You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 07, 2016, 04:06:55 PM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: So... Mitt Romney  (Read 15490 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline kckolbe

Re: So... Mitt Romney
« Reply #150 on: September 19, 2012, 03:50:21 PM »
As has been said here before, Romney is not the only option if you don't want to vote for Obama.  Even though no third party candidate has much of a chance this go round, if you don't start voting for people we want things will not improve.  However, if third party candidates start getting larger turnouts, Democrats and Republicans will eventually see that their shit isn't being tolerated any more.

Offline Callie Del Noire

Re: So... Mitt Romney
« Reply #151 on: September 19, 2012, 04:02:26 PM »
A lot of Republicans have talking about massively reducing or eliminating the FDA, as well as pushing through a lot of deregulations in farming and food handling. As someone's who's suffered serious food poisoning from mishandled food, I cannot help but be horrified by their plans, and speak out against it.

As do I.. I was floored with a case of food poisoning for a week and a half and had two coworkers who were literally on an IV after being poisoned by mishandled/labeled food.

I'm also stunned that depending on which state you published in, that you couldn't publish the Jungle by Upton Sinclair if it was printed today. It is ILLEGAL in some states to state such things about the meatpacking industry.

Offline Vekseid

Re: So... Mitt Romney
« Reply #152 on: September 19, 2012, 04:51:20 PM »
I'm also stunned that depending on which state you published in, that you couldn't publish the Jungle by Upton Sinclair if it was printed today. It is ILLEGAL in some states to state such things about the meatpacking industry.

I can't picture that one flying in court. As extremist as the Supreme Court may seem, this is still the one that 9-0'd the CDA and Clarence Thomas was a part of that court.

Offline Trieste

  • Faerie Queen; Her Imperial Lubemajesty; Willing Victim
  • Dame
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Apr 2005
  • Location: In the middle of Happily Ever After with a dark Prince Charming.
  • Gender: Female
  • I am many things - dull is not one of them.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 4
Re: So... Mitt Romney
« Reply #153 on: September 20, 2012, 05:22:34 PM »

Offline MasterMischief

Re: So... Mitt Romney
« Reply #154 on: September 20, 2012, 07:51:26 PM »
In such a wealthy nation like the US, yeah...I think we should be able to feed everyone.  If that makes me a US hating, pinko, commie scum...so be it.

Watching Rmoney implode on himself...priceless.

Offline Chelemar

Re: So... Mitt Romney
« Reply #155 on: September 20, 2012, 11:04:38 PM »
Quote
As has been said here before, Romney is not the only option if you don't want to vote for Obama.  Even though no third party candidate has much of a chance this go round, if you don't start voting for people we want things will not improve.  However, if third party candidates start getting larger turnouts, Democrats and Republicans will eventually see that their shit isn't being tolerated any more.

Or, you end up splitting the vote and the one whom is really awful, whose policies are just beyond acceptable gets elected. 

Offline Luna

  • Muse's Blessing ~ Shadowsmaiden's little Koneko-chan
  • Champion
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: May 2012
  • Location: The deep end of the gene pool
  • Gender: Female
  • My soul is painted like the wings of butterflies
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: So... Mitt Romney
« Reply #156 on: September 22, 2012, 11:41:27 AM »
I just want to add to whatever I said, that Willard has now admitted he isn't fit to be president. In a previous interview, he stated that if someone were to voluntarily pay more taxes than they needed to, they wouldn't be fit to lead the country.

Now he has released last year's taxes and, lo and behold, he payed more taxes than he was required to.

I think it's time to put this one to bed, folks. (which is where I should be going, too)

Offline BeorningTopic starter

Re: So... Mitt Romney
« Reply #157 on: September 22, 2012, 04:39:03 PM »
Okay, soooo...

From what I've gathered from the discussion is that most of you don't like Romney at all. Simply put, you think that he'd make an awful president.

Meanwhile, today I just watched a TV debate by two (non-US) experts. And they seemed to agree that Romney would be an very good president...

