Romney Keeps on Winning

[Frank DeMartini]

Why?

http://www.hollywoodrepublican.net/2012/02/romney-keeps-on-winning/ (http://www.hollywoodrepublican.net/2012/02/romney-keeps-on-winning/)

[TJDave]

Keeps on winning. He's got a whopping 100 delegates, or so...Impressive :rolleyes:

I will continue to support his competition.

[bigmack]

I will continue to support his competition.
Not unlike 'supporting' Paula J in this bout.

Me? My money's on Romney & Tonya.

m91HH9gxXrI

[canleakid]

we are down to the final two (sorry rick and ron) so it's the "morman" vs. the "polygamist". Mitt will win, like most of us knew way back when, even if we do not really like him but we got to go with what we got. The tea bunch :D were and still are just a bunch of wannabes. It will be a hard fight to win back the White House, but we got a shot!!!!!

[Tom]

Who is the polygamist?
Do you know what the word means?

[canleakid]

Who is the polygamist?
Do you know what the word means?

Yes I do,how 'bout YOU :confused:
here I will even spell it for you (google) political satire, if you plan to to smack, try to understand it too ;)

[Robert Goren]

Newt converted to Catholicism in 2009. A friend of mine who did the same had to go through process of getting his previous marriage annulled by the the Catholic Church before his current marriage was recognised by the Church. I have no idea if Newt has done this, but he has not, I could see how some Catholics might see him as a polygamist. I do not, but I am not Catholic either.

[PaceAdvantage]

I have no idea if Newt has done this, but he has not, I could see how some Catholics might see him as a polygamist. I do not, but I am not Catholic either.WHAT? He wouldn't be seen as a polygamist... :lol:

Where do you come up with this stuff? :lol:

[bigmack]

Where do you come up with this stuff?
Hypocrisy knows no bounds on the airwaves of National Public Radio, as their Minnesota-based star Garrison Keillor led off his latest edition of “A Prairie Home Companion” by mocking the GOP frontrunners as “the Mormon running against the polygamist.” This is a rich dig coming from Keillor, since he has been married three times – just as many times as Newt Gingrich.
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2012/02/06/thrice-married-npr-snob-garrison-keillor-mocks-newt-gingrich-polygamist

[elysiantraveller]

Newt converted to Catholicism in 2009. A friend of mine who did the same had to go through process of getting his previous marriage annulled by the the Catholic Church before his current marriage was recognised by the Church. I have no idea if Newt has done this, but he has not, I could see how some Catholics might see him as a polygamist. I do not, but I am not Catholic either.

His previous marriages were not recognized by the church so no they do not have to be annulled. If he were to re-marry now it would have to be.

[TJDave]

Who is the polygamist?
Do you know what the word means?

Here are more words. Do you know what they mean?

Proxy Baptism

Endowment

Sealing

Second Anointing

[Tom]

Here are more words. Do you know what they mean?

Proxy Baptism

Endowment

Sealing

Second Anointing

I do, but what does that have to do with the topic being discussed here?
Are you participating randomly?

[TJDave]

what does that have to do with the topic being discussed here?


You have a valid point.

I also believe that Mitt Romney would not want it part of any discussion anywhere, at anytime. ;)

[canleakid]

Mitty on a roll

GOP front-runner Mitt Romney won Maine's Republican presidential caucuses with 39 percent of the vote, breaking a three-state losing streak by besting libertarian-leaning Ron Paul, who finished a close second with 36 percent.

Romney had 2,190 total votes, while Paul got 1,996. Rick Santorum finished third with 18 percent (989 votes). Newt Gingrich was fourth with 6 percent (349 votes0

Mitt Romney has won a straw poll of Republican voters at the American Conservative Union's annual CPAC conference in Washington.

Romney received 38 percent of Saturday's vote on the final day of the Conservative Political Action Conference, followed by Rick Santorum, who garnered 31 percent Newt Gingrich came in third place with 15 percent of the straw poll vote. Rep. Ron Paul won just 12 percent support

and yes silly sarha was there :D eye candy :confused:

[jognlope]

Watch Santorum on MTP this morning, he's very confident, not nerdy like Romney, and speaks intelligently like about how the feminists denigraded women's traditional role as being not good enough.

[Rookies]

Well, you never know with Eye of Newt. He might have more than 9 creepy lives!:lol:

As for Rick, you go boy! Defeat that Mor-(m)an and cinch the deal for the President!

[Robert Goren]

Mitty on a roll

GOP front-runner Mitt Romney won Maine's Republican presidential caucuses with 39 percent of the vote, breaking a three-state losing streak by besting libertarian-leaning Ron Paul, who finished a close second with 36 percent.

Romney had 2,190 total votes, while Paul got 1,996. Rick Santorum finished third with 18 percent (989 votes). Newt Gingrich was fourth with 6 percent (349 votes0

Mitt Romney has won a straw poll of Republican voters at the American Conservative Union's annual CPAC conference in Washington.

Romney received 38 percent of Saturday's vote on the final day of the Conservative Political Action Conference, followed by Rick Santorum, who garnered 31 percent Newt Gingrich came in third place with 15 percent of the straw poll vote. Rep. Ron Paul won just 12 percent support

and yes silly sarha was there :D eye candy :confused:There was more ballot cast in the CPAC poll than in Maine. If there had a none of the above, I think it would have beat Romney in both places.

[Robert Goren]

Did I miss them or was Sarah the only woman at CPAC? Whenever they showed the crowd, I don't remember see a woman among them.

[lamboguy]

Did I miss them or was Sarah the only woman at CPAC? Whenever they showed the crowd, I don't remember see a woman among them.I think that MICHELLE BACHMAN spoke, she was actually somewhat funny for once. she said that if you want to become president you had to know the birthday of ELVIS PRESLEY

[jognlope]

I heard her complaining about chrony capitalism in DC and saying it was Obama's fault, figured it was a waste of time to listen any further.

[bigmack]

Defeat that Mor-(m)an and cinch the deal for the President!
Clever. For a bigot.

[Tom]

Slow day in Canada?
The bigots are out for a drive.

[PaceAdvantage]

Clever. For a bigot.Yup, replace "Mor-(m)an" with "Muslim" or "Jew" and watch all hell break loose...but somehow, it's ok because he's Morman. :rolleyes:

[EvenSteven]

Follow the Money...

[Valuist]

Slow day in Canada?
The bigots are out for a drive.

Slow days are the only kind of day in Hoserland.

[reckless]

Not so fast on resurrecting Romney's failing campaign.

Since the start of this campaign last year we've been told the following by both the elite media and the GOP establishment:

(1) that Mitt Romney is the presumptive de-facto GOP nominee; there's no denying this;

(2) that said Romney is a conservative;

(3) that Mittens is the *only* candidate capable of beating Obama.

As of today what do most of us now know so far?

1-Romney is not the de-facto GOP nominee and his chances are weakening by the day;

2-Romney is *not* a conservative (as most conservatives have known already);

3-Romney has proven to be the one candidate that is the most unlikely to defeat Obama come fall.

Santorum has won Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri and Colorado. Rick thumped Romney in all three latter states, two of them won by Mittens in 2008!

He is also leading in Michigan by a very large margin, a state that was 'presumed' to be a Romney 'lock'.

Romney won an open primary in New Hampshire, won a caucus in Nevada and took a closed primary in Florida, plus an insignificant caucus in neighboring Maine the other night. He got a lower percentage of votes in all four states he won than last time. Even in Florida where he spent about $15+ million in negative ads against Gingrich he underperformed. Heck, both Santorum and Ron Paul didn't even campaign much in Florida.

In South Carolina, Mitt was leading in the polls up to a week or so before the debates that carried Newt to his lone moment in the sun.

The C-Pac straw poll win by Mitt was a joke too, with the Romney camp buying piles of tickets and having those supporters vote for Mitt. Not illegal at all but conservatives are onto this game and it only reinforces their disdain for him.

Yes, the GOP establishment could eventually carry Romney through all this, but I personally doubt it. The citizens won't let the GOP establishment or media tell us who the nominee will be.

A big loss in home state Michigan will probably doom the Romney run for good. It might help a Jeb Bush push come convention time so Santorum is far from a lock as well. But Romney is toast and it's a matter of time.

And, if Gingrich drops out completely before Super Tuesday, then Santorum gets just about all his supporters and this race might really be over. Hard to believe, but Santorum is looking great right now and poor Mitt, well the clock is ticking.

[NJ Stinks]

Not so fast on resurrecting Romney's failing campaign.



Sounds like an Obama over the field exacta wheel is the play. :ThmbUp:

[JustRalph]

I heard her complaining about chrony capitalism in DC and saying it was Obama's fault, figured it was a waste of time to listen any further.

Never heard of Solyndra huh?

[johnhannibalsmith]

Sounds like an Obama over the field exacta wheel is the play. :ThmbUp:

Careful Grunder... :lol:

[NJ Stinks]

Careful Grunder... :lol:

In all sincerity, when Richard says "in the first at Tampa" I almost always regret not being at Tampa Bay that day for the card. For me, it wouldn't feel right if Grunder wasn't on the mic.

Surprisingly enough, I'm still waiting to connect with Romney. Maybe I'll ask Mack who he likes. ;)

[newtothegame]

In all sincerity, when Richard says "in the first at Tampa" I almost always regret not being at Tampa Bay that day for the card. For me, it wouldn't feel right if Grunder wasn't on the mic.

Surprisingly enough, I'm still waiting to connect with Romney. Maybe I'll ask Mack who he likes. ;)
Becareful NJ, you might get a picture of the family as well lol :lol:

[PaceAdvantage]

A big loss in home state Michigan will probably doom the Romney run for good. It might help a Jeb Bush push come convention time so Santorum is far from a lock as well. But Romney is toast and it's a matter of time.Jeb Bush? BUSH? Are you joking?

We might not have had that 100 years of Democrat rule that was promised us after the GOP got that ass-kicking back in 2006 and 2008, but it might just be 100 years until another BUSH has a snowball's chance in hell at the White House.

And as for "President Santorum...."

Well, it just has an odd ring to it...so I'm guessing it will never happen... :lol:

[Robert Goren]

The fact that anyone is even mentioning Jeb Bush's name shows desperate the GOP is for viable national candidates.

[Robert Goren]

I think that MICHELLE BACHMAN spoke, she was actually somewhat funny for once. she said that if you want to become president you had to know the birthday of ELVIS PRESLEY So they had two women at CPAC and both were speakers. Humm........ It reminds me of why I became a democrat way back when. I was elect to local GOP county convention. They served Koolade and cookies. The Democrats served beer and pizza at theirs. I know they were more my type of people.

[newtothegame]

So they had two women at CPAC and both were speakers. Humm........ It reminds me of why I became a democrat way back when. I was elect to local GOP county convention. They served Koolade and cookies. The Democrats served beer and pizza at theirs. I know they were more my type of people.
Now I could be reading this qwrong, hopefully, but if I didn't know any better that could be construed as....nahhh it couldn't be.
Would it be safe to say Robert, that for your money, women should be home, barefoot, and in the kitchen??? :lol:

[reckless]

Jeb Bush? BUSH? Are you joking?

We might not have had that 100 years of Democrat rule that was promised us after the GOP got that ass-kicking back in 2006 and 2008, but it might just be 100 years until another BUSH has a snowball's chance in hell at the White House.

And as for "President Santorum...."

Well, it just has an odd ring to it...so I'm guessing it will never happen... :lol:

Not that my opinion matters but I do not want another Bushie in the White House.

I say Jeb Bush only because the GOP establishment is all-in at the moment for Mittens Romney, but he's proven to be a dud and a liberal -- which spells disaster in the November election. A Michigan primary loss will have the establishment GOP guys getting agita, you can bet.

Jeb Bush is Plan B for Tampa, especially if one candidate does not win the necessary delegates going into the convention. The so-called broken convention scenario. Look, imho, if Bush hadn't mssed all the state primary filing deadlines (since Romney was the guy) who is to say he wouldn't have thrown in his hat after South Carolina?

Didn't you find it odd that Jeb never endorsed Romney in the Fla. primary despite the Fla. state GOP establishment total embrace of Mitt? Pappy Bush's nod for Mitt was also cursory at best too.

[reckless]

The fact that anyone is even mentioning Jeb Bush's name shows desperate the GOP is for viable national candidates.

Jeb Bush is a relatively far-fetched idea at this point, yes, but Robert, the GOP establishment is at wit's end right now, especially going nuts these past few weeks or so with Rick Santorum surging.

Romney has been the GOP house guy since the day after Obama beat McCain. But their big problem is that the people -- you know who, those pagans in pitch forks -- are totally rejecting both the swishy liberal Romney and those GOP suits in Washington.

Unless Santorum, or the less likely, Newt, wins an unstoppable amount of delegates, hell breaks loose in Tampa in a 'broken convention' scenario.

Jeb Bush appeals to those that feel that the GOP needs to win Florida more so than Pennsylvania. Also, too many Rockefeller Republican elite types feel that Santorum is too far-right for their cocktail party chatter. This makes it hard for Rick in Tampa if he doesn't have an overwhelming amount of delegates.

Bush is truly conservative enough to fend off the righties. Also, Bush's conservative bona fides are much more believable than that of that 'severe conservative', Mittens.

Not that it matters, while I don't endorse Bush, he is a safe compromise for both the GOP establishment and the conservative base.

One thing seems sure: there's now a total rejection of Mitt and a loss in Michigan, which is very likely, makes him toast, Super Tuesday or not.

[Tom]

Whoever wins the Apprentice will be Truimp's running mate.
Trump and Teutul....I can see it now.

[canleakid]

a lot of folks in the North Dallas watering holes like Mitty :confused:

[Robert Goren]

Now I could be reading this qwrong, hopefully, but if I didn't know any better that could be construed as....nahhh it couldn't be.
Would it be safe to say Robert, that for your money, women should be home, barefoot, and in the kitchen??? :lol: Not what I said and you know it. I just wandering where all the women were. They weren't on TV in any of the crowd shots I saw. The only 2 I know for sure that were there were paid to be there. I got to wonder why so few women would go to a big conservative event like CPAC.

[bigmack]

I got to wonder why so few women would go to a big conservative event like CPAC.
Don't strain that brain of yours too much. You may need it some day.

[Tom]

The women that matter were there....

[Lefty]

Hey Robert, those Dims you love so much want to put extra taxes on your beer and pretzels. :D :D :D

[Greyfox]

At the CPAC conference last weekend, one of the introducers (Santorum's)
told the following joke:

"A Conservative, a Moderate, and a Liberal walk into a bar...
The Bar Tender looked at him said: "What'll it be Mitt?"

