Watching CPAC From the Sidelines

If I had a little money and a lot of time, I’d love to have attended this year’s CPAC conference. As Sen. Jim DeMint said this weekend, “there has never been a time in our history when CPAC was more necessary.”

Because I could not possibly attend, however, I wanted to replace the normal installment of “Weekend Reading” and take some of what I think were the best moments and bring them to you at America’s Right. Now, I don’t have time to transcribe video–thanks to C-SPAN and YouTube, video is most readily available–so over the course of the weekend I will be taking a look now and again for actual transcripts of speeches.

It’s with regard to the transcripts that I ask you to help me out — I’d really like to bring you some of the best comments from people like DeMint, like Mike Huckabee, Ann Coulter, Newt Gingrich, Rush Limbaugh, Rick Santorum, Tim Pawlenty and more . . . but I need the transcripts. So, if you find any, please e-mail me the link and I’ll be sure to get some comments up here on the site. Thank you, and have a great weekend.

– Jeff

Mitt Romney

ON CONSERVATISM:

Some critics speak as if we need to redefine conservatism. I think that misses the mark. America’s challenges are different from year to year, but our defining principles remain the same. Conservatives don’t enter each new political era trying to figure out what we believe. Facing new and complex problems, we find the answers in principles that endure. Ronald Reagan used to say that “the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that what they know is wrong. ” Conservatives don’t claim to know everything, but what we know is right.

Conservatives believe in settling great questions the way the Founders intended — especially where the stakes are the highest. Courts that have undermined the fundamental right to life have shown an equal disregard for the rights of property and the rights of religious freedom. We’ve even seen them extend rights to terrorist combatants who have killed Americans and who would like to kill many more.

[...] America voted for change. America did not vote for a boat-load of new government spending programs that would guarantee higher taxes and high deficits as far as the eye can see and that would threaten our currency, our economy, and our future. We must be the alternative course. We can’t be that if all we say is no. Our plans must be clear, compelling, and first to the table. Our plans must have at least one common thread — they must make America stronger. Better education strengthens our kids; better healthcare strengthens our citizens; and bringing our budget into balance strengthens our economy and preserves our future. Today, as much as ever, conservative principles are absolutely essential to keeping America strong and prosperous and free.

ON THE “STIMULUS” PLAN:

The President has already moved to stop our economy’s downward spiral. Parts of the stimulus will, in fact, do some good. But too much of the bill was short-sighted and wasteful. Every single Republican in Congress voted in favor of a better stimulus plan, one that focused on creating jobs immediately. But Congressional Democrats couldn’t restrain themselves from larding up their bill with tens of billions of dollars for their political friends. Republicans wanted to stimulate the economy, Democrats wanted to stimulate the government. Conservatives in the House and Senate stood their ground and voted no — and they were absolutely right.

So far, the administration has been unclear on what it will do to address the huge decline in the pool of risk and investment capital. These losses will be felt in businesses that don’t start-up and grow, and in jobs that don’t get created. To grow the pool of investment capital, the last thing you’d do is to raise taxes on investment, as the President has proposed. The surest, most obvious course is to rule out higher taxes on investment. I would propose going one step further. For all middle-class Americans, we ought to abolish the tax on interest, dividends and capital gains.

ON LIBERAL HYPOCRISY:

For the last several years, we’ve heard liberals moaning about the 700 billion dollars that have been spent over six years to win freedom in Iraq. They have now spent more than that in 30 days. And with a government almost 12 trillion dollars in debt, any unnecessary spending puts at risk the creditworthiness of the United States. If the world loses confidence in our currency, that could cause a run on the dollar, or hyperinflation that would wipe out savings and devastate the Middle Class. President Obama says he hopes to cut the deficit in half after four years — does that mean a deficit in 2012 of 600 billion dollars? No president should accept such a staggering deficit, much less hold it up as a national goal. This is the time to pare back government spending. It is not the time to fulfill every liberal dream and spend America into catastrophe.

Rep. Mike Pence

ON CONSERVATISM:

I stand before you today at a historic moment for the conservative movement, and for this great country. The coming weeks and months may well set the course of this nation for the next generation.

This Administration and this Congress is barely a month old, and already the problems facing this nation have grown in magnitude — eclipsing the ones the nation faced when voters cast their ballots in November.

How we, as conservatives, respond to these challenges could determine whether America retains her place in the world as a beacon of freedom; or whether we slip into the abyss that has swallowed much of Europe in an avalanche of socialism.

While some are prepared to write the obituary on capitalism and our movement… I believe we are on the brink of a great American awakening.

ON THE “STIMULUS” BILL:

After writing a stimulus bill that was nothing more than a wish list of liberal spending priorities and power grabs, Speaker Nancy Pelosi went to the House floor and said, “Every American is asking, ‘What’s in it for me?’”

She thinks the American people are a bunch of congressmen!!

No, Madame Speaker, they wanted to know what’s in it, period. Which is more than you can say for the 246 Democrats who cast their votes for it.

The American people weren’t asking “what’s in it for me”… they were asking, what’s in it for America? What’s in it that will strengthen the foundations upon which our prosperity rests?

As the details of that bloated bill emerge, the answers to “what’s in it for America?” are all too clear. What’s in it for America is generations of debt, burdening our children and grandchildren with debt tomorrow to fund liberal priorities today — all with sore little chance of stimulating the economy.

