Is Mitt Romney A Weak Spineless Wussy?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 07, 2012 7:29 PM GMT
    http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/05/06/conservative-radio-host-pressures-romney-then-mocks-him-for-caving/

    Did Romney's decision to cave and fire his newly-hired openly gay aide reveal that Mitt Rimney is a weak spineless wussy?

    Or did Romney just flip-flop YET AGAIN?

    Either way it proves that Romney is not fit to be president.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 07, 2012 7:34 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 saidObama Launches Campaign In Half-Empty Stadium

    obamafail.png





    Let's compare Obama's rally with Romney's rally, shall we?

    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/05/07/1089475/-A-tale-of-two-rallies

    Mine is bigger than yours!

    And a new Gallup poll out today shows that the Democrats lead the Repubs 55% to 46% in voter enthusiasm!
  • DalTX

    Posts: 612

    May 07, 2012 7:40 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 saidObama Launches Campaign In Half-Empty Stadium

    obamafail.png



    In this stadium...
    11,000 more people than have ever attended a rally for Willard McEtchASketch
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 07, 2012 7:44 PM GMT
    So is SB just going to regurgitate his other threads whenever something showing Romney to be an empty suit gets posted?

    Will there be pictures of catfish because that joke is certainly not at all old?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 07, 2012 7:45 PM GMT
    RickRick91 saidhttp://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/05/06/conservative-radio-host-pressures-romney-then-mocks-him-for-caving/

    Did Romney's decision to cave and fire his newly-hired openly gay aide reveal that Mitt Rimney is a weak spineless wussy?

    Or did Romney just flip-flop YET AGAIN?

    Either way it proves that Romney is not fit to be president.


    Seriously, I think this demonstrates that the base is not behind Romney and that could really hurt his GOTV efforts.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 07, 2012 7:48 PM GMT
    Christian73 said
    RickRick91 saidhttp://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/05/06/conservative-radio-host-pressures-romney-then-mocks-him-for-caving/

    Did Romney's decision to cave and fire his newly-hired openly gay aide reveal that Mitt Rimney is a weak spineless wussy?

    Or did Romney just flip-flop YET AGAIN?

    Either way it proves that Romney is not fit to be president.


    Seriously, I think this demonstrates that the base is not behind Romney and that could really hurt his GOTV efforts.




    President Obama has also come out swinging hard at Romney and the Repubs in his reelection campaign speeches.

    His fire and fight has already ramped up enthusiasm among Democratic voters, and the Dems now lead the Repubs in voter enthusiasm.

  • nanidesukedo

    Posts: 1036

    May 07, 2012 8:06 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    Christian73 said
    RickRick91 saidhttp://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/05/06/conservative-radio-host-pressures-romney-then-mocks-him-for-caving/

    Did Romney's decision to cave and fire his newly-hired openly gay aide reveal that Mitt Rimney is a weak spineless wussy?

    Or did Romney just flip-flop YET AGAIN?

    Either way it proves that Romney is not fit to be president.


    Seriously, I think this demonstrates that the base is not behind Romney and that could really hurt his GOTV efforts.



    I think this demonstrates that liberals don't know the difference between a campaign stop and a "grand re-election kickoff event." icon_wink.gif


    Or that Republicans don't realize that 14,000 people is a large number of people...

    Of course, the lack of evil college education probably makes counting above 10 difficult...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 07, 2012 8:16 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    Christian73 said
    RickRick91 saidhttp://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/05/06/conservative-radio-host-pressures-romney-then-mocks-him-for-caving/

    Did Romney's decision to cave and fire his newly-hired openly gay aide reveal that Mitt Rimney is a weak spineless wussy?

    Or did Romney just flip-flop YET AGAIN?

    Either way it proves that Romney is not fit to be president.


    Seriously, I think this demonstrates that the base is not behind Romney and that could really hurt his GOTV efforts.



    I think this demonstrates that liberals don't know the difference between a campaign stop and a "grand re-election kickoff event." icon_wink.gif




    Then let's compare President Obama's large crowd of 14,000 with the size of the crowd that attended Romney's much hyped "key speech" on his economic "vision".

    http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/romney-empty-stadium-speech/2012/02/26/id/430606

    Again - mine is bigger than yours!

