Bye Mitt!

[Manarius]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080207/ap_on_el_pr/romney;_ylt=AiBn0HuTYtW0dCiUn2cQ3nus0NUE

WASHINGTON - Mitt Romney suspended his faltering presidential campaign on Thursday, effectively sealing the Republican presidential nomination for John McCain. "I must now stand aside, for our party and our country," Romney told conservatives.

Can't say I'm too broken up about it.

[shelfy]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080207/ap_on_el_pr/romney;_ylt=AiBn0HuTYtW0dCiUn2cQ3nus0NUE



Can't say I'm too broken up about it.

why would you be?

[Zeppelin]

Go McCain!

[shelfy]

Go McCain!

http://www.subaru-svx.net/photos/files/Landshark/43225.jpg

[Zeppelin]

:b&: :b&: :b&:

[shelfy]

:ban: :ban: :ban:

you had to see that coming. :D

[NikFu S.]

Go McCain!

http://www.subaru-svx.net/photos/files/Landshark/43225.jpg

Seconded. .

[Wikedjuggalo]

huck is the answer.

[chaswiggins]

I'm voting for Barack Obama!

People need to put aside their bitter differences and vote for a guy that can actually bring our country together, raise our standing around the world, and whose only agenda is to restore a sense of hope and peace in this country.

[NikFu S.]

How exactly is he going to do that?

[chaswiggins]

Well, he is the only candidate that doesn't chastise the party other than their own, for one. He has shown in the senate that he will work across party lines. I believe he will get more votes from all parties than any other candidate in the general election.

The bush administration was a dictatorship over the past seven years and I'm willing to bet that Barack Obama will work for us and not anyone else.

[Landshark]

I'm voting for Barack Obama!

People need to put aside their bitter differences and vote for a guy that can actually bring our country together, raise our standing around the world, and whose only agenda is to restore a sense of hope and peace in this country.


he's been in the Senate for three years.

i wouldn't let someone manage a Walmart with that kind of experience, let alone be President of the United States and Commander-In-Chief of its military. :lol:

[NikFu S.]

Well, he is the only candidate that doesn't chastise the party other than their own, for one.

Despite my lack of understanding about what exactly this is supposed to mean, I'm going to say this is a flat-out falsification. You obviously do not have a devout understanding of ALL the candidates.

You also did nothing to answer my question. Not that I'm taking an aggressive stance on your loyalty, I am just curious as to why people like him. I don't get it.

I think it's because he's sort of black-looking and relatively young. As if electing a non-white president is going to prove to the world and to ourselves we are beyond racial boundaries when that couldn't be farther from the truth. :rolleyes: I see Obama as something of a political smokescreen.

He was compared to JFK recently. Boy did that touch a nerve with me. JFK, that man that took us to the moon compared to Obama the guy that wants to KILL NASA.

Yeah, they're the same. :rolleyes:

[lhopp77]

I'm voting for Barack Obama!

People need to put aside their bitter differences and vote for a guy that can actually bring our country together, raise our standing around the world, and whose only agenda is to restore a sense of hope and peace in this country.


You jest of course????? :rolleyes:

Lee

[chaswiggins]

Conservative and Liberal Presidential Historians have rated the GWBush admin as one of the worst in US history.

Look at all the people in the upper echelons of his admin and count up the decades of years of experience. If this admin has tought us anything at all it is about how experience is NOT the top trait to running a successful government. BTW there was a president named Abe Lincoln that had what was argued at the time too little experience to be pres.

I have family and friends that are in Iraq and Afghanistan and they want to end this war. They know it isn't surrending to pull out. They tell me to vote Democrat this time around.

Look for an unbeatable Clinton/Obama ticket.

[chaswiggins]

There is a reason why in the primaries and caucuses so far a little over 19 million have voted democrat and 12 million have voted republican. And when Huckabee/Paul drop out and McCain is the Repub. candidate, they'll be so many republicans that won't show up to vote in the general it'll be silly.

The only way McCain could win the general is if 1. Hillary doesn't ask Obama to run as VP. 2. If McCain picks Colin Powell to be Pres. 3. If pigs begin to fly.

[ensteele]

For the good of this country, I hope you are wrong. :o

[chaswiggins]

For the good of this country, I hope you are wrong. :o

Why would you be so pessimistic about the potential for so much good to come?

[ensteele]

I live in a Democratic State (liberal) and am being taxed excessively. I don't even want to go on about what else is in the future for us. :( :(

[ensteele]

Why would you be so pessimistic about the potential for so much good to come?

Oh, do you mean the invitation to the terrorists to come to our home soil, and redistribution of money made (or increase in taxes) just to mention a couple. :(

[chaswiggins]

The US has amounted a 7 trillion dollar deficit over the past 7 years.

I am quite optimistic that a democrat in the highest office will do the country good on all levels including homeland security.

I too am fearful of another attack on US soil. It is only a matter of time before it happens but you have to realize that the war in Iraq has over shadowed and put our goal to erradicate terrorism on the back burner.

WHERE'S BIN LADEN?? You'd think after spending 2trillion on 2 wars and over 3000 US soldiers dead we could have found the mastermind behind 911. Its already known that Iraq had NOTHING to do with 911 so why stay there and call it the frontline on terror. Bush is an idiot.

I want my friends and family home!!

[ensteele]

The US has amounted a 7 trillion dollar deficit over the past 7 years.

I am quite optimistic that a democrat in the highest office will do the country good on all levels including homeland security.

I too am fearful of another attack on US soil. It is only a matter of time before it happens but you have to realize that the war in Iraq has over shadowed and put our goal to erradicate terrorism on the back burner.

WHERE'S BIN LADEN?? You'd think after spending 2trillion on 2 wars and over 3000 US soldiers dead we could have found the mastermind behind 911. Its already known that Iraq had NOTHING to do with 911 so why stay there and call it the frontline on terror. Bush is an idiot.

I want my friends and family home!!

That amount of money spent is not just for hunting Bin Laden. That was not the goal in Iraq.

Many people during WWI, WW2 and past wars and conflicts wanted their friends and family members home, but that was not possible. They were in the military and their duty was already defined for them.

[NikFu S.]

There is a reason why in the primaries and caucuses so far a little over 19 million have voted democrat and 12 million have voted republican.

And that is reason is there are far more registered democrats right now than republicans.
How is this significant?
MOST people are so bound to partisanship they refuse to look outside their registered party.
As an example, when I asked my mother who she wanted to vote for (Obama) I asked her why and she didn't really have an answer, so I tried to convince her to vote for Ron Paul.
I was able to convince her he was a good candidate, but when I told her he was runing republican she outright refused saying she will not vote for a republican. :rolleyes:

I think the moral here is LOTS of people are like that. Your 19 million Dems probably did not even weigh any of the Reps, and vice versa.

I guess the few of us who stand beyond partisanship or religious/military loyalty are Ron Paul supporters. :rolleyes:

[chaswiggins]

I like Ron Paul. Honest, straight talker, wants to revamp Washington; GREAT IDEA!

The problem is that he is out of main stream politics and way to radical. This is why Nader was never elected. I love Ralph Nader btw.

It is my belief that Rove politics divided this nation and that type of politics is out the door. That type of politics is not patriotic.

Quote--"And that is reason is there are far more registered democrats right now than republicans."

FAR MORE, ha. People are sick and tired of big government something the republicans are supposed to be against.

[NikFu S.]

See, I don't think he is radical at all. I find him to be VERY conservative. He doesn't have one radical thought in his mellow head but his plans to reform the faces of government has people shaking in their boots, so they call him "radical" and "isolationist" and people buy into it.
I feel he is by far the most patriotic candidate, and the least likely to sell out to big corp, unless you think the corporate interest is partiotism.
He wants minimal government, and fair treatment of everyone. You can't rely on democrats to give you that just because they say they are democrats.
There is a lot going on behind the scenes, a lot you can't prove, but with Ron there is no scenes. There is no secrets. There is no greed, there is no lies, there is no hidden agenda.

I have yet to hear one good reason why he should not be in office.

[chaswiggins]

See, I don't think he is radical at all. I find him to be VERY conservative. He doesn't have one radical thought in his mellow head but his plans to reform the faces of government has people shaking in their boots, so they call him "radical" and "isolationist" and people buy into it.
I feel he is by far the most patriotic candidate, and the least likely to sell out to big corp, unless you think the corporate interest is partiotism.
He wants minimal government, and fair treatment of everyone. You can't rely on democrats to give you that just because they say they are democrats.
There is a lot going on behind the scenes, a lot you can't prove, but with Ron there is no scenes. There is no secrets. There is no greed, there is no lies, there is no hidden agenda.

I have yet to hear one good reason why he should not be in office.

