Rani Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 [quote name='Venger' timestamp='1349799618' post='558121'] Creees I hate you so much right now I could ban myself. I actually lost IQ points watching that video. If I were Pres.Obama I would play this video before every TV ad I had out there. He would be sure to win. Gods save us all. P.S. Mormons are considered Christians as they believe in Christ's divinity and strive to be like him. (proof,as if needed,that this girl has zero clue.) [/quote] After viewing the video I may have to revisit my stance about needing to pass an intelligence test before you're allowed to vote. 'Rani Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheScotsman Posted October 10, 2012 Author Share Posted October 10, 2012 Where do you actually get "separation of church and state" in the constitution? Just in case you need a hint: It's not there, that fallacy is a result of a progressive activist judiciary in 1878 (date may be off... it's been a verrrrryyyyy long time since those courses.) The whole separation idea, as it is today, stemmed out of the gov't looking for an excuse to not pay for busing students to catholic schools in the years just post WW2. Before that case the feds never applied the "wall of separation" theory to any events at a state level. Talk about needing a test to vote, how about just allowing people that actually know the constitution fill in a ballot. Wouldn't be many of us, easy to recount the ballots. How could LDS members even hold a candle to the asshole that is Rev. Wright? or did we forget that wanker? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chreees Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 Separation of church and state is what has kept this country from falling into absolute madness thus far. Let's see how much longer we get before our great nation falls... Yes, religion is what's killing not only this country, but the world. Tapatalk'd via iPhone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheScotsman Posted October 10, 2012 Author Share Posted October 10, 2012 [quote name='Chreees' timestamp='1349848737' post='558175'] Separation of church and state is what has kept this country from falling into absolute madness thus far. Let's see how much longer we get before our great nation falls... Yes, religion is what's killing not only this country, but the world. Tapatalk'd via iPhone [/quote] Your opinion is noted, but you still failed the basic premiss - Show me any part of the constitution that states a thing about separation of church and state. We are a nation built on that single document, more than anything else. How about that mess in Libya? I can't wait for the debate about foreign policy. I'm going to need popcorn for that event. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chreees Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 [quote name='TheScotsman' timestamp='1349878686' post='558184'] [quote name='Chreees' timestamp='1349848737' post='558175'] Separation of church and state is what has kept this country from falling into absolute madness thus far. Let's see how much longer we get before our great nation falls... Yes, religion is what's killing not only this country, but the world. Tapatalk'd via iPhone [/quote] Your opinion is noted, but you still failed the basic premiss - Show me any part of the constitution that states a thing about separation of church and state. We are a nation built on that single document, more than anything else. How about that mess in Libya? I can't wait for the debate about foreign policy. I'm going to need popcorn for that event. [/quote] Did I ever suggest that separation of church and state was in the Constitution? No. But I do think it should be. Then maybe these religious nuts could really be told to shut up and sit down. EDIT: I had a feeling there was something concerning it in the Constitution, but was doubtful... Turns out there is: The [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution"]First Amendment to the United States Constitution[/url] provides that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ...." and [url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_Six_of_the_United_States_Constitution"]Article VI[/url] specifies that "[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Religious_Test_Clause"]no religious Test shall ever be required[/url] as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rani Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 I keep hearing about the fact that separation of church and state isn't per se in the constitution but it has been successfully argued before the Supreme Court that it is implied. Last time I checked they still get the final word, until someone else finds a way to sneak in a counter argument to be heard. Regardless, I don't know if it's going to last....... With religious lunatics ramping up everywhere, where you MUST be Muslim or die, or you MUST be fundamental Christian or die, or you must be.......... It's like no one is going to give up until they effectively take over government and put to death everyone who doesn't fit it. All sides have lost it. God would be (and probably is) appalled at what people are doing to each other and blaming him as the reason. However, in the meantime I think it's reasonable to be concerned when the faith of a candidate for the Presidency is one that subscribes to government involvement/takeover. I keep saying I almost hope the son of a bitch wins so the people who voted for his Mormon ass can finally understand they didn't just shoot themselves in the foot, they blew it off altogether with a 12 gauge. 'Rani Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheScotsman Posted October 10, 2012 Author Share Posted October 10, 2012 I don't think you have to "hope" he wins, It's romney's race at this point. Always was, the lib media just pulled the wool over the truth - the bias always leaves the polls in the last 45 days. You are seeing something closer to the true numbers now. Then there is the effect of the president and the state dept lying, bold faced, at the American people. Where has carney been? He's in hiding so he doesn't have to answer any questions about the pres lying about Libya. They are trying hard to shift the focus to big bird, but it's not working. The mid east is a disaster many times worse than when the pretender took office, we are broker, everything is more expensive, the world thinks the USA is a laughing stock, and it's going to coast him a second term. Like the fact major businesses are dumping their full time staff in favour of part-time only so thy don't get hosed by 'bamercare? Gee, what idiot didn't think that would happen? Oh, wait, the Chamber told them this would happen - Gotta pass this bill so you can see how fucked you are a result of it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rani Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 [quote name='TheScotsman' timestamp='1349900808' post='558225'] I don't think you have to "hope" he wins, It's romney's race at this point. Always was, the lib media just pulled the wool over the truth - the bias always leaves the polls in the last 45 days. You are seeing something closer to the true numbers now. Then there is the effect of the president and the state dept lying, bold faced, at the American people. Where has carney been? He's in hiding so he doesn't have to answer any questions about the pres lying about Libya. They are trying hard to shift the focus to big bird, but it's not working. The mid east is a disaster many times worse than when the pretender took office, we are broker, everything is more expensive, the world thinks the USA is a laughing stock, and it's