Quantcast

Comments about ‘Romney and Obama focus on debate preparations’

Return to article »

Published: Saturday, Oct. 13 2012 1:35 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Mad Hatter
Provo, UT

It is difficult to believe two people who talk about war and peace who have no skin in the game. Neither Romney nor Ryan have been in military service. One might argue that same about Obama and Biden, but Joe Biden's son served in Iraq. That gives them credibility when it comes to making decision about sending young men and women off to war.

Mitt Romney was a major supporter of the Vietnam War. But he didn't volunteer to go off to Southeast Asia and do his duty. He protested against those who protested the war, but he took his student deferments, went off to France on a LDS Mission with a religious deferment, and took more student deferments upon his return. Then he got a high number which kept him out of the military draft altogeter.

Others went, but he stayed home and cheered them on. Similarly, Paul Ryan could have gone when Bush I went to war in 1991 (he was 21 and the military was voluntary) but he had other priorities like and earlier VP nominee. Serving the nation in the military, obviously, was not an interest yet they want to make decisions using it.

SammyB
Provo, UT

I find it odd that the Romney camp and the media continue to let so many lies go by. For instance, it is constantly being parroted that Romney will lower taxes for the rich. His plan calls for closing loop-holes for the rich and not lowering their taxes. Obama's plan is to lower taxes for the rich.

Another example is that Romney called for the auto-industry to go through a restructuring bankruptcy 4 years ago. Obama gave them a huge bail-out that didn't work so they finally did what Romney had suggested in the first place and the bail-out was never paid back. It is pretty simple so why is it never straightened out? Romney tried a few times but the media never gets it right so maybe he gave up.

I am proud of the American people. They are seeing through the lies or omissions of the press and it looks like Romney will win anyway.

Salsa Libre
Provo, UT

SammyB

Provo, UT

If Obama is re-elected (even if only by a small margin), would you accept that as final? If Congress refuses to overturn Obamacare, would you accept that?

Or will you refuse to accept the result and continue to claim that there was a violation of of the people "real" concerns, Obama is illegitimate and Obamacare is a fraud?

We know where people who will consider Obama illegitimate regardless of the election. They want their way and none other. They hide behind the prejudices as giving them supreme authority to decide what is right and what is not. They make the statement that there is only black and white and they tell you directly which is which.

Instead of repeating conservative talking points ad nauseum, think about what you are saying. What deductions? The "media" includes the extensive Right Wing media. The automobile industry bailout was a success. The stimulus kept us from going over the cliff. Romney's economic proposals are like trickle-down economics, fuzzy and misleading.

There are legitimate conservative issues which are not being discussed. However, partisanship blinds us if carried to extremes. Ideologues only see extremity.

RedShirt
USS Enterprise, UT

To "SammyB" you, like so many of your ilk cannot understand that if you close or reduce the number of deductions a wealthy person can take, they will end up paying more in taxes, so to offset the increase in taxes, their rates would be lowered. There is an article at Reason where they use IRS data to show that before the Bush tax cuts the wealthy paid 37% of all income taxes, then after the tax cuts were enacted, they paid 38%. There, using numbers from the IRS, they show that thanks to the Bush tax cuts, the wealthy paid more.

To "Mad Hatter" just take a look at Obama's record when he has sent troops out there, and see how well he has done with their lives. In Afghanistan between 2001 and 2009, there were about 600 deaths in Afghanistan. Since 2009 there has been around 1400 deaths. Does Obama understand the military? I don't think so. Now Romney shows that he understands the military. He knew that in Vietnam the troops needed to be given bullets and be allowed to shoot.

worf
Mcallen, TX

Got to give credit where credit is due.

With the stimulus package of a few years ago, Obama has indeed created thousands of jobs, and helped build the economy. Here's how:

* With billions of American tax money, China and Japan produced electric producing windmills.
* Stimulus money sent an Australia company, allowed them to build a windmill farm in Texas.
* Money sent to Finland and Mexico, allowed the building of auto plants and employment in the area.
* Billions sent to Brazil, allowed for the building of off shore drilling and employment for the local citizens.

Obama cares, and has proven to be a job creator.

Mad Hatter
Provo, UT

RedShirt

USS Enterprise, UT

"Now Romney shows that he understands the military."

Huh? All hat and not cattle. "Understands"? Based on what? Vietnam was a debacle. Mitt's father finally came to understand that. Perhaps Mitt also came to understand that. But talking up more war is not understanding the military. Putting the lives of young Americans in harms way takes more that what current conservative policy of talking tough suggests.

So what is Romney's plan? Send troops back into Iraq? Keep troops fighting in Afganistan as allies depart? Put boots on the ground in Syria? Bomb Iran? Tell me. What is his plan?

The perception that America is weak in the eyes of the world is a Republican untruth. The idea that American needs to project its military power throughout the Middle East is a ludicrous. It only puts on display the conservative candidate's lack of knowledge of world affairs and history.

J-TX
Allen, TX

I wonder, if Obama fails as abysmally in debate2 as in debate1, will Springsteen play a dirge?

JWB
Kaysville, UT

If I was still in the Air Force or Army and after the debacle of the past month from the Libyan execution of the United States of America Ambassador and other civilian servants of our country and the lack of integrity in that issue, I would not trust this President in anything. That is the bottom line of a Commander-in-Chief type of operation, are our United States of America diplomatic and military personnel safe as required by DoD and State Department Regulations and standards? Did the Ambassador and his personnel request additional help to protect them?

We only spent $70,000 in Pakistan telling those people that it was the June video that caused the riots and stirred up the people in a riot, on 9/11/12. The weapons the real perpetrators used were military and precise heavy type weapons, right on target. Riots would not have been precise, they would not have had the availability of those weapons. People that riot could not be trusted with that kind of operation.

Libya's leaders even said it wasn't a riot but a precise operation. We cannot trust this administration with a debate of Biden or Obama.

JWB
Kaysville, UT

Even though Mrs. Clinton is not in the debate, she was told exactly what to say about the death of her Ambassador representing the United States in basically a war zone without that type of protection.

To state that it was a video that had been out 2 to 3 months before the incident and specificity about that video is a shame for our diplomatic corps around the world. What does that mean about their security in any other country where the defense is not good for our people?

Mrs. Clinton's husband may have had a problem with the definition of "is" but he didn't kill anyone with that useage. However, the Secretary of State is responsible for her personnel.

When VP Biden said he didn't know about any requests from the Embassy to the Department of State or higher for security in his debate was probably not the truth. In a month there has been so much controversy about those executions in Libya that there is no way he could state that he didn't know about the requests. VP becomes President if Obama was reelected and anything happened to him. We can't take chances.

Rifleman
Salt Lake City, Utah

The good news for liberals is that Obama will do better in this debate than during the first one. He certainly couldn't do any worse. After the elections are over it will be said the the presidential debate in Denver cost Obama the presidency.

They are still trying to decide whether it was Denver's high elevation or valium that did him in

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments