Things You Might Want to Know About Mitt Romney . [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Things You Might Want to Know About Mitt Romney .


RDW
07-04-2012, 14:48
Things You Might Want to Know About Mitt Romney's Personal Information.

* His full Name is: Willard Mitt Romney
* He was Born: March 12, 1947 and is 65 years old.
* His Father: George W. Romney, former Governor of the State of Michigan
* He was Raised in: Bloomfield Hills , Michigan
* He is Married to: Ann Romney since 1969; they have five children
Education:
* B.A. from Brigham Young University ,
* J.D. and M.B.A. from Harvard University
Religion: Mormon - The Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter-Day Saints Working Background:
* After high school, he spent 30 months in France as a Mormon missionary.
* After going to both Harvard Business School and Harvard Law School simultaneously, he passed the Michigan bar, but never worked as an attorney.
* In 1984, he co-founded Bain Capital a private equity investment firm, one of the largest such firms in the United States .
* In 1994, he ran for Senator of Massachusetts and lost to Ted Kennedy.
* He was President and C.E.O. of the 2002 Winter Olympic Games.
* In 2002, he was elected Governor of the State of Massachusetts where he eliminated a 1.5 billion deficit.
Some Interesting Fact about Romney:
* He gave his entire inheritance from his father to charity.
* Bain Capital, starting with one small office supply store in Massachusetts, turned it into Staples; now over 2,000 stores employing
90,000 people.
* Bain Capital also worked to perform the same kinds of business miracles again and again, with companies like Domino's, Sealy, Brookstone, Weather Channel, Burger King, Warner Music Group, Dollarama, Home Depot Supply, and many others.
* He was an unpaid volunteer campaign worker for his dad's gubernatorial campaign 1 year.
* He was an unpaid intern in his dad's governor's office for eight years.
* He was an unpaid bishop and stake president of his church for ten years.
* He was an unpaid President of the Salt Lake Olympic Committee for three years.
* He took no salary and was the unpaid Governor of Massachusetts for four years.
* Mitt Romney is one of the wealthiest self-made men in our country but has given more back to its citizens in terms of money, service and time than most men.

Mitt Romney has Nothing to Hide
* He will show us his high school and college transcripts.
* He will show us his law degree.
* He will show us his birth certificate
* He will show us his social security card.
* He will show us his draft notice.
* He will show us his medical records.
* He will show us his income tax records.
* He will show us he has nothing to hide.

Mitt Romney's background, experience and trustworthiness show him to be a great leader.
He has the background and record to become an excellent President of the United States .

Most importantly - HE'S NOT OBAMA!

Atomic Punk
07-04-2012, 15:23
i was planning on voting for him even with all the bad press released about him. nice to know he has some good points.

fortyofforty
07-04-2012, 15:51
I would like to see a comparable list about Odumbo. I think the true resume would be shocking to most Americans. Can you say "Choom Gang"?

http://blog.beliefnet.com/watchwomanonthewall/files/2012/06/Obama-and-The-Choom-Gang-Rare-Photo.jpg

(Don't know if this image is legitimate or not. I do know if it was Mitt Romney in the photograph, the media would be climbing over each other trying to interview all the guys shown, to get the dirt.)

certifiedfunds
07-04-2012, 16:41
I would like to see a comparable list about Odumbo. I think the true resume would be shocking to most Americans. Can you say "Choom Gang"?

http://blog.beliefnet.com/watchwomanonthewall/files/2012/06/Obama-and-The-Choom-Gang-Rare-Photo.jpg

(Don't know if this image is legitimate or not. I do know if it was Mitt Romney in the photograph, the media would be climbing over each other trying to interview all the guys shown, to get the dirt.)

Amazing how people from his past just don't appear.

Amazing.

ModGlock17
07-04-2012, 16:51
Things that are important to me about Mitt Romney:

1. He was raised by a full set of parents, neither one abandoned the other or him. They taught him more spiritual value of America than not.
2. He made his wealth in America, as in he HAS a stake in America's success, rather its downfall.
3. He held real jobs of a private Executive as well as public Executive (Governorship) commanding real men and women... and an armed force (National Guard in Massachusetts).
4. He more than survived a tough contest of vesting, called the Primary, against very good men and woman.

ModGlock17
07-04-2012, 16:56
My only concern is that Mitt may not be dirty enough to be President.....

c01
07-04-2012, 17:01
I was lost during the last election cycle. Didn't like the way the country was going and wanted a change. Voted for Obama. Well, live and learn a little. I should have listened to the folks that had been around enough that told me I didn't want that much change.
I'm voting for Mitt..

D

<< Is sorry he helped in the current state of affairs

hogship
07-04-2012, 17:15
I was lost during the last election cycle. Didn't like the way the country was going and wanted a change. Voted for Obama. Well, live and learn a little. I should have listened to the folks that had been around enough that told me I didn't want that much change.
I'm voting for Mitt..

D

<< Is sorry he helped in the current state of affairs

Thank you for this post........:bowdown:

I know it's a difficult thing to admit, and I know others who are still not going to publicly say what you just did......probably, the majority of them will never do that.

I know some people who voted for Obama and are feeling betrayed. Some of these people so strongly believed in Obama, that it literally distroyed the relationship we had at one time. Maybe time can heal that, but we don't have that luxury if we are to steer America away from the hidden destruction that has been planned for it.

Romney was never my choice, but at this time, a vote for Romney is a vote for America to shake this off and get on a better course.

ooc

cowboy1964
07-04-2012, 17:21
Most importantly - HE'S NOT OBAMA!

