November

[Guest]

VOTE FOR ROMNEY VOTE FOR ROMNEY VOTE FOR ROMNEY VOTE FOR ROMNEY VOTE FOR ROMNEY VOTE FOR ROMNEY VOTE FOR ROMNEY VOTE FOR ROMNEY It's the only way out of this mess

[Guest]

What "mess" you referring to?

[Guest]

It's at least a chance. I have no faith in Establishment Republicans to do what they need to do. You know the Tea Party Coalition candidates will come through on their votes, but you can never count on the "McCains" to do what right once they're seated in the big room.

The one chance this country has is to gain both houses and the Presidency. Then they need to act swiftly before the mid-terms in scaling back all the "mess" you're speaking of.

Will they stay together and do this?

It's the only hope this country has.

[Guest]

VOTE FOR ROMNEY VOTE FOR ROMNEY VOTE FOR ROMNEY VOTE FOR ROMNEY VOTE FOR ROMNEY VOTE FOR ROMNEY VOTE FOR ROMNEY VOTE FOR ROMNEY It's the only way out of this mess

Got pom poms? Jeezers.

[Guest]

It's at least a chance. I have no faith in Establishment Republicans to do what they need to do. You know the Tea Party Coalition candidates will come through on their votes, but you can never count on the "McCains" to do what right once they're seated in the big room.

The one chance this country has is to gain both houses and the Presidency. Then they need to act swiftly before the mid-terms in scaling back all the "mess" you're speaking of.

Will they stay together and do this?

It's the only hope this country has.

I dont know Rich...lets assume it is Romney and he has both houses of congress. I dont want him to repeal the healthcare act , but I want it severely reworked to actually cut health costs because that has to be done.

I think we need some serious tax reform also......and the almight jobs.

These alone are going to take lots of time. I think on those three items he will even get Democratic support, because despite all the glee being shown, there are a slew of Democrats who despise the health bill in its format right now....who strongly feel the tax code needs revised and would gladly work on any jobs bill forwarded.

These 3 things would go a long way to getting this country fixed.

Also, if Romney does get elected he must insure that he stays in constant communications with both parties and both houses. This President did not and does not.....even his own party talks in private about it thus he will never be able to bring us together. Romney has to open and above board with both parties from the beginning. I just recently read or reread how many times Obama invited heads to the WH, nodded his head and said..ok...and nobody of either party ever heard from him again. THAT you cannot do.

[Guest]

It's at least a chance. I have no faith in Establishment Republicans to do what they need to do. You know the Tea Party Coalition candidates will come through on their votes, but you can never count on the "McCains" to do what right once they're seated in the big room.

The one chance this country has is to gain both houses and the Presidency. Then they need to act swiftly before the mid-terms in scaling back all the "mess" you're speaking of.

Will they stay together and do this?

It's the only hope this country has.

I think that if most "thinking" people really examine their gut feelings this is what they think when it is boiled down to it's basic elements.
Oh sure there are those on the left that for what ever reason think that Obama is the saviour of the earth and those on the right that think he is the death of America.

I think a politician is a politician and does what ever keeps them in the money. I know our local Rep. congressman and have known him for almost thirty years and he would do what ever make him rich and so would any dem.
If you think they are there for you, you are the idiot!
I think it is reflected in unions when people know in their heart that it can't go on like this but they have to be for it because it hits them in their bank account.
There are always going to be those people that think that the money that people earn belongs to everybody and they will always be for people like Obama.
We are a capitalistic economy and we need the economy to work and Obama's way just does not work. It is just that simple.
Sure we want everybody to have all they need but many of those people are not willing to to do what it takes to get those things and need an Obama to get it for them. That is not what our country was built on.

[Guest]

I dont know Rich...lets assume it is Romney and he has both houses of congress. I dont want him to repeal the healthcare act , but I want it severely reworked to actually cut health costs because that has to be done.

I think we need some serious tax reform also......and the almight jobs.

These alone are going to take lots of time. I think on those three items he will even get Democratic support, because despite all the glee being shown, there are a slew of Democrats who despise the health bill in its format right now....who strongly feel the tax code needs revised and would gladly work on any jobs bill forwarded.

These 3 things would go a long way to getting this country fixed.

Also, if Romney does get elected he must insure that he stays in constant communications with both parties and both houses. This President did not and does not.....even his own party talks in private about it thus he will never be able to bring us together. Romney has to open and above board with both parties from the beginning. I just recently read or reread how many times Obama invited heads to the WH, nodded his head and said..ok...and nobody of either party ever heard from him again. THAT you cannot do.

I have to disagree about the humongous health care legislation that improperly was rewritten by InJustice Roberts to have an appearance of constitutionality. Anything this massive always has unforeseen consequences that on top of the "foreseen" consequences make it much to dangerous to stand in my opinion. It must be repealed, on Constitutional grounds alone.

Health care problems need to be addressed and should be done incrementally. It's much easier to adjust solutions that way instead of this monstrosity that no one fully has a handle on.

I'm sure Romney is going to be immensely more open to dealing with Democrats than Obama was in even talking with Republicans. I'm not sure that's a good thing. We always get screwed. Democrats don't compromise. They don't give ground. We can learn something from them on that score.

[Guest]

We built this country on rock and roll!

[Guest]

I have to disagree about the humongous health care legislation that improperly was rewritten by InJustice Roberts to have an appearance of constitutionality. Anything this massive always has unforeseen consequences that on top of the "foreseen" consequences make it much to dangerous to stand in my opinion. It must be repealed, on Constitutional grounds alone.

Health care problems need to be addressed and should be done incrementally. It's much easier to adjust solutions that way instead of this monstrosity that no one fully has a handle on.

I'm sure Romney is going to be immensely more open to dealing with Democrats than Obama was in even talking with Republicans. I'm not sure that's a good thing. We always get screwed. Democrats don't compromise. They don't give ground. We can learn something from them on that score.

And Republicans, the party of no, do compromise? Really? Can you compromise when your whole strategy is to see that Obama is a one term President. Give me a break. :yuck:

[Guest]

Apparently a lot of posters on this forum support ending Medicare as we know it and replacing it with a voucher system, while ending the ACA which would eliminate the pre-existing condition protection. Must be a hearty stock to not have to worry about pre-existing conditions.

Also, most posters must favor Mitt Romney's five trillion dollar tax cuts over the next decade for millionaires and billionaires, even though he has yet to articulate how they will be paid for.

[Guest]

Apparently a lot of posters on this forum support ending Medicare as we know it and replacing it with a voucher system, while ending the ACA which would eliminate the pre-existing condition protection. Must be a hearty stock to not have to worry about pre-existing conditions.

Also, most posters must favor Mitt Romney's five trillion dollar tax cuts over the next decade for millionaires and billionaires, even though he has yet to articulate how they will be paid for.Those are the same people who say,"...don't take away MY Medicare, I paid for it over fifty years!" or "...don't take away MY VA health benefits, I'm a vet!", or "...cut taxes, we'll grow our way back to a balanced budget", or "...all we need to do is eliminate waste and fraud to fix our fiscal problems". Those aren't the deepest thinkers we have on this forum.

They're also the same people who have never really taken the time to study how financially devastating a voucher system would be to tens of millions of Americans, and how detrimental it would be to the overall health of the nation.