[JustRalph]

I heard her complaining about chrony capitalism in DC and saying it was Obama's fault, figured it was a waste of time to listen any further.

I suggest you read the latest

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/venture-capitalists-play-key-role-in-obamas-energy-department/2011/12/30/gIQA05raER_story.html

Or the short version here
http://hotair.com/archives/2012/02/15/wapo-finds-nearly-4-billion-in-green-tech-stimulus-funds-went-to-wh-connected-firms/

[NJ Stinks]

Obama is committed to breakthrough clean energy technologies. That seems like a pretty good thing to commit funds to in this day and age. So federal funding is given to alternative energy companies that backed Obama when he ran for president. Is this surprising or something new in the political arena? Or is this the way the world turns?

Or more to the point, does anybody believe that a Republican winner to the White House this year will not reward his backers when providing financial backing for whatever?

[Lefty]

The President is not supposed to be investing our tax money into private companies. That makes him a gambler at best and a crook at worst.
Maybe when your energy bill doubles and triples you'll feel differently.

[johnhannibalsmith]

...Or more to the point, does anybody believe that a Republican winner to the White House this year will not reward his backers when providing financial backing for whatever?

Or more to the point, does it begin to make sense why the Greek citizens have low "tax morale"?

[boxcar]

Obama is committed to breakthrough clean energy technologies. That seems like a pretty good thing to commit funds to in this day and age. So federal funding is given to alternative energy companies that backed Obama when he ran for president. Is this surprising or something new in the political arena? Or is this the way the world turns?

Or more to the point, does anybody believe that a Republican winner to the White House this year will not reward his backers when providing financial backing for whatever?

This is precisely what's wrong with this country. This unholy marriage made in Hell itself between the Government and the Private Sector, a/k/a corporate welfare. If the people want alternate energy, the people will invest in those companies. Let the green companies make their case to the private sector for "alternative energy" sources and let the private sector decide if the companies and their plans are investment-worthy.

You are such a welfare junky already, it's amazing you don't have to apply, yet, for government grants to help you find where you have to wipe after you have a BM. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[Tom]

Obama is committed to breakthrough clean energy technologies. That seems like a pretty good thing to commit funds to in this day and age

That is BS.

His job is to protect the nation, defend the constitution, get the economy going, decrease dependency on foreign oil ( not block drilling).

It is NOT his job to pick and choose who get rewarded and who doesn't - he is a miserable failure on EVERY single Green project so far and it has cost us billions. This jerk doesn not in any way shape or form represent all of America - he is a tool for a slect few groups at the expense of the others. He and his policies will NEVER succeed - because success is not his goal, and America is not his concern.

The man is a traitor.

[JustRalph]

I heard her complaining about chrony capitalism in DC and saying it was Obama's fault, figured it was a waste of time to listen any further.

Here's another one for you.....

http://freebeacon.com/democratic-national-cronyism/

This is downright criminal and nobody gives a shit. The President should be facing a Special Prosecutor

[bigmack]

Does anyone have a pamphlet outlining each candidates positions on giving away free shit? jognlope is trying to find the one with the most bearing presents for her to vote for.

[Valuist]

So they had two women at CPAC and both were speakers. Humm........ It reminds me of why I became a democrat way back when. I was elect to local GOP county convention. They served Koolade and cookies. The Democrats served beer and pizza at theirs. I know they were more my type of people.

I'm guessing the Dems ran up a far bigger tab at their convention.

[jognlope]

A panel of McErney (Boeing CEO), GE CEO and Dow Chemical CEO on C-SPAN, they agreed regulation needs to be streamlined, a "one-stop regulatory guide," which administration is working on. Obama had joked that their our two separate agencies to protect smoked salmon and fresh water salmon. But these three guys said the key to jobs is raising math/science aptitudes, cooperation between companies and community and 4-year colleges like apprentice programs (tax incentives to do so), opening up markets and leveling playing field and making corporate tax competitive globally. Nothing new I guess, but they were interesting.

[Robert Goren]

I'm guessing the Dems ran up a far bigger tab at their convention. I don't know about the dem's beer and pizza, but the koolade and cookies was paid for by a private person, Anne Batchelder.

[bigmack]

I don't know about the dem's beer and pizza, but the koolade and cookies was paid for by a private person, Anne Batchelder.
Does it ever occur to you that your opinions have been formed by the most absurd reasons possible? Reagan screwed the farmers and because they served Koolaid and cookies you're a Dem.

WTF am I saying? I get it, you're an ignoramus. You HAVE to become a Dem by default. :jump:

It all makes sense now.

[canleakid]

Arizona

2012 President: Republican Primary
36% Romney
33% Santorum
16% Gingrich
9% Paul


Michigan
Santorum leads Romney 37%-30%, according to a RealClearPolitics.com average of four statewide polls taken over the past nine days. Texas Rep. Ron Paul and Gingrich have 10% each.

[Robert Goren]

It pretty clear that a lot of republicans don't want Romney. The problem is when ever they take a good look at anybody else they like him even less. It remains to be seen if Santorum can withstand a closer look by GOP voters. We will know in a month or so. I am not sure that Newt is done yet either. He has more lives than a cat.

[Buckeye]

Romney sucks and he ain't leading. His major problem is lack of personality.

[Lefty]

But the leftwing media machine is after Santorum bigtime. They are calling him a religious zealot. In the end, Romney will be the nominee.

[bigmack]

In the end, Romney will be the nominee.
Romney now leading in Mich polls.

When the boxcars of the world realize Brylcreem is the only one that can beat the wide eared fellow, they'll fall in line, or they'll be blackballed, as they should.

[Lefty]

The knock on Romney is that he's not conservative enough. Well, he's at least a million times more conservative than Obama and that's good enough for me...

[Buckeye]

no charactor. No personality. No identity.

[JustRalph]

Romney now leading in Mich polls.

When the boxcars of the world realize Brylcreem is the only one that can beat the wide eared fellow, they'll fall in line, or they'll be blackballed, as they should.

I see it that way too.

Preparing to black ball the fools.

[bigmack]

Coulter column:

We're being asked to hand Obama another four years in the White House in order to "send a message." To whom? And what message? That we're morons? Message received!

Meanwhile, Romney cheerfully campaigns on, the biggest outsider and most conservative candidate we've run for president since Reagan, while being denounced by the Establishment as "too Establishment."

http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2012-02-22.html

[boxcar]

I see it that way too.

Preparing to black ball the fools.

The only fools around here are those who buy into the MM propaganda of who "can" beat who. :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[bigmack]

The only fools around here are those who buy into the MM propaganda of who "can" beat who.
OK, Wisenheimer, start makin' a case for Santorum, Paul or Gingrich, beating BO.

Ain't gonna happen.

As governor of one of the most liberal states in the union, Mitt Romney did something even Ronald Reagan didn't do as governor of California: He balanced the budget without raising taxes.

Romney became deeply pro-life as governor of the aforementioned liberal state and vetoed an embryonic stem cell bill. (Meanwhile, Newt Gingrich lobbied President George W. Bush to allow embryonic stem cell research.)

Romney's approach to illegal immigration in Massachusetts resembled what Gov. Jan Brewer of Arizona is doing today, making her a right-wing heroine.

Romney pushed the conservative alternative to national health care that, had it been adopted in the 49 other states, would have killed Obamacare in the crib by solving the health insurance problem at the state level.

Unlike actual Establishment candidates, Romney has never worked in Washington, much less spent his entire life as a professional politician. He's had a Midas touch with every enterprise he has ever run, including Bain Capital, the Olympics and Massachusetts.

The chestnut about Mitt Romney being pushed on unsuspecting conservatives by "the Establishment" is the exact opposite of the truth. The Establishment, by any sensible definition, is virulently opposed to Romney -- and for completely contradictory reasons.

The entire NFM (non-Fox media) hate Romney because he is the only candidate who stands a chance of beating Obama.
Coulter from linkie above.

[Tom]

Hitler, Tojo.

You make the call.

[boxcar]

OK, Wisenheimer, start makin' a case for Santorum, Paul or Gingrich, beating BO.

Ain't gonna happen.


Coulter from linkie above.

A self-confessed "non-partisan" progressive v. a progressive. Being too much like your opponent will only make it easier for the incumbent to get reelected. Enough said! No real conservatives can get a thrill running up or down their leg over the Rug.

Boxcar

[bigmack]

A self-confessed "non-partisan" progressive v. a progressive. Being too much like your opponent will only make it easier for the incumbent to get reelected. Enough said! No real conservatives can get a thrill running up or down their leg over the Rug.
Refresh me on this self-confession and then we'll dig into your world and find your mind has changed politically over the years.

Or has your brain always been this thick?

Neanderthal ideologue. Shame your wants continue to be so far removed from anything that will ever pan out in reality.

[elysiantraveller]

Refresh me on this self-confession and then we'll dig into your world and find your mind has changed politically over the years.

Or has your brain always been this thick?

Neanderthal ideologue. Shame your wants continue to be so far removed from anything that will ever pan out in reality.

Why waste your time?

He hasn't even said who he supports and we all know he will vote for Romney in the general election anyway...

[bigmack]

Why waste your time?

He hasn't even said who he supports and we all know he will vote for Romney in the general election anyway...
You're right. Besides, why waste my time with a Flahridian geriatric.

Flahrida. :lol: Muggy & buggy. They can't even figure out how to put shoulders on their roads. We got lanes 8 wide on either side, WITH shoulders and I haven't seen a bug in over 14 years.

Comparing FL to CA is like oranges to a prune.

[boxcar]

Refresh me on this self-confession and then we'll dig into your world and find your mind has changed politically over the years.

Or has your brain always been this thick?

Neanderthal ideologue. Shame your wants continue to be so far removed from anything that will ever pan out in reality.

Hey, Burger Flipper, before you point to anyone else's brain as being too thick, it appears you could use several doses of blood thinner for yours. (Perhaps a powerful vac, too, to clear out the cobwebs and fog!) You having problems keeping up, since I have posted on this previously? And on top of that you have forgotten how to use Google? And if all this weren't enough, you doubt my veracity? I'm not in the habit of getting things like this wrong. I have a feeling this election is turning you into a basket case, Mack. Tsk, tsk, tsk. But here it is again. Love it, Learn it, and Live it. And never let it be said that I'm not a passionate conservative. :lol:

Romney in 2002: I'm "Moderate," "Progressive," and "Not a Partisan Republican" [VIDEO]

http://motherjones.com/mojo/2011/12/romney-2002-moderate-progressive-not-partisan-Worcester

Boxcar

[boxcar]

You're right. Besides, why waste my time with a Flahridian geriatric.

Flahrida. :lol: Muggy & buggy. They can't even figure out how to put shoulders on their roads. We got lanes 8 wide on either side, WITH shoulders and I haven't seen a bug in over 14 years.

Comparing FL to CA is like oranges to a prune.

I see you're right at home in the Land of the Progressives. It truly has rubbed off on you. You're infected and don't know it.

Boxcar

[Robert Goren]

I think a lot of the conservatives are rooting for Romney, so when Obama beat the GOP nominee, they can say he just wasn't conservative enough to get out the base and that's the reason the GOP got beat. Some conservatives are already making excuses for all the candidiates. They see the hand writing on the wall and don't want to admit that their ideas will be rejected by the American voters.

[boxcar]

I think a lot of the conservatives are rooting for Romney, so when Obama beat the GOP nominee, they can say he just wasn't conservative enough to get out the base and that's the reason the GOP got beat. Some conservatives are already making excuses for all the candidiates. They see the hand writing on the wall and don't want to admit that their ideas will be rejected by the American voters.

Yeah, the sure ticket to beating the incumbent progressive is to run another progressive against him. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[bigmack]

http://motherjones.com/mojo/2011/12/romney-2002-moderate-progressive-not-partisan-Worcester
What a schnook. Suckin' on the tailpipe of MotherJones.

He said his ideas are progressive. NOT that he's a progressive.

Somehow, I relish that you despise him so.

[boxcar]

Why waste your time?

He hasn't even said who he supports and we all know he will vote for Romney in the general election anyway...

Are you a self-made clueless wonder or were you born that way?

Boxcar

[riskman]

Romney is not a conservative, nor is he a liberal. Romney is a politician. Have to admit, he is very adept in wiggling out of past positions in the debate process by putting his opponents on the defensive of their past positions. You almost forget that Willard was the one who was attacked-- yep, he is a smoothie.
Now, I think I have an idea where Boxcar is coming from.Do not want to speak for him but he is looking for a conservative who believes that the government should do what the Constitution says, and who actually will reduce the size and power of the federal government, and make an attempt to restore the protection of our natural rights and civil liberties.
To be honest, do not know if a candidate like this is electable. The country seems to like being pandered and to continue the socialism, the environmentalist interference and the warmongering, as well as the Fed’s inflationary money printing. Eventually, this will present monumental problems for us but we continue to kick the can down the road.
Romney most likely has the best chance of being elected of the present candidates, and by far he is better qualified to lead the country despite his so called shortcomings as a conservative.
The choice for me and others is between continuing the socialism, corporate-government cronyism and central planning which are destroying America from within and will leave us to ruin – or reason, common sense, and the restoration of the rule of law and freedom. Can Romney or another candidate lead us in the right direction or is it a lost cause?

[johnhannibalsmith]

OK, Wisenheimer, start makin' a case for Santorum, Paul or Gingrich, beating BO.

Ain't gonna happen.


Coulter from linkie above.

In all seriousness, why wouldn't Ron Paul have a better chance of beating BO if we apply your theory to how this is supposed to go down?

According to you, it's all aboard the Beat Obama Express. So, all the same people that can't stand Romney but will vote against Obama by picking him will still vote Paul. Then you pick up a fair amount of folks that probably just sit at home because they won't vote for Obama, nor Romney.

Hypothetically, if Paul suddenly caught fire and secured the nomination - you'd still be pushing the "you got no right to bitch if you don't vote GOP" platform right?

So how does Paul do worse than Romney if he gets all of Romney's "by default only" voters plus all of those that just want to vote for something totally different?

Romney = Romney + Santorum + Gingrich

Paul = Paul + Romney + Santorum + Gingrich + disillusioned

Mathify me.

[boxcar]

Romney is not a conservative, nor is he a liberal. Romney is a politician.

So, you think Romney was lying in that vid because he was running for office in a Blue State? And now that he's running for national office and claims to be a conservative, he's also lying? So, what we're supposed to get really excited and enthusiastic about is electing another lying politician? And this lying politician is going to lead us out of the wilderness into the promised land?