    Of course it's not hard to understand why Romney couldn't draw a crowd to hear him talk about his economic proposals considering the fact that Romney's economic proposals = more Bushonomics!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 07, 2012 8:26 PM GMT
    RickRick91 saidhttp://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/05/06/conservative-radio-host-pressures-romney-then-mocks-him-for-caving/

    Did Romney's decision to cave and fire his newly-hired openly gay aide reveal that Mitt Rimney is a weak spineless wussy?

    Or did Romney just flip-flop YET AGAIN?

    Either way it proves that Romney is not fit to be president.


    Perhaps if you dropped an "is" we might figure out what your heading is trying to ask rhetorically.

    Also, Romney never fired anyone, there was a resignation.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 07, 2012 8:42 PM GMT
    mocktwinkie said
    RickRick91 saidhttp://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/05/06/conservative-radio-host-pressures-romney-then-mocks-him-for-caving/

    Did Romney's decision to cave and fire his newly-hired openly gay aide reveal that Mitt Rimney is a weak spineless wussy?

    Or did Romney just flip-flop YET AGAIN?

    Either way it proves that Romney is not fit to be president.


    Perhaps if you dropped an "is" we might figure out what your heading is trying to ask rhetorically.

    Also, Romney never fired anyone, there was a resignation.





    Fixed it for ya.
    Although you obviously were the only one who couldn't figure out what this thread is asking!
    Everybody else had no problem figuring it out.

    And everybody knows that Romney caved on this and forced Grenell to resign.
    As my link proves - even right-wingers know that Romney either folded like a wimp or flip-flopped!

    http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/05/06/conservative-radio-host-pressures-romney-then-mocks-him-for-caving/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 07, 2012 8:48 PM GMT
    RickRick91 saidhttp://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/05/06/conservative-radio-host-pressures-romney-then-mocks-him-for-caving/

    Did Romney's decision to cave and fire his newly-hired openly gay aide reveal that Mitt Rimney is a weak spineless wussy?

    Or did Romney just flip-flop YET AGAIN?

    Either way it proves that Romney is not fit to be president.


    No.

    Obama's refusal to affirm the dignity, freedom, and civil rights of all Americans by supporting marriage equality reveals that Barack Obama is a weak spineless wussy.

    Romney's decision to throw his gay spokesman under the bus to appease right wingers who actively hate gay people reveals that he is a craven opportunistic homophobe.

    (Option A is marginally better than Option B. Marginally.)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 07, 2012 9:14 PM GMT
    TroyAthlete said
    RickRick91 saidhttp://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/05/06/conservative-radio-host-pressures-romney-then-mocks-him-for-caving/

    Did Romney's decision to cave and fire his newly-hired openly gay aide reveal that Mitt Rimney is a weak spineless wussy?

    Or did Romney just flip-flop YET AGAIN?

    Either way it proves that Romney is not fit to be president.


    No.

    Obama's refusal to affirm the dignity, freedom, and civil rights of all Americans by supporting marriage equality reveals that Barack Obama is a weak spineless wussy.

    Romney's decision to throw his gay spokesman under the bus to appease right wingers who actively hate gay people reveals that he is a craven opportunistic homophobe.

    (Option A is marginally better than Option B. Marginally.)






    Not quite.
    President Obama may not "affirm the dignity" of gay Americans by supporting full gay marriage (yet) - but he already affirms the "freedom, and CIVIL RIGHTS" of gay Americans with his support for full and equal civil partnership for gay Americans.

    UNLIKE Mitt Romney - who wants to enshrine anti-gay bigotry in our Constitution by taking the extreme step of AMENDING THE CONSTITUTION to make gay marriage illegal NATIONWIDE forever.

    That is NOT a "marginal" difference.
    It's a MASSIVE difference.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 07, 2012 9:56 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    RickRick91 said
    Not quite.
    President Obama may not "affirm the dignity" of gay Americans by supporting full gay marriage (yet) - but he already affirms the "freedom, and CIVIL RIGHTS" of gay Americans with his support for full and equal civil partnership for gay Americans.


