Flop, Flop, Flip, Flip… Oh What A Big Twit He Is!

Mitt Romney is the most inconsistent person that has ever ran for any governmental position during my lifetime, certainly a man with little or no convictions, who is willing to do and say anything in order to get what he wants, on this occasion getting elected.

Following is just a few of the issues where Mitt disagrees with himself:

Flip: 1994. Agriculture. When he was running for Senator of Massachusetts Romney said he wanted to eliminate the Department of Agriculture and called for reducing farm subsidiaries.

Flop: 2007. When he was trying to be the GOP contender for the Presidency, he changed his tune. In 2007 he loved agriculture and firmly believed that agriculture was “key to the economy and the American people.” By 2012, I guess agriculture is no longer the “key to the economy or the American people” since the subject is not even mentioned on his website.

Flip: 2003. Environment. While Governor of Massachusetts he was a big supporter of regulating coal power plants and implementing tough emissions standards. He believed in global warming, in the greenhouse effects and he went as far as issuing a 72-point Climate Protection Plan. Surprisingly and unusual coming from him, he maintained his position for eight years and on June 2011 during an interview he said that he believed in global warming and also that humans contributed to it. 

 

Flop: 2011. A month later, in July during a town hall meeting in Derry, NH he is against regulating coal power plants and now believes that carbon emissions do not harm our bodies. Three months later, in October he completely abandons what he had fought for and believed for so long and publicly states that there is no such thing as global warming. Eloquently he said these words of wisdom: “By the way, they do not call it America warming, they call it global warming it loses jobs for Americans and ultimately it won’t be successful, because industries that are energy intensive will just get up and go somewhere else.”

Flip: 2006. Health Care. As Governor of Massachusetts, Romney created the blueprint on which “Obamacare” was later built. In 2009, Romney publicly suggested to Obama to use tax penalties or credits to induce people to acquire insurance.

Flop: 2007. A year later, in the midst of the Tea Party and the GOP outrage for “Obamacare” Mitt changed his mind and sided with the Right calling Obamacare “an unconstitutional abuse of power.” By 2011 Romney was a full pledge supporter of the Ryan plan “The Path to Prosperity.” Today, Obamacare is one of the thousand things he is going to repeal on “his first day in office.”

Flip: 2002. Campaign Funding. During his Senate Campaign Romney proposed spending limits on congressional campaigns and abolishing political action committees (PAC). 

Flop: 2007.  In 2007, a few months after leaving the Governorship, Mitt Romney was against the McCain-Feingold Law claiming that it was unconstitutional. Back then, Mitt Romney said “We step into dangerous territory when politicians start eviscerating our fundamental freedoms in the name of amorphous principles, like campaign finance reform.” Today he is more than happy to receive and accept unlimited funds from PAC, Citizen’s United and the Koch Brothers.

Flip: 2008. Auto Industry. When the American Automobile Industry was desperately trying to keep their heads above water and avoiding bankruptcy, Mitt said on national television “Let Detroit go bankrupt.” The modern version of “Let them eat cake.”

Flop: 2012. Romney has the audacity to say that President Obama followed his advice!

Flip: 2009. Stimulus. On January Mitt Romney gave his opinion about the stimulus by saying “I think there is a need for an economic stimulus. Americans have lost about $11 trillion in net worth. That translates into about $400 billion a year less sending that they’ll be doing, and that’s net of additional government programs like Medicaid and unemployment insurance. And government can help make that up in a very difficult time. And that’s one of the reasons why I think a stimulus program is needed.”

Flop: 2012. Romney openly criticized Obama saying “[Obama] wants another stimulus, he wants to hire more government workers. He says we need more firemen, more policeman, more teachers. Did he not get the message of Wisconsin? The American people did. It’s time for us to cut back on government and help the American people.”

