Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
An example if why I distrust Romney
88 views
Skip to first unread message
bkn...@conramp.net
Nov 1, 2012, 3:49:26 PM11/1/12
to
MNMikeW
Nov 1, 2012, 4:43:37 PM11/1/12
to
bkn...@conramp.net wrote:
> http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/01/opinion/mitt-romney-versus-the-automakers.html?smid=fb-share&_r=0
>
Successful and wildly popular bailout? LOL! Popular to the UAW folks
perhaps.
> http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/01/opinion/mitt-romney-versus-the-automakers.html?smid=fb-share&_r=0
>
Successful and wildly popular bailout? LOL! Popular to the UAW folks
perhaps.
Steve B
Nov 1, 2012, 4:53:18 PM11/1/12
to
Here's an example of why I distrust Obama:
What he said in NY, re: "We will leave no one behind" after leaving some
servicemen and US embassy personnel behind in Benghazzi.
There is a list of other things he said and did, but I shall not go into it
here, as I do not have the 16 to 24 hours it would take to type them out.
Let's just say just about everything he has said and done in the last ......
well, as long as the slimy little slug has been around.
Steve
What he said in NY, re: "We will leave no one behind" after leaving some
servicemen and US embassy personnel behind in Benghazzi.
There is a list of other things he said and did, but I shall not go into it
here, as I do not have the 16 to 24 hours it would take to type them out.
Let's just say just about everything he has said and done in the last ......
well, as long as the slimy little slug has been around.
Steve
bkn...@conramp.net
Nov 1, 2012, 5:26:38 PM11/1/12
to
On Thu, 1 Nov 2012 13:53:18 -0700, "Steve B" <ste...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Here's an example of why I distrust Obama:
>
>What he said in NY, re: "We will leave no one behind" after leaving some
>servicemen and US embassy personnel behind in Benghazzi.
Speculation only.
>Here's an example of why I distrust Obama:
>
>What he said in NY, re: "We will leave no one behind" after leaving some
>servicemen and US embassy personnel behind in Benghazzi.
>
>There is a list of other things he said and did, but I shall not go into it
>here, as I do not have the 16 to 24 hours it would take to type them out.
>Let's just say just about everything he has said and done in the last ......
>well, as long as the slimy little slug has been around.
>
>Steve
>
Horseshit.
>There is a list of other things he said and did, but I shall not go into it
>here, as I do not have the 16 to 24 hours it would take to type them out.
>Let's just say just about everything he has said and done in the last ......
>well, as long as the slimy little slug has been around.
>
>Steve
>
bkn...@conramp.net
Nov 1, 2012, 5:29:01 PM11/1/12
to
man has not been steadfast about very much. Note that he now is
backing off his abortion stance that he used during his quest for the
nomination. Now that he has it the more conservative Republicans
will see a lot of that.
MNMikeW
Nov 1, 2012, 5:52:24 PM11/1/12
to
MNMikeW
Nov 1, 2012, 5:56:14 PM11/1/12
to
bkn...@conramp.net wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Nov 2012 13:53:18 -0700, "Steve B" <ste...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Here's an example of why I distrust Obama:
>>
>> What he said in NY, re: "We will leave no one behind" after leaving some
>> servicemen and US embassy personnel behind in Benghazzi.
>
> Speculation only.
Speculation that could all be resolved except the most transparent
> On Thu, 1 Nov 2012 13:53:18 -0700, "Steve B" <ste...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Here's an example of why I distrust Obama:
>>
>> What he said in NY, re: "We will leave no one behind" after leaving some
>> servicemen and US embassy personnel behind in Benghazzi.
>
> Speculation only.
administration evaaaaahhhh is doing all it can to brush this under the
rug. And his minions in the liberal press are doing all they can to help
him out.
>>
>> There is a list of other things he said and did, but I shall not go into it
>> here, as I do not have the 16 to 24 hours it would take to type them out.
>> Let's just say just about everything he has said and done in the last ......
>> well, as long as the slimy little slug has been around.
>>
>> Steve
>>
> Horseshit.
>
Same could be said about your opinion.
>> There is a list of other things he said and did, but I shall not go into it
>> here, as I do not have the 16 to 24 hours it would take to type them out.
>> Let's just say just about everything he has said and done in the last ......
>> well, as long as the slimy little slug has been around.
>>
>> Steve
>>
> Horseshit.
>
bkn...@conramp.net
Nov 1, 2012, 5:56:44 PM11/1/12
to
"duplicity". He proved that he would do or say anything to get the
nomination, and is going the same route for election. It just may
work.
bkn...@conramp.net
Nov 1, 2012, 6:12:02 PM11/1/12
to
On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 16:56:14 -0500, MNMikeW <mnmi...@aol.com> wrote:
>bkn...@conramp.net wrote:
>> On Thu, 1 Nov 2012 13:53:18 -0700, "Steve B" <ste...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Here's an example of why I distrust Obama:
>>>
>>> What he said in NY, re: "We will leave no one behind" after leaving some
>>> servicemen and US embassy personnel behind in Benghazzi.
>>
>> Speculation only.
>
>Speculation that could all be resolved except the most transparent
>administration evaaaaahhhh is doing all it can to brush this under the
>rug. And his minions in the liberal press are doing all they can to help
>him out.
The cry of the ultra right when the media doesn't fall in line with
>bkn...@conramp.net wrote:
>> On Thu, 1 Nov 2012 13:53:18 -0700, "Steve B" <ste...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Here's an example of why I distrust Obama:
>>>
>>> What he said in NY, re: "We will leave no one behind" after leaving some
>>> servicemen and US embassy personnel behind in Benghazzi.
>>
>> Speculation only.
>
>Speculation that could all be resolved except the most transparent
>administration evaaaaahhhh is doing all it can to brush this under the
>rug. And his minions in the liberal press are doing all they can to help
>him out.
Faux News.
>>>
>>> There is a list of other things he said and did, but I shall not go into it
>>> here, as I do not have the 16 to 24 hours it would take to type them out.
>>> Let's just say just about everything he has said and done in the last ......
>>> well, as long as the slimy little slug has been around.
>>>
>>> Steve
>>>
>> Horseshit.
>>
>Same could be said about your opinion.
True. But then I do actually read what others post and don't
>>> There is a list of other things he said and did, but I shall not go into it
>>> here, as I do not have the 16 to 24 hours it would take to type them out.
>>> Let's just say just about everything he has said and done in the last ......
>>> well, as long as the slimy little slug has been around.
>>>
>>> Steve
>>>
>> Horseshit.
>>
>Same could be said about your opinion.
automatically respond with broad .When "slimy little slug" is said
about the POTUS it says it all about the poster .
Carbon
Nov 1, 2012, 6:35:15 PM11/1/12
to
Alan Baker
Nov 1, 2012, 6:49:51 PM11/1/12
to
In article <afg98o...@mid.individual.net>,
Is that honestly what you think is going on?
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
BAR
Nov 1, 2012, 7:08:18 PM11/1/12
to
In article <pan.2012.11...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>,
nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com says...
Ask Obama why he went from opposing homosexual marriage to supporting it
in the span of a week or two last summer.
nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com says...
in the span of a week or two last summer.
