 New link in the top of page "IRC Chat". |
| Register | Login | |||||
 |
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Last Posts
| IRC Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | XPW | Stats | Color Chart | Photo album |
|
| | ||
New link in the top of page "IRC Chat". |
| Register | Login | |||||
|
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Last Posts
| IRC Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | XPW | Stats | Color Chart | Photo album |
|
| | ||
| 0 users currently in Debate Shrine. |
| User | Post |
| Katana Posts: 3486/3649 |
Yeah. That's what I meant, that pro-choice doesn't mean you're all about abortions willy nilly. But that's what pro-lifer's seem to throw at the pro-choicers. |
| Elara Posts: 8190/9736 |
I'm pretty sure that even the Pro-choice people do not think that abortions should ever be used as a form of birth control... only the truly stupid people doing that seem to think that way. |
| Katana Posts: 3474/3649 |
The more conservatives the better. To oppose something or someone does not have to equate to the idea of enemies.
Honestly, the more and more I follow this...I'm pretty certain that Mitt Romney's views haven't changed much. Personally at least. I mean, there's a difference between change that comes with growth and understanding and flip-flopping. So, I'm sure as a human being, the man has experienced his own growth...but he's caught, redhanded, saying one thing in front of one group, and then something completely different in front of another. Why is that going on? John Kerry did it in 2004, and while I was not legal, nor did I have access to obtaining information like I do now, something didn't sit right with me then either. You see, barring being angry enough to rant unintelligibly, my main issues are with the PEOPLE currently running these institutions, not the beliefs behind them. For instance, if what you say about Mr. Romney's beliefs on abortion are true, and I'm going by what YOU said, because you've made it far more clear and blunt than Mr. Romney has lately, then I respect the hell out of that. I honestly do. For instance, I'm personally pro-life. I think the use of abortion as a form of birth control is wrong. But...I also understand that there ARE certain situations that people can't predict beforehand. And I'm not just talking about situations like rape. But any who, if I come back with proof of this redhandedness I previously spoke of, as conservatives, I'm looking forward to your responses, Vulkar and True. Its not about attacking "sides". My hope was to get people incensed with the idea of expecting more from their leaders. I don't think either side is inherently bad. When I step away from the "celebrity" aspect of politics, I find people on all ends of the spectrum with good intentions. For instance, and any other conservatives/Republicans who might be reading this, the issues going on involving women's rights...you've GOT to be pissed off about the bullshit! I'm willing to bet money that what's going on lately does not accurately reflect most of the Republican/Conservative belief system. |
| Lord Vulkas Mormonus Posts: 4274/4541 |
Just going to address a couple issues...
Dang, it's good to have an ultra conservative back again, isn't it? xD. With regards to abortion: His views really haven't changed, if you look at it. Back in the 2008 nominee election, I knew several people who would not support him because he was "pro-choice." However, way back then I looked a little deeper into it. The perspective of Mitt Romney has and always will be that is should be legal in cases of either rape or incest. He's never liked or supported abortions, but has rather stated that such a law overturning Roe vs Wade would have to come from the people, and canot be established or dictated by the federal government. So, prochoice? No, not really. Prolife? Kind of. But really, I quote him directly, "There's no legislation with regards to abortion that I'm familiar with that would become part of my agenda." |
| True Flight Posts: 5077/5245 |
Herr herr herr... He's got my vote now. XD |
| Elara Posts: 8163/9736 |
I hear them pop up here and there... but yeah, focus is on the big dogs.
And the second two debates were SO much better. The moderator was actually present and so was Obama... and he did much better. Of course, Romney helped by making statements like "binders full of women". |
| True Flight Posts: 5066/5245 |
sad thing is Elara. No one cares about the VP.  Or so Joe Biden has not popped in any conversation I have been in. |
| Elara Posts: 8145/9736 |
So the VP debate was much better. I think actual journalists should always be moderators... she took no shit from either of them!