That is, in fact, the only point that matters.

jakebrake
07-04-2012, 17:41
I was lost during the last election cycle. Didn't like the way the country was going and wanted a change. Voted for Obama. Well, live and learn a little. I should have listened to the folks that had been around enough that told me I didn't want that much change.
I'm voting for Mitt..

D

<< Is sorry he helped in the current state of affairs

a lot of people found out the hard way. waking up with an obama hangover, and having that coyote moment has come to you. now you know better.

took guts for you to admit that. i give you credit for it.

G29Reload
07-04-2012, 19:07
I was lost during the last election cycle. Didn't like the way the country was going and wanted a change. Voted for Obama. Well, live and learn a little. I should have listened to the folks that had been around enough that told me I didn't want that much change.
I'm voting for Mitt..

D

<< Is sorry he helped in the current state of affairs


1. I don't know of, and have never heard of anyone who voted for McCain, who, having seen what transpired will vote for Obama now and wishes he did the first time.

2. I know of PLENTY of people like you who voted for Obama, are sorry they did, and will not again.

This gives me some hope that we might actually unseat him.

stopatrain
07-04-2012, 19:19
Anybody but Obama. I've warmed up a little towards Romney.

beforeobamabans
07-05-2012, 03:59
ABO....

It's a :crying: shame the GOP can't put forth a candidate that gives you many reasons why people should vote FOR him.

Cavalry Doc
07-05-2012, 04:44
My only concern is that Mitt may not be dirty enough to be President.....

If he wants it, he's going to have to fight for it. Presidential elections are no longer a place for Marquess of Queensberry rules. It a brass knuckles street brawl. Gentlemen finish last.

Cavalry Doc
07-05-2012, 04:49
ABO....

It's a :crying: shame the GOP can't put forth a candidate that gives you many reasons why people should vote FOR him.

It's a shame no one beat him. It's a contest.


We need a new primary system, one where litte blue states don't give the wrong guys momentum. One that is essentially OVER before the larger conservative leaning state get input.

aspartz
07-05-2012, 10:34
You give a long list that shows he is a good moral person. You have shown me nothing that shows he knows how to distance himself from those morals while governing.

Yes, he's not Obama. You have shown me nothing to show that he is BETTER than Obama. Change for the sake of change is useless.

ARS

jaklcrow
07-05-2012, 10:43
That list screams TOO religious to me.

Cavalry Doc
07-05-2012, 11:08
You give a long list that shows he is a good moral person. You have shown me nothing that shows he knows how to distance himself from those morals while governing.

Yes, he's not Obama. You have shown me nothing to show that he is BETTER than Obama. Change for the sake of change is useless.

ARS

Being a moral person will attract more voters than it repels

aspartz
07-05-2012, 11:28
Being a moral person will attract more voters than it repels
So we get a big government moralist. How is this an improvement?

I'm not saying that being moral is bad. The problem is that many moral people feel the need to legislate their own personal morality.

ARS

amazon
07-05-2012, 11:42
I'd rather have a Pres. with Christian morals than one without (or one that seems to shun them).

While Gov. here he never had the "I know better than you" attitude or approach. And yes, I have even met the man.

PocketProtector
07-05-2012, 12:03
I'd rather have a Pres. with Christian morals than one without (or one that seems to shun them).

While Gov. here he never had the "I know better than you" attitude or approach. And yes, I have even met the man.

Yep....seems that we were GREAT when there was some sense of morals, and we suck since secularism....it just might be a good thing.

Remember "In God we Trust"? I used to see that in lots of places.
We did not become great by "In Choom we trust".

Sam Spade
07-05-2012, 12:14
I'm not saying that being moral is bad. The problem is that many moral people feel the need to legislate their own personal morality.

ARS

Any evidence that Romney has done that? Plenty of opportunity as governor and various CEOs....so where has it happened?

ModGlock17
07-05-2012, 12:42
..

I'm not saying that being moral is bad. The problem is that many moral people feel the need to legislate their own personal morality.

ARS

It seems to me that you hate being told what to do according to a set of principle you don't necessarily buy in. Me, too!

Say, how do you like your in-laws ? or how do you like being mandated for healthcare ?

My point is that you (and I) will always have that issue in every aspect of life. Therefore, it is a moot point.

And I think you will being told what to do LEAST by Mitt than by Barry. Simple enough ???

barbedwiresmile
07-05-2012, 12:43
There are a few facts about Romney that the OP neglected to mention, the two most important being:

1. He is opposed to the second amendment, as written.

2. He implemented Obamacare before it was Obamacare.

He is also, if you have followed his courting of the MIC and the "public safety" lobby, a chicken hawk.

aspartz
07-05-2012, 12:45
ABO....

It's a :crying: shame the GOP can't put forth a candidate that gives you many reasons why people should vote FOR him.
That would be a good thing. Instead the GOP is locked into the lesser of two evils mode.

Any evidence that Romney has done that? Plenty of opportunity as governor and various CEOs....so where has it happened?
RommneyCare

ARS

ModGlock17
07-05-2012, 12:52
There are a few facts about Romney that the OP neglected to mention, the two most important being:

1. He is opposed to the second amendment, as written.

2. He implemented Obamacare before it was Obamacare.

He is also, if you have followed his courting of the MIC and the "public safety" lobby, a chicken hawk.

Those are not worries of mine as long as Congress is Rep dominated.

I think it's called Check&Balance (at least in idea). Presidents can't make laws, he's got to twist some 300+ pair of arms in the Capitol. Barry did: that's called "ram it down the throat" or "vote then you can find out what's in it" mode of operation.

