It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Here a flip, there a flop, everywhere a flip flop!

page: 2
8
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 12 2012 @ 01:33 AM
link   
store.barackobama.com...

Yep one of those things is not like the other.




posted on May, 12 2012 @ 01:35 AM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


Could you imagine the fire storm if Romney came out with 'traditional marriage' apparel. I could see the headlines now "Romney Pedals Hate for Cash." LOL. It takes a special kind of low to merchandise issues like these. Especially when your grand 'evolution' is just wishy washy crap.



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 01:36 AM
link   
reply to post by snusfanatic
 





"Romney Pedals Hate for Cash." LOL


That is how it would be spun!




posted on May, 12 2012 @ 01:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Blackmarketeer
But when the chips were down, Obama backed same-sex marriage, whatever his personal tastes or views on the matter - which is all anyone can ask for.

Romney not only flip-flopped but is letting either his pandering to the hard-right or his religious views dictate his policy, which means denying an entire demographic of the population the same rights enjoyed by the rest.



Question..............
You find nothing wrong with PANDERING VOTER EXPLOITATION ?



I mean,if you are that hung up on flip-flopping on issues,and being sincere on issues,i would expect you to find this just as damning......


Hopefully you wont give me an "excuse",as to it being,all good .






posted on May, 12 2012 @ 02:13 AM
link   
One thing Obama did when he ran in 2008 was say he would seek to end DADT, and seek to protect the rights of LGBT persons. He has done that.

You think he is "pandering for votes" when he says "same-sex couples should be able to get married"? He is costing himself more votes from the fundies and evangelicals.

Pandering is when you say one thing then do another. Mitt has one consistency about him - he will say ANYTHING to get elected no matter who it is to. After running as a fairly liberal governor in Mass., he comes out pretending to the primary crowds he is a staunch hard-right conservative. Romney will avoid social issues because he refuses to go on record with what his position is.

The Nation: Gay Marriage Caught Romney Off Guard

So what is Mitt's stand on gay issues? Will he put DADT back in place? Reaffirm DOMA? Ban same-sex marriages? Or do nothing?

We know where Obama stands on the issue. He stopped legally defending the Defense of Marriage Act after entering office and has legislated for it's repeal with the Respect for Marriage Act.


Defense of Marriage Act, enacted in 1996, mandates unequal treatment of legally married same-sex couples, selectively depriving them of the 1,138+ protections and responsibilities that marriage triggers at the federal level. DOMA stigmatizes people by dividing married Americans into two classes. Unlike different-sex married couples, same-sex married couples are denied such important protections as Social Security survivor benefits, immigration rights, family and medical leave, and the ability to pool resources as a family without unfair taxation.

Overturning federal marriage discrimination is a key part of Freedom to Marry’s three-track Roadmap to Victory, which also includes winning marriage in more states and growing and diversifying the majority for marriage.

The Respect for Marriage Act was introduced on March 16, 2011 in the Senate by Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and in the House by Representative Jerrold Nadler (D-NY). The bill would repeal DOMA, and return the federal government to its longstanding practice of honoring marriage without a “gay exception.”


Republicans like Romney love to say they won't impose their morality on everyone, but then cram garbage like DADT and DOMA down people's throats. They say one thing, then do another - that is a flip-flopper. Obama may make statements that show he isn't keen on gay marriage, but he has always said he would support acts and laws that assure EVERYONE, including gays and lesbians, are treated as equals, and he has the record to prove it.



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 03:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Blackmarketeer
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 

You can make up your own opinions but you can't make up your own facts.

I pointed out the records of the two men currently running for President, in their own quoted words or videos, over the period of the last 15 years or so.

In the case of both men and on this topic in particular they both cited religion. Religion isn't the area you just change your thinking on over a 15 year period unless Faith or choice of Churches comes along with it. Which tells me both never really meant what they said at least 1 of the 2 times they held the contradictory positions.

In reality, Romney was a bit less contradictory than Obama, although not by much at all. Obama is 180 degree, back and forth. Same church, same faith, same pastor. All 20 years. Yet, he cites Faith himself, in his own words and statements. (tilt) Something doesn't compute here. I believe the positions I showed for both are accurate and representative.

