Romney Defends Hateful Speech About Mormons?

#76
#76
Gramps said:
Very true.
There is a documentary been showing on current tv " The making of the Mormon candidate" ( not sure that is the exact name) that portrays the Mormons and of course Romney in a very bad way.
Click to expand...

The most popular play on Broadway right now is a parody called The Book of Mormon. HBO had a hit series about a Mormon polygamist called Big Love. TLC has a reality show about a dude with 4 wives. Haven't heard Mitt Romney call for any of them to be shutdown.
 
#77
#77
This guy makes me wish I could go back in time and change my major from History to Horticulture.

You want to be objective? Study some fuggin' plants.
 
#79
#79
n_huffhines said:
zing.jpg
Click to expand...

If you have passed a course in logic and joined the debate team, I would recommend against your giving up that kind of information around here. We got some people posting who favor ignorance and react very badly to education.
 
#80
#80
dukes_of_maggard said:
This made me laugh
Click to expand...

He's just talking crap. I gave several references, and I think I might just give him several more. Of course, he'll just keep talking crap because that's all he knows. I also provided some simple syllogisms that a child could understand and asked them to give an answer. They couldn't do it. lol
 
#81
#81
Vol Main said:
He's just talking crap. I gave several references, and I think I might just give him several more. Of course, he'll just keep talking crap because that's all he knows. I also provided some simple syllogisms that a child could understand and asked them to give an answer. They couldn't do it. lol
Click to expand...

the troll is strong with this one
 
#82
#82
therealUT said:
What the hell just happened in this thread?

If I read it correctly, the OP just stated the following:

Romney attacked the stance the White House took, saying that free speech ought never to be besmirched; the backdrop being an anti-Islam film.

Then, the OP went on to state that Romney, although he has yet to make such statements on record, would condemn free speech if an anti-Mormon movie was made.

Is this correct?

What kind of ****ed up bizarro world do you live in, Vol Main? You are taking shots at a guy due to your own projection of how he would react in a certain situation. Moreover, has Romney made any statements with regard to the critically-acclaimed Broadway play, "The Book of Mormon"? Oh, in fact, Romney has made the following statement:



So, basically, you are dead wrong, Vol Main.
Click to expand...

Not really; you just don't get the point. There's not a single person here getting it. I do have a confession though; the fix was in on this one, because I already read an article where Romney contradicted himself on his first statement before I wrote the OP. First Romney rips the Cairo Embassy for speaking in defense of religion. Then he steps up and talks about how much he supports freedom of religion. The mopes were supposed to howl that Romney would support freedom of religion, and they did. But they will never get the fact that Romney's first statement was to criticize the embassy for doing exactly that. They will never, ever, ever get that.
 
#83
#83
Vol Main said:
Not really; you just don't get the point. There's not a single person here getting it. I do have a confession though; the fix was in on this one, because I already read an article where Romney contradicted himself on his first statement before I wrote the OP. First Romney rips the Cairo Embassy for speaking in defense of religion. Then he steps up and talks about how much he supports freedom of religion. The mopes were supposed to howl that Romney would support freedom of religion, and they did. But they will never get the fact that Romney's first statement was to criticize the embassy for doing exactly that. They will never, ever, ever get that.
Click to expand...

the troll is strong with this one
 
#84
#84
Vol Main said:
Not really; you just don't get the point. There's not a single person here getting it. I do have a confession though; the fix was in on this one, because I already read an article where Romney contradicted himself on his first statement before I wrote the OP. First Romney rips the Cairo Embassy for speaking in defense of religion. Then he steps up and talks about how much he supports freedom of religion. The mopes were supposed to howl that Romney would support freedom of religion, and they did. But they will never get the fact that Romney's first statement was to criticize the embassy for doing exactly that. They will never, ever, ever get that.
Click to expand...

I'm amazed you graduated college if this thread is an indication of your thought process.
 
#85
#85
Vol Main said:
Not really; you just don't get the point. There's not a single person here getting it. I do have a confession though; the fix was in on this one, because I already read an article where Romney contradicted himself on his first statement before I wrote the OP. First Romney rips the Cairo Embassy for speaking in defense of religion. Then he steps up and talks about how much he supports freedom of religion. The mopes were supposed to howl that Romney would support freedom of religion, and they did. But they will never get the fact that Romney's first statement was to criticize the embassy for doing exactly that. They will never, ever, ever get that.
Click to expand...

GSvol alt?
 
#87
#87
volinbham said:
I'm amazed you graduated college if this thread is an indication of your thought process.
Click to expand...