Sam Spade
07-05-2012, 13:06
RommneyCare

ARS

That you have to grab for such a non-standard example of "legislating morality" reassures me greatly about this aspect of Romney's run.

Cavalry Doc
07-05-2012, 13:07
So we get a big government moralist. How is this an improvement?

I'm not saying that being moral is bad. The problem is that many moral people feel the need to legislate their own personal morality.

ARS

I guess we will find out, or not.

certifiedfunds
07-05-2012, 13:14
There are a few facts about Romney that the OP neglected to mention, the two most important being:

1. He is opposed to the second amendment, as written.

2. He implemented Obamacare before it was Obamacare.

He is also, if you have followed his courting of the MIC and the "public safety" lobby, a chicken hawk.

But we have to vote for him because of he'll pick better justices.:upeyes:

Here's hoping he doesn't nominate justices that share his views.

certifiedfunds
07-05-2012, 13:16
Those are not worries of mine as long as Congress is Rep dominated.

I think it's called Check&Balance (at least in idea). Presidents can't make laws, he's got to twist some 300+ pair of arms in the Capitol. Barry did: that's called "ram it down the throat" or "vote then you can find out what's in it" mode of operation.

Who held the Congress when the Patriot Act and Medicare Part D were signed into law by a Republican president?

RC-RAMIE
07-05-2012, 13:32
Who held the Congress when the Patriot Act and Medicare Part D were signed into law by a Republican president?

Thats republican programs whats wrong with them?

Sharkey
07-05-2012, 13:42
Uh, I KNOW he is not O and that is good enuff for me.
Once mitt is in than the conservatives can focus on taking the repubican party

certifiedfunds
07-05-2012, 13:44
Thats republican programs whats wrong with them?

:supergrin:

How about the TSA?
Department of Homeland Security?
No Child Left Behind?
Tax rebates to all but the people who actually pay taxes? TWICE

AND.......drumroll.....................

Chief Justice who just upheld Obamacare!!!!

series1811
07-05-2012, 13:54
You give a long list that shows he is a good moral person. You have shown me nothing that shows he knows how to distance himself from those morals while governing.

Yes, he's not Obama. You have shown me nothing to show that he is BETTER than Obama. Change for the sake of change is useless.

ARS

For me, I'm willing to roll those dice. I may turn out to be wrong. Before Obama, I didn't think I would ever see another President in my lifetime, worse than Jimmy Carter.

I have now.

amazon
07-05-2012, 14:05
There are a few facts about Romney that the OP neglected to mention, the two most important being:

1. He is opposed to the second amendment, as written.

2. He implemented Obamacare before it was Obamacare.

He is also, if you have followed his courting of the MIC and the "public safety" lobby, a chicken hawk.

1. Really?? Where? Or is this one of those "he passed gun control legislatin so he's anti-2A things". If this is about the AWB ban in MA, there's a crap load of back story about that. GOAL was heavily involved. His office practically had a revolving door with GOAL for 4 years. Not once has Patrick met with them. Check out his GOAL and NRA ratings. I'll take him over "under the radar" Obama any day of the week.

Just a note, a majority of of firearms restrictions are from our AG's regulations. Post-Romney.

2. Our state mandated healthcare requirement is not Obamacare. Not even close. Our state can do as it pleases as opposed to what the Feds can do (pre-SCOTUS :steamed:). No ones wants to talk about how it's bankrupting us (MASS). Although I didn't support it - where was the outrage then? Do you truly believe Romney has a "vision" of a socialist Amerika with a Federal run healthcare system?

Look, I'm not happy about living in one of the highest taxed, most regulated, and IMO least free states of the union - but family comes first. But this is what MA has until we get the moonbats out of Beacon Hill. Considering the "hostile" environment Romney had to work in, he did all right.

Cavalry Doc
07-05-2012, 14:10
For me, I'm willing to roll those dice. I may turn out to be wrong. Before Obama, I didn't think I would ever see another President in my lifetime, worse than Jimmy Carter.

I have now.

I'm there with you. If nothing else, there will be a changing of the people in the cabinet, and yes, I still think Barry will pick worse SCOTUS picks.

Roberts turning out to be an arse, does not make Barry look any better.

Oh well, there will be an election, one will win, then we will hang on and see what comes next.

Ruble Noon
07-05-2012, 14:35
Those are not worries of mine as long as Congress is Rep dominated.

I think it's called Check&Balance (at least in idea). Presidents can't make laws, he's got to twist some 300+ pair of arms in the Capitol. Barry did: that's called "ram it down the throat" or "vote then you can find out what's in it" mode of operation.

How is that system of checks and balances working out? Remember SCROTUS just rewrote an unconstitutional bill to make it pass constitutional muster.

9jeeps
07-05-2012, 14:49
Would love to see both resumes' posted side by side on every news media in this country.

But then we have so many that can't read. Or can read but comprehend nothing. Only the gibberish handed down in their own blood line. Let's make it simple to understand.

Romney was born and raised with American Morals.

Obama was NOT!

certifiedfunds
07-05-2012, 15:35
1. Really?? Where? Or is this one of those "he passed gun control legislatin so he's anti-2A things". If this is about the AWB ban in MA, there's a crap load of back story about that. GOAL was heavily involved. His office practically had a revolving door with GOAL for 4 years. Not once has Patrick met with them. Check out his GOAL and NRA ratings. I'll take him over "under the radar" Obama any day of the week.

