|
Mitt Romney doesn't intend to overturn Obama's policies on homosexuals in the military.
He doesn't intend to end Obamacare, and his Republican friends in Congress just fully funded it via the continuing resolution. He doesn't intend to overturn Obama's illegal usurpation/amnesty for illegal aliens. He fiercely supports the unconstitutional entitlement programs that are the centerpieces of the New Deal and the Great Society. He supports the judicial supremacist abortion on demand status quo. Like Obama, he panders to the Islamists, apparently hoping the crocodile will eat him last. Bottom line? He's an echo, not a legitimate choice for conservatives. -- Tom Hoefling, October 3, 2012 Romney won't deport immigrants who have Obama's deferred action status [illegal usurpation/amnesty]10/3/2012 Yahoo
Liz Goodwin Mitt Romney told the Denver Post on Monday that is he is elected president he will not cancel [Alleged] President Barack Obama's deferred action program for young illegal immigrants before instituting another immigration plan. Read this story at news.yahoo.com ... Romney Says Obama Is Trying to Fool Voters With Inaccurate Attacks
ABC News *excerpt* Romney said Obama accuses him of being in favor of lowering taxes on wealthy people. “No I’m not,” Romney said. “I’m not going to reduce the taxes on the wealthy at all..." US News
*excerpt* Mitt Romney: "I didn't refer to Islam at all, or to any other religion for that matter. I spoke about three major threats America faces on a long term basis. Jihadism is one of them, and that is not Islam. If you want my views on Islam, it's quite straightforward. Islam is one of the world's great religions and the great majority of people in Islam want peace for themselves and peace with their maker. They want to raise families and have a bright future. There is, however, a movement in the world known as jihadism. They call themselves jihadists and I use the same term. And this jihadist movement is intent on causing the collapse of moderate Muslim states and the assassination of moderate Muslim leaders. It is also intent on causing collapse of other nations in the world. It's by no means a branch of Islam. It is instead an entirely different entity. In no way do I suggest it is a part of Islam." June 3, 2009 RealClearPolitics - Watch the video here
"Obama's fighting for his life, his party is fighting for their life, and they're winning. This is, I've said all along, this is Romney's election to lose and by God he's losing," Caddell said. Romney Renews His Support For Gun Control: "That's the kind of legislation I like" - July 23, 20127/27/2012 FreeRepublic.com
NBC Transcript Xzins ...The latest possible trial balloon came this past Monday in an interview with Larry Kudlow. In that discussion, Romney relates the situation in Aurora, Colorado to his time in Massachusetts when he was able to ban weapons such as the AR15, one of America's favorite sporting rifles. Romney...the law that we signed in Massachusetts was a combination of efforts both on the part of those that were for additional gun rights and those that opposed gun rights,...Where there are opportunities for people of reasonable minds to come together and find common ground, that’s the kind of legislation I like.(http://www.nbcuniversal.presscentre.com/content/detail.aspx?ReleaseID=11599&NewsAreaId=2) Romney has given us other trial balloons in recent months. First, he consistently affirms RomneyCare, the massive government intrusion into healthcare that was the blueprint for Obama's massive government intrusion into healthcare. Sadly, Romney's health care plan included many items absolutely unacceptable to social conservatives. His continuing support for his program has many conservatives legitimately wondering if he intends merely to "fix" ObamaCare. Perhaps he thinks it would be better if just a little more in his own image. Next, and only this past April, was Mitt Romney's support for gay couples. Compounding that problem was his assertion that gay couples should be allowed to adopt children. There are compounding problems with that, too. Mitt Romney has long had a special relationship with the gay-agenda wing of both parties. He has in the past given those advocates special assurances that he is the man they want in office. Just this past week, when Obama permitted military uniforms to be worn in a gay pride parade, there was no protest from Mitt Romney that this author can find. (Since pro-life chaplains can't march in pro-life parades in uniform, one wonders at the double standard.) To cap this off, during the debates, Romney indicated he was just fine with permitting open homosexuality in our military. Now we have the governor who instituted strict gun control on "offensive weapons" reaffirming that decision. But that is not the critical part of the message. Mitt Romney actually said on Monday -- this past Monday -- that when he can get legislators to agree on gun control, then "that's the kind of legislation I like."! I can't help but dissect "that's the kind of legislation I like." What does that mean? Does it mean he's all in favor of signing gun control legislation if he can get legislators to originate it? That way, of course, he wouldn't be the only one taking the heat. Does that mean that he doesn't really have a core value opposing gun control, that he'll sign on if he's not the only one with his neck on the line? Trial Balloon or undisciplined comment? You be the judge. But, you also better be careful, and make sure Romney never has a large enough group of RINOs to team with democrats to bring him gun control legislation. After all, "That's the kind of legislation I like." ----- A reminder about who it is we're dealing with: Romney signs off on permanent assault weapons ban "Deadly assault weapons have no place in Massachusetts," Romney said, at a bill signing ceremony on July 1..."These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense. They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people." Provided courtesy of SayNOtoSocialism.com
