Poll: Mitt Romney only republican who can beat Obama

[jbeige]

Bull and more bull.  I don't trust the establishments assessment of Romney.  I see him as easily being spanked by Obama.  After all many of his policies were BHO lite and BHO knows that and has stated that he doesn't understand the appeal of Romney since he based Obamacare on what Romney did.  That is just the tip of the iceberg.  Romney will be dead on arrival.

This is so sad.
Romney is the only one that can beat obama, that's a fact that most polls show, Romney is a great debater and keeps his cool.

[muman613]

Abortion is wrong no matter what your excuse is. Allowing it is a desecration to life. There are only a couple of reasons which permit the killing of an unborn fetus. Killing a human being simply because his/her parents are not to your liking is very wrong. There is no support for this in Judaism {unless someone can give me a source}. The only exceptions are when the birth will cause health problems for the mother...

[briann]

I like that noise you made, I can just hear it, Woa Woa!!!
I didn't say you were for killing babies.
I'm for killing unborn babies when the mother is sitting on welfare and the father can't be found and the woman keeps pumping out children like she's a rabbit.
I am tired of paying for these people and their children and their children having more children.
I'm tired of the "true conservatives" not wanting abortion for these people but then not wanting to give them welfare and social programs, you can't have it both ways.
But that's my point of view and I know most people don't agree with me.

The Woa Woa Woa was from Bill Murray.  

So I assume you werent being sarcastic.  Killing those that are 'unwanted' is pure evil, and I want NO PART in this type of despicable action.  

I havent the foggiest what you are talking about when you say not wanting it both ways.   I want to remove welfare, remove any and all incentives for having children... BUT... once they decide to HAVE babies.... That doesnt justify KILLING babies because those babies are 'unwanted'  I don't see WHY you can't distinguish between these actions.

By the way.... why don't we just put all their  'unwanted' children in concentration camps?  Why stop there??? Why don't we do the same if they have unwanted teenagers, or adults that are unwanted as well???    Why don't we stick them in ovens or make soap out of them??

[muman613]

The Woa Woa Woa was from Bill Murray.  

So I assume you werent being sarcastic.  Killing those that are 'unwanted' is pure evil, and I want NO PART in this type of despicable action.  

I havent the foggiest what you are talking about when you say not wanting it both ways.   I want to remove welfare, remove any and all incentives for having children... BUT... once they decide to HAVE babies.... That doesnt justify KILLING babies because those babies are 'unwanted'  I don't see WHY you can't distinguish between these actions.

By the way.... why don't we just put all their  'unwanted' children in concentration camps?  Why stop there??? Why don't we do the same if they have unwanted teenagers, or adults that are unwanted as well???    Why don't we stick them in ovens or make soap out of them??

Yes, this would be the ultimate result of such anti-life policies...

[jbeige]

The Woa Woa Woa was from Bill Murray.  

So I assume you werent being sarcastic.  Killing those that are 'unwanted' is pure evil, and I want NO PART in this type of despicable action.  

I havent the foggiest what you are talking about when you say not wanting it both ways.   I want to remove welfare, remove any and all incentives for having children... BUT... once they decide to HAVE babies.... That doesnt justify KILLING babies because those babies are 'unwanted'  I don't see WHY you can't distinguish between these actions.

By the way.... why don't we just put all their  'unwanted' children in concentration camps?  Why stop there??? Why don't we do the same if they have unwanted teenagers, or adults that are unwanted as well???    Why don't we stick them in ovens or make soap out of them??

BUT... once they decide to HAVE babies?? That is the problem they don't decide to have babies, these welfare animals just have babies they do not use any form of birth control, so what you are saying it's ok for these welfare mothers to pop out baby after baby after baby and let the taxpayers keep paying?  The conservatives can not have it both ways, if they are for these welfare people having babies then they should want all the social programs to support them.

[jbeige]

By the way.... why don't we just put all their  'unwanted' children in concentration camps?  Why stop there??? Why don't we do the same if they have unwanted teenagers, or adults that are unwanted as well???    Why don't we stick them in ovens or make soap out of them??