Just a note, a majority of of firearms restrictions are from our AG's regulations. Post-Romney.

2. Our state mandated healthcare requirement is not Obamacare. Not even close. Our state can do as it pleases as opposed to what the Feds can do (pre-SCOTUS :steamed:). No ones wants to talk about how it's bankrupting us (MASS). Although I didn't support it - where was the outrage then? Do you truly believe Romney has a "vision" of a socialist Amerika with a Federal run healthcare system?

Look, I'm not happy about living in one of the highest taxed, most regulated, and IMO least free states of the union - but family comes first. But this is what MA has until we get the moonbats out of Beacon Hill. Considering the "hostile" environment Romney had to work in, he did all right.

“We do have tough gun laws in Massachusetts; I support them, I won’t chip away at them; I believe they protect us and provide for our safety.”

“These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense. They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people.

.....

Acujeff
07-05-2012, 15:47
[QUOTE=barbedwiresmile;19165345]There are a few facts about Romney that the OP neglected to mention, the two most important being:

1. He is opposed to the second amendment, as written.QUOTE]


Here's Romney's Position on Gun Rights:
http://www.mittromney.com/issues/gun-rights

Read Romney‘s entire record and decide for yourself:
http://www.goal.org/newspages/romney.html

During the Romney Administration he met and worked with Gun Owners’ Action League (the Mass. based pro-2A group) and no anti-second amendment or anti-sportsmen legislation made its way to the Governor’s desk. He amended the permanent AWB making it less restrictive, he removed any anti-second amendment language from the Gang Violence bill passed in 2006, and signed five pro-second amendment bills into law.

Compare that to current Democrat Gov. Patrick who has refused to meet with GOAL during his entire 2 terms and only advocates for more gun control.

Romney earned a B from the NRA, which is higher than Obama (an F) or Hillary (also an F). Romney is certainly more pro-gun than McCain (rated a C+ by the NRA)

RC-RAMIE
07-05-2012, 15:58
[QUOTE=barbedwiresmile;19165345]There are a few facts about Romney that the OP neglected to mention, the two most important being:

1. He is opposed to the second amendment, as written.QUOTE]


Here's Romney's Position on Gun Rights:
http://www.mittromney.com/issues/gun-rights

Read Romney‘s entire record and decide for yourself:
http://www.goal.org/newspages/romney.html

During the Romney Administration he met and worked with Gun Owners’ Action League (the Mass. based pro-2A group) and no anti-second amendment or anti-sportsmen legislation made its way to the Governor’s desk. He amended the permanent AWB making it less restrictive, he removed any anti-second amendment language from the Gang Violence bill passed in 2006, and signed five pro-second amendment bills into law.

Compare that to current Democrat Gov. Patrick who has refused to meet with GOAL during his entire 2 terms and only advocates for more gun control.

Romney earned a B from the NRA, which is higher than Obama (an F) or Hillary (also an F). Romney is certainly more pro-gun than McCain (rated a C+ by the NRA)

Quote:
“We do have tough gun laws in Massachusetts; I support them, I won’t chip away at them; I believe they protect us and provide for our safety.”

Quote:
“These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense. They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people.

:dunno:
.....

Gundude
07-05-2012, 16:09
Uh, I KNOW he is not O and that is good enuff for me.
Once mitt is in than the conservatives can focus on taking the repubican partyAnd how will they do that, after just demonstrating they will vote for any progressive liberal Republican sent their way? What power will they have to "take the republican party"?

Gundude
07-05-2012, 16:14
no anti-second amendment or anti-sportsmen legislation made its way to the Governor’s deskYou have already admitted that is a lie, in this thread:The same anti-gun Democratic, veto proof, legislature that installed the permanent 1998 MA gun laws were still there in 2004. Of course the purpose of the bill for the legislature was to maintain the ban.A bill primarily designed to maintain a weapons ban is anti-second amendment legislation. Not only did it make its way to his desk, he signed it with great fanfare, focusing his words specifically on its primary purpose, to maintain the weapons ban.

certifiedfunds
07-05-2012, 16:22
You have already admitted that is a lie, in this thread:A bill primarily designed to maintain a weapons ban is anti-second amendment legislation.

I hate it when that happens... :rofl:

Acujeff
07-05-2012, 16:22
Quote:
“We do have tough gun laws in Massachusetts; I support them, I won’t chip away at them; I believe they protect us and provide for our safety.”

Quote:
“These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense. They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people.

:dunno:
.....


If you had actually read Romney's record it included his statements that pandered to the veto-proof gun control majority (over 85% anti-gun Democrat) in the MA legislature. He probably would've earned an A from the NRA otherwise.

But statements don't amount to a position - a record does.

All of Romneys "actions" have been pro-RKBA. Superficially stereotyping Romney as anti-gun is not the true story. You have to look a little deeper.

certifiedfunds
07-05-2012, 16:24
If you had actually read Romney's record it included his statements that pandered to the veto-proof gun control majority (over 85% anti-gun Democrat) in the MA legislature. He probably would've earned an A from the NRA otherwise.

But statements don't amount to a position - a record does.

All of Romneys "actions" have been pro-RKBA. Superficially stereotyping Romney as anti-gun is not the true story. You have to look a little deeper.

So what EXACTLY is the deeper meaning of:




Quote:
“We do have tough gun laws in Massachusetts; I support them, I won’t chip away at them; I believe they protect us and provide for our safety.”

Quote:
“These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense. They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people.

Is that northeast liberal codespeak for supporting the 2A?