Howard Brazee
Nov 1, 2012, 7:37:06 PM11/1/12
to
On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 16:29:01 -0500, bkn...@conramp.net wrote:
>That's all you perceived? What about the ubiquitous waffling. This
>man has not been steadfast about very much. Note that he now is
>backing off his abortion stance that he used during his quest for the
>nomination. Now that he has it the more conservative Republicans
>will see a lot of that.
Neither party see much advantage in following up to promises made to
>That's all you perceived? What about the ubiquitous waffling. This
>man has not been steadfast about very much. Note that he now is
>backing off his abortion stance that he used during his quest for the
>nomination. Now that he has it the more conservative Republicans
>will see a lot of that.
people who are solidly in their respective camps.
And neither party will give up power once they get it. Their biggest
power is the power to spend, which is why both parties have similar
records on increasing spending.
--
"In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found,
than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace
to the legislature, and not to the executive department."
- James Madison
Alan Baker
Nov 1, 2012, 7:38:12 PM11/1/12
to
In article <MPG.2afccaec...@news.giganews.com>,
That isn't what happened.
If you spend two years saying your opinions, views or beliefs are
"evolving", then you can't be said to be lying when you reach a new
conception of what is right after that time.
If you spend two years saying your opinions, views or beliefs are
"evolving", then you can't be said to be lying when you reach a new
conception of what is right after that time.
Carbon
Nov 1, 2012, 7:42:56 PM11/1/12
to
On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 17:37:06 -0600, Howard Brazee wrote:
> On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 16:29:01 -0500, bkn...@conramp.net wrote:
>
>> That's all you perceived? What about the ubiquitous waffling. This
>> man has not been steadfast about very much. Note that he now is
>> backing off his abortion stance that he used during his quest for the
>> nomination. Now that he has it the more conservative Republicans
>> will see a lot of that.
>
> Neither party see much advantage in following up to promises made to
> people who are solidly in their respective camps.
>
> And neither party will give up power once they get it. Their biggest
> power is the power to spend, which is why both parties have similar
> records on increasing spending.
And both parties have had roughly equal success in growing the national
> On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 16:29:01 -0500, bkn...@conramp.net wrote:
>
>> That's all you perceived? What about the ubiquitous waffling. This
>> man has not been steadfast about very much. Note that he now is
>> backing off his abortion stance that he used during his quest for the
>> nomination. Now that he has it the more conservative Republicans
>> will see a lot of that.
>
> Neither party see much advantage in following up to promises made to
> people who are solidly in their respective camps.
>
> And neither party will give up power once they get it. Their biggest
> power is the power to spend, which is why both parties have similar
> records on increasing spending.
debt. The Democrats tend to favor social programs, while the Republicans
favor tax cuts and starting wars in foreign lands.
BAR
Nov 1, 2012, 8:07:18 PM11/1/12
to
In article <6o169890ubs6lt0bj...@4ax.com>,
how...@brazee.net says...
elections.
how...@brazee.net says...
>
> On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 16:29:01 -0500, bkn...@conramp.net wrote:
>
> >That's all you perceived? What about the ubiquitous waffling. This
> >man has not been steadfast about very much. Note that he now is
> >backing off his abortion stance that he used during his quest for the
> >nomination. Now that he has it the more conservative Republicans
> >will see a lot of that.
>
>
> Neither party see much advantage in following up to promises made to
> people who are solidly in their respective camps.
>
> And neither party will give up power once they get it. Their biggest
> power is the power to spend, which is why both parties have similar
> records on increasing spending.
Power is transferred to the other pary all of the time. It is called
> On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 16:29:01 -0500, bkn...@conramp.net wrote:
>
> >That's all you perceived? What about the ubiquitous waffling. This
> >man has not been steadfast about very much. Note that he now is
> >backing off his abortion stance that he used during his quest for the
> >nomination. Now that he has it the more conservative Republicans
> >will see a lot of that.
>
>
> Neither party see much advantage in following up to promises made to
> people who are solidly in their respective camps.
>
> And neither party will give up power once they get it. Their biggest
> power is the power to spend, which is why both parties have similar
> records on increasing spending.
elections.
Bobster
Nov 1, 2012, 8:15:43 PM11/1/12
to
"MNMikeW" wrote in message news:afg57q...@mid.individual.net...
====================================================================================================
Certainly not popular with taxpayers who are still owed $25+ billion. Mitt
is exactly correct about the GM bankruptcy.
Certainly not popular with taxpayers who are still owed $25+ billion. Mitt
is exactly correct about the GM bankruptcy.
Howard Brazee
Nov 1, 2012, 9:38:00 PM11/1/12
to
On 01 Nov 2012 23:42:56 GMT, Carbon <nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>
wrote:
>> And neither party will give up power once they get it. Their biggest
>> power is the power to spend, which is why both parties have similar
>> records on increasing spending.
>
>And both parties have had roughly equal success in growing the national
>debt. The Democrats tend to favor social programs, while the Republicans
>favor tax cuts and starting wars in foreign lands.
There is a pretty good correlation between increased debt and tax cuts
though.
wrote:
>> And neither party will give up power once they get it. Their biggest
>> power is the power to spend, which is why both parties have similar
>> records on increasing spending.
>
>And both parties have had roughly equal success in growing the national
>debt. The Democrats tend to favor social programs, while the Republicans
>favor tax cuts and starting wars in foreign lands.
though.
Carbon
Nov 1, 2012, 10:03:23 PM11/1/12
to
On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 19:38:00 -0600, Howard Brazee wrote:
> On 01 Nov 2012 23:42:56 GMT, Carbon <nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>
> wrote:
>
>>> And neither party will give up power once they get it. Their
>>> biggest power is the power to spend, which is why both parties have
>>> similar records on increasing spending.
>>
>> And both parties have had roughly equal success in growing the
>> national debt. The Democrats tend to favor social programs, while the
>> Republicans favor tax cuts and starting wars in foreign lands.
>
> There is a pretty good correlation between increased debt and tax cuts
> though.
Yes, but that part of the platform is supposed to remain silent...
> On 01 Nov 2012 23:42:56 GMT, Carbon <nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>
> wrote:
>
>>> And neither party will give up power once they get it. Their
>>> biggest power is the power to spend, which is why both parties have
>>> similar records on increasing spending.
>>
>> And both parties have had roughly equal success in growing the
>> national debt. The Democrats tend to favor social programs, while the
>> Republicans favor tax cuts and starting wars in foreign lands.
>
> There is a pretty good correlation between increased debt and tax cuts
> though.
BAR
Nov 1, 2012, 10:20:01 PM11/1/12
to
In article <uu86985o3fe1c2o5h...@4ax.com>,
how...@brazee.net says...
how...@brazee.net says...
>
> On 01 Nov 2012 23:42:56 GMT, Carbon <nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>
> wrote:
>
> >> And neither party will give up power once they get it. Their biggest
> >> power is the power to spend, which is why both parties have similar
> >> records on increasing spending.
> >
> >And both parties have had roughly equal success in growing the national
> >debt. The Democrats tend to favor social programs, while the Republicans
> >favor tax cuts and starting wars in foreign lands.
>
> There is a pretty good correlation between increased debt and tax cuts
> though.
There is a serious correlation between spending more than you take in.
