I Told You Romney Was...

[arnaldoabru 11]

Pro Choice

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/romney-bain-abortion-stericycle-sec

[Tigermike 3,426]

Wow I guess I'll be voting for Obama now. :roflol: :roflol:

[arnaldoabru 11]

Good for you.

[autigeremt 6,970]

I really don't care. I want OBAMA OUT! Communism is a greater evil than choice right about now.

[TitanTiger 20,708]

So my choices in this matter are one who is rabidly pro-choice right now and has reiterated that stance in no uncertain terms and one who claims to be pro-life now even if his past causes me to question how deep that change runs.

You think this revelation of yours makes the decision harder?

[arnaldoabru 11]

I really don't care. I want OBAMA OUT! Communism is a greater evil than choice right about now.

Who's a communist?

[Tigermike 3,426]

I really don't care. I want OBAMA OUT! Communism is a greater evil than choice right about now.

Who's a communist?

Obama's father and his mentor after his father cut out and left.

[arnaldoabru 11]

So my choices in this matter are one who is rabidly pro-choice right now and has reiterated that stance in no uncertain terms and one who claims to be pro-life now even if his past causes me to question how deep that change runs.

You think this revelation of yours makes the decision harder?

Not for me, but you have a conundrum

[arnaldoabru 11]

I really don't care. I want OBAMA OUT! Communism is a greater evil than choice right about now.

Who's a communist?

Obama's father and his mentor after his father cut out and left.

How old was President Obama's father when he left? I don't think President Obama ever met Sal Alinsky.

[japantiger 4,077]

Obama is a communist. A rose by any other name.....

[TitanTiger 20,708]

So my choices in this matter are one who is rabidly pro-choice right now and has reiterated that stance in no uncertain terms and one who claims to be pro-life now even if his past causes me to question how deep that change runs.

You think this revelation of yours makes the decision harder?

Not for me, but you have a conundrum

I really don't. Not between these two. One is utterly and despicably committed to giving the unborn no rights at all. The other at least claims to be different and has to answer to a voting base that supports the unborn's right to live.

Obama has made it rather easy even with Romney's past. And not just on abortion.

[arnaldoabru 11]

Obama is a communist. A rose by any other name.....

You've seen his communist party membership card, but not his birth certificate

[TitanTiger 20,708]

Obama is a communist. A rose by any other name.....

You've seen his communist party membership card, but not his birth certificate

Gotta give you props for that one. Well played.

[TexasTiger 13,556]

So my choices in this matter are one who is rabidly pro-choice right now and has reiterated that stance in no uncertain terms and one who claims to be pro-life now even if his past causes me to question how deep that change runs.

You think this revelation of yours makes the decision harder?

Not for me, but you have a conundrum

I really don't. Not between these two. One is utterly and despicably committed to giving the unborn no rights at all. The other at least claims to be different and has to answer to a voting base that supports the unborn's right to live.

Obama has made it rather easy even with Romney's past. And not just on abortion.

Romney's decision on this issue was driven by profits. Convince yourself you feel a-okay with that if you need to.

[TitanTiger 20,708]

I don't feel a-ok with it. There's a reason why I supported others in the primaries. But Obama doesnt present anything close to a viable alternative on the issue. His zeal for Roe combined with his naked election year pandering to his base on the HHS mandate make the decision for me.

[Grumps 3,706]

So my choices in this matter are one who is rabidly pro-choice right now and has reiterated that stance in no uncertain terms and one who claims to be pro-life now even if his past causes me to question how deep that change runs.

You think this revelation of yours makes the decision harder?

Not for me, but you have a conundrum

I really don't. Not between these two. One is utterly and despicably committed to giving the unborn no rights at all. The other at least claims to be different and has to answer to a voting base that supports the unborn's right to live.

Obama has made it rather easy even with Romney's past. And not just on abortion.

Romney's decision on this issue was driven by profits. Convince yourself you feel a-okay with that if you need to.

How does claiming to be pro-life make more profit for Romney?

[TitanTiger 20,708]

Forgive me, but under the current circumstances I will take recently and perhaps not strongly pro-life (at least as strong as I think we all should be) over rabidly pro-choice. Perhaps if Obama were more balanced on this issue there would be reason to ponder my options. He isn't.

[TexasTiger 13,556]

I don't feel a-ok with it. There's a reason why I supported others in the primaries. But Obama doesnt present anything close to a viable alternative on the issue. His zeal for Roe combined with his naked election year pandering to his base on the HHS mandate make the decision for me.

Roe is the law of the land. You're free to disagree with Obama's principles, although one should be fair in characterizing them. Based on his record, Romney's heart-felt principles are pretty hard to discern.

[TitanTiger 20,708]

Yes, Obama doesn't reluctantly abide by Roe while working to get it overturned or at the very least modified to have some humane and common sense restrictions. He zealously defends and applauds it as is.

I may not be certain what Romney's heartfelt principles are on this, but I know Obama's and they are repugnant.

[TexasTiger 13,556]

Yes, Obama doesn't reluctantly abide by Roe while working to get it overturned or at the very least modified to have some humane and common sense restrictions. He zealously defends and applauds it as is.

I may not be certain what Romney's heartfelt principles are on this, but I know Obama's and they are repugnant.

