ext_12976 ([identity profile] rick-day.livejournal.com) wrote in [community profile] talkpolitics2012-01-06 04:17 pm
Entry tags:

The Game Changer?

Hit the Mitt!

Well, it looks like Mitt Romney has been playing the "Selective Family Album" game and kinda/sorta/oppsies forgot to tell everyone he is 1/4 Mexican.

And just did why did Mitt's father flee Mexico for the safety of the US?

In his public life Mitt Romney has said and written little about his ancestors' history in Mexico.  In one oft-repeated quote he said his family left the U.S. for Mexico to escape persecution for their religious beliefs.

In fact, Romney's great grandfather, Miles Park Romney, led that first expedition to escape not persecution but prosecution for polygamy, or what Mormons called ‘plural marriage.’

Well, this is rather awkward, from a race standpoint. So we have the Southern US. There is a strong showing of rather simple minded voters who are Crusading Voters for Christ and All Other Things White™.

Who they going to vote for. Mitt the Mex? Barrak the Magic Negro?

Or maybe that white guy Gary Johnson, the only real social liberal/fiscal conservative in the race.

God DAMN I love Southern Idiocracy.

Question: Game changer? If Mitt embraces his SOTB roots, will this swing brown skins to his camp? WILL ANYONE DEMAND TO SEE HIS BIRTH CERTIFICATE?

ETA: This just in! Cain demands to know more about this polygamy thing!

[identity profile] dreadfulpenny81.livejournal.com 2012-01-07 08:14 am (UTC)(link)
Since this is in reply to my comment, I would LOVE for you to point out an instance where I EVER said because Obama's dad was a socialist, that made him one, too.

Otherwise, you might wanna revise your comment.

[identity profile] chessdev.livejournal.com 2012-01-07 08:16 am (UTC)(link)
I didn't say that just *you* said this, although it was said plenty
both online and over in conservatism.

A position I'm fairly certain you have never argued *against*.

[identity profile] dreadfulpenny81.livejournal.com 2012-01-07 08:18 am (UTC)(link)
A position I'm fairly certain you have never argued *against*. - Considering my original statement, I think you know the answer to that. But nice straw man all the same. ;)

[identity profile] chessdev.livejournal.com 2012-01-07 08:25 am (UTC)(link)
I remember the numerous battles and times you brought it up in conservatism
and thinking to myself "YEAH...mividaloca99 understands the connection is a false one"

and how you took that stand and shot down those accusations of false association -- I
almost couldn't keep up with your responses.

...

...

... except it didnt happen, and you never made this point until now when it
concerned Romney.

I wonder how that happened...

[identity profile] dreadfulpenny81.livejournal.com 2012-01-07 08:44 am (UTC)(link)
I've consistently argued that family members shouldn't be the focus of elections if they aren't the ones running. I've even said that about Obama's kids in this comm and you know that!

My first entry about Obama on LJ (http://mividaloca99.livejournal.com/4365.html) - not one mention of Obama's daddy.

Anything else?

[identity profile] blue-mangos.livejournal.com 2012-01-07 01:30 pm (UTC)(link)
I've got something! By your own logic in your recent abortion post by not speaking out against something harmful, groups or people are passively endorsing it. So I guess [livejournal.com profile] chessdev is right, you did endorse those statements made against Obama. Unless you are a hypocrite and your belief only applies to a certain issue.

[identity profile] chessdev.livejournal.com 2012-01-07 04:32 pm (UTC)(link)
Beat me to it!

[identity profile] dreadfulpenny81.livejournal.com 2012-01-07 08:52 pm (UTC)(link)
WRONG! The groups are endorsing it because they're more concerned about the censorship issue and want the information allegedly being censored to spread. Never said anything about groups not speaking out all together. Got it? Good!

[identity profile] chessdev.livejournal.com 2012-01-07 09:51 pm (UTC)(link)
Uh -- the comment was about *your* statements, as well as just general implicit consent...not about other groups.

[identity profile] blue-mangos.livejournal.com 2012-01-07 10:49 pm (UTC)(link)
Do you think anyone here buys your backpedaling and attempts at revision? We don't, no matter how loudly you shout or get antagonistic and rude.

[identity profile] dreadfulpenny81.livejournal.com 2012-01-08 02:55 am (UTC)(link)
Frankly, I'm getting sick and tired of being told what I'm saying when I know exactly what I said and I meant it. If you don't like what I have to say, that's your business but I don't appreciate people making false assumptions or putting words in my mouth. I can speak for myself just fine and I think I've proved that. Thanks!

[identity profile] geezer-also.livejournal.com 2012-01-07 04:14 pm (UTC)(link)
And I always thought it was because of his voting record in the Senate....oh wait.

[identity profile] chessdev.livejournal.com 2012-01-07 04:34 pm (UTC)(link)
Which votes would those be??

and when he was President, Obama had some of the most
successful Capitalists on his financial advisory board.


But HEY....why let little things like that matter, right?

[identity profile] telemann.livejournal.com 2012-01-07 04:35 pm (UTC)(link)
He's wasn't that liberal. Slightly left of center. Check out "Roll Call" (a data base of every Congress' vote and each Senator), they do an average of every congress and since the 1960s, Congress has been moving to the right. [livejournal.com profile] politikitty has mentioned this database several times to BDJ when he asserts the President Bush was no conservative (Presidents can offer their views on specific bills in Congress, even though technically they can't vote, and Bush was extremely conservative).

[identity profile] geezer-also.livejournal.com 2012-01-07 04:59 pm (UTC)(link)
Actually I was referring more to his lack of votes due to his short time in the Senate. (ya know, just snark ;))

Thanks for the link.

[identity profile] chessdev.livejournal.com 2012-01-07 05:02 pm (UTC)(link)
I'm not quite sure how the ABSENCE of a vote either way could be
used to determine a political leaning,

but ok...it was just snark on your part, so ok...


8-i

[identity profile] telemann.livejournal.com 2012-01-07 05:11 pm (UTC)(link)
You know, the GOP "inexperienced" meme thingey. But see, that being an "outsider" of DC meme thingey can only work for specific Republicans, if Democratic candidates use it, well.... HAHA.

It's a CRAAAAZY town, that D.C.

[identity profile] telemann.livejournal.com 2012-01-07 05:32 pm (UTC)(link)
Haha, it's like that Chris Rock routine about the girl friend that complains if you pay too little attention ("you don't love me anymore"), or complains if you give her too much attention ("would you please stop suffocating me, give me some room!") ;)

[identity profile] geezer-also.livejournal.com 2012-01-08 04:27 pm (UTC)(link)
Yeah, you are correct, except it seems not to matter how "outsider" one is, once they get in, no more outsider (regardless of party)

[identity profile] badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com 2012-01-08 03:32 pm (UTC)(link)
And besides, it just shows where he stands in the Senate, not where he stands ideologically overall. But telemann thinks the CBO actually counts outputs and not only inputs, so the confusion is understandible.

[identity profile] geezer-also.livejournal.com 2012-01-08 04:29 pm (UTC)(link)
Hey, I'm just happy that when I imply something negative about the President, I'm not accused of being a racist ;)

[identity profile] badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com 2012-01-08 05:03 pm (UTC)(link)
Don't jinx yourself.