Both would surely like to forget any of this happened. .......but there it is. It did, they did and the record is there. I didn't invent facts, unless someone thinks I'm actually skilled enough to fabricate Obama in a video that seamlessly. If so, I can give you my College admin's Email for an early degree request.


The story is being carried in various forms all over, incidentally. I wish I could take credit for the idea, but it was more a matter of trying to keep my own presentation distinct from so many others on the net right now. The presentation...Well... This wasn't my best in that way. Indeed.


So who to trust, and they both lack credbility or sincerity. That, was the point. Romney makes up for all the questions about HOW much he flipped when he's clearly quoted and saying his position hasn't changed his whole time in office.


You came up with a contrite theory and then tried to shoehorn reality to fit it.

So... Contrite? To some perhaps, although how that quite fits here isn't real clear.


Unfortunately the voting and legislative record of one of your candidates has been consistently in favor of extending and protecting the rights of those who identify as LGBT.

Voting records? What voting records? GOVERNOR Romney had a voting record to compare to Obama?? This was an accurate thing when it was McCain and Obama and they'd both served the Senate in the same years, same votes and same records. Your thinking about the wrong election.

Obama's voting record when? Senate? You mean the seat he was quoted in my OP running for? Yeah. We can also go into how often Senator Obama deemed it worthy of his attention to show up and vote at all. I'm not personally arguing this abstractly as a partisan issue. I'm leaving a lot out, which is nothing but partisan.

Oh and since when did I define anything as LGBT? You clicked the link in my OP on that, I'd assume or you already knew about it? That goes to the brand new LGBT section of the Obama Store for your Official Obama merchandise. LGBT T-shirts, mugs and more! Really, that is HIS WEBSITE and the Team Obama store.

I couldn't believe a sitting President was hawking activist crap of any kind, for any cause what so ever. However, that is where I used the term from. You may see, if you notice many posts I make, I've not used that term before (That I honestly recall). I doubt I'll ever use it again.



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 04:11 AM
link   
@ Thread

Thanks for not skinning the bunny. I honestly expected mods to kill it after my facepalm. I was shocked and then more than a bit wary when I saw the post count... Images of torches and pitchforks and Elmer Fudd multiplied came to mind


A few hours sleep and off to get more.. Whew... 15 hours last night (24 hours ago type last night.lol) Hopefully this gets easier for planning time in following semesters. It's hell this first one.



Oh well, as for the topic, at this point? I think my own name will look just fine on the write-in.
Why not... Down ticket races ALWAYS make showing up and make voting worthwhile.

I just can't see either here as one really trustworthy at this point, and there is quite a bit of time and history to both to be honest. The stakes are so high that we really need someone to match one of the 'Great' Presidents of our past, and all we have are middle to average choices at best.

edit on 12-5-2012 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 05:43 AM
link   
if OP could bring back one of the previous pres elects (guess that would have to be before JFK, then?)

which ONE would you bring into office this coming term,

and why?




posted on May, 12 2012 @ 07:43 AM
link   
reply to post by BiggerPicture
 

Hmmm... I put some real thought into that and there aren't many that even came to mind. One could say George Washington, but that's just absurd because times don't remotely compare and for all we know, he wouldn't have had the same qualities in today's world.

Dwight Eisenhower is the one. No real question in my mind. 3 reasons...

1. He struck the right balance for his time in office to keep peace between the U.S. and Soviet Union and without a major confrontation to recall him for. I think his military record made him more reluctant to use it and that worked for the benefit of everyone.

2. His oversaw and managed not to screw up what may have been the strongest economic boom of our history in the huge bump after WW-II.

3. His enforcement of Brown V. Board of Education was admirable and truly a thing to respect. The record shows he was uncertain in his own mind about where he stood on it, but respected the Super Court as the final word. Period. In that he used the natonal guard to end segregation by opening Little Rock, Ar. I think of that as one of the moments the Nation could have gone either way and the US had the right man there for the right decision.



