Posted on 06/11/2012 9:17:17 AM PDT by EternalVigilance
"All officers of government in this country, in every branch, at every level, have as the first obligation of their sacred oath the protection of all innocent lives within their jurisdiction.
Should I be elected to the office of President of the United States, I will keep my oath.
Justice Blackmun, in Roe vs. Wade, admitted that “of course” the child in the womb is protected by the Fourteenth Amendment, if they are a person.
Since it is self-evident that they are a person, my first act as President, after having sworn the oath, will be to publish a presidential finding to that effect.
My second act will be to ask for the resignation of anyone in the executive branch who will not act accordingly.
My third act will be to order the closing of every abortion facility in the country, as per the explicit, imperative requirement of the Supreme Law of the Land.
'No person shall be deprived of life without due process of law.'
'No State shall deprive any person of life without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.'”
-- Tom Hoefling
Are you really trying that?!LOL...
You're seriously saying that you aren't concerned about an obama win? Well, most of us are concerned about it. You will find yourself in the minority there. That's fine of course... but you appear foolish in your refusal to acknowledge that you could put obama in charge again.
What's worse Finny? Obama or Romney? If you answer that like Jay Carney, then YOU are part of the problem.
And why we will not settle for anything less in any potential political leader.
America's Party Leadership Pledge
It's not an unreasonable demand.
Odd that as a n00b you leave out the other possibilities for voting for Rominy as a voter against letting the little bastard commie finish off the Republic. I suppose you don’t beleive the collapse can happen or you want it to so you can use the preaprpations you may have made to wait it out to whatever comes next. (See how easy it is to mischaracterize what someone posts? Welcome to Freerepublic, n00b)
LOL. Another classic meme!
How might ansel12 put it?
Find a more creative way than that to malign my realistic conservatism.
LOL, really this is your big pro-Romney roll out to persuade conservatives?
This is your big show, the 2012 campaign for Mitt Romney for President?
I like Dante's take on that.
“The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who, in times of great moral crisis, maintain their neutrality.”
Bizarre, you are shilling for Romney, promoting Romney, that is what you are pestering me about, you want me to vote for your man Romney.
Thank you. You are righteous on this thread.
Reagan was never pro-abortion, yet Romney has spent 5 years telling the public that he was “adamantly” pro-abortion. Romney despised Reagan, conservatism, and was passionately pro-abortion, Romney was emotionally and sincerely pro-abortion and had become so in 1963 and remained vocally so until he started running for the GOP nomination.
Reagan quickly realized that he had been rolled in the late 1960s as a new Governor, years before Roe v Wade and the effective pro-life awakening to what was happening.
from Mark Levin:
“Others have suggested that Reagan flip-flopped on abortion; this is also false. He advocated a health exception (for the life of the mother) which, as he explained later, was exploited to include virtually anything. But he wasn’t pro-abortion. Giuliani and Romney were. And they are struggling with it today. Reagan learned that the exception became the rule, and he would oppose abortion of any kind from then on. To compare this with those who emphatically defended abortion on demand (and federal funding no less, in Giuliani’s case) is nonsense.
Moreover, Reagan did all he could as president to follow through on his pro-life position. He instituted his Mexico City policy, preventing the use of federal funds for abortions abroad. His administration was directed to deny funds, wherever it could, for abortions. He was also part of an effort, led by Jesse Helms in the Senate, to amend the Constitution. There weren’t enough votes, but they tried.”
Read the rest here:
http://article.nationalreview.com/print/?q=M2JiMmZhZTQ5NzI5YzYyOGQ5MGNkYWY5M2YzMjYzZGI=
I think you’re in over your head Tau Food.
First, welcome to Free Republic. Second, you insult everyone here and make yourself too easy to spot when you post with such myopia.
Yes, a whole hell of a lot of people are scared shotless of what an obama 2nd term would mean - and yes I do feel compelled to do all I can to avoid it. That you do not have any such fear is telling - as is your post construction.
There is, unfortunately, only one candidate who can realistically deny Bambi that second opportunity to finish America off, and it's none of those that I supported. It's a shame, but it's what we have.
I'm sorry you wouldn't answer the question, but it does look bad to anyone looking at your posts.
you may be a nice guy (or not), but you will do nothing but make stupid purists waste their opportunity to get rid of this most evil of administrations.
And you'll likely make a living off of them at the same time. Good luck with that.
-- "troll"
-- "Tom wants to be a dictator"
-- "Oh yeah, because yer a troll"
-- "Stop doing drugs and then perhaps people will listen."
--"hey shithead, I’m not a liberal"
-- "go eat a gob of fat"
-- "You’re just showing your ignorance and lack of class."
-- "u bore me"
All things I found in a quick search of your posting history.
Who's been hurling insults again? Where have I leveled that kind of invective at folks who disagree with me?
>>Therefore, I ask you, as someone who has been watching this much longer than me, are these folks really so frightened by the future or are they just ashamed of what they believe? <<
I’ll answer.
I’m terrified that Obama will win.
I said from the beginning, ABO.
This isn't pro-homosexual?
"For some voters it might be enough for me to simply match my opponent’s record in this area. But I believe we can and must do better. If we are to achieve the goals we share, we must make equality for gays and lesbians a mainstream concern. My opponent cannot do this. I can and will."
"One issue I want to clarify concerns President Clinton’s “don’t ask, don’t tell, don’t pursue” military policy. I believe that the Clinton compromise was a step in the right direction. I am also convinced that it is the first of a number of steps that will ultimately lead to gays and lesbians being able to serve openly and honestly in our nation’s military. That goal will only be reached when preventing discrimination against gays and lesbians is a mainstream concern, which is a goal we share."
I got over heated, and over zealous, good luck to you.
Well, Principled, I sure don't feel like I'm in over my head. Yes, a whole hell of a lot of people are scared shotless of what an obama 2nd term would mean - and yes I do feel compelled to do all I can to avoid it.
Thank you for answering my question, Principled. I'll repeat what I said to driftdiver in post 211: "It must be painful to feel that you are compelled to choose between the shame of voting for Romney and the fear of a future without a President Romney to protect you."
It's pitiful, really.
And, if you get what you think you want, I think you'll be sorry for it.
But, you vote the way you want for whatever reason you want. I'm going to be proud of my vote and I won't look back.
Thanks.
Are you people on LSD?
You get on freerepublic beating us over the head promoting Mitt Romney, attacking us for not supporting your man, and in between all that aggressive Romney posting, you interject posts saying "I'm not pro-Romney".
You are on this very thread pushing Mitt Romney!
You are pro-Romney.
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.