Jump to content
rigney

Will a Romney/Ryan win save us?

Recommended Posts

GM Janesville, was build in 1918 and later became one of the first Chevrolet/Fisher Body plants in the US and by 2008, was the oldest operating GM plant in the US. Talk of closing the plant had been persistent from the day's my Dad was Material Superintendent in the 50's in Janesville and while I worked for CNW RR, which supplied both Fisher and Chevrolet with most parts used, then building most all Chevrolet Models and Small Trucks, not pick ups.

 

While media an people seem to ignore the similarity between lies and deception, for all practical purposes Obama deceived the people in South Central Wisconsin, who believed Obama WOULD save the impending closing of the plant, which several previous politicians had done over time, delaying the actual closing until after the 2008 elections, when it did closed in late December 2008. IMO, no one could have prevented the closing as it and was well beyond handling a structural retooling to the modern robotic manufactureing model or said another way would have had to be rebuilt from the ground up and cost prohibitive.

 

As for who lies or deceives the ELECTORATE, most often for strictly political gains, historically Obama is the champion. Ryan's not even in the same ballpark on this issue.

 

http://www.audacityofhypocrisy.com/fashion-shows/

 

rigney, I'm posting to you while your still here and note I've seen many of your post, especially threads that have been distorted by the power to be here and want to commend you for you efforts. It's always a pleasure for me to see and read things from people that have been around the block, state what they feel and mean what they say.

 

I saw where you "earned" a three day suspension for this and want you to know there are others that didn't agree then or do they now. While I won't any longer post here if you earn the ultimate reward for bothering to make 1600 post over a couple years, it's been my honor to read many of your thoughts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

As for who lies or deceives the ELECTORATE, most often for strictly political gains, historically Obama is the champion. Ryan's not even in the same ballpark on this issue.

 

 

Sorry, which side are you batting for here?

Nobody said Ryan was the champion: that's Romney

As far as I can see the webpage you list gives fewer lies in several years than Romney managed in 30 weeks.

(and, in what seems to me to be typical Republican style, it double counts some of them so it's hard to judge the true number)

Seriously

if you want to say that Obama is more of a liar than Romney then you need to be able to point to a period of 30 weeks in which he told more than 533 lies.

 

Can you do that or are you, not to put to fine a point on it, a liar?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GM Janesville, was build in 1918 and later became one of the first Chevrolet/Fisher Body plants in the US and by 2008, was the oldest operating GM plant in the US. Talk of closing the plant had been persistent from the day's my Dad was Material Superintendent in the 50's in Janesville and while I worked for CNW RR, which supplied both Fisher and Chevrolet with most parts used, then building most all Chevrolet Models and Small Trucks, not pick ups.

 

While media an people seem to ignore the similarity between lies and deception, for all practical purposes Obama deceived the people in South Central Wisconsin, who believed Obama WOULD save the impending closing of the plant, which several previous politicians had done over time, delaying the actual closing until after the 2008 elections, when it did closed in late December 2008. IMO, no one could have prevented the closing as it and was well beyond handling a structural retooling to the modern robotic manufactureing model or said another way would have had to be rebuilt from the ground up and cost prohibitive.

 

As for who lies or deceives the ELECTORATE, most often for strictly political gains, historically Obama is the champion. Ryan's not even in the same ballpark on this issue.

 

http://www.audacityofhypocrisy.com/fashion-shows/

 

rigney, I'm posting to you while your still here and note I've seen many of your post, especially threads that have been distorted by the power to be here and want to commend you for you efforts. It's always a pleasure for me to see and read things from people that have been around the block, state what they feel and mean what they say.

 

I saw where you "earned" a three day suspension for this and want you to know there are others that didn't agree then or do they now. While I won't any longer post here if you earn the ultimate reward for bothering to make 1600 post over a couple years, it's been my honor to read many of your thoughts.

Believe me Jackson, 95 % of the time my statements are only thoughts. I leave justification for my ignorance to the more learned intellectuals on this forum. I hope to hang around until after the election so I can say, "I told you so". But as of now it does seem iffy. The three days I was awarded were fun after reading some the trash I see posted. Even my closest Mexican friends, all (4) of them; wondered why I got whacked as I did for my humor. But Hey! You can't please everyone. The joke is that, in my day Juarez had two fantastic bull rings, the Plaza Del Toro, or down town bull ring as it was called and the Monumental. There was no Running of the Bulls in Juarez until the drug lords decided it might become great sport. Thanks for the boost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GM Janesville, was build in 1918 and later became one of the first Chevrolet/Fisher Body plants in the US and by 2008, was the oldest operating GM plant in the US. Talk of closing the plant had been persistent from the day's my Dad was Material Superintendent in the 50's in Janesville and while I worked for CNW RR, which supplied both Fisher and Chevrolet with most parts used, then building most all Chevrolet Models and Small Trucks, not pick ups.

 

While media an people seem to ignore the similarity between lies and deception, for all practical purposes Obama deceived the people in South Central Wisconsin, who believed Obama WOULD save the impending closing of the plant, which several previous politicians had done over time, delaying the actual closing until after the 2008 elections, when it did closed in late December 2008. IMO, no one could have prevented the closing as it and was well beyond handling a structural retooling to the modern robotic manufactureing model or said another way would have had to be rebuilt from the ground up and cost prohibitive.

What was the specific deception, jackson?

 

Do you not see the "if" in Obama's statements?

As for who lies or deceives the ELECTORATE, most often for strictly political gains, historically Obama is the champion. Ryan's not even in the same ballpark on this issue.

 

http://www.audacityofhypocrisy.com/fashion-shows/

A major portion of the site is dedicated to the politifact rating of Obama. However, Ryan is clearly worse. By percentages, Ryan dominates Obama in terms of falsehoods. That means that Ryan has more "pants on fire" statements, more "pants on fire" or "false" statements, more "pants on fire" or "false" or "mostly false" statements, more "pants on fire" or "false" or "mostly false" or "half true" statements, and more "pants on fire" or "false" or "mostly false" or "half true" or "mostly true" statements. By any measure of percentages, Obama has been more truthful than Ryan.

 

That is one of several glaring problems I see with your reference.

rigney, I'm posting to you while your still here and note I've seen many of your post, especially threads that have been distorted by the power to be here and want to commend you for you efforts.

Name one distortion.

=Uncool-

 

You have such a wonderful way with words.

Mercifully I have an image to look back at me and I do understand my inadequacies. But unfortunately, you are such an intellectual that you haven't a clue as to what your shortcomings are.

If you understand your inadequacies, then why do you keep displaying them, apparently without even making the attempt to correct them?

 

For example, you see others apparently attacking you, and so you are trying to strike back without making sure that you are making sense. Being an intellectual has little to do with seeing your own shortcomings. I know several of my shortcomings, and I listen to others about my shortcomings.

 

What people are asking you to do is to actually attempt to know what backs up your opinion. Know what the facts that you cite actually are. Know what the reasoning you are attempting to build is. I think that's quite reasonable. And yet you continue to fail to do so.

=Uncool-

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see how a Romney Ryan win can save us. A federal handout was required for Romney to save the Olympics.

 

Not that Romney hasn't done just fine at milking the government when it suits his purposes, the most obvious instance being the incredible $1.5 billion in aid he siphoned out of the U.S. Treasury as head of the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake – a sum greater than all federal spending for the previous seven U.S. Olympic games combined. Romney, the supposed fiscal conservative, blew through an average of $625,000 in taxpayer money per athlete – an astounding increase of 5,582 percent over the $11,000 average at the 1984 games in Los Angeles.

 

Read more: http://www.rollingst...9#ixzz25Rr8Nt3V

 

Even his attempt at managing Bain Capital required federal assistance.

