J
Jeanne_S
Guest
Rush Limbaugh said something really funny"Obama did almost as poorly in the Wed.nite debate,as he did in his debate with Clint Eastwood!"
- Status
H
HansTrappist
Guest
Point well taken.
I know Paul is not running but I think it was a mistake for Romney not to integrate some of his ideas, especially on foreign policy.
I guess I will wait and see what Romney has to say at VMI on Monday, and what he says in the foreign policy debates. He suprised me with his performance on Wednesday and who knows, he may suprise me again.
I just think he would be crazy not to integrate some of Paulâs ideas on foreign policy, ideas that are constitutionally correct, fiscally sound, have the support of a large proportion of the active duty military folks as well as the support of a majority of independents and undecided, and are ideas that will actually make the United States and the World safer in the long run. Remember, Paul is not against a strong military, a point he shares in common with Romney. The middle east is on fire because of our intervention over there. Obama is commited to intervention and so is Romney, the only difference is that Romney thinks he can intervene better than Obama. Remember, Romney actually wants more intervention in Syria and thinks we need to confront Russia when it is actually the United States that keeps getting closer and closer to Russiaâs borders with our military bases. The cold war is over. Intervention has proven to be a failed policy. We really face two paths: we can either commit to endless war for an illusory peace and watch the U.S. economy crash and burn in the process, or we can get back to the principles of non-intervention and strong national defense that made this country truly secure, at home and abroad.
L
LisaA
Guest
I follow Romney closely and have not seen references to intervention. I see him as more of a Reaganesque âpeace through strengthâ which he has stated many times. A strong national defense is clearly his philosophy. Again do not see his references to intervention and foreign adventures.
The reference to Russia may well be our abandonment of the Poles and Czechs with respect to the missile systems. Obama has CLEARLY approached our long time allies with a wink and a nodâŚto their enemies! I see ZERO resemblance between Romney and Obama with respect to foreign policy.
I donât think we have intervened in Syria and other than providing help for the innocents caught in the crossfire, I hope we donât. I think weâve all learned from Iraq and Afghanistan that boots on the ground or nationbuilding are a waste of blood and treasure.
I disagree with the strict Buchanan isolationist approach. We arenât a self contained island surrounded by ocean on all sides. We do have to engage with the rest of the world. However the saber rattling or nation building are not anything I would support nor do I see Romney taking this approach.
Can you enlighten me?
What about the life issues you also addressed. I think several have responded that between Romney and ObamaâŚno contest.
Lisa
H
HansTrappist
Guest
Have you ever gone to Romneyâs website? Go the foreign policy section. In it you will find that he is just as much an interventionist as Clinton, Bush II and Obama. You will find that he mistakenly believes that America is the indispensable people and that this century must be the âAmerican Century.â He thinks that it is Russia, rather than the hegemonic, hubristic United States, that is âexpandingâ and âaggressiveâ and that a Romney administration would seek to âencourage democratic political and economic reformâ in Russia. This is crazy talk and Putin has already called him out on it to the effect that he hopes it is simply campaign rhetoric, because no sane world leader can talk like this and hope to be effective on the world stage. You can go down the list of issues from Iran, to China, to Israel and find that Romney is no different than Clinton, Bush II and Obama. He simply thinks he can be better than all of them at implementing our failed, bankrupt foreign policy. But, like I said, hopefully that stuff on his website is just exaggerated campaign rhetoric and hopefully he spends time at his speech on Monday at VMI telling the American public that he is going to start following the Constitution again and will stop inventing war powers that donât exist, will give his delegated war making powers back to the Congress, will repeal the NDAA, will curb the abuses of the Patriot Act, and will reinstall our civil liberties. Most important of all, hopefully he will make it perfectly clear that the United States is soverign and independent, that we are not going to war anymore based on what the UN thinks or the pressure exerted by Israel and Saudi Arabia through their lobbying agents here in United States. Hopefully Romney will make it perfectly clear that his powers as President are limited and that he will never go to war without a War Declaration following a vote in Congress. If he said that, I might just vote for him.
B
beehumble
Guest
from jwinch2:
âPlease donât get me wrong. We need to help those who need it. We need to see Christ in them. However, we also need to be honest. My wife is from Brasil. When people talk about the poor in the news or comments are made by political candidates, she laughs. According to her, America is the only country where the poor drive to pick up their unemployment check in their own car, and while waiting in line, check facebook on their iPhone. Having been overseas extensively myself, I am inclined to say her basic point is sound.â
I have to agree. I worked with a Philippino guy and once said âwell, we had five kids so my parents couldnât afford to get us too much stuff.â
he looked at me and said, âDid you have shoes?â I was shocked into silence, and could only say âYes.â
Actually the 5 kids and my parents each had at least one pair of shoes and a pair of sneakers, and 3 square meals a day, plus junk food, plus summer vacation, movies, cars, tvâs, hot running water, and on and on - stuff many in the world do not have.
