« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Mitt Romney Finds A Problem-Solver

The Man Romney Will Run against Just Unified The GOP Base

By: Repair_Man_Jack (Diary)  |  May 11th, 2012 at 12:00 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

“What I’m hearing from folks around the country is: ‘Game on, we’re in, we will do whatever is necessary to elect Mitt Romney now because Obama has shown where he really stands,’” Brown said.

(HT: Politico.com)

A lot of Social Conservatives looked askance at Mitt Romney’s relatively easy victory in this year’s GOP Primary race. I endorsed Rick Santorumin the GOP Primary myself. Then conceded to reality and decided to suck it up. Thus, I refrain from whinging over various primary season butt-hurts and support my party’s inevitable nominee.

Then yesterday happened – now it’s time to commit even for the Mitt! At least that’s what some recent polling suggests is now happening in the GOP.

What’s funny is that Mitt really didn’t have to do much to earn this burst of enthusiasm. He just had to stand by his record as a moderately Republican Governor of The Commonwealth of Massachusetts. This made him look like an absolute Rock of Gibraltar athwart Barack Obama’s shameless, gutless and toothless pander to the homosexual community concerning same sex marriage. This in advance of a Big Hollywood fundraiser. Way to sell yourself and not in a good way.

So much for President Gutsy Call. Roger Stone blogs on behalf of Libertarian Presidential Candidate and Turncoat Former Republican, Gary Johnson. However, he describes Barack Obama’s gutlessness to a tee.

Once Gay Americans are through celebrating President Barack Obama’s “personal” support of Gay marriage equality, they will learn that Obama’s “evolution” changes nothing…This comes on the heels of an cynical Obama campaign pirouette where Team Obama trotted out first Secretary of State Hillary Clinton then Vice President “Crazy” Joe Biden to say they support gay marriage and imply that the President would too–after the election. Now, incredibly, Obama says Gay marriage is a state issue.

This benefits Mitt Romney who displayed a quiet, yet firm stick-to-itiveness on the issue of same-sex marriage. Mitt Romney fought homosexual marriage all the way to the State Supreme Court as a governor and has decided not to veer from that stance on the issue.

“My view is that marriage is a relationship between a man and a woman,” Romney said. “That’s the position I’ve had for some time, and I don’t intend to make any adjustments at this point. … Or ever, by the way.”

Mitt Romney did nothing more than remain Mitt Romney. Barack Obama herded disaffected social conservatives in Mr. Romney’s direction like the Tail-End Charlie on a cattle drive. Then, Mr. Obama ran away from his own panderation to his base after pocketing the checks and hob-knobbing with George Clooney. Thus, this becomes more than just a debate on same-sex marriage. It becomes a discussion of who these two men are and how each is faring with their respective party base.

Barack Obama is the unprincipled flip-flop artist that everyone accuses Mitt Romney of being. Mitt Romney hasn’t had to move an inch. Barack Obama sold out to his base and quite literally sang for his supper in the Palatial Clooney Mansion, amongst the pampered 1%. The GOP Base may not totally agree with Mitt Romney, but at least they no longer have to ask themselves how he is different than Barack Obama. Barack Obama’s pathetic moral cowardice has offered Mitt Romney’s Presidential Campaign a contribution-in-kind.

Tags: , , , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • califgal

    His arrogance, his blathering, his love of his own voice, his belief that he can talk, lecture, opine his way out of trouble is indicative of his hubris, and I do believe independents and working class registered democrats have seen that for some time, and with each appearance, chin up in air, the animus gets stronger.

    Now, the hit piece in the WAPost on line is another straw against THE ONE. People see it for what it is, a hit piece, by a lib paper and it’s a reminder to the independents and to the working class voters who already are not fond of Barry, that his team is just a bunch of punks aided by the liberal press.

    Do they think that people have forgotten that the press never vetted Obama? That we don’t even know what his undergrad major was, do we? Yet, they did for stuff about Romney that goes back to high school?

    Oh, and now, there’s this:

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/05/11/Washington-Post-Romney-Bullying-Profile-Contradicted-By-Automobile-Magazine

    Think ABC news will cover the contents of this story as they did the hit piece? The WaPo guy (I can’t call him a reporter) conveniently left out this info.

    WaPo is a liberal paper, but until this latest bit couldn’t be accused of being as low as the NYTimes, but now?

    • mikeymike143

      jack, like you i initally supported santorum. but when he dropped out after winning 11 states it was obvious to all(except idiot paulbots) that romney was going to be the nominee. and i believe romney/demint is going win in november over obama/biden and will also be reelected in 2016.

      yeah, i am still shilling for jim demint to be the VP choice. :)

    • robbieb

      So, the WaPo piece is construed as a “hit job”… Musta touched a nerve, though, cuz Romney’s people put him out there awfully fast to downplay the “childish hijinx” (who the f says that word?).

      Read the Brietbart tripe. Big deal. Nothing to see here folks.

      Character is relatively set at a young age. If Mitt really did what his high school friends said, he lacks the character to lead this country. If Mitt can’t say yes or no to holding down a kid (with the help of a gang) and cutting his hair off, then he’s lying.

      • PowerToThePeople

        that describes your response.

        The WaPo piece was a hit job and it would hit a nerve as this is a major election. Anyone who knows anything about politics knows that there is a large portion of the populace that are too stupid to vote but because we can not take away that right, a person who wants to win must address all crap that is thrown at them. If he were not to address it, Mr and Mrs Dummy would change their minds on who they support because ole Romney was a “meanie.”

        As to your character comment, while there is some validity in the statement, to claim that juvenile mistakes and errors reflect on the character of the adult is ludicrous. Kids do dumb things because they are kids lacking in the maturity of an adult. They do things because they bow to peer pressure or because they want to look “cool” but yet would never think to engage in that type of behavior as an adult.

        So please, peddle your BS in a place that fits your obvious leftist leanings, we could care less how you or your kind think.

      • wintermute

        alas, there was none.

        “Character is relatively set at a young age.”

        This is entirely what your argument is based on. This is really dumb. But for the sake of argument lets say its not. That would mean that the current commander in chief is a pot smoking, coke snorting, booze slamming junk head with constant attendance issues (according to his own admission). Lol I had no idea that all that golf he was playing was actually frisbee golf!

        Using your own logic, I look forward to seeing your steadfast support of The Barber of Cranbrook over the drughead.

        For the record, that was a pathetic hit piece.

        • blakemoney

          is funny. Sort of minimizes things, too. My only worries now is that this “bully” image is going to linger out there in the minds of independents. Mitt could had done much worse to this kid beside cut his hair, but there are moderates out there that may see this is some kind of character-defining issue–sort of like Roscoe. If he had a real problem solver in his group, he probably would have confessed, in a very regretful manner, and used it as an opportunity to talk about all his positive contributions in his past. Instead, I think he let his operatives say, “Look, this looks bad, Mitt. And there were a lot of witnesses. Just say you don’t remember this particular incident, but you’ve done some things you’re not proud of, and apologize in a general way, and then move on.”

          Either all those people are lying, or Mitt really has forgotten the haircutting incident, which doesn’t sound great, either. So Mitt is just letting this “bully” image of himself fester. Someone needs to get ahold of him and tell him that his first instincts “Roscoe loved it on the roof!” are not always best.

          • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

            The reality of his early life is nothing like that anecdote.
            That’s what makes it a hit-job.
            The whole POINT of WashPost lib-media hit pieces like this is to create these impressions – they did it to George Allen, then to candidate/now-Gov McDonnell. This same journalist did a number on Michele Bachmann last July, also dwelling on gay related issues.

      • grapenephi

        Like other libtards, you fire off at the mouth before asking questions. The man’s OWN FAMILY denies that it ever happened. Romney denies that it happened. Those who supposedly endorsed the telling of the story have now backtracked. Those who knew Mitt the best back then readily admit that he was a clown, but vehemently deny he was ever cruel. By the way, in case you haven’t noticed–this election is not about haircuts, cookies, or dogs on roofs. It’s about the economy, stupid.

      • APA Guy

        Otherwise, you’d know about that new evolutionary process we grown-ups call MATURITY.

        [See what I did there? I threw in evolution...just for you :) ]

      • rickey5825

        can’t say no to drugs and booze and bullying then what does that say about him?He tries to bully congress,the Supreme Court,contributors to Mitt Romney’s campaign, uses the EPA and Justice Department to bully states,the oil and coal industries and you talk about Romney?Maybe you’d like to get a clue or buy a vowel or maybe phone a friend!
        If character is set at a young age as you say,then our dog eating,druggie,bullying,narcissist-in-chief,with zero leadership experience and even less common sense is woefully unprepared to lead this country!He has done an excellent job of proving that for the last 3 1/2 years!

      • Racist

        “If Mitt really did what his high school friends said…”. The problem for Obama and his co-conspirators in the Lying Stream Media, is that it only took about 2 seconds to verify that Romney Didn’t do whatthey accused him of doing! The supposed friend, it turns out wasn’t there, and had no knowledge of it until he was “reminded” by the media. Plus the sister of the alleged “victim” said she never heard anything about it either! Apparently, this was another one of the Obama/Media Complex’s “composite” events. Just like thecomposite fight with the composite white girlfriend. The composite series of events in 1965 Selma that led to Obama’s birth in 1961! The composite domestic servant of a British Official-Grandpa Obama, who apparently made enough money being an indentured servant in Kenya, that he was able to pay off the family of Obama Sr’s first wife with a post-wedding dowry of 14 cows!!!
        Everything about Barack Hussein Obama is a complete fabrication! The man is a compulsive serial liar, and his cohorts in the media are serial liars who continually cover up his lies and fabricate their own in order to sell the manufactured man Obama to the lazy, gullible, and captive imaginations of the American People!

