Breaking News



Proverbs 19:22
What is desired in a man is loyalty,
and a poor man is better than a liar.

The Opening Few Minutes of the 2012 Political Superbowl is upon us.

The first innings of the 2012 Political World Series.

The Democrat lineup appears set with Mombasa-Kenyan-born Barack (pronounced: Burrock) "Barry Soetoro" Obama (pronounced: Ohbahmmuh) whose actual non-Hawaiian Birth Certificate can be seen at http://lyingaround.tripod.com and also http://bareflash.tripod.com

The present GOP Presidential-candidates lineup includes the following:

RON PAUL = Economy-competent, public-morality-ambivalent, laissez-faire isolationist, old man

MITT ROMNEY = Wall-Street-business-savvy, cultically-Mormon, handsome but deceptively wind-sniffing flip-flopper - especially on sexual social issues

RICK PERRY = Handsome and hawkish, moralistically hard-headed, authoritarian reaganite

RICK SANTORUM = Anti-muslim, homogay-indiscriminate hawk and social-issues semi-conservative moralist

NEWT GINGRICH = Third-wife-loving, honestly non-compromising, frustrated-with-injust-criticism, issues-competent, Man with a Comprehensive Plan

MIGRAINE MICHELE = Inferior-gender, sexist feminist, moral-issues quasi-conservative wannabe

JON HUNTSMAN = Handsome and diplomatic, homogay-tolerant dove

---------------------------------------------------------

PARTIAL TRANSCRIPT OF INTERVIEW COMMENTS
MADE BY COMPROMISING-ON-HOMOSEXUALS
GOP CANDIDATE RICK SANTORUM (R-PA)
WHICH HE UTTERED ON 7 APRIL 2003:

SANTORUM: I have no problem with homosexuality. I have a problem with homosexual acts. As I would with acts of other, what I would consider to be, acts outside of traditional heterosexual relationships. And that includes a variety of different acts, not just homosexual. I have nothing, absolutely nothing against anyone who's homosexual. If that's their orientation, then I accept that. And I have no problem with someone who has other orientations. The question is, do you act upon those orientations? So it's not the person, it's the person's actions. And you have to separate the person from their actions.

We have laws in states, like the one at the Supreme Court right now, that has sodomy laws and they were there for a purpose. Because, again, I would argue, they undermine the basic tenets of our society and the family. And if the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to anything.

Does that undermine the fabric of our society? I would argue yes, it does. It all comes from, I would argue, this right to privacy that doesn't exist in my opinion in the United States Constitution, this right that was created, it was created in Griswold — Griswold was the contraceptive case — and abortion. And now we're just extending it out. And the further you extend it out, the more you — this freedom actually intervenes and affects the family. You say, well, it's my individual freedom. Yes, but it destroys the basic unit of our society because it condones behavior that's antithetical to strong healthy families. Whether it's polygamy, whether it's adultery, where it's sodomy, all of those things, are antithetical to a healthy, stable, traditional family.

Every society in the history of man has upheld the institution of marriage as a bond between a man and a woman. Why? Because society is based on one thing: that society is based on the future of the society. And that's what? Children. Monogamous relationships. In every society, the definition of marriage has not ever to my knowledge included homosexuality. That's not to pick on homosexuality.

I've been very clear about that. The right to privacy is a right that was created in a law that set forth a (ban on) rights to limit individual passions. And I don't agree with that. So I would make the argument that with President, or Senator or Congressman or whoever Santorum, I would put it back to where it is, the democratic process. If New York doesn't want sodomy laws, if the people of New York want abortion, fine. I mean, I wouldn't agree with it, but that's their right. But I don't agree with the Supreme Court coming in.