Americans are not happy. And they know this is not just about dollars and cents… this is about who we are as a nation.

As Reagan said in 1964, it’s about whether “we abandon the American Revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in far-distant capital can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves.”

My money is on the American people.

ON THE “FAIRNESS DOCTRINE”:

And the freedom to listen to what we want, who we want, when we want is also a blood-bought American right.

Despite assurances to the contrary from the White House, Democrats from Speaker Nancy Pelosi to Illinois Senator Dick Durbin to California Senator Diane Feinstein all openly advocate a return of the so-called Fairness Doctrine to the airwaves of America.

But there’s nothing fair about the Fairness Doctrine. Allowing bureaucrats to decide what opinions can be expressed on the public airwaves is nothing more than government rationing of free speech and it must be opposed.

We cannot permit the Democrats to censor the airwaves of America. We must pass the Broadcaster Freedom Act and once and forever, send this Doctrine of Censorship to the ash heap of broadcast history.

Rep. Tom Price

ON CONSERVATISM:

Republicans remain far from the prominence we require to set the course for our national policy. Having failed to intelligently or ideologically define and communicate our principles to the American people, the party finds itself out of power, and many conservatives have lost faith in our leadership.

The Republican Party is at its best when its leadership has a bold vision rooted to conservative principles: personal responsibility, liberty, limited government, traditional values, providing for the common defense, and optimism about the future. These principles represent the lifeblood of America and our party. It is time that we again embrace these traditions and set a course for renewal.

[...] Moreover, no longer can Republicans cede the language or institutions. And we must remain unified and disciplined. Once, Americans valued “responsibility,” “self-determination,” and “hard work.” Now, these ideals have been replaced by fuzzy appeals to “diversity,” “fairness,” and “social justice.” Democrats have been successful in altering the mindset of what made this nation great through language and institutions.

Hostile Democrat majorities and liberal special interests are more energized than they have been in decades, and there are many battles ahead. From an attempt to eliminate secret ballot elections in union organizing to the trillions of dollars more that the administration seeks to spend to inject itself further into the private market; from their goals of a bureaucratic government-run health care system to the ongoing attacks on traditional American values, we must stand up and fight. As a unified and principled force for freedom, we will beat back the liberal Washington agenda and restore the principles upon which our party and proud nation were founded.

Sen. Mitch McConnell

ON CONSERVATISM:

Over the past few months, we’ve seen a Big Government mentality creep back into fashion on Capitol Hill. It seems the failed big government solutions of the Carter-era are making a comeback — and I assure you, Republicans are going to do everything we can to make sure that the failed policies of the past stay where they belong: right next to the bell-bottoms and the leisure suits.

No one doubts that government should have a role. Indeed, some challenges are so great or so urgent that they require government to act. Government can also play an important role in helping Americans meet 21st century challenges through things like education reform, making healthcare more efficient and more affordable for everyone, and increasing energy exploration. But in the face of new challenges, Democrats seem to be reverting to the old playbook of bloated government, out-of-control spending, and higher and higher taxes to pay for it all.

During the last administration, they never passed up an opportunity to wring their hands about the spending that both parties approved to recover from a horrific terrorist attack, fight two wars, and to rebuild after the single worst natural disaster in U.S. history. Now the shoe’s on the other foot. And what have we seen? Well, in just one month, Democrats have spent more than President Bush spent in seven years on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and Hurricane Katrina — combined. If the overall spending has been jaw-dropping, then the individual proposals have been even more troubling. Everyone is familiar with the $1 trillion dollar Stimulus Bill. A bill that was supposed to be timely, targeted, and temporary turned out to be none of the above. Much of the spending won’t go into effect for years, much of it’s directed at wasteful projects like government golf carts, and much of the new government spending will be virtually impossible to cut off once the economy recovers.

Rush Limbaugh

ON CONSERVATISM:

Let me tell you who we conservatives are: We love people. When we look out over the United States of America, when we are anywhere, when we see a group of people, such as this or anywhere, we see Americans. We see human beings. We don’t see groups. We don’t see victims. We don’t see people we want to exploit. What we see — what we see is potential. We do not look out across the country and see the average American, the person that makes this country work. We do not see that person with contempt. We don’t think that person doesn’t have what it takes. We believe that person can be the best he or she wants to be if certain things are just removed from their path like onerous taxes, regulations and too much government.

We want every American to be the best he or she chooses to be. We recognize that we are all individuals. We love and revere our founding documents, the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. We believe that the preamble to the Constitution contains an inarguable truth that we are all endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights, among them life. Liberty, Freedom. And the pursuit of happiness. Those of you watching at home may wonder why this is being applauded. We conservatives think all three are under assault.

ON LIBERALISM:

[T]ake a look at all the constituency groups that for 50 years have been depending on the Democrat Party to improve their lives. And you tell me if you find any. They’re still complaining, still griping about the same problems. Their problems don’t get fixed by government. And those lives have been poisoned. Those lives have been cut short by false promises, from government representatives who said don’t worry about it, we’ll take care of you. Just vote for u


Read the rest of Limbaugh’s [long but good] speech yourself..