If it wasn't so sad and alarming, it would be laughable.

[Guest]

Along with Obama, you have Michelle. Don't laugh, as time grows closer, you will see her out there stumping more and more. Don't forget, she's a hard core attorney.

This election will be so close that you might as well have a pajama party and serve breakfast!

[Guest]

Those are the same people who say,"...don't take away MY Medicare, I paid for it over fifty years!" or "...don't take away MY VA health benefits, I'm a vet!", or "...cut taxes, we'll grow our way back to a balanced budget", or "...all we need to do is eliminate waste and fraud to fix our fiscal problems". Those aren't the deepest thinkers we have on this forum.

They're also the same people who have never really taken the time to study how financially devastating a voucher system would be to tens of millions of Americans, and how detrimental it would be to the overall health of the nation.

If it wasn't so sad and alarming, it would be laughable.

I would love to know how the last two posters here (VK and JANMCN) arrived at this subject from the thread and also would love for them to validate their claims about folks on this forum believe ????? If there was a survey, I missed it, and if not, I rescind any right you think you may have to speak for me !!!

The comments are just twitter remarks used on all these threads to change any subject to a criticism of Romney, et al Very bad style in my opinion.

Do not mind discussing anything but you two are in left field as compared to this thread and it is becoming a common thing on here.

[Guest]

I would love to know how the last two posters here (VK and JANMCN) arrived at this subject from the thread and also would love for them to validate their claims about folks on this forum believe ????? If there was a survey, I missed it, and if not, I rescind any right you think you may have to speak for me !!!

The comments are just twitter remarks used on all these threads to change any subject to a criticism of Romney, et al Very bad style in my opinion.

Do not mind discussing anything but you two are in left field as compared to this thread and it is becoming a common thing on here.i'm not aware of any survey. What I said was based on what people post here. I've made the assumption that what they write is some indication of what they think, the balance and depth of their thinking and how that leads to what they choose to post.

[Guest]

One would assume, on a thread started "vote for Romney", that posters supporting Romney would support his positions. Why else would anyone "vote for Romney"?

[Guest]

that leaves an even bigger question then.....why did anybody vote for Obama in the first place?

Not being combative or sarcastic. Given the need for many to haze a business man like Romney who is more of a known entity than Obama at a like period in his campaign.....what is it that a total unknown did to earn your vote??

btk

PS I suppose this question could/should be a separate thread.....if anybody even answers.

[Guest]

that leaves an even bigger question then.....why did anybody vote for Obama in the first place?

Not being combative or sarcastic. Given the need for many to haze a business man like Romney who is more of a known entity than Obama at a like period in his campaign.....what is it that a total unknown did to earn your vote??

btk

PS I suppose this question could/should be a separate thread.....if anybody even answers.

If you remember the democratic primary, President Obama was the only one (along with Dennis Kucinich) who thought the Iraq war was a "dumb" war. He promised to end the war, which he did. He promised to get Bin Laden, which he did. He promised to pass a healthcare bill, which is something that had been tried for 100 years, and he did. He promised to end "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" which he did. He promised to fight for the American people, which he did. He promised us hope and change.

That optimism is not apparent in the Mitt Romney campaign. All we hear are the dour consequences of re-electing Obama.

[Guest]

that leaves an even bigger question then.....why did anybody vote for Obama in the first place?

Not being combative or sarcastic. Given the need for many to haze a business man like Romney who is more of a known entity than Obama at a like period in his campaign.....what is it that a total unknown did to earn your vote??

btk

PS I suppose this question could/should be a separate thread.....if anybody even answers.

I have a opinion on that !!! The media, plain and simple.

Never have we had a man so NON qualified for the position. Never have we had a man with a complete vacancy of experience. Never have we had a man who has never been in a leadership position. Never have we had a man with such a questionable past ?

I could go on but you get the point.

He is/was a great orator. He can turn a phrase. He became "the thing to do" in this country an our media simply fawned over him instead of doing what they are supposed to do...journalism. He was smart, sort of glib and folks like Chris Mathews forgot completely what journalism is all about.

This does not mean that I think McCain would have been great at all....just that a man was elected to be the most powerful man in the world with NO qualifications except for being smart and able to turn a phrase...THAT IS IT.

I just completed the book CONKRITE and thus it is even more obvious to me that journalism per se does not exist any longer. The election of 2008 was such a fiasco. He even had the middle east and Europe swooning over his words...but look at how they feel about him now.

He has always been about his words and what he says......never agrees with what he does. He did not even serve in office as a senator except in the title, as his entire life has been about running for office.

MEDIA...MEDIA...MEDIA...that is what it was all about and frankly it still is.

[Guest]

Many of us have witness the disasterous results of of an individual promoted beyond his/her skill sets )Peter Principle). The disastrous results are usually unknown in the bginning. It takes time for these ill conceived programs and policies to do their damage. In the meantime the Peter Principled manager believes he/she is advant garde....and then the house of cards begin to fall.

Romney right now is better prepared to lead this nation than Obma who has served one term. Obama did not even have the intelligence to learn from his mistakes . Obama has always been in the telling mode and never in the listening/learning mode.

Having said that my focus for the upcoming November elections is going to be on the re-set for Congress because it may not matter who is president if Congress moves from more liberal to more moderate to conservative.

[Guest]

There was nobody more qualified to be president than Richard Nixon, having served as VP and in congress, and we all know how that worked out.

It is shocking that certain posters on here watch and quote Chris Matthews. He despises Mitt Romney and lets it be known.

[Guest]

If you remember the democratic primary, President Obama was the only one (along with Dennis Kucinich) who thought the Iraq war was a "dumb" war.
He promised to end the war, which he did.
on a time table established before he became POTUS. Ask the service people who came home or better yet ask the ones still there if that war is ended. The media just does not report on what is still going on there.

He promised to get Bin Laden, which he did.
initiatives that were already underway before he became Potus. It just happened on his watch, hence he gets the credit for what the military started, pursued and finished.



He promised to pass a healthcare bill, which is something that had been tried for 100 years, and he did.
that he did. With no known costs and impacts on the financial s. Which was passed by lemmings who did not know what was in the bill. Which is still floundering because it was unpopular with the majority when he rammed it through. It was proven to be unpopular again during the 2010 elections. And it will be proven just as unpopular in the 2012 election.

He promised to end "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" which he did.
Yawn!!!!


He promised to fight for the American people, which he did.
that is an urban legend parroted by his supporters. It is well known what ever Obama does is all about him.

He promised us hope and change.
And the hope continues to fade as there has ONLY been business as usual enhanced by the Chicago style, let's make a deal politics.

None of the above is argumentative. Just how Obama is viewed by an experienced executive evaluator from the private sector in which Obama would not have made a full year in the job.

btk

[Guest]

If you remember the democratic primary, President Obama was the only one (along with Dennis Kucinich) who thought the Iraq war was a "dumb" war.
He promised to end the war, which he did.
on a time table established before he became POTUS. Ask the service people who came home or better yet ask the ones still there if that war is ended. The media just does not report on what is still going on there.

He promised to get Bin Laden, which he did.
initiatives that were already underway before he became Potus. It just happened on his watch, hence he gets the credit for what the military started, pursued and finished.



