But yours is SO warm and cuddly!
Posted on 05/06/2012 8:09:35 AM PDT by Seizethecarp
Attention "Anyone But Obama" (ABO) FReepers! If you go to the thread at the link you will will see that JimRob has "declared a truce" and hundreds of ABO FReepers are now vigorously defending their belief, which I share, that the ineligible Marxist Manchurian MUST BE DEFEATED to preserve the Republic...without fear of "the ZOT"! Please consider a DONATION not just to fund renewal of expression and amplification of your ABO views, but let's over-achieve this FReepathon to get JR his new equipment!
IMO, Free Republic and FReepers could be vital in swing states in rallying just enough conservatives to tip the election and prevent our troops from having to salute for even one day longer than necessary an ineligible Marxist committed to destroying the USA !
and as a side note - do you know how disgusting it is when the guy you are conference calling goes to the toilet?
I mean, we all do it, but on the freaking phone?
Who stuck NOT into that second sentence from the last?
Ah!
Ok...
You made ACCUSATIONS about me, and when I want the evidence you call it SPAMMING?
Sigh...
But yours is SO warm and cuddly!
Ok, since this guy is being a jerk and I refuse to listen to his bowel symphony (I hate my life sometimes) lets deal with the important stuff first.
I’ve received, in the last hour, 2 1/2” of rain on my property here in central Indiana! My driveway is flooded and no doubt the grass seed I put down over the weekend has floated away!
Now that is some serious wetness! If you put the seed about half an inch down and stamped it in it should be fine. If not, go out in the morning with a rake - drag the rake, re-seed then jump up and down on the places you have seeded.
Trust me - no one knows better than dealing with rain than an englishman - well a scotsman may know better!
Don't hate me because I'm beautiful.
Yup, I DO like to provoke.
Especially those who need it.
However, to be NOTHING BUT a provoker would be a mis-characterisation of me; don't you think?
Of particular importance to me, is this included in your commnets: I simply believe that our nation was founded by believers and our system of governance and law is based on biblical belief and that our form of government will not work under any other set of beliefs. I believe this country was better and freer in the days of our youth, before the war on Christianity was launched by non-believers and before our government representatives lost sight of and denied God. I believe we will never restore the constitutional limits on government or our unalienable rights until we once again allow God back into the public square and back into our hearts.
I don't believe enough men of good-will completely comprehend the importance of what I quoted above.
When George Bush talked of 'Democracies' popping up across the Middle-East, he didn't realize he should have been hawking 'Constitutional Republics' instead. In addition, it is vitally important that people understand that our forum of government will not work in societies where Christianity is not the prevailing religion.
Take a look at Islam for instance. If the society is predominantly Islamic, then Islamic ideals will be the bedrock of the founding documents of the nation. That being the case, no peace, no ability to co-exist will exist.
If people would take this concept, expand it, and understand how crucial the Christian God is to our form of governance and society, I think it might open their eyes.
Great point on your part, perhaps the greatest most fundamental point possible.
You don’t want to know what I think.
By all means; do it!
How will I EVER ‘correct’ my behavior if I do NOT know EXACTLY what behavior is wrong?
REply numbers would be a start; showing the exact WORDING would be even better.
I am NOT offend if someone ‘judges’ me; it happens ALL the time.
I dislike this, because you are asking me to judge something that is between you and the Lord.
But, you did ask.
You have been uncharitable. Not always, but sometimes. It is one of the problems I have - there are the rules, but we see what people say and make excuses.
I do think you have been out of line, both personally and scripturally. I would prefer NOT to be right. It is just the impression I got.
Now, before you worry I am having a go at you, I ain’t.
Gonna tell you a tale. Way back before this guy talking to you made furniture, or made words come together, his job was to kill.
Not in an “oh hell, spray and pray” fashion during an ambush, but pure, deliberate murder. Get up, eat breakfast, go and shoot a target or two then sit down and eat lunch while ignoring their kids. Sorry - I do not and will not shoot kids.
I cannot judge you, because my sins are far greater than yours. I can merely advise you, if you will accept it, from one who has worked the edge of hell and is going to spend a long time in purgatory. Yeah, know you are not Catholic, but I am.
There is good in everyone, I don’t care who. Evil is snuffing out the good and rejecting it.
Now I am not saying Romney is good. But there is good in him. The guy is human, after all.
His religion is irrelevant.
Cut him a little slack.
And NEVER make me defend Romney again please,
What I am saying, is not that Obama is better — he is worse, — but that conservatives should not endorse Romney. Obama winning is bad, but the Conservative movement steamrolled by the GOP centrist hacks is worse.
