with what one candidate hedging on specifics but the specifics that the other has already done.
We are urged to vote against a person more than we are to vote for a person. The more a person reveals, the more ammo they they supply to the other side. We, the voters, are being played by the slick campaign organizations whose job is to study our vulnerabilities and fears. They use their skills to create perception rather than truth. Just like a game show, we now have an opportunity to choose between what we already have in our hands or what's behind the door.
.....is anybody's guess. Romney has taken conflicting positions on the same issue within the same interview. Even if you go back to his 1994 campaign against Ted Kennedy (the one in which he referred to blind trusts as "an age-old ruse"), much of the criticism leveled against him was that nobody could tell where he stood on anything.
I have my suspicions about our president. Those suspicions stem from his activist roots which I've stated here before. He was a competent and studied person in the arts of manipulation and persuasion. So are the proverbial "used car salesmen". As such, you listen to the spiel but don't buy anything based upon it. This doesn't necessarily make a person a liar but you do need to be careful. I see too many that follow a person like a sheep does a shepherd. The shepherd also uses dogs to round up his sheep when they begin to leave the herd. I think Obama's herd was showing signs of wandering and that left him vulnerable to a lesser known challenger. The dogs have been put to work now...overtime.
Frankly, I don't think Romney has much chance of winning the election but I'd hope he at least puts a good scare into the president and lets him know there's no clear mandate to bull ahead with his own person agenda and ideas of what the US should be.
that's World Peace in progress. That's why they are called "Progressives". It's like an imaginary point that keeps moving further away the harder they try to reach it. It's all Relative. There is no Unified Theory. Conjecture is the rule of the day with them, (when not asking silly questions that lead nowhere).
literally been an open book for years........what did we know about BO, even back to his Chicago days and how his campaign leaked the SEALED divorce settlement records of his Senate seat opponent (Jack Ryan....remember that name? It's the one he mixed up and called Paul Ryan by that name during the 'dressing down' he gave Ryan publicly) and forced his opponent to resign from the race. Recognize the tactics being used against Romney? Nothing has changed.........BO's own statement of "if you have no record to run on you destroy the opponent".....and one of the first campaign slogans of this re-election for BO was "KILL ROMNEY".
You can't wrap your head around the idea of supporting a candidate that you know 'absolutely nothing' about, and yet you support the ONE candidate that most people STILL know nothing about.......you are a prime candidate for buying stock in Tylenol Migraine meds........because the headaches should BO get back in will only worsen.
his 5-point plan that he's been clearly stating for at least two months already......
>>>I've never heard Romney state as clearly as he did at this rally what he plans to do as president. He elaborated on a five point plan to invigorate the economy: energy independence; improving the education system for our children and our workers; taking advantage of trade globally to open new markets and export our goods, while stopping China's cheating; cutting and capping federal spending, and getting on track to have a balanced budget; and, being the champion for small business to grow and create jobs.
Romney specifically stated that he wants to help women, who are more likely to start a small business, to have the tools needed to open and grow small businesses. He emphasized that he knows that jobs come from small businesses and his administration would make it easier to open and run a business in this country. For Powell especially, this is important as we have many solopreneurs and small businesses in our city who are struggling under the regulatory environment brought on by government bureaucracies.>>>
That said....he's had his original 59 bullet point plan on his website nearly since the first day of his running announcement if you want those 5 points heavily detailed since he has taken the main five and compressed them for the campaign rallies and speeches.........take a peek...
Now tell me how BO isn't spouting the same garbage as he did four years ago, with no new plan to do anything differently....he never had a plan other than to pass Obamacare (which HE didn't even contribute to and left it entirely up to Pelosi and Reid to put together for him), stimulate his green energy cronies, help his union backers, and screw the rest of the country. Same plan this time around......if you know differently, please give me information about what HIS plan is since you wanted details about Romney's plan and I've provided it for you.
Let's see -- he goes on about the stimulus that his running mate took advantage of and that WORKED, he talks about repealing "Obamacare" even though he appears to like most of it (at least that was what he said LAST week), he wants to cut taxes for the richest Americans, a proposal that leading economists say will raise middle class taxes by up to $2,000 a year, he wants to deregulate the banks so they can go back to doing the things that caused the economy to crash in 2008, sounds great.
I saw something about him wanting to limit damage awards from high-dollar lawsuits. Clearly another attempt to protect those zillionaire businessman pals of his from those nasty consumers. A trial lawyer was once asked why not sue for a dollar if it isn't about the money. His response (paraphrasing), "Because if I sue for a dollar, they'll just give me the dollar. The large sum is a way to get them into court an punish them for their wrongdoing." Limiting damage awards is another way of limiting corporate liability.
I'll give him wanting to see an end to frivolous lawsuits. Who doesn't?
I've only skimmed through it; I'd have to guess that a lot of it was written by his campaign staff because when Romney is asked these questions, he never seems to be able to answer them with any specificity.
didn't 'anticipate' this latest terrorist protests all over the middle east.....and continues to blame it on a movie that 90% of those countries didn't even know existed, and yet the protests don't mention it in most of those countries. It's strictly 'death to America, death to Israel'........even Libya's leader and other leaders interviewed say that the attacks on the embassies all over were planned ahead of time to coincide with 9-11. Our leader is clueless, but he has to have his Admin keep blaming the movie because to do otherwise this close to the election would be his downfall that he didn't anticipate the 9-11 anniversary and protect our embassies and consulates. Plus he went to more fundraisers the nights the events were taking place and continues to do so.
.....in his comments about bin Laden. If Bush had gotten him, he'd have "spiked the ball" too and rightly so. It was an accomplishment to be proud of and one of the great achievements of his presidency. The only thing sad about it is the pathetic attempts by the Right to downplay or criticize the capture and killing of the most wanted terrorist in the world.
....that it was SEAL Team Six. He did not reveal any names, and other than the one guy who has come out, we still don't know who any of them are and I doubt we will for a long, long time, if ever.
Could he have gone without naming the group that did it? I suppose. As for details, I would assume that anything that will appear in the movie has been cleared first, and even then I bet there are details the filmmakers were not given.
The biggest potential liability for us was the helicopter that got left behind, even after they blew it up.
during his first presidential campaign debates. As I recall, he bobbed and weaved as best he could by attempting to divert attention from discussing his own ideas by harping on what he said were failures of the previous administration in that area. He seemed to have no plan other than to rely more on the UN for direction. His promises were more focused on returning the energy of government to domestic rather than foreign matters. I'd say that McCain was far better versed in foreign policy but that didn't seem to hurt Obama.
For one he will say exactly the same things, the same way, he's said them before.
BWAA HA HA HA!!
All Romney has to do is say and claim some of them first and then accuse Obama of trying to copy him during the debate, LOL. Attack the others before he has a chance to say them, so when he does it sounds weak. At the least he will know already what Obama is going to fall back to, everytime, his scripted and by now very memorized statements.