[quote]Gaius Octavius wrote:
This is why democracy is a bad idea.[/quote]
Hey when I was 20 I actually thought Ted Kennedy should be President. So don’t feel bad for saying stupid stuff.
[/quote]
Too bad you never got any smarter :/[/quote]
Oh you got confused again…lol. You see wanting someone like Ted Kennedy to be President is a stupid thing. Much like your idiotic comment on democracy. I’ve outgrown those idiotic statements and you’re still swimming knee deep in them.
Mitt Romney?s campaign is attacking Newt Gingrich as an ?influence peddler.? But it turns out that some of Romney?s closest advisers (or the firms they lobbied for) were paid hundreds of thousands ? maybe millions ? of dollars on behalf of failed mortgage giant Freddie Mac.
The Romney campaign did not respond to requests for comment.
According to the AP, former Rep. Susan Molinari ? a top Romney surrogate and adviser (watch her attacking Gingrich in this video) ? was one of the former GOP lawmakers paid quite handsomely to help stop ?any meaningful regulation in the years before the housing mortgage giant crashed ??
Edit: More to it than that…keep reading. Funny that Gingrich’s work as an adviser is backed up, but Romney’s campaign is run by ‘influence peddlers.’ That is, actual lobbyists that, you know lobby. Even for the F’Mac’s. Nice investments, too, Mitt…
You’re telling me the only guy who can possibly beat Obama can’t repeal all of Obamacare! And he said he could! ARRGGHHHH!!
Why that dirty liar! He’s also an evil rich guy (I know that’s true because they said it on MSNBC). Let’s all go out and support Gingrich for President he never lies! Oh wait…Okay forget that. Neither one of us like him anyway. We both like Santorum but he hasn’t a ghost of a chance of getting the nomination.
Ah, I have an idea, sicne we can’t get our perfect candidate let’s just join the chants I can hear them now…
FOUR MORE YEARS! FOUR MORE YEARS!
Hey Sloth you have something in common with the Occupy Wallstreet movement they hate Romney too–He’s too rich for them therefore he’s evil. Wow…you know I never realized something could be so simple. Rich = evil. GOT IT!
By the way I enjoyed hearing Obama last evening talk about “rich” people not paying their fair share. Funny though the top 1% pay 37% of all taxes and the top 5% of all income earners pay almost 60% of all taxes. I have no idea how much you make (nor am I asking) but four more years of Obama is something that I’m really looking forward to. I want to start paying my fair share.
Mitt Romney?s campaign is attacking Newt Gingrich as an ?influence peddler.? But it turns out that some of Romney?s closest advisers (or the firms they lobbied for) were paid hundreds of thousands ? maybe millions ? of dollars on behalf of failed mortgage giant Freddie Mac.
The Romney campaign did not respond to requests for comment.
According to the AP, former Rep. Susan Molinari ? a top Romney surrogate and adviser (watch her attacking Gingrich in this video) ? was one of the former GOP lawmakers paid quite handsomely to help stop ?any meaningful regulation in the years before the housing mortgage giant crashed ??
I knew all you needed was a good intervention. Now, you need to stay away from your old hangouts and old associates. See, falling off the wagon is a real possibility this early in post-Romney recovery.
I knew all you needed was a good intervention. Now, you need to stay away from your old hangouts and old associates. See, falling off the wagon is a real possibility this early in post-Romney recovery.
[/quote]
LOL…But you have not yet joined me in the chant,. Come on now buddy, "four more years, four more years.
Remember man when you say no to one thing you automatically say yes to something else.
That’s how life and politics work–Uh huh, watch and see.
[quote]Gaius Octavius wrote:
This is why democracy is a bad idea.[/quote]
Hey when I was 20 I actually thought Ted Kennedy should be President. So don’t feel bad for saying stupid stuff.
[/quote]
Too bad you never got any smarter :/[/quote]
Oh you got confused again…lol. You see wanting someone like Ted Kennedy to be President is a stupid thing. Much like your idiotic comment on democracy. I’ve outgrown those idiotic statements and you’re still swimming knee deep in them.
Once again, age will take care of most of that.
Clear yet?
If not I can go over it again.
[/quote]
No, it’s perfectly clear. Your posts should be ignored the moment they stop focusing on political commentary and start commentating on other posters because when you do you stop being a good, contributing poster and become a rude troll
[quote]Gaius Octavius wrote:
This is why democracy is a bad idea.[/quote]
Hey when I was 20 I actually thought Ted Kennedy should be President. So don’t feel bad for saying stupid stuff.