I personally think that Biden won the debate, since all the Republicans could say afterward was "he smiled too much"... I've heard remarks that he was rude and interrupting, but after they praised Romney for doing the exact same thing during the last debate I don't think they have a leg to stand on. |
| Xeoman Posts: 10060/11757 |
I'm gonna have to run through this thread or get a rundown on what's going on to get me up to date. From the sounds of it, our future doesn't sound great at all. |
| Elara Posts: 8138/9736 |
No, it doesn't sound like you are attacking either one for any views. It's true, they both performed badly. And I am personally pissed about it. If they can't get that, then they are fucking idiots and need to be beaten with sticks while they go through high school civics again. |
| Katana Posts: 3464/3649 |
New question: One public Facebook debate, and a few other side debates induced this one....
If I were to say "Both candidates performed like shit at the debates. One acted like a poster boy for the cover "I Am America and You Can Too" Magazine (Get it? Colbert anyone?) but any who...and the other looked like a stuttering mess who didn't know exactly what he wanted to say." Does that look like I'm attacking one being for or against anything? Does that look like I'm attacking either side for their specific political views? (If that was my goal, I would have flat out said whatever it was that I had a problem with) Or does it look like I'm upset with the superficial aspect of this? The performance itself... Probably could have phrased my question better...but...I'm apparently now a closet democrat to the republicans arguing with me, and a closet republican to the democrats arguing with me...I'm registered Independent...I actually see positives and negatives in both candidates (Yes, even Mitt Romney/Barack Obama for you democrats/republicans.) and so I registered as an independent. I have MUCH better reasoning for this, but I'm just pointing out that I'm interested in both parties fighting for me because right now I don't feel like either is as good as it can be...but any who....yeah... Wtf...guess I'm just ranting too.... |
| Katana Posts: 3457/3649 |
I've been growing more and more intrigued by politics over the past few years actually...which is odd, because until I was about 21 or so, I wouldn't be caught dead caring. But now it's like...wait a minute....politics is the act of people getting together to talk about certain issues...and the issues themselves are things I care about, so...
But lack of good lively debate has been an issue for me as well, True. That's why I like running my mouth here. There's a response. Hang out in my house, and all you hear is "The Republicans are gonna take a bath this time!" I don't even know wtf that MEANS, but I think it's pretty close to saying "They're gonna lose." which, okay...I've been struggling with my own political identity for a while, because no one in my household supports WHY they claim that "the people are going to wise up and the Republicans are going to go bye-bye." Then I go to my boyfriend's house, and his mother is pretty much the embodiment of the entire RNC and Tea Party influence. I love the woman to death, she's a good person. She'll bitch about entitlements, and then give you the shirt off her back if she sees you shiver, whether she knows you or not (Kinda like, doesn't practice what she preaches, but usually that means the practicing involves negative acts. She speaks of things I take as negative, but then acts completely different, so it's kinda odd.) But like Elara said about the RNC being anti-Obama, and no "Romney" chants...that's what I get when I deal with the other end of the spectrum. They can't tell me WHY they vote republican without pretty much saying "We don't vote democrat." and then trashing the other side. I always walk away unsatisfied because I went INTO the conversation knowing they didn't like the other side, and never walk away with a clear understanding to why they like the side they're on. It's making me bitter too. And driving me up a wall...but...I can't help it...these are things that I care about...And I've come to realize that I don't actually hate politics...it's the politicians that are the problem for the most part. On all sides. Not all are bad, but still...you can offer me valid points supporting Dems or Reps, but odds are, I'm still going to be disappointed by the people representing you and me. That's kinda the reason for the first question I posed here. I'm not looking to understand one side and attack the other...I'm looking at the asinine things these people are doing, and why they're getting away with it. I mean, I KNOW why, but they shouldn't be. People should be aware and give a damn and stop voting for them and get REAL champions on there (pipe dream, I know.) |
| True Flight Posts: 4977/5245 |
I hate politics anyway. It's sort of a taboo in my grands house to discuss it. I guess a lack of a good lively debate over all this crap has made me a very VERY bitter person about politics. |
| Astrophel Posts: 2537/2724 |
I think the idea was that if the Republicans had more power, it would have been worse.
The exact delivery needed some work, though. |
| True Flight Posts: 4973/5245 |
I still laugh at Obama's retort. "It could've been worse." |
| Elara Posts: 8088/9736 |
Several of the speeches at the DNC called out the lying... Pres Clinton's in particular I think did a good job. But I agree that that is nowhere near how badly Kerry got slammed back in 2004.