    Incorrect.

    He and his gay-loving (hating) Democrat party had super majorities in the House and the Senate in 2009-2010 and did nothing about granting "full and equal civil partnership for gay Americans."

    And they certainly knew that their complete control of government was an event rare in recent history and that the time for acting was THEN - and they didn't.






    LOL

    The Democrats never had a super majority in the Congress.
    In order to have a super majority - the Democrats would've had to have had at least 60 Democrats in the Senate and they never did.
    Plus some of the Democratic senators that they did have were CONSERVATIVE Blue Dog Dems who wouldn't have voted for "full and equal civil partnership" legislation.

    And the first priority for President Obama in those early days of his first term was passing legislation to prevent the Bush recession from becoming a major depression.

    President Obama passed his stimulus bill which helped to keep the economy moving.

    Not long after that - the newly-elected conservatives in the UK rammed through the harsh austerity measures advocated by Romney and the Repubs.

    Now we can see the results of the two approaches.
    In the US- President Obama's policies have kept the economy growing.
    In the UK - the economy has fallen into a double dip recession.

    The evidence is clear.
    We need to stear clear of the harsh austerity measures advocated by Romney and the Repubs.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 07, 2012 10:09 PM GMT
    RickRick91 said
    mocktwinkie said
    RickRick91 saidhttp://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/05/06/conservative-radio-host-pressures-romney-then-mocks-him-for-caving/

    Did Romney's decision to cave and fire his newly-hired openly gay aide reveal that Mitt Rimney is a weak spineless wussy?

    Or did Romney just flip-flop YET AGAIN?

    Either way it proves that Romney is not fit to be president.


    Perhaps if you dropped an "is" we might figure out what your heading is trying to ask rhetorically.

    Also, Romney never fired anyone, there was a resignation.





    Fixed it for ya.
    Although you obviously were the only one who couldn't figure out what this thread is asking!
    Everybody else had no problem figuring it out.

    And everybody knows that Romney caved on this and forced Grenell to resign.
    As my link proves - even right-wingers know that Romney either folded like a wimp or flip-flopped!

    http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/05/06/conservative-radio-host-pressures-romney-then-mocks-him-for-caving/


    There is no evidence that Romney forced Grenell to resign, you're full of you know what. Romney hired him in the first place.

    Do you even realize how idiotic you sound making unsubstantiated accusations?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 07, 2012 10:20 PM GMT
    mocktwinkie said
    RickRick91 said
    mocktwinkie said
    RickRick91 saidhttp://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/05/06/conservative-radio-host-pressures-romney-then-mocks-him-for-caving/

    Did Romney's decision to cave and fire his newly-hired openly gay aide reveal that Mitt Rimney is a weak spineless wussy?

    Or did Romney just flip-flop YET AGAIN?

    Either way it proves that Romney is not fit to be president.


    Perhaps if you dropped an "is" we might figure out what your heading is trying to ask rhetorically.

    Also, Romney never fired anyone, there was a resignation.





    Fixed it for ya.
    Although you obviously were the only one who couldn't figure out what this thread is asking!
    Everybody else had no problem figuring it out.

    And everybody knows that Romney caved on this and forced Grenell to resign.
    As my link proves - even right-wingers know that Romney either folded like a wimp or flip-flopped!

    http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/05/06/conservative-radio-host-pressures-romney-then-mocks-him-for-caving/


    There is no evidence that Romney forced Grenell to resign, you're full of you know what. Romney hired him in the first place.

    Do you even realize how idiotic you sound making unsubstantiated accusations?





    LOL
    Do you even realize how delusional you sound?

    Only a brainwashed Repubot would try to claim that Mitt didn't force Grenell out to try to stem a major uprising by the anti-gay religious right base of the Repub party.

    You only reveal yourself as a delusional knee-jerk defender of the Repub party by trying to deny what all sane rational fair-minded people can see happened!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 07, 2012 10:20 PM GMT
    RickRick91 said
    TroyAthlete said
    RickRick91 saidhttp://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/05/06/conservative-radio-host-pressures-romney-then-mocks-him-for-caving/

    Did Romney's decision to cave and fire his newly-hired openly gay aide reveal that Mitt Rimney is a weak spineless wussy?