> On 01 Nov 2012 23:42:56 GMT, Carbon <nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>
> wrote:
>
> >> And neither party will give up power once they get it. Their biggest
> >> power is the power to spend, which is why both parties have similar
> >> records on increasing spending.
> >
> >And both parties have had roughly equal success in growing the national
> >debt. The Democrats tend to favor social programs, while the Republicans
> >favor tax cuts and starting wars in foreign lands.
>
> There is a pretty good correlation between increased debt and tax cuts
> though.
MNMikeW
Nov 2, 2012, 10:35:12 AM11/2/12
to
MNMikeW
Nov 2, 2012, 10:35:50 AM11/2/12
to
MNMikeW
Nov 2, 2012, 10:37:52 AM11/2/12
to
simply bury their heads in the sand about it.
MNMikeW
Nov 2, 2012, 10:41:34 AM11/2/12
to
bkn...@conramp.net wrote:
> On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 16:56:14 -0500, MNMikeW <mnmi...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> bkn...@conramp.net wrote:
>>> On Thu, 1 Nov 2012 13:53:18 -0700, "Steve B" <ste...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Here's an example of why I distrust Obama:
>>>>
>>>> What he said in NY, re: "We will leave no one behind" after leaving some
>>>> servicemen and US embassy personnel behind in Benghazzi.
>>>
>>> Speculation only.
>>
>> Speculation that could all be resolved except the most transparent
>> administration evaaaaahhhh is doing all it can to brush this under the
>> rug. And his minions in the liberal press are doing all they can to help
>> him out.
>
> The cry of the ultra right when the media doesn't fall in line with
> Faux News.
The media is 100% in the tank for Obama. Any moron can see that. Do you
> On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 16:56:14 -0500, MNMikeW <mnmi...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> bkn...@conramp.net wrote:
>>> On Thu, 1 Nov 2012 13:53:18 -0700, "Steve B" <ste...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Here's an example of why I distrust Obama:
>>>>
>>>> What he said in NY, re: "We will leave no one behind" after leaving some
>>>> servicemen and US embassy personnel behind in Benghazzi.
>>>
>>> Speculation only.
>>
>> Speculation that could all be resolved except the most transparent
>> administration evaaaaahhhh is doing all it can to brush this under the
>> rug. And his minions in the liberal press are doing all they can to help
>> him out.
>
> The cry of the ultra right when the media doesn't fall in line with
> Faux News.
really think this would be a non-issue if this happened during a
Republican administration? No fucking way.
>>>>
>>>> There is a list of other things he said and did, but I shall not go into it
>>>> here, as I do not have the 16 to 24 hours it would take to type them out.
>>>> Let's just say just about everything he has said and done in the last ......
>>>> well, as long as the slimy little slug has been around.
>>>>
>>>> Steve
>>>>
>>> Horseshit.
>>>
>> Same could be said about your opinion.
>
> True. But then I do actually read what others post and don't
> automatically respond with broad .When "slimy little slug" is said
> about the POTUS it says it all about the poster .
>
Yes, I recall you defending Bush all the time when he was called a name.
>>>> There is a list of other things he said and did, but I shall not go into it
>>>> here, as I do not have the 16 to 24 hours it would take to type them out.
>>>> Let's just say just about everything he has said and done in the last ......
>>>> well, as long as the slimy little slug has been around.
>>>>
>>>> Steve
>>>>
>>> Horseshit.
>>>
>> Same could be said about your opinion.
>
> True. But then I do actually read what others post and don't
> automatically respond with broad .When "slimy little slug" is said
> about the POTUS it says it all about the poster .
>
BWHAHAHAHA.
Howard Brazee
Nov 2, 2012, 10:47:50 AM11/2/12
to
On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 09:37:52 -0500, MNMikeW <mnmi...@aol.com> wrote:
>Yes the Dems tend to favor social programs that are unsustainable. And
>simply bury their heads in the sand about it.
If the Republicans aren't any more fiscally responsible (and why
>Yes the Dems tend to favor social programs that are unsustainable. And
>simply bury their heads in the sand about it.
should they mean it this time?), why should we go in that direction?
bkn...@conramp.net
Nov 2, 2012, 11:01:51 AM11/2/12
to
bkn...@conramp.net
Nov 2, 2012, 11:02:13 AM11/2/12
to
bkn...@conramp.net
Nov 2, 2012, 11:02:52 AM11/2/12
to
bkn...@conramp.net
Nov 2, 2012, 11:04:26 AM11/2/12
to
MNMikeW
Nov 2, 2012, 11:32:22 AM11/2/12
to
anything intelligent to say?
bkn...@conramp.net
Nov 2, 2012, 11:36:10 AM11/2/12
to
MNMikeW
Nov 2, 2012, 11:46:51 AM11/2/12
to
Frank Ketchum
Nov 2, 2012, 11:52:37 AM11/2/12
to
<bkn...@conramp.net> wrote in message
news:4hk598h0sjl0j718m...@4ax.com...
> http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/01/opinion/mitt-romney-versus-the-automakers.html?smid=fb-share&_r=0
>
Any examples of why we should trust Obama?
MNMikeW
Nov 2, 2012, 12:11:36 PM11/2/12
to
bkn...@conramp.net
Nov 2, 2012, 12:28:23 PM11/2/12
to
I meant. :-)
bkn...@conramp.net
Nov 2, 2012, 12:34:22 PM11/2/12
to
many things.
Incidentally, I'd be willing to wager that I'll vote for more
Republicans than you you'll vote for Democrats this election.
Steve B
Nov 2, 2012, 12:37:35 PM11/2/12
to
<bkn...@conramp.net> wrote in message
news:q7q5985turhempqke...@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 1 Nov 2012 13:53:18 -0700, "Steve B" <ste...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Here's an example of why I distrust Obama:
>>
>>What he said in NY, re: "We will leave no one behind" after leaving some
>>servicemen and US embassy personnel behind in Benghazzi.
>
> Speculation only.
>>
>
>>Here's an example of why I distrust Obama:
>>
>>What he said in NY, re: "We will leave no one behind" after leaving some
>>servicemen and US embassy personnel behind in Benghazzi.
>
> Speculation only.
>>
>>There is a list of other things he said and did, but I shall not go into
>>it
>>here, as I do not have the 16 to 24 hours it would take to type them out.
>>Let's just say just about everything he has said and done in the last
>>......
>>well, as long as the slimy little slug has been around.
>>
>>Steve
>>
> Horseshit.
I would expect this from someone who has an educational level that speaks in
>>it
>>here, as I do not have the 16 to 24 hours it would take to type them out.
>>Let's just say just about everything he has said and done in the last
>>......
>>well, as long as the slimy little slug has been around.
>>
>>Steve
>>
> Horseshit.
incomplete sentences, and one word responses. You're done.
Steve
MNMikeW
Nov 2, 2012, 12:39:16 PM11/2/12
to
bkn...@conramp.net
Nov 2, 2012, 12:45:56 PM11/2/12
to
to just get to the point. I guess it was over your head.
Frank Ketchum
Nov 2, 2012, 12:49:46 PM11/2/12
to
"MNMikeW" <mnmi...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:afib9l...@mid.individual.net...
