Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons

Townhall.com The Blogspot for Political, Conservative and Republican Blogs and Bloggers


Tuesday, August 28, 2007
For GOP Candidates, Endorsements can also be a Liability
Posted by: Matt Lewis at 8:44 AM


It's getting to the point where GOP presidential candidates might want to avoid  seeking endorsements of prominent Republican leaders. 

... Or, at lest, they should start vetting people a bit more (despite the picture above, one of my contacts says Sen. Larry Craig often wore a pinky ring.  Memo to candidates:  Avoid anyone with a pinky ring ...)

So far this year, Rudy Giuliani, Sen. John McCain, and, now, Gov. Romney have been embarrassed by the actions of their high-profile GOP supporters.

As Politico's Jonathan Martin reports, Sen. Larry Craig was, until yesterday, a co-Senate liaison to Romney's campaign:

Explaining why he's backing Romney, Craig says in the video that it's in part because "he has very strong family values."

"That's something I grew up with and believe in," Craig explains.
Yeah ...

As Martin reports, a pro-Romney YouTube video clip featuring Craig was taken down yesterday.

It is unlikely that Romney's campaign will suffer any major backlash due to this, primarily because this is merely the latest in a long series of embarrassing endorsements.  But it certainly doesn't do him -- or Republicans, in general -- any good.


View in ascending order View in descending order
Alan writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 9:09 AM
Not again...
Why oh Why....
RASHUM writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 9:15 AM
I like title
For "GOP" candidates.....

Pointing out the fact that GOP candidates are held to a higher standard. Democratic candidates would probably seek out endorsements from even Spitzer and McGreevey.
RASHUM writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 9:15 AM
I like the title
For "GOP" candidates.....

Pointing out the fact that GOP candidates are held to a higher standard. Democratic candidates would probably seek out endorsements from even Spitzer and McGreevey.
mantlejim writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 9:26 AM
MA Mitt
The real question is, who didn't know this guy was a pervert?

When a presidential candidate has a record of being incredibly pro homosexual, who and what will flock to his side to support him. Birds of a feather flock together.

We should look at the other politicians who support Mitt and check them out also.

Drew writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 9:29 AM
Quick Response
No one has noted this yet, but I think it is a sign of a well-oiled and responsive campaign machine that the Mitt Romney campaign was able to remove Craig's video from YouTube so quickly.
Eichendorff writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 9:32 AM
mantlejim
It is absurd to say Mitt Romney is "pro-homosexual". He is nothing of the kind. He just believes that since gays are human beings, they should be treated like human beings.
roho writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 9:58 AM
Romney has a history of courting the gay
vote. He was endorsed by the Homosexual newspaper "Bay Windows" in Boston as Governor. In 1994 he received the endorsement of the "Log Cabin Republicans" organization. As Governor, he told Catholic Services to "Place orphan children in Gay Homes or go out of business!" In 12-27-05, the conservative web site of "Human Events on Line" voted Mitt as #8 for the top 10 Rinos in American Government.........He ain't conservative!(See MASSRESISTANCE.ORG for the truth.)
mantlejim writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 10:00 AM
Eichendorff
Obviously you have never stopped at a rest stop in MA, to rest. Obviously you are unaware of the education program in MA. Obviously you are unaware that Mitt called on the Boy Scouts of America to allow gays in. Obviously you are unaware that Mitt has been publicly pro homosexual his entire time as Governor of MA. Obviously you are unaware that Mitt tried to force Catholic Charities to accept homosexuals as legal adoptive parents. Etc.....

That is a lot different than what you state. His record is public knowledge. It didn't take me long to find out his record, considering it is being plastered everywhere. I would suggest you go research Mitt and his record.
Ex-tex writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 10:04 AM
roho- Are you sure about this?
"As Governor, he(Romney) told Catholic Services to "Place orphan children in Gay Homes or go out of business!"

If this is right than I got a REAL problem with Mitt!

mantlejim writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 10:06 AM
roho
I have seen two different terms used on TH.com and don't know what they mean exactly. RINO and CINO?

Could you tell me please.
Matt Lewis writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 10:07 AM
translation
RINO - Republican in Name Only
CINO - Conservative in Name only

See also "Squish" or "Red Tory" ...
mantlejim writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 10:11 AM
Matt Lewis
Thanks Matt.
SGRivette writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 10:30 AM
mantlejim
Both the RINO and CINO things are stupid. Some people just feel you have to be all or nothing.
none none writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 10:33 AM
Romney and Gay Adoption law
mantlejim has misrepresented Romney's position on the gay adoption law in MA. When the law passed, Romney introduced a bill to exempt religious groups from the law because it interfered with religious practice. But that failed in the legislature.

