Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Members | Log In | Register

Can Romney/Ryan get elected? Options · View
LadyX
Posted: Sunday, September 09, 2012 4:53:02 PM

Rank: Artistic Tart
Moderator

Joined: 9/25/2009
Posts: 4,813
I predict it swings largely on the happenings in the first presidential debate, but if I had to predict now, I'd say Romney wins on the strength of Florida, and again that state's results will be clouded by controversy.
stephanie
Posted: Sunday, September 09, 2012 5:01:23 PM

Rank: Bohemian

Joined: 1/1/2010
Posts: 5,322
Location: Dublin, Ire., Ireland
LadyX wrote:
I predict it swings largely on the happenings in the first presidential debate, but if I had to predict now, I'd say Romney wins on the strength of Florida, and again that state's results will be clouded by controversy.


I'm leaping here, but I think Obama will thrash Romney in that debate... Quite simply, Romney has no policies and can't speak beyond home-spun, placatory platitudes. Obama is at least an astute political thinker and a master communicator.

xx Steph

"Stirring Up The Smooth Sands Of Monotony Since 1967." xx SF
CleverFox
Posted: Sunday, September 09, 2012 5:35:21 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/25/2012
Posts: 483
Location: United States
1ball wrote:


Sounds exactly like 2007-2011 with the names changed to protect the guilty.


No, the Republicans have been invited to the table, they just refused to seat themselves.
1ball
Posted: Sunday, September 09, 2012 8:10:22 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 9/13/2011
Posts: 970
Location: United States
CleverFox wrote:


No, the Republicans have been invited to the table, they just refused to seat themselves.


What good does it do to sit at a table and be lectured at? One major difference between the two parties is the tendency of the Dems to focus on style and form at the expense of function and substance. I don't blame the Republicans in the least for doing what it takes to get back into power. That's politics. If you're going to justify voting against someone, excuses that ignore political reality are just bashing. Complaining that they're the party of "No!", conveys the principle that you expect the minority party to abandon their principles and further weaken their political position. The Dems didn't do that 2001-2007. But you expected the Republicans to do it 2007-2011? You can do better.

My latest story is too hot to publish. My most recent story before that is Even Stranger In Lust
CleverFox
Posted: Sunday, September 09, 2012 8:38:55 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 1/25/2012
Posts: 483
Location: United States
1ball wrote:


What good does it do to sit at a table and be lectured at? One major difference between the two parties is the tendency of the Dems to focus on style and form at the expense of function and substance. I don't blame the Republicans in the least for doing what it takes to get back into power. That's politics. If you're going to justify voting against someone, excuses that ignore political reality are just bashing. Complaining that they're the party of "No!", conveys the principle that you expect the minority party to abandon their principles and further weaken their political position. The Dems didn't do that 2001-2007. But you expected the Republicans to do it 2007-2011? You can do better.


I don't expect them to give up their principals but I do expect them to come to the table and offer a compromise. The Republicans have not done this. From 1995 to 2007 the Republicans never gave to Democrats the chance to offer a compromise. The Republicans have been given the chance but they refuse to use it. The Rebublican definitionof bipartisanship has been "You will do it my way or you won't do it at all."
principessa
Posted: Sunday, September 09, 2012 8:48:24 PM

Rank: Sophisticate

Joined: 8/23/2011
Posts: 4,309
Location: Canada
CleverFox wrote:


No, the Republicans have been invited to the table, they just refused to seat themselves.


The Republicans stated that their goal - from the day after Obama's inauguration - was not to work for the betterment of their constituents and their country, but to see to it that he was not re-elected. Both Boehner and McConnell said it. So much for the vaunted patriotism of the GOP. Politics, not country first. They would not give an inch in case he got credit for doing something positive.

I cannot help but wonder if the depth of the GOP animus towards Obama is not based (even if subconsciously) on racism.
sprite
Posted: Sunday, September 09, 2012 8:56:11 PM

Rank: Her Royal Spriteness
Moderator

Joined: 6/18/2010
Posts: 16,029
Location: My Tower, United States
principessa wrote:


The Republicans stated that their goal - from the day after Obama's inauguration - was not to work for the betterment of their constituents and their country, but to see to it that he was not re-elected. Both Boehner and McConnell said it. So much for the vaunted patriotism of the GOP. Politics, not country first. They would not give an inch in case he got credit for doing something positive.