Frank Ketchum
Nov 2, 2012, 12:50:24 PM11/2/12
to
bkn...@conramp.net
Nov 2, 2012, 12:51:31 PM11/2/12
to
prime example.
You didn't mention the last sentence. That wager is open to you too.
bkn...@conramp.net
Nov 2, 2012, 1:02:01 PM11/2/12
to
On Fri, 2 Nov 2012 12:50:24 -0400, "Frank Ketchum"
<nos...@thanksanyway.com> wrote:
>
><bkn...@conramp.net> wrote in message
>news:sbt798p89cqhpshbj...@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 2 Nov 2012 11:52:37 -0400, "Frank Ketchum"
>> <nos...@thanksanyway.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>><bkn...@conramp.net> wrote in message
>>>news:4hk598h0sjl0j718m...@4ax.com...
>>>> http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/01/opinion/mitt-romney-versus-the-automakers.html?smid=fb-share&_r=0
>>>>
>>>
>>>Any examples of why we should trust Obama?
>>>
>> Between the two I choose Obama. Romney is so duplicitous about too
>> many things.
>>
>> Incidentally, I'd be willing to wager that I'll vote for more
>> Republicans than you you'll vote for Democrats this election.
>
>So what?
>
Just an indication of my politics.
>
><bkn...@conramp.net> wrote in message
>news:sbt798p89cqhpshbj...@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 2 Nov 2012 11:52:37 -0400, "Frank Ketchum"
>> <nos...@thanksanyway.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>><bkn...@conramp.net> wrote in message
>>>news:4hk598h0sjl0j718m...@4ax.com...
>>>> http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/01/opinion/mitt-romney-versus-the-automakers.html?smid=fb-share&_r=0
>>>>
>>>
>>>Any examples of why we should trust Obama?
>>>
>> Between the two I choose Obama. Romney is so duplicitous about too
>> many things.
>>
>> Incidentally, I'd be willing to wager that I'll vote for more
>> Republicans than you you'll vote for Democrats this election.
>
>So what?
>
Frank Ketchum
Nov 2, 2012, 1:25:55 PM11/2/12
to
<bkn...@conramp.net> wrote in message
news:g3v79813is7r7ilgv...@4ax.com...
tells us all we need to know about your politics. It doesn't much matter
that you will vote for the republican dog catcher.
la...@pivotforpower.com
Nov 2, 2012, 1:41:36 PM11/2/12
to
On Thursday, November 1, 2012 7:03:23 PM UTC-7, Carbon wrote:
We have no better laboratories than the states and the EU. We can easily review what they did about taxes and regulations and see the results.
There is a 100% correlation between high taxes and regulation with unemployment and distress. Spain and France and Italy have allowed their liberal sentiments to override good business and economic sense. So their productive have flown away and they have had to borrow to support their welfare states. States with Republican Governors are ALL better off than those with Democrat governors. Illinois and California are basket cases. Texas and Utah are doing fine, even with the load of the federal government on them.
Obama started the US on the road to the EU. We have national debt almost 10 times our annual GDP and he would add at least $1Trillion annually with not even a hint of a reduction in future years. He has not even produced a budget that got more than a SINGLE VOTE in congress. The Senate has not even proposed a budget in several years. Obama and Harry Reid know any realistic budget would be instantly rejected-- by both sides! No Democrat could be reelected after voting for an irresponsible bill, so they just don't vote!! Even though a budget is required by law.
So even as the EU will continue borrowing to stay afloat, the US needs a "daddy" to come down to the basement and turn off the music and close the bar. The party is OVER! Romney will be "daddy," and he will do what needs to be done, whether he is popular afterward or not. VERY LIKELY he intends to be POTUS only 4 years, until he is 70 years old. Then he will retire.
Larry
> On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 19:38:00 -0600, Howard Brazee wrote:
>
> > On 01 Nov 2012 23:42:56 GMT, Carbon <nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>
>
> > wrote:
>
> >
>
> >>> And neither party will give up power once they get it. Their
>
> >>> biggest power is the power to spend, which is why both parties have
>
> >>> similar records on increasing spending.
>
> >>
>
> >> And both parties have had roughly equal success in growing the
>
> >> national debt. The Democrats tend to favor social programs, while the
>
> >> Republicans favor tax cuts and starting wars in foreign lands.
>
> >
>
> > There is a pretty good correlation between increased debt and tax cuts
>
> > though.
>
>
>
> Yes, but that part of the platform is supposed to remain silent...
>
> > On 01 Nov 2012 23:42:56 GMT, Carbon <nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>
>
> > wrote:
>
> >
>
> >>> And neither party will give up power once they get it. Their
>
> >>> biggest power is the power to spend, which is why both parties have
>
> >>> similar records on increasing spending.
>
> >>
>
> >> And both parties have had roughly equal success in growing the
>
> >> national debt. The Democrats tend to favor social programs, while the
>
> >> Republicans favor tax cuts and starting wars in foreign lands.
>
> >
>
> > There is a pretty good correlation between increased debt and tax cuts
>
> > though.
>
>
>
We have no better laboratories than the states and the EU. We can easily review what they did about taxes and regulations and see the results.
There is a 100% correlation between high taxes and regulation with unemployment and distress. Spain and France and Italy have allowed their liberal sentiments to override good business and economic sense. So their productive have flown away and they have had to borrow to support their welfare states. States with Republican Governors are ALL better off than those with Democrat governors. Illinois and California are basket cases. Texas and Utah are doing fine, even with the load of the federal government on them.
Obama started the US on the road to the EU. We have national debt almost 10 times our annual GDP and he would add at least $1Trillion annually with not even a hint of a reduction in future years. He has not even produced a budget that got more than a SINGLE VOTE in congress. The Senate has not even proposed a budget in several years. Obama and Harry Reid know any realistic budget would be instantly rejected-- by both sides! No Democrat could be reelected after voting for an irresponsible bill, so they just don't vote!! Even though a budget is required by law.
So even as the EU will continue borrowing to stay afloat, the US needs a "daddy" to come down to the basement and turn off the music and close the bar. The party is OVER! Romney will be "daddy," and he will do what needs to be done, whether he is popular afterward or not. VERY LIKELY he intends to be POTUS only 4 years, until he is 70 years old. Then he will retire.
Larry
Don Kirkman
Nov 2, 2012, 2:28:34 PM11/2/12
to
On Thu, 1 Nov 2012 20:07:18 -0400, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>In article <6o169890ubs6lt0bj...@4ax.com>,
>how...@brazee.net says...
>> people who are solidly in their respective camps.
>elections.
Or money.
--
Don Kirkman
don...@charter.net
>In article <6o169890ubs6lt0bj...@4ax.com>,
>how...@brazee.net says...
>>
>> On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 16:29:01 -0500, bkn...@conramp.net wrote:
>>
>> >That's all you perceived? What about the ubiquitous waffling. This
>> >man has not been steadfast about very much. Note that he now is
>> >backing off his abortion stance that he used during his quest for the
>> >nomination. Now that he has it the more conservative Republicans
>> >will see a lot of that.
>>
>>
>> Neither party see much advantage in following up to promises made to
>> On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 16:29:01 -0500, bkn...@conramp.net wrote:
>>
>> >That's all you perceived? What about the ubiquitous waffling. This
>> >man has not been steadfast about very much. Note that he now is
>> >backing off his abortion stance that he used during his quest for the
>> >nomination. Now that he has it the more conservative Republicans
>> >will see a lot of that.
