|
Official Romney thread
|
|
Topic Started: Jan 10 2012, 10:06 AM (208 Views)
|
|
HoosierLars
|
Jan 12 2012, 10:38 AM
Post #16
|
3 in a row
- Posts:
- 22,916
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- February 5, 2008
|
- Mr Gray
- Jan 12 2012, 08:50 AM
yes, I would vote for Romney over Obama, however it would virtually guarantee another liberal route 4-8 years later, because moderate policies will not help, and the populace will turn away from the GOP again. Gray, you do realize that Congress writes and passes our budgets. All Mitt needs to do is pass them. So you need to focus your energy on electing more fiscal conservatives to Congress, and worry less about how conservative the president is.
|
|
| |
|
HoosierLars
|
Jan 12 2012, 10:40 AM
Post #17
|
3 in a row
- Posts:
- 22,916
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- February 5, 2008
|
- HoosierLars
- Jan 12 2012, 10:38 AM
- Mr Gray
- Jan 12 2012, 08:50 AM
yes, I would vote for Romney over Obama, however it would virtually guarantee another liberal route 4-8 years later, because moderate policies will not help, and the populace will turn away from the GOP again.
Gray, you do realize that Congress writes and passes our budgets. All Mitt needs to do is pass them. So you need to focus your energy on electing more fiscal conservatives to Congress, and worry less about how conservative the president is. Also, Romney has actually managed large business transactions, and Paul has done little in that arena. Romney's experience at Bain Capital should help him cut waste in many areas. Paul might focus his energy on ending the Fed, and that wouldn't help us, IMO.
|
|
| |
|
Mr Gray
|
Jan 12 2012, 10:56 AM
Post #18
|
Coach
- Posts:
- 16,503
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #26
- Joined:
- February 5, 2008
|
- HoosierLars
- Jan 12 2012, 10:38 AM
- Mr Gray
- Jan 12 2012, 08:50 AM
yes, I would vote for Romney over Obama, however it would virtually guarantee another liberal route 4-8 years later, because moderate policies will not help, and the populace will turn away from the GOP again.
Gray, you do realize that Congress writes and passes our budgets. All Mitt needs to do is pass them. So you need to focus your energy on electing more fiscal conservatives to Congress, and worry less about how conservative the president is. I am aware that this is how it is SUPPOSED to work, however we have allowed much more authority at the executive level in all areas, including budgets.
|
 The body knows what fighters don't: how to protect itself. A neck can only twist so far. Twist it just a hair more and the body says, "Hey, I'll take it from here because you obviously don't know what you're doing... Lie down now, rest, and we'll talk about this when you regain your senses." It's called the knockout mechanism.
|
| |
|
Bobobinc
|
Jan 12 2012, 05:47 PM
Post #19
|
Scrimshanker
- Posts:
- 8,742
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #73
- Joined:
- February 6, 2008
|
- Mr Gray
- Jan 12 2012, 08:50 AM
- HoosierLars
- Jan 11 2012, 10:06 PM
- IUCOLTFAN
- Jan 11 2012, 11:28 AM
There is a HUGE difference between hypothetical national security issues and the ACTUAL safety of the homeland. I'm pretty sure Paul would not let anyone just up and bomb the homeland yet you seem to think his views on foreign policy would ruin this country basically overnight..........talk about crazy.
IMO, Paul's fiscal policy ideas greatly outweigh what you think are his foreign policy deficiencies.
Foreign policy mistakes are a real wildcard. They could cause zero problems, or result in the mid-east turning into a large chunk of glass, and world instability and poverty for generations. I like Paul's fiscal policy, and would like it even more if he could stop the incessant rambling about the Federal Reserve and reverting to a gold standard. If Paul was nominated, I would probably hold my nose and vote for him because good fiscal policy will trump poor foreign policy. If Romney wins the nomination, will you vote for him next November?
yes, I would vote for Romney over Obama, however it would virtually guarantee another liberal route 4-8 years later, because moderate policies will not help, and the populace will turn away from the GOP again. And botched conservative policies didn't lead to Obama being elected? Oh, I assume Bush's policies weren't conservative enough.
|
|
| |
|
brumdog44
|
Jan 12 2012, 06:33 PM
Post #20
|
The guy picked last in gym class
- Posts:
- 43,823
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #181
- Joined:
- February 20, 2008
|
- HoosierLars
- Jan 12 2012, 12:56 AM
- brumdog44
- Jan 11 2012, 11:26 PM
Foreign policy mistakes -- you mean like getting our military involved in pretty much every known conflict? I agree, those have been huge mistakes. I'm glad to see you finally disavow Iraq.