In the end, Romney was not authorized to exempt Catholic Charities from having to comply with the Gay Adoption law, which is a FAR CRY from the way mantlejim has represented it.

Romney has always rightly believed that children have a right to a MOTHER and a FATHER.

Distortion of Romney's record is rampant here on TH. It may be the only thing you guys have left in your bag of tricks. LOL
mantlejim writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 10:44 AM
portlandmom
I think you are wrong.

Mitt Romney demonstrates his commitment to homosexual "rights" before becoming Governor of Massachusetts in January 2003:

* 1994 Campaign vs. Ted Kennedy for U.S. Senate: Romney pledged he “will provide more effective leadership” than Kennedy on homosexual rights; endorsed by Log Cabin Republicans.
* 2000-2002: As head of Salt Lake City Olympic Committee, Romney banned Boy Scouts from participating.
* 2001 Called first citizens' petition to define marriage “too extreme” and “bigoted” because it banned civil unions.
* 2002 Campaign for Governor: Romney makes promises to GLBT community, according to leading Boston homosexual newspaper; endorsed by homosexual activist Log Cabin Republicans.
mantlejim writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 10:44 AM
portlandmom
Nov. 18, 2003 Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) rules that same-sex marriage is protected in the Mass. Constitution, and gives the Legislature 180 days to act (“Goodridge” ruling).

* Nov. 18, 2003 Romney responds to SJC ruling with four-sentence statement implicitly recognizing SJC’s authority, says only remedy will be a constitutional amendment: “I disagree with the Supreme Judicial Court. Marriage is an institution between a man and a woman. I will support an amendment to the Massachusetts Constitution to make that expressly clear. Of course, we must provide basic civil rights and appropriate benefits to nontraditional couples, but marriage is a special institution that should be reserved for a man and a woman.”
* Nov.-Dec. 2003 Romney reportedly working with Legislators promoting “civil unions”.
* Jan. 2004 Romney silent on proposal to remove four SJC justices through Bill of Address (put forward by Article 8 Alliance / MassResistance).
* Feb. 4, 2004 SJC tells Legislature that civil unions for same-sex couples will not satisfy its interpretation of the Mass. Constitution; only full-fledged marriage will do.
mantlejim writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 10:45 AM
portlandmom
# Feb. 5, 2004 Romney publishes editorial in Wall Street Journal laying all blame on the SJC for problem in Massachusetts. Suggests other states strengthen marriage statutes and pass constitutional amendments. Says don’t “attack … gays, singles or non-traditional couples.”
# Feb. 2004 Justices of the Peace are told by their professional association they will be able to claim “conscientious objector” status and refuse to perform same-sex marriages -- though this was never agreed to by Romney administration.
# Feb.-May 2004 Pro-family leaders and columnists urge Romney to defy court, and issue Executive Order to block same-sex marriage; no public comment from Romney.
mantlejim writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 10:54 AM
portlandmom
Let me guess. Your a Mormon (LDS)?
BG writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 11:09 AM
Craig
Larry Craig has been very solid against the gay agenda and very pro family. He is open borders but reliably conservative on all other issues.

There seems to be a growing number of prominent Republicans who fight for what is right but can't live up to the standards they set.

It would be best for Senator Craig to retire and let another Republican become Senator.
postmaster writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 11:18 AM
Mitt
Mitt Romney has always been in favor of equal rights (employment, etc). for gay citizens but has been adamantly opposed to gay marriage. Stop distorting the facts.
none none writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 11:21 AM
Thank you, mantlejim
for making my point. Massresistance = misrepresentations.

Example if anyone is interested:

http://www.evangelicalsformitt.org/front_page/jay_sekulow_responds_to_boy_sc.php

Let me guess? You're a Mormon Bigot?
none none writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 11:23 AM
Thank you, mantlejim
for making my point so well. Massresistance = misrepresentations. Example:

http://www.evangelicalsformitt.org/front_page/jay_sekulow_responds_to_boy_sc.php

Let me guess? You're a Mormon bigot?
mantlejim writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 11:41 AM
portlandmom
You know rumor has it, that there are paid Mormon bloggers here at TH.com.