going to coast him a second term. Like the fact major businesses are dumping their full time staff in favour of part-time only so thy don't get hosed by 'bamercare? Gee, what idiot didn't think that would happen? Oh, wait, the Chamber told them this would happen - Gotta pass this bill so you can see how fucked you are a result of it! [/quote] BS flag coming up....... Electoral count still shows Obama ahead. Plus, the Romney bump is still being highly based on his admittedly good display at the first debate, but there are two more to go. "John" of Papa John's pizza actually ran the numbers and discovered that insuring every single currently uninsured person in his organization would cost all of $0.14 per pizza. And since he can't raise the cost exactly fourteen cents probably your pizza delivery will go from $7.99 to $8.25. Woo hoo, gonna break the bank on that one huh? The Middle East is still in major upheaval no doubt but more and more citizens are coming out on the side of supporting the U.S. diplomacy efforts. The extremism was bound to end up hitting a wall eventually as more and more people managed to become Western educated. Overall, the prognosis is better than it's been for a long, long time. Certainly better than it ever was under Republican efforts. (Anybody got any shoes I can throw at Scotsman????) Yes, everything in more expensive. Inflation does that. It would be more expensive no matter who'd been in the White House past four years, and if you want to talk uninhibited inflation talk about the fact that health care costs rose at more than three times the rate of inflation every year for the past 30 years. But, nah, don't want to reign that in now do we? You must own stock Scotsman. And lastly, I am sick to death of the inference that Pelosi was hiding something during the passage of "Obamacare". There were seven versions of the AFFORDABLE HEALTH CARE ACT at any given time, all constantly being negotiated right up until the moment they passed the vote, so yeah, you kind of have to wait until it passes to actually see what's in a bill. Have you never, ever once negotiated a contract? Sure don't sound like it. I have and until the moment it was signed, yep, still all up in the air. The state department.....Oh, somebody blew it big time. But I sincerely doubt that was either Clinton or Obama. More likely it was the guy processing the security requests. I very much doubt if anybody above the guy manning that desk even knew about the request. Should have, but welcome to red tape. Unbelievably sad that four people died because of red tape, but let's be honest, it happens all the time and is usually what causes us to improve our methods. Damn shame, but factual nonetheless. You know Scotsman, you and I actually agree at points during our various discussions here and there........ And I generally try and be polite because really yelling never solved anything. But you're wrong. Just wrong. And unlike most of the idiots who want to intentionally keep us in the dark ages, I think you enjoy being wrong. You're the guy always rubbing the cat's fur the wrong way. The guy who ignores the crosswalk just because it's beneath your dignity to follow the rules. And I actually like that about you. But you gotta quit buying into the hype because it suit your rebellious personality. It's way too dangerous against someone like Romney who think his buddies should put you out of business and keep all the money for themselves. 'Rani Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chreees Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 Well this shouldn't be surprising... Mitt flipping again: http://news.yahoo.com/romney-promises-no-abortion-legislation-004508435--election.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheScotsman Posted October 11, 2012 Author Share Posted October 11, 2012 Rani, you should know by now, I am never wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chreees Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 Vice Presidential debate... Now THAT was a debate... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rani Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 [quote name='Chreees' timestamp='1350009637' post='558330'] Vice Presidential debate... Now THAT was a debate... [/quote] I actually watched most of this one. Should have had the popcorn concession. Ryan did better than I expected, but he still came across as very "cardboard" to me. You could see Biden's emotional investment in every answer and although they both had the fact checkers busy this morning, it's also very clear that Biden did the much better job. 'Rani Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coleman Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 Ryan had a look of fear upon his face, at least I thought he did, occasionally when Biden would call him out. Especially when Biden brought up the Ryan personally sent him two letters asking for support of two companies when Ryan was saying he was against us borrowing 831 million I think it was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chreees Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 There were so many great points made in that debate, there's too many to list. Biden brought the facts and Ryan couldn't keep his lies straight. Hilarious how he contradicted not only his past stances on issues (i.e. standing with Todd Akin on extreme abortion legislature, but now saying there should be exceptions for rape, incest, or life of the mother), but also how he often contradicted more current things, such as not being on the same page as his running mate when it comes to whether they will pass abortion legislature if elected. Biden said it best when he said "Romney changes his mind too much." Just a few of many great points made in this debate. This is how the presidential debate should have been... Tapatalk'd via iPhone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chreees Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 [img]http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mbsghrPfqF1ratyllo1_500.jpg[/img] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rani Posted October 12, 2012 Share Posted October 12, 2012 [quote name='Chreees' timestamp='1350071372' post='558373'] There were so many great points made in that debate, there's too many to list. Biden brought the facts and Ryan couldn't keep his lies straight. Hilarious how he contradicted not only his past stances on issues (i.e. standing with Todd Akin on extreme abortion legislature, but now saying there should be exceptions for rape, incest, or life of the mother), but also how he often contradicted more current things, such as not being on the same page as his running mate when it comes to whether they will pass abortion legislature if elected. Biden said it best when he said "Romney changes his mind too much." Just a few of many great points made in this debate. This is how the presidential debate should have been... Tapatalk'd via iPhone [/quote] One of the things that does concern me about both Romney and Ryan is that they're better than most at listening, and then feeding back at you what you want to hear. Just like we all do with our parents, our boss, etc. Once you know what someone wants to hear, it's a no-brainer to tell them exactly that. Meanwhile you're sneaking out the back window and doing what you planned to do in the first place. I don't say judge Romney or Ryan on their speeches, or their campaign ads, or their debates. Look into them - who they are and what they're about. Read Romney's book, check how Ryan voted, check what the people in Mass really think about Romney and his performance. Listening to their words won't get you anywhere because they're just telling what you hope to hear. 