FordBuyer Posted July 4, 2012 Share Posted July 4, 2012 My prediction is that there will be much controversy and media attention over Romney's business dealings and income for many years to come if he wins the election. And couple that with the rights vicious attace of Obama over last four years, and you know the Demos will be on attack big time. No one even knows what Romney is really worth since he is so secretive about his net worth. That's fine for private citizen, but not when you run for President. I should know his net worth almost to the penny and who he is beholding to if he is rerpresenting me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FordBuyer Posted July 4, 2012 Share Posted July 4, 2012 Click here: Mitt Romney's offshore assets hint at larger fortune | Nation/World | Detroit Free Press | freep.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Gilmore Posted July 4, 2012 Share Posted July 4, 2012 How about the gridlock that has ensued ever since? Good for the country? The tea party is a joke because they try to present themselves as anything BUT ultra-conservatives. The truth is, that's all they are. Love the way they think of only themselves as "patriots". That level of silliness is no better than OWS. Just as the pendulum swings towards conservatism, it will swing back to liberalism, and hopefully someday back somewhere center. It's nice how you ignore history and facts. In 2006, the Dems took control of the Senate and Congress and made it their mission to prevent another Repub from being in the White House. They were successful, and in 2008 had full control of the Government. Problem is, in 2010 the voters didn't like the direction the Dems were taking the country, and voted the Tea Party in to do something about it. And that's exactly what the Tea Party is doing. The Tea Party is doing what the people asked them to do, and Dems either can't understand it, or are pissed off about it (let's be honest, the people don't want Obamacare, and they do want the Keystone Pipeline, and we see how the Left feels about those things) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Gilmore Posted July 4, 2012 Share Posted July 4, 2012 Click here: Mitt Romney's offshore assets hint at larger fortune | Nation/World | Detroit Free Press | freep.com I can only wish you people spent half as much time and energy looking into Obama's past, that you have looking into Romney's Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rn4 Posted July 4, 2012 Share Posted July 4, 2012 Happy are you Canadian, if so don't worry about Romney or Obama doesn't concern you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark B. Morrow Posted July 4, 2012 Share Posted July 4, 2012 By the way - Red State / Blue State / whatever - I have found myself spontaneously whistling "Going Fishing" throughout the day. My condolences to the people of your fine state for the passing of a fine native son RangerM. Speaking of the good old days, when even the smallest town could afford to get the Sheriff a new Ford police car every year and two guys travelling the country working odd jobs could have a new Corvette. RIP Andy, you were a class act. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
napfirst Posted July 4, 2012 Share Posted July 4, 2012 All this political bullshit. Who cares. All I care about is a Congress that gets things done for us, the people. Like maybe $10 in long term debt cuts for every $1 in revenue raised. Maybe adopting lots of Simpson-Bowles spending cuts and revenue enhancements. Instead, the House is dominated by NIHILIST Tea Baggers that are nothing more than obstructionists that want to defeat a sitting President even if the whole country goes down with the ship. They spend their days voting for bullshit policy that will never see the light of day much less be signed by President while the red ink flows even more. They talk about jobs, but won't approve any job plans by other side no matter how effective. It took many extra months just to get a highway bill through Congress to keep thousands of construction workers working because the NIHILISTS didn't like the Complete Streets program that actually helps keep pedestrians alive and communities walkable. The NIHILISTS want to turn the clock back and revisit an America that was never that great in the first place with even more poverty, dirty air, and toxic ground. I don't remember you being on here, during the time the dems had complete control of the government, touting the virtues of bipartisan cooperation and spending cuts....I'm sure you remember....$860 billion stimulus that was suppose to keep unemployment below 8%......when the dems shoved obamacare down the throats of Americans using every possible under handed means to circumvent to the normal legislative process...backroom deals....now you want everyone to work together....the 2010 elections changed all that.....and there's bigger change coming this Nov.....you libs see that and know that he's going to get his ass kicked along with dem senators....especially since it has been determined that obamacare will produce the largest tax increase on the middle class ...ever!...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Gilmore Posted July 4, 2012 Share Posted July 4, 2012 Happy are you Canadian, if so don't worry about Romney or Obama doesn't concern you. You're absolutely right. The death of the United States economy will have no effect on any other nation, especially their closest trading partner. Again, do you know how stupid you sound every time you post? (don't worry, I'm sure one of the Obama apologist will come in and respond for you while you hide out) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted July 4, 2012 Author Share Posted July 4, 2012 You're absolutely right. The death of the United States economy Take a pill and get happy. The United States' economy is not going to die, because there are 350 million people who need things. The economy has changed and will keep changing. It might get bigger, it might get smaller over time, but it won't be dying. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FordBuyer Posted July 4, 2012 Share Posted July 4, 2012 I don't remember you being on here, during the time the dems had complete control of the government, touting the virtues of bipartisan cooperation and spending cuts....I'm sure you remember....