Share

Comments

  1. BlueWater says:

    I just finished watching Rush at CPAC. Very inspiring. By the way, did anyone see where Obama has given land rights to China if we don’t pay up on our debts to them? Go to AtlasShrugs.com.

  2. dc says:

    One way these Un-American, Un-Constitutional thieves will deal or confront with the views of American citizens is: not to.

    Already they give "No comment" to questions, and they will not allow watchdogs to oversee what they are planning.

    Total "take over" and holding the chain in the nose ring of Americans.

    Everyone is still being "considerate and polite" as the loose is being tightened around the neck and pressure being applied little by little (frog in the pot of water being turned up to high).

    I can now see Scripture ringing true and the cup filling to full and ready to come to fruition when watching this unfold.

    "Tea Parties" are but a laugh to them, as they sign another order that demands "more for them" and "less for the whole" and our good.

    View: http://www.FreedomsPhoenix.com/Find-Freedom.htm?EdNo=001&At=046490

    Anything of real merit will require a "big stick" in the right hands. And there's a number of heads that need to connect with it – to 'change' their mind for good.

  3. Anonymous says:

    I too watched Rush this afternoon and, although in true Rush style (somewhat disjointed and rambling at times), I thought that he earned his keep.

    But I was dismayed that the attendees’ straw poll chose Mitt Romney as the candidate for 2012.

    How anyone, after carefully reflecting on Romney’s term as govenor in MA, could call him a Conservative is beyond me. Clearly, he adapts his position on key policies to fit the electorate rather than heartfelt commitment to conservative principles.

    I personally have another problem with him; I could never vote for a leader who has a higher-order commitment to an organization with secret pledges and rituals. Mormonism is not just a religion (religion should never be a litmus test for public service) but rather it is a secret society with plans and goals that supercede national interests.

    I do not say this out of bigotry or dislike but rather as a result of study and a rational evaluation of the tenets of the Morman faith.

    Old Bob

  4. David Gleason, Kent, WA says:

    Rush has posted the the transcript of his speech at http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_030209/content/01125106.member.html. He also has links to video if someone wants to watch it.

  5. bud nc says:

    Jeff
    This might intrest you.
    US gives China eminent domain over US property.

    http://www.rense.com/general85/give.htm

  6. Claudia says:

    Today at about 6:30 PM Pacific time, we lost the father of News.

    Paul Harvey died at age 90 in Phoenix, AZ.

    RIP Dear Paul, and now for the rest of the story…… I guess we will never know what the rest of the real story is.

  7. Anonymous says:

    Please forward this link to every police officer you know:

    http://www.lawfulpath.com/ref/vk2k.shtml

  8. Anonymous says:

    DC…The tea parties are in the beginning stages, my friend. It only took a few weeks of liberal policies to get people to take to the streets. Something is, as some are saying…afoot…at hand…stirring…revolting…

    Rush made mention of the tea parties in his speech today. I don’t remember his exact words, but in lieu of underlying stirrings, rumblings, etc…it’s already beginning to backlash. It hasn’t been barely a month, and already thousands of people are organized throughout several cities to protest this administration’s actions, power grabs, nominations of criminals and thieves, and an all-out assault on our Constitution. So, the tea parties are inspiring and encouraging. Dissent is so beautiful in action…

  9. Anonymous says:

    Hillary is a Saul Alinsky student, too. Her thesis was written about him. She's no different than Obama. The same Soros' funds that paid for Obama have been thrown her way in the past.

    Activist Alex Jones' film revealed years ago that our countries coveted landmarks, National parks & ports were given up to the U.N. while Bill Clinton was president. Look up United Nations Biosphere project.

    Secondly Bobby Jindal ISN'T eligib le to be President of the U.S.either. Do the Republicans know the rules set forth in our Constitution? We know the media doesn't know the rules for POTUS. He was born of two immigrant Indian parents. He's a Rhodes Scholar and has a heavy background in community organizing. Sound familar? Look up the history of Rhodes. That "prestigious" scholarship ISN'T what you think it is, either!

  10. dc says:

    Thanks “Anonymous” (11:47) for the encouraging words! These people even made their “own signs” instead of being just a mindless “carrier” for those who care nothing about them.

    The Lawful Path (noted above) is interesting (will have to take the time and read it thru), they even bring GOD back into the picture and Foundational values!

    “America is great because America is GOOD. If America ever ceases to be good it will cease to be great.”

  11. Lance in TX says:

    Hey Old Bob,

    I doubt you have really looked at the LDS faith. What you say is what all anti-Mormons say after being told what to say by their Pastors. Hey, what religion are you? Southern Baptist? Evangelical?

    I am a convert (many years now)because of the tenets of the LDS faith. (Grew up Episcopal and Catholic).

    Actually we don’t have Secret pledges or rituals. We have Sacred rituals, but they are not Secret.

    Where did you find out about our rituals? Where did you do your “study and rational evaluation”? Which anti-Mormon books did you read?

    So, how about leaving your bigotry (and yes you show it) out of it or at least be HONEST and admit it.

  12. Anonymous says:

    I tried to post yesterday about the Chinese being given eminent fomsin rights as collateral for loans. It is horrifying, if true, that our govt. would give land seizure rights of American soil to a foreign govt. I cannot even begin to think that is happening. What are the people in Congress doing about this? Do they or did they agree to it? Is this the thing that Biden warned about we weren’t going to like? Jeff do you know what the truth is on this?

