Free Republic

Catholic-bashing byatch belongs with Bill Maher, another xhit-faced Christian basher.

This is what “Death eating Xhit” looks like.

Hey, even though Romney was not my 1st choice (there were some that I wished and had encouraged to run). And certainley he is no Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Coolidge or Reagan !

But he is way the phuc better than that “transform = tear down” socialist/communist, redistributionist, tele-prompter reading, community organising (Acorn / SEIU) , in bed with every “hate America” fringe-radical group HERE and ABROAD, Chicago UNION thug, muslim axx kissing BUFFOON that A mericans were stupid to elect to the Office of President of The United States !

Lets get Romney ELECTED and as many Conservative Senators, Congressmen, State and Local people as possible !!! And turn back the liberal horde for our childrens and grandchildrens sake.

American Patriots rose to many a crisis in the past - let us not shirk Our Duty NOW! Let it be said of US that we were the generation that turned America back from the brink and back to the principles of Our Founding Fathers. Amen

Sorry - liberal moderated debaTes

The guy that clearly won the Republican debates did NOT translate into primary wins.
Why?
Slanted attacks and ads by 1) Romney 2) Santorum 3) Paul ... In order of severity. Caused voters to question Newts creds. Each of the candidates had drawbacks but in my opinion Newt had the fewest!

Voters couldn’t see thru the hocus pocus of outright lies or half truths and we got what we deserved ...Mitt.

The most decent, polished, and knowlegeable was Newt... try and tell me I’m wrong.

Now we have to wait and see how Romney does in the liberal moderated debares !? (I don’t think Newt would ever have agreed to this kind of slanted debates)

U.N. = Un-indicted co-conspirators

Liberal postion = drop drawers, bend over, grab ankles

Made My Day!
The question BO has to be thinking about is - “do I feel lucky?”
Well do you? Punk!

Does anyone else take offense at the term “ultraconservative” for someone who holds traditional, principalled values?
As if there is something wrong with a person who holds those views!?

That’s what gets liberals like Bubba the fornicator Clintoon and Oblahblah the Kenyan to claim that they are “Centrists”???

That’s lunacy!

Does anyone else take offense at the term “ultraconservative” for someone who holds traditional, principalled values?
As if there is something wrong with a person who holds those views!?

That’s what gets liberals like Bubba the fornicator Clintoon and Oblahblah the Kenyan to claim that they are “Centrists”???

That’s lunacy!

Moderate! Such an offensive term politically!
Spineless
Wishy washy
Gutless
No moral compass
Rhino
No balls
Go along to get along
lukewarm

Moderate! Such an offensive term politically!
Spineless
Wishy washy
Gutless
No moral compass
Rhino
No balls
Go along to get along
lukewarm

“City Data?” discussion groups were/are liberal biased also.
b o r i n g ... leftists - Winning an argument for them means taking their ball and going home!

ROFLMFAO!
Twitter’s TOS (Terms Of Service) just like AOL’s were biased against conservatives! Or let’s say more regularly ENFORCED against conservatives than liberals.
after all - Aren’t the jerks who started twitter and googala, radical leftist’s themselves?

And who the heck ever bother’s to read their Efn terms of service...

most of the lefties that frequent these talk/discussion groups, do this on a full-time basis! They have no jobs, are probably collecting SSI and sitting in the basement of their mommy’s house at their computers.
Usually you can spot them by their self-inflicted User Names.
One ahole on AOL, if I can remember, went by user name F***Bush... Numerous complaints and AOL never removed him/her ... great TOS there!?

Liberals have been the totalitarian thugs since the very first liberal.
Any conservatives on those twitter debates should return the favor by “scam blocking” their most egregious violators. tit for tat
I remember AOL discussion blogs where anybody with a Conservative bent was targeted for expultion. I myself got thrown off more than once until I just got bored with AOL and their “biased” liberal moderators. Ef AOL, Ef twitter

Norms comment, “many of us will never get to vote in a primary anyway.. “ WHY IS THAT???
For the last few presidential cycles I am getting more and more pissed-off...
On what stone tablet is it written that the first primary be held in tiny-asse ((new (Olde) england)) fliberal New Hampshire??... followed by a ?caucus? wtf is that? in Ioway?

Sorry but the entire state (how does it qualify?)
of new hampshire wouldn’t make a decent sized wart on Naperville Illinoise arse...

And Iowa?? don’t they have television in that cornfritter state? The rest of the country has primaries but iowa HAS TO BE DIFFERENT!! sit all day in a (no bathroom break) caucus to make their constipated decision! WTF!?

Sorry but it is time for a change...you and I don’t need or want to see a bunch of presidential nominees waste our donated money on political television ads in new hampshire on 10 people who might or not watch? For what seems like an eternity - just so that we get to see who they elected to get their 1 1/2 delegate to the convention - big whoop!

And Ioway... Only Rick Santorum was dumb enough to visit every village in the entire frickin’ state to win their SUPER DOOPER ENDORSEMENT and 2 1/2 delagatii to the cornvention...

Two INCONSEQUENTIAL states that with t.v. MarxStream fliberal pundits help made a mountain out of two tiny anthills - WHAT A FRICKIN JOKE! sORRY - BUT I’M SICK OF IT!