$860 billion stimulus that was suppose to keep unemployment below 8%......when the dems shoved obamacare down the throats of Americans using every possible under handed means to circumvent to the normal legislative process...backroom deals....now you want everyone to work together....the 2010 elections changed all that.....and there's bigger change coming this Nov.....you libs see that and know that he's going to get his ass kicked along with dem senators....especially since it has been determined that obamacare will produce the largest tax increase on the middle class ...ever!...... Obamacare got so watered down that it's hardly recognizable after all the compromises to get the votes from conservative Demos. The health care exchanges each state sets up will be private sector insurers. And small business owners with less than 50 employees get tax incentives for supplying healthcare to their employees. Hardly socialist to me. Medicare is arguably socialist, but not Obamacare. As for stimulus spending, I supported it for most part, but thought it could have been targeted much better. We tend to forget how dark those days were as Bush handed power over to Obama with the credit markets completely frozen. My big disappointment with Obama is that his leadership skills are average at best, he is too detached, and many of his programs lack creativity and are for most part very conventional and not innovative in large part. This country needs an extraordinary President, and sadly there are none in sight to lead the nation and congress to do the right things. However, Obama has four years of experience and no time to put in a rookie who talks recklessly about the deficit, education, environment, and overseas. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rn4 Posted July 4, 2012 Share Posted July 4, 2012 Obamacare got so watered down that it's hardly recognizable after all the compromises to get the votes from conservative Demos. The health care exchanges each state sets up will be private sector insurers. And small business owners with less than 50 employees get tax incentives for supplying healthcare to their employees. Hardly socialist to me. Medicare is arguably socialist, but not Obamacare. As for stimulus spending, I supported it for most part, but thought it could have been targeted much better. We tend to forget how dark those days were as Bush handed power over to Obama with the credit markets completely frozen. My big disappointment with Obama is that his leadership skills are average at best, he is too detached, and many of his programs lack creativity and are for most part very conventional and not innovative in large part. This country needs an extraordinary President, and sadly there are none in sight to lead the nation and congress to do the right things. However, Obama has four years of experience and no time to put in a rookie who talks recklessly about the deficit, education, environment, and overseas. No matter who is President, it won't make any difference if congress doesn't start working together for the betterment of the country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rn4 Posted July 4, 2012 Share Posted July 4, 2012 You're absolutely right. The death of the United States economy will have no effect on any other nation, especially their closest trading partner. Again, do you know how stupid you sound every time you post? (don't worry, I'm sure one of the Obama apologist will come in and respond for you while you hide out) You really are a Richard Cranium. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
napfirst Posted July 4, 2012 Share Posted July 4, 2012 However, Obama has four years of experience and no time to put in a rookie who talks recklessly about the deficit, education, environment, and overseas. Now that's funny right there.......you were kidding right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FordBuyer Posted July 4, 2012 Share Posted July 4, 2012 Now that's funny right there.......you were kidding right? Which one has been President last four years? And which one has taken out more top terrorists than Bush did in 6 years with Drones? While Romney has been spouting off forever about what he would do if he were President, Obama has been in the driver's seat doing it. We get it....Romney wouldn't have saved the U.S. auto industry and he would have started new wars with Syria and Iran. Unfunded of course and balanced the federal budget deficit at same time. Or maybe Romney would have used Bain Capital money to fund auto managed bankruptcy and fund new wars in Middle East. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
napfirst Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Which one has been President last four years? And which one has taken out more top terrorists than Bush did in 6 years with Drones? While Romney has been spouting off forever about what he would do if he were President, Obama has been in the driver's seat doing it. We get it....Romney wouldn't have saved the U.S. auto industry and he would have started new wars with Syria and Iran. Unfunded of course and balanced the federal budget deficit at same time. Or maybe Romney would have used Bain Capital money to fund auto managed bankruptcy and fund new wars in Middle East. cut it out man...you've got me laughing so hard my sides hurt......Remember; "Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity" Dr. M. L. King Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark B. Morrow Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 cut it out man...you've got me laughing so hard my sides hurt......Remember; "Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity" Dr. M. L. King You want to tell us what he said that wasn't true? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
