Posted on 04/11/2012 8:04:00 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
Notice: Free Republic has been in full rebellion mode since 2008 and will remain in full rebellion mode for the duration!
No more Doles!! No more McCains!! No more RINOS!!
NO ROMNEY!!
Those who cannot stomach rebellion might as well start looking for a new home on the net!!
Those who have ignored my hundreds of posts on this crucial issue or who have doubted me these last three or four years might as well get used to it. FR will never support the abortionist, homosexualist, socialist, mandate loving, constitution trampling liar Mitt Romney.
In case you haven't noticed, a TEA Party rebellion is on and Free Republic signed on years ago. There is no turning back. No more crap from the GOP-e!! They've screwed us for the last time!! Karl Rove and Mitt Romney, et al, loathe conservatism and loathe the tea party and took it upon themselves to use their money and connections to destroy nearly every one of our conservative tea party candidates while pushing their big government RINOS. That makes them the enemy. I will not reward that betrayal by giving them my support or my vote.
FR is and will remain a pro-life, pro-limited government conservative site!!
We are beholden to NO ONE!! We bow to no kings!! We bow to NO RINOS!!
I'd rather fight and die like a man than bend over and be screwed by a RINO!! I refuse to kiss Karl Rove or Mitt Romney's rings!! They can kiss my rosy red ass instead!!
FUMR!! FUGOP!!
Long live the rebellion!!
Hope my message is clear.
bookmark
Uh.....boss...can we...like, report abuse for language on the, like....the boss? :o)
“Or does endorsing Romney immediately convert you to a RINO, despite your life’s work as a Conservative?”
If one goes out and rapes a woman after a lifetime of celibacy, does that make him a rapist?
If one goes out and blows up a loaded school bus after a lifetime of pacifism, does that make him a killer?
If one writes a hate filled screed claiming the Jews use the blood of children in recopies, does that make him anti-semitic?
Yes. You throw away a lifetime of conservatism by helping to elect a rino. All your life’s work was for nothing if it means you abandon it out of a desire to ‘win’ regardless of your principles. I am utterly convinced that people with this question, and those who share the rationalization, simply want to have their cake and eat it too. There is no possible way that it can survive the most basic pass of critical thought, yet over and over, I see some version of it posted.
I have said this on numerous posts and no one even attempts to give it a serious answer. They duck, dodge, and get offended, but they refuse to answer....
“How can a conservative vote for a liberal/RINO without abandoning their conservatism?”
Again...
Conservative thought is the polar opposite of RINO/Lib. When you vote RINO/lib, you are saying that rather than sticking with what you claim to believe, you are willing to abandon your beliefs and adopt others in opposition to them. There is no other way around it. A conservative will not, CANNOT vote for a lib/RINO and remain conservative. Saying you can is no different than saying you can have sexual intercourse and remain a virgin.
Remember the Republican revolution of the 90s.... At that time Newt had been a congressman for several years. It didn’t happen overnight. It took several years for the GOP to come to its senses that they could gain the majority in congress...... It was Newt who convinced just enough of them that it could be done.
Then came the Contract with America, which got so many GOP candidates elected to congress because they made a promise to get things done. They won the majority after over 40 years of Democrat control. Newt became speaker, and under his leadership, things got done. Big things, like welfare reform and the first balanced budget in decades.
You want to say that Newt is anything but Consevative!.... but you have no idea..... I think you need to go onto his website and read his new “21st Century Contract with America.”.... I’m telling you that he’s like no other GOP candidate in a very long time......
He not only has a chance of beating Romney even at this late stage, but also getting a lot more conservatives elected to congress on the strength of the contract alone..... We could win the Senate and get a larger majority in the House.......
Romney’s not going to do that for us...... It’s more than just the presidency, it’s turning the liberal machine on its head in a major way. That’s what Newt’s agenda has always been and will continue to be if he becomes POTUS.
He’s way better than Palin (although I like her), Santorum, or any of the current GOP field. He’s the seasoned conservative master politician who WILL get it done.... His record on that stands....
Romney will just be a “manager in chief.” Certainly way better than Obama, but without Newt’s vision and record for actually changing Washington. It’s not too late.
(Borrowed) But says what I think.
