Romney's Insensitivity to LGBT People (Page 9/15)
Red88FF SEP 12, 06:25 PM

quote
Originally posted by theBDub:


Umm, last time I checked, Obama's first name is Barack. Romney's is Mitt. I said Gary.

Try again.




Well, the reality is that a no vote or a vote for anybody but Mitt is a vote for Obama.
I apologize for being a dick. Feeling extra dickish today. Not in a gay way


By the way I think there was an article going around years ago that said his name was Gary.
fierofetish SEP 12, 06:36 PM

quote
What makes you think that it will be detrimental to the child? You keep talking about nature's plan as if nature is a sentient being. It isn't... so there is no plan there. And I highly doubt if nature is a sentient being, that it cares how a child was raised.


Is God a sentient being then?
Edit to add: sorry to glaze over..I am very busy, and only come up to rest and have a drink or sandwich every now and then

[This message has been edited by fierofetish (edited 09-12-2012).]

82-T/A [At Work] SEP 12, 06:39 PM

quote
Originally posted by theBDub:

I understand personal beliefs, but as far as his comments go... Are they okay for someone who might be the next leader of the "Land of the Free"?

“I looked him in the eye as we were leaving,” recalls Goodridge. “And I said, ‘Governor Romney, tell me — what would you suggest I say to my 8 year-old daughter about why her mommy and her ma can’t get married because you, the governor of her state, are going to block our marriage?’”

His response, according to Goodridge: “I don’t really care what you tell your adopted daughter. Why don’t you just tell her the same thing you’ve been telling her the last eight years.”

Romney’s retort enraged a speechless Goodridge; he didn’t care, and by referring to her biological daughter as “adopted,” it was clear he hadn’t even been listening. By the time she was back in the hallway, she was reduced to tears.


[/QUOTE]


Do you know why this is making news, or why any of this is actually important right now? Because the Democrats have NOTHING... I mean NOTHING to base their re-election campaign on. Their campaign was filled with discussions about abortion rights, and gay rights. In the grand scheme of things, war, collossal debt, massive unemployment, on-going home crisis... do you REALLY... (seriously now) REALLY think most of the people in the United States of America give two shits about abortion and gay rights? For one, the rules surrounding abortion probably won't change over the next presidency, or even the next 5 or 6 for that matter.

It's all deflection... all you're doing is perpetuating this. Even to most gay people, this is not the most important thing in the world right now, and God knows I know a **** -load of them, half my family is gay, and I personally know two people who have gone through gender re-assignment surgery. WAKE UP man... this is all bull **** , there's a lot more important things going on than worrying about this stuff. And for that matter, the benefits of being married are about to be stripped anyway if Obama doesn't continue the Bush Tax Cuts (the Marriage Penalty Tax will be re-instated)


Todd
WhiteDevil88 SEP 12, 06:40 PM

quote
Originally posted by Red88FF:


Well, the reality is that a no vote or a vote for anybody but Mitt is a vote for Obama.
I apologize for being a dick. Feeling extra dickish today. Not in a gay way


By the way I think there was an article going around years ago that said his name was Gary.



Gary Johnson. Two term republican Gov from New Mexico. Built a one man handyman business into a 1000 employee construction company. Known as Gov. Veto. Re elected as a republican in a predominantly D state. Wants to abolish IRS. Wants to legaliZe marijuana and release all non violent drug offenders.

A vote for truth is never wasted.
82-T/A [At Work] SEP 12, 06:50 PM

quote
Originally posted by WhiteDevil88:

Gary Johnson. Two term republican Gov from New Mexico. Built a one man handyman business into a 1000 employee construction company. Known as Gov. Veto. Re elected as a republican in a predominantly D state. Wants to abolish IRS. Wants to legaliZe marijuana and release all non violent drug offenders.

A vote for truth is never wasted.




Sure it is... you should have pushed like this during the primaries if this was your goal. (and if you did, I missed it, either way, it's not how things ended up)

You, and everyone else who's going to vote for him knows full well that he won't win the presidency, and you are probably also aware that MOST of you would probably have voted for Romney instead of Obama (I'm sure you'll tell me I'm wrong, but I'm not). So the sad fact is... at THIS point right now... a vote for anything other than Romney, is either a vote or a pass for Obama.
carnut122 SEP 12, 06:56 PM

quote
Originally posted by tutnkmn:

Neither candidate is worth voting for IMHO. There is no lesser of two evils, they are equally evil in different ways.



