Tea Partiers against Romney need to ask

[Maple]

You are not fooling me at all, if you liken Romney or any other GOP candidates with Obama, you are either extremely mis-informed or a far left wing nut trying to pretend you actually are a Republican or a tea party member as there are extreme differences between all the GOP candidates and Obama.

Obama is a full blown socialist with marixt leanings.

" Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, the gospel of envy, it's only virtue is the shared equality of misery." Winston Churchill.

lol at me being a left wing nut because I disagree with you.

So Romney is somehow largely different because all of the sudden his excuse of states rights makes the solution he came up with for healthcare different?

And no I'm not a republican or tea party member, I'm an independent, some would say libertarian. I would prefer Ron Paul or Herman Cain, why would I preted to like someone who isn't going to get elected?

All you have done is made an ad hominem attack.

I'm against free trade, that makes me a liberal? When people devalue currencies you have to take action. Read up on Alexander Hamilton and how this country actually paid to exist. America is the biggest consumption market, I am the first to admit that's a disadvantage, however, if you can pay off debt it becomes a huge advantage. Free trade only works when a country has a trade surplus otherwise it plagues a country. Secondly, every country besides us makes taxes in other forms, for instance all drinks that are imported in to Mexico have to be on plastic crates made in mexico. People have to get paid to change the crates, or people have to pay to buy this crates and shipped. Everyother country adds some kind of tax in a round about way besides us so I say eliminate it. You want to play that game, this is what happens. Free trade is a joke that has been imposed on people who can't think for themselves.

Romney will offer little other solutions vastly different from Obama, same with Perry. They have not shown any will to do so in how they have ran their campaign. They tell you what they think you want to hear like Obama. This is vindictive of the way they will rule, only difference will be instead of the president sympathizing with the lefts frustration he will be playing that game with the right.

Trade is your issue, I am assuming, then it might be helpful for you to know that it's also Mitt Romney's issue. I suggest you read his policy on trade, he wants free trade, but it has got to be FAIR trade, he wants to implement a Reagan era trade policy in which China can't manipulate it's currency and for those that don't trade fairly we don't trade with. It's all in his job's plan he addresses it completely. I suggest you read it. BTW Reagan created 20 million new jobs. In fact, Romney is the ONLY candidate that has addressed trade.

It is on page 69 of his job's plan.

" Encouraging trade does not mean entering into agreements that disadvantage the United States or being soft with trading partners who ignore our agreements... The world trade organization litigation process has been singularly unreceptive to American interests. None of this is reason to embrace protectionism, but it is reason for TOUGH bargaining and strict implementation." Mitt Romney.

 

[Maple]

Their is little difference between Obama and Romney. No matter what he says he is what he is, and I doubt he will come up with the solutions and focus on the problems we need too. So I wouldn't consider myself a tea partier, but I agree with them on a lot of stuff, as well as disagree, and Romney is simply not for me. Romney, Obama, Bush, Perry, there is essentially little difference.

You are not fooling me at all, if you liken Romney or any other GOP candidates with Obama, you are either extremely mis-informed or a far left wing nut trying to pretend you actually are a Republican or a tea party member as there are extreme differences between all the GOP candidates and Obama.

Obama is a full blown socialist with marixt leanings.

" Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, the gospel of envy, it's only virtue is the shared equality of misery." Winston Churchill.

lol at me being a left wing nut because I disagree with you.

So Romney is somehow largely different because all of the sudden his excuse of states rights makes the solution he came up with for healthcare different?

And no I'm not a republican or tea party member, I'm an independent, some would say libertarian. I would prefer Ron Paul or Herman Cain, why would I preted to like someone who isn't going to get elected?

All you have done is made an ad hominem attack.

I'm against free trade, that makes me a liberal? When people devalue currencies you have to take action. Read up on Alexander Hamilton and how this country actually paid to exist. America is the biggest consumption market, I am the first to admit that's a disadvantage, however, if you can pay off debt it becomes a huge advantage. Free trade only works when a country has a trade surplus otherwise it plagues a country. Secondly, every country besides us makes taxes in other forms, for instance all drinks that are imported in to Mexico have to be on plastic crates made in mexico. People have to get paid to change the crates, or people have to pay to buy this crates and shipped. Everyother country adds some kind of tax in a round about way besides us so I say eliminate it. You want to play that game, this is what happens. Free trade is a joke that has been imposed on people who can't think for themselves.

