 |

Oldfatrad
Aug 16, 2012, 5:06 PM
Post #1 of 34
(1430 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2006
Posts: 40
|
SOCIALISM -is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the gospel of envy. Its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. -Winston Churchill- Sure sounds like Obama is a socialist.
|
|
|
 |
 |

curt
Aug 16, 2012, 5:52 PM
Post #2 of 34
(1418 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 26, 2002
Posts: 18043
|
Andrew Carnegie wrote: I believe Socialism is the grandest theory ever presented, and I am sure it will someday rule the world. Then we will have attained the Millennium.… Then men will be content to work for the general welfare and share their riches with their neighbors. Andrew Carnegie in New York Times (1 January 1885) "A Millionaire Socialist" Curt
|
|
|
 |
 |

ubu
Aug 16, 2012, 6:06 PM
Post #3 of 34
(1409 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 17, 2008
Posts: 1475
|
Oldfatrad wrote: SOCIALISM -is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the gospel of envy. Its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. -Winston Churchill- Sure sounds like Obama is a socialist. "When Catholicism goes bad it becomes the religion of amulets and holy places and priestcraft: Protestantism, in its corresponding decay, becomes a vague mist of ethical platitudes” -C.S. Lewis Sure sounds like Romney is a Protestant. While this is also an obvious non sequitur, it actually makes more sense than yours.
|
|
|
 |
 |

pinktricam
Aug 16, 2012, 6:32 PM
Post #4 of 34
(1403 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 7947
|
curt wrote: Andrew Carnegie wrote: I believe Socialism is the grandest theory ever presented, and I am sure it will someday rule the world. Then we will have attained the Millennium.… Then men will be content to work for the general welfare and share their riches with their neighbors. Andrew Carnegie in New York Times (1 January 1885) "A Millionaire Socialist" Curt Churchill > Carnegie
(This post was edited by pinktricam on Aug 16, 2012, 6:33 PM)
|
|
|
 |
 |

curt
Aug 16, 2012, 6:44 PM
Post #5 of 34
(1394 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 26, 2002
Posts: 18043
|
pinktricam wrote: curt wrote: Andrew Carnegie wrote: I believe Socialism is the grandest theory ever presented, and I am sure it will someday rule the world. Then we will have attained the Millennium.… Then men will be content to work for the general welfare and share their riches with their neighbors. Andrew Carnegie in New York Times (1 January 1885) "A Millionaire Socialist" Curt Churchill > Carnegie Leading a country into war, yes. In the area of economics and finance--not so much. Curt
|
|
|
 |
 |

veganclimber
Aug 16, 2012, 6:53 PM
Post #6 of 34
(1386 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 17, 2005
Posts: 2773
|
pinktricam wrote: curt wrote: Andrew Carnegie wrote: I believe Socialism is the grandest theory ever presented, and I am sure it will someday rule the world. Then we will have attained the Millennium.… Then men will be content to work for the general welfare and share their riches with their neighbors. Andrew Carnegie in New York Times (1 January 1885) "A Millionaire Socialist" Curt Churchill > Carnegie I can play that game too.
Albert Einstein wrote: I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate (the) grave evils (of capitalism), namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals. In such an economy, the means of production are owned by society itself and are utilized in a planned fashion. A planned economy, which adjusts production to the needs of the community, would distribute the work to be done among all those able to work and would guarantee a livelihood to every man, woman, and child. The education of the individual, in addition to promoting his own innate abilities, would attempt to develop in him a sense of responsibility for his fellow-men in place of the glorification of power and success in our present society. Einstein >> Churchill
|
|
|
 |
 |

pinktricam
Aug 16, 2012, 8:19 PM
Post #7 of 34
(1371 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 7947
|
veganclimber wrote: pinktricam wrote: curt wrote: Andrew Carnegie wrote: I believe Socialism is the grandest theory ever presented, and I am sure it will someday rule the world. Then we will have attained the Millennium.… Then men will be content to work for the general welfare and share their riches with their neighbors. Andrew Carnegie in New York Times (1 January 1885) "A Millionaire Socialist" Curt Churchill > Carnegie I can play that game too. Albert Einstein wrote: I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate (the) grave evils (of capitalism), namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals. In such an economy, the means of production are owned by society itself and are utilized in a planned fashion. A planned economy, which adjusts production to the needs of the community, would distribute the work to be done among all those able to work and would guarantee a livelihood to every man, woman, and child. The education of the individual, in addition to promoting his own innate abilities, would attempt to develop in him a sense of responsibility for his fellow-men in place of the glorification of power and success in our present society. Einstein >> Churchill Oh, yeah? Jesus >>> Einstein [Boo-YA!] I may like the "principle", but I don't trust the institution. The "helping your fellows is" best met at the local level; from society up, not from the top down.
|
|
|
 |
 |

curt
Aug 16, 2012, 8:30 PM
Post #8 of 34
(1366 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 26, 2002
Posts: 18043
|
pinktricam wrote: veganclimber wrote: pinktricam wrote: curt wrote: Andrew Carnegie wrote: I believe Socialism is the grandest theory ever presented, and I am sure it will someday rule the world. Then we will have attained the Millennium.… Then men will be content to work for the general welfare and share their riches with their neighbors. Andrew Carnegie in New York Times (1 January 1885) "A Millionaire Socialist" Curt Churchill > Carnegie I can play that game too. Albert Einstein wrote: I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate (the) grave evils (of capitalism), namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals. In such an economy, the means of production are owned by society itself and are utilized in a planned fashion. A planned economy, which adjusts production to the needs of the community, would distribute the work to be done among all those able to work and would guarantee a livelihood to every man, woman, and child. The education of the individual, in addition to promoting his own innate abilities, would attempt to develop in him a sense of responsibility for his fellow-men in place of the glorification of power and success in our present society. Einstein >> Churchill Oh, yeah? Jesus >>> Einstein [Boo-YA!] Even accepting that at face value, Jesus was a revolutionary socialist. Curt
|
|
|
 |
 |

pinktricam
Aug 16, 2012, 8:36 PM
Post #9 of 34
(1355 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 7947
|
curt wrote: pinktricam wrote: veganclimber wrote: pinktricam wrote: curt wrote: Andrew Carnegie wrote: I believe Socialism is the grandest theory ever presented, and I am sure it will someday rule the world. Then we will have attained the Millennium.… Then men will be content to work for the general welfare and share their riches with their neighbors. Andrew Carnegie in New York Times (1 January 1885) "A Millionaire Socialist" Curt Churchill > Carnegie I can play that game too. Albert Einstein wrote: I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate (the) grave evils (of capitalism), namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals. In such an economy, the means of production are owned by society itself and are utilized in a planned fashion. A planned economy, which adjusts production to the needs of the community, would distribute the work to be done among all those able to work and would guarantee a livelihood to every man, woman, and child. The education of the individual, in addition to promoting his own innate abilities, would attempt to develop in him a sense of responsibility for his fellow-men in place of the glorification of power and success in our present society. Einstein >> Churchill Oh, yeah? Jesus >>> Einstein [Boo-YA!] Even accepting that at face value, Jesus was a revolutionary socialist. Curt Hence, my liking the "principle." It's my distrust of our government's means of bringing this about in an efficient and equitable manner that lends me pause.
|
|
|
 |
 |

Kartessa
Aug 17, 2012, 11:46 AM
Post #10 of 34
(1303 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 17, 2008
Posts: 7155
|
Pinkie makes my head spin
|
|
|
 |
 |

petsfed
Aug 17, 2012, 8:56 PM
Post #11 of 34
(1264 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 24, 2002
Posts: 8571
|
Based solely on what Obama's critics have said over the last four years, I think I've come up with the most concise definition of socialism for today's political landscape. Socialism is when people poorer than the speaker benefit from tax expenditures. When it benefits people richer than the speaker, its called "Job Creation".
|
|
|
 |
 |

rrrADAM
Aug 18, 2012, 6:57 AM
Post #12 of 34
(1250 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17535
|
Oldfatrad wrote: SOCIALISM -is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the gospel of envy. Its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. -Winston Churchill- Sure sounds like Obama is a socialist. Wow... In all the years you have posted the same tired stuff on more than one site, and the response it gets, each and every time, from everyone, I am suprised you haven't figured out yet that you are all noise and no signal. What does that say about YOUR thinking process?
|
|
|
 |
 |

