Posted on 06/04/2012 8:06:33 AM PDT by greyfoxx39
Mitt Romney has named former Utah Gov. Mike Leavitt to lead his presidential transition team should he win November's general election, the Republican presidential candidate's campaign confirmed Monday.
-SNIP-
Leavitt, Romney's pick to lead a potential transition, was elected governor of Utah in 1992, and went on to hold the office for ten years. He was governor of the state when Romney headed the Salt Lake City Olympic Organizing Committee in 2002.
In 2003 Leavitt was nominated by President George W. Bush to serve as administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. He later became Bush's Secretary of Health and Human Services.
(Excerpt) Read more at politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com ...
Oh dear, looks like somebody has put Romney up on a pedestal...
Altura understands much.
She understands that this is nothing but a tool to use against Mitt Romney.
A very small sect of Mormons may believe in polygamy.
Mitt Romney is not of that sect.
He is far less a danger to marriage as we now know it than Obama is.
Please save it for someone stupid. I’m not.
I am not on true blue.
If I were, I might have said something like that because I am deeply disappointed in the people here, their ugly hate, their lack of reason and their meanness.
I did not and would not call you stupid.
And, I think we probably agree that we both would like to prevent all polygamous marriages and if you and I can’t do that, we nonetheless agree that it is best to keep all polygamous marriages in the closet.
One man, one woman seems to work best.
Huh?
Your the one who said they put their faith in Romney, not me.
As a side note do you even know what that versus is speaking about?
How about this instead of “wise cracks”, be cogent.
Huh?
You’re the one who said they put their faith in Romney, not me.
As a side note do you even know what that versus is speaking about?
How about this instead of “wise cracks”, be cogent.
"I am not on true blue."
Hmmm...well the TBL "altura" posted this comment there...http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2874129/posts?page=406#406
To: Windflier
This is exactly what I’m talking about.
You accuse me of cowardice. The other day I was told by a charming freeper to “eat shit and die.”
I’ve explained my position several times. I stand by it.
Perhaps if I use the term The Republican Nominee instead of the Romney word, I could escape the abuse.
How are we going to discuss the upcoming election if we become a 3rd party site? There is no 3rd party. If you want one, start now for 2016 but in the meantime, get rid of Obama.
I read posts by otherwise sane seeming people who say ‘there are worse things than losing elections.’
What would that be? A pointless stand that nobody will remember and that won’t even be a ripple in history while a known tyrant who’s already announced he will be more free in a second term to ruin this country gets another term?
Nobody here has been able to convince me that this is a good policy.
And, yes, a majority of people here agree with me but, sadly, they are afraid to post their opinions for fear of receiving ugly comments or being banned.
406 posted on Friday, April 20, 2012 6:25:39 AM by altura since 11-28-1997
I would certainly raise hell over at TBL if someone else were using MY name to post this kind of garbage.
All anyone has to do is to visit that site and search for "altura". Very informative.
I don't give a damn who is over there, but if they are keeping their FR account and trashing FR over there AND trashing FReepers here, some of us are taking notice.
So, you didn't say the things set out in post 95?
Or did you mean you are not on true blue this minute?
Speaking of meanness and ugly hate, you have called people here idiots, sniveling cowards, haters and told them they belong in an institution.
The glass house approbation, comes to mind.
” Pope John II personally ruled that Mormonism is not Christian, but is it’s own religion. “
Yes, I was aware of that and concur.
I think of the Mormon religion as quite outside the box, space cadets actually, but I am not against religious liberty and take on only what I know about as my case against Romney, which is his willingness to entertain and implement Marxist/socialist policies. You know what I mean?
It seems to me there is more than enough political downside to reject Romney, in the same way there was reason to reject Ted Kennedy, without the religion bashing. The faith lapses of these two courses of belief in these men, for me, are a side issue until they prove to be otherwise.
I recognize Kennedy as an apparent apostate from the Catholic faith, and Romney as a non-Christian, and it just should end there. In practice, they both look quite devout, but see their fruits and one can opine that their religion to them has become simply utilitarian. Romney himself has said of Mormans, “you don’t have to believe everything....”, and he has certainly been known to flip and flop on some of the voodoo practices the Mormans have entertained down through their history.
You are way off base, Romney is absolutely devoted to his faith and is recognized by his religion as such.
Romney has never criticized his religion, in fact he has always done the opposite.
I don't know what you mean with this, or where that quote comes from, or why you are trying to sell this highest ranking church official as outside of his church.
Where is this coming from, especially the meaningless piece of "quote"? ""Romney himself has said of Mormans, “you don’t have to believe everything....”, and he has certainly been known to flip and flop on some of the voodoo practices the Mormans have entertained down through their history.""
It looks like BS to me.
Apparently you do care a lot about True Blue.
There are a lot of disenchanted freepers over there.
Unfortunately some of the best brains and nicest people are among them.
In my personal opinion, when one is torn between two opposing groups, they should keep their own counsel, decide which group to stand with, then publicly announce that fact to both sides. Grumbling in private about one group to the other, is immoral, in my opinion.
A fellow Freeper sent me the URL to an ex-Freeper site recently. Out of curiosity, I took a look, and was surprised at some of the Freeper handles I saw posting there. That site is the alleged successor to the 'True Blue Freedom' site, which according to them, is now defunct.
I wrote up what I found and put it on the correct channels here.
Wait, how would you know, you are not on trueblue...
And you don’t denegrate FR...
Wait, how would you know, you are not on trueblue...
And you don’t denegrate FR...
Well, okay.
Mean, sniveling cowards, haters....
You all are mean. You cannot discuss things rationally but attack a person’s character. I have been accused of not being a Christian and of being godless.
You are sniveling cowards when you ping Jim to posts against me because apparently you cannot defend yourselves and want to call Daddy. Daddy is busy and has given his permission for people here to disagree.
Maybe you are not haters, but you play haters on this forum so well that I begin to think you are haters.
So you see everything I said was true and in good faith.
Peace be upon you.
PS I guess I should be flattered that you and your buddies have time to follow me from post to post and from forum to forum. I would think you’d have a better hobby.
You all are mean.
_____________________________
Thats enough of that kind of talk...
Go to your room till you can play nicer....
Yeah, it takes a whole lot of intelligence to go to a new site and spend all your time bashing the old site....
Intelligent folks would walk away and stay away and MOVE ON...(hint.)
LOL..."There are a lot of disenchanted freepers over there"...yep, a whole lot...as of today 407 total members...of course if you aren't there you wouldn't be one of them, right?
BTW, if you AREN'T there, why are you advertising for them?
Thanks. I guess I confused you with the people here who are using polygamy against Romney.
Most of us believe in one man/one woman (or at least one at a time).
If you’re against gay marriage, then you should be for Romney.
Obama is much more of a thread to conventional marriage than Romney is.
placemarker
I was there but I returned here to try to be a prophet to the clueless.
I prefer this site but I temporarily sought refuge over there for the way I was treated (and am still being treated) here.
My sin? I want to defeat Barak Obama.
My sin? The only real way to do it is to vote for Romney.
I cannot understand the mindset of people who seem to intend to spend the next five months before the election doing Obama’s work, bashing Romney.
To the point of using his religion against him, which is just sick.
PS It’s hard to be a prophet. Nobody likes you. Just ask John the Baptist.
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.