I completely agree with you but in the world of politics one has to be realistic. He wants to essentially get rid of all government agengies, which would leave millions of people without high paying government jobs. The private sector couldn't provide those people with instant jobs. Do you know what would happen if millions of people with +50k salaries lost there jobs overnight. Recession. Stock market crash. Depression. Its that easy.

If Ron Paul toned down his rhetoric just a little he might appeal to more people, but to revamp a 3.1Trillion budget economy its gonna take a lot more than a good guy with pretty good ideas.

[lhopp77]

WHERE'S BIN LADEN?? You'd think after spending 2trillion on 2 wars and over 3000 US soldiers dead we could have found the mastermind behind 911. Its already known that Iraq had NOTHING to do with 911 so why stay there and call it the frontline on terror. Bush is an idiot.

I want my friends and family home!!

You ask the wrong question and are fully aware of it. The question is--How many attacks have there been on US soil since start of the War on Terror?? How much influence and direct control has Osama had on worldwide terror planning??--practically zero as its hard to operate from deep hiding.

The vast majority of "your friends and family" believe in what they are doing and are fully willing to sacrifice all to complete their missions. But even that is a mute point at this time---we simply cannot leave it unfinished for the chaos and long term problems it would create. Not to mention short term direct acts against US soil and/or interests.

I agree with Earl--I don't need any more taxes either to give to non producing or non contributors to our society. (and don't start on speeches about the "disenfanchised"--that is a catchy term that has no basis in reality) Payment for non-productivity is a slippery slope from which there is no return.

Oh, I love one of those Hillary commercials--that says she warned Bush over a year ago about the coming mortgage crunch. The question should be---Hillary, WHAT LEGISLATION DID YOU INTRODUCE TO ADDRESS THE PROBLEM AT THAT TIME--OR EVEN BETTER WHAT LEGISLATION DID ANY DEMOCRAT INTRODUCE OR PROPOSE THEN?? Its very easy to point out problems and anyone with a half brain could have seen this coming years ago when all the "creative" financing options came out. Solutions are what is needed and they should not be to bail out people who knew they would have to payup at some point or be bailed out at the expense of other taxpayers. The legislation should be to keep big business from making such deals that will eventually come due. There needs to be many new laws in the area of financing debt--whether credit card or mortgage. As we all know---large credit is extended to people that have no business getting it and will obviously default at some future point.

Didn't mean to say so much---:o

Lee

[chaswiggins]

You ask the wrong question and are fully aware of it. The question is--How many attacks have there been on US soil since start of the War on Terror?? How much influence and direct control has Osama had on worldwide terror planning??--practically zero as its hard to operate from deep hiding.

Iraq had nothing to do with the war on terror until after we invaded, through over, and occupied. Latest Pentegon studies show that Al Queda is at its full potential again.

for the chaos and long term problems it would create.

Iraq is as chaotic as it ever will be. Do you actually think our military can root out and kill every single insurgent? Not a chance as long as we are occupying there country.

I don't need any more taxes either to give to non producing or non contributors to our society.

Buddy well get used to it. This country wouldn't work without taxes and thanks to the Bush admins terrible decisions, my great grandchildren will be paying for this war. The only way to get back on track fiscally is to elect a Democrat.

Oh, I love one of those Hillary commercials--that says she warned Bush over a year ago about the coming mortgage crunch. The question should be---Hillary, WHAT LEGISLATION DID YOU INTRODUCE TO ADDRESS THE PROBLEM AT THAT TIME--OR EVEN BETTER WHAT LEGISLATION DID ANY DEMOCRAT INTRODUCE OR PROPOSE THEN??

Doh, the republicans controlled all three branches of government, its impossible to pass any legislation when Capitol Hill is hijacked. The dems knew that they'd have to wait until 06 when the country was ready to boot it republican elected officials. Now that congress is narrowly democratically controlled, the republicans can filibuster any legislation that might thwart their doomed agenda.

[sicksubie]

:)I completely agree with you but in the world of politics one has to be realistic. He wants to essentially get rid of all government agengies, which would leave millions of people without high paying government jobs. The private sector couldn't provide those people with instant jobs. Do you know what would happen if millions of people with +50k salaries lost there jobs overnight. Recession. Stock market crash. Depression. Its that easy.

If Ron Paul toned down his rhetoric just a little he might appeal to more people, but to revamp a 3.1Trillion budget economy its gonna take a lot more than a good guy with pretty good ideas.