I'm not saying it, but people are saying that its true. I have read it. So of course it's a natural question to ask you since you are defending Romney based on a record that is not what you say it is. Are you a Mormon?

mantlejim writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 11:44 AM
portlandmom
It's no different than if I asked someone if they were a Catholic, supporting JFK. I only want to understand your view point. Simple.
mantlejim writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 11:58 AM
portlandmom
I went to one of the sites and read it. Here is a quote, taken from the site you sent me to.

"He said then that he supported local councils’ right to make local decisions, but that he personally opposed the policy. “I feel that all people should be allowed to participate in the Boy Scouts, regardless of their sexual orientation,” he said."


none none writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 11:59 AM
mantlejim
Yes, I am LDS and very happy to say so, but what does it have to do with anything? - and it is obvious that if you were not a bigot, you would not have asked the question.

Paid Mormon bloggers here? One wonders whether you are capable of rational thought.

What is your motive in misrepresenting Romney's record? I only want to understand your viewpoint - simple.
none none writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 12:03 PM
mantlejim
You seem to have missed the whole point of the story - that Romney DID NOT bann the Boy Scouts from participating in the Olympics - no one did. The story is false.

I'm sure it was just an oversight on your part. And did you also miss the part about Romney actually being on the Boy Scout council?

Your misrepresentations are easily refuted.
mantlejim writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 12:17 PM
portlandmom
No, I did not miss the fact that Mitt was on the excecutive board of the Boy Scouts. That is why I feel even strongly, that Mitt is supporting homosexuals and always has. It is clear and simple what he said. It is public record. There is no disputing it. Right from the horses mouth. Right from the article you sent me too.

I don't care what the author said in the article, I want to know what Mitt Romney said and he said the following. He personally opposed the Boy Scouts anti homosexual policy and he was on the excecutive board, as you clearly state.. Read it again.

"He said then that he supported local councils’ right to make local decisions, but that he personally opposed the policy. “I feel that all people should be allowed to participate in the Boy Scouts, regardless of their sexual orientation,” he said."
mantlejim writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 12:42 PM
portlandmom
It's hard to get rid of the smell of a pig, if you play in the pig pen.
none none writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 12:47 PM
mantlejim - you have not cleared up
your misrepresentation. Did Romney ban the Boy Scouts from participation in the Olympics as you said? No, he did not.

You also chose not to acknowledge your misprepresentation on the Gay Adoption Law. Will you correct your statements?

It's also safe to assume that Romney's own sons were all scouts. Romney being on the board shows his committment to the Boy Scouts.

Equality under the law for homosexuals is a reasonable position that the majority of Americans agree with, and Romney has never advocated anything more than that, no matter how you miscontrue what he has said and done.

Dumbfounded D writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 12:51 PM
*plugging nose*
tell me about it. she has only been debating you a few minutes and she already stinks to high heaven.
none none writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 12:52 PM
mantlejim - afraid to admit the truth
I'm sorry I ever responded to your irrational posts. Rush is right - never argue with a fool, and I might add - a bigot. It's not worth the energy.

Have a nice day anyway!
mantlejim writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 12:56 PM
portlandmom
"miscontrue what he has said and done."

Tell it to the voters in MA.

"Exclusive: 2002 Salt Lake Committee Bans Boy Scouts From Olympics

David M. Bresnahan
Monday, Dec. 18, 2000"

http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2000/12/15/214301.shtml
judgedredd1 writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 1:12 PM
mantlejim
Wow! That was a Grand Slam!!! The Red Sox win the world series and the MA voters stand and cheer, their new champion "mantlejim"!!!

portlandmom mom goes back to the bullpen (pigpen), her head held in shame.

Dumbfounded D writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 1:33 PM
GRAND SLAM??
She Left after you could not answer the Majority of your falsehoods. and then she respectfully excused herself from and argument you couldnt win against yourself. and thats because you are wrong. read this and tell me if this sounds like a guy that is pro-homo.
Dumbfounded D writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 1:36 PM
here
http://stoptheaclu.com/index.php?s=mitt+romney
mantlejim writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 1:46 PM
Dumbfounded D
Here is a link I found right here on TH. This is exactly what made me stop supporting Mitt Romney. Watch and listen to him in his own words.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9IJUkYUbvI


Dumbfounded D writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 2:01 PM
SORRY
i am currently at a shi**y work computer. But regardless. why cut off your nose to spite your face?? true, there has been some politics involved in politics. big surprise there. one of the things i look for in a candidate is someone that can keep his promises. and whether you think he flip flopped or not he kept his campaign promises. as far as abortion he said he would maintain the current law. whenever a law came to his desk that weakened that law, he vetoed it.

