PDA

View Full Version : National Right to Life Endorses Romney?? Seriously??



mike128
04-13-2012, 06:01 PM
Have social conservatives lost their minds?? Or are they so desperate, they are willing to believe anything that comes out of Romney's mouth??

Here's the link:
http://www.nationalrighttolifenews.org/news/2012/04/national-right-to-life-endorses-governor-mitt-romney/

Social conservatives really need to look at the records of Romney's liberal Massachusetts Supreme Court picks before giving away important endorsements so easily.

JB
04-13-2012, 07:48 PM
Who would you have them endorse?

MountainMan
04-13-2012, 09:10 PM
Have social conservatives lost their minds?? Or are they so desperate, they are willing to believe anything that comes out of Romney's mouth??

Here's the link:
http://www.nationalrighttolifenews.org/news/2012/04/national-right-to-life-endorses-governor-mitt-romney/

Social conservatives really need to look at the records of Romney's liberal Massachusetts Supreme Court picks before giving away important endorsements so easily.
Like you care. You are an Obama supporter anyway.

Retread
04-13-2012, 09:27 PM
http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQU0iJRRvQz5ihQlqHNjgwiub8h2F5F6 YRMZZRdllM_ieBTA8Se

Zathras
04-13-2012, 09:38 PM
Have social conservatives lost their minds?? Or are they so desperate, they are willing to believe anything that comes out of Romney's mouth??

Here's the link:
http://www.nationalrighttolifenews.org/news/2012/04/national-right-to-life-endorses-governor-mitt-romney/

Social conservatives really need to look at the records of Romney's liberal Massachusetts Supreme Court picks before giving away important endorsements so easily.

And here I didn't think I would be able to use this anymore....

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v602/HeroesAtWork/deadhorse.jpg

mike128
04-13-2012, 10:56 PM
Who would you have them endorse?
A candidate who is truly pro-life. Back in 2000, NRTL endorsed Pat Buchanan over George W. Bush. Perhaps they can endorse a truly pro-life third party candidate instead. Mitt Romney is NOT pro-life.

MountainMan
04-14-2012, 12:42 AM
A candidate who is truly pro-life. Back in 2000, NRTL endorsed Pat Buchanan over George W. Bush. Perhaps they can endorse a truly pro-life third party candidate instead. Mitt Romney is NOT pro-life.

Just like a true Obamunaut. Endorse a third party candidate because your buddy Obama can't win without help.

Rockntractor
04-14-2012, 12:52 AM
Just like a true Obamunaut. Endorse a third party candidate because your buddy Obama can't win without help.

Here is a picture of Mike128 as a child, bottom left.
http://awkwardfamilyphotos.com/wp-content/uploads/cache/2012/04/image-5-e1317365236820/1591620763.jpg

Zathras
04-14-2012, 02:33 AM
A candidate who is truly pro-life. Back in 2000, NRTL endorsed Pat Buchanan over George W. Bush. Perhaps they can endorse a truly pro-life third party candidate instead. Mitt Romney is NOT pro-life.

Why do you care if Romney is not a true conservative since you're not a true conservative either? You never have been one and any claim that you make saying you are is an outright lie. A true conservative would not pick a raving moonbat for govenor or president over the more conservative candidate as you have done.

mike128
04-14-2012, 03:02 PM
Meg Whitman is no conservative, Zathras. She is as liberal as they come. You were head-over-heels in love with her during the last California gubernatorial election. So what does that make YOU, Zathras? :rolleyes:

Zathras
04-14-2012, 05:56 PM
Meg Whitman is no conservative, Zathras. She is as liberal as they come. You were head-over-heels in love with her during the last California gubernatorial election. So what does that make YOU, Zathras? :rolleyes:

Well, since you wanted her opponent to win, the very liberal Jerry "Moonbeam" Brown, a candidate who is even more pro abortion, more tax and spend and pretty much the anti-conservative candidate in that election, I guess that would make me more conservative than you, wouldn't it?