Poof! My brain just blew... I don't know what to think at all :o

Offline Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: So... Mitt Romney
« Reply #158 on: September 22, 2012, 05:03:11 PM »
The man has shown little skill for diplomacy, which has been shown in both his domestic and foreign appearances (the man scheduled a fund-raising dinner in Israel on a fasting holy day, and insulted the UK about how they were handling the Olympics!)  In the current world climate, diplomacy is a very important skill to have.  Regardless of how I feel about his stance on the issues, I really don't see him as presidential material.  Running a country is not the same thing as running a business.

Offline Trieste

  • Faerie Queen; Her Imperial Lubemajesty; Willing Victim
  • Dame
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Apr 2005
  • Location: In the middle of Happily Ever After with a dark Prince Charming.
  • Gender: Female
  • I am many things - dull is not one of them.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 4
Re: So... Mitt Romney
« Reply #159 on: September 22, 2012, 05:15:23 PM »
Maybe his skillset is more suited to being president. Perhaps his life experience and his time as Governor places him firmly in the "better-qualified" column. But I don't trust the man. He has no integrity. He has no inner core. And he has no real platform; he contradicts himself constantly. So... sure, he's better-qualified, but better-qualified to do what? In what direction will he steer our country? Will he go to war with Iran? Will he privatize Social Security? Will he repeal so-called "Obamacare"? And will he actually replace it, or will he just let things sink back to where they were before? Will he actually care about the college debt crisis that is mounting? What about credit card debt? What will he do to get the banks moving, investing, lending again? I mean, I think he's answered all of these questions - possibly twice - but he is not a man of his word. I believe that Obama may not get everything done that he set out to do but I believe that he will at least set out to do them. With Romney, I don't believe that. I don't have faith in him. It has little to do with Republican or Democrat - it's that he has no honor. I expect my leader to have honor.

Offline JadenMystic

  • “You've gotta dance like there's nobody watching, Love like you'll never be hurt, Sing like there's nobody listening, And live like it's heaven on earth.” ― William W. Purkey
  • Lady
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Oct 2009
  • Location: The state dedicated to Horse Racing and Bourbon Baby!!!!!
  • Gender: Female
  • Be strong, and give it your all!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: So... Mitt Romney
« Reply #160 on: September 22, 2012, 06:15:33 PM »
My Vote 2012

 I'm a single mom, on Medicaid that Romney wanted to get rid of, raising two children on the autism spectrum. I've gone to college, have a degree, but have no work experience. No one will hire if you don't have experience. My ex, is a deadbeat that doesn't pay his child support, and both children receive SSI. It's the only income the three of us have to survive on for the month. We are also on food stamps. I am grateful everyday for the government. The voucher idea is the most retarded thing I've ever heard of. If a person is diabetic, like I am, and I use up all my vouchers before rights year is up, I'm screwed, and he would be signing my death certificate. I would not have the money to pay out of pocket for my supplies, let alone my children's medications and have money left over for food and bills. If Romney were to get in office, by the time his four years were up, my kids and I would be dead. Obama putting into action the United Health Care was the smartest thing to ever do. Only people it hurts are the private insurance companies that like to screw over their customers anyways. If all we had was the UHC like Canada and Great Britain have... hell, Great Britain celebrated their opening ceremonies of the Olympics! I'm not going to have a man in office that says, if I get raped, I have to suffer my entire life and have to have the child. The rapist should suffer. Not the victim. Where do we draw the line? I'm drawing the line with my vote in November to keep Obama in office. I wouldn't even be opposed to doing random drug tests like places of employment does if it meant I had what I needed to survive and raise my children...

Offline gaggedLouise

  • Quim Queen | Collaborative juicy writer
  • Champion
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Location: Scandinavia
  • Gender: Female
  • Bound, gagged and unarmed but still dangerous.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: So... Mitt Romney
« Reply #161 on: September 22, 2012, 08:23:06 PM »
Meanwhile, today I just watched a TV debate by two (non-US) experts. And they seemed to agree that Romney would be an very good president...