In the US we have so much. The problem is we always see somebody else here who has more, so we think we are missing out, but compared to the world, we are in the top percent as far as a good life.
God bless you.
âPlease donât get me wrong. We need to help those who need it. We need to see Christ in them. However, we also need to be honest. My wife is from Brasil. When people talk about the poor in the news or comments are made by political candidates, she laughs. According to her, America is the only country where the poor drive to pick up their unemployment check in their own car, and while waiting in line, check facebook on their iPhone. Having been overseas extensively myself, I am inclined to say her basic point is sound.â
I have to agree. I worked with a Philippino guy and once said âwell, we had five kids so my parents couldnât afford to get us too much stuff.â
he looked at me and said, âDid you have shoes?â I was shocked into silence, and could only say âYes.â
Actually the 5 kids and my parents each had at least one pair of shoes and a pair of sneakers, and 3 square meals a day, plus junk food, plus summer vacation, movies, cars, tvâs, hot running water, and on and on - stuff many in the world do not have.
In the US we have so much. The problem is we always see somebody else here who has more, so we think we are missing out, but compared to the world, we are in the top percent as far as a good life.
God bless you.
L
LisaA
Guest
First I totally disagree with Buchananâs total isolationist policy and if you want to see Romney adopt this or Ron Paulâs âheck itâs just fine if Iran gets a nuke!â approach then there is nothing more to say.
OTOH yes I have and just went back to Romneyâs website because I sure never saw a single reference to foreign interventions, boots on the ground, nation building or saber rattling. Didnât see it this time either. What I see is a lot of focus on using the power of the purse to put these recalcitrant tin pot dictators in line. He speaks frequently of withdrawing funding from those countries such as Pakistan and Egypt that have one hand out asking for dough and the other with a torch to burn the American flag. He speaks of actually enforcing sanctions against countriesâŚlike Obama buddy Imeltâs GE that does business with Iran. Enforcing sanctions that have some teeth not the âoh please Mr Mullah donât be meanâ cr*p that Obama usesâŚthatâs working out well dontcha think?
Further he spoke of rebuilding the areas of our defense that are necessary to preserve our security and the security of those ocean paths we use directly or again for national security. IOW more focus on technology, advanced systems, and reducing waste and overlap within the military.
When you claim Romney is âno differentâ than Obama or Bush 43 you are talkinâ trash Hans Trappist. Just as those who claim there is little difference between Obama and Romney on life issues, you seem to conflate anything but strict isolationism as a desire to take up the flag and invade some other sovereign country. I sure didnât see it on the website nor have I heard it from Romney himself.
I guess you are a better âbetween the linesâ reader than I.
BTW apparently he is giving a foreign policy speech on Monday. Maybe you will find the answers there.
Lisa
H
HansTrappist
Guest
No, Lisa, I am not talking âtrash.â Never once have I attacked Mitt Romney or his intentions. He may honestly believe that intervention is the way to go, but I donât think any serious foreign policy critic would doubt that he is an interventionist in the traditions of Bush II as evidenced by the fact that he gets most of his foreign policy advice from the same guys that were whispering into Bushâs ear. There is no need to get personal here and I forgive you for accusing me of talking âtrashâ, but I am simply giving you my honest assessment on Romney. I will probably end up votin for him, given the fact that his opponent is Obama, but Romney may not be a done deal at this point and we need to look at these candidates honestly without preconcieved notions. Yes, it is true that I supported Ron Paul in the primaries, not because I particuarly thought he was the most polished candidate or the best speaker, etc. but because he was on to the truth of the matter and was not afraid to say it. He mobilized an army overnight, getting most of his support and donations from people that had given up on the political process. Romney NEEDS that support to win, given how close the race is. Not only would it be good for his poll numbers but it would make good consitutional, fiscal, and military sense to revise his foreign policy in the direction of Ron Paul and the Founders. Romney has a history of âconversionsâ and changing his positions on issues as he becomes better educated, and so he could come up with a polished way of changing his mind on this issue. I think his handling of the foreign policy issue in the next debates is going to make or break him, and the undecided independents and the disillusioned voters from both parties are simply ravished to hear somebody speak the truth on the foreign policy situation. Hopefully Romney tells the truth on this issue, or he might just get a suprise from Obama in the next debate.First I totally disagree with Buchananâs total isolationist policy and if you want to see Romney adopt this or Ron Paulâs âheck itâs just fine if Iran gets a nuke!â approach then there is nothing more to say.
