Who do you support for Governor in Pennsylvania in 2010?

did-u-c-that wrote:

<quoted text>
Are you not accusing the majority of Americans who don't agree with gay marriage of being bigots? And would that be because they don't agree with your perspective on the situation? Could that be because you are not a religious person and most people who don't agree with gay marriage are? And, I don't understand how I am minimizing the importance of this issue. I'm simply discussing it with you in a rational way. I'm debating you fairly, without name calling. Isn't that what you always ask people to do? To have a rational discussion. I'm being willful in my intent to possibly make you see that those who oppose gay marriage are not bigoted as you would like to have us believe.

You are deciding to deny certain rights under the law to a particular segment of our population. Discrimination? Bigotry as you thing gays as lesser beings?

The law doesn't care what your religion says. Marriage to government is like a contract that provides protects to those married & offers benefits such as social security & taxes, and by hospitals.

No one cares if you are personally against gay marriage. Just quit trying to legislate your views.

Dan the Man wrote:

<quoted text>
First chickenshit, your denial of the majority stance on slavery, Jim Crow, interracial marriage and segregation reveals just how far you will stoop to continue your dishonest personal attacks on me. Anyone who denies that the mere existence of those laws doesn't reflect the stance of the majority reveals that he is simply not a serious or honest person.
Second, comparing homosexuality to pedophilia or choice of motor vehicle further shows that you are not being serious or honest.
You are either so completely ignorant and morally stunted that you honestly can't tell the difference between sexual orientation and choice in hair dye or you are deliberately taking asinine positions just to find a way to argue with me.

danny BOY begins the defense of his unsupported statements with farm animal scatology. What compelling adult language. More of the same from little danny BOY.

danny BOY, you stated that a MAJORITY OF AMERICANS: supported slavery, supported jim crow, opposed interracial marriage, supported racial segregation in the military and supported the denial of voting rights to blacks. You can't just make things up to fabricate a straw man to make your point. Had you merely stated that those groups historically experienced discrimination it would have been honest. But you didn't say that did you? It's doubtful that a MAJORITY OF AMERICANS supported those discriminatory practices and you offered no proof supporting your grandiose statements.

Your response, rather than offering any proof of your claims, is "Anyone who denies that the mere existence of those laws doesn't reflect the stance of the majority reveals that he is simply not a serious or honest person." How convenient. You provide no supporting evidence but rather accuse me of not being a serious, honest person in questioning your broad brushed and unsupported comments. You are a slippery liar, danny BOY.

That's so often the issue with you. You make things up, embellish, pad and lie shamelessly to support your point of view. You are a pathological liar and seem incapable of opining without lying or embellishing. When caught you typically name call and respond even more irrationally.

Actually I WAS being honest in querying your support of classes of people who often experience discrimination. My point was that you knee-jerk accuse those on the other side of YOUR issues as bigots. Apparently that's the measure. If danny BOY supports a class experiencing discrimination then those on the other side are bigots.

At the moment you are accusing approximately half of adult Americans bigotry.

You might gain a little credibility in using a scalpel rather than exclusively using a hammer.

Settle down or I'll send in Mitt Romney and his bikini wax kit!

Ted wrote:

It's doubtful that a MAJORITY OF AMERICANS supported those discriminatory practices and you offered no proof supporting your grandiose statements.

"It's doubtful." Also no proof.

I believe that laws stand because the majority supports them. And that when a majority no longer supports them, laws get changed. Nothing grandiose about that - that's how democracy works.

But for some reason, you don't think that's true.

I find that puzzling. But nothing I've ever posted has ever convinced you of anything, so there's no reason for me to put any energy into proving you wrong. I'll just leave it at this - your position makes no logical sense.

Ted wrote:

Actually I WAS being honest in querying your support of classes of people who often experience discrimination. My point was that you knee-jerk accuse those on the other side of YOUR issues as bigots. Apparently that's the measure. If danny BOY supports a class experiencing discrimination then those on the other side are bigots.
At the moment you are accusing approximately half of adult Americans bigotry.
You might gain a little credibility in using a scalpel rather than exclusively using a hammer.