He promised to pass a healthcare bill, which is something that had been tried for 100 years, and he did.
that he did. With no known costs and impacts on the financial s. Which was passed by lemmings who did not know what was in the bill. Which is still floundering because it was unpopular with the majority when he rammed it through. It was proven to be unpopular again during the 2010 elections. And it will be proven just as unpopular in the 2012 election.

He promised to end "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" which he did.
Yawn!!!!


He promised to fight for the American people, which he did.
that is an urban legend parroted by his supporters. It is well known what ever Obama does is all about him.

He promised us hope and change.
And the hope continues to fade as there has ONLY been business as usual enhanced by the Chicago style, let's make a deal politics.

None of the above is argumentative. Just how Obama is viewed by an experienced executive evaluator from the private sector in which Obama would not have made a full year in the job.

btk

Dear Experienced Executive Evaluator,

Please list Mitt Romney's campaign promises as I have a hard time following him.

To be a leader, one must inspire people, and Romney is not very inspirational.

[Guest]

To be a leader, one must inspire people, and Romney is not very inspirational.

However to led by someone who wants to limit my liberty is not inspirational either.
I don't want government to control every corner of my life as Obama wants government to do.
It seems that you want to be led through life. Not me!

[Guest]

However to led by someone who wants to limit my liberty is not inspirational either.
I don't want government to control every corner of my life as Obama wants government to do.
It seems that you want to be led through life. Not me!

Well, we can be inspired by different things I'm thinking. What inspires me is the idea of getting this decidedly unAmerican President out of the people's house and putting in one who actually loves this country and promises to try to bring it back on a path to it's former prosperity.

There's an inspirational thought for ya.

[Guest]

VOTE FOR ROMNEY VOTE FOR ROMNEY VOTE FOR ROMNEY VOTE FOR ROMNEY VOTE FOR ROMNEY VOTE FOR ROMNEY VOTE FOR ROMNEY VOTE FOR ROMNEY It's the smart thing to do!

[Guest]

Well, we can be inspired by different things I'm thinking. What inspires me is the idea of getting this decidedly unAmerican President out of the people's house and putting in one who actually loves this country and promises to try to bring it back on a path to it's former prosperity.

There's an inspirational thought for ya.

Kinda what I was thinking.

[Guest]

"Dear Experienced Executive Evaluator,"

the above may make someone feel better, however inaccurate as you know the name is btk.

I did provide that my background was rescuing businesses that were in trouble and yes most of the time it was the executives responsible that were the major cause of not doing what was required to keep or make the business deliver what was expected.

Provided ONLY to underscore the basis for which and or how I look at Obama. NOTHING MORE!!!

I'll be happy to evaluate Romney based on his performance against his promises just as I did for Obama, hence we will just have to wait until he is elected POTUS. Then like I did for Obama, I will reserve judgement until he makes his first State of the Union address (one year of office holding)....offering my observation/opinion/measurement of him just like I did for Obama.

And just like I did when I was working, I did not need to know whether the person being evaluated was an R or D or what religion or race. Just how they do or most often do not do the job.

I know the above is difficult for partisan loyalists who back their man/party NO MATTER WHAT, to understand!!!

btk

[Guest]

that leaves an even bigger question then.....why did anybody vote for Obama in the first place?

Not being combative or sarcastic. Given the need for many to haze a business man like Romney who is more of a known entity than Obama at a like period in his campaign.....what is it that a total unknown did to earn your vote??

btk

PS I suppose this question could/should be a separate thread.....if anybody even answers.

"Dear Experienced Executive Evaluator,"

the above may make someone feel better, however inaccurate as you know the name is btk.

I did provide that my background was rescuing businesses that were in trouble and yes most of the time it was the executives responsible that were the major cause of not doing what was required to keep or make the business deliver what was expected.

Provided ONLY to underscore the basis for which and or how I look at Obama. NOTHING MORE!!!

I'll be happy to evaluate Romney based on his performance against his promises just as I did for Obama, hence we will just have to wait until he is elected POTUS. Then like I did for Obama, I will reserve judgement until he makes his first State of the Union address (one year of office holding)....offering my observation/opinion/measurement of him just like I did for Obama.

And just like I did when I was working, I did not need to know whether the person being evaluated was an R or D or what religion or race. Just how they do or most often do not do the job.

I know the above is difficult for partisan loyalists who back their man/party NO MATTER WHAT, to understand!!!

btk

Dear BTK

You are eager to debate what promises President Obama campaigned on in 2008, but you are unable or unwilling to debate what promises Mitt Romney is campaigning on until after he is elected? For those of us having a hard time following Romney's platform, please list his campaign promises. Personally, I would rather know where he stands on the issues before the election, not after the election. How will we know what promises he kept, if we don't know what those promises are?

[Guest]

I consider the point counter point 3 months before the election nothing more than that...point/counter point.

For me the reasonable place to start is at the convention when each candidate will be espousing that which they are going to do to retain/gain/win delegates.

When both candidates start to talk about what they will do for we the people instead of about each other maybe then we will get a better perspective.

For me, prior to the convention is just partisan noise from both candidates.

We can all pass judgement on what we hear and see each day and prior to the convention there will be too much flip flopping to put too much stock into what either say.

Also for me at this point what is more important is their respective backgrounds and accomplishments. Obama did not measure up to the kind of candidate I would ever support (either party) because of his obscure and non commital back ground in the senate and before.

There just was not enough information available about who Obama was and what his claims to fame were prior to and after the election continuing to the present.

All of what is/was Romney up to his becoming governor and what he did as governor along with his personal life that we know of plus his family life with his parents are all contributors to a positive view of him as a candidate.

Right or wrong that is my position.

We all know that none of the candidates were ever fully prepared to know what it is/was they could not do or get done in the cronyism, business as usual politics in Washington.....so readily demonstrated by the likes of Rangle type politics.

Let me give a real simple example of creating an initiative and making a commitment and then doing something to make it happen....Kennedy when he stated what we were going to do as a nation to get a man on the moon. That was not just talk.

btk

[Guest]

Those are the same people who say,"...don't take away MY Medicare, I paid for it over fifty years!" or "...don't take away MY VA health benefits, I'm a vet!", or "...cut taxes, we'll grow our way back to a balanced budget", or "...all we need to do is eliminate waste and fraud to fix our fiscal problems". Those aren't the deepest thinkers we have on this forum.

They're also the same people who have never really taken the time to study how financially devastating a voucher system would be to tens of millions of Americans, and how detrimental it would be to the overall health of the nation.

If it wasn't so sad and alarming, it would be laughable.

VK, you continue to assign beliefs to people and assert your views of Romney's plans that are not fact based. After you asserted several times that Romney would appoint John Bolton as Secretary of State, I pointed you to the list of his foreign policy advisors and it did not include John Bolton. You are now supporting the assertion that Romney will replace Medicare with a voucher system. Once again, untrue. Romney's proposals for Medicare are spelled out here: Medicare (http://www.mittromney.com/issues/medicare)

Please note that he wishes to introduce a voucher system, but in parallel with existing Medicare. You may wish to take the time to go to mittromney.com and find outgo where he stands on the issues rather than assuming what other sources say he believes or plans to do.