Stay away from Romney. Write in somebody. The idea that elections are battles for the center is what gave us the mess we are in. Elections are battles for (or against) ideologies. The center follows ideology most clearly stated.
I guess it all depends on how you define "bashing". If challenging a doctrine that is borne out of a man claiming that all other Christian faiths/doctrines/creeds are an abomination to God is defined as "bashing", then what would the original "challenge" by the mormons be defined as?
Confusing debate, rebuttal, etc. with bigotry and hatred, can be excused if one is merely ignorant of the history between Mormonism and Christianity. But it's inexcusable if it's done to stifle debate or out of an already existing prejudice towards those who would rise to the challenge that the Mormons have handed down.
Or just ask me. I haven't yet made a post that I later regretted, aside from the usual inadvertent stuff.
I am a conservative Catholic monarchist and American nationalist. You want an opinion about elections , -- I got one, but I don't put a great faith in the democratic process in general.
My general advice is to first of all vote your conscience and vote strictly pro-life. If there is no conservative in the race, we all are better off not voting. Electing lefties is bad but diluting conservatism by whoever the GOP politburo thinks electable is worse. Screw Romney.
Such a great post. I feel the same way. When Romney was just short of "inevitable" (Lord how I have learned to hate that word), I was still at the spitting nails stage and told my dad that I would not vote for him. Reality has a way of softening our stance in dire circumstances such as the one in which we find ourselves at the moment. ABO with a heavy sigh of disgust at GOPE is the end of this road for me.
I will actively work for down ticket candidates and perhaps even a little bit for Romney. I have about $30-50 per month to give in the Sept to Nov season. That will all go to down ticket folk. The GOPE got what they wanted, they can figure out how to finance it without my donation.
x
God bless you, too!
Last time I saw that many swirling colors, I was a Paultard.... /sarc.
No I won't concede that. MA ignored the Hyde amendmet until 1981 and funded for "medically necessary" abortions under Medicaid. The legislature apparently passed a bill to bring State requirements in line with Hyde, but I cannot find when and if it came into effect.
I have found evidence that in 1985 MA covered abortions under "medical necessity" and also in the mid 90's. Unfortunately, as we know and Reagan found out, "medical necessity" is nothing more than a loophole to further abortion.
This covers your point #2 also...with this qualifier-Romney did not set the schedule for subsidies for insurance, of which the abortion coverage was a part. That is the Commonwealth Health Insurance Connector Authority. Many of the details of Romneycare were completely out of his hands. The inclusion of abortion coverage was one of those things.
#3- As you mention, those levels of income you mention are not totally subsidized. They are on a sliding scale based on income and household members. Yes, they undoubtedly cover some women that would not be covered under the fed guidelines for Medicaid coverage. Fortunately, as income rises, the number of women that avail themselves of abortions fall.
I would point out that Bay State natives still support Romneycare 3 to 1. They overwhelmingly supported it from its inception. People that don't can certainly relocate. Romney has specifically and repeatedly said he opposes obamacare for that reason...it is outside the Federal governments power to mandate something that is delegated specifically to the states...just as auto insurance is a state matter not a federal one.
Romney should have vetoed, rather than praised and signed, any legislation that would pay abortionists to kill children.
He vetoed eight portions of the health care bill, and every one was overridden. MA was going to get government health care regardless of who was governor. Romney's plan prevented the legislature from using a direct tax to fund government health care.
His original proposal didn't even include a mandate...he favored tax incentives for those that did have coverage and one's that didn't actually pay for their healthcare out of pocket. (If someone can find a copy of his original proposal tagged as MA House Bill #4279 July 20th, 2005 I would greatly appreciate it. I would like to actually see his proposal and compare it to what came out as "Chapter 58".)
In fact, his original proposal came about to head off a house and senate proposals, and a drive for a MA constitutional amendment forcing government health coverage that acquired 75,000 signatures in favor of. All would have been worse than Romneycare.
For all this arguing over the abortion funding in Romneycare, the net effect was no more abortions than prior years, and in fact, a reduction in abortions in the following years. That is a national trend, but if Romneycare encouraged abortion to the extent you claim, there should have been a dramatic increase.
On a personal note....digging through all this is disgusting. Nothing is more Godless and wrong than on demand abortions. I'm surprised God hasn't zotted MA.
As far as Romney himself is concerned, I would never support him except for one reason....OBAMA IS WORSE. This election is the biggest crock of sh*t I have ever seen. I warned what would happen when conservatives turned their back on a man as good as GWB, now see where we are. I'm warning you again...if Obama isn't defeated, there will be nothing left of a conservative movement.
If conservatives can't help get Obama out, what use are we?
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.