I might gain credibility with YOU if I did that? LOL! You're funny.

For some reason you aren't concerned about discrimination against your fellow Americans based on sexual orientation. Can you explain that? Can you explain why you seek to deny homosexuals equal protection under the law?

i want to marry my cat....whats the law say about that ???.....this way i get all the pussie i want.......
HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!

im all for gay marriage why cant people get along today?
its none of your business and none of mine..
abortion and gay rights and if you believe in god should not be the governments role to dictate....

as long as a couple are happy,.who cares what sex they are???????
as most marriages between a man and a woman end up in divorce ( 50-% rate in this country ) lets give the gays a shot at marriage... is it really gonna hurt you??
Affect your life? who cares!!

Dan the Man wrote:

<quoted text>
"It's doubtful." Also no proof.
I believe that laws stand because the majority supports them. And that when a majority no longer supports them, laws get changed. Nothing grandiose about that - that's how democracy works.
But for some reason, you don't think that's true.
I find that puzzling. But nothing I've ever posted has ever convinced you of anything, so there's no reason for me to put any energy into proving you wrong. I'll just leave it at this - your position makes no logical sense.

You're danny BOY, there IS no proof. But YOU are the one who stated it as fact.

In the danny BOY world all you say is fact unless someone digs for evidence to the contrary. That's the mind set of a pathological liar.

This statement: "I believe that laws stand because the majority supports them." indicates the shaky foundation of your assumptions. A majority of Americans now support gay marriage yet over 60% of states currently have laws against it.

There are MANY laws, historically and currently, that a majority of Americans do not support.

Ted wrote:

<quoted text>
You're danny BOY, there IS no proof. But YOU are the one who stated it as fact.
In the danny BOY world all you say is fact unless someone digs for evidence to the contrary. That's the mind set of a pathological liar.
This statement: "I believe that laws stand because the majority supports them." indicates the shaky foundation of your assumptions. A majority of Americans now support gay marriage yet over 60% of states currently have laws against it.
There are MANY laws, historically and currently, that a majority of Americans do not support.

Like I said, I believe that slavery, Jim Crow, segregation, and laws against interracial marriage existed because a majority wanted them.

You evidently believe that they existed even though a majority DIDN'T want them.

I think we're clear now. Thanks.

Correction to previous post, first sentence.

I had trouble saying, "You're RIGHT danny BOY"

So we know that Mitt Romney bullied gays when he was 18 years old. How did he behave as an adult governor?

----------

Romney Battled LGBT Anti-Bully Commission As Governor

Mitt Romney clashed with a state commission tasked with helping LGBT youth at risk for bullying and suicide throughout his term as Massachusetts governor over funding and its participation in a pride parade. He eventually abolished the group altogether.
...
The Governor's Commission on Gay and Lesbian Youth, created by Republican Gov. William Weld in 1992 in response to newly released statistics showing alarmingly high suicide rates among gay and lesbian teens, was designed to combat harassment in schools. It served at the pleasure of the state's chief executive. The commission funded Gay Straight Alliances in high schools and provided training and information for teachers.

----------

Additionally, Romney has said that if elected President he will fight for an anti-gay amendment to the US Constitution.

He wants to enshrine the RESTRICTION of civil rights into our Constitution. Stunning.

Americans have a VERY clear choice this November - an anti-gay bully or a President who stands up for minorities.

Dan the Man wrote:

<quoted text>
Like I said, I believe that slavery, Jim Crow, segregation, and laws against interracial marriage existed because a majority wanted them.
You evidently believe that they existed even though a majority DIDN'T want them.
I think we're clear now. Thanks.

..........

Like I said, I believe that slavery, Jim Crow, segregation, and laws against interracial marriage existed because a majority wanted them.

..........

It should come as no surprise that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican.

In that era, almost all black Americans were Republicans.

Why? From its founding in 1854 as the anti-slavery party until today, the Republican Party has championed freedom and civil rights for blacks.

And as one pundit so succinctly stated, the Democrat Party is as it always has been, the party of the four S's:

slavery,

secession,

segregation

and now socialism.

It was the Democrats who fought to keep blacks in slavery and passed the discriminatory Black Codes and Jim Crow laws.

The Democrats started the Ku Klux Klan to lynch and terrorize blacks.

The Democrats fought to prevent the passage of every civil rights law beginning with the civil rights laws of the 1860s, and continuing with the civil rights laws of the 1950s and 1960s.

During the civil rights era of the 1960s, Dr. King was fighting the Democrats who stood in the school house doors, turned skin-burning fire hoses on blacks and let loose vicious dogs.

It was Republican President Dwight Eisenhower who pushed to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and sent troops to Arkansas to desegregate schools.

President Eisenhower also appointed Chief Justice Earl Warren to the U.S. Supreme Court, which resulted in the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision ending school segregation.

Much is made of Democrat President Harry Truman's issuing an Executive Order in 1948 to desegregate the military.

Not mentioned is the fact that it was Eisenhower who actually took action to effectively end segregation in the military.

RealDave wrote:

<quoted text>
You are deciding to deny certain rights under the law to a particular segment of our population. Discrimination? Bigotry as you thing gays as lesser beings?
The law doesn't care what your religion says. Marriage to government is like a contract that provides protects to those married & offers benefits such as social security & taxes, and by hospitals.
No one cares if you are personally against gay marriage. Just quit trying to legislate your views.

Did you get your moms permission before you posted this?

Dan the Man
Carlisle, PA

sez

..........

For those who didn't know - Mitt Romney assaulted a gay kid when he was in prep school.

----------

Valerie Jarrett to Trump:

You Can Forget About the Obama’s School Records

White House senior advisor Valerie Jarrett said President Obama will not release his academic records, commenting a day after Obama put out his “long form” birth certificate and Donald Trump decided to press his luck by demanding Obama’s college transcripts.

“We know this is nonsense,” Jarrett said in an interview on The Joe Madison Show on SiriusXM on Thursday morning.

”He is almost 50 years old.

And he is president of the United States and I don’t think anybody will debate his intelligence and so now we do need to get serious…let’s just get serious…get back to focusing on what’s important.

Trump, on a birther roll as he explores a 2012 GOP presidential run, claimed credit for forcing Obama to finally release the “long form,” which proved what had been proved before–Obama was born in Hawaii.

Trump is now on another tangent, asking why Obama never released college transcripts and wondering how he got into Occidential and Harvard.

Dan the Man wrote:

<quoted text>
I might gain credibility with YOU if I did that? LOL! You're funny.
For some reason you aren't concerned about discrimination against your fellow Americans based on sexual orientation. Can you explain that? Can you explain why you seek to deny homosexuals equal protection under the law?

Yes, you'd gain more credibility with ME if you reduce your lying and dishonest embellishments and you would not have to hear my 'pathological liar' accusations. I won't hold my breath waiting. Telling things truthfully seems beyond you.

Here is another danny BOY embellished, unfounded and inaccurate lie to support what you WANT to be true: "you aren't concerned about discrimination against your fellow Americans based on sexual orientation."

You fail to notice it's not the issues I comment on. It's your LIES about the issues.

My personal opinion is that it's hard enough to be happy in life without needless arbitrary barriers preventing couples--man-woman, man-man, woman-woman--from committing legally to one another. I believe that couples committing to each other is a good thing.

Your assumption and accusation that I "seek to deny homosexuals equal protection under the law" is wrong. But that's what you do. You regularly make arbitrary, inaccurate, embellished and unsupported statements.

Ted wrote:

<quoted text>
Yes, you'd gain more credibility with ME if you reduce your lying and dishonest embellishments and you would not have to hear my 'pathological liar' accusations. I won't hold my breath waiting. Telling things truthfully seems beyond you.
Here is another danny BOY embellished, unfounded and inaccurate lie to support what you WANT to be true: "you aren't concerned about discrimination against your fellow Americans based on sexual orientation."
You fail to notice it's not the issues I comment on. It's your LIES about the issues.
My personal opinion is that it's hard enough to be happy in life without needless arbitrary barriers preventing couples--man-woman, man-man, woman-woman--from committing legally to one another. I believe that couples committing to each other is a good thing.
Your assumption and accusation that I "seek to deny homosexuals equal protection under the law" is wrong. But that's what you do. You regularly make arbitrary, inaccurate, embellished and unsupported statements.

