Mitt Romney

[Lemon law]

I think we can blame mech for the following whopper---namely---Meaning he changes his stance on issues that the president typically hasn't had any real influence on anyways?

For someone who has just experienced six years of the GWB&co. treatment---your the President does not have much influence on hypothesis is a really hard sell for me. I know different.
Never underestimate the power of the man at the top to profoundly screw everything up---GWB seems to have a absolute genius at that---and he unerringly seems to find so many to help him in the total screwing of America. One can perhaps understand a Rummy and a Cheney--already pre corrupted and morally bankrupt---but how many rocks did he have to look under to find wack jobs like Alberto Gonzales and Bownie?

 

[Cabages]

I live around a bunch of Mormons (in Utah) and it saddens me that my senior class that are becoming eligible to vote, will probably vote for him just because he is mormon.

A lot of my classmates have blind faith in their religion. But they are very good, honest people.

 

[mect]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
I think we can blame mech for the following whopper---namely---Meaning he changes his stance on issues that the president typically hasn't had any real influence on anyways?

For someone who has just experienced six years of the GWB&co. treatment---your the President does not have much influence on hypothesis is a really hard sell for me. I know different.
Never underestimate the power of the man at the top to profoundly screw everything up---GWB seems to have a absolute genius at that---and he unerringly seems to find so many to help him in the total screwing of America. One can perhaps understand a Rummy and a Cheney--already pre corrupted and morally bankrupt---but how many rocks did he have to look under to find wack jobs like Alberto Gonzales and Bownie?

So Bush has played a major role on abortion? That is the main issue where I've seen him change his stance. But since you seem convinced to the contrary, please elaborate. You can perhaps convince me otherwise, but in regards to gay rights, I've read much from both view points and currently don't think he's changed his position here. Stem cell research would be the most concerning, but this is a very sensitive issue that I'm still giving careful consideration to myself, so I guess I can easily forgive him if he has changed here. You seem more interested in twisting my statements to win an argument than in any kind of honest conversation though. I look at these boards mainly to find fresh view points. You haven't presented anything other than vague assertions that he's somehow like Bush. So until you do, I don't see any point in continuing down this path. Romney appears to me to have been very successful in life. His stances on many issues agree with my personal idealogy. He is in favor of balancing budgets. He has a successful history of balancing budgets. He is in favor of private school vouchers. He is in favor of subsidized health insurance for the lower class. He is in favor of alternative energy research, but also utilizing the resources we have available. He appears to try to become informed about issues (it is said he set up a private tutor session on embryonic stem cell research with nationally acclaimed scientists). Now he might be lying through his teeth on these issues to get popularity as you claim. But I'll give him a chance to present his message before judging it rather than taking your twisted claims (if they in any way reflect how you've tried to portray my opinions.)

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: piasabird
Mitt Romney is dangerous because he believes in something and actually lives his beliefs.

Some people say they are pro-family but it is all just prattle. I guess it proves that voters would rather be lied to.

In my opinion, that's exactly backwards. Romney lost credibility with me with his first TV ad. In it, he said something to the effect that it's time to let the people write legislation instead of unelected judges. What a crock, blatant pandering to the dupes who bought the whole "activist judges" propaganda. The real problem is legislation written by special interests, but saying that would be bad for his fundraising.

Couple that with the recent flap over his non-hunting, and he looks to me to be someone who lacks convictions. He's willing to say or do whatever he thinks will get him votes. No thanks. Been there, done that.

 

[ayabe]

Originally posted by: Cabages
I live around a bunch of Mormons (in Utah) and it saddens me that my senior class that are becoming eligible to vote, will probably vote for him just because he is mormon.

A lot of my classmates have blind faith in their religion. But they are very good, honest people.

Was it Brigham Young or Joseph Smith who preached that black people can't get into heaven?