*nods* that's actually quite well documented, too.

Live, love, laugh.
Ruthie
Posted: Sunday, September 09, 2012 9:05:35 PM

Rank: Story Verifier
Moderator

Joined: 10/21/2010
Posts: 2,696
Location: United States
principessa wrote:


The Republicans stated that their goal - from the day after Obama's inauguration - was not to work for the betterment of their constituents and their country, but to see to it that he was not re-elected. Both Boehner and McConnell said it. So much for the vaunted patriotism of the GOP. Politics, not country first. They would not give an inch in case he got credit for doing something positive.

I cannot help but wonder if the depth of the GOP animus towards Obama is not based (even if subconsciously) on racism.


The Randian wing of the Republican party thinks nothing of putting selfish interests ahead of the country's interest. It's what their philosophy is all about. It's more important to them to gain power so that they can privatize more than it is to help run the country.
Milik_Redman
Posted: Sunday, September 09, 2012 9:25:19 PM

Rank: Internet Philosopher
Moderator

Joined: 8/14/2009
Posts: 4,753
Location: somewhere deep under the Earth, United States
I think the republicans have so thouroughly lost their message that the party itself is in danger of failing. They no longer stand for fiscal responsibility, the last bush administration spent like a drunken liberal. They have lost credibility on the subject of foreign policy, becoming involved in so many small brush wars have made them look like imperialist neo-cons. They have lost the argument of lower taxes simply by letting spending run away.
No, all they have left is their pathetic, right-wing pseudo moralist agenda that only serves the interest of the religious right.

This is sad to, because without the message of the old school, fiscally responsibly thinking conservatives the left is likely to continue to spend away the future of your children for the benefit of the politically active but selfish baby boomers.
1ball
Posted: Sunday, September 09, 2012 9:37:04 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 9/13/2011
Posts: 970
Location: United States
CleverFox wrote:
I don't expect them to give up their principals but I do expect them to come to the table and offer a compromise. The Republicans have not done this. From 1995 to 2007 the Republicans never gave to Democrats the chance to offer a compromise. The Republicans have been given the chance but they refuse to use it. The Rebublican definitionof bipartisanship has been "You will do it my way or you won't do it at all."


I don't think it's ever been that one-sided. There are members of both parties on all the committees. There are party line votes on almost everything that passes through the committees. There are back channel communications to see what it would take to get either side to budge and both sides try to put poison pills into their compromises. The Democrats weren't willing to accept all the blame for what they would have forced to stay in Obamacare, so the Republicans used a winning strategy of letting them take all the blame they were willing to take. That's politics.

My latest story is too hot to publish. My most recent story before that is Even Stranger In Lust
1ball
Posted: Sunday, September 09, 2012 9:56:07 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 9/13/2011
Posts: 970
Location: United States
principessa wrote:
The Republicans stated that their goal - from the day after Obama's inauguration - was not to work for the betterment of their constituents and their country, but to see to it that he was not re-elected.


Making the opposing side's guy a one-term president is always the goal, regardless of party. That's politics. Every president for as long as I've been voting has faced a brick wall from the other party in Congress. Obama got no more resistance than any other. The only time I've seen compromise is when a president is in his second term and wants to patch up his image for the sake of his legacy. That's because during his first term, he's not focused on what's best for the country. He's focused on reelection.

But why make the mistake of believing what politicians say they will do? If Obama had offered enough compromise, he would have gotten significant Republican support including Boehner and McConnell's votes on any bill. What Congressman wouldn't support a bill that would guarantee his reelection? Boehner and McConnell said what they thought their constituents wanted to hear. That doesn't mean they would have passed up a deal that gave them enough of what they wanted.

My latest story is too hot to publish. My most recent story before that is Even Stranger In Lust
sandymoon
Posted: Monday, September 10, 2012 9:24:06 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/10/2012
Posts: 139
I am not happy with what we have now, so I will vote for change because I can. Will the next Ronald Reagan please come out of hiding :)
lafayettemister
Posted: Monday, September 10, 2012 9:48:54 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/4/2010
Posts: 6,424
Location: Alabama, United States
Romney/Ryan can win. I still think it's unlikely, but becoming more likely. The debates will push things one way or the other. Many opponents of Romney are saying he has no concrete plans to do what he says he'll do. But most candidates present that closer to election time and during debates. No reason to lay out all your plans months ahead of time so the incumbent has time to dissect it. It's one of the few advantages a challenger has over an incumbent whose policies and ideas are already well known.

