How is Romney's campaign going

[Captain Obvious]

Only righties should reply. Discriminatory yes, but I would appreciate if both of the lefties on the forum would refrain.

[Peter1469]

I am happy with the direction that the campaign has gone. We need to have the discussion about our broken tax code.

When 47% don't pay federal income taxes a nation is on the edge of collapse. We can't have the top paying the way for everyone.

If the hard left wins, we will get a currency collapse sooner or later.

[Chris]

Romney's doing better than I expected. It's close, maybe the debates will make a difference.

[Shoot the Goose]

Only righties should reply. Discriminatory yes, but I would appreciate if both of the lefties on the forum would refrain.

I think you should have included two more options. Such as "Going well", and "Going not so well".

Romney is even in the top polls (ahead by 1-2, behind likewise). The bias in many of the polls is unlike anything in my lifetime however. They over-sample Democrats by 5-10%. They have just now decided that the Dems are "more enthusiastic than the GOP", which substantiates the over-sampling we will continue to see. Which defies all rationale. To include the 2010 elections.

GOP voters are uber-motivated. More than 2010. Romney controls the debates, not Obama. If he does poorly, its because he screwed up.

I believe Obama to be currently heading for a 47-53 loss at best. Possibly 45-55.

I'll entertain a few straight-up bets, via PayPal, that Romney wins. Cheap stuff though. $2 a pop.

[Smartmouthwoman]

Nobody expects Romney to run a glitzy campaign. He said in the beginning, he is what he is, a serious businessman who can turn our economy around.

He's got my vote. I guess that means his campaign is going great, huh?

[Captain Obvious]

Romney's doing better than I expected. It's close, maybe the debates will make a difference.

The debates will be the decisive turning point in either candidates campaign IMO.

[Trinnity]

He's so calm....I think he needs to push harder and ramp up the passion in his voice. I do think he'll win.

[Goldie Locks]

Romney could be better, not in love with Romney, but compared to Ubama??? No contest. I know what Ubama is and what he will do in the next 4 years...I'll take a chance on Romney.

[IGetItAlready]

I agree Trinity. He could stand to ramp things up a bit but considering the multi-front war he's being forced to wage against Obama's moronic media I think he's doing pretty well. Looking forward to the debates as that should be the deciding point for both candidates.
As I said in another thread, were the two Univision hosts who recently grilled Obama over Fast and Furious, or ANYONE whom I thought might ask Obama some hard questions on his record moderating the debates, I'd not have a doubt in the world as to how this whole thing is going to play out.
The mods we're stuck with are not unlike Obama's DoJ investigating Obama's DoJ. Romney will have to take it upon himself to keep the focus on Obama's failures and I really hope he's brushing up on the lies Obama likes to repeat over and over and over. He'll need to call Obama on his BS and it probably wouldn't hurt to bring up a few of our favorite Obamaisms like when he called Bush "unpatriotic" for adding $4 trillion to our debt in 8 years, the fact that the ACA is the largest tax increase in American history, you didn't build that, etc.
We all know how Obama plays, I see no reason Romney shouldn't play by "the same set of rules". :wink20:

[IGetItAlready]

Romney could be better, not in love with Romney, but compared to Ubama??? No contest. I know what Ubama is and what he will do in the next 4 years...I'll take a chance on Romney.

I'm guessing even many of those Obama thinks he has in his tank are going to see things the same way.
Or they'll simply stay home which is just as well.

[GrassrootsConservative]

I'm going to be truly honest here, Romney's campaign isn't going as well as I had hoped, and he's not really the candidate I was wishing for in the primaries (Ron Paul 2012 sticker on my bumper, just to give you a hint). But Obama's campaign is going so bad with all the recent events and he's not doing anything about them, just campaigning. I don't see how Romney could lose this.

[Czernobog]

I said "total fucking train wreck", but only because There wasn't a "really fucking bad" option. I mean do think that's where it is - really fucking bad. Which is quite as bad as train wreck. I mean, train wreck implies that it's all over but the crying. I wouldn't go that far, although two major fuck-ups in a week? not looking so good. I would say that Romney is going to have score a perfect 10 on the debates, to keep this alive. And lets face it; Romney don't debate so well. But, hey. They have had a lot of time to prep him, sooooo...we'll see.

