A question for the Romney apologists

[TMF]

Like I said, why does it matter? You can either get punched in the face or kicked in the balls. One of the two is going to happen either way. If you end up getting kicked in the balls and you would have rather been punched in the face, don't go bitching about it if you didn't bother to make a choice. If it is all the same to you, then stay home or vote for Mickey Mouse.

[mikegideon]

Then I suppose it makes no difference to you who is elected, so my question then becomes, Why do you care? If they are both the same and they are the only two with any chance, realistic or otherwise, of being elected, then why even start this thread? Look, even though I tend to be libertarian, Gary Johnson has no chance of garnering the necessary votes to be elected President. You are therefore perfectly happy with President Obama's re-election.

You're wasting your time. His noggin is harder than Tenifer .

[Chucktshoes]

Then I suppose it makes no difference to you who is elected, so my question then becomes, Why do you care? If they are both the same and they are the only two with any chance, realistic or otherwise, of being elected, then why even start this thread? Look, even though I tend to be libertarian, Gary Johnson has no chance of garnering the necessary votes to be elected President. You are therefore perfectly happy with President Obama's re-election.

My role purpose is simple. I am standing here pointing at the guy with no clothes on.

I just want to know if y'all really believe the #### sandwich you are eating tastes as good as you are trying to tell me it does.

[Guest ThePunisher]

Couth, I ain't got it.

The same monotonous refrain of "you are just a democrat and want the commie to win" in every thread detracts from the conversations.

So you think I'm childish? Good, maybe you'll stop wasting your time posting the same lame, nonsensical attack in every thread I am involved in. What part of "I think Romney is really a liberal based upon his record" are you failing to grasp? If Romney is too fiscally liberal for me, how can I be a Democrat? If I want to massively cut federal spending and involvement back to its constitutionally enumerated roles, to include ending ALL social service programs, even the ones the Republicans like, how exactly does that make me a Democrat? When you can back up your statements with something resembling a cogent argument based in some realm of logic, then I will take you seriously.

I can see that reading comprehension is a problem for you. I don't recall ever referencing you in any of my posts. But if the shoe fits wear it. It has become apparent to me that you've been stalking me on this forum. My opinions I post on this forum must really be sensitive to you. Get over it. I have a right to my opinions just like everyone else on this forum, and if you don't like what I post, then you've got a problem that's not very healthy. I believe it's called an Obsession.

You revealed your childlike behavior by your rude juvenile response, and I don't really care if you take me seriously.

Edited September 13, 2012 by ThePunisher

[Guest 6.8 AR]

You big Dummys!

[daddyo]

[RobertNashville]

...there has been quite a lot of glossing over of Romney's very progressive record...

Since you've made it clear you intend to not vote for him it's curious that you would care at all about his record.

Mitt Romney doesn't need me or anyone else to apologize for him - there are issues on which I agree with him and issues I don't agree with him and that has been true with respect to every candidate that has ever run for office that I have considered voting for in any past election and probably always will be true unless I am running for office myself. I'm voting for Mitt Romney for one simple reason, he is the single best choice of all the available choices we have for President this year and one of only two choices (the other being Obama) who will win the election in November. It's no more complicated than that.

Regardless of who wins in November, even were it Ron Paul or Gary Johnson, it is up to the citizenry to hold him accountable for his actions and how he governs. The responsibility of the the true citizen of the United States doesn't end with an election or just because "their" candidate wins...all must be active...all must invest time and resources into their government or who wins is meaningless. In my opinion, it's because so many have shirked that responsibility for so long that we now have a government that is but a poor, shallow reflection of the government our founders gave to us.

Edited September 12, 2012 by RobertNashville

[MikePapa1]

My role purpose is simple. I am standing here pointing at the guy with no clothes on.

I just want to know if y'all really believe the #### sandwich you are eating tastes as good as you are trying to tell me it does.

So there's a naked candidate with a chance for election and a clothed one with none. Great. I hope you enjoy another term for your current President. I'm not sure why you think my response to you needed to be responded to with such crudity, but OK. I'm no fan of Romney, but he'd be a world better than President Obama. I guess I live in the world of the possible as opposed to some alternate reality where libertarians are going to sweep into power and return the federal government to its Constitutional bounds. That would be nice but I don't see reversing a century of Progressivism between now and November. You may think that's what your fighting for but it appears to me to be a fool's errand. Romney surely would be the better than the current crew. Better is always better than as it is or worse. Libertarianism is on the rise, but there's no way on God's green Earth it will be electable before 2016.

[sigmtnman]

I heard Romney open carried into the Turkey Creek Chic fil a and got it posted.

[mikegideon]

I heard Romney open carried into the Turkey Creek Chic fil a and got it posted.

Yeah. What an asshat

[daddyo]

:rofl: :rofl:

You guys are killin' me!!

[Chucktshoes]

It has become apparent to me that you've been stalking me on this forum.

You an always be counted on for a laugh. I appreciate it. I'll dedicate this next one to you.

[Links2k]

I heard Romney open carried into the Turkey Creek Chic fil a and got it posted.

I also heard that he liked the biscuits and cheesey grits.

[Guest bkelm18]

Why is it that it's always the 3rd party whiners start these threads? Who cares? It's either Mitt or Obama. Those are the two choices. You're going to have one or the other. Nobody else has a chance of winning, period. If you honestly think a third party candidate has a possibility of winning this election, simply put, you're an idiot. You all can bang your 3rd party drum all you want, it will fall on a nation of deaf ears.

[TMF]

I also heard that he liked the biscuits and cheesey grits.

Ugh, I hate cheese in my grits. Since he prefers it I'm sure he'll pass a law that states all grits must include cheese. He has lost my vote for sure now!