besides, do you really care that the boy scouts were not aloud to (Officially) participate in the events?? is it imperitive to our existance? or just an out dated campaign smear?
roho writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 2:27 PM
Understanding the human condition,
it is absolutely illogical that a culture of liberal voters could elect, and relect Ted Kennedy and John Kerry with such CONSISTANCY, only to awaken one morning and think how cool it would be to have a CONSERVATIVE Governor.......For what.....Grins and giggles?...NO!....Mitt Romney is a master salesman that becomes what he neads to be, inorder to close the deal....And he is a master salesman just as Ross Perot was.
mantlejim writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 2:28 PM
Dumbfounded D
Everything that is being portrayed about Mitt from Mitt, is not the Mitt of record.

In this day and age of law suits, Mitt would be even richer if he sued himself.



All for America writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 2:30 PM
Thanks PortlandMom
Jay Sekulow's article was very helpful. Mitt did a great job with the Olympics and will make a great president.
mantlejim writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 2:46 PM
Dumbfounded D
"GRAND SLAM??"

I wouldn't call it a grand slam, just two people not in agreement, each one not willing to budge.
Eichendorff writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 3:13 PM
I can only say...
...that if mantlejim and judgedredd1 are typical of the enemies of Mitt Romney and the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, then neither Romney nor the Church has anything to worry about.
Dumbfounded D writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 3:37 PM
grand slam
that was my point. i hardly thought it was. the way i feel about it is there are proven facts on each side but those facts do not make one side wrong or right. it was situations that arose from very complex issues which cannot be colored in black and white. and the actions dont always portray the end result. like i said, there is more gray in politics than bill clintons fro'
judgedredd1 writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 3:43 PM
Eichendorff
Gee isn't it funny how Eichendorff and portlandmom and others hawk every Romney article and brow beat anyone who dislikes pro homosexual, pro abortion, pto gun control Romney.

You dear and kindest of them all Eichendorff, Romneys religion matters. Just like if a priest, reverened, bishop or a pope from another religion is running for office.

Perhaps you would like to tell us Romney's title within the Mormon Church or his positions held?

Is it not important to know if someone is a Bishop of a religion, a high priest, running for office?

Why do you want to hide what he is?

Eichendorff writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 3:53 PM
judgedredd1
Nobody is hiding anything, except perhaps you are desperately trying to hide any evidence of your own intelligence.

The positions Mitt Romney has held in the Church are not relevant to the presdidency except maybe in the area of experience in dealing with people and being able to understand the many different problems and challenges people face.

Romney's religion matters only to bigots like you.
Dumbfounded D writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 3:56 PM
jobs
you all need to understand that positions in the church are very different than that of other churches. i would equate them to being appointed a boyscout leader. i know, bad example but it along the same lines as far as receiving callings. it is not a prestigious calling. you do not get paid. you donate your time to fill the position. you teach and guide members based on what you have always learned growing up in the church and from church materials. i would not even compare them to clergy's or pastors. pastors and such donate there life to there church. Mitt Participated in his faith. and i think that is the difference.
judgedredd1 writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 3:57 PM
Eichendorff
"Nobody is hiding anything"

Oh really, it wouldn't matter if a catholic pope was running for president of the United States?

Just answer the question?

What positions has he held in the Mormon Church?

Eichendorff writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 3:58 PM
Poor judgedredd1
I'm sorry you feel so *sniff* browbeaten. *sob* Portlandmom and Eichendorff are so mean.
Eichendorff writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 4:00 PM
You've lost it judgedredd1
This discussion has nothing to do with the Pope.
judgedredd1 writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 4:03 PM
Eichendorff
"Nobody is hiding anything"

Oh really, it wouldn't matter if a catholic pope was running for president of the United States?

Just answer the question?

What positions has he held in the Mormon Church?



judgedredd1 writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 4:08 PM
Eichendorff
"This discussion has nothing to do with the Pope."

Your right, it has everything to do with a man who holds a religious title and is running for office in the United States. Something that he and his church want to hide. Why?


What positions has he held in the Mormon Church?



Eichendorff writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 4:09 PM
Positions
I honestly don't know for sure, and it really doesn't matter, except to bigots like you.
Eichendorff writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 4:12 PM
I suspect...
...Mitt Romney has been released from all Church positions because he is so busy running for President that he is not able to fulfill any formal Church responsibility at the moment.

But, then, you don't really care about the important details, do you? You just want to bash Mormons as much as you possibly can.
judgedredd1 writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 4:14 PM
Eichendorff
Hey Eichendorff do any of these titles ring a bell?