“Don’t even bother to call me a romneybott. Don’t bother to try and convince me that Romney is just as bad as Obama. I won’t be bullied because I care more about my kids than a bunch of groupthink on a web forum. I shared a reasoned opinion with you and it deserves more than name calling. If I get banned for voting anyone but Obama... so be it. I wish all of you luck and God bless. Choose wisely, my children are counting on you!”
Someone has to choose wisely for them since their dad is using the lib ‘bully’ mantra and advocating voting for a man who would abort them.
Sorry Dad, but you need to grow a pair. For your kids and your country.
He'll have to be electable without my help.
Thank you very much! The campaign has been great. There’s been a lot of people who have worked really hard.
And yes Mormons do see Romney as the fulfillment of their prophecy....but they will deny, as with other facts revealed of their beliefs, that that prophecy is today.
No surprise...the LDS switch positions to whatever is necessary to be accepted within the Christian Church....they have failed to do so and are now reaching for the Gold....once they seat Romney then the world will “have to” accept the Mormon Religion as Christian in their eyes.
I wouldn't expect more than niceties from any higher ups in the Priesthood etc....although they are simply corporate investors using their church membership for revenue sources IMO...like all cults..the men at the top reap many financial returns and investments....and one of the reasons the men choose to advance....it's a sure way to win the jackpot at every higher level....but you have to learn how to be "nice" along the way...any dirty work is done behind the scenes...like most that happens within the LDS Organization.
Although Romneys been showing to what extremes their money will take them..and they let that speak for them...via ads and otherwise ways of bringing people down. Nasty business they do...while smiling innocently and deceiving the masses who support them.
LOL. Go Newt!
“Groupthink” is a weasel word full of assumptions and intentions to bully people through their emotions. It’s not the tactic of a thinking person but rather of a sheeple who wants to pretend to be a sheep dog.
Well if you truly mean that then understand what we have going into this right now is one candidate who has taken the fight to Obama and Obama forced to fight back..... That is Newt.. on Energy, foreign policy and general presidential presence...
No one else has done that.... You don't hear Obama addressing challenges from Romney,... you have Obama on the offense with Romney, not defense.
Newt is clearly the one who not only beats Obama by keeping him on defense, but has the bold vision necessary to be a truly great president.
You won't beat Obama with a near mirror image of Obama. Obama will thank Romney for Obamacare, and it will be over.
Time to support Newt and let's take back Washington for the people and conservativism!
So stay home election day or write someone in - oZero thanks you
rut roh!
The candidate you supported in 2008, Sarah Palin, just seemed to indicate that she is very comfortable with Romney as President, that he will surround himself with the correct people.
I guess we’ll now see the trashing of her. The circular firing squad will continue.
Unfortunately, Newt found the wrong issue; apologized for it, and stated that it's one of the "biggest mistakes" he's made. It's a done deal now.
To keep pounding out that connection when he has broken off from it is an indication of just that desperate grasping at straws.... perhaps you don't like Newt,.... but clearly you neither understand him, nor have attempted to educate yourself on him so that you can.
The bottom line is that people think of things. Newt is no different.... People think of things that are not such a good idea. Newt is no different. ....Sometimes people think of things that are not such a good idea, and they put them into action, and continue to support them as good ideas..... Newt has NOT done that to any significant degree as a politician, he pulls back from them and why he asks supporters for their oppinions if he's going the wrong way on his site, so you really have nothing on him. This guilt by association is not working too well for you.
Look...There's nothing bolder than what Newt did in the 1990s for conservativism.. and there's nothing bolder than what he has planned for 2013-2015. We don't even know what Romney's plans are let alone how he intends to impliment them, and neither does he.....we do Newts and he's asked us to come along and make it happen!
Go to Newt.org and educate yourself further...then decide if Romneys your guy...or Newt far surpasses him on every mark important to us.
“I’m still here, Jim and just as hard as nails as I have always been.”
Supporting Romney isn’t hard as nails. It is soft as Jello.
“I believed Reagan when he said he changed...I will give Romney that same consideration.”
Reagan didn’t change everything he believed in at one time in order to run for an office. Romney has been on the wrong side of every significant issue of our day. Every one. You are throwing up a false argument using Ronaldus Magnus’ good name. Romney isn’t worthy to be used in the same sentence with Reagan.