 

In the end, the government surrendered. At the time, The Boston Globe cited bankers dismissing the bailout as "relatively routine" – but the federal documents reveal it was anything but. The FDIC agreed to accept nearly $5 million in cash to retire $15 million in Bain's debt – an immediate government bailout of $10 million. All told, the FDIC estimated it would recoup just $14 million of the $30 million that Romney's firm owed the government.

 

Read more: http://www.rollingst...9#ixzz25RrOy6Xr

 

Who will save Rmoney when he's president?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have such a wonderful way with words.

Mercifully I have an image to look back at me and I do understand my inadequacies. But unfortunately, you are such an intellectual that you haven't a clue as to what your shortcomings are.

Super. Thanks. Will you now be addressing any of the actual content in my post, or will you just ignore it entirely and evade as per your usual?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mercifully I have an image to look back at me and I do understand my inadequacies. But unfortunately, you are such an intellectual that you haven't a clue as to what your shortcomings are.

 

At least to me, it's simply that you continually start threads on why you dislike Obama, but even when spoon fed differences in policy e.g.

 

could take a minute to look what about each parties' approach [and tells us] you object to or agree on and why?

 

Or try with tax reform:

http://www.ontheissu..._Tax_Reform.htm

http://www.ontheissu..._Tax_Reform.htm

 

Or any other issue?

 

You abjectly refuse to actually point out any policy you don't support and continue to post spin and rhetoric as support for your position. If you ask me as an outsider, it's people like you on both sides who buy into the spin and hype that tickle up their prejudices and preconceptions, blatantly refusing to look at actual political differences between candidates who allow US politics to be such a circus.

 

Seriously, it does not take any intellectual superiority and only a little effort to actually determine what each party actually proposes to do on a given issue. The only three reasons I can think of for not being willing to are being a) too lazy, b) too apathetic or c) not wanting one's preconceptions and prejudices to be overturned by actual facts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We could set things right. We could reform our politics, end special interests and reform campaign financing, remove the waste from government programs while strengthening the ones that work, start a national health insurance program that allows doctors to be doctors who put health above the dollar, put regulations back that protect our economy from relentless business models, tax the top and the corporations at the rate they were taxed when the USA was at it's most prosperous all around, and bring some integrity back into our representative government. The real problem, rigney, is going to be convincing people who hold your point of view that we're not "bringing our nation to an end" as we're setting things right.

Phi, I wish I had confidence in the democratic party as you do. I actally research many things concerning both major parties, but my biggest drawback is sorting out the lies from the truth connected with just about everything a liberal politician says. Ok! I'll sure that I will be questioned on that statement alone. Things like, where is the proof? Who would make such statements? Let me for instance use Paul Ryans comments about GM closing their manufacturing plant in Janesville, Wisconsin that make him out to be a liar. Oh! But that was a decision made by GM long before Obama came to office. Well, he was right on one account; that complex will likely stand for another 100 years, just not as a GM factory. But now that GM practically belongs to the federal government and if, just if; Obama should get reelected in November, he may re-open it under a new name: "GM, Another Obama Bail Out"? Thank goodness that FORD is still solvent.

Today I'm hearing on FOX NEWS that the big unions who donated millions for Obama's 2008 campaigne hasn't donated a red cent to the current one in Charlotte, NC. Could someone tell me why the change? And yes, lets talk about the two big black $million buses for Obama's mid-west tours and the planes to fly them around in, all paid for by the middle class dupes he is trying to save. Will the Republican party get to keep these buses after they win this next election? Plus, I wonder who paid for the two week party spree on Martha's Vineyard, or the Christmas vacations in Hawaii? I won't even try tabulating the cost of either at TAX PAYERS expense. But hey! We can give them another four years of these liberal goodies if you vote right.

Edited by rigney

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Phi, I wish I had confidence in the democratic party as you do. I actally research many things concerning both major parties, but my biggest drawback is finding out the lies connected with just about everything a liberal politician says. Ok! I'll sure that I will be questioned on that statement alone. Things like, where is the proof? Who would make such statements?