Acujeff
07-05-2012, 16:35
You have already admitted that is a lie, in this thread:A bill primarily designed to maintain a weapons ban is anti-second amendment legislation.

A bill that reduces gun control or makes it less strict is anti-second amendment legislation only in your biased mind.

Obama supporters like Gundude have been distorting the facts to get gun-owners to vote against their own interests. It is definitely in our best interests to look deeper and get the whole story.

Gundude
07-05-2012, 16:36
For those voting Anybody But Obama: Can you simply admit to yourselves Romney is anti-gun and a proponent of government run health care? You already know you're voting for a candidate you don't like. You're voting for him on the sole basis that he's better than Obama. Do you need to believe he's pro-gun or against national healthcare? If so, why?

janice6
07-05-2012, 16:40
He's not Obama. That's good enough for me. Kick the bum out.

Gundude
07-05-2012, 16:40
A bill that reduces gun control or makes it less strict is anti-second amendment legislation only in your biased mind.

Obama supporters like Gundude have been distorting the facts to get gun-owners to vote against their own interests. It is definitely in our best interests to look deeper and get the whole story.Nope, in this thread:
http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?p=19102478
I linked to all the relevant legislation, not opinion, which shows the true purpose of the bill, to maintain the weapons ban.

It didn't reduce gun control, it protected it. It's in black and white in the legislation I linked to. Anybody who truly wants to see it can go to that thread and see for themselves, as I did all the work of finding and linking to the relevant statutes, on the MA legislature site itself.

Calling the bill Romney signed pro-gun is the height of delusion.

Acujeff
07-05-2012, 16:52
Is that northeast liberal codespeak for supporting the 2A?

Actually, it was the only way to get the MA legislature to make any changes to the strict 1998 (pre-Romney) gun control laws and still is. They had to think they were strengthening the gun control laws

With Romney's help we were able to reduce existing and block additional gun control in MA. Under Dem Gov. Patrick we've had no access or success.

If you think those two statements by Romney are worse than Obama's anti-RKBA actions (Fast and Furious, UN Gun Ban Treaty, 2 anti-constitutionalist SC Justices, and gun registration on the four Southwest border states) than you are a delusional Obama supporter and hold no crediblity.

Gundude
07-05-2012, 16:54
Actually, it was the only way to get the MA legislature to make any changes to the strict 1998 (pre-Romney) gun control laws and still is. They had to think they were strengthening the gun control lawsAnd judge Roberts had to make Liberals think they were getting government run healthcare! :rofl: :rofl:

Geniuses, both of them! When Romney makes Congress think they're passing a new federal assault weapons ban, I wonder what pro-gun treasures will be buried inside of it for all of us. :rofl:

Acujeff
07-05-2012, 17:12
Gundude - Thank you for posting your previous threads so folks can see how you take credit for sources you didn't find, distort what those sources say, admit your biased support for Obama and abuse GTer's that don't agree with you.

Romney record shows he is much better for gun-owners that Obama.
Obama's awful record shows he will be even worse if he gets a 2nd term.

Does anyone still dispute that the purpose of the criminal activity of the Fast and Furious operation was to institute more gun control?

Gundude
07-05-2012, 17:14
Gundude - Thank you for posting your previous threads so folks can see how you take credit for sources you didn't find, distort what those sources say, admit your biased support for Obama and abuse GTer's that don't agree with you.You're welcome. As long as people go to those sources and look at it for themselves, what they think of me doesn't matter.

Gundude
07-05-2012, 17:34
Romney record shows he is much better for gun-owners that Obama.
Obama's awful record shows he will be even worse if he gets a 2nd term.

Does anyone still dispute that the purpose of the criminal activity of the Fast and Furious operation was to institute more gun control?It's one thing to say Romney's better than Obama. It's another altogether to say he's pro-gun. One paints you as pragmatic, the other as delusional.

fortyofforty
07-05-2012, 17:34
One of the two, Romney or Obama, used the illegal transfer of thousands of firearms to Mexican drug cartels in a concerted effort to boost support for increased gun control. Here's a hint. It wasn't Romney.

coastal4974
07-05-2012, 21:07
For those voting Anybody But Obama: Can you simply admit to yourselves Romney is anti-gun and a proponent of government run health care? You already know you're voting for a candidate you don't like. You're voting for him on the sole basis that he's better than Obama. Do you need to believe he's pro-gun or against national healthcare? If so, why?

At this point it doesn’t make a difference. Anything but Obama.

I wish I had a different choice to make but I don’t so I’d rather vote for a lib than a Marxist ruler set on bringing down this country and writing his own constitution.

LASTRESORT20
07-05-2012, 21:08
Things we know about berry

G19G20
07-06-2012, 02:43
I was mildly impressed up until this "datapoint".


* Bain Capital also worked to perform the same kinds of business miracles again and again, with companies like Domino's, Sealy, Brookstone, Weather Channel, Burger King, Warner Music Group, Dollarama, Home Depot Supply, and many others.

Only an uninformed person would for a moment believe this is true. This really suggests that Bain Capital rescued Domino's? Im sure Domino's founder would have a problem with that statement if he wasn't a Romney supporter. Weather Channel and Warner Music were rescued by Bain? Get outta here.


Mitt Romney has Nothing to Hide
* He will show us his high school and college transcripts.
* He will show us his law degree.
* He will show us his birth certificate
* He will show us his social security card.
* He will show us his draft notice.
* He will show us his medical records.
* He will show us his income tax records.
* He will show us he has nothing to hide.