Romney will offer little other solutions vastly different from Obama, same with Perry. They have not shown any will to do so in how they have ran their campaign. They tell you what they think you want to hear like Obama. This is vindictive of the way they will rule, only difference will be instead of the president sympathizing with the lefts frustration he will be playing that game with the right.

BTW- Ron Paul will not pull 5% of the vote, he is a purist and a isolationist, he is also a nut case that blames America for the 9-11 attacks. He is naive to think that terrorists will leave us alone if we just pull out of their countries and leave them alone. Their entire and complete goal is to convert the world, the entire world, to radical islam and sharia law. They will kill you, your family, your freinds in order to accomplish this, it's dangerously naive to think any differently. They would have killed all of us on 9-11 if they could have done so, they are radical, indifferent to death, they do not fear death, in fact they become matrys in Allah's eyes when they murder innocense, they truly beleive that there are 72 virgins waiting for them. They are honored in their countries of origin and looked to as hero's, in fact, the young men and women in these countries train to murder as they beleive this so fearlessly. It is their ultimate goal to die for Allah and their goal of converting the WORLD to radical Islam.

 

[LOki]

if they would rather have 4 more years of Obama, than Romney.

LOLsome. This is like asking, "Would you rather have a grilled-cheese sandwich, or a grilled-cheese sandwich."

Because Romney is the ONLY GOP candidate with a realistic chance of defeating 9 % unemployment Obama in 2012. Even if the economy gets worse.

Wow. Utter failure to see the familiarity of relationship in Romneycare and unemployment in Massachusetts; and Obamacare and unemployment nationally.

Newsflash: Despite the propaganda pronouncing the contrary so that your choice of candidate is an emotional choice rather than a rational choice, Obama and Romney belong to the same political party.

There is very little familiarity or relationship between the bill passed in Ma and Obamacare. Romney's plan used the free market system and it dealt ONLY with the 7% in his state that could afford health care insurance but choose to let "you" flip the bill in higher premiums and higher taxes. Obama care is designed to push us all towards a one payer system in which the Federal government is in charge of all your health care. Obama care raises taxes, Romney's doesn't. Obama care reduces medicare by 500 billion dollars, Romney didn't. Romney expanded HSA's health savings plans, these are high deductible plans that use pre-tax dollars, he set up exchanges so that individuals could shop for the coverage they need to find the best deals, he was successful. He has stated over and over and over again that this is a state's issue and that yes he would have changed some things in the plan. He had an 85% democratic legislature to deal with and vetoed several items but was overridden by the democrat legislature. He has also stated over and over and over again that he would repeal Obamacare, and would issue a mandate on his first day a waiver for all 50 states on Obamacare, until he gets it repealed.

Seems weird considering the claims that Obamacare was modeled after Romneycare.

And of course the Governor of MA can't institute changes in federal policies.

It helps to read a little before you make a stand or a judgement on anything. This is all documented and available for your reading.

Well, that's what I read.

BTW- how do you legislate personal behavior?

Why ask me? I have nothing in common with statists who wish to legislate personal behavior.

Personal behavior is a Republican platform, we beleive that people should take responsibility for their own actions and behavior.

You mean dictating personal behavior according to superstitions brewed up in the Middle Eastern rock-chucking tradition.

How would you legislate personal behavior, because I am sick and tired of paying or flipping the bill for people who can afford their own insurance policy, yet don't.

Well I certainly wouldn't support any plan that guarantees premiums for insurance companies by forcing people to buy insurance--directly or indirectly through subsidies paid with higher taxes.

So how would you do it, you obviously don't want a mandate, so if you don't, how are you going to get people who can afford to pay for their own policy, yet don't.

Deny them a policy. Was that a trick question?

That's the question and I have yet to get an answer, and don't tell me that we should refuse health care to these individuals because it will never not ever happen.