Now, I think I have an idea where Boxcar is coming from.Do not want to speak for him but he is looking for a conservative who believes that the government should do what the Constitution says, and who actually will reduce the size and power of the federal government, and make an attempt to restore the protection of our natural rights and civil liberties.
To be honest, do not know if a candidate like this is electable.

So, let's go with that argument then. Let's say that such is not electable. If such a candidate is not electable, then why prolong the agony? Why kick the can down father down the road? Because at some point in time, America will be ready to elect a conservative? :rolleyes: Heck...if a real conservative is not electable, you're implying that most people in this country want to embrace Socialism. Well...if they want to go that route, why not just vote for the Marxist who is already in office? And this has been my logic all along. If the people of the nation really don't want a conservative, then my feeling is (and I'm not alone) is that who am I to deprive all the "smart" people of what they really want? Maybe they know something about Communism Lite that I don't. :rolleyes:

The country seems to like being pandered and to continue the socialism, the environmentalist interference and the warmongering, as well as the Fed’s inflationary money printing. Eventually, this will present monumental problems for us but we continue to kick the can down the road.

Eventually, eventually, eventually....Eventually, the nation will have to run into a brick wall. Better sooner than later.

Romney most likely has the best chance of being elected of the present candidates, and by far he is better qualified to lead the country despite his so called shortcomings as a conservative.
The choice for me and others is between continuing the socialism, corporate-government cronyism and central planning which are destroying America from within and will leave us to ruin – or reason, common sense, and the restoration of the rule of law and freedom. Can Romney or another candidate lead us in the right direction or is it a lost cause?

So let me see if I have this right: This self-professed liberal who helped engineer socialized medicine in his state is going to take this country off the road to Socialism and take us exactly where, again? Do I hear anyone saying that he's going to take us back to a limited form of government per the Constitution? Oh wait... but he can't do that because the majority of the people don't want THAT, right!? Horrors of horrors! What a ghastly idea!

Bottom line: Give the people what they want! Give a nation enough rope and it will hang itself.

Boxcar

[bigmack]

So, all the same people that can't stand Romney but will vote against Obama by picking him will still vote Paul.
Vote for Paul when, now in the primary or in the general?

Look, I can't take you all that serious if you're going to bring me a hypothetical that involves RP catching on fire.

I sized-up the field and the negatives on the others just won't cut it against BO.

I'm far less a 'conservative' than I am incredulous of the complete insane rubbish coming from Team D.

I'm doing some work with Shell and I need BO, O.U.T., A.S.A.P.

After seeing Brykcreem in the debate last night, the debates between he & BO will be as lopsided as Butterbean v. Knoxville.

32bJKMPy6Bs

[elysiantraveller]

Are you a self-made clueless wonder or were you born that way?

Boxcar

I just figure its kinda like how you bagged on McCain the last whole election cycle before you voted for him.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Vote for Paul when, now in the primary or in the general?

...

The context was the remark about "who has a better chance of defeating OBama than Romney?" "Make the case, Boxcar"

Don't gimme the NJS/mopo/Goren two-step now with an objection to the hypothetical of Paul catching fire - you asked the question:

OK, Wisenheimer, start makin' a case for Santorum, Paul or Gingrich, beating BO.

I made the effort, now don't just dismiss me in hand...

Why wouldn't Paul actually get more votes against Obama than Romney would if we vote according to your philosophy that the key is simply being anti-Obama?

[elysiantraveller]

The context was the remark about "who has a better chance of defeating OBama than Romney?" "Make the case, Boxcar"

Don't gimme the NJS/mopo/Goren two-step now with an objection to the hypothetical of Paul catching fire - you asked the question:



I made the effort, now don't just dismiss me in hand...

Why wouldn't Paul actually get more votes against Obama than Romney would if we vote according to your philosophy that the key is simply being anti-Obama?

Paul isn't a Republican. He is a libertarian and isolationist because of that HE WON'T win the nomination so there is no point hypothesizing how he would do in the general election.

[bigmack]

Why wouldn't Paul actually get more votes against Obama than Romney would if we vote according to your philosophy that the key is simply being anti-Obama?
People know the extreme isolationist foreign policy RP holds. The uber-conservatives like boxie, would have a stroke before they'd vote for Paul. While Paul has a 2 point lead with Independents over Romney, Paul wouldn't draw R's like MR.

Who's next, Santorum?

[johnhannibalsmith]

Paul isn't a Republican. He is a libertarian and isolationist because of that HE WON'T win the nomination so there is no point hypothesizing how he would do in the general election.

Mack asked for a case to be made for Paul over Obama. He was on his list and he asked the question.

I'm not suggesting he would win the nomination, but those of us that object to Romney for principled reasons are expected to suck it up and vote for him simply because he isn't Obama or we are blackballed. Unless you can make the case that Paul couldn't fare better than Romney in the general, then I find that position on behalf of Romney/GOP to be a bit of a joke. If you can't nominate the guy because of principles even if he actually is the most electable, than it is absurd to condemn others for not supporting Romney for the same reason.

[johnhannibalsmith]

People know the extreme isolationist foreign policy RP holds. The uber-conservatives like boxie, would have a stroke before they'd vote for Paul. ...

But he isn't Obama. That's the case for Romney for the most part - at least the part that's being pushed here for the skeptics. That's supposed to be enough to get Romney elected and anyone that objects is pathetic and blackballed.

:kiss:

[elysiantraveller]

Mack asked for a case to be made for Paul over Obama. He was on his list and he asked the question.

I'm not suggesting he would win the nomination, but those of us that object to Romney for principled reasons are expected to suck it up and vote for him simply because he isn't Obama or we are blackballed. Unless you can make the case that Paul couldn't fare better than Romney in the general, then I find that position on behalf of Romney/GOP to be a bit of a joke. If you can't nominate the guy because of principles even if he actually is the most electable, than it is absurd to condemn others for not supporting Romney for the same reason.

Ron Paul isn't even electable within his own party. Romney, however, is as the results up to this point prove it. Paul's foreign policy stances alienate a vast block of conservative support and money. I'm not saying its right as I agree with RP on a lot more issues than not but the simple truth is if you aren't electable within your own party you have no chance in the general election.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Ron Paul isn't even electable within his own party. Romney, however, is as the results up to this point prove it. Paul's foreign policy stances alienate a vast block of conservative support and money. I'm not saying its right as I agree with RP on a lot more issues than not but the simple truth is if you aren't electable within your own party you have no chance in the general election.

For the record, I like a lot of Paul's ideas but think he would be recorded as one of history's all-time least effective presidents if elected.

The problem, for me, is that the more Romney fails to separate himself and make a case for himself, the more the rallying cry has been to say that anyone that wants Obama out has to vote for whomever is the GOP candidate. Oh and by the by, that candidate has been designated as Romney because he's the most electable.

Maybe my math was rudimentary but if you on the one hand expect everyone within the party to vote for whomever is nominated (romney ahem), then add in all of the votes that Paul does bring in that won't go to Romney - I don't think it is a stretch to think that Paul does better than Romney.

When you object to that line of thought, it undermines the theme that has been pushed that you are an Obama lover if you don't vote for Romney. In other words, it's fine and okay to stand against Paul against Obama because of foreign policy, but you can't possibly object to Romney or risk the wrath of Mack. :(

[bigmack]

But he isn't Obama. That's the case for Romney for the most part - at least the part that's being pushed here for the skeptics. That's supposed to be enough to get Romney elected and anyone that objects is pathetic and blackballed.
Don't be sill. If you'd like for me to sell you on RM I'd be happy.

What's your problem with him, not conservative enough? I doubt it.

[boxcar]

I just figure its kinda like how you bagged on McCain the last whole election cycle before you voted for him.

That was back then. You're stuck in the past. All the smart Americans voted in the most liberal senator into the WH! That's the game changer. Maybe all those smart Americans still want him since conservatism is, evidently, dead in America.

Boxcar

[elysiantraveller]

Maybe my math was rudimentary but if you on the one hand expect everyone within the party to vote for whomever is nominated (romney ahem), then add in all of the votes that Paul does bring in that won't go to Romney - I don't think it is a stretch to think that Paul does better than Romney.

Its a huge stretch because Ron Paul isn't electable within his own party. He is not a Republican. Among Republicans Ron Paul is not electable, among Republicans the other three are... they have proved that, he hasn't.

[boxcar]

Its a huge stretch because Ron Paul isn't electable within his own party. He is not a Republican. Among Republicans Ron Paul is not electable, among Republicans the other three are... they have proved that, he hasn't.

Would you mind defining what a "Republican" is for us?

Boxcar

[elysiantraveller]

That was back then. You're stuck in the past. All the smart Americans voted in the most liberal senator into the WH! That's the game changer. Maybe all those smart Americans still want him since conservatism is, evidently, dead in America.

Boxcar

I'm stuck in the past? Kind of like you when you consistently bang on Romney's past...

Move along... you are both a hypocrite and a coward.

[bigmack]

Would you mind defining what a "Republican" is for us?
Here we go.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Don't be sill. If you'd like for me to sell you on RM I'd be happy.

What's your problem with him, not conservative enough? I doubt it.

I'll be honest - it has nothing to do with too this or that, or not this or that enough.

This coronation of Romney from the outset just feeds the narrative that the game is rigged. If he could really set himself as the leader on his merit, it would be one thing, but I think an election like this one, at this time, where everything feels entirely predetermined does a disservice to an already skeptical voting public. This type of election may be great - it may be the catalyst that turns a large group into 3rd party voters.

In other words, I don't think he's a terrible candidate. My objection to him is less him and more the mechanics. I don't like what he represents in politics. He's not the only one, don't take that impression, but he's the figurehead.


Now that I answered the question, answer me this: If Romney fell ill (or whatever) and Paul did end up being nominated, would you suck it up and vote for him against your objections as someone like Boxcat is expected to do in the case of Romney?

[bigmack]

Now that I answered the question, answer me this: If Romney fell ill (or whatever) and Paul did end up being nominated, would you suck it up and vote for him against your objections as someone like Boxcat is expected to do in the case of Romney?
I figured that was the nugget you were looking for.

Look. I can pick-up what you're puttin' down about this perception that MR was/is the inevitable nom. But here again I ax; who else ya got?

I heard Tommy talkin' about Palin. :lol:

Is Romney a default guy? Yeah. But so what? Again, ain't nobody else.

As you fight the process, Boxie fights the potential passage of made-up legislation that he deeply fears. Then again, G. Gordo Lidsky isn't right enough for Box & Tommy.

Would I vote for Paul? Yes. (Anybody have a sick bag?)

[johnhannibalsmith]

...
Would I vote for Paul? Yes. (Anybody have a sick bag?)

:) Then I guess I can deal with you pounding Boxcat over the head.

[bigmack]

:) Then I guess I can deal with you pounding Boxcat over the head.
Good thing I thought it through. Technically I lied, but was unable to tella the truth for fear of having to endure the wrath of you & he for the next 9 months.

Score one for dishonesty.

http://28.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lt7hy3XSjQ1qe0eclo1_r26_500.gif

[johnhannibalsmith]

...Score one for dishonesty...



:lol:


Mitt would be proud. :lol:

[bigmack]

Mitt would be proud. :lol:
OK, Wiseguy. Don't spread it around. And for gawd sake, DO NOT TELL Boximillion.

[Tom]

After Newt's comments on our sell-out of a president siding, once again, with the terrorists, He is now the ONLY candidate.

Forget all the knucklehead stuff.....there is one issue this year.
Obama is the issue.

[boxcar]

OK, Wiseguy. Don't spread it around. And for gawd sake, DO NOT TELL Boximillion.


Too late, Mack. It seems you're always a day late and dollar short. I've had Mitten's number for quite a while. He might even come to rival BO in the lying department before it's all over.

Boxcar

[jognlope]

Santorum realized too late the word theology refers to religion and he goofed when using the term phony theology to refer to Obama's protection of the environment. So then he tried to cover his mistake by bringing up that church Obama attended for 20 years. Desparate man.

[Tom]

Truthful man.
Right on both counts.

Too many heathens out there these days! :rolleyes::D

[boxcar]

Santorum realized too late the word theology refers to religion and he goofed when using the term phony theology to refer to Obama's protection of the environment. So then he tried to cover his mistake by bringing up that church Obama attended for 20 years. Desparate man.

No, he didn't goof! He told it like it was! Fundamentalist Environmentalism is a Religion! It's a religion that says Man must be subservient to Earth. That he is to serve the Earth. Mother Earth is all but worshiped. However, biblical theology says that Man was put in charge of all God's creation. That the planet was created for Man and for his use -- not that Man was created to serve the Planet.

Boxcar

[Greyfox]

After Newt's comments on our sell-out of a president siding, once again, with the terrorists, He is now the ONLY candidate.

Forget all the knucklehead stuff.....there is one issue this year.
Obama is the issue.

Good points. :ThmbUp:
Unfortunately, Newt has little traction at this time.

By the way, when Obama came to power, the words "Terrorism, Terrorist,
and War on Terror" were banned by from Government use by his administration. In Obama's mind, they don't exist. (Logical extension would be that he can't side with what doesn't exist.)

[elysiantraveller]

Good points. :ThmbUp:
Unfortunately, Newt has little traction at this time.

By the way, when Obama came to power, the words "Terrorism, Terrorist,
and War on Terror" were banned by from Government use by his administration. In Obama's mind, they don't exist. (Logical extension would be that he can't side with what doesn't exist.)

They were banned yes but the war has definitely been ratcheted up under his Administration.

- Osama Bin Laden is dead.
- The drone campaign is much more aggressive than it was under Bush, completely ignoring sovereignty of multiple nations.
- He has toppled a regime.
- He has assassinated American nationals.
- Passed the NDAA

He may not want to call it a "war on terror," but he has not had a problem fighting it.

[Greyfox]

They were banned yes but the war has definitely been ratcheted up under his Administration.

- Osama Bin Laden is dead.
- The drone campaign is much more aggressive than it was under Bush, completely ignoring sovereignty of multiple nations.
- He has toppled a regime.
- He has assassinated American nationals.

He may not want to call it a "war on terror," but he has not had a problem fighting it.

True. And you didn't even mention Michelle who must be a terror to live with.

[elysiantraveller]

True. And you didn't even mention Michelle who must be a terror to live with.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Good one!

Doesn't want to get the two confused! :ThmbUp:

[bigmack]

Me buddy, Mitt picked-up a little tear-it-downer up the road in La Jolla. (The Jewel) for a measly $12M. He gonna tear down the 3550 sq. ft there and put in an 11,000 SF two starry spread. I know a chum that lives up the block.

If all goes well perhaps some August afternoon I'll get invited over for a barbie.

Just Mitt, Ann and a garden variety porn star: me. Gonna be sum good times.

All 8 years :ThmbUp:

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/mrhome.png

[Greyfox]

Me buddy, Mitt picked-up a little tear-it-downer up the road in La Jolla. (The Jewel) for a measly $12M. He gonna tear down the 3550 sq. ft there and put in an 11,000 SF two starry spread. I know a chum that lives up the block.

If all goes well perhaps some August afternoon I'll get invited over for a barbie.

Just Mitt, Ann and a garden variety porn star: me. Gonna be sum good times.

All 8 years :ThmbUp:

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/mrhome.png

Hey! That's my living quarters a couple of hundred yards up the beach.
I move it when the tide is in. I'm trying to get other "Occupiers" to join me.

[johnhannibalsmith]

...

All 8 years :ThmbUp:

...

Quit with that khakiness.

I don't believe you actually believe this guy is poised to be a great President. I'll buy an improvement, but you're just being a complete caricature now. :D

[bigmack]

Quit with that khakiness.

I don't believe you actually believe this guy is poised to be a great President. I'll buy an improvement, but you're just being a complete caricature now. :D
Wrongo, Longo.

Know what this country needs? Good management.

Like Ratso Rizzo told Joe Buck - "What you need my friend is management."

Don't you see it? MR is the quintessential manager. Rolls the sleeves up and gets to work.

In the OhOh, you'll soon hear, ala Lumbergh from O.Space, Ah. Yeah. So I guess we should probably go ahead and have a little talk about your TPS reports, Hmm?

He's perfect. He's L7.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_MMkemu3GvWE/TIRfxDgRaKI/AAAAAAAAADI/P6XKAV6wdNI/S700/midnight.jpg

[PaceAdvantage]

Romney lays out economic vision - in mostly empty stadium

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/02/24/10499355-romney-lays-out-economic-vision-in-mostly-empty-stadium

What a nightmare image this is...seriously...what were they thinking? Whoever is running Romney's campaign ought to be fired for this...EVEN IF they didn't pick the venue...they should have never let him do this...what a joke...

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Photo/_new/120224_romney_stadium.photoblog600.jpg

[newtothegame]

Romney lays out economic vision - in mostly empty stadium

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/02/24/10499355-romney-lays-out-economic-vision-in-mostly-empty-stadium

What a nightmare image this is...seriously...what were they thinking? Whoever is running Romney's campaign ought to be fired for this...EVEN IF they didn't pick the venue...they should have never let him do this...what a joke...

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Photo/_new/120224_romney_stadium.photoblog600.jpg

Geeze Louise......are there even 200 people there?? :faint:

[hcap]

A better perspective

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-gq8ZX3REOjM/T0fVhjPCB6I/AAAAAAAADOg/oWGeuBcOMdE/s1600/large.jpg

[bigmack]

The cavernous, 65,000 seat Ford Field was selected by the Economic Club, but couldn't possibly be filled. The result: tens of thousands of empty seats and a space so large it swallowed applause altogether.
The candidate joked about the venue at the beginning of his remarks.
"I guess we had a hard time finding a large enough place to meet and this ... certainly is," he said. :lol:

*** UPDATE *** Regarding the optics of Romney giving a speech to a largely empty stadium, a Romney official gave this response to NBC's Peter Alexander:

"Beth Chappell -CEO of Detroit Economic Club just now spoke with ABC and told them that the campaign had nothing to do with venue choice...they typically use the atrium at Ford Field as a venue for their events, but due to the size of the crowd there were security concerns with the atrium so they moved it to the field. Once they moved the campaign worked on logistics but the campaign had nothing to do with this."

The president of the Detroit Economic Club also responded:

"I just heard that there is some confusion in the media regarding the selection of today's venue. That is very disappointing after such a terrific meeting. As I said in my remarks today, we sold out the previous venue in 90 minutes and were delighted that Ford Field was available and could accommodate the DEC. Further, we thought it a wonderful Detroit landmark to host this nationally broadcast meeting."

"The original plan was to host the Romney meeting in the atrium, which is where we host DEC meetings when at Ford Field. During our walk through with the security team there were further issues raised due to the size of the crowd so we moved the event to the field. Had we followed our normal plan in the atrium, the football field would not have been visible - and the room would have been packed."

From PA's linky.

[hcap]

Hey, my uncle is a dyed-in-the-wood true Ayn Rand fanatic. He would have been so happy to serve refreshments in his guest bedroom for Mitt and loyal fans.

The deli down the block caters both large and small affairs. Even throws in an extra quart of potato salad for extra special occasions!

[Robert Goren]

At this point, if you hooked a lie detector to the Romney voters, they would have admit they are holding their noses while they are voting for him. There is no passion for him. His campaign is that he is more likely to to beat Obama than anybody else. Everything else he says in window dressing and everybody knows it. If somebody gets close to him in the polls, his PAC spends a bunch of money attracting them and the GOP is stuck with Romney again. As more and more time passes, it becomes less about who can beat Obama and more about who is going to be the bigger disaster as a candidate and who will take down the fewest GOP office holders with him.

[Tom]

A better perspective

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-gq8ZX3REOjM/T0fVhjPCB6I/AAAAAAAADOg/oWGeuBcOMdE/s1600/large.jpg


You bucking for a job on CNN?
You swing the news so well, you could be Wolfie's replacement.

Would anyone but a total idiot or a democrat - is that redundant? - think there ever a plan to fill the only open space in Detroit large enough to hold a thousand people.

[hcap]

My guess is more pigeons were flying around inside the stadium than pigeons listening on the ground

[jognlope]

Ok if you're basing your obligation to protect the earth on a strict interpretation of the Bible, then how about riches?

“I tell you the truth, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.” Matthew (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Matthew) 19:23-24 (http://bibref.hebtools.com/?book=%20Matthew&verse=19:23-24&src=NIV)

[hcap]

Ok if you're basing your obligation to protect the earth on a strict interpretation of the Bible, then how about riches?

“I tell you the truth, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.” Matthew (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Matthew) 19:23-24 (http://bibref.hebtools.com/?book=%20Matthew&verse=19:23-24&src=NIV)

Look's like a camel would have drawn a LARGER crowd

[bigmack]

Look's like a camel would have drawn a LARGER crowd
What are you, some kind of a dense dolt?

You don't know that it was sold-out by now?

You remain as dishonest as Baron Münchhausen.

[hcap]

What are you, some kind of a dense dolt?

You don't know that it was sold-out by now?

You remain as dishonest as Baron Münchhausen.This was sold out for a smaller venue?

How many is "SOLD OT" 1000, 2000?
Gee, it sure looks like Romney REALLY hit the big time. After running for president for what is about 7 years now draws maybe a big 100-200 folks?

I remember even Joe the Plumber doing much better babbling about the trials and tribulations of being a proprietor of a plumbing business. Funny thing is, even after it turned out he was only a plumbing proprietor WANNABE, he still drew more than the Brylcream kid.

And when you guys were creamin' in your pants over Sarah P, this Romney "sold out" crowd would have been barely a pimple on the backside of her draw. I know Romney is just warming up, but one would think as the nominee, he might have done a bit better than what the the proverbial CAMEL I mentioned, parading on the sidewalk just outside would have pulled simply from the camel gawkers alone.

On the other hand if the camel did give a speech on economic policy, well so much for the above "sold out" venue. A economics spouting camel certainly be qualified as the latest en vogue republican nominee. Maybe Santorum could enlist our economic camel as VP?

[PaceAdvantage]

What are you, some kind of a dense dolt?

You don't know that it was sold-out by now?

You remain as dishonest as Baron Münchhausen.It doesn't matter what the truth was here bigmack...cause even the truth is bizarre.

There is no way, and I repeat NO WAY Romney's team should have agreed to this venue change...it is a total marketing nightmare and will only be used against him (and quite effectively I might add) by the hcaps of the world...

Somebody needs to be fired over this...what a major **** up...

[bigmack]

.it is a total marketing nightmare and will only be used against him (and quite effectively I might add) by the hcaps of the world...

Somebody needs to be fired over this...what a major **** up...
I can't keep up with all the MAJOR faux pas that will be used "quite effectively against him."

Was it the HUGE venue with a slight crowd? Maybe it was the use of "severe." No, perhaps when he wanted to wager $10K. Heck no, it must be that his wife has two Caddies. :lol: :lol:

Don't make me laugh that ANY of it will have ANY effect.

MR will make mincemeat of BO in debate.

[PaceAdvantage]

I can't keep up with all the MAJOR faux pas that will be used "quite effectively against him."

Was it the HUGE venue with a slight crowd? Maybe it was the use of "severe." No, perhaps when he wanted to wager $10K. Heck no, it must be that his wife has two Caddies. :lol: :lol:

Don't make me laugh that ANY of it will have ANY effect.

MR will make mincemeat of BO in debate.When you're facing an incumbent, it's best not to make yourself look bad when it can be avoided.

Marketing 101.

Right now, you're sounding as ridiculous as some of the Romney bashers around here with your failure to acknowledge these multiple screw ups by Team Romney.

And yes, a picture of a touted Romney speech with him speaking to a mostly empty stadium is and will be used effectively...it's a slam dunk to his opposition...something else to paint him in a negative light.

You think that's helpful? Something to be encouraged?

Go Team Romney! You guys rock! :lol:

[bigmack]

Right now, you're sounding as ridiculous as some of the Romney bashers around here with your failure to acknowledge these multiple screw ups by Team Romney.
I have no problem acknowledging them, they just won't amount to a squat bit of difference.

Flo from FL in Nov of this year: Honey, did you see the BO commercial showing MR talking to a group of 1200 in an arena that holds 65,000?
Gus. Flo's wife: Holy Crumcake! I ain't votin' for him.
Flo: Me neither.

Sure Bud. I can see that happ'nin'. :rolleyes:

[PaceAdvantage]

Never thought they would make a campaign commercial about it...just saying all this stuff doesn't help his campaign, and certainly can hurt it...

PLUS, it's stuff that could have been avoided...no matter what anyone says to try and save face, this could have been avoided...that's what good campaign managers are for...

[johnhannibalsmith]

...

MR will make mincemeat of BO in debate.

A2xx9NqUT2c

[Tom]

I have yet to see Mitt show any debating skills. He is a big mouth attack dog, but I see no skills at all. I see a POS politician who is not fit to walk the dogs.
Mitt has nothing to offer. Nothing.

[bigmack]

I have yet to see Mitt show any debating skills. He is a big mouth attack dog, but I see no skills at all. I see a POS politician who is not fit to walk the dogs.
Mitt has nothing to offer. Nothing.
That's right, you want Palin. :lol: :lol:

[PaceAdvantage]

That's right, you want Palin. :lol: :lol:I don't see how your guy is really faring any better...it's less than nine months until election day and Romney can't even garner majority support from his own "kind."

Every few months another Republican becomes a threat to Romney...this time around, it's Santorum's turn...

Really inspiring... :lol:

[Tom]

Christie/Pailin come the convention.
Christie will come clean and admit he was drinking heavily when he back Mitt.
Or he lost a bet. :lol:

[bigmack]

Once you come to your senses that you can't pick a horse from another race, you'll come around.

Gee, I wonder what kind of numbers Palin would be racking up now. More than likely would have pulled-out, ala Huntsman, Perry.

Christie ain't going nowhere. I like my CandyDates well vetted. I don't need no Guiliani married to a cousin, type. Christie may not have skeletons in his closet but there has to be a pop tart or two. ;)

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_p8KOFXprbnE/R1Tx18YvDrI/AAAAAAAABhw/lVB-WljzrFM/s1600-R/romneyboysandsomeoldguy.jpg
Volleyball Monsters!

[PaceAdvantage]

Once you come to your senses that you can't pick a horse from another race, you'll come around.

Gee, I wonder what kind of numbers Palin would be racking up now. More than likely would have pulled-out, ala Huntsman, Perry.

Christie ain't going nowhere. I like my CandyDates well vetted. I don't need no Guiliani married to a cousin, type. Christie may not have skeletons in his closet but there has to be a pop tart or two. ;)

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_p8KOFXprbnE/R1Tx18YvDrI/AAAAAAAABhw/lVB-WljzrFM/s1600-R/romneyboysandsomeoldguy.jpg
Volleyball Monsters!Both Palin and Romney get little to no respect from the mainstream media. No conservatives/Republicans do.

It's amazing what they did to Palin, but that's neither here nor there...topic for another thread.

[lsbets]

Both Palin and Romney get little to no respect from the mainstream media. No conservatives/Republicans do.

It's amazing what they did to Palin, but that's neither here nor there...topic for another thread.

Yes Palin was treated poorly by the media. But in the last year she has shown herself to be a shrieking idiot. The best thing that could happen to Republicans is her moving into an isolated igloo on the tundra with no camera on her so no one ever has to hear her voice again.

[lamboguy]

Both Palin and Romney get little to no respect from the mainstream media. No conservatives/Republicans do.

It's amazing what they did to Palin, but that's neither here nor there...topic for another thread.who in god's name accused either one of those two as being "conservative"?

i wonder how many american's are scared to death of the thought of either one of those two becoming a leader here?

[elysiantraveller]

Yes Palin was treated poorly by the media. But in the last year she has shown herself to be a shrieking idiot. The best thing that could happen to Republicans is her moving into an isolated igloo on the tundra with no camera on her so no one ever has to hear her voice again.

Agreed.

She wasn't treated fairly but she is also a idiot.

[TJDave]

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_p8KOFXprbnE/R1Tx18YvDrI/AAAAAAAABhw/lVB-WljzrFM/s1600-R/romneyboysandsomeoldguy.jpg
Volleyball Monsters!

You think they're wearing an abbreviated version of "magic underwear" or do Mormons get special dispensation when playing sports?

[highnote]

But in the last year she has shown herself to be a shrieking idiot.


In the last year? Hell, in the last 5 years!

She cost McCain the election.

Well, actually McCain cost McCain the election by selecting her as a running mate. That choice alone proved to voters he wasn't the best candidate.

Obama won 48% to 44%. McCain could have easily won 4% of the vote with a better candidate.

[PaceAdvantage]

You think they're wearing an abbreviated version of "magic underwear" or do Mormons get special dispensation when playing sports?You don't want to start talking about some of the weirder aspects of world religions now do you? Plenty of kooky things are done by Catholics, Jews, Muslims...you name it...

Where shall we begin?

[PaceAdvantage]

Agreed.

She wasn't treated fairly but she is also a idiot.How did she get elected Governor of Alaska?

How did Bush get elected governor of Texas (twice), not to mention President of the United States (twice)...another idiot, right?

How do all these idiots do it?

[boxcar]

In the last year? Hell, in the last 5 years!

She cost McCain the election.

Well, actually McCain cost McCain the election by selecting her as a running mate. That choice alone proved to voters he wasn't the best candidate.

Obama won 48% to 44%. McCain could have easily won 4% of the vote with a better candidate.

There were numerous reasons why McCain was destined to lose, but Palin wasn't one of them. Put a lib up against another lib and this is what you'll get every time. Same thing will probably happen this election if the Rug gets the nom.

Boxcar

[bigmack]

You think they're wearing an abbreviated version of "magic underwear" or do Mormons get special dispensation when playing sports?
We need to be careful about flagrant religious bigotry. By 'we' of course I'm referring to you.

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/boss1.gif

[chickenhead]

On Human Intelligence:


Just think about how stupid the average person you meet is. Then realize half the people out there are even stupider than that.

-- George Carlin

[JustRalph]

She's not stupid. She was smart enough not to run for President.

HBO and Tom Hanks spent 50 million to make a movie going after her, with plans to release it right in the middle of the primary season. That should tell you how much they feared her.

She's no dummy. She is filling a very interesting place in the party and the media.

[lsbets]

She's not stupid. She was smart enough not to run for President.

HBO and Tom Hanks spent 50 million to make a movie going after her, with plans to release it right in the middle of the primary season. That should tell you how much they feared her.

She's no dummy. She is filling a very interesting place in the party and the media.

She doesn't understand the issues. She was governor of a state that is smaller than most cities population wise and quit because she couldn't handle it. From everything I can gather, the movie is pretty accurate. No one fears her. I think team BO was praying she would run. If she somehow managed to get the nomination, BO would win all 57 states. As long as she is out there she hurts the Reps. Only a small lunatic fringe likes her.

[bigmack]

Sorry to break wind and/or ranks, but as far as 'folk heroes' go; S.Palin is about on par with Johnny Appleseed. Who's Johnny A, you ax? Exactly!

Nice enough person, she is.

Using woids beyond her reach, she began to feel like Stallone after people thought he was actually oafish, judging him by his 'beliveable' character Rocky. He got a vocabooLarry coach and 'tore it up' on talkshoes. I heard him use adroit one time. Swear. To. God.

Sarah should do charitable work. Having her voice changed would be a start.

[TJDave]

We need to be careful about flagrant religious bigotry. By 'we' of course I'm referring to you.


OK, setting aside whether questions about obscure religious practice is bigotry...

So....

When do religions become religions?

In the case of Mormonism it's less than 180 plus years, right?

When can we expect the same for Scientology?

Or the Unification Church?

Because I would hate to be bigoted about them, also. :rolleyes:

[PaceAdvantage]

OK, setting aside whether questions about obscure religious practice is bigotry...

So....

When do religions become religions?

In the case of Mormonism it's less than 180 plus years, right?

When can we expect the same for Scientology?

Or the Unification Church?

Because I would hate to be bigoted about them, also. :rolleyes:Lots of people look at Christianity and Judaism the way you look at Mormonism and even Scientology...these people are called atheists (very intellectual folks like the late Christopher Hitchens for one)...how far do you really want to go down this road?

[bigmack]

When do religions become religions?

In the case of Mormonism it's less than 180 plus years, right?

When can we expect the same for Scientology?

Or the Unification Church?
Last time I brought up my venture into running security for a deprogramming organization and running around No/So America kidnapping people from religious cuhlts - Scratch 'kidnapping', we called it 'snatching' people from cults - I was accused of being a dreamah; with little meat on the bones.

So anyway, we done never got the green, or even yellow light, from a family asking us to rescue someone from The Morms.

I'm startin' to feel the PercyCueTion of your people. I'm seeing some bigotry of me boy, Mittzsky.

I sleep well knowing the ACLU & MSNBC are going to expose this silent bigotry of Mormonism. :ThmbUp:

[elysiantraveller]

Once you come to your senses that you can't pick a horse from another race, you'll come around.

Gee, I wonder what kind of numbers Palin would be racking up now. More than likely would have pulled-out, ala Huntsman, Perry.

Christie ain't going nowhere. I like my CandyDates well vetted. I don't need no Guiliani married to a cousin, type. Christie may not have skeletons in his closet but there has to be a pop tart or two. ;)

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_p8KOFXprbnE/R1Tx18YvDrI/AAAAAAAABhw/lVB-WljzrFM/s1600-R/romneyboysandsomeoldguy.jpg
Volleyball Monsters!

I shook your man crush's hand today... How jealous are you? ;)

[bigmack]

I shook your man crush's hand today... How jealous are you? ;)
Partially. Firm grip?

[elysiantraveller]

Partially. Firm grip?

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Yes, firm grip. Not as tall as I expected though.

[bigmack]

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Yes, firm grip. Not as tall as I expected though.
OMG, I have SO many questions.

- Did he mention me at all?
- Was he wearing a jacket & jeans (My favorite outfit of his)
- Was Ann by his side?
- Did you smell Brylcreem at all or is it Vitalis?

[elysiantraveller]

OMG, I have SO many questions.

- Did he mention me at all?
- Was he wearing a jacket & jeans (My favorite outfit of his)
- Was Ann by his side?
- Did you smell Brylcreem at all or is it Vitalis?

No, Jeans/Button-up, Yes, No, and his hair is real...

Anything else?

[bigmack]

Anything else?
Just to say he is one heck of a guy.

Look at the athleticism.

http://images1.dailykos.com/i/user/151025/mittromneyhappybike.jpg

[Tom]

So much alike.....so much alike.........:bang:

[NJ Stinks]

I shook your man crush's hand today... How jealous are you? ;)

So what was the event, Ely? Does Romney appear confident? Relaxed?

Any details would be interesting details. :cool:

[bigmack]

So much alike.....so much alike.........:bang:
Wrong. Wrong.

- No helmet = Macho
- Drop 'racing style' handlebars = Sporty
- Suit & Tie = Ready for management at any moment.

[johnhannibalsmith]

A LOT in common.



http://alt.coxnewsweb.com/shared-blogs/austin/fitcity/upload/2008/10/most_fit_and_least_fit_preside/bush%20biking.JPG

[elysiantraveller]

So what was the event, Ely? Does Romney appear confident? Relaxed?

Any details would be interesting details. :cool:

Campaign rally here in Michigan. Rally was decent and that campaign is pretty confident about a victory in Michigan which, IMO, they should be as all polls are indicating he has beaten back the Santorum surge. Absolutely insane amount of press there though, I spoke with a couple of them, they seem to think the guy has it wrapped up in this state as well.

I went because I was able to kill two birds with one stone. It was in my alma mater's town so I got to go check it out for a bit then swing over to the Frat house for a visit. I was long overdue to see the house mom.

[hcap]

Gold Medal. International Pretzel Olympics

http://mitglied.multimania.de/Schueppi/Images/pretzel.jpg

[PaceAdvantage]

Wrong. Wrong.

- No helmet = Macho
- Drop 'racing style' handlebars = Sporty
- Suit & Tie = Ready for management at any moment.
This is some seriously funny stuff... :lol:

Ready for management at any moment... :lol: :lol: :lol:

[bigmack]

This is some seriously funny stuff..
Holy Shite. Someone actually getting my material besides Falconridge & Toes around this joint . :eek:

[Tom]

Originally Posted by bigmack
Wrong. Wrong.
- No helmet = Macho
- Drop 'racing style' handlebars = Sporty
- Suit & Tie = Ready for management at any moment.
- Bicycle = no solution for gas prices!



Yikes!

[NJ Stinks]

Campaign rally here in Michigan. Rally was decent and that campaign is pretty confident about a victory in Michigan which, IMO, they should be as all polls are indicating he has beaten back the Santorum surge. Absolutely insane amount of press there though, I spoke with a couple of them, they seem to think the guy has it wrapped up in this state as well.

I went because I was able to kill two birds with one stone. It was in my alma mater's town so I got to go check it out for a bit then swing over to the Frat house for a visit. I was long overdue to see the house mom.

Thanks for responding. :cool:

Stopping by to see your house mom is pretty cool too.

[boxcar]

Romney will not attack Obama,won't say ”incendiary”,”outrageous” & ”accusatory” things about Obama

Mitt Romney: I’m not willing ‘to light my hair on fire’ to win conservative votes - The Washington Post

Wow. This from our new convert to Conservatism!?. :rolleyes: Strange attitude to have. He's not nearly interested in the conservative base as he is in - - - - - - -. Well, fill in these blanks or any other you wish to add. He's probably shooting for those "independents" because he thinks so many of them are moderates or centrists like himself.

With statements like this, it's no wonder at all he told the folks at that debate that they shouldn't get all upset and uptight over the individual mandate in ObamaCare. He really cannot relate to conservatives because he isn't one.

..”It’s very easy to excite the base with incendiary comments,” Romney told reporters. “We’ve seen throughout the campaign that if you’re willing to say really outrageous things that are accusatory and attacking President Obama that you’re going to jump up in the polls. You know, I’m not willing to light my hair on fire to try and get support. I am who I am.”....

Yes, Mr. Romney, you are who you are. And this is one person you haven't fooled. Whatever it is you are, you are not a conservative. You're just the run-of-the-mill, puke bag elitist "moderate". (In fact, Mr. Romney, most Dems run on being a moderate! So, you're not different than they are!) But you're also much more than that. You have to be to have signed off on the state assuming authority over a minor in RomneyCare if a minor didn't like her mother or fathers' decision on abortion. You're a hard-core, big government, control-freak statist. That's who you really are.

But will this be a winning strategy for Romney -- this tempered, even-handed, soft-gloved, gentleman's approach to debating Obama? Well, how well did McCain do against Obama with this exact same approach?

Boxcar

[elysiantraveller]

Romney will not attack Obama,won't say ”incendiary”,”outrageous” & ”accusatory” things about Obama

Mitt Romney: I’m not willing ‘to light my hair on fire’ to win conservative votes - The Washington Post

Wow. This from our new convert to Conservatism!?. :rolleyes: Strange attitude to have. He's not nearly interested in the conservative base as he is in - - - - - - -. Well, fill in these blanks or any other you wish to add. He's probably shooting for those "independents" because he thinks so many of them are moderates or centrists like himself.

With statements like this, it's no wonder at all he told the folks at that debate that they shouldn't get all upset and uptight over the individual mandate in ObamaCare. He really cannot relate to conservatives because he isn't one.

..”It’s very easy to excite the base with incendiary comments,” Romney told reporters. “We’ve seen throughout the campaign that if you’re willing to say really outrageous things that are accusatory and attacking President Obama that you’re going to jump up in the polls. You know, I’m not willing to light my hair on fire to try and get support. I am who I am.”....

Yes, Mr. Romney, you are who you are. And this is one person you haven't fooled. Whatever it is you are, you are not a conservative. You're just the run-of-the-mill, puke bag elitist "moderate". (In fact, Mr. Romney, most Dems run on being a moderate! So, you're not different than they are!) But you're also much more than that. You have to be to have signed off on the state assuming authority over a minor in RomneyCare if a minor didn't like her mother or fathers' decision on abortion. You're a hard-core, big government, control-freak statist. That's who you really are.

But will this be a winning strategy for Romney -- this tempered, even-handed, soft-gloved, gentleman's approach to debating Obama? Well, how well did McCain do against Obama with this exact same approach?

Boxcar

At least he isn't pleading with Democrats for votes in a GOP primary.

[lamboguy]

ROMNEY leading so far in exit polling in MICHIGAN, according to DRUDGE report.

going into the day, this was a pick-em-up primary.

[boxcar]

At least he isn't pleading with Democrats for votes in a GOP primary.

He pleaded in other ways, "boasting" about all the GM cars he owned. He clearly was pandering to union people, most of whom are Dems.

And I actually applaud Santorum for his strategy. There's nothing morally or legally wrong with it. It is an open primary state. If people of Michigan don't like Santorum's strategy, then they should change the primary rules!

Boxcar

[elysiantraveller]

He pleaded in other ways, "boasting" about all the GM cars he owned. He clearly was pandering to union people, most of whom are Dems.

And I actually applaud Santorum for his strategy. There's nothing morally or legally wrong with it. It is an open primary state. If people of Michigan don't like Santorum's strategy, then they should change the primary rules!

Boxcar

You are a walking contradiction you know that?

Here are some headlines and your reaction to them.

Santorum Seeking Union Democrat Votes.

"Thats perfectly fine... Bravo!... nothing wrong with it. Open primary!"

Mitt Romney Won't Hurl Incendiary Insults

"He is a progressive! Too weak! RINO!"

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[boxcar]

You are a walking contradiction you know that?

Here are some headlines and your reaction to them.

Santorum Seeking Union Democrat Votes.

"Thats perfectly fine... Bravo!... nothing wrong with it. Open primary!"

Mitt Romney Won't Hurl Incendiary Insults

"He is a progressive! Too weak! RINO!"

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Explain, please, how a Santorum primary strategy for a specific state would contradict Romney's presidential campaign strategy if he should win the primary. I'll be waiting with bated breath for that explanation. And then we'll see who has the last laugh. ;)

Boxcar

[elysiantraveller]

Explain, please, how a Santorum primary strategy for a specific state would contradict Romney's presidential campaign strategy if he should win the primary. I'll be waiting with bated breath for that explanation. And then we'll see who has the last laugh. ;)

Boxcar

I'm not talking about campaign strategies. I'm talking about you and the endless contradictions you post up on these forums.

[boxcar]

I'm not talking about campaign strategies. I'm talking about you and the endless contradictions you post up on these forums.

Then in 176 why did you post campaign strategies and even go so far as to fabricate my responses to them if you weren't talking about them? Now, who is talking out of both sides of their mouth? :rolleyes:

And you still haven't showed how I have contradicted myself. I'm waiting... I hope you're just not another empty drum around here that makes a lot of annoying, ear-ringing noise.

Boxcar

[elysiantraveller]

Then in 176 why did you post campaign strategies and even go so far as to fabricate my responses to them if you weren't talking about them? Now, who is talking out of both sides of their mouth? :rolleyes:

And you still haven't showed how I have contradicted myself. I'm waiting... I hope you're just not another empty drum around here that makes a lot of annoying, ear-ringing noise.

Boxcar

Its quite obvious.

You "applaud" Santorum for trying to get Democrats to try and vote for him but routinely criticize Romney as a moderate, RINO, panderer.

Its a very obvious double standard.

[bigmack]

Its quite obvious.

You "applaud" Santorum for trying to get Democrats to try and vote for him but routinely criticize Romney as a moderate, RINO, panderer.

Its a very obvious double standard.
Of course it is. Look at him waltzing in here talking about Santorum not breaking any laws. It's akin to Mostie yappin' about videos of ACORN.

Forgive him. He's freaking out as my boy is Double-O bound. :ThmbUp:

[boxcar]

Of course it is. Look at him waltzing in here talking about Santorum not breaking any laws. It's akin to Mostie yappin' about videos of ACORN.

Forgive him. He's freaking out as my boy is Double-O bound. :ThmbUp:

What laws would those be, precisely? And how come "your boy" isn't pressing charges or suing? Oh wait, I know...because this is a sweet, family man, temple-goin' gentleman -- this Mitt Romney.

Boxcar
P.S. I wonder how families in Mass. feel about the state usurping their parental authority over their kids in abortion cases. Maybe you can conduct a survey for us, eh Mack? :D

[elysiantraveller]

Of course it is. Look at him waltzing in here talking about Santorum not breaking any laws. It's akin to Mostie yappin' about videos of ACORN.

Forgive him. He's freaking out as my boy is Double-O bound. :ThmbUp:

Democrat turnout in Michigan up to 10%. 50% of them are voting for Rick Santorum.... :lol:

Good old fashioned attempt at hijacking! :D

[boxcar]

Democrat turnout in Michigan up to 10%. 50% of them are voting for Rick Santorum.... :lol:

Good old fashioned attempt at hijacking! :D

Darn clever of Ricky -- being all legal-like and everything. :lol:

Boxcar

[bigmack]

What laws would those be, precisely?
That's the point, DoDo Bird.

You think it's OK because it's not illegal. I say you're full of dung.

[boxcar]

That's the point, DoDo Bird.

You think it's OK because it's not illegal. I say you're full of dung.

And your progressive solution to this heinous problem is what, exactly? Lock him up for not breaking any laws? :lol: :lol:

You're turning out to be worse than a flaming lib, Mack. Now you whine and complain just like them and about things that are baseless and groundless. You're like a double-minded Hcap who always wants things both ways. If it were against the law, you'd complain. And now that it isn't, you still complain.

Solution: Move to Michigan and change the system there. You've been in Kalifornnnia too long. You need a change of venue. :lol:

Boxcar

[elysiantraveller]

That's the point, DoDo Bird.

You think it's OK because it's not illegal. I say you're full of dung.

Romney gets attacked for being a moderate but Rick Santorum gets a pass for saying:

"Union Democrats, I can't get enough conservative votes in my party's primary so please come vote to help me out.... puhleeeeeze!!!!"

"Please UAW... come vote for me... puhleeeze!!!"

:lol: :lol: :lol:

[elysiantraveller]

And your progressive solution to this heinous problem is what, exactly? Lock him up for not breaking any laws? :lol: :lol:

You're turning out to be worse than a flaming lib, Mack. Now you whine and complain just like them and about things that are baseless and groundless. You're like a double-minded Hcap who always wants things both ways. If it were against the law, you'd complain. And now that it isn't, you still complain.

Solution: Move to Michigan and change the system there. You've been in Kalifornnnia too long. You need a change of venue. :lol:

Boxcar

No one said it was illegal. It isn't. I don't care if Democrats try to hijack our primary... I live here. What I have a problem with is a GOP Candidate pleading with the likes of the UAW and our Democrats in this state to get them to try to intentionally hijack our election.

He is essentially saying; "Stick it to Romney now so you can stick it to me in November."

[bigmack]

And your progressive solution to this heinous problem is what, exactly? Lock him up for not breaking any laws?
You're starting to piss me off.

Don't you get it? Mosty is continually talking about the most unscrupulous things ever done and he paints it with a brush of "it ain't illegal."

You're equally as pathetic as he.

Then again, you get your marching orders every morning from Limbaugh.

Get a mind of your own.

[boxcar]

Romney gets attacked for being a moderate but Rick Santorum gets a pass for saying:

"Union Democrats, I can't get enough conservative votes in my parties primary so please come vote to help me out.... puhleeeeeze!!!!"

"Please UAW... come vote for me... puhleeeze!!!"

:lol: :lol: :lol:

You still haven't answered my question: Where is the contradiction there?

I could easily make an analogy by contrast between these two guys and blow your silliness out of the water. Do you really want me to embarrass you that badly? Even now, you're comparing apples to oranges. Pretty anemic. Maybe you should cut your losses, otherwise, pretty soon, you'll be begging me to pull your plug to put your out of your misery. :lol: :lol:

Boxcar

[boxcar]

You're starting to piss me off.

Don't you get it? Mosty is continually talking about the most unscrupulous things ever done and he paints it with a brush of "it ain't illegal."

You're equally as pathetic as he.

Then again, you get your marching orders every morning from Limbaugh.

Get a mind of your own.

Physician heal thyself. I bet the last time you had an original thought they were still hand printing calendars.

Unscrupulous" indeed? What part of OPEN in "open primary" don't you understand? States that have these kinds of primaries are tacitly inviting any all all residents to participate in the process and vote. :bang: :bang: All Santorum did was play offense in this primary. He took a more proactive approach. What he has done is no more unscrupulous than Michigan's primary laws themselves! :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Stick that in your hash pipe and puff on it, Einstein. :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[bigmack]

What part of OPEN in "open primary" don't you understand? States that have these kinds of primaries are tacitly inviting any all all residents to participate in the process and vote. :bang: :bang: All Santorum did was play offense in this primary. He took a more proactive approach. What he has done is no more unscrupulous than Michigan's primary laws themselves!
That's odd. That's EXACTLY the position of Limbaugh. What are the odds?

Is that you on the left?

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-h3qlBVsk_5Y/Tmlu2irFC-I/AAAAAAAACfY/17CQItcl4YA/s1600/rush-limbaugh-girlfriend-kathryn-rogers.jpg

[elysiantraveller]

You still haven't answered my question: Where is the contradiction there?

You attack Mitt Romney for appealing to moderates but applaud Santorum for actually campaigning, intentionally, for Democratic votes.

You are a hypocrite.

Even worse you would rather have a phony candidate selected by the opposition than one that gets the support of the party.

So you are also a fraud.

Meander along now...

[elysiantraveller]

That's odd. That's EXACTLY the position of Limbaugh. What are the odds?

Is that you on the left?

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-h3qlBVsk_5Y/Tmlu2irFC-I/AAAAAAAACfY/17CQItcl4YA/s1600/rush-limbaugh-girlfriend-kathryn-rogers.jpg

I hate to break it to people but Rush Limbaugh is a @#$%ing idiot.

Earlier today Tom repeated Rush's opinion that the Republicans should welcome new voters... there is one slight problem with that... anyone who attempts to modernize or change the party or make it more accomdating is attacked by him with such vitriol they say eff it and leave.

If you want to bring in new voters you have to accomodate them... something some of these dinosaurs both on here and in the media don't undertand.

[NJ Stinks]

Is that you on the left?

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-h3qlBVsk_5Y/Tmlu2irFC-I/AAAAAAAACfY/17CQItcl4YA/s1600/rush-limbaugh-girlfriend-kathryn-rogers.jpg

I'll never look at Boxcar the same way again.

[boxcar]

You attack Mitt Romney for appealing to moderates but applaud Santorum for actually campaigning, intentionally, for Democratic votes.

You are a hypocrite.

Even worse you would rather have a phony candidate selected by the opposition than one that gets the support of the party.

So you are also a fraud.

Meander along now...

You couldn't be more wrong. Your charges are patently false. I never attacked the Rug for "appealing to moderates". I have accused him of being progressive because that's what he is. And I have attacked him for claiming a sudden conversion to conservatism in one breath, but then he turns around shortly afterward and says he's not interested in attracting the conservative base. So, if you want to talk about hypocrisy, point to Romney's!

Secondly, Rick knows that a certain percentage of registered Democrats (probably a fair amount) don't want to see BO get reelected anymore than you, Mack and others here do. So, why not reach out to them? All he's telling them is that there are enough differences between him and BO to make him an attractive proposition. Surely, you would not object to "blue dog" Dems (or any other type) pulling the lever for the Republican in the general election, would you? If not, why do you whine like a baby now about a Republican seeking that kind of support in a primary? Explain that to me. And if you can't, then look in the mirror to see who the real hypocrite is!

Boxcar
P.S. The only reason Romney is ticked off at Rick is because he was too stupid to think of this strategy first. :lol: :lol:

[boxcar]

I'll never look at Boxcar the same way again.

You'll never have to worry about that. I'm far better looking than she is.

But what I think you really meant to say is that you'll never look at the Mack, the closet liberal quite the same way again. This election is Mack's coming out party. Must be once he starts attacking conservative talk show hosts.

Boxcar
P.S. Whatever you do, don't tell the Big Guy that I also listen to Levin, too.
P.P.S. But above all else, please don't turn him on to Randi Rhodes, although that horse might have escaped the barn a long time ago. :lol:

[elysiantraveller]

You couldn't be more wrong. Your charges are patently false. I never attacked the Rug for "appealing to moderates".

Really?!?!

Yup, you nailed it. Poll-driven politics. He {Romney} will tell the American people what he thinks we want to hear in order to win. Tickling people's ears is a mark of a genuine principled leader who is driven to lead by his core values, isn't it?

Thank you so much for helping me make my point, i.e. "same ol', same ol'.

Thank god you don't run for office... you need aides just to keep your story straight on here...

You are right though... What Santorum did wasn't same 'ol... No one has ever spent money pandering to people in the opposition before to give him some votes in their primary...

[boxcar]

Really?!?!



Thank god you don't run for office... you need aides just to keep your story straight on here...

You are right though... What Santorum did wasn't same 'ol... No one has ever spent money pandering to people in the opposition before to give him some votes in their primary...

Where in my quote did I say Romney wants to appeal only to Moderates? I said that he'll tickle people's ears and tell them what he thinks we want to hear.

Boxcar
P.S. And you need a reading course -- badly.
P.P.S. But answer my question in the last post. Would you whine and complain about Dems voting for the Republican in the general election?

[elysiantraveller]

Anyone else think Box is being a bit hypocritical?

[boxcar]

Anyone else think Box is being a bit hypocritical?

What's the matter? You're feeling a little uncomfortable? A little unsure of yourself? Your confidence in yourself is a little shaky, is it? Seeking that safety in numbers thingy, eh? I'm sure you can find some moral support among the "conservatives" on this forum. Why don't you go ask JR or Elk or NTG or John or even PA? Maybe one or more of these gents can get you to feel good about yourself again. :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[canleakid]

Mitty wins, theeeeeeeeeee Mitty wins !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! our flavor of the moment

[elysiantraveller]

What's the matter? You're feeling a little uncomfortable? A little unsure of yourself? Your confidence in yourself is a little shaky, is it? Seeking that safety in numbers thingy, eh? I'm sure you can find some moral support among the "conservatives" on this forum. Why don't you go ask JR or Elk or NTG or John or even PA? Maybe one or more of these gents can get you to feel good about yourself again. :rolleyes:

Boxcar

No.

I just can't argue with irrational people.

You set a double standard... just admit it and move on.

[bigmack]

Anyone else think Box is being a bit hypocritical?
Let him be anything he wishes. He's making a complete buffoon of himself.

Just think of the laughs we'll have throughout the 8 glorious years while my boy is Progressin' the country right back into financial viability.

This Flahridian geriatric is out of his mind with fear. Have you been able to see any of his itemized fears when RM is sworn in? It's gotta be something not unlike TJDave's objection.

[boxcar]

Let him be anything he wishes. He's making a complete buffoon of himself.

Just think of the laughs we'll have throughout the 8 glorious years while my boy is Progressin' the country right back into financial viability.

This Flahridian geriatric is out of his mind with fear. Have you been able to see any of his itemized fears when RM is sworn in? It's gotta be something not unlike TJDave's objection.

:lol: :lol: :lol: I'm the one in fear!? You're the "con" here who is ga-ga over getting a progressive in office -- all because you think he won't be anywhere near as bad as BO. You're one the crippled with fear over the prospects that BO would get reelected. I'd bet you'd sell your soul to the evil one if you could get a guarantee from him that that wouldn't happen on your watch. But you're not alone, Mack. You have lots of company. Many people will be voting against BO come this election, just as most voted against the Republican because of Bush backlash in the last. But will the "many" in this upcoming election translate into the most votes? That's the big question.

As for me and my household, we're pretty comfortable with whoever gets elected; for whoever it is -- whoever it is.....listen carefully, Mack....that leader will get elected only because The Sovereign King who rules from heaven ordained it. And whoever gets elected will become His servant just as the wicked King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon was called God's servant.

Sleep tight, Mack.

Boxcar

[Tom]

You still haven't answered my question: Where is the contradiction there?

That is is word of the day from It Pays to Increase Your Word Power!

[NJ Stinks]

But what I think you really meant to say is that you'll never look at the Mack, the closet liberal quite the same way again. This election is Mack's coming out party. Must be once he starts attacking conservative talk show hosts.

Boxcar


You're right, Boxcar. There is something askew with Mack. Hopefully, he will straighten himself out before attempting to crash a Barack Inauguration party. :jump:

[bigmack]

And whoever gets elected will become His servant just as the wicked King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon was called God's servant.
Hey, listen. If ya run into Nebuchadnezzar anytime soon, tell him he owes me $46.95 (plus tip) for the lobster he ordered from room service on that nutty night in Vegas. That guy is a maniac!

Good. It doesn't matter to you & The Mrs. who gets elected.

So do me a solid. STHU!

[boxcar]

Hey, listen. If ya run into Nebuchadnezzar anytime soon, tell him he owes me $46.95 (plus tip) for the lobster he ordered from room service on that nutty night in Vegas. That guy is a maniac!

Hey, what happens in Sin City has to stay there, remember?

Good. It doesn't matter to you & The Mrs. who gets elected.

So do me a solid. STHU!

Aww...you're in such a foul mood. :( :( What a pity. I see crossing over to the dark side hasn't been agreeable to you at all. :lol:

Boxcar
P.S. Man, I really hope for your sake the Republican wins the upcoming election because if he doesn't, you'll be one pathetic basket case. You're already well on your way there. :lol:

P.P.S. Btw, are you and your buddy Elysian going to team up during the presidential campaign to see if you can get as many Dems as possible to cross over to vote for the Republican? Or you two wouldn't sacrifice your principles and stoop that low to become such hypocrites, eh? :lol: :lol:

[elysiantraveller]

Hey, what happens in Sin City has to stay there, remember?