Poof! My brain just blew... I don't know what to think at all :o


I think TV experts and pundits, at this stage in an ongoing lengthy event, want to show that they can come up with fresh angles and how they are not in anybody's hock, financially or mentally. So they try, some of them, to defend a position that will make people jump a bit. Often by disregarding some of the equations, some of the real forces in upcoming situations. or they just make a thinly veiled appeal to faith in the future wisdom of whatever way America will vote (yeah, I saw a well-known political editor here pull that line in an article on Bush and Gore in the autumn of 2000!), but it's less than easy to buy into that these days when elections and campaigns look the way they do.

The man has shown little skill for diplomacy, which has been shown in both his domestic and foreign appearances (the man scheduled a fund-raising dinner in Israel on a fasting holy day, and insulted the UK about how they were handling the Olympics!)  In the current world climate, diplomacy is a very important skill to have.  Regardless of how I feel about his stance on the issues, I really don't see him as presidential material.  Running a country is not the same thing as running a business.

Agree, his businessman style really isn't what the U.S. and the world needs in the early 21st century. Diplomatic actions, treaties and negotiations are not always glamorous but it can be a lot more productive than war.

I also think the guy looks doctrinaire in his ideas about restoring a very-small-government, self-made men America where you swim or sink - and I haven't seen him discussing the financial and jobs crisis at all, in any other terms than cutting taxes to stimulate a lot of new companies and industries starting up and letting them run the show. He never addresses the economic and human misery wrought by tye crisis, or the underlying causes. That is unsettling, because it makes me think he would pudh the U.S. further back into a small-scale, less educated and less responsible society.


And agree with Trieste that the guy appears dishonest and without solid, thought-through convictions and methods for how to solve problems in the U.S. and abroad. He has not been accountable as a businessman and he doesn't seem to have it in him to allow for others to discuss him and his plans openly, and listen, himself, to their reasons and concepts. Not at the White House and not in public. He just isn't that kind of person: he is not presidential. For a comparison I didn't feel Tony Blair was "presidential" in that sense either, and British prime ministers have much of the standing and room to move of a U.S. president. Blair had real, inner convictions and he was a great speaker, but there was something increasingly dishonest and fluid about him.
« Last Edit: September 22, 2012, 08:49:20 PM by gaggedLouise »

Offline Ironwolf85

  • Eletronic Scribe of naughty things.
  • Lord
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: May 2010
  • Location: New England Somewhere I won't tell you
  • Gender: Male
  • Here to have fun, Role play, and maybe get laid
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: So... Mitt Romney
« Reply #162 on: September 22, 2012, 09:40:03 PM »
He's much like John Kerry in that regard, the man was awful in the political ring, he lost to bush, the most hated president in the 20th and 21st century (save Hoover, but that's an exception) for a reason.

I don't think he will win.

Offline MasterMischief

Re: So... Mitt Romney
« Reply #163 on: September 26, 2012, 09:08:57 AM »
Maybe his skillset is more suited to being president.

If you want a president that will protect the rich at the expense of the middle class and poor.  It really comes down to what you define as a 'good' president.

Offline Stattick

Re: So... Mitt Romney
« Reply #164 on: September 26, 2012, 11:14:51 AM »
Speaking of diplomacy...

http://news.yahoo.com/putin-says-romney-stance-shows-russia-missile-shield-220147010.html

Romney's remarks about Russia being enemy number one for the US has already had a powerful and deleterious effect on US - Russian relations.

Quote from: Vladimir Putin, Bond villian
"The fact that Mr. Romney considers us enemy No. 1 and clearly has a poor opinion of us is a minus. But the fact that he speaks that way - directly, frankly and clearly - means that he is a direct and candid person. That's a plus," he said.

"We'll focus on the pluses, not the minuses," he told reporters in the Black Sea resort of Sochi.

