We have forgotten what our Founding Fathers fought for and were willing to lay down their lives for. We are now SLAVES to the government for 6 months of the year to pay taxes. So the ELITE of both parties can live the life of the Rich and Famous.
Posted on 07/11/2012 7:55:12 AM PDT by EternalVigilance
No, I’m not going to just assume that you know what you’re talking about when you claim that Stericycle waited until Romney sold his interest in Stericycle before disposing of fetuses. I don’t even think Romney has said what you’re claiming.
Listen, anybody can create imaginary doubts about anything. Let me suggest another one to add to your list: “How do we know that it’s not a different Mitt Romney?” Let’s see someone prove that!!
As we discussed in earlier posts, Romney tried to deceive us when he wanted us to believe he was done with Bain in 1999. That’s the point of these articles all over the news today. Obviously, he doesn’t need your help to make up facts.
If he’s got an exculpatory explanation for all this, Romney can and will hold a press conference and get it behind him. If he doesn’t, well, then he just doesn’t.
And, remember, not all Republicans are conservative and not all Republicans are opposed to abortion He still has his liberal base.
"Federal documents filed by Mitt Romney's former company appear to conflict with the Republican presidential candidate's statements about when he left Bain Capital, the private-equity firm central to his legacy in the private sector.
In a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission in February 2001, Bain Capital listed Romney as the company's 'sole shareholder, sole director, chief executive officer and president.' It said Romney's "principal occupation" was as Bain's managing director."
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gayxGHH8V9fU3ki-NY19OL-NgLcg?docId=ecbfec91b0d04af38fab5e776c4b01ca
So, if the sole shareholder, sole director, chief executive officer and president of Bain didn't know what Bain was doing, who did?
And, if the sole shareholder, sole director, chief executive officer and president of Bain wasn't responsible for the content of its legal filings, who was?
Maybe you have a name.
A vote for evil is a vote for evil.
Obozo is evil.
Mittler is evil.
Your first paragraph is a quite valid complaint. It is NOT trashing Norma McCorvey OR Dr. Bernard Nathanson to point out their public reversal in regard to abortion. Therefore you have my apology for my assertion. I might make arguments in mitigation but not honestly. On this, you are right and I was wrong. I have too many reasons to be validly angry this year. You are not one of those reasons.
As a recovering attorney who has represented, among 1100 arrested in various incidents of abortion mill "rescues," two future important staffers of National Right to Life Committee when they were still principled enough to be arrested, I am afraid that I do have some probably unwelcome news for you.
One of those clients is still and ever as principled as he was then and shortly after being employed by NRTLC, resigned and moved on to genuine pro-life activity with Judie Brown and American Life League. The other, to the best of my knowledge, is still with NRTLC and seems primarily interested in salary, perks, and a fifty-year pin and a gold watch at retirement whether Roe vs. Wade is conquered or not. A major priority of such charity bureaucracies is "Don't Rock the Boat." Another is the slogan of the Chicago Demonrat Machine: "Don't back no losers. Don't make no waves."
Don't be taken in by organization's names. Most of NRTLC's leadership, through abject public cowardice and a palpable love of various forms of creature comfort, is more of a hindrance to the survival of babies in utero than is the despicable likes of Schmuckie Chewmer. At least Chewmer is an "honest" and candid militant baby-killer. What you see is what you get. Schmuckie is not a stealth coward.
When Fr. Pavone founded Priests for Life, it was a red hot and useful organization. In recent years, not so much. It is a sign of a troubled priest when he moves from diocese to diocese when he disagrees with his diocesan ordinary to whom he owes obedience. He is ordained as a Catholic priest and the Church is not some debating society. He has been repeatedly called to account for the finances of his organization by the IRS IIRC and far more importantly by bishops who have real administrative responsibilities. If they were not doing THEIR jobs of oversight, the Church's army of critics would be attacking the bishops for blindly trusting him. My personal opinion of Fr. Pavone is that he is a very fine man but is increasingly caught up in worldly concerns detrimental to his chosen ministry.
When $$$ concerns intrude on otherwise principled groups (such as one might argue the GOP and RSCC and RCCC used to be) and become their standard of judgment, disaster looms. To rationalize support of the likes of Romney because doing otherwise may offend spaghetti-spined mush-brained Republican country clubbers who like to think themselves "moderately" pro-life is to be part of the problem and not part of the solution.
