MY SKEPTICISM OF MITT (MITTENS) ROMNEY

i Think those are valid concerns, and I share them as well. Fiscally and socially, I really don't think there is too much distance between the two candidates.

However, I have the bigger issue with Obama and all of his radical ties and questionable past.

-Why did he hang out with terrorists/radicals/socialists/communists/American haters?
-Why is he an American apologist?
-Why is hsd SS number fake?
-How did he rise to power so quickly?
-Why did he attend Columbia as a foreign student/accept foreign aid?

And many more


Plus, his love for-

Executive orders
NDAA
Hundreds of Czars
Larry Sinclair

I share your skepticism of Mittens. So many of my friends in MA detested him when he reigned, liberal and conservative. He changes his position like most change their underwear to pander to whomever he's talking to. His version of capitalism is predatory rather than free market. I'm socially liberal, but very fiscally conservative... so he and I will never see eye to eye as I suspect he'd become rather theocratic due to the hold the Mormon church has on him. I don't see him making any real attempt to cut waste... and I see him as a corporate socialist. So with one, the money goes to the bottom which helps businesses like grocery stores, etc. With a corporate socialist, it goes straight to the top and gets hoarded. I don't like either way, but I detest the thought of my money going up rather than down and I'm pragmatic. That being said, I'm voting for Gary Johnson because I see him as the only hope for getting the goobermint out of the redistribution business. I realize it won't get him elected, but I'm not in a swing state either... and I'll be able to sleep at night knowing I wasn't complicit in the victory of either socialist candidate.

Plus, I'd like to add the fact that O wants to create a government-dependant society.

Yea, my Obama list would be a mile long....

So basically, again.....We have to choose the best of the worst.

Nice. Very well said.



Thank you.

Like the Red's trying to pick an Ace out of their pitching staff.....

Yeah, it's a tough choice to pick between Cueto or Latos.

They are both so good.

Last Edited by Sleeping Giant on 09/28/2012 01:55 PM

He won the swing state of Iowa by a landslide. This is just getting better and better.

Kick the fucking freeloaders and welfare dogs and fags to the curb.

Times...are a changin'.

Don't forget that he plans on spending BILLIONS more on military. Billions that don't need to be spent if we just bring our men back home.

A personal problem for me is that this man is as socially conservative as they get. You're dead on correct when you say that he won't shrink the overall size of the government. THAT'S the problem we have with our current party system. If you vote Democrat, you get more government through a fiscally liberal system. If you vote Republican, you get more government through a socially conservative system.

The ideal candidate for me is somebody that's fiscally conservative and socially liberal. Less government telling us what we need to do with our money and less government telling us what's good for us in our private lives.

I'm not sure what your position is on marijuana...frankly, I don't care. All I know is that Mitt Romney will fight legalization of this PLANT "tooth and nail" according to his own words.

As far as I'm concerned, if it doesn't affect someone else's life, freedom, or possessions...it shouldn't have big brother's grimy hands in it.

He also supports the outdated embargo on Cuba. I want some goddamn cigars.

well that is what we all thought before is the pubs ment smaller gov. but those days are long gone. they are all either side for big gov and big corp handouts. we need a third party for the health of our nation. we have no money to hand out and gov. needs shorter term limits than they have now. no more career politicians.

at least Mitt isn't a muslim, a muslim who follows the Quaran, and who would side with the Muslims as Mr O said he would in one of his books..

Very well said. As for him being super socially conservative....that has only been the last couple years. I believe the pander to his conservative audience. He used to be more...well I guess more like less socially conservative.

As for the rest of your post, I agree with all of it. Well said.

Yea, Obama is very Anti American. He wants to change us to what he, and europe and the middle east would like to see us be. Which goes against our entire foundation.

Although I do not believe he is a muslim. I believe him to be an Atheist. The rest of his feelings and policies don't line up with someone with any religious beliefs.

He would be faaar more conservative if he was a muslim...IMO

Link?

Not to mention, Romney never wiped Larry Sinclair's butt with the constitution.

Last Edited by Sleeping Giant on 09/28/2012 02:52 PM

I dunno...I heard of a youtube vid....

I think Mitt (and Ryan) would cut the budget. At least, as much as the executive branch can do that. See, Ronald Reagan submitted balanced budgets to congress every year he was in office, but Tip O'Neal never let one of them through. Reagan is blamed for the huge increase in the deficit, but that deficit was the result of his compromise with congress and even his own party, not his budgets because they were never even considered. To be fair, Obama’s budgets haven’t been used either, but at least they were voted on and voted down even by the super majority of democrats he enjoyed the first two years in office and Harry Reid hasn’t let any budget get through the Senate in three years. No matter who is elected, the Senate will have to change before the budgets really even has a change of getting any better.

That said, my problem with Mitt is that he fundamentally does not have constitutional principles. He just doesn't. However much he might reduce spending or regulation it will not be in the name of the constitution's limitations on government's authority. Otherwise, he would never have allowed the state of MA to have government mandated and government run health insurance. He also would not have been proud to have some of the strictest gun control laws in the nation. He seems like a nice guy and all, but I would not trust him to change anything other than federal government’s the balance sheet and that is not the core problem we face today. We have abandoned our core principles. Everything else suffers from that and it is something I just don’t think he will change.

Sadly, I don’t see anyone else who would that is running and has a credible chance of winning, so may wind up pushing the button for him anyway. I feel so ashamed that our nation has come down to this.

Great points. We have had a huge decline in morals and principles. Which also was a huge factor in the fall of Rome also.

OP notes the real problem here. We have, since the '70s, been given a choice between tax and spend Democrats, and borrow and spend Republicans. Neither party will stop the spending, they just pay for it differently.

That's why I have been voting Libertarian since 1988, and will do so again this year.

Gary Johnson 2012!

Exactly! Well said sir.

:romwhoops:

:nocatdaddy4u:

Said it perfectly man. Did you see the debates? Not one mention of the Federal Reserve. We owe them more dough than we own China. I don't trust any of the two puppets.

My main problem with Romney (aside from the theology) is that he (and the rest of the predatory vulture capitalist class) *IS* the true face of the current economic disaster.

When you get right down to the root cause, it ain't food stamps and helping grandma pay the nursing home bill that got the country in this humongous debt situation. It was "bailing out" the banks/corporate tax giveaways and the govt buying everything the M.I.C. decided it wanted to sell us - and the of course, the cost of using it so it could be claimed as "necessary" purchases.