OTOH yes I have and just went back to Romneyâs website because I sure never saw a single reference to foreign interventions, boots on the ground, nation building or saber rattling. Didnât see it this time either. What I see is a lot of focus on using the power of the purse to put these recalcitrant tin pot dictators in line. He speaks frequently of withdrawing funding from those countries such as Pakistan and Egypt that have one hand out asking for dough and the other with a torch to burn the American flag. He speaks of actually enforcing sanctions against countriesâŚlike Obama buddy Imeltâs GE that does business with Iran. Enforcing sanctions that have some teeth not the âoh please Mr Mullah donât be meanâ cr*p that Obama usesâŚthatâs working out well dontcha think?
Further he spoke of rebuilding the areas of our defense that are necessary to preserve our security and the security of those ocean paths we use directly or again for national security. IOW more focus on technology, advanced systems, and reducing waste and overlap within the military.
When you claim Romney is âno differentâ than Obama or Bush 43 you are talkinâ trash Hans Trappist. Just as those who claim there is little difference between Obama and Romney on life issues, you seem to conflate anything but strict isolationism as a desire to take up the flag and invade some other sovereign country. I sure didnât see it on the website nor have I heard it from Romney himself.
I guess you are a better âbetween the linesâ reader than I.
BTW apparently he is giving a foreign policy speech on Monday. Maybe you will find the answers there.
Lisa
L
Lapey
Guest
Have you ever gone to the democrat websiteâŚthe one with the party platform that supports countless intrinsic evils which we as Catholics must reject.
L
LisaA
Guest
Hans Trappist, the âtalkinâ trashâ reference was tongue in cheek so if you took it seriously Iâm sorry, it was not my intention.
Again I just donât see the great interventionist approach by Romney but one more time, if you are a strict isolationist in the tradition of Buchanan or Paul, then even Romneyâs objective of âpeace through strengthâ would sound like saber rattling. So maybe it would help if I understood where you stand.
I read and re-read Romneyâs position, country by country as well as the home page on foreign policy and I see a businessmanâs approach----use money as a carrot or a stick as need be. Be preparedâyou know Mormons LOVE the Boy Scout creed
âso getting our Navy beyond the USS Minnow where I think Obama wants to take it sounds like a good plan to me.Further, his VERY strong focus on DOMESTIC energy both as a stimulus to the economy (a real one with real jobs not make believe jobs) as a way of getting costs down and as an element of our national security show me a man who does NOT want to venture outside our borders unless necessary. I mean really Hans Trappist, wouldnât you love to be able to say to Chavez, the Saudi Princes and the MullahsâŚ'Letâem drink oil."? I would.
There are many things I like about Rep Paul, but his foreign policy isnât one of them. I just donât think that realistically we can hole up and pretend the rest of the world doesnât exist. Further the idea of Iran getting a nuke disturbs me greatly. Paul seemed so blase about that possibility during the debates I kept wondering if I heard him correctly.
I see a place for Rep Paul in a Romney administration. I want to set him loose auditing the Fed
We shall see what happens with the upcoming foreign policy speech but I assure you Obama and Romney are polar opposites when it comes to foreign or domestic policy
Lisa
H
HansTrappist
Guest
Yes I have, and I already stated that I could never vote for Obama.
But it is not Democrats that Romney needs to win this election. They are already voting for Obama.
And the Republicans are already behind Romney.
It is the Independents and maybe a few disillusioned voters from the two big parties, that are at play and are who Romney NEEDS to win. NOW is the time he better start speaking to them, and for a majority of them foreign policy is a huge issue.
A
austenbosten
Guest
I donât know about you, but I went to Obamaâs website and this is what I saw:
Equal Rights:
Supporting marriage for -]same-sex/-] couples
Standing up for the -]LGBT/-]community
Health Care:
Womenâs health and birth -]control/-]
Ensured that the cost-]of contraception/-] is fully covered by most health plans
Committed to protecting a womanâs right to choose
-]Opposed /-]attempts to defund Planned Parenthood
Whatâs the problem?
L
Lapey
Guest
I see what they didâŚI donât know about you, but I went to Obamaâs website and this is what I saw:
Equal Rights:
Supporting marriage for -]same-sex/-] couples
Standing up for the -]LGBT/-]community
Health Care:
Womenâs health and birth -]control/-]
Ensured that the cost-]of contraception/-] is fully covered by most health plans
Committed to protecting a womanâs right to choose
-]Opposed /-]attempts to defund Planned Parenthood
Whatâs the problem?