This is opinion, not assertion, but I think that they are saving the harder slams for after the DNC. Right now, you can look at the speeches from both conventions and the Dems come out looking much better because they actually talked about issues, made their criticisms, but kept attacks to a minimum. The Republicans spent it attacking the President at every turn, not really talking about details on anything, and spouting lies. There were no cries for "Rom-ney"... just cries against Obama. Source: the speeches for both the RNC and DNC (yes, I watched on MSNBC, but this is commentary aside) |
| Katana Posts: 3436/3649 |
Not a bad strategy at all, actually. The blow, which was inevitable, came MUCH softer since it came from a supporter, which again, is second best to it coming from yourself. If you take away the political affiliation and just look at it this way "someone was imperfect. It came out publicly. They/their supporter acknowledged it." is MUCH softer than it being acknowledged by opposition or even neutral forces. It's a strategy that can work with a multitude of things, not just politics. It's subliminally saying (or seeming to say) "Shit. I fucked up. I'm going to be honest and admit that and therefore fix it."
But I highly doubt that its going to be a problem for the Republicans in the long run. The attention they're getting aren't calling him out on being so damned blatant it seems. I was hoping True would add her two cents. The world is a big place. I think its foolish to think in absolutes just because your own personal world is one way....and what I'm seeing in my own, much smaller world, is that no one, not even his opposition are shedding light on this. Opposition is pointing it out, but that's about it. They're not DRIVING the point. They're not forcing him to face that particular issue. They're just criticizing... So, I'm just trying to take advantage of the fact that we're from all over the place here...maybe someone can point something out like "No, you're wrong." and show me some of their local news articles where he is being challenged. I can only say that in my own backyard, we are not...and that's a damned shame. If someone I supported was like that, I'd still want them to own up to it...so again, it's not even about whether or not you support Mitt Romney...it's about why are people turning such a blind eye? I know there are bigger issues...but...c'mon...if Obama wins, Romney will have given him a run for his money, that's painfully obvious...and I'm not too comfortable with someone potentially leading the country who gets away with blatantly lying not only to others but to himself! |
| Cteno Posts: 2870/3416 |
If that's a strategy, it was very poorly executed. :laugh:
No idea why he's not being chastised for it. It's the same thing that would cost a different candidate their entire election. Who knows, maybe it will negatively affect the Republican party in the long run? |
| Katana Posts: 3435/3649 |
The "Even Fox News is calling him out." bit though...Paul Ryan DID flat out lie in that speech, don't get me wrong, but no matter what side you're on, strategy is strategy. No one is perfect. However, when running for public office, one of the worst things to happen to you isn't your imperfections. It's when someone else showcases them for you. As the Fox article mentioned...it's about strategically airing your own dirty laundry...
I don't see this as "Even Fox...." I see this as political strategy. He didn't air his own dirty laundry, so Fox, a supporter, was the next best thing. They got their article out there a little TOO quickly for it to have been for any other reason but that. But, my main question was this...why isn't he getting enough shit for it? I watched the RNC last week (through MSNBC though.) and they aired all sorts of clips of him literally saying one thing, and then either saying something TOTALLY to the contrary, or denying he ever said it. I'm not trying to incite opinions on WHAT he's saying and then saying differently later. Abortion, for example...this isn't a question about whether or not he's right to be for or against it...it's a question to why isn't he challenged for a response to stick with and chastised...I mean bad, he's only getting tiny slaps on the public wrist for this...why is this working? Why is he still getting supporters that aren't saying "Woah...wait a minute." It's okay to support someone who isn't perfect. It's even better to see the vices but still stick by your guns...but...why are they ignoring the vices? |
| Cteno Posts: 2867/3416 |
No, you aren't misinformed. He is pretty much the textbook definition of "panderer". Romney has utterly ignored all of his past positions supporting abortion and civil unions only to gain GOP approval. He's been running for office continually since 1974 and he always tries (in vain) the same routine.
I don't personally think he is nearly as bad as his running mate, Paul Ryan. Ryan has lied constantly, enough to even make Fox News call him out -- something I never thought would happen. |
| This is a long thread. Click here to view it. | |
