Posted on 04/11/2012 2:36:55 PM PDT by hope
MSNBC on Tuesday investigated the Mormon faith of Mitt Romney and "its particular attitudes towards race."
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Avoiding Military Service : Mitt Romney and his five sons : Tagg 41; Matt 40; Josh 36; Craig 30, Ben 33
- Talking a lot of Jingoism, Chauvinism, Militarism, Brutality and Aggression while avoiding military service and danger
JVR said...
THE ROMNEY FAMILY
MORE IN LOVE WITH MONEY THAN AMERICA
GEORGE W. ROMNEY (Mitt’s Father) DODGED THE DRAFT ALL DURING WORLD WAR II.
MITT ROMNEY AND HIS BROTHER BOTH DODGED THE DRAFT FOR A DECADE DURING THE VIETNAM WAR.
NONE OF MITT’S FIVE SONS HAVE SERVED IN THE U.S. ARMED FORCES.
THEY ALL HAVE A LUST FOR MONEY NOT REAL SERVICE FOR THE COUNTRY!
IF MITT ROMNEY IS ELECTED PRESIDENT HE WILL HAVE THE POTENTIAL TO SEND OUR SONS AND DAUGHTERS INTO COMBAT WHILE HE AND HIS FAMILY CONTINUE TO DO WHAT THEY HAVE DONE SINCE 1941—AVOID MILITARY SERVICE WHILE LIVING A LUXURIOUS LIFESTYLE.
(World War II, Korean War, Vietnam War, Desert Storm, Iraq, and Afghanistan: six wars fought by Americans and not one of the eight Romney men have served!)
2/1/12 6:24 AM
So? How’s Gingrich’s military record? The only military guy in the race I was interested in was Perry. None of the others could hold his jockstrap.
Not sure what that has to do with my post 40
This thieving commie slut is married to one of the most despicable thieves in American history - alan greenscam.
Greenscam did more to rob Americans of their treasure than anyone in American history.
I’m hoping to see both of these traitors hanging side-by-side from lampposts.
John Adams to James Sullivan
on women, the poor, and voting rights
May 26, 1776
[Adams explains why women, children, and the poor are excluded from the vote. — TGW]
It is certain in theory, that the only moral foundation of government is the consent of the people. But to what an extent shall we carry this principle? Shall we say, that every individual of the community, old and young, male and female, as well as rich and poor, must consent, expressly, to every act of legislation? No, you will say. This is impossible. How then does the right arise in the majority to govern the minority, against their will? Whence arises the right of the men to govern women, without their consent? Whence the right of the old to bind the young, without theirs?
But let us first suppose, that the whole community of every age, rank, sex, and condition, has a right to vote. This community, is assembled—a motion is made and carried by a majority of one voice. The minority will not agree to this. Whence arises the right of the majority to govern, and the obligation of the minority to obey? from necessity, you will say, because there can be no other rule. But why exclude women? You will say, because their delicacy renders them unfit for practice and experience, in the great business of life, and the hardy enterprises of war, as well as the arduous cares of state. Besides, their attention is so much engaged with the necessary nurture of their children, that nature has made them fittest for domestic cares. And children have not judgment or will of their own. True. But will not these reasons apply to others? Is it not equally true, that men in general in every society, who are wholly destitute of property, are also too little acquainted with public affairs to form a right judgment, and too dependent upon other men to have a will of their own? If this is a fact, if you give to every man, who has no property, a vote, will you not make a fine encouraging provision for corruption by your fundamental law? Such is the frailty of the human heart, that very few men, who have no property, have any judgment of their own. They talk and vote as they are directed by some man of property, who has attached their minds to his interest…
I should think that wisdom and policy would dictate in these times, to be very cautious of making alterations. Our people have never been very rigid in scrutinizing into the qualifications of voters, and I presume they will not now begin to be so. But I would not advise them to make any alteration in the laws, at present, respecting the qualifications of voters.
Your idea, that those laws, which affect the lives and personal liberty of all, or which inflict corporal punishment, affect those, who are not qualified to vote, as well as those who are, is just. But, so they do women, as well as men, children as well as adults. What reason should there be, for excluding a man of twenty years, Eleven months and twenty-seven days old, from a vote when you admit one, who is twenty one? The reason is, you must fix upon some period in life, when the understanding and will of men in general is fit to be trusted by the public. Will not the same reason justify the state in fixing upon some certain quantity of property, as a qualification.
The same reasoning, which will induce you to admit all men, who have no property, to vote, with those who have, for those laws, which affect the person will prove that you ought to admit women and children: for generally speaking, women and children, have as good judgment, and as independent minds as those men who are wholly destitute of property: these last being to all intents and purposes as much dependent upon others, who will please to feed, clothe, and employ them, as women are upon their husbands, or children on their parents…
Society can be governed only by general rules. Government cannot accommodate itself to every particular case, as it happens, nor to the circumstances of particular persons. It must establish general, comprehensive regulations for cases and persons. The only question is, which general rule, will accommodate most cases and most persons.
Depend upon it, sir, it is dangerous to open so fruitful a source of controversy and altercation, as would be opened by attempting to alter the qualifications of voters. There will be no end of it. New claims will arise. Women will demand a vote. Lads from 12 to 21 will think their rights not enough attended to, and every man, who has not a farthing, will demand an equal voice with any other in all acts of state. It tends to confound and destroy all distinctions, and prostrate all ranks, to one common level.
the GOP E-RINOs wanted mitt’s mormonism ... i say let them Die in Agony ... politically, of course ... with their darling mittens ...
“Here comes weeks of Mormon this ,Mormon that ,Mormon ,Mormon ,Mormon”
That’s true. And rightfully so. We had no business nominating someone whose “religion” is so un-mainstream. Every goofy aspect of it will be in the limelight for months now. It’ll be the reason for Hussein’s second term; the GOP will have handed it to him on a silver platter. We’re pathetic.
As someone on my local paper website said, we will have the Magic Underwear vs the Magic Negro, or someone who thinks that he’s God vs someone who believes he will become a God.
Yup, the Dems are going to Mormon us to death...look for them to start false flag newly-founded “evangelical” groups attacking Mormonism for political reasons.
I’m Catholic, but I’m sick and tired of godless media types, remembering some nonsense they heard on a grade school playground, and presenting to some ignorant, lapsed, whatever, as though they have a clue, and then presenting the result to the public, as an authoritative response.
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.