Laughable, very laughable. Stock market crashes? Recessions? Please, be serious. There would not be a simultaneous firing of government employees. First of all it is VERY hard to eliminate government jobs and second of all they all have VERY nice pensions. The market would not even hiccup with the termination of government jobs. In fact long term it would probably be good for the economy. More skilled people in the private sector, less government expenditures = good things to come. Please do not state economic issues as if they are fact unless you truly know what you are saying. I myself am only a senior in college (Finance and Economics major) and realize that I still have a long ways to go before I know even an iota about economies. The things you stated though are basic microecon stuff and they are wrong.


P.S. And to touch on something you said earlier about 19million dems voting versus 12million reps. That is because there is no candidate that really entices true conservatives. McCain disgusts me on several issues. Luckily I do not live in a "battleground" state because I would be forced to vote for him just to keep Clinton or Obama out of office. I will be voting for Ron Paul because like NikFu said, I have not seen a reason that he should not be elected.

[sicksubie]

Wow... NikFu and I agree :eek::lol: See there is hope...

[sicksubie]

Buddy well get used to it. This country wouldn't work without taxes and thanks to the Bush admins terrible decisions, my great grandchildren will be paying for this war. The only way to get back on track fiscally is to elect a Democrat.

Again basic econ stuff here. LOWER TAXES= HIGHER GOVERNMENT REVENUE

[chaswiggins]

Long term it probably would be a good thing for smaller government but why waist time/money on a presidency and an agenda that just aint gonna happen. Ron Paul unfortunetly will be a footnote in american history.

LOWER TAXES= HIGHER GOVERNMENT REVENUE

If its as simple as that, why do we have a mindboggling deficit.

[NikFu S.]

I completely agree with you but in the world of politics one has to be realistic. He wants to essentially get rid of all government agengies, which would leave millions of people without high paying government jobs. The private sector couldn't provide those people with instant jobs. Do you know what would happen if millions of people with +50k salaries lost there jobs overnight. Recession. Stock market crash. Depression. Its that easy.

If Ron Paul toned down his rhetoric just a little he might appeal to more people, but to revamp a 3.1Trillion budget economy its gonna take a lot more than a good guy with pretty good ideas.

That's kind of a pessimistic view, he won't just shut down the government, and he's only trying to get rid of the agencies that are broken. He's not even trying to get rid of things like the Department of Education, he just wants each state to run their own departments because the Federal system is severely broken. I'm sure his approach would be very systematic and jobs replaced with something actually useful.

Way I see it, the gov will never be fixed if we never elect a person willing to change it at the core.

It does seem he will be a footnote in history, though, because people who like him think he cannot win.
I hear it all the time. "Ron Paul is a great candidate but he'll never win so I won't vote for him."

I see Iraq and Osama were brought up so here is a little copy/paste to mull over concerning how the war on terror really began. :)
Dan on Islam:
I think the problem is that many Americans simply have no understanding of the world outside their borders. They think that Islamic people have an irrational hatred of them, but in a large part it is rational.

First America set up the state of Israel, and that pushed all of the Palestinians into Jordan and Lebanon. And they backed Israel's independence through three wars with their neighbours. So you have Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon all hating America and the rest of the area isn't very sympathetic to Israel's existence.

Then they backed the Mujahideen and the Taliban in Afghanistan, but only for the war, and they gave nothing to help rebuild the country. So Afghanistan is full of American trained and equipped freedom fighters/terrorists that know how to conduct guerrilla warfare but don't have a primary education. Any education they do get will be provided by the Taliban. So guess who they love?

Meanwhile American corporations have been backing whatever Saudi royal families will give them access to their oil so that the few people in charge get ridiculously rich off of selling their national resources.

America supported Iraq invading Iran, but then later went to war to defend Kuwait against Iraq. The reason was that the pro American Iranian monarchy had been overthrown before the war, so the USA wanted a new leader, so the urged Iraq to attack them. Hussein had his own reasons as well, and the two countries have always had religious tensions. In Kuwait as well, the USA used their position to established a friendly autocratic government. Democracy my ass! Directly or by proxy, America has been involved in almost every war in the Middle East in the last half century.