For an issue that you find so obvious and compelling, I would think you would find Romney's "whatever you guys want me to say" approach pretty repugnant.

[arnaldoabru 11]

So my choices in this matter are one who is rabidly pro-choice right now and has reiterated that stance in no uncertain terms and one who claims to be pro-life now even if his past causes me to question how deep that change runs.

You think this revelation of yours makes the decision harder?

Not for me, but you have a conundrum

I really don't. Not between these two. One is utterly and despicably committed to giving the unborn no rights at all. The other at least claims to be different and has to answer to a voting base that supports the unborn's right to live.

Obama has made it rather easy even with Romney's past. And not just on abortion.

Romney's decision on this issue was driven by profits. Convince yourself you feel a-okay with that if you need to.

How does claiming to be pro-life make more profit for Romney?

If you are going to come in late, start at the beginning and read the link

[arnaldoabru 11]

Yes, Obama doesn't reluctantly abide by Roe while working to get it overturned or at the very least modified to have some humane and common sense restrictions. He zealously defends and applauds it as is.

I may not be certain what Romney's heartfelt principles are on this, but I know Obama's and they are repugnant.

I've never met a single pro choice person who are in favor of late term-partial birth abortions( except in mothers health, etc..). I'm sure you can find some link to some wacked out people who are. Just like I can find examples of prolifers killing doctors and blowing up clinics. President Obama I'm pretty sure is on the record for saying the samething I just said

[AFTiger 282]

Yes, Obama doesn't reluctantly abide by Roe while working to get it overturned or at the very least modified to have some humane and common sense restrictions. He zealously defends and applauds it as is.

I may not be certain what Romney's heartfelt principles are on this, but I know Obama's and they are repugnant.

I've never met a single pro choice person who are in favor of late term-partial birth abortions( except in mothers health, etc..). I'm sure you can find some link to some wacked out people who are. Just like I can find examples of prolifers killing doctors and blowing up clinics. President Obama I'm pretty sure is on the record for saying the samething I just said

Obama is one of those persons.

A pro-life activist in Illinois says Barack Obama has repeatedly mischaracterized his opposition to the Illinois Born Alive Infants Protection Act while he was a state senator.

The Federal Born Alive Infants Protection Act was signed into law in 2002 after receiving unanimous support from the U.S. Senate. The measure that forces hospitals to give medical care to abortion survivors -- if warranted -- even received the backing of liberal senators Ted Kennedy (D-Massachusetts ), Barbara Boxer (D-California), and Hillary Clinton (D-New York).

Obama now says he did not support the Illinois measure because it "lacked the Federal language clarifying the act would not be used to undermine Roe vs. Wade."

Pro-life blogger Jill Stanek recently wrote a column for WorldNetDaily.com titled "Obama's biggest lie about supporting infanticide." She points out Obama actively opposed the Born Alive Infants Protection Act for three years in the Illinois senate.

"He voted against it. He was the sole senator speaking against it on the [illinois] senate floor [for] two years. And the third year, he held the bill from being considered altogether in committee and killed the bill," Stanek contends.

She says Obama's explanation for opposing the Illinois bill does not pass the straight-face test because, as a committee chairman, he blocked the measure's sponsor from adding the federal language protecting Roe vs. Wade. That federal provision says the bill does not deny or add rights to the species Homo sapiens before birth.

Stanek fought to stop "live-birth abortion" after holding a live aborted baby at a Chicago-area hospital where she worked as a registered nurse.

"Barack Obama is now saying that, had that provision been in the Illinois bill he would have voted for it, which is absolutely false – because in 2003, the senate sponsor tried to add that provision and Barack Obama, as the chairman of the committee where the bill was being held, disallowed him from adding that provision, disallowed me from testifying, disallowed the committee from even voting on it. So, it sat in committee for 22 months," Stanek explains.

She reveals it was not until Obama left the Illinois Senate that the Illinois Born Alive Infants Protection Act passed in August of 2005.

[TitanTiger 20,708]

Yes, Obama doesn't reluctantly abide by Roe while working to get it overturned or at the very least modified to have some humane and common sense restrictions. He zealously defends and applauds it as is.

I may not be certain what Romney's heartfelt principles are on this, but I know Obama's and they are repugnant.

For an issue that you find so obvious and compelling, I would think you would find Romney's "whatever you guys want me to say" approach pretty repugnant.

Anytime someone has a relatively recent conversion on the issue that also coincides with political ambitions, I have real questions as to their sincerity. But Obama has shown no moderation at all on this issue. Do I vote for someone who claims to have changed to pro-life and will have to answer to pro-life people as a significant part of his base, or someone who's brazenly obvious and consistent about not viewing the unborn as persons?

Throw in the HHS contraception mandate BS he pulled and my disagreement over the gay marriage issue (albeit the latter is far down the list) and the choice for me isn't that difficult. There's no way on earth I'd pull the lever for someone with Obama's views and record. So it's Romney or nobody. I don't particularly want Obama to have another term, this time with no reelection considerations to moderate his decisions.

[rolltide316 0]

Regardless of which party a typical American leans, most do not care about a politicians view on abortion. Both parties polarize the issue when most really don't care. They use the issue as a rallying cry for the extremes on each side. Personally, I think because there is no way to have a consensus on where life begins the federal government cannot take a stance. Thus leave it to each state to decide.