Replies

No true conservative can vote pro-homosexual. That means that no true conservative can cast a vote for Romney. What does it mean to be a conservative? It means that you are interested in conserving the traditional values that have made America strong. This is for the survival of America. These traditional values are part of our Judeo-Christian Heritage. One of the most important of these values is obedience before the Laws of God. God defined homosexuality as an abomination the spread of which must be opposed in any culture. All legislative assemblies in America, from her founding were obedient to this mandate. And what was the result? America rose to super power status as a beacon of freedom unto the world. As America abandons this posture of strength, and embraces the foolish idea of homosexual virtue, where is America now? It is no coincidence that the homosexual movement is achieving its greatest gains, as America, for the first time in its history, is falling into second rate status among nations. As the homosexual movement gets stronger, America gets weaker. Why? Because God refuses to invest any more of his strength into a nation that believes it is an act of wisdom to rebel against his laws.

Voting for Romney would simply continue this judgment upon America, as Romney is just as pro-homosexual as Obama.

Since when did you become the official to define true conservative?

I'm as true, or more true, conservative than you and I think your post is absurd.

Instead of insulting oldenEagles, perhaps you could specify yoyur grounds for disagreement.

Is homosexuality an abomination before God?

For that matter, does an entire lifetime political track record of sociopathic, self-serving lies as to one's beliefs, intentions and policies, make a candidate like Robamney an abomination as well?

Is it OK for the "conservative" candidate to persecute morally conservative churches as Robamney did in Robamneycare to the Roman Catholic and other morally conservative churches in Massachusetts but somehow different when Obozo, following Robamney's lead, does precisely the same thing nationally to the same churches?

If it IS OK for Robamney, please explain WHY it is OK for him and not for Obozo.

Are the values and principles of Western Civilization now irrelevant to the conservative movement because we just gotta beat Obozo even with his whiteface counterpart?

Is the conservative movement now reduced to further slashing the taxes of the privileged and protecting the trust funds of their little Junior Leaguers and polo players (Muffy and Skipper). What do we have for the modest folks who did not generate the zillions of libelous and slanderous advertising that bought the nomination for the Massachusetts trashbag?

Is it your position that we just gotta vote for Robamney because he is about 1% better than Obozo and besides, he is rich!!! and therefore a comfort to GOP voters.

Should we try to nominate George Soros next time? His financial resources make Robamney's finances look like those of a skid row sterno bum. Carville and the old Clinton team could concoct a campaign of even more vicious advertising than Robamney's well-funded but amateur (by comparison) ad execs.