Honest Question for the Conservative Republicans on the board

[Skysooner]

I don't want to hear about Obama and what he has or hasn't done or the evils of Obamacare, etc.

What I want to know is what you expect out of Romney if he wins the next 4 years as President? How are you going to change things? What are you going to do about a divided Congress because even if you have both houses, you won't have a filibuster proof majority in the Senate? Lay out your strategy.

I only ask as I rarely see anything but complaints about the current administration and how bad things are. There are rarely policy discussions.

[pphilfran]

What I want to see and what I expect are different...

I expect nothing...

I would like to see immigration reform...fair trade instead of free trade...GDP growth of 4% causing unemployment to drop slowly over his term...a true energy policy...I* wold be a happy camper...

[Skysooner]

What I want to see and what I expect are different...

I expect nothing...

I would like to see immigration reform...fair trade instead of free trade...GDP growth of 4% causing unemployment to drop slowly over his term...a true energy policy...I* wold be a happy camper...

If he could do all of that, it would be wonderful to see. I concur on every point.

[diverdog]

If he could do all of that, it would be wonderful to see. I concur on every point.

plus reign in Wall Street.

[okie52]

Sky-I think you already know my hopes for a Romney administration are centered primarily on 2 issues-energy and immigration. I think you know my specifics so I won't bore you by repeating them.

[badger]

What I think Romney has going for him that Obama doesn't is consumer and business confidence. One of them has experience leading business, will have Congress majorities on his side, will speak of lowering unemployment and improving the economy.

President Obama does not inspire confidence from consumers or business. The result is what you've seen in recent years, where businesses are camping on money afraid to hire and expand, and consumers shutting their wallets, worried that they will need every dollar for rough economic times in the future.

So, I think Romney, as president, would have that going for him immediately if elected, regardless of what he does policy-wise. Obama? People and businesses might give up being tightwads, but not completely if they don't feel confident in the future, which they won't if he is re-elected.

[Curly Bill]

If Romney is elected I'd like to hear nary a word about income redistribution.

[BigTip]

President Obama does not inspire confidence from consumers or business. The result is what you've seen in recent years, where businesses are camping on money afraid to hire and expand, ........ worried that they will need every dollar for rough economic times in the future.

So, I think Romney, as president, would have that going for him immediately if elected, regardless of what he does policy-wise. Obama? People and businesses might give up being tightwads, but not completely if they don't feel confident in the future, which they won't if he is re-elected.

I own a business. This is exactly how I feel. I have some reinvestment decisions to make. If Romney is elected I will immediately place an order to make upgrades. I will, in my own small way, stimulate the economy by making those purchases.

If Obama is reelected I will possibly sell my business. My thinking being what's the point of continuing.

Extrapolate that mind set over a million or so small businesses and you can get a very good idea of what is at stake. My thinking is not unique.

[SoonerProphet]

don't think are many many conservative Republicans left. many conservatives are abandoning the party that favors the welfare-warfare state.

[badger]

I own a business. This is exactly how I feel. I have some reinvestment decisions to make. If Romney is elected I will immediately place an order to make upgrades. I will, in my own small way, stimulate the economy by making those purchases.

If Obama is reelected I will possibly sell my business. My thinking being what's the point of continuing.

Extrapolate that mind set over a million or so small businesses and you can get a very good idea of what is at stake. My thinking is not unique.

The funny thing - and Tipster may or may not agree - is that it's just a mindset! It's all about perception! There's going to be absolutely no immediate changes in policy, no immediately changes to Obamacare, to tax rates, to the value of the dollar... it's just people suddenly feeling confident enough to participate in the economy again!

If people would just suddenly feel confident right now, we could have lower unemployment, expanding business, and more tax money for the government to continue to cycle.

Instead, people are worried if the sun will come out tomorrow and as such, are clinging to whatever they have. :(

Part of me welcomes a brainwashing device that would just make everyone happy and optimistic. Another part of me thinks that our society needed a tough love economy lesson on spending with debt rather than spending earned income.

Lots of sadness all around with how things turned out. Unlike Rush Limbaugh (not the clone, the real one), I did not want President Obama to fail, because that meant the country would suffer.

[Skysooner]

President Obama does not inspire confidence from consumers or business. The result is what you've seen in recent years, where businesses are camping on money afraid to hire and expand, ........ worried that they will need every dollar for rough economic times in the future.

So, I think Romney, as president, would have that going for him immediately if elected, regardless of what he does policy-wise. Obama? People and businesses might give up being tightwads, but not completely if they don't feel confident in the future, which they won't if he is re-elected.

I own a business. This is exactly how I feel. I have some reinvestment decisions to make. If Romney is elected I will immediately place an order to make upgrades. I will, in my own small way, stimulate the economy by making those purchases.

If Obama is reelected I will possibly sell my business. My thinking being what's the point of continuing.

Extrapolate that mind set over a million or so small businesses and you can get a very good idea of what is at stake. My thinking is not unique.

I work for a very large corporation, so I don't necessarily understand the lack of confidence. The economy tanking is a world wide event. However what I wouldn't understand is the regulatory environment which is equally as bad. I suspect Obamacare has an issue as well. I also agree on Romney inspiring confidence from a business environment. What specifically about Obama doesn't inspire confidence from actions rather than just what is said?