[Guest]

btk writes, "All of what is/was Romney up to his becoming governor and what he did as governor along with his personal life that we know of plus his family life with his parents are all contributors to a positive view of him as a candidate."

Well, he created RomneyCare in Massachusetts with a personal mandate to buy it.

You have a problem with Pres. Obama's family? He has done an outstanding job for someone that came from a mixed marriage and broken home to graduate from Harvard Law School without having a silver spoon in his mouth from birth. His wife and daughters are marvelous, too. Mrs. Obama is an excellent attorney and advocate for healthy eating.

Post something worthwhile instead of your snippets.

[Guest]

Just for the record, Obama went to an exclusive private school in Hawaii. Michelle may be an excellent attorney, but for some reason she gave up her law license. Nobody seems to know why.

[Guest]

"Post something worthwhile instead of your snippets."

As usual if you do not see what you agree with the response is derogatory.

You can always make use of the block feature of the forum.

I did not say anything about having a problem with Obama's family. As usual you say what you want to interpret presenting the regurgitation as the original posters intent. That comment wasn't mine and not what I intended.

As stated many times before you are entitled to your opinion, but not posting your interpretation of my post and representing it as what I said or intended. Disagree, dislike, debate or what ever but please refrain from twisting my comments to suit your message(s).
Thanx!

btk

[Guest]

btk writes, "All of what is/was Romney up to his becoming governor and what he did as governor along with his personal life that we know of plus his family life with his parents are all contributors to a positive view of him as a candidate."

Well, he created RomneyCare in Massachusetts with a personal mandate to buy it.

You have a problem with Pres. Obama's family? He has done an outstanding job for someone that came from a mixed marriage and broken home to graduate from Harvard Law School without having a silver spoon in his mouth from birth. His wife and daughters are marvelous, too. Mrs. Obama is an excellent attorney and advocate for healthy eating.

Post something worthwhile instead of your snippets.

Hi buggyone: I am surprised regarding the accolades you bestow upon Obama. As a Human Resources Director you must have read thousands of resumes' and interviewed hundreds and hundreds of applicants. So again I find it surprising that given Obama's background, associations, etc that you would find Obama qualified,sitable for the office of President

From my experiences as an HRD his resume' would have been canned. Obama lacked any real experience. The position he did hold required creating divisions instead of uniting and his associations were so extreme that his politics would not fit moderate America.

Instead of me doing a comparison why don't you sit down and review Obama's background against Romney's as you wouild have done in the day and then chose the applicant you find more suitable to fill the office of the President.

[Guest]

Hi buggyone: I am surprised regarding the accolades you bestow upon Obama. As a Human Resources Director you must have read thousands of resumes' and interviewed hundreds and hundreds of applicants. So again I find it surprising that given Obama's background, associations, etc that you would find Obama qualified,sitable for the office of President

From my experiences as an HRD his resume' would have been canned. Obama lacked any real experience. The position he did hold required creating divisions instead of uniting and his associations were so extreme that his politics would not fit moderate America.

Instead of me doing a comparison why don't you sit down and review Obama's background against Romney's as you wouild have done in the day and then chose the applicant you find more suitable to fill the office of the President.

Did you apply the same criteria when you voted for Sarah Palin in 2008? What on her resume' jumped out at you? Was it that she was president of the PTA, or mayor of a town of 8000, or her attending six colleges to receive her journalism degree?

[Guest]

Did you apply the same criteria when you voted for Sarah Palin in 2008? What on her resume' jumped out at you? Was it that she was president of the PTA, or mayor of a town of 8000, or her attending six colleges to receive her journalism degree?

You can't rule out her being a half-governor of a state with a smaller population than Orlando. :wave:

[Guest]

You can't rule out her being a half-governor of a state with a smaller population than Orlando.


Although I think she may have been over her head when it came to being VP or maybe Pres. she had more experience than Obama even if you only count her half term.
Somehow the left seems to always have a blind eye, no excuse me, a sight impaired vision of Obama.
Somehow him not doing anything qualified him to be POTUS!
Go figure.

[Guest]

Although I think she may have been over her head when it came to being VP or maybe Pres. she had more experience than Obama even if you only count her half term.
Somehow the left seems to always have a blind eye, no excuse me, a sight impaired vision of Obama.
Somehow him not doing anything qualified him to be POTUS!
Go figure.

Are we talking about the same Sarah Palin? The one who doesn't know why there are two Koreas? The one who couldn't find Germany on the map? The one who her handlers said "knows nothing"? That Sarah Palin?

[Guest]

Are we talking about the same Sarah Palin? The one who doesn't know why there are two Koreas? The one who couldn't find Germany on the map? The one who her handlers said "knows nothing"? That Sarah Palin?


Yep! Sad, isn't it that your savior of the earth is less qualified than her!!

But at least Obama has been to all 54 states!

And yes, yes I know He got OSB! Good thing he did not screw that pre-planned mission up.

[Guest]

Wow,some of you are great at rewriting history. Preplanned to get binLaden? Are you kidding me? To compare the President to Palin and somehow say that Palin was more qualified is really dumb,dumb,dumb. It's the same posters over and over rewriting,inventing,making up stuff. Then one of you has the audacity to claim the Dems don't compromise,that's just a lie. Has a republican ever broke ranks in a vote? Oh I forgot their sole purpose is to make sure Obama does not get a 2nd term not to discuss issues.

[Guest]

Wow,some of you are great at rewriting history. Preplanned to get binLaden? Are you kidding me? To compare the President to Palin and somehow say that Palin was more qualified is really dumb,dumb,dumb. It's the same posters over and over rewriting,inventing,making up stuff. Then one of you has the audacity to claim the Dems don't compromise,that's just a lie. Has a republican ever broke ranks in a vote? Oh I forgot their sole purpose is to make sure Obama does not get a 2nd term not to discuss issues.

I do not have time to stay on here but may I say that you show your colors here.

This is more than a two way street. DO you have any idea of what has been going on and continues in the US SENATE ???????

Before you throw stones be sure you know of what you speak, PLEASE !

This is not a defense of anyone or an endorsement of anything except that you really need to accept facts and not make things up.

[Guest]

Wow,some of you are great at rewriting history. Preplanned to get binLaden? Are you kidding me? To compare the President to Palin and somehow say that Palin was more qualified is really dumb,dumb,dumb.

I will attempt to be civil here.

Your post is a personal attack.

My post was a response to the years old mantra from the left and, I would guess you, of how stupid Sara Palin is. Now I am dumb? Sounds like anybody that is not you or like you is dumb or stupid.

I would bet that both Obama and Palin are smarter than both of us.

I have a masters degree in my field and am happy to say I am not dumb as I bet neither are you. So why do you have to call people that? What purpose does it serve?

To think that Obama thought up this plan after he was in office, set it up and pulled it off with out any help from previous administrations policies is ridiculous!

So what part of history did I rewrite and please back it up with some info so maybe I can learn something other than how dumb, dumb, dumb I am.
Were you there when Obama planned this mission or is this based on the obviously totally correct information from your leftest sources?

So, I would say at what point do you start showing respect for someones opinion instead of insulting them?
If you have a counter point, then make it. I did not see a point made in your post. Mine was an opinion on qualifications and the truth, Obama said he visited 54 states, all of them!

