Mitt Romney Presidential Campaign

[ishii]

Reagan couldn’t win a GOP primary today running on his own record. He raised taxes!

Please - you’re engaging in sophistry. Reagan cut the top marginal rate which resulted in years of strong economic growth and won the Cold war without firing a shot. I don’t think he’d have any problem running and winning with that track record.

Ishii

 

[oldcelt]

Reagan cut the top marginal rate which resulted in years of strong economic growth

And the beginning of runaway deficits…which, no President, save one has done anything to stop.

John

 

[Seeker1961]

Please - you’re engaging in sophistry. Reagan cut the top marginal rate which resulted in years of strong economic growth and won the Cold war without firing a shot. I don’t think he’d have any problem running and winning with that track record.

Ishii

Look it up!!! The man raised taxes 11 times and the debt ceiling 18 times! Explain to me how a candiate with that baggage would have ever gotten through the 2012 primary?? Grover Norquist pledge anyone??

Reagan was RIGHT, the 2012 GOP is wrong.

 

[lynnvinc]

Again, please quote anything from Mitt Romney or the Holy Father trying to dissuade your personal efforts to minimize your “carbon footprint.” I believe they are both 100% fine with individual efforts. Your generalization is baseless and completely marginalizes the points you are trying to make about climate change concerns.

You don’t understand. My individual efforts are a drop in the bucket and won’t do much without everyone else’s efforts – as JPII told us back in 1990, that this is everyone’s responsibility.

By sneering at people like me who are striving to mitigate, he is dissuading everyone else from doing their part, not to mention it is demoralizing to me and I start to think what’s the use of doing what I’m doing.

Unfortunately there is not much government can do to make people mitigate, but our leaders certainly can encourage people to mitigate (in ways that will also help their finances and the economy in general). Both JPII and BXVI have admonished ALL of us to mitigate climate change, so I don’t really believe BXVI is telling us not to do so. But Romney surely is in several ways.

First he made a facetious statement several weeks ago about how he couldn’t put a windmill on his car to drive on windpower. Well, we are driving our Chevy Volt on our 100% wind-generated electricity, which is cheaper than dirty energy and much cheaper than gasoline – we pay about $1.25 per 40 miles.

So we very certainly CAN drive on wind power (and without the dangerous I.C.E. fumes in our car). He is a CAN’T DO person when it comes to anything that has to do with saving lives thru sensible environmental actions, and that is bec he is very heavily funded by the devoils. And perhaps bec he is relying on the votes of climate change denialists (who care much more about derailing any efforts to mitigate climate change than they do about saving babies from abortion).

Second he made an extremely nasty statement about how Obama wanted to slow the rise of the oceans and save the earth during his convention speech (and later in subsequent speeches – he is on the warpath against those who would mitigate climate change). It was very hard slap in my face, the faces of the small portion of people who are earnestly striving to reduce their greenhouse gases, and a tremendous slap against the victims of climate change now and on into the future – a death sentence against them.

I couldn’t sleep the whole night after that convention speech. He is so much worse than Bush, I was totally flabberghasted. He is totally dangerous. He does not have the best interests of people at heart; he would be the absolutely worst president this nation has ever had and would spend his time nailing the coffin on life.

I cannot say enough. This man is very dangerous. I feel extremely ashamed that I had actually been planning on voting for him bec of his stance on abortion (which is totally unbelievable now). I am going to do everything in my power to work against his election. I care about life, and I put it above everything else, including the economy and my own personal interests.

I am so very sorry that people like Arroyo promote such dangerous people. I think Arroyo is fairly innocent and really doesn’t understand the issues. That may also be true for many of the Catholic priests, bishops, and laypeople who are bamboozled by Romney and are promoting him. So I won’t fault them. Maybe even Romney doesn’t understand. But I cannot pull the voting lever condemning life on earth to annihilation, and I can’t understand how anyone could.

 

[ishii]

And the beginning of runaway deficits…which, no President, save one has done anything to stop.

