Skip to comments.Santorum endorses one-time rival Romney
Posted on 05/07/2012 8:41:01 PM PDT by Free ThinkerNY
WASHINGTON (AP) Rick Santorum is endorsing his one-time bitter rival Mitt Romney in a late-night e-mail to his supporters.
Santorum on Monday urged his supporters to join him in working with the effective Republican nominee to deny President Barack Obama a second term.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
So who’s your candidate, newb?
After reading her posts, Troll it is.
Watch the Video of Rick Santorum Campaigning With/for Mitt Romney in 2008
I’m not surprised.
"ABO"...an obvious euphemism for...
...(potential) Romney voters...
...plus those who find "safe haven" under this euphemistic umbrella...like...
...Romney supporters (subtle Romney vocalists)
...and Rombots (public advocates & campaigners for Romney)
If they were truly "ABO" -- they wouldn't mind...
...voting for Ron Paul in the primaries...
...voting for Ron Paul third-party...
...voting for Virgil Goode (Constitution) party...
...voting for Tom Hoefling (FREEPER running for POTUS)...
After, third-party voters are "ABO" voters, too right!
I voted for RP in the NYS primary.
I think the idea is to get ABO in office, which is generally the reason why you vote for a candidate. True, ABO would apply to candidates from, for example, the Constitution Party, but the CP has been consistent around 0.10% percent of the vote, so I don’t think voting that way would like result in ABO in office.
Santorum supporters weren’t really no mitt, they would loudly no NEWT! So now their votes go to mitt, nothing unexpected here, they were told but didn’t want to listen even though everything pointed to it. They won’t admit they and America were duped.
Is you a Moby??!!!
Punk the prez? - Moby’s anti-Bush tricks
New York Daily News ^ | 2/09/04 | Rush & Molloy
One of Sen. John Kerry's celebrity supporters is ready to pull out all the stops to get him elected. Republicans are shrieking over a suggestion by rocker Moby that Democrats spread gossip about President Bush on the Internet. “No one’s talking about how to keep the other side home on Election Day,” Moby tells us. “It's a lot easier than you think and it doesn't cost that much. This election can be won by 200,000 votes.”
Moby suggests that it's possible to seed doubt among Bush's far-right supporters on the Web.
“You target his natural constituencies,” says the Grammy-nominated techno-wizard. “For example, you can go on all the pro-life chat rooms and say you're an outraged right-wing voter and that you know that George Bush drove an ex-girlfriend to an abortion clinic and paid for her to get an abortion.
“Then you go to an anti-immigration Web site chat room and ask, ‘What's all this about George Bush proposing amnesty for illegal aliens?’”
Moby didn't claim that he believed the abortion story.
Well if the Senate gets more conservatives, then at least, with the House, they can put MItts feet to the fire.
I’ve been watching politics since Nixon was in office. I can count on one hand the number of times that a GOP congress didn’t cave when the GOP President wanted to do something leftwing. If we could get a conservative majority not just a GOP majority, I’d agree with you. Meanwhile, This election is what it is. Obama is so bad that I can understand wanting him out at any cost. I just think we conservatives need to go in with both eyes wide open, not pretending that Mitt isn’t also the enemy.
“Very sad that the GOP-e in their infinite RINO wisdom didn’t think about that earlier.
Please visit: www.exmormon.org for more information on mormonism.”
~ ~ ~
America needs to hear it from Mitt.
Romney is avoiding, he doesn’t want to explain Mormonism, what crazy beliefs. Liberals and even conservatives, admit
it, you help him by avoiding, saying...
Faith is not important in choosing our country’s leader, do not discuss it
“morality” is called social issues instead of moral issues
the “contraception mandate” is about the loss of freedom and not the fact “contraception” is an intrinsic evil
yeah, don’t speak of it. Romney is home free...
FRegards to you, too, unkus!
Will somebody please put up the video where Romney proudly states he is for abortion.
There are several, depends on the year and the people he is
trying to sell.
What’s he selling now? I hear...Romneycare has no abortion
in it and Mitt is now for life.
His mother must be turning over in her grave (not really).
A lot of deception, instigation, etc.
And, if, come late October, the polling for Romney is below 40% at that time, will we hear from you a concession of the same anticipated reality? [Awaiting the MSM "vet" onslaught of Romney]
'Cause you see...if you're a football team...and on the schedule the ultimate "league champ" beats somebody 42-39...and beats another foe 42-2...doesn't matter that the one team scored 39 vs. the mere "safety" of the other team...they're both "also-rans"...both "losers"...
Besides...if you're going to go "utilitarian" on me & speak of "practicalities," then you need to consider another utilitarian practicality:
If you Tally ALL FREEPER votes -- and if they were ALL Romney -- most of them, if not ALL, won't matter in the end outcome.
(a) Liberal states?...not enough (r) votes...Obama will win anyway [Reality here? Absolutely ZERO reason to not vote third-party considering we have two pro-abort big-govt socialist healthcare libs running]
(b) Conservative (non-swing) states? Take away ALL the FREEPER votes...Romney wins, anyway...[might as well save searing your conscience]
(c) Genuine Swing states? These are the only "true" ABO "utilitarian" voters...and even then...I'm talking "swing states" as of late Oct/early Nov (based upon polls)...NOT genericized MSM designated "swing states" NOW...