'Rani Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheScotsman Posted October 13, 2012 Author Share Posted October 13, 2012 Now we know why congress gets nothing done. Both were full of bullshit, and semi-facts, neither one had a plan for anything. The debate format didn't do it for me, can't put my finger on just what it was, but it didn't work. Looked and felt too much like a political talk show, and not a debate. That last few minutes of religious stuff was pretty useless, I expected to hear trumpets, and see a burning bush they way they were laying the BS on. And good grief, the abortion horse got flogged again. When do we get to just give that argument up? We have a SCOTUS decision, it seems to work, time for the churchies to give that the hell up. I would rather have heard some opinions about the Syria/Turkey escalation, and something about the tension between Japan and China than which one is more Catholic. Holy crap, (all pun intended) that was a useless segment. Ryan couldn't answer a question with any sort of coherent answer that actually had much to do with the actual question, would have helped if biden would shut his mouth for 4 minutes, on the other hand, since it was just party line talking points on both sides, it really didn't matter. Biden couldn't tell the truth if he had to - his acting like a 15 year old girl was really degrading to the debate, and the office. Biden was just spouting party platform talking points. Looked like an infomercial, expected the sham-wow guy to pop out at any point, The grunting, giggling, and grinning reminded me of a village idiot. What does that moron think is so funny about a nuclear armed iran, or our embassy being attacked? It's not a funny matter, even if joie-boy thinks so, so why all the giggling? Win- biden if you heard it on the radio, and didn't see the way he acted, Ryan if you watched it, and saw that idiot. Cbs gave it to Biden CNN gave it to Ryan Rasmussen gave it to Ryan Frankly, in either case, I would rather see BHO in the office over either of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chreees Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 I do believe Obama won that one... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheScotsman Posted October 17, 2012 Author Share Posted October 17, 2012 Well, at least we can say O showed up... then spent 90 minutes running around the ring trying to stay ahead of his own record. Fecked himself with libya question. For 2 weeks we heard him blame a video, We heard rice go running to 5 sunday shows and say "the best information" was the attack was a result of a riot... and even go to the UN, then blame the same video... then tonight he says he was on the phone getting reports as it was happening. Hmm... can't have it both ways. Obama lied, and they died. Point blank he lied in your face. The advert committee is staying up to write material over that BS fest. Spontaneous demonstration... ya, with a 120mm mortar, and a couple of 40mm bofers canons. Spontaneous demonstration my ass, did anyone believe that crap if the first place? - Romney missed a big chance to hammer that home. candy was outright wrong (or trying to spin it for O, couldn't tell), I just listened to the rose garden speech, he never called the embassy assault an act of terrorism. - that one question, and waffeling, then lie tonight will be a nightmare for him Obama blatantly lying on the oil permits. Who would have guessed. Offshore federal land permits cut 62% under Bummer Onshore federal land permits cut 30% + Permits for shale development cut 40%+ Still the same Obama, no answers except that mittens sucks worse. What a campaign platform?!??!?! Obama ran from fast & furious like a 5 year old running from nap time. Romney hurt himself talking over mod, Not that she didn't need it. Still, Romney was presidential looking, and O was running from his record, spouting his old talking point. Saying the same crap as he did 4 years ago. Needs some new material. Best question was the guy that said he voted for O last time, but has no faith now. O's answer, in a nutshell, "he will suck worse". Neither of them was willing to piss on the NRA sparkplug. Asked about gun laws we got some shit about married parents, and schools? Good grief, it's like being in an alternate universe when these guys talk. What the hell was mitties doing asking O questions? Elementary school debate club should have told him you never open a door for the opposition by asking them something and waiting for a response. What did he expect, an honest answer? foolish, amateurism, and a mistake... or maybe just that mitts is a CEO and not a lawyer, doesn't know lawyer rule one about asking questions and not already knowing the answer. Overall looked like O did better (and incorrect information from the mod may have helped a bit), but the cost was giving the romney campaign a bus load of videotape material to shoot back at them over the next 2 weeks. - Maybe a good trade, maybe not, only the next week will tell us the answer to that. I don't think we will ever see that format again. Last question was a handout to the guv, gave them both a chance to humanize themselves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rani Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 [quote name='TheScotsman' timestamp='1350445935' post='558573'] Well, at least we can say O showed up... then spent 90 minutes running around the ring trying to stay ahead of his own record. Fecked himself with libya question. For 2 weeks we heard him blame a video, We heard rice go running to 5 sunday shows and say "the best information" was the attack was a result of a riot... and even go to the UN, then blame the same video... then tonight he says he was on the phone getting reports as it was happening. Hmm... can't have it both ways. Obama lied, and they died. Point blank he lied in your face. The advert committee is staying up to write material over that BS fest. Spontaneous demonstration... ya, with a 120mm mortar, and a couple of 40mm bofers canons. Spontaneous demonstration my ass, did anyone believe that crap if the first place? - Romney missed a big chance to hammer that home. candy was outright wrong (or trying to spin it for O, couldn't tell), I just listened to the rose garden speech, he never called the embassy assault an act of terrorism. - that one question, and waffeling, then lie tonight will be a nightmare for him [color=#0000cd][b]Po-tay-to, po-tah-to, Scotsman. I watched the speech when it happened. Just because he didn't say word for word "Libya was an act of terrorism" doesn't negate the fact that he did say acts of terror, etc., etc., etc. Get over it. [/b] [b]Further, I'm actually on his his side in the confusion about what really happened in Libya and even his continuing his schedule after the event. Remember like him or not he's the President of the United States. Anything he says will be all over the internet and in the hands of the perpetrators within minutes of his opening his mouth. His actions are watched very closely especially in an election year when they're publicized even more than usual. All of that has to take priority over "informing" the general public especially when his actions could potentially give clues to our response, By going on about his schedule, by not coming out with threats and imprecations, he's left the enemy wondering. Is he even pissed off? Does he care? Is he going to do anything about it? Bin Laden probably thought we'd forgotten about him too. Right up until the moment Seal Team Six broke down the door and shot his ass. Under these circumstances, I prefer a president who's going to keep his mouth shut, keep them all thinking they might have gotten away with it, and be willing to take the heat for it. You don't sneak up on somebody by announcing you're coming. I don't know if Obama is that smart and cagey, but I do know that it's exactly the way a smart and cagey man would react. Right up until the moment he put them in the ground. So I think on this one we kind of have to wait and see if it's smarts, or just ineptitude. If there's a strike team in motion in a few weeks or months, we'll know it was smarts.