It's fairly typical that your argument ignores all the detail I've tried to put in my posts and simply reduces me to being confident in the Democratic party. I think I've made it quite clear that I see them, by far, as the lesser of two evils in a two party election. Do I agree with everything the Dems do? No, but I completely disagree with what Romney/Ryan want to do regarding most issues. To me, the Dems need more time to undo the horror of the Bush years. Romney/Ryan will just bring them crashing back, with even more special interest emphasis.

 

And again, I think your argument against "liberal politicians" is simply rhetoric. You're being fooled by those with special interests into believing that people are either liberal or conservative about everything, or that those definitions are even worthy of being applied to issues with the level of nuance we see these days. There are some fantastic social programs in effect currently, some that many Republicans and Democrats support wholeheartedly, and also some that are ineffective and need reform or dismantling altogether, but they all get called "welfare" and suddenly it becomes a liberal issue.

 

It's like conservative belief that the media has a liberal bias. The media has a commercial bias, and a need to get people to understand what they mean with the fewest, shortest words possible, words that will keep consumers from changing channels. The media only cares what you think liberal and conservative mean, what it means to their viewers, and since they mean completely different things to everyone, those definitions are worse than meaningless; they're misleading and divisive and don't serve to explain anything.

 

Let me for instance use Paul Ryans comments about GM closing their manufacturing plant in Janesville, Wisconsin that make him out as a liar. Oh! But that was a decision made by GM long before Obama came to office. Well, he was right on one account; the building will probably stand for another 100 years, just not as a GM factory. But now that GM belongs to the federal government and if, just if; Obama should get reelected in November, he may let them open it under a new name: "GM, Another Obama Bail Out"? Thank goodness that FORD is still solvent.

Well, we all knew auto industry bailouts was a powderkeg issue, damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don't. But your argument fails to take into account the poor leadership GM has, and thus the mistakes it has made. I hope you aren't falling into the trap of blaming Obama for how the company is being run. Obama already has a demanding job we're paying him to do.

 

 

Today I'm hearing on FOX NEWS that the big unions who donated millions to Obama's 08 campaigne hasn't donated a red cent to the current one in Charlotte, NC. Could someone tell me why the change?

I know the AFL-CIO pulled some projected funds from all federal campaigns way back in June. It supposedly wasn't to snub Obama, it was to direct that money into their own infrastructure and advocacy programs. Perhaps you could link us to the news story you're talking about.

 

And yes, lets talk about the two big black $million buses for Obama's tours and the planes to fly them around in and paid for by the middle class he is trying to save. Do Republicans get to keep the buses after they win this next election? Plus, I wonder who paid for the two week party in Martha's Vineyard, or the Christmas vacations on Hawaii? I won't even try tabulating the cost of them at TAX PAYERS expense. But hey! We can give them another four years of these liberal goodies if you vote right.

Heilige Mutter Gottes, rigney, do your research before you puke up this crap! The buses belong to the Secret Service, and they have about a 10-year lifespan, so yes, if the Republicans win this fall, they'll get to use the buses. It's a protect-the-President kind of thing, not a liberal thing or Obama thing.

 

And you don't want to go down the road that leads to presidential vacations, because you'll lose. Obama has spent 1/3 the time on vacation that Bush II did in his first term, and 1/2 the time Reagan did in his first term. Once again, you should check the facts before regurgitating the junk you hear from a single source.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The really insidious thing about Ryan's claim about the auto plant is that help was offered to his district and he refused it, but that's conveniently forgotten.

 

 

OK, I made that up. Why should rigney have all the fun?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[The really insidious thing about Ryan's claim about the auto plant is that help was offered to his district and he refused it, but that's conveniently forgotten.]

 

 

OK, I made that up. Why should rigney have all the fun?

 

Offered by who and how? The AP reported Ryan joined with other Wisconsin legislators to lobby GM to keep the plant open, but they were unsuccessful. I suppose it's something else to blame on Bush

 

Phi for All says: Heilige Mutter Gottes, rigney, do your research before you puke up this crap! The buses belong to the Secret Service, and they have about a 10-year lifespan, so yes, if the Republicans win this fall, they'll get to use the buses. It's a protect-the-President kind of thing, not a liberal thing or Obama thing.
Who authorizes the purchases, Bush? And the puked up crap, I hear that expression from most all liberals trying to allow Obama to re-build our government from the ground up "ALL OVER AGAIN".