Flip: 1994. Abortion. Mitt Romney believed that abortion should be legal and during his Senatorial campaign he said: “regardless of one's beliefs about choice, you would hope it would be safe and legal.” Further, when accused by Ted Kennedy of his position being a “multiple choice” he stressed his position by stating “On the accusation of being 'multiple-choice', I have to respond. I have my own beliefs, and those beliefs are very dear to me. One of them is that I do not impose my beliefs on other people. Many, many years ago, I had a dear, close family relative that was very close to me who passed away from an illegal abortion. It is since that time my mother and my family have been committed to the belief that we can believe as we want, but we will not force our beliefs on others on that matter. And you will not see me wavering on that, or being multiple-choice, thank you very much.”

Flop: 2005. No longer running for Governor or in office, Mitt Romney changed his believes and erased from his mind that "dear, close family relative" that passed away from an illegal abortion. He said in an interview for the Boston Globe on July “I am pro-life. I believe that abortion is the wrong choice except in cases of incest, rape, and to save the life of the mother. I wish the people of America agreed, and that the laws of our nation could reflect that view. But while the nation remains so divided over abortion, I believe that the states, through the democratic process, should determine their own abortion laws and not have them dictated by judicial mandate." However, Mitt Romney is the only Republican presidential candidate that refused to sign the Pro-Life Pledge sponsored by Susan B. Anthony.

Flip: 2002. Stem Cell. Mitt Romney was an advocate for stem cell research and promised to lobby George W. Bush to accept steam cell research.

Flop: 2008. By this time, Romney advocates banning stem cell research because “it cheapens the sanctity of life.”

Flip: 1994. Gun Control. Romney supported the Brady Bill and some gun regulations. He acknowledged that probably that decision wasn’t going to make him any friends at the NRA. He said back then “That's not going to make me the hero of the NRA. I don't line up with the NRA.”

Flop: 2008. Romney joined the NRA.

Flip: 1994. Gay Rights. Romney supported gay rights and proposed a policy for domestic partnerships. In 2002, he said: “All citizens deserve equal rights, regardless of their sexual orientation." Romney said that domestic partnership status should be recognized in a way that includes the potential for health benefits and rights of survivorship.

Flop: 2011. Romney opposes gay marriage however; he still supports policies to grant rights to domestic partnerships. It must be said that on the same year, Romney refused to sign a pledge opposing gay marriage but by October he had signed the 2012 Presidential Pledge sponsored by the National Organization for Marriage.

I am sure that the flip-flopping will continue. Mitt Romney can’t help himself, he wants to win and will say whatever is necessary to win... Except going against his sugar daddies, that is when he draws the line after all, the one thing he firmly believes in is that money talks and bullshit walks!

Some information obtained through Wikipedia

Ms. Sandra Fluke goes to Washington

I have been receiving many emails asking me to sign a petition to force the obnoxious Rush to apologize for his heinous behavior and insulting language towards a 3rd year law student, Ms. Sandra Fluke. I’ve been bombarded with article after article in Facebook from friends relating the story or, once more, to sign more petitions demanding that Rush apologizes. I ignore them.

First of all, this individual that does not deserve to be called a man, Rush, and I refuse to dignify him by even calling him by his full name or last name, the bastard doesn’t deserve that distinction and I must apologize to any bastard in the real sense of the word that might be out there, he thrives on this type of revolt. By keeping his name afloat, he is rejoicing by the free publicity we ‘liberals’ are giving him. No. I refuse to give him any reason to inflate his ego more than already is, I actually don’t know what’s greater, his weight or his ego.

What we must be talking about and focusing our efforts on is the courage, integrity and eloquence of this young lady, Ms. Sandra Fluke, who at the young age of 23 stood before Congress and said it like it is. A young woman that spoke softly, clearly and addressed the many issues that concerns million of women in this country, while she kept her calm and demeanor. That’s admirable and more so when facing a group of people that considered her not fit to give her statement when the so-called “experts” gave theirs in front of Congress weeks before. According to Congress, these so-called experts were composed of men, not one single woman exposing her views on the matter. No, every single one of them were men, but that’s not all, there were all representing a religious group. They were: Rev. Matthew Harrison, Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, Dr. Craig Mitchell, Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, Roman Catholic Bishop William Lori, Rev. Jonah Paffhausen, Washington archbishop of the Orthodox Church in America and Rabbi Meir Soloveichik. None of these men have any, I repeat, any medical background. Apparently, they were experts in women issues much more than a woman and Ms. Sandra Fluke was denied her participation. I salute the congresswomen that decided to ask where the women were in that panel and walked out on such charade!  