>>
>>
>> people who are solidly in their respective camps.
>>
>> And neither party will give up power once they get it. Their biggest
>> power is the power to spend, which is why both parties have similar
>> records on increasing spending.
>
>Power is transferred to the other pary all of the time. It is called
>> And neither party will give up power once they get it. Their biggest
>> power is the power to spend, which is why both parties have similar
>> records on increasing spending.
>
>elections.
Or money.
--
Don Kirkman
don...@charter.net
Don Kirkman
Nov 2, 2012, 2:28:34 PM11/2/12
to
On Thu, 1 Nov 2012 22:20:01 -0400, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>In article <uu86985o3fe1c2o5h...@4ax.com>,
>how...@brazee.net says...
you correlating spending to? Or have you just not decided yet what
you want to put on the other side of the equation?
--
Don Kirkman
don...@charter.net
>In article <uu86985o3fe1c2o5h...@4ax.com>,
>how...@brazee.net says...
>> >> And neither party will give up power once they get it. Their biggest
>> >> power is the power to spend, which is why both parties have similar
>> >> records on increasing spending.
>> >
>> >> power is the power to spend, which is why both parties have similar
>> >> records on increasing spending.
>> >
>> >And both parties have had roughly equal success in growing the national
>> >debt. The Democrats tend to favor social programs, while the Republicans
>> >favor tax cuts and starting wars in foreign lands.
>>
>> There is a pretty good correlation between increased debt and tax cuts
>> though.
>
>> >debt. The Democrats tend to favor social programs, while the Republicans
>> >favor tax cuts and starting wars in foreign lands.
>>
>> There is a pretty good correlation between increased debt and tax cuts
>> though.
>
>There is a serious correlation between spending more than you take in.
You must have meant to stop, 'cuz you put in a period, but what are
you correlating spending to? Or have you just not decided yet what
you want to put on the other side of the equation?
--
Don Kirkman
don...@charter.net
Frank Ketchum
Nov 2, 2012, 3:13:43 PM11/2/12
to
"Don Kirkman" <don...@charter.net> wrote in message
news:hg3898hbh7vp39kvh...@4ax.com...
correlation is between spending more than you take in and increasing debt.
It's not like that relationship is a secret either by the way.
Frank Ketchum
Nov 2, 2012, 3:15:11 PM11/2/12
to
"BAR" <sc...@you.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.2afccaec...@news.giganews.com...
> In article <pan.2012.11...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>,
> nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com says...
>>
>> On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 16:52:24 -0500, MNMikeW wrote:
>> > bkn...@conramp.net wrote:
>> >> On Thu, 01 Nov 2012 15:43:37 -0500, MNMikeW <mnmi...@aol.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>> bkn...@conramp.net wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/01/opinion/mitt-romney-versus-the-automakers.html?smid=fb-share&_r=0
>> >>>>
>> >>> Successful and wildly popular bailout? LOL! Popular to the UAW folks
>> >>> perhaps.
>> >>
>> >>>
>> >>>> http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/01/opinion/mitt-romney-versus-the-automakers.html?smid=fb-share&_r=0
>> >>>>
>> >>> Successful and wildly popular bailout? LOL! Popular to the UAW folks
>> >>> perhaps.
>> >>
>> >> That's all you perceived? What about the ubiquitous waffling. This
>> >> man has not been steadfast about very much. Note that he now is
>> >> backing off his abortion stance that he used during his quest for the
>> >> nomination. Now that he has it the more conservative Republicans
>> >> will see a lot of that.
>> >>
>> >> man has not been steadfast about very much. Note that he now is
>> >> backing off his abortion stance that he used during his quest for the
>> >> nomination. Now that he has it the more conservative Republicans
>> >> will see a lot of that.
>> >>
>> > Oh, so "evolving" is a bad thing now. LOL.
>>
>> Evolving. Is that what lying is called now?
>>
>
> Ask Obama why he went from opposing homosexual marriage to supporting it
> in the span of a week or two last summer.
Maybe an experience he had changed his mind.
bkn...@conramp.net
Nov 2, 2012, 3:38:22 PM11/2/12
to
On Fri, 2 Nov 2012 13:25:55 -0400, "Frank Ketchum"
I marvel at your small-minded, but egotistical, bullshit. "Us" is
also something that is pretentious from you. Speak for yourself, I'm
sure that others may agree, but you can't say it for them.
The fact that I make that one vote tells you only one thing; that I
prefer Obama over Romney. The other votes I'm casting are for
senatorial races and state offices, much more important than
dogcatcher.
More of your pretended ESP.
also something that is pretentious from you. Speak for yourself, I'm
sure that others may agree, but you can't say it for them.
The fact that I make that one vote tells you only one thing; that I
prefer Obama over Romney. The other votes I'm casting are for
senatorial races and state offices, much more important than
dogcatcher.
More of your pretended ESP.
Howard Brazee
Nov 2, 2012, 5:32:40 PM11/2/12
to
I wonder if I would change my political preferences if there was the
slightest bit of evidence that Republicans in power were more fiscally
responsible than Democrats in power.
--
"In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found,
than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace
to the legislature, and not to the executive department."
- James Madison
slightest bit of evidence that Republicans in power were more fiscally
responsible than Democrats in power.
--
"In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found,
than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace
to the legislature, and not to the executive department."
- James Madison
Howard Brazee
Nov 2, 2012, 5:34:07 PM11/2/12
to
On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 10:04:26 -0500, bkn...@conramp.net wrote:
> The cry of the ultra right when the media doesn't fall in line with
> Faux News.
In China, it is illegal to report facts that the Party doesn't want
> The cry of the ultra right when the media doesn't fall in line with
> Faux News.
reported.
Howard Brazee
Nov 2, 2012, 5:37:44 PM11/2/12
to
On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 11:34:22 -0500, bkn...@conramp.net wrote:
>Between the two I choose Obama. Romney is so duplicitous about too
>many things.
The more important elections are with Congress.
>Between the two I choose Obama. Romney is so duplicitous about too
>many things.
One thing that Romney is running on is the idea that the Republicans
won't be spending their primary effort in defeating Romney.
I don't know whether corporate bail outs were good for the country,
but when people vote for them for Bush, then swear that their primary
goal is to defeat Obama and switch their strategy - which causes them
to switch their efforts from such bail outs, I believe their new oath
is counter to their oaths to the country. An other word for that is
treason.
Frank Ketchum
Nov 2, 2012, 5:49:28 PM11/2/12
to
<bkn...@conramp.net> wrote in message
news:q288985n39qnvaddm...@4ax.com...
democrat?
BAR
Nov 2, 2012, 5:53:26 PM11/2/12
to
In article <35n798pgnc1ogqild...@4ax.com>,
how...@brazee.net says...
>
> On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 09:37:52 -0500, MNMikeW <mnmi...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >Yes the Dems tend to favor social programs that are unsustainable. And
> >simply bury their heads in the sand about it.
>
> If the Republicans aren't any more fiscally responsible (and why
> should they mean it this time?), why should we go in that direction?
It will slow the bleeding.