  • pff23ro

    So let me start off by saying I am gay right off the bat. So it is assumed that i am supposed to be all excited and euphoric. I’m sorry but I seriously don’t get this whole situation. It is blatantly obvious that Obama supported gay marriage. It is obvious that every democrat does. Even when he said he didn’t (or was evolving or whatever he decided to call it). So he came out for it. The most left wing president in American history supports gay marriage. Big shock.

    What is stunning and just plain annoying is the fawning, sickiningly sweet praise that all the celebrities and gay rights activists are showering on him. All it shows is two things.

    1. Celebrities care about how they look and may not necessarily believe in gay marriage themselves. If they did, they should be pissed about him not coming out in support before the NC. The reason he did it was for political expediency.

    2. I think if the gay community had any integrity, we should never put up with this “I’m evolving” bs. Instead we get politicos and celberties falling all over themselves to praise this hack.

    I’m for civil unions as a rule. I don’t feel that I am oppressed because if I wanted to get married, I can marry a woman at anytime. Why should we as members of the gay community try to be like heterosexual couples? We have our own culture, with it’s own social and sexual mores. Why not have our own unique institution exclusive to our community? That is the question I would love to ask.

    However believing that would just make me a self hating gay man. So to be accepted, I have to believe in marriage and nothing else. Oh and apparently I need to have fundimental communist transformation of the United States to get this as well.

    Needless to say…no thank you.

    • Repair_Man_Jack

      This is the best and most interesting post I’ve gotten from the “other side” of the gay/straight divide. I tend to think you have a better idea than a lot of homosexual activists. If copying a marriage appears artificial in your view, why not find some other way to solomnize a committed relationship? Think of a good way, and you become a trend-setter of some sort. It sounds like a very positive solution to what is seemingly an ugly and intractable dilemna.

      • WA_Cowboy

        pff23′s comments are the best and most interesting that I’ve read on the matter.

    • falgore

      You should have to suffer like the rest of us.

      • Next93

        I have a friend who came out, left his wife of nine years, and moved in with his partner all in one week. His mother will go to her grave convinced all the fault of said partner.

        Call it marriage, call it civil union, I’m willing to bet that my mother-in-law problems pale in comparison to what both of those guys have to deal with.

        • renl57

          Gays will have as much fun with community property settlements and divorce proceedings as we straights have had.

    • lineholder

      Thank you for sharing your viewpoint on this.

    • http://lukos.com Ed54

      Another one that you hint at is the notion that not only must you support gay marriage, but it must be your number one most important issue or you hate yourself. Why is it not possible for a gay person to believe in gay marriage, but feel that economic freedom, limited government, and strong national defense are more important issues to vote on? That is my view, but since I’m a married straight guy nobody accuses me of hating gays. In fact, I would be lauded by the opposition for my views, but for you it is somehow logically inconsistent.

    • grapenephi

      Let me start off by saying I’m not gay. I have very sincere beliefs about what homosexuality is. However, I have had many gay friends who feel exactly the way pff23ro feels about this issue. It’s too bad that your own “kind,” if you will, would lash out at people like yourself if more of them would make their opinion on this matter known in the public spotlight.

      • teenytom

        It’s fine if you think gays should have a separate but equal kind of partnerships allowed, but the fact that you guys don’t truly understand what is happening is stunning, and explains a lot about where the Republican party is now.

        You can say Obama’s “evolving” belief is bs (and it could be), but look at the the polling in this country on gay marriage. In the last 8 years an enormous amount of people have changed their viewpoints on it as well, so claiming Obama is a flip-flopper on this issue is not going to resonate, because the majority of people probably don’t also consider themselves flip floppers.

        The percentage of people supporting gay marriage will never go down – eventually plateauing is the best that will happen.

        And everyone knows Obama saying he supports doesn’t mean any laws will be passed ? it’s just a momentous occasion to have a president say he supports for the first time in history.

        You don’t have to agree with him on the subject, but failing to get why that moves people says a tremendous amount.

        • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

          It’s very enlightening that, while polling percentages continue to show either outright majorities in favor of “gay marriage”, every time the issue is on the ballot, the “one-man, one-woman” position comes out victorious and typically bay a large margin.

          It’s true “somebody” doesn’t get it. Based on real poll results I doubt the “somebody” is your “You guys”. In fact, in this particular instance polling has proven to be consistently wrong.

          And, FWIW, a black gentleman with whom I work made a comment to another employee a couple of days ago when the subject of Obama’s “conversion” came up. Keep in mind he was a serious supporter of the President in ’08. When asked what he thought about Obama’s comments on gay marriage, the gentleman said, “I hate that son-of-a-[female dog reference]. I’ll never vote for his worthless, immoral ass again.”

          I don’t think his position will be widely followed in the black community, but if Obama loses 5 to 10% of the black vote because they stay home, let alone vote for Romney, it’s a disaster for him.

          • lineholder

            A member of my family said that a black pastor was on one of the shows on Fox this afternoon. More or less, what it comes down to is that he said Obama has put pastors in the black community in a tough spot by his “evolution”.

            I’m trying to find confirmation on this, but haven’t found anything so far. And what it might translate into come November is hard to say.

            It almost seems that the media is rather desperately pushing the meme that this won’t impact voting patterns within the black community at all. And I think Obama is relying on blind loyalty from the black community at this point. But what I know for a fact (at least here in my area of NC) is that efforts to restore the nuclear family in the black community are being made. Very real point of conflict there. We’ll have to see how it goes, I guess.

            Also, I’ve been looking at some of that polling data that everybody keeps referencing, and reading comments at other sites, and…apparently I’m not the only person who is questioning the validity of that data now as compared to what is actually occurring when votes are tallied.

          • lineholder

            one interview, radio show, can’t find it on you tube, but it’s worth listening to and reading the article

            But at the end of the article, here’s the comment by the pastor that was stated:

            Later in the interview Pastor Bryant gave a shocking prediction and warned President Obama he must get in “some black churches real soon clapping his hands [and] singing Amazing Grace.”

            “Black people are not going to switch over to the Republican party or put Romney signs on their front lawn. The critical concern is whether they will vote with apathy and not show up at the polls,” Bryant said.

            “The reality is, President Obama better be in some black churches real soon clapping his hands, singing Amazing Grace and waving that right hand because the black vote is going to be very critical and apathy may win this election if we don’t get on the ground,” Pastor Bryant warned.

          • lineholder

            http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/05/10/black_pastor_obama_better_get_to_black_churches_soon_to_prevent_voter_apathy.html

          • trutexan

            I’ve shared a cube with a black co-worker for years and I asked him yesterday if this topic has come up in the black community. He said they talk of little else. And the consensus was, “It’s better to not vote for a black man who supports gay marriage, than to vote for a black man.”

            When he said that, I felt a tingle go up my leg.

          • teenytom

            does anybody here honestly believe that, moving forward, less people will support gay marriage?

          • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

            This is one of those “hot button” issues where people are obviously telling pollsters one thing and when it comes time to vote, they’re doing the opposite.

          • teenytom

            you’re talking about the Bradley Effect, where people tell pollsters what they think the politically correct answer is, but secretly voting differently.

            you heard a lot of right wingers talking hopefully about this during the last election when Obama was polling so well, but it didn’t turn out to be happening.

            Anyway, that wasn’t my point. I wasn’t arguing that the polling on this issue has been done well, I asked if anyone honestly thought that, moving forward, less people would favorite gay marriage?

            Even if the polling is over-estimating the support by, let’s say 30 points, does anyone really think it’s going to go down?

            No, of course not. This is just another issue the Repubs are allowing themselves to get caught flat-footed on.

          • aesthete

            is, quite simply, because old people vote. Old folks are more likely to support traditional marriage than the general population, at least for now.

          • lineholder

            Just because the polls might be showing support among a generation of young Americans doesn’t mean that those same Americans will have the same viewpoint 10 or 20 years from now that they have at present time.

            And given the re-population trends…what aesthete said above is likely to hold true for many years to come…that is, “old people vote”.

            One of the strongest historical trends around is that people become conservative in their outlook with age, teenytom

          • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

            20 somethings and less, you’re going to get about the farthest left position available. As they get older, and actually gain experience and wisdom, those lefties typically get significantly more conservative.

            I voted for George McGovern. As I look back, that was period of dark ignorance in my life that I, fortunately, outgrew. I’m watching my sons, both in their late 20s, turn from caterpillars to butterflys just as I did. In 08 both voted for Obama – they live in California so their vote essentially didn’t count – and this year at least one will be voting for Romney. The turnaround for him was his first six months at UC Santa Cruz when he discovered the absolute intolerance, indifference and ignorance of the vast majority of his tenured professors.