“If he gets into office and proves different, then I will cease all support for him in an instant...I have a hard enough time supporting him in the least in any case.”
It will be too late after you support him and get him elected.
@ post 1012 - wow, I will never be able read all of these.
I won’t dispute a thing you said about Mitt Romney. I am depressed about his seemingly inevitable nomination although I truly feel like our nation is too far gone for any single politician to fix. I don’t expect him to reverse the downward trend of our nation and government.
I had a long drive today for work and thought about this. I stand by what I previously said regarding SCOTUS because, as horrifying as it sounds, that is the only thing holding our current government leaders back - and I include most of the GOP in Congress with that statement.
I am in Washington state on the conservative side. If Romney runs the uninspiring campaign that I expect it is unlikely that my vote will count since the Seattle/Olympia left coast corridor rules statewide elections.
I won’t spend time on this site trying to pursuade any person to vote for a particular candidate. We are all adults that make our own decisions and our children will live with it.
I think our nation is finished. I can’t see a pursuasive path to cut entitlement spending and the size/power of government. That would take a generation to accomplish and the handout crowd will mobilize when they get cut off and take back power within 2 years. I don’t think “insert your dream candidate here” can fix it. That is just the way I see it.
If Romney nominates a couple of lukewarm Justices that may give us a few more years to get the hobby farm built up. The extra time to prepare for what may be coming will not be wasted. I won’t be voting for him. I will be voting against the other guy.
I believe we should be able to discuss issues in a reasonable manner. Thank you for believing the same and each of us should do what we believe is best. May God bless you and yours.
Yes, and we are still paying mightily for the damage that Jimmy Carter wrought.
Good to see someone else with the same déjà vu as I. Only this time the damage is unimaginable - JimmyCarter 10 . The stakes are just to high.
Both Romney and Obama have money and the cash flow to "BUY" the Presidency.....neither can win it by their agendas because neither are clear what that is to the public....neither promote the welfare of this country. Only one does so and has pledged his heart to do so...he has nothing to loose by doing so.. and wants to get this country back under "One Nation under God"..and I'll add the Christian God for which our founders established this nation on.
It's time to get behind Newt for every conservative here on FR......and on to convention!!!!!
And listen to this: "The history of how Reagan came from behind and won because he had big ideas and sensible plans for getting us out of the then liberal establishment in Washington with the 2nd most liberal president in history.
Romney now is Bush then. Gingrich now is Reagan then. Gingrich has the ideas and the fighting spirit. Romney, like Bush is simply the "manager in chief."
Nothing is inevitable until the primaries are over. And even then, it's more and more likely now that we will have the 1st brokered convention in over 80 years.
Also look at the 08 Dem primaries where Clinton was ahead until the bitter end when Obama finally surged... You can't predict these things, and you certainly can't go with the conventional wisdom, because it is almost always wrong.
Obama is clearly afraid of Newt, but has no fear of Romney as we know....this Primary is not over by any means...their are still cards to be played.
Remmeber too that Newt said when he began this, and knowign he did not have the funds to match Romney... he would wait until the front runners had stepped down...well now the last one is gone.. so I suspect we'll be seeing Newt rise again...be watcching for it Onyx! This is going to be a great ride!!!!!!
Sadly the ABO screed is all we will hear.
Rush
Levin
Hannity
Palin
All have vowed to fight 100% for the nominee, which in my mind gave the GOPe the b@lls to stick with the 30 percenter to the end.
God help us all.
No wonder JimRob responded to this post of Mormon Jeff Head by saying "What a steaming pile of mealy-mouthed clap trap. What happened to the strong hard as nails pro-life, pro-Liberty conservative Jeff Head that I used to admire and respect."
Jeff Head wants us to judge RomneyCare on the basis of the Bay State being a liberal state & looking @ what Romney vetoed overall in that state. Even if we conclude that RomneyCare was some sort of "given" -- as Jeff contends -- how about looking at what Romney could have vetoed to dilute the abortion impact of RomneyCare...but refused:
By April 12, 2006 when RomneyCare passed, this was no longer an issue of Romney having to do or say something to get elected or even govern (as Jeff insinuates -- "though it is clear Romney took liberal positions to get elected governor, and then to govern there")...nobody in 2006 was forcing a gun to Romney's head to remain pro-abortion.
Via RomneyCare, Mitt expanded abortion access/taxpayer funded abortions for women--including almost 2% of the females of his state who earn $75,000 or more. Assessment: (Wait a minute, I thought he told us post-'06 that ALL of his actions were "pro-life?" How could this be other than what JimRob concluded: "Romney is a fricken compulsive LIAR!!").
Also, not only this, but as governor, Romney could have exercised veto power to portions of Commonwealth Care. Did Romney exercise this power? (Yes, he vetoed Sections 5, 27, 29, 47, 112, 113, 134 & 137). What prominent section dealing with Planned Parenthood as part of the "payment policy advisory board" did Romney choose NOT to veto? (Section 3) That section mandates that one member of MassHealth Payment Policy Board must be appointed by Planned Parenthood League of MA. (See chapter 58 of the Acts of 2006, section 3 for details).
That’s a bold and powerful photo Elsie...and truth in the flesh! Thank you for posting that...it speaks volumes!
Having been one of the Freepers who went to the wall repeatedly in defense of Palin in the PDS wars, I also have no problem saying that if in fact she campaigns for MR, promotes him et all, then she will have become every bit as much a part of the problem as a Bohener, Rove or ‘insert RINO here’. Right and wrong are not mutable states of being.
Saying that greatly upsets me as I spent considerable time and effort defending her to unsubstantiated attacks. But if the shoe fits her, I’ll not shy away from saying she should wear it.
She and every other ‘conservative’ can stand and be counted, or not. And live with the fallout of her actions. She has MANY good qualities and I’d love to see them as President. But if she goes to the dark side, her past conservatism goes away with it. She would not be the first politico to disappoint me. But it sure would be a hard hit.
I think that's right BTW. Today I was reading Romney's fathers history.....learned a great deal why Romney is the way he is.
from the book : "The Making of the President" this quotes for how his father was sized up in his run:
Presidential historian Theodore H. White wrote that during his campaign Romney gave.... "the impression of an honest and decent man simply not cut out to be President of the United States."
Governor Jim Rhodes of Ohio more memorably said,... "Watching George Romney run for the presidency was like watching a duck try to make love to a football". HAhAHAAHAHA! Like father like son.
Someone has to choose wisely for them since their dad is using the lib ‘bully’ mantra and advocating voting for a man who would abort them.
Sorry Dad, but you need to grow a pair. For your kids and your country.
I am not the one bullying others on this thread. Last time I checked, the GOP is pro-life and the DNC is pro-death. If you can say with a straight face that Romney won’t be better than Obama on the issue of abortion there is no use continuing the conversation.
You make the decision you feel is best. I will do the same. If it looks like Romney stands no chance (a distinct possibility) I might write in Mickey Mouse without a regret. If it looks like there is the slimmest of chances that Zero will return to Chicago there is no question who I will vote against. Those are the realistic choices.
How pathetically sad IS this........now Sarah Palin???????????? She’s going to be attacked here now? Called a rino? SARAH PALIN?
She’s going to lose her conservative cred with you because she’s not willing to let Obama win another election?
I hear you. Im very frustrated with getting things shoved down my throat. I’ve had a few intubations and I’m not doing it anymore.
“If you can say with a straight face that Romney won’t be better than Obama on the issue of abortion there is no use continuing the conversation.”
I sure can. Especially considering the $50 Abortion menu special at McRomney’s. And his cash contributions, his legislation RE PP.....
No, there’s no point in this conversation. You let fear rule you. And you whine like a lib about Bullies. Again. Grow a pair. Or at least stop lying to yourself about the man you intend to vote for.
Sad truth. If you support RINOS, you are one. SP, you, me, anyone. I’m not attacking her by pointing out a simple logical reality.
God bless everyone here.
I’m still praying and keeping faith!
It’s only April.
This primary is ugly, but NOT over.
FReepers of good conscience, must continue to PRAY!
Nothing is set in cement.
GO NEWT!
I hate the democrats/marxists, I hate the marxist/democrat maintream media. I will never surrender to them.
ROTFLOL.
Great finds, dear caww!
God bless you!
FR is and will remain a pro-life, pro-limited government conservative site!!
“I’ve been here for many years. And I admire you, Jim. I know you will do what you think is right. But if it comes to giving Obama 4 more years to finish destroying this country, I will hold my nose and vote for Romney. If you wish to banish me, so be it.”
I agree with your post 100%! You have correctly identified the #1 enemy of rights,freedom, and the Constitution and it is unmistakably OBAMA. Supporting or creating an environment that results in the re-election of Obama is hari kari. I’m a hard core right winger but I am not a Stepford Wife. If this post is my adieu via banishment, then best wishes to all. This was my favorite site, but I’ll get over it.
I don’t have to “decide” if Romney is my guy, he is not.
As for the biggest mistake he’s ever made, jumping on whatever hot topic of the moment is why such dumb decisions are made. It’s impulsive.
Perhaps I will phrase it this way. What makes you trust him? I am not averse to it, but tell me why I should not regard him as opportunistic, basically saying what we want to hear, after ripping Ryan’s budget as too extreme. If that is too extreme how can I expect him to fix things because he doesn’t even want to fix them at the slow pace Ryan does?
And fyi, I never said newt praised pelosi, please show me where I said that.
A man can lay 10,000 bricks, but that don’t make him a mason.
But just let him blank one blank....
Both Romney and Obama have money and the cash flow to "BUY" the Presidency.....neither can win it by their agendas because neither are clear what that is to the public....neither promote the welfare of this country. Only one does so and has pledged his heart to do so...he has nothing to loose by doing so.. and wants to get this country back under "One Nation under God"..and I'll add the Christian God for which our founders established this nation on.
It's time to get behind Newt for every conservative here on FR......and on to convention!!!!!
RE "Romney...like Obama... cannot stand on his record so both back away from stating naything that will put them on one side or the other of an issue unless the public seems up for it...."
As if that wasn't bad enough, Rush and Mark Levin have taken to given Romney talking points via their broadcasts, which is really somehow filthy and immoral - they are pretty much serving as on-air consultants for helping Mitt appeal to the base... can you believe it? I mean, can you believe it? Maybe of Rush, but I certainly never expected it of Levin... And I never expected Levin to endorse Romney the other night... Never. I am still in shock...
They are actually trying to make Romney look like something he is not... and that something they want him to appear to be is a conservative...
Please do anything you can to help Newt... we all have to beyond words and into action..
Stay Strong!
Well, to hear-tell directly from Mitt and Ann Romney over the past two campaigns (Mitt, Aug/2007 & Ann, Fall, 2011), why the Romneys were supposedly never pro-abortion! Look @ the chart below for Mitt Romney's Aug 2007 interview with Chris Wallace...and Ann Romney's Fall 2011 interview with Parade Magazine:
| YEAR | Obvious Pro-Abortion Romney | Romney Feigning 'Pro-Life' | |
| Bottom-Line Summary: Mitt Romney Lies Thru His Teeth | “Over the last multiple years, as you know, I have been effectively pro-choice." (Bruce Smith, "Romney Campaigns in SC with Sen. DeMint," The Associated Press, 1/29/07) + ...”my position was effectively pro-choice." (Source: 2007 GOP Iowa Straw Poll debate 8/5/2007) | So, not only does Ann Romney tell Parade Magazine November 2011 that they've “never changed” re: abortion and that they've “always been pro-life,” but Mitt Romney told Chris Wallace part-way through their 2007 campaign that: “I never allowed myself to use the word pro-choice because I didn't FEEL I was pro-choice. I would protect the law, I said, as it was, but I wasn't pro-choice”...This was seven months after he said in January 2007 that he was “always for life.” | |
| 1994 (Campaign) | "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) = Mitt the flipster from what most LDS represent their faith as being...BTW, Romney uses the strongest word possible for support – “sustain” ...Note for non-Mormons: Lds use the word “sustain” for support for their own “prophet” | Romney has since invoked a "nuanced stance" about what he was in 1994: He says "Look, I was pro-choice. I am pro-life. You can go back to YouTube and look at what I said in 1994. I never said I was pro-choice, but my position was effectively pro-choice. (Source: Source: 2007 GOP Iowa Straw Poll debate Aug 5, 2007) | |