Oh, I see - you don't personally oppose extending equal rights to homosexuals, you just defend those who do. A distinction without a difference. What a typically cowardly position for you to take. LOL!

I do not lie. Every accusation you've made that I have lied has been nothing but a willful distortion of my words or claims that I've said things that I simply have not.

And I TOTALLY notice that you don't take positions on issues here. All you do is make dishonest personal attacks on me. I've said that over and over - your obsessive fixation on me is the whole reason you're here. It's your reason for being. Attacking me is what DEFINES you. I've been making that point forever, so it's nice to see you finally admitting it. Thank you.

If you simultaneously claim that what Mitt Romney did in high school is irrelevant while having a hissy fit that the President "eats dog" because it was served to him as a child ... you might have Obama Derangement Syndrome.

From Gallup...

Obama Has Big Likability Edge Over Romney

"Registered voters are nearly twice as likely to say Barack Obama, rather than Mitt Romney, is the more likable of the two presidential candidates. Obama's 60% to 31% advantage on this characteristic is the largest for either candidate on five separate dimensions tested in a May 1-2 USA Today/Gallup poll."

http://www.gallup.com/poll/154547/Obama-Big-L...

Previously from Gallup...

Favorable Ratings as Predictors of the Election Outcome

"A positive sign for Obama's prospects of becoming the 44th U.S. president is that the candidate who has had the higher favorable rating among likely voters at the end of the election has been elected president each time since 1992."

http://www.gallup.com/poll/111439/Obama-McCai...

Still waiting for the rightwingers to describe Romney's path to 270 electoral votes, but none seem to be able to do it.

I'm also still waiting for a list of Romney's accomplishments. Nobody wants to attempt that one either.

When your own party doesn't much like you and can't muster the energy to advocate for you, there's really not much chance that you can get elected to the hardest job in the world.

xfactor wrote:

<quoted text>
Both candidates (OBAMNEY) are megabank multinational corporate controlled minions.
Keep your little left/right media created banter going.
We once revolted against tyranny and now we're surrounded by it and the populace is either&#65279; stoned on some sort of anti-depressant,distracted by sports or celebrity antics, or too apathetic/complacent to give a shit.

Seeems you have to copy and paste someones opinion...cant you think of one of your own????
thus the #65279 that is inserted in your post!!!! Means you took it from an opinion site....and we all know opinions are like azzholes,,,,,,,everyone has one.
HAAAAAAAAAAAA!!

xfactor wrote:

<quoted text>
Both candidates (OBAMNEY) are megabank multinational corporate controlled minions.
Keep your little left/right media created banter going.
We once revolted against tyranny and now we're surrounded by it and the populace is either&#65279; stoned on some sort of anti-depressant,distracted by sports or celebrity antics, or too apathetic/complacent to give a shit.

So was Bush Sr and Bush Jr and Clinton and ,and and..........been that way for years...whats your point?

Business and corporations give money to their candidate......
Not even going the mention all the PAC money......

RealDave wrote:

<quoted text>
You are deciding to deny certain rights under the law to a particular segment of our population. Discrimination? Bigotry as you thing gays as lesser beings?
The law doesn't care what your religion says. Marriage to government is like a contract that provides protects to those married & offers benefits such as social security & taxes, and by hospitals.
No one cares if you are personally against gay marriage. Just quit trying to legislate your views.

I'm not one who would deny gays to marry, as I've stated before. I can just understand the point of view of those who do not agree with it. I don't feel they are being bigots, I feel it is their right to feel the way they do, just as it is my right to think it should be allowed. But, I'm not going to call people bigots just because their point of view is different than mine. That is the problem that I have. There is no reason to be hateful and call them bigots.
Another thing, I don't see gay people as any lesser beings. I'll quit trying to legislate my views if you do the same.