Romney once called Russia "without question our No. 1 geopolitical foe", and has promised "less flexibility and more backbone" in policy on Russia if he defeats President Barack Obama in the November 6 election.

[...]

 Last week, Putin said that Romney's criticism was in large part electioneering, but that his apparent animosity meant Russia's suspicions about a missile shield the United States is building in Europe would only deepen if he is elected.

U.S. plans for a missile defense shield in Europe, which Washington has already started to deploy, have been a major irritant in U.S.-Russia relations.

Washington says the shield is meant to counter a potential threat from Iran and will pose no risk to Russia.

Russia says the system's interceptors will be able to destroy Russian warheads in flight by about 2018, weakening its nuclear arsenal and upsetting the balance of power. Moscow wants a binding guarantee the system would never be used against it.

Putin elaborated on the idea on Tuesday, saying he was "grateful" to Romney because his description of Russia as a foe "has once again confirmed our approach to the issue of missile defense is the right one".

"He has strengthened our negotiating position on this sensitive and very important issue,"
Putin said.

Russian officials have said that while the Obama administration's assurances that the shield is not meant to weaken Russia may be honest, a future president could have different intentions.

"The main thing for us is that even if Romney does not win this election, in four years he or somebody with similar views may come to power," Putin said. "And we must take that into account when we consider how to provide for the security of the Russian Federation well into the future."


Russia says it is taking steps to neutralize the perceived threat, including upgrades to its offensive nuclear arsenal. Russia's top general said in May that Russia could carry out pre-emptive strikes on future missile defense installations in Europe to protect its security.

Who says that a buffoon who doesn't have a chance of winning the office he's running for can't make things worse? Mitt Romney, he's the guy bringing back the Cold War. What an incompetent asshole.
« Last Edit: September 26, 2012, 11:18:59 AM by Stattick »

Offline Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: So... Mitt Romney
« Reply #165 on: September 26, 2012, 12:02:03 PM »
I am resisting the urge to go dive into some of Tom Lehrer's old videos, particularly 'Who's Next', 'MLF Lullaby', 'So Long, Mom', and 'We'll All Go Together When We Go.'

China's got us by the economic short-hairs, the Middle East has extremists who have demonstrated that they would be more than happy to take out as many Americans as they can, and Romney's worried about Russia

Offline Stattick

Re: So... Mitt Romney
« Reply #166 on: September 26, 2012, 12:18:38 PM »
I am resisting the urge to go dive into some of Tom Lehrer's old videos, particularly 'Who's Next', 'MLF Lullaby', 'So Long, Mom', and 'We'll All Go Together When We Go.'

China's got us by the economic short-hairs, the Middle East has extremists who have demonstrated that they would be more than happy to take out as many Americans as they can, and Romney's worried about Russia?

He and Sarah Palin both apparently rode the same short bus to school together.

Offline MasterMischief

Re: So... Mitt Romney
« Reply #167 on: September 26, 2012, 12:37:59 PM »
We should be concerned about Russia and how we can get them to back us on Iran.

But yeah...I do not think running this country like Bain Capital is a good idea.

Offline Stattick

Re: So... Mitt Romney
« Reply #168 on: September 26, 2012, 12:42:11 PM »
Mitt Romney: Corporations are people and should be allowed to make unlimited contributions to Republican coffers, but FUCK YOU TEACHERS! TEACHERS ARE EVIL LIBERULS WHO TRY TO BUY ELECTIONS AND THEY MUST BE STOPPED!

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57520009-503544/romney-teacher-contributions-to-politicians-should-be-limited/

Quote
Speaking in New York at Education Nation, a forum sponsored by NBC, Romney told interviewer Brian Williams that he is not necessarily against a right to strike. "I don't know that I would prevent teachers from being able to strike," he said, adding later that "allowing teachers to strike on matters such as compensation I think is a right that exists in this country."

