• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

And Mitt Picks...

Rachel_Ambler said:
To be honest - no matter who was picked Romney would have still been bashed.
Click to expand...

I agree with that 100%. It's symptomatic of what is so incredibly wrong with politics in this country. It's no longer about who has the best ideas or the best plans. It's more of a religion than anything. People become convinced that Party A is correct. By nature of that decision, Party B must be incorrect. Therefore everything Party B does is wrong. There is absolutely nothing at all Romney can do that he won't be demonized for by the left. There is absolutely nothing at all Obama can do that he won't be demonized for by the left. No one takes the time to actually analyze logically which, if either, is right. That is irrelevant. More important to be blindly loyal to the party you have chosen and smash all who oppose you with obliterating force. There is not a single person on the planet Romney could've chosen who would've made the left wingers happy. He could've chosen Hillary Clinton as his Veep and the left would've bashed him.
 
A.Nonymous said:
There is not a single person on the planet Romney could've chosen who would've made the left wingers happy.
Click to expand...

I know what you mean, but I have to disagree. I can think of several that would make them ecstatic, like Palin, or anyone they were loaded for.

But someone like Ryan, with a Tea Party mindset, means they
 
The tea party didn't do too well with Sarah Palin; somehow I'm not so sure this will get them any better results.
 
OutofDate1980 said:
Interesting, you believe Romney-Ryan is your best choice to rectify "nearly broke, disabled and fighting for benefits" ?

It's better not to invest in our citizens, this country's real resource, but instead support the philosophy starting in the 80's that have led this country into becoming a third world country ?
Click to expand...

Invest??? Seriously?? He was referring to the leeches who rather than earn a living choose to sit on their butts and collect government handouts.
Rewarding laziness is not investing in people.
 
Bren S. said:
Invest??? Seriously?? He was referring to the leeches who rather than earn a living choose to sit on their butts and collect government handouts.
Rewarding laziness is not investing in people.
Click to expand...

You of course realize that many of these leeches were property owning folks who had their lives devastated by the banks that played with other people's money and assets. Many of the leeches where pawns in the banks games.

The leeches are facing a ridiculous amount of stigma because of who they are and, thanks to the credit bureaus, will remain at the bottom of the pile for years to come.

Just thank your lucky stars you weren't a Leech - or decent hardworking Americans as I like to call them.
 
Rachel_Ambler said:
You of course realize that many of these leeches were property owning folks who had their lives devastated by the banks that played with other people's money and assets. Many of the leeches where pawns in the banks games.

The leeches are facing a ridiculous amount of stigma because of who they are and, thanks to the credit bureaus, will remain at the bottom of the pile for years to come.

Just thank your lucky stars you weren't a Leech - or decent hardworking Americans as I like to call them.
Click to expand...

I'm not talking about hard working Americans.
I'm talking about those who choose not to work, those whose goal is to get handouts for doing absolutely nothing.
There is a difference.
 
But those leeches have been leeching for years and years with no major problems. It looks like the current problems with the country began with what Rachel_Ambler said. Property owners losing their jobs & homes.

WallStreetersJailed.jpg
 
saptech said:
But those leeches have been leeching for years and years with no major problems. It looks like the current problems with the country began with what Rachel_Ambler said. Property owners losing their jobs & homes.

WallStreetersJailed.jpg
Click to expand...

No major problems????
 
Problems began long before property owners lost their jobs. Problems began when those property owners over reached, didn't save, bought more than they could afford and failed to live within their means or plan for the future. You can do that as long as everything is great, but sooner or later, there's going to be a bump in the road. It's inevitable. Then the chickens come home to roost.
 
Bren S. said:
All I'll say here is that I am not a big Romney fan BUT anyone/anything is better than obummer.
Click to expand...

I don't think you, me or the previous president would be. Think for yourself.

As for Romney, I can't imagine a European leader who would be worse than him; Every EU government is center-right.
 
Bren S. said:
Invest??? Seriously?? He was referring to the leeches who rather than earn a living choose to sit on their butts and collect government handouts.
Rewarding laziness is not investing in people.
Click to expand...

You do realise that not everyone can simply get a job right now? Its impossible so the government has to help
Bren S. said:
I'm not talking about hard working Americans.
I'm talking about those who choose not to work, those whose goal is to get handouts for doing absolutely nothing.
There is a difference.
Click to expand...

They are what, like a tenth of those claiming benefits? Get a grip.

And surely voting in Romney will make life worse for said ridiculously hard working Americans. Look at how much you guys work for so little...
 
OutofDate1980 said:
Using Public Office for private gain = bad.
Click to expand...

Obama shut down two public beaches that are funded by tax dollars so he could hold a $40k a plate fundraiser. So in the middle of the summer, he denies taxpayers use of two public beaches so he can appear at a campaign fundraiser where a meal costs more than a lot of those taxpayers make in a year. No criticism for that though. Why is that?
 
A.Nonymous said:
Obama shut down two public beaches that are funded by tax dollars so he could hold a $40k a plate fundraiser. So in the middle of the summer, he denies taxpayers use of two public beaches so he can appear at a campaign fundraiser where a meal costs more than a lot of those taxpayers make in a year. No criticism for that though. Why is that?
Click to expand...

Source ?
 
OutofDate1980 said:
Source ?
Click to expand...

Here's my main source. The cost is apparently $35,800 a plate and not the $40k I previously thought according to Fox News. It's still more than a lot of people make in a year. City loses revenues from the beaches and has to spend extra money on providing security no doubt. They may be up a creek since apparently the Obama campaign doesn't pay it's bills. Can you imagine the outcry if this was the Romney campaign? Romney robs taxpayers of their tax funded beaches so he can hobnob with the elite. Romney is filthy rich, but can't pay his bills. Do you really want him as President? But Obama gets a free pass on both. Nice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom