Christ First Forum

17 Reasons Why A Vote For Mitt Romney Is A Vote For The New World Order

Once again, the Republican Party is being tempted to vote for "the lesser of two evils". A lot of Republicans are actually considering voting for Mitt Romney because they have bought the lie that he has "the best chance" of defeating Barack Obama in 2012. But just because he is the Republican candidate that is most like Barack Obama does not mean that he has the best chance of defeating him. The truth is that no self-respecting Republican should ever vote for Mitt Romney. A vote for Mitt Romney is a vote for the New World Order. Romney comes from the financial establishment, he is being showered with money from the financial establishment and he supports all of the goals of the financial establishment. This year, millions upon millions of dollars are being funneled into Romney's campaign and into pro-Romney organizations. The New World Order is literally trying to buy the 2012 election for their dream candidate. Romney would be the ultimate Wall Street puppet, and if you cast a vote for Mitt Romney you are playing right into the hands of the financial elite.

If you do not believe that a vote for Mitt Romney is a vote for the New World Order, just consider Mitt Romney's positions on the issues....

#1 The Federal Reserve

To the financial elite, there is no more important financial institution in the United States than the Federal Reserve, and Mitt Romney is a huge supporter of the Federal Reserve.

During one Republican debate, Romney actually tried to explain to all of us why "we need to have a Fed".

Not only that, Mitt Romney has stated that he is not really concerned about what is going on over at the Federal Reserve. Mitt Romney has publicly stated that he is "not going to take my effort and focus on the Federal Reserve".

That kind of talk is music to the ears of the financial elite.

Also, Romney fully supported the reappointment of Ben Bernanke as the Chairman of the Federal Reserve despite his absolutely horrific track record.

#2 Money From The Bankers

Mitt Romney is getting far, far, far more money from Wall Street bankers than any other Republican candidate.

In a recent article entitled "The Big Wall Street Banks Are Already Trying To Buy The 2012 Election", I detailed how numbers compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics show that Mitt Romney is getting more money from the employees of the "too big to fail" Wall Street banks than all of the other Republican candidates combined.

The following is an excerpt from that article that shows how much money employees of those banks (and their spouses) gave to various candidates for president during the first 9 months of 2011....

Mitt Romney: $813,300
Barack Obama: $198,874
Tim Pawlenty: $101,515
Rick Perry: $58,900
Jon Huntsman: $28,250
Ron Paul: $13,104
Herman Cain: $2,715
Michelle Bachmann: $1,500
Newt Gingrich: $1,250

Even though Romney's poll numbers have been in the mid to low 20s most of the time, employees of the big Wall Street banks gave him $813,300 during the first 9 months of 2011 and they only gave $105,719 to the rest of the Republican candidates that were still in the race at the end of the third quarter combined.

#3 The Wall Street Bailouts

During the last financial crisis, Mitt Romney was a very enthusiastic supporter of the Wall Street bailouts.

Back in 2009, Romney delivered a speech in which he made the following statement about bailing out Wall Street....

"I know we didn’t all agree on TARP. I believe that it was necessary to prevent a cascade of bank collapses. For free markets to work, there has to be a currency and a functioning financial system."

During the Wall Street bailouts, gigantic mountains of money were transferred from the pockets of U.S. taxpayers into the hands of greedy Wall Street bankers.

Wall Street would definitely like to have someone in the White House who will bail them out once again when the next great financial crisis strikes.

#4 Health Care

Republicans are supposed to be against Obamacare, and yet millions upon millions of them plan to vote for someone that came up with the plan that Obamacare was based upon.

Barack Obama has admitted that much of his health care plan came directly from what Mitt Romney did up in Massachusetts. In fact, a recent MSNBC article brought to light some new information about the relationship between Romneycare and Obamacare....

Newly obtained White House records provide fresh details on how senior Obama administration officials used Mitt Romney’s landmark health-care law in Massachusetts as a model for the new federal law, including recruiting some of Romney’s own health care advisers and experts to help craft the act now derided by Republicans as “Obamacare.”

The records, gleaned from White House visitor logs reviewed by NBC News, show that senior White House officials had a dozen meetings in 2009 with three health-care advisers and experts who helped shape the health care reform law signed by Romney in 2006, when the Republican presidential candidate was governor of Massachusetts.

