SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - Romney's a socialist?

SUBSIM Radio Room Forums (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php)

- General Topics (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/forumdisplay.php?f=175)

- - Romney's a socialist? (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=197355)

Romney in the white house, is like wall street in the white house. The bankers will directly have their man in charge, instead of having someone on the take. Should Romney win, it will be interesting watching things go from worse to horrific. As for Obama, I'm not sure what I think of him, aside from perhaps being the lesser evil. Either way though, special interests will have their way, the difference will be in a matter of degree.

Anthrax or Ebola - pick you poison. Go voting, die proud!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skybird (Post 1917030)

Anthrax or Ebola - pick you poison. Go voting, die proud!

No we won't die. We'll survive either Obama or Romney. You can bet on it. :yep:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skybird (Post 1917030)

Anthrax or Ebola - pick you poison. Go voting, die proud!

That being the case, stepping into the voting booth is like stepping into a gas chamber. To that I say, No thanks, been there, done that. I'll pass. It's irritating, and your never happy with the result.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-b-9LDv1fHf...00/2-3-08a.jpg

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ducimus (Post 1916898)

Everything ive read, leads me to believe he's the upper class spokesman. The representative of the "upper 1%", with only their interests at heart. One article in particular that i read on CNN put me off to him. If i could remember it i'd link it but it was a few weeks ago. Everything about the guy gives me the impression of someone who's a financial crook. Regardless of anything I may have read, I've always thought there was just something shady about the guy, i'm not sure what it is, but i'm pretty sure I don't like it.

If your hair is over your ears and you pay $400 for a haircut, that tells me all I need to know about him.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Armistead (Post 1917062)

If your hair is over your ears and you pay $400 for a haircut, that tells me all I need to know about him.

:o What other services that "haircut" included? I paid worth of about $25 last time and that was not cheapest in town.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ducimus (Post 1917018)

Quote:

Originally Posted by CCIP (Post 1916582)

I think the only thing this whole foreign trip showed is that Romney is really dumb and unable to communicate effectively without constantly offending people in the host countries. The only thing he can do is play up his position to the domestic audience, but IMO he's consistently been rude and divisive in all three of his destinations. I'm almost relieved that he's as much of an idiot when it comes to handling foreign relations diplomatically as I feared he was.

Sorry, but at least Barry H.O. knows how to speak without running his mouth at everything he doesn't understand, and getting most of everybody outside the continental US angry at him. In the globalized society that we live in, you really need a leader who can not only represent American interests, but also respect others' and be able to participate in talks in a way that's forthcoming and balanced. All Romney's even tried to do on this trip was to score points with his key electorate, pump up his own apparent good qualities (arrogance and inability to meaningfully compromise apparently among them), and shamelessly raise funds with powerful lobby groups. And the best he could do with actual political leaders whom he doesn't see eye-to-eye with is just bluff and fake his way through. Ugh. Bad show. I hope he pays for it with moderate votes that he doesn't get.

Lol, as long as the teleprompter doesn't shut down, Barry is a whiz. :haha:

Thanks for pushing me closer to the Romney camp :know:

I love Subsim. Democrat John Edwards was the one who paid $400 bucks for a haircut, not Romney. But lets not let that stand in the way of a good Republican slam during election year... :yep:

Ahem, you could have phrased that more accurately. "I love politcal discussions", for example. Subsim has nothing to do with ill-formed opinions, which can be found everywhere. :shifty:

:arrgh!:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neal Stevens (Post 1917218)

Ahem, you could have phrased that more accurately. "I love politcal discussions", for example. Subsim has nothing to do with ill-formed opinions, which can be found everywhere. :shifty:

:arrgh!:

Sorry. All I meant was here is where I read them most often.

Quote:

Originally Posted by August (Post 1917200)

But lets not let that stand in the way of a good Republican slam during election year... :yep:

Slamming Republicans shouldn't be restricted to election years. :D

Quote:

Originally Posted by Penguin (Post 1917266)

Slamming Republicans shouldn't be restricted to election years. :D

True dat!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Penguin (Post 1917266)

Slamming Republicans shouldn't be restricted to election years. :D

Ill be honest. I sort of route for the democrats, ONLY because when the democrats get their way, it pisses off the republicans, which results in them shoveling more hypocrisy, more rhetoric, and more emotionally charged dribble. They are both sad, and pathetic. Do i honestly believe in the democrats? Do I really want the democrats to win? No, i don't.

However, the republicans are so far gone, so far from reason, so bought out, so full of manure , its hard to feel anything for them except contempt. For me, its a case of "anyone but the republicans". The republican party this day and age is an utter joke. (EDIT: Obligatory related link ) It is not the same party I registered under many years ago.

If I had my way, both parties would be disolved and people would get offices based on their own merit, and not what their party affliliation is. The way it is now, party comes before country when it's supposed to be the other way around.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ducimus (Post 1917273)

If I had my way, both parties would be disolved and people would get offices based on their own merit, and not what their party affliliation is. The way it is now, party comes before country when it's supposed to be the other way around.

This. (Well with the added opinion of Planet and Humanity before country)

These days politics has just become a crappy sports event. (Well I consider all sports to be crappy) The media just rakes in the cash playing each side against each other and you get a bunch of annoying fanboys out of it all. Nothing ever gets done (Except what the big corporations pay to get done) and the sides get more and more polarized to the point of the parties rejecting even their own ideas if the other party says it.

Party: "I vote we raise taxes by 1% to help raise money!"
Other party: "NO YOUR PARTY IS BAD"
-later-
Other party: "I vote we raise money by increasing taxes by 1%!"
Party: "NO YOUR PARTY IS BAD"

OP: Romney's a socialist?

Answer: No.

But is he a Christian?

Quote:

Let us start with the question of wealth. Far from emphasizing the importance of wealth-creation, Jesus repeatedly told his followers to forsake it; that it would get in the way of their relationship with God. His advice to a wealthy would-be disciple? Sell all you have and give it to the poor. And give it to the poor! No sign here that he thought of the poor as being to blame for their own predicament, people to be frowned on, people who did not deserve to have their well-being taken into account. Suppose Jesus really were alive today. Would he despise the poor? Ignore their needs? Begrudge their miserable welfare hand-outs? Cheer at the idea of letting the uninsured die of disease?
When did the Jesus of the Gospels ever proclaim that the poor and sick and unfortunate do not deserve your compassion? That you are not your brother’s keeper? That paying tax is an abomination?
The Gospels show us a man who shunned the respectable, reaching out instead to the poor and weak, seeking out society’s rejects and publicly aligning himself with them. Would the Jesus who healed abundantly have been outraged at the idea of “Obamacare”? At the suggestion that he should put his hand in his pocket to help ensure the poorest in the wealthiest nation on Earth did not have to live in fear of illness?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...504a_blog.html

Maybe a 'christian', but not a follower of Jesus.