muhawhawhaw

EricPWJohnson on November 18, 2007 at 8:08 PM

Still waiting for the quote.

It was simple

you blasted fred for being a federalist on Abortion

You forgot you praised Romney for being a Federalist on Abortion a little over a week ago

we call that WHoops!

I’m not arguing with you because you are arguing with yourself

feel free to continue

EricPWJohnson on November 18, 2007 at 5:02 PM

OK, I gave you a chance to be at the adult table, but you would rather act like a child. You have serious problems gibot.

Let me know when you’re ready to grow up and I’ll consider allowing you the respect of my attention.

Muhawhawhawhawhaw

CsDeven still claiming he misquoted himself?

Muhawhawhawhaw

Bill C on November 18, 2007 at 2:58 PM

You’re right, science can’t prove it yet, but if it could, one way or the other, the controversy could be put to bed.

That one justice is why the dems need to be defeated this election. If we could get 8 years of a conservative, we could stack the court with constructionists and put a serious dent in the liberals attempts to destroy the conservative principles that make this country the greatest on the face of the earth.

All you have to do is quote the post. It’s that simple. I don’t get what it is with you people. A different HA member started this same stuff the other day and refused to quote the post. I am willing to discuss it, but when you want to make accusations and then not want to discuss them, well, you come off like someone with zero credibility.

csdeven on November 18, 2007 at 11:37 AM

Would you care to discuss why Fred’s 20 billable hours trumps his 100% pro-life voting record? Or why giving a member of his firm advice on extradition comprises working for a dictator? You have used people’s ignorance of the role of a lawyer to consistently slander Fred Thompson then you go ballistic when someone questions Mitt’s CV in any way. You are a dishonest partisan. No one should trust what you have to say at this point.

The groups who support the HLA are frustrated with the failure of the SCOTUS to overturn RvW, so they have come up with this. Getting 3/4 of the states is easier than getting all 50 to ban it individually. Of course the preferred why is to strike down RvW and send it to the states to decide. But even then, not all win ban it and that is too many.

I my opinion, the easiest way to banning abortion is through science. IF science can prove that life begins at conception, then the baby is eligible for all the protections under the US constitution and no state could write a law contradicting it.

csdeven on November 18, 2007 at 9:52 AM

The NRLC has a focus on overturning Roe in the SCOTUS because that would be the easiest thing to do. They don’t have any illusion of banning abortion in all 50 states. It is an impossible task. However, we are just one justice away from saying goodbye to Roe. For me, that is as good as we can expect from the Federal gov’t and as long as a candidate is for appointing Federalist society members then I can’t complain.

Science can’t prove an essentially existential question. It is philosophical which is why the question has been answered politically and will have to be changed politically.

So, um, WHERE is Hugh Hewitt to scold Mitt for this lapse in pro-life like he did when he beat up the NRTL guy on his show for picking Fred Thompson over Huckabee??

Hugh smacked that guy around heavy because they chose Thompson even though Thompson stood on a Federalist’s position and wouldn’t support the Right to life Amendment. Hugh said that he was himself a big “prolifer” and couldn’t understand the NRTL guys picking Thompson.

But, now Hugh’s own GUY can be shown not supporting the Amendment.

So where is Hugh’s faux outrage and high dudgeon??

The man is an utter hypocrite.

Warner Todd Huston on November 18, 2007 at 8:14 AM

I refuse to listen to Hugh anymore.

His 3hour Romney commericial is too off-putting for me.

And intellectually dishonest.

Does anyone seriously think that a Human Life Amendment could be ratified?

Hell no.

Anyone see the 2004 election results?

davenp35 on November 18, 2007 at 12:12 PM

I support Romney and Giuliani. Either one of them would be find by me, as they both have a tremendous amount to offer, and both have executive experience.

Romney is more of a social con in how he leads his life, but Giuliani employed many conservative policies when he ran NYC. I lived there and suffered under the previous ultra-liberal administrations, and I know first hand what he accomplished in the area of welfare reform, tax reform, going after the unions, crime reduction, fighting the ACLU, quality of life issues, and so forth.

Let’s start with what daily life was like on this cushy mission:

The son of a car company chief executive who later became governor of Michigan, Mitt Romney called his mission an “instructive” first experience of deprivation. He lived on about $100 a month, sleeping on cast-off mattresses with other missionaries and crowding into small flats in groups of four. The only toilet was often down the hall and the only shower in a public bathhouse./The 175 missionaries in France all rose at 6 a.m. each day, rang doorbells from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. and turned in by 10.

Now let’s examine the geography of France. Keep in mind that Mitt served in Paris, which is part of the Ile de France., and Bordeaux, which is in the Aquitaine Region.

Map of France.

Map of Aquitaine Region.

Map of Paris.

Map of the French Riviera.

In fairness to EricPW, I won’t put this particular error in the category of “lying”, but will file it away in a folder labeled “Willful Ignorance”.

Buy Danish on November 18, 2007 at 12:03 PM

I don’t think he can square the two. But, I’m still willing to hear him out.