Ricochet Ben Domenech One of the few Republicans in the country who's been tirelessly pushing for the implementation of Obamacare at the state level has been tapped to head Mitt Romney's transition team, should he become president. Former HHS Secretary Michael Leavitt, and his consulting group Leavitt Partners, are the primary advocates within Republican circles for implementation of Obamacare's exchanges. It just so happens that his consultancy is one of the major beneficiaries of the taxpayer funded gold mine of hundreds of millions of dollars in exchange implementation grants. Read more at ricochet.com ... Provided courtesy of CTMSR.com
New York Magazine Jonathan Chait The real news in Mitt Romney’s interview with Mark Halperin, as Charles Pierce points out, is that Romney openly repudiated the central argument his party has been making against [Alleged] President Obama for the last three years: that he spent too much money and therefore deepened the economic crisis. Indeed Romney himself had been making this very case as recently as a week ago (“he bailed out the public sector, gave billions of dollars to the companies of his friends, and added almost as much debt as all the prior presidents combined. The consequence is that we are enduring the most tepid recovery in modern history.”) But in his Halperin interview, Romney frankly admits that reducing the budget deficit in the midst of an economic crisis would be a horrible idea: Halperin: You have a plan, as you said, over a number of years, to reduce spending dramatically. Why not in the first year, if you’re elected — why not in 2013, go all the way and propose the kind of budget with spending restraints, that you’d like to see after four years in office? Why not do it more quickly? Romney: Well because, if you take a trillion dollars for instance, out of the first year of the federal budget, that would shrink GDP over 5%. That is by definition throwing us into recession or depression. So I’m not going to do that, of course. Read more at nymag.com ... Tom Hoefling for President 2012: Mitt Romney Rejects the Reagan Republican Pro-Life Platform5/20/2012 One of the primary planks of the Republican Platform is the party's commitment to recognizing the Fourteenth Amendment protection of unborn children. In this video clip, Mitt Romney states his opposition to that commitment. Mitt Romney is not a prolife candidate. Vote for life in 2012. Vote for Tom Hoefling. tomhoefling.com The Washington Post
Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney (R) said Thursday that he believes gay couples should be allowed to adopt children... The Hill: Gay adviser's resignation presents hurdle for Romney's shift to center
*excerpt* The Romney campaign did not respond to questions about the Grenell affair Thursday, but spokesman Eric Fehrnstrom told CNN on Wednesday evening that the conservative criticism of Grenell's sexual orientation were "disappointing." "Wherever there are voices of intolerance within the party, or the Democratic Party for that matter — it doesn’t matter where it’s coming from — it’s disappointing," Fehrnstrom said. "And the governor has taken the opportunity in the past to denounce those voices of intolerance. "We do not take into consideration non-factors like race or ethnicity or sexual orientation," he added. "We look for the best possible people to do the job." *end excerpt* Romney says he wanted gay spokesman to stay on job Steve Deace: How to Lose Worse Than John McCain In the following story, the scorpion is the Romney Republican establishment. The fox represents Republican conservatives. The moral? Never make a truce with a scorpion.  The Scorpion and the Fox
One day the fox came a river, and prepared to swim across. A scorpion was standing there and asked the fox to give him a ride to the other side. The fox refused, saying, "If if I let you on my back you will sting me and I will die." The scorpion swore he wouldn't do that, because if he did, he too would drown. Although skeptical, the fox agreed, let the scorpion climb on his back, and began to swim. In the middle of the stream, suddenly he felt a painful sting on his back! He cried out to the scorpion, "Why, oh why, did you do that?! Now we are both going to die!" And the scorpion, as they sank beneath the waves, replied, "It is my nature." The Wall Street Journal
