Posted on 07/04/2012 1:16:13 PM PDT by Jim Robinson
Geez-o-man!!
Musta forgot.
Getting old, I guess.
Well then, put me back on your ping list.
LUB
Sorry, but there isn’t a single site that doesn’t have that. Every site has something that opens it to ridicule. Who cares? I can’t imagine why anybody would care what somebody they don’t even know says about their religion.
Folks have been predicting "gulags" and "martial law" and "the end of America if _____" (fill in the blank) with regard to Obama since 2008. I think Obama is more of a scarecrow than the MSM and Democrats would ever want us to know, and I believe in my heart, after examining in detail the down-to-the-minute news "coverage" (more like cover-up) at the time, that the U.S. military so loathes him as CIC that they have already blatantly defied him at least twice, and things had to be spun in a big hurry (the Airforce One fly-by of NYC, and the Navy Seals' taking out of the Muslim pirates in the hostage situation even while Obama's attempts were going on to negotiate) to make it look like Obama was actually in charge, when in fact it looked very much like our warriors were reminding him that ultimately, they have him by the balls.
I think Obama is a lot weaker than it appears -- so much so that I think it is worth the risk of seeing him re-elected, especially when that risk is also odds-on that he could only be re-elected with an embarassing, humiliating plurality.
As for apprehension of risking an Obama 2nd term because a third party vote forfeits any influence in the outcome of O v R ... that's what courage is for. Courage doesn't mean not being afraid of risks, it means being afraid but "saddling up anyway," as John Wayne said.
God bless America.
Why? Lazamataz is a dear friend of mine. We talk here and elsewhere, and we get along well with each other. He's a great guy.
HEY!
*Tears well up and overflow...*
Sniff.
Matthew 5
People who check profiles or Free Republic join dates have issues.
Yep. Well-said statement derived from straight thinking. And it is why your tagline is so true, and why a third party vote at the top of the ticket, entirely neutral as to influencing the count toward either Obama or Romney but instead ultimately working to weaken the victory of whichever authoritarian tyrant wins, is both the only and best choice for conservatives.
I know. I keep telling my kids to STOP CALLING ME DUDE!!
You're making a fool of yourself defending this RINO:
http://www.massresistance.org/docs/marriage/romney/record/
Romney told the U.S. Senate on June 22, 2004, that the "real threat to the States is not the constitutional amendment process, in which the states participate, but activist judges who disregard the law and redefine marriage . . ." Romney sounds tough but yet he had no qualms advancing the legal career of one of the leading anti-marriage attorneys. He nominated Stephen Abany to a District Court. Abany has been a key player in the Massachusetts Lesbian and Gay Bar Association which, in its own words, is "dedicated to ensuring that the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court decision on marriage equality is upheld, and that any anti-gay amendment or legislation is defeated."
Press release from governor's office 5/4/2005
- U.S. Senate testimony by Gov. Mitt Romney, 6/22/2004
"Governor Mitt Romney, who touts his conservative credentials to out-of-state Republicans, has passed over GOP lawyers for three-quarters of the 36 judicial vacancies he has faced, instead tapping registered Democrats or independents -- including two gay lawyers who have supported expanded same-sex rights, a Globe review of the nominations has found. Of the 36 people Romney named to be judges or clerk magistrates, 23 are either registered Democrats or unenrolled voters who have made multiple contributions to Democratic politicians or who voted in Democratic primaries, state and local records show. In all, he has nominated nine registered Republicans, 13 unenrolled voters, and 14 registered Democrats."
- Boston Globe 7/25/2005
http://www.wnd.com/2012/01/romney-judicial-record-liberals-running-wild/
“It was criteria commonly used by the left. For starters, his nominees were mostly pro-abortion. Indeed, while campaigning for governor in 2002, Romney told the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL) that his judicial nominees would more likely protect abortion rights than would those of a Democrat Governor, according to notes from a person attending this meeting.”
Another Romney criteria, Baldwin explained, was “diversity.”
“The other criteria consistently emphasized by Gov. Romney in deciding judicial selections was ‘diversity.’ This is the silly notion that judgeships should reflect the population in terms of race and gender and even sexual orientation, regardless of a person’s judicial philosophy,” he said. “Clearly, the use of diversity quotas demonstrates Romney’s lack of a coherent conservative worldview.”
Now please, don’t confuse the poor boy with facts.
LOL!
“”Governor Mitt Romney, who touts his conservative credentials to out-of-state Republicans, has passed over GOP lawyers for three-quarters of the 36 judicial vacancies he has faced, instead tapping registered Democrats or independents “
Let me be the first to say, “Duh!” It’s Massachusetts. The Governor’s council is 7/8 Democrats and the legislature is 80% Democrats. The fact that Romney got about 25% Republican judges through the process is an indicator of success, not failure.
Materially and mathematically false. A third party vote is 100% neutral with regard to favoring either Obama or Romney. Pure, plain, mathematical fact.
The way it worked out with Clinton, was to give us the Republican Revolution. Or do you think it would have happened if Clinton had won with a majority or HW had been re-elected?
As for the Supreme Court Justices, look at Romney's record.
Now you've done it Dark; you've gone and made her list. Considering she is knee deep in that hate-FR site and constantly trashes JR, FR and its members you should wear it with a badge of honor.
Yet you feel the need to disrespect those who have very different expectations, those who by very his very record, a record of FACTS well established without the occasional hyperbole that yes we do see in this emotional situation, see it being possibly even as problematic especially if he has a willing Republican Congress who refuses to go against a sitting President of the same party.
Romneycare is real, his judicial appointments are there, there is none of this dishonestinty you claim in these facts. His record has not matched his new found words. I hope he is telling the truth but ACTIONS speak louder and his scream...
Will I end up voting for him, more than likely, I am not suicidal, but I will not go cheering this time for i feel Conservatism has been betrayed by the establishment more than ever before. I cannot get excited about Romney, and in good conscience cannot salivate on demand of his sycophants. There is too much out there for me to be even remotely comfortable with the man.
Why that is such an issue to you I have no clue but that is what it is for many.
What you call “facts” I call incoherent, tendentious, cut-and-paste nonsense.
That said, it’s totally par for the course for those campaigning against the GOP nominee here on “America’s premier conservative web forum”.
It has all been posted time and time and time again. It does not constitute a substantive response to the points I raised.
No amount of sneering will obscure that simple fact.
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.