Do you agree with oldschool, and believe getting involved in WW2 was a mistake? Are you seriously equating WW2 with Iran right now?
|
|
| |
|
Mr Gray
|
Jan 12 2012, 06:54 PM
Post #21
|
Coach
- Posts:
- 16,503
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #26
- Joined:
- February 5, 2008
|
- Bobobinc
- Jan 12 2012, 05:47 PM
- Mr Gray
- Jan 12 2012, 08:50 AM
- HoosierLars
- Jan 11 2012, 10:06 PM
- IUCOLTFAN
- Jan 11 2012, 11:28 AM
There is a HUGE difference between hypothetical national security issues and the ACTUAL safety of the homeland. I'm pretty sure Paul would not let anyone just up and bomb the homeland yet you seem to think his views on foreign policy would ruin this country basically overnight..........talk about crazy.
IMO, Paul's fiscal policy ideas greatly outweigh what you think are his foreign policy deficiencies.
Foreign policy mistakes are a real wildcard. They could cause zero problems, or result in the mid-east turning into a large chunk of glass, and world instability and poverty for generations. I like Paul's fiscal policy, and would like it even more if he could stop the incessant rambling about the Federal Reserve and reverting to a gold standard. If Paul was nominated, I would probably hold my nose and vote for him because good fiscal policy will trump poor foreign policy. If Romney wins the nomination, will you vote for him next November?
yes, I would vote for Romney over Obama, however it would virtually guarantee another liberal route 4-8 years later, because moderate policies will not help, and the populace will turn away from the GOP again.
And botched conservative policies didn't lead to Obama being elected? Oh, I assume Bush's policies weren't conservative enough. oh wow....I thought we had covered this to death on here brum, but Bush absolutely is not a conservative nor are his policies. Rule #1 of conservatism is reducing spending, which he didn't do. #2 would be reduce debt, which he didn't do. #3 would be reduce the size of government, which he didn't do. #4 would be increase individual freedom and liberty, which he didn't do (Patriot Act).
Romney might actually be a little more conservative than Bush, but I think you need a true conservative in the WH to get us going the right way...then you have to be able to show those results so that you can have at least 16 years of conservatism to actually fix our problems....then when everyone gets fat and happy, we elect another liberal to screw it all up.
|
 The body knows what fighters don't: how to protect itself. A neck can only twist so far. Twist it just a hair more and the body says, "Hey, I'll take it from here because you obviously don't know what you're doing... Lie down now, rest, and we'll talk about this when you regain your senses." It's called the knockout mechanism.
|
| |
|
HoosierLars
|
Jan 12 2012, 09:38 PM
Post #22
|
3 in a row
- Posts:
- 22,916
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- February 5, 2008
|
- brumdog44
- Jan 12 2012, 06:33 PM
- HoosierLars
- Jan 12 2012, 12:56 AM
- brumdog44
- Jan 11 2012, 11:26 PM
Foreign policy mistakes -- you mean like getting our military involved in pretty much every known conflict? I agree, those have been huge mistakes. I'm glad to see you finally disavow Iraq.
Do you agree with oldschool, and believe getting involved in WW2 was a mistake?
Are you seriously equating WW2 with Iran right now? Didn't expect you to answer.
|
|
| |
|
brumdog44
|
Jan 12 2012, 10:21 PM
Post #23
|
The guy picked last in gym class
- Posts:
- 43,823
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #181
- Joined:
- February 20, 2008
|
- Mr Gray
- Jan 12 2012, 06:54 PM
- Bobobinc
- Jan 12 2012, 05:47 PM
- Mr Gray
- Jan 12 2012, 08:50 AM
- HoosierLars
- Jan 11 2012, 10:06 PM
- IUCOLTFAN
- Jan 11 2012, 11:28 AM
There is a HUGE difference between hypothetical national security issues and the ACTUAL safety of the homeland. I'm pretty sure Paul would not let anyone just up and bomb the homeland yet you seem to think his views on foreign policy would ruin this country basically overnight..........talk about crazy.
IMO, Paul's fiscal policy ideas greatly outweigh what you think are his foreign policy deficiencies.
Foreign policy mistakes are a real wildcard. They could cause zero problems, or result in the mid-east turning into a large chunk of glass, and world instability and poverty for generations. I like Paul's fiscal policy, and would like it even more if he could stop the incessant rambling about the Federal Reserve and reverting to a gold standard. If Paul was nominated, I would probably hold my nose and vote for him because good fiscal policy will trump poor foreign policy. If Romney wins the nomination, will you vote for him next November?
yes, I would vote for Romney over Obama, however it would virtually guarantee another liberal route 4-8 years later, because moderate policies will not help, and the populace will turn away from the GOP again.