It is better by far to operate as fast-moving and effective light infantry than to become bogged down trying to figure how to keep half-assed enemy potential contributors happy to finance better air-conditioning at the general's comfy headquarters or to buy the general a spiffier limousine to make HIM happy.
I have represented many wonderful pro-life priests and particularly the late Fr. Norman Weslin who died this year on May 16, three years after his arrest for protesting Obozo's role in the Notre Shame University commencement exercises, for singing the Ave Maria in the face of Notre Shame "authorities," for public pro-life activity (quite peaceful) not approved by the heathens posing as Catholic priests like Fr. Jenkins who run the place and for criminal trespass. I represented him several times in New England for "rescues." Google his name. Find first The American Catholic and the victim soul website obituaries. If Fr. Weslin were still alive, I would say to you: Convince Fr. Weslin to vote for Mittler and you have convinced me. Knowing Fr, Weslin as I did, that would be as likely as Lucifer successfully apologizing to God.
No pro-life priest I have known as a Rescue client would EVER vote for Mittler.
One barrier between thee and me is that you actually believe Mittler's lies and apparently you are not aware of Mittler's history.
It is true that Obozo has refused to vote, as an Illinois State Senator, to interfere with the death by exposure of abortion victims who survive and are born so long as the "mother" persists in wanting the child put to death. It is, ummm, highly unlikely that a Senate run by cowardly Harry Cathouse Reid which has not the guts to vote a budget for fear of the voters, would EVER consider the legalization of killing the handful of survivors who are born in whatever condition. Kagan and Ginsburg might have the brass to try to legalize by SCOTUS decision. Sotomayor might join in but probably not. Breyer and the five Republicans NEVER.
Now let's dispense with the politicians' mere posturing and get to the real issues.
1. On Church persecution by making mandatory the funding of abortion and other abominations: Mittler is actually worse than Obozo. Romneycare, IIRC, has no exemption for the churches themselves. Mittler has ALREADY persecuted the Church through Romneycare. Obozocare may never go into effect. We don't know until we see who gets elected this November to House and Senate. Romney required the bishops to provide Romneycare coverage of abortion, sterilization, abortifacients, morning after pills, IUDs and other "birth control." Both Obozo and Mittler require such premiums be paid for employees of church schools, hospitals and other ministries. Under Mittler, 97-year-old Sister Cunnigundus, a nun sooooo old that she was an actual Catholic when she professed her vows and not a Marxist social worker which is now the vogue, MUST have coverage for abortion, sterilization, etc., if she is insured under a school policy. Like everyone else of her age and condition (let's say COPD), Sr. Cunnigundus will NOT be getting actual medical care for which her bishop MUST pay but, in the unlikely event that she should be in dire need of an abortion or a belated "gender reassignment" therapy and surgery, she'll have coverage paid by her bishop. At least Obozo (not that I would be caught dead voting for him either) leaves a loophole or two unlike Mittler.
2. While Obozo is a candid pro-abort, Mittler is the more stealth variety. Neither has ever done a damned thing to reduce abortions. Talk is cheap for politicians. Actions speak louder than words.
3. This post is long enough already BUT Mittler 2 YEARS AFTER CLAIMING TO BECOME PRO-LIFE installed Romneycare which is actually MORE pro-abort and church persecuting (by a smidgeon) than Obozocare. Neither major party candidate is describable as a person whose "absolute personal opposition to procured abortion" is well known. In fact BOTH Obozo and Mittler are shameless Margaret Sanger abortionist pom pom girls (with apologies to the Dallas Cowgirls and nice high school cheerleaders across the fruited plain).
It is not morally permissible, particularly under the pope and documents you cite, to vote for Mittler OR Obozo. Reserve your faith for God and not for politicians. We must resist moral relativism which is the surest path to hell.
Finally, as to Mittler's "public reversal," did his lips move???
1. You have any actual numbers on partial birth abortions???? I did not think so. Yet you are raving about tens of thousands of them that have been/will be slaughtered by partial birth abortion. You know better than that just on the numbers. Also, the baby conceived a minute ago is as valuable as the eight-month old baby in utero who may be killed by partial birth abortion or you or me or your grandfather if still alive. Each of us is a soul wrapped in an aging body (whatever age) and a day closer to physical death of that respective body with each sunrise.