            So, bottom line, I have no problem conceiving that the approval of homosexual (there’s nothing “gay” about it) marriage will not rise in the future. I’m sure if you live in Manhattan or Hollow-wood that won’t register, and I’ll be the first to admit it’s based on anecdotal evidence and a very small sample size, but I don’t find it to be an unreasonable conclusion.

          • teenytom

            I actually was asking the question rhetorically, not thinking it possible that anyone would ever think that less people would support gay marriage in the future. But, as you point out, it’s not uncommon people get more conservative as they get older, so I can actually now understand why someone could think that.

            I do happen to live in Hollywood and I admit that it is not the best place to get an accurate temperature of the rest of the county sometimes (I am, however, originally from Texas, so I am not completely clueless).

            That being said, however, I don’t think this is one of the issues that people may get more conservative about over time (like their taxes, or entightlements, etc).

            To me, this is an issue like getting women the right to vote, interracial marriage, etc. Not the types of issues that ever go backwards.

            And it’s only a matter of time before someone you care about comes out as gay, and you realize that they’re not big scary agents of destruction. Just normal people who want the same things as you, just not sexually.

          • APA Guy

            People may say the right things…even poll the right way, when it suits their conscience. But clearly when it comes to impacting their lives directly, they vote a completely different way. This is why you could poll CA a thousand times and get a majority favoring gay marriage…yet when it comes down to a vote that cements it into the state’s constitution, it goes down in flames during what was the strongest Democrat election cycle in recent memory.

            Look at this also within the context of the taxes issue. Ask a group of voters whether they want better schools, and polls will tell you that a strong majority approves. Ask them whether they approve of raising taxes and other fees to improve local education…then watch that support dissipate quickly.

            I am a believer that most of this country values its traditional roots…a firm believer at that. This is why the issue of gay marriage is a winner for us politically. But at the end of the day, it won’t decide the election…the economy will. Romney needs only reiterate his position that marriage is and always should be between a man and a woman and leave it at that…then hammer Obama on the economy relentlessly.

          • teenytom

            I wasn’t really trying to use polling as the gist of my arguments. I think polls on something like this especially can very wildly just by subtle differences in how you ask the question.

            But, it seems obvious (to me, at least), that more people are in favor of gay marriage now then they were 10 years. When gay marriage will start winning at the polls? Who knows. I say pretty soon, I’m guessing you would say that it will plateau before it reaches a majority. Only time will tell.

            I don’t think it’s like the tax thing because with taxes you’re actually asking the citizen to take money out of his own pocket. With the marriage thing, you’re only asking a citizen not to stop two people from getting married.

            But who knows, you could be right.

            I just, for the life of me, don’t see how anyone could really support the government from having a say in who people can marry. That seems so crazy to me. Because you belief system tells you one thing, you have no problem telling other people that they should follow your belief system?

            Anyway, thanks for your thoughtful response.

          • APA Guy

            Right now, the government tells me that, in spite of my belief system, my tax money MUST support public schools, public broadcasting, even ABORTIONS, yet some are offended when what has been the male-female bedrock to societal stability is defended in its historical and current form? Look closely enough and you’ll see these examples of government value-supporting all across the board.

            One thing more:

            Don’t make the mistake of believing the MSM’s garbage about this just being about fundamentalist Christians wanting to step on gays…or that only closed-minded creeps want to “oppress” gays by not allowing them to marry. I have personally spoken with countless numbers of homosexuals who don’t want gay marriage, just the legal protections that accompany a legally-recognized union.

            This isn’t about the government telling people who to marry. That has already happened with the Defense of Marriage Act signed into law by President Clinton in 1996. It’s about refusing to redefine what has been the foundation of a good and moral nation under God, to say nothing of what it has represented to mankind for thousands of years.

          • teenytom

            …you don’t have a problem with the government telling people who to marry, as long as it coincides with your belief system. Interesting.

            Also, using the history of marriage as a point for your belief system is a argument. Marriage has change drastically in thousands of years (like how recently inter-racial marriage was illegal), and it will continue to change wether you like it or not.

            It’s a silly debate, who cares who marries who in their provate life, don’t we have better things to concentrate our energy on?

          • APA Guy

            Few things are more essential to our survival as a country (and as humans) than the sanctity of marriage and the fruits it bears societies. It is the covenant that men and women make before God that sustains our lives and gives us purpose.

            Nothing silly about this debate at all…and we disagree on whether we will change how we view marriage. The people of many states obviously disagree with you on this.

          • teenytom

            …how allowing gay people to get married undoes the good that comes of straight marriage?

            Can you please explain how it affects your marriage?

          • APA Guy

            You really need to learn to read what others actually say instead of what you wish they meant.

            U.S society can be equally strengthened by allowing civil unions for gays and marriage for heterosexuals…of that I am thoroughly convinced, and the scores of gay Americans who I know and personally interact with agree with me 100%. Do you feel you know and understand their interests better than they do?

          • teenytom

            …imply that gay marriage was a threat to marriage?

            Your title of your post was “If you don’t defend the institution of marriage, what IS worth defending?”

            I assume since we were talking about gay marriage, you were saying we needed to “defend” straight marriage from it. Which means straight marriage is under attack from gar marriage. This is calling gay marriage a threat.

            So I asked how it threatens YOUR marriage. You say your marriage is not under attack. OK, then that at least mean other people’s straight marriages are under attack.

            So I’ll ask you the same question this way: can you please explain to me how anybody’s gay marriage affects a straight marriage?

            You also asked me if I feel I know and and understand gay interests better than they do. No, I do not. I feel I understand them better than you do.

            The funny thing I see on this site, is people often stating what friends or coworkers say about their respective cultures, and you guys treat that like it represents the whole group.

            This is what smart people call “anecdotal evidence”, and it doesn’t mean anything.

            Maybe the scores of gay Americans you’re always talking to don’t feel like getting into an argument with you about gay marriage, so they just agree with you to get you to shut up about it. Or maybe they’re against it, I don’t know.

            I do know, however, that the vast majority of gay people are for it and so are millions of other Americans (maybe even a majority, if you believe the polls).

            And how about this – since marriage has been so spoiled already, why not just let gays get married, and heterosexual couple get civil unions? If it’s just as good anyway, why not, right?

          • APA Guy

            No need to reinvent the wheel here…with a single exception, every gay man and woman I know desires civil unions with the same legal protections as married folks.

            Do you presume to speak for their preferences and interests better than they do?

            You ARE correct about one thing: You DON’T know…about a great many things.

            You are spouting leftist propaganda about gay marriage in conflict with a large majority of states in this republic…including CA and NC…both on different sides of the country…different political bents…both saying NO to gay marriage.

          • APA Guy

            I call a large number of them my friends…and I live in a decidedly conservative part of a conservative state. If you knew these people personally (which you don’t), you’d know that they would never tell ANYONE what they think they want to hear.

            Whether you like it or not – and I don’t care if you don’t – a significant percentage of gay Americans don’t harbor a narcissistic need to infringe upon what is a pillar of our great and decent society. They simply want the tax and legal benefits that married folks currently receive…and I am all too happy to give them those benefits.

            But they would receive them via CIVIL UNIONS…because marriage is and always will be between a MAN AND A WOMAN.

            Hope you enjoyed this conversation…I know I did :)

          • teenytom

            …how gay marriage hurts straight marriage. Just saying that it’s always been between a man and a woman is not a compelling argument in my opinion.
            Using that same logic, you could have argued during suffrage that women shouldn’t have the right to vote because “they’ve never had the right the vote.”
            Or you could interracial marriages in the United States should stay illegal because “they’ve never been legal.”
            No matter how many times I ask on this site, no one can tell me how gay marriage hurts anyone or anything.

            And this absurd point that you and some other people on here keep making about the gays you’re talking to and what they’re saying to you. THis anecdotal evidence is just maddening.

            I live next to West Hollywood and am from Texas – I’ve met literally hundreds of gay people and not a single one of them I’ve spoken to about this is not 100% for having the legal right to marry. But you know what that means? Nothing, because that is such a small fraction of how many gay people are out there.

            You can’t just use the limited amount of people you’ve come in contact with to understand a much broader issue.

            Oh well, I think this conversation has run its course. You’re right about one thing – there is certainly a lot I do not know.

            But I believe you’re wrong about what you said about marriage always being between a man and woman.

          • teenytom

            …I did enjoy this conversation. Thank you!

          • trutexan

            for years and I asked him yesterday if the black community is talking about this. He said they are talking about little else. His consensus was that it’s better to stay home on Nov 6 and not vote for a black man who supports gay marriage, than to get out and vote for a black man. The love is gone.

            (When I heard this, I felt a tingle go up my leg).

          • teenytom

            so you’re basing your understanding of the entire black race off of one co-worker? how do you know he hasn’t been messing with you this entire time?

          • Bill S

            How do you know trutexan isn’t messing with you?

          • teenytom

            …based on what he wrote. He comes off like he was basing the entire black community’s opinion based on his one co-worker. That was not an unreasonable conclusion to draw form his comment.

            And if he was messing with me by actually making some deeply satirical point about how liberals could actually believe that a white guy would be so ridiculous as to infer the political leanings of entire culture just because of the thoughts of one coworker he shares a cube with, then yes, he got me, and I would feel stupid.

          • trutexan

            I never said that from what he said, I assumed the entire black culture felt this way. Where did you get that from and why did you leap to that conculsion? See that’s the trouble with libs. You guys are so all or nothing. And I’m not a he, I’m a she.

