I'm concerned about Mitt Romney
 

Seriously.

The guy blows his big EU trip.

He has to muzzle Ryan shortly after he picks him to be VP.

The convention was a dud.

His campaign strategy is lead by someone the GOP thinks is a kook, hell they won't even barely let him on TV.

And now he's just insulted 1/2 the country in perhaps one of the most ignorant, clumsy and witless attacks I've ever seen. Hell, it's like the guy was playing MadLibs with Jim's talking points after blowing the top off of a few Reddi Whips.

We haven't even got to the point where the Dems start highlighting all his flip flops.

Seriously, if Obama is "that bad" Romney is demonstrating that he may just have the credentials to be worse.

-spence

Spence, it was a bad monent, to be sure. But can you tell me why Romney's statement is worse than what then-candidate Obama said about those of us who cling to our religion and guns because we are frustraded racists?

Here'sthe difference. Obama's comment had no truth to it. Romney's comment, while not self-serving as far as the election guys, is a lot more accurate than what Obama said.

Obama gets a pass, Romney gets villified.

Scott Rasmussen isn't worried about Romney, so I doubt you need to.

Here's a good perspective of why you're exactly wrong.

Romney’s “47 percent” vs. Obama’s “cling to guns or religion”: Which gaffe is worse? - Slate Magazine

-spence

"playing MadLibs with Jim's talking points "

And Spence, as I have posted here, there are issues that I feel liberals are on the right side of (gun control, gay marriage). Unless you can tell me there are important issues that you side with conservatives on, please don't try to make me out to be a fanatic. You're a pure ideologue. I'm not a mirror reflection of you, not even close. I don't follow either side blindly. My 'talking points' are an interpretation of real, actual facts, seen through a prism of love and common sense. All you regurgitate is "liberal good, conservative bad."

I'm not the who says things like "Michelle Obama never said she wasn't proud of her country until Barack got the nomination."

I am concerned with the whole political mess this is. Mostly pandering to extremists (aka swing voters) with TV adds for those with a 6 year old's mental capacity. I hate having to use my right to vote to try and pick the lesser of two evils. Too many people have sacrificed too much for it to come to this at election time. I wish I someone knew how to fix this. I really do. Maybe it all comes back to the education thread, but I don't see that happening anytime soon.

As much as I hate to say it, this may be coming down to the devil you know vs. the devil you don't. (oops, unintended opening to the "religious right")

I'm concerned about someone that has been head cheerleader and princple defender for all things Obama here for the last 4 years, now actually suggesting that based his hyperbole and rehtoric(got that Bryan:)) Romney might be undermining his own chances to be President and thereby improving the chances for the object of his affection to continue on for 4 more years and that this somehow ....."concerns" him...

concerned?...shouldn't you be elated???:jump1:

Seriously:uhuh::screwy: if it's "that bad" it should be in the bag...start the party:happy:... if you are accurate(or actually believe) in your (very biased)observations "interpretations"(for bryan)

wait....this all sounds a little familiar...didn't you start essentially the same thread a few months ago?

Spence, you being a Lib and all, we know how concerned you are about the welfare and the deep compassion you have for Repubs and conservatives, but relax, take a deep breath and don't loose any sleep over it.
They will be ok. :grins:

this is a funny thread
Looks like Spence is buying in to the talking points

This is a 100% true statement and the root cause of most of the problems we have in this country

"There are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent on government, who believe that they are the victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, you name it, that that's an entitlement and they will vote for this president no matter what."

If you wake up every day and wonder what the governtment is doing for you, you will vote for Obama

If you wake up every day and wonder what the government is doing to you, you will vote for Romney

Spence????? Neva. :doh: :tooth:

Kudos!

That's what I was telling my brother when he heard the news "blip" saying how Romney was attacking the poor.

Romney may have not phrased it as "PC" as the media usually dictates, but he was , in fact, 100% right on point!

Isn't it amazing that when a Democrap blatantlylies to our face, it's OK and they don't get called to the mat for it, but a Republican speaks the truth, without padding the numbers or inflating the facts, and he is attacked as a monster who wants to destroy us?

When I see all the ads on TV, the one direct link to all the Democrat ads is that they seem to be attack ads against the Repubicans and not telling what they can/will do for America.

That wouldn't be so bad if they were based solely on the WHOLE truth.
Unfortunately they won't spend the money to find out the facts, and are content to bombard the airwaves with pieces of speaches and a sentence from an article so far out of context that that 47% thinks they are the all that was said or written.

It's definitely coming down to voting for the "lesser of two evils", and the incumbent evil hasn't shown why he's worthy of another shot.