Then again, that's not hard, since any claim you make to being a conservative is an out and out lie. Also, since you'd rather see Obama win another 4 years over Romney, you're an Obama supporter and have never been a conservative. You're living a lie and the sooner you admit this fact the better you'll feel.

Odysseus
04-14-2012, 11:58 PM
Is there an option that will keep Mike128 from starting any new threads? Given that the all have the same subject, there's really no point to allowing him to keep making the same idiotic point over and over again.

ABC in Georgia
04-15-2012, 01:14 PM
Is there an option that will keep Mike128 from starting any new threads? Given that the all have the same subject, there's really no point to allowing him to keep making the same idiotic point over and over again.

We could give him 0 views and 0 replies to his threads. Especially zero *views.*

That would work. I'd love to see that! :evil-grin:

~ ABC

Deadhead
04-15-2012, 01:26 PM
I don't understand. Shouldn't the pro life crowd be happy that Mitt Romney is on their side? I understand the argument that Romney will say anything to get elected, but I don't get why he's taking so much flack on this. Why does Mitt turning pro life make him a flip flopper when for everybody else the pro life crowd would be happy?

mike128
04-15-2012, 04:25 PM
I don't understand. Shouldn't the pro life crowd be happy that Mitt Romney is on their side? I understand the argument that Romney will say anything to get elected, but I don't get why he's taking so much flack on this. Why does Mitt turning pro life make him a flip flopper when for everybody else the pro life crowd would be happy?
If I really believed that Mitt Romney was pro-life, I would personally be ecstatic that he will be the nominee. Mitt Romney flip-flopped on his abortion position when he decided he wanted to run for president the first time around. He refused to sign a single pro-life pledge during the 2012 primaries, and he also snubbed all presidential debates where the main topics were abortion and other social issues. Once again, Mitt Romney is NOT pro-life! He has done absolutely nothing to reach out to social conservatives, like myself. So he will not be getting my vote. Niether will Obumbler, for that matter.

Rockntractor
04-15-2012, 04:36 PM
If I really believed that Mitt Romney was pro-life, I would personally be ecstatic that he will be the nominee. Mitt Romney flip-flopped on his abortion position when he decided he wanted to run for president the first time around. He refused to sign a single pro-life pledge during the 2012 primaries, and he also snubbed all presidential debates where the main topics were abortion and other social issues. Once again, Mitt Romney is NOT pro-life! He has done absolutely nothing to reach out to social conservatives, like myself. So he will not be getting my vote. Niether will Obumbler, for that matter.

How far are you from the Golden Gate Bridge?

linda22003
04-15-2012, 05:32 PM
A candidate who is truly pro-life. Back in 2000, NRTL endorsed Pat Buchanan over George W. Bush.

And how well did that work out for them, exactly?

Zathras
04-15-2012, 06:16 PM
If I really believed that Mitt Romney was pro-life, I would personally be ecstatic that he will be the nominee. Mitt Romney flip-flopped on his abortion position when he decided he wanted to run for president the first time around. He refused to sign a single pro-life pledge during the 2012 primaries, and he also snubbed all presidential debates where the main topics were abortion and other social issues. Once again, Mitt Romney is NOT pro-life! He has done absolutely nothing to reach out to social conservatives, like myself. So he will not be getting my vote. Niether will Obumbler, for that matter.

Still living the lie of you being a conservative, eh DUmbass? Nobody here is falling for your lies anymore. And isn't it funny that, when I point out your consevative hypocracy, you go as quiet as a church at prayer time and don't respond to the facts. That's because you can't without lightning striking you.

You have said that you want Darrel Issa to win the govenorship here in California. I do as well. But, if you think he'll sign a bill or do anything at all to curtail abortions here, guess what....not gonna happen DUmbass. No matter how much you stomp your little feet and cry to the heavens, abortion is not going away here in California. There are more important issues here in Cali that need attention to than abortion and to run on such a topic is the best way to lose the election for govenor here. But then again, if you actually lived here instead of where you do, you'd understand this fact and take off those blinders you wear constantly and join the real world of politics.