[/b][/color] Obama blatantly lying on the oil permits. Who would have guessed. Offshore federal land permits cut 62% under Bummer Onshore federal land permits cut 30% + Permits for shale development cut 40%+ [b][color=#0000cd]And did you do the fact checking? According to the fact checkers, Obama was correct and did not lie. He said the pulled those leases not being worked and sitting unused and were reletting them. Exactly what he should be doing. And overall, drilling on federal land/offshore is actually up more than 10% from when he took office. The 14% Romney spoke of was a temporary drop due to the freeze after the Gulf disaster. [/color][/b] Still the same Obama, no answers except that mittens sucks worse. What a campaign platform?!??!?! Obama ran from fast & furious like a 5 year old running from nap time. [b][color=#0000cd] I believe he actually stood up to answer and the moderator forced him to move on, which she should have probably been doing even earlier. They both walked all over her, though Romney was a little more rude about it.[/color][/b] Romney hurt himself talking over mod, Not that she didn't need it. Still, Romney was presidential looking, and O was running from his record, spouting his old talking point. Saying the same crap as he did 4 years ago. Needs some new material. Best question was the guy that said he voted for O last time, but has no faith now. O's answer, in a nutshell, "he will suck worse". Neither of them was willing to piss on the NRA sparkplug. Asked about gun laws we got some shit about married parents, and schools? Good grief, it's like being in an alternate universe when these guys talk. [color=#0000cd][b]Obama did at least say that military guns have no reason to in the hands of citizens, and although I'm a firm supporter of the right to bear arms and consistently vote against any gun control legislation, I have to agree with him on that statement. Having hunted most of my life, I see no reason to take an AK-47 deer hunting.[/b][/color] What the hell was mitties doing asking O questions? Elementary school debate club should have told him you never open a door for the opposition by asking them something and waiting for a response. What did he expect, an honest answer? foolish, amateurism, and a mistake... or maybe just that mitts is a CEO and not a lawyer, doesn't know lawyer rule one about asking questions and not already knowing the answer. Overall looked like O did better (and incorrect information from the mod may have helped a bit), but the cost was giving the romney campaign a bus load of videotape material to shoot back at them over the next 2 weeks. - Maybe a good trade, maybe not, only the next week will tell us the answer to that. I don't think we will ever see that format again. Last question was a handout to the guv, gave them both a chance to humanize themselves [/quote] [color=#0000cd][b]There's feedback today that for some reason women are taking great offense at Romney stating he had "binders of women" candidates for cabinet positions. I'm not sure at all why that would be offensive, but maybe they don't understand it's a management thing. We put shit in binders to keep it altogether. It's what we do. I don't buy he went looking for women for any other reason except so during his future presidential run it wouldn't come back to haunt him he had almost no women in his cabinet. He's not on the side of women's issues - never has been, never will be. I caught him in a couple lies by sheer coincidence of having been in Massachusetts during his governorship. The one that sticks in my mind is when ee said he'd increased education, and brought the state to number one in the nation. Actually it was hovering around 13th or 14th when he took office, he eviscerated Education and by the time he left office they were 47th in the nation. Outright lie. One of the biggest things that caught my attention was his "tax reform" statements. First of all, not a single economist agrees with his math. He simply cannot offer this cuts he claims without adding taxes to the middle class. More importantly to me, was his statement about removing the taxes on savings accounts, something something, capital gains, something something. Now that sound good in theory to a lot of people, however remember that Romney has been under attack for his only paying 14% income tax. The rebuttal that has always come has been that his income is all capital gains, so the tax amount he paid is perfectly legal. But if he removes the taxes on capital gains under his plan he'd go from paying 14% tax to ZERO...... Oh yeah, and who exactly do you think is going to make up the difference? Ummm, I believe that would be all the rest of us. Look, I'm not saying Obama is the greatest thing since sliced bread because he's not. He's made some major missteps in his tenure and just been plain absent during a few others. But Romney is sooooo much worse for all of us actually working for a living and trying to just survive. I have no idea why the GOP thought Romney would be a good candidate to back. Maybe the election really has already been decided in some back room somewhere and they put up this buffoon so "the other guy" wouldn't accidentally get elected for real. Who the hell knows? I do know that if Romney by some miracle wins, it will confirm my suspicions - that the American voting public are complete morons. 'Rani[/b][/color] 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuie Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 Still only 2 people debating huh. Guess that's why I didn't watch it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheScotsman Posted October 17, 2012 Author Share Posted October 17, 2012 WALL OF TEXT WARNING: Go relisten to the speech better yet, go read it. When he did mention terrorisim, it was clearly, and unquestionably in the context of talking about 9/11/2001, NOT the present situ in libya, there is no way you can make that comment be about libya without ignoring the 8 feggin' paragraphs about the WTC attack. Then after you spin that, you gotta spin the speech at the UN, where he blmaed the video 19 people saw until the state dept brought it up, and you gotta convince me the UN amb went on 5 sunday talk shows, blaming a cheesy youtube, and nothing else, really meant terrorisim, when she said protest... and that she went on the sunday talk shows without WH approval, and after all that you need to believe hillary said it was a protest about the video... a bunch of times... but really meant a terrorist attack. Then you have to do all that with a straight face, and honestly believe it. Holy crap, send in the fecin' clowns! Then you get to explain this particular piece of his RG speech... [color=#333333][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] [color=#ff0000][i]The United States condemns in the strongest terms this outrageous and shocking attack. We're working with the government of Libya to secure our diplomats. I've also directed my administration to increase our security at diplomatic posts around the world. And make no mistake, we will work with the Libyan government to bring to justice the killers who attacked our people.