@ Mike Richards 5:28 p.m. Oct. 10, 2012"Romney told us that the
unborn have rights. I agree with Romney. No mother has the "right" to
destroy her unborn children."If the unborn have rights; what
about the undead? Seriously, the way you phrase your claim makes me
realize how ludicrous the whole abortion argument can be. Morality
should NOT be legislated. At some point, we will all suffer repercussions for
all the choices we make... whether it me karma, deity, or poetic justice.
Impact Wrestling on Spike last night was far more credible, realistic, &
entertaining than the debate.
re: Howard Beal 11:08 p.m. Oct. 10"If there is a middle ground
on abortion I think Romney found it. But here's the rub. Who cares? I am
not planning on having an abortion. I just want the economy to get
better..."Agreed.Just like the Repubs. Regardless of
the situation, they trot out an emotional wedge issue to keep their base
vehemently rabid to obfuscate more important issues i.e. economy.P.S. For me, the obesity epidemic takes higher precedence than abortion.
@Ford DeTreeseObama is a failure and his only chance at winning is
the infamous "kill Romney" strategy to make his opponent toxic; which is
why his deputy campaign manager, Stephanie Cutter, has been spreading lies all
summer (Failure in Libya is a result of Romney's media circus; Romney wants
to cut 5 trillion in taxes; Romney is a felon: All of which are certifiable
lies)Yet Obama would simply deny that he is a liar, which in itself
would be a lie. In fact, this is exactly the Obama approach.@WHAT
NOW?Endlessly repeating the question "Which Romney?" merely
exposes your own confusion. Anyone looking past the Obama MSNBC media spin
machine can see Romney quite clearly
@Ford DeTreeseObama has adopted a strategy of "kill Romney,
because Obama cannot run on his own record - so he must make his opponent toxic
to even have a change: Obama must simply deny that he, himself, is a liar,
which in itself would be a lie. In fact, this is exactly the stated Obama
approach - to lie about Romney, Libya, war on women, jobs; anything in the way
of his power.
Mike RichardsSouth Jordan, UtahEither you believe in ending an
innocent life, or you oppose it. There is no middle ground.I agree
with Romney. No mother has the "right" to destroy her unborn
children.•5:28 p.m. Oct. 10, 2012================ Richards, There you go again with your All-or-Nothing false
reasoning.1. Of course there is Middle Ground, and there is a
Choice.2. You keep parroting the GOP party-line of No Abortions,
ever, not for any reason. You can have your PoliticalParty opinions, but keep in
mind they are not inline with the LDS Church’s policy.3. Mitt
Romney’s is actually more in line with the LDS Church’s and against
the GOP party platform – allowing for Rape, Incest, Life and Health of the
Woman, and Viability of the fetus. He also said just this week that he will not
push for a change in Roe v. Wade or promote any anti-abortion legislation [do
you still agree with him on that?].4. You either support the LDS
Church and its policies regarding abortion, or you oppose it. There is no middle
@atl134See what I mean? The only specific legislation you can point
at is an amendment to a state law in Mississippi. How exactly does that become
"part of [a president's] agenda"?@Ford DeTreese
"Where does the deceit end?"Probably never...there will
always be people like Obama and Biden. All you can do is refute them with
facts, over and over again. Eventually they get voted out, or their term ends.
The real question is, how do you repair the damage?
If there is a middle ground on abortion I think Romney found it. But
here's the rub. Who cares? I am not planning on having an abortion. I
just want the economy to get better...
@mrichards"...Romney has made his position clear..."Which Romney?Which position?Which day?
Roland,Abortion is not reversible. It ends a life. There are no
"second chances". Either you believe in ending an innocent life, or you
oppose it. There is no middle ground.Romney has made his position
clear. You seem to want to sit on the fence. It's time to get off the
fence and state your position. Do you think that an innocent unborn child
should be destroyed because one person doesn't want that unborn child to
live? For that matter, do you think that you, or anyone else, should be able to
tell anyone in society that their life doesn't matter because YOUR life
would be better off if they didn't live?That is the real
choice. That is the only option. That is the position that every candidate has
to make.Obama told us that a living, breathing BORN infant must be
allowed to die if the mother desired to destroy that infant and the abortion was
somehow blotched. How do you feel about that?Romney
told us that the unborn have rights. I agree with Romney. No mother has the
"right" to destroy her unborn children.
lost in DC West Jordan, UT"MadHatter,Parker can condemn
those in the repub party who are sexist and still support repub ideals. Bill
Maher said even worse things about repub women; why have we heard nothing from
any on the left condemning him as Parker condemned the "troglodytes"?
