Mitt Romney for President, MyManMitt.com
About Us
Contact Us
Donate to Mitt Romney Campaign

Mitt Romney on the Issues
Videos Mitt Romney
Help Mitt Romney




Friday, July 11, 2008
posted by Kyle Hampton | 1:14 PM | permalink
For any California readers (and any others interested), I began a new blog in defense of traditional marriage in the lead up to the November ballot. As a citizen of California I want to help persuade people to vote for the constitutional amendment to defend traditional marriage.

Please come by and visit http://calmarriagedefense.blogspot.com/.

Labels: ,

These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • del.icio.us:California Marriage Defense
  • DiggCalifornia Marriage Defense
  • Fark:California Marriage Defense
  • Furl:California Marriage Defense
  • Ma.gnolia:California Marriage Defense
  • Netscape:California Marriage Defense
  • NewsVine:California Marriage Defense
  • Reddit:California Marriage Defense
  • Slashdot:California Marriage Defense
  • StumbleUpon:California Marriage Defense
  • TailRank:California Marriage Defense
  • Technorati:California Marriage Defense
  • YahooMyWeb:California Marriage Defense

Technorati Tags: |
 
5 Comments:


God Bless Tony Snow & His Family

By Anonymous Anonymous, at July 12, 2008 at 11:01 AM  


Gay couples are capable of raising a non conventional family. Gay couples can also love their non conventional families. The government isn't and shouldn't help them or encourage them to do so. If they want to start a family and have the means to do so, that's great. The government isn't going to and should never encourage it with marriage benefits.

The benefits derived from marriage are supposed to help a man and a woman naturally raise and love a family. The government should encourage natural marriage with benefits. The government should discourage gay marriage cause it isn't natural. Not saying gays can't marry or spend a lifetime together. They just shouldn't get the same benefits as a natural relationship.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at July 12, 2008 at 5:09 PM  


The next institution that movement will target are religious ones. It will be an effort to force clergy to perform their "marriage" ceremonies in the name of God. Certainly they will get the courts involved, and there seem to be plenty of judges willing and ready to restructure society whether it's against the will of the majority or not.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at July 14, 2008 at 3:23 PM  


This is a big issue for my Church (LDS). We cannot and will not ever support same sex marriage. It goes against the doctrine of our Church and they are not going to change it. This also eliminates any same-sex married couples from becoming members of our Church or going to our Temples. You can be homosexual in our Church, but you cannot be active in your homosexuality. The Bible is very clear on homosexuality.
The homosexual activists are already attacking religions world wide. Many have fallen to their pressure. They will not give up until all do.
I don't know what our Church will do if the courts ORDER them to accept same sex married couples. I dred the day that this happens because it will destroy our Church.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at July 14, 2008 at 5:30 PM  


As a quick followup since I forgot to add it to the post I submitted..
Here is what our Church believes about Family.

This proclamation was sent out on Sept 23, 1995 and it is called "The Family: A Proclamation to the World"

http://www.lds.org/library/display/0,4945,161-1-11-1,00.html

By Anonymous Anonymous, at July 14, 2008 at 10:33 PM  



Thursday, July 10, 2008
posted by AmericanTestament.com | 5:50 PM | permalink
I swear I'm not a shill for the Sunlight Foundation. I just keep bumping into their stuff online. And, so far, I like what I see.

The House Franking Committee (Commission on Congressional Mailing Standards) wants to take away your representative's right to use the Internet to communicate with you.

See the interview video.

See the extensive "Red Book" mailing manual (72 pages...great for insomniacs).

While I agree with the principle of not allowing spend-o-crats access to taxpayer funds to spam us with unsolicited screeds about what they will do/have done if/after elected, what I object to is a rule that would essentially put a gag order on a politician using his/her cell phone to use Twitter. Half the people talking about implementing this rule don't have a clue about the Web as it stands...how can we trust them to regulate it?

Jon Henke at The Next Right has some thoughts on that as well. Yes, Jon, for members of Congress, every year is like it's 1999 (or earlier).

My favorite quote from the video should be carved into the steps of the House.
"Listen, Mike (Capuano), you have about as much chance of regulating the Internet as King Canute did at stopping the tide."
Capuano was quoted in the Washington Post earlier this year as saying:
"I make no bones about it. I don't know anything about this stuff," Capuano said with a shrug. "To me, the Web is a necessary evil," he admitted, "like cellphones."
This gives me a whole new perspective on why my emails to my representatives go unanswered, or when they are, amount to a brush-off form letter containing no real information.

Go ahead. Tell 'em how you really feel.