Healthcare costs are not the same thing as healthcare prices. The high price of healthcare services is due to a healthcare insurance system that is insulated from market forces.

"Insuring primary care is like insuring lunch," says Nick Hanauer of Second Avenue Partners, a Seattle venture-capital fund. "You know you're going to need it. You know you can afford it. Why on earth would you pay a third party to pay the restaurant on your behalf, adding overhead and taking a big chunk out of the money you pay—and because of the process, have to wait a week to get a table and then have only 10 minutes to eat?"

There is certainly a role for insurance to play in the health care industry, but it's not a role mandated by the government, it not a role performed by the government, and it really shouldn't be involved in routine primary care.

 

[Wacky Quacky]

Trade is your issue, I am assuming, then it might be helpful for you to know that it's also Mitt Romney's issue. I suggest you read his policy on trade, he wants free trade, but it has got to be FAIR trade, he wants to implement a Reagan era trade policy in which China can't manipulate it's currency and for those that don't trade fairly we don't trade with. It's all in his job's plan he addresses it completely. I suggest you read it. BTW Reagan created 20 million new jobs. In fact, Romney is the ONLY candidate that has addressed trade.

It is on page 69 of his job's plan.

And you believe him?? Fact is, Romney supports free trade policies, in fact he wants a shit ton more of them. Whether or not they will be "fair" is in the eyes of the beholder. Most politicians today seem to think that our current trade policies are "fair" because they stock our store shelves with cheap crap. Romney's plan and talk are just that, him talking about a plan to win votes. I have little to no doubt in my mind that Romney will not do a single damn thing about our trade policies besides continue on the current path. Why? Because his record shows him to be a establishment, status quo, empty suit politician just like the rest of them.

If the Tea Party does bow out and vote for Romney, then they loose any and all sway they had. The establishment will know that when it comes down to it, the Tea Party will still just vote for any random Republican with no regard to their values. The Tea Party will be all but finished.

 

[CT9]

Trade is my issue haha, I know what you said about Paul, but what can I do? I'm not going to sop believing that because some dude thinks their is a difference between Obama and Romney.

and good post Wacky, I couldn't of said it better myself

 

[JoeB131]

if they would rather have 4 more years of Obama, than Romney.

Because Romney is the ONLY GOP candidate with a realistic chance of defeating 9 % unemployment Obama in 2012. Even if the economy gets worse.

Perry is TOAST with his pathetic perf in the 3 debates.

Cain and Paul are niche candidates who have no chance of winning a general election.

Chrisitie doesn't seem to want to run -and he reminds me of Mario Cuomo - who back in the 80s everybody was begging to run for president (reason escaped me)

If the GOP's conservative message is so poorly regarded by Americans that the only way to sneak it in is to run a RINO who focus group tests every speech to not offend anyone, it's a pretty weak message, isn't it?

Romney is unelectable because he's got a weird religion, he's made his money ruining people's lives, because he's a phony. Considering that with 9% unemployment, the only weapon Obama's got is to play the Class Warfare Card, Romney is pretty much a villian from central casting.

"I look like the guy you work with, Romney looks like the guy who lays you off." - Mike Huckabee.

 

[Valerie]

Its wayyy too early to start thinking about who will win in 2012. Romney is a class act. He polished his act since last time. Some of the young guns hope to gain experience and build an organization for 2016 or 2020, like Chris Christie, Rick Santorum, Marco Rubio, Tim Pawlenty, Paul Ryan....no women?....

Mitt is like a cat playing with a mouse with nowhere to run. He knows that when the actual delegates get picked he wins. Then he knows that during the presidential election, it will be like 2008 only in reverse....

Romney will loose because thats all he is, an act. He has so many flip flops that someone started a website just of his flip flops.

What he is is just another spoiled rotton prety boy with lots of money. He is a piece of shit scumbag that is the spitting image of whats wrong with this country. Do you really think the public is going to continue to accept manufactured candidates forever??

Allegations of votor fraud, allegations of election funding fraud with perry in texas, so many flip flops there is no hope of knowing how he is going to behave once elected. Then you have the issues with his business ventures...