And botched conservative policies didn't lead to Obama being elected? Oh, I assume Bush's policies weren't conservative enough.
oh wow....I thought we had covered this to death on here brum, but Bush absolutely is not a conservative nor are his policies. Rule #1 of conservatism is reducing spending, which he didn't do. #2 would be reduce debt, which he didn't do. #3 would be reduce the size of government, which he didn't do. #4 would be increase individual freedom and liberty, which he didn't do (Patriot Act). Romney might actually be a little more conservative than Bush, but I think you need a true conservative in the WH to get us going the right way...then you have to be able to show those results so that you can have at least 16 years of conservatism to actually fix our problems....then when everyone gets fat and happy, we elect another liberal to screw it all up. Why are you addressing me?
|
|
| |
|
brumdog44
|
Jan 12 2012, 10:23 PM
Post #24
|
The guy picked last in gym class
- Posts:
- 43,823
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #181
- Joined:
- February 20, 2008
|
- HoosierLars
- Jan 12 2012, 09:38 PM
- brumdog44
- Jan 12 2012, 06:33 PM
- HoosierLars
- Jan 12 2012, 12:56 AM
- brumdog44
- Jan 11 2012, 11:26 PM
Foreign policy mistakes -- you mean like getting our military involved in pretty much every known conflict? I agree, those have been huge mistakes. I'm glad to see you finally disavow Iraq.
Do you agree with oldschool, and believe getting involved in WW2 was a mistake?
Are you seriously equating WW2 with Iran right now?
Didn't expect you to answer. No, I don't think entering WW2 was a mistake. That has ZIP to do with Iran, but as resident Idiot Analogist, I wouldn't expect you to know that.
|
|
| |
|
HoosierLars
|
Jan 12 2012, 10:29 PM
Post #25
|
3 in a row
- Posts:
- 22,916
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #20
- Joined:
- February 5, 2008
|
- brumdog44
- Jan 12 2012, 10:23 PM
- HoosierLars
- Jan 12 2012, 09:38 PM
- brumdog44
- Jan 12 2012, 06:33 PM
- HoosierLars
- Jan 12 2012, 12:56 AM
- brumdog44
- Jan 11 2012, 11:26 PM
Foreign policy mistakes -- you mean like getting our military involved in pretty much every known conflict? I agree, those have been huge mistakes. I'm glad to see you finally disavow Iraq.
Do you agree with oldschool, and believe getting involved in WW2 was a mistake?
Are you seriously equating WW2 with Iran right now?
Didn't expect you to answer.
No, I don't think entering WW2 was a mistake. That has ZIP to do with Iran, but as resident Idiot Analogist, I wouldn't expect you to know that. When conversing with Paulites, it's helpful to know if a fatal dosage of Koolaid has been consumed.
|
|
| |
|
boilergrad01
|
Jan 12 2012, 10:30 PM
Post #26
|
Working on the last 5
- Posts:
- 10,098
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #135
- Joined:
- February 9, 2008
|
Once again who has called for us to go to war with Iran?
Having ships in the Persian Gulf is nothing new. Having covert assets in Iran is nothing new.
|
|
Nothing beats an Astronaut
|
| |
|
hoosierinhogville
|
Jan 12 2012, 10:35 PM
Post #27
|
Coach
- Posts:
- 5,812
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #155
- Joined:
- February 11, 2008
|
- Mr Gray
- Jan 12 2012, 06:54 PM
Bush absolutely is not a conservative nor are his policies. Rule #1 of conservatism is reducing spending, which he didn't do. #2 would be reduce debt, which he didn't do. #3 would be reduce the size of government, which he didn't do. #4 would be increase individual freedom and liberty, which he didn't do (Patriot Act).
+ infinity
|
|
| |
|
Bobobinc
|
Jan 12 2012, 10:44 PM
Post #28
|
Scrimshanker
- Posts:
- 8,742
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #73
- Joined:
- February 6, 2008
|
- Mr Gray
- Jan 12 2012, 06:54 PM
- Bobobinc
- Jan 12 2012, 05:47 PM
- Mr Gray
- Jan 12 2012, 08:50 AM
- HoosierLars
- Jan 11 2012, 10:06 PM
- IUCOLTFAN
- Jan 11 2012, 11:28 AM
There is a HUGE difference between hypothetical national security issues and the ACTUAL safety of the homeland. I'm pretty sure Paul would not let anyone just up and bomb the homeland yet you seem to think his views on foreign policy would ruin this country basically overnight..........talk about crazy.
