Posted on 10/16/2012 10:52:22 AM PDT by SarahPalin2012
Or would you have still backed Cain/Gingrich/Santorum/Christie/Palin (whoever your choice was from before or during the primary). I think it's an interesting question. Mitt wasn't my first choice, but am glad that he is doing so well. Would you now prefer Mitt over another who may or may not have done as well? Of course, I myself am a completely committed supporter of Mitt Romney since the primary was decided.
Do you think a stepfather or father who raped their daughter would force her to have an abortion to cover up incest?
Happens far more than you could think.
Should your daughter get raped, do you want her to have that child...
Ah, now we're getting somewhere. AT least unlike many pro-aborts, you concede a child is indeed under risk of dismemberment here.
Oh. And I wasn't aware that telling a mom to dismember her young one was some sort of "cure" for rape (or incest). You can't double back & erase the crime involved by forcing/coercing/encouraging a mom to become a participant in yet another crime (in God's eyes).
Would you FORCE your daughter to have that child? What would you say if it was your brother that raped your daughter?
Force?
ALL: Here's a clear lesson where wastedyears talks and acts like a liberal Democrat pro-abort.
#1, the "force" of violence occurred during the rape BY THE RAPIST...NOT during the ensuing period of safety and sanctuary as the girl/women's family rallies around her to protect her!
You've pulled a liberal, Democratic pro-abort boner of an argument here: Here you've lamely attempted to transfer the guilt from the rapist -- blaming the family instead for "forcing" themselves upon the girl/woman.
How shameful such a conclusion is!!!
Here, if a loving family rallies around a girl or young woman for the approximate 2 to 5-month time a woman can have an abortion (Note: this period varies because abortionists don't do abortions until approximately three months' gestation...and most abortionists don't do late-term abortions for insurance-risk and high insurance premium reasons), YOU, shameful one, call that "FORCING" themselves upon the woman.
You convert the world upside down with your vocab by turning the peaceful, loving care of a family into an act of "force" -- while you seem to overlook who did the violent forcing???
Now tell us: If your daughter was dating somebody you absolutely loathed and wouldn't "have it" ANY WAY that this guy become the father of your grandchild, what advice would you give to your daughter then?
(Your slippery slope runneth over here...'cause I can tell you quite frankly that many a man would deem some of the boys/men their daughters are dating as no better than a serial rapist)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2945670/posts?page=107#107
When you understand this Grasshopper, get back to me.
I believe we will hear the theme from round 1, plus Benghazi, from Romney. Zero is going down, despite the “perfectionist FReepers” posting their “purity” theme. Clowns they are.
Will I be disappointed by some of the things he will do? Time will tell!
If you studied my history, you would see many posts against Mormonism. But, Romney can be my President, and I believe he can lead us back to prosperity! I am a Christian, but I am also a Patriot! I will continue to pray for him to see his spiritual life in danger!
BUT, I will vote for him like I did for McCain. It will be based on his pick for VP!!! He is certainly a RINO, but that will likely get us back into the FRONT DOOR of the White House...
************
From his first debate... responding to Zero:
ROMNEY: Well, sure. Id like to clear up the record and go through it piece by piece.
First of all, I dont have a $5 trillion tax cut. I dont have a tax cut of a scale that youre talking about. My view is that we ought to provide tax relief to people in the middle class. But Im not going to reduce the share of taxes paid by high-income people. High-income people are doing just fine in this economy. Theyll do fine whether youre president or I am.
The people who are having the hard time right now are middle- income Americans. Under the presidents policies, middle-income Americans have been buried. Theyre just being crushed. Middle- income Americans have seen their income come down by $4,300. This is a — this is a tax in and of itself. Ill call it the economy tax. Its been crushing.
At the same time, gasoline prices have doubled under the president. Electric rates are up. Food prices are up. Health care costs have gone up by $2,500 a family. Middle-income families are being crushed.
And so the question is how to get them going again. And Ive described it. Its energy and trade, the right kind of training programs, balancing our budget and helping small business. Those are the — the cornerstones of my plan.
But the president mentioned a couple of other ideas Ill just note. First, education. I agree: Education is key, particularly the future of our economy. But our training programs right now, weve got 47 of them, housed in the federal government, reporting to eight different agencies. Overhead is overwhelming. Weve got to get those dollars back to the states and go to the workers so they can create their own pathways to get in the training they need for jobs that will really help them.
The second area, taxation, we agree, we ought to bring the tax rates down. And I do, both for corporations and for individuals. But in order for us not to lose revenue, have the government run out of money, I also lower deductions and credits and exemptions, so that we keep taking in the same money when you also account for growth.
The third area, energy. Energy is critical, and the president pointed out correctly that production of oil and gas in the U.S. is up. But not due to his policies. In spite of his policies.
Mr. President, all of the increase in natural gas and oil has happened on private land, not on government land. On government land, your administration has cut the number of permits and licenses in half. If Im president, Ill double them, and also get the — the oil from offshore and Alaska. And Ill bring that pipeline in from Canada.
And, by the way, I like coal. Im going to make sure we can continue to burn clean coal. People in the coal industry feel like its getting crushed by your policies. I want to get America and North America energy independent so we can create those jobs.
And finally, with regards to that tax cut, look, Im not looking to cut massive taxes and to reduce the — the revenues going to the government. My — my number-one principal is, there will be no tax cut that adds to the deficit. I want to underline that: no tax cut that adds to the deficit.
But I do want to reduce the burden being paid by middle-income Americans. And I — and to do that, that also means I cannot reduce the burden paid by high-income Americans. So any — any language to the contrary is simply not accurate.
Bert, is that really your take...
Tell me, was increasing our debt by 92% under Bush America first?
Was the implementation of a new great society plan, the Medicare Prescription Coverage, America first?
Was trying to transition the 20 to 35 million illegal in the U. S. to legal, an example of America first?
Romney wants Romneycare, not Obamacare. Is that America first?
Is dismissing the right to life, America first?
Is planning to continue to have large deficits into the foreseeable future America first?
It’s not my intention to spend more time here explaining why I can’t vote for Romney. I don’t really want to lay out something that might cause others to rethink their vote.
Lets move out onto the forum and address the evils of Obama/Biden/Clinton instead.
I hear ya. Sad but true...
The fault is theirs for not having a conservative candidate at the top of the ticket. They have done the math and think that they are better off with milquetoast moderates instead of solid conservatives. Ok, so be it. That is their choice. They have clearly stated that they don't want conservatives or conservative ideas in the party. So don't try to guilt me into voting for your candidate. Because if that is all you have left to try and get someone to support your candidate, you have a really weak candidate.
If the GOP wants my vote, they will have to earn it with a conservative candidate. Till then, I will vote for conservatives.
Indeed.
I can imagine God in heaven at the end of election day, conversing with an angel: "So my people in this one land have just openly endorsed and sanctioned a man who claims to be my 'rival' as a competing 'god.' A would-be 'god-in-embryo.'"
For those who might want an explanation of what a temple Mormon like Romney deems to be a "god-in-embryo" -- read below the asterisk line...
****************
The truth is man is a child of God a God in embryo. Mitt Romney's father's cousin, Marion G. Romney one of the top three Lds hierarchists a generation ago...in Conference Report, April 1973, p. 136; or Ensign, July 1973, p. 14.
* "What is [man]? He had his being in the eternal worlds; he existed before he came here. He is not only the son of man, but he is the son of God also. He IS a God in embryo, and possesses within him a spark of that eternal flame..." (3rd "prophet" John Taylor, The Gospel Kingdom, pp. 52-54, as cited in Teachings of the Presidents: John Taylor, p. 2, 2001 -- compiled & published by its "intellectual reserve" publishing trademark).
* "If we take man, he is said to have been made in the image of God...being his son, he is, of course, his offspring, an emanation from God...He...came forth possessing, in an embryonic state, ALL the faculties and powers of a God." (Taylor, The Gospel Kingdom, p. 52, as cited in Teachings of the Presidents: John Taylor, p. 3, 2001).
Many people know of Spencer W. Kimball, the 12th "prophet" of the Lds church (1973-1985), as the man who allowed blacks to become Mormon priests in 1978.
But did you know Mormonism teaches you are all "gods in embryo"??? (And Kimball was one of its key proponents)
Did you know that Mormonism teaches the false "gospel" of self-transformation -- of pulling yourself up by the bootstraps to become a god? (And Kimball was one of its key proponents)
Spencer W. Kimball on these very topics:
1969 "Being a GOD IN EMBRYO with the seeds of godhood neatly tucked away in him, and with the power to become a god eventually, man need not despair...he must...transform himself..." (Spencer W. Kimball, The Miracle of Forgiveness, pp. 173-174)
A couple he was advising in Kimball's office "did not understand that forgiveness is not a thing of days or months or even years but is a matter of intensity of feeling and transformation of self...This couple seemed to have no conception of satisfying the Lord, of paying the total penalties and obtaining a release..." (Ibid, p. 156)
To Kimball, you had to "pay the total penalties" for your sin -- vs. that being a role occupied by the true Jesus Christ.