[daddyo]

you're an idiot.

Limited vocabulary?

[D3vo]

The standard argument is the Democrat and the Republican are the same. They will both answer to "the man in the dark smoke filled room who got him elected". The truth is Romney is a whole lot closer to the third party candidate than he is to Obama. I think the point of the thread is strategically to get to the nomination you have to get past the one most like me (Paul/Johnson). This is why there are no Obama threads started here.

[1pointofview]

In the discussions I have had on here there has been quite a lot of glossing over of Romney's very progressive record as governor of MA. The most common defense given is that "MA is a liberal progressive state and he did the beat he could." This defense begs one question, if Romney was really a conservative, how did he get to be governor of a liberal progressive state in the first place?

My guess is that you get there by being a liberal. His record as governor appears to back that up.

I have a question for those who continue try and poo poo on the only guy who is running against obama in this election. I get the whole lesser of 2 evils stuff that everyone is tired of but please don't come to me with the Ron Paul/Gary Johnson horse crap. Ron Paul and Gary Johnson have just as many foriegn policy and (in the case of Gary Johnson) open door immigration failed policy stances. The point is and has been for the last 50 years, we as a nation have to start moving in a direction. We can not jump together, we have to move in a common direction. Please don't tell me that Romney and Obama are "the same direction". If that is the case then the Paul/Johnson direction of legalizing drugs or mass undocumented immigration is the same direction of the left.

With Romney, a Libertarian agenda is much more accepted. But beyond Mitt Romney, we have to elect a Conservative house and senate. Just like under Bush, we had a lot of conservative ideas and principles until we allowed the house and senate to be co-opted by progressives from the left and right and then Bush's own progressive tendencies started to show.

I want people to hold Mitt Romney acccountable but I want to hold the people of this state accountable as well. We are the ones sending worthless progressives like Lamar Alexander, Corker, and the 2 liberal Democrats to washington. So until we as a state fix our own representative issues, let's stop whining about how the President is not exactly what we want. We have 49 other states voting, we have the opportunity to at least fix our direct representation and we fail every election. It is hard to get a Republican into the white house and expect him to govern as conservative as possible when we are sending slobs like Alexander in there feeding progressive legislation

Edited September 12, 2012 by 1pointofview

[mikegideon]

Limited vocabulary?

I want the crabby guy back

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Limited vocabulary?

I know Spock meant to say "Not logical, Captain".

The standard argument is the Democrat and the Republican are the same. They will both answer to "the man in the dark smoke filled room who got him elected". The truth is Romney is a whole lot closer to the third party candidate than he is to Obama. I think the point of the thread is strategically to get to the nomination you have to get past the one most like me (Paul/Johnson). This is why there are no Obama threads started here.

Oh, I've started a few.

[daddyo]

I want the crabby guy back

Oh, he's still here; I just thought I'd try to lighten things up a little.

[southernasylum]

I usually stay out of these but I'll throw my hat into this one. I was not a Romney supporter until the moment he won the primary. Now I am. I don't feel a need to apologize for that. Here's Romney's own words from another thread:

Gov. Romney: "Chris, I believe the next president could indeed have the opportunity to shape the Court for decades to come, and that’s a key reason why the tens of millions of Americans who support the NRA should support my candidacy. My view of the Constitution is straightforward: Its words have meaning. The founders adopted a written constitution for a reason. They intended to limit the powers of government. The job of a judge is to enforce the Constitution’s restraints on government and, where the Constitution does not speak, to leave the governance of the nation to its elected representatives. I believe in the rule of law, and I will appoint wise, experienced and restrained judges who take seriously their oath to discharge their duties impartially in accordance with our Constitution and our laws—not their personal policy preferences."

I don't see the other candidate with a chance of winning believing or even saying anything anywhere close to this. And if he did he wouldn't hesitate to break his word. Here we have Romney on record with the above statement. Lets elect him and hold him to it! Especially when it comes to the appointment of Supreme Court justices, I support Romney.

Just my $.04 (i value my opinion at least twice as much as that of others) =)

-southernasylum

[Guest ThePunisher]

I usually stay out of these but I'll throw my hat into this one. I was not a Romney supporter until the moment he won the primary. Now I am. I don't feel a need to apologize for that. Here's Romney's own words from another thread:

Gov. Romney: "Chris, I believe the next president could indeed have the opportunity to shape the Court for decades to come, and that’s a key reason why the tens of millions of Americans who support the NRA should support my candidacy. My view of the Constitution is straightforward: Its words have meaning. The founders adopted a written constitution for a reason. They intended to limit the powers of government. The job of a judge is to enforce the Constitution’s restraints on government and, where the Constitution does not speak, to leave the governance of the nation to its elected representatives. I believe in the rule of law, and I will appoint wise, experienced and restrained judges who take seriously their oath to discharge their duties impartially in accordance with our Constitution and our laws—not their personal policy preferences."

I don't see the other candidate with a chance of winning believing or even saying anything anywhere close to this. And if he did he wouldn't hesitate to break his word. Here we have Romney on record with the above statement. Lets elect him and hold him to it! Especially when it comes to the appointment of Supreme Court justices, I support Romney.

Just my $.04 (i value my opinion at least twice as much as that of others) =)

-southernasylum

Good $.04 worth of opinion. I agree.

Edited September 13, 2012 by ThePunisher

[Guest CaptAhab]

You might be able to debate most things ( Not me, I think we must throw the commie out ) but all you should need to see, as a gun owner, is the two parties platforms. Republican platform is against more gun control. The Democrat platform is for much more gun control.

Nuf said.

[sigmtnman]

who is this Nuf?