Very true.
Very true.
So he's been "a public figure"... how is that different than "community organizer" or whatever Obama was?
He has less experience in government than Obama had prior to the 08 election. There is less reliable data from Romney's actions (not his words) to say "He does ABC action in XYZ position/office" than was available with Obama. The only reliable data on Romney says the opposite of what he now stands for. Nearly every decision he made as Governor in MA (including the pinnacle of his policital career - RomneyCare) contradicts what he says he will do now. There is no proof that Romney will do anything differently than he has already done (much of which lines up with Obama's policies/actions).
So I'm not necessarily choosing to know less about him - it sounds like you are, or at least you're trying to justify a vote for Romney as the lesser of two evils (when both are in fact, different vessels for the same evil). I completely get the lesser of two evils thing man, but I'm not ignoring the fact that if Romney is less evil than Obama, its only by a very tiny margin.
LOL off topic but my 15 yr old sometimes assists me if im on the road and clients start texting me. and she is constantly telling me she is texting people those exact words & getting threatened with dishes forever if she does!
Im one of the may sit it out crowd, so Im no Romney booster, but youll have to explain that one to me. A state Governor has less government experience than a junior Senator (that spent half of his term running for President)?
I'm no Obama supporter, but Romney was Governor of MA for 4 years (2003–2007).
Obama was a State Senator from 1997–2004, and a US senator from 2005–2008.
I'll be the first to say that State Senate experience isn't exactly Presidential in the experience column, but I'd say the same thing about Governor.
Since Romney was a governor, he didn't really vote in Congress or attempt to introduce any legislation. In order to tell what type of politician he was, you sort of have to look at the bills he backed, or acts he signed (as well as the things his cabinet did). You still don't have the record tracking that you do on a Congressman (its pretty damning when someone like Ron Paul effectively uses only your voting record against you in a debate). What I don't like is that as Governor, Romney can sort of sit on the fence and say he backed anything that became popular later. You have to rely on his words more than his actions. Nearly all of his words from 2003-2007 contradict what he says he stands for now.
Obama did at the state and federal level so we sort of already knew what type of politician he was prior to the 08 election - he did go off the deep end to be fair, so it wasn't as if he didn't flip-flop and I don't trust him, but I had more evidence (4 more years and a lot of legislation with his name on it) of what type of politician he was prior to 08 than I do of Romney right now.
If you dig into Civil War letters home, you'll find some pretty severe butchery of the language. There has pretty much always been a bunch of semi-literates and a bunch of articulate folks, though I think the gap may be widening and the low end multiplying. As the middle class shrinks, and it has been doing so for at least 40 years, the gap will widen and the low end will expand.
I have seen a bunch of crap supposedly posted by right wingers, and I have seen a bunch of crap (this thread containing an example) supposedly posted by left wingers. My strong suspicion is that wankers from both wings have been speaking on behalf of the other wing. Anybody who pays attention to wing wankers of any stripe is either bone stupid or desperately looking for confirmation of dearly held opinions.
y u mad tho?
I did. I knew as soon as the liberal hate machine was exposed the lefties would try to say the right is just as bad. They love to attack the right as being haters, racist, violent, hypocrites, etc but hate to be shown as much worse.
Similar threads