Conservatives all over the country have been loudly denouncing the individual health insurance mandate in Obamacare, but Mitt Romney has had the gall to claim that the individual health insurance mandate that he signed into law as governor of Massachusetts was based on "conservative principles".

So how has Romneycare worked out for residents of Massachusetts?

Well, according to the Daily Caller, health care costs and health insurance premiums have gone up dramatically in Massachusetts....

Since the bill became law, the state’s total direct health-care spending has increased by a remarkable 52 percent. Medicaid spending has gone from less than $6 billion a year to more the $9 billion. Many consumers have seen double-digit percentage increases in their premiums.

That doesn't sound good.

Romney now says that he wants to "repeal" Obamacare, but what he means by repeal may not be what you and I mean by repeal.

Someone should ask Romney what he meant when he stated that he wants “to eliminate some of the differences, repeal the bad, and keep the good” in Obamacare.

#5 Free Trade

One of the key goals of the New World Order is to create a one world economic system. That is why so many of our politicians continue to push "free trade" even though tens of thousands of U.S. businesses and millions of U.S. jobs have gone overseas.

Of course Mitt Romney is a huge advocate of the "free trade" agenda.

The following quote comes directly from the Romney campaign website....

Access to foreign markets is crucial to growing our economy. We must reassert American leadership in international negotiations, follow through on commitments we have already made, and push aggressively for advantageous new agreements.

But the results of this "free trade" agenda have been absolutely nightmarish for the United States. According to U.S. Representative Betty Sutton, America has lost an average of 15 manufacturing facilities a day over the last 10 years. During 2010 it got even worse. That year, an average of 23 manufacturing facilities a day shut down in the United States.

In all, more than 56,000 manufacturing facilities in the United States have permanently closed down since 2001.

Globalism is ripping our economy apart a little bit more every day, and if Romney is elected the globalist agenda will only accelerate.

#6 Taxes

The New World Order loves to extract taxes from the American people. It was not a coincidence that the Federal Reserve and the individual income tax came into existence at nearly the exact same time nearly 100 years ago.

During his time as governor of Massachusetts, Mitt Romney significantly raised taxes. The following is an excerpt from a CBS News article....

Mitt Romney's Harvard MBA and gold-plated resume convinced many business leaders he would follow in the tradition of corporate-friendly Republicans when he was elected governor of Massachusetts in 2002.

Within three years, some had a vastly different opinion, after Romney's efforts raised the tax bill on businesses by $300 million

That same article also notes that Romney jacked up "fees and fines" on Massachusetts taxpayers substantially during his tenure as governor....

Romney and lawmakers also approved hundreds of millions in higher fees and fines during his four years in office.

Many in the Massachusetts business community were quite disgusted with Romney by the end of his term. Peter Nicholas, the chairman of Boston Science Corporation, says that "tax rates on many corporations almost doubled because of legislation supported by Romney."

#7 Government Spending

The New World Order loves big government and big government spending.

And let there be no doubt - Mitt Romney is a big spender when it comes to government money.

Government spending in Massachusetts increased significantly under Mitt Romney. This was especially true for the last two budgets passed under Romney. In fiscal year 2006, government spending in Massachusetts increased by 7.6 percent. In fiscal year 2007, government spending in Massachusetts increased by a whopping 10.2 percent.

#8 Global Warming

It turns out that Mitt Romney is a believer in the theory of man-made global warming. In fact, Al Gore recently praised Mitt Romney on his blog. In a post entitled "Good for Mitt Romney -- though we've long passed the point where weak lip-service is enough on the Climate Crisis", Al Gore lavished the following praise on the former Massachusetts governor....

"While other Republicans are running from the truth, he is sticking to his guns in the face of the anti-science wing of the Republican Party"

Not only that, it is also very important to remember that while Mitt Romney was governor, Massachusetts became the very first state to pass a law to regulate carbon emissions.

#9 Cap And Trade

If Mitt Romney becomes president, he is going to cram the radical green agenda right down our throats.

While campaigning for president in 2007, Mitt Romney said that he would fully support a global "cap and trade" carbon tax scheme as long as the entire world goes along with it....

