YES Network.com

MLB NBA
MLB NBA
 
Jump Menu:
Post Reply
Page 3 of 3  •  Prev 1 2 3
Koch Brothers/Sheldon Adelson
2 years ago  ::  Nov 08, 2012 - 8:10PM #21
louisiana_lightning
Posts: 3,925

Nov 8, 2012 -- 7:40PM, Yankee1954 wrote:


you talk a big game and then you suggest Ron Paul for Sec. Of the Treasury.




It's a name we are all familiar with and he has been consistantly right on these issues.  The policies we follow have been thoroughly debunked by history but our Nation and the World in general is so economically illiterate that we constantly tolerate such destructive irresponsible behavior.  If it was someone without a well known consistant track record they would be undermined by more well known academics invested in the status quo.  Allen Greenspan was supposed to be a "goldbug" "objectivist" but he tried to manipulate interest rates and the money supply like a maestro denouncing his previous writings until the consequences he had predicted prior to his stint came to fruition.  He still passes the buck on everyone except his own contribution to our fiscal problems.

2 years ago  ::  Nov 08, 2012 - 10:11PM #22
22yankees22
Posts: 472

Nov 8, 2012 -- 8:00PM, louisiana_lightning wrote:





I think Obama was able to define Romney's campaign for him.  He's a Mormon, that's a third class citizen in the Christian family, he was also a popular Mass. Governor.  If he were elected I think he would have stayed far away from social issues but the President kept baiting him in.  The women's health benefits mandate on private plans with no co-pays or opt outs, changing his views on gay marriage in his last year to distinguish them from Romney's (they were both on board with civil unions previously), not enforcing deportations during an election year but refusing to spend any political capital prior to that on the issue (if you go back to 2008 Barack wanted immigrants to pay a fine, learn english, and get at the back of the line).  He backed Romney into a corner where he was forced to play to his base when the only real issue was always economics and scope of government.


The only real answer to the Democrats is a libertarian party regardless of what it's called.  Anything based upon religous zealotry or Democrat Lite GW Bush types aren't worth the effort.  I'd rather the Democrat run unopposed.  It bugs me when the Federal government is pulled into issues that it has no business being involved in.




Romney's problem was not that Obama was able to define Romney's campaign for him, it was that Romeny never defined his own campaign for himself.  No one could pin down what he stood for on anything.   I will not disput that  Mormon is not a full citizen in the Christian Nation, but neither is any other religion.  I will say however that the christian right wing did suprise me when the actually did mostly embrace him as their candidate.  Mitt did a good job of  rarely to never mentioning "mormon' by name.  


And from a social issues perspective, I don't agree that it was front and center this election. As a matter of fact, in the days leading up the election I was angry that Obama wasn't hammering mitt on them MORE.  Because allowing Mitt to remain silent on it only benefited Mitt.  Many many family members of mine sat back and said....seeeeeee mitt isn't anti gay, he never mentions it at all.  


2 years ago  ::  Nov 08, 2012 - 10:48PM #23
louisiana_lightning
Posts: 3,925

Nov 8, 2012 -- 10:11PM, 22yankees22 wrote:


Romney's problem was not that Obama was able to define Romney's campaign for him, it was that Romeny never defined his own campaign for himself.  No one could pin down what he stood for on anything.   I will not disput that  Mormon is not a full citizen in the Christian Nation, but neither is any other religion.  I will say however that the christian right wing did suprise me when the actually did mostly embrace him as their candidate.  Mitt did a good job of  rarely to never mentioning "mormon' by name.  


And from a social issues perspective, I don't agree that it was front and center this election. As a matter of fact, in the days leading up the election I was angry that Obama wasn't hammering mitt on them MORE.  Because allowing Mitt to remain silent on it only benefited Mitt.  Many many family members of mine sat back and said....seeeeeee mitt isn't anti gay, he never mentions it at all.  




It appears to me that Obama and Romney were most likely on the same page on those social issues.  Where they diverged was Obama's 11th hour pandering while I think Romney would have preferred to avoid impacting those from the executive office at all.  I guess it depends on how much of an active roll we want the Federal government to take in our lives and the people have made clear we want to be subjected to the whims of the President on social issues.

2 years ago  ::  Nov 08, 2012 - 11:01PM #24
22yankees22
Posts: 472

Nov 8, 2012 -- 10:48PM, louisiana_lightning wrote:


Nov 8, 2012 -- 10:11PM, 22yankees22 wrote:


Romney's problem was not that Obama was able to define Romney's campaign for him, it was that Romeny never defined his own campaign for himself.  No one could pin down what he stood for on anything.   I will not disput that  Mormon is not a full citizen in the Christian Nation, but neither is any other religion.  I will say however that the christian right wing did suprise me when the actually did mostly embrace him as their candidate.  Mitt did a good job of  rarely to never mentioning "mormon' by name.  


And from a social issues perspective, I don't agree that it was front and center this election. As a matter of fact, in the days leading up the election I was angry that Obama wasn't hammering mitt on them MORE.  Because allowing Mitt to remain silent on it only benefited Mitt.  Many many family members of mine sat back and said....seeeeeee mitt isn't anti gay, he never mentions it at all.  




It appears to me that Obama and Romney were most likely on the same page on those social issues.  Where they diverged was Obama's 11th hour pandering while I think Romney would have preferred to avoid impacting those from the executive office at all.  I guess it depends on how much of an active roll we want the Federal government to take in our lives and the people have made clear we want to be subjected to the whims of the President on social issues.




I don't believe they were ever the same on the social issues, especially on gay issues.  I really don't feel the need to do a tit for tat on the differences, but if Romeny's website is still up...he clearly states he is anti gay, right there on his website.  I just sent the link to my parents last week.  And he signed the NOM Pledge  and donated at least as much as he was willing to bet Rick Perry to them as well.  


As for Obama, yup he sure does appear to have 'changed" his stance or as he puts it he 'evolved'.  I actually believe up until May 9th of this year he was lying about his stance.  He was pro-equality a decade ago, but this is a "Christian Nation" and up until the moment he "evolved" it was political suicide to say anything other than hetero marriage is superior.     


Here is how I would best describe my feelings on his victory.  I cannot articulate how relieved I am that in this chrisitan nation, that coming out and saying in an election year, out loud that gay people are not 3/4 of a citizen that doing that did not cost him this election.  I am not happy.  I am not gloating that he won.  I am just relieved his stance on gay issues did not cost him this election.  Because in EVERY single presidential election before this one in 2012, it would have.  




Page 3 of 3  •  Prev 1 2 3
Jump Menu:
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing

Yankees Forum