James Freeman Former presidential candidate Rick Santorum warned that Mitt Romney might not present a "clear contrast" to [Alleged] President Obama in the general election. Judging by Monday's action on the campaign trail, Mr. Santorum had a point. On a day when the White House urged Congress to increase student-loan subsidies, Mr. Romney had an opportunity to draw a sharp distinction between the expanding Obama entitlement state and a plan to revive the private economy. But instead of laying out plans to create jobs and reduce government spending, the former Massachusetts governor arrived at the same policy conclusion as Barack Obama. "Given the bleak job prospects that young Americans coming out of college face today," said Mr. Romney, "I encourage Congress to temporarily extend the current low rate on subsidized undergraduate Stafford loans. I also hope the president and Congress can pass the extension responsibly that offsets its cost in a way that doesn't harm the job prospects of young Americans." House members who have been opposing the extension know it is anything but responsible. The Obama-Romney subsidy will keep rates as low as 3.4% for many student borrowers, not that far above the 3.1% rate that the Treasury pays to borrow for the long term. If interest rates spike, taxpayers could be losing on every single new loan, never mind the cost of defaults. And as for offsets, the White House and Senate Democrats favor a new tax on small businesses. If Mr. Romney can't provide a contrast to that idea, Republicans will know they're in for a very long campaign. Read more at online.wsj.com ... Tom Hoefling
I wrote the following in response to an Orange County Register piece that was posted at FreeRepublic.com, and it bears repeating here: ----- Not a single sitting justice of the Supreme Court recognizes the personhood of the child in the womb and their protection by the explicit, imperative requirements of the Fifth and the Fourteenth Amendments. "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." Not even one of the majority of the justices who were picked by Republican presidents, members of a party whose platform HAS recognized the personhood of the chld and their protection by our Constitution for the last 28 years. So, what do you think are the chances that a "president Romney" (it makes me sick just typing that) would pick a judge who is more conservative than Thomas or Scalia? I say the chances of that are for all intents and purposes ZERO. Especially since Mitt Romney himself is a pro-choice democrat. He thinks God-given rights can be decided by a majority vote. He thinks courts make our laws, and that only they get to decide what is constitutional. In other words, he supports the abortion on demand status quo, the destruction of the checks and balances that make our form of government possible, and the erasure of the legitimate lines of authority granted to the various branches and departments of our government. He thinks states can alienate unalienable rights if they want. A Stephen A. Douglas Democrat position if there ever was one. In other words, even in this shape-shifter’s current incarnation, his views are anti-republican. No matter how you cut it, Obama or Romney, all the babies continue to die, and so does the republic whose founding premise was the equal protection of the rights of all. "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men..." Frankly, at this point in history, all the Romney Republican fear-mongering about judges does is disgust and anger me. Denial ain't just a river in Egypt - Republican conservatives can't handle the truth about Romney4/27/2012 Tom Hoefling
April 27, 2012 I deal on a regular daily basis with self-identified conservatives all across America who are addicted to the Republican Party. And when it comes to the impending nomination by their party of the most liberal governor in U.S. history, Mitt Romney, their reactions are overwhelmingly in line with the classic symptoms described below. We can't make them face reality, of course. All we can do is to keep pointing it out to them, in the sincere hope that they will recover in time to help save the country. ----- From Wikipedia: Denial (also called abnegation) is a defense mechanism postulated by Sigmund Freud, in which a person is faced with a fact that is too uncomfortable to accept and rejects it instead, insisting that it is not true despite what may be overwhelming evidence. The subject may use:
Denial of fact In this form of denial, someone avoids a fact by lying. This lying can take the form of an outright falsehood (commission), leaving out certain details to tailor a story (omission), or by falsely agreeing to something (assent, also referred to as "yessing" behavior). Someone who is in denial of fact is typically using lies to avoid facts they think may be painful to themselves or others. Denial of responsibility This form of denial involves avoiding personal responsibility by:
For example: Troy breaks up with his girlfriend because he is unable to control his anger, and then blames her for everything that ever happened. Denial of impact: Denial of impact involves a person's avoiding thinking about or understanding the harms of his or her behavior has caused to self or others, i.e. denial of the consequences. Doing this enables that person to avoid feeling a sense of guilt and it can prevent him or her from developing remorse or empathy for others. Denial of impact reduces or eliminates a sense of pain or harm from poor decisions. Denial of awareness: This type of denial is best discussed by looking at the concept of state dependent learning. People using this type of denial will avoid pain and harm by stating they were in a different state of awareness (such as alcohol or drug intoxication or on occasion mental health related). This type of denial often overlaps with denial of responsibility. Denial of cycle: Many who use this type of denial will say things such as, "it just happened". Denial of cycle is where a person avoids looking at their decisions leading up to an event or does not consider their pattern of decision making and how harmful behavior is repeated. The pain and harm being avoided by this type of denial is more of the effort needed to change the focus from a singular event to looking at preceding events. It can also serve as a way to blame or justify behavior (see above). Denial of denial: This can be a difficult concept for many people to identify with in themselves, but is a major barrier to changing hurtful behaviors. Denial of denial involves thoughts, actions and behaviors which bolster confidence that nothing needs to be changed in one's personal behavior. This form of denial typically overlaps with all of the other forms of denial, but involves more self-delusion. Denial at this level can have significant consequences both personally and at a societal level. DARVO See also: Victim blaming Harassment covers a wide range of offensive behaviour. It is commonly understood as behaviour intended to disturb or upset. In the legal sense, it is behaviour which is found threatening or disturbing. DARVO is an acronym to describe a common strategy of abusers: Deny the abuse, then Attack the victim for attempting to make them accountable for their offense, thereby Reversing Victim and Offender. Psychologist Jennifer Freyd writes: ...I have observed that actual abusers threaten, bully and make a nightmare for anyone who holds them accountable or asks them to change their abusive behavior. This attack, intended to chill and terrify, typically includes threats of law suits, overt and covert attacks on the whistle-blower's credibility, and so on. The attack will often take the form of focusing on ridiculing the person who attempts to hold the offender accountable. [...] [T]he offender rapidly creates the impression that the abuser is the wronged one, while the victim or concerned observer is the offender. Figure and ground are completely reversed. [...] The offender is on the offense and the person attempting to hold the offender accountable is put on the defense. Provided courtesy of DefendtheNaturalFamily.com
americanvisionnews.com Joel McDurmon MetroWeekly.com is exposing the whole truth that Washington Post would not reveal: Mitt Romney’s campaign tonight announced that it has hired Richard Grenell, an out gay former George W. Bush administration official, to serve as the presumptive Republican presidential nominee’s “national security and foreign policy spokesman,” according to a report from The Washington Post that did not mention Grenell’s sexual orientation. Grenell served through September 2008 in the Bush administration as a spokesman to the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations — and told The Advocate‘s Kerry Eleveld as he left the administration that it was his hope that New York would have marriage equality soon and that he would one day be able to marry his partner, Matt Lashey. The couple has been together 10 years. . . . Andrew Sullivan, who had endorsed Obama’s 2008 run, wrote of the news, “For Romney to have an openly gay spokesman is a real outreach to gay Republicans, a subtle signal to moderates, and the Santorum faction’s reaction will be worth noting.” Grenell is not just gay, but a gay activist who pushes for same-sex marriages. At the end of Grenell’s service in the Bush administration, he took a notable whack at the administration, telling The Advocate‘s Kerry Eleveld of his effort to have his partner, Matt Lashey, listed in the United Nations’ Blue Book, which is “a reference guide of contact information for different member states of the United Nations as well as diplomatic personnel and their spouses.” Grenell had attempted to have Lashey’s name added several times, to no avail. He told The Advocate back in 2008, “What put me over the edge was a friend and colleague who met her spouse after I was already with my partner — they got married and subsequently were put into the Blue Book in a matter of days.” The State Department eventually told him that the Defense of Marriage Act prevented the listing. Although he protested the decision behind the scenes, Lashey’s name was not ever added, which led to his coming forward to criticize the treatement publicly as he left his post. HuffPost has noted that since the choice, Grenell has scrubbed his Twitter account and website of offensive material... Read this story at americanvisionnews.com ... "The only argument Romney Republicans have for their candidate is fear, an abject fear that is intended to convince you to support what you say you hate.
Well, I, for one, refuse to be motivated or activated by fear, or to abandon the truth, or principle, out of fear. My Bible tells me that God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind, and that He rewards those who act out of a principled faith. And so, like the free men and women who built this country, let us laugh in the face of fear, and simply do right. Let us maintain the spirit and attitude of our first and greatest president, George Washington: 'If, to please the people, we offer what we ourselves disprove, how can we afterwards defend our work? Let us raise a standard to which the wise and the honest can repair. The event is in the hand of God.'" -- Tom Hoefling, April 23, 2012 |
Dial in to talk to
|
RSS Feed