John

Yes, the price for the defense buildup which won the Cold War. Oldcelt, if you’re really “old” you would understand that Reagan knew that he would never get Tip O’neil to allow the deep cuts in domestic programs that would have prevented the kind of deficits that occured during the '80’s. Reagan recognized that our defenses were weak and underfunded, and that our economy - double digit inflation, interest rates, and unemployment (remember that?) was in need of energizing with tax cuts. Those were the urgent issues - he didn’t have enough political clout to achieve a balanced budget. Reagan budgets were always declared by the Tip O’neil dominated House as “dead on arrival.”

Ishii

 

[ishii]

Look it up!!! The man raised taxes 11 times and the debt ceiling 18 times! Explain to me how a candiate with that baggage would have ever gotten through the 2012 primary?? Grover Norquist pledge anyone??

Reagan was RIGHT, the 2012 GOP is wrong.

No, you’re still wrong - you said that Reagan couldn’t win running on his own record. Of course he could! Reagan’s record was to cut the top marginal tax rates dramatically, and preside over an economic boom that lasted years! He also defeated our enemy, the Soviets. He would have no problem “running on his record” of success.

Ishii

 

[rlg94086]

You don’t understand. My individual efforts are a drop in the bucket and won’t do much without everyone else’s efforts – as JPII told us back in 1990, that this is everyone’s responsibility.

By sneering at people like me who are striving to mitigate, he is dissuading everyone else from doing their part, not to mention it is demoralizing to me and I start to think what’s the use of doing what I’m doing.

Unfortunately there is not much government can do to make people mitigate, but our leaders certainly can encourage people to mitigate (in ways that will also help their finances and the economy in general). Both JPII and BXVI have admonished ALL of us to mitigate climate change, so I don’t really believe BXVI is telling us not to do so. But Romney surely is in several ways.

First he made a facetious statement several weeks ago about how he couldn’t put a windmill on his car to drive on windpower. Well, we are driving our Chevy Volt on our 100% wind-generated electricity, which is cheaper than dirty energy and much cheaper than gasoline – we pay about $1.25 per 40 miles.

So we very certainly CAN drive on wind power (and without the dangerous I.C.E. fumes in our car). He is a CAN’T DO person when it comes to anything that has to do with saving lives thru sensible environmental actions, and that is bec he is very heavily funded by the devoils. And perhaps bec he is relying on the votes of climate change denialists (who care much more about derailing any efforts to mitigate climate change than they do about saving babies from abortion).

Your personal situation of being able to power your Volt on wind power is not a nationwide sustainable solution. Romney’s point wasn’t to denigrate an individual’s efforts but to state that we are not in a position to go completely green. It is economically not feasible at this time.

Second he made an extremely nasty statement about how Obama wanted to slow the rise of the oceans and save the earth during his convention speech (and later in subsequent speeches – he is on the warpath against those who would mitigate climate change). It was very hard slap in my face, the faces of the small portion of people who are earnestly striving to reduce their greenhouse gases, and a tremendous slap against the victims of climate change now and on into the future – a death sentence against them.

I couldn’t sleep the whole night after that convention speech. He is so much worse than Bush, I was totally flabberghasted. He is totally dangerous. He does not have the best interests of people at heart; he would be the absolutely worst president this nation has ever had and would spend his time nailing the coffin on life.

You are making WAY too much out of a simple, political statement. His point was that Obama promised huge, bold things for the environment, whereas Romney is promising to help people get jobs so they can take care of their families. You overreacted.

I cannot say enough. This man is very dangerous. I feel extremely ashamed that I had actually been planning on voting for him bec of his stance on abortion (which is totally unbelievable now). I am going to do everything in my power to work against his election. I care about life, and I put it above everything else, including the economy and my own personal interests.

I am so very sorry that people like Arroyo promote such dangerous people. I think Arroyo is fairly innocent and really doesn’t understand the issues. That may also be true for many of the Catholic priests, bishops, and laypeople who are bamboozled by Romney and are promoting him. So I won’t fault them. Maybe even Romney doesn’t understand. But I cannot pull the voting lever condemning life on earth to annihilation, and I can’t understand how anyone could.