Oldfatrad
Aug 18, 2012, 11:30 AM
Post #13 of 34
(1234 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2006
Posts: 40
|
rrrAdam, There is plenty of signal, you are merely to0 unsophisticated to understand the concepts or it's possible that you are on the receiving end of the socialism and desire more. TheTool
|
|
|
 |
 |

rrrADAM
Aug 18, 2012, 12:16 PM
Post #14 of 34
(1227 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17535
|
Wow... You sure told me. BTW... Again, you need to do some research... Israel is democratic and is home to several political parties which stretch across the political spectrum. However, since its establishment in 1948, Israel has followed an economic model that resembles liberal socialism. Not that I think you will actually try to expand your world-view to something that doesn't fit nicely into your little box, but it's worth leading the horse to water especially since I'm stupid enough to think that it might drink:
In reply to: If socialism is evil, does that make Israel bad? Israel is, at least in part, a socialist country. From their policies on healthcare, welfare, daycare, free benefits for immigrants, nationalization of banks and other industries, it cannot be argued that Israel does not employ socialism. Healthcare: while Americans argue about the evils or benefits of universal healthcare, Israel enjoys their own universal, compulsory system. A state-run collection agency collections a membership fee from every employer, and distributes it to one of four different HMOs. Each person must choose one of these HMOs, and in turn, these HMOs cannot turn anyone down for healthcare. Prescription drugs were actually given free of charge until recently. Now a nominal (small) fee is charged. . . . Stipends (read: welfare) are given to ultra-Orthodox males who choose to study at religious yeshivas. The majority of ultra-orthodox males do not work their entire lives - at least 65% of males choose to study the Torah as their main occupation, and Israel has always had a policy of encouraging this practice. In addition, many ultra-orthodox females do not work outside of the home for religious reasons. As a result, more than half of all Ultra-Orthodox families live in poverty and receive government assistance. . . . http://bonosrama.newsvine.com/...that-make-israel-bad Note that we (USA) give ~$3 BILLION a year to Israel, so the taxpayers here also pay into the welfare state that is Israel. The article above cites many sources, and gives lots of info on all the other ways in which they employ socialism. Or, you can research it on your own... If you choose to look outside your little box, that is.
(This post was edited by rrrADAM on Aug 19, 2012, 1:20 PM)
|
|
|
 |
 |

Kartessa
Aug 18, 2012, 9:16 PM
Post #15 of 34
(1197 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 17, 2008
Posts: 7155
|
Oldfatrad wrote: rrrAdam, There is plenty of signal, you are merely to0 unsophisticated to understand the concepts or it's possible that you are on the receiving end of the socialism and desire more. TheTool Its funny... people bitch about those on the receiving end until they realize they may need it. Imagine you or someone you love was diagnosed with cancer or some other disease that can be expensive and long to treat? Would you appreciate socialized health care then? How about financial safety nets to help make ends meet while missing work due to treatment? How about families with a disabled child? (Maybe even one they knew was going to be disabled before birth but didnt want an abortion) Are they freeloaders? Should foster kids quit whining and get jobs to support themselves? I mean if their families aren't going to take care of them, they sure as hell shouldnt depend on tax payers, am I right? You're right. Government has no place protecting society's most vulnerable. Children, the sick, the disabled, and the old shouldn't assume that the rest of your country cares enough to take care of them. That's why the bible says not to take care of each other, because socialism is evil and brotherhood is blasphemy. YAY GREED!
|
|
|
 |
 |

Toast_in_the_Machine
Aug 19, 2012, 9:15 PM
Post #16 of 34
(1169 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 11, 2008
Posts: 5169
|
The problem that the Reptilian (accidental spell check that I'll leave in) party is making is that I don't vote against someone, I vote FOR someone. Sure Obama has his faults, but shit, Romney looks a fuck of a lot worse. I have yet to hear a compelling arguement to vote FOR Romney. If you have one I'd be delighted to hear it.
|
|
|
 |
 |

Kartessa
Aug 20, 2012, 6:31 AM
Post #17 of 34
(1148 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 17, 2008
Posts: 7155
|
My favourite part of the Christian right is the whole bit about "Love thy neighbour" (unless he needs help, then screw him).
|
|
|
 |
 |

tradpuppy
Aug 20, 2012, 8:49 AM
Post #18 of 34
(1124 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 15, 2002
Posts: 720
|
"You're all a bunch of slaves!" ~Jim Morrison
|
|
|
 |
 |

rmsusa
Aug 20, 2012, 10:32 AM
Post #19 of 34
(1108 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 24, 2004
Posts: 1017
|
Here 'ya go: The tremendous financial firepower they bring to the table in troubling economic times. Romney spent years buying and selling businesses. He's an astute financial statement decoder with an eye for improvement. Ryan had the stones to make a proposal and knows more about government finance than possibly anybody in government today. Whatever else you have against them, their financial acumen is just awesome.
|
|
|
 |
 |

curt
Aug 20, 2012, 10:42 AM
Post #20 of 34
(1104 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 26, 2002
Posts: 18043
|
rmsusa wrote: Here 'ya go: The tremendous financial firepower they bring to the table in troubling economic times. Romney spent years buying and selling businesses. He's an astute financial statement decoder with an eye for improvement. Ryan had the stones to make a proposal and knows more about government finance than possibly anybody in government today. Whatever else you have against them, their financial acumen is just awesome. One of the funniest (incorrect) things I've ever read. Curt
|
|
|
 |
 |

Toast_in_the_Machine
Aug 20, 2012, 10:49 AM
Post #21 of 34
(1099 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 11, 2008
Posts: 5169
|
Is divesting Texas is on the table?
|
|
|
 |
 |

Kartessa
Aug 20, 2012, 10:56 AM
Post #22 of 34
(1095 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 17, 2008
Posts: 7155
|
rmsusa wrote: Here 'ya go: The tremendous financial firepower they bring to the table in troubling economic times. Romney spent years buying and selling businesses. He's an astute financial statement decoder with an eye for improvement. Ryan had the stones to make a proposal and knows more about government finance than possibly anybody in government today. Whatever else you have against them, their financial acumen is just awesome. Of course you'll get rich if you don't pay your taxes
|
|
|
 |
 |

dr_feelgood
Aug 20, 2012, 1:06 PM
Post #23 of 34
(1080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 6, 2004
Posts: 25313
|
Toast_in_the_Machine wrote: Is divesting Texas is on the table? Please! Give them to Mexico as a colony!
|
|
|
 |
 |

veganclimber
Aug 20, 2012, 2:25 PM
Post #24 of 34
(1060 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 17, 2005
Posts: 2773
|
rmsusa wrote: Here 'ya go: The tremendous financial firepower they bring to the table in troubling economic times. Romney spent years buying and selling businesses. He's an astute financial statement decoder with an eye for improvement. Ryan had the stones to make a proposal and knows more about government finance than possibly anybody in government today. Whatever else you have against them, their financial acumen is just awesome. Romney sure knows a lot about making money, for himself. He's good at hanging on to it too. The last thing I want is for somebody to run the country like Romney ran Bain. I'm not at all impressed with Ryan's budget either. It's a massive tax cut for the rich, while increasing taxes on the poor and middle class. It would result in an estimated $4.3 trillion loss in revenue over 10 years. He makes up for this loss of revenue by cutting spending. Of course his spending cuts primarily hurt the poor. The one thing he won't cut is defense spending. Who cares if people are sick and don't have access to health care. Who cares if people are starving. As long as we maintain the ability to police the world. Just more republican bullshit from these two. Give more to the rich while taking from the poor and middle class. One more thing. You might want to look into Ryan's past before praising him as a fiscal conservative.
|
|
|
 |
 |

ubu
Aug 20, 2012, 4:29 PM
Post #25 of 34
(1047 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 17, 2008
Posts: 1475
|
rmsusa wrote: Here 'ya go: The tremendous financial firepower they bring to the table in troubling economic times. Romney spent years buying and selling businesses. He's an astute financial statement decoder with an eye for improvement. Ryan had the stones to make a proposal and knows more about government finance than possibly anybody in government today. Whatever else you have against them, their financial acumen is just awesome. Paul Ryan's budget plan in a nutshell: step 1. lower taxes, offset with closing loopholes in step 2. step 2. step 3. profit! Yes, he's clearly a budget genius.
|
|
|
 |
 |

