Charles P. Pierce - The many faces of Romney

PBulldog2 wrote:I agree with whomever wrote the article in Esquire.

Did you notice Romney's initial statements during the debate? He spent time thanking everyone imaginable...and then, last of all and almost as a passing thought, thanked President Obama for his presence. The tone of voice Romney used to thank President Obama dripped with acid and contempt.

nochain wrote:

PBulldog2 wrote:I agree with whomever wrote the article in Esquire.

Did you notice Romney's initial statements during the debate? He spent time thanking everyone imaginable...and then, last of all and almost as a passing thought, thanked President Obama for his presence. The tone of voice Romney used to thank President Obama dripped with acid and contempt.

After all the lies and misinformation BHO has been spouting one could hardly blame Romney for not asking for BHOs autograph. Geez.

othershoe1030 wrote:

nochain wrote:

PBulldog2 wrote:I agree with whomever wrote the article in Esquire.

Did you notice Romney's initial statements during the debate? He spent time thanking everyone imaginable...and then, last of all and almost as a passing thought, thanked President Obama for his presence. The tone of voice Romney used to thank President Obama dripped with acid and contempt.

After all the lies and misinformation BHO has been spouting one could hardly blame Romney for not asking for BHOs autograph. Geez.

Autograph, I expected to see the words "birth certificate" in that location in your post. Talk about spreading lies, the birther crusade of lies has got to be at the top of the list of those spouted by the winger fringe, along with the lies that got us into a war with Iraq of course.

nochain wrote:

othershoe1030 wrote:

nochain wrote:

PBulldog2 wrote:I agree with whomever wrote the article in Esquire.

Did you notice Romney's initial statements during the debate? He spent time thanking everyone imaginable...and then, last of all and almost as a passing thought, thanked President Obama for his presence. The tone of voice Romney used to thank President Obama dripped with acid and contempt.

After all the lies and misinformation BHO has been spouting one could hardly blame Romney for not asking for BHOs autograph. Geez.

Autograph, I expected to see the words "birth certificate" in that location in your post. Talk about spreading lies, the birther crusade of lies has got to be at the top of the list of those spouted by the winger fringe, along with the lies that got us into a war with Iraq of course.

I also think the birther deal was stupid. Iraq on the other hand is too complicated to attribute to "lies". The data available at the time convinced many country's (and our own) that there was a problem. That the "problem" was moved to Syria at some point is often ignored. Of course looking back with 20-20 hindsight it is easy for the usual haters to say the war was predicated entirely on lies.

Floridatexan wrote:
http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/last-night-debate-13800806

"...But not even I expected Romney to let his entitled, Lord-of-the-Manor freak flag fly as proudly as he did on Tuesday night. He got in the president's face. He got in Crowley's face. That moment when he was hectoring the president about the president's pension made him look like someone to whom the valet has brought the wrong Mercedes.

"You'll get your chance in a moment. I'm still speaking."

Wow. To me, this was a revelatory, epochal moment. It was a look at the real Willard Romney, the Bain cutthroat who could get rich ruining lives and not lose a moment's sleep. But those people are merely the anonymous Help. The guy he was speaking to on Tuesday night is a man of considerable international influence. Outside of street protestors, and that Iraqi guy who threw a shoe at George W. Bush, I have never seen a more lucid example of manifest public disrespect for a sitting president than the hair-curling contempt with which Romney invested those words. (I've certainly never seen one from another candidate.) He's lucky Barack Obama prizes cool over everything else. LBJ would have taken out his heart with a pair of salad tongs and Harry Truman would have bitten off his nose..."


Read more: http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/last-night-debate-13800806#ixzz29eRuibKc

PkrBum wrote:Would you prefer someone that we knew next to nothing about except some vague reference to redistribution and some sorted associations? Oh... to be fair i should mention his most liberal senator award.

knothead wrote:

PkrBum wrote:Would you prefer someone that we knew next to nothing about except some vague reference to redistribution and some sorted associations? Oh... to be fair i should mention his most liberal senator award.

pkr,
I think changing horses in mid-stream is nuts. Obama is not perfect and has made some mistakes but this guy is terrible so my preference? Obama, hands down.

PkrBum wrote:

knothead wrote:

PkrBum wrote:Would you prefer someone that we knew next to nothing about except some vague reference to redistribution and some sorted associations? Oh... to be fair i should mention his most liberal senator award.

pkr,
I think changing horses in mid-stream is nuts. Obama is not perfect and has made some mistakes but this guy is terrible so my preference? Obama, hands down.

Mid-steam towards what? I don't see a positive outcome here. What would lead you to believe we're headed uphill?

Ive no delusion romney is much better... and will vote for neither... but romney would'nt take over more private sector.

Rogue wrote:[quote=\"knothead\"][quote=\"PkrBum\"] [quote=\"knothead\"][quote=\"PkrBum\"]Would you prefer someone that we knew next to nothing about except some vague reference to redistribution and some sorted associations? Oh... to be fair i should mention his most liberal senator award.

Rogue wrote:[quote=\"knothead\"][quote=\"PkrBum\"] [quote=\"knothead\"][quote=\"PkrBum\"]

**************************************************

The GOP is undeniably anti women from top to bottom. .

knothead wrote:

Rogue wrote:[quote=\"knothead\"][quote=\"PkrBum\"] [quote=\"knothead\"][quote=\"PkrBum\"]

**************************************************

The GOP is undeniably anti women from top to bottom. .

Yea, I guess that explains why a woman was on McCains ticket last election cycle. Yepper, that's because the GOP is so "anti-woman". Was Condoleezza Rice a man in disguise?

nochain wrote:

knothead wrote:

Rogue wrote:[quote=\"knothead\"][quote=\"PkrBum\"] [quote=\"knothead\"][quote=\"PkrBum\"]

**************************************************

The GOP is undeniably anti women from top to bottom. .