[/i][/color][/font][/color][color=#333333][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] [color=#ff0000][i]Since our founding, the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths. We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. But there is absolutely no justification to this type of senseless violence. None. The world must stand together to unequivocally reject these brutal acts.[/i][/color][/font][/color] Not much question he is refering to, and blaming a shitty youtube for insulting Islam, and causing a retaliation. No spin can change facts, no rearranging words will make the admins response, and lies to the US people any thing more than a load of lies. Why else would he say .... "[color=#ff0000][i]We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. But there is absolutely no justification to this type of senseless violence."[/i][/color] Then, after all that comedy act, you have to explain why the WH sent 70,000,000.00 to run adverts in Pakistan blaming the video, apologizing for the video, and disavowing responsibility for the video. All we need is caliope music, and a ringmaster for that circuis! But wait in ring 3 we have THIS from the UN address - [i][u][color=#ff0000]"And on this we must agree: There is no speech that justifies mindless violence. There are no words that excuse the killing of innocents. There’s no video that justifies an attack on an embassy."[/color][/u][/i] Now, if he wasn't blaimng the youtube video for a protest, just what did he mean about no video justifying an attack on an embassy? He was LYING about is not blaming the video, he clearly did. Energy... http://naturalresources.house.gov/issues/issue/?IssueID=15410 - house of rep info http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/watercooler/2012/oct/16/picket-flashback-oil-drilling-permits-down-36-perc/ http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/wo/MINERALS__REALTY__AND_RESOURCE_PROTECTION_/energy/oil___gas_statistics/data_sets.Par.69959.File.dat/table-01.pdf _BLM info http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/12/reminder-oil-and-gas-production-just-keep-falling-under-president-obama/ http://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/annual/pdf/aer.pdf -EIA Women in the workplace... First, when they take years out to raise kids, then expect the same pay as anyone who had spent those years getting work exp, they are just wrong. For some reason, a woman at 50, who spent 20 years in a part time, or no job at all, wants to hold up the pay of a man who has 20 more years work exp, and say she isn't getting paid the same, is nuts. Pay commensurate with experience, and when you have not got the same experience, you don't get the same pay. I would be intrested to see a well-done, scientific and non agenda driven study of pay vs actual experience vs education vs gender. I have not found one. Staying open on this one. I know a bunch of LDS families. Can't say I have ever seen anything less than complete respect for their wives, sometimes to the point of being sickening. Setting asside the sister-wives sects, I think the nature of the LDS church is not going to allow a whole lot of "war on women". Taxes, No economist agrees with romney? Well, on the other side, the DEMs won't even bring the president's plans to a vote, sponsor them in a bill, or even have their names afixed to any document stating just what his "policies" are this week. Which is worse? Lets look at businesses converting their F/T help to P/T to avoid the current admin's plans. Nuff said, anything is better than where we are now. Time for a new hope, and definity change. Oh, then there is -"Five Nobel laureates (Gary Becker, Robert Lucas, Robert Mundell, Edward Prescott, and Myron Scholes) signed the statement which, in part, reads, “We enthusiastically endorse Governor Mitt Romney’s economic plan to create jobs and restore economic growth while returning America to its tradition of economic freedom.” Why is it that the libs always say romney's plan will increase taxes for the middle class, but never mention a word about's effect on economic growth? Answer: they don't want you to look at the economic growth that would result. They are concentrated on the century-old liberal pattern of inducing class warefare into every discussion they can not win. A good read, if rather dry:https://www.princeton.edu/ceps/workingpapers/228rosen.pdf May be some sample doubling between income groups if I am reading it right. The short answer is that under obama's plan LLc's with a 250K takeget screwed big time. Answer, we all go back to being privately held corporations. There is zero net tax increase for small business, no more money goes into the gov't, and we all get to do that same shit-load of paperwork we had to 20 years ago to avoid being taxed out of existance. The LLc's came about as a simplification of business practices, and tax breaks for using an LLc over an inc. Did you ever do incorporation tax bs for a small sole-holder biz? I did, and still do, it blows! What obama's plan to goon the 250K level does is send all those SBs into the domain of corporation taxes, and the many wonderfull deductions, write-offs, depreciations, that come with it. That possibility alone will nullify any increase in revenue to be had by increasing the tax rate on that particular group. Hell, big promoition for the average LLc holder, you get to form a corp, promote yourself to CEO, and legally deduct so many expences you can't deduct as an LLc. Their tax rate would drop significantly. Maybe that is how the obama plan works! Hey, that's it !!! I got it now. Obama tax plan creating jobs. 1 raise tax rate on LLc's to the point they have to convert to privately held corps 2 inc's save a load of money on taxes through new write-offs in conversion 3 inc's spend some of that money hiring a floatilla of new accountants 4 gov't hires as many revenue people to handle ass-load of forms that are basically blank, but required 4b gov't get's fed reserve to print them a load of 'bamma-bucks to pay new gov't workers 4c gov't unions contribute to dem party camapigns with 'bama-bucks they force their membership to pay 5 newly inc'd biz hires one new worker on saved tax bucks... then pays healthcare, fires worker, and buys a machine to do same job minus healthcare cost. Machine made in China 6 small biz hates paperwork, puts off until last minute, uses a whole laser toner cart to print inc tax return toner cart from China 7 SB owner goes to wal mart, buys new toner... no one else is open at 1:00 am on April 14th 8 SB owner hits deer on way home, ends up going hospital, with no insurance, because he couldn't afford it, and paid penalty 8a hospital bed made in china, cool gown that won't close, and leaves my hairy white ass hanging out made in china, food tray the colour of baby-puke made in china, pen to sign check to pay for it made in china 9 SB onwer goes home in cast made in... guess it.... No, China, sits on chair made in china, watches made in china TV, harasses nice lady in california named RANI on a computer.... made in china. See??? it will all work out! You fact checkers seem to be typical liberal spinmeisters... er, I mean fact checkers, sorry, I get those confused. If you are trying to convince anyone that the guy whom said energy prices would go up under his admin, then hired Chu, a guy that openly stated he wanted higher energy prices, is suddenly the champion of a whole load of new exploration, you are outa your mind. That arguement someone who is openly against traditional energy sources is so helping us all find/utilize our in-country energy sources is so wacky I don't see how anyone can make that connection with any sort of honest thought process. In short, your "fact