Romney Wants to Represent All Americans Regardless of Sexual Orientation!!!

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

    Jul 11, 2012 11:12 PM GMT
    So he wants the best for gay Americans but wants to create a federal amendment banning gay marriage? Something sounds fishy.

    Look at 1:05 to 1:30.


  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19138

    Jul 12, 2012 12:34 AM GMT
    Being pro-traditional marriage does not necessarily make someone a gay hater.
  • TheBizMan

    Posts: 4091

    Jul 12, 2012 12:43 AM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ saidBeing pro-traditional marriage does not necessarily make someone a gay hater.

    Except that he is not for gay civil unions either.icon_confused.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 12, 2012 12:56 AM GMT
    TheBizMan said
    CuriousJockAZ saidBeing pro-traditional marriage does not necessarily make someone a gay hater.

    Except that he is not for gay civil unions either.icon_confused.gif


    He also once said he supports ENDA and would vote for it, but reversed his position and now says he opposes it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 12, 2012 1:02 AM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ saidBeing pro-traditional marriage does not necessarily make someone a gay hater.


    Correct, but many will want to remand blind to that as their hate prevents them from seeing many truths.

    But he may support Civil unions? I myself have not heard him say he is not and do know Mormons who do support ther concept of Civil Unions.

    I myself a Bona Fide Homosexual, in a 20+ year relationship have no interest in such a thing called gay marriage, OMG I don't ever want a gay wedding. But I do support Civil Unions 100%.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 12, 2012 1:09 AM GMT
    Thought this was common knowledge, but apparently it is not.

    “My view is the same as it’s been from the beginning,” Mr. Romney told a CBS affiliate in Denver. “I don’t favor civil unions if it’s identical to marriage, and I don’t favor marriage between people of the same gender.” Asked why he opposed civil unions, in particular, he explained that in many cases they represent marriage by a different name for gay couples."

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/10/us/politics/romney-reaffirms-opposition-to-marriage-or-similar-for-gay-couples.html
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 12, 2012 1:10 AM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ saidBeing pro-traditional marriage does not necessarily make someone a gay hater.


    Not a valid excuse. icon_wink.gif

    The question is...why.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19138

    Jul 12, 2012 1:10 AM GMT
    TheBizMan said
    CuriousJockAZ saidBeing pro-traditional marriage does not necessarily make someone a gay hater.

    Except that he is not for gay civil unions either.icon_confused.gif


    Admittedly, that is one thing about Romney that has disappointed me. Not sure how committed he is to keeping that from
    happening.


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

    Jul 12, 2012 1:29 AM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ said
    TheBizMan said
    CuriousJockAZ saidBeing pro-traditional marriage does not necessarily make someone a gay hater.

    Except that he is not for gay civil unions either.icon_confused.gif


    Admittedly, that is one thing about Romney that has disappointed me. Not sure how committed he is to keeping that from
    happening.

    How about supporting a party that is committed to MAKING it happen, rather than to a party that is officially committed to making it NOT happen, as well as committed to removing all gay protections and rights. And a Presidential candidate about whom you're "not sure" where he stands, versus a candidate who has repealed DADT, is working against DOMA, supports gay marriage, and has pushed for gay rights in all levels of government. And you have some doubts about where to throw your gay support?
  • TroyAthlete

    Posts: 4269

    Jul 12, 2012 1:31 AM GMT
    Lame excuse du jour from the right:

    "Being pro-traditional separate-but-equal fountains does not make one a hater of coloreds."

    Hogwash. "Traditional marriage" is just a red herring talking point that means nothing except as a excuse for the rampant homophobia and hatred of gays in the Republican party. Whose traditions are they even talking about? Past marriage traditions in this country included laws that did not allow interracial marriage and laws that did not allow women to divorce their spouses.

    So according to right-wingers, being pro-"traditional marriage" means that you don't hate women, gays, and interracial couples. The rest of us know better, and we (rightly) have no intention of letting anti-freedom, anti-equality Republicans roll back the clock to marriage law as codified in 1692.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 12, 2012 1:42 AM GMT
    In politics, to say you represent a group means you champion their cause.

    How does someone champion the cause of a group when they do not treat the individuals of that group as 100% human being with all human rights endowed?

    This guy is twisting words in typical Republican-speak. He'll represent us alright, not unlike an attorney forced by the court to represent a death row inmate to assure he gets his last meal before the state executes him.

    Representation feels wonderful, doesn't it? It's good to have friends in high places.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 12, 2012 1:46 AM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    CuriousJockAZ said
    TheBizMan said
    CuriousJockAZ saidBeing pro-traditional marriage does not necessarily make someone a gay hater.

    Except that he is not for gay civil unions either.icon_confused.gif


    Admittedly, that is one thing about Romney that has disappointed me. Not sure how committed he is to keeping that from
    happening.