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 11:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


You started this post and focused it exclusively on the LGBT issue. Romney has done two things for the LGBT community - hired a gay campaign manager who quit saying he was driven out by conservatives, with no backing by his boss, and the rest consisting of appeals to the LGBT community to support him while not doing anything at all for them, not even taking a stand on a single LGBT issue. Wishy-washy, man. Both Romney and the LGBT community know he will throw equality rights under the bus once in office because as a Republican playing to the arch-conservative base that is his only choice. So what he is doing now, pretending he cares with these campaign speeches and letters, is pandering.

Obama has done more for the LGBT community and has openly stated his position - and his record proves it.
Accomplishments by the Obama Administration and Congress on LGBT Equality

You're comparing apples and oranges here.



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 01:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blackmarketeer
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


You started this post and focused it exclusively on the LGBT issue. Romney has done two things for the LGBT community - hired a gay campaign manager who quit saying he was driven out by conservatives, with no backing by his boss, and the rest consisting of appeals to the LGBT community to support him while not doing anything at all for them, not even taking a stand on a single LGBT issue. Wishy-washy, man. Both Romney and the LGBT community know he will throw equality rights under the bus once in office because as a Republican playing to the arch-conservative base that is his only choice. So what he is doing now, pretending he cares with these campaign speeches and letters, is pandering.

Obama has done more for the LGBT community and has openly stated his position - and his record proves it.
Accomplishments by the Obama Administration and Congress on LGBT Equality

You're comparing apples and oranges here.


Wrong.

Because hes done so much for the LGBT community,he should reap the "rewards",of selling T-shirts, holding fundraisers, and placing himself as the Savior to the Gay community, THE DAY AFTER making this supposed "historic" ACT of valor?

Oh Please. Ive talked to my gay friends,and even THEY are not as gullible to place him on this pedestal ! All you are doing Black,is pimping out the gay community,for "his" cause.

His true "cause" is votes and money.






posted on May, 12 2012 @ 02:27 PM
link   
reply to post by sonnny1
 


So if Obama does anything for the LGBT community, you accuse him of "pandering for votes". If he doesn't do something for the LGBT community, you accuse him of flip-flopping. Damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. His stated position is and has been to increase equality rights for LGBT members, and his lengthy list of accomplishments in 3 years of office support that position. Meanwhile...

Romney pretends he is sensitive to the needs of the LGBT community but then he secretly funnels money to a group like National Organization for Marriage.

[url=http://www.rightsequalrights.com/2012/04/16/complaint-filed-against-the-national-organization-for-marriage-nom/]Complaint Filed Against The National Organization for Marriage (NOM)

[url=http://www.inquisitr.com/222150/romneys-donations-to-fight-gay-marriage-leaked/]Romney’s Donations To Fight Gay Marriage Leaked

What exactly has Romney, or Republicans in general, done for the LGBT community? Nothing. And anything they say otherwise is a clear "pandering for votes".



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 03:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blackmarketeer
reply to post by sonnny1
 


So if Obama does anything for the LGBT community, you accuse him of "pandering for votes". If he doesn't do something for the LGBT community, you accuse him of flip-flopping. Damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. His stated position is and has been to increase equality rights for LGBT members, and his lengthy list of accomplishments in 3 years of office support that position. Meanwhile...

Romney pretends he is sensitive to the needs of the LGBT community but then he secretly funnels money to a group like National Organization for Marriage.

[url=http://www.rightsequalrights.com/2012/04/16/complaint-filed-against-the-national-organization-for-marriage-nom/]Complaint Filed Against The National Organization for Marriage (NOM)

[url=http://www.inquisitr.com/222150/romneys-donations-to-fight-gay-marriage-leaked/]Romney’s Donations To Fight Gay Marriage Leaked

What exactly has Romney, or Republicans in general, done for the LGBT community? Nothing. And anything they say otherwise is a clear "pandering for votes".


Stop playing LEFT,RIGHT !

Romney isn't the PRESIDENT. Get it ?

Both of these idiots Pander for votes,but Obama has topped it ! Hes got a freaking T-shirt drive,on his web page !

He hosted a PARTY the day after,garnering millions. Romney isn't PANDERING the gay vote !

Whats next for Obama,sanctuary for Illegals,to garner votes from them ?

Come on Black............

You keep saying Obama has cared about the LGBT community,but hes flipped flopped on the issue himself. QUIT trying to paint him a Savior. That's all I am asking .



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 05:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blackmarketeer
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


You started this post and focused it exclusively on the LGBT issue.

No, actually, I didn't. However, you have been hammering away at derailing the thread since the 2nd post . I'll grant you points for sheer persistence and you even got my goat at the start. It kills me to have given someone such as yourself the satisfaction, but I wasn't myself and at a very low point from fatigue and the mountain for stress at finals. Err.... Excuses aren't my speed, but some probably wondered 'wtf?' at my very uncharacteristic waffling and open self doubt on a thread I wrote myself.


Romney has done two things for the LGBT community - hired a gay campaign manager who quit saying he was driven out by conservatives, with no backing by his boss, and the rest consisting of appeals to the LGBT community to support him while not doing anything at all for them, not even taking a stand on a single LGBT issue.

There we go again. This isn't about petty partisan crap. Sadly, you've managed to draw some good folks on the thread into the same swamp right along with you. Right/Left...Obama/Romney....Us/Them. It would just be sad if it wasn't being done on a thread 100% ABOUT getting PAST the partisan fighting and holding one loser above the other loser to say MY loser is less so than yours.



Wishy-washy, man. Both Romney and the LGBT community know he will throw equality rights under the bus once in office because as a Republican playing to the arch-conservative base that is his only choice. So what he is doing now, pretending he cares with these campaign speeches and letters, is pandering.

Hey, we agree completely. I just say your words apply to both, equally. Obama has held both extremes of the same issue with nothing having changed in his own Religious life to justify what he has said was entirely a religious based belief and value...more than once. Yeah, one is better than the other.
There is where we just can't agree, now or ever. One isn't better. D/R are flip sides of the same filthy coin.


Obama has done more for the LGBT community and has openly stated his position - and his record proves it.
Accomplishments by the Obama Administration and Congress on LGBT Equality

Oh I see. Now his record DOES matter and SHOULD be taken to represent his feelings on the matter. His record in 2004 and prior to that, as my op shows...in HIS words and on HIS video showing HIS OWN BELIEFS isn't to be considered? Only your example is fit to be called his record to show?

Yeah. Deny Ignorance has to start with at least allowing for all aspects of a debate and topic. You seem to be quite happy in dumping a fair part of President Obama's record outright because reality doesn't fit how you'd dearly like it to be. Well, it rarely is....and most of us learn to adapt to reality, not continue trying to force reality to adapt to us.


You're comparing apples and oranges here.

lol... That's original. In so far as I'm comparing Candidate Romney with Sitting President Obama, you're right. They are two entirely different things. You know, that makes it SO MUCH WORSE for Obama though, and I deliberately avoided a heavy focus on that.

The bias and outright one sided nature of the whole argument was precisely the point to AVOID here...not build upon and fight over.

As I predicted in my second post to the OP, that whole thing would be lost on someone. You came and proved that true. I wonder though, if you even read far enough into the OP to see that what you were about to post on that second reply was precisely what I said someone WOULD come along and do without reading the OP to the fullest and understanding the point of the thread.

Pointing this out at all wouldn't be fair..if I hadn't literally predicted it would happen, word for word, in my own OP. That makes the fact you plowed right past that, perfectly fair to note.

One other observation. I'm a bad one to whine about derailing, as I'm not exactly Mr. On-Topic myself often enough. I try not to drop into someone's thread then derail for the whole point of devolving it into a combat thread or just killing it outright, though. Exploring topics and yes, LEARNING from others is what drives me to spend time here. At some point, fighting just isn't "fun" anymore and what IS ultimately gained? I've yet to see anything in this setting.



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 05:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Every single point you raised in the OP was about the candidates position on LGBT issues - ergo, "you focused this thread on LGBT" - not me, you.

Now find any other administration that has come close to the level of supporting LGBT issues as Obama has. Bush? Clinton? The other Bush? Reagan? Not even remotely close. If "pandering for the gay vote" means actually doing something for them, then I guess you got Obama there. You tried to make this thread to show how Obama and Romney were exactly the same, but all it does is highlight their differences.



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 05:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blackmarketeer
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Every single point you raised in the OP was about the candidates position on LGBT issues - ergo, "you focused this thread on LGBT" - not me, you.