Their silence speaks volumes about how the left views sexism against
conservative women as OK."As you may not like generalizations
regarding conservatives, perhaps you might lend the same understanding of the
differences in people of the Left. Sure, I can accept Kathleen Parker and her
support of Republican ideals. Seriously, I think she would like to purge the
Party of those she considers harmful and shift back towards the center.Similarly, I disagree with a lot of what Bill Maher says. It does not mean
that just because someone considers himself/herself politically liberal
doesn't mean they can't be obnoxious and disreputable. Think about
the terms "conservative" and "liberal" and what they mean in the
context of political discourse, not the knee-jerk, simplistic comments you read
here.Many define themselves by partisan views, but few see the
complexity that lay within. Few are pure ideologues
@Nate"Obama can't call Romney a liar to his face. Romney
would cheerfully dismantle the accusation point by point."Romney
would simply deny that he is a liar, which in itself would be a lie. In fact,
this is exactly the Romney-Ryan approach. They can say anything, no matter how
ridiculous, and then, when they are called on it, they cry foul, or they claim
that the fact checkers are wrong. Where does the deceit end? Hopefully not in a
Super-PAC-paid trip to the White House.
Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah"No one has the unilateral
right to choose to destroy another human being, especially when that human being
is totally defenceless." I commend you on your remarks regarding
the of killing the defenseless. The Catholic Church teaches that all life is
precious. However, how does your defense of the unborn (a zygote, if you
please, or even an unfertilized egg and sperm in the fallopian tubes prior to
fertilization) extend to the life of a innocent civilian targeted in a drone
strike in the Middle East?I'm sure you were opposed to the Rape
of Nanking by the Japanese soldiers in WWII. What are your thoughts on the
bombing of Dresden? What about Harry Truman's decision to drop the atomic
bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Not only were "innocent zygotes"
destroyed, but thousands of innocent children (not to mention adults)?Or are you selective in what "innocents" should and should not be
killed? With regard to an abortion, do you think government has the right to
interfere in a woman's right to choose? And what other areas of a
person's personal life should the government be involved?
Will the new Mitt Romney, if elected, be allowed to govern as a pragmatic
moderate? Many on the Left believe that he is "lying through his teeth"
when he says things like he's been saying recently. However, judging from
what I believe is the essence on the man, he is adaptable and he changes to the
situation.Although Romney declared himself to be "severely
conservative", I don't think his business problem solving skills are
conducive to being an ideologue. His "flip flops" are his way of
dealing with reality. If one problem requires a certain solution, he applies
that solution. The choice of taxing or not taxing to increase revenue depends
on the problem and not some piece of paper shoved in front of him by Grover
Norquist.I don't think that Romney intends to be the
"signing robot" that Norquist demands. He may turn out to be the
pragmatic moderate that his father was (not as liberal on social issues because
that would be the kiss of death), but he may just avoid dealing with those
issues that the extreme Right covets. Abortion legislation, for example, may
not be very high on his priority list.
atl134"has had" and "existing" are not the same thing.LDS Lib,no, the Romney plan and redistribution of wealth or no
more the same thing than soviet style socialism is free enterprise.
redistribution of wealth and soviet style socialism are giving a man a fish (by
taking from the fisherman, whether he likes it or not); raising the poor into
the middle class is teaching them to fish.and of course, BO's
support for global warmoing treaties just furthers the global redistribution of
wealth from us to the rest of the world.MadHatter,Parker can
condemn those in the repub party who are sexist and still support repub ideals.
Bill Maher said even worse things about repub women; why have we heard nothing
from any on the left condemning him as Parker condemned the
"troglodytes"? Their silence speaks volumes about how the left views
sexism against conservative women as OK.
It's the news cycle and what editors want to feature in the news stories.