[Skysooner]

Sky-I think you already know my hopes for a Romney administration are centered primarily on 2 issues-energy and immigration. I think you know my specifics so I won't bore you by repeating them.
I know on energy for sure. We are on agreement there. On immigration I am not as sure as I am not as well educated on that subject.

[jk the sooner fan]

honestly? about all i expect is a whole hearted attempt to repeal Obama care and an attempt at appointing conservative minded judges to the appellate courts......my biggest fear with an Obama re-election is how he could potentially reshape SCOTUS

scares the hell out of me actually

[badger]

What specifically about Obama doesn't inspire confidence from actions rather than just what is said?
It seems that Obama's solution to problems is to let the government solve them, whereas the Romney solution is to let the people solve them. It's like one guy saying "Don't worry, the government will take care of you" and the other is saying "Let's get back to work, America"


my biggest fear with an Obama re-election is how he could potentially reshape SCOTUS
Agree. Republican-appointed SCOTUS justices are the ones that are the free thinkers that most often deviate from their assumed party lines. Democrat-appointed SCOTUS justices usually lockstep in the leftward direction, Constitution be damned.

[Soonerjeepman]

Really? what I have seen in most threads are folks saying exactly what you are asking....just happens to be about a specific subject...but I'll throw this out there.


honestly? about all i expect is a whole hearted attempt to repeal Obama care and an attempt at appointing conservative minded judges to the appellate courts......my biggest fear with an Obama re-election is how he could potentially reshape SCOTUS

scares the hell out of me actually

This, plus I agree on the business front, even though I just teach most of my friends are in the "business" world. I'm also very concerned with obama's thinking/dealings/feelings with the muslim world, his "vision" of America.

[landrun]

I'd like to see real spending cuts and the gutting of some government agencies. I'd also like to see some cuts in defense spending and troop levels around the world reduced.
Obamacare replaced. Protections for religous freedoms and free speech, which I feel the Obama admin has attacked.
I'd like to see them reform social security so that the money I've put back for retirment isn't eventually consumed and stolen by the US goverment.
And I'd like us to start paying back the debth and balancing the budget.

... and that's just off the top of my head here. :)

[okie52]

I know on energy for sure. We are on agreement there. On immigration I am not as sure as I am not as well educated on that subject.

Obama has done many things to enable illegal immigrants to reside in this country and is pursuing amnesty for the 12,000,000 illegals. W and McCain did the same thing so they were only marginally better with the exception that Obama has fought every illegal immigrant measure from the states including ones that punished the employer for hiring illegals...neither W nor McCain did that. Fortunately Obama lost the employer battle at the supreme court. Obama has basically stopped deporting illegals unless they have a criminal record and is supporting subsidizing
the dream act for illegal students.

Romney has stated that he won't give amnesty, will secure the borders, and wants illegals to self deport through loss of benefits and employment. I support that approach.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

I own a business. This is exactly how I feel. I have some reinvestment decisions to make. If Romney is elected I will immediately place an order to make upgrades. I will, in my own small way, stimulate the economy by making those purchases.

If Obama is reelected I will possibly sell my business. My thinking being what's the point of continuing.

Extrapolate that mind set over a million or so small businesses and you can get a very good idea of what is at stake. My thinking is not unique.If the lbs can't imagine the govt. check drying up right now, it will enter their minds if Obama is reelected... insolvency of govt. All printed out, all taxed out, all borrowed out, and SOL. Then, what happens?

[marfacowboy]

If Romney is elected I'd like to hear nary a word about income redistribution.

Do you realize all taxes are income redistribution?

[marfacowboy]

It seems that Obama's solution to problems is to let the government solve them, whereas the Romney solution is to let the people solve them. It's like one guy saying "Don't worry, the government will take care of you" and the other is saying "Let's get back to work, America"


I just don't see how people can say this about Obama. I guess it's because he sees a role for government, as he should. He's done things to help the private sector. Raises an enormous amount of money from Wall Street. Do you think they'd support him if they really thought he was as anti-business as is portrayed on this forum?

Anyone with even a modicum of understanding about our economic history understands it takes both government and private enterprise to make the country work. One can't work without the other.

[Skysooner]

Do you realize all taxes are income redistribution?

There is also state income redistribution.

[pphilfran]

Payroll taxes also redistribute wealth...

[Skysooner]

The funny thing - and Tipster may or may not agree - is that it's just a mindset! It's all about perception! There's going to be absolutely no immediate changes in policy, no immediately changes to Obamacare, to tax rates, to the value of the dollar... it's just people suddenly feeling confident enough to participate in the economy again!

If people would just suddenly feel confident right now, we could have lower unemployment, expanding business, and more tax money for the government to continue to cycle.

Instead, people are worried if the sun will come out tomorrow and as such, are clinging to whatever they have. :(

Part of me welcomes a brainwashing device that would just make everyone happy and optimistic. Another part of me thinks that our society needed a tough love economy lesson on spending with debt rather than spending earned income.

