USA Election 2012 — Page 5

EyeShotFirst, I apologize for overreacting.  There are those who say exactly what you said on a regular basis and mean it.  When I'm in the mood for laughs are just feel like getting worked up, I head over to the Huffington Post and read the comments section--man, nothing gets me on fire quite like that--and that's coming from the all-loving, all-inclusive Left.  I know that such represents the worst of that side and we have plenty of that on ours.  I in fact consider myself a moderate as well.  I just don't like reading what you wrote from those who mean it.  Again, sorry for blowing up, though it did spur some interesting research on my part :)

Warbler, Obama is a Christian of the Protestant branch, and more specifically, the black liberation movement.  Romney is a Christian as well, of the Restoration branch, and of the Latter-day Saint variety.  Many have argued that neither is truly Christian.  From an objective standpoint, they both truly are.  From my perspective, they both truly are, though I don't feel Obama's church has always acted in a Christ-like manner.  But I feel very strongly that Mormons are Christian.  No offense taken, just wanting to clear that up :)

Mrebo said:

Warbler said:

Mrebo said:

His campaign was about reducing women to #ladyparts

???

 

it wasn't a Democrat that said women couldn't get pregnant via rape.   It wasn't a Democrat that called pregnancy via rape, a gift from God.    If you want the Republicans to have chance, you need to gets these kinds of yahoos out of the party. 

The first guy was roundly and swiftly criticized by the Republican Party which withdrew all support from him and pressured him to drop out. Blame the man, not the party. A person does not need permission from the party to run under its banner.

I think the party does have some say there.   Do you really think either on of the Clintons or Obama would be allowed to as Republicans?   The party really couldn't have prevented Akins from running under the Republican banner?  Need I remind you that Akins was supported by Michelle Bachmann?  There's another nut the party needs to distance itself from. 

Mrebo said:

And the second guy, as previously discussed, expressed his personal view (so as to explain his principled opposition to all abortion) that the innocent growing baby should be regarded as a gift from God (how terrible! /sarcasm).

It may be a gift from God to that guy,  but to the woman who was made pregnant via rape, it is her worst nightmare come true.     Can you imagine what it would be like to have to carry a baby from rape in you for 9 months??

Mrebo said:

 It doesn't need to toss someone out for being 'too' pro-life.

no, but the party does need to show more sympathy for women pregnant via rape. 

Mrebo said:

Obama said there should be no restriction on abortion, ever. The Democratic Party removed the word "rare" from their platform when it comes to abortion. To me, that is extreme. If we want to demonize a party based on the issue of abortion it should be the Democratic Party.

of course you'd say that,  you're pro-life. 

Mrebo said:

Women dressed up as 'ladyparts'

when and where were women dressed up as lady parts. 

Mrebo said:

Perhaps you cannot see what a demeaning self-parody that is.

all I can tell you is that most feminist groups believe that the right to chose is a women's rights issue.  Just who do you think the feminists voted for in this election?   

Right now there is a perception out there that the republican party is out of touch with modern times and the common man and minorities, that it is the party of old Christian white men.    And yes, I know the media is to blame for that perception. The Republicans really need to show that perception isn't that case.   They really need to distance themselves from the likes of Akins,  Bachmann,  Palin, Trump, and Bush Jr.     They have to stop making themselves so easy targets for the media. 

darth_ender said:

Warbler, Obama is a Christian of the Protestant branch, and more specifically, the black liberation movement.  Romney is a Christian as well, of the Restoration branch, and of the Latter-day Saint variety.  Many have argued that neither is truly Christian.  From an objective standpoint, they both truly are.  From my perspective, they both truly are, though I don't feel Obama's church has always acted in a Christ-like manner.  But I feel very strongly that Mormons are Christian.  No offense taken, just wanting to clear that up :)

Some would argue that both are Christian, and some would argue that neither are.   My point to bringing it up was to show a difference between them.   Maybe Mormons are Christian, I don't know, but it is still different from being Protestant.  Just like being Catholic is different that being a Protestant.  

darth_ender said:

EyeShotFirst said:

The reason the minorities go democratic, is because the republicans want to throw em out.

Mexicans are controlled and screwed by the republicans. So when they come to America, they know to avoid that vote.

Bigot: : a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance. Source

I'm talking about those dang Republicans, right?

No.  I'm talking about idiots who make blanket statements like the above quote.  Most Republicans respect all peoples, though liberal politicians would have you believe otherwise.  The conservative viewpoint is not the strawman that liberal politicians and the mainstream media make us out to be.  Sure, there are racist conservatives.  There are also racist liberals.  Sure there are racist whites.  There are also racist blacks.  To attribute everything to one group, i.e. conservatives, whites, men, Christians, as well as liberals, blacks, women, or Muslims is....

*gasp*

BIGOTRY.

Don't be a bigot.  Not even a liberal one.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/campus-overload/post/obamas-re-election-sparks-racially-charged-protest-at-ole-miss/2012/11/07/35129110-2914-11e2-bab2-eda299503684_blog.html?socialreader_check=0&denied=1

Tyrphanax said:

Bahahahahahaha

lol

*speechless*

You know, if Republicans are really about state's rights, and really want to shed their image as a bunch of square...

the entire GOP should roll to Denver and blaze it up in a huge post-election pot-fest.

Although I don't smoke pot and would not want to be around people doing pot(I once walked by someone smoking pot and the smell almost made me throw up),  since pot in not mentioned in the Constitution I would think the 10th amendment would apply.  