    Or did Romney just flip-flop YET AGAIN?

    Either way it proves that Romney is not fit to be president.


    No.

    Obama's refusal to affirm the dignity, freedom, and civil rights of all Americans by supporting marriage equality reveals that Barack Obama is a weak spineless wussy.

    Romney's decision to throw his gay spokesman under the bus to appease right wingers who actively hate gay people reveals that he is a craven opportunistic homophobe.

    (Option A is marginally better than Option B. Marginally.)






    Not quite.
    President Obama may not "affirm the dignity" of gay Americans by supporting full gay marriage (yet) - but he already affirms the "freedom, and CIVIL RIGHTS" of gay Americans with his support for full and equal civil partnership for gay Americans.

    UNLIKE Mitt Romney - who wants to enshrine anti-gay bigotry in our Constitution by taking the extreme step of AMENDING THE CONSTITUTION to make gay marriage illegal NATIONWIDE forever.

    That is NOT a "marginal" difference.
    It's a MASSIVE difference.


    Nope. Still marginal.

    Civil partnerships are separate from marriage. To begin, separate but equal is not freedom. (For a primer on this, see the Jim Crow era.) I daresay the President's affirmation that he supports separate but equal doctrine is borderline bigoted. Real Democrats and progressives are not going to confuse Jim Crow with civil rights -- you might want to read up on both.

    There are open bigots, of course, and Obama is not one of those. But there are those whose laziness, cowardice, and/or indifference enables the same; Obama is definitely that. As Martin Luther King, Jr. explained in his Letter from the Birmingham Jail -- the difference between the two is marginal (at best).

    So nice try, but no. I know inequality when I see it. It's a MARGINAL difference. Lip service and table scraps won't do, except in an election year, I guess, because Romney is an absolute no-go with his rank right-wing homophobia.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 07, 2012 10:52 PM GMT
    RickRick91 said
    mocktwinkie said
    RickRick91 said
    mocktwinkie said
    RickRick91 saidhttp://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/05/06/conservative-radio-host-pressures-romney-then-mocks-him-for-caving/

    Did Romney's decision to cave and fire his newly-hired openly gay aide reveal that Mitt Rimney is a weak spineless wussy?

    Or did Romney just flip-flop YET AGAIN?

    Either way it proves that Romney is not fit to be president.


    Perhaps if you dropped an "is" we might figure out what your heading is trying to ask rhetorically.

    Also, Romney never fired anyone, there was a resignation.





    Fixed it for ya.
    Although you obviously were the only one who couldn't figure out what this thread is asking!
    Everybody else had no problem figuring it out.

    And everybody knows that Romney caved on this and forced Grenell to resign.
    As my link proves - even right-wingers know that Romney either folded like a wimp or flip-flopped!

    http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/05/06/conservative-radio-host-pressures-romney-then-mocks-him-for-caving/


    There is no evidence that Romney forced Grenell to resign, you're full of you know what. Romney hired him in the first place.

    Do you even realize how idiotic you sound making unsubstantiated accusations?





    LOL
    Do you even realize how delusional you sound?

    Only a brainwashed Repubot would try to claim that Mitt didn't force Grenell out to try to stem a major uprising by the anti-gay religious right base of the Repub party.

    You only reveal yourself as a delusional knee-jerk defender of the Repub party by trying to deny what all sane rational fair-minded people can see happened!


    Of course, if you even possessed a brain in the first place that could get washed you would have realized that by Romney hiring Grenell at all he put his standing with social conservatives in jeopardy. Even if he did force Grenell out, which he didn't, it's not like it would put him in any more favor with the socons because they already think that he's not a "solid" social conservative and easily manipulated by the "evil gay agenda".

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 08, 2012 3:04 AM GMT
    TroyAthlete said
    RickRick91 said
    TroyAthlete said
    RickRick91 saidhttp://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/05/06/conservative-radio-host-pressures-romney-then-mocks-him-for-caving/

    Did Romney's decision to cave and fire his newly-hired openly gay aide reveal that Mitt Rimney is a weak spineless wussy?