            I’ve known this guy and his family for eight years. I spend more waking hours with him than I do my own husband. So I think I would know if he was “messing with me”. He’s a devout Christian and has absolutely no reason to lie.

            Nope. I asked him about it. He replied. And I posted the conversation on RS. That’s it. Sorry if that doesn’t fit your argument.

          • teenytom

            …that he said the consensus was the black community would rather stay home than vote for a black man who supported gay marriage.

            here is your exact quote:

            “I asked him yesterday if the black community is talking about this. He said they are talking about little else. His consensus was that it?s better to stay home on…etc etc…the love is gone.”

            Your use of the words “black community” and “consensus” lead me to believe that you trusted his opinion that there was a consensus about the black community no longer backing Obama, and that it why it sent a Matthews-style tingle up your leg.

            I don’t think it was unreasonable for me to come to that conclusion.

            You did bust me on thinking you were a guy, however.

            Also, I didn’t really think he was messing with you, I just thought it’d be funny to say that. I know there are black conservatives out there, and non-conservatives who really are against homosexuality.

            But it has nothing to do with “fitting my argument.” There’s plenty of ways Mitt can win this election, but getting the black vote is not one of them.

          • trutexan

            A “community” is not a “race”. You said “of the entire black race”. A community by definition is communal group. His community consists of his co-workers, his fellow Christians, and his friends/family. He’s one who attends church throughout the week, not just on Sundays, and it was that individual “community” of which I referenced, even though I didn’t say so. I certainly, under no certain terms, did I infer “race”. To do so would be assenine. That’s the leap I think you took. I told him about your comment and he got a crazy “where did he get THAT from?” look.

            Also, I think I’m doing a pretty good job of explaining the TEA party to him. He despises the establishment on both sides and says that so many distrust the entire process and everyone in it. I’m telling him that the TEA Party is despised by the GOP establishment for that very reason because they are the alternative. The only reason the TEA party votes Republican, is because they vehemently oppose bigger government, which provides the entitlements the Democrats always want. You simply cannot be a better person if you cannot fail and learn from your mistakes, nor can you be a better person if the government is the family breadwinner. So the TEA party votes Republican because they are Constitutional Conservatives who want smaller government and unlike the Dems, we’re not afraid to oust our own incumbents in the process. And now that Socialists and Progressives are taking over the Dem Party, millions of people are looking for an alternative.

            As far as the Matthews “tingle”, his comment led me to believe that if he can find an alternative, he’d vote for someone other than Obama. The Emperor’s clothes are off and everyone can see every flaw with the stats of the economy. Even if every single black person in America voted for BO in 2008, he still wouldn’t have won. A lot of non-blacks voted for him too. But this time around, I suspect most of the voters who aren’t pulling the lever because of color/party loyalty will vote with their feet and stay home.

            I mean really…Are you better off now than you were $5 trillion dollars ago?

          • teenytom

            …you didn’t think he was speaking for the entire race, just his community. I can understand that. I don’t think I was crazy to misunderstand it the way I did, but I see what you were saying now.

            A lot of people in the black community are disappointed in Obama’s gay marriage position, but personally I don’t see that really affecting their vote in November, but we’ll see.

            Oh well, I hope that Obama is re-elected because I think he’s done a pretty good job with the situation he’s been handed. And if he does get another four years, maybe by the end of the second term you all will finally realize that he’s not actually trying to destroy the country, or turn us into communists, or blow us up, but is actually a pretty good man with some brains.

            Nice talking to you, I always love getting intelligent opposing viewpoints.

          • romeg

            those who say they support this or that cause or condition and those who are actually willing to DO SOMETHING to support said cause or condition.

            Asked by a pollster or a friend whether or not you believe in or support something often results in the answer that the questioner wanted to hear or that the one being questioned THOUGHT the questioner wanted to hear.

            Voting, that is getting off one’s duff, going to the polls and pulling the lever requires some level of commitment and the belief that in so doing, the voter can make a difference.

          • http://lukos.com Ed54

            Intensity of support is just as important as breadth of support, and often more important. Even if the polls are correct that a majority of people support gay marriage, that only matters if they care enough to make voting decisions based on it. The great majority of such people are already strongly aligned (gays with the Dems, evangelicals with the GOP).

            Many other people are probably like myself. I happen to support gay marriage, but it’s probably about #426 on the list of issues I care about, and I cannot conceive of a circumstance where it would change my vote.

            I think this was about Obama shoring up his liberal base, which is showing some weakness. But in doing so, he pays a potential price with other parts of his base, as you have identified.

            He also hands Romney a huge gift by helping him consolidate the conservative base. A month ago we were debating whether Romney would ever be able to win support from evangelicals. Obama just handed him a solution on a sliver platter.

          • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

            Remember, Prop 8 passed in California in 2008 when Obama won a landslide on the same ballots. I don’t have a link or exact numbers, but I do recall that blacks voted like 99% for Obama and split roughly 60/40ish in favor of Prop 8.

            I saw a Rasmussen poll today that said 13% of voters were more likely to vote for Obama because of his stand on homosexual marriage and 26% were less likely.

        • pff23ro

          I have to respectfully disagree with your analysis. I’m not criticizing Obama for supporting gay marriage. Nor do I disagree that the polling has changed rather vastly on the subject over the past few years. Although there is some MAJOR discrepancy that has not been explained. With the polling data supporting it, how do you square the referendum results from 32 states, And not just conservative ones. I mean California passed prop 8 in 2008. 2008!! The republicans took a massive beating. The media said that the republican party and conservatism was dead. And yet this still got passed. That should tell you something.

          But I digress..

          The point I was trying to make is that I don’t understand the response that it has generated. What is the big freaking deal? I mean he ended DADT & he isn’t enforcing DOMA. Having him support gay marriage IS NO GIGANTIC EARTH SHATTERING SHOCK!! My question is why the hell didn’t he come out for this sooner? The simple answer is he was either too cowardly to do it, or did it for political expediency. Most likely a combination of both. As you said, because he supports it, doesn’t mean any laws will be passed. My question to you would be is: Why the heck not?!? If he believes this, why wouldn’t he try to pass a law requiring it? Or at least propose one?

          I am criticizing the media, pop culture, and overzealous response that his completion of evolution has brought us. The response that this has generated has been just obnoxious to watch. It is like the media and pop culture experienced this simultaneous orgasm over this revelation that everybody on the planet knew before hand. There is no question that he will have the media, gay community, and pop-culture’s support in the next election. I just see it as some giant naval gazing exercise., where everybody is congratulating him for stating something he has believed since 1996. And let’s be blunt, this will not stop the African-American community from supporting the first black president in American history. There will be no defection what so ever because of his support. Anybody who believes that is either in complete denial, or is an idiot.

          The fact that you used the term “separate but equal” in explaining my position shows that you do not respect my opinion. The term makes a moral implication that is incorrect. This isn’t like having separate drinking fountains, and this isn’t like jim crow. Being in a same sex relationship is a completely different bond than being in a hetero one. As I stated earlier, there are different cultural and sexual mores that must be taken into account. Having the legal rights of marriage is important. I would be willing to stake my annual salary that everybody on this site probably agrees with that. It is merely in the execution of those rights that is in dispute.

          What I propose is not separate but equal. It is for a unique institution that is exclusive to the LGBT community. This is something should be ours and ours alone. I fully understand that this is not a popular position in the gay community. I will also point out that it is quite off the reservation of gay cultural political thought. So there is not a chance for an idea like this to even get discussed. The best thing I can equate it to would be being a black conservative. There is no respect given, and you are ostracized from the community speaking your ideas openly.

          • teenytom

            Thanks for your thoughts ? you kind of jumped around a bit there, but I’ll try to tackle each point.

            What I was saying is that the right’s inability to understand why this a big deal to people betrays are certain misunderstanding of where a big part of the nation is. It’s not just the gay community or the media or hollywood who is pretending this is a big deal – real, average Americans find it so. The first president top openly come out and support gay marriage means something to people. A big part, for the lefties, it meant that Obama finally stopping screwing around and just came out with it. He looks like he finally as the balls to support a controversial left cause.

            You also mention the marriage amendments disprove my theory that more people are supporting gay marriage. I didn’t argue that the majority of Americans now favor gay marriage, I’m only arguing it’s only heading in that direction. For social issues like this, it never reverses. If you’re arguing that support for gay marriage is diminishing, then there is probably no reason to continue this conversation.

            Regarding my use of “separate but equal”, I apologize if you found it condescending, but seriously, this is how you describe your position:

            “It is for a unique institution that is exclusive to the LGBT community.”

            A “unique” institution that is “exclusive”? I think you could swap in those terms quite easily and not change its meaning. And my point was that that is how a lot of people, not just gays, view your idea. And rightfully so. Marriage is not solely a Christian institution, why do they get to decide who gets to participate?

            I do, however, sympathize with your position that if you don’t take the main stream opinion in your community then any original idea will be ostracized.

            I just look forward to the day when government has nothing to do with marriage and people’s sexual preferences are none of my business.