What will he TRY and do in another 4 years? He's already apologized to the world for being American so maybe he's subjegate himself to the world and give away our rights and freedonms?
Don't laugh, as it could very well be true!

I'm no liberal, you should know that by now.

And I do care about the GOP as we need a healthy Republican party to function. I'm concerned the party has poisoned itself to the point where they'd rather take the whole system down than do anything constructive.

-spence

Spence, you are a liberal

Agree.

No, hopefully you'll be at your therapist.

And exactly why Romney was so wrong. At least you've clarified that for us.

-spence

really?
So you dont think the fiscal decisions made in the next 12 months will impact your life? You dont think the wacky liberal wave of banning soft drinks, cup cakes, father daughter dances is REAL? You dont think massive increases in govt dependance is REAL?
Not only are you a liberal, you're ignorant. Is that an oxymoron?

might be the dumbest thing you've ever said :uhuh:

Spence has jumped the shark.

progressives will rarely admit this....don't like to be pinned down to a particular idealogical classification fantasizing that they are the best of all worlds...they fancy themselves hovering above the ordinary classifications sniffing a purer air :)

I thought Romney only cared about rich people?

Mitt Romney Outed By The Milkman: Candidate Anonymously Donates Thousands Of Pints Of Milk To Sick Vets

I think he's absolutely right. The mission of the GOP for the last 4 years was to deny POTUS another term. Nothing else.

And they moved so far towards the right they are hitting the bible belt circuit when they aren't in DC

They don't want to take the "whole" system down--just that portion that has devoured the truly constitutional system that founded this nation. At least a fair percentage of Republicans do, and little, if any, Democrats do. Republicans would like to minimize or eliminate much of the "fourth branch of government," the regulatory agencies whose unelected bureaucrats promulgate the vast majority of federal laws and regulations that constrict us against the intent and purpose of the Constitution. They would like to return us to that original system of limited government by elected representatives, rather than maintaining the leviathan administrative state of masterminds who know better what we need than we do. They would like to eliminate those who rule with little to no restraint on a trajectory to being an all-powerful centralized government which gives us those rights it deems "good" and useful to a collective society, and would like to return us to a society of sovereign individuals who possess unalienable rights. They would like to take down the idea that for the "good" of all, diverse individual desires must be subservient to the well-functioning administrative power, which, in return, will give us rights to replace unalienable or constitutional rights, and allow us the properties it considers necessary.

That is the portion of "the whole system" Republicans would like to take down. And that would be extremely healthy and constructive.

If the above were substantiated as a fact I would see it as a meaningful endeavour. However, it seems as things have gotten twisted in trajectory

that's a very tired Zimmy talking point that Woodward forced Scarborough to admit was inaccurate or incomplete :uhuh:

JOE SCARBOROUGH, HOST: And Bob, you talk about this. And you see it time and time again in your book where Republicans give ideas, and every idea is rejected outright. I want to focus, though, on a quote. And I’ve got to admit, just by reading press reports, I didn't know the other side of the Mitch McConnell quote. And I think I, at least, owe him an apology here on the air because we've repeated it a thousand times where Mitch McConnell says, my one priority, my top priority is preventing a second Obama term. But you actually pull out what nobody in the media pulls out, and that's the rest of Mitch McConnell’s statement. What is it?

BOB WOODWARD: And where McConnell says, I don't want Obama to fail, I want him to change. And I agree with you. I think that that's significant. Now, there is a brazenness to the first part of the quote, and as you know, Mitch McConnell is...

JOE SCARBOROUGH: He's tough.

BOB WOODWARD: He’s a hard ass on these subjects, to say the least.

JOE SCARBOROUGH: But McConnell went on to say -- and it's just never been reported -- McConnell went on to say, but if he changes, I want to work with him, and basically that's the attitude of if the guy will meet us halfway -- and I see John Heilemann rolling his eyes around the set, but time and time and time again, republicans offered suggestions, and time and time and time again, the first two years, the president rejected them outright.

Do you see it as a meaningful enough of an endeavor to make? The endeavor has been substantiated in various attempts by Republicans to rein in the power of various regulatory agencies. Various Republicans have been critized for advocating the elimination of various regulatory agencies. Various Republicans have promised to work for that end. Many Republicans campaign on the promise to restore the Constititution. Is their endeavor meaningful enough to the voters? Are the voters even aware of the problem? Do the media consider the endeavor meaningul enough to report on it in depth, or just make occaisional derisive comments, if they comment at all? If you consider it a meaningful endeavor, do you discuss it with your friends and family, or on this forum? If the masses are ignorant, or don't care, and the media does not discuss the issue or ignores it, and if the Democrat party and enough in the Republican party disagree with the endeavor or think it's silly, how can the mission of the endeavor be finally realized and become not only an endeavor but an accomplishment? Are other endeavors, such as free contraceptives for women, and all the little and large benefits that the Federal Government gives us, and in turn makes it larger, more powerful, and more to be depended on--are other such endeavors more important to the voters?