Aside from the other completely whacked out beliefs of the mormons, the fact that the founders of their religion believed and taught such things automatically disqualifies them from being taken seriously. The 'origins' of this cult are among the most pathetic stories I have ever heard.

 

[engineereeyore]

I know many people think he can't get elected simply because he's Mormon, but if there is any political position aside from President that I never imagined seeing a Mormon elected to, it governor of Massachusetts. If he can get that, he can get President. Not saying he will, just that he can.

 

[engineereeyore]

Originally posted by: ayabe

Originally posted by: Cabages
I live around a bunch of Mormons (in Utah) and it saddens me that my senior class that are becoming eligible to vote, will probably vote for him just because he is mormon.

A lot of my classmates have blind faith in their religion. But they are very good, honest people.

Was it Brigham Young or Joseph Smith who preached that black people can't get into heaven?

Aside from the other completely whacked out beliefs of the mormons, the fact that the founders of their religion believed and taught such things automatically disqualifies them from being taken seriously. The 'origins' of this cult are among the most pathetic stories I have ever heard.

That is not a doctrine of the LDS church. It may have been the opinion of some of the leaders, but it is not doctrine, and there is a big difference.

Cabages, I agree and I think it's sad. I'm Mormon, but that doesn't mean I'm going to vote for him, but I know many will. I'm going to vote for who I feel best represents my views and who I believe actually has a chance of winning. Though I'm not Republican, so I guess it doesn't matter.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: piasabird
Mitt Romney is dangerous because he believes in something and actually lives his beliefs.

Sure... As long as you don't care if he changes what he lives and believes ever few days. As I said in my previous post, Romney's a multi-faced political whore who advocates whatever side of an issue he thinks will get him more votes. He once supported abortion rights, the Brady gun control law, gay rights and stem-cell research. Now, he opposes all of them.

He supported stem cell research when his wife, Ann, was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis in 1998, he said she hopes stem-cell research provides a cure. Then, he blocked certain types of the research.

He showed true colors on the subject of gun control, last week. I won't bother to repost the text of the linked article. Just scroll back to my previous post.

Some people say they are pro-family but it is all just prattle. I guess it proves that voters would rather be lied to.

Some people will say anything they think will get them elected, even if they say something else to another audience the day before or the day after. His "pro-family" speeches are usually scheduled for weekends to catch the network talking head shows and may carry over to Monday morning if a political gathering runs late. Don't count on him to say the same thing by the following Tuesday.

 

[child of wonder]

Originally posted by: engineereeyore

That is not a doctrine of the LDS church. It may have been the opinion of some of the leaders, but it is not doctrine, and there is a big difference.

They weren't denied the Celestial Kingdom for being black, but being black is considered a curse according to the Book of Mormon.

"Many of the references which resulted in this treatment of persons of African ancestry had their origins in the Book of Abraham. The theology and teachings contained in the Latter Day Saints Book of Abraham remain today as canonized Church Scripture. Joseph Smith, Jr. taught as justification for these doctrines that in the pre-existence, one third of the angels of heaven fought against God and one-third fought for God. He also taught that one-third remained neutral, and as punishment, God forced this neutral third of spirits in the pre-existence to take bodies of the accursed lineage of Cain (African ancestry) and that they lent their influence to the devil."

"And [God] had caused the cursing to come upon them, yea, even a sore cursing, because of their iniquity. For behold, they had hardened their hearts against him, that they had become like unto a flint; wherefore, as they were white, and exceedingly fair and delightsome, that they might not be enticing unto my people, the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them. And thus saith the Lord God; I will cause that they shall be loathsome unto thy people, save they shall repent of their iniquities." (2 Nephi 5:21, emphasis added)

Once a black person is saved, the curse is supposedly lifted after death and they become white.

 

[Jaskalas]

In the first debate, Romney gave answers that seemed like Bush was answering the question. That was not a comforting notion of having another big-government Republican in office. In the debate I could clearly see him sitting on the fence, and that?s never a good sign.