    Or did Romney just flip-flop YET AGAIN?

    Either way it proves that Romney is not fit to be president.


    No.

    Obama's refusal to affirm the dignity, freedom, and civil rights of all Americans by supporting marriage equality reveals that Barack Obama is a weak spineless wussy.

    Romney's decision to throw his gay spokesman under the bus to appease right wingers who actively hate gay people reveals that he is a craven opportunistic homophobe.

    (Option A is marginally better than Option B. Marginally.)






    Not quite.
    President Obama may not "affirm the dignity" of gay Americans by supporting full gay marriage (yet) - but he already affirms the "freedom, and CIVIL RIGHTS" of gay Americans with his support for full and equal civil partnership for gay Americans.

    UNLIKE Mitt Romney - who wants to enshrine anti-gay bigotry in our Constitution by taking the extreme step of AMENDING THE CONSTITUTION to make gay marriage illegal NATIONWIDE forever.

    That is NOT a "marginal" difference.
    It's a MASSIVE difference.


    Nope. Still marginal.

    Civil partnerships are separate from marriage. To begin, separate but equal is not freedom. (For a primer on this, see the Jim Crow era.) I daresay the President's affirmation that he supports separate but equal doctrine is borderline bigoted. Real Democrats and progressives are not going to confuse Jim Crow with civil rights -- you might want to read up on both.

    There are open bigots, of course, and Obama is not one of those. But there are those whose laziness, cowardice, and/or indifference enables the same; Obama is definitely that. As Martin Luther King, Jr. explained in his Letter from the Birmingham Jail -- the difference between the two is marginal (at best).

    So nice try, but no. I know inequality when I see it. It's a MARGINAL difference. Lip service and table scraps won't do, except in an election year, I guess, because Romney is an absolute no-go with his rank right-wing homophobia.





    Nope.

    You're entitled to your opinion of course.

    BUT Romney has vowed to work to amend the Constitution to make gay marriage illegal nationwide in all states forever.
    President Obama opposes that.
    That's not a "marginal" difference - that's major.

    Romney would put justices on the SCOTUS who would vote against marriage equality.
    President Obama would not.
    That's not a "marginal" difference - that's major.

    And let's look at recent history as well.
    President Obama worked to repeal DADT and succeeded at ending the policy.
    While the most vocal bitter opponent of repealing DADT was the 2008 Repub nominee John McCain.
    Obviously if McCain had been elected - DADT would STILL be in place.
    That's not a "marginal" difference - that's major.

    Instead of whining and carping - gay Americans should look at the fact that more progress by FAR has been made on gay rights during the Obama administration than during any other previous administration.

    And it's clearly obvious that allowing Romney to get elected would set back progress on gay rights for many many years - because whoever is president for the next four years will be able to appoint 1-3 justices to the SCOTUS.
    And we know that if Romney is the one who picks those justices - we'll have an extremely anti-gay rights SCOTUS for the remainder of our lifetimes.

    That's not "marginal" - THAT'S MAJOR.

  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19119

    May 08, 2012 4:15 AM GMT
    RickRick91 said
    Either way it proves that Romney is not fit to be president.



    You're entitled to your opinion. Millions don't agree. He is certainly fit to be President, and Romney did not fire Grenell -- he hired him. If anyone is a "wussy" it's Grenell.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 08, 2012 4:24 AM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ said
    RickRick91 said
    Either way it proves that Romney is not fit to be president.



    You're entitled to your opinion. Millions don't agree. He is certainly fit to be President, and Romney did not fire Grenell -- he hired him. If anyone is a "wussy" it's Grenell.




    So typical of you.
    Defend the Repub.
    Blame the gay guy.
    Same old chit we've come to expect from you.

    It must suck to hate yourself.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19119

    May 08, 2012 5:25 AM GMT
    RickRick91 said
    CuriousJockAZ said
    RickRick91 said
    Either way it proves that Romney is not fit to be president.



    You're entitled to your opinion. Millions don't agree. He is certainly fit to be President, and Romney did not fire Grenell -- he hired him. If anyone is a "wussy" it's Grenell.