September, 1974: Man can transform himself and he must. Man has in himself the seeds of godhood, which can germinate and grow and develop. As the acorn becomes the oak, the mortal man becomes a god. It is within his power to lift himself by his very bootstraps from the plane on which he finds himself to the plane on which he should be. It may be a long, hard lift with many obstacles, but it is a real possibility. Source: http://speeches.byu.edu/reader/reader.php?id=6057 (Spencer W. Kimball speech entitled Be Ye Therefore Perfect 9/17/74 devotional address @ BYU)
1975: Man is created in the image of God. He is a GOD IN EMBRYO. He has the seeds of godhood within him, and he can, if he is normal, pick himself up by his bootstraps and literally move himself from where he is to where he shows he should be." Source: http://emp.byui.edu/marrottr/LovevsLust.pdf, "Love vs. Lust," Spencer W. Kimball, Provo: BYU Publications, 1975
November 1977: Self-mastery, then, is the key, and every person should study his own life, his own desires and wants and cravings, and bring them under control. Man can transform himself and he must. Man has in himself the seeds of godhood, which can germinate and grow and develop. As the acorn becomes the oak, the mortal man becomes a god. It is within his power to lift himself by his very bootstraps from the plane on which he finds himself to the plane on which he should be. It may be a long, hard lift with many obstacles, but it is a real possibility. To be perfect, one can turn to many areas as a starting place....As we have stated before, the way to perfection seems to be a changing of ones lifeto substitute the good for the evil in every case. Source: By President Spencer W. Kimball An address given to students of Weber State College, Ogden, Utah on 4 November 1977 http://lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?hideNav=1&locale=0&sourceId=244ed0640b96b010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&vgnextoid=2354fccf2b7db010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD
July, 1978 Ensign Magazine: Lds church officially endorses Kimball Weber State College comments by publishing them in their official magazine
This quote also becomes part of Chapter 19 of what Lds officially teach college students in their Institute curricula: See http://institute.lds.org/manuals/doctrines-of-the-gospel-student-manual/doc-gosp-11-20-19.asp
Because 9-9-9 would have saved me a boatload of money and would have spread the tax base to places it is not currently appreciated.
I say 'clowns' because so many are looking for attention, so they can lay out their reasons why they must not sully themselves. They assume everybody will listen to their plight and give them attention. I see it as a little 'needy'.
This will be my only post to you, so you can go on back and play with others. I have somewhere to go right now.
Rest assured, God is keeping score! He will listen to our prayers. But, He really prefers to hear them from our "closet", and used to further His Kingdom. Your posts do neither, from what I read. All I hear is screed! You start posting as many negatives about him as you can find, then say you "didn't want to sway anyone". If it walks like a duck...
I'm a Sarah Palin supporter. I have sent a lot of money to SarahPac and have seen it used to further the cause. What cause, say you? The salvation of America from the precipice of debt and socialism, IMO. Apparently she agrees with me. She told us so, but I had already decided to help Romney defeat the pResident.
You can rest assured that many of us don't care if you don't vote for Romney. Enjoy the debate tonight, and have a glass of Scotch with me. I'll also be smoking a Dominican Cohiba. ...and, yes, I will be laughing all the way to the polls to pull the R trigger, and haul many old folks out of the retirement homes to vote for him, too!
Congratulations to Mitt Romney on his choice of Congressman Paul Ryan as his running mate. President Obama has declared that this election is about two fundamentally different visions for America. Goodness, hes got that right. Our country cannot afford four more years of Barack Obamas fundamentally flawed vision. We must now look to this new team, the Romney/Ryan ticket, to provide an alternate vision of an America that is fiscally responsible, strong, and prosperous an America that understands and is proud of her exceptional place in the world and will respect those who fight to secure that exceptionalism, which includes keeping our promises to our veterans. ... -FaceBook/SarahPalin
My choices were: Palin—Never ran, finally announced “No” (broke my heart!); Cain—went to see in Alabama, great speech, crowd fired up, but left race after mysterious women attacks...who spearheaded those, Obama or another REPUBLICAN running????; and Gingrich, actually got to vote for Newt in my primary, but he lost to Santorum; Santorum; but then he dropped out; Romney, last man standing, and anybody but the Kenyan freak, which is where we are today.
If I could have my way, I would love to see Palin 50%, Obama 46%, in today’s Gallup Likely Voter.
Romney was my last choice and still is. Against Obama, I would vote for anything the GOP put up. Dead cat? No problem, I’ll vote for it.