Isn't that what the so called "true conservatives" want to do by not giving them welfare and social programs?
So it's ok for these welfare children to be born, you just don't want the government to take care of them?

[briann]

Isn't that what the so called "true conservatives" want to do by not giving them welfare and social programs?
So it's ok for these welfare children to be born, you just don't want the government to take care of them?

How can you not see the error here?? UGHH!!!  We dont WANT the welfare children to be conceived...  we will do anything and everything to stop them from being conceived.  We will stop every incentive possible.  We will stop Welfare and handouts for having more children and yes, this DOES have a net positive effect and helps societies exit the welfare 'culture'.  I can prove this with real life examples if you want.   We WILL promote abstinence and waiting and will promote 'responsible' birth control assuming it doesn't promote promiscuity.

But 'murdering' does NOT fit in this picture... EVER..

Also, according to the last 3 trailing  years of Gallup data... roughly 50% of the US population identifies themselves as 'pro life'.  So we are NOT extremists or have extreme opinions on this subject.

[jbeige]

briann
It's nice to have a debate with you, I think this is what the forum should be about, no name calling just debates and opinions.
I hope you have no hard feels because we don't see eye to eye on some issues.
At least you believe Romney is the only one that can beat obama

[briann]

briann
It's nice to have a debate with you, I think this is what the forum should be about, no name calling just debates and opinions.
I hope you have no hard feels because we don't see eye to eye on some issues.
At least you believe Romney is the only one that can beat obama

Yes, I have stated that from the beginning.  As much as I would prefer Santorum... I just dont think he will win against Obama.

[Rubystars]

I just don't understand this argument.  Obviously the government has NO right to handout contraception or force contraception education, propaganda, etc etc.

BUT, the government has no RIGHT to say we can't use contraception.  That would be a HUGE infringement on our rights and is really Orwellian/fascist.   What we do in our own privacy that DOESNT infringe on other people's rights should NEVER EVER be the domain of the government.

This post of yours is right I think. It's true that they shouldn't be handing it out I just don't want it to be banned.

One thing that throws a wrench into this is that pro-abortion people try to frame abortion as a privacy issue too. I do think that abortion should be banned by all the states except to save the mother's life. The reason for this is that it doesn't just involve one woman and her privacy but involves at least two people (mother and child) and possibly three or more (if the father doesn't want his baby killed, there's nothing legally he can really do to stop it now, or the grandparents might not want their daughter to kill their developing grandchild, etc.).

I like that noise you made, I can just hear it, Woa Woa!!!
I didn't say you were for killing babies.
I'm for killing unborn babies when the mother is sitting on welfare and the father can't be found and the woman keeps pumping out children like she's a rabbit.
I am tired of paying for these people and their children and their children having more children.
I'm tired of the "true conservatives" not wanting abortion for these people but then not wanting to give them welfare and social programs, you can't have it both ways.
But that's my point of view and I know most people don't agree with me.

Jbeige, you said it yourself, they are having more children to milk the social programs. That's why they're pumping out children like rabbits. If we cut off the welfare, then they will not be able to support so many children and they will have fewer, or better yet we could make contraception of some kind a condition for going on welfare (there might have to be an alternative for those who religiously object to it, but for the most part this would cut down on the problem). It's not the child's fault if their mama is a welfare queen. They shouldn't be punished for having a stupid parent so I don't agree with aborting them.

[briann]

This post of yours is right I think. It's true that they shouldn't be handing it out I just don't want it to be banned.

One thing that throws a wrench into this is that pro-abortion people try to frame abortion as a privacy issue too. I do think that abortion should be banned by all the states except to save the mother's life. The reason for this is that it doesn't just involve one woman and her privacy but involves at least two people (mother and child) and possibly three or more (if the father doesn't want his baby killed, there's nothing legally he can really do to stop it now, or the grandparents might not want their daughter to kill their developing grandchild, etc.).