jt512
Aug 20, 2012, 8:38 PM
Post #26 of 34
(728 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 11, 2001
Posts: 21781
|
Toast_in_the_Machine wrote: The problem that the Reptilian party. Brilliant phrase. I'm so going to steal it that you might as well consider it already stolen. Jay
|
|
|
 |
 |

jt512
Aug 20, 2012, 8:48 PM
Post #27 of 34
(722 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 11, 2001
Posts: 21781
|
Toast_in_the_Machine wrote: Is divesting Texas is on the table? It was in 1861. Talk about unintended consequences. Jay
(This post was edited by jt512 on Aug 20, 2012, 9:00 PM)
|
|
|
 |
 |

Toast_in_the_Machine
Aug 21, 2012, 2:12 AM
Post #28 of 34
(700 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 11, 2008
Posts: 5169
|
We have faced the facts of modern life and realize what has been staring us in the face this whole time: America is a company and we are only hurting ourselves by not acting like it is one. As a result of this realization, we have but one first action we need to take. We need to divest the USA of Teabagistan. Specifically we are spinning off the present states of Texas, Arizona, New Mexico, and Oklahoma. While we welcome cash offers, we are assuming that much of this will be funded by debt swap between USA and Teabagistan. First, we need to look at the numbers. For simplification I will be referring to Wikipedia and other sources (http://www.economist.com/...mericas-fiscal-union). Looking at how these states impact the Federal budget (our “bottom line”) is the first key step. Teabagistan represents 183.2b per year and 186.6b of expenditures (20 year average). The main reason why AZ, NM, and OK are included on this is that we need to unload these drains on our bottom line. Since this portion of the US also represents, pretty much bang on 10% of our bottom line, TB will assume 10% of the current US debt load in a new bond offering. Based on current US debt, we will transfer debt held by China, Russia, Oil Exporters, and Caribbean Bankers (plus any local debt in TB) to be the TB debt holders. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_public_debt) This allows those major bond holders to best have as direct a say in the new entity as possible to ensure that TB maintains good fiscal policy. For US voting shares (a.k.a. electoral college), this now changes the dynamics in that for the US election, we have removed 61 votes and now have only 479 electoral votes. This does make the US considerably more liberal and while it isn’t impossible that a Republican can now win the white house, it does make the task noticeably harder. On the plus side, those that feel disenfranchised will have their own country to move to. In order to smooth this transition, assuming that he will lose the election in the re-sized US, Mitt Romney will be appointed head of the divesting committee. We are seeking investors for the US South, which still represents a drag on the US bottom line. These underperforming states (in both income, education, and tax revenue contribution), may be restructured as we see if we can work with the newly divested Teabagistan to see if they will take as many of the citizens who do not like to live in the modern United States. We are also opening a bid to merge with Canada, with the intent that part of Canada (the French speaking) we will merge with Puerto Rico and parts of Louisiana to for a new entity of Non-English North American States. Unlike Teabagistan, we will maintain an investment relationship with the NENA. We are also exploring other M+A activity on the global scale and focusing first on those countries that speak English and those countries with similar financial dealings (i.e. banking in Iceland). Before this kind of swap would be impossible, but with the new streamlined and more liberal and more financially sound US, we believe these opportunities exist. Since this is Teabagistan that we are divesting ourselves of a special note must be made about football. The US will not have TB schools as part of the current college football landscape. This means that the winner of UT, A&M, OK and any other “big 12” school can declare themselves “national champion” which seems to fit the ego of those schools anyways. We will keep trade open for professional sports.
|
|
|
 |
 |

rmsusa
Aug 22, 2012, 2:31 PM
Post #29 of 34
(648 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 24, 2004
Posts: 1017
|
Toast_in_the_Machine wrote: Is divesting Texas is on the table? and .... maybe buying Baja California?
|
|
|
 |
 |