Time to regain our sanity and put the new hampshire’s and ioways in their rightful place of INSIGNIFICANCE!

I think (therefore I is) that we have ?maybe 4-6 regional primaries with say 1-2 weeks between primaries with 4-6 debates in-between! That’s it!
Chosen by lot in Sept/Oct as to the order of the regional primaries!
Just to keep it from getting tooo confusing - MANDATE that each candidate be allowed ONLY 2 TWO - 30 minute ad spots on television (no commercials) to be run FREE on a rotating Major Network basis in each Region.

This way the “playing field” can’t be TILTED in a rich guy’s favor and everybody will have the same opportunity to present their ideas or if they wish to run ATTACK t.v. spots - but remember ONLY 2-30 minute spots per region. And best the Networks don’t get Squat Money!

As far as PAC’s,union and corporate, (attack or pro-candidate) ads, LIMIT the number of $$$dollars that they can spend (per candidate) in each region! Who needs to see the same bogus negative attack ad 5 times a day for weeks on end - Eff Themm! They only influence the STUPID!

Internet Ads.... it’s free! “So let the sky be the limit”!

Ohhh! and you can’t spend any of your own “personal wealth” to buy yourself the Presidency! Like Romney, Kerry, Edwards and a slew of other lameasses..

I’m sure others have thought likewise and this was just off the top of my head and can be - refined.

Time to get the filthy money out of our (campaigns) and get ideas and people involvement, back in!

Mandatory! Presidential debates like Newt suggested!

What I have a HUGE problem with is what they don’t say and how they mischaracterize this “invasion” and its effects on our American culture and its effect on law, on order, respect for this country and a balance of power shift that in effect can victimize native Americans and put them into second class status.
You are absolutely right on that. And the Catholic Church’s direct role in that is truly embarrassing to me and to most other Catholics who are (a) aware of that role and (b) actually believe what is Catholic doctrine. That role is through the “Catholic” Campaign for Human Development (CCHD). If you really want to get ticked off at the Catholic Church...and rightfully so, look at this excellent video by Michael Voris (it’s about an hour long). (BTW, Michael Voris is a faithful Catholic, not some outsider spewing lies)

That’s what these activist bishops do.
Typical left-wing tactic of changing the subject (migrant vs. illegal) or leave things out... like what gives an invading army of 11 to 20 million ILLEGALS the right to legal status.
Lie.
Change the subject.
Omit.
Attack opposition by name calling.

I don’t have any love for these liberal anti-American priest’s.

Can anyone tell me the difference between “legal status” and “amnesty” when they use the first term “legal status” are they not just avoiding to use the term “amnesty”?

11 to 20 million or more people, some who are criminals, mostly illiterate.

Are we suicidal to accept this?

“Don’t these guys ever get called on the carpet in Rome?”

That’s not the way the John PaulII or Pope Benedict are handling it. They change the hierarchy by attrition and doing due diligence in promoting men that are not as radical. As long as it is not against the Faith these Cardinals are pretty much a law unto themselves. The Pope could ask them to step down - vow of obedience. Thank God they have a mandatory retirement age.

Look at chicago where Cardinal Francis can’t do anything with that loudmouth, liberation theology, social justice activist, Father Phleger.

Here’s a U.S.Conference of Catholic Bishops press release which is a falsehood. Profiling? Wasn’t that strictly prohibited?

USCCB News Release

10-144
July 29, 2010
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

USCCB Migration Chairman Lauds Court Decision Regarding Arizona SB 1070, Urges Comprehensive Immigration Reform
WASHINGTON— As chairman of the U.S. bishops’ Committee on Migration, Bishop John C. Wester of Salt Lake City applauded the July 28 decision by U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton to halt some of the most controversial provisions of Arizona SB 1070 from going into effect the next day. Bishop Wester lamented the status quo on immigration as “unacceptable” and called for the Federal government to act immediately on immigration reform.

“It is the right decision,” Bishop Wester said. “Any law that provides legal cover to profiling affects all members of our communities, including legal residents and citizens. It is a very slippery slope. What is needed now is for Congress and the Administration to live up to their responsibilities and address this issue by passing immigration reform.”

The U.S. Catholic bishops believe that any comprehensive immigration reform bill should contain the following elements: a legalization program that gives migrant workers and their families an opportunity to earn legal permanent residency and eventual citizenship; a new worker visa program that protects the labor rights of both U.S. and foreign workers and gives participants the option to earn permanent residency; reform of the U.S. family-based immigration system to reduce waiting times for family reunification; and restoration of due process protections for immigrants, including asylum-seekers. In the longer term, policies that address the root causes of migration, such as the lack of sustainable development in sending nations, should also be part of the equation.

Many of these “Princes” of the Church are so entrenched.
If bankrupting Archdioceses from lawsuits because of pedophilic and abusive priests wasn’t enough which happened under their watch. They are still here espousing more of their “social justice”, “liberation philosophy”.
They knew this *hit was going on.

They also have the “bully” pulpit from which to propagandize their flock. Hey if the Cardinal says it’s the Word of God or from the Bible, who am I to argue with him?

The fact is, it is not in the Bible. It’s either taken out of context or twisted to mean what they want it to mean.

When enough parishoners wake up and pass on the collection plate... then maybe!?