[Guest]

I do not know either of you but I would seriously doubt if Sarah Palin is smarter than either of you.

The 54 states by Pres. Obama was a gaffe and anyone can slip. However, Palin did not know where Germany is on a map, thought she had foreign relations skill because Alaska is close to Russia, thought the Queen of England was the head of government, did not know of two Koreas, etc.

She can orate with the best of them - but dumb as a box of lint.

[Guest]

However, Palin did not know where Germany is on a map, thought she had foreign relations skill because Alaska is close to Russia, thought the Queen of England was the head of government, did not know of two Koreas, etc.

I have to say I did not see these things in the news and may have just missed them. I did a little research and could not come up with any links to these things being true,
So could you tell me where to find facts to back this up and what is the difference between Palin being "Dumb" and really means these things but Obama just made a gaffe.
If they are true, then they are true. If they are not they should not be used to make a point.
Could it be that she was caught off guard because she was being attacked from angles that most people did not even knew existed. No she had to be stupid and Obama just made a gaffe. Typical!!

[Guest]

Sarah Palin 'believed Queen was in charge of British forces in Iraq' - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/sarah-palin/9094048/Sarah-Palin-believed-Queen-was-in-charge-of-British-forces-in-Iraq.html)


http://www.ontheissues.org/2012/Sarah_Palin_Foreign_Policy.htm

[Guest]

I do not know either of you but I would seriously doubt if Sarah Palin is smarter than either of you.

The 54 states by Pres. Obama was a gaffe and anyone can slip. However, Palin did not know where Germany is on a map, thought she had foreign relations skill because Alaska is close to Russia, thought the Queen of England was the head of government, did not know of two Koreas, etc.

She can orate with the best of them - but dumb as a box of lint.

I will take the middle ground here. I think that many people on this board have as much intellectual capacity as Ms. Pallin. At the same time, she is not dumb or she could not have fooled as many good people as she has. My feeling is she was rather insular, having spent many years in a small town in a very small state which is isolated from the rest of the U.S. geographically. She did not, in my opinion, posess the gravitas to be the Vice President of the nation. I think calling her dumb is not giving her enough credit for the things she has accomplished, but did she have enough intellectual capacity, or the ability to work through the kind of weighty issues a President would have to handle, not close in my opinion. (I'm guessing this will elicit several responses as to the current POTUS's intellect, experience, etc. so knock yourselves out).

[Guest]

Your first link is a obvious one sided report based on what she said off the record during a coaching session. If she said the Queen is in charge of the country and the troops that is one thing. But it is not clear in this link that she said anything like that.
If she thinks the Queen runs the country, that is sad but that is not what she said, it is what the film makers wanted her to say so they did just enough research to say they did and then told the story the way they wanted it to be.

The other link about seeing Russia from her back porch was like saying "I have seen something a MILLION time" when what you mean is you have seen it many times but not a million.
Again this is one of the best examples of the left lying about what she meant knowing what she meant.
Don't you think it is obvious that you could not see Russia from the middle of Alaska.
I think it is just like Obama saying he has been to 54 states. I know he knows, you know he knows but somehow you think she is stupid because you twist what she means and Obama just made a mistake.
The difference between you and I is I can admit that he made a mistake and you and the left will make a movie about misrepresenting what she said.
I don't think she should be president, never did, but you people just can't let it go.
I would like to see how you would fair when getting a anal exam 24/7 from dozens of people who would like to see you fail. Would you make a mistake, misspeak or say something that could be misinterpreted or would you just be stupid or dumb.
Listen to yourself.

It would be fun to see some of you debate her without your computer to look stuff up. Would be fun to watch.

[Guest]

My feeling is she was rather insular, having spent many years in a small town in a very small state which is isolated from the rest of the U.S. geographically.

This makes my point. I know you did not mean "small state" but that is what you said. So why is what she said and how she said it any different.

Alaska is a "Big State"
Other than that I can not disagree with the rest of your post.

[Guest]

This makes my point. I know you did not mean "small state" but that is what you said. So why is what she said and how she said it any different.

Alaska is a "Big State"
Other than that I can not disagree with the rest of your post.

I thought it would be obvious I meant "small state" to mean from a population standpoint.

[Guest]

I will take the middle ground here. I think that many people on this board have as much intellectual capacity as Ms. Pallin. At the same time, she is not dumb or she could not have fooled as many good people as she has. My feeling is she was rather insular, having spent many years in a small town in a very small state which is isolated from the rest of the U.S. geographically. She did not, in my opinion, posess the gravitas to be the Vice President of the nation. I think calling her dumb is not giving her enough credit for the things she has accomplished, but did she have enough intellectual capacity, or the ability to work through the kind of weighty issues a President would have to handle, not close in my opinion. (I'm guessing this will elicit several responses as to the current POTUS's intellect, experience, etc. so knock yourselves out).

Hold on now...I think your post is pretty much on very solid ground.

I am however, very touchy on this subject. This woman AND HER ENTIRE family has been maligned over the years to such an extent it borders on inhumane. I have two problems with this subject...I dont like the personal things that are said about her and her family in anyway, and I had to add this just so you would not think I have lost it totally by agreeing with you....I wish the media had done half the looking into Obama as they did with her.

BUT, on this subject, I think your post hit it on the head...folks on this forum are over the top with Palin. I am really tired of the calling people stupid and being so doggone personal. I criticize Obama a lot but never ever personally and never his family. I just wish that the same respect was shown to others.

[Guest]

I am however, very touchy on this subject. This woman AND HER ENTIRE family has been maligned over the years to such an extent it borders on inhumane. I have two problems with this subject...I dont like the personal things that are said about her and her family in anyway, and I had to add this just so you would not think I have lost it totally by agreeing with you....I wish the media had done half the looking into Obama as they did with her.

BUT, on this subject, I think your post hit it on the head...folks on this forum are over the top with Palin. I am really tired of the calling people stupid and being so doggone personal. I criticize Obama a lot but never ever personally and never his family. I just wish that the same respect was shown to others.

You said it much better than I did. This is what I am saying. It is so over the top on degrading her and her family and it never seems to end. Just imagine this happening to your family, it would kill me.


Quote:
Originally Posted by notlongnow View Post
This makes my point. I know you did not mean "small state" but that is what you said. So why is what she said and how she said it any different.

Alaska is a "Big State"
Other than that I can not disagree with the rest of your post.


Originally Posted by eweissenbach
I thought it would be obvious I meant "small state" to mean from a population standpoint.



It was crystal clear to me. It just made my point so I used it. I know you know the size of Alaska.

[Guest]

I wouldn't believe anything Steve Schmidt said. He didn't like her from day one. He was a horrible drag on the McPain campaign. I wish people would stop saying that she said she coould see Russia from her house. Tina Fey said it, not Palin.

[Guest]

Just so you lefties can have one less thing to misrepresent:

It was actually comedian Tina Fey, who was impersonating Ms. Palin on Saturday Night Live, who uttered the line that is now widely attributed to the former Alaska governor.

The basis for this line comes from a September 2008 interview with ABC News's Charles Gibson, who asked Palin what insights she had from her state being so close to Russia. She responded: "They're our next-door neighbors, and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska."

