Why Romney must be POTUS - there is only one idiot in the world. his name is Obama,

When I see Benito Mussolini running for president, I'll certainly vote for him because he is not Barack Obama.

Seems legit.

 

I didnt find a reference to ANWR on his site. We have plenty of other places to drill, no need for ANWR right now.

Because regulations are the last thing we need in safe industries like nuke plants, coal mining, controversial mining techniques?

Capital gains tax? This would be a reason I would vote against him. Capital gains are income and should be taxed as income.

Romney cant really alter tax laws. All we need are some more loopholes for corporations to avoid taxes, we have way too much revenue.

Pretty vague statement there. By making it easier to do business I assume you mean eliminating regulation and lowering their taxes. Sounds like trouble to me. Business does what is best for business, which is increase profits. Without regulations, business will not all of a sudden grow a conscience and morals.

He is definitely no Gingrich, not even close. Yes he is better than Obama, but not by much. If being better than Obama is the test for being president, we are in a world of hurt.

 

Yes because Apple is hurting so much financially....Oh and the rest of your post is equally absurd, its nothing but republican talking points for the rich.

 

I've read it a couple times and it doesn't say most of that and the rest are innuendoes and false claims since he claims power he doesn't hold even if he were the president.

The most telling thing about his comments is he says he needs 10 years to make the changes necessary to straighten up the mess the two party system under Bush/Obama caused. Telling because republicans have been saying that since Nixon.

Romney will do nothing about jobs because he can't, under the present conditions, neither could Obama. You cannot perpetuate the exact same failed policies, and expect different results. There's a word for that, it's called "insanity".

Neither deserve the office, because, for no other reason than they are bold faced liars, who are equally part of the problem. Both participants/purveyors of cronyism politics.


So again I ask, what will Romney do that is any different than what Obama (the best republican democrats ever elected) did for the last four years that will #1 create jobs, and #2 boost our failing economy?

 

Drill for oil, for starters.
Second, get out of the way. Government can't make jobs but they can get in the way of making jobs. Get rid of unnecessary rules and regulations.
Allow people to buy their health insurance across state lines. Nation wide competition will go a long way to making health insurance more affordable.

 

I rescind any previous endorsements I may have made prior to reading this.

 

-If conservatives support drilling in ANWR so much, why were they so outraged at the oil spill? They have no right to be outraged at the result of something they support.
-Yay global warming!
-Haven't read much about Capital gains, so I can't comment.
-Is Apple in danger of becoming bankrupt?
-Nonsense, those greedy cooperations will always stay in places like China as long as they continue to underpay and mistreat their workers in the interest of capital gain.
-Actually, he's just slightly worse. He wants to implement the same austerity measures that are destroying Europe right now.

 

He's making a point about the Romney voters.

 

They were only pissed because their precious oil was lost to the sea....

 

LOL, you do know what sarcasm is, right? "only one idiot in the world"

 

Ooohhh, your entire OP makes a lot more sense now.

 

what rules and regulations do you want to get rid of?

 

I can tell you that it will be a cold day in hell before I could ever vote for Romney. I am a Independent, not Obama's biggest fan, but Obama is clearly the better candidate here hands down lol.

 

Two fallacies here:

First, that government is solely responsible for imposing rules and regulations. Many businesses incorporate their own self-imposed rules and regulations to ensure product quality, safety, ect. It's generally bad for business if you're making salmonella burgers or vaccines that are dangerous, lawsuits are expensive. HOWEVER....it is not enough to simply trust businesses to always do the right thing. This is where government rules and regulations come into play, which overlap the ones typically self-imposed by the business itself. Not only will you get sued civilly for selling salmonella burgers, but now there's a potential criminal component attached if negligence or whatever can be demonstrated, as well as heavy government imposed monetary sanctions.

Second, that all government rules and regulations are bad. Just who decides this? A pharmaceutical company may claim that government rules and regulations requiring testing on their medications to be 'unnecessary'. The contracted company installing an elevator in your building may claim that government rules and regulations requiring certain building codes and safety measures to be met, as 'unnecessary'. A financial institution may claim that government rules and regulations pertaining to the use of funds in your accounts to be 'unnecessary'. An automobile manufacturer may claim that government rules and regulations pertaining to certain vehicle safety specificalities and recalls to be 'unnecessary'.

Just who decides what's unnecessary? This issue is much more complex than you think it is, and the numerous variables involve change drastically from industry to industry.

Also there is zero evidence to substantiate the claim that government gets in the way of making jobs. This is simply a regurgitated notion that ignores the reality that government rules and regulations are typically there for safety and accountability reasons, whereas the rules and regulations self-imposed by private enterprise are there for liability and profit reasons.

Just a thought.

 

You're a liberal Democrat, not an independent. It's like all people who claim to be independent because they're ashamed to let people know what they really are. If you think Obama is the best candidate with his radical policies, suffocating debt, incompetence, class and race warfare, that puts you firmly on the Left so far you might fall off a cliff.

 

Double thumbs up

 

I have noticed many republicans are now calling themselves libertarians after Romeny got the nod from republicans as their best candidate for the election, is it because they're ashamed to let people know what they really are?


.

 

Uh...you do realize that most independents are genuinely non-partisan (like myself), right?

 

You're non partisan except for all the extreme whacked out leftist positions you defend. There's a certain leftward gravity that exerts itself. It's the most weak, cowardly, and simple position one can take. Any hippie can toke on their joint, blow out a puff of smoke, and say, "Yeah, man. I think the WOMAN should choose." There isn't an ounce of moral fiber in the Left, so it becomes the default position even for those who think they take no position at all. If you aren't anchored to the right, you drift to the Left. It really is that simple.

 

Hahahahah, that's almost as good as this one:



or this one:

 

LOL I think the right would rather discuss something else. Dignity and character are only an issue when it's a liberal.

 

You have no idea what you're talking about, but I'll humour you. Name the five "immoral" positions of the left and I'll tell you where I stand.

 

But Romney is constantly changing his mind; what guarantees to we have that he won't change his mind again on issues important to the country???

 

Good point. Remember when Kerry ran and right wingers were clammering "Flip-flopper! Flip flopper!" every 5 minutes? Apparently now, flip flopping is a good thing. Right wing hypocrisy reigns supreme once again.