Mrebo said:

Mrebo said:

Women dressed up as 'ladyparts'

when and where were women dressed up as lady parts.

 warning: ladyparts ahead

oh good god. 

Mrebo said:

Warbler said:

Although I don't smoke pot and would not want to be around people doing pot(I once walked by someone smoking pot and the smell almost made me throw up),  since pot in not mentioned in the Constitution I would think the 10th amendment would apply.  

The 10th Amendment always applies.

it doesn't apply to sports betting.   

Mrebo said:

The Republicans really need to show that perception isn't that case.   They really need to distance themselves from the likes of Akins,  Bachmann,  Palin, Trump, and Bush Jr.     They have to stop making themselves so easy targets for the media. 

Alan Grayson, Howard Dean, Barbara Boxer, Carter, Chris Matthews...I have my own list of boogey-people who are extremist incompetent loud-mouthed idiots. If the media was hammering the Democratic Party about them the way Republicans are attacked for this or that person you'd have a very different view of things.

you may be right.   But you can't control the media.   The media is going to target republicans whenever possible.   What the party can do, is give the media less ammunition. 

Mrebo said:

 If the people of Bachmann's district want her as their representative, that's on them. She's not my cup of tea but that doesn't mean she should be shut out of power.

not saying she should be out of power, but the rest of the party should distance themselves from her and not give her any support.   The party needs to show that it is not just not just a bunch of extreme Christian nutcases like Bachmann. 

Mrebo said:

Mrebo said:

Perhaps you cannot see what a demeaning self-parody that is.

all I can tell you is that most feminist groups believe that the right to chose is a women's rights issue.  Just who do you think the feminists voted for in this election?   

And it's not only the abortion, it's all the ladyparts  issues.

??? 

Mrebo said:

I think any feminism based on abortion is idiotic as well. Feminism used to mean something more than that. We're not talking about "feminist groups," we're talking about women motivated to turnout and vote because their ladyparts were allegedly imperiled. Just because you're told that feminism = abortion doesn't make it truth.

of course feminism doesn't equal abortion.  never said it did.  All I did say was that it is considered a women's rights issue. 

Mrebo said:

Lots of feminists voted for Romney, if one thinks feminism is something more substantial.

?  I'd like to see some proof that lots of feminists voted for Romney.  I'd be willing to bet my life savings that many more feminists voted for Obama than did for Romney.    

Mrebo said:

This is one of the situations where it's not about opinion.  If Clinton wants to be a Republican, nobody can stop him. He can run as a Republican, he can win as a Republican. Obama could switch to being a Republican tomorrow. No permission is needed!

maybe, but there is no way they'd win a nomination under the Republican banner, and yet Akins was able to do so.   

Mrebo said:

The party really couldn't have prevented Akins from running under the Republican banner?  Need I remind you that Akins was supported by Michelle Bachmann?  There's another nut the party needs to distance itself from.

I really am serious about it. I'm not actually a Republican, never have been. When I registered, I chose no party.

I can not find the words to express how much this shocks me. 

Mrebo said:

When I get around to becoming a Republican, the party will have no say in whether I am one or not. It's not conditioned on good behavior. And if I subsequently run for office the party also has no say. The party can say all kinds of things against me, refuse to fund me, try to do underhanded things against me...but it can't legally stop me. If people in the primary or general election choose me, that's too bad for the Republican Party.

So you are telling if someone were to win the Republican primary, but then was arrest for murder, that there is no way for the Republican party to get that person's name off the ballot and have him replaced by someone else?

Mrebo said:

Mrebo said:

And the second guy, as previously discussed, expressed his personal view (so as to explain his principled opposition to all abortion) that the innocent growing baby should be regarded as a gift from God (how terrible! /sarcasm).

It may be a gift from God to that guy,  but to the woman who was made pregnant via rape, it is her worst nightmare come true.     Can you imagine what it would be like to have to carry a baby from rape in you for 9 months??

Unless you're demanding all those women get abortions, that's not too much of a point.

huh?  

Mrebo said:

Mrebo said:

 It doesn't need to toss someone out for being 'too' pro-life.

no, but the party does need to show more sympathy for women pregnant via rape. 

You shouldn't believe the disgusting narrative pushed by Democrats that Republicans don't have sufficient sympathy for rape victims.

and the republicans make the narrative more believable every time an Akins opens his big mouth.  

Mrebo said:

I agree Akin was an idiot who deserved shunning. Murdock was talking about how he can possibly have a moral opposition to all abortion. Even if you don't agree with him, it's a respectable position. It's the way I respect pacifists even though I think they are terribly naive.

it may be a respectable position, but it doesn't mean it is wise to call a pregnancy via rape, a gift from God.  Its insensitive.

Mrebo said:

Mrebo said:

Obama said there should be no restriction on abortion, ever. The Democratic Party removed the word "rare" from their platform when it comes to abortion. To me, that is extreme. If we want to demonize a party based on the issue of abortion it should be the Democratic Party.

of course you'd say that,  you're pro-life. 

Intentionally removing from a party platform the idea that abortions should be "rare" is only objectionable because I'm pro-life?

well who the heck is it going to be more objectionable for, the pro-lifer or the pro-choicer? 

Mrebo said:

Permit an abortion of a 9 month old fetus is only objectionable because I'm pro-life? No, no, no.

if you were pro-choice you wouldn't find it objectionable. 
  

Warbler said:

Mrebo said:

Mrebo said:

Women dressed up as 'ladyparts'

when and where were women dressed up as lady parts.

 warning: ladyparts ahead

oh good god. 

I know, pretty hot, right?

*sigh*