Oh and since you brought up your obsesive compulsive hatred of the future Republican nominee for President I leave you with this....

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v602/HeroesAtWork/deadhorse.jpg

Odysseus
04-15-2012, 08:22 PM
I don't understand. Shouldn't the pro life crowd be happy that Mitt Romney is on their side? I understand the argument that Romney will say anything to get elected, but I don't get why he's taking so much flack on this. Why does Mitt turning pro life make him a flip flopper when for everybody else the pro life crowd would be happy?

Mike128 hates Romney with a blinding, white hot passion that is immune to any reasoned argument.

One can believe Romney when he says that he had an epiphany while discussing stem cells with a researcher and came away shocked by the callous disregard for human life that has taken root since Roe v. Wade, or one can believe that he is simply saying what it takes to get elected, but he did not permit any liberalization of Massachusetts' abortion laws while he was governor, and did not fund any expansion of them. Either way, I'll take him over Obama. Mike128 cannot see the difference, but it's hard to see clearly with his head up his fourth point of contact.

ABC in Georgia
04-15-2012, 10:37 PM
Mike128 cannot see the difference, but it's hard to see clearly with his head up his fourth point of contact.

Oh my ...

You DO have a way with words, Ody! :biggrin-new: ... :applause:

~ ABC

Zathras
04-16-2012, 01:46 AM
How far are you from the Golden Gate Bridge?

Actually the Brooklin Bridge would be closer for DUmbass128 since he lives in New Jersey.

noonwitch
04-16-2012, 08:52 AM
Never think that RTL is anything more than a political lobbyist.


In the 2010 Michigan GOP governor's primary race, there were 3 candidates and an open primary. 2 candidates were conservatives (Hoekstra and Cox), one a moderate (Snyder). The dems were running a crook versus a toady, so there was going to be crossover.

Cox, the conservative from metro Detroit, is a scumbag. He was caught cheating on his wife, then claimed that Geoffrey Fieger tried to blackmail him about it. An investigation by a fellow republican prosecutor (Gorcyca) cleared Fieger. Cox is who got the RTL endorsement.

Hoekstra, a congressman from Holland, is a die-hard, conservative, family values guy who has been faithful to the cause both in his personal and political lives. I'm not a fan of his, but by conservative standards, he really did deserve the endorsement.


What ended up happening is this-the RINO is governor now, because the conservative vote got split and the crossover dems and independents went with the self-proclaimed Nerd, Snyder.

RTL makes lots of mistakes because they have become more about politics than about the rights of embryos, zygotes and feti.

mike128
04-16-2012, 03:25 PM
One can believe Romney when he says that he had an epiphany while discussing stem cells with a researcher and came away shocked by the callous disregard for human life that has taken root since Roe v. Wade, or one can believe that he is simply saying what it takes to get elected, but he did not permit any liberalization of Massachusetts' abortion laws while he was governor, and did not fund any expansion of them.
Romney signed leglislation which expanded funding to Planned Parenthood, the nation's largest abortion provider, AFTER his so-called "pro-life" conversion. Sorry, but I'm just not buying it.

Deadhead
04-16-2012, 03:44 PM
Mike128 hates Romney with a blinding, white hot passion that is immune to any reasoned argument.

One can believe Romney when he says that he had an epiphany while discussing stem cells with a researcher and came away shocked by the callous disregard for human life that has taken root since Roe v. Wade, or one can believe that he is simply saying what it takes to get elected, but he did not permit any liberalization of Massachusetts' abortion laws while he was governor, and did not fund any expansion of them. Either way, I'll take him over Obama. Mike128 cannot see the difference, but it's hard to see clearly with his head up his fourth point of contact.I don't care what people say, I like Romney. Maybe he's not someone I can have a beer with(or in his case, a caffeine free Diet Coke), but I think he'd make a real good President. And yea, I've come to find out that whenever abortion is being discussed people just lose their minds and say all kinds of crazy shit. But yea, Romney has my vote. Dunno I'm gonna go door to door or anything since I try not to take politics too seriously, but he definitely has my vote