    How about supporting a party that is committed to MAKING it happen, rather than to a party that is officially committed to making it NOT happen, as well as committed to removing all gay protections and rights. And a Presidential candidate about whom you're "not sure" where he stands, versus a candidate who had repealed DADT, is working against DOMA, supports gay marriage, and has pushed for gay rights in all levels of government. And you have some doubts about where to throw your gay support?

    The trade-off results from a Democratic Party currently led by an ideologue who wants to lead us to financial ruin. Bill Clinton has said several times you don't raise taxes at all during these times, but Obama cares more about his ideology of social engineering than the economy. He has pretty much given up on the economy and hopes to deflect and pander to every other group.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 12, 2012 1:54 AM GMT


    US traditional marriage:
    traditionalmarriage1.jpg

    Seems it changes frequently CuriousjockAZ icon_wink.gif
  • Timbales

    Posts: 13993

    Jul 12, 2012 1:59 AM GMT
    He wants what he feels is best for gay and lesbian Americans - they should stop being homosexual.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 12, 2012 1:59 AM GMT
    The shocking thing to me is that I really do believe Mit is better than the statements he has made. He was already burned to death in the Republican primaries for not being conservative enough. He seems to support civil unions somewhat but if he came out with that stance it would be a huge Target come November.

    However, representing a certain group of Americans means you stand up for them. I don't care if this has political motivations or election motivations. Obama made a stance no President has done before and that is something that I respect. I have a hard time voting for someone who actively pursues limiting my freedoms as an American citizen.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 12, 2012 2:08 AM GMT
    socalfitness saidThe trade-off results from a Democratic Party currently led by an ideologue who wants to lead us to financial ruin. Bill Clinton has said several times you don't raise taxes at all during these times, but Obama cares more about his ideology of social engineering than the economy. He has pretty much given up on the economy and hopes to deflect and pander to every other group.

    Do you really feel compiled to lie, in order to debate effectively? Have you considered trying the truth for a change?

    Obama is far from an ideologue. On the contrary, it is right wingers who are ideologues. Wedded to positions that have little justification based on common sense realities, but only in rigid pre-determined positions.

    Pander to every group? An excellent description of Romney, who now tries to tell us he represents gays, whom he's demonized all during this campaign, and signed pledges against us.

    Obama only wants to raise the taxes on the 1% rich, a move even Warren Buffet and Bill Gates support. Do you know something that the richest men in the US don't?

    Social engineering works both ways. It also works when you deliberately eliminate the US middle class, leaving us with the mega-rich and the mega-poor. Now THAT's social engineering.

    Be careful of these terms you bandy about so carelessly (and cluelessly); they may come back to bite you in the ass. When you quote others who have no principles and no honor, and play fast and loose with the facts, you merit the same disdain as they do. Whether or not you really know what the Hell it is you're trying to sell to us here, when you parrot these idiocies.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 12, 2012 2:20 AM GMT
    msuNtx saidSo he wants the best for gay Americans but wants to create a federal amendment banning gay marriage? Something sounds fishy.

    Look at 1:05 to 1:30.




    Mitt caught once again being a hypocrite? How many flip flops have we caught this man in already?

    And "pro traditional marriage" is just another spin word that sounds better then being called out as an anti gay marriage bigot. I am so tired of how the GOP spins words.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 12, 2012 2:29 AM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    socalfitness saidThe trade-off results from a Democratic Party currently led by an ideologue who wants to lead us to financial ruin. Bill Clinton has said several times you don't raise taxes at all during these times, but Obama cares more about his ideology of social engineering than the economy. He has pretty much given up on the economy and hopes to deflect and pander to every other group.

    Do you really feel compiled to lie, in order to debate effectively? Have you considered trying the truth for a change?

    Obama is far from an ideologue. On the contrary, it is right wingers who are ideologues. Wedded to positions that have little justification based on common sense realities, but only in rigid pre-determined positions.

    Pander to every group? An excellent description of Romney, who now tries to tell us he represents gays, whom he's demonized all during this campaign, and signed pledges against us.

    Obama only wants to raise the taxes on the 1% rich, a move even Warren Buffet and Bill Gates support. Do you know something that the richest men in the US don't?

    Social engineering works both ways. It also works when you deliberately eliminate the US middle class, leaving us with the mega-rich and the mega-poor. Now THAT's social engineering.

    Be careful of these terms you bandy about so carelessly (and cluelessly); they may come back to bite you in the ass. When you quote others who have no principles and no honor, and play fast and loose with the facts, you merit the same disdain as they do. Whether or not you really know what the Hell it is you're trying to sell to us here, when you parrot these idiocies.

    Perhaps discarding all the platitudes, you might explain why the position advocated by Bill Clinton is wrong and Obama is right. Furthermore, I have demonstrated the fundamental consistency of major policies and world views of Obama and the French Socialist Hollande. As far as I'm concerned he is a Socialist in the European tradition, has expanded government, and is seeking more people dependent on government. He completely disregarded the recommendation of the Bowles Commission to reduce the debt, has submitted budget proposals that neither party in Congress took seriously, he was influenced by the Marxist professors he hung around with (per his own words in a book), and one of his major mentors was Frank Marshall Davis, a member of the Communist Party of the USA and an active supporter of the USSR and China. I could go on and on, but calling him an ideologue is charitable, given what he really is.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 12, 2012 2:33 AM GMT
    socalfitness saidI could go on and on...