Jbeige, you said it yourself, they are having more children to milk the social programs. That's why they're pumping out children like rabbits. If we cut off the welfare, then they will not be able to support so many children and they will have fewer, or better yet we could make contraception of some kind a condition for going on welfare (there might have to be an alternative for those who religiously object to it, but for the most part this would cut down on the problem). It's not the child's fault if their mama is a welfare queen. They shouldn't be punished for having a stupid parent so I don't agree with aborting them.

Yes, The pro choice idiots think that people have the right to kill the unborn out of 'privacy'

This is so sick.  Imagine if we accepted that the Nazis have the right to throw 'unwanted' children in ovens because of privacy rights.  Its the most absurd argument I've ever heard.

[Dr. Dan]

Here's the news....the media will support Obama even if it were Ron Paul running against him.  Better to go with Santorum or Newt who hopefully won't be so nice about Obama...If you are going to lose an election, better to lose trying that fight than being politically correct and nice to your opponent who is evil.

[Rubystars]

Yes, The pro choice idiots think that people have the right to kill the unborn out of 'privacy'

This is so sick.  Imagine if we accepted that the Nazis have the right to throw 'unwanted' children in ovens because of privacy rights.  Its the most absurd argument I've ever heard.

It's really absurd but the leftists have used this argument effectively to get what they want. With years and years of precedent reinforcing Roe vs. Wade it will be very difficult to overturn it too. The more babies this country murders the harsher the judgment that will come down on the USA.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

Bill O'Reilly just had an interview with Santorum... He asked some questions which made Santorum look far-right. Santorum would support states who want to ban contraceptives because contraception goes against Catholic teachings. He also would retroactively annul the gay 'marriage' which has been allowed to this point. I agree with Santorum on these two issues, btw.... But that is not going to fly with a lot of voters as Axl has pointed out...


Watch this and see if you agree..

http://video.foxnews.com/v/1365948794001/rick-santorum-enters-the-no-spin-zone

Explain how banning contraception would be a good thing.

[IsraelForever]

Only G-d knows how many abortions were prevented thanks to contraception.  If you want to save lives, don't favor banning contraception. 

Of course, no one will ban contraception anyhow.  But Santorum's idea is preposterous.

[Rubystars]

Only G-d knows how many abortions were prevented thanks to contraception.  If you want to save lives, don't favor banning contraception. 

Of course, no one will ban contraception anyhow.  But Santorum's idea is preposterous.

Very good point

[briann]

Only G-d knows how many abortions were prevented thanks to contraception.  If you want to save lives, don't favor banning contraception. 

Of course, no one will ban contraception anyhow.  But Santorum's idea is preposterous.

My point exactly.

[jbeige]

This post of yours is right I think. It's true that they shouldn't be handing it out I just don't want it to be banned.

One thing that throws a wrench into this is that pro-abortion people try to frame abortion as a privacy issue too. I do think that abortion should be banned by all the states except to save the mother's life. The reason for this is that it doesn't just involve one woman and her privacy but involves at least two people (mother and child) and possibly three or more (if the father doesn't want his baby killed, there's nothing legally he can really do to stop it now, or the grandparents might not want their daughter to kill their developing grandchild, etc.).

Jbeige, you said it yourself, they are having more children to milk the social programs. That's why they're pumping out children like rabbits. If we cut off the welfare, then they will not be able to support so many children and they will have fewer, or better yet we could make contraception of some kind a condition for going on welfare (there might have to be an alternative for those who religiously object to it, but for the most part this would cut down on the problem). It's not the child's fault if their mama is a welfare queen. They shouldn't be punished for having a stupid parent so I don't agree with aborting them.

I would like to know how and what State or country is going to cut off welfare?, do you know the riots and the killing in the streets, there wouldn't be a white person alive.
There are protests in New York just to finger print people on food stamps and you want to say you can't get welfare unless you use birth control, this has been tried before and it was illegal for the government to tell these people not to have children.
As far as birth control these people do not use that, it's like in the jungles, you get the fever and you do it anywhere.
You go on to say about not hurting the children and it's not their fault so how do you cut off welfare? 
I don't understand?
You can talk any religion under the sun but lets get to 2012 and reality with these people abortion is the only way to go, give them a voucher to get a free one with every welfare check that is handed out each month.

