Why 'no serious Christian could support Mitt Romney', an article by a former Satanist, Mason and Mormon. Religious biased site, looks like, but still... as it says, the matter at hand is not the same as Kennedy's Catholicism. It's about how the Church of Latter Day Saints regards itself in terms of American history and prophecy.
If Mitt Romney became US President this year, would he allow his faith to influence government policy? I think he might.
Separation of Church and State, for god's sake....! Faith has no business interfering in politics. Not in a modern democracy anyway. Mormonism is a dangerous cult and the US government should shut them down like they did to Koresh. Plenty of taxable assets and property to seize... so, why not? I hope they take out Scientology too while they're at it. Why are these cults even allowed to exist in a country as advanced as the USA? Religions pay no tax, if you didn't know. That's what it's all about ... money, as always.
You have to understand Mike, Mormans are not Christian, they are pagan. The only thing they have in common with "Christianity" is who they named their God: Jesus Christ. In their religion he is one of many Gods, in particular, the one assigned to Earth. The inner workings of the Mormon Church are very private, and Mitt Romney is high up in them. There is no question there would be a conflict of religion and government if he were elected. Live your life as a proper Mormon and you become a God and are assigned a world to rule all your own. That sound like a monotheistic religion to you?
AntwortenLöschenThat sounds like L Ron Hubbard's 'Xenu' nonsense...
AntwortenLöschenWhat are the alternatives this time? Libertarians and others doing ok?
This is also interesting. 100% Christian conspiracy theorist author, won't pretend otherwise, but facts are facts:
AntwortenLöschenhttp://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/bloodlines/mormon.htm
I think if Ron Paul finds a way to get on the ballot this whole thing will blow sky high. Other than that, I don't know. My suspicion is we get another four years of Obama, and if we all survive that lord knows what 2016 will bring.
AntwortenLöschenIs Romney a blue-blood, anyone know?
AntwortenLöschenhttp://www.salon.com/2012/01/17/why_do_the_republicans_nominate_blue_bloods/
AntwortenLöschenIf Mitt Romney receives the Republican presidential nomination, he will be the third upper-class candidate in a row nominated for the presidency by a party that speaks in the accents of Jacksonian populism and pretends to be against “elites.”
America may not have titled aristocrats, but it has always had patrician families, defined by a combination of wealth, educational affiliations and public service. Today’s Republicans may sound like George Wallace in their denunciations of paper-pushing bureaucrats and pointy-headed intellectuals, but their presidential selection pool is a very selective country club.
Between 1980 and 2008, inclusive, there have been eight presidential elections. The Republicans have nominated five presidential candidates — Ronald Reagan, George Herbert Walker Bush, Bob Dole, George W. Bush and John McCain. During the same time, the Democrats have nominated seven presidential candidates — Jimmy Carter, Walter Mondale, Michael Dukakis, Bill Clinton, Al Gore, John Kerry and Barack Obama.
The middle-class Republican candidates — Reagan and Dole — have been outnumbered by the candidates born into the social elite — the two Bushes and McCain. George Herbert Walker Bush’s father, and George W.’s grandfather, Prescott Bush, was a wealthy Connecticut senator, whose own father, Samuel Prescott Bush, was a rich steel and railroad company executive. John McCain’s father and grandfather were both four-star admirals.
Among Democratic presidential nominees in the same era, only Kerry — related to the wealthy Forbes, Winthrop and Dudley families of the Northeast — could claim anything like the pedigree of the Bushes. If it takes three generations to make a gentleman, or even two, Al Gore doesn’t qualify as upper class. His father, who preceded him as a senator from Tennessee, came from a modest background and received his law degree from the Nashville YMCA Night School of Law. The other Democratic nominees in the 1980-2008 period came from middle-class backgrounds, like Barack Obama, the son of two college professors. Bill Clinton was born into the lower middle class.