[/quote]
Too bad you never got any smarter :/[/quote]
Oh you got confused again…lol. You see wanting someone like Ted Kennedy to be President is a stupid thing. Much like your idiotic comment on democracy. I’ve outgrown those idiotic statements and you’re still swimming knee deep in them.
Once again, age will take care of most of that.
Clear yet?
If not I can go over it again.
[/quote]
No, it’s perfectly clear. Your posts should be ignored the moment they stop focusing on political commentary and start commentating on other posters because when you do you stop being a good, contributing poster and become a rude troll :)[/quote]
Yet, you still respond. Now what does that say about your intelligence?
Now run along back to the “why am I still getting pimples at the age of 21” thread.
No worries Zeb, looks like the negative ad deluge, including the multiple daily robocalls from Team Romney (I’m getting those now), establishment punditry (National Review, Drudge, etc.) shadow campaign, all have lifted Mitt back into the lead. Moving the party to the left, and left, and left. A friggen guy that distanced himself from Reagan, wouldn’t support the Contract with America, passed an assault weapon ban, signed on to an individual mandate (which uses tax money for elective abortions) he’s still proud of, not long ago was only talking about fixing the ‘bad parts’ of Obamacare, and etc. Only to still lose to Obama (win or lose Florida, he’s been exposed as horribly weak candidate). And, I truly believe, triggering a grassroots conservative exodus from the party. Will not vote for the man.
I think that Mitt really hates and is uncomfortable with the whole election process.
In other words, I think that if he could, he would just as soon just “get to the job”.
However, I think that Newt likes the “rough-and-tumble/take-no-survivors/survival-of-fittest” nature of a good Political Fight. In fact, I think he thrives on it.
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
I think that Mitt really hates and is uncomfortable with the whole election process.
In other words, I think that if he could, he would just as soon just “get to the job”.
However, I think that Newt likes the “rough-and-tumble/take-no-survivors/survival-of-fittest” nature of a good Political Fight. In fact, I think he thrives on it.
Thoughts?
Mufasa[/quote]
No, No, No! The ugliest campaign has been Romney’s, period! The Romney team has spent FAR more, like not even comparable, on take-no-survivors campaigning. It started first against Gingrich, then started up for a time against Santorum (while still hammering Gingrich, but it slacked off) when it appeared he might take off. Then when Santorum’s surge faltered, it focused right back on Gingrich. Then you have the Romney shadow campaign going on with Drudge and National Review. The ugliness you’re seeing in the Republican party was kicked off by Moderate Mitt.
Mitt is uncomfortable because he’s not a conservative. He has to concentrate at it really hard, leaving his well-monied candidate destruction machine to do the heavy lifting. The theme of this cycle has been this. Romney couldn’t sell himself. He lost SC, and was days away from losing Fl. Heck, he still might after the debate tomorrow, and the anti-Romney ad roll out. He had to destroy every rising not-Romney until he seemed to be the only choice. Prediction; low base turnout, the independent/moderate/democrat turnout for Mitt never materializes. Obama wins by landslide against a forgettable Republican candidate. The party is lurching hard left with Progressive Mitt. The establishment resents it’s base. I see a fracture coming. A big one.
Edit: The GoP motto should be “We’re coming around to Democrat positions, a few years later at a time.”
I agree that there will be a fracture of the GOP…and a big one…if the Party as a whole continues to try to define who is conservative or not, based on often very debatable (within the Party) criteria.
Romney is conservative…but it appears not “conservative enough” for many.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Newt’s not even conservative for me. I think Alan Keyes was the last candidate I actually really liked (yes Sloth In know =] )[/quote]
Romney is conservative…but it appears not “conservative enough” for many.
Mufasa[/quote]
Right, and I suppose in another 2 years Obama will be considered a ‘conservative.’ The party is about to nominate a man who distanced himself from Reagan AND the Contract with America. A man who delivered the model for Obamacare. Obamacare, of which Romney not so long ago only said that he’d repeal ‘the bad’ and keep ‘the good.’ He’s a progressive republican playing at a conservative.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Newt’s not even conservative for me. I think Alan Keyes was the last candidate I actually really liked (yes Sloth In know =] )[/quote]
Really?
Why is Newt not conservative to you?
Mufasa[/quote]
Setting aside his personal life, he’s flirted with the individual mandate, cap and trade, TARP, etc. However, he has to be given his due for welfare reform, balanced budget, taxes, etc during the glorious early Contract with America days. Basically the stuff Romney distanced himself from back in the day.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Newt’s not even conservative for me. I think Alan Keyes was the last candidate I actually really liked (yes Sloth In know =] )[/quote]