“I support Cap-and-Trade on a global basis but not the USA going alone. I want to do it with other nations involved and on a global scale.”

#10 Illegal Immigration

Mitt Romney is very, very soft on illegal immigration. Back in 2007, Mitt Romney made the following statement....

“But my view is that those 12 million who've come here illegally should be given the opportunity to sign up to stay here”

Of course that will only encourage millions more to come here illegally, but Mitt Romney does not seem too concerned about that.

#11 Gun Control

One of the key goals of the New World Order is to disarm the American people, and Mitt Romney has been a huge supporter of gun control laws. When he was running for governor in Massachusetts, he made the following statement....

"We do have tough gun laws in Massachusetts- I support them...I believe they help protect us, and provide for our safety."

#12 Abortion

Mitt Romney has a long record of supporting the population control agenda of the global elite.

He claims that he is "pro-life" now, but Mitt Romney also once claimed that he was more "pro-choice" than Ted Kennedy.

Not only that, Romney once forced Christian hospitals and Massachusetts taxpayers to subsidize abortions in the state of Massachusetts. You can see evidence of this right here.

If he becomes president, Romney will be just like George W. Bush - a president that gives lip service to the pro-life crowd but that does next to nothing to actually stop abortion.

#13 The Pharmaceutical Industry

Just like the banking industry, the pharmaceutical industry is almost completely dominated by the New World Order. And the pharmaceutical industry has been absolutely showering money on Mitt Romney.

According to the CDC, the percentage of Americans that say that they have taken a prescription drug within the last 30 days has risen to almost 50 percent.

If Mitt Romney becomes president, it will be a new "golden age" for the pharmaceutical industry and that number will likely go even higher.

#14 The TSA

It recently came out that very elderly women are being strip-searched by TSA agents at U.S. airports, but Mitt Romney continues to fully support the TSA.

So if Romney becomes president we will continue to have to endure incredibly dehumanizing searches before we are allowed on to our flights.

#15 The Homeland Security Apparatus

Mitt Romney has stated repeatedly that he wants to make "homeland security" even stronger.

I have previously written about how Bush and Obama have turned America into a giant prison where virtually everything we do is watched, monitored, listened to, tracked and recorded in order to keep us all "safe".

Well, Romney believes that all of this is necessary as part of the "war on terror", and if Romney becomes president he will almost certainly push the envelope even farther.

#16 Guantanamo Bay

Mitt Romney has publicly stated that he would like to double the number of prisoners in Guantanamo Baby.

Just check out what Romney said during one Republican debate....

Now we're going to -- you said the person's going to be in Guantanamo. I'm glad they're at Guantanamo. I don't want them on our soil. I want them on Guantanamo, where they don't get the access to lawyers they get when they're on our soil. I don't want them in our prisons. I want them there.

Some people have said, we ought to close Guantanamo. My view is, we ought to double Guantanamo.

#17 NDAA

Barack Obama just signed a law which allows the U.S. military to arrest American citizens on U.S. soil, detain them indefinitely and ship them off to Guantanamo Bay for endless "interrogation" sessions. Mitt Romney has not taken a position against this horrible new law.

The truth is that if you look at the history of what he has done (not what he now says), Mitt Romney is virtually a clone of Barack Obama.

If the 2012 election is Romney vs. Obama, it really does not matter which one of them wins. Either one of them would do the bidding of the New World Order.

But millions of Republicans are being fooled. They don't realize that Romney will say just about anything to get elected.

Mitt Romney's wife, Ann Romney, once made the following statement about her husband....

“He can argue any side of a question. And sometimes you think he’s really believing his argument, but he’s not.”

So how do we know if he is telling the truth now?

The following is an epic video which demonstrates very clearly how dramatically Mitt Romney has flip-flopped over the years....



Sadly, most elections in America are not determined by the voters.

Rather, most elections in America are determined by money.

Republican candidates spent more than $10 million on television and radio ads in Iowa in the month of December alone.

Those ads have a huge impact on voters.

So who is spending the most money?

Well, according to a recent article in the Des Moines Register, pro-Romney forces are spending the most money even though Romney is not even really campaigning in Iowa....