  13. Anonymous says:

    Dear member of the LDS (anonymous 3/1 1:16 AM).

    I guess that I expected a response such as yours – a personal attack. It is the same type of rsponse that I get from from liberals and other ideologs when I try to make a point about the fallicies of the their agendas vis-a-vis Conservatism.

    I might add that I spent the largest part of my professional career in one of the world’s premier organizations that has a strong Mormon influence and many, many, of my peers and personal friends were Temple-approved leaders of the LDS. On a personal level, I have the greatest respect for most of the Mormons that I have known and worked with. They typically have been talented, highly educated, high-achievers, and very professional and gracious in their relationships. But let’s not kid each other, the LDS IS an exclusive organization where Mormans are a little more equal than non-Mormans when choices and decisions are made at the societal level.

    As far as “secret” vs “sacred” is concerned, it’s just a matter of semantics, such as “it depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is”. But this is Jeff’s blog, and it’s not right to engage in a religious debate on subjects that he hasn’t written about.

    And pleas don’t be so defensive. I have nothing against Mormans as individuals. I have simply researched their literature, and, like the Koran, I take the words seriously. As far as bigotry is concerned, I have none, but I am capable of making objective decisions based on honest research.

    And, even though I am a Gal. 2:20 type of believer in Jesus Christ, I identify with no particular denomination. And that’s exactly the point; I have but one authority in my life, and that is Jesus Christ, and I will allow nothing to insinuate itself between me and Him. There is no organization or theology to which I have sworn alligiance other than to Him and His inspired Word. If you’re an honest person, you will have to admit that, for those of your faith, that is not the case.

    That’s fine, and that’s your choice, but I don’t have to drink the Kool Aid, as O’Reilly might say.

    But don’t feel as though I’m picking on the LDS. I consider ALL man-made organizations which require a pledge of obesience above all other pledges (including the Constitution) in the same category as the LDS chuch. The Masons, which many of my professing Christian friends in the past have belonged to, is another example.

    I simply would never knowingly vote for anyone who belongs to any organization that has secret (i.e. not known or accessible to non-members) signs, ceremonies, and pledges and that exclude everyone except the “faithful”

    And I am sorry that I offended you. That was not my intent. And my apologies to Jeff for bringing this up on his blog.

    Old Bob

  14. Claudia says:

    DC,
    Thank you for bringing up Lawpath and its contents. Another article that is VERY WORTH reading is the one about the Missing 13th Amendement and waht caused the removal of it from the Constitution as it stands today… did you know that probably close to 86% of ALL of Congress and Judicial, Treasury is made up of LAWYERS and yet technically, it is illegal for them to run for OFFICE in the USA.

    http://www.lawfulpath.com/ref/13th-amend.shtml

    There are other araticles that are interesting in their reading room also….

    Claudia,
    Reno, NV

  15. Claudia says:

    Jeff, and all who are worried about the Eminent Domain thing with Hillary giving to China, here is the latest on it:
    from theobamafile.com

    “Obama Grants Eminent Domain Rights to China ~ Well, maybe?

    This is an update to yesterday’s report.

    Red County has a report that points to the Examiner as the source.

    The Examiner names the Patriot Room and LiveLeak as its sources.

    LiveLeak deadends. The LiveLeak report has no source.

    Patriot Room attributes the report to the Hal Turner Show — “Honest talk in a time of universal deceit.”

    The Hal Turner Show blog, in a February 26, 2009 entry, entitled, “FEDS GRANT EMINENT DOMAIN AS COLLATERAL TO CHINA FOR U.S. DEBTS!,” contains this statement in the second paragraph:

    “On February 11, Bloomberg Business News reported that China was seeking “guarantees” for its US Government debt, and it now appears they got it. Well placed senior sources at the US Embassy in Beijing CONFIRM the formal written agreement was delivered by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton during her recent trip to China.”

    The third paragraph draws a conclusion:

    “This means that in the event the US Government defaults on its financial obligations to China, the Communist Government of China would be permitted to physically take — inside the USA — land, buildings, factories, perhaps even entire cities – to satisfy the financial obligations of the US government.”

    It appears Turner draws his conclusion from this statement in the Bloomberg report:

    He Zhicheng, an economist at Agricultural Bank of China, the nation’s third-largest lender by assets, “In talks with Clinton, China will ask for a guarantee that the U.S. will support the dollar’s exchange rate and make sure China’s dollar-denominated assets are safe,” said He in Beijing. “That would be one of the prerequisites for more purchases.”

    Bloomberg Business News reports that China was seeking “guarantees” for its US Government debt — probably true.

    As Bloomberg reports:

    “China’s loss of more than $5 billion from investing $10.5 billion of its reserves in New York-based Blackstone Group LP, Morgan Stanley and TPG Inc. since mid-2007 may increase its demand for the relative safety of Treasuries.” said Zhang Ming, secretary general of the international finance research center at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences in Beijing.

    “The government will be a net buyer of Treasuries in the short term because there’s no sign they have changed their strategy.”

    So, in the negotiations, China made it clear they were shaky about the deal and they wanted guarantees. Those guarantees would come in the form of Treasuries — bonds.

    So, China will hold a lot of American bonds.

