This'll probably escalate quickly

[Ted]

Then maybe repub primary voters shouldn't vote for a douche bag for nominee.

The same could also be said of Democratic voters.

 

[Jack Burton]

What charge did I make up?

How about this one:

"Yep, we can hate on Obama for anything while simultaneously denying anything Romney may have done."

Since that followed directly in the context of the dog incidents it was obvious that you were speaking of the dogs. I can understand you wanting to deny it but we can thank Al Gore for inventing scroll back when he invented the 'net.

I'm talking about Romney's bullying accusation. There was a thread belittling Obama for eating dog but people are in a tizzy about this bullying story of Romney. I don't know if he did or not. I'm only asking for those so sure he didn't do it to provide their proof. They don't know of it's true but it doesnt stop them from saying it isn't.

Well, Obama wrote he ate dogs from the fingers of his own hands, and Romney has been accused of an incident where the witnesses keep changing thier stories, the principal in the incident has been dead for many years so he can't chime in, the family of the supposed victim has rejected the story, and it was printed in a newspaper with an obvious desire to re-elect Obama and defeat Romney. Excuse us for being a little skeptical of the provenance of the story.

BTW, I am unaware where someone stated clearly that Romney " didn't do it." Perhaps I overlooked it in the thread. Perhaps if you really think someone came out and posted that you can alert us to the exact post.

And 2nd BTW. I think that Obama also had sex with an outer space alien. I'm only asking for those so sure he didn't do it to provide their proof. It's their responsibility, by your standards.

And again... WHY was there a thread about Obama eating dog in the first place. You keep wanting to push that but you either won't admit that there is much more to it than that... or you just plain don't know.

 

[hornadylnl]

The same could also be said of Democratic voters.

Uni party can be applied

 

[rambone]

The reason why the LSM has brought this to light, is that there is little else to attack his character.

Romney's character is weak. He has no real principles to temper his decisions. He either doesn't understand capitalism or he rejects it. He endorses theft against taxpayers through federal bailouts. I've watched him advocate against virtually every one of the first 10 Amendments to the Constitution.

 

[rambone]

 

[Kutnupe14]

There is more than enough truthful evidence in his record as president, to support the fact that President Obama isn't fit for his office.

The truly sad matter is that by not electing Romney, it will more assuredly result in another 4 years of Obama.

I'd rather have Obama than Romney, and Larry Flint over them both!

 

[Ted]

Not an endorsement of Romney, but.....

Romney's character is weak. He has no real principles to temper his decisions.

His apparent fidelity to his family and his faith speaks volumes of his character.

He either doesn't understand capitalism or he rejects it.

His business success to date would also tend to reject your assertion.

He endorses theft against taxpayers through federal bailouts. I've watched him advocate against virtually every one of the first 10 Amendments to the Constitution.

Possibly. Though as a Governor of a hyper-liberal state, I also take in consideration that a number of his actions were either forced upon him, or he did so for political expediency/survival.

I'd rather have Obama than Romney,....

A valid point upon Obama and Romney for a couple of reasons.

The devil you know, is better than the devil you don't.

And secondly, how can things truly change, unless we truly hit bottom under the current administration (ala Jimmy Carter).

...and Larry Flint over them both!

While tempting on some level, we already have a moral crisis in this country. We don't need something to push us over the edge.

 

[J_Wales]

And secondly, how can things truly change, unless we truly hit bottom under the current administration (ala Jimmy Carter).

Ah... a race to rock bottom.

Gee, as attractive as that sounds I would prefer other alternatives.

Secession anyone?

 

[CarmelHP]

I'd rather have Obama than Romney, and Larry Flint over them both!

I think that's your problem.

 

[churchmouse]

There is more than enough truthful evidence in his record as president, to support the fact that President Obama isn't fit for his office.

The truly sad matter is that by not electing Romney, it will more assuredly result in another 4 years of Obama.

This is the sad truth we are faced with. There is no other "Viable" solution present at this time. We are stuck with the options at hand and Ron Paul is not an electable candidate at this time. (I can see the flame throwers coming) If he was I would consider him. The grid lock that would result would at least stop any more give away vote buying legislation for a while.
All those who feel we give the Republicans a break should just look at what is going on in the world and then realize, we are all (mainly) conservatives.

 

[churchmouse]

I'd rather have Obama than Romney, and Larry Flint over them both!

Really............you see this as a better solution.................Please, we who care are not ready for any more of Fearful leader. Opinions are free and you can have as many as you want but this one, well, sucks.....in my free opinion. Explains a lot though. Carry on.

 

[edporch]

I have no use for Mitt Romney but this is a NON-STORY.

Let's look at the time frame this supposedly happened.

I remember DISTINCTLY that in 1965, long hair on males was NOT something accepted by many.

It was not uncommon for them to get "haircuts" against their will, and it was common in those days to say that a guy with long hair "must be queer".

