the romney weather vane

[Danzig]

i like the analogy will saletan used in regards to romney and his abortion stance...er, stances.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...xtremist_.html

he makes a good point, not just regarding abortion, but all women's issues could be lumped in. they're issues because the pro-choice and women have ignored or taken for granted their reproductive rights. and yes, they are under attack...but then, what isn't these days?

[jms62]

Originally Posted by Danzig

i like the analogy will saletan used in regards to romney and his abortion stance...er, stances.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...xtremist_.html

he makes a good point, not just regarding abortion, but all women's issues could be lumped in. they're issues because the pro-choice and women have ignored or taken for granted their reproductive rights. and yes, they are under attack...but then, what isn't these days?

He is a tool... Please take the time to read what I posted vis a vis the economy....

He's an a.sshole. No other way around it. A bad actor who is a complete fraud and will make Obama about as likeable as the great Walter Payton before it's all said and done.

He was brought to us to destroy the republic. I truly believe that.

This video, even though it's blatant propaganda and a setup, shows just what a scumbag dick this guy is.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRN9Y...layer_embedded

I can't stand him.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by jms62

He is a tool... Please take the time to read what I posted vis a vis the economy....

yeah, he is a tool. and it should show just how dissatisfied people are with our current commander in chief considering just how close the polls are right now. obama should be beating him by a country mile-except that he sucks, the economy sucks, and we are still engaged in the longest war in us history.
what i really don't understand is why the question 'who will do better on the economy' has romney at 60 vs 40% who think obama would be better. of course, obama has had plenty of time to show leadership in that regard, but hasn't.
and the argument i've seen that republicans stalled any of his economic ideas---uh, bullsh!t. he got that wheelbarrow load of crap called the ppaca pushed thru, so don't give me the hogwash that he couldn't push thru infrastructure spending bills. we don't need more teachers and police and firemen (whose future incomes would be provided solely by those cities after an inital jolt from the fed), we needed to take the opportunity to get real work done with that money. bridges in sad disrepair, interstate roads in horrible shape, etc, etc. he should have taken a page out of fdr's book on that.
but romney won't be better. he knows finance, and look what financiers who have bought up so many pols have done for us....or to us is more like it!

[Danzig]

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slate...l_donors_.html


Not a lot is known about the CNP, which appears to be just the way its members like it. The New York Times did some digging back in 2004 and filed this report on the group and its "strictly confidential" membership. Here's a few snippets to whet your appetite:

Three times a year for 23 years, a little-known club of a few hundred of the most powerful conservatives in the country have met behind closed doors at undisclosed locations for a confidential conference, the Council for National Policy, to strategize about how to turn the country to the right. Details are closely guarded. ...

Mr. Bush addressed the group in fall 1999 to solicit support for his campaign, stirring a dispute when news of his speech leaked and Democrats demanded he release a tape recording. He did not.
Not long after the Iraq invasion, Vice President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld attended a council meeting.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/28/po...7dcad1&ei=5070


the latter link is to the ny times article about the group. and one member...grover norquist. who is that guy??

[Rileyoriley]

Originally Posted by jms62

He is a tool... Please take the time to read what I posted vis a vis the economy....

I did read. I also agree. It is going to be up to the people to bring this country back. Anyone relying on government to do it will keep getting screwed (not that we all aren't anyway ). Unfortunately most people in this country are more interested in reality shows than reality.
I do think there needs to be less regulations on business.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Rileyoriley

I did read. I also agree. It is going to be up to the people to bring this country back. Anyone relying on government to do it will keep getting screwed (not that we all aren't anyway ). Unfortunately most people in this country are more interested in reality shows than reality.
I do think there needs to be less regulations on business.

it's always up to the people. as for regs-it all depends on the regulations. banks need theirs all put back on that were removed, leading to the bank bubble bursting and taking much of the economy with it. some regs are absolutely absurd.