---------------------------------------------------------

PARTIAL TEXT OF 15 DECEMBER 2011 FOX NEWS GOP DEBATE:

MODERATOR: Governor Romney, many people believe that the way to reign in, so-called activist judges is to be careful in appointing or nominating the judges in the first place. As governor of Massachusetts, you passed over Republicans for three quarters of the judicial vacancies you faced, instead nominating Democrats or Independents. With that track record, why should Republicans believe that you will appoint conservatives to the bench if you become president?

ROMNEY: Well I have to let you know that in Massachusetts, I actually don’t get to appoint the judges. I get to nominate them. They go before something known as the Governor’s Council. It consists of, I believe, seven members, all of whom are elected Democrats. And so to be able to get my appointments through, I had to have people of both parties. And the people I put forward, all were individuals who I vetted very carefully to make sure they would follow the rule of law.

These were largely people going into criminal courts. I chose overwhelmingly people who had been prosecutors in their prior experience. And so we had that kind of justice. Now, let — let me note that the key thing I think the president is going to do, is going to be with the longest legacy. It’s going to be appointing Supreme Court and justices throughout the judicial system. As many as half the justices in the next four years are going to be appointed by the next president.

This is a critical time to choose someone who believes in conservative principles. Now I — I don’t believe that it makes a lot of sense to have Congress overseeing justices. The — the — the only group that has less credibility than justices perhaps is Congress. So lets not have them be in charge of overseeing the — the justices.

ROMNEY: However — however, we don’t call it we the judges. We call it we, the people. And we do have the ability to remove justices that need to be impeached. We also have the ability to pass new amendments if we think a justice is taken the nation in the wrong direction. And where a statute has been misinterpreted, congress can write a statute that clarifies that point. We have ability to rein in excessive judges.

MODERATOR: Chris Wallace has the next round of questions.

MODERATOR: Thanks, Bret. Governor Romney, you have changed your position in the last 10 years on abortion, on gay rights, on guns. You say keeping an open mind is a strength, but some of your critics say that every one of these moves has been to your political advantage. When you were running in Massachusetts, you took liberal positions. Running now as president, you take more conservative positions. Is that principle or is it just politics?

ROMNEY: Well, I’ll begin by taking exception with your list there. I did change my…

MODERATOR: Which — which one?

ROMNEY: Gay rights.

MODERATOR: Well…

ROMNEY: I’m firmly in support of people not being discriminated against based upon their sexual orientation. At the same time, I oppose same-sex marriage. That’s been my position from the beginning.

With regards to abortion, I changed my mind. With regards to abortion, I had the experience of coming in to office, running for governor, saying, you know, I’m going to keep the laws as they exist in the state. And they were pro-choice laws, so effectively I was pro-choice....

MODERATOR: If I may just pick up, you say the one issue which I was wrong on was gay rights. Correct, sir?

ROMNEY: Mm-hmm. What was the — what was the — I don’t recall the whole list, but I…

MODERATOR: It was abortion, gay rights, and guns.

MODERATOR: If I may, sir, in 1994, when you were running for the Senate, you wrote a letter to the Log Cabin Republicans in which you said, “I am more convinced than ever before that, as we seek full equality for America’s gay and lesbian citizens, I will provide more effective leadership than my opponent,” who was Ted Kennedy.

In 1994, you also said you supported not only an assault weapons ban, but also a five-day waiting period. And in 2002, when you were running as governor, you said that you supported the tough gun control laws in Massachusetts. And then as you say in 2004, you also signed an assault weapons ban.

So you are still more of a champion of gay rights than Ted Kennedy was?

ROMNEY: I think — I think — I think you just said exactly what I s aid, which is this.

MODERATOR: I…

ROMNEY: Let me — let me go back and say that. I do not believe in discriminating against people based upon their sexual orientation. There are some people that do. I had a member of my administration, my cabinet who was — who was gay. I didn’t ask justices that I was looking to appoint — rather, people who are applicants for jobs — what their sexual orientation was.

I believe as a Republican, I had the potential to fight for antidiscrimination in a way that would be even better than Senator Kennedy, as a Democrat, was expected to do so.

