Posted on 11/01/2011 1:05:31 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
Free Republic founder Jim Robinson has a message for supporters of Mitt Romney: go away.
In an email to POLITICO this afternoon, Robinson admitted that the site routinely blocks Romney supporters from posting -- and offered no apologies for the practice:
Free Republic is a pro-life, pro-family, pro-gun, pro-small government, pro-constitution, pro-liberty site. Governor Romney is none of the above. His record is that of an abortionist, gay rights pushing, gun grabbing, global warming advocating, big government, mandate loving, constitution trampling, flip-flopping liberal progressive with no core values. That and the fact that he is the chief architect and advocate for ObamaCare disqualifies him for any consideration whatsoever on Free Republic as a potential nominee for the presidency.
Read more: http://nation.foxnews.com/mitt-romney/2011/11/01/romney-supporters-banned-free-republic#ixzz1cU7qh32p
(Excerpt) Read more at nation.foxnews.com ...
What part of Jim’s statement don’t you get? You don’t like it around here feel free to leave anytime you want.
You’re a hypocrite, you’ve already spent your 2 braincells pining for a candidate that hasn’t even nominated yet but have already made up your mind that he has, you’ve essentially given up on real conservatism right out of the gate.
This tells me that you and posters like you who claim to not really support Romney are closet Romney drag queens.
Get bent RINO.
The thing about Paul is that he comes across as a different sort of pol but in reality he’s just another Washington game player, performing for a different audience.
And frightful. You won't be laughing. There's still time to learn about the real God and His real purpose for your life, but time is fleeting.
A member since 1998 ???
What were you doing during 2007-2008 ??? On the moon ???
Sheesh, Nana... calm down. I didn't say WHEN I was "ill-informed" about Mitt. It was quite awhile ago, and it lasted about a 'nana-second'. :-)
FR has been INNUNDATED with Romney hatred for quite a few years... it's hard to miss. Frankly, I think most of the rhetoric about him is "over the top"... but, it was enough to make me not want to have him as President.
I do still think he would have been better than McCain, and better than Obama... but, that's about the lowest praise I could give anyone.
Thanks for your concern. Is this the same Mr. S from yesterday?
Geez... so, now the definition of RINO is someone who, given a CHOICE between Romney and Obama, decided to vote AGAINST Obama??
Never thought of myself as a RINO.. I don't even think of myself as a "Republican"! But, I'd make that choice in a second. Hell, I made a WORSE choice last time around.
We need to work like HELL to NOT have to make that kind of choice again. Primaries are coming... time to get working.
Get out there and say "NI" to Romney supporters!!
“FR has been INNUNDATED with Romney hatred for quite a few years...”
Most of what I have heard of Romney has been on his religion. Most of the “hatred” has been not so much towards him but towards Mormons in general. At least from my point of view. I know more about Romney the Mormon than Romney the RINO because of FR.
I can say this however if Romney was a true Mormon he would be pro life. Most Mormons I know are very pro life. It would appear that most of the Mormons, like a few Catholics we know (Nazi Pelosi, any of the kennedys) are pro life until they get into public office.
y6162 FR has the mission statement posted when one enters the forum. I will ask you this. Why would any “conservative” come to a place like FR and push a man like Romney when he goes against what we believe? In fact if they are conservative themselves why are they for him? If they are conservative then Romney is not their guy. They need to walk up and smell the coffee and not be a lemming like those who voted for Obozo.
Jim,
I happen to agree with your thoughts on Mitt Romney. I’m not totally for banning them, but that’s your call, as it’s your site.
I do have an issue though. Why is it that some “conservative Christians (of whom I’m one)” tend to say things like “FUMR”?
I have a scripture on the wall in my house....
Eph. 4:29
“Do not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouths, but only what is helpful for building others up according to their needs, that it may benefit those who listen.”
I agree... but, didn't really want to go there. Showing lack of hatred for Mormons is equally dangerous....
That's a pretty big PERHAPS Buddha.
There are tens of thousands more devout in the 194302 that signed up before you did.
And many more in front of you also that signed up after you did.
You are pretty important though! You've made that quite clear...
JR can ban me too any time he rules it helpful to whatever cause he likes.
Dang, I wish he would make that clear. Kind of hard to figger out after 6 years is it?
I fully understand JR can ban me....any time
It would mean much less to me personally, than it would to Freedom’s agenda.
Oh my! LOL!
Geez, when I said that yesterday, I got blasted. First, there’s NO hatred on FR and then, it’s only a dislike of Mormonism, not Mormons...???
Maybe it’s me!!
There are good atheists and buddists and Muslims, too. At least good by human standards, not by God’s. But I wouldn’t vote for any of them for President.
| YEAR | Obvious Pro-Abortion Romney | Romney Feigning ‘Pro-Life’ |
| Romney, goin’ back to 1970 when Romney’s Mom ran for Senate | ”I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country. I have since the time when my Mom took that position when she ran in 1970 as a U.S. Senate candidate. (October, 1994 Senatorial debate vs. Ted Kennedy) | ”’He’s been a pro-life Mormon faking it as a pro-choice friendly,’” Romney adviser Michael Murphy told the conservative National Review..., says the Concord Monitor = So I guess that made him a below-the-radar “flip” acting like a “flop?” |
| 1994 (Campaign) | ”I believe that abortion should be safe and legal in this country. I have since the time when my Mom took that position when she ran in 1970 as a U.S. Senate candidate. I believe that since Roe v. Wade has been the law for 20 years that we should sustain and support it, and I sustain and support that law and the right of a woman to make that choice.” (October, 1994 Senatorial debate vs. Ted Kennedy) = Mitt the flipster from what most LDS represent their faith as being...BTW, Romney uses the strongest word possible for support ¨C ¡°sustain¡± ...Note for non-Mormons: Lds use the word ¡°sustain¡± for support for their own ¡°prophet¡± | Romney has since invoked a “nuanced stance” about what he was in 1994: He says ”Look, I was pro-choice. I am pro-life. You can go back to YouTube and look at what I said in 1994. I never said I was pro-choice, but my position was effectively pro-choice. (Source: Source: 2007 GOP Iowa Straw Poll debate Aug 5, 2007) |
| 1994 (Planned Parenthood ties) ¡ú 2001 | (a) Romney’s wife gives donation to Planned Parenthood... (b) On June 12, 1994, Romney himself attends private Planned Parenthood event at home of a sister-in-law of a Planned Parenthood board member where the president of Planned Parenthood recalls talking to Romney: ”Nicki Nichols Gamble, a former president and chief executive of Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts, said today that the photo shows Mitt and Ann Romney at a private home in Cohasset in June 1994.” Source: See http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1941932/posts; ”Gamble said the pic was snapped at an event at GOP activist Eleanor Bleakie¡¯s house and that she ¡°clearly¡± remembered speaking with Romney at the event.” Source: See http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1941627/posts; ”In fact Romney personally attended the Planned Parenthood event in question on June 12, 1994. Gamble, the President of Massachusuetts Planned Parenthood in 1994, also attended the event at the home of a Republican, Eleanor Bleakie, the sister-in-law of a Planned Parenthood Board member. Both Romney and Michael Kennedy, who appeared on behalf of nephew of Ted Kennedy, attended the event.” Source: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1941240/posts | 2001: ”I do not wish to be labeled pro-choice.” (Mitt Romney, Letter to the Editor, The Salt Lake Tribune, 7/12/01) = So he doesn’t want to be known as a “flop” (so what is he?) |
| 2002-2004 | ¡°I will preserve and protect a woman¡¯s right to choose, and have devoted and am dedicated to honoring my word in that regard¡(Nov. 2, 2002) = Well, now guess what? He’s solidly pro-abortion AGAIN! See also: ”I respect and will protect a woman’s right to choose. This choice is a deeply personal one ¡ Women should be free to choose based on their own beliefs, not mine and not the government’s.” (Stephanie Ebbert, “Clarity Sought On Romney’s Abortion Stance,” The Boston Globe, 7/3/05) = Ah, back securely in the “flop” saddle again? | Nov. ‘04: Romney & his wife had simultaneous pro-life “conversions” linked to stem cell research: Romney met w/Dr. Douglas Melton from Harvard Stem Cell Institute: He recalls that it happened in a single revelatory moment, during a Nov. 9, 2004, meeting with an embryonic-stem-cell researcher who said he didn’t believe therapeutic cloning presented a moral issue because the embryos were destroyed at 14 days. “It hit me very hard that we had so cheapened the value of human life in a Roe v. Wade environment that it was important to stand for the dignity of human life,” Romney says. Source: Time Mag, March 9, 2007 = (So the pro-abortion-but-no-pro-choice-label-please-is-now-a-pro-life-convert?) |
| 2005 | May 27 2005: Romney affirms his commitment to being “pro-choice” at a press conference. (”I am absolutely committed to my promise to maintain the status quo with regards to laws relating to abortion and choice.”) = OK, this is at least a flop from November ‘04! | What about his gubernatorial record ‘03-’06? Mitt later says his actions were ALL pro-life. I assume somewhere in ‘05 some ‘pro-life’ decisions. ”As governor, I¡¯ve had several pieces of legislation reach my desk, which would have expanded abortion rights in Massachusetts. Each of those I vetoed. Every action I¡¯ve taken as the governor that relates to the sanctity of human life, I have stood on the side of life.” = So, THESE ACTIONS were not only an ‘02 commitment reversal, but his May 27, ‘05 press conference commitment as well. So “flipping” is beginning to be routine |