Also, notice should be taken that the Congressmen that have actively tried to block President Obama’s mandate on contraception are all men too. The bills that Senators Fortenberry and Rubio as well as Representative Blunt brought before Congress were not co-sponsored by any woman, which makes me wonder what it is that these men think they know about women that women don’t? How can these men, political and religious men, say that if the need for contraceptive pills was for medical reasons other than preventing a pregnancy they would not be fighting it, when it is a medical fact that these pills are used for many female conditions besides preventing a pregnancy; yet, they want the insurance companies not to provide contraceptives in their plans, even when women will be paying for it. That is absurd! Why is it then that Viagra is covered under the insurance plans offered to the religious clergy? For crying out loud, it is on the Catholic Priests plans! Aren’t they supposed to be celibate? What possible explanation can there be for the inclusion of Viagra other than sexual? Ah! They will claim that Viagra controls hypertension but, if the contraceptive pills that control many illness suffered by women can’t be included because the side effect is preventing a pregnancy, therefore going against their religious believes then, Viagra shouldn’t be included either – there are other medications without the so welcomed side effect of an erection to treat hypertension – and, since the priests are not supposed to fornicate because that too is against their religious beliefs… What the heck is Viagra doing in their plan? What’s good for a dick must be good for a vagina! 

Ms. Sandra Fluke tried desperately to express the importance contraceptives play in treating medical illnesses that many women suffer in our country.  Every woman doesn’t take the infamous pill just for sex; many take it for health reasons. I knew of a little girl that was prescribed contraceptives by her pediatrician because her ovaries were not developing properly, so yes, there are many other uses for contraceptives.  (for a transcript of Ms. Fluke Statement to Congress, click here)

These extreme right-wing Senators and Representatives in an effort to gain the pious vote by siding with the religious institutions have opened a Pandora’s box. It is obvious that they know so much about women that didn’t think they would turn in masses against them. They stupidly decided to secure religious freedom, to side with religious institutions that by the way, contribute zero to the finances of our government since they are tax exempted and are supposed to respect the statute 501c3 by making no contributions to any political candidate or party. These Congressmen decided to go against the rights of millions of women who do vote, pay taxes and unlike a theological ideology, are breathing and living human beings. I am certain these Congressmen didn’t think of the huge favor they were doing to the Democrats, you see… they’ve decided to wage a war against women by trying to control their reproductive system over a decadent and perverted Catholic Church. At the end, we must thank the retrograde Republican Party for waging this war against women; nothing worse than an enraged woman, Catholic women do take contraceptives and they do vote, and their rage will be felt on November 2012!


To read a transcript of Rush and a caller opinion on Ms. Fluke and contraceptives, click here
To read a transcript of Rush ironically called "Pearls of Wisdom" where he once more trashes Ms. Fluke, click here
To read the transcript and listen to Rush questioning why did Ms. Fluke selected to go to Georgetown, click here
To watch The Young Turks commentary and the video of Rush Limbaugh calling Ms. Fluke a slut, click here

To be or not to be

Today, when I heard the news that President Obama had compromised with the Catholic Church I was appalled! Without listening to the President, I assumed – and I know one never must do that – that Catholic women were going to be denied that very important coverage and I couldn’t believe it! As it turned out to be, the Catholic Church managed to save a few dollars, as well as their employees, since the new mandate requires for insurance companies to ‘pick-up’ the tab. I am glad for the women employed by the Catholic Church but… there’s always a but, that means that the Catholic Church not only pays no taxes, but that the insurance premium that they will pay will be cheaper too. Once again, the wealthiest of institutions get away with not spending a dime and someone else paying for it, or do you honestly think that the insurance companies will pay for this? Of course not! They will distribute that expense onto the paying individuals and companies enrolled with them.