checkers" (cnn, pbs, media matters, huff-po something of the such) are full of shit. At least according to the House of Rep, BLM, EIA, Wash Times, and most everything else I have read. If they can't get this one right, how the hell can anyone beleive any single thing they say? You can't! It's not fact checking when it's clouding/confusing the truth, then trying to twist a few words to distort the facts into a favourable light. that becomes nothing more than the kabuki theatre we have endured the last 4 years. And, by the way, the bumster didn't bail out GM... that was bushes fault. Bush did the GM bailout, and according to libs everywhere, savem millions of jobs... so the bumster needs to quit lying and taking credit for it. One of the dumbest things bush did. You libs think that bailout was such a saviour for the nation, you better get on your knees in front of GW. Send me some pix. I have used a klash style (SVd) for hunting, and an Fn, and an AR... best hunting rifles in the world, why not use one? Better in crappy weather, better when my son slams the hummer door on it, better when I fall down the hill, into the swamp, whatever... just better. What it looks like doesn't make a difference, it's the society that glorifies gangs, violence, and the like. Want to see that end? lets see a 1 hour appeal of death sentences, and execution by firing squad, in public within 8 hours, unmarked burial within 1 hour. Bet you would see the punks quit pretty fast. Execute a load of innocent people, but what is wrong with that to the average communist? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chreees Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 [quote name='Rani' timestamp='1350487500' post='558593'] [quote name='TheScotsman' timestamp='1350445935' post='558573'] Well, at least we can say O showed up... then spent 90 minutes running around the ring trying to stay ahead of his own record. Fecked himself with libya question. For 2 weeks we heard him blame a video, We heard rice go running to 5 sunday shows and say "the best information" was the attack was a result of a riot... and even go to the UN, then blame the same video... then tonight he says he was on the phone getting reports as it was happening. Hmm... can't have it both ways. Obama lied, and they died. Point blank he lied in your face. The advert committee is staying up to write material over that BS fest. Spontaneous demonstration... ya, with a 120mm mortar, and a couple of 40mm bofers canons. Spontaneous demonstration my ass, did anyone believe that crap if the first place? - Romney missed a big chance to hammer that home. candy was outright wrong (or trying to spin it for O, couldn't tell), I just listened to the rose garden speech, he never called the embassy assault an act of terrorism. - that one question, and waffeling, then lie tonight will be a nightmare for him [color=#0000cd][b]Po-tay-to, po-tah-to, Scotsman. I watched the speech when it happened. Just because he didn't say word for word "Libya was an act of terrorism" doesn't negate the fact that he did say acts of terror, etc., etc., etc. Get over it. [/b] [b]Further, I'm actually on his his side in the confusion about what really happened in Libya and even his continuing his schedule after the event. Remember like him or not he's the President of the United States. Anything he says will be all over the internet and in the hands of the perpetrators within minutes of his opening his mouth. His actions are watched very closely especially in an election year when they're publicized even more than usual. All of that has to take priority over "informing" the general public especially when his actions could potentially give clues to our response, By going on about his schedule, by not coming out with threats and imprecations, he's left the enemy wondering. Is he even pissed off? Does he care? Is he going to do anything about it? Bin Laden probably thought we'd forgotten about him too. Right up until the moment Seal Team Six broke down the door and shot his ass. Under these circumstances, I prefer a president who's going to keep his mouth shut, keep them all thinking they might have gotten away with it, and be willing to take the heat for it. You don't sneak up on somebody by announcing you're coming. I don't know if Obama is that smart and cagey, but I do know that it's exactly the way a smart and cagey man would react. Right up until the moment he put them in the ground. So I think on this one we kind of have to wait and see if it's smarts, or just ineptitude. If there's a strike team in motion in a few weeks or months, we'll know it was smarts.[/b][/color] Obama blatantly lying on the oil permits. Who would have guessed. Offshore federal land permits cut 62% under Bummer Onshore federal land permits cut 30% + Permits for shale development cut 40%+ [b][color=#0000cd]And did you do the fact checking? According to the fact checkers, Obama was correct and did not lie. He said the pulled those leases not being worked and sitting unused and were reletting them. Exactly what he should be doing. And overall, drilling on federal land/offshore is actually up more than 10% from when he took office. The 14% Romney spoke of was a temporary drop due to the freeze after the Gulf disaster. [/color][/b] Still the same Obama, no answers except that mittens sucks worse. What a campaign platform?!??!?! Obama ran from fast & furious like a 5 year old running from nap time. [b][color=#0000cd] I believe he actually stood up to answer and the moderator forced him to move on, which she should have probably been doing even earlier. They both walked all over her, though Romney was a little more rude about it.[/color][/b] Romney hurt himself talking over mod, Not that she didn't need it. Still, Romney was presidential looking, and O was running from his record, spouting his old talking point. Saying the same crap as he did 4 years ago. Needs some new material. Best question was the guy that said he voted for O last time, but has no faith now. O's answer, in a nutshell, "he will suck worse". Neither of them was willing to piss on the NRA sparkplug. Asked about gun laws we got some shit about married parents, and schools? Good grief, it's like being in an alternate universe when these guys talk. [color=#0000cd][b]Obama did at least say that military guns have no reason to in the hands of citizens, and although I'm a firm supporter of the right to bear arms and consistently vote against any gun control legislation, I have to agree with him on that statement. Having hunted most of my life, I see no reason to take an AK-47 deer hunting.