No working class should connect with Romney. He's a poor little rich boy
telling audiences that he is "out of work too". How completely out of
touch can you get?! He isn't your class. He has no idea what it is to be laid
off (he did the firing), unable to find work, affording stuff for your kids.
Look past the religion.He was born with a silver spoon in his mouth
and campaigns by sticking a silver foot in there too.
The point is, if everyone pays into the system, there are benefits to the
masses. i e education, medical coverage etc. (Maybe we should rethink the
notion that playing world cop, and going to war around the world is too costly).
Mitt is the man, if you want that 401k to look good. Unfortunately that could
mean, and in Mitts case, it meant shipping jobs overseas to reap the benefits of
cheap labor. I realize that tithing is optional, but it works! Mandates are part
of life! Making everyone pay into a medical system makes perfect sense, unless
you want those who think they don't have to pay, but get the free medical on the
backs of the ones that do pay! Call it socialism, call it tithing, call it what
ever you want.. It is what it is.
Obama's not pro oil. Romney is the best candidate for all Americans. The
Church Welfare System, tithing, fast offerings is not Socialism. The
contributions are voluntary, Socialism isn't. Maybe fortydam wants to work on a
collective farm someday, but I don't.
Why can't Mitt tell them that socialism works! The redistribution of wealth
happens in all religions. That is what fast offerings, church welfare systems,
welfare farms, and ten percent tithing do. Why can't anyone see the connection
to successful religious institutions, and business. Now this isn't an
inflammatory remark, but I keep getting it rejected. Why can't this be
UtahBlueDevil, I hope you're right. I don't mind being wrong if it
benefits the country, but I don't trust the man.
By the way, in the last post, better man is supposed to read betting man....
anyway.Back to the subject at hand, I did see some polling data from
Michigan that said one of the biggest issues is that the people of Michigan felt
betrayed by Romney in his stance on the Auto Bailout. During his 2008 campaign,
he campaigned on the theme he was going to protect manufacturing jobs in
American. Then later on, while supporting the Wall Street Financial
Institutions bailout, he was against the Detroit Bailouts. See as he was a
native son, "working class" people said they felt he sold them out.Of course this was not everyone, but probably enough that it is
represented in the slide in support Romney is getting.
Romney should be getting real support from this group. They are a key
demographic of the old-school, traditional Republican party. Romney
knows what it is like to be a part of working America. He read all about it in
his monthly board meeting report. He understands how it feels to
open up his wallet and not have the right money to pay for dinner. Many
restaurants can't handle hundreds or thousand dollar bills. I
promise you he's seen more pink slips in his life than you or I. Promise
you...he's handed out more than the average American has seen. I'm
telling you...he's right there with each and every normal American.
"Sorry guys, but after Solyndra (among other decisions), I can't trust the
mans wisdom"Well then you must have huge issues with Romney
seeing how he invested in over 30 companies that ultimately failed under his
management... or is that different?I get you don't like Obama. But
lets debate issue and policy based on the real world, not artificial sound
bites. Worf, if I were a better man, I would say that Keystone will ultimately
go through. It really does make a lot of sense. But just like other oil field
policy, this isn't like deciding on where to go to dinner, mistakes have huge
multibillion dollar price tags attached.The fact is Obama despite
what the radio talking heads say has been relatively pro oil. We are at our
highest production levels in over 30 years. Our dependence on foriegn oil is
below Jimmy Carter days. And current forecast have the US totally energy
independent by 2030. These are the things we don't hear because Republcans
don't want to acknowledge it, and it is highly sensitive for Obama to promote
this. The reality is every president moves to the middle once in
office - even Reagan did. It is how the job is set up. Presidential powers are
limited, Obama isn't a dictator, and some of his poor decisions like mandated
contraception coverage will likely be striken down. It is why and how our
republic has survived over 230 years.
How many times has BO shoved his agendas down our throats, and now he wants to
take his time to study things out? The Chinese will love the Keystone deal if BO
takes can't make a decision.Sorry guys, but after Solyndra (among
other decisions), I can't trust the mans wisdom.
Worf, explain to me this. If Keystone was such a good deal, why isn't Canada
building a refinery on thier own land, rather than having a US company pay for a
pipeline that will require the use of emninent domain to cross over what is
largely private property now? Is there something that is preventing
the use of rail, which is commonly used today to achieve the same thing out of
other oil fields? What was the reason the Republicans put an artificial
deadline for a decision, before even the state themselves had agreed to a plan?
Or before environmental impacts studies had been done? Nebraska already forced
a change in the proposed route, and at the time of this arbitrary deadline still
handn't accepted the alternate yet.Your complaint is the president
of the United States decided no on a project that didn't have a complete project
plan yet, and all the studies were not done yet... a date set for political
purposes, not requirements of the project itself.The other factor is
US refinning is running at near capacity now. To start consuming this oil from
Canada, other domestic sources would not be shut down. The whole idea here is
to get off of international oil.... and Canada is a foriegn country - a nice one
- but still not "domestic" This would have provided Canadien Jobs,
and filled Canadien wallets. Keystone can still happen, and likely
will when all the data is in. Its not a bad idea. But to approve it just to
satisfy some political agenda in the House, so the speaker can claim victory
after loosing face and having to extend the payroll tax cut, not a good idea.
Maybe people with street smarts know something that people with college degrees
should look into. Is this guy's policies going to be any good for any who works
for a living?
'Obama not stuggling to attract Chinese and other countries working class. Says
no to Keystone.' - worf | 11:29 a.m. Feb. 16, 2012 How many jobs
would that have cost, worf? 'Thousands'? As compared
too... ** 'Let Detroit Go Bankrupt' - By Mitt Romney - NY Times -
11/18/08 Effect? ** 'How Many Jobs Depend on the Big
Three?' - By CATHERINE RAMPELL - NY Times - 11/17/08 'In both cases,
there would be major short-term shocks to employment; depending on which
scenario you use, a contraction of the Detroit Three would result in direct and
indirect job losses of 2.5 million to 3 million in 2009.' - article
The loss... of 3 MILLION, American jobs.
Obama not stuggling to attract Chinese and other countries working class. Says
no to Keystone.Thank you B.O for your caring of our country.
'Romney struggling to attract white working class' - Title Why is
that...? ** 'Taking heat over his $10,000 bet, Mitt Romney responds
with the story from his LDS mission By Jamshid Ghazi Askar Published by DSnews
- 12/12/2011 ** Mitt Romney downplays $374,000 in speaking fees as
Not Very Much By Ryan Grim & Luke Johnson Huffington Post 01/17/2010 ** 'Mitt Romney: Corporations are people...my friend - By Phillip
Elliot - AP - Published by DSNews 08/11/11 ** 'Mitt Romney as job
creator clashes with Bain record of job cuts' - By Lisa Lerer, Bloomberg News -
Published by DSNews - 07/20/11 ** 'Let Detroit Go Bankrupt' - By
Mitt Romney - NY Times - 11/18/08
The press keep us informed of the election process but sometimes they go so far
it becomes too much.This week even though Mitt got beat by Santorum
in the last three states, the press already outlined what Mitt's financial
empire will do to Santorum in order to squash him and he hasn't even unleashed
it yet.The country needs a man for the people and Mitt nor Santorum
seem to fit the bill so they are having to make changes and concessions in order
to pretend they will help the middle income worker.Chances are the
middle income worker will have to look after themselves as they have for decades
but it would be nice to elect a president who would get the countries fiscal
house in order. Both these candidates like the existing president plan to do
business as usual in the white house. That means if either gets elected in
November the only thing that would change is the party that lives in the white