Obama wants to open all of our monetary veins and make us go bankrupt
faster.
how...@brazee.net says...
>
> On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 09:37:52 -0500, MNMikeW <mnmi...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >Yes the Dems tend to favor social programs that are unsustainable. And
> >simply bury their heads in the sand about it.
>
> If the Republicans aren't any more fiscally responsible (and why
> should they mean it this time?), why should we go in that direction?
It will slow the bleeding.
Obama wants to open all of our monetary veins and make us go bankrupt
faster.
BAR
Nov 2, 2012, 5:59:57 PM11/2/12
to
In article <q288985n39qnvaddm...@4ax.com>,
bkn...@conramp.net says...
We elect people to speak for us. We hire people to speak for us.
bkn...@conramp.net says...
BAR
Nov 2, 2012, 6:02:37 PM11/2/12
to
In article <f3f898dv2g5tfu0cl...@4ax.com>,
how...@brazee.net says...
does, Obama said he is the decider of whether things are constitutional.
> One thing that Romney is running on is the idea that the Republicans
> won't be spending their primary effort in defeating Romney.
>
> I don't know whether corporate bail outs were good for the country,
> but when people vote for them for Bush, then swear that their primary
> goal is to defeat Obama and switch their strategy - which causes them
> to switch their efforts from such bail outs, I believe their new oath
> is counter to their oaths to the country. An other word for that is
> treason.
John Corzine should be in jail with Bernie Madoff.
All of your "evil banksters" on Wall Street shoud got of without a
charge or an indictment from the Obama administration.
how...@brazee.net says...
>
> On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 11:34:22 -0500, bkn...@conramp.net wrote:
>
> >Between the two I choose Obama. Romney is so duplicitous about too
> >many things.
>
> The more important elections are with Congress.
As we have seen over the past 4 years, it doesn't matter what Congress
> On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 11:34:22 -0500, bkn...@conramp.net wrote:
>
> >Between the two I choose Obama. Romney is so duplicitous about too
> >many things.
>
> The more important elections are with Congress.
does, Obama said he is the decider of whether things are constitutional.
> One thing that Romney is running on is the idea that the Republicans
> won't be spending their primary effort in defeating Romney.
>
> I don't know whether corporate bail outs were good for the country,
> but when people vote for them for Bush, then swear that their primary
> goal is to defeat Obama and switch their strategy - which causes them
> to switch their efforts from such bail outs, I believe their new oath
> is counter to their oaths to the country. An other word for that is
> treason.
All of your "evil banksters" on Wall Street shoud got of without a
charge or an indictment from the Obama administration.
BAR
Nov 2, 2012, 6:05:28 PM11/2/12
to
In article <hue8981d78v9qee32...@4ax.com>,
how...@brazee.net says...
are missing the point.
how...@brazee.net says...
>
> I wonder if I would change my political preferences if there was the
> slightest bit of evidence that Republicans in power were more fiscally
> responsible than Democrats in power.
If all you are concerned with is who spends money irresponsibly then you
> I wonder if I would change my political preferences if there was the
> slightest bit of evidence that Republicans in power were more fiscally
> responsible than Democrats in power.
are missing the point.
bkn...@conramp.net
Nov 2, 2012, 6:08:58 PM11/2/12
to
On Fri, 2 Nov 2012 17:49:28 -0400, "Frank Ketchum"
The last time the GOP ran someone who was a better choice than the
Democratic option.......Reagan. No way I could bring myself to vote
for the two Bush candidates.
Democratic option.......Reagan. No way I could bring myself to vote
for the two Bush candidates.
Howard Brazee
Nov 2, 2012, 6:12:41 PM11/2/12
to
about the whole thing. Entities can borrow, as long as the return
is worth the investment. Individuals, businesses, and governments
can be permanently in debt - as long as the wealth increase is worth
the interest payments. But when we have determined that the debt is
too much - the cost is bigger than the benefit, the actions should
result in lowered debt. If someone claims the debt is too high,
and preaches fiscal responsibility - and that someone gets power and
the debt goes up, that someone is not fiscally responsible.
Howard Brazee
Nov 2, 2012, 6:14:09 PM11/2/12
to
the past. Certainly Romney hasn't detailed anything to indicate that
this time will be different.
Howard Brazee
Nov 2, 2012, 6:16:17 PM11/2/12
to
On Fri, 2 Nov 2012 18:02:37 -0400, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>> The more important elections are with Congress.
>
>As we have seen over the past 4 years, it doesn't matter what Congress
>does, Obama said he is the decider of whether things are constitutional.
Yes, he is too much like previous presidents there.
>> The more important elections are with Congress.
>
>As we have seen over the past 4 years, it doesn't matter what Congress
>does, Obama said he is the decider of whether things are constitutional.
But the president doesn't control the purse strings nor the taxes,
economic issues are done by Congress.
Carbon
Nov 2, 2012, 10:34:48 PM11/2/12
to
On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 16:14:09 -0600, Howard Brazee wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Nov 2012 17:53:26 -0400, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>> In article <35n798pgnc1ogqild...@4ax.com>,
>> how...@brazee.net says...
>>> On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 09:37:52 -0500, MNMikeW <mnmi...@aol.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yes the Dems tend to favor social programs that are unsustainable.
>>>> And simply bury their heads in the sand about it.
>>>
>>> If the Republicans aren't any more fiscally responsible (and why
>>> should they mean it this time?), why should we go in that direction?
>>
>> It will slow the bleeding.
>>
>> Obama wants to open all of our monetary veins and make us go bankrupt
>> faster.
>
> The Republicans have not slowed the bleeding when they gained power in
> the past. Certainly Romney hasn't detailed anything to indicate that
> this time will be different.
It's interesting watching facts bounce off the true believers. It must
> On Fri, 2 Nov 2012 17:53:26 -0400, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>> In article <35n798pgnc1ogqild...@4ax.com>,
>> how...@brazee.net says...
>>> On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 09:37:52 -0500, MNMikeW <mnmi...@aol.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yes the Dems tend to favor social programs that are unsustainable.
>>>> And simply bury their heads in the sand about it.
>>>
>>> If the Republicans aren't any more fiscally responsible (and why
>>> should they mean it this time?), why should we go in that direction?
>>
>> It will slow the bleeding.
>>
>> Obama wants to open all of our monetary veins and make us go bankrupt
>> faster.
>
> The Republicans have not slowed the bleeding when they gained power in
> the past. Certainly Romney hasn't detailed anything to indicate that
> this time will be different.
kill them to have to keep ducking the provable fact that historically
Republicans have been no more fiscally reliable than Democrats.
Don Kirkman
Nov 3, 2012, 1:31:23 AM11/3/12
to
unfinished thought I was amused by. :-)
--
Don Kirkman
don...@charter.net
Horva...@net.net
Nov 3, 2012, 9:27:44 AM11/3/12
to
On Thu, 1 Nov 2012 19:08:18 -0400, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote this
crap:
>
>Ask Obama why he went from opposing homosexual marriage to supporting it
>in the span of a week or two last summer.
He probably tried it.
Vote for Romney. Repeal the nightmares.
crap:
>
>Ask Obama why he went from opposing homosexual marriage to supporting it
>in the span of a week or two last summer.
Vote for Romney. Repeal the nightmares.
la...@pivotforpower.com
Nov 3, 2012, 1:44:24 PM11/3/12
to
On Thursday, November 1, 2012 12:49:27 PM UTC-7, bkn...@conramp.net wrote:
> http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/01/opinion/mitt-romney-versus-the-automakers.html?smid=fb-share&_r=0
It is very simple. If you want 4 more years like the last 4, likely even worse unemployment and at least $6 Trillion more national debt and severely degraded national credit rating, vote for Obama. You will have only yourself to blame.
If you want to start turning this government around, vote Romney.
Larry
> http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/01/opinion/mitt-romney-versus-the-automakers.html?smid=fb-share&_r=0
It is very simple. If you want 4 more years like the last 4, likely even worse unemployment and at least $6 Trillion more national debt and severely degraded national credit rating, vote for Obama. You will have only yourself to blame.
If you want to start turning this government around, vote Romney.
Larry
Lloyd
Nov 3, 2012, 2:07:38 PM11/3/12
to
In article <b8a7ce3d-9aa7-4c18...@googlegroups.com>,
Not one thing that Romney has ever done, and not much of what he has
said provides any backing for your conjecture.
said provides any backing for your conjecture.
Alan Baker
Nov 3, 2012, 3:49:59 PM11/3/12
to
In article
<lloydparsons-C6E6...@news.eternal-september.org>,
It is interesting to note that there is one group of voters uniquely
informed on Romney's qualifications to be president: the people of
Massachusetts, who've experienced his time as governor.
Massachusetts is solidly for Obama.
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
<lloydparsons-C6E6...@news.eternal-september.org>,
informed on Romney's qualifications to be president: the people of
Massachusetts, who've experienced his time as governor.
Massachusetts is solidly for Obama.
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
Frank Ketchum
Nov 3, 2012, 4:19:26 PM11/3/12
to
<bkn...@conramp.net> wrote in message
news:0rg898t82t5712eid...@4ax.com...
have been 2008. The next time they run someone better than the dem will be
on tuesday.
bkn...@conramp.net
Nov 3, 2012, 5:13:27 PM11/3/12
to
On Sat, 3 Nov 2012 16:19:26 -0400, "Frank Ketchum"
An opinion with which I wholeheartedly disagree.
Carbon
Nov 3, 2012, 5:48:47 PM11/3/12
to
suggest anything to you about his powers of observation?
Don Kirkman
Nov 3, 2012, 6:32:30 PM11/3/12
to
On 03 Nov 2012 21:48:47 GMT, Carbon <nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>
wrote:
You mean they were pretty good back then? :-)
--
Don Kirkman
don...@charter.net
wrote:
--
Don Kirkman
don...@charter.net
Frank Ketchum
Nov 3, 2012, 6:38:52 PM11/3/12
to
"Carbon" <nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2012.11...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com...
counterpart. lol
Carbon
Nov 3, 2012, 6:49:45 PM11/3/12
to
idiot. He more than held his own in the VP debate. A lot of the righties
here (you?) were predicting a Ryan bloodbath. Did not happen.
bkn...@conramp.net
Nov 3, 2012, 8:04:29 PM11/3/12
to
On Sat, 3 Nov 2012 18:38:52 -0400, "Frank Ketchum"
<nos...@thanksanyway.com> wrote:
>
>"Carbon" <nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
>news:pan.2012.11...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com...
>> On Sat, 03 Nov 2012 16:19:26 -0400, Frank Ketchum wrote:
>>> <bkn...@conramp.net> wrote in message
>>> news:0rg898t82t5712eid...@4ax.com...
>>>> On Fri, 2 Nov 2012 17:49:28 -0400, "Frank Ketchum"
>>>> <nos...@thanksanyway.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> When was the last time you voted for a republican for president over
>>>>> a democrat?
>>>>
>>>> The last time the GOP ran someone who was a better choice than the
>>>> Democratic option.......Reagan. No way I could bring myself to vote
>>>> for the two Bush candidates.
>>>
>>> The last time the gop ran someone who was a better choice than the dem
>>> would have been 2008. The next time they run someone better than the
>>> dem will be on tuesday.
>>
>> McCain picked a dull normal as his running mate, over Romney. Does that
>> suggest anything to you about his powers of observation?
>
>Barry picked Biden. Carp about Palin all you like, Biden was the
>counterpart. lol
>
Maybe he was the deciding factor.
>
>"Carbon" <nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
>news:pan.2012.11...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com...
>> On Sat, 03 Nov 2012 16:19:26 -0400, Frank Ketchum wrote:
>>> <bkn...@conramp.net> wrote in message
>>> news:0rg898t82t5712eid...@4ax.com...
>>>> On Fri, 2 Nov 2012 17:49:28 -0400, "Frank Ketchum"
>>>> <nos...@thanksanyway.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> When was the last time you voted for a republican for president over
>>>>> a democrat?
>>>>
>>>> The last time the GOP ran someone who was a better choice than the
>>>> Democratic option.......Reagan. No way I could bring myself to vote
>>>> for the two Bush candidates.
>>>
>>> The last time the gop ran someone who was a better choice than the dem
>>> would have been 2008. The next time they run someone better than the
>>> dem will be on tuesday.
>>
>> McCain picked a dull normal as his running mate, over Romney. Does that
>> suggest anything to you about his powers of observation?
>
>Barry picked Biden. Carp about Palin all you like, Biden was the
>counterpart. lol
>
BAR
Nov 3, 2012, 10:14:59 PM11/3/12
to
In article <pan.2012.11...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com>,
nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com says...
Joe Biden doesn't know what state he is in or what he is supposed to be
doing.
nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com says...
doing.
BAR
Nov 3, 2012, 10:16:09 PM11/3/12
to
bkn...@conramp.net
Nov 3, 2012, 10:45:50 PM11/3/12
to
Frank Ketchum
Nov 5, 2012, 5:56:25 PM11/5/12
to
"Bobster" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:9aWdnXf1stA2jQ7N...@giganews.com...
"MNMikeW" wrote in message news:afg57q...@mid.individual.net...
bkn...@conramp.net wrote:
> http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/01/opinion/mitt-romney-versus-the-automakers.html?smid=fb-share&_r=0
>
Successful and wildly popular bailout? LOL! Popular to the UAW folks
perhaps.
====================================================================================================
Certainly not popular with taxpayers who are still owed $25+ billion. Mitt
is exactly correct about the GM bankruptcy.
- - - -
25 billion? That's probably something like an hour's worth of deficit
spending the way things are currently going.
How about the secured bond holders who were strongarmed into walking away
from their claims in order to hand it over to Obama's union base? How about
how the rule of law gets fucking trampled for politics?
Frank Ketchum
Nov 5, 2012, 6:20:24 PM11/5/12
to
"Carbon" <nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2012.11...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com...
> On Sat, 03 Nov 2012 18:38:52 -0400, Frank Ketchum wrote:
>> "Carbon" <nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
>> news:pan.2012.11...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com...
>>> On Sat, 03 Nov 2012 16:19:26 -0400, Frank Ketchum wrote:
>>>> <bkn...@conramp.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:0rg898t82t5712eid...@4ax.com...