[/b][/color] What the hell was mitties doing asking O questions? Elementary school debate club should have told him you never open a door for the opposition by asking them something and waiting for a response. What did he expect, an honest answer? foolish, amateurism, and a mistake... or maybe just that mitts is a CEO and not a lawyer, doesn't know lawyer rule one about asking questions and not already knowing the answer. Overall looked like O did better (and incorrect information from the mod may have helped a bit), but the cost was giving the romney campaign a bus load of videotape material to shoot back at them over the next 2 weeks. - Maybe a good trade, maybe not, only the next week will tell us the answer to that. I don't think we will ever see that format again. Last question was a handout to the guv, gave them both a chance to humanize themselves [/quote] [color=#0000cd][b]There's feedback today that for some reason women are taking great offense at Romney stating he had "binders of women" candidates for cabinet positions. I'm not sure at all why that would be offensive, but maybe they don't understand it's a management thing. We put shit in binders to keep it altogether. It's what we do. I don't buy he went looking for women for any other reason except so during his future presidential run it wouldn't come back to haunt him he had almost no women in his cabinet. He's not on the side of women's issues - never has been, never will be. I caught him in a couple lies by sheer coincidence of having been in Massachusetts during his governorship. The one that sticks in my mind is when ee said he'd increased education, and brought the state to number one in the nation. Actually it was hovering around 13th or 14th when he took office, he eviscerated Education and by the time he left office they were 47th in the nation. Outright lie. One of the biggest things that caught my attention was his "tax reform" statements. First of all, not a single economist agrees with his math. He simply cannot offer this cuts he claims without adding taxes to the middle class. More importantly to me, was his statement about removing the taxes on savings accounts, something something, capital gains, something something. Now that sound good in theory to a lot of people, however remember that Romney has been under attack for his only paying 14% income tax. The rebuttal that has always come has been that his income is all capital gains, so the tax amount he paid is perfectly legal. But if he removes the taxes on capital gains under his plan he'd go from paying 14% tax to ZERO...... Oh yeah, and who exactly do you think is going to make up the difference? Ummm, I believe that would be all the rest of us. Look, I'm not saying Obama is the greatest thing since sliced bread because he's not. He's made some major missteps in his tenure and just been plain absent during a few others. But Romney is sooooo much worse for all of us actually working for a living and trying to just survive. I have no idea why the GOP thought Romney would be a good candidate to back. Maybe the election really has already been decided in some back room somewhere and they put up this buffoon so "the other guy" wouldn't accidentally get elected for real. Who the hell knows? I do know that if Romney by some miracle wins, it will confirm my suspicions - that the American voting public are complete morons. 'Rani[/b][/color] [/quote] Totally agree, Rani. Was going to post the same, more or less. I'll take Obama over Romney ANY day of the week... or four years. I do think however we should have assault rifles, but for one reason and one reason only... World War Z. [quote name='Stuie' timestamp='1350487876' post='558596'] Still only 2 people debating huh. Guess that's why I didn't watch it. [/quote] Yep, Johnson really should be up there. Then things wouldn't be so "black and white." Umm, no pun intended. [quote name='TheScotsman' timestamp='1350495866' post='558622'] WALL OF TEXT WARNING: Go relisten to the speech better yet, go read it. When he did mention terrorisim, it was clearly, and unquestionably in the context of talking about 9/11/2001, NOT the present situ in libya, there is no way you can make that comment be about libya without ignoring the 8 feggin' paragraphs about the WTC attack. Then after you spin that, you gotta spin the speech at the UN, where he blmaed the video 19 people saw until the state dept brought it up, and you gotta convince me the UN amb went on 5 sunday talk shows, blaming a cheesy youtube, and nothing else, really meant terrorisim, when she said protest... and that she went on the sunday talk shows without WH approval, and after all that you need to believe hillary said it was a protest about the video... a bunch of times... but really meant a terrorist attack. Then you have to do all that with a straight face, and honestly believe it. Holy crap, send in the fecin' clowns! Then you get to explain this particular piece of his RG speech... [color=#333333][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][color=#ff0000][i]The United States condemns in the strongest terms this outrageous and shocking attack. We're working with the government of Libya to secure our diplomats. I've also directed my administration to increase our security at diplomatic posts around the world. And make no mistake, we will work with the Libyan government to bring to justice the killers who attacked our people.[/i][/color][/font][/color] [color=#333333][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][color=#ff0000][i]Since our founding, the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths. We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. But there is absolutely no justification to this type of senseless violence. None. The world must stand together to unequivocally reject these brutal acts.[/i][/color][/font][/color] Not much question he is refering to, and blaming a shitty youtube for insulting Islam, and causing a retaliation. No spin can change facts, no rearranging words will make the admins response, and lies to the US people any thing more than a load of lies. Why else would he say .... "[color=#ff0000][i]We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. But there is absolutely no justification to this type of senseless violence."[/i][/color] Then, after all that comedy act, you have to explain why the WH sent 70,000,000.00 to run adverts in Pakistan blaming the video, apologizing for the video, and disavowing responsibility for the video. All we need is caliope music, and a ringmaster for that circuis! But wait in ring 3 we have THIS from the UN address - [i][u][color=#ff0000]"And on this we must agree: There is no speech that justifies mindless violence. There are no words that excuse the killing of innocents. There’s no video that justifies an attack on an embassy."[/color][/u][/i] Now, if he wasn't blaimng the youtube video for a protest, just what did he mean about no video justifying an attack on an embassy? He was LYING about is not blaming the video, he clearly did. Energy... [url="http://naturalresources.house.gov/issues/issue/?IssueID=15410"]http://naturalresour.../?IssueID=15410[/url] - house of rep info [url="http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/watercooler/2012/oct/16/picket-flashback-oil-drilling-permits-down-36-perc/"]http://www.washingto...s-down-36-perc/[/url] [url="http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/wo/MINERALS__REALTY__AND_RESOURCE_PROTECTION_/energy/oil___gas_statistics/data_sets.Par.69959.File.dat/table-01.pdf"]http://www.blm.gov/p...at/table-01.pdf[/url] _BLM info [url="http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/12/reminder-oil-and-gas-production-just-keep-falling-under-president-obama/"]http://hotair.com/ar...resident-obama/[/url] [url="http://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/annual/pdf/aer.pdf"]http://www.eia.gov/t...ual/pdf/aer.pdf[/url] -EIA Women in the workplace... First, when they take years out to raise kids, then expect the same pay as anyone who had spent those years getting work exp, they are just wrong. For some reason, a woman at 50, who spent 20 years in a part time, or no job at all, wants to hold up the pay of a man who has 20 more years work exp, and say she isn't getting paid the same, is nuts. Pay commensurate with experience, and when you have not got the same experience, you don't get the same pay. I would be intrested to see a well-done, scientific and non agenda driven study of pay vs actual experience vs education vs gender. I have not found one. Staying open on this one. I know a bunch of LDS families. Can't say I have ever seen anything less than complete respect for their wives, sometimes to the point of being sickening. Setting asside the sister-wives sects, I think the nature of the LDS church is not going to allow