    So typical of you.
    Defend the Repub.
    Blame the gay guy.
    Same old chit we've come to expect from you.

    It must suck to hate yourself.


    4-2.gif

    I wouldn't know about hating myself. But I am sure you wallow in self-hatred pretty much hourly. And, YES, I absolutely blame the gay guy here. What did he expect? If he was so "out & proud" as he has claimed to be for years -- quite loudly I might had -- how did he suddenly become a shrinking violet the moment the heat was on? As far as I'm concerned, he let himself down, he let Romney down (who, by the way, did hire him knowing he was out and gay) and, most importantly, he let the gays down by letting some lame clueless anti-gay bigot win. Shame on him. Grenell clearly did not have the balls that it takes to handle the heat and scrutiny of a major political campaign. I wish he had considered this prior to accepting the job in the first place.
  • MikemikeMike

    Posts: 6932

    May 08, 2012 5:43 AM GMT
    Democrats, including Obama, never flip flop. LMFAOicon_lol.gif Dellusional.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19119

    May 08, 2012 5:46 AM GMT
    MikemikeMike saidDemocrats, including Obama, never flip flop. LMFAOicon_lol.gif Dellusional.



    icon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gif It's like every time RickRick posts we need to play...




    The sad thing is that I think he may actually believe the crap he spews. icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 08, 2012 5:14 PM GMT
    RickRick91 said
    Nope.

    You're entitled to your opinion of course.

    BUT Romney has vowed to work to amend the Constitution to make gay marriage illegal nationwide in all states forever.
    President Obama opposes that.
    That's not a "marginal" difference - that's major.

    Romney would put justices on the SCOTUS who would vote against marriage equality.
    President Obama would not.
    That's not a "marginal" difference - that's major.

    And let's look at recent history as well.
    President Obama worked to repeal DADT and succeeded at ending the policy.
    While the most vocal bitter opponent of repealing DADT was the 2008 Repub nominee John McCain.
    Obviously if McCain had been elected - DADT would STILL be in place.
    That's not a "marginal" difference - that's major.

    Instead of whining and carping - gay Americans should look at the fact that more progress by FAR has been made on gay rights during the Obama administration than during any other previous administration.

    And it's clearly obvious that allowing Romney to get elected would set back progress on gay rights for many many years - because whoever is president for the next four years will be able to appoint 1-3 justices to the SCOTUS.
    And we know that if Romney is the one who picks those justices - we'll have an extremely anti-gay rights SCOTUS for the remainder of our lifetimes.

    That's not "marginal" - THAT'S MAJOR.



    Biggest Obama-boot-licking load of crap apologetics I've ever heard.

    Look, if you're perfectly happy with your inequality and second-class citizen status, you're certainly entitled to it. But please, don't try to patronize those of us who know the difference between the party of Johnson/Humphrey -- who knew that justice and freedom couldn't wait -- and the party of Obama for whom justice, freedom, and equality are just slogans.

    To begin, Obama did not "work" for the DADT repeal, he didn't lift a finger to help the repeal along, and his team even tried to stymie it. They were overruled by Senate Democrats led by Joe Lieberman. Nice attempt at rewriting history, but you might try it on someone who is a little less informed than I am.

    Why should I believe whom Obama would put on the SCOTUS re: marriage equality when he can even be honest about his "evolving" position? Nothing Obama says or promises on gay marriage can be believed or trusted.

    Instead of accusing Americans who actually believe in freedom of "whining and carping" ass-licking Obama apologists like you need to be accusing the President of "evolving and equivocating" and pressuring him to act like a Democrat, not a right-wing Republican.

    Martin Luther King was right, and you are wrong: those who stand idly while bigots run amock are only marginally different from the bigots themselves. That includes Obama. MLK and his wife, who supported gay rights, would be ashamed of the President. But who are they? Just a bunch of "whiners and carpers" whose "whining and carping" about civil rights accomplished nothing...

    ...oh wait.
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14310

    May 08, 2012 5:37 PM GMT
    All politicians both democrat and republican flip flop on issues in order to pander to different groups and get their support. All democrats and republicans are just out for their own self aggrandizement.