          • pff23ro

            First off, thank you for putting up with my ADHD influenced postings. It’s a problem :-)

            I have to dispute your assertion that the right doesn’t understand why it is a big deal. I believe the right simply doesn’t care about it because it was common knowledge. There has never been any question that Obama supported gay marriage. The fact he came out and said it, does not impress the right. Nor do I believe that it impresses a lot of people in general. All the euphoria over this has been found in the media and hollywood. Also more generally on the left. For the majority of Americans, its a pretty ho-hum moment. Nothing new learned here.

            This happens on the republican side of the aisle as well. George W. Bush said that he believed in global warning in the 2000 election. I think everybody knew it was BS. And once the election was over, he dropped his support for it. Just like Obama and his denial and eventual evolution. Ultimately I don’t believe that this announcement is not as immense as you may think. And the polling seems to show it so far.

            Also once again I do have to disagree with the interchangeability of the words. The sexual mores of a gay relationship can be very different from a hetero one. (Note, i will try to be as vague and clean as possible in the following explanation, hopefully it won’t be too confusing). For example, I know a couple that has been together goin on almost 10 years. Recently they decided that they may no longer want to be in a totally monogamous relationship, provided they shared in the openness of the relationship together. While this is sometimes found in hetero marriages, it is a bit more common in the gay community.

            It is possible that the reason this is more common in the gay community is that two men in a relationship may be able to handle this better than a male and female. The relationship is fundamentally different because of the biology involved. A way for you to understand this may be ro look at a teenage daughter scenario. Most fathers of a daughter are very leary of teenage boys, aRound their daughters. And probably for good reason. Men and women act a certain way in terms of sexual attraction and courtship. This process between two men is fundamentally different.

            Being that this is a different dynamic that exists from hetero relationships, why shouldn’t this be part of a different institution? Think about divorce in this situation. In this relationship divorce may not be warranted in this circumstance, and its openess may be a term of the relationship that should be protected. As it is something that is more common and biologically more acceptable for male sexuality vs female.

            The issue that I believe the right and most conservatives have with the concept of gay marriage is that the sexual mores of certain types of gay relationships would become mainstreamed in heterosexual marriage. It is a fear because I don’t believe that a hetero marriage can accommodate these mores. The institution has taken such a beating for years, there is some ligitimate fear that it can damage the institution beyond repair.

            As I said prior, I think nobody would object to the concept of legal rights that marriage confers on male/female relationships. The majority of the gay community is looking for nothing more than that. I believe that when you ask people what they mean by gay marriage, this is what they think of. It is spoken of in terms of respect and tolerance for what is a very different, but loving kind of relationship that people may see as similar to their own. Democrats also use the rights issue as their main talking point. Because it works. The problem is the Democrat party thinks nothing of the consequences of their actions when it comes down to social issues. Start with the war on poverty and see the results. Not to mention they see anything of tradition in terms of class struggle and victimhood. As such, tradition is worthy of ridicule, degradation, and ultimately distruction. In their eyes, there is no moral good to be found in it. Because tradition oppresses. That is what the right is against.

          • teenytom

            My take on what you’re saying is that men are aggressively sexual. When you put two of them together, it lends itself to some loser morales than when you pair one with a woman?

            Gay men though are only half of the equation. We’re also saying women can marry each other. Lesbian relationships don’t have the debaucheries connotation that the make homosexual do. Not only outside their relationships, but inside them as well. There’s even a name – Lesbian Death Syndrome – which describes the common phenomena of a lesbians in a serious relationships no longer having very much sex.

            So are you saying that lesbians should be punished for the reputation gay males have?

            Anywho, what you said about gays getting all the same rights as married couples is not true – check out what North Carolina passed. It took away a bunch of rights from civil unions.

            Anyway, this whole thing is so silly. If marriage was this perfect institution that was working so well, I could see how allowing gays may scare you into thinking it would disrupt the whole thing. But it’s not, people get married, divorced, remarried all the time. Infidelity in straight relationships is rampant. Let the gays in, who cares, move on.

            I also have a bit of add so forgive my ramblings as well.

          • http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

            Why didnt Obama ‘come out’ sooner?

            “The simple answer is he was either too cowardly to do it, or did it for political expediency. ”

            -5- A winner comment!

            Which begs a HUGE question, that goes far beyond this one issue: What ELSE will Obama ‘evolve’ and flip-flop on once he has the ‘flexibility’ to be his own man and not worry about pesky voters?

            Obama’s flip-flop is clearly a sign not that he changed his mind but that he CONCEALS HIS POSITIONS WHEN CONVENIENT.

            hence the hot mike whispers into a Russian PM’s ear. Hence the pushing out to 2013 on some key agenda items, and promises to latino groups for amnesty, promises for more EPA enforcement, and other panders designed for maximum gain now and pain later.

            The media has gullibly bought up Obama’s phony ‘evolution’ as they are just PR flaks for Team Obama. What we on the conservative side need to point out is Obama’s flip-flop phoniness and his willingness to treat voters disrespectfully.

        • radicalrighty

          The only polling that counts with me is 32-0. 32 states voted down same-sex marriage – even California.

          • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

            I don’t think this is a case of bad sampling, it’s a case of respondents saying one thing and doing another. Or maybe it is a sample problem, 100% Democrats. :-)

          • lineholder

            right before the vote here in NC, the breakdown was 49% D, 34% R, and 17% I.

            And the totals were 55% FOR Amendment 1. Higher D sample population, but still high support for keeping the traditional definition of marriage.

            http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/2011/PPP_Release_NC_506.pdf

        • http://lukos.com Ed54

          Here is the one that matters:

          http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/226981-poll-majority-say-obamas-gay-marriage-stance-wont-change-their-vote

          “According to a Gallup poll released on Friday, 60 percent of adults nationally said Obama?s new position makes no difference, while 26 percent said it would make them less likely to vote for the president and 13 percent said it would make them more likely to.”

    • Bill S

      Thanks for that comment. It’s nice to see that there is some degree of sanity out there in your community.

    • avgjo

      While I disagree with homosexuality, this is by far the best comment I have seen about ‘gay’ rights. The leaders of that movement could learn a lot, a LOT from you.

      • pff23ro

        Mind if I ask how you disagree? Always interested in hearing the otherside…

        • avgjo

          I am a Christian. the way i was brought up, very traditionally, it’s a sin. Don’t misunderstand me, no more than adultery or fornication. Please don’t misunderstand, I am not condemning your or judging your soul, both of which are obviously not my place.

          The only reason I even mentioned it was in the interest of full disclosure and to underscore how much your comment impressed me.

      • renny

        Chris Christie got 33% of the gay vote in NJ on economics, As one of the community put it, “I vote my pocketbook, too.” I would think anyone voting the “kitchen table” vote in 2012 will have to vote Rep.

    • Jack_Savage

      Especially this:

      “We have our own culture, with it?s own social and sexual mores.”

      Hammer, meet nail.

      Don’t let the Gay Mafia find out where you live, though. You saw what they tried to do to Kramer for not wearing the ribbon.

    • Justin_Case

      ” We have our own culture, with it?s own social and sexual mores. Why not have our own unique institution exclusive to our community?”

      Thanks for your wisdom.

    • demsaresatanic

      homosexual marriage may be a bridge too far for homosexuals. The remarkable tolerance of homosexuality in the West should not be assumed to extend to infinity, and all demands for tolerance can be carried too far. One only needs to look at the circumstances of homosexuals in non-Western cultures to understand the potential for backlash.

      There is much to be said for tolerance, it is unlikely that you deliberately chose to poke your finger in the eye of religious and cultural values, but were indeed ?born that way.? The desire of homosexuals to be considered fully equal in all imaginable circumstances is understandable, but not necessarily wise.

      • pff23ro

        This discussion can only really happen in the west generally. And it is also why i dont believe that the gay community is looking for complete equality per se, just equality under he law. Don’t get me wrong, there is a real drive by certain elements in the gay community to force our preferences down he throats of people. I have no question that there are some who would make churches marry gay couples by force given the chance. Just like what was done with e-harmony by force of judicial rule, making them offer gay matchmaking services.. But I don’t consider that is popular view. And seems to come from the more fascist tendencies of the left making the state as god (not God), as opposed to a real desire by most.

        As for being born this way, I can’t say for sure. See unlike that great scientific authority Lady Gaga, there is no real explanation as to what causes homosexuality. Theories range from genetics, to chemistry of the womb, to other external forces. Part of why it isnt known is political to be sure. Part of it is moral. See the only way to really study it would be to experiment with children as they develop. And just the thought of that makes me physically ill.

        I’m pretty sure that every person who is gay at some point has not wanted to be. It define is not a choice for me. But I had to learn to accept it, because here is no proven way to change.

        The ironic thing is that Christian values and morality (aside from the unacceptability of homosexuality) are in desperate need in te gay community as a whole (my observation). Just remember gay activists use what you feel about homosexuality against you. A gay pride parade is designed to shock you and your sensibilities.

  • wbf

    You are right, this issue does unify the GOP base. It is a comfort to conservatives that on this issue Mitt Romney has remained consistent.

    • iphess

      I am/was a Santorum supporter, and I do think that Obama’s announcement will move social conservatives in Romney’s direction. However, this won’t be because of Romney’s supposed consistency. Both Romney and Obama will still be viewed as flip-flops. The reason this will push social conservatives to Romney is because Romney flipped onto the right side (no pun intended). Obama flipped onto the wrong side.