MODERATOR: Senator Santorum, you have campaigned on social issues as much or perhaps more than any other candidate on this stage. Are you persuaded that Governor Romney has made these changes or what he says in some cases are not changes, based on principle and not political expedience?

SANTORUM: Governor Romney, when he was governor of Massachusetts, was faced with a Supreme Court decision that said that same-sex — that traditional marriage was unconstitutional. In that court decision, the court said that they did not have the power to change the law in Massachusetts and rule same-sex marriage legal. Why? Because in the Massachusetts constitution, it states specifically that only the governor and the legislature can change marriage laws.

Governor Romney — the court then gave the legislature a certain amount of time to change the law. They did not. So Governor Romney was faced with a choice: Go along with the court, or go along with the constitution and the statute. He chose the court and ordered people to issue gay marriage licenses, and went beyond that. He personally as governor issued gay marriage licenses. I don’t think that is an accurate representation of his position of saying tolerance versus substantively changes in the laws.

[ Editor: Contrast the flip-flopping attitudes of Romney on abortion and homosexual sodomy . . . with those of Newt Gingrich and especially Rick Perry.

The first page entries on Google using the keywords Rick Perry - abortion and Rick Perry - gay discrimination . . . will clearly reveal that Perry is forthrightly consistent against both types of sin and crime ]

- http://thesextet.tripod.com
- http://lyingaround.tripod.com
- http://bareflash.tripod.com

------------------------------------------------------------

It is no surprise that Romney (and even Santorum) have been and continue to be endorsed by compromising pseudo-"conservative" RINOs.

In these dangerous times of kamakaze-like islamo-kooks strapping explosives on themselves, it is beyond acceptable bounds to use violent sports-term euphemisms in non-qualified association with honorable GOP presidential candidates running in the 2012 Election. It is damnable defamation to state that Newt Gingrich is a "bomb-thrower." May God's severe curse be on all who revile Gingrich and Perry with that and/or similar obviously-unfair-and-derogatory descriptions!

Would the preferable 2012-Election VP running mate for Newt Gingrich be Rick Perry . . . or the preferable 2012-Election VP running mate for Rick Perry be Newt Gingrich?

Sexist feminism has rightly taken a back seat by inferior-gender Migraine Michele Bachmann "stepping aside." Homogay activists - lamentably besieged by the arrogant and insubordinate deviancies of feminist-sexist power-craving chauvenists satanically insisting on leadership-over-men equality - who are consequentially demanding apologies from anti-homosexuals, and who are on a diabolical and destructive crusade to become, be, and promote effeminate and/or commit same-gender sodomy (in or out of non-"civil" unions) are next.

No one is ever born homosexual, despite a one-sided interpretation of automatic "original sin." To become and/or be effeminate and.or commit same-gender sodomy is a CHOICE - an EVIL choice!

Leviticus 20:13, Romans 1:26-28, and First Corinthians 6:9-10 as rendered in the best translations of The HOLY BIBLE, will not change, but will remain in full effect against homoperverts -- no matter what slanderous, satanspeak/weaselword, pseudo-intellectual excuses and irrationalizations they infer, insinuate, and blatter out in their despicable demonic accusations and godless judgmentalism.

It is not a question of "What would OTHER people think" if watered-down "non-extremist" "moderation" is not followed thus upposedly] scaring [allegedly]-"normal" people. It is instead: "What does GOD want?"

If it comes down a choice between Perry or Gingrich...versus Obama....who would YOU PERSONALLY vote for in November of 2012?

----------------------------------------------------------

Concerning all those who would never be happy in a Heaven of perfect public modesty:

Revelation 21:8 But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the polluted, as for murderers, fornicators, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their lot shall be in The Lake That Burns With Fire And Sulphur, which is The Second Death.

