Under Romney, Bain Made Money off of Disposed Fetuses

[Article 15]

So here's the logic...Abortion is wrong but profiting from it is ok

Hilarious, right?

 

[Article 15]

You see no reason to whine about the Republican Canidate for President making a profit from the thing that they are supposed to be against. As I said in the first post....Making money trumps Morality to the righties. You've just proved that. I dont see why you have a problem with me saying it...you just did.

you really are not very bright, are you.

There are necessary evils in the world. Things that, because of other things, HAVE to be done. Disposal of an aborted fetus is one of them.

If there were no companies handling this necessary evil, what would you suggest we do with the aborted fetuses? Force someone to deal with them at no cost?

Making money does not trump morality. Performing a necessary evil, and thus making a profit, is not a moral problem for me.

Necessary evils will always exist, it doesnt mean that Romney has to fill that void considering his strong stance on it publicly and personally.

No companies were handling the thing Romney is against? Well hells bells, he had to do it then.

Of course it's not because like I said....Profit beats morality. Romney didnt have to fill that void. You talk like someone made him take the company against his will. He chose to be against abortion and he chose to profit from the very thing he says he's against.

That would be like James Brady owing a gun shop. Alec Baldwin owning a mink fur shop. Or the womans rights advocate pimping girls in where ever prostitution is legal.

Why am I not surprised that this post was ignored?

 

[Pho_King]

[/B]

I completely agree

And also because conservatives tend to punish their representatives for their ideological inconsistencies and deceptions. Lefties could care les how many times Obama lies to us, changes his positions, and flips us a finger.

That's the other way around. The GOP trash lies to their useful sheep all the time, craps all over the constitution, attempts to shake down supreme court justices etc,.. Willard has no idea what his position is on anything but his supporteres don't care, he has an (R) next to his name and that's all that matters.

GOP voters are like battered wives where their husband beats them over and over, yet they never leave, and keep voting (R) at every election because "he told me he loves me and this time he promised he would stop"

Well, our black Messiah believes in virtually unlimited federal power under both the taxing power and the commerce clause, has spewed countless lies to support his power, and changes his positions the way clean people change underwear. Of course, when Obama does it, it's for our good, so none of us care. Only the racists do.

 

[Pho_King]

you really are not very bright, are you.

There are necessary evils in the world. Things that, because of other things, HAVE to be done. Disposal of an aborted fetus is one of them.

If there were no companies handling this necessary evil, what would you suggest we do with the aborted fetuses? Force someone to deal with them at no cost?

Making money does not trump morality. Performing a necessary evil, and thus making a profit, is not a moral problem for me.

Necessary evils will always exist, it doesnt mean that Romney has to fill that void considering his strong stance on it publicly and personally.

No companies were handling the thing Romney is against? Well hells bells, he had to do it then.

Of course it's not because like I said....Profit beats morality. Romney didnt have to fill that void. You talk like someone made him take the company against his will. He chose to be against abortion and he chose to profit from the very thing he says he's against.

That would be like James Brady owing a gun shop. Alec Baldwin owning a mink fur shop. Or the womans rights advocate pimping girls in where ever prostitution is legal.

Why am I not surprised that this post was ignored?

What is the moral thing to do with a trash bag full of dead babies?

 

[Article 15]

Necessary evils will always exist, it doesnt mean that Romney has to fill that void considering his strong stance on it publicly and personally.

No companies were handling the thing Romney is against? Well hells bells, he had to do it then.

Of course it's not because like I said....Profit beats morality. Romney didnt have to fill that void. You talk like someone made him take the company against his will. He chose to be against abortion and he chose to profit from the very thing he says he's against.

That would be like James Brady owing a gun shop. Alec Baldwin owning a mink fur shop. Or the womans rights advocate pimping girls in where ever prostitution is legal.

Why am I not surprised that this post was ignored?

What is the moral thing to do with a trash bag full of dead babies?

Irrelevant.

Is it hypocritical to profit off of something you believe is wrong?

 

[Seawytch]

'every single issue'. Overstate much?

Oh good! I think I've found someone that can finally answer the question I've been asking...

Can you name one issue that Reversible Mittens has remained steadfast on? One issue he has never wavered or flip flopped on?

same question for Obama.

People in glass houses.......

Nice deflection. Can't think of one I see.

 

[Pho_King]

Why am I not surprised that this post was ignored?

What is the moral thing to do with a trash bag full of dead babies?

Irrelevant.

Is it hypocritical to profit off of something you believe is wrong?

Irrelevant. Romney did not profit off of abortion.

 

[Article 15]

What is the moral thing to do with a trash bag full of dead babies?

Irrelevant.

Is it hypocritical to profit off of something you believe is wrong?

Irrelevant. Romney did not profit off of abortion.

Uh huh

 

[Pho_King]

Irrelevant.

Is it hypocritical to profit off of something you believe is wrong?

Irrelevant. Romney did not profit off of abortion.

Uh huh

That's about like believing Conde Nast, Bon appetit and the countless other publications found in dentist offices profit off of root canals. But go ahead. Fire away while the rest of us laugh.