As far as flip-flop you must mean his position on abortion, I too have changed my mind on that as I am sure most who " think" have. It's a difficult topic and one that takes years of maturity and knowledge to make. Romney is a conservative, has been one and was unfortunate enough to be a governor in a deep, deep blue state where 85% of the legislature was democratic. In other words, he did not have his way with them, what he did do was quite an accomplishment considering that the deck was stacked against him.

Yep, it is just another way the reactionaries attack Romney... That he is supposedly such a big "flip-flopper" but in reality there is no substance there. So once we get past..He a Mormon..He's a flip-flopper..All they have left is the health care which if ANY of these candidates is smart enough get us out of this mess, it is Mitt.

 

[WatertheTree]

Their is little difference between Obama and Romney. No matter what he says he is what he is, and I doubt he will come up with the solutions and focus on the problems we need too. So I wouldn't consider myself a tea partier, but I agree with them on a lot of stuff, as well as disagree, and Romney is simply not for me. Romney, Obama, Bush, Perry, there is essentially little difference.

You are not fooling me at all, if you liken Romney or any other GOP candidates with Obama, you are either extremely mis-informed or a far left wing nut trying to pretend you actually are a Republican or a tea party member as there are extreme differences between all the GOP candidates and Obama.

Obama is a full blown socialist with marixt leanings.

" Socialism is the philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, the gospel of envy, it's only virtue is the shared equality of misery." Winston Churchill.

No, I agree with him. Zero difference between Romney and Obama.

Mark my words, zero change in policy if we transition from Obama regime to Romney.

No change in domestic policy, and no change in foriegn policy.

They are both establishment men, corporate men. They like things just the way they are, thats why neither one of them have done -anything- to change current policy.

 

[Valerie]

Please, Mitt Romney is NOTHING like Obama.



How sad all the delusional revolutionaries will be so disappointed next year...

 

[JoeB131]

Please, Mitt Romney is NOTHING like Obama.

How sad all the delusional revolutionaries will be so disappointed next year...

Only disappointed people will be Romney's supporters when he loses.

 

[Valerie]

Please, Mitt Romney is NOTHING like Obama.

How sad all the delusional revolutionaries will be so disappointed next year...

Only disappointed people will be Romney's supporters when he loses.

That would just leave a lot of people disappointed in another 4 years of Obama.

 

[JoeB131]

Please, Mitt Romney is NOTHING like Obama.

How sad all the delusional revolutionaries will be so disappointed next year...

Only disappointed people will be Romney's supporters when he loses.

That would just leave a lot of people disappointed in another 4 years of Obama.

Probably.

But nominate Romney, that's what you'll get.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Etownp_Rmw&feature=related]Hitchens & Dawkins Expose Mormon Religion - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Valerie]

Only disappointed people will be Romney's supporters when he loses.

That would just leave a lot of people disappointed in another 4 years of Obama.

Probably.

But nominate Romney, that's what you'll get.

See all you want to do is put down his religion. Sad, you can't address how it might actually effect anything if he became president...


http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/188426-leading-gop-candidate-a-cult-member-3.html#post4243650

 

[Full-Auto]

That would just leave a lot of people disappointed in another 4 years of Obama.

Probably.

But nominate Romney, that's what you'll get.

See all you want to do is put down his religion. Sad, you can't address how it might actually effect anything if he became president...


http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/188426-leading-gop-candidate-a-cult-member-3.html#post4243650

I dont care about his religion............ However I see him as a big government politician. That will not get my vote.

 

[Valerie]

...



"America faces a new generation of challenges. Radical violent Islam seeks to destroy us. An emerging China endeavors to surpass our economic leadership. And we are troubled at home by government overspending, overuse of foreign oil, and the breakdown of the family.

"Over the last year, we have embarked on a national debate on how best to preserve American leadership. Today, I wish to address a topic which I believe is fundamental to America's greatness: our religious liberty. I will also offer perspectives on how my own faith would inform my presidency, if I were elected.