[Rubystars]

I would like to know how and what State or country is going to cut off welfare?, do you know the riots and the killing in the streets, there wouldn't be a white person alive.

I think welfare could be reformed and still have a safety net for people who genuinely need help for a period of time. The length of time someone can be on it should be limited, there should not be an incentive to have more children while on welfare, and illegal immigrants should not have access to programs like WIC as they currently do now. Also the only food they should be able to buy on any kind of food stamps should be staple foods (rice, dry beans, flour, milk, fresh fruits and vegetables, that sort of thing, not Doritos, Soda, candy bars, etc.)

There are protests in New York just to finger print people on food stamps and you want to say you can't get welfare unless you use birth control, this has been tried before and it was illegal for the government to tell these people not to have children.

I think it could be worded in a way which would make it legal. For example they might have access to more funds if they agreed to have birth control monitored by a doctor. This would be optional but would be an incentive to get on the birth control. There are programs in place that require birth control for example if someone is using the prescription version of Thalidomide or some other very dangerous drugs like that, they have to be monitored to make sure they are on constant birth control. There could be alternatives to those who religiously object to being on birth control, such as a certain amount of community service being done.
 

As far as birth control these people do not use that, it's like in the jungles, you get the fever and you do it anywhere.

That is their culture, but I think it would be better to give them incentives to not have children rather than give them incentives to have children. As it is now, if a welfare mother has more children, she gets more welfare.

You go on to say about not hurting the children and it's not their fault so how do you cut off welfare? 
I don't understand?

It's the mother's responsibility to care for her children, not the state's. If she is unable to provide for her children's basic needs, then they will go into the foster care system. Force these people to take responsibility for their own kids and they might learn that it's in their own interest to reign in the jungle urges or at least discover these fancy new inventions called 'condoms'.

You can talk any religion under the sun but lets get to 2012 and reality with these people abortion is the only way to go, give them a voucher to get a free one with every welfare check that is handed out each month.

I believe that abortion is murder and is not justifiable unless there is no other way to save the mother's life (as in the case of an ectopic pregnancy, where there are really no alternatives).

[heyuguys]

jbeige, are you for aborting the babies of leftist jews who will grow up and hurt the jewish people, or just minorities like blacks or hispanics who are on welfare?

[briann]

I would like to know how and what State or country is going to cut off welfare?, do you know the riots and the killing in the streets, there wouldn't be a white person alive.
There are protests in New York just to finger print people on food stamps and you want to say you can't get welfare unless you use birth control, this has been tried before and it was illegal for the government to tell these people not to have children.
As far as birth control these people do not use that, it's like in the jungles, you get the fever and you do it anywhere.
You go on to say about not hurting the children and it's not their fault so how do you cut off welfare? 
I don't understand?
You can talk any religion under the sun but lets get to 2012 and reality with these people abortion is the only way to go, give them a voucher to get a free one with every welfare check that is handed out each month.

Removing welfare DOES work and it has positive results.  Welfare was scaled back in 1995, and there was the typical protesting, etc etc... but in the end...  it was a huge success... and even some leftists acknowledged that it was an improvement.... and of course, Obama reversed it.

I suppose if you had been Newt Ginrich back in 95, you woulda said... NAHHHH... lets NOT scale back welfare... because after all.... There will be protestors!!!!!  We must not have protestors... oh noooo.

By the way.... WHY WOULD THE WELFARE MOMMAS EVEN WANT TO GET AN ABORTION!!!?   Think about it... That baby is BLACK GOLD!!!!    The more babies popping out... the more money!!!!!!!   But then again... you are too worried about those pesky protestors.

[Debbie Shafer]

I honestly don't belive this,  Romney is not trusted because he flip flopped on the Health care issue, also abortion, and creating Jobs.