Lots of sadness all around with how things turned out. Unlike Rush Limbaugh (not the clone, the real one), I did not want President Obama to fail, because that meant the country would suffer.

I agree about the mindset. It is like some people just decided this last 4 years was a nuclear winter, and they come out of the ground every few days to see if they can see their shadow....

This is the government we have. We have to work within it. Even if McCain had won, it is still likely that unemployment would be exactly where it is now. There are some real demographic shifts taking place in this country. Minorities that generally vote more Democratic are being more numerous and voting more. White domination of voting is waning. Younger people don't think like the older people. They are more mixed in their racial lines and much more liberal in their social beliefs. This is going to happen whether people like it or not. The key is to get ourselves solvent again as soon as possible.

I'm not saying I agree with what Obama has done in many cases. I think that we have to get our financial house in order particularly with regards to health care, and the system he passes really doesn't address some of the hard questions to help rein in costs. He also takes credit for the energy policy that was really the work of the oil and gas industry that he constantly derides.

I'm not sure I agree about the SCOTUS appointments though. I would prefer we vote more middle of the road justices just to balance the extremes out at either end. It is about time the parties start to work together rather than apart, but the last election cycle really drove out the candidates of either party I could support. I'm just happy my local Democratic candidate for the House is my kind of candidate. The current Tea Party candidate will likely be reelected but then the districts change the next cycle. I simply don't like him as he was one of the stalwarts that caused the issues in the summer of 2011 that caused the market to tank for a bit. Had some issues with my portfolio over that one.

[Skysooner]

If the lbs can't imagine the govt. check drying up right now, it will enter their minds if Obama is reelected... insolvency of govt. All printed out, all taxed out, all borrowed out, and SOL. Then, what happens?

So instead of the rhetoric, what would you do? You and cruiser were two that I really hoped to hear from here rather than another seagull moment.

[BigTip]

I just don't see how people can say this about Obama. I guess it's because he sees a role for government, as he should. .

Just listen to him. "YOU DID NOT BUILD THAT." He thinks that government is the end all to all problems.
But the government is not what made this country what it is today.

This is why this is the most important presidential election this country has ever had.

[badger]

I just don't see how people can say this about Obama. I guess it's because he sees a role for government, as he should. He's done things to help the private sector. Raises an enormous amount of money from Wall Street. Do you think they'd support him if they really thought he was as anti-business as is portrayed on this forum?

Anyone with even a modicum of understanding about our economic history understands it takes both government and private enterprise to make the country work. One can't work without the other.

It's hard to be upbeat and optimistic when so many people are out of work, wages are stagnant or falling and there's a looming European economic crisis just across the pond. Fairly or not, Obama will get tied to this pessimism because he's the president.

In previous campaigns, incumbents had the benefit of two methods of campaigning: Being positive and upbeat about how things have gone under their watch, and being able to bash their opponent for being overly negative when the opponent tries to tell voters why things are not as good as the incumbent says they are and change is necessary. Obama's election is not a shoo-in because of this. He can still label Romney as being a negative nancy, but if Obama tries to say that the private sector is fine... yeah.

[Skysooner]

Just listen to him. "YOU DID NOT BUILD THAT." He thinks that government is the end all to all problems.
But the government is not what made this country what it is today.

This is why this is the most important presidential election this country has ever had.

I'll agree to disagree with you on that. Like many others, I read that quite differently. I'm mostly curious from your perspective has there been an increase in regulation (which would be directly attributable to the executive branch) or any specific piece of regulation to make you feel like that? To my way of thought, even if Obama wins, it is going to be a divided government. There is nothing too extreme that will be passed.

[BigTip]

The funny thing - and Tipster may or may not agree - is that it's just a mindset! It's all about perception! .

I do agree. How many times have we watched a president talk on TV saying, "Things are going to be okay." From Reagan extolling people to go out and spend money to Obama doing the same thing.

Headlines drive people's monetary decisions. If the headline says the stock market took a dive, I will have a slower day of sales. It is an unusual phenomena.

But when Obama tells me to go out and spend money, I don't believe him when he says, "things will be fine." I know that he is going to tax me more, make me pay more for my employee benefits, and regulate me more making it more difficult to do business.

[marfacowboy]

I do agree. How many times have we watched a president talk on TV saying, "Things are going to be okay." From Reagan extolling people to go out and spend money to Obama doing the same thing.

Headlines drive people's monetary decisions. If the headline says the stock market took a dive, I will have a slower day of sales. It is an unusual phenomena.

But when Obama tells me to go out and spend money, I don't believe him when he says, "things will be fine." I know that he is going to tax me more, make me pay more for my employee benefits, and regulate me more making it more difficult to do business.

Tax you (you said "me") or your business?
As I understand it, Obama proposed extending the tax cuts for income brackets below $250,000. He's repeatedly cut taxes for families. Furthermore, under his plan, 97 percent of small business owners would avoid getting hit with any income tax hike.

[marfacowboy]

Just listen to him. "YOU DID NOT BUILD THAT." He thinks that government is the end all to all problems.
But the government is not what made this country what it is today.

This is why this is the most important presidential election this country has ever had.

non-sequitur

People are latching on to this phrase, taking it out of context, and making a mountain out of a molehill. Saying "you did not build that" doesn't imply he thinks the government is the "end all."
If he thought that, he would have nationalized GM.

[Skysooner]

I do agree. How many times have we watched a president talk on TV saying, "Things are going to be okay." From Reagan extolling people to go out and spend money to Obama doing the same thing.

Headlines drive people's monetary decisions. If the headline says the stock market took a dive, I will have a slower day of sales. It is an unusual phenomena.

But when Obama tells me to go out and spend money, I don't believe him when he says, "things will be fine." I know that he is going to tax me more, make me pay more for my employee benefits, and regulate me more making it more difficult to do business.

I want to thank you for your honest answers. I'm learning quite a bit from this thread.

[BigTip]

I want to thank you for your honest answers. I'm learning quite a bit from this thread.

I asked a similar question a few weeks ago trying to get an understanding of what liberals were honestly thinking. "What is the worst thing that can happen if (not your candidate) is elected?"

What I got from that is that the liberals said that if Romney is elected the poor people will suffer. The conservatives response was if Obama is elected it's the end of the country as we know it.

I am hoping that the former is enough motivation to drive a big turnout from conservative voters. It certainly has been for me. I have never been as active in discussing an election as I have in this one.

[Skysooner]

I asked a similar question a few weeks ago trying to get an understanding of what liberals were honestly thinking. "What is the worst thing that can happen if (not your candidate) is elected?"

What I got from that is that the liberals said that if Romney is elected the poor people will suffer. The conservatives response was if Obama is elected it's the end of the country as we know it.

I am hoping that the former is enough motivation to drive a big turnout from conservative voters. It certainly has been for me. I have never been as active in discussing an election as I have in this one.

I'm more of a social liberal and fiscal conservative. If Romney is elected there will be some changes but nothing fundamental. He may or may not get Obamacare rescinded. To me it is more the economy getting fixed that will help poor people. There is only so much that we can do. I have a special needs son that will be eligible for disability in about 2 years that we intend to take advantage of up to a point (mainly finding a job assistance, etc.). I'm sensitive to the needs of the poor but realize you can't make people wealthy simply by giving them money. I would be more about job training for specific industries or even tax breaks for companies that would hire people that are socio-economically disadvantaged but want to work. There are many ways to structure this. I would also be for some sort of university assistance like the GI Bill if during school they would work on public projects but also mandate that the degree programs have to be necessary (i.e. elementary education, engineering). If they want to do art history, let them borrow the money or work their way through school. So basically I'm saying the poor people are going to suffer due to the economy rather than Romney or Obama getting elected. On the country ending as we know it, it just doesn't work that way with the government divided.

To me the biggest change if Romney gets in is that some of the regulatory agencies should ease up which would be a nice change.

Edit: All of these are only workable if they work like the GI Bill which is actually revenue positive with the effects it has on the economy. People who serve in the military are generally good bets on university or work programs as they have already shown a sense of public service and that is a decent indicator of success in a broader sense.

[pphilfran]

non-sequitur

People are latching on to this phrase, taking it out of context, and making a mountain out of a molehill. Saying "you did not build that" doesn't imply he thinks the government is the "end all."
If he thought that, he would have nationalized GM.

It is not only that one statement...if you look at what he has said over the last four years it all starts to add up....it is not too difficult for me to see the direction he wants to push the country...

His statement to Joe The Plumber fits nicely with his earlier redistribution speech...

The You did not build that combined with his distaste for the successful companies and his willingness to over regulate and raise taxes in a stumbling economy....

How he will bankrupt coal and the push for solar and wind for "energy independence" even though solar and wind have nothing to do with "energy independence"...not to mention his concern on the middle class yet fails to recognize the ability of ng to to supply wealth to the middle class...

His "feelings" about the poor but his regulations on energy, CAFE standards, and allowing illegals to take the lower paying jobs all hurt the poor...

I think he is a snake that hasn't taken the time to look at how all of his wants and beliefs fit together....

[BigTip]

To me it is more the economy getting fixed that will help poor people. .

BOOM!

This.

Now if we can only convince the 47%, maybe they WILL vote for Romney.

I know that I have some of my employees convinced of this. It is not really that hard to comprehend. If you kill the golden goose there will be no more eggs for anyone.

[ouwasp]

Well, I'm not sure what the answer is to the fiscal canyon the country is in. But one thing I'm counting on from a President Romney is the thought that he won't appoint Supreme Ct Justices that will turn the Constitution into a pretzel with bizarre rulings.

[OU_Sooners75]

First I'm not a conservative republican....

That said, what do I expect out of a president?

1. Learn how to be a bipartisan. You cannot say you want bipartisanship without being the leader of bipartisanship.

2. Someone that isn't afraid to tell either side and their own side to shove it when it doesn't better our nation!

3. One that doesn't try to nationalize anything!

4. One that isn't afraid to tackle the current tax code problem!

5. One that isn't afraid to sacrafice his office for the greater good of this nation....ie make the true hard decisions as long as it betters this nation.

