bush_cheney2004 Posted January 22, 2012 Report Share Posted January 22, 2012 Yeah right. The delay was probably to give his "accountants" time to cook the books. More libel defamation from somebody with no pony in the show. Prove it.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted January 22, 2012 Report Share Posted January 22, 2012 More libel defamation from somebody with no pony in the show. Prove it.... Exactly. It's pathetic how low some people are willing to go regarding an issue that has nothing to do with any real substance. Not to mention that the IRS has received, and been fine, with every Romney tax return every submitted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 More libel defamation from somebody with no pony in the show. Prove it.... Prove what? I said "probably". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 Prove what? I said "probably". Just as I thought....no pony or clue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 Prove what? I said "probably". And this says a lot about your ethics right here. No evidence. But you don't like him, so you say he "probably" did something illegal and feel it's perfectly ok to accuse him of it because of the "probably." I would say that you "probably" have no qualms about telling lies. Fair enough statement, eh? Or not so much? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August1991 Posted January 23, 2012 Report Share Posted January 23, 2012 (edited) It looks like you were right, Michael.Now, can he beat Obama? Looks like I spoke too soon, MH.I should have stuck with my initial reaction (above in this thread) to the NYT analysis. The game isn't over until the fat man with the white hair puts a TV debate moderator in his place. I'll watch this one tonight in Tampa. Edited January 23, 2012 by August1991 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted January 24, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 Looks like I spoke too soon, MH. I should have stuck with my initial reaction (above in this thread) to the NYT analysis. The game isn't over until the fat man with the white hair puts a TV debate moderator in his place. I'll watch this one tonight in Tampa. Oh, it's not over. But Romney is still the inevitable nominee. Why ? It's in the article. The Republicans don't want to lose - it's that simple. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 Oh, it's not over. But Romney is still the inevitable nominee. Why ? It's in the article. The Republicans don't want to lose - it's that simple. I agree. Florida is pretty close. Romney can definitely win. Then it's off to Michigan, where he'll probably win as well. And then Nevada, where he won last time around, and will probably win again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 (edited) Another day another Bain problem. This time it is that Bain made 350 million dollars while destroying a Florida company. Bet Newts holds on to this one and uses it if he needs to. The Devil is really in the details. From the The Miami Herald. By 1998, Mr. Romney and his restless colleagues at Bain began looking for a way to cash out of the firm’s investment in Dade. A hefty offer arrived. Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Company, a rival buyout firm, proposed buying Dade Behring for $1.9 billion, according to documents filed in the bankruptcy case. But Bain executives rejected it, disappointed by the price, the documents indicate. Bain settled on a common tactic in private equity: In April 1999, it pushed Dade to borrow hundreds of millions of dollars to buy half of Bain’s shares in the company — and half of those of its investment partners. Bain pocketed the $242 million. Goldman received $121 million. Top Dade executives got $55 million, records show. The total payout to shareholders reached $420 million — nearly as much as the purchase price for Dade. So they did just run this company into the ground to make a profit. They could have sold it to someone who wanted it to run it but instead they forced this company to take huge loans to buy stock in Bain. If this is the "capitalism works" argument Romney is going to run on the guy is already sunk. Then we have his tax returns which give us reason to believe he is using off shore bank accounts to avoid paying American taxes and Mittens aint looking to good. Edited January 24, 2012 by punked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 And this says a lot about your ethics right here. No evidence. But you don't like him, so you say he "probably" did something illegal and feel it's perfectly ok to accuse him of it because of the "probably." I would say that you "probably" have no qualms about telling lies. Fair enough statement, eh? Or not so much? Holy hell, people can't hypothesis without you jumping down someones throat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Manny Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 (edited) Oh, it's not over. But Romney is still the inevitable nominee. Why ? It's in the article. The Republicans don't want to lose - it's that simple. Nothing is inevitable, as you saw in the debate. Only takes one soundbite to turn the whole thing around. And all it takes is for somebody to expose Romney, or for him to say something. the more he talks the deeper he puts himself in a hole, as evidenced a few times now. he better learn to stick to his practiced talking points, otherwise shut up. But besides that, none of them really look that good as presidential material, IMO. Edited January 24, 2012 by Manny Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted January 24, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 Nothing is inevitable, as you saw in the debate. Only takes one soundbite to turn the whole thing around. And all it takes is for somebody to expose Romney, or for him to say something. the more he talks the deeper he puts himself in a hole, as evidenced a few times now. he better learn to stick to his practiced talking points, otherwise shut up. But besides that, none of them really look that good as presidential material, IMO. Read the OP. Also, as others have pointed out Newt isn't on the ballot in some states. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Manny Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 Read the OP. Also, as others have pointed out Newt isn't on the ballot in some states. I read the OP already. It's just an opinion, and it's worded exactly as so many other opinions about all of the candidates. So what? I said if Romney craps on himself, if some bad news comes out then he will be just as impossible as the rest of them. Then if that happens it comes to a completely different equation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Manny Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 But "irregardless", it looks grim for the GOP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted January 24, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 I read the OP already. It's just an opinion, and it's worded exactly as so many other opinions about all of the candidates. So what? Any opinion is "just an opinion". The facts backing up any opinion give it weight. I said if Romney craps on himself, if some bad news comes out then he will be just as impossible as the rest of them. Then if that happens it comes to a completely different equation. What are the chances of that though ? You can say any opinion is invalid based on what "might" happen. I predict that I will post this comment, but you never know what *could* happen. I may be struck by indoor lightning in the next 5 seconds. Looks like it didn't happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 Newt isn't on the ballot in some states but the 500 number is greatly exaggerated. It is closer to 100 delegates Newt can't get which isn't that bad in a race that has some 3000 delegates which they are trying for. It is a very very small issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted January 24, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 Ok - there's still the problem of organization, and money. And the fact that he's unelectable, so the Republican organization will find a way to undermine him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 Ok - there's still the problem of organization, and money. And the fact that he's unelectable, so the Republican organization will find a way to undermine him. Sure maybe but Money aint a problem with new SuperPacs two or three millionaires can just buy Newt. As for the Republican Organization if 2010 taught us anything it is that the base hates the establishment and will burn the party to the ground to make them do what they want. Remember the witch Lady, and the crazy women they ran against Reid. They created the tea party and now the genie is out of the bottle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 Sure maybe but Money aint a problem with new SuperPacs two or three millionaires can just buy Newt. As for the Republican Organization if 2010 taught us anything it is that the base hates the establishment and will burn the party to the ground to make them do what they want. Remember the witch Lady, and the crazy women they ran against Reid. They created the tea party and now the genie is out of the bottle. I think cooler heads will prevail and the Republicans will nominate Romney... Not that I think Romney is a great candidate or anything(By the way,I don't think Obama's that great,either)...I find him to be milquetoast and wooden,however,if Gingrich actually won the thing,ya' have to wonder where moderate conservatives in the US would go to? Or would they stay home? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 I think cooler heads will prevail and the Republicans will nominate Romney... Not that I think Romney is a great candidate or anything(By the way,I don't think Obama's that great,either)...I find him to be milquetoast and wooden,however,if Gingrich actually won the thing,ya' have to wonder where moderate conservatives in the US would go to? Or would they stay home? Tea Party is staying home if it is Romney and in an election like 2012 which is shaping to be a base election losing any part of your base is going to cost not only you but down ticket as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 Tea Party is staying home if it is Romney and in an election like 2012 which is shaping to be a base election losing any part of your base is going to cost not only you but down ticket as well. And the moderates stay away,or do something,if Romney is'nt the nominee.And I don't see anyone else fitting the bill of "moderate" amongst those left over. Quite a conundrum for the Republican's... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 Tea Party is staying home if it is Romney Nope, not at all. When you get to the general election, the Tea Party will be just as energized to beat Obama. Especially if Chris Christie is his VP. But even more especially after they see Obama during each of the debates, lying his face off. Nothing will motivate the Tea Party greater than Obama, his lying, and his failed policies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 (edited) Nope, not at all. When you get to the general election, the Tea Party will be just as energized to beat Obama. Especially if Chris Christie is his VP. But even more especially after they see Obama during each of the debates, lying his face off. Nothing will motivate the Tea Party greater than Obama, his lying, and his failed policies. Only in dream land is the Tea Party gonna support an Establishment, Illegal employing, Tax cheating, who shipped or bankrupted American companies, candidate. Like I said they would rather burn the party to the ground then move it to the middle. That has been their whole point the whole time. Maybe they hold their noise or maybe they vote third party, or maybe they stay home. Edited January 24, 2012 by punked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 Only in dream land is the Tea Party gonna support an Establishment, Illegal employing, Tax cheating, who shipped or bankrupted American companies. Like I said they would rather burn the party to the ground then move it to the middle. "Don't tread on me,Romney!!!!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted January 24, 2012 Report Share Posted January 24, 2012 Only in dream land is the Tea Party gonna support an Establishment He is definitely establishment. But establishment is still a lot better than Obama. Illegal employing He never employed illegal workers. Tax cheating He doesn't, or has never cheated on taxes. who shipped or bankrupted American companies He's never shipped or bankrupted any American companies. Companies bankrupt themselves by bad business decisions and/or bad business models. Sometimes businesses do outsource to other countries. Usually to stay competitive, or simply survive. Thanks to Obama's brutual regualtions and new taxes, he's done more to outsource jobs than any single person in the history of the country. 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.