bleedorange Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 Thanks for biting (looking at your dog picture). Can you think of a succinct explanation for why you will vote for Romney? I find him to be the better choice between the two candidates. When it comes to issues involving taxes, government spending, government regulations, methods to achieve economic and job growth, etc., I'm more aligned with Romney. I'm also not a fan of how Obama has handled foreign policy for the most part. Link to post Share on other sites
IRememberDBoon Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 so bleedorange you want to go back to the policies we had from 00 to 08 in the white house?? are you high? Link to post Share on other sites
bleedorange Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 so bleedorange you want to go back to the policies we had from 00 to 08 in the white house?? are you high? No, I'd like to go back to the general policies we had between 1980 and 2000. Link to post Share on other sites
Doug C Posted June 25, 2012 Share Posted June 25, 2012 so bleedorange you want to go back to the policies we had from 00 to 08 in the white house?? are you high?No, I'd like to go back to the general policies we had between 1980 and 2000.What about boon's other question? Link to post Share on other sites
lost highway Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 No, I'd like to go back to the general policies we had between 1980 and 2000. Looking for Romney to do something Clinton-esque. I think the problem with that hope is that he is in deep, like up to his neck with the mega-corporations. A lot of the new regulation is to keep tycoons from casting bets with your mortgage and then needing us to bail them out. Also, I believe the taxes were on the average higher in that period then they are now. Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Jules Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 I am also voting for the stiff white dude. Link to post Share on other sites
lost highway Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 I am also voting for the stiff white dude. Can we get an update for your reasons why? (You token Republicans are the reason this is actually a dialog). Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Jules Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 mostly taxes and spending Link to post Share on other sites
lost highway Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 Romney has already vowed to "Restore our national defense", apparently we haven't put enough cash, blood, or bullets in that category lately. How can we weather another several years of decreased revenue from taxes and increased spending on weapons and foreign quagmires? Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Jules Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 We probably can't. Link to post Share on other sites
caliber66 Posted June 27, 2012 Share Posted June 27, 2012 Good reason to vote for Romney, then, huh? Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Jules Posted June 27, 2012 Share Posted June 27, 2012 Yes actually. Of course he can't just cut taxes and increase defense spending. That obviously won't work. His plan is to "re-build" while increasing efficiencies and cutting major waste in the defense department. Procurement staffing being one. I've seen it from the supplier side and it's ridiculous. I'm not saying he'll be able to do it, but I like the train of thought. Link to post Share on other sites
Sweet Papa Crimbo Posted June 27, 2012 Share Posted June 27, 2012 I am a little leery of all the hagiography of Mr. Obama. The messianic tone to his campaign(s) is scary. Of course, the Republicans fielded the weakest slate in my lifetime. Link to post Share on other sites
lost highway Posted June 27, 2012 Share Posted June 27, 2012 I'm not saying he'll be able to do it, but I like the train of thought. What could possibly wrong with the already formidable size of our military? Why would we want to invest more in a complex that has brought us and our unfortunate targets nothing but ruin in the past six decades? Korea, Vietnam, Irag, Afghanistan, count 'em up man. One shit show after another. Link to post Share on other sites
bleedorange Posted June 27, 2012 Share Posted June 27, 2012 What could possibly wrong with the already formidable size of our military? Why would we want to invest more in a complex that has brought us and our unfortunate targets nothing but ruin in the past six decades? Korea, Vietnam, Irag, Afghanistan, count 'em up man. One shit show after another. Those "shit shows" aren't a result of defense spending, they're the result of bad decision-making. Spending money on defense is necessary in order to keep up with new technology and maintain strong forces when they are needed. It's one of the few things that the federal government is actually supposed to spend money on. There are ways to make it more efficient, though. Link to post Share on other sites
lost highway Posted June 27, 2012 Share Posted June 27, 2012 What I mean is we've spent a massive amount of money on that tool, and it hasn't brought us or the world any prosperity (unless you own stock in the arms industry, read: the tail that wags the dog). We sit in the richest country with an embarrassing health care crisis, a public school system that is still in need of innovation, and the untapped potential to lead the world in efficient high-speed mass transit, and clean energy. But, people are getting excited (or more commonly, grumblingly obliging) to vote for a guy who wants to make sure the world knows we once again have indisputably the biggest military force in the world. He also wants to fix the deficit. He also wants to lower taxes. I know this model. There was a guy around here who tried to do this recently. You see, the shit show is inevitable when you invest in the military. No one wants to park a high tech, experimental jet car in their driveway and just leave it there. The nature of the military industrial complex is people need to play with, and use the toys. Then we have some kid half way around the world with his guts splattered all over the sidewalk and one of our boys has to come home to counseling for PTSD, cause he watched the whole thing. Or worse yet, he did it. Eisenhower spelled it out half a century ago and people still don't get it. You need to beware even more so when there are billions of dollars private defense contractors, and arms companies. It is a gold trigger that demands to be pulled. Every hawk on capital hill knows this, but they sell you stars and stripes. I think it's high time we get honest with ourselves as a country and look at this with open eyes. I can understand a conservative that is worried about their tax dollars getting soaked up in an inefficient welfare state, but we have had a right wing in this country that spends money on bullets and bank corporations. And now I sound like Ron Paul. /rant. Link to post Share on other sites
lost highway Posted June 27, 2012 Share Posted June 27, 2012 On a non-military note. How do the Romney fans feel about the fact that middle class tax, and small business taxes are lower under Obama than Bush? Link to post Share on other sites
lost highway Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 The Supreme Court upheld the Health Care Act. Link to post Share on other sites
Mr. Heartbreak Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 I'm not that easily surprised these days, but this decision surprised me. First time Roberts has impressed me in any way, shape or form.But it's going to be a looooooong summer. Link to post Share on other sites
Tweedling Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 Great. Now what? Link to post Share on other sites
Sweet Papa Crimbo Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 I wonder if the supporters of the Affordable Care Act understand that this is not a single payer system. When people start paying a penalty (tax) for not having health insurance...it's interesting. I am really dispassionate about this.I have a job. I have health insurance. I have relatives who don't have health insurance. I have also worked two jobs for 15 years to be able to afford certain lifestyle choices that I have made and to put my kids through college. I understand the costs. But I also understand the basic philosophical and political argument about personal choice and responsibility. Will this lead to lower health care costs? Will it lead to better health care across the board? Or are we heading for the usual lowest common denominator like we always seem to get with Federal action? I'm afraid I already know the answers, but I hope to be surprised. Link to post Share on other sites
Mr. Heartbreak Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 I think this is the closest we will see to bipartisanship for a good long while. A Democrat got a law through, over huge Republican opposition, and it was today upheld by a Republican-dominated Supreme Court. Amusingly enough, people all over the internet are still bitching up a storm. I hope they will at least be honest enough to criticize CHIEF Justice Roberts just as harshly as they criticize our President. Link to post Share on other sites
ih8music Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 Pleasantly surprised by the ruling. Everyone seemed to be leaning to the mandate getting struck down. Link to post Share on other sites
Sweet Papa Crimbo Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 How is someone who can't afford health insurance going to be helped by paying a tax/penalty for not having health insurance? Link to post Share on other sites
lost highway Posted June 28, 2012 Share Posted June 28, 2012 Well, I need to read the fine print, but hopefully the penalty would also function as coverage. I do know that I was "under insured" when I dislocated my shoulder years ago and the trip to the hospital set me back five grand (for x-rays, and two minutes with the doctor popping my shoulder back in). I worked out a payment plan, but 5 grand was a huge drain on my finances over the course of a couple years. Long story short, the "penalty" right now is already very expensive. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts