FredHayek wrote: Your quotes of slanted hit pieces don't change the facts that the jobs created under Obama suck and real wages continue to drop.
Facts are a stubborn thing... You can call them "slanted hit pieces", but the numbers from the Department of Labor don't lie... And Gov. NumbNuts has been shown to be the elitist PoS that he is.
And your counterpoint of it is all Bush's fault doesn't fly. "W" isn't running. Didn't even attend the convention. Wheras Obama had to divert his record by bringing out Clinton as cover.
It doesn't matter that "Bush isn't running." Bush did what he did...The numbers are the numbers... And they're not "slanted hit pieces"...And you can run from the truth all you want, and it doesn't change the facts....
Something the Dog Said wrote: Also, since the topic is that Mitt feels that it is not his job to worry about the elderly, the poor, the disabled, military veterans, families with children, those who are able to work the tax codes, because they are all on entitlements, do you think that is an appropriate attitude for someone seeking to be President of all Americans?
Fair enough, it was going off topic.
1. I think you are misreading his statement, I read it as he was strategically not going after the vote of those 47% who don't pay taxes, not that he doesn't worry about them personally.
2. I think it was a dumb statement that wasn't meant for general consumption. If he wants to win the election, a better strategy would be promote an economic plan that would benefit those 47% with job opportunities so they could be more self-sufficient. Hard to do, but he needs to do a better job of it IMO I'm not optimistic.
If you want to be, press one. If you want not to be, press 2
Republicans are red, democrats are blue, neither of them, gives a flip about you.
Democracy4Sale wrote: If I waited for an apology for every lie I catch the teabaggers in, Hell would indeed freeze over...
Not that I know you directed this at me (although I did request flowers so I guess it's me), for your info I'm not a tea party member or follower. I'm a former Dem who is now an independent. I consider myself a moderate, but compared to a left leaning Dem like you, duh, I'm more conservative. So if you are calling me a "teabagger", wrong again. And compared to a right leaning tea party person, I'm a liberal.
You've wrongly called me names this thread, and have called me a liar before which didn't stick either. It's your MO. And I know you won't apologise. That says enough about you. But hey, you get a smiley from me out of it at least! lol
I know it's tough to be proven wrong again, especially after attacking the messenger.
Democracy4Sale wrote: If I waited for an apology for every lie I catch the teabaggers in, Hell would indeed freeze over...
Not that I know you directed this at me (although I did request flowers so I guess it's me), for your info I'm not a tea party member or follower. I'm a former Dem who is now an independent. I consider myself a moderate, but compared to a left leaning Dem like you, duh, I'm more conservative. So if you are calling me a "teabagger", wrong again. And compared to a right leaning tea party person, I'm a liberal.
You've wrongly called me names this thread, and have called me a liar before which didn't stick either. It's your MO. And I know you won't apologise. That says enough about you. But hey, you get a smiley from me out of it at least! lol
I know it's tough to be proven wrong again, especially after attacking the messenger.
I actually don't care what you are... I go by what you say and do on this forum...
Democracy4Sale wrote: If I waited for an apology for every lie I catch the teabaggers in, Hell would indeed freeze over...
Not that I know you directed this at me (although I did request flowers so I guess it's me), for your info I'm not a tea party member or follower. I'm a former Dem who is now an independent. I consider myself a moderate, but compared to a left leaning Dem like you, duh, I'm more conservative. So if you are calling me a "teabagger", wrong again. And compared to a right leaning tea party person, I'm a liberal.
You've wrongly called me names this thread, and have called me a liar before which didn't stick either. It's your MO. And I know you won't apologise. That says enough about you. But hey, you get a smiley from me out of it at least! lol
I know it's tough to be proven wrong again, especially after attacking the messenger.
I actually don't care what you are... I go by what you say and do on this forum...
LOL wrote: 1. I think you are misreading his statement, I read it as he was strategically not going after the vote of those 47% who don't pay taxes, not that he doesn't worry about them personally.
Nobody is "misreading his statement." What we have is about 40 minutes of VIDEO, of him saying what he is saying...It's not "out of context"; it's not "misrepresented"; it's not "slanted"... It is an elitist PoS expressing his feelings towards 47% of the population, that he generally accuses of being low-lifes, parasites and suck-ups...without any distinctions between retirees, veterans, disabled, elderly, and anybody else that will vote for Obama because they feel that TeaHadists are a threat to society.
Something the Dog Said wrote: Also, since the topic is that Mitt feels that it is not his job to worry about the elderly, the poor, the disabled, military veterans, families with children, those who are able to work the tax codes, because they are all on entitlements, do you think that is an appropriate attitude for someone seeking to be President of all Americans?
Fair enough, it was going off topic.
1. I think you are misreading his statement, I read it as he was strategically not going after the vote of those 47% who don't pay taxes, not that he doesn't worry about them personally.
2. I think it was a dumb statement that wasn't meant for general consumption. If he wants to win the election, a better strategy would be promote an economic plan that would benefit those 47% with job opportunities so they could be more self-sufficient. Hard to do, but he needs to do a better job of it IMO I'm not optimistic.
Here are his actual remarks:
All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it. That that's an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what…These are people who pay no income tax.
Romney went on: "[M]y job is is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."
Do you agree with him, that 47% of Americans only want freebies from the government, believe they are victims and should get entitlements and have no personal responsibility. That almost every other person is this way? Or do you believe that he is incredibly out of touch with the average American?
That is not the America that I know.
"Remember to always be yourself. Unless you can be batman. Then always be batman." Unknown
LOL wrote: I learned a lot by doing my own taxes for 30 years. Just sent in my 3Q SE tax payment too, everyone should be self employed and pay quarterly IMO. And fill out your own forms! It's a blast!
Sorry hard to laugh with puke in my mouth. Isn't that like a beaten child learning how to sit just right at the kitchen table.
I only meant its informative and educational to learn and understand how taxes work by filing and suffering thru it. I actually loath it more than cleaning the toilet, and do it at the last minute and stress out over it every April. And mine are pretty simple since I quit trading stocks and investing due to tax reporting.
If you don't fill out your own tax returns, how can you possibly understand how the system really works?
If you want to be, press one. If you want not to be, press 2
Republicans are red, democrats are blue, neither of them, gives a flip about you.