[bigrun]

Originally Posted by Danzig

yeah, he is a tool. and it should show just how dissatisfied people are with our current commander in chief considering just how close the polls are right now. obama should be beating him by a country mile-except that he sucks, the economy sucks, and we are still engaged in the longest war in us history.
what i really don't understand is why the question 'who will do better on the economy' has romney at 60 vs 40% who think obama would be better. of course, obama has had plenty of time to show leadership in that regard, but hasn't.
and the argument i've seen that republicans stalled any of his economic ideas---uh, bullsh!t. he got that wheelbarrow load of crap called the ppaca pushed thru, so don't give me the hogwash that he couldn't push thru infrastructure spending bills. we don't need more teachers and police and firemen (whose future incomes would be provided solely by those cities after an inital jolt from the fed), we needed to take the opportunity to get real work done with that money. bridges in sad disrepair, interstate roads in horrible shape, etc, etc. he should have taken a page out of fdr's book on that.
but romney won't be better. he knows finance, and look what financiers who have bought up so many pols have done for us....or to us is more like it!

Yes, courtesy of G Dumya Bush and now another of his handoffs to Obama...Don't remember if Obama promised to depart that hellhole sooner than scheduled pullout..don't care..said 100 times,destroy the terrorists camps, route the taliban, capture or kill osama in and out in one year..tops..
Nah nah, Bush/Cheney had eyes on Iraq...You know how that turned out..
I know, get over it...I can't...Understand Obama won't be on Rushmore and i won't be shocked if he is gone in Nov...Just can't stand the thought of repuke rule...apoligize for hi-jacking your post, can't help myself...

[Rileyoriley]

Originally Posted by Danzig

it's always up to the people. as for regs-it all depends on the regulations. banks need theirs all put back on that were removed, leading to the bank bubble bursting and taking much of the economy with it. some regs are absolutely absurd.

In the state of Mass., most fall into the absurd column. Companies have left the state in droves heading either south or out of the country. With the exception of the casinos, none are looking to move into this state. Western Mass. has become a ghost town but not to worry, we're going to build a high speed rail here!

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by bigrun

Yes, courtesy of G Dumya Bush and now another of his handoffs to Obama...Don't remember if Obama promised to depart that hellhole sooner than scheduled pullout..don't care..said 100 times,destroy the terrorists camps, route the taliban, capture or kill osama in and out in one year..tops..
Nah nah, Bush/Cheney had eyes on Iraq...You know how that turned out..
I know, get over it...I can't...Understand Obama won't be on Rushmore and i won't be shocked if he is gone in Nov...Just can't stand the thought of repuke rule...apoligize for hi-jacking your post, can't help myself...

everyone knows who started it... and everyone knows we're still there. you can only blame your predecessor for so long. obama ran for office, knowing the lay of the land. he can't just duck responsibility for ever on that issue. who got us in vietnam? it became several presidents war. obama isn't special, why should he be the one leader who gets to say 'not my fault'?
he's the commander in chief, has been for almost four years, has had ample opportunity to take care of business there. but, he hasn't; that is NOT bushes fault.

[Rileyoriley]

Originally Posted by Danzig

everyone knows who started it... and everyone knows we're still there. you can only blame your predecessor for so long. obama ran for office, knowing the lay of the land. he can't just duck responsibility for ever on that issue. who got us in vietnam? it became several presidents war. obama isn't special, why should he be the one leader who gets to say 'not my fault'?
he's the commander in chief, has been for almost four years, has had ample opportunity to take care of business there. but, he hasn't; that is NOT bushes fault.

I noticed lately "it's Congress' fault".

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Rileyoriley

I noticed lately "it's Congress' fault".

yeah...well, they deserve a share of the responsibility as well. was bush to blame, of course he was. but he's not the only one. president never is the only one.
what gets me tho is when the president gets all the praise for good news that comes out, and none of the blame when it's bad! now, that's a great pr team.

[bigrun]

Originally Posted by Danzig

everyone knows who started it... and everyone knows we're still there. you can only blame your predecessor for so long. obama ran for office, knowing the lay of the land. he can't just duck responsibility for ever on that issue. who got us in vietnam? it became several presidents war. obama isn't special, why should he be the one leader who gets to say 'not my fault'?
he's the commander in chief, has been for almost four years, has had ample opportunity to take care of business there. but, he hasn't; that is NOT bushes fault.

I agree...It is now Obama's...but i still insist if Bush acted wisely and got the heck out early it wouldn't be Obama's/our problem.


Americans tune out Afghan war as fighting rages on..

KABUL, Afghanistan -- It was once President Barack Obama's "war of necessity." Now, it's America's forgotten war.

The Afghan conflict generates barely a whisper on the U.S. presidential campaign trail. It's not a hot topic at the office water cooler or in the halls of Congress -- even though more than 80,000 American troops are still fighting here and dying at a rate of one a day.

Americans show more interest in the economy and taxes than the latest suicide bombings in a different, distant land. They're more tuned in to the political ad war playing out on television than the deadly fight still raging against the Taliban. Earlier this month, protesters at the Iowa State Fair chanted "Stop the war!" They were referring to one purportedly being waged against the middle class.

By the time voters go to the polls Nov. 6 to choose between Obama and presumptive Republican nominee Mitt Romney, the war will be in its 12th year. For most Americans, that's long enough.

Not since the Korean War of the early 1950s -- a much shorter but more intense fight -- has an armed conflict involving America's sons and daughters captured so little public attention.

"We're bored with it," said Matthew Farwell, who served in the U.S. Army for five years including 16 months in eastern Afghanistan, where he sometimes received letters from grade school students addressed to the brave Marines in Iraq -- the wrong war.

"We all laugh about how no one really cares," he said. "All the 'support the troops' stuff is bumper sticker deep.".How true..

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articl...ing-rages.html

[pointman]

Originally Posted by bigrun

Yes, courtesy of G Dumya Bush and now another of his handoffs to Obama...Don't remember if Obama promised to depart that hellhole sooner than scheduled pullout..don't care..said 100 times,destroy the terrorists camps, route the taliban, capture or kill osama in and out in one year..tops..
Nah nah, Bush/Cheney had eyes on Iraq...You know how that turned out..
I know, get over it...I can't...Understand Obama won't be on Rushmore and i won't be shocked if he is gone in Nov...Just can't stand the thought of repuke rule...apoligize for hi-jacking your post, can't help myself...

[bigrun]

Originally Posted by pointman

[Thepaindispenser]

So Big Run since you support charges against Bush,I would assume you support charges against Obama for his indiscriminate drone attacks in Pakistan which kill innocent people right? After all I know you are not a hypocrite.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by Thepaindispenser

So Big Run since you support charges against Bush,I would assume you support charges against Obama for his indiscriminate drone attacks in Pakistan which kill innocent people right? After all I know you are not a hypocrite.

Checkmate

[bigrun]

Originally Posted by Thepaindispenser

So Big Run since you support charges against Bush,I would assume you support charges against Obama for his indiscriminate drone attacks in Pakistan which kill innocent people right? After all I know you are not a hypocrite.

You guys tickle the schit out of me...crying over innocent people killed in war..How many tears did you shed over the 'innocents' killed in Bush's war in Iraq?...or when Saddam gassed his own 'innocents' -one of Bush's excuses for invasion?..did you give a schit?..No, you cheered Bush on..
Now you attack Obama for using a plan to keep our military out of harm's way while taking out known terrorist leaders..or is killing terrorists no longer a priority for you 'patriots'?..talk about hypocrites, look in a mirror..Go back to jobs and economy bashing, maybe you know something about that..

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by bigrun

You guys tickle the schit out of me...crying over innocent people killed in war..How many tears did you shed over the 'innocents' killed in Bush's war in Iraq?...or when Saddam gassed his own 'innocents' -one of Bush's excuses for invasion?..did you give a schit?..No, you cheered Bush on..
Now you attack Obama for using a plan to keep our military out of harm's way while taking out known terrorist leaders..or is killing terrorists no longer a priority for you 'patriots'?..talk about hypocrites, look in a mirror..Go back to jobs and economy bashing, maybe you know something about that..

this post is on a Riot / Dellinger type level.

Come on big run, you are better than that.

[bigrun]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

this post is on a Riot / Dellinger type level.

Come on big run, you are better than that.

So Big Run since you support charges against Bush,I would assume you support charges against Obama for his indiscriminate drone attacks in Pakistan which kill innocent people right? After all I know you are not a hypocrite.

That's some heavy company you placed me in, i thought it was fairly mild.
I usually ignore all the Obama bashing but i just couldn't pass on the killing innocents..those are the same 'patriots' that cheered Bush on and now with Obama they are no longer patriots...sucks...