2. As you well know, there is a legitimate argument among pro-lifers in which one faction believes in saving each and every life no matter what and sees it as necessary not to compromise by taking the low-hanging fruit like fighting partial birth abortion as though it were a separate issue.
2A. There is another position that says that since each life is precious, we must take the low-hanging fruit like ending partial birth abortion even if doing so makes harder the saving of first trimester and second trimester babies. This appears to be your position but correct me if I am wrong.
2B. I look at the dichotomy like a fireman who really cares about his job, fervently wishes that people would take every known precaution against fires, works to improve regulations, participates in community education and updates each and every firefighting skill to best be able to save folks in fires. One night the fireman is called to the scene of an apartment house blaze. The east wing of the building (6 apartments) is totally engulfed. The central structure (6 apartments) is beginning to burn. The west wing (6 apartments) is so far untouched. I don't think that the fireman can, in good conscience, throw up his hands in frustration and abandon the occupants because no one listened to his wisdom. He must act to save as many as he can save in the immediate emergency. That does not mean he has to abandon his efforts to reform the law and totally end abortion.
3. You may, in your apparent enthusiasm for the lies of Governor Etch-a-Sketch or out of a passionate need to convince yourself that pro-lifers have a major party candidate or in an exercise in moral relativism, wish to go after Tom Hoefling for what is the genuinely consistent position. I don't join in that. I have learned from Tom before this and may well learn from him again on this.
4. Your post and your accusations against Tom are not just and not worthy of the pro-lifer you have always been. Which baby must die involuntarily so that a few may live??? Is it your, my or Tom's decision to make? Or should we resist each and every abortion?
5. If we leave it to Mittler and/or Obozo, they all die if their "mommies" say so and a paid "medical" hit man cooperates. Stop kidding yourself otherwise for whatever reason.
BTW, you give EV too much benefit of the doubt with 2B, but that is expected when you cannot discern that he has used the abortion issue as his means to empower his compensation ladened self-righteousness with his all or nothing position over the years. Also, your twisting knot in #4 reveals your confusion. Has Tom tried to wheedle money out of you yet 'to help him get out of being stranded somewhere'?
And just so you'll know, Conservatives do not have a candidate this election WHO CAN ACTUALLY WIN THE ELECTION AND CHANGE ANYTHING. For empowerment we must vote in conservatives down ticket, and turn out in record numbers to overcome the criminal cheating the bastard commie's minions will accomplish.
But you certainly know how to sound good with empty platitudes while insulting a fellow pro-life freeper.
I did. Thanks. Very inspirational. You were blessed to know him.
One barrier between thee and me is that you actually believe Mittler's lies and apparently you are not aware of Mittler's history.
Not exactly. Had a front-row seat to his antics, and IMO he was more of a figurehead in MA than people realize (and than he would like to admit). The liberal state legislature mostly runs the show (this week going head to head with Gov. Deval Patrick, Obama's Chicago buddy). I have viewed him as a typical mercenary-politician (hence the flip-flopping), whereas I view Obama as a hardened Marxist idealogue. Even based on the premise that politicians of all stripes are self-serving tools of government rather than moral beacons, I still hope that a mercenary Republican has a higher likelihood of being functionally more malleable and responsive to pro-life issues (although there is no guarantee, of course) than an idealogue Democrat. Obama, after 3 1/2 years in office, leaves us in no doubt whatsoever of what is in store if he continues on his destructive path. Romney (maybe?) has the potential to be led in a less morally repugnant direction. Admittedly I'm a cynic, but still not ready to relinquish the field to Obama if there is even a sliver of hope that his wretched Marxist policies can be stymied in ANY way. How is it succumbing to moral relativism if the goal is to push back against a Marxist dictator wannabe who rules by fiat and executive order? After all, Marxism and death go hand in hand.
Reserve your faith for God and not for politicians.
You're absolutely right. Furthermore, expect little to nothing in the way of moral or even rational leadership from politicians, or prepare to be disappointed. Try to vote in a way that mitigates the damage they are allowed to inflict. God will sort out the mess in His own time.