IMO, Paul's fiscal policy ideas greatly outweigh what you think are his foreign policy deficiencies.
Foreign policy mistakes are a real wildcard. They could cause zero problems, or result in the mid-east turning into a large chunk of glass, and world instability and poverty for generations. I like Paul's fiscal policy, and would like it even more if he could stop the incessant rambling about the Federal Reserve and reverting to a gold standard. If Paul was nominated, I would probably hold my nose and vote for him because good fiscal policy will trump poor foreign policy. If Romney wins the nomination, will you vote for him next November?
yes, I would vote for Romney over Obama, however it would virtually guarantee another liberal route 4-8 years later, because moderate policies will not help, and the populace will turn away from the GOP again.
And botched conservative policies didn't lead to Obama being elected? Oh, I assume Bush's policies weren't conservative enough.
oh wow....I thought we had covered this to death on here brum, but Bush absolutely is not a conservative nor are his policies. Rule #1 of conservatism is reducing spending, which he didn't do. #2 would be reduce debt, which he didn't do. #3 would be reduce the size of government, which he didn't do. #4 would be increase individual freedom and liberty, which he didn't do (Patriot Act). Romney might actually be a little more conservative than Bush, but I think you need a true conservative in the WH to get us going the right way...then you have to be able to show those results so that you can have at least 16 years of conservatism to actually fix our problems....then when everyone gets fat and happy, we elect another liberal to screw it all up. Uh, Bob.....and I knew what your answer would be.
Any party in power eventually empowers the other.....be it conservative, liberal, moderate.....whatever.
Sometimes they fuck it up, most of the time party loyalists refuse to acknowledge the other party did anything right. Slash and burn, win an election.
|
|
| |
|
Mr Gray
|
Jan 12 2012, 10:55 PM
Post #29
|
Coach
- Posts:
- 16,503
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #26
- Joined:
- February 5, 2008
|
- brumdog44
- Jan 12 2012, 10:21 PM
- Mr Gray
- Jan 12 2012, 06:54 PM
- Bobobinc
- Jan 12 2012, 05:47 PM
- Mr Gray
- Jan 12 2012, 08:50 AM
- HoosierLars
- Jan 11 2012, 10:06 PM
- IUCOLTFAN
- Jan 11 2012, 11:28 AM
There is a HUGE difference between hypothetical national security issues and the ACTUAL safety of the homeland. I'm pretty sure Paul would not let anyone just up and bomb the homeland yet you seem to think his views on foreign policy would ruin this country basically overnight..........talk about crazy.
IMO, Paul's fiscal policy ideas greatly outweigh what you think are his foreign policy deficiencies.
Foreign policy mistakes are a real wildcard. They could cause zero problems, or result in the mid-east turning into a large chunk of glass, and world instability and poverty for generations. I like Paul's fiscal policy, and would like it even more if he could stop the incessant rambling about the Federal Reserve and reverting to a gold standard. If Paul was nominated, I would probably hold my nose and vote for him because good fiscal policy will trump poor foreign policy. If Romney wins the nomination, will you vote for him next November?
yes, I would vote for Romney over Obama, however it would virtually guarantee another liberal route 4-8 years later, because moderate policies will not help, and the populace will turn away from the GOP again.
And botched conservative policies didn't lead to Obama being elected? Oh, I assume Bush's policies weren't conservative enough.
oh wow....I thought we had covered this to death on here brum, but Bush absolutely is not a conservative nor are his policies. Rule #1 of conservatism is reducing spending, which he didn't do. #2 would be reduce debt, which he didn't do. #3 would be reduce the size of government, which he didn't do. #4 would be increase individual freedom and liberty, which he didn't do (Patriot Act). Romney might actually be a little more conservative than Bush, but I think you need a true conservative in the WH to get us going the right way...then you have to be able to show those results so that you can have at least 16 years of conservatism to actually fix our problems....then when everyone gets fat and happy, we elect another liberal to screw it all up.
Why are you addressing me? because I am a notorious "skim reader"...saw a "b" and bob isn't usually on here....my bad.
|
 The body knows what fighters don't: how to protect itself. A neck can only twist so far. Twist it just a hair more and the body says, "Hey, I'll take it from here because you obviously don't know what you're doing... Lie down now, rest, and we'll talk about this when you regain your senses." It's called the knockout mechanism.
|
| |
|
brumdog44
|
Jan 12 2012, 11:30 PM
Post #30
|
The guy picked last in gym class
- Posts:
- 43,823
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #181
- Joined:
- February 20, 2008
|
BTW, aaron, how many times do you vote for the neo-con?
|
|
| |
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
|