      • grapenephi

        Romney didn’t flip anything. Where are you coming up with that?

        • iphess

          Just check out Romney’s record. I’m 99% sure he said at one point he supported gay marriage, but in any event, as governor he facilitated 186 homosexual marriages. He didn’t have to, as the court and legislature had come down on different sides of the issue.

          Regardless of what you think about Romney’s record, the conservative base (i.e. about 60% of GOP primary voters) didn’t vote for Romney. I’m pretty sure that if you were to poll them, their vote for someone other than Romney boiled down to a) Romneycare, b) Romney’s flip-flops, or c) some combination of the two. For you to gloss over this doesn’t advance your cause. Most conservatives just don’t trust Romney. Incidentally, I don’t. I just hope that Romney will end up more conservative than he talks and how he governed. That doesn’t mean I won’t support Romney – far from it. But there is a very large contingent of Santorum/Newt/Paul supporters that aren’t sure they’ll vote for Romney. This is something Romney and his supporters need to come to terms with.

          • Joshua Persons

            “I?m 99% sure he said at one point he supported gay marriage, but in any event, as governor he facilitated 186 homosexual marriages. He didn?t have to, as the court and legislature had come down on different sides of the issue.”

            Can you provide concrete sourcing for this other than “Romney’s record”? The first claim is false as far as I know, and the rest is unparseable nonsense to me. What does “facilitating” a marriage even mean? And a judicial/legislature squabble doesn’t magically give the executive carte blanche.

      • retrocon87

        he has NEVER supported gay marriage and he never will… he’s done having to try to win elections in Massachusetts and w/ 90% of the national GOP opposing it he knows it would be political suicide to flip on it and give skeptical members of the base another reason to not trust him… he’s no santorum on social issues but I’m pretty sure this is one issue we won’t have to worry too much about w/ him.

  • winning2012

    I’m surprised I haven’t seen it mentioned anywhere, but you can you imagine what sort of drain on resources gay marriage will cause for state pension plans and entitlements like Social Security with things like survivor benefits?

    Why isn’t anyone asking Obama about what gay marriage would do to these plans and entitlements?

    You’re talking about billions and billions of dollars, to say nothing of the rampant fraud that will take place.

    Probably the hardest part about fighting for traditional marriage is the “Meh, don’t care” response from many. But if gay marriage is seen a costly to taxpayers, that could greatly move the needle in our direction.

    • skorrent1

      It’s quite likely the numbers are not there for either side. The gays will never admit that they constitute less than 2% of the population, not all of whom want to get “married”. And the cost for those who do, and who manage to live to retirement, would get lost in the noise of Medicare fraud.

  • AceInTX

    time will tell.

    I will say this however…leave it to Obama on the Gay marriage issue and the press on this BS hair cutting story to make a politician who makes me wretch at the mere mention of his name a sympathetic figure for me….

    Romney is the nominee and as such I support him….he has a chance here to fire me up and millions like me…the kindling is dry and all is needed to light a fire under the movement is a spark from our nominee…but he’s gotta show some conviction and drive the nail home to capitalize on it.

    I’m watching…Praying…and hoping he lights the bonfire…

    we shall see

    • acat

      There have been several articles up at Ace of Spades and Moe Lane’s page highlighting Romney’s shots at Obama.

      Romney is clearly different than McCain. Neither were the candidate I wanted, but … here we are. Romney, at least, knows who and what Obama is, and is prepared to fight.

      Mew

    • clintonformccain

      Voters opposed to gay marriage already know that he is opposed to gay marriage and has a record to back that up. So, making a big deal isn’t going to get him any new voters.

      I’m not sure I see the upside. Better to keep the messaging focus on jobs, the economy, and Obama’s failed leadership.

      • acat

        both passed with unexpectedly large minority* votes against gay marriage.

        Is Romney likely to pick off many Obama supporters among non-whites? No .. but he’ll get some. Better, he’ll force Obama to play defense… and given Obama’s record, that’s not gonna work too well, eh?

        Mew

        * supposition in the case of NC 1 – if the exit polling had supported a “but non-whites love it!” narrative, we’d be hearing it… the silence is the message.

        • lineholder

          Like you said, there aren’t solid numbers to support it. Poll prior to, and articles in specific areas directly after the vote.

          But I think you’re right all the same.

        • AceInTX

          Everyone was surprised by the results of those issues when the people were given a choice to gut the traditional understanding of what marriage is….this despite the FACT that 30 states who have let the voters decide…have passed pro traditional marriage amendments with 60% or more of the votes in every single case…and each time it’s reported as a surprise because so called Polls show majority support for Gay Marriage.

          How can that be?

          Everyone has heard the cliche’ that there are “Lies, Damned lies and Statistics”

          I’d say you could replace the word statistics with the word Polls….because it’s becoming increasingly obvious that the press and our so called leadership are manipulating us using agenda driven and manipulated polls the same way they used to do statistics before the voters caught onto their game.

          I have been saying for months Romney could fire us up by using the religious liberty aspect of the birth control mandate, the fact that Obamacare is charging a $1 surcharge on every health insurance plan in America to pay for abortions and now this to fire up Values voters and drive turnout…and this is something that should play to true libertarians as well…

          Like I said…the tinder has been laid out…it’s dry…all he need to do is start hitting Obama on these issues to fire up the base….and Obama is toast…

          Will he do that…or will he listen to clintonformaccain, Mike Murphy and the rest of the losers who brought us the 1976, 1992, 1996, and 2008 fiascos?

          Time will tell

          • acat

            It looks, to this cat, like the problem with the polling in NC and CA is that the Dems are counting on minority blocs voting like, well, Dems… and there’s a rather large disconnect among the blocs on social issues.

            In short, if a poll asks “Did you vote Dem?” and *assumes* the respondent to be pro-gay-marriage based on that …

            I think we’re seeing a wedge issue that may finally crumble some of the long-term traditional Dem blocs. Not right away, not in time to help Romney, but …

            Mew

      • AceInTX

        Do you think King Leonidas led 300 Spartans to give their lives at Thermopylae…and lead them to defy and delay 100,000 to 300,00 Persians for seven days by telling them they didn’t matter and that they should just die for Greece because at least Greece is better than Persian King Xerxes?

        Or maybe Washington won at Trenton by telling his men the cause was lost but they could brave the freezing temperatures and cross a frozen Delaware on Christmas Morning anyway?

        Or what of the defeat of Cornwallis at Yorktown?

        No…they lead their men…they were fighting for a cause….they inspired and motivated their troops to do what was considered impossible…for a cause…for a leader they could depend on…and for a leader that cared about what mattered to them.

        Compare that tio a party and a leadership who wants to tell US…the people in the trenches…who fight to put them in a position to represent us that we don’t matter…that we’re unreasonable and extreme because we expect our “REPRESENTATIVES” to =….you know REPRESENT US!!

        • clintonformccain

          …by the time November rolls around.

          • AceInTX

            many of the same advisers that ran those campaigns are now running Rooney’s.

            Romney needs to pick social issues that unite the party…SoCons AND Libertarians as well as FisCons to unite the base and persuade independents to the rightness of the cause.

            Leadership includes inspiration, persuasion, and motivation….either Romney is going to lead my using all these traits…or he’s not….if he exhibits these traits, I assure you…his path to victory will be a lot more clear than McCain’s was in 2008 when all he did for the base was brow beat us about our duty while demanding our votes and full support despite the fact that he insisted on peeing down our legs.

    • grapenephi

      I really approve of Romney’s approach at this whole thing. Make clear statements about his beliefs, but keep the focus on the economy. To do otherwise would give the Democraps exactly what they want–Romney would start pandering to the right and make himself look like a bigot through hyperbole, rather than make himself just look wise, and with the country’s best interests in mind. Keep it simple, Mitt. Don’t let the distractions work!

      • garfieldjl

        I’m wondering if this amateur hour will continue all the way to election day, Bill Clinton has come out slamming Obama recently.

        This could be an interesting election.

        • gekster

          Honest question.

          • garfieldjl

            I’m starting to think his entire campaign team is drunk and high on LSD at the same time.

            They are making unforced mistakes right and left. If Obama runs a competitent campaign, I don’t think Romney can win, but with amateur hour going on, Romney could probably win due to Obama imploding.

          • gekster

            Like I said about crystal balls, they can easily be broken.
            Looks like one just got broke.

          • gekster

            It’s like I said about crystal balls.
            They can be easily broken.
            Looks like one just got broke.

          • gekster

            Like I said about crystal balls,
            they are easily broken.
            Looks like one just got broke.

          • gekster

            Like I said about crystal balls,
            they are easily broken.
            Looks like one just got broke.

          • gekster

            Like I said about crystal balls,
            they are easily broken.
            Looks like one just got broke.

            (sorry for late reply. computer mess up)

          • gekster

            Like I said about crystal balls,
            they are easily broken.
            Looks like one just got broke.

          • http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

            when people actually do that “vote” thingy, is just shy of six months away. Most people aren’t paying attention in any serious way. Real TV hasn’t even started and the press is just practicing giving some cover.

            Of course, if you actually knew anything about election cycles, you’d know that.

            You don’t even begin to use the word “imploding”, or for that matter any other descriptive adjectives, about either candidate. It’s interesting to see that you’re still making a fool of yourself via ignorance.

