Catholics don't believe that men become Gods of their own planet. They believe Jesus is God. There is a huge difference. Nor are they required, by their religion, to convert people. Romney is not just a casual member of a church, he was a Bishop, a high level leader, in a cult, that believes people can be gods. And this freak in the magic underwear is beating war drums against so called extremist terrorists in Iran. Do you think this guy is about personal freedom? Please don't vote for him. At least with Obama I know what the status quo is.
Romney is the magic undewearing man from Monsanto, he wants to increase the war on drugs, end the personal freedom reason medical marijuana, and he wants to continue on with the Bush wars, increasing spending by 2 trillion and launching the US further into the middle east. And a tax cut for the rich. Haven't you learned anything from the last guy that got in on this agenda?
GOP unleashes attacks on Libertarian presidential candidate
Recent polls suggest Republican nominee Mitt Romney is narrowing in on US President Barack Obama, but the incumbent isn’t the only one posing a challenge to the GOP. Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson is also giving Republicans a run for their money.
Johnson, the two-time governor of New Mexico and former contender for the GOP endorsement in this year’s race, has all but ended his attempt to win next month’s presidential vote. Gov. Johnson forfeited his race against Romney and other Republican Party frontrunners earlier this year, only to re-enter the contest as the Libertarian Party’s nominee. Now with Election Day nearing and a good number of Americans unsure of whether to cast their ballots to the left or right, Gov. Johnson just might have enough support to significantly alter next month’s vote.
To The New York Times, Gov. Johnson says the two-party dog-and-pony show has left voters to watch “a debate between Coke and Pepsi,” leaving his third-party presence to resemble something more alike to Perrier than the sugary, sappy sodas he equates to Pres. Obama and Gov. Romney.
That doesn’t mean that he’s not being afforded any attention, however, and in fact, it’s quite to the contrary. Although he hasn’t polled successfully enough to warrant a spot during the presidential debates or even receive enough funding to find himself on the same level financially as the two top dogs, Gov. Johnson may have already attracted enough support to remind the country what a third-party candidate can do to competitive election.
Republicans, however, have taken heed to this news and are urgently rolling out an effort to keep Gov. Johnson with interfering with a presidential race that could come down to the wire.
As the third week of October opens up, pollsters with Real Clear Politics predict that Pres. Obama stands to secure 201 electoral votes to Gov. Romney’s 191, suggesting that a single swing-state can theoretically make-or-break next month’s election. Also in the equation, however, is how much impact Gov. Johnson can have.
Robert Gleason, chairman of the Pennsylvania Republican Party, has been adamant with ensuring that Gov. Johnson won’t do to the Keystone State what Green Party candidate Ralph Nader did in elections past.
“This election will be close — if you remember, Bush lost by only something like 143,000 votes in 2004,” Mr. Gleason tells the Times, adding that the Pennsylvania Republican Party has successfully managed to disqualify tens of thousands of Libertarian signatures. “So we play the game hard here.”
In other jurisdictions, though, Gov. Johnson is gaining momentum, especially in the wake of Rep. Ron Paul’s (R-Texas) failure to secure the GOP nomination. Rep. Paul, a long-time lawmaker with heavy libertarian leanings, has wowed the country with his ability to attract young Republicans with like-minded ideals in this election and last. With the congressman coming short in his race to win the GOP nod from Gov. Romney, though, Gov. Johnson might be some libertarian’s last hope in 2012.
With Paul being pushed out of the GOP races, Johnson is quickly moving in on the ground that the congressman has relinquished along with his run, and with it gaining yet more momentum. For the Republican establishment, this is worrisome to say the least.
“As we all learned in Florida, when something’s close enough, even small numbers can make a difference,” said Charlie Cook, the publisher of The Cook Political Report, tells New York Times.
as much as I would have loved to see Ron Paul as the nominee, the idea of him beating Obama is not realistic. Until the resent debate, so was the idea of Romney doing it so I guess that is neither here nor there. BUT, the idea of a Johnson candidacy being taken seriously is simply over the top. I'd view myself as equally Libertarian and Republican although the republican half is harder to admit these days.
Shouldn't any sane Libertarian vote for anyone but Obama, or is it such to the Libertarian purist that Romney is just as bad only a different bad? My Paleo-Conservative underpinnings (the source of my Libertarianism) just demand that anyone but O, even if they are not perfect.
No doubt a third party Libertarian takes from Romney and helps Obama. Isn't four more years of that, way worse from a typical Libertarian perspective or do I not get it?
When we getting a beef?
The following user says Thank You to wldman for this post:
No, there is no difference. Most people in the world think its wacky to call Jesus God in the first place.
Living in Nevada I know and have worked with dozens of Mormons over the past 20 years, and not a single one has tried to convert me to Mormonism. The mission is the engine for their conversion efforts. They don't bring religion to the workplace, period, I have never seen it. I can promise you that Romney is not going to try to convert anyone in the government to Mormonism and I would bet real money that not one of the 15 members of congress has ever tried to convert another member to Mormonism.
The status quo is an economy that is one tick above rock bottom by virtually every measure and indicator other than the artificially QE inflated equities market. This is the most pressing issue and someone with zero practical expertise in economics is not the right person for the job.
Increase spending and decrease it elsewhere with both parties arriving at a consensus of what makes the most sense, that's the budgeting process, except, wait...the Democratic controlled Senate believes it unnecessary to have a budget. I have seen nothing to support the other arguments. If you want to convince me, then you will need to provide references.
My choice is not to elect Romney. My choice is to un-elect Obama, based purely on what he has actually done and actually failed to do the past four years. If the magic underwear is a deal-breaker for you or anyone else, then please vote for Obama, but at this point I really don't care if he wears the magic underwear on his head for fun, not kidding, I am still voting for Romney over Obama.
Reuters claims 46% oppose legalization and greater than 50% are for legalization of pot, not the other way around as you quoted. It's a miracle cure for a lot of people's health problems, completely natural, and completely harmless, yet, the guy in the Magic Underwear, who believes his fellows here and on the other Mormon planets are gods and that the rest of us are satan's breed, yes, Mr. Bishop Romney, seeks to outlaw our personal freedoms for his cult beliefs. How much is he going to spend on that agenda? There is supposed to be a separation of church and state. Voting for Romney is going the wrong way on this.
Believing in God is not whacky, I would say most people do. Believing that you yourself are a God, I would say, is a bit problematic, if not whacky. That' is Mormonism. Romney is the son of Polygamists, he wears magic underwear, and believes in all that crap. How can you have a someone in the white house, at the helm of the greatest power on earth, believing in such absurdity? Furthermore, why would you want someone legislating on such a whacky agenda?
I totally appreciate the problem with budget and where to spend and where not spend. At any rate, we all know it's going to get spent on and by the corporations that wield the most power in congress. The President doesn't spend it, afterall. Lot's of things to consider, no doubt, and not many very pleasing choices it would seem. It's a tough one. A magic underwearing corporatist that wants to invade Iran and spend more advancing the police state would be my second choice though, for sure.