Yea, I guess that explains why a woman was on McCains ticket last election cycle. Yepper, that's because the GOP is so "anti-woman". Was Condoleezza Rice a man in disguise?

********************************************

Gimme a break, sure they have had women, very competent women in fact, within their administration. That's not the point in my mind. It is things like their support of the Blount Amendment, they do not support the Lilly Ledbetter Act (equal pay for equal work), defund Planned Parenthood that provide essential services to poor women, Romney's statement that he would seek out justices who would overturn Roe v Wade (litmus test for the judiciary), in short this pattern establishes without a doubt that under the R/R rule women would regress back a half century surrendering many things that were won from old white guys telling women how to control their bodies.

knothead wrote:

nochain wrote:

knothead wrote:

Rogue wrote:[quote=\"knothead\"][quote=\"PkrBum\"] [quote=\"knothead\"][quote=\"PkrBum\"]

**************************************************

The GOP is undeniably anti women from top to bottom. .

Yea, I guess that explains why a woman was on McCains ticket last election cycle. Yepper, that's because the GOP is so "anti-woman". Was Condoleezza Rice a man in disguise?

********************************************

Gimme a break, sure they have had women, very competent women in fact, within their administration. That's not the point in my mind. It is things like their support of the Blount Amendment, they do not support the Lilly Ledbetter Act (equal pay for equal work), defund Planned Parenthood that provide essential services to poor women, Romney's statement that he would seek out justices who would overturn Roe v Wade (litmus test for the judiciary), in short this pattern establishes without a doubt that under the R/R rule women would regress back a half century surrendering many things that were won from old white guys telling women how to control their bodies.

"(CNSNews.com) – According to its latest annual report, the Planned Parenthood Federation of America (PPFA) received $487.4 million in tax dollars over a twelve-month period and performed 329,455 abortions."

Personally I don't care if a woman wants an abortion but tax dollars should not pay for it. PP is an abortion machine.

Ryan voted against the Lilly Ledbetter Act - so? All the act does is extend the statute of limitations for filing a lawsuit, it dos not solve pay inequality. How many people does that really affect? Except lawyers.

As for the Blunt Amendment, why should an employer be forced into funding something they have a fundamental or moral objection to doing? Until liberals and other hypersensitive groups agree to allow or fund things they object to then they need to shut up.

********************************************************

I accept the number provided as to the number of abortions. Remember these are, for the most part, very poor people who cannot run off to a secret place on Daddy's money and have their abortion, they have little or no choice and PP fills a need in performing the service. How many cervical cancer screenings were performed, how many were found early to intervene early? PP provides contraceptives to prevent unwanted pregnancies thus lowering the unwanted pregnancies . . . . a good thing. The Blount Amendment gives disproportionate authority over their employees based their "conscious" so we disagree on that as well. Finally, your view that those elements who advocate for things with which you disagree should shut up, well in short we both know it ain't gonna happen. Women have every right to stand up for basic things and the GOP is the George Wallace standing in the door of access. It could cost them big time!

knothead wrote:

Rogue wrote:[quote=\"knothead\"][quote=\"PkrBum\"] [quote=\"knothead\"][quote=\"PkrBum\"]

**************************************************

Women have every right to stand up for basic things and the GOP is the George Wallace standing in the door of access. It could cost them big time!

nochain wrote:

knothead wrote:

Rogue wrote:[quote=\"knothead\"][quote=\"PkrBum\"] [quote=\"knothead\"][quote=\"PkrBum\"]

**************************************************

Women have every right to stand up for basic things and the GOP is the George Wallace standing in the door of access. It could cost them big time!

Of course women have every right to stand up for EQUAL rights. As I taught both my daughters, never depend on a man to take care of you, make sure you can take care of yourself. You are missing my point on the three issues, PP may have some value however their function is not to provide abortions but it seems to be the easy way out and they sure do a bunch of them - meaning their other programs are basically ineffective. The number came from their own annual report.

knothead wrote:

nochain wrote:

knothead wrote:

Rogue wrote:[quote=\"knothead\"][quote=\"PkrBum\"] [quote=\"knothead\"][quote=\"PkrBum\"]

**************************************************

Women have every right to stand up for basic things and the GOP is the George Wallace standing in the door of access. It could cost them big time!

Of course women have every right to stand up for EQUAL rights. As I taught both my daughters, never depend on a man to take care of you, make sure you can take care of yourself. You are missing my point on the three issues, PP may have some value however their function is not to provide abortions but it seems to be the easy way out and they sure do a bunch of them - meaning their other programs are basically ineffective. The number came from their own annual report.

*****************************************

PP providing abortions to poor women are saving society millions by not bringing unwanted children into this world with no ability to provide for them. We bitch and moan about the cost of the low lifes in our society but we lack the meddle to keep in place providers to provide basic services they would not otherwise have. Congrats on the lesson you taught your daughters as it will pay huge dividends.

2seaoat wrote:No one is going to be changing that law. Its just mentioned as a moral standing really in todays elections.

That is not what Mitten the Kitten said during the Republican debates....he would sign a bill outlawing abortion.....this is not just a moral standing.....I know women who risked their health and traveled to get abortions out of state in the late 60s and early 70s. It should never be the first choice a woman makes, but nowhere in the constitution in the 4th and 14th amendment is person extended to an unborn child. A simple constitutional amendment could overturn Roe, or the Supreme Court could revisit it, but it is much more than moral standing when people are threatening to make it criminal to take a day after pill.