Wrong again, Pagan.I am not justifying Mitt's switching stances. I
asserted that he DIDN'T switch stances on that issue. Time (20-30 yrs) was the
catalyst for the GLBT community demanding more - Mitt's promise to advocate more
for them in 1994 never included gay marriage because NOBODY sought that then.
Remember, DADT was still new (1993) allowing gay servicemembers to serve as long
as no one asked and no one told (your experience notwithstanding - someone
asked, you told, breaking both sides of that agreement). GLBT demands have
expanded with time to include gay marriage.And you wrongly reported
results of last July's discussion about DADT between us: you (then and now)
cited headlines, and I showed the incorrectness of the headlines from actual
survey results.Military support personnel (supply truck drivers,
translators/ office workers, MWR folks in food-services, etc.) comprise most
respondents who said "serving with a gay person won't bother me."
Actual boots-on-the-ground - folks with lives on the line, Marines, combat Army
infantry, sailors on submarines - were still against serving with gays. And the
Pentagon moved ahead with the decision anyway. Google "DADT repeal survey
results" - media headlines conceal the actual findings.
Axe-man says:"Gay marriage is a very recent concept Harvey Milk
couldn't have dreamed of...""Mitt can pledge his intent to
provide more rights for gays in 1994 and still be opposed to gay marriage in
2002 ..."---No, we dreamed Axe, we just never imagined
we'd see the day when we could actually marry the person we love though. Having
grown up in an era when gays were relegated to the outer reaches of the solar
system, I can tell you that the dream has always been there. If I
recall the stories about Mitt's father, he actually marched with blacks in their
quest for equality. Mitt doesn't even begin to fill his father's shoes. All
Americans of whatever stripe MUST be treated equally under the law or we are not
a country that values justice and liberty. Mitt, can believe
whatever he wants; that is his right. It is also the right of FREE Americans to
marry the person they love. Romney, and the other Republican candidates would
automatically divorce married GLBT Americans. How would you feel if the
government came to you and said: "your divorced because someone else
doesn't like your choice of mate"?
I really hate the process where the Republicans all get to throw manure on their
fellow Republicans, but that is America. I sure couldn't do it. But
I love that in it all we are finally starting to see information trickle out
about Romney's ability to take educated risks and to be victorious. I know some
Americans are shallow enough to think America can be fixed without government
workers losing jobs, but job loss is going to happen so that a stronger job
groth environment can be fostered. Romney knows how to rebuild it. That is what
'(Remember the poll numbers vis-a-vis removal of DADT and my assertion about
boots-on-the-ground versus support personnel poll results?)' - Axe-man | 12:08
p.m. Jan. 9, 2012 Not sure why this is being denied. It addresses a
concern that you brought up Axe-man. Poll numbers about DADT in the
general public: **"In U.S., 67% Support Repealing "Don't
Ask, Don't Tell" - Lymari Morales - Gallup - 12/09/10 vs. Poll
numbers from the military directly: **'Pentagon study dismisses risk
of openly gay troops' - By Anne Flaherty - AP - Published by DSNews -
11/30/10 Even: **'AMA meeting: "Don't ask, don't
tell" said to hurt patient care; repeal urged' - By Kevin B. O'Reilly,
amednews staff. Posted Nov. 23, 2009. - America Medical
Association Your justification for switching stances is...time.
(20-30 years) So then, I would like you to explain your support, for
Mitt Romney. **'Mitt Romney steers clear of Ohio health, union
issues' - By Dan Sewell - AP - Published by DSNews - 10/25/11Then: **'Mitt Romney reverses himself, supports anti-union law' -
By Philip Elliott - AP - Published by DSNews - 10/26/11 When it's 24
Apples and oranges, Pagan: as is your wont, you've selectively compared and only
chosen "facts" that support your point of view. (Remember the poll
numbers vis-a-vis removal of DADT and my assertion about boots-on-the-ground
versus support personnel poll results?)In 1994, Catholic Sen. Ted
Kennedy and most of the rest of the world had no intention of allowing gay
marriage. Gay marriage is a very recent concept Harvey Milk couldn't have
dreamed of, introduced as a possibility by the ever-increasing rights that the
GLBT community has gained in the last 20-30 years. The push in Salt Lake City by
business and community leaders, including the LDS Church, to common-sense rights
such as housing and employment security, would have seemed radical for Utah 20
years ago, and while not radical there, would have been a stretch even for
Massachusetts.There is no disagreement between being "a
stronger advocate for gay rights" and yet opposing gay marriage. Mitt can
pledge his intent to provide more rights for gays in 1994 and still be opposed
to gay marriage in 2002 (governor's election) or 2011 (your cited headline).