Lots of promises there. Betting few will ever be followed up on. Obama said same things in 2008. That's not working out either.

barbedwiresmile
07-06-2012, 04:55
This thread should be titled: "In what focus group tested phrases and sound-bites would you like to be addressed by your oligarchs?" Leftish sounding, anti-warish, and hopish? Or strong-on-defensish and small govermentish?

What is the preferred racial background of your ideal oligarch?

When losing individual liberties, do you prefer a "national security" justification or a "fairness" rationalization?

When paying more tax to support larger and more expensive government and associated fraud, would you prefer the theft to occur overseas or domestically?

Would you like a healthcare "mandate" and associated fines to be enforced at the state or federal level?

Would you prefer your 'assault weapons' ban enacted by an oligarch who is "pro" 2A or anti?

Good hair or no hair?

Do you like your oligarchs lapel pin round or square?

series1811
07-06-2012, 07:16
For those voting Anybody But Obama: Can you simply admit to yourselves Romney is anti-gun and a proponent of government run health care? You already know you're voting for a candidate you don't like. You're voting for him on the sole basis that he's better than Obama. Do you need to believe he's pro-gun or against national healthcare? If so, why?

I haven't seen anything to make me think he is more anti-gun, anti-capitalist, anti-American, anti-working class, than Obama.

Maybe you just had to have lived through Jimmy Carter as a working adult to get it.

series1811
07-06-2012, 07:19
It's one thing to say Romney's better than Obama. It's another altogether to say he's pro-gun. One paints you as pragmatic, the other as delusional.

No, the people that think Obama will wake up after being re-elected, and suddenly have an economic plan, become a leader, quit pandering to the welfare class and painting the real taxpayers as evil and selfish, and quit being a socialist are delusional.

amazon
07-06-2012, 08:30
All I'll say to sum it up is that as a gun owner in MA in the 90's things got BETTER for us under Romney with the exception of the adoption of the AWB that the VETO PROOF legislature was ramming through because they wouldn't let it expire. Even still, there are loopholes in what was written so we can still have our AR's and don't need the mod's like those in CA.

If someone like Patrick was in there at the time...I shudder to think of the outcome.

I would be shocked if a F&F were conceived under a Romney administration.

Guss
07-06-2012, 11:08
All that time in college and the Mormon missionary work served him well as a draft-dodger. During Vietnam, ordinary people like me got drafted.

fortyofforty
07-06-2012, 11:23
All that time in college and the Mormon missionary work served him well as a draft-dodger. During Vietnam, ordinary people like me got drafted.

Well, I guess he didn't have time to become a charter member of the Choom Gang! :rofl:

http://l3.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/YNqNGeJhIuttRyRt1Ak8ng--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7cT04NTt3PTMxMA--/http://www.theblaze.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Screen-shot-2012-06-18-at-2.01.02-PM.png

Mister_Beefy
07-06-2012, 16:08
there are thousands and thousands of people in the U.S. that will find reasons to not vote for romney.

he's too religious, he's too moral, he dodged the draft, etc.

then they'll ***** and moan during obama's second term about how the system is broken, how their vote didn't matter (even though there was a choice and they made it)

Cavalry Doc
07-06-2012, 16:18
there are thousands and thousands of people in the U.S. that will find reasons to not vote for romney.

he's too religious, he's too moral, he dodged the draft, etc.

then they'll ***** and moan during obama's second term about how the system is broken, how their vote didn't matter (even though there was a choice and they made it)

We aren't going to change any minds with posts here. People are going to do what they want to do anyway, even if you point out that it is counterproductive. The blame game can be played after the election.

Right now, everyone has a right to do what they want with their vote. Nothing to do about that. What will be will be. I'm voting the way I think is correct. If others don't, and it's reasonable, I'll take them to task later.

The Machinist
07-06-2012, 16:45
Uh, I KNOW he is not O and that is good enuff for me.
I like the standards you've set for yourself. Never set your sights higher than the curb, so you never have far to fall.

Once mitt is in than the conservatives can focus on taking the repubican party
LOL!:rofl: Seriously? When has that plan ever worked?

porschedog
07-06-2012, 16:51
Here is the only thing you need to know about Mitt

He is the far better alternative to obummer

The Machinist
07-06-2012, 16:55
This thread should be titled: "In what focus group tested phrases and sound-bites would you like to be addressed by your oligarchs?" Leftish sounding, anti-warish, and hopish? Or strong-on-defensish and small govermentish?

What is the preferred racial background of your ideal oligarch?

When losing individual liberties, do you prefer a "national security" justification or a "fairness" rationalization?

When paying more tax to support larger and more expensive government and associated fraud, would you prefer the theft to occur overseas or domestically?

Would you like a healthcare "mandate" and associated fines to be enforced at the state or federal level?

Would you prefer your 'assault weapons' ban enacted by an oligarch who is "pro" 2A or anti?

Good hair or no hair?

Do you like your oligarchs lapel pin round or square?
Excellent post. The choice between Romney or Obama is no choice at all. America's on autopilot, and neither stooge is going to lift a finger to change our course.

fortyofforty
07-06-2012, 17:11
Excellent post. The choice between Romney or Obama is no choice at all. America's on autopilot, and neither stooge is going to lift a finger to change our course.

And your little Ronnie Earmarks would? :rofl: He couldn't even win one primary. He's been in Congress for how long now, and how's the country doing? Either he's a lying, pandering hypocrite or he's an idiot. I haven't decided yet, but I'm leaning towards the former. :dunno:

RC-RAMIE
07-06-2012, 17:21
And your little Ronnie Earmarks would? :rofl: He couldn't even win one primary. He's been in Congress for how long now, and how's the country doing? Either he's a lying, pandering hypocrite or he's an idiot. I haven't decided yet, but I'm leaning towards the former. :dunno:

Because the current condition of the country is based on one man congress? You attacks don't make much sense.


