View Full Version : The Real Mitt Romney
BlueStreak
05-14-2012, 08:32 PM
Enjoy watching this lying, flip-flopping gas bag run his mouth. And think of the 180 degree "pivot". Politics? You bet.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9IJUkYUbvI&eurl
finnbow
05-14-2012, 08:49 PM
Outside the 4 walls of his home, I'm not sure there is a real Mitt Romney.
However, I have it on good authority that he likes lakes, trees and cars. (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/15/opinion/mitt-likes-music-including-this.html?_r=1)
bhunter
05-15-2012, 02:42 AM
Enjoy watching this lying, flip-flopping gas bag run his mouth. And think of the 180 degree "pivot". Politics? You bet.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9IJUkYUbvI&eurl
After reading that line, I thought it referred to Obama's Gay marriage talk. OH, BTW, it was all talk. I guess when it's Obama it is just an evolution of policy.
It's one thing to have voted for Obama back in 2008 without having seen the real Obama (sounds like an oxymoron), but having now seen the real Obama I'm pretty comfortable giving just about anyone else a shot for the next four years. So say whatever you like about Romney, this election is not about who Romney is or what he's done as most of that is yet to be seen, it's about who Obama is and what he's done. The Obama people know this and that's why they are trying to change the subject all of the time. I don't think it's going to work. This election is pretty simple, Obama's been mediocre at best, a huge failure at worst. Anywhere in between means that it's time to vote for change.
Gee, that sounds familiar doesn't it. Obama the pathetic.
finnbow
05-15-2012, 09:51 AM
It's one thing to have voted for Obama back in 2008 without having seen the real Obama (sounds like an oxymoron), but having now seen the real Obama I'm pretty comfortable giving just about anyone else a shot for the next four years.
Same logic applied to the 2004 and Dubya, a much worse President than Obama by most measures, was reelected. The advantages or incumbency cannot be overstated in Presidential elections. Were this not true, the people that most Republicans prefer (Christie, Mitch Daniels, etc.) would have chosen to run. They are, however, keeping their powder dry for 2016 when they won't have to face an incumbent.
Same logic applied to the 2004 and Dubya, a much worse President than Obama by most measures, was reelected. The advantages or incumbency cannot be overstated in Presidential elections. Were this not true, the people that most Republicans prefer (Christie, Mitch Daniels, etc.) would have chosen to run. They are, however, keeping their powder dry for 2016 when they won't have to face an incumbent.
There is an incumbent advantage, but the candidate the Democrats put forth in 2004, John Kerry, was not ideal. The left has their illusions about Bush having been some kind of bad or unpopular president when the facts are that Obama's support from congress (across both aisles) and his approval ratings with the public have indeed been well below those of G.W. He's been nothing really but a lot of talk. Empty promises mixed with outright lies. The public isn't as stupid as the Obama people are hoping and of all the Republican candidates who could have succeeded, Romney was the most moderate and is the best positioned to win the presidency. He might not have been my first choice or that of a lot of conservatives, but he will be the choice of a lot of independents and he'll capture the middle which is all he's gonna need. Obama is a lefty radical compared to Romney's position along the political the spectrum. Romney successfully led one most liberal states in the union as governor for four years. Obama's policies and lack of integrity have left the country in need of a change. Incumbent advantage noted, Obama is poised to circumvent that and we could be looking at a sound win for Romney. Look at the polls since the race got down to two. Obama's trending down.
BlueStreak
05-15-2012, 01:12 PM
"Romney successfully led one most liberal states in the union as governor for four years."
Yes, especially what he did with their healthcare. I hear it's very popular. Maybe the same should be done on a natio..........Oh.
"Romney successfully led one most liberal states in the union as governor for four years."
Yes, especially what he did with their healthcare. I hear it's very popular. Maybe the same should be done on a natio..........Oh.
Obama didn't quite get that right now did he?... and now it very well might be declared unconstitutional. We need some kind of health care reform and I'm all for universal coverage - done right. Most people don't understand the details. Obama rammed his plan down everyone's throats and it was put in with some obvious holes in the design and they tried to sell it with a bunch of lies and misrepresentations. Obama and his folks simply take people for stupid.
Romney's plan for Massachusetts didn't mandate everyone to buy government health insurance, it provided disincentives for not doing so - like forfeit of one's personal tax exemption for not having insurance among other things. Romney inherited a multi-billion dollar deficit when he took office in Mass and ran surpluses for his last 2 years in office. Given that the state went back to running deficits after he left office, he struck a balance there of raising money through licensing fees (basically equivalent to excise taxes) and cutting state spending to achieve his deficits. His whole time in office the state legislature was (and still is) a large majority Democrat. So he had to deal across the aisle on everything. Even with the state leg overturning a lot of his initiatives, and Romney's only power sometime being the veto, he got a lot done for Mass in his 4 years and handed Patrick a state in much better shape financially than it was in when Romney took office.
Romney isn't the conservative dream, but he's what this country needs right now, Obama was never what it needed... he just misrepresented himself as being what the country needed and he's still doing it because he's really got nothing else but more misrepresentation to offer.
BlueStreak
05-15-2012, 01:33 PM
"Romney's plan for Massachusetts didn't mandate everyone to buy government health insurance, it provided disincentives for not doing so - like forfeit of one's personal tax exemption for not having insurance among other things."
Ha, ha, ha, ha........
What's the difference?
Your still punishing someone for not doing as they're told.
I'd call that a mandate.
finnbow
05-15-2012, 01:39 PM
There is an incumbent advantage, but the candidate the Democrats put forth in 2004, John Kerry, was not ideal....
Nor is The Mittster, BTW.
It's one thing to have voted for Obama back in 2008 without having seen the real Obama (sounds like an oxymoron), but having now seen the real Obama I'm pretty comfortable giving just about anyone else a shot for the next four years.
I have no issues with any critiquing of public figures but this is an argument I've just not understood: it seems to me that President Obama was pretty up front about what he'd do from the Executive and has taken every reasonable effort to produce such. :confused:
Not liking what has occurred is one thing (which I still disagree with but this is America) but pretending it was a secret since the Democratic primaries strikes me as ridiculous.
d-ray657
05-15-2012, 01:51 PM
The right wing noise machine had certainly been fixated on the notion that the health care plan was rammed down people's throats. To the contrary, the plan slowly plodded through the legislative process for nearly a year. Moreover, the bill had so many fingerprints on it by the time it finally became law that that it is silly to suggest that Obama imposed his will on the people. Finally, he campaigned on health care reform, including universal coverage. The People were well aware of that goal when they went to the voting booth. It is beyond me how anyone can claim that Obama engaged in some sort of totalitarian oppression by enacting a central plank of his platform.
Regards,
D-Ray
"Romney's plan for Massachusetts didn't mandate everyone to buy government health insurance, it provided disincentives for not doing so - like forfeit of one's personal tax exemption for not having insurance among other things."
Ha, ha, ha, ha........
What's the difference?
Your still punishing someone for not doing as they're told.
I'd call that a mandate.
It makes it a choice with financial disincentives rather than a fine for breaking the law. Just one example. The Obama health care bill is sloppy and full of problems like this and worse. Obama's personal input appears to have been minimal. He's too elite to get his hands dirty with the details. His job is to take the credit if it's successful and distance himself if it's not. He doesn't have a stake in anything. Romney fought out details of the legislation at nearly every turn and personally mediated to get things passed in the end. His approach will be a refreshing change. He has a record of advocating tolerance on social issues as well and I'm pretty sure that if he all of the sudden decided to support something like same sex marriage he wouldn't be going around bragging that he is single handedly leading the revolution of social change in America the way Obama is bragging now.
BlueStreak
05-15-2012, 02:08 PM
No. There is no difference. Whether you "fine" someone for not doing as they are told, or "provide financial disincentive" is same-same. It is still using financial punishment to force someone to act against their will. IT'S THE SAME THING.
Maybe Obama didn't consider himself an expert on health insurance and left it to professionals in the field to draft the legislation? Maybe he figured copying Mitts ideas was good enough since Mitt seems to be such an omniscient being?:p
Mitt has a record of advancing social issues when it's politically expedient. Like all politicians do. What are his stance on those issues at the moment? That's what you need to ask. And be quick about it, because it changes daily, depending on whom he's speaking to.
He's a world class "flip-flopper".
That was the point of this video, and it demonstrates it quite well. You know it's the truth and it burns your ass, doesn't it?
