A President Antonin Scalia.
Think he is a Republican?
Isn't anyone else tired of these stuffed suits we've been voting for?
Posted on 12/15/2006 7:22:32 PM PST by FarRockaway
To: The Republican Party
I am a Christian conservative or social conservative. I am Pro-Life. I vote.
Rudy Giuliani is pro-gay, pro-gun control, and pro-abortion.
For these reasons and others, I state very firmly that I will not vote for Rudy Giuliani for President of the United States under any circumstances.
Senator John McCain has waffled on human cloning, has supported experimentation on human embryos, and has attacked prominent Christian clergy because of the, "evil influence that they exercise." John McCain has said of Pro-Life voters, on a public broadcast radio show, that they are, "otherwise intelligent people who say that that's the only issue that will determine their vote." McCain told the San Francisco Chronicle, "I would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade."
For these reasons and others, I state very firmly that I will not vote for John McCain for President of the United States under any circumstances.
Sincerely,
The primaries will decide the candidates that will populate the ballot. The "vote republican clique" abandoned conservative principles long ago.
Work within the primaries to help your candidate who exhibits the values and leadership you want as President.
At the risk of repeating ad naseum, a signifigant portion of the GOP was demoralized in '06 (about 15-percent) and did not join the process.
Thus, the GOP lost all "close" races in the Northeast and 'battleground' states.
In fact I am STILL ticked at the GOP over their lack of leadership on illegal immigration, on their unwillingness to fight back against the detractors of our battle against Islamo-psycho's, the corruption issue, and several others.
The Dem-wimp party, on the other hand, enjoyed having an '06 campaign free of ideas or responsibility and with an ENEMEDIA pushing all the 'right' liberal buttons---- how could they lose?
Just so we're clear. The home page of this website says it is the "premier conservative website" NOT the "premier Republican Party website."
Your repost of Robinson's comment is a reposting of his opinion, not a restructuring of the mission statement of the website. No attempt by you to make it so will stand. There are lots of Republican Party websites out there and if I want that, I can go there.
Got it?
A President Antonin Scalia.
Think he is a Republican?
Isn't anyone else tired of these stuffed suits we've been voting for?
I have read it! He's wonderful; a man for such a time as this! He and his family are exhausted, but I think that if his country called on him, he would make himself available!
I love your tag line; the only change I would make is to relace Newt with Lynn Cheney! Can you imagine her in a debate with Hillary?
:-)
Oh sweet merciful crap!
You are practicing intolerance of the tolerant.
Everybody has to agree with you or they are "intolerant."
Neither are you.
And demoralizing the GOP and turning them against their own is the reason this article was written. That was my point. We shouldn't be stupid enough to buy into this crap.
The 100% crowd are the reason we lost. Amongst them are the birchers, the buchananites and the perotistas and they actually think they accomplished something by punishing the Republicans who weren't pure enough for them.
They're also the folks that gave us Clinton in the 90s.
Now, we all may be pissed at the GOP over their lack of leadership on the issues you cite, but did it cause you not to vote for them, or to vote the Democrat, as a way to "punish" them for their sins? For those that did that I have not only no sympathy, I have active disgust and disdain.
Evidently you haven't read many of my posts; I'm no "moderate," no Bush-bot, and like you held my nose and voted straight (R) last month. But I would like to avoid President Hillary in '08, and Giuliani seems like the best candidate to do so, so far...
If I ever have the misfortune of engaging in a post involving you again I'll remember to use simple words and declarative sentences tailored for your limited reading and comprehension skills. I'm sorry if my use of actual late 90s sort of computer tools to format my post were intimidating to you. I'll avoid all such scary high tech thingies or complex logic that you don't seem to understand in the future.
Buh bye.
Like I posted to Howlin,
If Giuliani gets the nod, I will reexamine his stated current positions. Hopefully, he will have fixed those that I have found most loathsome.
I will not vote for McCain under any circumstances. He is just as dangerous as Fat Bottomed Girl.