Rockntractor
04-16-2012, 04:03 PM
I don't care what people say, I like Romney. Maybe he's not someone I can have a beer with(or in his case, a caffeine free Diet Coke), but I think he'd make a real good President. And yea, I've come to find out that whenever abortion is being discussed people just lose their minds and say all kinds of crazy shit. But yea, Romney has my vote. Dunno I'm gonna go door to door or anything since I try not to take politics too seriously, but he definitely has my vote

No worries with you are there?

Deadhead
04-16-2012, 04:14 PM
No worries with you are there?Not when it comes down to the election. I don't believe that the future of the republic depends on this election or that America is gonna turn into a third world country if Obama wins again. Also, I don't wanna get too depressed/raging if my candidate loses. Yes, I'll vote, but I don't get too wrapped up in these things and I certainly don't put too much faith and hope in politicians.

Rockntractor
04-16-2012, 04:17 PM
Not when it comes down to the election. I don't believe that the future of the republic depends on this election or that America is gonna turn into a third world country if Obama wins again. Also, I don't wanna get too depressed/raging if my candidate loses. Yes, I'll vote, but I don't get too wrapped up in these things and I certainly don't put too much faith and hope in politicians.

You are no lone eagle here, a lot of others are expressing themselves the same way.

Deadhead
04-16-2012, 04:23 PM
You are no lone eagle here, a lot of others are expressing themselves the same way.Good to hear. I don't like it when people get way too wrapped up in anything. ESPECIALLY politics.

Adam Wood
04-16-2012, 04:46 PM
Romney signed leglislation which expanded funding to Planned Parenthood, the nation's largest abortion provider, AFTER his so-called "pro-life" conversion. Sorry, but I'm just not buying it.Well, then you should run right out and not vote for him. Then you'll really show him that, in this race in which abortion is absolutely NOTHING if importance, you'll make the one issue that doesn't matter into your single-issue for voting.

Fool.

Deadhead
04-16-2012, 05:01 PM
Well, then you should run right out and not vote for him. Then you'll really show him that, in this race in which abortion is absolutely NOTHING if importance, you'll make the one issue that doesn't matter into your single-issue for voting.

Fool.I'd have to agree. Alright, I understand where the hardcore pro life crowd is coming from, I really do. But nobody likes a zealot and getting caught up in the mess that is social issues is the fastest way to get yourself marginalized *coughcoughsantorumcoughcough*

Not that those things don't matter, but they don't matter as much as some other things

Zathras
04-16-2012, 06:43 PM
Romney signed leglislation which expanded funding to Planned Parenthood, the nation's largest abortion provider, AFTER his so-called "pro-life" conversion. Sorry, but I'm just not buying it.

Just like we don't buy the snake oil you're selling, repeating the lie that you're a conservative and your faux ranting and raving about a non issue in this election.

Lager
04-16-2012, 07:45 PM
I don't believe that any republican who ran for the nomination would have been able - if elected - to do much to change the status quo on the legal status of abortion. Even Santorum. The drive to get the people of this nation to see abortion as immoral will not have success simply by electing pro-life candidates.

fettpett
04-16-2012, 08:13 PM
There is really no way to get Roe v. Wade overturned and put into legislation in any meaningful way. It has become too much of an issue for the Dems to push and use as a bludgeon against any and all pro-life individuals. The ruling was so blatantly bad it's not even funny, the best time to deal with it would have been during Reagan's first term but that didn't happen.

the worse thing about it? Abortion was a non-issue when it was a state issue and the federal government kept its nose out of it.

ABC in Georgia
04-16-2012, 09:13 PM
Well, then you should run right out and not vote for him. Then you'll really show him that, in this race in which abortion is absolutely NOTHING if importance, you'll make the one issue that doesn't matter into your single-issue for voting.

Fool.