And now both Afghanistan and Iraq are neck deep in ****. There is no happy ending for either of these countries. The people are much worse off than they were before, and you have another generation growing up hating America. The more you take from people, the less they have to lose when they want revenge. For all of the money spent on Iraq, probably more than a trillion dollars now, it would have been more efficient to just pay every Iraqi to buy a satellite tv and a car and start living the American capitlist dream. The only ones that profited from the Iraq war were Haliburton, Israel, and maybe Iran.

So you see it really would be the same if you replaced Islam with any religion for that area.
If its as simple as that, why do we have a mindboggling deficit.
Thank the [Non]Federal Reserve. There are may facets to the problem, but the FR is the gem they are crowed upon.

[chaswiggins]

Oil is key, that is the primary reason why we are over there.

Nobody talks about how Condi Rice was on the board of directors at Chevron. In fact she was so good at what she did at Chevron they put her name on the side of one of there oil tankers.

Ironic that they painted over her name on that ship when she was in the Cabinet.:eek:

[NikFu S.]

Oh no, we know all about Condi. She just has a lot of support from people like herself. The oil companies are pretty much in control of government right now. They strongarm politicians (or are elected as them) and cry like babies when they don't get their way.
That is exactly why we are over there. I don't even have a problem with oil imperialism, I just wish our government would be honest and say, "hey, we want your oil and we're going to kill you and our own troops to get it". I might not be so anti-government if they would just stop lying and being so secretive.
But no, if they were truthful in conquest like an honorable empire there would be [more] resistance, and we can't have that. :rolleyes:

[chaswiggins]

Well said. Its ridiculous.

You know I could see Obama having Ron Paul in his cabinet.

Obama has said if he were elected he would want people around him that would challenge his ideas, challenge conventional wisdom. No better than Ron Paul for that. Plus Paul wants to bring the troops home too so thats good.

[lhopp77]

If its as simple as that, why do we have a mindboggling deficit.

Check out the built in growth to entitlement programs. Those programs that pay people for doing nothing and NOT being productive. :p

But it is very true that lower taxes create additional revenue. Why should an entrepeneur hire more people and produce more goods if he is going to have to pay 75 percent of it in taxes or even some very large percentage? He would be better off producing at a lower level with lower tax rates. Simple economics---higher taxes do NOT stimulate production, job growth or company growth.

Lee

[chaswiggins]

Simple economics---higher taxes do NOT stimulate production, job growth or company growth.

But your assumption is that any democrat in office will raise taxes. I'm a democrat but also very pro-life.

[NikFu S.]

It is very unlikely any one person fits any party model to the letter. This is why the party system is flawed.

Off subject, I just read from someone that Obama turns his back to the flag when there is pledging of allegiance? Not that I care, but does anyone know what that is about?

[Landshark]

Off subject, I just read from someone that Obama turns his back to the flag when there is pledging of allegiance? Not that I care, but does anyone know what that is about?


he hates America, and will overrun it with SWAT teams if elected!

[sicksubie]

Obama turns his back and will not recite the pledge. There was an article online where he was interviewed and explained why.

[lhopp77]

Buddy well get used to it. This country wouldn't work without taxes and thanks to the Bush admins terrible decisions, my great grandchildren will be paying for this war. The only way to get back on track fiscally is to elect a Democrat.

Doh, the republicans controlled all three branches of government, its impossible to pass any legislation when Capitol Hill is hijacked. The dems knew that they'd have to wait until 06 when the country was ready to boot it republican elected officials. Now that congress is narrowly democratically controlled, the republicans can filibuster any legislation that might thwart their doomed agenda.

Of course taxes are needed to run this country---I just don't want to pay anymore or for many of the reasons liberal democrats spend megabucks. As we ALL know a basic concept of these people is to redistribute wealth (but actually read income).

I seem to recall that Democrats have controlled both houses of Congress for over a year now. Again, my question----what legislature did she or her buddie EVEN introduce??????????? :rolleyes:

Lee

[chaswiggins]

Haha thats called propaganda or as I would like to call Rove politics.

You will find all kind of misinformation on the internet, but you have to just go one more step to find the truth.

Of course he recites the pledge. In fact he leads in reciting the pledge in congress. HE'S A SENATOR!!! Do you all actually think Chi-town would elect a traitor.

The picture thats floating around the internet where he isn't holding his hand on his heart; there reciting the National Anthem not the Pledge of Allegiance.

Everybody knows you don't have to hold your hand over your heart during the National Anthem.

There is a reason why there hasn't been one negative ad against Obama. Its hard to find a bad thing about him.

[NikFu S.]

He's on the Council on Foreign Relations.