Aww...you're in such a foul mood. :( :( What a pity. I see crossing over to the dark side hasn't been agreeable to you at all. :lol:

Boxcar
P.S. Man, I really hope for your sake the Republican wins the upcoming election because if he doesn't, you'll be one pathetic basket case. You're already well on your way there. :lol:

P.P.S. Btw, are you and your buddy Elysian going to team up during the presidential campaign to see if you can get as many Dems as possible to cross over to vote for the Republican? Or you two wouldn't sacrifice your principles and stoop that low to become such hypocrites, eh? :lol: :lol:

Who'd you support again?

[bigmack]

sacrifice your principles and stoop that low to become such hypocrites
Check the side effects on your medication. One of them is giving you self absorbed, delusional thinking. The train has left the station. Nobody axed you what station you want to be let off, OR, what color you want the seats, OR, whether or not you like the view from your window, OR, who you're sitting next to.

The newsflash is that he's the guy. Get it? One train.

Trust me, we're kickin' you off WITHOUT stopping.

Oh. And take your 'sacrificing principles crap' and get outta town.

You ain't got nobody. Who you got? Come on, man, who you got?

[newtothegame]

Check the side effects on your medication. One of them is giving you self absorbed, delusional thinking. The train has left the station. Nobody axed you what station you want to be let off, OR, what color you want the seats, OR, whether or not you like the view from your window, OR, who you're sitting next to.

The newsflash is that he's the guy. Get it? One train.

Trust me, we're kickin' you off WITHOUT stopping.

Oh. And take your 'sacrificing principles crap' and get outta town.

You ain't got nobody. Who you got? Come on, man, who you got?

Damn, is this is a bad scene from throw mama from da train??? lol

[boxcar]

Check the side effects on your medication. One of them is giving you self absorbed, delusional thinking. The train has left the station. Nobody axed you what station you want to be let off, OR, what color you want the seats, OR, whether or not you like the view from your window, OR, who you're sitting next to.

The newsflash is that he's the guy. Get it? One train.

Trust me, we're kickin' you off WITHOUT stopping.

Oh. And take your 'sacrificing principles crap' and get outta town.

You ain't got nobody. Who you got? Come on, man, who you got?

I'm delusional!? Mack, here's a newsflash for you -- listen up, carefully: In order to kick someone off a train, they first have to be on board. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: I don't ride the Progressive Express, Macky. Wouldn't want to come into such close proximity to Loonies and risk catching what you have.

Boxcar
P.S. But my bad about my "sacrificing principles" remark. Sorry 'bout that. What was I thinking? One has to have some first before they can be given up. Now, I can understand why you're so upset. You have a chronic case of Principles Envy. :lol: :lol:

[boxcar]

Who'd you support again?

I'll tell you as soon as you answer my question about whether or not you would object to Republicans trying to solicit Dems' votes in the general election.

Boxcar

[bigmack]

You have a chronic case of Principles Envy.
Bupkis. That's what you've got. Squat.

Hang on to your 'principles' and lose to a clown.

God forbid, I should ever end up in a foxhole with you. I'll have to do all the work for you. You're like a deer caught in headlights, BUT you have principles. :D

http://seeker401.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/obama-clown-and-sickle.jpg

[boxcar]

Bupkis. That's what you've got. Squat.

Hang on to your 'principles' and lose to a clown.

I think you meant to say, "Hang on to your principles and may the best clown win." They're both bona fide losers, Mack. Your fear of the current clown winning again has blinded you to this fact. But I'm the one caught in the headlights? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[bigmack]

I think you meant to say, "Hang on to your principles and may the best clown win." They're both bona fide losers, Mack. Your fear of the current clown winning again has blinded you to this fact. But I'm the one caught in the headlights?
Why are you CONTINUALLY whining about the contestants?

Either dope the race, pass the race, or leave the track.

You sit there like some old curmudgeon fart, talking about what bums they are and yet you have NOTHING. NOTHING! :D

If it weren't so pitiful, it would be hilarious.

Last response to you on this subject. You lost in space.

BaBye.

[boxcar]

Why are you CONTINUALLY whining about the contestants?

Either dope the race, pass the race, or leave the track.

Ahh...so if I pass a race, it doesn't mean I leave the track, Einstein. It just means I pass the race. And if I pass the race, I did so because I reached an informed opinion on it., otherwise how would I know whether to play or pass? Just as I don't bet races that are filled with ambulatory cases, neither will I bet any two-legged ones any longer that are filled with liberals. I leave that kind of betting for the losers....MACK: :lol: :lol:

You sit there like some old curmudgeon fart, talking about what bums they are and yet you have NOTHING. NOTHING! :D

Well, you finally have gotten something right. That old adage about blind squirrels is true. :rolleyes: You're right: I have nothing because there is nothing worth betting on. Smart players recognize when to keep their bankroll in the pocket. What's your excuse, again? :lol:

If it weren't so pitiful, it would be hilarious.

Last response to you on this subject. You lost in space.

BaBye.

Yeah, right! "Last response." :rolleyes: You love this because you think you're going to be the last man standing. But you're so lost that you have forgotten to look down recently to notice that you don't have a leg to stand on, and haven't had one for months. :lol: :lol:

Boxcar

[elysiantraveller]

I'll tell you as soon as you answer my question about whether or not you would object to Republicans trying to solicit Dems' votes in the general election.

Boxcar

No I don't have a problem trying to solicit votes.

Romney will get out of the primaries. His staff will poll the American people, they will tweak their platform, finalize it, and go take on Obama.

The election is still a long way to go.

Apparently you do however as this was your response to it... which again.... makes you a hypocrite on the Santorum issue...

Yup, you nailed it. Poll-driven politics. He will tell the American people what he thinks we want to hear in order to win. Tickling people's ears is a mark of a genuine principled leader who is driven to lead by his core values, isn't it?

Thank you so much for helping me make my point, i.e. "same ol', same ol'.

Whats even worse is Santorum blatantly attempting to undermine his own party's primary with a bush league manuever. I live in the state. We know democrats always try to stir things up and we do the same when we can, however, for a Republican, in a Republican primary to issue a plea to Democrats to come out and vote for him to stick it to the other guy pissed a lot of people off.

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by boxcar
I'll tell you as soon as you answer my question about whether or not you would object to Republicans trying to solicit Dems' votes in the general election.

You:
No I don't have a problem trying to solicit votes.

Then you're a hypocrite because that's all Santorum was trying to do. I rest my case. What a phony you are. You climb on your high moral white charger and and act self-righteously indignant about Santorum openly doing the very thing you yourself would have no problem doing in the general election. :ThmbDown:


Originally Posted by Me
Romney will get out of the primaries. His staff will poll the American people, they will tweak their platform, finalize it, and go take on Obama.

The election is still a long way to go.


Apparently you do however as this was your response to it... which again.... makes you a hypocrite on the Santorum issue..

Originally Posted by Boxcar
Yup, you nailed it. Poll-driven politics. He will tell the American people what he thinks we want to hear in order to win. Tickling people's ears is a mark of a genuine principled leader who is driven to lead by his core values, isn't it?

Thank you so much for helping me make my point, i.e. "same ol', same ol'.

You're comparing apples to oranges. There's no moral parallel between the two strategies. Santorum wasn't trying to tickle anyone's ears, i.e. deceive anyone. There was nothing dishonest about his strategy. What was deceptive or dishonest about a Republican in an open primary actively soliciting Democratic votes? However, "tickling someone ears" for the purpose of winning them over is deceptive because the person isn't speaking his own mind and what is in his own heart, but he's trying to divine what someone else wants to hear so he can curry favor with that person in order to achieve his objective. He has an ulterior motive. But HONEST, PRINCIPLED people don't have to worry about "tweaking" (a cute euphemism for "changing colors like a chameleion") their platform. Honest people are open and transparent and are only concerned about expressing what is in their heart and mind, who they are, what they stand for and what their core values and principles are. Used car salesman "tweak" their sales pitch after they have had a chance to size up their customer (or "mark') because their only motive is to make the sale. Crooked politicians do the same thing because their only selfish motive is to win the election.

So, again, you are the hypocrite here. I am not. And you're worse than any liberal on this forum when it comes to analogies.

Whats even worse is Santorum blatantly attempting to undermine his own party's primary with a bush league manuever.

That's a matter of opinion. Since you live in the state and don't like the open primary system, act like an adult and work hard to change it instead of whining about it like a baby.

Boxcar
P.S. Oh, yeah, I did promise you that I would reveal who I voted for in my closed primary. My wife and I voted for the Newt.

[newtothegame]

No I don't have a problem trying to solicit votes.



Apparently you do however as this was your response to it... which again.... makes you a hypocrite on the Santorum issue...



Whats even worse is Santorum blatantly attempting to undermine his own party's primary with a bush league manuever. I live in the state. We know democrats always try to stir things up and we do the same when we can, however, for a Republican, in a Republican primary to issue a plea to Democrats to come out and vote for him to stick it to the other guy pissed a lot of people off.
Hey Elysian, not that I really give two cents as it is an open primary..but Romney has done the same thing......
CNSNews.com) - Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who is seeking the Republican presidential nomination, and who said on Tuesday it was a "dirty trick" for the campaign of former Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania to seek crossover votes from Democrats in the Michigan primary, told ABC News in an interview on Feb. 18, 2007 that he had often personally voted in Democratic primaries.
Romney said in 2007 that he did so as a way to help ensure that the Democrats nominated the weakest candidate.

However, in 1994, Romney told the Boston Globe he voted for former Sen. Paul Tsongas over Arkansas Gov. Bill Clinton in the 1992 Democratic presidential primary because, as the Globe put it, "he favored [Tsongas's] ideas over those of Bill Clinton."

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/romney-i-d-vote-democrat-primary

[Tom]

He out-spent Santorem 40-1 in Michigan and split the state.
Nice.

[elysiantraveller]

Hey Elysian,

I don't care if people in open primaries go out and vote against people within the opposing party. They are well within their right to do so and it usually splits between people A) wanting to pick a weaker opponent for their candidate and B) wanting to hedge their bets.

Like I have said countless times. I have a problem with a republican candidate asking democrats to vote, not for him, but against a rival within his primary. He wasn't even appealing to voters he was trying to "teach Mitt Romney a lesson" and in doing so helping to undermine his own parties' primary. Again, is it illegal? No. Is it unethical? Hell yes.

[elysiantraveller]

He out-spent Santorem 40-1 in Michigan and split the state.
Nice.

Where are you getting these numbers? It was 3-1.5x depending on who you believe. I live here and if he outspent him 40-1 I have no idea on what becaue their exposure on the phone and on TV was about even.

[Tom]

4-1...typo.
That's what they reported on the news this morning.

[elysiantraveller]

4-1...typo.
That's what they reported on the news this morning.

LOL

Okay...

Reports on spending vary. But 40-1...?!?! I thought I must have been under a rock for the past couple of weeks.

[boxcar]

I don't care if people in open primaries go out and vote against people within the opposing party. They are well within their right to do so and it usually splits between people A) wanting to pick a weaker opponent for their candidate and B) wanting to hedge their bets.

Like I have said countless times. I have a problem with a republican candidate asking democrats to vote, not for him, but against a rival within his primary.

So, you now you have a problem negative campaigning? With candidates pointing to the flaws or weaknesses in other candidates? You do realize that they use this strategy to win over voters to their side, and that this practice has been going on since time immemorial? Very unethical, right? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Here's part of the message in Dem-targeted robocall:

The call tells members that if they care about their right to own a gun, then this message is critical. It notes that Santorum received an A-plus rating from the NRA and calls him a a friend of sportsmen and hunters. Romney, on the other hand, is derided as a disaster for gun owners and uses his own words against him.

"I don't line up with the NRA," Romney is heard saying, replaying his comments from his 1994 Senate bid.

Then, the ad urges Michigan residents not to vote for a moderate from Massachusetts and not to let him destroy gun rights and then plays the Romney quote again.

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/02/27/10518784-dirty-trick-gun-rights-robo-calls-in-michigan-boost-santorum-uses-nra-name

Oh, my...the world is coming to an end. What a despicable, unethical call. What a "dirty trick"! How dare Santorum use Romney's own words against him. :rolleyes:

And if you thought the calls were unethical, what about an add like this in which Santorum again beats the dust mites out of the duplicitous Rug with his own words? I particularly like this comment from our new convert to conservatism:

— “I‘d be embarrassed if I didn’t ask for federal dollars every chance I had.” – Mitt Romney. Source: Washington Post

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/santorum-uses-romneys-own-words-against-him-in-michigan-tv-ad/

Ahh...spoken like a true fiscal conservative -- a true blue small government guy. :)

I take it that, then, that Romney would also be equally embarrassed to not grant federal dollars to needy states that will eventually hold out their hands begging for federal aid -- states like Kaliifornnnia. (Ah, no wonder Mack is so enamored with "his boy". Burger Head figures that a bailout would soon be forthcoming if Rom wins.) :lol: :lol:

But here's a newsflash for you Elysian: Ditch your phony self-righteous indignation. If Rom is going to stand a chance to win the WH, he's going to need all the help he can get, so you should team up with Meathead, attend a Mormon proselytizing workshop or two, stock up on nice clean white shirts, buy some nice ties, learn how to ride bikes, chew your gum and preach the gospel of Progressivism to as many Dems as possible to get them to vote for your guy because Rom will need every vote he can get to win this election.

Boxcar
P.S. Don't forget to wear those cute little helmets, too. Gotta protect your coconuts from getting any more cracks in them than they already have. And ride safely. :lol:

[Tom]

I just heard it was 6-1 at noon.

Maybe will will get the best government money can buy.

[bigmack]

Tom & Box still shootin' blanks.

You got nothin', and you got NObody!

[boxcar]

Tom & Box still shootin' blanks.

You got nothin', and you got NObody!

You couldn't be more wrong. My King rules in heaven. But the guy you're so enamored with is such a wussy coward he can't even bring himself to say that BO is a socialist, let alone the Marxist clown you have depicted Obama to be. Better get on the same page as "your boy" or he'll kick you off his plantation. And I'm the one "shootin' blanks"? :rolleyes:

Boxcar

[Tom]

Shooting blanks?
Romney is a blank.
Mark my words - he will NOT be the candidate.

[elysiantraveller]

Shooting blanks?
Romney is a blank.
Mark my words - he will NOT be the candidate.

Then who?

[boxcar]

Then who?

Hopefully someone who'll make your head implode. Then I'll know they have finally chosen the right candidate. :lol:

Boxcar

[bigmack]

Hopefully someone who'll make your head implode. Then I'll know they have finally chosen the right candidate.
It's far too fun to see you with your head blown to kingdom come.

Romney will be our next Pres. IT'S THE END OF THE WORLD!

Get your head screwed on right. Embrace rational thoughts.

http://gifsoup.com/webroot/animatedgifs/271530_o.gif

[boxcar]

It's far too fun to see you with your head blown to kingdom come.

Hmm...is that one of Romney's brats? So much for his family values.

Romney will be our next Pres. IT'S THE END OF THE WORLD!

Just remember: You said it. I didn't.

Get your head screwed on right. Embrace rational thoughts.

There's nothing rational about trying to get rid of one progressive only to replace him with another.

Boxcar

[bigmack]

Do you suspect your'll be bellyaching throughout the ENTIRE 8 years?

http://www.picgifs.com/baby-graphics/baby-graphics/crying/baby-graphics-crying-533424.gif

He's not conservative enough for me. Waaaaaaaaa!

[Steve R]

You couldn't be more wrong. My King rules in heaven. But the guy you're so enamored with is such a wussy coward he can't even bring himself to say that BO is a socialist, let alone the Marxist clown you have depicted Obama to be. Better get on the same page as "your boy" or he'll kick you off his plantation. And I'm the one "shootin' blanks"? :rolleyes:

Boxcar
Ask a real socialist if Obama is a socialist and you'll be laughed out of the room. Delivering 30 million customers to a parasitic, private health care insurance industry that makes no positive contribution to either the quality or cost of health care is not socialism. Saving a failing private automobile industry through the temporary use of public funds is hardly socialism, although I suppose laissez-faire capitalists would have preferred that GM and Chrysler go under. If Obama was a socialist those companies would not be private today. Same for a corrupt financial industry. I guess if Obama was a socialist he would have insisted the private banks go under as well and today they would be national banks instead of private institutions still ripping off the public.

I think Obama is a monster - a mass murdering war criminal who piece by piece is deconstructing the U.S. Constitution. But he is no more a socialist than Bush 43 or Reagan. I've been a socialist for 50 years and Obama makes me want to throw up.

[Steve R]

Ask a real socialist if Obama is a socialist and you'll be laughed out of the room. Delivering 30 million customers to a parasitic, private health care insurance industry that makes no positive contribution to either the quality or cost of health care is not socialism. Saving a failing private automobile industry through the temporary use of public funds is hardly socialism, although I suppose laissez-faire capitalists would have preferred that GM and Chrysler go under. If Obama was a socialist those companies would not be private today. Same for a corrupt financial industry. I guess if Obama was a socialist he would have insisted the private banks go under as well and today they would be national banks instead of private institutions still ripping off the public.

I think Obama is a monster - a mass murdering war criminal who piece by piece is deconstructing the U.S. Constitution. But he is no more a socialist than Bush 43 or Reagan. I've been a socialist for 50 years and Obama makes me want to throw up.
Oh yes, and I left out the most important thing.

If Obama was a socialist he never would have put a rollback of Social Security and Medicare "on the table" for discussion. In fact, he is the first Democratic president ever to do so.

[boxcar]

Ask a real socialist if Obama is a socialist and you'll be laughed out of the room. Delivering 30 million customers to a parasitic, private health care insurance industry that makes no positive contribution to either the quality or cost of health care is not socialism. Saving a failing private automobile industry through the temporary use of public funds is hardly socialism, although I suppose laissez-faire capitalists would have preferred that GM and Chrysler go under. If Obama was a socialist those companies would not be private today. Same for a corrupt financial industry. I guess if Obama was a socialist he would have insisted the private banks go under as well and today they would be national banks instead of private institutions still ripping off the public.

I think Obama is a monster - a mass murdering war criminal who piece by piece is deconstructing the U.S. Constitution. But he is no more a socialist than Bush 43 or Reagan. I've been a socialist for 50 years and Obama makes me want to throw up.

You need to keep up with events better and also recognize that socialists do things incrementally. Recently, the Health Secretary said that insurance companies will soon become a thing of the past. ObamaCare was designed to do that through the back door. ObamaCare in its present form is just a stepping stone to nationalized health care.

But you are right about one thing: Obama is a Monster -- a Marxist Monster. He sat under a radical leftist BLT pastor for 20 years and most of them are Marxists. He was mentored by a Marxist when growing up. He surrounded himself in college with Marxists. He's a bosom buddy of domestic terrorists, etc., etc. And I want to remind you of something else: All the commie organizations in this country support Obama.

Boxcar

[boxcar]

Do you suspect your'll be bellyaching throughout the ENTIRE 8 years?

http://www.picgifs.com/baby-graphics/baby-graphics/crying/baby-graphics-crying-533424.gif

He's not conservative enough for me. Waaaaaaaaa!

I won't vote for Rom if he gets the nomination not because of what he isn't, but because of what he is.

Boxcar

[Steve R]

You need to keep up with events better and also recognize that socialists do things incrementally. Recently, the Health Secretary said that insurance companies will soon become a thing of the past. ObamaCare was designed to do that through the back door. ObamaCare in its present form is just a stepping stone to nationalized health care.

But you are right about one thing: Obama is a Monster -- a Marxist Monster. He sat under a radical leftist BLT pastor for 20 years and most of them are Marxists. He was mentored by a Marxist when growing up. He surrounded himself in college with Marxists. He's a bosom buddy of domestic terrorists, etc., etc. And I want to remind you of something else: All the commie organizations in this country support Obama.

Boxcar
Sorry, but you are clueless about how socialists do or don't do things. But to be fair, maybe I should consult our secret guidebook to be sure. We do things "incrementally"? As opposed to what, the way capitalists do things all at once?

And please provide the reference to the Heath Secretary assertion that insurance companies will soon be a thing of the past. Are you sure it wasn't Beck or Limbaugh who said it? Anyway, I think you meant health insurance companies, the elimination of which would be welcome. As I have stated earlier, they are parasites whose profits depend on exorbitant rates for inferior care and on not paying on claims, and they do a good job. You know, I've never understood why conservatives think it's OK for a private insurance company wonk who's trying not to pay to make your medical decisions instead of the doctor and patient under a single payer system. Unless of course conservatives don't really understand single payer. I live in a country with universal health coverage and superior medical care (at least if you go by the number of Americans participating in medical tourism here) and never once has a medical decision involved anyone other than my doctor and me.

I am surprised you are concerned that "all the commie organizations in this country support Obama". Could you please list all of them? I lose count. Or would you expect the "commie" organizations to support the fascists running on the other side?

[boxcar]

Sorry, but you are clueless about how socialists do or don't do things. But to be fair, maybe I should consult our secret guidebook to be sure. We do things "incrementally"? As opposed to what, the way capitalists do things all at once?

Capitalism and Conservatism have not been winning ideologies in this country for over 100 years. (In fact, the Socialist Labor Party was founded in this country in the latter part of the 19th Century!) What clearly has been advancing, however, over this same period of time is a socialistic ideology, starting with the Marxist idea of a progressive income, then the New Deal, The War on Poverty, etc.,etc. Wake up and smell the coffee, already.

And please provide the reference to the Heath Secretary assertion that insurance companies will soon be a thing of the past. Are you sure it wasn't Beck or Limbaugh who said it? Anyway, I think you meant health insurance companies, the elimination of which would be welcome.

And what if it was? Would that automatically make it untrue? In fact, I believe she said that the health insurance industry is doomed or in a death spiral. (And I submit to you that that this obsolescence was planned and built in to ObamaCare.) Sounds like the industry has a really bright future, eh?

And by the way, I've grown weary of doing the Google homework for lazy libs and moderates on this forum. Look it it up. The HHS Secretary's name is Kathleen Sebelius.

Ditto for the commie organizations you're too lazy to look up. I refuse to babysit internet illiterates. However, you could start with the CPUSA and then go from there. But the fact that the commies support and endorse Obama blows your argument about Obama out of the water. They wouldn't support anyone who didn't substantially and essentially share or embrace their ideology.

Boxcar

[Tom]

And please provide the reference to the Heath Secretary assertion that insurance companies will soon be a thing of the past. Are you sure it wasn't Beck or Limbaugh who said it?

HHS K.S. said it.

[boxcar]

HHS K.S. said it.

And...what libs will so conveniently forget is that many conservatives, including notable talk show hosts, predicted this would happen. Many of us knew that ObamaCare was merely the precursor to a single-payer system -- that the way the bill was written is that it would guarantee the eventual demise of the health insurance companies. So, what Sebelius was doing was bracing Americans for the inevitable, which is setting things up for another health care crisis and which will only be conveniently solved by complete government takeover of the health care industry, which was the goal of ObamaCare from the outset.

Boxcar

[Frank DeMartini]

I agree. That is why I posted the article.

[Steve R]

Capitalism and Conservatism have not been winning ideologies in this country for over 100 years. (In fact, the Socialist Labor Party was founded in this country in the latter part of the 19th Century!) What clearly has been advancing, however, over this same period of time is a socialistic ideology, starting with the Marxist idea of a progressive income, then the New Deal, The War on Poverty, etc.,etc. Wake up and smell the coffee, already.



And what if it was? Would that automatically make it untrue? In fact, I believe she said that the health insurance industry is doomed or in a death spiral. (And I submit to you that that this obsolescence was planned and built in to ObamaCare.) Sounds like the industry has a really bright future, eh?

And by the way, I've grown weary of doing the Google homework for lazy libs and moderates on this forum. Look it it up. The HHS Secretary's name is Kathleen Sebelius.

Ditto for the commie organizations you're too lazy to look up. I refuse to babysit internet illiterates. However, you could start with the CPUSA and then go from there. But the fact that the commies support and endorse Obama blows your argument about Obama out of the water. They wouldn't support anyone who didn't substantially and essentially share or embrace their ideology.

Boxcar
Before you start calling people lazy and illiterate, I suggest you look in the mirror. I asked for the reference because I scanned at least a dozen pages of Google search results on "Sebelius health insurance companies future" and not one included anything close to what you claim she said. OTOH, she did say this just a few months ago:

"By 2014, the health insurance market will be flooded with 30 million more Americans purchasing plans through "health insurance exchanges." Created by the reform law, these online marketplaces will make purchasing a health plan "more like buying plane tickets or a home appliance," according to Health & Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius." - www.pbs.org

Doesn't sound much like a prediction of the demise of insurance companies. IOW, I think your full of crap about that attribution. Of course, it could have come via Breitbart. It's the sort of lying he was so good at.

And do work on your internal sarcasm detector. You obviously didn't understand the intent of "Could you please list all of them? I lose count."

I am fascinated by the fact that someone who so blithely pontificates on Socialism, Communism, Marxism, Conservatism and Capitalism knows so damn little about them. I think Fascism must be more in your comfort zone. It has to be gratifying, though, to know you reside within the same bubble as the troglodytes on the far right now running for president. But as I said earlier, nothing would please me more than a Santorum or Gingrich presidency.

I'm all for your agenda. Fight hard as you can against any national health program. The fewer Americans with access to health care the better. The more who are sick and obese the weaker American power. That's fine with me.

Keep lowering taxes until there is no money for infrastructure, predatory wars against fabricated enemies or any other programs that might sustain American hegemony. Let's see how many wars you can continue to lose. What is it? Sixty-five years and counting since you won a legitimate military confrontation? Get ready to rack up another loser in Afghanistan. But keep funding those wars with Chinese money. Some day they'll call in their loans, and won't the shit hit the fan then.

And most important, keep shoving out those Constitution killers like the Patriot Act, NDAA and all the various "executive" orders that have made American democracy a laughing stock.

I really mean it. Do all those things. Whatever it takes to throw post-Reagan America on the trash heap where it belongs.

[bigmack]

I won't vote for Rom if he gets the nomination not because of what he isn't, but because of what he is.
You fear businessmen? He was in public office for a mere 4 years.

Gawd, what a sniveling little whiner you've turned out to be.

BOO!

[boxcar]

You fear businessmen? He was in public office for a mere 4 years.

Gawd, what a sniveling little whiner you've turned out to be.

BOO!

He's also a spineless, politically-correct, flip-flopping, non-partisan moderate with progressive views. This "businessman" packs a lot of garbage in his luggage. But garbage is right up your alley, isn't it? After all, you live in Kaliifornnia, right? :lol:

Boxcar

[bigmack]

Whatever it takes to throw post-Reagan America on the trash heap where it belongs.
Doesn't the salt air calm you down AT ALL down there in that Banana Republic?

Do you ever get the feeling this deep seeded hatred you harbor is something many of us relish and know will continue to plague any semblance of joy you'll ever have in life?

Funny shit. Thanks for the laughs. Keep 'em comin'.

[boxcar]

Before you start calling people lazy and illiterate, I suggest you look in the mirror. I asked for the reference because I scanned at least a dozen pages of Google search results on "Sebelius health insurance companies future" and not one included anything close to what you claim she said. OTOH, she did say this just a few months ago:

"By 2014, the health insurance market will be flooded with 30 million more Americans purchasing plans through "health insurance exchanges." Created by the reform law, these online marketplaces will make purchasing a health plan "more like buying plane tickets or a home appliance," according to Health & Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius." - www.pbs.org

Doesn't sound much like a prediction of the demise of insurance companies. IOW, I think your full of crap about that attribution. Of course, it could have come via Breitbart. It's the sort of lying he was so good at.

You really need to work on your Google search skills. They're pathetic! As I said previously, you need to keep up better. Months old news is old; try this piece on for size. And notice the date on it:

Obama Cabinet Secretary: 'The Private Market is in a Death Spiral'

Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius told the House Ways and Means Committee on Tuesday that the days of private health insurance are coming to an end in the United States.

“The private market is in a death spiral,” Sebelius said, contending this would be the case whether or not President Barack Obama's health care law had been enacted.

More and a vid here:

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-cabinet-secretary-private-market-death-spiral

Of course, this hack is going to say that it's not the fault of ObamaCare; but again conservatives were saying 3 years ago that this would happen because that's the way ObamaCare was designed.

Also,do work on your internal sarcasm detector. You obviously didn't understand the intent of "Could you please list all of them? I lose count."

Hey, buddy, if you have to ask for something that is so easy to find, and for which most fourth graders would be too ashamed to ask for help on something so basic, then you're either downright lazy or illiterate. What's so difficult about searching for "communist organizations in the U.S.A.", and then going from there? Really deep stuff, eh? I bet you have to don hip boots when you can't sidestep a muddle puddle. :rolleyes:

I am fascinated by the fact that someone who so blithely pontificates on Socialism, Communism, Marxism, Conservatism and Capitalism knows so damn little about them.

But you're such an expert on all the above, eh? Yet, you're so ignorant on how to use basic internet tools? Wow! You're a real enigma, aren't you? :rolleyes:

As for the the rest of your stupid rant, I have no time or inclination to answer. You're nothing more than a loud, empty barrel --and a rusty one at that.

Boxcar