A week later Romney is still a douchebag

[dirk digler]

My guess Mittens he won because he didn't insult half the country and didn't come across as a prick to normal middle class people.

Mitt: Obama won because of 'gifts'

http://www.politico.com/news/stories...#ixzz2CIgh0NOo

Mitt Romney told donors Wednesday he blamed last week’s loss to President Barack Obama in part to “gifts” the Obama administration gave to key voter blocs, including African Americans, Hispanics and young women, according to media reports.

“The president’s campaign focused on giving targeted groups a big gift — so he made a big effort on small things. Those small things, by the way, add up to trillions of dollars,” Romney said on a conference call with donors, the Los Angeles Times first reported.

The “gifts,” according to Romney, included forgiving college loan interest, free contraceptive coverage and the part of Obamacare that allows people 26 and younger to be covered under their parents’ health care plans.

“You can imagine for somebody making $25,000 or $30,000 or $35,000 a year, being told you’re now going to get free healthcare, particularly if you don’t have it, getting free healthcare worth, what, $10,000 per family, in perpetuity. I mean, this is huge,” Romney said, the New York Times reported.

“Likewise with Hispanic voters, free healthcare was a big plus,” Romney added. “But in addition with regards to Hispanic voters, the amnesty for children of illegals, the so-called Dream Act kids, was a huge plus for that voting group.”

[HemiEd]

Originally Posted by Iowanian

A week later, the market has dropped over 710 points before the start of trading today............a week later, the weekly unemployment claims jumped mysteriously to 439,000 NEW claims.



Great Job Obama(and those who put him in office).


They call it "Hope and Change" because with your guy, no one can afford hope and CASH.

Free shit for everybody!!

[dirk digler]

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

Well, of course not, because we are using text.

For the record, I don't need to write/hear you or anyone type/say that. Enough posts can also communicate that. The left claimed Obama would unite the country. You, and the side you support, consistently come down in favor of a one way for all approach by favoring the federal govt to do things it ought not. You just did when you criticized a state's governor for passing a law you don't agree with.

So now you can read people's minds? You are pretty talented BEP.

Speaking only from me I don't favor a one way approach for everything. Some things the fed government does better and others it doesn't and shouldn't do.

Now you are not allowing me to criticize anything? Look who is trying to control people now.

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by dirk digler

So now you can read people's minds? You are pretty talented BEP.

No but I can read posts and figure where a person is at on issues in terms of where power should be.

Speaking only from me I don't favor a one way approach for everything. Some things the fed government does better and others it doesn't and shouldn't do.

I've never seen you make any case for de-centralization via federalism and you support the incorporation doctrine. I'll stand my position on you're being a prog.

Now you are not allowing me to criticize anything? Look who is trying to control people now.

No you can criticize but I can criticize what you criticize too. That's not controlling you. You're the one who called for an action on a state to do as you think—not I.

[BucEyedPea]

Wait until all those people who think they're getting something free, realize there's no such thing as a free lunch.

Plus, democratic policies have a way of making future Republicans as happened when there was a mass exodus out of the Democratic party. The young just have to learn the same lessons other learned before them.

[dirk digler]

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

I've never seen you make any case for de-centralization via federalism and you support the incorporation doctrine. I'll stand my position on you're being a prog.

That is because you don't pay attention. You think you know shit but you really don't. So let me help you.

Some Things I believe the Fed government can\should do:
1. Defense\Intelligence
2. Immigration
3. Health Care

Some Things I believe the Fed government shouldn't do or have less role:

1. Education (should be more up to state and local officials)
2. Regulate marriage
3. Regulate pot
4. Personal choices like what to eat, what to drink etc

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

No you can criticize but I can criticize what you criticize too. That's not controlling you. You're the one who called for an action on a state to do as you think—not I.

I didn't call for any action I was just laughing at them dummy.

[loochy]

Well of course he won because of "gifts" given to key demographics. That's how you get elected retard. Obama just chose the right gifts to the right demographics. Romney did not.

[Dave]

12 years later, so is Al Gore...

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by dirk digler

That is because you don't pay attention. You think you know shit but you really don't. So let me help you.