So sadly true.
fierofetish SEP 12, 07:46 PM
Brennan, I was just wondering if you will realise the irony of your comment here?

quote
/Because that's how we evolved
WhiteDevil88 SEP 12, 08:29 PM

quote
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:
Sure it is... you should have pushed like this during the primaries if this was your goal. (and if you did, I missed it, either way, it's not how things ended up)

You, and everyone else who's going to vote for him knows full well that he won't win the presidency, and you are probably also aware that MOST of you would probably have voted for Romney instead of Obama (I'm sure you'll tell me I'm wrong, but I'm not). So the sad fact is... at THIS point right now... a vote for anything other than Romney, is either a vote or a pass for Obama.



A vote for Romney or Obama is the same thing, a vote for the status quo. The same old **** . Sorry, but you can't try to guilt trip me there. As long as the two sides of the same coin are played, our results won't be any different. If Romney can't get elected on his own merit, maybe the republican party needs to readjust its vision.

82-T/A [At Work] SEP 12, 08:58 PM

quote
Originally posted by WhiteDevil88:

A vote for Romney or Obama is the same thing, a vote for the status quo. The same old **** . Sorry, but you can't try to guilt trip me there. As long as the two sides of the same coin are played, our results won't be any different. If Romney can't get elected on his own merit, maybe the republican party needs to readjust its vision.




I'm definitely not trying to guilt trip you, and I'm not suggesting that you're unAmerican by voting the way you are... if anything, that might be MORE American, at least in spirit.

Where I think you are right now, is you believe that Romney will do the exact same thing that Obama has done, and what Bush did all through his second term.

Romney says that he WON'T... Romney says that he IS different.


Obama said the same thing, and we know he TOTALLY did the exact opposite of everything he said he was going to do (even though the Democrats on here either don't believe it, or are blind to it.)

Now, I'm not so much of an idiot that I wouldn't understand the concept of Burn me once, burn me twice, etc...


But I'm stuck in a position right now where we KNOW EXACTLY how one president functions, vs how the candidate says he simply would NOT be.

When I'm given two options, there's really no other choice in my mind. I KNOW FOR A FACT what Obama wants... at this point, I can ONLY take Romney at his word, and those are much better odds than not knowing at all.

It's not like third party candidates are something that's never existed in this country. We've had three third party candidates that had a substantial amount of votes in the past 30 years. In Bush Senior's re-election bid. Ross Perot basically cost Bush the election. In the end, I think Perot got almost 1/4th of the votes in the National Vote... and it was only that low because he stepped out of the race at the last minute (only later to decide to get back into it).

But in my opinion, I just don't think that NOW is the time to make a "point"... there are a LOT of people who are dissatisfied with both their options... honestly, I know very few people who actually prefer Obama over any number of other possible candidates that they could pick from the Democrat party, just like there are plenty of Republicans that many Republicans would rather have.


Anyway... I'm repeating myself now... but you know obviously that Gary Johnson won't win with your write-in votes. Romney is teetering on the verge of not winning this election. So for me, I have to decide at this point whom I want... Romney or Obama... and I know who I don't want.


On a side note, there's a lot of people who are dissapointed with the primary process. I've read a few studies that suggest hte PRIMARY election should be changed to allow each voter a three-tiered vote during the primaries. What this would be is the ability for the voter to pick three candidates, and rank them 1-3 on who they'd want to be their primary candidate. Using the scoring system of 3 thorugh 1, a person who might otherwise pick a "radical" candidate would probably still pick someone who was a little less radical as their second and third pick. If everyone did this, the candidate who would likely win would probably be someone who was more compatible with everyone's beliefs.

The primary "process" is only 100 years old anyway... and wasn't really envisioned by the founders (best I can figure).


Anyway, I just really don't want another 4 years of what we're going through now... and the ONLY odds I have at this point, is a vote for Romney.
Todd
theBDub SEP 12, 09:22 PM

quote
Originally posted by Red88FF:


Well, the reality is that a no vote or a vote for anybody but Mitt is a vote for Obama.
I apologize for being a dick. Feeling extra dickish today. Not in a gay way


By the way I think there was an article going around years ago that said his name was Gary.



I disagree. I'll be voting for Gary Johnson. He won't win, but the more votes the Libertarian Party gets, the more coverage they will get. I'm looking at a long term goal, here.


quote
Originally posted by fierofetish:

Is God a sentient being then?
Edit to add: sorry to glaze over..I am very busy, and only come up to rest and have a drink or sandwich every now and then




I haven't brought God up once during this discussion. I've only responded to others.


quote
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:
Do you know why this is making news, or why any of this is actually important right now? Because the Democrats have NOTHING... I mean NOTHING to base their re-election campaign on. Their campaign was filled with discussions about abortion rights, and gay rights. In the grand scheme of things, war, collossal debt, massive unemployment, on-going home crisis... do you REALLY... (seriously now) REALLY think most of the people in the United States of America give two shits about abortion and gay rights? For one, the rules surrounding abortion probably won't change over the next presidency, or even the next 5 or 6 for that matter.