All right, let's look at "thought process." What is the subject of the OP? Here's a big hint; look at the title. Romney is the subject, i.e. Romney and respect for freedom of speech and religion. Is that an important subject? Well, in my opinion it is, because Romney is nominated as a candidate for President of the United States. Also, the topic I think is an important subject. But in your thought process, I become the subject. Why? Am I a candidate for President? No. So why do I become the more important subject in your thought process than Mitt Romney? Do my views on respect for free speech and religion really matter to the country? Not so much. But you make me the subject of your thought process. Why? Why does your thought process shift from the important subject...to me? Please explain that, because I think that thought process is messed up. Does the OP introduce an important issue about Romney? Yes, and that is purpose of the OP. So where is your concern for the purpose of the OP? You haven't even gotten to it. What happened in your thought process to divert your thinking from the subject and stop you from thinking about its purpose? What did you do? You thought something negative, something bad...about what? Did you think about something more important than the subject? No, you thought about me. I am not important, but I became more important to you than a candidate for the Presidency and the issue about him in the OP. What kind of thought process is that? Well, relying only upon observation, it appears that thinking and saying something bad about me was more important to your thought process than the subject and issue in the OP. Your thought process diverted to the unimportant for the purpose of being negative towards someone who is unimportant, before it ever even arrived at the subject and real issue. Now, if you want to think about someone with a messed up thought process, look at the man in the mirror, because I'm here to tell you that's messed up.
 
#88
#88
Vol Main said:
All right, let's look at "thought process." What is the subject of the OP? Here's a big hint; look at the title. Romney is the subject, i.e. Romney and respect for freedom of speech and religion. Is that an important subject? Well, in my opinion it is, because Romney is nominated as a candidate for President of the United States. Also, the topic I think is an important subject. But in your thought process, I become the subject. Why? Am I a candidate for President? No. So why do I become the more important subject in your thought process than Mitt Romney? Do my views on respect for free speech and religion really matter to the country? Not so much. But you make me the subject of your thought process. Why? Why does your thought process shift from the important subject...to me? Please explain that, because I think that thought process is messed up. Does the OP introduce an important issue about Romney? Yes, and that is purpose of the OP. So where is your concern for the purpose of the OP? You haven't even gotten to it. What happened in your thought process to divert your thinking from the subject and stop you from thinking about its purpose? What did you do? You thought something negative, something bad...about what? Did you think about something more important than the subject? No, you thought about me. I am not important, but I became more important to you than a candidate for the Presidency and the issue about him in the OP. What kind of thought process is that? Well, relying only upon observation, it appears that thinking and saying something bad about me was more important to your thought process than the subject and issue in the OP. Your thought process diverted to the unimportant for the purpose of being negative towards someone who is unimportant, before it ever even arrived at the subject and real issue. Now, if you want to think about someone with a messed up thought process, look at the man in the mirror, because I'm here to tell you that's messed up.
Click to expand...

I really wonder what goes on in your brain.

Okay - I'll play once more.

Romney's reaction to the embassy statement was that instead of condemning the attack on the embassy the statement ONLY commented on how wrong it was for someone to mock Islam. Romney was NOT defending the content of the video - he was condemning the only statement from the US about attacks on it's embassy as being more concerned about the protesters' than saying the attacks were wrong and would not be tolerated. It felt it was too apologetic and was apologizing for free speech. The Obama administration ALSO felt the embassy statement was wrong FOR THE SAME REASONS.

Now any rational person realizes that defending the right to free speech is completely different than condoning the content of said speech. As such it is completely consistent to complain about apologizing for free speech and simultaneously expressing an opinion that you don't agree with the content of the speech. Both Hillary Clinton and Obama did the same thing.

So your supposed uncovering of some double standard is once again based on your own interpretation of a situation that just about anyone would see is not a double standard. After all - if it is a double standard then Hillary and Obama are likewise guilty.

Now to the crazy rant about moving from the topic to commenting on posters. You do this throughout the thread yourself. You've made all sorts of predictions about what MG would do. The post of yours I responded to was almost entirely about the posters in this thread and how they might react and how they can't see your truth. All I can conclude is that you are a troll or recently suffered a stroke.
 
#89
#89
Shortly before posting, I read an article which included Romney's second comment about the Cairo incident. You recall that Romney's first reaction was to criticize the Embassy's statement. But Romney's followup comment was almost identical to the Embassy's statement that he had criticized the previous day. Think about that. Writing the OP as I did was probably a bad idea. Instead of making some plain statement of fact, I thought I'd try to get some mental energy built up and then release it where it had to go. But that depended upon people thinking from point A to B to C, and that doesn't happen around here. Oh well. I get bored sometimes with the straight line, so I experiment with different writing techniques and styles. Sometimes they work, sometimes they don't. And yeah, I find that all of the personal crap directed at me can alter my style, which is why some people are going on filter. But don't tell me that I diverted from a subject to criticize somebody, when criticizing me was all he was doing. After taking my time to respect you enough to tediously reply to your question, you just respond by calling it a crazy rant. So MG is on filter now, and so are you.
 
Last edited:
#92
#92
Vol Main said:
Not really; you just don't get the point. There's not a single person here getting it. I do have a confession though; the fix was in on this one, because I already read an article where Romney contradicted himself on his first statement before I wrote the OP. First Romney rips the Cairo Embassy for speaking in defense of religion. Then he steps up and talks about how much he supports freedom of religion. The mopes were supposed to howl that Romney would support freedom of religion, and they did. But they will never get the fact that Romney's first statement was to criticize the embassy for doing exactly that. They will never, ever, ever get that.
Click to expand...

The only way this works is: (1) to say that the statements made, which Romney was responding to, were not made in any official government capacity; or, (2) that they were but that the government has personhood and, therefore, has the right to free speech.

You might be able to make a compelling argument for (1); I'd love to see you try to make the argument for (2) (hell, maybe you will do my pre-dissertation groundwork for me).
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top