"There are some who may feel that religion is not a matter to be seriously considered in the context of the weighty threats that face us. If so, they are at odds with the nation's founders, for they, when our nation faced its greatest peril, sought the blessings of the Creator. And further, they discovered the essential connection between the survival of a free land and the protection of religious freedom. In John Adams' words: 'We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion... Our constitution was made for a moral and religious people.'

"Freedom requires religion just as religion requires freedom. Freedom opens the windows of the soul so that man can discover his most profound beliefs and commune with God. Freedom and religion endure together, or perish alone.

"Given our grand tradition of religious tolerance and liberty, some wonder whether there are any questions regarding an aspiring candidate's religion that are appropriate. I believe there are. And I will answer them today.

"Almost 50 years ago another candidate from Massachusetts explained that he was an American running for president, not a Catholic running for president. Like him, I am an American running for president. I do not define my candidacy by my religion. A person should not be elected because of his faith nor should he be rejected because of his faith.

"Let me assure you that no authorities of my church, or of any other church for that matter, will ever exert influence on presidential decisions. Their authority is theirs, within the province of church affairs, and it ends where the affairs of the nation begin.

"As governor, I tried to do the right as best I knew it, serving the law and answering to the Constitution. I did not confuse the particular teachings of my church with the obligations of the office and of the Constitution - and of course, I would not do so as president. I will put no doctrine of any church above the plain duties of the office and the sovereign authority of the law.

"As a young man, Lincoln described what he called America's 'political religion' - the commitment to defend the rule of law and the Constitution. When I place my hand on the Bible and take the oath of office, that oath becomes my highest promise to God. If I am fortunate to become your president, I will serve no one religion, no one group, no one cause, and no one interest. A president must serve only the common cause of the people of the United States.

"There are some for whom these commitments are not enough. They would prefer it if I would simply distance myself from my religion, say that it is more a tradition than my personal conviction, or disavow one or another of its precepts. That I will not do. I believe in my Mormon faith and I endeavor to live by it. My faith is the faith of my fathers - I will be true to them and to my beliefs.

"Some believe that such a confession of my faith will sink my candidacy. If they are right, so be it. But I think they underestimate the American people. Americans do not respect believers of convenience.

Americans tire of those who would jettison their beliefs, even to gain the world.

"There is one fundamental question about which I often am asked. What do I believe about Jesus Christ? I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Savior of mankind. My church's beliefs about Christ may not all be the same as those of other faiths. Each religion has its own unique doctrines and history. These are not bases for criticism but rather a test of our tolerance. Religious tolerance would be a shallow principle indeed if it were reserved only for faiths with which we agree.

"There are some who would have a presidential candidate describe and explain his church's distinctive doctrines. To do so would enable the very religious test the founders prohibited in the Constitution. No candidate should become the spokesman for his faith. For if he becomes president he will need the prayers of the people of all faiths.

"I believe that every faith I have encountered draws its adherents closer to God. And in every faith I have come to know, there are features I wish were in my own: I love the profound ceremony of the Catholic Mass, the approachability of God in the prayers of the Evangelicals, the tenderness of spirit among the Pentecostals, the confident independence of the Lutherans, the ancient traditions of the Jews, unchanged through the ages, and the commitment to frequent prayer of the Muslims. As I travel across the country and see our towns and cities, I am always moved by the many houses of worship with their steeples, all pointing to heaven, reminding us of the source of life's blessings.

"It is important to recognize that while differences in theology exist between the churches in America, we share a common creed of moral convictions. And where the affairs of our nation are concerned, it's usually a sound rule to focus on the latter - on the great moral principles that urge us all on a common course. Whether it was the cause of abolition, or civil rights, or the right to life itself, no movement of conscience can succeed in America that cannot speak to the convictions of religious people.

"We separate church and state affairs in this country, and for good reason. No religion should dictate to the state nor should the state interfere with the free practice of religion. But in recent years, the notion of the separation of church and state has been taken by some well beyond its original meaning. They seek to remove from the public domain any acknowledgment of God. Religion is seen as merely a private affair with no place in public life. It is as if they are intent on establishing a new religion in America - the religion of secularism. They are wrong.