It's all deflection... all you're doing is perpetuating this. Even to most gay people, this is not the most important thing in the world right now, and God knows I know a **** -load of them, half my family is gay, and I personally know two people who have gone through gender re-assignment surgery. WAKE UP man... this is all bull **** , there's a lot more important things going on than worrying about this stuff. And for that matter, the benefits of being married are about to be stripped anyway if Obama doesn't continue the Bush Tax Cuts (the Marriage Penalty Tax will be re-instated)


Todd



I, for one, agree that this is one of the less important issues today. Economy, economy, economy for me. However, I don't care why it is now making news. I do care about how I feel about it right now. This is less about LGBT rights, and more about how Romney responded. I don't like the attitude portrayed, and I don't support that in my President.


quote
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:
Sure it is... you should have pushed like this during the primaries if this was your goal. (and if you did, I missed it, either way, it's not how things ended up)

You, and everyone else who's going to vote for him knows full well that he won't win the presidency, and you are probably also aware that MOST of you would probably have voted for Romney instead of Obama (I'm sure you'll tell me I'm wrong, but I'm not). So the sad fact is... at THIS point right now... a vote for anything other than Romney, is either a vote or a pass for Obama.



I pushed for Paul. I thought he had a shot at the Republican nomination if enough people created a big enough fire. Unfortunately, they didn't, and I like Gary Johnson a lot so I will be voting for him. He won't win the presidency, but if I continue voting for the lesser of two evils, the Libertarian Party will never see the light of day, and that's something I'm not okay with. I'm losing this election. I'm winning the future.


quote
Originally posted by fierofetish:

Brennan, I was just wondering if you will realise the irony of your comment here?



You're probably referring to nature.

Are you going to continue disregarding the rest of my post or will you continue talking about nature?


quote
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]:
I'm definitely not trying to guilt trip you, and I'm not suggesting that you're unAmerican by voting the way you are... if anything, that might be MORE American, at least in spirit.

Where I think you are right now, is you believe that Romney will do the exact same thing that Obama has done, and what Bush did all through his second term.

Romney says that he WON'T... Romney says that he IS different.


Obama said the same thing, and we know he TOTALLY did the exact opposite of everything he said he was going to do (even though the Democrats on here either don't believe it, or are blind to it.)

Now, I'm not so much of an idiot that I wouldn't understand the concept of Burn me once, burn me twice, etc...


But I'm stuck in a position right now where we KNOW EXACTLY how one president functions, vs how the candidate says he simply would NOT be.

When I'm given two options, there's really no other choice in my mind. I KNOW FOR A FACT what Obama wants... at this point, I can ONLY take Romney at his word, and those are much better odds than not knowing at all.

It's not like third party candidates are something that's never existed in this country. We've had three third party candidates that had a substantial amount of votes in the past 30 years. In Bush Senior's re-election bid. Ross Perot basically cost Bush the election. In the end, I think Perot got almost 1/4th of the votes in the National Vote... and it was only that low because he stepped out of the race at the last minute (only later to decide to get back into it).

But in my opinion, I just don't think that NOW is the time to make a "point"... there are a LOT of people who are dissatisfied with both their options... honestly, I know very few people who actually prefer Obama over any number of other possible candidates that they could pick from the Democrat party, just like there are plenty of Republicans that many Republicans would rather have.


Anyway... I'm repeating myself now... but you know obviously that Gary Johnson won't win with your write-in votes. Romney is teetering on the verge of not winning this election. So for me, I have to decide at this point whom I want... Romney or Obama... and I know who I don't want.


On a side note, there's a lot of people who are dissapointed with the primary process. I've read a few studies that suggest hte PRIMARY election should be changed to allow each voter a three-tiered vote during the primaries. What this would be is the ability for the voter to pick three candidates, and rank them 1-3 on who they'd want to be their primary candidate. Using the scoring system of 3 thorugh 1, a person who might otherwise pick a "radical" candidate would probably still pick someone who was a little less radical as their second and third pick. If everyone did this, the candidate who would likely win would probably be someone who was more compatible with everyone's beliefs.

The primary "process" is only 100 years old anyway... and wasn't really envisioned by the founders (best I can figure).


Anyway, I just really don't want another 4 years of what we're going through now... and the ONLY odds I have at this point, is a vote for Romney.
Todd



Well, Gary isn't write in. Gary is actually in the election. He's the Libertarian candidate. He won't win. I don't want Obama at all. I want Romney over Obama. That said, I'm going to vote for the candidate I most want to see in office. You can disagree with that all you want. I completely understand your point that I would vote for Romney over Obama so to you it's a lost vote. It's not for me. Johnson is my vote. Romney isn't. Obama isn't.

Not that it matters much. Electoral college and all.