    While in China, Hillary Clinton went on Chinese television and urged China to keep buying U.S. treasury bonds. “It’s a good investment, it’s a safe investment.”

    “Our economies are so intertwined. The Chinese know that in order to start exporting again to its biggest market, the United States has to take some drastic measures with the stimulus package. We have to incur more debt. The Chinese recognize our interconnection”

    So, the question becomes — what is our exposure?

    Buried way, way down in the US – China agreement there is a standard bond agreement that contains language giving whomever or whatever access to the eminent domain process?

    And, what about this vote? — the U. S. House of Representatives’ voted on a motion offered by Foxx (R – VA, NC) that would prevent funds in the Omnibus Appropriations Act from being used to exercise the power of eminent domain.

    H.R. 1105 — Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009, February 24, 2009, Managers: McGovern / Session

    “To make in order and provide the appropriate waivers for amendment #6, offered by Rep. Goodlatte (R-VA), which would prevent funds in the bill from being used to exercise the power of eminent domain to take private property from a private entity and give that property to another private entity, while exempting certain enumerated uses, such as highways, prisons, public utilities, and in cases of national emergencies or national disasters declared by the President.”

    The motion was defeated 4 to 7.

    I know I spent more time buying my last car than the Obama spent organizing this trillion $ deal. There’s no way all the “t”s are crossed and all the “i”s dotted.”

    Now the thing that I find disturbing is in the paragraph here….
    “To make in order and provide the appropriate waivers for amendment #6, offered by Rep. Goodlatte (R-VA), which would prevent funds in the bill from being used to exercise the power of eminent domain to take private property from a private entity and give that property to another private entity, while exempting certain enumerated uses, such as highways, prisons, public utilities, and in cases of national emergencies or national disasters declared by the President.”

    and more specifically in this sentence …”which would prevent funds in the bill from being used to exercise the power of eminent domain to take private property from a private entity and give that property to another private entity,” which I think says only THAT IT this portion of the bill that was defeated by a vote of 7 to 4 of the people that voted on 1105 that day, that this little wording in this amendment would PREVENT FUNDS in ths bill from being used to exercise the power of eminent domain to take private property from a private entity…… now that looks like only FUNDING would be prevented. Maybe I am wrong here, but it certainly seems to me that there is nothing preventing eminent domain from being granted. Only funding to put it in place is not granted.

    Otherwise, YES the thing that Hillary took to CHina was given and that included some form of guarantee for the Chinese and their committment of more monies to the USA and it seems that form of guarantee was a strong hiden force for them being able to seize eminent domain of US soil and business, just without the funding by the US Government to actually do it, as in the Courts being granted the money by the Government to actually stand on this, rather the Chinese Gov’t will have to pay the monies to actually take the land, homes and businesss of the people away from the people of the USA.

    IF I am wrong in my assessment of this littel codicil, please go through it and point us all in the right directions.

    Thanks, Jeff, for all your work and honesty, and I am hoping to hear your final thoughts on this,(as I really do trust your legal mind and your breakdown, especially on ambigious subjects that many of us only know a smattering on), as it is really important to every American’s life for now and all ofo the future. As you know, I was the firrst one to bring this omminus report to America’sright and I am deeply concerned about it. AS we all should be.

    Claudia
    Reno, NV

  16. Anonymous says:

    Regarding Chinese rights to foreign land, over the past year I have seen similar accusations made by British bloggers that Gordon Brown has done the same thing to the UK.

    The problem with politicians who think they are above the law is that they play foolish games.

    No international court could legitimately uphold a private deal made by an elected politician, but that doesn’t mean the politicians won’t try to build a political coalition to protect their private deals.

    I predict the Supreme Court and Congress will soon be confronted with the back door dealings of the Fed. That is when we will know if they are Americans or international pirates.

  17. Anonymous says:

    Eric Cantor throws Rush under the bus.

    http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2009/03/cantor-rejects.html

  18. Anonymous says:

    Steele throws Rush under the bus.

    http://defendfaithandfamily.blogspot.com/2009/03/steele-comments-on-rushs-speech.html

    I can’t WAIT for the RNC to call me asking for money. But I feel sorry for whomever is on the other end of the line.

  19. Anonymous says:

    Kyl just tried to rationalize the Republican part of the earmarks. In case you didn’t know, Republicans own 40% of them.

    Disgraceful.

    Verification word: rerear!

  20. Laurie says:

    Hi Jeff, I am late in posting this but I was glued to the seat and FOX and watched the CPAC from home. All I can say is that I would have given my eye teeth to be there in person. I was moved, especially by Rush, and am hoping that together we will be able to be the Hope and Change that this country needs now.

  21. Anonymous says:

    Sorry just checked back and saw my post at 11:51 has the word domain totally scrambled! Guess I should have edited myself. Very serious subject though. Hope someone has the real truth of it.

  22. goddessdivine says:

    Old Bob–I invite you to revisit the difference between secret and sacred. Something sacred is ‘regarded with reverence’. I would certainly hope that there are things in your life that you consider sacred, and do not share or exploit. The LDS church is open to everyone. Anyone who wants to learn more can do so, and even join, and thus be privileged to participate in the sacred ordinances granted to worthy members.

    I find it disconcerting that people use Romney’s religion as a reason not to vote for him. Here is a man who believes in something bigger than himself by dedicating his life to his Creator, is committed to his faith, has strong family values, and attends a church that teaches its members to be better people.