You don’t care about life. Your priorities are totally out-of-whack. He and the Republican Party have no interest or desire in “condemning life on earth to annihilation.” Again, you are completely marginalizing yourself and hurting your own cause. When you take it to this level of hyperbole, even people who care about the environment (like me) completely tune you out.

 

[oldcelt]

Yes, the price for the defense buildup which won the Cold War. Oldcelt, if you’re really “old” you would understand that Reagan knew that he would never get Tip O’neil to allow the deep cuts in domestic programs that would have prevented the kind of deficits that occured during the '80’s. Reagan recognized that our defenses were weak and underfunded, and that our economy - double digit inflation, interest rates, and unemployment (remember that?) was in need of energizing with tax cuts. Those were the urgent issues - he didn’t have enough political clout to achieve a balanced budget. Reagan budgets were always declared by the Tip O’neil dominated House as “dead on arrival.”

Ishii

And yet…those two men would sit down and have a drink together. Of course…it was all the Democrat’s fault…despite the fact that the President held the veto pen…and never used it.

Regarding the Cold War, the Soviet Union was already on its knees…falling from its own weight. I give President Reagan great credit for seeing that they did not recover. In truth, all we had to do was wait…ad give a few well-worded speeches…which Reagan did.

So you know, I was working in Washington , DC in the office of Congressman William Clinger on the day that JPII was shot. He was a moderate Republican…I think you can guess what I was.

John

 

[Seeker1961]

No, you’re still wrong - you said that Reagan couldn’t win running on his own record. Of course he could! Reagan’s record was to cut the top marginal tax rates dramatically, and preside over an economic boom that lasted years! He also defeated our enemy, the Soviets. He would have no problem “running on his record” of success.

Ishii

You can have your own opinion but you cannot have your own FACTS. You are the one who is blatantly ignoring the facts that do not fit your personal opinion.

Yes he instituted a tax cut, but then he subsequently raised taxes 11 times to fix the damage that tax cut caused. He was prudent that way. He saw the problem and fixed it, even though the solution was unpopular.

Stay away from the talking points and look at actual history sometime.

 

[lynnvinc]

Your personal situation of being able to power your Volt on wind power is not a nationwide sustainable solution. Romney’s point wasn’t to denigrate an individual’s efforts but to state that we are not in a position to go completely green. It is economically not feasible at this time.

I’d be jumping for joy if we went, say 20% green. And considering it is possible for our nation to reduce its GHGs by 75% with off-the-shelf technology and without reducing productivity or living standards (even increasing them), one wonders why people, businesses, schools, and churches are not doing that they can to reduce such grave risks.

You are making WAY too much out of a simple, political statement. His point was that Obama promised huge, bold things for the environment, whereas Romney is promising to help people get jobs so they can take care of their families. You overreacted.

I am not. Even Bush admitted anthropogenic climate change was real and promised to control CO2 emissions (even tho I figured he was lying), and upon leaving office said we were addicted to oil.

Romney could have simply kept quiet on the issue, and I would have voted for him, thinking he was perhaps better than Bush. But not now. This was an extremely serious and highly dangerous statement. And it was not against Obama as much as it was against people who are striving to do their part and against all of life on earth.

If it were against Obama, then he would have said that he will do better in mitigating climate change, and getting the American people behind him. Everyone knows Obama has not done much to mitigate climate change or rally people to do so, that he put nearly all his political capital into affordable health care.

The problem is people do not understand that jobs and the economy are useless if the air we breathe, water we drink, food we eat and chemicals that permeate our skin are killing us, and there is no food in the grocery stores. They take God’s creation for granted, but when we are left with a condition of ever diminishing basic resources necessary to sustain life, then they will come to understand. Unfortunately it may be too late by then.

…When you take it to this level of hyperbole, even people who care about the environment (like me) completely tune you out.

I sincerely wish, pray, and hope that what I say is hyperbole, and I am exceedingly grieved that it is not.