Certainly Michael Gerson will write positive stories about Mitt Romney since he
is a conservative columnist. Like Kathleen Parker, he needs to favor one side
over the other because his paycheck demands it. The same can be said about
Andrew Sullivan, Peggy Noonan, and all the other columnists who write on
politics and slant either Right or Left.For example, Kathleen Parker
writes about the troglodytes in the Republican Party who say really bad things
about women, but she remains faithful to the cause. Peggy Noonan condemns
Romney for this 47% comments, but is praising him in the next sentence. Gerson
does his part to keep a positive light on Romney's campaign as if by
repeating it will he improve Romney's chances in the next debate.We just have to see. News cycles go up and down. If Romney does poorly in the
next debate, will the conservative columnists moan and groan or will they come
up with "positive" stories and emphasize the "bad" in the other
guy. Will it be the "new" Romney or an "even new and improved"
TekakaromatagiDammam, Saudi ArabiaRomney saying that he wants to
raise the poor to being middle class is what his election needs. ============= You realize that that is the very essence and
definition of Redistributing the Wealth, don't you?FYI - the
Middle Class in America has shrunk as American Middle Class jobs were off-shored
to Communist China, by the same token, interesting to note how the sudden
emergence and explosive growth of the Chinese Middle Class coindedendally
happened hand-in-hand with said off-shoring?WallStreet and
America’s Corporations are traitors to America, and yet are bestest
buddies and friends with our foes.BTW – That’s called
Globally – a Re-Distribution of the Wealth.
@Nate"He can be aware of no existing legislation that he would
support, and yet support future legislation designed to protect life."The Republican House has had dozens of votes on various abortion type
legislation, as well as hundreds of state legislature bills. Surely he can find
something in there. Mitt Romney himself told Huckabee he supported the
Mississippi personhood amendment which would ban all abortions, no exceptions.
Romney saying that he wants to raise the poor to being middle class is what his
election needs. At last, finally, someone running for president is beginning to
talk about fighting poverty in a meaningful way. Too bad for the Democrats that
it is a Republican.
Nate said: Obama can't call Romney a liar to his face. Romney would
cheerfully dismantle the accusation point by point...Actually nate,
probably 20 lies told by mitt were listed yesterday in these comment after one
of your fellow deniers challenged anyone to even come up with one... many, many
followed but then those issuing the challenge disappeared as usual. Look up
mitts lies yourself, I'm tired of listing them so that folks like yourself
won't read them anyway, because of their love of ignorance or blind
allegiance to a man or party.
Obama can't call Romney a liar to his face. Romney would cheerfully
dismantle the accusation point by point, in front of a national audience, who
already has begun to notice that the reigning emperor is wearing no clothes.@Roland Kayser: You realize, of course, that both of the Romney
statements can be true. He can be aware of no existing legislation that he
would support, and yet support future legislation designed to protect life.If you're interested in exposing real lies, you could turn your
attention to Obama's response to the terrorist attack in Benghazi.
Mike Richards: I don't ever post on abortion, people have their minds made
up and no one is swayed by a newspaper comment. What I was commenting on was
that Romney reversed his position within a two hour period.
The mind of this enlightened has not been changed. As, I suspect is the case for
almost everyone in the nation.
Mike, Are still going to cheer the NEW and improved Rockefeller,
Etch-a-Sketch NorthEast BlueDog, moderate Mitt Romney – Who --
Supports the mandate and Obomneycare, Fought for stem cell
research?Wants minimum wage should keep up with inflation?signed Gay
Marriage in Massachusetts?Promised to protect a woman's right to
choose? And now repeats just YESTERDAY that Roe v. Wade is the law of the
land and that we should sustain and support it?As a side note
– Are you still going to vote for Orrin Hatch?As I recall
during the nomination and Primaries – you said and I quote –
“I will NEVER vote for Hatch…He is part of the problem we see in
Washington… He has shrugged his Constitutional duty and is a traitor to
Roland,The entire purpose of the Federal Government is to protect
"life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness". That statement is part of
the Declaration of Independence which led to a bloody war that we fought to
insure that we would have LIFE.Any President who does not protect
the unborn has not kept his oath of office. If the most innocent are destroyed
without protection from the government that defends us all from all enemies,
foreign or domestic, then what is the value of having that government?No one has the unilateral right to choose to destroy another human being,
especially when that human being is totally defenceless. You may
call it flip-flopping, I call it leadership. It's time that America
stopped the killing of the most innocent among us.It is not wonder
that Romney is still in the conversations of millions. Millions saw him for the
first time as a dynamic leader and they saw Obama for what he really is -
unprepared for even the most simple task - a debate.The minds of
many have been enlightened. Many have changed their vote from Obama to Romney.
“There’s no legislation with regards to abortion that I’m
familiar with that would become part of my agenda,” Romney told The Des
Moines Register in an interview.Two hours later Romney spokeswoman
Andrea Saul told the National Review Online's Katrina Trinko that Romney
"would of course support legislation aimed at providing greater protections
for life."A flip-flop in a two hour time period. Is that a new