Well said. Thanks!
What I was referring to is the desire of Jim (and many) to call a truce and get about the business of electing all the conservatives we can to the House and Senate.
The name calling ,the endless lamenting, all of it does us no good. If we end up tearing us apart what has been accomplished? Let’s get on with what we can do and cut the crap on the rest
We lost the nomination in the primaries because conservatives were squabbling and swearing that they would never vote for x or y or z. Well the GOP-E got their candidate because we could not see beyond our nose to unite behind one alternative. Great. It did nothing for us.
Now we must hunker down to the work in front of us. That is the message I read from Jim. Perhaps you didn’t
Hey, Jeff. Harry Reid, a Mormon in good standing with the church, said several years ago while speaking to a large BYU student body also well-attended @ the professorial/admin level:
"I am a Democrat because I am a Mormon, not in spite of it."
Source: Reid Gets Warm Reception at BYU
If the "religio-political" combo dimension is true for Harry Reid, then, hey, why not Mitt Romney as well?
As to religion, if you must make it about that, for those who want to know what a long time convert to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believes...
[...ALL: Be sure to go beyond getting the "carview" from only the used car salesman commissioned there!]
I do not think it will matter either. I would be surprised to see Bachman or Pawlenty accept VP. Anyone with any future political ambitions will be tainted if they run with Romney.
That’s not what you said. You wanted to add Jim to a list of “conservatives” who endorsed Romney. Ann Coulter LOVES Romney. Jim doesn’t belong on any such list.
Ann Coulter hasn’t been a conservative for years.
I always know what I mean when I post. My words don’t always translate as well as they should. So sorry for your angst. I won’t bother posting on the negative posts anymore because I want my energies to go towards something that will help us. Bitching and moaning over and over and over about Romney seems not only pointless at this juncture but more than a bit petulant.
We as conservatives did this to our selves by not coming together behind a solid candidate. Now we must do everything we can to elect true conservatives to the House and Senate.
You can bitch at me all you want. I no longer care. It seems conservatives take glee in shooting our own
Like so many here, I was never a Rick "fanatic". He became acceptable to me after all others had been eliminated except Romney. Gingrich was acceptable to me too at that time.
The only two I was a fan of was Palin and Cain, the others were simply "acceptable". Romney was never and never will be acceptable to me. Even Ron Paul would be more acceptable to me than Romney. Romney is a liberal and always will be, I will never vote for him.
Go ahead and tell me "that's the same as a vote for obama", it's not like I've never heard that one before, I'll vote down ballot.
Romney vs. Obama? One of them has to lose, I'll rejoice in that fact, whichever it is.
"Enough. Ill not discuss this subject with you any longer."
LOL! No, you'll just send me a Freepmail saying "You're one slick troll."
Typical Romney lover.. Gutless, and as two-faced as the day is long.
(Amazing how easily they can blend in......)"
That's me. Didn't you know? Everyone who hasn't been here for a decade is a troll.
At least SOMEBODY called me a troll for once, though. I was beginning to think nobody cared!
Yeah, he's all that----and more, LOL.
It made me sick when Perry endorsed him (and I imagine Perry himself choked on it a bit), but I knew it would happen. Sad times.
btw, welcome to Free Republic, where the troll radar increases over time.
Incidentally there were a couple of question marks after that 'troll' thing. You coulda just come back and declared your authentic conservative credentials.
Or something other than admitting your troll-ness outright. :)
(I've always wanted to ask you that. :)
I was going to post exactly that.
It sort of goes against my nature to be defensive when I don’t have a reason to be. I figure my posting history either smells right, or it doesn’t, you know?
I stand by what I see. I see you as a Troll. Your posts prove it.
Bye bye. Go about your business.
(I'd never recommend that...too many other races...ballot issues)
No, I won't vote for Hitler or Satan, so please save that strawman for someone else.
Well, ya know...technically relevant the way people define "ABO"...more relevant, tho, for your children & grandchildren, etc.
I can easily see the Dems running "THE anti-Christ" @ some pt...the Repubs (if not extinct by then)...might counter with someone claiming to be a "reincarnated Hitler" (or at least someone well to the left of Obama)...
And then since so many political relativists have "educated" their kids & grandkids well...that "reincarnated Hitler" or to-the-left-of-Obama will look "pretty good" compared to the "ABTAC" crowd who will come on board FR...
"ABTAC" = "Anybody But THE Anti-Christ"...
We'll have the relativistic "conservative" voters on FR and off FR to "thank" for setting that "anti-legacy" in motion...
“Like it or not, this is the pack of cards we have been dealt with.”
Sadly so, but we are strong and will make the best of it until the next election.
The good news is that Mourdock won his primary, and hopefully we will get many more CONSERVATIVES in Congress in the fall.
Why are people who are opposed to Romney’s liberalism haters, trolls, BHO supporters.........(whatever today’s word is).
We’re in a very bad predicament and people are extremely frustrated.