The bigger problem, Romney said, is that "the person sitting across the table from them should not have received the largest campaign contribution from the teachers union themselves ... [It's] an extraordinary conflict of interest and something that should be addressed."

He later added that "we simply can't have" elected officials who have received large contributions from teachers sitting across from them at the bargaining table "supposedly" to represent the interests of children. "I think it's a mistake," Romney said. "I think we have to get the money out of the teachers unions going into campaigns. It's the wrong way for us to go. We've got to separate that."

The problem is broader than teacher unions, Romney said, but they are the issue when it comes to Democrats. "I don't mean to be terribly partisan but I kinda am," he said to laughter.
« Last Edit: September 26, 2012, 12:44:00 PM by Stattick »

Offline MasterMischief

Re: So... Mitt Romney
« Reply #169 on: September 26, 2012, 12:44:27 PM »
Mitt Romney: Corporations are people and should be allowed to make unlimited contributions to Republican coffers, but FUCK YOU TEACHERS! TEACHERS ARE EVIL LIBERULS WHO TRY TO BUY ELECTIONS AND THEY MUST BE STOPPED!

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57520009-503544/romney-teacher-contributions-to-politicians-should-be-limited/


Offline Callie Del Noire

Re: So... Mitt Romney
« Reply #170 on: September 26, 2012, 02:52:57 PM »
Mitt Romney: Corporations are people and should be allowed to make unlimited contributions to Republican coffers, but FUCK YOU TEACHERS! TEACHERS ARE EVIL LIBERULS WHO TRY TO BUY ELECTIONS AND THEY MUST BE STOPPED!

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57520009-503544/romney-teacher-contributions-to-politicians-should-be-limited/

So, it's a conflict for a group of educators to rally behind people who support their livelihood BUT it's NOT a conflict to appoint people who payed in MILLIONS to your campaign and superPacs backing up your side of the thing because they are more rational and/or ethical due to be businessmen like Mitt Romney who built a company whose sole purpose was to buy and sell (and occasionally dismember) companies while producing nothing of it's own?

To quote my favorite movie..  "I don't think that means what you think it means..."

Offline Sabby

Re: So... Mitt Romney
« Reply #171 on: September 30, 2012, 01:21:55 PM »

Offline MasterMischief

Re: So... Mitt Romney
« Reply #172 on: September 30, 2012, 04:39:40 PM »
Kind of the Republican party as a whole, no?

Offline Ironwolf85

  • Eletronic Scribe of naughty things.
  • Lord
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: May 2010
  • Location: New England Somewhere I won't tell you
  • Gender: Male
  • Here to have fun, Role play, and maybe get laid
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: So... Mitt Romney
« Reply #173 on: September 30, 2012, 10:04:34 PM »
I find it funny that Mitt actually doesn't pay income tax, he pays captial gains... this means, by his logic, he must vote for his opponent.

Also I have no problem with a bit of political backrubbing, as you appoint who you know and think is qualified and each president brings a web of conacts he'll probably look to first.
But to stock your cabinet with politicos, power grabbers, and yes men has never lead to sucess, and in fact brings misery to the country, and from what I've seen that's who romney will appoint.

Offline Stattick

Re: So... Mitt Romney
« Reply #174 on: September 30, 2012, 10:28:58 PM »
I find it funny that Mitt actually doesn't pay income tax, he pays captial gains... this means, by his logic, he must vote for his opponent.

Also I have no problem with a bit of political backrubbing, as you appoint who you know and think is qualified and each president brings a web of conacts he'll probably look to first.
But to stock your cabinet with politicos, power grabbers, and yes men has never lead to sucess, and in fact brings misery to the country, and from what I've seen that's who romney will appoint.

No, no, that's not true. Romney does make money that he has to pay income tax on. He does speaking engagements for what he calls a "little bit of money" each year. Last fiscal year, he made about $375,000 doing speaking engagements. Granted, it's a mere pittance compared to his annual income, but he does have to pay income taxes on that $375,000.