"The founders proscribed the establishment of a state religion, but they did not countenance the elimination of religion from the public square. We are a nation 'Under God' and in God, we do indeed trust.

"We should acknowledge the Creator as did the Founders - in ceremony and word. He should remain on our currency, in our pledge, in the teaching of our history, and during the holiday season, nativity scenes and menorahs should be welcome in our public places. Our greatness would not long endure without judges who respect the foundation of faith upon which our constitution rests. I will take care to separate the affairs of government from any religion, but I will not separate us from 'the God who gave us liberty.'

"Nor would I separate us from our religious heritage. Perhaps the most important question to ask a person of faith who seeks a political office, is this: does he share these American values: the equality of human kind, the obligation to serve one another, and a steadfast commitment to liberty?

"They are not unique to any one denomination. They belong to the great moral inheritance we hold in common. They are the firm ground on which Americans of different faiths meet and stand as a nation, united.

"We believe that every single human being is a child of God - we are all part of the human family. The conviction of the inherent and inalienable worth of every life is still the most revolutionary political proposition ever advanced. John Adams put it that we are 'thrown into the world all equal and alike.'

"The consequence of our common humanity is our responsibility to one another, to our fellow Americans foremost, but also to every child of God. It is an obligation which is fulfilled by Americans every day, here and across the globe, without regard to creed or race or nationality.

"Americans acknowledge that liberty is a gift of God, not an indulgence of government. No people in the history of the world have sacrificed as much for liberty. The lives of hundreds of thousands of America's sons and daughters were laid down during the last century to preserve freedom, for us and for freedom loving people throughout the world. America took nothing from that Century's terrible wars - no land from Germany or Japan or Korea; no treasure; no oath of fealty. America's resolve in the defense of liberty has been tested time and again. It has not been found wanting, nor must it ever be. America must never falter in holding high the banner of freedom.

"These American values, this great moral heritage, is shared and lived in my religion as it is in yours. I was taught in my home to honor God and love my neighbor. I saw my father march with Martin Luther King. I saw my parents provide compassionate care to others, in personal ways to people nearby, and in just as consequential ways in leading national volunteer movements. I am moved by the Lord's words: 'For I was an hungered, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: naked, and ye clothed me...'

"My faith is grounded on these truths. You can witness them in Ann and my marriage and in our family. We are a long way from perfect and we have surely stumbled along the way, but our aspirations, our values, are the self-same as those from the other faiths that stand upon this common foundation. And these convictions will indeed inform my presidency.

"Today's generations of Americans have always known religious liberty. Perhaps we forget the long and arduous path our nation's forbearers took to achieve it. They came here from England to seek freedom of religion. But upon finding it for themselves, they at first denied it to others. Because of their diverse beliefs, Ann Hutchinson was exiled from Massachusetts Bay, a banished Roger Williams founded Rhode Island, and two centuries later, Brigham Young set out for the West. Americans were unable to accommodate their commitment to their own faith with an appreciation for the convictions of others to different faiths. In this, they were very much like those of the European nations they had left.

"It was in Philadelphia that our founding fathers defined a revolutionary vision of liberty, grounded on self evident truths about the equality of all, and the inalienable rights with which each is endowed by his Creator.

"We cherish these sacred rights, and secure them in our Constitutional order. Foremost do we protect religious liberty, not as a matter of policy but as a matter of right. There will be no established church, and we are guaranteed the free exercise of our religion.


cont...


Transcript: Mitt Romney's Faith Speech : NPR

^

 

[JoeB131]

That would just leave a lot of people disappointed in another 4 years of Obama.

Probably.

But nominate Romney, that's what you'll get.

See all you want to do is put down his religion. Sad, you can't address how it might actually effect anything if he became president...


http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/188426-leading-gop-candidate-a-cult-member-3.html#post4243650

Well, as far as I'm concerned, the discussion was over the minute I found out he was a Mormon. So the discussion about supporting Romney for me was over in 2007. Why are we still talking about this?

Oh, yeah, because Romney's ability to spend his nine-figure fortune makes him a formidable candidate even though he has little in common with the GOP Base on religion, government, politics or morals.