Adam ...

Am trying to simply *read * in here and not post ... but you are so correct, I had to come in.

I am Pro-Life, with the exception of endangering the *very* life of the mother.

In this election, the most important thing at the moment is trying to keep this country SOLVENT!

If we go down financially, and I mean in the near future ... nothing else will matter. Hopefully, there is still time to correct this.

On my down days, I fear that is almost impossible to get out of this dreadful debt that Obama has imposed on us.

Most (especially uninformed hard working, too busy making a living to pay attention folks) don't know the difference between millions, billions, and trillions of dollars of debt.

I like to ask if they were to measure it in "seconds" ticked by, instead of "dollars" ... how long do they think a million seconds would take, in comparison to a billion seconds, and finally a trillion seconds.

It simply amazes them when I tell them that (1) a million takes approx. 10 days to tick by (2) a billion takes approx. 30 years ... and (3) a trillion takes approx. 30,000 YEARS!

If only everyone could see and face the truth of this, and forget their "high-minded" principles (just for now) and help us get rid of this man, before it is too late.

Gotta run ~ ABC

Retread
04-16-2012, 11:28 PM
If Mitt Wins The Nomination, I Will Enthusiastically Support Him

...(I)f Mitt wins the nomination, as seems very likely, I will enthusiastically support his candidacy. For my friends who have hesitation on that score, Iíd just ask you to keep four things in mind: Justice Scalia just turned 78, Justice Kennedy will turn 78 later this year, Justice Breyer will be 76 in August, and Justice Ginsburg turned 81 about a week ago. We wish them all well, of course, but the brute fact is that whoever we elect as president in November is almost certainly going to choose at least one and maybe more new members of the Supreme Court ó in addition to hundreds of other life-tenured federal judges, all of whom will be making momentous decisions about our lives for decades to come. If you donít think it matters whether the guy making those calls is Mitt Romney or Barack Obama, I think youíre smokiní something funky.

Andrew C. McCarthy, National Review Online
March 23, 2012

JoeKwonDo
04-16-2012, 11:56 PM
Meg Whitman is no conservative, Zathras. She is as liberal as they come. You were head-over-heels in love with her during the last California gubernatorial election. So what does that make YOU, Zathras? :rolleyes:

WOW - Are you really this clueless... Let's see if I can speak to you in your native tongue: OMG dude, fer real, you need to de-anus your head fer sure.

ABC in Georgia
04-16-2012, 11:56 PM
Andrew C. McCarthy, National Review Online
March 23, 2012


... in addition to hundreds of other life-tenured federal judges, all of whom will be making momentous decisions about our lives for decades to come. If you don’t think it matters whether the guy making those calls is Mitt Romney or Barack Obama, I think you’re smokin’ something funky.

Great addition to this thread, Retread. It really deserves repeating!

So will, yet again! ... :biggrin-new:


all of whom will be making momentous decisions about our lives for decades to come.

~ ABC

JoeKwonDo
04-16-2012, 11:58 PM
How far are you from the Golden Gate Bridge?

:lol:

JoeKwonDo
04-17-2012, 12:02 AM
Andrew C. McCarthy, National Review Online
March 23, 2012

Good post 2.. er Retread!

Zathras
04-17-2012, 02:16 AM
WOW - Are you really this clueless... Let's see if I can speak to you in your native tongue: OMG dude, fer real, you need to de-anus your head fer sure.

What was funny is he was rooting for Jerry Brown, someone who is even more liberal and pro-abortion than Whitman, to win the election on some paranoid delusion that Whitman would run for President of these United States if she won. Not something a social conservative that he claims he is would do.

Retread
04-17-2012, 12:27 PM
Good post 2.. er Retread!

Don't blow my cover dude!

JoeKwonDo
04-17-2012, 12:55 PM
Don't blow my cover dude!

No worries :evil-grin:

NJCardFan
04-17-2012, 03:56 PM
Meg Whitman is no conservative, Zathras. She is as liberal as they come. You were head-over-heels in love with her during the last California gubernatorial election. So what does that make YOU, Zathras? :rolleyes:

Um, weren't you for Brown in Cali?

