Posted on 07/02/2007 4:17:47 PM PDT by AFA-Michigan
and the fact that the majority Hotel have this and for some reason everytimes this article is recylcs in the news, it only name Marroitt no other hotels even though the article says hotel chains!
Those other hotel that don't have it also don't have HDTV cable service they offer the cheaper version of cable service!
If the cheaper hotels had a higher quality TV they would have it but it cost more to provide this service so who is kidding who!
The Cheaper hotels have trouble with guess ripping off their equipment!
That's all Mitt's fault. /sarcasm
Romney gets blamed for a lot of stuff that’s not true or unfair but he seems to keep rollin’ along. I admire him for that. Keeps his focus. Right on!
So, your answer is “yes.”
It’s good practice for the presidency. In the near future, people will be blaming everything on President Romney! : )
After all the Dog and Porny farce
TIME FOR SOME ROMNEY REALAITY
http://www.mittromney.com/Learn-About-Mitt/Photo-Album/The-Romney-Family/Ann_Romney_Christmas_2006
Where can I find one of those huge ottomans?
It’s a nice, warm family video, unpretentious and relaxed. Thoroughly enjoyable. Thanks, restornu. : )
Yep, sweet Anne. Donor to Planned Parenthood who did TV appearances in 2002 to assure pro-abort women that her husband as governor would protect abortion on demand.
In action
Nothing that’s any of your damn business, that’s for sure.
Happy Fourth of July!
So what? Doesn't make the prosecutors right. Nifong came to a different conclusion than we did. The Fed prosecutors came to a different conclusion regarding the Waco survivors than we did. Fitzpatrick came to a different conclusion than we did. Guiliani damned sure came to different conclusions in the Milken case than dispassionate, rational people.
Using a prosecutor's opinion to buttress one's argument only undercuts it. It certainly does not buttress it.
I'm not for Romney at all, but as gcruse says above, socons are their own worst enemies. I think many try to parody themselves as agents provocateur.
Think of the person that, at present, you would like to see become the next President. Got it?
Now, suddenly, that person has converted to Mormonism.
Do you still want him/her to be President? Yes or No.
AFA-Michigan: Don’t care, Smithee. Instead of straw men, you keep putting up softballs. Unless you are one, I’ve helped elect more Mormons to public office than you’ve probably ever met.
Like I said, it's a "Yes" or "No" question. "Don't Care" is NOT an answer. But you've answered the question nonetheless.
Hey, Cartouche! Looks like you could be right.
Smithee, last night you got all giddy and made a fool of yourself, high-fiving about my leaving the thread in a post two minutes after I’d responded to you.
Apparently, you haven’t learned your lesson.
First, you’re free to ask questions any way you wish. And I’m free to answer them any way I wish.
Just so my use of the English language isn’t over your head, “don’t care” means I don’t care whether Mitt or my hypothetical candidate is a Mormon (or a Baptist or a Presbyterian).
Don’t even need the “just converted” angle. I’d support a candidate who’s been a lifelong Mormon, if he actually has a record of supporting LDS values (unlike Mitt).
Managed my first legislative campaign 29 years ago at age 20 for an LDS auto mechanic, at whose funeral I sang last year. Consulted another state rep candidate that year, an LDS farmer who won.
Two years later, in the GOP primary, took out an incumbent state rep who was a Nazarene minister with an LDS Realtor. Also that year consulted an LDS former county prosecutor running for state Senate, who narrowly lost. Plus managed the manager of an LDS insurance salesman who took out an incumbent Dem state senator in the fall.
Two years later, managed the manager of an LDS guy running against an incumbent GOP senator. But did my best to take out the incumbent LDS Democrat governor. (Woops, you finally caught me opposing an LDS candidate.)
Two years later, personally managed LDS printer’s ouster of incumbent Dem state senator. Gave my PAC’s largest donation ever to an LDS electrician. Helped LDS insurance agent get reelected. My PAC’s only contribution to a state House candidate that cycle was to an LDS farmer.
And that cycle was over 20 years ago...but three months, supported two LDS candidates in a local school board race.
Now, wild man, tell me how many LDS candidates you’ve help get elected to public office — then, if you qualify, I might let you throw that “religious bigotry” slow pitch across the plate again.
In further reply to Smithee’s dazzlingly clever “yes” or “no” question — zzzzzzz (to indicate snoring) — go to my post on another thread yesterday...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1860275/posts#35
Well, this time, I waited for a response. I didn't get one.
First, you’re free to ask questions any way you wish. And I’m free to answer them any way I wish.
I'm glad you realize that. So you should understand that if you choose to be vague or non-responsive, you have nothing to complain about when people get the wrong impression. You gave it.
I told you explicitly it was a "yes" or "no" question TWICE, and you chose an answer that was neither "yes" nor "no." Now, since you're such a hotshot political consultant, you know good and well that when a politician/spokesperson/bureaucrat is given a perfectly relevant "yes" or "no" question and chooses to respond with an answer that is neither "yes" or "no," s/he is -- almost 100% of the time -- giving you a load of crap. (There is no better illustration of this than Michael Chertoff's refusal to answer Chris Wallace "yes" or "no" as to whether all the enforcement billion$ the Bush Admin offered Republicans as a sweetener to the amnesty bill would now be proposed to enforce current immigration law.)
Just so my use of the English language isn’t over your head, “don’t care” means I don’t care whether Mitt or my hypothetical candidate is a Mormon (or a Baptist or a Presbyterian).
Don’t even need the “just converted” angle. I’d support a candidate who’s been a lifelong Mormon, if he actually has a record of supporting LDS values (unlike Mitt).
Then you should have simply answered "Yes." Why didn't you?
Even if you don't have a problem, I have serious doubts about a Pat Robertson-affiliated organization's motivations. Robertson is a failed Presidential candidate and a loose cannon with delusions of grandeur -- remember how in 2005, he publicly urged the White House to assassinate Hugo Chavez, as if they would have listened? What a maroon.
As so too does strenuous exercise, sex (of course only that sex blessed by marriage)and any number of other activities (like freeping)
I believe this kind of thinking was tried out earlier in Afghanistan by the Taleban Morality Police.
Oh, Saundra ~ I’m so grateful for your post.
It’s the most positive, endearing one I’ve ever read from you, and it prompted me to watch the video.
I think Ann Romney is Mitt’s greatest asset. She’s absolutely beautiful, both face and soul.
My favorite part was the kiddles sledding down the stairs on a mattress!
restornu ~ thanks for posting this peek into the Romney family. I hope it does them a lot of good.
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.