Bless us Holy Mary, Mother of God.

Edited by rigney

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The really insidious thing about Ryan's claim about the auto plant is that help was offered to his district and he refused it, but that's conveniently forgotten.

 

 

OK, I made that up. Why should rigney have all the fun?

 

 

 

Awesome... simply awesome...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the reply is even more awesome.

 

Offered by who and how? The AP reported Ryan joined with other Wisconsin legislators to lobby GM to keep the plant open, but they were unsuccessful. I suppose it's something else to blame on Bush

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who authorizes the purchases, Bush? And the puked up crap, I hear that expression from most all liberals trying to allow Obama to re-build our government from the ground up "ALL OVER AGAIN".

Bless us Holy Mary, Mother of God.

Secret Service determines what's needed for the security of those it protects, so this is a non-issue for anyone trying to bash a single president. Every president gives the Secret Service fits every time they want to leave the White House. All those motorcades you see, the buses, Air Force One, any time any president needs to go somewhere it costs a fortune in security measures. This is not an issue where Obama has been any better or any worse than any other president, so if you don't remove this from your repertoire of Obama/Liberal/Other-Misunderstood-Things bashing, you're just feeding the propaganda machine.

 

Seriously, if you want some support on subjects where Obama hasn't done enough, go after his lack of inspiration while in office, after such an inspirational campaign to get there. There were so many times when he should have addressed the nation about what he was up against, and called on us to urge our representatives to help pull the nation back together. Obama focused on policy and partisan bridge-building when the GOP was dead set against his getting re-elected, to the point where they wouldn't even support him on issues they should have.

 

For goodness sake, rigney, the Republicans shot down H.R. 466 (Wounded Veteran Job Security Act), a bill that would have protected the jobs of veterans who have to take time off work to treat a service-related disability (and that's not the only bill for veterans they blocked).

 

The Republicans shot down H.R. 515 (Radioactive Import Deterrence Act), which keeps businesses from bringing low-level nuclear waste from other countries into the US (wtf?!).

 

The Republicans shot down H.R. 1029 (Alien Smuggling and Terrorism Prevention Act), a bill that would make it tougher to enter the US illegally and impose stricter penalties and better border enforcement (and yet they still blame Obama for lax immigration policy).

 

The Republicans shot down H.R. 1110 and H. R. 1258 (PHONE Act and Truth in Caller ID Act), bills that would make it a crime to spoof the caller ID number for the purposes of commercial transactions aimed at defrauding the person being called (I get calls like this at least once a month, from people who show up on caller ID as a business telling me my "account" is in jeopardy, and if I could just verify the account number and PIN...).

 

The list goes on and on, good and smart and effective legislation stonewalled just because it came from a source that would have made Obama look good, something the GOP has been trying to avoid ever since Obama took office and Rush Limbaugh cried, "I hope Obama fails!" Obama should have personally let the public know what was happening instead of trying to build bridges with a bunch of wet noodles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not just the stock market. Democratic presidents are better overall for the economy, over a wide range of metrics.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-06-25/democratic-presidents-are-better-for-the-economy.html

 

As much as one might complain about Obama, he's doing markedly better than Bush 43, whose mess he is trying to un-do. So I wonder how re-embracing those disastrous policies (or going them one further) is supposed to be a good thing.

 

Obama's score has no doubt been hampered by high unemployment, in which house republicans are complicit since the 2010 elections, as they have done nothing for job creation. Zero legislation.