Bishop, Stake President, Missionary and High priest


Eichendorff writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 4:15 PM
Sure.
So what?
judgedredd1 writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 4:21 PM
Eichendorff
Why don't we talk about history and what happens when prior Mormon Church officials have held absolute power in the United States, over a population. Care to go there?
Eichendorff writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 4:23 PM
With you...
...it's all about Mormons. You're obsessed with them. I really pity people who are as stupid as you are, who have nothing better to do than bash someone else's religion.

This is my last response to you.
judgedredd1 writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 4:25 PM
Eichendorff
Care to explain the Atonement of Blood and Brigham Young's public speech. Was he a public official?
judgedredd1 writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 4:31 PM
Eichendorff
Typical.
judgedredd1 writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 4:52 PM
Eichendorff
Look above at the posts. I didn't bring up religion, you did. Further you decided to attack me by calling me a bigot. There is a book out, I'm not sure of the title, but it is something like this:

How to make friends and influence people.


Maybe you should give it a read.
Military Man writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 4:55 PM
Dude judge? and others
Did you bother to read what they wrote? In the service we have an acronym for that it's RIF(f)...Reading is fundamental (f'er). It's hard to argue let alone debate if you don't actually listen to (read) the other persons perspective.

The "Highest" position he has held is a Bishop.

I put Highest in quotation because that is the word that you used. In reality it isn't a job that someone holds indefinitely instead it is a long-term volunteer position from which there is no pay received, and no prestige received.

Exactly how gay is a 10 yr old scout anyways? Did it occur to anyone that associating with "normal" kids might help a child that couldn't distinguish healthy sexual roles because he had not learned them at home. How much participation can the BSA really have in the Olympics? Are you worried about them tying a big Gay knot and some how turning all of the other countries gay too?

Why are you making a big deal about the "Log Cabin Republicans" endorsements. Umm Hello? , they are Republicans. And at the current rate they we treating him with more civility than some of the Ignorant on here are. Even though all he promised to do was to Enforce the law. An Executive order given by a Governor expires at the end of his term, or it would be overriden when the next Governor took office. It would have been a stop gap at best and completely ineffective in the long run.

I would vote for the Pope if he was a Republican (and acted like it), but I would not vote for Harry Reid (D-NV) for President even though he is the same religion as myself and Mitt Romney.

The Real Question in my opinion is not who are you Neanderthals against... since that is so obvious.

Who are you for?
Military Man writes: Tuesday, August, 28, 2007 5:02 PM
Dude you might want to check you gaskets
Did you bother to read what they wrote? In the service we have an acronym for that it's RIF(f)...Reading is fundamental (f'er). It's hard to argue let alone debate if you don't actually listen to (read) the other persons perspective.

The "Highest" position he has held is a Bishop.

I put Highest in quotation because that is the word that you used. In reality it isn't a job that someone holds indefinitely instead it is a long-term volunteer position from which there is no pay received, and no prestige received.

Exactly how gay is a 10 yr old scout anyways? Did it occur to anyone that associating with "normal" kids might help a child that couldn't distinguish healthy sexual roles because he had not learned them at home. How much participation can the BSA really have in the Olympics? Are you worried about them tying a big Gay knot and some how turning all of the other countries gay too?

Why are you making a big deal about the "Log Cabin Republicans" endorsements. Umm Hello? , they are Republicans. And at the current rate they we treating him with more civility than some of the Ignorant on here are. Even though all he promised to do was to Enforce the law. An Executive order given by a Governor expires at the end of his term, or it would be overriden when the next Governor took office. It would have been a stop gap at best and completely ineffective in the long run.

I would vote for the Pope if he was a Republican (and acted like it), but I would not vote for Harry Reid (D-NV) for President even though he is the same religion as myself and Mitt Romney.

The Real Question in my opinion is not who are you guys against... since that is so obvious.

Who are you for?
smith writes: Wednesday, August, 29, 2007 7:05 PM
frustrated
i am republican and i am starting to hate my own party becuase of its disgusting members. this guy makes me sick. he does this and then has teh arrogance to stick around and tell us he didn't do it.

romney and all the candidates should simply say, i don't want any endorsements from the trash in washington. power ruined, arrogant, losers.

smith writes: Wednesday, August, 29, 2007 7:07 PM
oh judgedredd is here, im out of here
there can't be anything worth reading here if he is posting his anti mormon rants.
judgedredd1 writes: Wednesday, August, 29, 2007 9:14 PM
smith
Thanks for bringing up Romney and religion again.