    I doubt you can be comfortable with any candidate then, because the majority belong to some denomination or other.

    (Sorry to go off again Jeff, just can’t keep quiet on these matters.)

    But regarding the CPAC, I only caught Limbaugh’s speech and it was brilliant…..and inspiring. Thanks for posting key points for many of the participants.

  23. Seeks Truth says:

    Old Bob,
    I agree with what you are saying and we are like-minded in our faith. But what about the people who profess to be born-again Christians (Carter, Bush, Obama) in absence of fruit? I don’t expect perfection, but I do expect striving. It has been extremely distressing to see the pattern of behavior by those leaders who profess the name of Christ. I cannot judge their hearts but I am to be discerning. Sorry, but it seems like they are reading a different Book than what I have. Has it all been for political expediency?

    The USA is considered a Christian nation, not because we have or had a majority of Christians. It was because we were founded upon Biblical principles. Yet, at that time even non-believers embraced these principles as being good for us. So to my point, though I would always prefer a born-again Christian, I could accept someone with character — one who had lived a life LIVING by the principles they TALK about. Not sure Romney meets that test, but my point is that my rejection of him has more to do with his track record.

    Bible trivia of the day:
    Isaiah 33:22
    For the LORD is our judge, The LORD is our lawgiver, The LORD is our king.

    And you wondered where they ever came up with the three branches of government. Those founders were wise to draw from the Well.

  24. Anonymous says:

    Pence and Palin are the only two that can rally the base, fire up the kids, bring back the indpendents, and beat Obama. Run these two together, and you got a winning ticket. Get rid of the Rhino’s, the Republican Lites, Republican Obama’s, and the Columbia and Harvard elitist grads. Run with the Christians, and take back this country!!! Don’t move left, move right! The campaign’s rallying cry…”Stop this nonsence, stop it now”.

  25. Anonymous says:

    To "Goddessdevine" (Great name. It perfectly describes the goal of all Morman women.)

    Regarding your question about "sacred" things in my life that I "do not share or exploit", actually, all that I would dare call "sacred" in my life – the Scripture and my relationship to God through Jesus Christ – is an open book; one that I share gladly with whomever inquires as to "the hope that is within me". The only ordinances (not rituals) that I participate in are those that Jesus Himself prescribed – baptism and communion.

    I have no need for "Temple- worthiness"; no need for secret/"sacred" rituals behind a curtain, performed by temple workers; no group of mortal men creating "scripture" and passing judgement on my righteous based on that self-created scripture; no threat of eternal damnation for non-conformance to the doctrines of a narcisistic cultist from upstate N.Y. a couple hundred years ago. No, I am free from all of that. Thanks to Jesus Christ, nothing, and no one, stands between me and God and eternal life. And I didn't make that up; it's all there, clear as anything, in the Bible. Not in The Book of Morman and not in the D&C's, but in the Bible.

    And by the way, there is a legitimate intersection of religious beliefs and politics that must be considered by the prudent voter. The issue is not the individual candidate's right to believe as he or she chooses, but rather how those beliefs might play out in a position of secular power, such as the presidency.

    Would it not be proper for a voter in the U.S. to question whether or not a devout Muslim is suited for the highest office in the land? I think that it would be entirely proper, based on what we know from experience and their sacred text, the Koran. Would you call me a bigot if I said, "Nah, I don't think that's a good idea", not because of predjudice but because the Muslim idea of a free society is different than mine? I don't think that you would because you know that, in accordance with Muslim doctrine, there are believers and there are infidels, (that would be you and me) and the infidels are lesser persons, not just religiously but also socially and economically, and Muslims are known to practice discrimination against those who do not belong. Furthermore, you know that the goal of Islamism is the elimination, either by conversion or elimination, of all other faiths. Based on my experience with Mormans and a more-than-casual purusal of their supra-Scriptural writings and their history from the beginning, I view the LDS church as being much the same.

    And I haven't had a problem finding candidates with whom I can, in good conscience, vote for. It's not, as you say, a denominational thing. The problem is, however that the LDS church is not just another "demomination". In fact, it's not a "Christian" denomination at all. Due to the interposition of the vain musings of mortal men over the Bible, in the truest sense of the word, it is clearly a cult. If you can find a different or better definition of a cult, let me know.

    As we all know, the LDS church is less a spiritual entity than it is an ecomomic (the true extent of their wealth is hidden from the public, but, at last report, estimates were approaching $100 billion dollars), social, and quasi-governmental, empire organized by power-seeking men (starting with Joeseph Smith, who had a little problem keeping peace among the husbands of the women that he bedded, so we can gather from that what his power trip was all about), and perpetuated for the exclusive benefit of those who pledge to submit to their control in exchange for the promise of becoming a God themselves in the after-life.

    Sure, as you say, anyone is free to join and "enjoy" those benefits, but free persons do not usually choose to do so. Like a true conservative, I'm for freedom. As Jesus said, "It is for freedom that I have set you free".

    Respectfully (and henceforth mute on this subject because, my strong beliefs notwithstanding, I take no joy in creating displeasure on the part of other sincere and good people like yourself and "Lance from Texas").