          • radicalrighty

            He is stepping out of the way and letting Obama look silly on the issues no one (but the MSM) cares about, while hammering him on the economy and jobs.

            It’s working so far . . .

  • libertyatstake

    #2 Pencil … Steny the One Eyed Sock Puppet … Henry the Barking Chimp … any incandescent light bulb …

  • runner12

    Obama may have just single-handedly removed any qualms Evangelicals had about voting for Romney. Not only that, Obama may have encouraged them to come out in droves to vote for Romney.

    All Romney had to do is sit back and watch Obama implode.

    Which brings me to something that has been puzzling me since this “announcement.” Why now? Obama is actually campaigning on this issue. Not exactly the most politically astute move. It hurts him with faith-based minorities and does nothing to draw Independents towards himself. It rallies social conservatives around Romney, a group who (with reason) have been skeptical of Romney. So Obama has effectively diminished his own base and energized his opponents.

    It makes me think that is internal polling must be abysmal, leaving him no choice but to pander to the hard Left Hollywood-types. A more radical thought I have pondered is that Obama knows there is a high likelihood that he will lose in November and that this may be his attempt to cement his place as the most radical Left President in history. To him, that would be a badge of honor and garner him the attention he seems to crave.

    • westcoastpatriette

      was money. I read that some of his huge donors who are pushing SSM threatened to stop contributing to his campaign unless he came out in favor of SSM.

      • runner12

        But it was a desperate move wrought with many negatives, despite the influx of campaign money. In other words, the risks far outweighed the benefits politically.

        Now this man’s ego knows no bounds. Perhaps he thinks he can pander back and forth between groups and the “little people” will buy it hook, line, and sinker.

        This may very well be his downfall. Gas prices are out of control, the economy is in a freefall, people cannot find jobs, and even those who are blessed with jobs are struggling to make ends meet. The American people will not take kindly to a campaign whose main strategy is to do a song and dance every week to pander to various Left-wing groups.

        But what else can Obama run on? All he has left are the smoke and mirrors.

      • runner12

        But it was a desperate move wrought with many negatives, despite the influx of campaign money. In other words, the risks far outweighed the benefits politically.

        Now this man’s ego knows no bounds. Perhaps he thinks he can pander back and forth between groups and the “little people” will buy it hook, line, and sinker.

        This may very well be his downfall. Gas prices are out of control, the economy is in a freefall, people cannot find jobs, and even those who are blessed with jobs are struggling to make ends meet. The American people will not take kindly to a campaign whose main strategy is to do a song and dance every week to pander to various Left-wing groups.

        But what else can Obama run on? All he has left are the smoke and mirrors.

      • runner12

        But it was a desperate move wrought with many negatives, despite the influx of campaign money. In other words, the risks far outweighed the benefits politically.

        Now this man’s ego knows no bounds. Perhaps he thinks he can pander back and forth between groups and the “little people” will buy it hook, line, and sinker.

        This may very well be his downfall. Gas prices are out of control, the economy is in a freefall, people cannot find jobs, and even those who are blessed with jobs are struggling to make ends meet. The American people will not take kindly to a campaign whose main strategy is to do a song and dance every week to pander to various Left-wing groups.

        But what else can Obama run on? All he has left are the smoke and mirrors.

      • runner12

        But it was a desperate move wrought with many negatives, despite the influx of campaign money. In other words, the risks far outweighed the benefits politically.

        Now this man’s ego knows no bounds. Perhaps he thinks he can pander back and forth between groups and the “little people” will buy it hook, line, and sinker.

        This may very well be his downfall. Gas prices are out of control, the economy is in a freefall, people cannot find jobs, and even those who are blessed with jobs are struggling to make ends meet. The American people will not take kindly to a campaign whose main strategy is to do a song and dance every week to pander to various Left-wing groups.

        But what else can Obama run on? All he has left are the smoke and mirrors.

      • runner12

        But it was a desperate move wrought with many negatives, despite the influx of campaign money. In other words, the risks far outweighed the benefits politically.

        Now this man’s ego knows no bounds. Perhaps he thinks he can pander back and forth between groups and the “little people” will buy it hook, line, and sinker.

        This may very well be his downfall. Gas prices are out of control, the economy is in a freefall, people cannot find jobs, and even those who are blessed with jobs are struggling to make ends meet. The American people will not take kindly to a campaign whose main strategy is to do a song and dance every week to pander to various Left-wing groups.

        But what else can Obama run on? All he has left are the smoke and mirrors.

        • runner12

          Not sure how that happened. Yikes!

  • cactusjack

    We are dealing with the machinations of the DNC/Axelrod/Hollywood cabal here, so on a surface level – consciously, I’d say no. But on a subconscious level, I think you nailed it – the frame of mind (if I may use that term loosely) that -0- is in. Kind of chlling isnt it – means he’s ready and prepared to go down with a slash and burn campaign. Honest the very first thing that came to my mind when I heard he had announced this was, “Oh no, this means here comes Executive Order citizenship for Illegals!” Please tell me I’m wrong.

  • toothpick

    …we may look back and decide that Mitt Romney was the luckiest Presidential candidate since FDR first ran in 1932. Lucky in the sense of having a really, really weak opponent. Nothing against Mitt, but if you are going to have enemies, it’s best that they be feeble and incompetent.

  • filobeddoe

    it’s not much of a reason to vote for him. I cant get Romneycare out of my head. I cant forget that he calls himself a severe conservative…whateve that may be. I am still reminded of his recent promise to raise the minimum wage. Ive voted bush, Dole, Bush, McCain. Ive had my fill of liberal Republicans…if you can call Romney a Republican. I fashion him as Mike Blumberg. Someone without any real core who just uses the Republican ticket to propogate himself. Yes, propogate.

    Four years of Obama or eight years of Romney? That basically means the conservative movement is dead for quite sometime. I like the idea of Romney losing so we can install a true conservative.

    I will never vote for Romney.

    • grapenephi

      I know you were trying to spite your face and all, but you missed. Try a little harder.

      Or….

      Stop being so defiant. If you think either of the Bushes was too liberal, you probably won’t be satisfied for quite some time. It’s time to suit up and stand with your team.

      • filobeddoe

        Im registered as an independent actually. You know, the ones Romney’s trying to woo.

        I voted with the team for a lot of RINOs already and Ive had my fill. I dont owe Romney my vote. When (if) the party puts up someone who shares the same values, then I will happily vote for him.

        It seems a bit silly to me to vote out Lugar (good riddance) only to vote in a RINO president.

        • gekster

          It’s that way.
          <———-

          • filobeddoe

            You’re the one voting for Democrat, not me. Unless you think Romneycare is something a Republican would do.

            I plan to vote this way.

            —————————————>

  • macwell

    over in his grave. Looking down and crying that the first black President was such a loser. It’s like the man Obama never existed. He was a figment of someone’s imagination and his whole story is make believe.

    We the people must remove all people who believe that America needs to be “fundamentally transformed” in November.

  • pff23ro

    I have to respectfully disagree with your analysis. I’m not criticizing Obama for supporting gay marriage. Nor do I disagree that the polling has changed rather vastly on the subject over the past few years. Although there is some MAJOR discrepancy that has not been explained. With the polling data supporting it, how do you square the referendum results from 32 states, And not just conservative ones. I mean California passed prop 8 in 2008. 2008!! The republicans took a massive beating. The media said that the republican party and conservatism was dead. And yet this still got passed. That should tell you something.

    But I digress..

    The point I was trying to make is that I don’t understand the response that it has generated. What is the big freaking deal? I mean he ended DADT & he isn’t enforcing DOMA. Having him support gay marriage IS NO GIGANTIC EARTH SHATTERING SHOCK!! My question is why the hell didn’t he come out for this sooner? The simple answer is he was either too cowardly to do it, or did it for political expediency. Most likely a combination of both. As you said, because he supports it, doesn’t mean any laws will be passed. My question to you would be is: Why the heck not?!? If he believes this, why wouldn’t he try to pass a law requiring it? Or at least propose one?

    I am criticizing the media, pop culture, and overzealous response that his completion of evolution has brought us. The response that this has generated has been just obnoxious to watch. It is like the media and pop culture experienced this simultaneous orgasm over this revelation that everybody on the planet knew before hand. There is no question that he will have the media, gay community, and pop-culture’s support in the next election. I just see it as some giant naval gazing exercise., where everybody is congratulating him for stating something he has believed since 1996. And let’s be blunt, this will not stop the African-American community from supporting the first black president in American history. There will be no defection what so ever because of his support. Anybody who believes that is either in complete denial, or is an idiot.

    The fact that you used the term “separate but equal” in explaining my position shows that you do not respect my opinion. The term makes a moral implication that is incorrect. This isn’t like having separate drinking fountains, and this isn’t like jim crow. Being in a same sex relationship is a completely different bond than being in a hetero one. As I stated earlier, there are different cultural and sexual mores that must be taken into account. Having the legal rights of marriage is important. I would be willing to stake my annual salary that everybody on this site probably agrees with that. It is merely in the execution of those rights that is in dispute.

    What I propose is not separate but equal. It is for a unique institution that is exclusive to the LGBT community. This is something should be ours and ours alone. I fully understand that this is not a popular position in the gay community. I will also point out that it is quite off the reservation of gay cultural political thought. So there is not a chance for an idea like this to even get discussed. The best thing I can equate it to would be being a black conservative. There is no respect given, and you are ostracized from the community speaking your ideas openly.