Now find any other administration that has come close to the level of supporting LGBT issues as Obama has. Bush? Clinton? The other Bush? Reagan? Not even remotely close. If "pandering for the gay vote" means actually doing something for them, then I guess you got Obama there. You tried to make this thread to show how Obama and Romney were exactly the same, but all it does is highlight their differences.

I give up. I could draw it in Crayon, in 3 foot lettering, across a damned wall and you'd still miss it. You'r SO deeply and single mindedly focused on Obama and so hard obsessed with attacking anything that doesn't worship the ground the man walks on with petals dropped at his feet, that nothing gets through.

Well.. Troll away... You're very accomplished at that, as you've proven on not only this thread but 3 others I've watched you derail and basically tear up in the last week alone. I really don't get what drives people to SEEK OUT conflict and work to find openings to attack a point, despite the attack being from a direction outside the scope of the thread being discussed. However, it seems to be enough for some. You enjoy yourself now....No one else is enjoying you very much, and the outright hostility I see down your posts, in your profile, is where I get that from.

There are a few people on here that I find offensive enough to add to my Foe list as a reminder to ignore them when the name comes up on anything, in any context. You're the first member at ATS which has left me actually wishing we had the formal ignore feature to block having to see the hate your generating on a number of threads, by software exception. The peace and quiet would be nice.

Sadly, we don't have an Ignore feature, so I'll have to suffice with simply ignoring by choice and action. After your conduct on this thread, as the last of the series I've seen you on, I shall ignore everything related to you from this day forward. Trolls don't twirl my baton, and you define the term.

Good day to ya.


edit on 12-5-2012 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 06:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Yes he is quite well trained in deconstructionism and in your face tactics. Truly you are speaking to a brick wall in trying to point out the original purpose of this thread to such a committed individual. That he cannot see the hypocrisy of Obama's position and how he is using the LGBT community for political gain is pathetic.



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 06:43 PM
link   
LOL, sure blame it on me for failing to get your invalid "point". A flip-flopper is someone who promises something to one group then does exactly the opposite, or supports opposing sides of an argument/issue, depending on who he talks to. Obama may have his opinion on gay marriage (which he doesn't seem to care for) but he has always stated that he will support marriage equality. He ran in 2008 on the promise he would repeal DA/DT and opposed DOMA, and he has kept those promises. He has never claimed he would seek to oppose gay marriage to court votes from the religious right. I could care less if he came out and said he hates gays, so long as he states what his position is on the issue and sticks to that position so the voters know what they are getting. With Obama, I know he will continue to push for equal rights for LGBT members. With Romney? Who knows. He panders to the LGBT community for votes, then secretly funnels money to a group opposing gay marriage. Has Obama worked in secret to oppose gay marriage while claiming he openly supports them? No.

You can attack someone all you want for not immediately supporting your narrow viewpoint, but that isn't going to make you correct.



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 07:29 PM
link   
OK so I must not be smart enough to get this post either, I still dont get the OP's point. Are you saying all candidates are the same and they all flip-flop? Or are you saying they all flip-flop on gay issues?

OP also makes a good argument against his own point then says he know someone will come along and say this... well, yea considering it's a valid argument against your point, why shouldn't they?

I look at flip-flops like this:

1. Did the candidate make good on his promise? If yes, then not a flip-flop

2. Did the candidate make good on his promise OR attempt to make good on it? If yes, then not a flip-flop.

3. Did the candidate not bother to make good on his promise? If yes, then a flip-flop.

4. Did the candidate promise mutually exclusive goals to opposing groups? This is an automatic flip-flop.

#2 for a good ppoint would be Barak Obama promise to close gitmo. Did he suceed? No. BUT he did make good on his promise to TRY and close it. He got shut down in the attempt by Congress. So he didn't flip-flop on the issue, even tho he didn't suceed.

Romney made good on his prommise to bring health care to his state when he was governor. But now I think he is flip-flopping on the issue of health care by saying he will oppose the same thing nationwide, since obamacare is romneycare.

Maybe thats the point of the OP was trying to make, but I got lost in it being so much about the gay issue.



posted on May, 12 2012 @ 07:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Here a flop there there a flip a smack and slap and poke.




new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join