Posted on 12/02/2009 9:21:09 AM PST by pissant
I have been a minor participant at Free Republic, the Internet’s leading conservative forum, since September 2004. An online friend referred me to a discussion where members of Free Republic were talking about the 1952 and 1956 presidential elections, and using my maps from this page to make a point. I had to join FR to introduce myself to that group, and thank them for visiting. Because that was right after the “Rathergate” scandal, I thus became one of the “Pajamahadeen” that had just brought down the Sauronic eye of CBS.
Being a “Freeper” has been an interesting and fun experience, but I am disturbed by a current trend on those boards. For the past few weeks, at least since the latest fundraising drive ended, I have noticed that every new thread begins with a picture or video reminding us that Mitt Romney, the former Massachusetts governor and presidential candidate, supports abortion. It doesn’t matter what the topic is, the anti-Mitt material pops up.
Personally, I think our current priorities ought to be making sure President Obama and his leftist pals don’t force their health care plan down our throats, and defeating as many moonbats as possible in next year’s congressional and gubernatorial elections, especially Harry Reid, Barbara Boxer, Chris Dodd and Slobbering Barney Frank. Then in 2011 or 2012 we can fight over who we want for the presidency. Consequently, yesterday I posted the following on the Kentucky board:
Is anyone else getting sick and tired of the Mitt Romney bashing that goes on at the beginning of each new thread? Granted, he may not be conservative enough for most of us (my first choice for 2012 would probably be Sarah Palin or Duncan Hunter), but he just HAS to be better than the Chicago mob that rules Washington now. Somebody ought to tell Jim Robinson that BHO and his cabal are the real enemy, not Mitt. Sheesh, an outside observer looking at us now is probably getting the impression that Republicans eat their own. And as for Mitt Romney being a Mormon, well, I’m more concerned about Harry Reid’s Mormon faith. Does he HAVE any?
Four replies have appeared since then, and only one agrees with me. The others just said we ought to do whatever we can to make Mitt Romney unelectable. I guess I’m going to take a timeout from Free Republic. Hopefully the Freepers will be acting more sensibly when I return. ’Bye, see you guys next year.
I do question the mormon religion.
Although I totally understand being born into the religion...and having little choice. Considering the mormon history about folks leaving the religion...I can also understand those that stay...even though they might not want to.
Plenty of "jack" mormon's out there....that would probably agree with me.
Can you imagine...growing up a mormon, all your family is mormon..and you want to leave that faith? I can't.
One of the problems in 2012 that I can see is...IF Mr. Romney is the candidate....is the mormon church has a horrible history as far as black people go. And the state run media will kill him over it...Make no mistake about it.
Not to mention that the mormon church is a huge Corp. And has billions in assets...Yes, billions.
Frankly I would be surprised if the mormon leadership didn't send messages to Mitt....not to run. Because they don't want the exposure.
fwiw-
Mitt was never “for infanticide,” which is a different matter than abortion. He was never in favor of abortion, he took the libertarian position.
I ignore everything that appears at the beginning of threads. Everything.
Name one.
I saw people leaving on their own to go elsewhere where they could find people that shared their RINO views, and people that got banned for being downright abusive, but I don't recall anyone that got banned for simply disagreeing.
He conveniently did a complete flip-flip on abortion and several other key issues, just in time for the GOP primaries. I see no reason at all to trust him, after he campaigned as and governed as a Liberal his entire career.
True but check the link out UNDER Reagan!
Mitt ain't itt!
Get lost then.
Pretty simple.
---------------------------------- I think it's time for you to make like a tree and leave.
Thanks for proving the point.
And when you do, it's because people feel sorry for you ... until you open your mouth to spout your whiny, angry, victim attitude ...
... and then you go for another couple of years with people "forgetting" to invite you to the impromptu barbecue.
I’ve wondered how many people who call Romney a “baby-killer” because he supported abortion also have people in their family who support abortion, and if they call them “baby-killers” at Thanksgiving.
Abortion is murder. Abortion doctors are baby-killers. Women who allow doctors to abort their babies support baby-killers.
People who never have an abortion, but who express the opinion that women have a choice, are wrong-headed, but are not killing babies. If they aren’t in a position to change the law, it’s hard to see the point in claiming they are murderers.
I think language suffers when it is overwrought. If the guy at the desk next to you who says women have a right to choose is a “baby-killer”, what do we call the person who actually kills the baby?
Am I supposed to beat up my co-worker for murder?
If I was to create a new name for myself, it would be 'worker-ant'.
PS> Maybe we should investigate Romney's pardons?
...didn't work out well for Huck.
And excuse me, you were NOT speaking for yourself, you were accusing everybody here of reject Mitt primarily because of his Mormonism -- you were "speaking" for them.
Wipe the smudges off your glasses, dear, so you can read your own words a little more clearly.
I agree with you, pissant. I'm no RomneyBot by any means, but it's getting a bit "over the top" lately here at FR.
IMHO, we've got much bigger "enemies" to fight right now... I would prefer we stay as unified as possible and focus on fighting Obama and the Left.
Well, it seems to have worked. Now instead of Mitt, the opener to the threads is Ronald Reagan. It IS time we focused on what binds rather than divides us.
The infighting and name-calling adds nothing to the conservative message or to recruit potential candidates .. who in his/her right mind would ever get involved in a campaign where, if they don’t agree 100% with one conservative wing, they will be lambasted?
Reagan and the libs/Dems have one thing in common: knowing that there are times you have to take half a loaf.
Excellent statement and well put.
Don't let the door hit ya where the good Lord split ya!
LLS
reading an 18,000 post thread is not how I wish to spend my day, to find a name for you.
It might be, Might be another thread is coming.
But actually, we are too early in the 2012 election campain to start purging FReepers who disagree with the boss.
Who knows who will be the front-runners in 2011?
You don't have to read anything here....and you don't have to respond either.
Sounds like you need to grow a new skin...or a pair.
Take your pick.....
Good luck.
Reagan didn't allow anything! The 1967 California Therapeutic Abortion Act was designed to address the most difficult abortion cases. The bill was limited to the 1%-2% exceptions for rape, incest, or personal health risk of the mother. As with most states, abortion was legal to save the life of the mother under California law going back 150 years. The real problem was the California liberal medical community abusing the law and basically encouraging women to have an abortion.
You completely ignore the fact that the Democrat controlled legislature would have overrode any veto by Reagan. These cheap pot shots against Reagan to make a POS like Romney look better are wrong and have to stop.
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.