Values. When Mitt Romney was supporting abortion, then was against
it. When: **'Mitt Romney steers clear of Ohio health,
union issues' - By Dan Sewell - AP - Published by DSNews - 10/25/11
Then: **'Mitt Romney reverses himself, supports anti-union law' - By
Philip Elliott - AP - Published by DSNews - 10/26/11 'FAIRFAX, Va.
A day after he refused to endorse an Ohio ballot measure that limits public
employee union rights, Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney said
Wednesday that he is "110 percent" behind the effort.'
When: **'Mitt Romney pledges opposition to gay marriage' - CBS News
- 08/04/11 Then: 'It's also notable because Romney was
not always such a strong opponent of gay rights. In 1994, he sent a letter to a
gay Republican group saying he would be a stronger advocate for gay rights...' -
Same Article These are the 'values' of Mitt Romney. Ever
"A man of deep and abiding faith, Mitt ...he is "pro-marriage"
and that he is "pro-family." Unless you are part of a GLBT
family. Mitt wants to automatically divorce all the GLBT couples across the USA
who have been married, breaking up their families, at least that's what he said
on the debate the other night.That, ladies and gentlemen, is not
"pro-family" or "pro-marriage". It is anti-marriage and
anti-family. @don17;Attacking another country, without first
being attacked or having absolute proof that the country is going to attack us
is Pro-War. Romney has said he will ATTACK Iran - even if they don't plan to
Sergio, what do you consider a real job? Just because he was born into a
family, who's father was successful, gave him the opportunity to receive a good
education, opened doors to work with other successful individuals, does not mean
that he does not have similar values as some Americans. Some Americans value
hard work, being self-reliant. Some Americans would rather not work hard and
depend on the government to support them. Which of these American values is he
I see many of you do not know the history of the Romney family. His father
demanded that his children work for their own way. Democrats and
Republicans,including unions endorse Mitt Romney' s father as governor of
Michigan. John Broder of the New York Times considered his father one of the
most respected politicians of the 1970s and 1980s. There was no silver spoon in
the mouths of the Romney family.
What shared values does Romney share with most Americans: he was born with a
silver spoon in his mouth, he has never worked at a real job, he dodged military
service, etc. He shares the values of privileged aristocratic plutocrats at the
top one percent; unfortunately that is not representative of American values.
Mountanman: Your right on as usual!The_Kaiser: So Mitt Romney does
not understand the Constitution? Who told you that? Where is the Proof?I do believe Mitt Romney has a degree in Finance from BYU(definitely taught
there). A MBA from Harvard and a Law Degree from Harvard! I know they teach all
aspects of the Constitution there as well. Trying to make the point he doesn't
know something without proof is just plain, well, not correct thinking! Hoping
he doesn't is not a valid fact. In all my dealings with the candidate I am
confident he understands it! As do all the republican candidates!No
Republican Candidate is "Pro War"! But they are pro-defense of America
and her true allies! Just because a candidate would use the military to defend
America does not make them pro war. Just pro America and smart thinking!
@Shaun, Of course I know what socialism is! It is communism light. Its wealth
redistribution and Maxism. When the government robs Peter to pay Paul, Paul is
happy and that is socialism! But when the Pauls out number the Peters, as they
always will over time, that is result of socialism, as per Greece, Spain, France
and England.As far as you hating the "wealthy", do you realize
that nearly 80% of all federal income taxes are paid by the wealthiest Americans
while almost 50% of Americans pay no income taxes at all? Of all people, you
should be grateful to the wealthy for paying for nearly all your entitlments
The battle between individual rights and the powers alotted governments rages
on. Obama doesn't act under the rule of law, except his own. This offends me
and goes against everything the Founding Fathers did when establishing the
Constitution. But this nation will stand on the principles of Constitutional
law. It may falter because of the attempts of some, but it will never fail.
@Mounatain man. Do you even know the definition of socialism? Because Obama is
not a socialist. As far as wealth distribution goes you are right
that it is happening except it is the wealthy who are benefiting.And
Obama is going to win the next election. Mitt doesn't have a chance and none of
the current republicans have a chance.
Romney's tax records are no one's business but his own. So are his finances.
Voters would greatly value Mr. Romney being truthful and forthright in
discussing his finances and releasing his tax records.Why does he refuse
to do so?
Romney is a "pro-life conservative" who "believe that life begins
at conception," that he is "pro-marriage" and that he is
"pro-family." Too bad he is "Pro-War",
"Pro-Federal Reserve", "Pro-Patriot Act" and has proven that
he doesn't understand the Constitution enough to uphold it.There is
a better conservative candidate out there.
@ Hutterite. It depends on what you value. If a person values self reliance,
family,personal responsibility, freedom and financial responsibility, he could
not support Obama who values big government, wealth redistibution and socialism.
That's why he will lose the next election! Romney is being smart to talk about
the vast differences between himself and Obama so voters can see the
Values. The most overused term in politics. Because everybody thinks they corner
the market on them, but we all have 'em.