In summary, the entire conflict caused by non-asked-for immodesty imposed is like a very-serious game of "hide-and-seek" - in that the potential victims, previously oppressed by sinful and wicked immodesty of the impolitely-inconsiderate worldly, both hide [away] from such (as much as safely possible), while doing what it takes to seek the absence of the sight of such vile immodest intruders...many of whom will sadistically continue to irresponsibly defile strangers with selfish and self-justifying deviance in irrational self-denial:

Proverbs 4:16 For they cannot sleep unless they have done wrong; they are robbed of sleep unless they have made some one stumble.

Malachi 2:8 But you have turned aside from the way; you have caused many to stumble by your instruction; you have corrupted the covenant of Levi, says the LORD of hosts

Mutual cooperation is "the name of the game" for there to be peaceful coexistence between the genders (especially during seasonably warm weather) - the female of which is Scripturally admonished to always take care to be dressed modestly when even in [reasonably]-potential view of visually-stimulated men they are not presently married to:

First Corinthians 12:22 On the contrary, the parts of the body which seem to be weaker are indispensable,
23 and those parts of the body which we think less honorable we invest with the greater honor, and our unpresentable parts are treated with greater modesty,
24 which our more presentable parts do not require. But God has so composed the body, giving the greater honor to the inferior part,
25 that there may be no discord in the body, but that the members may have the same care for one another.
26 If one member suffers, all suffer together; if one member is honored, all rejoice together.
27 Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it.

First Timothy 2:8 I desire then that in every place the men should pray, lifting holy hands without anger or quarreling;
9 also that women should adorn themselves modestly and sensibly in seemly apparel, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or costly attire
10 but by good works, as befits women who profess religion.
11 Let a woman learn in silence with all submissiveness.
12 I allow no woman to teach or to have authority over men; she is to keep silent.
13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve;
14 and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor.
15 Yet woman will be saved through bearing children, if she continues in faith and love and holiness, with sobriety.

Revelation 16:15 Wow, I am coming like a thief! Blessed is he [and she] who is awake, keeping his [and her] garments that he [especially; she] may not go naked and be seen exposed!

A warm-weather female has the capacity (though NOT the right) to dress however she likes whenever and wherever in a free country, but:

Job 36:21 Take heed, do not turn to [pornographic-misattire] iniquity, for this you have chosen rather than affliction.

Song 8:4 I adjure you, daughters of Jerusalem, that you stir not up nor awaken love until it please.

Romans 14:15 (paraphrase) If your brother is being injured by how you are dressed, you are no longer walking in love. Do not let what you wear cause the ruin of one for whom Christ died.

First Corinthians 8:9 Only take care lest this liberty of yours somehow become a stumbling block to the [visually-arousable] weak.

The males are admonished to not go looking(!) for [immodest-sights] trouble [whether when driving along a pedestrian-intense roadway, shopping in a female-customer-intense store, etc.] to not explore with demonic curiosity to become self-appointed judges and investigators, and go sticking their noses into the worse-than-contagious-germ-laden/radioactive-contaminated, indecent-exposed filth they will eventually find and soil themselves with if they try hard enough:

First Samuel 12:21 ...and do not turn aside after vain things which cannot profit or save, for they are vain.

Proverbs 4:15 Avoid it; do not go on it; turn away from it and pass on.

Proverbs 14:7 Leave the presence of a fool...

Proverbs 17:24 A man of understanding sets his face toward wisdom, but the eyes of a fool are on the ends of the earth.

Proverbs 22:3 A prudent man sees danger and hides himself; but the simple go on, and suffer for it.
Proverbs 27:12 A prudent man sees danger and hides himself; but the simple go on, and suffer for it.

Matthew 5:28 But I say to you that every one who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

Matthew 18:9 And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out and throw it away; it is better for you to enter life with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into the hell of fire.
Mark 9:47 And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out; it is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than with two eyes to be thrown into hell

Ephesians 5:7 Therefore do not associate with them

Second Timothy 3:5 ....avoid such people.