Don't forget they are both at least half white as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by cstone
Printable View
Don't forget they are both at least half white as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by cstone
She has to make a living too. She, just like any other politician out there has to make money to feed her kids (even though she hunts), pay the bills etc. criticizing someone because they are good at making money is just jealousy. Same thing the OWS retards are doing...same thing the obama supporters say about Romney. They are pissed that Romney has money. who cares...he has done well, whether it was from his father or not, he still does well for himself. He plays the system the way it has been set up. Everyone else has pretty much the same opportunities...if they don't they scream bloody murder and want to tax the shit out of those making the money so they can get some of the "good life" without working for it.Quote:
Originally Posted by sroz
Not vilifying her at all. She can make all the $$ she wants and it has no impact on my life. Just think back to how long she strung the party faithful along while she was promoting herself with her bus tour. How long was she "undecided" about whether she was gonna throw her hat in the ring? All the while promoting her speaking tour. Just my opinion, but I believe she knew the whole time she couldn't win and would not enter the race. She just took advantage of her rock start status among the tea party.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bailey Guns
I'm done. I do like how we managed to redirect this thread, however....[Coffee]
I have no doubt she was taking full advantage of her "rock star" status. But I don't think it was necessarily to benefit her personally. She, along with the Tea Party, has done more to excite conservatives than anyone in my lifetime. Well, except for maybe Barack Obama.
Did you ever consider she might have been using her status to get the base fired up?
Well...that's the best I've seen so far. Nobody from the Romney=Obama camp seems to be able to come up with anything substantial.Quote:
Originally Posted by cstone
Not that I am trying to say that they are equal, and I will vote for Romney, but two things that really bother me are:Quote:
Originally Posted by Bailey Guns
1) Both have drafted a form of socialized medicine that is very similar. (Though Romney vows to repeal ObamaCare, so I am not sure if this counts.)
2) Both came from states with absolutely ridiculous gun laws, and had a hand in their implementation and enforcement though neither actually created said gun laws.
It is unclear to me how much of a hand Romney had when dealing with the two things that I have listed, and I think that the information out there has been obscured on purpose because there is not a single thing either way that directly links him to the legislation that was drafted while he was in office, or what he did to oppose the implementation of the legislation. So it is not fair to say that they are on a level playing field on the issues. But if he was in a position of power and had the ability to stop the Massachusetts health care reform, or at least make it less like ObamaCare why didn't he? If he is really pro 2A why is there gun control act revisions banning more "assault weapons" during times when he was governor?
http://www.mass.gov/eopss/firearms-r...laws/gun-laws/
And to be clear, I actually like Romney a little. He seems to be financially smart and from an economic standpoint has sound ideas. Unlike BO who has absolutely no idea what he is doing in any facet of life much less the presidency.
I am not trying to demonize him, I just would like to see some questions answered about where he stands, and why certain things in his past were allowed to happen if he had the ability to stop them.
Danimal...
Already covered the difference between Obamacare and Romneycare...look back a page or two.
Gun thing? Like I said...he ain't the strongest but he's better than most. Look on his page for specific quotes re: gun rights. I don't think he's gonna be really hip to any new anti-gun legislation...nor will the house assuming it stays republican.
Well you see you and I have about the same view on Romney. Sadly it seems some have bought the sly politician talk hook line and sinker. If you look at his commits and record on things over the last four years such as tarp, gm and bank bailouts, the stimulus, healthcare and gun control, it really doesn't take a genius to figure out why some on the right, especially those who value liberty, are a bit uneasy. Then you consider the flip flopping and change in stance on some issues since he started campaigning for president and it looks shockingly similar to all the other politicians we've seen over the last few decades. You can't look at only what he SAYS now, you have to look at what he has done or hasn't done in the past as well. Is he better than Obama? By a long shot. Would he be considered a liberal 20 or 30 years ago? Absolutely. Is he a beginning to turning this country around? No way, but he will at least slow down the bleeding until conservatives can hopefully grow in number and convince the country we don't need a moderate, we need to go back to the conservative thinking of the long distance past, such as the founding fathers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Danimal
Well, they both have a penchant for socialized health care. And they are both gun grabbers. And they are both liars. And they'll say anything to get elected, so you can't trust anything at all they say.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bailey Guns
If I had to vote based solely on gun rights, I'd have to choose between the guy that signed an assault weapons ban into law, and the guy who signed national parks carry into law.
Otherwise I'd be voting between the guy whom I know where he stands, and the guy that keeps changing his mind and says that when he said/did things, he didn't really want to, but had to.