NJCardFan
04-17-2012, 04:03 PM
The choice is simple. You either vote for Romney or Obama and a no vote for Romney is a vote for Obama.

Zathras
04-17-2012, 04:07 PM
Um, weren't you for Brown in Cali?

Oh hell no. I was around and remember what that asshole did the first time. No way in hell would I support him for a second term.

mike128
04-17-2012, 04:47 PM
Um, weren't you for Brown in Cali?
No, I was never FOR Jerry Brown. I was AGAINST Meg Whitman, because if she won the last gubernatorial election, not only would California get stuck with her for the next 8 years, but the RINOs in the Republican 'establishnent' would be salivating over the prospect of her running for president. Also, Jerry Brown will be too old to run in the next election.

So, my analysis of the situation was that it was best for Meg Whitman to lose this time around, so that a REAL conservative, like Darrell Issa could run 4 years down the road, and eventually run for president from delegate-rich California. I think it would be great if Darrell Issa ran for president someday. But definitely NOT Meg Whitman!

fettpett
04-17-2012, 06:20 PM
No, I was never FOR Jerry Brown. I was AGAINST Meg Whitman, because if she won the last gubernatorial election, not only would California get stuck with her for the next 8 years, but the RINOs in the Republican 'establishnent' would be salivating over the prospect of her running for president. Also, Jerry Brown will be too old to run in the next election.

So, my analysis of the situation was that it was best for Meg Whitman to lose this time around, so that a REAL conservative, like Darrell Issa could run 4 years down the road, and eventually run for president from delegate-rich California. I think it would be great if Darrell Issa ran for president someday. But definitely NOT Meg Whitman!

http://velvetspectrum.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/blah_blah_blah.jpg?w=500&h=324

Zathras
04-17-2012, 06:21 PM
No, I was never FOR Jerry Brown. I was AGAINST Meg Whitman, because if she won the last gubernatorial election, not only would California get stuck with her for the next 8 years, but the RINOs in the Republican 'establishnent' would be salivating over the prospect of her running for president. Also, Jerry Brown will be too old to run in the next election.

Are you really that stupid? If you're against one candidate in a two candidate race, then you are for the other one. And, as I told you before, there is no age limit to run for the govenorship here in California so that wouldn't have stopped Brown you lying sack of shit. And as for Meg running for President? Only in your feeble mind would that have happened and nowhere else.


So, my analysis of the situation was that it was best for Meg Whitman to lose this time around, so that a REAL conservative, like Darrell Issa could run 4 years down the road, and eventually run for president from delegate-rich California. I think it would be great if Darrell Issa ran for president someday. But definitely NOT Meg Whitman!

Bullshit...do you ever stop lying? You're so-called analysis is much like your claim to be a conservative...based on falshoods and lies.

mike128
04-18-2012, 07:32 PM
Jerry Brown can't run again anyway, Zathras. He's currently serving his second term. Aren't there term limits for Governor of California, Zathras? :rolleyes:

Rockntractor
04-18-2012, 07:35 PM
Jerry Brown can't run again anyway, Zathras. He's currently serving his second term. Aren't there term limits for Governor of California, Zathras? :rolleyes:

Do you have any short piers close to home Mike?

Rockntractor
04-18-2012, 07:36 PM
Do you like to take long walks Mike?

Zathras
04-19-2012, 02:04 AM
Jerry Brown can't run again anyway, Zathras. He's currently serving his second term. Aren't there term limits for Governor of California, Zathras? :rolleyes:

Yes but I'm not sure if the law is retroactive to terms served before the law was passed fucktard. Besides you claimed he couldn't run again based on age, not term limits. And it doesn't change the fact that you supported the more liberal candidate in the election, making your claim to be a social conservative an out and out lie. So, do everyone a favor and shut your hypocritical pie hole up and take your lying ass off this site.