    Old Bob

  26. goddessdivine says:

    Wow, Bob. You are so misguided. There are more fallacies in your arguments I don’t know where to begin. I can only guess that you are a product of anti-Mormonism in its fullest. To that I can only offer my deepest sympathies. Perhaps you should take a deeper look into that Bible of yours to understand what really constitutes Christ’s Church (that and the fact there are missing pieces due to translation errors, thus does not contain His complete gospel). As one who has spent her life studying and living the gospel of Jesus Christ through my LDS faith (a christian religion, not a ‘cult’ as you suggest), I can only bear witness of its truthfulness.

    (Sidenote: Goddessdivine is merely just a play on words. And if you wish to criticize us ‘Mormons’, please spell it correctly.)

  27. Lance in TX says:

    Old Bob,
    Would you consider the Catholic Church “less a spiritual entity than it is an economic …” afterall it holds more assets and money than the LDS Church does! And the only “Power-seeking men” are the ones that killed Joseph Smith because they did not like what he was saying. They had lost “control” of their flocks because they were going to the LDS Church.

    Many of your “compaints” of the LDS Church can be said about the Catholic, Episcopal, and other Churches.

    Also, “no group of mortal men creating ‘scripture’”?? So, the Apostles and Prophets of old were not mortal men? The group that met at Nicea were not mortal? They picked what was “scripture” and what was not “scripture”… I think you don’t really know the early history of the Christian churches (I have studied this).

    Actually, the LDS Church is more inline with the 1st and 2nd century Christians than the current “Christian” Churches are.

    And yes we are Christian. Actually, you don’t have the right (unless Christ Himself gave it to you) to determine who is and is not Christian. Christ will do that Himself and I am 100% confident he will determine we are Christian, just as others are.

    Lance in TX

  28. Lance in Tx says:

    Old Bob,

    One last question.. Are you an Ex-LDS person? Many of your comments follow other Ex-LDS people that I have talked to. Just Curious.

    Lance in TX

  29. Anonymous says:

    The banter in here, back and forth about Romney, is the perfect example of how the republican message would take a back seat if Romney runs. Romney is too risky. IMHO, Romney can’t get the young vote, either, (he’s too stiff, and you know it), which is critical.

  30. Anonymous says:

    This is an unending debate about Mormonism, and I am truly sorry that I brought it up. It’s too incendiary, because, underlying it all, there is a feeling of persecution and victimhood on the part of the Mormon church.

    I’m reminded of a conversation that I had prior to the presidential election. I was explaining to another person, who was an Obama supporter and also a professing Christian, that I couldn’t vote for him, first and foremost, because of his position on the sanctity of life, starting with conception, issue. The other person immediately became defensive and declared that “you must be a racist”.

    My original post asking how in the world would anyone conclude that Mitt Romney is a conservative should have ended with just that question. His reign as governor of Massachusetts certainly wouldn’t qualify him for that designation. That’s all. My personal perspective relative to his religion is irrelevant.

    Let’s agree to leave it there.

    Old Bob

  31. Lance in TX says:

    Old Bob,

    I can understand your feelings about Romney not being a Conservative. I agree that he is not as conservative as I would like (a heck of a lot more than Hucakabee and some of the others though and never ended up on Judical Watch as one of the top 10 most corrupt politicians in 2007 [http://www.judicialwatch.org/judicial-watch-announces-list-washington-s-ten-most-wanted-corrupt-politicians-2007]). I don’t and have never had an issue with your statements on that.

    Now your other statement “My personal perspective relative to his religion is irrelevant” is not honest and truthful. Here is your previous statement:

    I personally have another problem with him; I could never vote for a leader who has a higher-order commitment to an organization with secret pledges and rituals. Mormonism is not just a religion (religion should never be a litmus test for public service) but rather it is a secret society with plans and goals that supercede national interests.

    I do not say this out of bigotry or dislike but rather as a result of study and a rational evaluation of the tenets of the Morman faith.

    As you can see by your own statements, to you, it is not irrelevant.

    Also, there is a reason the LDS Church members have a feeling of “persecution and victimhood”… We (LDS Members) have a long history of being persecuted. Please tell me what other group (other than Native American Indians) that have been run out of almost every place they tried to settle (and by ‘Christians’)? How many other leaders of their religion were murdered by other ‘Christians’? What other group has had a full ‘Extermination Order’ placed against them? (Missouri Executive Order 44 issued October 27, 1838 by Missouri Govenor Lilburn Boggs, rescinded June 25, 1976)

    Now there is also the issue of targeted and well funded attempts to discredit us by other “Christian” churches. Most of them don’t even really know what we believe. The members are just told to hate us (we have friends that used to attend an Evangelical Church until they were invited to Sunday lessons on how to attach and bash us directly) and in some cases get physical against us (we have had missionaries had red drinks tossed on them while they ride their bikes on the road, been run off the road by cars, and have been beaten up just because they are missionaries). Very ‘Christian’ behaviour!

    How many anti-Southern Baptist books are there out there? How about anti-Evangelical books?

    All I can say is that Satan must REALLY want us to fail with all of the persecution we face every day.. And guess what, we are still in the top 4 growing Christian Churches in 2008 and is still ranked as the 4th largest Church in the USA! The top 3 largest Churches all LOST membership according to the National Council of Churches USA.(http://www.ncccusa.org/news/090130yearbook1.html)

    We must be doing SOMETHING right.