And for those who would thereby, in turn, proceed to "lecture" me on the "realities" of voting for a third-party candidate, please spare me...until you can show me links to how you lectured all Romney & would-be Romney voters in blue states -- since voting for Romney in non-swing state blue states is likewise "throwing your vote away" on a candidate who absolutely has ZERO chance of claiming those particular electoral votes.
Btw: Voting for a third party candidate in a non-swing state is better than voting for a pro-abort who will lose (in that state) anyway. And if I happened to reside in a swing state, guess what? (I'd still vote for Virgil Goode...why vote for somebody portending to be a "god in embryo" whose in favor of dismembering younger versions of Jessica Ridgeway???)
****************************
Oh, and speaking of which:
Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Rhode Island, Washington, -- and if Michigan stays blue, that state, too.
Also, you can readily write in "Virgil Goode" in Illinois and Maryland.
If you live in one of these nine states (well, at least eight even if you subtract Michigan), there's absolutely NO reason to vote for Romney. Obama will win these states, anyway. If you've ever told somebody NOT to vote for a third-party candidate 'cause they'll lose, anyway...well, guess what? Your argument just collapsed on yourself in you live in these given states!!!
Alabama, Idaho, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, North Dakota, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia (looking more red than swing now), and Wyoming.
Also, you can readily write in "Virgil Goode" in Arizona, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Montana, North Carolina (looking more red now than swing), and West Virginia.
So, even if we exclude Virginia and North Carolina and just concentrated on the other 17 red states listed above, if you're a FREEPER and you vote for Virgil Goode, Mitt Romney will not miss your vote. Obama will still lose these given states!
Therefore, why vote for a liberal pro-abort like Romney when you can't even use a utilitarian relativist reason to do so?
Colorado, Florida (looking more red than swing), Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, Ohio, and Wisconsin.
Well, this is where it gets "interesting" for utilitarianist philosophies vs. "principle"...
Do you want to train your children & grandchildren to vote always for the "right uniform color" (red) -- no matter what they espouse -- just 'cause it's a political "improvement" over the "blue" team?
Who do you vote for? The idolatry monger "god-in-embryo" Mitt Romney, or the false political messiah who may have Muslim-ties Obama? Or a third party like Virgil Goode -- knowing that God sees your vote?
As I said, I wasn’t sure what his present position was/is.
Why should i try to defend anything, you’ve already told me what to think. Thanks!
no
I would have supported Cain or Gingrich. Never Santorum, and neither Palin nor Christie were running. Cain and Gingrich dropped out so I guess I am happy about Romney.
“Knowing What You Know Now, Would You Have Backed Romney From The Primary?”
Nope. I already lowered my standards enough when I supported Gingrich. In my book, Romney’s still a left-winger who has an ‘R’ next to his name, and has no credibility where I’m concerned. I figure voting for him is an act of selling out, an act of rank hypocrisy, and one without a good outcome. I’ll probably do it anyway... But I’ll at least not be lying to myself and others when I’m doing it. My view is that this Presidential election is a choice between a specious turd and a vile POS, and I see attempts to paint it otherwise as propaganda. Hope that answers your question.
First, to answer your question, I would have still supported Newt in the primaries. However, Romney has moved up the ladder from the bottom or next to the bottom. I put him into third, behind Newt and maybe Santorum. I liked Perry for a bit, but the debate performances sealed his fate. I like Cain, but I think he was the dog who caught the car; he didn't expect his campaign to actually catch fire like it did and was unprepared. I never thought Bachmann was ready. Who else? Ron Paul is like the Libertarian Party. He has some good ideas in some areas, but the craziness of the rest make him unpalatable.
I've decided these 'Romney is Obama-lite, so I'm staying home' voters are like liberals in a lot of ways. By 'liberals,' I mean your typical, mainly non-politician, feel-good liberals. Not the Marxists in the White House and most of the Democrats in congress and the Senate. Most liberals, I believe, have good intentions. Heal the sick, feed the hungry, save the Earth, etc. But, their policies and plans tend to have the exact opposite effect than what they want. Welfare promotes dependency, equality of outcome policies lower the average, socialism results in wide-spread poverty. But, that doesn't matter, their intentions are what counts. This is like the ABR voters. The results of their actions don't matter to them. They can't look past their self-piety to see the harm their actions, if followed by enough, would cause. Is Romney perfect? No. Is Newt? Is Palin? Was Reagan? No, not one of them. However, Obama is the scourge inflicted on this country. And Romney is the only cure. If by your actions, or inaction, you allow an evil to occur, how can you say those actions are principled? You are intentionally myopic.
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.