This is true. As Slate has pointed out, on a clear day, those on the Alaskan island of Little Diomede can see the Russian island of Big Diomede, located across the International Date Line some two and a half miles away. Given that Big Diomede has no permanent population, the amount of foreign policy experience one can gain from staring at it is debatable. But you can see Russian soil while standing in Alaska.


So what else is it that you believe that is not true??

Alaska played a huge roll in the cold war and I am sure that while living there does not make you as smart as you think Obama is, it would give you some insight that those of us in the lower 48 will never have. I think the foreign policy experience was also added to her answer because it made their report sound better to the dem base.

[Guest]

Sarah Palin is an intellectual midget.

[Guest]

Sarah Palin is an intellectual midget.

Way to add substance, well thought out! Really! that is what you have?

[Guest]

I do not know either of you but I would seriously doubt if Sarah Palin is smarter than either of you.

The 54 states by Pres. Obama was a gaffe and anyone can slip. However, Palin did not know where Germany is on a map, thought she had foreign relations skill because Alaska is close to Russia, thought the Queen of England was the head of government, did not know of two Koreas, etc.

She can orate with the best of them - but dumb as a box of lint.

Everything you wrote here is bogus tripe and very shameful.

The myths surrounding this All American woman is getting tiresome.

Get a new hobby, why don't ya.

[Guest]

other than the K-6 level name calling all any of you doing so know about Palin is what you read/hear in the media. And that qualifies for the continual stoning.

Agree, disagree, opine, debate all to one's liking that would be adult about it (and a lot of other subjects as well)....the name calling....truly nothing more than K-6 and I may be a little unfair to the K-6 folks.

btk

[Guest]

other than the K-6 level name calling all any of you doing so know about Palin is what you read/hear in the media. And that qualifies for the continual stoning.

Agree, disagree, opine, debate all to one's liking that would be adult about it (and a lot of other subjects as well)....the name calling....truly nothing more than K-6 and I may be a little unfair to the K-6 folks.

btk

I think that the ones who use name calling and cute constructions (obamascare for example), do it to agitate people on the other side of an issue, and love that it gets under their skin.

[Guest]

I will admit in the one post when I used the term Obamascare, that was exactly the intent..........

btk

[Guest]

I will admit in the one post when I used the term Obamascare, that was exactly the intent..........

btk

I enjoy and appreciate your candor.

[Guest]

UOTE=eweissenbach;516289]I think that the ones who use name calling and cute constructions (obamascare for example), do it to agitate people on the other side of an issue, and love that it gets under their skin.[/QUOTE]

I sincerely apologize because I use that term always and was totally unaware it was considered in anyway to be offensive. I do apologize and will not do it again, although the media uses it all the time which is where I picked it up and many left leaning posters use it as well.

But now that I know it is considered to be cute, which I am not close to...wont happen again

Sorry

[Guest]

UOTE=eweissenbach;516289]I think that the ones who use name calling and cute constructions (obamascare for example), do it to agitate people on the other side of an issue, and love that it gets under their skin.

I sincerely apologize because I use that term always and was totally unaware it was considered in anyway to be offensive. I do apologize and will not do it again, although the media uses it all the time which is where I picked it up and many left leaning posters use it as well.

But now that I know it is considered to be cute, which I am not close to...wont happen again

Sorry[/QUOTE]

Not sure you understood Bucco. While obamaCARE is a contrived construction, and may be offensive to some because it seems to imply that the POTUS was totally responsible for it - I was referring to obamaSCARE, which was a term BTK used a couple days ago.

[Guest]

I sincerely apologize because I use that term always and was totally unaware it was considered in anyway to be offensive. I do apologize and will not do it again, although the media uses it all the time which is where I picked it up and many left leaning posters use it as well.

But now that I know it is considered to be cute, which I am not close to...wont happen again

Sorry

Not sure you understood Bucco. While obamaCARE is a contrived construction, and may be offensive to some because it seems to imply that the POTUS was totally responsible for it - I was referring to obamaSCARE, which was a term BTK used a couple days ago.[/QUOTE]

That is good to hear....however I will still restrain myself I suppose. I am not a fan of the cutsey stuff !

[Guest]

Not sure you understood Bucco. While obamaCARE is a contrived construction, and may be offensive to some because it seems to imply that the POTUS was totally responsible for it - I was referring to obamaSCARE, which was a term BTK used a couple days ago.

That is good to hear....however I will still restrain myself I suppose. I am not a fan of the cutsey stuff ![/QUOTE]

Even if I get crosswise with you occasionally, and I think you are a little obsessive, you are obviously a good man.

[Guest]

I will take the middle ground here. I think that many people on this board have as much intellectual capacity as Ms. Pallin. At the same time, she is not dumb or she could not have fooled as many good people as she has. My feeling is she was rather insular, having spent many years in a small town in a very small state which is isolated from the rest of the U.S. geographically. She did not, in my opinion, posess the gravitas to be the Vice President of the nation. I think calling her dumb is not giving her enough credit for the things she has accomplished, but did she have enough intellectual capacity, or the ability to work through the kind of weighty issues a President would have to handle, not close in my opinion. (I'm guessing this will elicit several responses as to the current POTUS's intellect, experience, etc. so knock yourselves out).

Hi eweissenbach As has been documented eve by the lefties, Palin boke through and broke down the good old boy network in Alaska. She demonstrated that one could be honest and also demonstrated that her desires were in the best interests of Alaska and its people. My wife would disagree but I cannot fault her for leaving the governorship. The lefties caused such distractions costing her and Alaska precious time and money. she recognized that as long as she held that office she would continue to be a target. quite frankly I believe she showed courage in leaving because she was well aware of what criticsm was coming. What I am not sure of is why the lefties feared her so much that they were unrelenting in their attacks and given the the HBO movie Game changer still fear her.

Palin had more politrical leadership than Obama in 2008 and leadership that required the cooperation of both parties. all Obama had to show was his experience as a community organizer whose main objective was to divide, destroy and conquer. Obama carried that same community organizer agenda with him andcontinues to operate in that same manner. of course he calls it things like hope and change and class warfare and......

I opine others can decide

[Guest]

I wonder what a Mitt Romney advisor meant when he said that Sarah Palin 'poisoned the well' for picking a woman to be VP. Wonder what he meant by that?


http://ed.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/06/19/12304452-report-palin-poisoned-the-well-for-a-woman-to-join-romney-ticket?lite

[Guest]

Hi eweissenbach As has been documented eve by the lefties, Palin boke through and broke down the good old boy network in Alaska. She demonstrated that one could be honest and also demonstrated that her desires were in the best interests of Alaska and its people. My wife would disagree but I cannot fault her for leaving the governorship. The lefties caused such distractions costing her and Alaska precious time and money. she recognized that as long as she held that office she would continue to be a target. quite frankly I believe she showed courage in leaving because she was well aware of what criticsm was coming. What I am not sure of is why the lefties feared her so much that they were unrelenting in their attacks and given the the HBO movie Game changer still fear her.

Palin had more politrical leadership than Obama in 2008 and leadership that required the cooperation of both parties. all Obama had to show was his experience as a community organizer whose main objective was to divide, destroy and conquer. Obama carried that same community organizer agenda with him andcontinues to operate in that same manner. of course he calls it things like hope and change and class warfare and......