6. One that isn't afraid of shrinking the size of the federal government and give each individual state the power to make their own decisions for what's best for their communities and people.

7. One that isn't afraid of shrinking the government spending and getting out debt under control.

8. One that isn't afraid of offending another country, as long as its in America's best interest.

9. One that won't cowtow to the UN or the international community!

10.one that isn't afraid to ween the population off entitlement programs...or isn't afraid to put a limit of help each person can receive.

I think that pretty much covers what I expect out of our president, no matter what party they belong too!

[marfacowboy]

First I'm not a conservative republican....

That said, what do I expect out of a president?

1. Learn how to be a bipartisan. You cannot say you want bipartisanship without being the leader of bipartisanship.

2. Someone that isn't afraid to tell either side and their own side to shove it when it doesn't better our nation!

3. One that doesn't try to nationalize anything!

4. One that isn't afraid to tackle the current tax code problem!

5. One that isn't afraid to sacrafice his office for the greater good of this nation....ie make the true hard decisions as long as it betters this nation.

6. One that isn't afraid of shrinking the size of the federal government and give each individual state the power to make their own decisions for what's best for their communities and people.

7. One that isn't afraid of shrinking the government spending and getting out debt under control.

8. One that isn't afraid of offending another country, as long as its in America's best interest.

9. One that won't cowtow to the UN or the international community!

10.one that isn't afraid to ween the population off entitlement programs...or isn't afraid to put a limit of help each person can receive.

I think that pretty much covers what I expect out of our president, no matter what party they belong too!

You lost me at #8. I prefer more diplomacy, and think Eisenhower would agree.
Let's remember why we have a UN.
There's nothing wrong with humility coupled with strength. We could learn a lesson or two from Chief Joseph in how to lead. Otherwise, I like your post.

[Turd_Ferguson]

You lost me at #8. I prefer more diplomacy, and think Eisenhower would agree.
Let's remember why we have a UN.
There's nothing wrong with humility coupled with strength. We could learn a lesson or two from Chief Joseph in how to lead. Otherwise, I like your post.**** the UN! If you actually believe in them, you're as stupid as I thought you were...

[LiveLaughLove]

Do you realize all taxes are income redistribution?
It's always in the degrees to which something is done. No one is against taxation. It's how MUCH taxation is the sticking point.

But you knew that, you were just being smug.

[LiveLaughLove]

You lost me at #8. I prefer more diplomacy, and think Eisenhower would agree.
Let's remember why we have a UN.
There's nothing wrong with humility coupled with strength. We could learn a lesson or two from Chief Joseph in how to lead. Otherwise, I like your post.

We have a UN to pay for it. Yep, that's about it. Can;t think of anything else it's for. Well, outside of it telling us how we don't help the rest of the world enough.

Even though we do more than the rest of the world combined. We don't need a UN for that.

[OU_Sooners75]

You lost me at #8. I prefer more diplomacy, and think Eisenhower would agree.
Let's remember why we have a UN.
There's nothing wrong with humility coupled with strength. We could learn a lesson or two from Chief Joseph in how to lead. Otherwise, I like your post.
We do not need the UN to show humility or strength.

We do not need the UN to tell us who can go to war with and who we can't go to war with.

We don't need the UN to tell us how much aid to send a country in need.

We don't need the UN period!!!

When yhou have countries like China and Russia turning their backs on the greater interest of civilization in order to protect their investments, we don't need to be a part of it!!!
For millinia, civilization has fared really well without the overlooking of the UN...which is a very corrupt organization anyway!!!

[LiveLaughLove]

non-sequitur

People are latching on to this phrase, taking it out of context, and making a mountain out of a molehill. Saying "you did not build that" doesn't imply he thinks the government is the "end all."
If he thought that, he would have nationalized GM.
Wrong, he meant it exactly as it's been taken, but that was debated ad nauseum in another thread. He didn't nationalize GM for one reason. It would have killed his Presidency, and no one, not even his most loyal liberals would have went along with it. He came as close to it as he could. He handed it over to his union buddies. Next best thing. A payoff with our money.

Just because he can't politically ram through things, doesn't mean he doesn't want those things to be so.

[Skysooner]

Wrong, he meant it exactly as it's been taken, but that was debated ad nauseum in another thread. He didn't nationalize GM for one reason. It would have killed his Presidency, and no one, not even his most loyal liberals would have went along with it. He came as close to it as he could. He handed it over to his union buddies. Next best thing. A payoff with our money.

Just because he can't politically ram through things, doesn't mean he doesn't want those things to be so.

When something has been put together with other sentences and without the main relevant sentence about bridges, there is no way it was taken out of context except by those who wanted this President to fail at all costs. You can argue actions which Big Tip is pointing out, but in this particular thing you are very much wrong.

[Skysooner]

It's always in the degrees to which something is done. No one is against taxation. It's how MUCH taxation is the sticking point.

But you knew that, you were just being smug.

The main problem is that the tax code for the last 20+ years has been this way and yet you want to point it out specifically about this President. The tax code hasn't changed under this President, so you can just blame all the Presidents and Congresses before this. By having a progressive tax rate that is in itself income redistribution.

[LiveLaughLove]

The main problem is that the tax code for the last 20+ years has been this way and yet you want to point it out specifically about this President. The tax code hasn't changed under this President, so you can just blame all the Presidents and Congresses before this. By having a progressive tax rate that is in itself income redistribution.

I do. And it is. And it is wrong. Anything else?

[LiveLaughLove]

When something has been put together with other sentences and without the main relevant sentence about bridges, there is no way it was taken out of context except by those who wanted this President to fail at all costs. You can argue actions which Big Tip is pointing out, but in this particular thing you are very much wrong.

When something is put together in multiples it is not called a "that". When you read the whole text, he had just gotten through belittling achievers, and then went in to "that".

The man is Harvard educated. Supposedly, a brilliant man. Therfore, I think he knows the English language. That is not those, and those are not that. Got it? Good.

[LiveLaughLove]

I think I want a Romney Presidency to be one that never bows again. Period.

I think I want a Romney Presidency to be one that thinks it can fix Washington from within.

We can let Obama go back "outside" and try to fix it from there. It's obvious he is in over his head. Let's see, Hawaii would be a nice distance outside.

[marfacowboy]

Wrong, he meant it exactly as it's been taken, but that was debated ad nauseum in another thread. He didn't nationalize GM for one reason. It would have killed his Presidency, and no one, not even his most loyal liberals would have went along with it. He came as close to it as he could. He handed it over to his union buddies. Next best thing. A payoff with our money.

Just because he can't politically ram through things, doesn't mean he doesn't want those things to be so.

You seem to have an unlimited supply of venom.
Take my advice. Leave the gun. Take the canoli.

[LiveLaughLove]

You seem to have an unlimited supply of venom.
Take my advice. Leave the gun. Take the canoli.

Nah, I've read most of what you have written in here. No offense, but your advise would be way down the list. Sorry.

[BigTip]

You seem to have an unlimited supply of venom.
.

Here's another typical internet liberal posting tactic. Labeling someone's post as ranting or full of hate, to try to discredit the point, when it is merely a strongly worded response to the discussion at hand. LiveLoveLaugh's was not full of venom. That particular post of his you quoted is not even worded very strongly.
What venom?

[marfacowboy]

Here's another typical internet liberal posting tactic. Labeling someone's post as ranting or full of hate, to try to discredit the point, when it is merely a strongly worded response to the discussion at hand. LiveLoveLaugh's was not full of venom. That particular post of his you quoted is not even worded very strongly.
What venom?

It's his body of work.
Cough cough

[LiveLaughLove]

It's his body of work.
Cough cough

My body of work is not taking what folks like you dish out. I don't think I go overboard in calling names, or insulting people. I do however, call it like I see it, and I do so boldly.

I don't lie, and I try to have my facts lined out before I speak on here. When I have been proven wrong, I have admitted it, thanked the person and moved on. That hasn't been too often.

When you guys say stuff that is just pure subjective bunk and try to pass it as fact, I call it so. When you try to sound superior, I call that out too. You're not. Mid's not, Sky's not, and on and on.

If you don't like it, put me on ignore. Please. I promise not to lose one wink of sleep tonight over it.

[hawaii 5-0]

Excellent post.

Speak your mind, then move on.

5-0

[marfacowboy]

My body of work is not taking what folks like you dish out. I don't think I go overboard in calling names, or insulting people. I do however, call it like I see it, and I do so boldly.

I don't lie, and I try to have my facts lined out before I speak on here. When I have been proven wrong, I have admitted it, thanked the person and moved on. That hasn't been too often.

When you guys say stuff that is just pure subjective bunk and try to pass it as fact, I call it so. When you try to sound superior, I call that out too. You're not. Mid's not, Sky's not, and on and on.

If you don't like it, put me on ignore. Please. I promise not to lose one wink of sleep tonight over it.

Frankly, sir, there are very few facts in your repertoire. It's a Curly Neal routine. I really see little more than the same old lank GOP talking points.
For example, I provided facts about Obama's tax plan(s). There was little response other than the same old Hannity-esque, wild-eyed, irrational garbage. Saying we're subjective is rich. Laughable!

OU_Sooner75 and I agree on one point. We may be headed toward serious civil unrest in this country. I think the right is going to go ballistic if Obama wins.

[LiveLaughLove]

Frankly, sir, there are very few facts in your repertoire. It's a Curly Neal routine. I really see little more than the same old lank GOP talking points.
For example, I provided facts about Obama's tax plan(s). There was little response other than the same old Hannity-esque, wild-eyed, irrational garbage.

OU_Sooner75 and I agree on one point. We may be headed toward serious civil unrest in this country. I think the right is going to go ballistic if Obama wins.

Ah the name calling from the uber eilitist (in your mind). Now who was spewing venom? I seem to have misplaced that memo somewhere.

Oh here it is, filed right behind the condescending pretentious know-it-all category. Found it! :) Isn't this fun.

[BigTip]

We may be headed toward serious civil unrest in this country. I think the right is going to go ballistic if Obama wins.

And frankly I am not scared of that. I have a feeling that the 47% won't get off their couches to go out and fight "for the cause."