In this race it's going to come down to whether or not the typical American's life is better now than it was four years ago. Yea, I realize that most Democrats believe that Pres. Obama was left a shitty mess by Pres W. Bush. No one could undo in four years what Bush caused in his eight. Even if we accept that premise, there still should have been progress towards fixing the crap that Pres. Bush left behind. Maybe four years isn't enough time to fix the economy and unemployment and whatever. But in those four years unemployment shouldn't have gone UP. It should have gone down some? Or at least stayed the same. The deficit should have decreased some, right. Not increased? It may not be possible to totally "fix" things in four years, but progress should be expected, right?

If Pres. Obama loses, it will be because many peoples' lives are worse than they were before he took office. Whether or not he's fully or partially or not at all to blame will be lost on many people. Their concern will be they had a job and food in their mouths four years ago, now they don't.





When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. Socrates
Guest
Posted: Monday, September 10, 2012 10:03:22 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 652,973
He can, but I'm hoping with all my hopes that he does not..
Kitanica
Posted: Monday, September 10, 2012 10:11:25 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/16/2011
Posts: 881
Location: The Sprawl, United States
Milik_The_Red wrote:
I think the republicans have so thouroughly lost their message that the party itself is in danger of failing. They no longer stand for fiscal responsibility, the last bush administration spent like a drunken liberal. They have lost credibility on the subject of foreign policy, becoming involved in so many small brush wars have made them look like imperialist neo-cons. They have lost the argument of lower taxes simply by letting spending run away.
No, all they have left is their pathetic, right-wing pseudo moralist agenda that only serves the interest of the religious right.

This is sad to, because without the message of the old school, fiscally responsibly thinking conservatives the left is likely to continue to spend away the future of your children for the benefit of the politically active but selfish baby boomers.


What about raegan tripling the countries debt?
Guest
Posted: Monday, September 10, 2012 10:24:08 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 652,973
Milik_The_Red wrote:
I think the republicans have so thouroughly lost their message that the party itself is in danger of failing. They no longer stand for fiscal responsibility, the last bush administration spent like a drunken liberal. They have lost credibility on the subject of foreign policy, becoming involved in so many small brush wars have made them look like imperialist neo-cons. They have lost the argument of lower taxes simply by letting spending run away.
No, all they have left is their pathetic, right-wing pseudo moralist agenda that only serves the interest of the religious right.

This is sad to, because without the message of the old school, fiscally responsibly thinking conservatives the left is likely to continue to spend away the future of your children for the benefit of the politically active but selfish baby boomers.


Fiscal responsibility requires a budget, we have gone three years with out one and than to for the hand by say if you dont cut we will. At the risk of the people who are there to defend our right to free speech, and bear arms. We have some soul searching to do to determine it that is the life we want to life. A person/family has a budget and we have to make it work, we just cant tell our employer that we need more money and get it. The House, Senate and the President need to learn to work together and put a game plan that is a winning solution, not a name calling game!
Issaquah
Posted: Monday, September 10, 2012 10:38:12 AM

Rank: Active Ink Slinger

Joined: 3/9/2012
Posts: 36
Location: Seattle, United States
Personally, I think both sides are totally screwed up. I know this may come as a surprise to many. Let me first say that I do believe the US is the greatest country in the world and am absolutely proud to live here. Our natural resources, workforce, manufacturing base, spirit, and public pride are second to none.

Unfortunately, the great hope that the US public had in Obama was, IMHO, completely wasted. I believe he had the opportunity, while the Dems had the majority in both the executive and legislative branches to do some great things...and blew it. That is not to say that the depth and breadth of the global melt-down was not far worse than anyone cared to admit, or that the Republicans had more than their share of blame, but Obama had an opportunity to do what a true leader is supposed to do...LEAD...not take us down the path of healthcare reform (that is a different crisis that still needs to be addressed).

However, I just cannot believe that the Republicans under Romney/Ryan are going to be able to do any better. The Republicans seem to think, again IMHO, that they have no responsibility what-so-ever in the problems we are facing today.