E
epan
Guest
Silly. Swedenâs economy supports Sweden.
The evidence is clear. There is a straight line correlation of all the âindustrializedâ countries. The US does the very worst in all social measures. You can plot all of the major advanced countries on a straight line base on income distribution. The rich suffer for their greed here, and so do the poor.
L
LisaA
Guest
What social measures are you talking about? Are you not aware your âstatisticsâ re infant mortality, life span are bogus? How many Americans are spending money out of their own pockets to get medical care in Britain or Sweden for that matter. I do hear you can get a cheap bust lift in Thailand, just pray you donât need a blood transfusion. Lots of AIDS over thereâŚ
Income distribution? Since when has that been an objective of anyone but the Communists? Like the animals in 1984, all animals are equal, some are more equal? I see nothing positive about somehow forcing substantial âredistributionâ of income or assets within this country.
We have a progressive income tax. We have a social industrial complex that provides a safety net, if not a hammock. We dontâ need a âdistributor in chiefâ although thatâs what weâll get if Obama has his way.
Lisa
K
kimmielittle
Guest
Dear Mr Gore and Company,
After investigating Mr Obamaâs claims after the debate, I think your claim of âMr Obama suffering from Altitude sicknessâ - might just have merit.
Mr Obama, seems to be suffering from Short Term Memory Loss.
POST DEBATE CLAIMS MADE:
âLast night, my opponent says he ** refuses to close the loophole ** that gives big oil companies $4 billion in taxpayer subsidies every year,â Obama said at a Denver campaign event on Thursday. **âHe ruled out closing the loophole ** that gives oil companies $4 billion in corporate welfare.â
âThe guy who was playing Mitt Romney said ** he refuses to close a loophole ** that gives big oil companies $4 billion in taxpayer subsidies every single year,â Obama said in Wisconsin on Thursday.
And again at a Friday event in Virginia, Obama claimed Romney said that there is âno wayâ heâd close loopholes for oil companies.
âHe said ** thereâs no way that heâd close the loophole** that gives big oil companies billions each year in corporate warfare,â Obama said on Friday.
To refresh Mr Obamaâs memory - Could you could put this on his teleprompter?
THE DEBATE TRANSCRIPTS:
cnn.com/2012/10/03/politics/debate-transcript/index.html
Where Mr Romney Clearly stated:
In fact, Mitt Romney said during the debate that getting rid of tax breaks for oil companies was âon the tableâ ** and that these breaks ** probably wouldnât survive a lowering of the corporate tax rate.
âBut, you know, if we get that tax rate from 35 percent down to 25 percent, ** why, that $2.8 billion is on the table,â ** Romney said during the debate. âOf course itâs on the table. Thatâs probably not going to survive you get that rate down to 25 percent.â
Saying something is on the table doesnât mean you are refusing or wonât. It means it is up for discussion.
Better an empty chair - than an empty mindâŚdonja think?
Thank you
kimmie
After investigating Mr Obamaâs claims after the debate, I think your claim of âMr Obama suffering from Altitude sicknessâ - might just have merit.
Mr Obama, seems to be suffering from Short Term Memory Loss.
POST DEBATE CLAIMS MADE:
âLast night, my opponent says he ** refuses to close the loophole ** that gives big oil companies $4 billion in taxpayer subsidies every year,â Obama said at a Denver campaign event on Thursday. **âHe ruled out closing the loophole ** that gives oil companies $4 billion in corporate welfare.â
âThe guy who was playing Mitt Romney said ** he refuses to close a loophole ** that gives big oil companies $4 billion in taxpayer subsidies every single year,â Obama said in Wisconsin on Thursday.
And again at a Friday event in Virginia, Obama claimed Romney said that there is âno wayâ heâd close loopholes for oil companies.
âHe said ** thereâs no way that heâd close the loophole** that gives big oil companies billions each year in corporate warfare,â Obama said on Friday.
To refresh Mr Obamaâs memory - Could you could put this on his teleprompter?
THE DEBATE TRANSCRIPTS:
cnn.com/2012/10/03/politics/debate-transcript/index.html
Where Mr Romney Clearly stated:
In fact, Mitt Romney said during the debate that getting rid of tax breaks for oil companies was âon the tableâ ** and that these breaks ** probably wouldnât survive a lowering of the corporate tax rate.
âBut, you know, if we get that tax rate from 35 percent down to 25 percent, ** why, that $2.8 billion is on the table,â ** Romney said during the debate. âOf course itâs on the table. Thatâs probably not going to survive you get that rate down to 25 percent.â
Saying something is on the table doesnât mean you are refusing or wonât. It means it is up for discussion.
Better an empty chair - than an empty mindâŚdonja think?
Thank you
kimmie
B
BroomWagon
Guest
And Sweden are relatively a âhomogenizedâ country. Big difference.
Oh, and itâs well known Abba fled from there.
M
markomalley
Guest
If Swedenâs model of omnipresent socialism is working, then why this?
Thatâs right, the European nation famously stereotyped for having aggressive taxation to fund an omnipresent state has actually decided that in response to the Eurozone crisis and the continued effects of the global economic downturn, or âGreat Recessionâ, that itâs time to ease up on taxes and reduce the size of government. While Sweden is not technically in the Eurozone, as it does not use the Euro as currency, it has been drawn into the financial mess of the Eurozone by sheer proximity. Unemployment in 2011 was north of 7.5 percent and GDP growth was anemic at .4 percent projected for 2012.
While the rest of Europe and the United States have gone on massive spending sprees fueled by government borrowing and tax hikes, Sweden took a different approach. In the Spring 2012 Economic and Budget Policy Guidelines, the Swedish Government and its Finance Minister, Anders Borg, have laid out a plan that is focused on lowering taxes. Their rationale? âWhen indviduals and families get to keep more their income, their independence and their opportunities to shape their own lives also increase.â
Borg also wants to lower the corporate tax rate as a way of meeting the governmentâs goal of âfull employmentâ. The government has already cut property taxes and other luxury taxes on the rich to lure investors and entrepreneurs back to Sweden. The government has also slashed spending across the board, including on the welfare programs that used to be Swedenâs claim to fame. Theyâve also installed caps on annual government expenditures: real and enforceable limits that the Swedes believe are pivotal to economic stability. They explain in their Policy Guidelines that âthe expenditure ceiling is the Governmentâs most important tool for meeting the surplus.â Imagine that, a government that stays within its limits. So why didnât Sweden hop on the stimulus bandwagon like the U.S. and much of Europe?
B
BroomWagon
Guest
Also, rather than say âIndustrialized Nationsâ, USA has a population of what? Around 300 million. We are in the Western Hemisphere. Iâd compare us to other populations in the Americas, compare us to Brazil, Argentina, Canada and others. To simply compare us to Europe doesnât seem like the best comparison. You could put Australia in there say but they are a largely homogeneous population too.
L
LisaA
Guest
WONDERFUL thank you! I think what stunned Mr Obama during the debate is that someone called him out on his ridiculous lies. It just hasnât happened in the last five or six years. He will say the most outrageous and inaccurate things about a sujbect and then bask in the glow of the ever fawing and obsequious media. They never seem to point out that heâs just plain wrong.
Notice Harry Reid is back at making up quotes and statements by Romney, setting up a strawman that he then knocks downâŚan Obama specialty. Obama seems to have an enteourage of those willing to just lie to stay in power.
I suppose heâll get away with the latest bit of baloney since heâs back in friendly territory. But hopefully enough Americans saw the falsehoods he was promoting during the debate and will take his many claims with a large grain of salt.
Lisa
E
Elizabeth502
Guest
While I agreed with you on some of your points about the economy, I do not agree with you on this. In fact, one could argue that your earlier concerns about economic implosion are partly (not entirely) related to excessive social support on the part of the U.S. government, both with regard to individuals, and collectively â with regard to bottomless government pockets.
Further, as someone else just pointed out, the heterogeneity of the U.S. exceeds that of all other countries. That, combined with our policies about that heterogeneity (multiple language support in every phase of life, from voting to education to healthcare to motor vehicle licensing to federal agencies such as Social Security) are enormously expensive policies, provided to millions of people. It could be argued that we go to extremes to fund every conceivable individual need â not just linguistically but in other ways. We are the planetâs Social Services Breadbasket. You will benefit the most from the U.S. government if you are a special category:
~second language speaker (immigrant)
~ethnic minority
~racial minority
~disabled
~low income for any reason
Down the list are the elderly; they get some services, but not nearly as many as the above.
Furthermore, the level of our heterogeneity combined with our laws â especially those regarding âprotected classesâ of individuals â is extremely expensive in other ways, because it requires armies of regulators, and personnel to carry out those regulations, on many levels â from public attorneys to civilian overseers of those laws to appointed mediators and grievance representatives. No other First World country shares such complexity with us.
- Status