    Indeed you do - aimlessly. When you can demonstrate some coherence in your posts, do get back to us. icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 12, 2012 2:45 AM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    socalfitness saidThe trade-off results from a Democratic Party currently led by an ideologue who wants to lead us to financial ruin. Bill Clinton has said several times you don't raise taxes at all during these times, but Obama cares more about his ideology of social engineering than the economy. He has pretty much given up on the economy and hopes to deflect and pander to every other group.

    Do you really feel compiled to lie, in order to debate effectively? Have you considered trying the truth for a change?

    Obama is far from an ideologue. On the contrary, it is right wingers who are ideologues. Wedded to positions that have little justification based on common sense realities, but only in rigid pre-determined positions.

    Pander to every group? An excellent description of Romney, who now tries to tell us he represents gays, whom he's demonized all during this campaign, and signed pledges against us.

    Obama only wants to raise the taxes on the 1% rich, a move even Warren Buffet and Bill Gates support. Do you know something that the richest men in the US don't?

    Social engineering works both ways. It also works when you deliberately eliminate the US middle class, leaving us with the mega-rich and the mega-poor. Now THAT's social engineering.

    Be careful of these terms you bandy about so carelessly (and cluelessly); they may come back to bite you in the ass. When you quote others who have no principles and no honor, and play fast and loose with the facts, you merit the same disdain as they do. Whether or not you really know what the Hell it is you're trying to sell to us here, when you parrot these idiocies.





    G-DAMIT ART_DECO ------ YOU NAILED THIS ONE !!!!


    But the fanatic republican will never see it !!


    and this too WAS PRICELESS !!!

    socalfitness saidI could go on and on...

    ART_DECO said >>Indeed you do - aimlessly. When you can demonstrate some coherence in your posts, do get back to us.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 12, 2012 2:55 AM GMT
    http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=represent
    3. Represent To annoy others with your presence. An activity often carried out by 'playaz'. See playa.

    Here we be, in Antarctica, representin' to all the penguins.


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

    Jul 12, 2012 2:56 AM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    socalfitness saidI could go on and on...

    Indeed you do - aimlessly. When you can demonstrate some coherence in your posts, do get back to us. icon_rolleyes.gif

    Nice cop out. Every one of those points I have backed up in threads over the past few months. Obama's radical stand is clear. But I will leave you with this one question I'll repeat. Bill Clinton says don't raise taxes for anyone when times are bad. Obama disagrees. How is Clinton mistaken? Can you answer that one?

    Point of reference: When Obama wanted to raise cap gaines tax, dialog below shows it was clearly for ideological reasons rather than raising revenue, the purpose of taxes. And you say he is not an ideologue.

    http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2012/04/12/obama-faulty-tax-agenda/
    As for the “basic issue of tax fairness:” This is a recurrent theme for Obama. In a 2008 debate between Obama and Hillary Clinton, ABC’s Charles Gibson asked Obama why he would support raising capital-gains taxes given the historical record of government’s losing net revenue as a result. “Well, Charlie, what I’ve said is that I would look at raising the capital-gains tax for purposes of fairness,” Obama replied. This moment revealed that Obama isn’t simply or even primarily interested in raising taxes for economic reasons (e.g., raising revenues or spurring growth). He sees taxes through a moral prism, as an instrument to advance “fairness,” which he takes to mean leveling higher taxes on wealthy Americans in order to decrease income inequality. The president really does favor, in his words, “spreading the wealth around.”
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 12, 2012 3:21 AM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ said
    TheBizMan said
    CuriousJockAZ saidBeing pro-traditional marriage does not necessarily make someone a gay hater.

    Except that he is not for gay civil unions either.icon_confused.gif


    Admittedly, that is one thing about Romney that has disappointed me. Not sure how committed he is to keeping that from
    happening.


    One either takes a stand and tells the TRUTH.. or one lies.
    I HATE liars............

    Now, what were you saying Todd?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jul 12, 2012 3:26 AM GMT
    socalfitness said
    Art_Deco said
    socalfitness saidI could go on and on...

    Indeed you do - aimlessly. When you can demonstrate some coherence in your posts, do get back to us. icon_rolleyes.gif

    Nice cop out.
    WHAT? Your version of a "cop out" is to completely ignore when you are wrong. You just pretend it never happened or no one ever said a word..

    Cop out my arse.......... you turn and run every time you're cornered.icon_rolleyes.gificon_rolleyes.gificon_rolleyes.gif
  • Webster666

    Posts: 9217

    Jul 12, 2012 3:37 AM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ saidBeing pro-traditional marriage does not necessarily make someone a gay hater.



    Step away from the Kool-Aid.