Oh, and BTW. If he does win, he will be inheriting a country in better, albeit slighty, shape than that horrendous mess that incompetent Republican left Obama. (And, I'm sure, deep down inside, you know that as well.):rolleyes:
merrylander
05-15-2012, 02:12 PM
Oh, and BTW. If he does win, he will be inheriting a country in better, albeit slighty, shape than the horrendous mess that incompetent Republican left Obama. (And, I'm sure, deep down inside, you know that as well.):rolleyes:
Unlike the Shrub I doubt it will take him eight years to flush it down the toilet, I just hope in the euphoria after a GOP win the housing market improves so we can rake the maximum profit out of this place.:rolleyes:
I have no issues with any critiquing of public figures but this is an argument I've just not understood: it seems to me that President Obama was pretty up front about what he'd do from the Executive and has taken every reasonable effort to produce such. :confused:
Not liking what has occurred is one thing (which I still disagree with but this is America) but pretending it was a secret since the Democratic primaries strikes me as ridiculous.
My problem with Obama has primarily revolved around the lack of integrity and leadership qualities which adversely affect his ability to effectively do his job. I understand that being president of the US is a little like trying to steer an oil tanker with a 20 inch wooden wheel, but this president has simply made a lot of promises (way too many) and failed to deliver. Whether it be through lack of experience or simply arrogance, he is described by insiders as aloof and very insulated within Washington, failing to do the legwork which is required to accomplish initiatives in a democrativc system. He has repeatedly failed, when opportunities abound, to take a principled stance on much of anything. His values seem fluent and his principles seem for sale. I understand that it takes a politican to get where he is, but he doesn`t seem to understand the power and responsibility of his office. His petty bragging, empty speeches, and divisive hypocrisy are far beneath what should be expected from the most powerful office in the world. He has continued to act like a small bit local politician in city government somewhere. He is clearly no uniter and is definitelty not post partisan (as he tried to pass himself off in `08) and his performance (or non-performance) on the economy and his record breaking runaway deficit spending has been nearly criminal.
The newsmedia hasn`t been objective or truthful regarding Obama. Compare him to some other presidents in the way he acts and with what he has actually accomplished. He simply does not measure up and it is a tragedy for the country which apparently had so much hope.
For those who aren`t sure about Romney, he is even worth a poker gamble considering what we have going on now. You`ve gotta know when to fold em and Obama`s poker hand has been bluffed as far as it can be. Simply time for some new cards. Nothing personal (although you can bet this desperate campaign will be... and Obama`s probably not going to come out looking like a nice guy).
BlueStreak
05-15-2012, 02:15 PM
Unlike the Shrub I doubt it will take him eight years to flush it down the toilet, I just hope in the euphoria after a GOP win the housing market improves so we can rake the maximum profit out of this place.:rolleyes:
In that one word, you said much. Euphoria; a feeling of well being, in the absence of any basis in reality.
Gotta run. I`ll catch up later.
merrylander
05-15-2012, 02:29 PM
As to the subject of this thread I am curious, is there a "real" Romnney or is he all facade?
merrylander
05-15-2012, 02:38 PM
In that one word, you said much. Euphoria; a feeling of well being, in the absence of any basis in reality.
I try to use the appropriate words, good thing that I have a reasonable vocabulary.;)
BlueStreak
05-15-2012, 03:24 PM
As to the subject of this thread I am curious, is there a "real" Romnney or is he all facade?
Cyborg, manufactured in the bowels of the Artificial Programmable Politician Research Facility at Koch Industries.
I try to use the appropriate words, good thing that I have a reasonable vocabulary.;)
The word I'll hopefully be using to describe my feelings at the time will be 'relieved'.
No. There is no difference. Whether you "fine" someone for not doing as they are told, or "provide financial disincentive" is same-same. It is still using financial punishment to force someone to act against their will. IT'S THE SAME THING.
While it may achieve the same end, one might just hold up in court... the other, we'll soon see.
Maybe Obama didn't consider himself an expert on health insurance and left it to professionals in the field to draft the legislation? Maybe he figured copying Mitts ideas was good enough since Mitt seems to be such an omniscient being?:p
Mitt has a record of advancing social issues when it's politically expedient. Like all politicians do. What are his stance on those issues at the moment? That's what you need to ask. And be quick about it, because it changes daily, depending on whom he's speaking to.
He's a world class "flip-flopper".