 

[Dot Com]

koshergrl must be voting for Obama or sitting this election out

 

[ClosedCaption]

Irrelevant. Romney did not profit off of abortion.

Uh huh

That's about like believing Conde Nast, Bon appetit and the countless other publications found in dentist offices profit off of root canals. But go ahead. Fire away while the rest of us laugh.

Romney's (dam you spell check!) company disposed of fetuses. Conde Nast is a publication that publishes stuff. I understand you are confused but one of these things is not the other. The Magazine can exist without root canals.

 

[Katzndogz]

Bain took a failing medical waste company and turned it profitable. I'm supposed to be upset over that?

No.

 

[WillowTree]

Here's the real deal. obama had a chance to vote on whether or not a fetus who accidently survived an abortion should receive medical care or not. You know how he voted? He voted NO.


now go stuff your cabbage.

 

[Borillar]

you really are not very bright, are you.

There are necessary evils in the world. Things that, because of other things, HAVE to be done. Disposal of an aborted fetus is one of them.

If there were no companies handling this necessary evil, what would you suggest we do with the aborted fetuses? Force someone to deal with them at no cost?

Making money does not trump morality. Performing a necessary evil, and thus making a profit, is not a moral problem for me.

Necessary evils will always exist, it doesnt mean that Romney has to fill that void considering his strong stance on it publicly and personally.

No companies were handling the thing Romney is against? Well hells bells, he had to do it then.

Of course it's not because like I said....Profit beats morality. Romney didnt have to fill that void. You talk like someone made him take the company against his will. He chose to be against abortion and he chose to profit from the very thing he says he's against.

That would be like James Brady owing a gun shop. Alec Baldwin owning a mink fur shop. Or the womans rights advocate pimping girls in where ever prostitution is legal.

Why am I not surprised that this post was ignored?

Indeed. There is no line the right won't cross as long as there is a buck on the other side.

 

[Pho_King]

Uh huh

That's about like believing Conde Nast, Bon appetit and the countless other publications found in dentist offices profit off of root canals. But go ahead. Fire away while the rest of us laugh.

Timbers company disposed of fetuses. Conde Nast is a publication that publishes stuff. I understand you are confused but one of these things is not the other. The Magazine can exist without root canals.

Conde Nast is a publication that sells both it's product and it's service. And yes, it could exist without root canals. Similarly, timbers company handled medical waste, of which trash bags filled with dead babies belonged. Along with syringes. And catheters. And iv bags, etc. no evidence has been put forth that timbers relied on the disposal of dead babies to exist. I understand that, in your zealous rage against profit and succes you are unable to rationally discuss romney's wild success. But carry on. Those that support you are laughing at you.

 

[Katzndogz]

In the world of liberal equality, all medical waste is abortions.

 

[Pho_King]

Necessary evils will always exist, it doesnt mean that Romney has to fill that void considering his strong stance on it publicly and personally.

No companies were handling the thing Romney is against? Well hells bells, he had to do it then.

Of course it's not because like I said....Profit beats morality. Romney didnt have to fill that void. You talk like someone made him take the company against his will. He chose to be against abortion and he chose to profit from the very thing he says he's against.

That would be like James Brady owing a gun shop. Alec Baldwin owning a mink fur shop. Or the womans rights advocate pimping girls in where ever prostitution is legal.

Why am I not surprised that this post was ignored?

Indeed. There is no line the right won't cross as long as there is a buck on the other side.

Ha ha. Business decisions arre the province of "the right".

 

[WillowTree]

Necessary evils will always exist, it doesnt mean that Romney has to fill that void considering his strong stance on it publicly and personally.

No companies were handling the thing Romney is against? Well hells bells, he had to do it then.

Of course it's not because like I said....Profit beats morality. Romney didnt have to fill that void. You talk like someone made him take the company against his will. He chose to be against abortion and he chose to profit from the very thing he says he's against.

That would be like James Brady owing a gun shop. Alec Baldwin owning a mink fur shop. Or the womans rights advocate pimping girls in where ever prostitution is legal.

Why am I not surprised that this post was ignored?

Indeed. There is no line the right won't cross as long as there is a buck on the other side.

Well if Republicans don't make a buck who's going to send you your welfare check? I know I know, it's obama money.

 

[Pho_King]

Why am I not surprised that this post was ignored?

Indeed. There is no line the right won't cross as long as there is a buck on the other side.

Well if Republicans don't make a buck who's going to send you your welfare check? I know I know, it's obama money.

Which is to say nothing of the fact that someone has to tend to those bags of dead babies the left clamors for.

 

[Borillar]

Indeed. There is no line the right won't cross as long as there is a buck on the other side.

Well if Republicans don't make a buck who's going to send you your welfare check? I know I know, it's obama money.

Which is to say nothing of the fact that someone has to tend to those bags of dead babies the left clamors for.

More of an item in demand by the right. The company should pickle them and put them into jars for sale to anti abortion zealots to wave around at anybody attempting to use planned parenthood clinics.