The Goat Pen

He must be mexican. I'm sure his real name is Arturo....

Romney speaks in front of Obammer's version of sustainable....teehee.

Toemeesleather wrote:Romney speaks in front of Obammer's version of sustainable....teehee.

Did you really just teehee, Elton?

not that there's anything wrong wt

Frankly, I think Mitt has a lot going for him and I have no qualms about touting his accomplishments.


The Success of RomneyCare in Massachusetts - Forbes
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2 ... re-reform/

"I think it's been a huge success," says Michael Widmer, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, an independant state watchdog that has a reputation as the "keeper of the keys" on the state budget numbers. "Romney should be proud of it. It has been one of the biggest policy achievements in this state over the last 25 years," he says. Although on the national level Republicans talk of overturning "ObamaCare", no Republican in the Massachusetts government is serious about overturning its predecessor, "RomneyCare."

AlabamAlum wrote:I know Artur. Good guy

Did he... touch you?

x

bluetick wrote:Frankly, I think Mitt has a lot going for him and I have no qualms about touting his accomplishments.


The Success of RomneyCare in Massachusetts - Forbes
http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2 ... re-reform/

"I think it's been a huge success," says Michael Widmer, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, an independant state watchdog that has a reputation as the "keeper of the keys" on the state budget numbers. "Romney should be proud of it. It has been one of the biggest policy achievements in this state over the last 25 years," he says. Although on the national level Republicans talk of overturning "ObamaCare", no Republican in the Massachusetts government is serious about overturning its predecessor, "RomneyCare."

Well that settles it. RomneyCare was good. Therefore ObamaCare must be good. That is a fabulous way for Romney to get elected as president. He's just like Obama, only more so.

When the head to head campaign gets into full swing, Obama is going to destroy Romney on job creation. Fairly or not (and it probably is), Obama is going to point out that Romney's entire M.O. was to take over companies and promptly fire half the workers. In terms of pure capitalism, I'm sure it was good business (and one need look no further than Romney's bank account to affirm that), but I doubt it will play well to the masses.

Personally, I think Romney would be an OK president. He's basically a republican version of Obama, i.e., pretty middle-of-the-road vis a vis the hard right wing of the republican party. Of course the yapping class of the republican party (so ably represented in here and chatrooms everywhere) think that Obama is somewhere to the left of Leon Trotsky, but the hardcore left wing of the party don't think he's liberal enough.

As always, you just can't win with some people (this applies equally, as far as I can tell, to the left and the right), but I don't really see a whole lot of difference b/w Romney and Obama. Romney certainly doesn't have the ultra right wing handlers (Rove, Cheney, Wolfowitz, etc) that Bush had in tow. I wouldn't be that bummed out if Romney won, and he certainly is positioning himself for a strong run in 2016, which is about the best he can hope for, b/c there's no way he'll win in 2012. Of course, Hillary will likely have something to say about Romney's chances in 2016, everything is setting up very nicely for her to make a strong run in 4 years as well. Poor, poor repubs...

Job growth in May was the weakest in a year and employers added far fewer jobs in the prior two months than previously reported, suggesting the economic recovery was faltering.

Employers created a paltry 69,000 jobs last month, the Labor Department said on Friday, the fewest since May last year.


5 MORE MONTHZZZZ!!!lll

When the head to head campaign gets into full swing, Obama is going to destroy Romney on job creation.


How? By touting his economic record...LMAO

"Why, yes we're better...look at Solyndra"

Yes, I still miss Pepper Rogers.

The only way Obama loses is if Europe and/or China meltdown, and drag us deeper into recession. That is a real possibility. The R's should be praying to St. John D. Rockefeller to make that happen.

Lots of fed-up folks out there...DNC has cut off money also....Obammer will have to use Kalifornia for his campaign, the opposite of Obammernomics is pulling Wisconsin out of the hole.


The labor movement and its left-wing allies in the Democratic Party thought they were doing something extremely clever when they reacted to their defeats at the hands of Scott Walker in the Wisconsin legislature by starting a recall campaign. The recall enabled the losers of the 2010 election where Walker and the GOP swept to power in the state to, in effect, get a do-over in which they could act as if the previous result didn’t really count. But as the latest polls from Wisconsin show, they are on the eve of a catastrophic loss that will not only leave Walker in power and stronger than ever but also deal the Democrats a crucial loss that may be a harbinger of more setbacks in the fall.

Obammer will have to use Kalifornia for his campaign, the opposite of Obammernomics is pulling Wisconsin out of the hole.

I completely agree that Obama wants to turn America into California and Greece, while Romney wants to turn America into Wisconsin. And Wisconsin is the only path that comprehends simple math and is remotely sane.

The sad part is, a huge part of the electorate WANT the California/Greece option. The people of California know their state is on the brink of bankruptcy, yet they don't seem to mind spending billions more on high speed rails to nowhere, or gutting their own agriculture industry to save a two inch fish. The Greeks would rather riot and default and exit the EZ than live within their means. To the stupid, the belief that "You can have it all and nothing has to change" is far more appealing than "You're going to have to give up something." Never underestimate the power of mass self-delusion.

Indeed, a fine example of this phenomenon in its full flower can be observed every day in here...

Toemeesleather wrote:

The tick jinx strikes again...

Hey Sardis, while I'm in Northern Ireland next week, I'll tell Ian Paisley you said hey.

I've shaken the man's hand once. I'm sure he'll remember me. Enjoy your 100th anniversary of the Ulster Covenant celebration.

2014 will be the 100th anniversary of the Third Irish Home Rule Act, which passed the British parliament and eventually resulted in the establishment of the Irish Republic. My grandfather - a devout Protestant, member of the Orange order and rabid unionist, emigrated with his family to America the next year. A coincidence? I think not.

Grandpa was a huge fan of Ian Paisley too.

hedge wrote:When the head to head campaign gets into full swing, Obama is going to destroy Romney on job creation. Fairly or not (and it probably is), Obama is going to point out that Romney's entire M.O. was to take over companies and promptly fire half the workers. In terms of pure capitalism, I'm sure it was good business (and one need look no further than Romney's bank account to affirm that), but I doubt it will play well to the masses.

I can not even BELIEVE that someone as ignorant as you earned a degree from the University of North Carolina.

Your IQ is not high enough to gain admission that that wonderful university. If it was, you would already know, that Bain Capital came in and took over ailing companies. In otherwords, dumbass, the company is about to go OUT OF BUSINESS and fire EVERYONE if they don't get capitalization (cash) and get it NOW. They can't go to a bank because all a bank does is loan them the money. Banks are not in the business of taking over a failing company. It is too risky for a bank to loan into a black hole. That is where Bain comes in, they flush them with cash and they take over. But Bain Capital only does that if the company invites them to do it. They fire the incompetant management and remove legacy parts of the business that weigh is down, weight that can take an otherwise viable business model and move it into receivership. Then, if possible, the company will survive and most of the employees that were there will remain there.

Solyndra, needed Bain Capital, not a loan from tax payers that will never be repaid. They needed a venture capital company to come in and take it over and make the company viable by removing all the dead weight. But that wasn't going to happen because the dead weight of that company (Obama's friends) wanted their tax-payer-funded golden parachutes, (parachutes that Bain Capital never gives.) So they weren't invited. They through themselves on the mercy of government and as a result, everyone was eventually fired.

Rest assured, all those people Romney's company fired, they were going to lose their jobs no matter what. Moreover, all the people who rely on brain-dead jobs in dead-end industries, they were all going to vote to re-elect the President no matter what he or Willard Mitt said. The "masses" cover a lot of people and you have no right saying what will or wont play well with them.

hedge wrote:Personally, I think Romney would be an OK president. He's basically a republican version of Obama, i.e., pretty middle-of-the-road vis a vis the hard right wing of the republican party. Of course the yapping class of the republican party (so ably represented in here and chatrooms everywhere) think that Obama is somewhere to the left of Leon Trotsky, but the hardcore left wing of the party don't think he's liberal enough.

As always, you just can't win with some people (this applies equally, as far as I can tell, to the left and the right), but I don't really see a whole lot of difference b/w Romney and Obama. Romney certainly doesn't have the ultra right wing handlers (Rove, Cheney, Wolfowitz, etc) that Bush had in tow. I wouldn't be that bummed out if Romney won, and he certainly is positioning himself for a strong run in 2016, which is about the best he can hope for, b/c there's no way he'll win in 2012. Of course, Hillary will likely have something to say about Romney's chances in 2016, everything is setting up very nicely for her to make a strong run in 4 years as well. Poor, poor repubs...

You better hope (for everyone's sake) Romney wins in November.