - Romney Republicans and continue to fight alongside the Obama regime by attacking them.
Yes, I fully expect you to feel justified and morally superior as you fight against the great majority of conservatives.
And, I expect you will to have to forever believe you were doing God’s will, rather than ever admit that you picked the wrong side at a very critical moment in the history of the republic.
"For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?"
If you think your soul is telling you to join Obama in fighting against the conservative side at this critical time for the republic, perhaps you’re listening to something else.
There wasn’t a political purity test at Valley Forge. You were either willing to sacrifice and fight the British or you left: letting others do it or helping the British.
Once again: Adios!
Interesting that you would say so in defense of a politician who banned exactly the sort of weapons that the British didn't want Americans, or the citizens of Massachusetts, to possess.
Of course, none of that matters to a Romney Republican. I understand that now.
That'll show us and really further your cause!
Enjoy the sideline in all its sanctimonious splendor.
I'm sure you have some real important history-shaking campaigning for yourself to do, so I'll let you have the last word so you can get back to the EternalVigilance For President Headquarters.
I'll leave you with a gift: A mascot for your campaign:
Personally, I wish you well. Not in your Obama campaign work of course, but as a person with struggles and problems like all of us have. For you and your family: God's blessings.
New tagline ...
"Deadly assault weapons have no place in Massachusetts," Romney said, at a bill signing ceremony on July 1..."These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense. They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people."
Among the natural rights of the Colonists are these: First, a right to life; Secondly, to liberty; Thirdly, to property; together with the right to support and defend them in the best manner they can. it is the greatest absurdity to suppose it in the power of one, or any number of men, at entering into society, to renounce their essential natural rights, or the means of preserving those rights; when the grand end of civil government, from the very nature of its institution, is for the support, protection, and defense of those very rights; the principal of which, as is before observed, are Life, Liberty, and Property. If men, through fear, fraud, or mistake, should in terms renounce or give up any essential natural right, the eternal law of reason and the grand end of society would absolutely vacate such renunciation. The right to freedom being the gift of God Almighty, it is not in the power of man to alienate this gift and voluntarily become a slave.
- SAMUEL ADAMS, The Rights of the Colonists (November 20, 1772)
The death of Dr. Joseph Warren at the battle of Bunker Hill
[W]hen the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them; but that they should not do it openly, but weaken them, and let them sink gradually, by totally disusing and neglecting the militia.
-- George Mason
I asked who you thought would be in the White House next year according to your plan. You haven’t answered that.
Spoiler Alert: This happens every single time
1. Republicans nominate a Moderate.
2. The Media calls the Moderate a racist.
3. The Moderate moves to the left to try to get the Media to stop calling him a racist.
4. The Media keeps calling him a racist.
5. The Moderate moves even further to the left to try to get the Media to stop calling him a racist.
6. The Media keeps calling him a racist.
7. The Moderate loses.
8. The Moderate endorses a Moderate in the next cycle. Ex: Bob Dole endorsed John McCain, John McCain endorsed Mitt Romney, and so on
So, which terrible candidate do you think Mitt Romney will endorse in 2016? I mean, there are so many terrible candidates to choose from. On one hand, theres the America-hating, Manchurian Candidate Jon Huntsman. On the other hand, theres the effeminate, totally hapless loser, Mitch Daniels.