    I am glad you feel secure in your belief. I am secure in my belief. I have NOT bashed YOUR direct belief (although I could say a lot from what you have posted). I have not called yours a Cult (although your belief does fall under the definition of a cult (read the definition http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cult) [actually all religion falls under the definition of a cult, but you were using it in a derogatory way]

    Please be kind to others that believe in Christ. Afterall, YOU do not have a right to determine who is and is not Christian. That is a personal thing between Christ and the person. (BTW: I have not said you were not a Christian)

    Since I do believe and follow Christ, I forgive your anti-LDS remarks, but I will always defend my freely chosen religion. I hope you can refrain from continuing to make them.

    Lance in TX

  32. Anonymous says:

    Dear Lance.

    I only meant that my personal beliefs about the LDS church (I don’t think that there were any personal attacks against you or Goddessdivine) are really irrelevant to the issue of whether or not Mitt Romney is a conservative. Of course they’re relevant to how I would vote, vis-a-vis another candidate in the primary, but probably not if he should receive the Republican nomimation.

    I am truly sorry that I have offended you. I can tell that you are passionate and sincere about your beliefs, and I respect you as an individual for that.

    I guess I forgot to mention that, in the last election, I gave more money (only hudreds, not thousands, but still more than 90% of the other donors coughed up) to my Senator’s campaign than I did to the McCain campaign. Oh yeah, I also manned the phone bank as a volunteer. He is a Mormon and, based on his record, he deserved to be returned to office.

    I guess that makes me a hypocrite or maybe schizophrenic, but, as I do with you, I judge him as an individual, not as the embodiment of the LDS church, which obviously, I have strong disagreement.

    Just one last suggestion. Put aside all literature regarding the message and ministry of Jesus Christ except the Bible (NT) and I think that we can find common ground.

    Old Bob

  33. Bobby K. says:

    Are there any repubs left in the senate that can stand up and stop this madness, it’s driving me up the wall. They are doing what ever they want and we are letting them. The gov. will be telling us what to drive, what to eat, what to wear, where we can send our kids to school, how much money we can make or spend. It’s sad when they are telling us to tighten our belt when they have thrown theirs away, and going out on a spending spree. When will it stop. Stop the givaways and make people work for what they get. I work 12 – 24 hr days depending on what is happening at work, and i don’t want to pay anymore taxes go some of our fellow deadbeat americians can sit on their buts and draw a check. to save money the gov should let us pick out some one sitting on their porch and just write them a weekly check, maybe it would save a handling fee from the gov… mad mad mad

  34. goddessdivine says:

    Bob, I appreciate the apology. I am so dedicated to my beliefs that I feel the urge to stand up for them when I feel they are being misrepresented; many of us do take these ‘attacks’ personally because our religion is such a huge part of who we are.

    I think we can definitely find common ground. ;-)

  35. Anonymous says:

    Dear Goddessdivine.

    Thanks for your kind words. Perhaps we both suffer from the same thing – a deep dedication to what we believe.

    There are a lot worse things than that, as long as we don’t lapse into disliking each other over our personal choices in the matter of faith.

    Old Bob

  36. Lance in TX says:

    Goddessdivine and Old Bob,

    I feel better about how things are going.

    Old Bob: I am glad we can come to a common ground. I feel we both truly want to follow Jesus Christ and have Him as part of our lives.
    My religion is not a separate part of my life. It defines who I am. My wife and I tell people that being LDS is a lifestyle, not just a religion. We live it every day, not just Sundays. This is why I get so offended (probably should not) when people misrepresent my religion. I don’t go around tearing down other people’s religions, I EXPECT the same treatment.

    Goddessdivine: I fully understand your feelings. My wife and I feel the same way.

  37. Anonymous says:

    Dear Lance.

    I think that it’s important to recognize that rational, reasonable, people can disagree on any issue – even one as deeply emotional as their personal faith – and still be good people (and be friends). I would hope that those closest to me would tell you that I truly love people – all people. I’m sure that yours would say the same of you.

    Faith is a choice; we choose what we will believe after considering whatever information is available to us. I like to think that my faith is a product of the convicting power of the Word, illuminated and made real to me by the Holy Spirit.

    One of the “convicting” aspects of the Word is that I can find no answer to the worlds problems – every one of them, without exception – other then for persons to “have the mind of Christ” within them, as Paul says in Romans. I’m sure that you feel the same.

    That should be our goal; not to be good Mormans, evangelicals, Catholics, etc. (or, dare I say it, even good conservatives), but to demonstrate that every societal ill known to man DOES have a solution – it is having the mind of Christ within us.

    Sincerely, Old Bob

    PS: I’ll give this a rest lest Jeff exclude me from his blog for trying to turn it into a theological discussion group.

  38. Anonymous says:

    There is one truth that defines the Christian faith.John 14-6. All other are religions, which is mans futile attempt to reach God. Christian faith is that God reaches out to man through his son Jesus Christ.Both Morman and Islam deny the divinity of Christ. Look at John 15, 18-27 as to why there is so much division and hatred. Beliving that Christ is the salvation of man does not end ones troubles.It often causes aleination and the threat of death. .But it offers a rational hope and reason that what is happening in this world will one day end with the return of Gods son, who died to save the world. Gods Grace

Speak Your Mind

*