I would be ecstatic if I were wrong and the denialists were right. But based on what I know – and I’ve been following the science like a hawk for over 20 years, and I know the way science works (striving to avoid the false positive, rather than striving to avoid the false negative) – if anything I’m underestimating the problem, and very bad things will be happening a lot sooner than 100s of years from now, maybe within a few decades.

Let us hope and pray I am wrong. But let us do what we can to mitigate this problem (actually there are some 9 or more very serious environmental problems), just in case I am right or even underestimating the problem.

 

[wussup]

First he made a facetious statement several weeks ago about how he couldn’t put a windmill on his car to drive on windpower. Well, we are driving our Chevy Volt on our 100% wind-generated electricity, which is cheaper than dirty energy and much cheaper than gasoline – we pay about $1.25 per 40 miles.

crazy thing is, the volt was #14 on the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy’s Green Book, and the 12 cars with better green scores were all gasoline…

 

[meltzerboy]

I’d be jumping for joy if we went, say 20% green. And considering it is possible for our nation to reduce its GHGs by 75% with off-the-shelf technology and without reducing productivity or living standards (even increasing them), one wonders why people, businesses, schools, and churches are not doing that they can to reduce such grave risks.

I am not. Even Bush admitted anthropogenic climate change was real and promised to control CO2 emissions (even tho I figured he was lying), and upon leaving office said we were addicted to oil.

Romney could have simply kept quiet on the issue, and I would have voted for him, thinking he was perhaps better than Bush. But not now. This was an extremely serious and highly dangerous statement. And it was not against Obama as much as it was against people who are striving to do their part and against all of life on earth.

If it were against Obama, then he would have said that he will do better in mitigating climate change, and getting the American people behind him. Everyone knows Obama has not done much to mitigate climate change or rally people to do so, that he put nearly all his political capital into affordable health care.

The problem is people do not understand that jobs and the economy are useless if the air we breathe, water we drink, food we eat and chemicals that permeate our skin are killing us, and there is no food in the grocery stores. They take God’s creation for granted, but when we are left with a condition of ever diminishing basic resources necessary to sustain life, then they will come to understand. Unfortunately it may be too late by then.

I sincerely wish, pray, and hope that what I say is hyperbole, and I am exceedingly grieved that it is not.

I would be ecstatic if I were wrong and the denialists were right. But based on what I know – and I’ve been following the science like a hawk for over 20 years, and I know the way science works (striving to avoid the false positive, rather than striving to avoid the false negative) – if anything I’m underestimating the problem, and very bad things will be happening a lot sooner than 100s of years from now, maybe within a few decades.

Let us hope and pray I am wrong. But let us do what we can to mitigate this problem (actually there are some 9 or more very serious environmental problems), just in case I am right or even underestimating the problem.

Environmental concerns are not even on Romney’s radar: he is too beholden to the interests of the big oil companies. Also, Romney has proven by his words that he lacks vision when it comes to the environment and may even believe that investment in alternative sources of energy is contrary to economic prosperity. Environmental concerns MAY be on Obama’s radar, but are most likely not of major interest to him either. However, I have little doubt they will be on the radar screen, front and center, of all our children and grandchildren. Hopefully, it will not be way too late by that time.

 

[ishii]

You can have your own opinion but you cannot have your own FACTS. You are the one who is blatantly ignoring the facts that do not fit your personal opinion.

Yes he instituted a tax cut, but then he subsequently raised taxes 11 times** to fix the damage that tax cut caused. ** He was prudent that way. He saw the problem and fixed it, even though the solution was unpopular.

Stay away from the talking points and look at actual history sometime.

First, cut out the snarkiness. Second, i have never disputed that Reagan may have raised taxes. My point (which you are ignoring) is that Reagan got the economy moving again with his tax cuts, and helped defeat the Soviet Union. He took an economy with double digit interest rates, double digit unemployment, and double digit inflation, and stagnant economic growth and turned it all around resulting in an economic boom that lasted years! That is a record that any GOP candidate could run on and win. So once again, you are wrong.

Ishii

 

[oldcelt]

First, cut out the snarkiness. Second, i have never disputed that Reagan may have raised taxes. My point (which you are ignoring) is that Reagan got the economy moving again with his tax cuts, and helped defeat the Soviet Union. He took an economy with double digit interest rates, double digit unemployment, and double digit inflation, and stagnant economic growth and turned it all around resulting in an economic boom that lasted years! That is a record that any GOP candidate could run on and win. So once again, you are wrong.

And built it on deficit spending…maybe Carter should have done that…he didn’t…and he could have been re-elected.

John

 

[Seeker1961]

First, cut out the snarkiness. Second, i have never disputed that Reagan may have raised taxes. My point (which you are ignoring) is that Reagan got the economy moving again with his tax cuts, and helped defeat the Soviet Union. He took an economy with double digit interest rates, double digit unemployment, and double digit inflation, and stagnant economic growth and turned it all around resulting in an economic boom that lasted years! That is a record that any GOP candidate could run on and win. So once again, you are wrong.

Ishii

You are the one ignoring facts and making up a whole new history to go with your personal opinion.

I am only “wrong” when placed against YOUR opinion.

If the tax cuts were so successful in helping the economy, why did he raise taxes 11 times after that? Oh, I forgot, that never happened in your world.

 

[ishii]

You are the one ignoring facts and making up a whole new history to go with your personal opinion.

I am only “wrong” when placed against YOUR opinion.

What did I say that is factually wrong? Let’s start with that and go from there.

Ishii

 

[ishii]

And yet…those two men would sit down and have a drink together. Of course…it was all the Democrat’s fault…despite the fact that the President held the veto pen…and never used it.

Regarding the Cold War, the Soviet Union was already on its knees…falling from its own weight. I give President Reagan great credit for seeing that they did not recover. In truth, all we had to do was wait…ad give a few well-worded speeches…which Reagan did.

So you know, I was working in Washington , DC in the office of Congressman William Clinger on the day that JPII was shot. He was a moderate Republican…I think you can guess what I was.

John

No one in the early 80’s was predicting that the Soviet was on its knees and that all we had to do was “wait it out” - all you can do is say that in hindsight. Everyone knew that the Soviet system was designed to fail - but no one knew how long it would take. It was more than speeches, oldcelt, that helped push the Soviets over the brink. Have you ever heard of SDI? The Reagan doctrine? The Soviets knew they couldn’t keep up and match our superiority. Hard to say what they would have concluded had Carter or Mondale been president and continued the policy of keeping America weak, economically and militarily.

Ishii

 

[oldcelt]

No one in the early 80’s was predicting that the Soviet was on its knees and that all we had to do was “wait it out” - all you can do is say that in hindsight.

Really, that’s strange since we were ramping up for war in 1979…with Iran…and did not concern ourselves with the opinions of the Russians.

I am always impressed with what Dwight Eisenhower, a five star general and Republican President of the United States said in his last, or close enough, speech as President, said, “Beware the Military Industrial Complex.”

The man who succeeded him said something similar…I paraphrase, If you build it, someone will want to use it.

Reagan, and all Presidents since then would have done well to listen.

John

 

[pnewton]

No one in the early 80’s was predicting that the Soviet was on its knees and that all we had to do was “wait it out” - all you can do is say that in hindsight.

Well, there was this fella.



“But as political leaders, they were finished. Visiting his native Poland in 1979, Pope John Paul II struck what turned out to be a mortal blow to its Communist regime, to the Soviet Empire, [and] ultimately to Communism.”

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_John_Paul_II

 

[ishii]

Really, that’s strange since we were ramping up for war in 1979…with Iran…and did not concern ourselves with the opinions of the Russians.

I am always impressed with what Dwight Eisenhower, a five star general and Republican President of the United States said in his last, or close enough, speech as President, said, “Beware the Military Industrial Complex.”

The man who succeeded him said something similar…I paraphrase, If you build it, someone will want to use it.

Reagan, and all Presidents since then would have done well to listen.

John

If Reagan’s defense buildup pushed the Soviets over the cliff and in so doing aggrandized the dreaded “military industrial complex” then so be it. I would say the freedom of millions of Russians and eastern Europeans was worth it.

Ishii