| December 2007 vs. November 2011 (Pro-treating offspring as research refuse late in previous POTUS campaign vs. now claiming 'never changed...always pro-life' | December 4, 2007: Romney: ...surplus embryos...Those embryos, I hope, could be available for adoption for people who would like to adopt embryos. But if a parent decides they would want to donate one of those embryos for purposes of research, in my view, that's acceptable. It should not be made against the law." (Source: Candidates Reveal Their Biggest Mistakes) Any "inquiring minds" want to try wrapping their minds around how a politician in one sentence mentions "adopting" embryos out (yes, a great thing to mention!) -- but then in the very NEXT breath says if a "PARENT" wants to be "pro-choice" (Mitt used the word "decides" which is what "pro-choicers" say they want) "to donate one of those embryos for purposes of research, in my view, that's acceptable." Say what???? How about 8-month gestationally-aged infants in the womb, Mitt? Or already-born infants, too, Mitt? If a "parent decides they would want to donate one of those...for purposes of research, in my view, that's acceptable..." No??? What's the 'pro-life' difference, Mitt? Here you call an embryo's mom&dad "parents" -- but "parents" w/ "research" give-away rights? How bizarre we have such a schizophrenic "candidate!" | In the past you’ve said he’s changed positions only once, on abortion. Was that your doing? No, no, I never talked to Mitt about that. Our personal opinions have never changed; we’ve always been pro-life (Ann Romney Reveals Mitt's Softer Side) |
He took very carefully worded positions when he ran of personally being against those things though promising to "support the law." I would not have even tried and played such games with such fundamental issues, but he did and they have resulted in this very understandable problem he has...and deserves... (Jeff Head, post 818)
He did no such thing...Let's look @ the chart above to review what language Romney used when he ran for Senate in 1994:
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)
Shame, double shame and triple shame upon the integrity of Jeff Head!
He of ALL people SHOULD KNOW how strong of a word it is for Mormons to say they "sustain" something? Why? Because that is the exact word used that Mormon grassroots & leaders are told to act toward their "living 'prophet'" -- to "sustain" him...!!!
”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
...though it is clear Romney took liberal positions to get elected governor, and then to govern there, he did change and flip-flop on most of them when running for the GOP nomination. As he would have to. He is saying and supporting most of the right things now... [Jeff Head, post 818)
Romney "flipped" to "pro-life" Nov of 2004;
"flopped" by saying @ a press conference that he was keeping the "status quo" of abortion in MA May of 2005 & followed that up with his taxpayer-funded abortion program & Planned Parenthood open doors of RomneyCare in Spring 2006;
Then he "flipped" "pro-life" again in most of 2007...
...until he "flopped" on the Katie Couric show Dec of '07 -- saying 'twas "OK" for parents to give up their offspring to "research"
Now he's "flipped" for the third time in less than 7.5 years!!!!
You not only can't trust Mitt Romney, you can't trust Mormons like Jeff Head...they'll say anything...
It’s going to get uglier no doubt...there are many “forces” at play so we’re all praying that God’s will will prevail.
Either he’ll lift this nation back up...or he’ll let it fall. The man we choose will make the difference which way this goes....and only Newt has the desire to put this nation back “Under Gods Sovernity” and has stated so.
May the Lord truly hear our prayers and grant Newt renewed strength and wisdom to know where the steps are God would have him go in these weeks ahead...on behalf of this nation and it’s people.
Keep praying. It’s said that God works in mysterious ways. Trust in Him.
I do and thank you for your kind words. I don’t wish ill on anyone on this forum and appreciate the differing views when they are accompanied by reasoning. I have learned plenty and share the anger and frustration. I swore up and down that I would never vote for John McCain 4 years ago prior to him choosing Palin.
No, he is not. That is cult of personality thinking. The enemy is the ideology of leftism. Socialism, communism, Progressivism. 0bungler is just one agent of that ideology among millions. Romney is another.
May 8, NC Primary- voting for Newt, and against gay marriage. A damn good day.
I’ve stoppped listening to Fox awhile ago...then stopped Beck...then Drudge...and now they’re all on the bandwagon...because they have to sell what they stations, producers and owners tell them.
I suspect Savage and others will also jump on in time...making Obama a very happy man.
Now that’s sweet music to my ears!...and no doubt to Gods!
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.