"Which in his times he shall shew, who is the Blessed and only Mighty, the King of kings and the Lord of lords"
As to moral relativism, google wikipedia's article on defining same and go to the section on Roman Catholicism's view of same within that article which references JP II, B-XVI and Veritatis Splendor and specifically uses the abortion "controversy" as an example of the moral relativism that has swept Europe (and the US?) since 1960.
Also, Drudge on Thursday night suggests that Condoleeza Rice is a finalist for VPOTUS nomination. If so, Mittler is flirting with an all pro-abort ticket to titillate the Junior Leaguers and polo players who will be sooooo excited that "we" have chosen an African-American woman who is a pro-abort. If this comes to fruition, there will be an exodus of pro-lifers from the GOP of truly Biblical proportions. I wouldn't vote for Romney no matter whom he chooses but many pro-lifers may want to really, really believe his lies unless and until he pulls this sort of bonehead move.
In Massachusetts, I know one guy whose judgment I would consider IF he supported Mittler. That is Bill Cotter of Operation Rescue Boston. He is not Father Weslin (no one is) but he is reasonably close.
A few more observations on moral relativism. Start with two quite triumphant and generally hard-line terms of Ronaldus Maximus. It was morning in America again. By year 7 he was beginning to slip a bit. Next we got Bush the Elder and "read my lips" who never believed in the Reagan agenda in the first place. Watch what they DO and not what they say. We read his lips and in the 1992 election the spineless liberal SOB had about 37% support left while just thrilling Muffy and Skipper. Bush the Elder paid lip service to pro-life but allowed Operation Rescue to be persecuted by the fedgov under RICO (even Justice Steven Breyer rejected in NOW vs. Scheidler the applicability of RICO). Then we nominated Robert Dole, described memorably by Jack Kemp as the "tax collector for the welfare state." Although Dole had a generally pro-life voting record which helped him in Kansas, he was married to untrustworthy Liddy and both "worshiped" at the same ultra-leftist Foundry Methodist Church in DC as Slick Willie and the Hildebeast. We tacked back a bit toward common sense with Dubya who was a far better man than his daddy as POTUS but certainly not perfect. Then we got McCain whose actual ideology is probably little but not much better than his infamous daughter Miss Piggy. Sarah Palin was the sole bright shining moment in that campaign but she got muzzled by the fashionables. Now it may be Romney/Rice. Not even Ronaldus Maximus was perfect but he was very very good. At his best, Dubya was good. Ford and Nixon were trash. So was Goldwater for reasons not noted in 1964. The others were trash as well. The more we were patient and loyal and supported the GOP-E trash, the worse they got.
It is always the same old lame argument from the GOP. The world will come to an end unless we defeat the Democrats. Yeah, our guy is (with few noted exceptions) a disgrace to the human race but at least he is OUR disgrace. If THEIR guy is elected, the boogie man will getcha and SCOTUS will become the supreme soviet of the US. Aren't you weary of this crap??? I am and I won't play their game anymore.
As recently as 2008, I am ashamed to say that I was having nasty arguments with Tom Hoefling here and I was taking the GOP side against the the 3rd party alternative. Now I will vote for Tom Hoefling and, if he is not on my ballot, I will vote for Virgil Goode who will be. Goode may well cause Mittler to lose Virginia. Let the GOP-E put THAT in their pipe and smoke it.
If Obozo is re-elected, the GOP will have to stick together to resist him and then maybe the pro-abort, anti-military, tax on modest folks hungry, pro-homosexualist, Church hating, GOP-E slack-jawed spoiled rich brats will get the message that conservatives don't exist to be used by them. They will have do it our way (not lip service but consistent effective ACTION) or they can pay a LOT higher taxes. Those are their options. If they want this conservative vote from now on at any level, they will have to EARN it.
I’m curious from a different angle. Bain never got involved in a business just for the hell of it. Bain got involved in failing businesses. I’d logically conclude that Stericycle was about to go under, and Bain was invited in to revamp its business. So, Mittlessly or otherwise, what did Bain do in Stericycle?
Wikipedia, of course, is always an accurate view of the Roman Catholic Church!
I don't think I have ever disrespected YOU but I certainly despise Romney.