I opine others can decide

BULLETIN: President Obama updates his resume'

Community Organizer
IL State Senator
US Senator (D-IL)
President of the United States (winning in a landslide victory)

What better experience for running for president of the US, than being president of the US.

[Guest]

BULLETIN: President Obama updates his resume'

Community Organizer
IL State Senator
US Senator (D-IL)
President of the United States (winning in a landslide victory)

What better experience for running for president of the US, than being president of the US.

Yea ,he's a legend in his own mind and come to think of your mind too

Personal Best Regards:

[Guest]

I wonder what a Mitt Romney advisor meant when he said that Sarah Palin 'poisoned the well' for picking a woman to be VP. Wonder what he meant by that?


Report: Palin 'poisoned the well' for a woman to join Romney ticket - The Ed Show (http://ed.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/06/19/12304452-report-palin-poisoned-the-well-for-a-woman-to-join-romney-ticket?lite)







"But obviously, we've got to stand with our North Korean allies."

I am hoping Willard picks The Wasilla Quitta for VP. The possibilities would be endless..............

[Guest]

Look, I don't need to go to the tabloids for reasons to not support Palin. My reasons for not liking her on the ticket were as follows:

- Mayor of a town that required little work. When interviewed, the current mayor of Wasilla said that the big thing that town employees did was "show up on Tuesdays for their paychecks". There's no police or fire departments run by Wasilla - that's done by state and county officials.

- Governor of a welfare state. Alaska get so much oil revenue that each citizen gets a rebate check every year - the size of which depends on how long they've been a resident. Being the Governor of Alaska means you've NEVER had to make a hard budget decision in your entire term. You BARELY have to prioritize because of all the revenue you're swimming in.

When prepared, this woman was DEFINITELY "telegenic". She had "it" and could really motivate a crowd when she was 'on'. But when caught unaware or off-guard, she failed miserably. I mean, the one "mainstream media" moment that said SO much to me to reinforce my opinion was Katie Couric and having a "deer caught in the headlights" look at a softball question that my kids could andwer in grade school - what newspapers do you read?

If I had seen *only* that, I would have written it off as a bad moment - but there were others *and* her resume was threadbare.

And yes, a couple of years in the U.S. Senate *does* count more than any amount of time as Governor of Alaska. A couple of years in the Senate would be *chicken feed* against the governor of a much more difficult state to manage - like almost all of them. Heck, Romney is WAY more qualified than Palin. He actually had to work with a virulently difficult legislature in Massachusetts.

[Guest]

Look, I don't need to go to the tabloids for reasons to not support Palin. My reasons for not liking her on the ticket were as follows:

- Mayor of a town that required little work. When interviewed, the current mayor of Wasilla said that the big thing that town employees did was "show up on Tuesdays for their paychecks". There's no police or fire departments run by Wasilla - that's done by state and county officials.

- Governor of a welfare state. Alaska get so much oil revenue that each citizen gets a rebate check every year - the size of which depends on how long they've been a resident. Being the Governor of Alaska means you've NEVER had to make a hard budget decision in your entire term. You BARELY have to prioritize because of all the revenue you're swimming in.

When prepared, this woman was DEFINITELY "telegenic". She had "it" and could really motivate a crowd when she was 'on'. But when caught unaware or off-guard, she failed miserably. I mean, the one "mainstream media" moment that said SO much to me to reinforce my opinion was Katie Couric and having a "deer caught in the headlights" look at a softball question that my kids could andwer in grade school - what newspapers do you read?

If I had seen *only* that, I would have written it off as a bad moment - but there were others *and* her resume was threadbare.

And yes, a couple of years in the U.S. Senate *does* count more than any amount of time as Governor of Alaska. A couple of years in the Senate would be *chicken feed* against the governor of a much more difficult state to manage - like almost all of them. Heck, Romney is WAY more qualified than Palin. He actually had to work with a virulently difficult legislature in Massachusetts.

I understand where you go not to get information but may I ask your reason for sharing all of this.

[Guest]

in your catharsis on qualifications you forgot to mention that Romney is far more qualified than Obama.....using the basis you presented.

I also would like to hear why you think 2 years in the senate (remember it is a part time job) is more meaningful than running a small town.

We know the senate is a glad handing, no effort required, no risks taken, what's in it for me, no matter what wrong you do you can't get fired part time job. Almost any high school graduate could do the job as well. Just look at the incumbents.

Running a small town or small business, unless one has done it there is no real knowledge to qualify for criticism.

btk

[Guest]

Would you equate serving as governor of a small state (MA) the same experience as being President of the United States for the same amount of time?

[Guest]

serving as POTUS does not automatically qualify a person any more than being the CEO of a small or large company.

When discussing qualifications the usual approach is to compare the qualifications/accomplishments/capabilities of the individual.

Just as you know my opinion regarding Obama's performance is negative. So to me and the millions like me his having the title of POTUS certainly does not make him the better candidate. In fact the four year track record works against his alleged "qualification(s)".

btk

[Guest]

Would you equate serving as governor of a small state (MA) the same experience as being President of the United States for the same amount of time?

Demonstrated incompetence does not qualify you to continue in a job. It shows that you should be fired.

[Guest]

Demonstrated incompetence does not qualify you to continue in a job. It shows that you should be fired.

The Iraq war vets who are no longer serving in Iraq might disagree with you, as might the auto workers who now have jobs, or the auto companies who are seeing their sales numbers soar, or the 50 million people who will now have health care under the Affordable Care Act, or the young hispanics who don't have to live under the threat of being deported, or the thousands of gays and lesbians serving in the Armed Forces who don't have to worry about being 'outed', or the women who can't be paid less for doing the same work as their male counterparts under 'The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009', or the six million young people who have health insurance under their parent's health insurance plans until they are 26 years old, or the people with pre-existing conditions who can't be denied health insurance, or the seniors who won't be caught in the 'doughnut hole' when paying for their meds, or women who can't be charged twice as much for insurance as their male counterparts, or people who don't have to worry about lifetime caps on their health insurance, or corporations who see their profits at a 45 year high, or investors who have seen the Dow Jones go from 9000 to 12,928. Ask Osama Bin Laden.

Have you asked these people about the incompetence of President Obama?

[Guest]

in your catharsis on qualifications you forgot to mention that Romney is far more qualified than Obama.....using the basis you presented.

I also would like to hear why you think 2 years in the senate (remember it is a part time job) is more meaningful than running a small town.

We know the senate is a glad handing, no effort required, no risks taken, what's in it for me, no matter what wrong you do you can't get fired part time job. Almost any high school graduate could do the job as well. Just look at the incumbents.

Running a small town or small business, unless one has done it there is no real knowledge to qualify for criticism.

btk

If you think Mitt Romney did such a bang-up job as governor of Massachusetts, ask yourself two questions: why didn't Romney run for re-election, and why isn't Romney expected to carry Massachusetts in the presidential election if his constituents think he did such a great job?

[Guest]

When Willard left MAS he had an approval rating of about 30%. The guy has been running for POTUS for 7 years.