So, my quandary is this, do I think we will be better off keeping the same folks in office, knowing they blew it big-time with their first go-around; or do I punish them by voting in another, ineffectual party? Neither one looks good to me...but I do plan to vote come November as I believe no vote is worse than an informed and considered vote. I know there are many who will vehemently oppose anything that is put forth as an opinion here, but I have enjoyed the dialogues that I have read so far.

Cheers...Issaquah

Would you like fries with that?
sweetestsammi
Posted: Monday, September 10, 2012 10:50:09 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 7/21/2011
Posts: 167
Location: United States
I think Paul is sexy as hell! I wanna rip that suit right off of him! I would much rather stare at him for the next for years!! How is that for a politically correct answer??
tazznjazz
Posted: Monday, September 10, 2012 11:08:48 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/30/2012
Posts: 329
Location: under bright lights, United States
I think this election is more about the way we want our country to proceed than about Obama/Romney. For reactionaries who believe we are slipping into socialism because we have extended S.S. and Medicare into healthcare like the rest of the civilized world, nothing will do but to take 10 steps back and let the trickle down theory fail again, deregulate Wall street so we can have a return to predatory lending, deregulate environmental regs. so we pollute our nation for our children so a few may profit, and proclaim less govt. is the best Govt. unless your talking about your rights in your bedroom or the right of a woman to decide whats best for her body.

On the other side we have a party that under the guise of compassion ends wars that pose no threat to national security, does it's best to balance the budget without the cooperation of a congress bent on making sure it's contrary to any solutions but their own and the interests of the lobby they are beholden to. Saves thousands of jobs, rather than let G.M. go bankrupt. Focuses on education and re-education with grants rather then''borrow from your father''.

Am I disappointed in Pres. Obama's first four years? yes, Do I think we will be better off under a corporate sponsored Republican administration? A resounding no.

Do I think four years of Romney would be the end of the world? again, No.
I think the tea party would be very disappointed to find him much more moderate than they might hope for.
tazznjazz
Posted: Monday, September 10, 2012 11:18:35 AM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 4/30/2012
Posts: 329
Location: under bright lights, United States
sweetestsammi wrote:
I think Paul is sexy as hell! I wanna rip that suit right off of him! I would much rather stare at him for the next for years!! How is that for a politically correct answer??


Paul Ryan reminds me of a pass the loot preacher, all false mournful trust me looks like a slick used car salesman, Sadly many base their votes on these kind of things[looks, race] rather than the issues.
Guest
Posted: Monday, September 10, 2012 11:43:17 AM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 652,973
I am a Republican because I am the wife of a small business owner and the Dems make owning and running a business a crap shoot with their un-ending legislation that does nothing positive. I agree that Bush overspent - in fact, I will allow that he spent like a liberal Democrat. However, we should certainly have seen some improvement in the numbers and we have not. In fact, Obama has thrown gasoline on the fire with his own spending.

Bottom line on the economy is that unemployment is not going to get better, salaries are not going to raise and companies are not going to expand for as long as international trade law is messed with every few weeks (which it has been under Obama), tax rates for businesses are stabilized and in some cases lowered and companies know their health costs are not going to skyrocket because of Obamacare.

We need a businessman who knows how to go in, recognize what waste is and cut it out or back. We need someone who has proven he knows how to make hard choices because we have a whole lot of them coming. Interest rates are high on our country's debt now. What is going to happen when those interest rates double and triple as they are projected to do? No one with any math skill at all can see this as a long-term way to run a country.
keoloke
Posted: Monday, September 10, 2012 12:06:37 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 8/12/2010
Posts: 599
Location: United States
I always thought that Obama would not have a dignified contender of the throne and after seeing the the other party hopeful candidates, I'm still with that state of mind. Now however I do believe he has a fight, but more because of his first term than of his competitor.

Don't you ever forget for moment of probably one of the most hated and controversial election of 12 years ago. GWB was voted, none wanted to work with him. He spent his first 8 months of the presidency literally camping than the miracle of 911 happened (forgive me to use this expression). He stood on top of WTC rubble, one arm over the shoulder of a firefighter and said: ''we will get them''.

Suddenly the American peoples forgot it all and while the presidential result were in doubt, three years later (as I predicted) he got even reelected.

