• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Romney Battled LGBT Anti-Bully Commission As Governor

Fishstyx said:
It is, ones character traits are hardly solidified in high school. Anyway, since you posted the ridiculous campaign hit ad (not really journalism at all), explain how immature behavior in high school or bullying if you so choose equates to funding priority decision he made as Governor.
Click to expand...

Actually character traits are often solidified in high school. Every single person I knew in high school, with one exception, turned out to be an older version of their high school personalities in later life. It was especially true of bullies and assholes. If you were one in high school, you were one in later life.
 
beerftw said:
funny the article i linked shown the wapo fabricated alot of the article,his friends said they never saw him do that,and the family of the alleged victim knew nothing of it as well.

odd you still follow a debunked article solely because it fits your views.second you havent proven where mitt attacks gays every chance he gets.


holding your ears and saying lalalalalalala does not make you argument valid,or your hypocrisy invalid,it just merely shows your ignorance.
Click to expand...

No, the article you linked did nothing of the sort. Odd that the other people involved in the assault seem to remember it pretty well but Willard has this strange lapse of memory.
 
99percenter said:
Its already been proven. If its all false why did romney apologize. I wouldnt apologize for something i didnt do.
Click to expand...

read the article,it explains alot.

better yet explain your double standard,and your belief that romney wants to physically attack gays at every possibility:2wave:
 
beerftw said:
hypocrisy meter just exploded.

again didnt the whole romney thing by wapo get mostly discredited for being false already?

and again you hold romney to a double standard compared to obama,if that isnt obama koolaid drinking i dont know what is:2wave:
Click to expand...

Human EVents? Really? A publication right up there with the old Pravda from the Soviet Union. Each equally believable.
 
Wiggen said:
Human EVents? Really? A publication right up there with the old Pravda from the Soviet Union. Each equally believable.
Click to expand...

yep attack the source not the information,a logical fallacy by epic means and simply used to refute a point without refuting it.

typically used by those who have no way of countering the evidence presented,so they attack the source.but please keep your logical fallacy going:)
 
Wiggen said:
No, the article you linked did nothing of the sort. Odd that the other people involved in the assault seem to remember it pretty well but Willard has this strange lapse of memory.
Click to expand...

Yeah that is pretty lame.
 
beerftw said:
obama physically bullied a girl in middle school,is he a violent criminal?or is your extreme hypocrisy kicking in again:2wave:
Click to expand...

Obama stopped picking on girls. Mitt continues to pick on gays
Obama did it when he was 10. Mitt did it when he was 18
Obama did it once. Mitt bullied numerous people, including at least two gay boys
Obama admitted to it in his book. Mitt still denies having bullied the boy because he was gay
 
Last edited:
sangha said:
Obama stopped picking on girls. Mitt continues to pick on gays
Click to expand...

can you prove this,ive asked like 6 times now and no one has answered.

or does being republican now =picking on gays by being an evil republican?
 
beerftw said:
can you prove this,ive asked like 6 times now and no one has answered.

or does being republican now =picking on gays by being an evil republican?
Click to expand...

It's already been proven. Mitt continues to fight to deny LGBTs their civil rights
 
sangha said:
It's already been proven. Mitt continues to fight to deny LGBTs their civil rights
Click to expand...

give proof,actual proof and it will be determined.

not this its already been proven bs,that simply means you have none.


i typed in google romney still picking on gays and it led me to this site,so obviously there isnt much proof,just a belief on the left
 
beerftw said:
give proof,actual proof and it will be determined.

not this its already been proven bs,that simply means you have none.


i typed in google romney still picking on gays and it led me to this site,so obviously there isnt much proof,just a belief on the left
Click to expand...

It's obvious that you would never accept anything as proof, but the fact remains that Romney has always supported denying equal rights for LGBTs. There are several threads on DP about this, and you have posted in some of them, so I know you know about them. Playing stupid in this thread is going to fool anyone
 
sangha said:
It's obvious that you would never accept anything as proof, but the fact remains that Romney has always supported denying equal rights for LGBTs. There are several threads on DP about this, and you have posted in some of them, so I know you know about them. Playing stupid in this thread is going to fool anyone
Click to expand...

its obvious by you saying i wouldnt accept it you have none,you are just spouting youre opinion again.

considering all of google couldnt back your claim,i suggest you find any logical evidence fast because right now you look like 99percenter,a partisan hack who debates off percieved opinion of others rather than fact.
 
beerftw said:
its obvious by you saying i wouldnt accept it you have none,you are just spouting youre opinion again.

considering all of google couldnt back your claim,i suggest you find any logical evidence fast because right now you look like 99percenter,a partisan hack who debates off percieved opinion of others rather than fact.
Click to expand...