If he can’t, it’s lucky for him, but unlucky for us, most people wont see this hypocrisy and know to avoid spending too much time trying to have a rational discussion with him. This really is the tipping point with me. If he cannot square this, or admit his duplicity, I’ll never engage him again.

all I said was he was a billionaires son the name sake and god son of one of the wealthiest families on the planet and his mothers extended family is EXTREMELY wealthy

And his path from internship in the riviera to the harsh confines of Harvard must have taken its toll that he barely landed a seven figure rookie VP job at a top wall Street firm

EricPWJohnson on November 18, 2007 at 11:37 AM

“All you said” is a complete fabrication.

Let’s go back and review one of your comments. We can play a game of “Find the Lies!”. I find a total of 4 in 4 sentences. That’s batting 1000. Good for you, EricPW!

Its relevant – his personal income comes from mormons- mormons are funding this campaign – its totally 100% relevant

Mitt refuses to acknowledge that he is not just a mormon but a direct descendant of one of founders of that faith.

If the mormons hadn’t given him his 8 figure job and financed this campaign then you would be right

But the source of his wealth is his parents and exyended family and relatives personal wealth

EricPWJohnson on November 15, 2007 at 10:18 PM

Oh, and is it a 7 figure or 8 figure job which was assert was handed to him on a silver platter by the Mormons? Just trying to get your story straight.

Thanks in advance!

EricPWJohnson on November 18, 2007 at 11:41 AM

Why can’t/wont you quote the post?

all I said was he was a billionaires son the name sake and god son of one of the wealthiest families on the planet and his mothers extended family is EXTREMELY wealthy

And his path from internship in the riviera to the harsh confines of Harvard must have taken its toll that he barely landed a seven figure rookie VP job at a top wall Street firm

Yes, all distortions I admit

EricPWJohnson on November 18, 2007 at 11:37 AM

Look, I’m pretty forgiving when people want to put finer points on their comments, so I’m going to give you the opportunity to explain this next comment that you made in the…..

“Uh oh: Reports of anti-Romney, anti-Mormon push polling in Iowa; Update: 527 org responsible?”

thread.

Bad Candy
Its relevant – his personal income comes from mormons – mormons are funding this campaign – its totally 100% relevant
Mitt refuses to acknowledge that he is not just a mormon but a direct descendant of one of founders of that faith.
If the mormons hadn’t given him his 8 figure job and financed this campaign then you would be right
But the source of his wealth is his parents and exyended family and relatives personal wealth
EricPWJohnson on November 15, 2007 at 10:18 PM

But I have to tell you, it seems as if you are at odds with what you are asserting in this thread. If you can satisfactorily explain the two, then I can see my way to giving you some credibility.

I patiently await your response.

Over and over and over and over

still claiming you misquoted yourself?

really this is too funny

My suspicions and my alleged what was that stupid word – oh yeah “gibotry” would be less

but a billionaire’s son buying himself a presidency financed by a religious movement and wealthy interested parties seems a bit – whats the word – tacky

EricPWJohnson on November 18, 2007 at 10:10 AM

You don’t really think anyone is the group is fooled by your BS do you?

All you have to do is quote the post. It’s that simple. I don’t get what it is with you people. A different HA member started this same stuff the other day and refused to quote the post. I am willing to discuss it, but when you want to make accusations and then not want to discuss them, well, you come off like someone with zero credibility.

Nice try

all I said was he was a billionaires son the name sake and god son of one of the wealthiest families on the planet and his mothers extended family is EXTREMELY wealthy

And his path from internship in the riviera to the harsh confines of Harvard must have taken its toll that he barely landed a seven figure rookie VP job at a top wall Street firm

Yes, all distortions I admit

It is amazing to see people so interested in a small, limited federal government assigning the power of the Almighty to the feds.

saved on November 18, 2007 at 9:14 AM

But you want to give the Almighty’s power to the states? Like for Elliot Spitzer to exercise? I think Federalism is a good thing, but it’s not a panacea either.

Romney was already married and had two young sons when he entered graduate school at 24, so his social circle generally comprised other men and women who, like himself, had children and lived off campus; at the time, Mitt and Ann Romney owned a house in Belmont. Romney’s academic responsibilities, paired with home obligations, meant he was mainly focused on school and family.

But he still partook in graduate school social life. He was an occasional visitor to Lincoln’s Inn, a Harvard Law School social club where students could eat, relax, and meet other students. “He was not just a visitor” to the Harvard campus, Rasmussen said. “He was part of it and he reached out to people and people reached out to him.”

Romney also occasionally attended weekend parties and group dinners at Cambridge restaurants such as Legal Seafoods and the now-closed Joyce Chen. The restrictions of his Mormon faith never interfered in these affairs.

“He didn’t mind if we were drinking coffee or having a beer, but that wasn’t what he did,” Serkin said.”We respected him for being true to what he believed in, and I found him to be completely open and tolerant to everybody else.”

It’s too bad that the same cannot be said of EricPWJohnson and a few others who share a similar mindset.