napfirst Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 You want to tell us what he said that wasn't true? Not you too Mark!.....you guys are running scared..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted July 5, 2012 Author Share Posted July 5, 2012 Now that's funny right there.......you were kidding right? Hey, everybody's sense of humor is different — now Mitt and Foreign Policy? How is it possible for a Gopper to be that ignorant? Now, that's funny! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerM Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 (edited) This country needs an extraordinary President, and sadly there are none in sight to lead the nation and congress to do the right things. However, Obama has four years of experience and no time to put in a rookie who talks recklessly about the deficit, education, environment, and overseas. While he has done some things correctly, President Obama has also been reckless in his own right--stimulus, Lilly Ledbetter Act, Obamacare, various Executive Orders, and the constant threat of taxing the economy into submission to support his ever-expanding vision of government. How can a President who speaks of "taxes to pay off the debt" when he has yet to propose (much less operate under) a balanced budget not be thought of as reckless? How can a President who believes the Government can tame (and coordinate) an additional 16% of the economy, when it hasn't proven it with the percentage under it's control now not be thought of as reckless? President Obama may have 4 years experience, but America also has 4 years experience under President Obama. Edited July 5, 2012 by RangerM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FordBuyer Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 While he has done some things correctly, President Obama has also been reckless in his own right--stimulus, Lilly Ledbetter Act, Obamacare, various Executive Orders, and the constant threat of taxing the economy into submission to support his ever-expanding vision of government. How can a President who speaks of "taxes to pay off the debt" when he has yet to propose (much less operate under) a balanced budget not be thought of as reckless? How can a President who believes the Government can tame (and coordinate) an additional 16% of the economy, when it hasn't proven it with the percentage under it's control now not be thought of as reckless? President Obama may have 4 years experience, but America also has 4 years experience under President Obama. Hard for me to believe that so soon after the financial collapse and still so much collateral damage (housing) about, we now want to go back to a guy who made his money pulling off complicated financial deals much like what got us into this mess in the first place. And it still goes on like with Chase recently and now Barclay. It seems to me during the Bush years, Ford closed down Wixom, Edison, Norfork, and many other big and small plants, and now under Obama is expanding and adding thousands of workers. Ditto GM and Chrysler with Nissan and Toyota opening up mothballed American plants. Believe it or not, I blame Clinton for the Enron and Dot Com mess also. Whoever is President at time gets the credit or blame whether he deserves it or not. I also credit Obama for getting us out of Iraq, getting Bin Laden, killing most of the top terrorist leaders in general, and shooting the Somali pirates. And I blame Obama for keeping us in that can't win war in Afghanistan with boots on the ground. Foreign policy is every bit as important as domestic policy, and while I'm not completely happy with Obama's foreign policy in Afghanistan, I don't trust Romney at all with his saber rattling at a time when we are flat broke and have no business invading other people's land. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 It seems to me during the Bush years, Ford closed down Wixom, Edison, Norfork, and many other big and small plants, and now under Obama is expanding and adding thousands of workers. If Ford hadn't closed those plants during the Bush years they would have been going through a bankruptcy during the Obama years, just like their cross-town rivals. I don't see how you can possibly relate that move to anything that was going on inside the White House at the time. Ridiculous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FordBuyer Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 If Ford hadn't closed those plants during the Bush years they would have been going through a bankruptcy during the Obama years, just like their cross-town rivals. I don't see how you can possibly relate that move to anything that was going on inside the White House at the time. Ridiculous. That's politics as you take my quote out of context. The Repubs blame Obama when gas prices hit $4 and give him no credit when gas prices recently hit $3.20 around here. So if Ford almost goes out of business under Bush, I blame Bush. If Ford does well under Obama, I credit Obama. Blame or not, Hoover got the blame for Depression. If candidates don't like this, then they shouldn't run. President's are blamed for everything that happens on their watch. The economy is ONE big business cycle, and as President you catch the cycle going up, you get credit, and if you catch cycle going down, you get the blame deservedly or not. Thought you knew that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 That's politics as you take my quote out of context. The Repubs blame Obama when gas prices hit $4 and give him no credit when gas prices recently hit $3.20 around here. So if Ford almost goes out of business under Bush, I blame Bush. If Ford does well under Obama, I credit Obama. Blame or not, Hoover got the blame for Depression. If candidates don't like this, then they shouldn't run. President's are blamed for everything that happens on their watch. The economy is ONE big business cycle, and as President you catch the cycle going up, you get credit, and if you catch cycle going down, you get the blame deservedly or not. Thought you knew that. Yes, politicians should expect it. That does not mean you should openly admit and celebrate being part of the problem. Rise above it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerM Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 Perhaps a couple of pertinent questions should be..... Am I better off than I was four years ago? Do I have more or less freedom than I had four years ago? After four years of Obama, my answers would be "yes" and "less". And I can credit Obama for one and not the other. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Gilmore Posted July 5, 2012 Share Posted July 5, 2012 If Ford hadn't closed those plants during the Bush years they would have been going through a bankruptcy during the Obama years, just like their cross-town rivals. I don't see how you can possibly relate that move to anything that was going on inside the White House at the time. Ridiculous. They're so desperate to make Obama look good on something, they'd give him credit for the sun coming up in the morning if they could. The praise for killing OBL is as ridiculous as the statement that most other Americans wouldn't have had the guts to make that call. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.