It's all a matter of standing up and saying something pertinent of what peoples wants hear at that moment, I said just “something” no need for the truth or issues. Also the voting system is controlled, regardless of what they say "go out and vote". The truth is that they don't want everyone to vote.

Romney and his vice are playing the ol’game of deceiving and lies, why? Because of the above…it works.

So, can Romney/Ryan get elected? My answer is Yes (sigh) they can.

Hey, If I was Mitt would enlist the magic of Carl Rove.

Choose n Practice Happiness

Life is simple; we are what we eat and what we read. Talk is superfluous.
lafayettemister
Posted: Monday, September 10, 2012 12:21:29 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 10/4/2010
Posts: 6,424
Location: Alabama, United States
keoloke wrote:
I always thought that Obama would not have a dignified contender of the throne and after seeing the the other party hopeful candidates, I'm still with that state of mind. Now however I do believe he has a fight, but more because of his first term than of his competitor.

Don't you ever forget for moment of probably one of the most hated and controversial election of 12 years ago. GWB was voted, none wanted to work with him. He spent his first 8 months of the presidency literally camping than the miracle of 911 happened (forgive me to use this expression). He stood on top of WTC rubble, one arm over the shoulder of a firefighter and said: ''we will get them''.

Suddenly the American peoples forgot it all and while the presidential result were in doubt, three years later (as I predicted) he got even reelected.

It's all a matter of standing up and saying something pertinent of what peoples wants hear at that moment, I said just “something” no need for the truth or issues. Also the voting system is controlled, regardless of what they say "go out and vote". The truth is that they don't want everyone to vote.

Romney and his vice are playing the ol’game of deceiving and lies, why? Because of the above…it works.

So, can Romney/Ryan get elected? My answer is Yes (sigh) they can.

Hey, If I was Mitt would enlist the magic of Carl Rove.


President Bush was not "literally camping" for eight months.





When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. Socrates
Guest
Posted: Monday, September 10, 2012 3:29:29 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 652,973
keoloke wrote:
I always thought that Obama would not have a dignified contender of the throne and after seeing the the other party hopeful candidates, I'm still with that state of mind. Now however I do believe he has a fight, but more because of his first term than of his competitor.

Don't you ever forget for moment of probably one of the most hated and controversial election of 12 years ago. GWB was voted, none wanted to work with him. He spent his first 8 months of the presidency literally camping than the miracle of 911 happened (forgive me to use this expression). He stood on top of WTC rubble, one arm over the shoulder of a firefighter and said: ''we will get them''.

Suddenly the American peoples forgot it all and while the presidential result were in doubt, three years later (as I predicted) he got even reelected.

It's all a matter of standing up and saying something pertinent of what peoples wants hear at that moment, I said just “something” no need for the truth or issues. Also the voting system is controlled, regardless of what they say "go out and vote". The truth is that they don't want everyone to vote.

Romney and his vice are playing the ol’game of deceiving and lies, why? Because of the above…it works.

So, can Romney/Ryan get elected? My answer is Yes (sigh) they can.

Hey, If I was Mitt would enlist the magic of Carl Rove.



No, Bush was not "literally camping" for the first 8 months. In the first eight months Bush was instrumental in pushing forward legislation in education and national security, in bringing about tax-reduction and allocating funds for global emergency AIDS relief. He withdrew the United States from participation in the 1998 Kyoto Protocol on world climate change and from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, as well as withdrawing U.S. support for the International Criminal Court.
WellMadeMale
Posted: Tuesday, September 11, 2012 10:40:38 AM

Rank: Constant Gardener

Joined: 9/30/2009
Posts: 10,427
Location: Cakeland, United States
Romney might lose some votes/support from the US armed forces, if his real past history were to ever see the light of day.

This magazine is dedicated to seeing that information come to the fore, however, since 6 conglomerates own all the media in the United States, this information will probably never be mentioned in any big newspapers nor be spit from the mouths of Wolf Blitzer, Joe Scarborough or Bill O

Draft Dodger Demonstrated for Vietnam Draft then Ran to France

Wikipedia gives Romney’s history, showing him to have dropped out of college at 19 and, instead of going to Vietnam as most Americans, he left for France but not covered by any deferment other than one claimed as part of a “private agreement” to name all Mormon children “ministers” according to Mitt’s biographers.