[marfacowboy]

And frankly I am not scared of that. I have a feeling that the 47% won't get off their couches to go out and fight "for the cause."

http://i565.photobucket.com/albums/ss99/jackburns/badass_zps83a7d21e.jpg

[BigTip]

Seriously?
I guess I am finished with until you sober up.

[marfacowboy]

Seriously?
I guess I am finished with until you sober up.

What do you want me to say? We're all ready to meet you in the streets with our guns? Come on, man. We've been there. You have to throw some humor at it. Or at least try.

[Mazeppa]

The first thing he should do i repeal most of the 900 executive orders such as:


* Executive Order 10990 allows the Government to take over all modes of transportation and control of highways and seaports.

* Executive Order 10995 allows the government to seize and control the communication media.

* Executive Order 10997 allows the government to take over all electrical power, gas, petroleum, fuels, and minerals.

* Executive Order 11000 allows the government to mobilize civilians into work brigades under government supervision.

* Executive Order 11001 allows the government to take over all health education and welfare functions.

* Executive Order 11002 designates the Postmaster General to operate a national registration of all persons.

* Executive Order 11003 allows the government to take over all airports and aircraft, including commercial aircraft.

* Executive Order 11004 allows the Housing and Finance Authority to relocate and establish new locations for populations.

* Executive Order 11005 allows the government to take over railroads, inland waterways, and public storage facilities.

* Executive Order 11049 assigns emergency preparedness function to federal departments and agencies, consolidating 21 operative Executive Orders issues over a fifteen-year period.

* Executive Order 11051 specifies the responsibility of the Office of Emergency Planning and gives authorization to put all Executive Orders into effect in times of increased international tensions and economic or financial crisis.

* Executive Order 11310 grants authority to the Department of Justice to enforce the plans set out in Executive Orders, to institute Industrial support, to establish judicial and legislative liaison, to control all aliens, to operate penal and correctional institutions, and to advise and assist the President.

* Executive Order 11921 allows the Federal Emergency Preparedness Agency to develop plans to establish control over the mechanisms of production and distribution of energy sources, wages, salaries, credit, and the flow of money in U.S. financial institutions in any undefined national emergency. It also provides that when the president declares a state of emergency, Congress cannot review the action for six months.

that would be a good start.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

This election is about getting rid of Obama, short and sweet. Voting for Romney is the only way that can be done. 46 days of malaise are left.

[Skysooner]

This election is about getting rid of Obama, short and sweet. Voting for Romney is the only way that can be done. 46 days of malaise are left.

Again you have no answers. Your hate overwhelms your sense.

[Skysooner]

My body of work is not taking what folks like you dish out. I don't think I go overboard in calling names, or insulting people. I do however, call it like I see it, and I do so boldly.

I don't lie, and I try to have my facts lined out before I speak on here. When I have been proven wrong, I have admitted it, thanked the person and moved on. That hasn't been too often.

When you guys say stuff that is just pure subjective bunk and try to pass it as fact, I call it so. When you try to sound superior, I call that out too. You're not. Mid's not, Sky's not, and on and on.

If you don't like it, put me on ignore. Please. I promise not to lose one wink of sleep tonight over it.

Actually I agree with LLL on what he says here. Not on his points mind you. We agree on almost nothing, but he is always sincere unlike some other posters.

[Soonerjeepman]

**** the UN! If you actually believe in them, you're as stupid as I thought you were...

agreed...do you (not you Turd) know that the dems are pushing the US to agree to several un treaties...from Children with disabilities "care" to gun control? Two dems tried pushing through the children with disabilities act treaty the other night at 9:45 pm on a vote...thank God there was a Rep there to stop the vote.

WE do NOT want to let the UN dictate to us. Ever heard of the One World push by clinton?

[marfacowboy]

This election is about getting rid of Obama, short and sweet. Voting for Romney is the only way that can be done. 46 days of malaise are left.

Good luck.

[marfacowboy]

Actually I agree with LLL on what he says here. Not on his points mind you. We agree on almost nothing, but he is always sincere unlike some other posters.

He's a true believer. I'll grant him that. He speaks from his heart.

[rock on sooner]

Mazeppa, I don't the answer to this, maybe you do. Do you think those
executive orders are SOP for every new prez? Seems to me that those
things listed are necessary in the event of the diffrerent emergencies they
address.

[OU_Sooners75]

Again you have no answers. Your hate overwhelms your sense.

Please, tell us what the answers to the nations problems are. And before you, answer without putting it with a name!


I really want to know what solutions anyone, conservative, moderate, or liberal can present. I am not interested in political jargan or talking points. We all know each sides talking points!

Real solutions without a political twist is what I'm after!!!

[Skysooner]

Please, tell us what the answers to the nations problems are. And before you, answer without putting it with a name!


I really want to know what solutions anyone, conservative, moderate, or liberal can present. I am not interested in political jargan or talking points. We all know each sides talking points!

Real solutions without a political twist is what I'm after!!!

My answers are all over this thread but concisely here it is:

I want this President to not get hung up on social issues as they tend to work themselves out. I'm a social liberal and prefer equality, but these things happen in their own times and generally through the courts.

