If you really believe what you just said, then I've got a bumper sticker for you.
Posted on 07/10/2012 12:27:49 PM PDT by Kaslin
Oh look, more insults, and no attempt at facts. See you just admitted you’re wrong. If you had confidence in your facts you’d use them, instead you run to the ad hominems, the tool of those who know they’re full of crap but aren’t man enough to admit it. Really the smart move for you is to just pretend this thread never happened because every post you make on it is just further proof that you’re full of crap. but I know you’re kind, you’ll keep plugging away with your fact free insults. have fun with that. Meanwhile Romney is still a socialist AND you know it to be true.
Yeah, if Romney only had some sort of record we could examine, we'd have a way of logically predicting how he might perform as president.
Oh wait....he does have a record. It's right here:
Mitt Romney’s Dismal Record
"As U.S. real output grew 13 percent between 2002 and 2006, Massachusetts trailed at 9 percent.
* Manufacturing employment fell 7 percent nationwide those years, but sank 14 percent under Romney, placing Massachusetts 48th among the states.
* Between fall 2003 and autumn 2006, U.S. job growth averaged 5.4 percent, nearly three times Massachusetts' anemic 1.9 percent pace.
* While 8 million Americans over age 16 found work between 2002 and 2006, the number of employed Massachusetts residents actually declined by 8,500 during those years.
"Massachusetts was the only state to have failed to post any gain in its pool of employed residents," professors Sum and McLaughlin concluded.
In an April 2003 meeting with the Massachusetts congressional delegation in Washington, Romney failed to endorse President Bush's $726 billion tax-cut proposal."
[Cato Institute annual Fiscal Policy Report Card - America's Governors, 2004.]
Romney's "accomplishments".
1. Implemented/created Gay Marriage in MA
2. Supported and forced Gay Adoption in MA
3. Supported Abortion wholeheartedly
4. Raised taxes/fees over 300% while being Governor of MA
5. Implemented a state-level Cap and Trade system.
6. Supported Man-Made Global Warming
7. Supported the Brady Bill
8. Implemented a state level “Assault” Weapons Ban after the Federal AWB was allowed to expire.
9. Supported TARP
10. Supported Amnesty for Illegal Aliens (Citizenship for those already here)
11. Supported McCain-Kennedy (Amnesty)
12. Implemented a socialized medicine in MA called RomneyCare complete with an Individual Mandate and $50 abortions.
13. Nominated 27 Democrats (out of 36 nominations) for judgeships in MA, many of them extreme left-wingers.
Being President vs Gov of one of the most Liberal states are not the same thing. So no, we don’t know exactly how he will act. I know how Obama will act and apparently you are ok with that.
If you really believe what you just said, then I've got a bumper sticker for you.
It’s better than your Obama bumper sticker you apparently own.
This is some crazy stuff.
The "GOP-e" are so unprincipled that they foisted Romney on us as a candidate, yet once Obama is re-elected these same cynical, unprincipled people are going to come together and impeach a just-reelected President?
That's just goofy!
Oh, I think the GOP(-e) wants to win -- it's just that they don't want to win with a conservative candidate (just with conservative votes -- as Mitt said, "They'll come around once I'm the nominee.") I think Rush is wrong on this one -- it's not that they're afraid of a Goldwater-type loss with a conservative; they're really afraid of a Reagan-type win (with a conservative)! Which would wreak havoc on their big gov't, corporatist, socially liberal, fiscally sort of moderate wish list.
I think it's more precise to say he's a statist. When he said he wasn't worried about the very poor, he was telling the absolute truth; it's when he went on to say he was worried about the middle class, he was lying through his teeth. But in common with socialist, the phrase "personal liberty" just isn't in his vocabulary. The only question for him is whether federal, state or local gov't should rule -- in any case, with the feds picking up a big chunk of the tab (as with the Olympics, with RomneyCare, and -- as understand it -- many times with his LBOs.
I don't think he's nearly philosophically coherent enough to be classed absolutely as anything.
Your analogy breaks down at “the right thing to do”! It’s more analagous to letting your doctor “bleed” you to cure your fever!
You’re already on it, FRiend. I hope you do occasionally post to these threads for the benefit of lurkers and new readers.
I think it's because it had a lot of help from the people allowing that wool to shelter them from seeing what they'd rather not see. It's human nature.
And I agree that people are blinded by the "R." I used to be one of them!!! Arnold Schwarzenegger finally made me pull the blinders off and helped me recognize Einstein's Definition of Insanity at work in the voting booth. I'm applying what I learned.
And justsoyouknow, I do know full well that I am guilty of that which I complain about.
I've never found that name-calling, insulting and taunting are especially good persuaders! JMHO, of course! ;-)
Oh I think we know who Romney is. We also know exactly what Obama is.
That's what I hate about debating those who were born without a moral compass or a spine. It's just unfathomable to them that anyone could possibly object to a person or thing because that person or thing stands in conflict with everything they believe in.
Conservatives have actual values, that Mr. Romney apparently doesn't care for, or is willing to thoroughly trash, as was clearly demonstrated during his time as Governor of Massachusetts. Through his deeds, he has proven that he stands in direct conflict with everything conservatives believe in.
You either believe in something or you don't. You don't vote for what you don't believe in. If you vote for a liberal, that says everything about your real beliefs, or lack thereof.
You sir are very interesting. Continue your great legacy of letting our country bleed out. If you have a person bleeding out and have some dirty rags, possibly with disease on them, you still grab them and put them on the wound. You stop the bleeding.
Do you not understand that our country is bleeding? It is. By “proving” a point, you are allowing the wound to flow freely.
I will be voting for Romney, but my vote will not be in support of Romney. It will be against Obama.
I do not understand your need blindness to reality. I really don’t. You are the rebels in Picketts charge thinking they should just attack again after losing 1/3rd of their men.
Again, a lot of jabbering, but no answer.
Hey, you’d make a great politician!
Of course I do. As a member of this community, I'm more aware of that fact than the average American. Painfully so. Where you and I differ, is in what to do about the bleeding.
I'm incensed that the opposition party is preparing to nominate a challenger to the menace in the White House who bears no substantial differences to him in actual deed. I don't give a rat's ass about what's come out of that man's mouth. I judge, rate, and categorize him by his past record, which is a record that any liberal Democrat would be proud of.
It appears that we're going to endure another four years of a Socialist, big government, nanny state administration, no matter who wins the election. If that's the case, then I withdraw my support from the process this go-round, and will concentrate on the only other 'co-equal' branch of government that I have a say in electing. The Executive Branch is lost.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.