No, it's the result of your refusing to believe the facts, just as you refuse to believe that SSM is a civil right. That's why you have stoop to posting childish name-calling
 
sangha said:
No, it's the result of your refusing to believe the facts, just as you refuse to believe that SSM is a civil right. That's why you have stoop to posting childish name-calling
Click to expand...

stil no link to anything,just another its true because everyone knows it??



your opinion is not fact!!!!you have done nothing but avoid proving your point,which means you have no proof of your wild claim!!!
 
sangha said:
It's already been proven. Mitt continues to fight to deny LGBTs their civil rights
Click to expand...

how very interesting. and of course up until 48 hours ago you were widely noted for your opposition to President Obama because of his denial of their rights.....


...oh.... wait, my bad. no, you are just acting like a dancing puppet, and celebrating an idiotic non-story.


every one of you hopping on this bandwagon are making as big fools of yourselves as conservatives who thought that Obama admitting to smoking weed was huge.
 
beerftw said:
stil no link to anything,just another its true because everyone knows it??



your opinion is not fact!!!!you have done nothing but avoid proving your point,which means you have no proof of your wild claim!!!
Click to expand...

If your posts were honest, you'd admit what everyone else knows - that Mitt wants a constitutional amendment banning SSM

Instead, you pretend that his opposition to equal rights is an opinion when it's a fact
 
cpwill said:
how very interesting. and of course up until 48 hours ago you were widely noted for your opposition to President Obama because of his denial of their rights.....


...oh.... wait, my bad. no, you are just acting like a dancing puppet, and celebrating an idiotic non-story.


every one of you hopping on this bandwagon are making as big fools of yourselves as conservatives who thought that Obama admitting to smoking weed was huge.
Click to expand...

Actually, I have never expressed support for Obamas position on SSM, and have called him homophobic, so keep posting your dishonest fictions
 
sangha said:
If your posts were honest, you'd admit what everyone else knows - that Mitt wants a constitutional amendment banning SSM
Click to expand...

im simply asking proof,but you have gone completely out of your way.

btw the original question was to prove mitt romney picks on gays every chance he gets,and i demanded proof,now you changed it like i wouldnt remember.


all hail sangha,king of the logical fallacy,and avoider of facts and proof!!!
 
beerftw said:
im simply asking proof,but you have gone completely out of your way.

btw the original question was to prove mitt romney picks on gays every chance he gets,and i demanded proof,now you changed it like i wouldnt remember.


all hail sangha,king of the logical fallacy,and avoider of facts and proof!!!
Click to expand...

You don't know that Romney wants a constitutional amendment banning SSM?
 
sangha said:
You don't know that Romney wants a constitutional amendment banning SSM?
Click to expand...

thats wasnt my original question,you answered my question asking for evidence romney picks on gays every chance he gets with him supporting a ban on ssm.


but please keep that red herring going,i love debating those who resort to logical fallacies rather than answering the question.
 
beerftw said:
thats wasnt my original question,you answered my question asking for evidence romney picks on gays every chance he gets with him supporting a ban on ssm.


but please keep that red herring going,i love debating those who resort to logical fallacies rather than answering the question.
Click to expand...

And I gave you evidence that Romney picks on gays. He wants a constitutional amendment banning SSM.

Now, you're dishonestly adding the words "every chance he gets" even though I never said anything like that. So you're not arguing logical fallacies; You're making dishonest arguments
 
sangha said:
And I gave you evidence that Romney picks on gays. He wants a constitutional amendment banning SSM.

Now, you're dishonestly adding the words "every chance he gets" even though I never said anything like that. So you're not arguing logical fallacies; You're making dishonest arguments
Click to expand...

that isnt evidence he picks on gays,why dont you go read a dictionary before you start these red herring arguments.
 
beerftw said:
that isnt evidence he picks on gays,why dont you go read a dictionary before you start these red herring arguments.
Click to expand...

You are now proving that I was right when I said that you would never accept the proof.

Romney opposes SSM. That's the proof and as I predicted, you won't accept the proof
 
sangha said:
And I gave you evidence that Romney picks on gays. He wants a constitutional amendment banning SSM.

Now, you're dishonestly adding the words "every chance he gets" even though I never said anything like that. So you're not arguing logical fallacies; You're making dishonest arguments
Click to expand...

somewhat right,you actually said continues to pick on gays,but still rather my misuse of words doesnt justify your argument.

opposing ssm marriage is not the same as picking on gays,please pull out a dictionary.
 
sangha said:
You are now proving that I was right when I said that you would never accept the proof.

Romney opposes SSM. That's the proof and as I predicted, you won't accept the proof
Click to expand...

that doesnt prove anything,picking on someone means to harass them,opposing a legalisation is not the same as harrassing,again pick up a dictionary and read it,or better yet just google merriam websters dictionary
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom