I get the pleasure of seeing some of these same people from the legal side…through civil rights complaints or removal of children or criminal charges. All of them have the exact same attitude…“it’s someone elses fault” attitude. The only ones that I ever saw get anywhere took responsibility and realized that if they wanted things to change, they would have to take the actions to change them.
What about the I’ll never convince them line?..that’s the killer. I suppose he meant that in only the most positive light…
In this scenario, President Obama is obviously Gilligan.
And, the rest are Democrats who will never be convinced because they are.
I think he meant it as an honest statement. Guess what John, there is NOTHING Barack Obama could say that would convince me to vote for him. Me and millions of my fellow travelers. Just as Romney is correct in saying that he is not going to convince the person who believes in government control and solutions to vote for him. It’s not meant as a negative or positive, it is simply a statement of fact. He is a businessman and has a businessman’s attitude. Don’t waste time and money chasing leprechauns.
In this scenario, President Obama is obviously Gilligan.
Yeah but he THINKS he’s The Professor!In this scenario, President Obama is obviously Gilligan.
Exactly.
And the economy under his watch is the SS Minnow
could be worse…he could think he is Ginger or Maryanne
Wishful thinking on your part.
How about protection from direct aggression by a foreign country?
The real difference is that the conservative would argue that the responsibility belongs to state, county and local governments as they are closer and more accountable to the people. This is the Catholic social justice principle of subsidiarity.
Oh come on ProVobis, even you can see the holes in that argument. When you pay federal income taxes you get nothing back as in a check written to you. Nor do you get more by paying in more. I remember telling my boss who was writing a check for $750,000 that he got exactly the same benefits as the person paying nothing in FIT. He was not amused.How about protection from direct aggression by a foreign country?
Republicans want to spend another $2 trillion on that. Do we get maximum bang for the buck is the question.
Did you forget all the 401k’s and the IRA’s out there, ready to get taxed?
Which people do you see “lowering their standard of living so the ‘subsidy’ becomes the sole source of income”? This sounds like one of the stereotypes about poor people, particularly Blacks, that were prevalent in the late 1960’s and 1970’s. I’m not sure to what extent it took place then, but is it really happening nowadays? I think people who qualify for food stamps ARE the truly needy in the vast majority of cases.
Yes it makes perfect sense to me…give up a $30,000,000 a year job, spend millions of your own money, spend years living in hotels and buses, have your family insulted and abused…all in the quest to be President for the sole reason of changing the tax laws to reduce rates and save a few mil. Now why didn’t I think of that?
I said the same thing. Middle East problems and whatnot, and this is the best they have on Romney? Even if it was damaging, it seems way to early. We still have 3 debates, plus the Ryden debate.
And you think this because? The standards have been relaxed. We’re seeing ads trying to convince people to sign up for food stamps…as if there aren’t enough already. I heard 16% of Americans are on food stamps… 48 million people. If that many people ARE truly needy it’s because Obama has helped to destroy economic growth and opportunities.