If the voters are not aware, or don't care enough about the growth of government and their growing dependency on it, the endeavor may be substantiated as an attempt or a wish, but it can never bear the fruit of reality.

Where is the tipping point? Its clear that Romney is right on about a certain percentage of Americans having their hands out to take all they can and contribute nothing. Is it 47%? I don't know (I hope its not 47% yet!).

The big issue is where is the tipping point at which point the country comes tumbling down because there are too few putting into the pot and too many taking out. This election has no principles. Its one guy going after the votes of the "takers" and promising more and more to attract more and more taker votes. Its about another guy going after the "haves"saying there are too many takers and if we don't get more putting into the pot there will be nothing to take out for anybody.

So at what percent of takers does the country collapse? Surely if everyone stops giving and everyone is taking the game is over. Romney says its now 47% but whatever it actually is , right now we are teetering. Is it 55%? Is it 65%? When does the house of cards tumble because people are taking out more that the rest can put back in? There is a tipping point. Only the biggest of idiots would deny that at some point there will not be enough to satisfy everyone with their hands out to take from the country. At what percent is that tipping point?

We are all betting on where that tipping point is in the next election. Will we reach it in the next 4 years? Is the probability of reaching it higher if Obama or Romney is President?

I am appalled that everything is about getting elected or reelected. There is no more right , wrong , no more doing what's good or bad for the country. Its all about doing whatever is nescessary to win the next election. I am tired of going to the polls and voting against the lesser of two bad choices. I want to be able to vote "for" someone for a change.

Unfortunately those with their hands out are or soon will be in the majority. We are on the road to socialism. Wealth will be redistributed. Everybody will be equal because we will all have nothing unless the government gives it to us. Unless we change direction before we hit that tipping point , there will be no turning back until the system collapses.

You didn't really mean that his statement is 100% true, did you. You couldn't have meant that. His statement confirms he is a bleeping fool. Hopefully, it will seal the deal in Ohio and Nevada and this thing is over.
Where to start? If he meant the 47% to be people who don't pay income tax, well then he is a moron because a large percentage of those are the elderly who vote republican, poor southern white men, veterans.
If he meant 47% of Americans, in general, will vote for Obama because they are victims, but not specifically reffering to the income tax group, that is also patently false. More educated people, professionals, and specifically educated women back Obama. So just eliminate those people and what is the percent that actually fall into his assinine categorization?

8% of Americans pay no income or payroll taxes. Most of that 8% are people who work, but make less than 20,000 a year working at places like McDonalds and DD. There are students and vets in that group, as well.There are freeloading bums out there, but they are a small percent. It is getting fun watching this guy flush it down the drain.

Oh yeah, 162,000 people in the top 10% tax bracket paid no income tax. He might have been one of them a couple years ago.

I am too SH, as I believe a lot of Americans are. The Constitution was written on
the basis that it would be carried out by Statesmen serving only for the reason of
what's best for America.
Where can you find such people? I know of a couple at the local and state level
but they could never make it to the top without selling their souls.
Until a true Statesman comes to the forefront, if ever, the only choice that I see
is a vote for a candidate for a large overbaring government that stifles our liberty or one who proports a smaller efficent one.

While the Mid East burns, our President is on a comedy show and 2 fund raisers
and Congress will be leaving for vacation on Friday. True servants.

The tipping point will be sometime determined by one thing...the Baby Boomers. Starting January 1 of 2010, 10,000 Baby Boomers a day turn 65, and are thus eligible for social security and Medicare. 10,000 a day. That will continue for 15 years.

I haven't heard Obama admit that drastic changes are needed. ALl he talks about is tweaking tax rates on the rich, which is practically meaningless.

Ryan proposed a plan to reduce Medicare costs bt $4 trilion.

That's a clear difference. Obama/Biden will obviously continue to kick the can down the road, Romney/Ryan wil try to do something (no one knows if their plan will work, though).

I don't stay up at night perseverating over what Government is doing, or may be about to do to me.

Financial decisions over the next year aren't likely to impact me in a meaningful way. It's an ongoing process that's important.

In the big picture it's insignificant, this stuff comes and goes.

Most of this is being driven by demographics. That's not to say there in a financial challenge, but in context of Romney's 47% comment -- which you whole heartily endorse -- it has little to do with ideology.

Statements like this only reaffirm my believe that many people don't have a clue what a real Liberal is...

-spence

Spence,

Please share what a REAL liberal is and what a FAKE liberal is.

Thanks!