Together, Romney and the super PAC going to bat for him had over half the ad buys in Iowa in December among the spending the Register examined.

If you can believe it, one pro-Romney "super PAC" actually spent $2.85 million in Iowa during the month of December.

$2.85 million can buy quite a bit of propaganda.

Sadly, in federal elections the candidate that raises the most money wins about 90 percent of the time, and Mitt Romney has raised far, far more money than the other Republican candidates have.

It would be nice to stick it to the establishment for once, but the reality is that it is really hard to go up against a candidate that is backed by millions upon millions upon millions of dollars.

But even if Mitt Romney only wins 30 or 40 percent of the delegates during the nominating process, that is still going to make it nearly impossible for any other candidate to win the nomination before the Republican convention.

In a previous article, I described how the new Republican voting rules are going to make a "brokered convention" much more likely....

The key is that most Republican primaries and caucuses will now allocate delegates using a proportional system rather than a "winner take all" system. Back in 2008, John McCain did very well in early "winner take all" primaries and wrapped up the Republican nomination very, very quickly. Nothing like that will happen in 2012. In fact, if the field remains crowded it is going to be very difficult for any candidate to accumulate more than 50 percent of the delegates by the time the Republican national convention rolls around.

If Mitt Romney wins more than 50 percent of the delegates during the primary season, the Republican establishment will let him have the nomination of course.

But if he is unable to do so, the Republican establishment will move heaven and earth to make sure that a candidate that they do not like does not accumulate more than 50 percent of the delegates.

Either way, the Republican establishment is going to do everything that they can to end up with a candidate of their choosing to go up against Barack Obama.

So can a miracle still happen?

Of course it can.

But just realize that it is going to take an all-out effort to overcome the power of the establishment.

A half-hearted effort simply is not going to get the job done.

http://endoftheamericandream.com/archiv ... orld-order

And if that's not enough, here's Romney's views on homosexuality:


Home » News
Romney Against Gay ‘Marriage’ But OK With ‘Domestic Partnerships,’ Gay Adoption, Gays in Military
By Michael W. Chapman
January 9, 2012
Subscribe to Michael W. Chapman's posts


APTOPIX Romney 2012

Republican presidential candidate, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney. (AP Photo/David Goldman)

(CNSNews.com) – Mitt Romney, who is considered by many Republican leaders as the conservative candidate strong enough to beat liberal Barack Obama in the 2012 presidential race, says he opposes “gay marriage” but supports same-sex “domestic partnerships,” adoption of children by gay couples, homosexuals serving openly in the military, and does not think states should prohibit sodomy.

Romney also says he favors an amendment to the Constitution that would define marriage as being between one man and one woman but does not think there is enough support for it nationally.

In the Fox News primary debate among the Republican candidates on Dec. 15, Romney said, “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.”

Moderator Chris Wallace then cited a letter from Oct. 6, 1994, in which Romney sought the endorsement of the Log Cabin Club of Massachusetts, a homosexual GOP group, saying, “I am more convinced than ever before that as we seek to establish full equality for America’s gay and lesbian citizens, I will provide more effective leadership than my opponent [Edward Kennedy].” Wallace asked: “So you are still more of a champion of gay rights than Ted Kennedy was?”

Romney answered, “Let me go back and say that I do not believe in discriminating against people based upon their sexual orientation. … 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. At the same time, Chris, in 1994, and throughout my career, I’ve said I oppose same-sex marriage. Marriage is a relationship between a man and a woman.”
romney

Mitt romney was interviewed for the Jan. 1, 2002 issue of Bay Windows, a leading homosexual newspaper in New England. (Courtesy: Bay Windows)

In Sunday’s debate in New Hampshire, Jan. 8, Romney was again asked about the issue and said “I don’t discriminate” but “at the same time, from the very beginning, in 1994, I said to the gay community, ‘I do not favor same-sex marriage.’ I oppose same-sex marriage. And that has been my view.”

In a Jan. 1, 2002, interview with Bay Windows, a pro-homosexual newspaper in New England, Romney--then running for governor of Massachusetts--was asked, “If you are elected, what would be the three top priorities for advancing gay and lesbian civil rights?”

Romney said: “My priorities as governor would be to improve the quality of life of all people in Massachusetts, and that means creating new jobs, improving educational opportunities and fixing the budget mess on Beacon Hill. As it relates to gay and lesbian issues in particular, I would look to protect already established rights and extend basic civil rights to domestic partnerships.”

The interview continued:

Bay Windows: “To you, what is the difference between civil unions between same-sex couples and gay marriage?”

Romney: “Very little, if any. For all intents and purposes, they are the same.”

Bay Windows: “Do you support civil unions?”

Romney: “ No, because I believe it’s virtually identical to marriage.”

Bay Windows: “Do you support gay marriage?”

Romney: “No.”

Bay Windows: “If you do not support gay marriage or civil unions, what keeps you from doing so?”

Romney: “I believe that marriage is a union between a man and a woman.” …

Bay Windows: “Do you support the Protection of Marriage Amendment?” [At that time, a proposed amendment to the State constitution in Massachusetts defining marriage as being between one man and one woman.]

Romney: “No, because it would outlaw domestic partner benefits for same-sex couples.” …

Bay Windows: “What is your position on each of the following issues? Domestic partner benefits for state and municipal employees –”

Romney: “I support domestic partner benefits. With regard to specific eligibility and benefits, I would need to study the costs and regulations associated with it in light of the state’s fiscal crisis.”

Bay Windows: “Repeal of sodomy laws –”

Romney: “I don’t think government should interfere in the private lives of consenting adults.” …

Bay Windows: “Do you have openly gay people on your campaign staff, either in a paid or volunteer capacity?”

Romney: “Yes.”

Bay Windows: “If elected, would you hire gays and lesbians?”

Mitt Romney: “I will impose no litmus test, but instead will look for the best qualified people to work in my administration, regardless of sexual orientation.”

Basically, Romney has maintained that he opposes same-sex “marriage” because as a social institution he believes that status is reserved only for one man and one woman. As for domestic partner benefits, Romney supports granting the legal privileges that heterosexual spouses enjoy, such as health insurance coverage, hospital visitation rights, joint ownership of property, survivorship rights, child custody, etcetera.
gay

(AP Photo)

That support for spousal benefits across-the-board apparently explains why Romney opposed the Massachusetts amendment to protect marriage--because it would not have afforded those benefits to gay couples.

While he has not explained his views in too much detail, Romney, in effect, supports providing the legal and social benefits that heterosexual married couples enjoy to homosexual couples who enter into “domestic partnership” agreements. But this “partnership” must not be recognized by the state as a marriage, according to Romney.

In August 2011, Romney signed a pledge by the National Organization for Marriage stating that if he is elected president, he will “sup[porting sending a federal constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman to the states for ratification,” as well as “defend the federal Defense of Marriage Act vigorously in court.”

When asked about that pledge during an editorial meeting with the Des Moines Register on Nov. 9, Romney was asked, “You signed a pledge opposing same-sex marriage. What’s the basis of your opposition to it, and what would you do about it as president?”

Romney said, “The basis of opposition is my view that the ideal setting for raising a child is where there’s a male and a female involved. I believe marriage is a relationship between a man and a woman, and support that concept. The action that I take as president depends in part on the state of play in Washington, the people that are there, and what options that exist. But certainly I would defend the Defense of Marriage Act, which the current president has refused to defend. I believe that the Defense of Marriage Act was well constructed and should be maintained. I would like to see a national amendment defining marriage as a relationship between a man and a woman, but that was tried maybe three or four years ago. I don’t think that’s likely to receive the necessary support at least in the near-term.”

The Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA, was signed into law by President Bill Clinton in 1996. It essentially says that for any federal purpose, a marriage is defined as being between a man and a woman. It does not touch on state laws or non-federal actions that may concern marriage. But it does protect one state from having to recognize a same-sex marriage from another state. The Obama administration has refused to defend this law, claiming it is discriminatory against homosexuals.
Children of Gays

In this Oct. 22, 2011 photo provided by the family, Jeff Littlefield, left, and his husband Tommy Starling pose with their 5-year-old daughter, Carrigan Starling-Littlefield, at a friend's wedding in Pawley's Island, S.C. (AP Photo/Gregory Pittman)

As for children, Romney believes it is okay for homosexuals to adopt and rear children. Romney does not think this is the ideal situation for the child, but he would not oppose it, according to his statements on the issue, but leave it up to states to decide how to handle the topic.