....

fortyofforty
07-06-2012, 17:29
Because the current condition of the country is based on one man congress? You attacks don't make much sense.


....

Because the current condition of the country has absolutely nothing to do with the members of Congress? Your defense doesn't make much sense. Paul is as responsible as any other member of Congress, especially one who has served so long. Maybe more so, since he's had an awful lot of chances to convince fellow members to vote with him. He failed. Miserably. Like his presidential campaign. A dismal failure. The rest of Congress continued to act as Paul acted, not as he talked, and here we are.

Ruble Noon
07-06-2012, 17:33
And your little Ronnie Earmarks would? :rofl: He couldn't even win one primary. He's been in Congress for how long now, and how's the country doing? Either he's a lying, pandering hypocrite or he's an idiot. I haven't decided yet, but I'm leaning towards the former. :dunno:

But he could win in the general election, unlike Romney. Too bad he couldn't get past the neo-cons and statists in the republican party.

fortyofforty
07-06-2012, 17:37
But he could win in the general election, unlike Romney. Too bad he couldn't get past the neo-cons and statists in the republican party.

How do you figure that? He is a buffoon. He can't win anything but a tiny little district in Texas, where he has to buy votes with earmarks and pork barrel spending. He had as much chance to win as anyone else. He failed. The DOPEs were unable to muster even ten percent of the vote. Failing to win the primary, failing to win the nomination, means he'd win the general election? :rofl: He got a pass from the media because they needed him to be a thorn in the side of the eventual nominee. Had Paul won the nomination, the knives would have come out and he'd have been ripped to shreds.

The Machinist
07-06-2012, 17:38
And your little Ronnie Earmarks would? :rofl:
Most likely, based on decades of voting records, speeches, and books.

He couldn't even win one primary.
Thank you, Captain Obvious.

He's been in Congress for how long now, and how's the country doing?
So voting against everything that has gotten us here now makes his fault? And his alone, too? Your sorry political insight even makes the MSNBC puppets look like geniuses.

Either he's a lying, pandering hypocrite or he's an idiot. I haven't decided yet, but I'm leaning towards the former. :dunno:
OK.

Ruble Noon
07-06-2012, 17:51
How do you figure that? He is a buffoon. He can't win anything but a tiny little district in Texas, where he has to buy votes with earmarks and pork barrel spending. He had as much chance to win as anyone else. He failed. The DOPEs were unable to muster even ten percent of the vote. Failing to win the primary, failing to win the nomination, means he'd win the general election? :rofl: He got a pass from the media because they needed him to be a thorn in the side of the eventual nominee. Had Paul won the nomination, the knives would have come out and he'd have been ripped to shreds.

How do I figure that? Easy, he has a sizable base that will gladly vote for him, ABO voters will vote for him, the anti-war crowd will vote for him. He does not have the cloud of gun bans hanging over his head nor was he responsible for mandating people buy health insurance.

fortyofforty
07-06-2012, 18:16
Most likely, based on decades of voting records, speeches, and books.

But not based on decades of pork barrel requests in order, of course, to "return" money to the taxpayers of his district. Give me a break. What a hypocrite.

Thank you, Captain Obvious.

So, by losing, over and over, in election after election, he's proven he's just the guy to defeat Odumbo? [Read this in your Dr. Evil voice] Riiiiiiiight.

So voting against everything that has gotten us here now makes his fault? And his alone, too? Your sorry political insight even makes the MSNBC puppets look like geniuses. OK.

Another Paul enabler. He voted "against everything", but used the very system to shovel pork to his constituents. What a stand up guy. Another few losses and he'll have them right where he wants them. :rofl:

Your sorry political insight makes even the Occupy Wall Street puppets look like geniuses.

Let Paul run for a small executive position before he tries his hand in the big leagues. I'd suggest dog catcher, but I'm not sure he could handle the tough decisions.

fortyofforty
07-06-2012, 18:20
How do I figure that? Easy, he has a sizable base that will gladly vote for him, ABO voters will vote for him, the anti-war crowd will vote for him. He does not have the cloud of gun bans hanging over his head nor was he responsible for mandating people buy health insurance.

Seriously? You think all those people, like many on GT, who pretend they'd vote for Paul over Odumbo would actually do so? Seriously?

If the media had ever needed to destroy Paul, which they would have had he won the nomination, he'd be in worse shape than this guy:

http://redriverpak.files.wordpress.com/2011/11/jaws_eating_captain_quint.jpg?w=500

The Machinist
07-06-2012, 18:22
I've never seen an anti-Paul dope with such a hard-on for him. Have fun voting for the greasy-haired, white Obama this November. :wavey:

fortyofforty
07-06-2012, 18:27
I've never seen an anti-Paul dope with such a hard-on for him. Have fun voting for the greasy-haired, white Obama this November. :wavey:

I've never seen a Paulista DOPE so infatuated with another man that he can't see any faults in him. He's so dreamy! :wavey:

http://reidreport.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Ron-Paul-openmouth.jpg
You LOVE me! You really LOVE me!

Glock Talk. The last refuge of extremists and ideologues outside of an Occupy Wall Street protest.

Any luck producing those tax returns yet? :rofl:

camelotkid
07-06-2012, 18:42
I'd rather have a Pres. with Christian morals than one without (or one that seems to shun them).