  • pff23ro

    I have to respectfully disagree with your analysis. I’m not criticizing Obama for supporting gay marriage. Nor do I disagree that the polling has changed rather vastly on the subject over the past few years. Although there is some MAJOR discrepancy that has not been explained. With the polling data supporting it, how do you square the referendum results from 32 states, And not just conservative ones. I mean California passed prop 8 in 2008. 2008!! The republicans took a massive beating. The media said that the republican party and conservatism was dead. And yet this still got passed. That should tell you something.

    But I digress..

    The point I was trying to make is that I don’t understand the response that it has generated. What is the big freaking deal? I mean he ended DADT & he isn’t enforcing DOMA. Having him support gay marriage IS NO GIGANTIC EARTH SHATTERING SHOCK!! My question is why the hell didn’t he come out for this sooner? The simple answer is he was either too cowardly to do it, or did it for political expediency. Most likely a combination of both. As you said, because he supports it, doesn’t mean any laws will be passed. My question to you would be is: Why the heck not?!? If he believes this, why wouldn’t he try to pass a law requiring it? Or at least propose one?

    I am criticizing the media, pop culture, and overzealous response that his completion of evolution has brought us. The response that this has generated has been just obnoxious to watch. It is like the media and pop culture experienced this simultaneous orgasm over this revelation that everybody on the planet knew before hand. There is no question that he will have the media, gay community, and pop-culture’s support in the next election. I just see it as some giant naval gazing exercise., where everybody is congratulating him for stating something he has believed since 1996. And let’s be blunt, this will not stop the African-American community from supporting the first black president in American history. There will be no defection what so ever because of his support. Anybody who believes that is either in complete denial, or is an idiot.

    The fact that you used the term “separate but equal” in explaining my position shows that you do not respect my opinion. The term makes a moral implication that is incorrect. This isn’t like having separate drinking fountains, and this isn’t like jim crow. Being in a same sex relationship is a completely different bond than being in a hetero one. As I stated earlier, there are different cultural and sexual mores that must be taken into account. Having the legal rights of marriage is important. I would be willing to stake my annual salary that everybody on this site probably agrees with that. It is merely in the execution of those rights that is in dispute.

    What I propose is not separate but equal. It is for a unique institution that is exclusive to the LGBT community. This is something should be ours and ours alone. I fully understand that this is not a popular position in the gay community. I will also point out that it is quite off the reservation of gay cultural political thought. So there is not a chance for an idea like this to even get discussed. The best thing I can equate it to would be being a black conservative. There is no respect given, and you are ostracized from the community speaking your ideas openly.

  • Jack_Savage

    “The family of the late classmate whom Mitt Romney allegedly bullied in high school said Friday the portrayal of their brother in new media reports is “factually incorrect” and that they are “aggrieved that he would be used to further a political agenda.”

    The family also said in the public statement that they would make no further public comment on the matter.”

    Over / under on where the retraction appears. I’ve got it at C-13 right now.

  • Racist

    But This (Barack Obama is the unprincipled flip-flop artist that everyone accuses Mitt Romney of being), is where you’re just wrong! What Barack Hussein Obama, and every Liberal and RINO in Congress and the Media who had the responsibility to honestly vet and truthfully present the facts about who the potential POTUS was to be… ARE CRIMINALLY NEGLIGENT SERIAL LIARS!!! Obama is a compulsive liar, who blatantly lies repeatedly to the face of the American People, and does it with a straight face, without a hint of remorse or reservation! He lies with the calculated determination of a sadistic and malevolent sociopath! He does not care at all who gets hurt or how badly, as long as his self-interests are served, and he benefits from the suffering of others, regardless of whom they are! I know a lot of “serious” political activists and pundits don’t like, or either have little respect for Glenn Beck. But he has done and is now in the process of doing the dirty work of exposing the real Barack Obama and his real agenda, to the world. Just a few minutes of Thursday’s show, confirms the nefarious and detestable scam that Obama and the media have perpetrated on the American People, and the entire world for that matter! By the media decieving us into handing Obama the highest office in the world, they are complicit in the destruction of Liberty and the Lives of the peoples of Egypt, Libya, Iran, Tunisia, Yemen, and Syria! Not to mention possibly the Eastern European allies he threw under the bus, or Israel. As a matter of fact, the damage that Obama has done and may yet do, could well lead to WWIII, or some other global catastrophe that could cause the deaths of millions and millions of human beings!!! And that’s without Obamacare!!!

  • boonerdan

    First off, unless you can find marriage in the Constitution, then it is a state issue. END OF STORY! Rather than apologizing for some 40 year old rumor about alleged bullying, why didn’t ‘Milk Toast’ Romney jump on Obama’s new position on state’s rights?? I believe it’s because Romney actually supports a BIG, overreaching federal government and has no intention of staking out a state’s rights position.

    I find it very interesting that so-called conservatives are now telling me I have to “suck it up” and support one Progressive over another. How can you tell the sheep on the left to think for themselves when you are falling in line yourself??

    • filobeddoe

      I see a lotta soul-selling here. And at wholesale prices. Let’s throw Dick Lugar out and install a different progressive as President. You know what, 2016 is not that far away.

  • Pingback: Albert Burkhard

  • Pingback: Everett Heuangvilay

  • Pingback: Renetta Servidio

  • Pingback: Herb Beetley

  • Pingback: electronic cigarette

  • Pingback: maids services

  • Pingback: Welcome to My Blog

  • Pingback: directory

  • Pingback: noclegi zakopane

  • Pingback: Magician

  • Pingback: Fischfutter

  • Pingback: Mining

  • Pingback: Portal randkowy

  • Pingback: ropa para bebes 3 meses

  • Pingback: http://brennerfamilytree.org/mediawiki-1.16.5/index.php?title=User_talk:Wzr_cv

  • Pingback: wedding dresses

  • Pingback: แทงบอลออนไลน์

  • Pingback: Mining Technology

  • Pingback: my web site

  • Pingback: jesus adrian romero jesus es el señor

  • Pingback: η ιστορία του αυτοκινήτου

  • Pingback: คอนโดเอแบคบางนา

  • Pingback: Links Eintragen

  • Pingback: descargar musica gratis facil

  • Pingback: BBCAT

  • Pingback: ps3

  • Pingback: Legal Assistant Jobs

  • Pingback: borderlands

  • Pingback: maternity dresses for wedding guest

  • Pingback: Koi

  • Pingback: hydratacne kremy

  • Pingback: liquor

  • Pingback: here

  • Pingback: Fusevision.com.sg

  • Pingback: Pool Shop

  • Pingback: Video on Demand

  • Pingback: official supply

  • Pingback: homemade baby shower favor

  • Pingback: serwis randkowy

  • Pingback: cheap car insurance florida

  • Pingback: wielu ludzi w jednym miejscu

  • Pingback: Aquariumfilter

  • Pingback: darmowa strona randki

  • Pingback: randki internetowe

  • Pingback: serwis randkowy

  • Pingback: randki za darmo

  • Pingback: Students

  • Pingback: macarons online

  • Pingback: Bank Card USA

  • Pingback: hand drawing techniques

  • Pingback: smartnet services

  • Pingback: free forex trading course

  • Pingback: kirby vacuum buy

  • Pingback: new nfl helmets

  • Pingback: best proxies for scrapebox

  • Pingback: umow sie na randke

  • Pingback: http://www.streamdownload.net/portfolio/youtube-music-downloader-for-windows

  • Pingback: portal randkowy za darmo

  • Pingback: wielu ludzi w jednym miejscu

  • Pingback: Arkadas Ara

  • Pingback: darmowa strona randki

  • Pingback: randki

  • Pingback: randki

  • Pingback: electronic cigarettes

  • Pingback: SEO Services Australia

  • Pingback: payday loans

  • Pingback: enjoy

  • Pingback: to learn wealth creation methods

  • Pingback: pronostic tiercé quarté quinté du jour

  • Pingback: wedding planner tuscany

  • Pingback: requirements

  • Pingback: Web Design

  • Pingback: a few other reading

  • Pingback: Caron

  • Pingback: Guy

  • Pingback: Case

  • Pingback: Emma Stone

  • Pingback: Kaylee Chaidez

  • Pingback: Julie Leiendecker

  • Pingback: alfileres de novia

  • Pingback: Fisher UK

  • Pingback: the assessment beneath

  • Pingback: Diseño web

  • Pingback: loans and bad credit

  • Pingback: Welcome to My Blog

  • Pingback: Heide Lenoue

  • Pingback: Chase Schriber

  • Pingback: Carman Parillo

  • Pingback: growing aloe vera

  • Pingback: Delano

  • Pingback: vegetables and grains

  • Pingback: dieta proteica dukan

  • Pingback: Eliza

  • Pingback: sofy rozkładane

  • Pingback: LoansAndBadCredit

  • Pingback: las vegas bankruptcy attorney

  • Pingback: Web designing in delhi

  • Pingback: xenon auto

  • Pingback: honda minivan

  • Pingback: keto diet

  • Pingback: Donatien

  • Pingback: Gaylord

  • Pingback: Cyprien

  • Pingback: Bari