Many quotes are taken out of context. A lot of information is sourced from the Journal of Discourses and presented as if though it is current Church doctrine, when in most cases it is not, and other cases never was.
When I try and point this out, I am bombared with endless other quotes of similar nature, rediculing and demeaning language, and told I am wrogn, a liar, or decieving people.
Quotes are taken, for example from Joseph Smith when he was in the midst of trying to defend the Church and the people in it in Missouri in the late 1830s from mobs of people and militia, who were driven on by an “extermination order,” by the Governor, Governor Boggs at the time, which was political in its origin, and illegal and unconstitutional IMHO. It indicated that an entire group of thousands of people, men, women and children were a danger to the state, when they themselves were being plundered, raped and pillaged (ie. research the Hahns Mill Massacre), and that those same people who were being victimized were to be “driven from the state or exterminated if necessary.”
Anyhow, in the midst of his trying to organize the defense of said people, in those emotions he indicated that if people continued to do this to him and his followers, he would become as a modern Mohammed to the enemies of the Church. It was a wrong thing to say...but in the circumstances I will give him a pass.
As it was, he surrendered and they took him and arrested him and then moved into the town, pillaged it, some women were raped, some folks were killed, and the rest, about five thousand people had to leave in the dead of winter, and trek 100+ miles across the snow to the river and cross it into Illinois. The suffering and death along that trail left literally a path of blood across the state.
Their land was confiscated and there never has been any recompense for the crimes committed against them.
But, those who want to attack all things LDS, then use this quote to indicate and try and convince people that the LDS Church back then and today is somehow equated to radical Islam.
That is not fair, that is not exhaustive, and that is not complete. It is a clear liberal methodology to seperate, demean and dehumanize and thus to marginalize a whole group of people.
I have been told that I am not a Christian, as if though these people can see in my heart and judge me.
If you want to know what active, faithful LDS believe, attend a church and ask them...not people who are alienated from it and clearly have a slanted opinion of the same. I challenge you to do that and then compare the two.
For example, I had one of these so-called, very active former members tell me that they never heard the words, “Jesus Christ,” mentioned in the meetings. This is simply not true as every main meeting on Sunday has the passing and partaking of the Lord’s Sacrement, which is blessed before hand in a prayer, spoken into a microphone over the loud speaker system, wherein the brad and water or blessed in the name of Jesus Christ that all who partake of it might remeber the suffering of the Son of God, Jesus Christ and always remember Him. This occurs in every sacrement meeting each week in each meeting all year except during conferences which are held 4 times a year.
In addition, every opening and closing prayer is said int he name of Jesus Christ. Before the sacrement is passed there is alweays a “sacrement” song about the atonement of Jesus Christ. Finally, talks from members of the church are given and in most acses one or more are centered on some aspect of Christ’s teachings.
So much for them having been “very active.”
In addition, if the tone of those postings, which is ridiculing, mocking, and demeaning is what you would call “fair,” then you and I have a different definition of the word, and if that is your definition, then there really is not much more to say on the matter between us other than simply leave you with this:
My Wintness for Jesus Christ
“I am a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. What many call a Mormon. We do have different beliefs about the Godhead. We believe in three, the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. We believe they are seperate and distinct individuals and turn to the Bible itself of that interpretation.”
~ ~ ~
May I ask you a question? Thanks for sharing your testimony even though you are not Christian and not meant to be mean. The above, this “different belief” is one of them that makes you a non-Christian. There is one God in three persons. Trinitarian, all three are God not just the Father. I don’t see you say, God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Ghost. Belief in the “Holy trinity” isn’t an option.
I might be wrong, is it not true...
Mormonism rejects Christ is divine, that He always was and always will be, instead Mormons believe Our Lord was created by God the Father?
This is SO true!
Communicating this way, by text, is difficult. We tend to think much faster than we type, so the fullness of our ideas tend to be truncated by the time our thoughts appear on the screen of our audience.
We lose the tone of our voice, the inflection of our words by not having audio. We lose body language by not having video. And we lose the immediacy of our message due to sometimes hours or days of delay in ours responses.
Heck! Because the 'net reaches 'round the world, even if we were communicating almost in real time, one person could be fresh, having just arisen from a good nights sleep, while the other could be dog-tired from working all day!
Mostly because they REFUSE to be deceived.
Do you, as a MORMON, have a Temple Recommend?
And you MORMONs do not ever seem to be able to post the claimed excised material that should be around the 'out-of-context' MORMON writings.
Standard response: "Oh, we discussed this before; no need to re-hash it here.
The problem here: 'MOST cases' means that SOME of it was; and that it will now be ignored.
Standard response: "Oh, the JoD isn't SCRIPTURE."
Guess what - neither are the rituals performed in your temples.
The problem here: PROOF of the 'teachings' of the JoD are presented by multiple OTHER others from MORMON writings.
Standard response: "Oh, we 'may' have taught that then, but we don't now."
Problem: MORMONs can produce NO other 'official' writings that nullify the previous teachings.
HMmm... Where have I heard this recently?
Spirit of Apostacy is at your door; wanting to sift you...