>>>>> On Fri, 2 Nov 2012 17:49:28 -0400, "Frank Ketchum"
>>>>> <nos...@thanksanyway.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> When was the last time you voted for a republican for president
>>>>>> over a democrat?
>>>>>
>>>>> The last time the GOP ran someone who was a better choice than the
>>>>> Democratic option.......Reagan. No way I could bring myself to
>>>>> vote for the two Bush candidates.
>>>>
>>>> The last time the gop ran someone who was a better choice than the
>>>> dem would have been 2008. The next time they run someone better
>>>> than the dem will be on tuesday.
>>>
>>> McCain picked a dull normal as his running mate, over Romney. Does
>>> that suggest anything to you about his powers of observation?
>>
>> Barry picked Biden. Carp about Palin all you like, Biden was the
>> counterpart. lol
>
> What a load of malarkey. I don't like the guy either, but he's not an
> idiot.
> He more than held his own in the VP debate. A lot of the righties
> here (you?) were predicting a Ryan bloodbath. Did not happen.
Steve B
Nov 5, 2012, 7:28:45 PM11/5/12
to
>> He more than held his own in the VP debate. A lot of the righties
>> here (you?) were predicting a Ryan bloodbath. Did not happen.
If you consider someone mugging for the camera and grinning like a hippie on
>> here (you?) were predicting a Ryan bloodbath. Did not happen.
acid or marijuana for an hour to have conducted a decent debate to be a good
debater, than you are an idiot. He looked like Chevy Chase in an old SNL
skit mugging behind Jane Curtin. I wish Ryan had said, "What is so funny,
you sot?"
Steve
MNMikeW
Nov 6, 2012, 11:38:20 AM11/6/12
to
bkn...@conramp.net wrote:
> On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 11:39:16 -0500, MNMikeW <mnmi...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> bkn...@conramp.net wrote:
>
> Try to think it out. He's more trustworthy than Romney ....that's a
> prime example.
>
> You didn't mention the last sentence. That wager is open to you too.
>
>
Only voted for one Dem this morning.
> On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 11:39:16 -0500, MNMikeW <mnmi...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> bkn...@conramp.net wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2 Nov 2012 11:52:37 -0400, "Frank Ketchum"
>>> <nos...@thanksanyway.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> <bkn...@conramp.net> wrote in message
>>> <nos...@thanksanyway.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> <bkn...@conramp.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:4hk598h0sjl0j718m...@4ax.com...
>>>>> http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/01/opinion/mitt-romney-versus-the-automakers.html?smid=fb-share&_r=0
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Any examples of why we should trust Obama?
>>>>
>>> Between the two I choose Obama. Romney is so duplicitous about too
>>> many things.
>
>>> Incidentally, I'd be willing to wager that I'll vote for more
>>> Republicans than you you'll vote for Democrats this election.
>>>
>> You didn't answer his question
>>>>> http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/01/opinion/mitt-romney-versus-the-automakers.html?smid=fb-share&_r=0
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Any examples of why we should trust Obama?
>>>>
>>> Between the two I choose Obama. Romney is so duplicitous about too
>>> many things.
>
>>> Incidentally, I'd be willing to wager that I'll vote for more
>>> Republicans than you you'll vote for Democrats this election.
>>>
>
> Try to think it out. He's more trustworthy than Romney ....that's a
> prime example.
>
> You didn't mention the last sentence. That wager is open to you too.
>
>
Only voted for one Dem this morning.
MNMikeW
Nov 6, 2012, 11:40:40 AM11/6/12
to
MNMikeW
Nov 6, 2012, 11:42:05 AM11/6/12
to
Lloyd
Nov 6, 2012, 11:48:19 AM11/6/12
to
In article <afssnt...@mid.individual.net>,
I voted for a few Republicans.
BTW, Obama appreciates your vote!! :) :0
BTW, Obama appreciates your vote!! :) :0
bkn...@conramp.net
Nov 6, 2012, 11:51:00 AM11/6/12
to
Hasta be a reason.
bkn...@conramp.net
Nov 6, 2012, 11:53:35 AM11/6/12
to
MNMikeW
Nov 6, 2012, 12:01:50 PM11/6/12
to
MNMikeW
Nov 6, 2012, 12:02:25 PM11/6/12
to
MNMikeW
Nov 6, 2012, 12:03:00 PM11/6/12
to
Lloyd
Nov 6, 2012, 12:04:54 PM11/6/12
to
In article <afsu3uF...@mid.individual.net>,
My Republican votes were all judges, including a personal friend.
BTW, I'm glad you enjoyed my tweak!
BTW, I'm glad you enjoyed my tweak!
bkn...@conramp.net
Nov 6, 2012, 12:07:18 PM11/6/12
to
chances to get elected????
How'd that work out for him?
Frank Ketchum
Nov 6, 2012, 12:18:09 PM11/6/12
to
"MNMikeW" <mnmi...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:afssnt...@mid.individual.net...
ticket needless to say.
I normally go around 9:30 or 10:00 because there is never anyone there.
However today, the place was jam packed! It took me an hour where normally
it takes 5 or 10 minutes. It's gonna take me all damn day to vote 9 more
times. Shit!
MNMikeW
Nov 6, 2012, 12:36:19 PM11/6/12
to
actualy had to wait for a stall to open up.
MNMikeW
Nov 6, 2012, 12:37:15 PM11/6/12
to
MNMikeW
Nov 6, 2012, 12:37:57 PM11/6/12
to
Lloyd
Nov 6, 2012, 1:17:52 PM11/6/12
to
bkn...@conramp.net
Nov 6, 2012, 2:55:33 PM11/6/12
to
followed. I was told that there were several hundred in line at 6:15
for the 7:00 opening though.
Frank Ketchum
Nov 6, 2012, 3:27:40 PM11/6/12
to
"Carbon" <nob...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2012.11...@nospam.tampabay.rr.com...
>> On Fri, 2 Nov 2012 17:53:26 -0400, BAR <sc...@you.com> wrote:
>>> In article <35n798pgnc1ogqild...@4ax.com>,
>>> how...@brazee.net says...
>>>> On Fri, 02 Nov 2012 09:37:52 -0500, MNMikeW <mnmi...@aol.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Yes the Dems tend to favor social programs that are unsustainable.
>>>>> And simply bury their heads in the sand about it.
>>>>
>>>> If the Republicans aren't any more fiscally responsible (and why
>>>> should they mean it this time?), why should we go in that direction?
>>>
>>> It will slow the bleeding.
>>>
>>> Obama wants to open all of our monetary veins and make us go bankrupt
>>> faster.
>>
>> The Republicans have not slowed the bleeding when they gained power in
>> the past. Certainly Romney hasn't detailed anything to indicate that
>> this time will be different.
>
> It's interesting watching facts bounce off the true believers. It must
> kill them to have to keep ducking the provable fact that historically
> Republicans have been no more fiscally reliable than Democrats.
Of what "facts" do you speak? George Bush was probably the most fiscally
irresponsible moron to ever sit in the white house. Then Obama came along
and tripled the deficit spending.
Alan Baker
Nov 6, 2012, 3:42:06 PM11/6/12
to
In article <Yyems.30132$MP7....@newsfe05.iad>,
You claim to be honest, but then you bring back that canard.
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages