Posted on 06/08/2012 1:21:30 PM PDT by Responsibility2nd
ROSEMONT, Ill.—Rick Santorum and Ron Paul have never gotten along, and while the primaries are effectively over, their intraparty rivalry could stretch on through the summer.
With 267 delegates pledged to him so far, Santorum is planning to flex his muscle at the Republican National Convention in August, where he predicted Friday there could be a showdown over the party platform between the social conservative delegates who pledged support for him and Ron Paul's libertarian supporters. Paul's campaign predicts that about 200 delegates will attend the convention on his behalf.
Both want a piece of the party platform, but the candidates agree on very little politically. Speaking to reporters here Friday at a conservative conference, Santorum said his supporters are ready for a "fight" in Tampa.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
“don’t ask me... ask your buddy romney..”
Who says Romney is my buddy? What is your problem?
It will be interesting what non-christian Romney insists on in the platform.
do you consider (as some do), me as a non-christian, as I was born and raised Roman Catholic?
granted the Mormons have some pretty strange(to my mind) beliefs(I use the south park explanation of Mormonism as my rule of thumb)...but they still include Jesus Christ in their official title...
at least its not “Mosque of Muhammed the child molester of latter day saints”....like some _residents we know.
Individual freedom? sounds like libertarian and paleo conservative to me...at least to a point.
I believe the the big L libertarians who wont defend America when she is attacked is the deal breaker for most ‘libertarian/conservatives’
Try substituting the stripping away of any other God-given, unalienable right for the word "abortion" in your paragraph, and see how this holds up to inspection.
Unlimited, unrestrained, Abortion including partial birth, homosexual marriage/adoption/military/custody, polygamy, open borders (truly open, firing the Border Patrol), getting out of the way of science and advertising related to drugs already in existence and whatever the drug world can come up with through mixing and research. Openly advertised and marketed, mainstreamed, routine prostitution.
Hopefully there is more that drives conservatives to fight and call out the left’s new attack on America, called libertarianism, than them just being weak on defense.
Those sound like big L libertarian talking points.
The founding fathers spoke of Liberty, and I follow the liberties as they are spelled out in the Declaration and the Constitution.
Do you have a problem with that kind of libertarian?
By the way I don’t care are what consenting adults do in private. As long as they don’t prostelitize with children.
The childish fantasy of ignoring reality and writing a personal dream script for an impossible world (ie, communism works perfectly in theory)is why both you and Noam Chomsky are libertarians, and neither one conservatives.
so stop doing it!
who said that? what does communism have to do with personal freedom? I will answer that for you....NOTHING....don't put words in my mouth.
I hope you fail in what you are trying to do to America.
Here is the leftists agenda hidden behind the Libertarian Party curtain.
Libertarian Party Platform:
Throw open the borders completely; only a rare individual (terrorist, disease carrier etc.) can be kept from freedom of movement through “political boundaries”.
Homosexuals; total freedom in the military, gay marriage, adoption, child custody and everything else.
Abortion; zero restrictions or impediments.
Pornography; no restraint, no restrictions.
Drugs; Meth, Heroin, Crack, and anything new that science can come up with, zero restrictions.
Advertising those drugs, prostitution, and pornography; zero restrictions.
Military Strength; minimal capabilities.
The reality is that those rights already have been stripped away. Restoration is going to need to happen on a state by state basis. It can happen at the state level right now, if only those state legislators and Governors would be willing to stand up to the federal government via nullification and any other measures.
I still haven’t figured out how a federal solution to abortion would play out under an EV administration. Do you care to share the specifics?
Even though I disagree with you now and before, I am happy to hear that you are running.
You’re evading.
The question is not whether the states can defend the God-given, unalienable rights of the people, starting with the supreme right, the right to live.
The question is whether they must do so, in order to fulfill God’s requirement, and the natural law’s requirement, and the stated principles of the republic’s founding, and the stated purposes of the Constitution, all of them, and the explicit, imperative requirement of the Constitution.
“No person shall be deprived of life without due process of law.”
“No State shall deprive any person of life without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
Sorry, but the keeping of the oath is not optional. It is absolutely binding.
“The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and ALL executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States AND of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution...”
“Sorry, but the keeping of the oath is not optional. It is absolutely binding.”
I don’t think anybody will disagree with you about that.
Unfortunately, the government we have is a direct reflection of the people who have elected them. Neither keeps oaths. Look at the divorce rate. People have turned their backs on God. The Republic will not be saved until there is widespread repentance.
You didn’t answer my question about what an EV administration would do about abortion at the state level.
Well, apparently you have admitted that all officers of government in this country, in every branch, at every level, have as the first obligation of their sacred oath the protection of all innocent lives within their jurisdiction.
So, I will be happy to answer your question.
In brief, should I be elected, I will keep my oath.
Blackmun, in Roe, admitted that “of course” the child in the womb is protected by the Fourteenth Amendment, if they are a person.
Since it is self-evident that they are a person, my first act as President, after having sworn the oath, will be to publish a presidential finding to that effect.
My second act will be to ask for the resignation of anyone in the executive branch who will not act accordingly.
My third act will be to order the closing of every abortion facility in the country, as per the explicit, imperative requirement of the Supreme Law of the Land.
“No person shall be deprived of life without due process of law.”
“No State shall deprive any person of life without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
Clear enough?
That's pretty much the same message from the GOPe to the Tea Party. And my response is, "Okay, Smell you later GOPe."
“God who gave us life gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that his justice cannot sleep forever.”
— Thomas Jefferson
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.