Ran for Senator - lost
Ran for POTUS in 2008 - lost
Running for POTUS again in 2012 - will lose again

[Guest]

because he figured if Obama could do what he did or didn't and run for POTUS and win, why not? :jester:

You all want to keep looking at the political spin by looking at the job or the title.

How about just looking at the capability of the man.....and to be fair you must compare Obama when he was a candidate to Romney as a candidate.
Two resume's to be compared at like points in time.

btk

[Guest]

I read through this thread today and do not have much to add except to note the uncivil tone of some posters. Now it doesn’t surprise me that most of them come from the Left. I am convinced that they all study Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals. Rule Number 5 is, and I quote,

“Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.”

[Guest]

I read through this thread today and do not have much to add except to note the uncivil tone of some posters. Now it doesn’t surprise me that most of them come from the Left. I am convinced that they all study Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals. Rule Number 5 is, and I quote,

“Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.”

Now that is ridiculous. :doh:

[Guest]

"Originally Posted by Number 6
I read through this thread today and do not have much to add except to note the uncivil tone of some posters. Now it doesn’t surprise me that most of them come from the Left. I am convinced that they all study Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals. Rule Number 5 is, and I quote,

“Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.”
__________________

What I find so amazing is that the wubers all seem to have a copy of Saul Alinsky's book and are having such a wonderful time reading and quoting from it. It reminds me of the followers of Mao Tse Tung all carrying "The Little Red Book of Chairman Mao's Quotations."

Well, they can put Alinsky's book in their bookcases next to their treasured books by Rubio, Gingrich, Palin, and Dr. Seuss.

[Guest]

"Originally Posted by Number 6
I read through this thread today and do not have much to add except to note the uncivil tone of some posters. Now it doesn’t surprise me that most of them come from the Left. I am convinced that they all study Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals. Rule Number 5 is, and I quote,

“Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.”
__________________

What I find so amazing is that the wubers all seem to have a copy of Saul Alinsky's book and are having such a wonderful time reading and quoting from it. It reminds me of the followers of Mao Tse Tung all carrying "The Little Red Book of Chairman Mao's Quotations."

Well, they can put Alinsky's book in their bookcases next to their treasured books by Rubio, Gingrich, Palin, and Dr. Seuss.

Just for information...doesnt mean anything but just info.....

Hillary Clinton wrote her thesis on this book and that fact was covered up during her husbands presidency and I think the thesis is still sealed.

And President Obama actually TAUGHT classes on Saul Alinsky during his days as an organizer

[Guest]

Just for information...doesnt mean anything but just info.....

Hillary Clinton wrote her thesis on this book and that fact was covered up during her husbands presidency and I think the thesis is still sealed.

And President Obama actually TAUGHT classes on Saul Alinsky during his days as an organizer

You're right.....it doesn't mean anything. :mad:

[Guest]

You're right.....it doesn't mean anything. :mad:

I will second that!

[Guest]

"Originally Posted by Number 6
I read through this thread today and do not have much to add except to note the uncivil tone of some posters. Now it doesn’t surprise me that most of them come from the Left. I am convinced that they all study Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals. Rule Number 5 is, and I quote,

“Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.”
__________________

What I find so amazing is that the wubers all seem to have a copy of Saul Alinsky's book and are having such a wonderful time reading and quoting from it. It reminds me of the followers of Mao Tse Tung all carrying "The Little Red Book of Chairman Mao's Quotations."

Well, they can put Alinsky's book in their bookcases next to their treasured books by Rubio, Gingrich, Palin, and Dr. Seuss.

What??............people read??........well that's not fair.

How are leftists supposed to convince anyone they actually have a clue on what to do, if the people are reading about their schemes and their long sordid history of failing over and over and over.

How do you think we got your number all you clueless liberals??

We study you. It's why you will always eventually lose.

[Guest]

Now that is ridiculous. :doh:

I get it. Now that's funny!!!!

[Guest]

Just for information...doesnt mean anything but just info.....

Hillary Clinton wrote her thesis on this book and that fact was covered up during her husbands presidency and I think the thesis is still sealed.

And President Obama actually TAUGHT classes on Saul Alinsky during his days as an organizer

Bucco.... I just have to ask, if the thesis is sealed how do we know what she wrote about?

Sorry

[Guest]

Bucco.... I just have to ask, if the thesis is sealed how do we know what she wrote about?

Sorry

Precisely.

[Guest]

What??............people read??........well that's not fair.

How are leftists supposed to convince anyone they actually have a clue on what to do, if the people are reading about their schemes and their long sordid history of failing over and over and over.

How do you think we got your number all you clueless liberals??

We study you. It's why you will always eventually lose.

I subscribe to the Zen of Pooh, myself. Winnie, that is. :laugh:

And BTW, when the Democrats lose, we come back stronger. When the Republicans win... the country loses. That said, I don't believe the Democrats will lose in November. :popcorn:

[Guest]

Bucco.... I just have to ask, if the thesis is sealed how do we know what she wrote about?

Sorry

I errred..it is no longer something sealed...a few lnks..

"Did you know Hillary's senior thesis was on Alinsky, and she has prevented it from being released ever since she came to prominence?

Well, that furtive Mrs. Clinton is no match for my Google-Fu! I found a .pdf image file of her thesis and a text-based .pdf file of her thesis generated using optical-character recognition software."

Change of Subject: Hillary Clinton's 'secret' Alinsky thesis EXPOSED!!! (http://blogs.chicagotribune.com/news_columnists_ezorn/2012/01/hillary-clintons-secret-alinsky-thesis-exposed.html)

"WELLESLEY, Mass. — The senior thesis of Hillary D. Rodham, Wellesley College class of 1969, has been speculated about, spun, analyzed, debated, criticized and defended. But rarely has it been read, because for the eight years of Bill Clinton’s presidency it was locked away.

As forbidden fruit, the writings of a 21-year-old college senior, examining the tactics of radical community organizer Saul D. Alinsky, have gained mythic status among her critics — a “Rosetta Stone,” in the words of one, that would allow readers to decode the thinking of the former first lady and 2008 presidential candidate."

Reading Hillary Clinton's hidden thesis - politics - Decision '08 - Hillary Clinton News - msnbc.com (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17388372/ns/politics-decision_08/t/reading-hillary-rodhams-hidden-thesis/#.T_ne4_Xgf7c)

"In the acknowledgments, she jokes about not having a "loving wife" to thank for keeping the kids at bay while she wrote. On page 65, she decries the pervasiveness of racism and bigotry. And in the notes at the end, she talks about her decision to forgo a job for the rigors of law school.

But what is perhaps most striking about Hillary Rodham Clinton's senior thesis at Wellesley College is the way in which she grapples with such labels as radical and liberal and what they mean, questions she is wrestling with now as she runs for president.

The 92-page thesis, "There is Only the Fight: An Analysis of the Alinsky Model," explores the life and methods of Saul D. Alinsky , a firebrand activist who organized the poor in Chicago to lobby in the 1930s for better housing and social services."

A student's words, a candidate's struggle - The Boston Globe (http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/03/04/a_students_words_a_candidates_struggle/?page=full)

What is amazing...you never heard about this before, and even though I think the one link is dated 2007, I could not find this in 2008.

I apologize for an assumption....dont usually do that...sorry