| 2006 | April 12, 2006—Mitt signs his “Commonwealth Care” into existence, thereby expanding abortion access/taxpayer funded abortions for women—including almost 2% of the females of his state who earn $75,000 or more. (Wait a minute, I thought he told us post-’06 that ALL of his actions were “pro-life?”). Also, not only this, but as governor, Romney could exercise veto power to portions of Commonwealth Care. Did Romney exercise this power? (Yes, he vetoed Sections 5, 27, 29, 47, 112, 113, 134 & 137). What prominent section dealing with Planned Parenthood as part of the “payment policy advisory board” did Romney choose NOT to veto? (Section 3) That section mandates that one member of MassHealth Payment Policy Board must be appointed by Planned Parenthood League of MA. (See chapter 58 of the Acts of 2006, section 3 for details). | ”As governor, I¡¯ve had several pieces of legislation reach my desk, which would have expanded abortion rights in Massachusetts. Each of those I vetoed. Every action I¡¯ve taken as the governor that relates to the sanctity of human life, I have stood on the side of life.” = So, then THESE ACTIONS were not only a reversal of his 2002 commitment, but his May 27, 2005 press conference commitment. So “flipping” is still routine |
| Early 2007 | On January 29, 2007 during South Carolina visit, Romney stated: ¡°Over the last multiple years, as you know, I have been effectively pro-choice.” (Bruce Smith, “Romney Campaigns in SC with Sen. DeMint,” The Associated Press, 1/29/07) = OK how could ”every action I’ve taken as the governor that relates to the sanctity of human life...” AND this statement BOTH be true? | Another South Carolina campaign stop has Romney uttering ”I was always for life¡±: ”I am firmly pro-life¡ I was always for life.” (Jim Davenport, “Romney Affirms Opposition to Abortion,” The Associated Press, 2/9/2007) = Oh, of course as the above shows, he’s always been pro-life! |
| Summer 2007 | ”I never said I was pro-choice, but my position was effectively pro-choice.” Source: 2007 GOP Iowa Straw Poll debate 8/5/2007 = OK...looking at ‘94 & ‘02 campaigns, both his public statements, his 2002 voter guide responses, & his actions (which are a major form of expression, ya know!) how could he say he ”never said” he was ”pro-choice?” | Then comes his 8/12/07 interview with Chris Wallace of Fox: ”I never called myself pro-choice. I never allowed myself to use the word pro-choice because I didn’t FEEL I was pro-choice. I would protect the law, I said, as it was, but I wasn’t pro-choice, and so...” = Whatever he was from ‘70 when his mom ran as pro-abortion senator & he sided w/ her, to 5/27/05, w/whatever interruption he had due to a pro-life altar call in Nov of ‘04, whatever that was...well, he assures us it wasn’t a pro-abortion ‘inlook’ or outlook ‘cause he didn’t feel “pro-choice...” = So does that make him a life-long pro-lifer? |
| December 2007 (Anything ‘different’ from embryos’ perspective than June 2002?) | 5.5 years before ¨C June 13, 2002: Romney: ...spoke at a bioethics forum at Brandeis University. In a Boston Globe story filed the next day, he was quoted as saying that he endorsed embryonic stem cell research, hoping it would one day cure his wife’s multiple sclerosis. And he went on to say: ”I am in favor of stem cell research. I will work and fight for stem cell research,” before adding, “I’d be happy to talk to [President Bush] about this, though I don’t know if I could budge him an inch.” When pressed, however, Romney and his aides declined to offer an opinion on “therapeutic” or embryonic cloning. Source: Weekly Standard | December 5, 2007: Romney: ...surplus embryos...Those embryos, I hope, could be available for adoption for people who would like to adopt embryos. But if a parent decides they would want to donate one of those embryos for purposes of research, in my view, that’s acceptable. It should not be made against the law.” Any “inquiring minds” want to try wrapping their minds around how a politician in one sentence mentions “adopting” embryos out (yes, a great thing to mention!) — but then in the very NEXT breath says if a ”PARENT” wants to be “pro-choice” (Mitt used the word ”decides” which is what “pro-choicers” say they want) ”to donate one of those embryos for purposes of research, in my view, that’s acceptable.” Say what???? How about 8-month gestationally-aged infants in the womb, Mitt? Or already-born infants, too, Mitt? If a ”parent decides they would want to donate one of those...for purposes of research, in my view, that’s acceptable...” No??? What’s the ‘pro-life’ difference, Mitt? Here you call an embryo’s mom&dad “parents” — but “parents” w/ ”research” give-away rights? How bizarre we have such schizophrenic “candidate!” |
Don't know who you think you're trying to lecture...read my posts before doing so.
I detest Romney and have made it clear at every opportunity.
So you’d sell out your country to a liberal who, in your opinion is less of a liberal than Obama, but the reality based off his own words he is the exact same?
And if Romney doesn’t get the nomination, will you then vote for Obama in protest?
Different subset.
Do they root for Willard?
Then bye-bye!
No; he won't.
That LOSER couldn't even beat a fellow rino LAST time outta the gate; and THIS time there are some REAL Conservatives in the field!
The Mitt-bot gene in the dna.
Churches have a 'cryroom' off the sanctuary for a reason...
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.