Oh come on. Obama's positions evolve and yet Romney's a flip-flopper. You can't win any converts with such obvious double standards. If you liberals want to copy strategies from Karl Rove's playbook, at least do it correctly - or you'll end up with an unworkable mess every time (like Obama's health care plan).
That was the point of this video, and it demonstrates it quite well. You know it's the truth and it burns your ass, doesn't it?
Oh, and BTW. If he does win, he will be inheriting a country in better, albeit slighty, shape than that horrendous mess that incompetent Republican left Obama. (And, I'm sure, deep down inside, you know that as well.):rolleyes:
I honestly did not see the (assuming propoganda) video. What kind of time do you think I have on my hands?
He'll be inheriting an unprecedented deficit, the level of damage to this country which it will cause, is as of yet to be seen... but we can guess. Obama's legacy won't be a good one.
Cyborg, manufactured in the bowels of the Artificial Programmable Politician Research Facility at Koch Industries.
I am kind of partial now to Cher's characterization which I posted in another thread describing Romney as a puppet of his ‘racist homophobic women hating tea bagger masters‘. :D (At least she'll say what she thinks).
BlueStreak
05-15-2012, 08:44 PM
I honestly did not see the (assuming propoganda) video. What kind of time do you think I have on my hands?
You seem to have tons of time on your hands to waste---banging your head against our wall. Do you even have a job?:p
I work at night, and sometimes suffer from insomnia, sleeping only a few hours a day, if at all.
What's your excuse?
BlueStreak
05-15-2012, 08:46 PM
Obama's legacy won't be a good one.
Do you think it will be as horrendous as GWs?
You seem to have tons of time on your hands to waste---banging your head against our wall. Do you even have a job?:p
I work at night, and sometimes suffer from insomnia, sleeping only a few hours a day, if at all.
What's your excuse?
My day job could sort of be described as overseeing what I've built up over the past 20 years or so which keeps me busy but affords me some flexibility. Most of my passionate endeavors these days are related to family, artistic pursuits, loud music, heavy drinking, and revving my Harley to annoy the liberal neighbors.
finnbow
05-15-2012, 09:05 PM
I am kind of partial now to Cher's characterization which I posted in another thread describing Romney as a puppet of his ‘racist homophobic women hating tea bagger masters‘. :D (At least she'll say what she thinks).
Seems like a fairly apt description of the Mittster.:D
BlueStreak
05-15-2012, 09:12 PM
Uh huh. Just as I thought.
You do nothing.
My neighbor is just like that. "The engine of the economy.", he calls himself.
He has a boat, that only sees water when it rains.....or he pisses himself in it. He sit's in the boat, with a cooler full of beer and a fishing pole, getting drunk and casting into the street. Twice, I've had to help his wife get his drunken ass into the house. Which isn't easy, 'cuz fat ass must weigh 350lbs now.
Must be all of that hard work........:rolleyes:
Uh huh. Just as I thought.
You do nothing.
My neighbor is just like that. "The engine of the economy.", he calls himself.
He has a boat, that only sees water when it rains.....or he pisses himself in it. He sit's in the boat, with a cooler full of beer and a fishing pole, getting drunk and casting into the street. Twice, I've had to help his wife get his drunken ass into the house. Which isn't easy, 'cuz fat ass must weigh 350lbs now. He has a boat, that only sees water when it rains.....or he pisses himself in it.
Must be all of that hard work........:rolleyes:
That some funny chit right there. I was half joking though. I do commute into the city about 4 times per week and put in pretty much an 8-5 day.
BlueStreak
05-15-2012, 09:54 PM
That some funny chit right there. I was half joking though. I do commute into the city about 4 times per week and put in pretty much an 8-5 day.
I work maintenance, high speed canning, 7p.m. to 7a.m., three days one week, four the next. It only get's tough when I and/or my coworkers don't do our jobs. So, most of the time, it's a pretty good gig.
Look, I don't care that guys like Grady, (or you), have yourselves set up the way you want. Good for you.
It's only when he starts telling me that I have it too good. I had to do my time in school, the military, and put in 30 years of wrench twisting of some sort or another to get on top of my game too. And, if you think it's easy being on your feet, on the concrete, in the 110 degree heat, the dust and grease, the ear splitting noise for 12 hours..................
I'm just sayin'
vBulletin® v3.8.6, Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.