I remember in 7th and 8th grade in the '68-'69 time frame, there were a couple of guy who were friends (definitely NOT gay) who both had long "hippy" like hair.

There were many guys who talked about grabbing these guys and cutting their hair.

I remember myself even saying jokingly to use Nair so it would take more time to grown back!

To add more historical context to this, it was well into the early 1970's that even the high school yearbook would tell guys their hair was too long in their Senior Picture and they needed to get a haircut and have it taken again.

 

[MagicKev]

I'd rather have Obama than Romney, and Larry Flint over them both!

I guess if that's who you really want to vote for...In that case I hope he is on the ballot and you don't have to write his name in, cause you certainly wouldn't be voting for who you think you are... the correct spelling is Larry FLYNT.

 

[churchmouse]

I have no use for Mitt Romney but this is a NON-STORY.

Let's look at the time frame this supposedly happened.

I remember DISTINCTLY that in 1965, long hair on males was NOT something accepted by many.

It was not uncommon for them to get "haircuts" against their will, and it was common in those days to say that a guy with long hair "must be queer".

I remember in 7th and 8th grade in the '68-'69 time frame, there were a couple of guy who were friends (definitely NOT gay) who both had long "hippy" like hair.

There were many guys who talked about grabbing these guys and cutting their hair.

I remember myself even saying jokingly to use Nair so it would take more time to grown back!

To add more historical context to this, it was well into the early 1970's that even the high school yearbook would tell guys their hair was too long in their Senior Picture and they needed to get a haircut and have it taken again.

So much truth here. We had a strict dress code and it was followed or you went home....period. Hair could not touch the top of your ears and had to be combed unless you had a burr or a flattop. Why has all of this been conveniently forgotten. Well, a lot of youngsters on here (by my old guy standards)

 

[Kutnupe14]

Really............you see this as a better solution.................Please, we who care are not ready for any more of Fearful leader. Opinions are free and you can have as many as you want but this one, well, sucks.....in my free opinion. Explains a lot though. Carry on.

Yes, I would vote for Barry O, a 1000 times over before Romney (if given either one moron over the other). I already know (as Ted implied) how a Obama White House is run, and believe the nation can survive him (give only has 4 more years). I do not know what Romney plans to do, other than that he's part of the same machine running us into the ground. I don't relish the fact that he may get 8 years to do so. Even if he's half as bad as Obama ,which we all know ISN'T true, we'll be in the same place when ole Mitt leaves office if he's given 8 years. And if he's worse than Barry, then we have EIGHT more years of grief. Give me 4.

Just out of curiosity, I'd be interested to know if you are speaking honestly about it "explaining a lot," or if simply you wanted to get a jab in. I would appreciate you citing postings either here or elsewhere supporting your notion.

(Kut is big on making people put their money where there mouth is)

 

[churchmouse]

Just out of curiosity, I'd be interested to know if you are speaking honestly about it "explaining a lot," or if simply you wanted to get a jab in. I would appreciate you citing postings either here or elsewhere supporting your notion.

(Kut is big on making people put their money where there mouth is)

No jab....Just puts some things in context at least for me. As I said, we all have opinions and they are free. We are free to post them and others are free to respond. I was not trying to incite or anger. It is just a fact that the currant coward and thief is not doing us any favors. What could he do with 4 more years and no fear of re-election....scary to me and many others. That it does not scare you is what makes me wonder. Just my opinion and nothing more. My opinion and $1.25 will get you a small black coffee at Denny's. We all need to realize our worth.
My opinions are formulated from living and working for a very long time. Growing up in the "Simple times (50's) and seeing the 60's first hand. Trying to raise a family in the 70's and so much more just from life. My posts lean that way, reality as I see it. Again, opinions. I am obviously not as well read as many in these threads on political history and the writings of the founders. It is a constant learning curve for me and not a day goes by that my mind is not considering some part of my beliefs to be off and in need of a tune up. My eyes have been opened up significantly since participating in this open forum. I see things in your posts and others that I can agree with totally and in the same post not so much. Again, my public school educated opinion and nothing more. We all have things to teach and things to learn. It never ends......ever.
No offense intended.

My money is in that cup of coffee..............


Honestly, I do not want either of them in office but what to do????????????

 

[Kutnupe14]

No jab....Just puts some things in context at least for me. As I said, we all have opinions and they are free. We are free to post them and others are free to respond. I was not trying to incite or anger. It is just a fact that the currant coward and thief is not doing us any favors. What could he do with 4 more years and no fear of re-election....scary to me and many others. That it does not scare you is what makes me wonder. Just my opinion and nothing more. My opinion and $1.25 will get you a small black coffee at Denny's. We all need to realize our worth.
My opinions are formulated from living and working for a very long time. Growing up in the "Simple times (50's) and seeing the 60's first hand. Trying to raise a family in the 70's and so much more just from life. My posts lean that way, reality as I see it. Again, opinions. I am obviously not as well read as many in these threads on political history and the writings of the founders. It is a constant learning curve for me and not a day goes by that my mind is not considering some part of my beliefs to be off and in need of a tune up. My eyes have been opened up significantly since participating in this open forum. I see things in your posts and others that I can agree with totally and in the same post not so much. Again, my public school educated opinion and nothing more. We all have things to teach and things to learn. It never ends......ever.
No offense intended.