This is from an earlier post:

I'm more of a social liberal and fiscal conservative. If Romney is elected there will be some changes but nothing fundamental. He may or may not get Obamacare rescinded. To me it is more the economy getting fixed that will help poor people. There is only so much that we can do. I have a special needs son that will be eligible for disability in about 2 years that we intend to take advantage of up to a point (mainly finding a job assistance, etc.). I'm sensitive to the needs of the poor but realize you can't make people wealthy simply by giving them money. I would be more about job training for specific industries or even tax breaks for companies that would hire people that are socio-economically disadvantaged but want to work. There are many ways to structure this. I would also be for some sort of university assistance like the GI Bill if during school they would work on public projects but also mandate that the degree programs have to be necessary (i.e. elementary education, engineering). If they want to do art history, let them borrow the money or work their way through school. So basically I'm saying the poor people are going to suffer due to the economy rather than Romney or Obama getting elected. On the country ending as we know it, it just doesn't work that way with the government divided.

To me the biggest change if Romney gets in is that some of the regulatory agencies should ease up which would be a nice change.

Edit: All of these are only workable if they work like the GI Bill which is actually revenue positive with the effects it has on the economy. People who serve in the military are generally good bets on university or work programs as they have already shown a sense of public service and that is a decent indicator of success in a broader sense.

I want this country to get on a sound financial footing again asap and this means that all entitlements, tax increases, spending cuts in the military are open for discussion. It does us no good to take one or two things off the table when the other side will dig its heels in. That being said there should be a reduction in our spending across the board.

I guess if you have to put my views in a nutshell, let's get the money where it will do the most good and that is basically into the hands of entrepreneurs who can create jobs with start up companies or expansion of successful small businesses. These are the job creators and not the ultra-wealthy (well not all of them some are job creators but I think you know what I mean). Let's get the economy roaring and prepare for future industries. I want a sound energy policy of production of our oil and natural gas resources to ensure that we keep our energy advantage at this point. We also are far advanced on this energy extraction technology which we can also export for a long time. A common sense safety net as mentioned above with incentives to get the ones that want to work education in relevant and needed fields so that we put more people to work. Much of our unemployment is unqualified workers and not lack of jobs. The job types have radically shifted over the last 20 years since I have been out of college. A drawdown in our military would be nice or at least not spending quite so much. This is the largest non-entitlement budget item and has to be open for discussion as well. This has to be done carefully too as many of the jobs that produce our military material are high-paying jobs, and you just drive the tax base down more if you eliminate these too quickly.

There are many ways to reach these goals. I'm not hard tied to any particular one, but what really p***** me off is the intractability of members of Congress to not do anything simply to make the other side look bad.

[TheHumanAlphabet]

I would expect nothing.

I would like to see a clamp down on illegals, possibly move the Army or Guard to close the border. A repeal of the dream act promulgated on us by The Socialist.

I would like to see policies to strengthen the dollar, not see it spiral downward.

I would like to see govertment spending on non-military items, excluding NASA cut and cut big.

I would stop all aid to Islamic states.

I would put Iran on notice and continue the insurgency against them.

I would stop kow-towing to China and demand free trade of their currency or look at tariffs on Chinese goods.

I would pull back Government securities owned by Russia and China.

I would continue Bush tax cuts.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

We do not need the UN to show humility or strength.

We do not need the UN to tell us who can go to war with and who we can't go to war with.

We don't need the UN to tell us how much aid to send a country in need.

We don't need the UN period!!!

When yhou have countries like China and Russia turning their backs on the greater interest of civilization in order to protect their investments, we don't need to be a part of it!!!
For millinia, civilization has fared really well without the overlooking of the UN...which is a very corrupt organization anyway!!!It's a crazy-bad, corrupt as he*l, anti-American, pirate organization that should be shut down and defunded, NOW or sooner.

[champions77]

I work for a very large corporation, so I don't necessarily understand the lack of confidence. The economy tanking is a world wide event. However what I wouldn't understand is the regulatory environment which is equally as bad. I suspect Obamacare has an issue as well. I also agree on Romney inspiring confidence from a business environment. What specifically about Obama doesn't inspire confidence from actions rather than just what is said?


Uncertainty will cause many businesses to "hunker down" and not do much in the way of hiring or expanding operations past what they already have. Obama in his 2007-2008 campaigning promised;
Higher taxes
More regulations
Cap and Trade
Obamacare
Not knowing exactly what was going to happen, there was enough reasons for most industries to adopt a "wait and see" posture. You keep hearing about the large amounts of cash that major companies have on hand.
Because of these factors along with the make up of Obama's advisors and cabinet (nary a one that had any appreciable experience in the Private sector) left the Private sector with a lot of questions about the future, and thus created a ton of uncertainty in the marketplace.

I believe the last four years have left little doubt of which environs that BHO feels more comfortable in, and it's sure not the Private sector.

There are reasons that this recovery is one of the very weakest in US history. The "pushback" of this President and his policies are evident to anyone. He has not created a culture that is conducive to job creation/growth. This President appeals to poor folks a lot more than he does to rich folks, and when is the last time you heard of a poor person hiring someone?