Some Things I believe the Fed government can\should do:
1. Defense\Intelligence
2. Immigration
3. Health Care

And there you have it. Precisely my point with the health care. That's a pretty massive swatch of federal involvement right there including invasion of health privacy since the govt gets our records.It's socialized health care and administered by hundreds of new bureaucrats including IRS agents to enforce it.

As for immigration, if the Feds don't do it then a state has some rights there as well.
In fact the US Constitution, authorizes Congress just one role in regard to immigration:

Article I, Section 8 says: "(Congress shall have the power) To establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization."

Naturalization. That's it. Plus, it's not even defined.

Defense? You support the idea of starting another war, this time on Iran. That's offense—not defense. They haven't started a war on us. Please, don't give me that line about how we put ourselves in the middle of a conflict first, resulting in an attack. You support intervening in other conflicts using our military. So not you spread the involvement of the federal govt outside of this country to other parts of the world to boot. That's progressive too.

Some Things I believe the Fed government shouldn't do or have less role:

1. Education (should be more up to state and local officials)
2. Regulate marriage
3. Regulate pot
4. Personal choices like what to eat, what to drink etc

That list does not do it. You can easily list those here. But I can go and get posts that show otherwise and do a better job. Furthermore, the Federal gov does not regulate marriage. It's done at the state level. I don't see you calling for abolishing the Dept of Ed either. You came down on the side of Michelle's busy-body lunches and never called for the feds to not be involved in the area at all.

I didn't call for any action I was just laughing at them dummy.

Sure didn't sound like it to me. You insisted that state should not do that.

You left out a lot, that I've seen you otherwise support of the feds, but it would take a long time to get the proof. One is civil rights act of 1964, and that school lunch debate we had regarding what Michelle Obama was doing. I'm sure I could find more. It may be paying for women's birth control, federal govt mandates on health insurers to make it more affordable when it actually increases the price. So you don't support all personal choices. You seem to come down on the side of the incorporation doctrine on social issues instead of leaving them to the states.

Really though, I don't want to digress too much. I just don't see it.

[Cave Johnson]

Originally Posted by patteeu

That last post was just a joke. Seriously though, Romney is just pointing out that Obama's supporters are mostly cheap whores and welfare crackheads (figuratively speaking). It's not like we didn't know this already.

Keep up this line of analysis. I'm sure it'll appeal to Hispanics, moderates, and the young in upcoming elections.

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by Cave Johnson

Keep up this line of analysis. I'm sure it'll appeal to Hispanics, moderates, and the young in upcoming elections.

He's not running for office. So he has more leeway.

I mean I could say keep up the class warfare rhetoric...when the policies crash you can get voted out again too. Nothing stays the same forever.

[Cave Johnson]

Originally Posted by Iowanian

A week later, the market has dropped over 710 points before the start of trading today............a week later, the weekly unemployment claims jumped mysteriously to 439,000 NEW claims.

Pssst, Superstorm Sandy mighta had something to do with the jobless claims.

[donkhater]

Originally Posted by dirk digler

Bobby Jindal disagrees with Mittens and he thinks he is dividing the country. Good for Jindal for standing up and speaking the truth

Jindal disagrees that this is the narrative that the GOP should put forth, that they should be above that.

I'm not sure where I read that he disagrees with Mitt's assessment. Only that he shouldn't point it out.

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by Cave Johnson

Pssst, Superstorm Sandy mighta had something to do with the jobless claims.

Will 8 years be enough for you guys to finally run out of excuses?

[dirk digler]

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

I am a babbling idiot

I agree.

I have stated for the longest time I believe in Medicare for All. That is no surprise.

Immigration and enforcement of our borders is a federal issue and always will be. And the one thing that Feds should do is National defense, doesn't matter if it is offense or defense the goal is to protect this country.

Most people aren't stupid RP's supporters who believe we shouldn't defend this country and our allies overseas.

Also if you could actually read which I am pretty sure you can't I said the Things the Fed government shouldn't do or have a less role in.

[Iowanian]

Originally Posted by Cave Johnson

Pssst, Superstorm Sandy mighta had something to do with the jobless claims.

I know....Sandy tore a bunch of shit up and should generate a ton of temporary cleanup jobs, contribute to the manufacture, distribution, sale and construction/repairs.
Sandy should end up causing a year or two of job GAINS.

Use it as an excuse, but it's bullshit.