 

Complaining about taxes being too high? Under Obama, the tax burden as a fraction of GDP hasn't been this low (15.3%) dating back to Truman. And the math-challenged want to lower it (for those with high incomes at least) in an effort to balance the budget. Johnny (actually Mitt and Paul) can't add. A-r-i-t-h-m-e-t-i-c

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not just the stock market. Democratic presidents are better overall for the economy, over a wide range of metrics.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-06-25/democratic-presidents-are-better-for-the-economy.html

 

As much as one might complain about Obama, he's doing markedly better than Bush 43, whose mess he is trying to un-do. So I wonder how re-embracing those disastrous policies (or going them one further) is supposed to be a good thing.

 

Obama's score has no doubt been hampered by high unemployment, in which house republicans are complicit since the 2010 elections, as they have done nothing for job creation. Zero legislation.

 

Complaining about taxes being too high? Under Obama, the tax burden as a fraction of GDP hasn't been this low (15.3%) dating back to Truman. And the math-challenged want to lower it (for those with high incomes at least) in an effort to balance the budget. Johnny (actually Mitt and Paul) can't add. A-r-i-t-h-m-e-t-i-c

Bush 43 was thrown into hell 8 months after taking office. BUt here is what I'm terribly afraid of happening if our present leader gets another 4 years in office.

 

Look at these links and tell me; will 88 % of Americans eventually become wards of a welfare system having only professionals, union members and government agencies acting as; keeper of the keys?

 

Which jobs pay better, Private or Federal sector?

http://money.cnn.com/2012/01/31/news/economy/federal_worker_pay/index.htm

 

Who does things better, Private vs Public?

http://www.donloper.com/business-and-entrepreneurship/government-vs-the-private-sector-who-does-things-better.html

 

Private vs Public?

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/private-sector.asp#axzz269UbTfGy

 

Private vs Public?

http://blog.royaltyuniverse.com/private-sector-vs-public-sector/

 

Another interesting tidbit!

http://www.thenewamerican.com/economy/sectors/item/11344-fed-approves-first-communist-chinese-takeover-of-us-bank

Edited by rigney

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bush 43 was thrown into hell 8 months after taking office.

And Obama was thrown into economic hell at the outset. So?

 

BUt here is what I'm terribly afraid of happening if our present leader gets another 4 years in office.

 

Look at these links and tell me; will 88 % of Americans eventually become wards of a welfare system having only professionals, union members and government agencies acting as; keeper of the keys?

As usual, I don't see what this has to do with anything I posted. What, exactly, are you terribly afraid of?

 

Which jobs pay better, Private or Federal sector?

http://money.cnn.com/2012/01/31/news/economy/federal_worker_pay/index.htm

Thank you for confirming that I am underpaid.

 

Simply put: bullshit. As far as I can tell he just pulled all of that out of his ass. The part of government I work in doesn't run this way. Creating a new billet is very hard to do.

 

And?

 

That's the federal reserve. What's the connection?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The tall tale about public sector employees getting better paid keeps being put about in the UK by our current government.

It's a convenient half truth.

It's true that a straight comparison shows that the average of one group is higher than the average of the other.

 

But the two groups are not the same

For example the demographics are different.

Public sector employees are, on average, older- so they get paid better.

Public sector employees have, on average, been in their jobs longer- so they get paid better.

 

There are other similar factors which are ignored by simplistic analyses like the one cited.

 

If it was true then, since the public sector hasn't suddenly got a whole new pay structure, it must have been equally true under the last right wing government.

Why do you think that a new right wing government would do anything more about it than the last one?

 

 

Also, Don Loper doesn't seem to live in the same world that I do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And Obama was thrown into economic hell at the outset. So?

 

 

As usual, I don't see what this has to do with anything I posted. What, exactly, are you terribly afraid of?

 

 

Thank you for confirming that I am underpaid.

 

 

Simply put: bullshit. As far as I can tell he just pulled all of that out of his ass.

Is that where the 2/3s majority overturning vote on God and Jurusulum was pulled from during the DNC?
The part of government I work in doesn't run this way. Creating a new billet is very hard to do.

 

 

And?

 

 

That's the federal reserve. What's the connection?

Isn't the federal reserve a part of our government? What a damned shame we have sunk so low.