And I will actively agitate and campaign against Hillary!
Disingenuous squirming. They reject your "cult" label.
BTTT
Not bad. (I'd turn it around, but I understand why you made Rudy the PREZ nominee.)
Too bad it won't happen. The Republican Party as of now is "stuck on stupid" and will not play that ticket.
"The crap this guy has been posting is just that - crap."
Harry Reid. I rest my case.
You said -- :Disingenuous squirming. They reject your "cult" label.
They actually don't. "Cult" is a defined term. It is -- like I've said several times before -- Christian terminology. So, any group that departs from what has been boiled down to the lowest common denominator, of *key Christian doctrine* between all the major Christian denominations -- is -- a cult.
So, you go down, point by point, on those items -- and a group either affirms or denies it. When you've "ticked them off", you know whether that group is Christian or *non-Christian -- according to the historic, basic and core Christian doctrines.
If you read that document closely -- you'll see that they're saying that the Mormons don't. In fact, they're saying that while *they* go back to Apostolic Christianity, that Mormons are (so to speak) "Jonny-come-latelies" and don't match what they (i.e., Presbyterians) believe from their "Apostolic traditions" (which is "code speak" for those who know it).
Now, what I've seen, by how people react to this terminology, is that they're thinking that the word pertains to something like Jim Jones or David Koresch. And, you see..., it's basically a "clinical term" -- if you will. It's a defined term. It's not an "emotional term" or a "derogatory" term -- as it's used. But, people "invest themselves" emotionally (in the term) instead of "clinically" and logically -- as one would do in a theology study course.
And that's what the "public at large" comes to think of the term, because they're reading the MSM and they'll use it to describe someone like Jim Jones or someone like David Koresch. The public sees (in their minds), burning buildings or dead people laying around on the ground.
So, once again, by definition, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is a *cult* -- by Christian terminology, meaning that they are *non-Christian*. They *do not* adhere to the basic and core Christian tenets. It's that simple (and not related to dead bodies, kool-aid or burning buildings).
Regards,
Star Traveler
Defend this, all you Romney-philes: (from Wikipedia)
1 Nephi begins in ancient Jerusalem around 600 BC, at roughly the same time as the Book of Jeremiah in the Bible. It tells the story of a prophet, Lehi, his family, and several others as they are led by God from Jerusalem, across the Arabian peninsula, and then to the Americas by ship. The books from 1 Nephi to Omni recount the group's dealings from approximately 600 BC to about 130 BC, in which the community splits into two main groups, the Nephites and the Lamanites, and grow into separate sizable civilizations that war with each other.
The Words of Mormon, written in AD 385 by Mormon, is a short introduction to the books of Mosiah, Alma, Helaman, 3 Nephi, and 4 Nephi, all of which he abridged from a large quantity of existing records that detailed his nation's history from the time of Omni to his own life.
3 Nephi is of particular importance because it contains an account of the resurrected and glorified Jesus's visit to the Americas sometime after his resurrection at Jerusalem, following his 40-day ministry and ascension into heaven. During his American ministry, Christ repeated much of the same doctrine and instruction given in the Gospels of the Bible and established an enlightened, peaceful society which endured several generations.
Mormon is an account of the events during Mormon's life, after the enlightened society of 3 Nephi and 4 Nephi deteriorated yet again into warring groups.
Ether is an abridgment of a record of an earlier people by Moroni. The account describes a group of families, headed by a man named Jared and his brother (referred to, in the text, as “the Brother of Jared,”) as it is led by God to the Americas. The Jaredite civilization existed on the American continent long before Lehi's family arrived in 600 BC, and it was much larger and more developed. Some have argued that the rise and fall of the Jaredite empire corresponds with that of the Olmec.
Moroni details the final destruction of the Nephites and the idolatrous state of the remaining society. He adds a few spiritual insights and mentions some important doctrinal teachings, then closes with his testimony and an invitation to pray to God for a confirmation of the truthfulness of the account.
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.