Do Mormon Church heirarchy get a special pass not to have their religion braught up, especially when a member of the clergy is running for president? Romney holds a position above a Mormon Bishop.

A religion that has a history of poligamy, murder and massacre right here in the United States.

Over 3000 people have watched this video, since you called me a bigot. Thanks "smith" for helping me see the truth of mormonism.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvaGLT-_GhY

Here is a great one that explains mormon teachings.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5dscqcNOGM&mode=related&search=



Military Man writes: Thursday, August, 30, 2007 5:55 AM
Judge still doesn't get it
Any position that Romney held he doesn't hold it any more. Only a small number of positions are permanent. Unlike reverands or pastors our positions aren't for life.

Further more perhaps we should hold Judge accountable for his bootlegging ancestors or how about one of his grandparents that owned slaves. It seems that you are attempting to pin too much on one individual. It's a good thing the courts don't work like this "judge". Because if they did one guy would commit murder and his whole family would be given the death penalty.
Sign Up to Post Your Comments Sign Up to Post Your Comments
Please take a few seconds to sign up, then you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, create your own blog and more! If you are already registered, click here.
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.
 


Your Blog Postings:
Last updated 11 Minutes 29 Seconds Ago
Last updated 20 Minutes 37 Seconds Ago
Last updated 24 Minutes 24 Seconds Ago
Last updated 26 Minutes 54 Seconds Ago
Last updated 27 Minutes 14 Seconds Ago
 

Archives of our Conservative, Republican, Political Blogs

Blog Search



Townhall Conservative, Republican, Political Blogs Townhall Blogs
Townhall Conservative, Republican, Political Columns Columns
Your Townhall Conservative, Republican, Political Blogs Your Blogs
By Month
 December 2009
 November 2009
 October 2009
 September 2009
 August 2009
 July 2009
 June 2009
 May 2009
 April 2009
 March 2009
 February 2009
 January 2009
 December 2008
 November 2008
 October 2008
 September 2008
 August 2008
 July 2008
By Issue
 A Culture of Life
 Budget & Government
 Campaigns & Elections
 Education
 Energy & Environment
 Faith & Family
 Foreign Affairs
 Health Care
 Immigration
 Jobs & Economy
 Judges & Courts
 Media & Culture
 Property Rights
 Safety & Security
 Science & Technology
 Second Amendment
 Social Security
 Tax Relief
Advertisement

Comments Comments

Axehole writes. . .
 Re: You Will Subsidize Abortion
  By Cicero
Axe
 Re: You Will Subsidize Abortion
  By BK
Lonny
 Re: Stupak: White House Is Pressuring Me To Keep Silent On The Abortion Amendment
  By Jo
Axe: - Welfare Clause pt#2
 Re: You Will Subsidize Abortion
  By BK
Lonny?
 Re: Stupak: White House Is Pressuring Me To Keep Silent On The Abortion Amendment
  By Kevlar
it is all the same
 Re: Stupak: White House Is Pressuring Me To Keep Silent On The Abortion Amendment
  By sceptyczny
Eugene
 Re: You Will Subsidize Abortion
  By Jo
Axe:
 Re: You Will Subsidize Abortion
  By BK
Transparency
 Re: Federal Aviation Administration Spends $5 Million On Drunken Holiday Bash
  By Crispian
BK the Plutocrat
 Re: You Will Subsidize Abortion
  By Careful with that axe, Eugene
At least
 Re: Federal Aviation Administration Spends $5 Million On Drunken Holiday Bash
  By Crispian
JD'S FARTING SON
 Re: Conservatives Are Happier Than Liberals
  By clarityseeker
why do the religious types
 Re: You Will Subsidize Abortion
  By sceptyczny
Loony
 Re: Stupak: White House Is Pressuring Me To Keep Silent On The Abortion Amendment
  By Publius4254
Mr. Medved,
 Re: “AVATAR” OFFERS STUNNING STYLE, INANE SUBSTANCE
  By Crispian
Tread
 Re: You Will Subsidize Abortion
  By BK
JD
 Re: Conservatives Are Happier Than Liberals
  By Jo
You're catching on
 Re: It's All About Connections
  By Exeye
Exeye
 Re: You Will Subsidize Abortion
  By sceptyczny
what the far right and far left have
 Re: Dem Sen: Opponents of Health Bill Are Birthers, Right-Wing Militias, Aryan Groups
  By Lonny

The Latest on Town HallThe Latest on Town Hall


Blog Roll Blog Roll