My money is in that cup of coffee..............


Honestly, I do not want either of them in office but what to do????????????

I'm not upset. No apology is needed. I actually think you are one of the more "stable" member on the forum. However, when I post here, I am very mindful that I illustrate information supporting my stance. If I can't support it, then how much weight can it carry?
Your opinion is worth well more, to me, than a Denny's cup of copy. At the very least it gives insight to the man.

 

[edporch]

Quote:
Originally Posted by edporch
I have no use for Mitt Romney but this is a NON-STORY.

Let's look at the time frame this supposedly happened.

I remember DISTINCTLY that in 1965, long hair on males was NOT something accepted by many.

It was not uncommon for them to get "haircuts" against their will, and it was common in those days to say that a guy with long hair "must be queer".

I remember in 7th and 8th grade in the '68-'69 time frame, there were a couple of guy who were friends (definitely NOT gay) who both had long "hippy" like hair.

There were many guys who talked about grabbing these guys and cutting their hair.

I remember myself even saying jokingly to use Nair so it would take more time to grown back!

To add more historical context to this, it was well into the early 1970's that even the high school yearbook would tell guys their hair was too long in their Senior Picture and they needed to get a haircut and have it taken again.

So much truth here. We had a strict dress code and it was followed or you went home....period. Hair could not touch the top of your ears and had to be combed unless you had a burr or a flattop. Why has all of this been conveniently forgotten. Well, a lot of youngsters on here (by my old guy standards)

The lack of historical context that people who are too young to remember 1965 is where this "story" is aimed.

 

[hornadylnl]

Quote:
Originally Posted by edporch
I have no use for Mitt Romney but this is a NON-STORY.

Let's look at the time frame this supposedly happened.

I remember DISTINCTLY that in 1965, long hair on males was NOT something accepted by many.

It was not uncommon for them to get "haircuts" against their will, and it was common in those days to say that a guy with long hair "must be queer".

I remember in 7th and 8th grade in the '68-'69 time frame, there were a couple of guy who were friends (definitely NOT gay) who both had long "hippy" like hair.

There were many guys who talked about grabbing these guys and cutting their hair.

I remember myself even saying jokingly to use Nair so it would take more time to grown back!

To add more historical context to this, it was well into the early 1970's that even the high school yearbook would tell guys their hair was too long in their Senior Picture and they needed to get a haircut and have it taken again.




The lack of historical context that people who are too young to remember 1965 is where this "story" is aimed.

And what good are traditions and standards if they are wrong? Is it liberty if we determine for others how they must dress and wear their hair?

 

[Smokepole]

And your proof that this event never took place or Romney was never a party to it is where? I'm not saying he was and don't care. It's just as likely that it never happened as it did happen. Just how does your evidence hold up in a court of law?

Truthfully, No better or less than the ability of the story as reported to hold up in a court of law. Let's see, the victim (the only person that can truly attest to the act) is DEAD and unable to corroborate (convenient at the least), only 5 people out of how many attest to the act (how many people out of anyone's past could be found to say some bad things about them, especially if paid nicely), the alleged victims family is staying conspicuously away from this, the alleged victim's family says that he was not gay and out of all the time that Romney has been running for office either Governor or President this is JUST NOW coming out? PUHHHLEEEEASE!!!

NO self respecting Prosecutor would go anywhere near a court with this. Why? Because if cannot be proved or disproved.

There are ceremonies (and other things like this) being conducted in colleges and universities as well as other organizations across this country right now that make this look like the kid got a "Hurts Donut". I am 50 years old and I can tell you with 100% certainty that there were kids all across this country back when that got their hair forcibly cut for any number of reasons, not the least of which was because they had the audacity to grow their hair long. And as someone else said, there is FAR worse going on in the school yard today.

If you want to assign believability to this story based on the fact that he did not vehemently deny it, why do companies (and people) settle out of court even when they have done nothing wrong? You don't waste time (and/or money) trying to prove a negative. Especially when it is ONE story. The stronger and more frequently Romney denies and spends time on this, the less time he spends on issues. And the more and harder he denies it the more the lapdog media will chase it. Get it?? It's a sparkly thing for them as well.

Do I think that the story as told is true? No idea. But looking at the way the man's family is handling it, I would guess no. Do I think this could possibly be manufactured to present another sparkly thing to be chased by those that have little ability to apply critical thinking and are looking for anything hold against the opponent? I don't discount the possibility. Because either could be the case do I WASTE time, energy and brain power on it? Not even close. Except to read parts of this thread for it's potential entertainment in watching those that do.

Be careful chasing sparkly things. The next one just might have a hook in it.