j_ung
Aug 24, 2012, 1:23 PM
Post #30 of 34
(595 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18681
|
pinktricam wrote: veganclimber wrote: pinktricam wrote: curt wrote: Andrew Carnegie wrote: I believe Socialism is the grandest theory ever presented, and I am sure it will someday rule the world. Then we will have attained the Millennium.… Then men will be content to work for the general welfare and share their riches with their neighbors. Andrew Carnegie in New York Times (1 January 1885) "A Millionaire Socialist" Curt Churchill > Carnegie I can play that game too. Albert Einstein wrote: I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate (the) grave evils (of capitalism), namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals. In such an economy, the means of production are owned by society itself and are utilized in a planned fashion. A planned economy, which adjusts production to the needs of the community, would distribute the work to be done among all those able to work and would guarantee a livelihood to every man, woman, and child. The education of the individual, in addition to promoting his own innate abilities, would attempt to develop in him a sense of responsibility for his fellow-men in place of the glorification of power and success in our present society. Einstein >> Churchill Oh, yeah? Jesus >>> Einstein [Boo-YA!] I may like the "principle", but I don't trust the institution. The "helping your fellows is" best met at the local level; from society up, not from the top down. Effect meaningful social change at the local level in one hand... shit in the other...
|
|
|
 |
 |

curt
Aug 25, 2012, 11:37 PM
Post #31 of 34
(555 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 26, 2002
Posts: 18043
|
Well, Romney can't be too terribly happy about this:
In reply to: Fmr. FL GOP Governor Charlie Crist Endorses President Obama On Eve of RNC Convention Former Gov. Charlie Crist: Here's why I'm backing Barack Obama I’ve studied, admired and gotten to know a lot of leaders in my life. Across Florida, in Washington and around the country, I've watched the failure of those who favor extreme rhetoric over sensible compromise, and I've seen how those who never lose sight of solutions sow the greatest successes. As America prepares to pick our president for the next four years — and as Florida prepares once again to play a decisive role — I'm confident that President Barack Obama is the right leader for our state and the nation. I applaud and share his vision of a future built by a strong and confident middle class in an economy that gives us the opportunity to reap prosperity through hard work and personal responsibility. It is a vision of the future proven right by our history. We often remind ourselves to learn the lessons of the past, lest we risk repeating its mistakes. Yet nearly as often, our short-term memory fails us. Many have already forgotten how deep and daunting our shared crisis was in the winter of 2009, as President Obama was inaugurated. It was no ordinary challenge, and the president served as the nation's calm through a historically turbulent storm. The president's response was swift, smart and farsighted. He kept his compass pointed due north and relentlessly focused on saving jobs, creating more and helping the many who felt trapped beneath the house of cards that had collapsed upon them. Curt
|
|
|
 |
 |

curt
Aug 26, 2012, 9:13 AM
Post #32 of 34
(534 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 26, 2002
Posts: 18043
|
Or this:
In reply to: TAMPA -- Mitt Romney's presidential campaign gave Texas Rep. Ron Paul a chance to speak at the Republican National Convention, but he declined due to the conditions of the offer, the New York Times reports: Mr. Paul, in an interview, said convention planners had offered him an opportunity to speak under two conditions: that he deliver remarks vetted by the Romney campaign, and that he give a full-fledged endorsement of Mr. Romney. He declined. "It wouldn't be my speech," Mr. Paul said. "That would undo everything I've done in the last 30 years. I don't fully endorse him for president." If anyone still has any doubts, this is exactly what the United States under Romney would be like. Curt
|
|
|
 |
 |

billcoe_
Sep 1, 2012, 8:04 PM
Post #33 of 34
(421 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 30, 2002
Posts: 4592
|
|
|
|
 |
 |

pinktricam
Sep 2, 2012, 9:20 PM
Post #34 of 34
(388 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 7947
|
curt wrote: Or this: In reply to: TAMPA -- Mitt Romney's presidential campaign gave Texas Rep. Ron Paul a chance to speak at the Republican National Convention, but he declined due to the conditions of the offer, the New York Times reports: Mr. Paul, in an interview, said convention planners had offered him an opportunity to speak under two conditions: that he deliver remarks vetted by the Romney campaign, and that he give a full-fledged endorsement of Mr. Romney. He declined. "It wouldn't be my speech," Mr. Paul said. "That would undo everything I've done in the last 30 years. I don't fully endorse him for president." If anyone still has any doubts, this is exactly what the United States under Romney would be like. Curt Oh, because it's not like that now....lol.
|
|
|
 |
|
|