They don't call their god Jesus. He is a lower level created being and brother of Lucifer, in direct contrast to the Jesus of the Bible
AntwortenLöschenThe Libertarians would be a better choice then Willard
AntwortenLöschenThere can still be a floor revolt.
AntwortenLöschenBut Obama then a conservative in 2016 would be a lot better then hold your nose for Willard, then in 2016 hold your nose again, then try and clean up the mess IF we can get a conservative in 2020
He is descended from the British royal family, and through his Dad and the LDS has links to the Rothschilds and the European and the mega bankers that think they should call the shots on a one world government. Is that blue enough for ya.
AntwortenLöschenThe unelected GOP ruling class needs to have their candidates rejected or the party needs to be replaced by a new second party.
AntwortenLöschenThanks Sid, good input. I guess I've not seen you lately because I'm not in EM, and have never been around RD or similar.
AntwortenLöschenI posted a note on the same theme yesterday/last night (I haven't slept so it's all the same here)... good to see you're still here ;)
Who's Willard?
AntwortenLöschenThat's Mitten's actual first name.
AntwortenLöschenWillard Mitt Romney.
One of the first fiction books I ever read was by a 'Willard'. Willard Price. Hal and Roger... 'Amazon Adventure'. :)
AntwortenLöschenYeah, but he reminds me more of this one:
AntwortenLöschenIn fact, I am surprised no one has photoshopped Mittens into that yet... (Cranks up copy of Photoshop)
Very Emo... all the rage, I gather
AntwortenLöschenWaffling Willard, Mitt, Romney
AntwortenLöschenHere is why I am supporting Romney;
AntwortenLöschenSince Obama has been elected;
Gas prices have risen
The National Debt has risen
Unemployment has risen
Home foreclosures have risen.
Every thing was better under Bush. The Bush economy was better than the Obama economy.
Obama has been dissaster. I am voting for the other guy.
No amount of "look at the scary religious guy" BS can change the fact that OBAMA is horrible.
And nothing you have said is a reason to vote for Mittens, just a reason to vote against Obama. Mittens could be worse, exactly the same or better. You have said nothing that would support any of those conclusions. I can vote against Obama without voting for Mittens.
AntwortenLöschenYes Randy. We all know Obama sucks. But Waffling Willard sucks almost as bad. For a lot of us, ALMOST as bad is not good enough
AntwortenLöschenWe will have a piece of crap with both of these trained monkeys. We get Obama until 2016, or we get Willard, be expected to hold our noses again in 2016, then have either piece of crap Willard or the piece of crap democrat until 2020.
AntwortenLöschenNo brainer. None of the above in Nov.
I like Romney's "sterling" resume. Something Obama lacked big time when he was elected.
AntwortenLöschenBill Clinton: Mitt Romney's business record 'sterling' - POLITICO.com
http://www.politico.com/politico44/2012/05/clinton-romneys-business-record-sterling-124980.html
Mitt has been a HUGE success at everything he has touched.
Obama has had four years and has produced results a lot worse than Bush ever did.
Yep, as liberals go he is a skilled businessman. But he is still a liberal. And he will be a successful liberal president. in that he will be successful in accomplishing progressive goals. I don't want anyone to be successful in accomplishing progressive goals.
AntwortenLöschenThat is why I would never vote for a Republican. They lie and misrepresent the facts.
AntwortenLöschen(1) The allegation about gas prices is based on a major drop in gas prices due to the recession just before the end of Bush. They were about the same as now before that sudden drop, and a few months before that had reached a higher peak than has ever been reached under Obama. Aside from that, gas prices are not under the President's control, except indirectly with middle-east politics.
(2) Of COURSE the debt has risen during a recession. It should increase. But actually, spending now is lower, and we are still paying for Bush's wars and tax cuts.
(3) Unemployment rose due to the recession, not from anything Obama did. He has prevented it from being much worse.
(4) See #3.
We are where we are today because BUSH (& Cheney) fucked up in major ways. It takes time to fix that.
If you're going to argue in favor of Romney, try to use something true. Not that Romney would, of course.