a whole lot of "war on women". Taxes, No economist agrees with romney? Well, on the other side, the DEMs won't even bring the president's plans to a vote, sponsor them in a bill, or even have their names afixed to any document stating just what his "policies" are this week. Which is worse? Lets look at businesses converting their F/T help to P/T to avoid the current admin's plans. Nuff said, anything is better than where we are now. Time for a new hope, and definity change. Oh, then there is -"Five Nobel laureates (Gary Becker, Robert Lucas, Robert Mundell, Edward Prescott, and Myron Scholes) signed the statement which, in part, reads, “We enthusiastically endorse Governor Mitt Romney’s economic plan to create jobs and restore economic growth while returning America to its tradition of economic freedom.” Why is it that the libs always say romney's plan will increase taxes for the middle class, but never mention a word about's effect on economic growth? Answer: they don't want you to look at the economic growth that would result. They are concentrated on the century-old liberal pattern of inducing class warefare into every discussion they can not win. A good read, if rather dry:https://www.princeton.edu/ceps/workingpapers/228rosen.pdf May be some sample doubling between income groups if I am reading it right. The short answer is that under obama's plan LLc's with a 250K takeget screwed big time. Answer, we all go back to being privately held corporations. There is zero net tax increase for small business, no more money goes into the gov't, and we all get to do that same shit-load of paperwork we had to 20 years ago to avoid being taxed out of existance. The LLc's came about as a simplification of business practices, and tax breaks for using an LLc over an inc. Did you ever do incorporation tax bs for a small sole-holder biz? I did, and still do, it blows! What obama's plan to goon the 250K level does is send all those SBs into the domain of corporation taxes, and the many wonderfull deductions, write-offs, depreciations, that come with it. That possibility alone will nullify any increase in revenue to be had by increasing the tax rate on that particular group. Hell, big promoition for the average LLc holder, you get to form a corp, promote yourself to CEO, and legally deduct so many expences you can't deduct as an LLc. Their tax rate would drop significantly. Maybe that is how the obama plan works! Hey, that's it !!! I got it now. Obama tax plan creating jobs. 1 raise tax rate on LLc's to the point they have to convert to privately held corps 2 inc's save a load of money on taxes through new write-offs in conversion 3 inc's spend some of that money hiring a floatilla of new accountants 4 gov't hires as many revenue people to handle ass-load of forms that are basically blank, but required 4b gov't get's fed reserve to print them a load of 'bamma-bucks to pay new gov't workers 4c gov't unions contribute to dem party camapigns with 'bama-bucks they force their membership to pay 5 newly inc'd biz hires one new worker on saved tax bucks... then pays healthcare, fires worker, and buys a machine to do same job minus healthcare cost. Machine made in China 6 small biz hates paperwork, puts off until last minute, uses a whole laser toner cart to print inc tax return toner cart from China 7 SB owner goes to wal mart, buys new toner... no one else is open at 1:00 am on April 14th 8 SB owner hits deer on way home, ends up going hospital, with no insurance, because he couldn't afford it, and paid penalty 8a hospital bed made in china, cool gown that won't close, and leaves my hairy white ass hanging out made in china, food tray the colour of baby-puke made in china, pen to sign check to pay for it made in china 9 SB onwer goes home in cast made in... guess it.... No, China, sits on chair made in china, watches made in china TV, harasses nice lady in california named RANI on a computer.... made in china. See??? it will all work out! You fact checkers seem to be typical liberal spinmeisters... er, I mean fact checkers, sorry, I get those confused. If you are trying to convince anyone that the guy whom said energy prices would go up under his admin, then hired Chu, a guy that openly stated he wanted higher energy prices, is suddenly the champion of a whole load of new exploration, you are outa your mind. That arguement someone who is openly against traditional energy sources is so helping us all find/utilize our in-country energy sources is so wacky I don't see how anyone can make that connection with any sort of honest thought process. In short, your "fact checkers" (cnn, pbs, media matters, huff-po something of the such) are full of shit. At least according to the House of Rep, BLM, EIA, Wash Times, and most everything else I have read. If they can't get this one right, how the hell can anyone beleive any single thing they say? You can't! It's not fact checking when it's clouding/confusing the truth, then trying to twist a few words to distort the facts into a favourable light. that becomes nothing more than the kabuki theatre we have endured the last 4 years. And, by the way, the bumster didn't bail out GM... that was bushes fault. Bush did the GM bailout, and according to libs everywhere, savem millions of jobs... so the bumster needs to quit lying and taking credit for it. One of the dumbest things bush did. You libs think that bailout was such a saviour for the nation, you better get on your knees in front of GW. Send me some pix. I have used a klash style (SVd) for hunting, and an Fn, and an AR... best hunting rifles in the world, why not use one? Better in crappy weather, better when my son slams the hummer door on it, better when I fall down the hill, into the swamp, whatever... just better. What it looks like doesn't make a difference, it's the society that glorifies gangs, violence, and the like. Want to see that end? lets see a 1 hour appeal of death sentences, and execution by firing squad, in public within 8 hours, unmarked burial within 1 hour. Bet you would see the punks quit pretty fast. Execute a load of innocent people, but what is wrong with that to the average communist? [/quote] I can't even take most of this seriously right now... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gramps Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 Just don't say we didn't warn you. I hope to be able to say, "I told you so." You're a "true believer", so no amount of evidence will change your mind (until it's too late). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rani Posted October 17, 2012 Share Posted October 17, 2012 [quote name='gramps' timestamp='1350509308' post='558642'] Just don't say we didn't warn you. I hope to be able to say, "I told you so." You're a "true believer", so no amount of evidence will change your mind (until it's too late). [/quote] Scotsman, I don't even have the time to begin looking up the research that has been quoted again and again refuting your statements. And it's all moot anyway with an election on countdown. But...... Even if everything, absolutely everything both of you said were true, we'd STILL be better off with Obama than we would with Romney. He doesn't care about you, or I or the middle class or anyone beyond himself and his wealth class. And you've heard that from his own mouth when he didn't know he was being recorded. Looks to me like there's plenty of "true believers" on the right wing side..Romney would be the end of this country as we know it. Hear me now, believe me later. Let me know how it works out for you should he, by some miracle, actually win. He'll be paying zero taxes, and you'll be paying it all. 'Rani Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now