While Gov. here he never had the "I know better than you" attitude or approach. And yes, I have even met the man.
those aren't christian morals :whistling: they are bat___ crazy mormon morals

The Machinist
07-06-2012, 19:06
I've never seen a Paulista DOPE so infatuated with another man that he can't see any faults in him. He's so dreamy! :wavey:
I know the facts are inconvenient for you, but it's been explained repeatedly that it's not the man, but the message. Ron Paul has plenty of faults, being human and all. I acknowledge them, and still support him and the cause of liberty.

For you, however, liberty is just a word in a book. You have but one standard for any candidate: An R next to their name. The GOP establishment doesn't even have to work for your vote. They already own it.

Any luck producing those tax returns yet? :rofl:
:bunny:

Ruble Noon
07-06-2012, 19:17
Seriously? You think all those people, like many on GT, who pretend they'd vote for Paul over Odumbo would actually do so? Seriously?




Aren't you one of those ABO guys? Are you telling me that you wouldn't vote for Paul who is most definitely ABO?

Mister_Beefy
07-07-2012, 18:05
those aren't christian morals :whistling: they are bat___ crazy mormon morals


bigotry like this is going to buy us four more years of obama.

thanks a lot.

The Machinist
07-07-2012, 19:10
bigotry like this is going to buy us four more years of obama.

thanks a lot.
Mr. Beefy, I would offer this to you: Jesus said, "Ye will be hated by all men for my name's sake." So don't sweat the people that get all worked up over the mere mention of Christianity. Let them lose sleep over it, because you shouldn't have to.

As for four more years of Obama: Yes, we will get four more years of the Cloward-Piven puppet. That's because his chief opponent is a liberal clown, and only conservatives can beat incumbent Democrats. I'll say it again - Romney is a liberal, and liberals cannot beat sitting liberals. There's no getting around that fact.

Prepare yourself, your loved ones, and your home against the coming onslaught, and pray. That's all we can do at this point.

Cavalry Doc
07-07-2012, 19:12
I've never seen an anti-Paul dope with such a hard-on for him. Have fun voting for the greasy-haired, white Obama this November. :wavey:

It's blowback. Should have been expected.

Sharkey
07-07-2012, 21:09
What is to know other than one wants to move forward with O care and one wants to repeal it. One is a successful businessman and one is a community organizer who hangs out with an unamerican preacher and unrepentant terrorist. Yeah, they are the same????

The Machinist
07-07-2012, 21:41
What is to know other than one wants to move forward with O care and one wants to repeal it. One is a successful businessman and one is a community organizer who hangs out with an unamerican preacher and unrepentant terrorist. Yeah, they are the same????
Romney wants to replace Obamacare with another government program. Haven't you been paying attention? Repeal and Replace anyone?

Lone_Wolfe
07-08-2012, 00:55
.........He has the background and record to become an excellent President of the United States .............

If only that would actually happen.

fortyofforty
07-08-2012, 05:57
Aren't you one of those ABO guys?

No, I am not. I never said I was.

fortyofforty
07-08-2012, 06:02
I know the facts are inconvenient for you, but it's been explained repeatedly that it's not the man, but the message. Ron Paul has plenty of faults, being human and all. I acknowledge them, and still support him and the cause of liberty.

For you, however, liberty is just a word in a book. You have but one standard for any candidate: An R next to their name. The GOP establishment doesn't even have to work for your vote. They already own it.


:bunny:

Unfortunately for you DOPEs, I am not a mindless Paulista robot. I can read. I can listen. I can evaluate. I read and heard Paul's positions, and I disagree with many of them. I read and heard Paul's "facts" that are, again and again, demonstrably false. I conclude that he is a lying, hypocritical, pandering blowhard or an idiot. I won't vote for either. Good luck if you will. Turn off your brain and vote for Paul. He'll be the answer. :rofl:

The Machinist
07-08-2012, 08:10
Unfortunately for you DOPEs, I am not a mindless Paulista robot. I can read. I can listen. I can evaluate. I read and heard Paul's positions, and I disagree with many of them. I read and heard Paul's "facts" that are, again and again, demonstrably false. I conclude that he is a lying, hypocritical, pandering blowhard or an idiot. I won't vote for either. Good luck if you will. Turn off your brain and vote for Paul. He'll be the answer. :rofl:
Which of Paul's positions did you disagree with?

fortyofforty
07-08-2012, 08:21
Which of Paul's positions did you disagree with?

Already pointed them out, endlessly, in several other threads. They are clear and obvious.

RC-RAMIE
07-08-2012, 10:14
No, I am not. I never said I was.

So you would have voted for Obama if RP won the nomination?


....

RC-RAMIE
07-08-2012, 10:15
Already pointed them out, endlessly, in several other threads. They are clear and obvious.
I'm sure you won't mind post them again you seem ok with posting your BS shrimp argument every chance you get.


....

fortyofforty
07-08-2012, 10:51
So you would have voted for Obama if RP won the nomination?


....

I might have had to go third party. You Paulistas have thrown some names out there I would have had to look at. :wavey: Plus you all said it was better to go third party than vote for an idiot or a liar like Paul.

fortyofforty
07-08-2012, 10:54
I'm sure you won't mind post them again you seem ok with posting your BS shrimp argument every chance you get.


....

Just because you can't justify Paul's hypocrisy without doing logical backflips and mental gymnastics doesn't make it BS. You can't explain it, you can't justify it, you can only excuse it because you're in love. I get it. Love conquers all.