Guttmacher??? The Planned Barrenhood propaganda foundation Alan Guttmacher Institute named after Planned Barrenhood's former Executive Director? That Guttmacher???
Use your head. There are very few (10, 20?) babybutchers who have EVER committed even ONE partial birth abortion. One can almost name them: Warren Hearn, the, ummm, late Killer Tiller, Carhardt, and a tiny handful of other ghouls. Very few women SEEK such late-term abortions in which the baby's body is extracted through the birth canal with the head remaining inside the mother for "legality's" sake and then the base of the baby's skull is punctured and the brain suctioned out. "Oh, Warren, the baby seems to be dead. Now we can pull the head out." A woman who survives that procedure with her mental state intact is either a psychopath or a very rare bird indeed. Tens of thousands of these are not a credible number. One such procedure is too many. It is NOT a numbers game and exaggeration is not necessary.
You are whining about being insulted while using "asshat agitprop Hoefling sycophant" and "hypocrite" (the dreaded leftist h word) as a description of me??? If and when you regain your composure after this imbecile excuse for a POTUS election is over, we may communicate again. If not, then not. Nice knowing you until very lately.
I have gone back and forth with Tom on this website for about six years. He knows who I am (almost no other FReepers do other than a couple of close personal old friends), where I live and what my telephone number is. He has never suggested that I give him one red cent. If I had money, I would help him upon request. Since I have verrrrry little income and no savings it is a moot point.
I reiterate paragraph 4 and stand by it. You are WAY out of line.
The argument in 2B is my own and not Tom's. I support him here but that does not make him responsible for the arguments I make or the words I choose. He is a lot more of a gentleman than I am. I suspect Tom would disagree with 2B because he is harder line than 2B. 2B is the somewhat ambiguous argument I used to make to hard-core pro-life (all or nothing as you put it) friends and Rescue clients in Connecticut. You were too busy indulging your frustrations and your Romney-addled anger (that is not an accusation as to your voting intentions but an observation that you have been addled by Romney whatever your intentions) to recognize it as taking a position similar to your own in (by necessary analogy) advocating triage and saving each baby who is practically savable but that's OK, who knows time cures all heels and you may regain your composure and sanity.
IF I were still practicing law and IF you had the courage to Rescue actual babies being scheduled for slaughter on a given morning in my geographical vicinity (as 1100 others arrested had), I would represent you anyway unless you insisted otherwise. In your current state of mind, you would probably claim I was looking for fees except I never charged an arrested pro-lifer a dime.
Now, if you are up to it, you can apologize to me as well as to Tom (see that paragraph 4) or not, as you see fit. If I intended to insult you, trust me that I know how. If you are soooooo upset by disagreement, then you would be carted off in a straitjacket to Happy Acres if I intended to insult you and carried through on it.
Challenge: what have I said that you regard as an insult and why? Show me what you regard as an unjustified accusation by me in your direction and I, if your complaint is accurate, I will apologize. If not, not.
Finally, were you planning to vote for Obozo??? Who knew? I did not think so. Virgil Goode??? I might too if Tom is not on my ballot. Skipping POTUS altogether? An honorable choice but not my own.
"In other words, Romney is telling the voters he had no idea what Bain was doing after February 1999 even though he was listed as sole owner and stockholder while drawing a six figure salary from them for years after and four other mysterious business entities were incorporated in conjunction with Bain during that time. Remind me again why we’re supposed to trust his “business experience” if he didn’t even know what his corporation was doing in his name?
The Romney campaign announced it will demand the Globe retract the story, but they’re just reporting what the documents say and asking the appropriate questions. There is an easier way for Romney to resolve the discrepancies between his campaign statements and his legal filings. Rather than trying to browbeat the media into covering up for him, he could just release the last ten years of his tax returns as every serious candidate for president has done since his own father set the precedent."
Romney can remove the clouds of smoke surrounding these events by getting the documents out to the public now and by following up with direct and honest answers to the questions raised by the conflict between what Romney and Bain are saying now and what the contemporaneous documents disclose. Romney should not drag this out. Even if the truth is painful, get it all out now!
We have forgotten what our Founding Fathers fought for and were willing to lay down their lives for. We are now SLAVES to the government for 6 months of the year to pay taxes. So the ELITE of both parties can live the life of the Rich and Famous.
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.