I am so fed up with religion institutions, particularly the Catholic Church, getting away with murder! From influencing in politics, not only in the United States but worldwide to hiding pedophiles, from not paying taxes and contributing like any other corporation – which is what they truly are – to picking and choosing who deserves their help in the form of charity. Thus far, the Catholic Church has enough money to help all the children from being killed in Somalia, but they don’t. We only need to look at the luxury in the Vatican; one of the gems in any of the jewels in the Vatican could save those children… One of the paintings stored in the Vatican could save those children but no, it is guarded and cherished while children are being murdered. And now, through their manipulation and false indignation they have, once more, got their way.

I call for action. Action to demand for all religious institutions that take part in making a political comment, whether these comments are made from the pulpit or publicly, or openly criticizing any political party, rule, law or leader – to nullify their 501c3 application. Churches receive that special treatment of no paying any taxes thanks to that application in exchange, they (the church) can’t openly speak out, organize in opposition to, anything that the government declares “legal,” even if it is immoral (e.g. abortion, homosexuality, contraception, etc.), a church that openly express their opinion and instigate their congregation against a political figure or against a law or mandate jeopardizes their tax exempt status. So, when on earth are we going to remove their free ride? Let’s pull the rug from under their feet – talk all they want but PAY for it!

A “pill” too hard to swallow

According to a recent article written by Jessica Yellin and Brianna Keilar, both Correspondents for CNN, the White House is trying to adjust the health care policy to appease the Catholic Church and perhaps get the vote of some Catholics. The article claims that this adjustment is due to “an avalanche of criticism.” Apparently, the White House will try to implement the same policy that is currently used in Hawaii for religion institutions, in which women that work for Catholic charities, hospitals and the church can acquire coverage directly from the insurance company at the same price their employers would pay. I do not think it’s fair that women working for Catholic enterprises and who may or may not profess that religion have to be excluded from that benefit, unless the Catholic Church increase their salary to the same amount they would have to pay out-of-pocket to acquire it. However, this modification suggested by the White House is not being accepted by the Catholic Bishops, according to the article the leaders of the Catholic Church will only accept a total reversal on the policy – which means totally removing the contraceptive clause from the health care policy. Who on earth do the Catholic Church thinks they are?

I am so tired of having any religious institution – who pay no taxes, who at no time accept government interference in ANY of their day-to-day business (as it should be), who have no government regulations set in place, to think that the government has no business in their religious matters but that they, the religious institutions of any denomination, have any right whatsoever in changing governmental policies because it does not agrees with their views! The religious groups are overstepping their boundaries interfering with politics – both at a local and national level – forcing their views onto everyone else as if the separation of church and state didn’t exist or if it does, it simply does not apply to them. While the leaders of any religious corporation (that’s what they are) enjoy a life of luxury, no taxes paid, no need to report any of their actions to the government because if the government decided to interfere in any of their business they will cry religious prosecution, they seem to think they have "divine" power and can stick their noses where it does not belong.

Of course, as expected, we have the Speaker of the House, Mr. "Cry me a River" Boehner, accusing this administration of ‘attacking religion freedom." How is that so? How it's making contraceptives accessible, not forcing any woman to take them, an attack on religion freedom? Why is not an attack to the State what religion institutions are doing? Why does this "attack" can only be applied on one direction? I am not surprised either at the holier than God comments coming from all the Republican candidates which are all up in arms about the intrusion of government in religion… Mitt Romney, as usual, is already counting his chickens before they hatch and has added another thing he would do on his first day as President, reversing this clause. Sorry Romney, but you will not be the 45^th President of the United States.

Mr. President, keep the policy as it is! Do not allow religion to change the policies that will affect thousands of women, even millions if the Catholic Church gets its way. It is time for a real separation of church and state, it is time for any religious institution to pay their fair share of taxes – no more getting rich by preaching, no more favoritism. According to their own beliefs, money is sinful… so lets help them release some of that sin, and pay taxes after all, they can’t seem to separate religion and politics so, if they want to be involved in politics they should contribute to the country, financially, as everyone else does!