In a statement sent to CNSNews.com in October, Romney’s spokesman said: “Gov. Romney has consistently said that gay adoption should be assessed on a state-by-state basis--not at the federal level.

Back on Oct. 17, 2006, CNN’s Wolf Blitzer asked Romney: “Should--do you believe that gays and lesbians should be able to adopt children?”

Romney said,”Well, they are able to adopt children.”

Blitzer: “But do you think that’s good?”

Romney: “And I’m not going to change that.”

In the 2008 presidential campaign, when Romney had tried to win the GOP nomination, he explained further that states should decide whether homosexuals can adopt children. See video:

As for homosexuals serving openly in the military – a position that most all congressional Republicans opposed – Romney says it is fine and he would do nothing to reverse the Obama administration’s repeal of the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy.

In his November interview with the Des Moines Register, a reporter asked Romney: “How do you feel about gays serving openly in the military?”

Romney said, “That’s already occurred. I’m not planning on reversing that at this stage.

Question: “But you’re comfortable with it?”

Romney: “I was not comfortable with making the change during a period of conflict, by virtue of the complicating features of a new program in the middle of two wars going on. But those wars are winding down, and moving to that direction at this stage no longer presents that problem.”
gay, rainbow

(AP Photo)

In response to Romneys’ support for domestic partnerships and across-the-board benefits for gay couples, Peter LaBarbera, head of Republicans for Family Values, said: “If Romney wins the Republican nomination, it will be a huge blow to the pro-family movement and our efforts to stop the normalization of sexual perversion. Romney personifies the failure of the current ‘marriage-only’ approach toward resisting ‘same-sex marriage’ – i.e., the idea that homosexuality is not the issue, but only ‘defending marriage.’

“Here is the supposed GOP standard-bearer saying that he has stood tall for real marriage,” said LaBarbera, “and yet, like some soulless post-modern, he proudly embraces legal ‘rights’ based on a crime against nature that once dared not speak its name.”

“Being against ‘gay marriage’ (in name only) while campaigning to legitimize state-supported legal ‘rights’ for an unnatural and unhealthy lifestyle condemned by God (and shown to be changeable through Christ) is not a ‘pro-family’ position,” said LaBarbera.

Mitt Romney is a Momon who served as a ward bishop for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (LDS) in Belmont, Mass., in the early 1980s. From 1986 to 1994, Romney further served his church by presiding over numerous congregations in eastern Massachusetts. By most accounts, Romney devoted many hours of his spare time to counseling and helping fellow church members and visiting the sick.

In a 2008 document, The Divine Institution of Marriage, the LDS church explained and defended the institution of marriage as being set by God and that the liberal drive to advance homosexual “marriage” would contribute to the corruption of children and the family.

“[T]he legalization of same-sex marriage likely will erode the social identity, gender development, and moral character of children,” reads the letter. “Is it really wise for society to pursue such a radical experiment without taking into account its long-term consequences for children?

“As just one example of how children will be adversely affected, the establishment of same-sex marriage as a civil right will inevitably require mandatory changes in school curricula. When the state says that same-sex unions are equivalent to heterosexual marriages, the curriculum of public schools will have to support this claim.

“Beginning with elementary school, children will be taught that marriage can be defined as a relation between any two adults and that consensual sexual relations are morally neutral. Classroom instruction on sex education in secondary schools can be expected to equate homosexual intimacy with heterosexual relations. These developments will create serious clashes between the agenda of the secular school system and the right of parents to teach their children traditional standards of morality.”

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/romney- ... s-military

I'm starting to get concerned that our choices this November will be Obama or Romney. What are we to do?????

My initial reaction is not to vote at all. Then I got to thinking about all the evil men Obama has brought into his administration. If only to cast out his thugs, I may vote for whoever opposes him. I will need to pray about it and search the Word for examples of what God's people have had to do to survive under evil leadership.

Hopefully, the conservative Repubs in congress would have much influence over a Romney.