Labels: , , , ,

These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • del.icio.us:Quite frankly, m'dear, I DO give a $%@!
  • DiggQuite frankly, m'dear, I DO give a $%@!
  • Fark:Quite frankly, m'dear, I DO give a $%@!
  • Furl:Quite frankly, m'dear, I DO give a $%@!
  • Ma.gnolia:Quite frankly, m'dear, I DO give a $%@!
  • Netscape:Quite frankly, m'dear, I DO give a $%@!
  • NewsVine:Quite frankly, m'dear, I DO give a $%@!
  • Reddit:Quite frankly, m'dear, I DO give a $%@!
  • Slashdot:Quite frankly, m'dear, I DO give a $%@!
  • StumbleUpon:Quite frankly, m'dear, I DO give a $%@!
  • TailRank:Quite frankly, m'dear, I DO give a $%@!
  • Technorati:Quite frankly, m'dear, I DO give a $%@!
  • YahooMyWeb:Quite frankly, m'dear, I DO give a $%@!

Technorati Tags: |
 
1 Comments:


Liberals have their monopoly on ABC, NBC, and CBS. This way they turn the lights off and rob America blind. Now they are trying to do the same with the internet. Makes you wonder how anyone could vote these creeps into office.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at July 11, 2008 at 11:59 AM  



Tuesday, July 8, 2008
posted by AmericanTestament.com | 10:08 AM | permalink
Looking for a great source for quoting McCain, Obama, and other political figures to set the record straight? Look no further than the Library Of Unified Information Sources (LOUIS), a project of the Sunlight Foundation. This database gathers in one place all text of the following "documents":
Although it's not yet finished, it does contain a surprising amount of info for a beta. I was disappointed, however, that a search for "UFO" didn't turn up the answers I had hoped for. :)

Labels: , , , ,

These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • del.icio.us:LOUISdb.org
  • DiggLOUISdb.org
  • Fark:LOUISdb.org
  • Furl:LOUISdb.org
  • Ma.gnolia:LOUISdb.org
  • Netscape:LOUISdb.org
  • NewsVine:LOUISdb.org
  • Reddit:LOUISdb.org
  • Slashdot:LOUISdb.org
  • StumbleUpon:LOUISdb.org
  • TailRank:LOUISdb.org
  • Technorati:LOUISdb.org
  • YahooMyWeb:LOUISdb.org

Technorati Tags: |
 
0 Comments:



Monday, July 7, 2008
posted by AmericanTestament.com | 9:06 AM | permalink
Bulldog Reporter announces that Fox News is pulling head of CNN again after the latter had a brief respite from a six year slump in the popularity of its news content. MSNBC continues at a sad and distant third.

Now, I don't know that Fox news coverage, integrity, blah, blah, blah is all that much better in quality that CNN's. But it certainly is different in terms of its bias. All news is biased because all news is reported by humans and all humans are biased.

Furthermore, we tend to associate with those who most share our interests and worldviews, so it follows that a network that is built of reporters who associate on conservative worldviews is going to be conservative. Likewise for a liberal network.

And that's okay. That's what the First Amendment was meant to protect. On the dark side of things, with Obama a serious contender for the presidency and a Democrat-controlled congress, the Fairness Doctrine looms on the horizon. For a peek at how scary the Left is becoming in their fanatical thinking about reinstating this outdated and poorly conceived idea, see here.

Labels: , , , , , , ,

These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • del.icio.us:Liberal TV can't sell its own sizzle
  • DiggLiberal TV can't sell its own sizzle
  • Fark:Liberal TV can't sell its own sizzle
  • Furl:Liberal TV can't sell its own sizzle
  • Ma.gnolia:Liberal TV can't sell its own sizzle
  • Netscape:Liberal TV can't sell its own sizzle
  • NewsVine:Liberal TV can't sell its own sizzle
  • Reddit:Liberal TV can't sell its own sizzle
  • Slashdot:Liberal TV can't sell its own sizzle
  • StumbleUpon:Liberal TV can't sell its own sizzle
  • TailRank:Liberal TV can't sell its own sizzle
  • Technorati:Liberal TV can't sell its own sizzle
  • YahooMyWeb:Liberal TV can't sell its own sizzle

Technorati Tags: |
 
1 Comments:


My advice is to watch all the news stations. Get a variety in your system. Although after flipping through all news stations. My dial usually stops on Fox News. They pride themselves on being fair and balanced. Fox News does this because if u put a blabbering liberal up against a blabbering conservative. The conservative always sounds and looks better. So Fox News always wins in the end.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at July 7, 2008 at 2:23 PM  



Sign up for MyManMitt
Enter your email address:

RSS Feed MyManMitt.com
Mitt Romney Facebook MyManMitt
Mitt Romney YouTube






Copyright 2007 MyManMitt.com