No mention at all of what Romney did to sneak out of the draft and being shipped to 'Nam. Volunteering for missionary duty is not officially recognized nor is it legal as safe passage from basic training.

How's this make all of you gung ho volunteers feel, you guys who are committing your lives and time to defense of this country? All those of you who were drafted and miraculously came home? Romney ditched America in a time of need to go lolly-fucking-gag around France for almost three years and avoid being drafted. Perhaps this is where he first learned how to offshore?

Both Democrats and Republicans are guilty of abusing US service men & women during times of war, but this Romney guy is truly another chickenhawk (right up there with Dick Cheney, who had other priorities than Vietnam)

If ya can't beat 'em... pay someone to do it for you.
ponyboy
Posted: Tuesday, September 11, 2012 12:08:53 PM

Rank: Forum Guru

Joined: 12/7/2011
Posts: 384
Location: United States
The missionary deferment along with two collage deferments and when he was fresh out of deferments he was drafted and pulled a high number, while protesting against anti-war protesters and bullying gays rather then enlist as most pro war supporters would feel morally obligated to do.dontknow
The fact that his father George came out as anti-war in his brief presidential bid must have been humiliating to ole Mitt.Embarassed

Guest
Posted: Tuesday, September 11, 2012 1:10:54 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 652,973
I know I'm a Brit and probably have no business posting on American politics, but Romney seems as much use as a marzipan dildo.
principessa
Posted: Tuesday, September 11, 2012 2:10:00 PM

Rank: Sophisticate

Joined: 8/23/2011
Posts: 4,309
Location: Canada
NightFox wrote:
He can, but I'm hoping with all my hopes that he does not..


Please everyone, don`t hope. If you are not registered to vote, go get it done. If you have time, get to work for the campaign as a volunteer. If you can afford it, contribute even just $10. Make sure that your friends, family and colleagues are registered and vote. That is what you can do. Participate to the extent that you can.
Guest
Posted: Tuesday, September 11, 2012 2:10:41 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 652,973
t-rex wrote:
Wow, every post is hating on Romney/Ryan. I hope they win. I am a guy who looks at every politician as a liar. They tell us what they think we want to hear so you will vote for them. Most are lawyers who learn how present a side of the argument that will make them or their party the greatest thing ever. Its sad to me that the USA has to pick between the candidates we have. Whether REP or DEM you got to admit they are both lame. However my choice is for making our country great again, having a leader who is proud to be AMERICAN and not apologetic for it. I feel that we have started down the path of socialism and I'm out on that plan. I'm out on making everyone even. If you work hard you get more, if you choose to sit a wait for someone tho give you something, well you get what you get. The entitlement mentality has to stop, we have ruined a generation of kids with it. Whether REP of DEM they need to be reminded they actually work for US and the rest of the knuckleheads who actually run the the place need to know that as well. I say term limits for every office and get rid of the career politicians. Oh well just my 2 cents.

Have a great day and GO ROMNEY/RYAN!!!!!! Sword Fight Sword Fight


Well said T-rex, I'm not a Rep or Dem I consider myself a constitutionalists as I believe in what our founding fathers wanted this country to be. We've turned our back on the constitution and need to get back to it.

I will also add that I'm a conservative christian, who believes that we all have the right do read and do what we sexually enjoy. I know many Christians don't think or feel as I. So let them condemn me if they so choice. It is my right as a free American to be here if I so choice

HUGS
Guest
Posted: Tuesday, September 11, 2012 2:17:02 PM

Rank: Lurker

Joined: 12/1/2006
Posts: 652,973
FAR Left.. FAR right.. Does anyone see that major changes are need to move in a direction that will cut the debt, control spending, and fulfill the mandates we the people send these people into offfice to do. In the end, we need a new tax structure, a more realistic health care system, better spending controls for military and ...oh my god some controls on entitlements. BIG GOVERMENT is not the answer and both party LOVE BIG GOVERMENT. I WANT TO SEE A FINANCIAL CONSERVITIVE AND SOCAILLY LIBERTARIAN LEADER.
Obama has retain so much of Bush which all the people hated but love now. It does not compute!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Users browsing this topic
Guest 


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS

Powered by Yet Another Forum.net version 1.9.1.6 (NET v4.0) - 11/14/2007
Copyright © 2003-2006 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.