Yukon Jack Posted February 1, 2012 Report Share Posted February 1, 2012 History has a nasty habit of repeating itself. The present situation brings 1980 to mind. Back then, there was a desperate middle class, struggling with high interest rates, high unemployment rates and high inflation. Today, admittedly it's only one out of three. Back then, there was a peanut farmer way over his head. Today there is a community organizer, way over his head. Back then, there was a nuclear scientist/engineer vs. a B-actor. Today there is a former governor vs. a state senator who quit for running for U.S. Senate, who quit that for running for the Presidency, based on nothing but one rousing speech and counting on the guilt feelings of white Americans, who were unable to see that their idol had NOTHING to do with slavery, since he was the son of a recent African immigrant. Back then, the B-actor was denigrated as an "amiable dunce" by the smart people, but was smart enough to ask: Are you better off than you were 4 years ago?. Today, the eventual Republican candidate will surely ask the same question. Back then, there was Iran. The over-his-head peanut farmer failed in his mission to rescue Americans held hostage by Iranians, because his predecessor did not develop methods to deal with situations involving terrorists. Today, there is AlQuaida. Obama was successful killing Osama Bin Laden, because of GWB's foresight and wisdom. Back then, Iran released the hostages as soon as Ronald Reagan was inaugurated. Whose election do you think would compel Iran to curb or stop their nuclear weapons development? The presence of Obama surely seems to make no difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 1, 2012 Report Share Posted February 1, 2012 Back then, Iran released the hostages as soon as Ronald Reagan was inaugurated. Whose election do you think would compel Iran to curb or stop their nuclear weapons development? The presence of Obama surely seems to make no difference. Neither did the presence of previous presidents. Iran's been at this for at least 20 years. President Obama is not President Carter...he will win a second term. Get use to it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharkman Posted February 1, 2012 Report Share Posted February 1, 2012 I'm not sure Romney can find the United States on a map, considering he sent a bunch of American jobs overseas and he seems to keep his bank accounts overseas too. At least he knows there are only 50 states and not 57 as Obama has opined. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted February 1, 2012 Report Share Posted February 1, 2012 At least he knows there are only 50 states and not 57 as Obama has opined. - that 57 states thingee has been so dealt with. How frivolous. But just for you - after lengthy travel, days-on-end, the actual quote from a tired Obama reads: "Because, you know, it is just wonderful to be back in Oregon, and over the last 15 months we've traveled to every corner of the United States. I've now been in fifty .... seven states? I think, one left to go. One left to go. Alaska and Hawaii I was not allowed to go to even though I really wanted to visit, but my staff would not justify it." so, of course, a guy who spent all those years living in Hawaii, with it's statehood number/significance, wouldn't actually know the number of U.S. states. In any case, he was talking about the continental states (the 48 contiguous states) and mistakenly started off with the "fifty" reference... then a lengthy pause... then the "seven" reference, followed by twice stating "one more to go". That would be 47... with one more to go... that's the 48 continental/contiguous states. He follows up with reference to the 2 non-continental U.S. states - Alaska & Hawaii. Hey! That's 50!!! you're welcome Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LonJowett Posted February 1, 2012 Report Share Posted February 1, 2012 You're welcome Oh, come on. Give him a break. It's like the Al Gore invented the Internet thing. Facts are completely irrelevant to the talking point. He will continue to spread misinformation because, when it comes down to it, that's all he's got. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharkman Posted February 1, 2012 Report Share Posted February 1, 2012 you're welcome Waldo you sure get sensitive about the smallest things. Notice Cyber, the person I was talking to, didn't even bother to respond? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bud Posted February 1, 2012 Report Share Posted February 1, 2012 Back then, Iran released the hostages as soon as Ronald Reagan was inaugurated. Whose election do you think would compel Iran to curb or stop their nuclear weapons development? The presence of Obama surely seems to make no difference. eh? the hostages were kept in iran, in exchange for arms sales by reagan's men. this was done to damage carter in the elections. how low can these people get, to prolong the release of the hostage just so they can damage someone politically? i mean, you didn't know about his or you just prefer to live in a world full of spins and half-truths? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted February 1, 2012 Report Share Posted February 1, 2012 Waldo you sure get sensitive about the smallest things. Notice Cyber, the person I was talking to, didn't even bother to respond? I have no problem with you referring to your running tab of made-up statements/claims as "the smallest things". Carry on! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted February 2, 2012 Report Share Posted February 2, 2012 Here is your 'inevitable' nominee Even if this was a complete set up, Romney handled this with his utmost proffesionalism as a politician. Shamefull. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted February 2, 2012 Report Share Posted February 2, 2012 Here is your 'inevitable' nominee Even if this was a complete set up, Romney handled this with his utmost proffesionalism as a politician. Shamefull. Whatever it is like Romney said today, he doesn't care about the little people, I mean poor people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted February 2, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 2, 2012 Here is your 'inevitable' nominee Even if this was a complete set up, Romney handled this with his utmost proffesionalism as a politician. Shamefull. How did you want him to handle it ? He answered the question at least. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Manny Posted February 2, 2012 Report Share Posted February 2, 2012 That was pretty cold man. And it shows what most of these people are like, utterly ignorant, one-track ideology, and heartless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted February 2, 2012 Report Share Posted February 2, 2012 How did you want him to handle it ? He answered the question at least. Actually he did not. Q Would you arrest me? A I don't support the legalization of medical weed. That's not answering the question, that's a bail. Remember this when he flip flops on this exact issue sometime down the road. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 2, 2012 Report Share Posted February 2, 2012 Oh shucks...Romney will lose the medical marijuana and doper vote! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonlight Graham Posted February 2, 2012 Report Share Posted February 2, 2012 Actually he did not. Q Would you arrest me? A I don't support the legalization of medical weed. That's not answering the question, that's a bail. I agree. He was like "balls to this, i'm outta here!". He should have said something like "If you only had a small amount on personal possession then no, I wouldn't spent state time and money arresting people like that. I don't agree with legalizing medical marihuana, but we should be going after the big operations that are dealing and not the little guys like you". Then before the dude can open his mouth, bail! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted February 2, 2012 Report Share Posted February 2, 2012 Oh shucks...Romney will lose the medical marijuana and doper vote! And that vote will give Obama the victory you predict? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 2, 2012 Report Share Posted February 2, 2012 And that vote will give Obama the victory you predict? No, close to a billion dollars in campaign funding will do that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Manny Posted February 2, 2012 Report Share Posted February 2, 2012 Romney caught in 'very poor' mess (CNN) -- Fresh off a momentum-building victory in the Florida primary, Mitt Romney made a potential speaking gaffe Wednesday when he said he "wasn't concerned about the very poor". "I'm not concerned about the very poor," he said. "I'm not concerned about the very rich; they're doing just fine." When pressed by CNN anchor Soledad O'Brien about his remark about the very poor, Romney cited food stamps, Medicaid and housing vouchers. The comment evoked memories of previous Romney statements that prompted criticism, such as when he said at a campaign event that he liked to fire people who provided poor service. In addition, Romney initially resisted releasing his tax returns until pressured by Gingrich and others but then had to defend his millions invested in offshore accounts and his 13% effective tax rate. The comment in an interview with CNN focused new attention on the ability of Romney, a multimillionaire, to connect with ordinary voters as he seeks the Republican presidential nomination to run against President Barack Obama in November. All Romney has to do to lose the nomination is actually make a statement of some kind... any kind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted February 2, 2012 Report Share Posted February 2, 2012 When pressed by CNN anchor Soledad O'Brien about his remark about the very poor, Romney cited food stamps, Medicaid and housing vouchers. He has vowed to cut these things.... i.e. the "Ryan bugdget" that he supported. So ol' Mit thinks poor people are just fine... social safety net and all that... no mention that he favours cutting the big holes in it! http://swampland.time.com/2011/04/06/the-nitty-gritty-details-of-paul-ryan%E2%80%99s-medicare-plan/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 2, 2012 Report Share Posted February 2, 2012 He has vowed to cut these things.... i.e. the "Ryan bugdget" that he supported. If cutting welfare was good enough for Bill Clinton, it's good enough for Mitt Romney. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BC_chick Posted February 2, 2012 Report Share Posted February 2, 2012 No, close to a billion dollars in campaign funding will do that. I was under the impression that Romney will easily outspend Obama in this election. I'm surprised to hear you say this BC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted February 2, 2012 Report Share Posted February 2, 2012 I was under the impression that Romney will easily outspend Obama in this election. I'm surprised to hear you say this BC. That's a common misconception. Obama significantly outspent McCain in 2008, running more negative ads than any other candidate in the history of Presidential campaigns. It's presumed that he'll do the same this time around as well, raising close to a billion dollars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted February 2, 2012 Report Share Posted February 2, 2012 That's a common misconception. Obama significantly outspent McCain in 2008, running more negative ads than any other candidate in the history of Presidential campaigns. It's presumed that he'll do the same this time around as well, raising close to a billion dollars. yes, yes he can! Although he's in tough given Trump's endorsement from today! The "You're fired" guy meets the "I like to fire people" guy! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted February 2, 2012 Report Share Posted February 2, 2012 yes, yes he can! Although he's in tough given Trump's endorsement from today! The "You're fired" guy meets the "I like to fire people" guy! Hopefully they can fire Obama! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted February 3, 2012 Report Share Posted February 3, 2012 Hopefully they can fire Obama! They do love firing people, and they don't ever worry about poor people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.