The Game Changer?

[rick-day.livejournal.com]

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!

Comments

[chessdev.livejournal.com]

Right, because it's not an issue. No one's talking about asylum because there's no need to talk about it.


YOU BROUGHT IT UP! Now, pointing out that *your* lack of a point somehow proves me wrong? It doesn't work that way...

I didn't throw it in

Yes you did. Because we weren't talking religious persecution -- we were talking about Double Standards of the GOP. Fleeing South so you can legally marry 2 or more women = GOOD. Fleeing North so you dont die in gang violence, starve to death, or go to jail for NOT paying a bribe = BAD.

Stop with the strawman argument. Even when your attempt to insert a non-issue backfires, you STILL try to act like the *absence* of your point means there is nothing to the conversation.

No - there was nothing to YOUR side of the conversation.

One more time so you'll get it: This is about Double Standards. If you were REALLY concerned about persecution it would have been brought up much sooner than now. But you haven't. In FACT, your fellow Republicans have argued **against** asylum for people fleeing persecution.


Face it. You're on the wrong side of the argument and your GOP buddies are inconsistent in their responses. Glad to clear that up for you...

(Who wants to bet he'll bring up "religious persecution" again even though it's NOT what we're talking about?)

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

YOU BROUGHT IT UP! Now, pointing out that *your* lack of a point somehow proves me wrong? It doesn't work that way...

I didn't write this post. You realize that, right? That I didn't put up an OP about Romney's Mexican heritage?

No, I didn't bring it up. The topic demands it, as it is part of the story.

Yes you did. Because we weren't talking religious persecution -- we were talking about Double Standards of the GOP.

No, you decided to try to play a "gotcha" game, and got burned big time. And now you can't admit you were off base, and need to compound a bigoted position in order to try and make Republicans look bad.

[chessdev.livejournal.com]

You trying to throw out a strawman, and my not playing along with it doesnt make my position bigoted...

I just dont buy into diversions that you keep throwing out there..