There is no way to resolve our differences. My opinions are mine only and yours belong to you. The people of this country will be the ones who decide who steers the ship come Nov.6, not you nor I alone. While i may never agree with the directives given, I will follow and respect them. Can you do the same? Edited by rigney

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no way to resolve our differences. My opinions are mine only and yours belong to you. The people of this country will be the ones who decide who steers the ship come Nov.6, not you nor I alone. While i may never agree with the directives given, I will follow and respect them. Can you do the same?

 

There's nothing wrong with forming your own opinions. The problem is that you seem to want to make your own facts.

 

Also, if you had any respect for us you would actually answer the questions we ask so, here it is again.

Why do you think that a new right wing government would do anything more about it than the last one?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no way to resolve our differences. My opinions are mine only and yours belong to you. The people of this country will be the ones who decide who steers the ship come Nov.6, not you nor I alone. While i may never agree with the directives given, I will follow and respect them. Can you do the same?

I have never had a problem following directives, or respecting the office of a senior officer/official (being ex-navy and all that). "Can you do the same?" Kind of implies that you might think otherwise, which is just a tad insulting. What have I said that would call that into question? (for the record, more than 2/3 of my government service has been under Republican presidents. That has never entered into the day-to-day performance of my duties)

 

But this isn't about having a difference of opinion. The problem I have is when you make an outrageous claim and then won't clarify what you mean, and instead posts non-sequiturs. I could post some drivel about how I hate what Romney did that time he visited that place, and how anyone who did such a thing shouldn't be president. And when you ask me for details, I post something that has nothing to do with my claim, get defensive and just chalk your question up to a difference of opinion.

 

If you aren't willing to have an actual discussion, what is your motivation for posting?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is no way to resolve our differences. My opinions are mine only and yours belong to you. The people of this country will be the ones who decide who steers the ship come Nov.6, not you nor I alone. While i may never agree with the directives given, I will follow and respect them. Can you do the same?

You do this constantly. You ask a question, you're provided with lots of facts and links to evidence that contradicts what you're arguing, and then you say, Oh well, it's up to the voters to decide. Why are you asking these questions if not to better inform yourself? When have we EVER made it about opinions and not supported them with LOTS of evidence in the face of your unsupported claims?

 

I'm not attacking YOU. I'm saying this is the way your arguments come across.

 

And guess what? Even if Obama is re-elected, if he suddenly wants to continue the Bush tax cuts for the top 1%, and wants to provide education vouchers and privatize more prisons, I'm NOT going to respect those directives. I would fight like hell to get him out of office with everything an American citizen can bring to bear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no way to resolve our differences. My opinions are mine only and yours belong to you. The people of this country will be the ones who decide who steers the ship come Nov.6, not you nor I alone. While i may never agree with the directives given, I will follow and respect them. Can you do the same?

 

We had 8 years of Bush and we didn't hang him by his balls, so yeah, we'll go along with just about anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We had 8 years of Bush and we didn't hang him by his balls, so yeah, we'll go along with just about anything.

If you think 8 years of Bush was bad, just give Obama another 4 years to get it done and all of us will lose our balls.

Check this out and tell me what Obama has done right?

http://obamafailedpolicies.com/

 

I have never had a problem following directives, or respecting the office of a senior officer/official (being ex-navy and all that). "Can you do the same?" Kind of implies that you might think otherwise, which is just a tad insulting. What have I said that would call that into question? (for the record, more than 2/3 of my government service has been under Republican presidents. That has never entered into the day-to-day performance of my duties)

 

But this isn't about having a difference of opinion. The problem I have is when you make an outrageous claim and then won't clarify what you mean, and instead posts non-sequiturs. I could post some drivel about how I hate what Romney did that time he visited that place, and how anyone who did such a thing shouldn't be president. And when you ask me for details, I post something that has nothing to do with my claim, get defensive and just chalk your question up to a difference of opinion.

 

If you aren't willing to have an actual discussion, what is your motivation for posting?

Some facts just speak for theirselves if you give them the chance.

http://obamafailedpolicies.com/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.