[GrumpyDog]

Obama is going to take advantage of Romney being a Caucasian fair skinned human, by trying to embarrass him with some statement which will send blood rushing to Romneys head making him appear on camera as blushing.

Romney, will not be able to use this tactic quite as effectively on Obama, so Romneys best strategy is to bring up subjects which will cause the darker complected Obama to perspire profusely, which will appear on camera as nervousness or fear.

[Aristophanes]

The debates will be the decisive turning point in either candidates campaign IMO.Owedummy can't talk without duh prompter.

Prepare to hear uh uh uh and DUH RICH did dat.

IOW, the same memorized class warfare bullshit we've heard every day for four solid years.

[Czernobog]

Obama is going to take advantage of Romney being a Caucasian fair skinned human, by trying to embarrass him with some statement which will send blood rushing to Romneys head making him appear on camera as blushing.

Romney, will not be able to use this tactic quite as effectively on Obama, so Romneys best strategy is to bring up subjects which will cause the darker complected Obama to perspire profusely, which will appear on camera as nervousness or fear.

Wow...I can't imagine where people get the impression that the Republican Party is the party of racists...

[Czernobog]

Owedummy can't talk without duh prompter.

Prepare to hear uh uh uh and DUH RICH did dat.

IOW, the same memorized class warfare bullshit we've heard every day for four solid years.

I'm sorry. When Romney called nearly half the population irresponsible, indulgent leeches, he kinda got to own the class war - especially when he chose to make that comment surrounded by a bunch of rich, white, old people.

[Peter1469]

I'm sorry. When Romney called nearly half the population irresponsible, indulgent leeches, he kinda got to own the class war - especially when he chose to make that comment surrounded by a bunch of rich, white, old people.

That is not what Romeny said. That is what the MSM said Romney said. Two very different things.

Romney said that 47% don't pay federal income taxes. And that those people likely don't agree with a tax cut agenda. Remember, if you don't pay taxes, a tax cut doesn't directly help you at all.

Romney is correct.

And the current tax code is very dangerous for society.

[Carygrant]

Owedummy can't talk without duh prompter.

Prepare to hear uh uh uh and DUH RICH did dat.

IOW, the same memorized class warfare bullshit we've heard every day for four solid years.

Probably the most accomplished speaker and presenter on the planet within the world of celebrity . Obama .
Probably the most gibberish post and poster on the the planet within the word of make believe .

[Peter1469]

Probably the most accomplished speaker and presenter on the planet within the world of celebrity . Obama .
Probably the most gibberish post and poster on the the planet within the word of make believe .

Obama is not really that good. Take his teleprompter from him and he stumbles. He is Ron Burgundy:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iGtGwkMSyWU

[Czernobog]

That is not what Romeny said. That is what the MSM said Romney said. Two very different things.

Romney said that 47% don't pay federal income taxes. And that those people likely don't agree with a tax cut agenda. Remember, if you don't pay taxes, a tax cut doesn't directly help you at all.

Romney is correct.

And the current tax code is very dangerous for society.

Let's play a little game of "Yes, or no". No equivocating, just answer the question, yes, or no:

Did Romney say that 47% of Americans feel "entitled" to "...food, homes, heathcare, what-have-you..."? Yes, or no?

[Peter1469]

Let's play a little game of "Yes, or no". No equivocating, just answer the question, yes, or no:

Did Romney say that 47% of Americans feel "entitled" to "...food, homes, heathcare, what-have-you..."? Yes, or no?

Yes

[Peter1469]

Yes

It was not PC. But there is much truth to it. He should have said that Some of the 47% who don't pay federal income taxes....

The point is that the current tax code is a recipe for national suicide. On that he is correct. And it is a discussion that must be had in this nation.

[Czernobog]

Yes

Good. Entitlement = equals indulgent. look it up. So, Romney did call 47% of Americans indulgent. Moving on:

Did Romney say that they "...expect government to give it to them..."? Yes, or no?

[Peter1469]

Good. Entitlement = equals indulgent. look it up. So, Romney did call 47% of Americans indulgent. Moving on:

Did Romney say that they "...expect government to give it to them..."? Yes, or no?

Yes.

Refer to my explanation above.

That is the discussion we should be having. Not supporting the current tax code that allows 47% to not pay federal income taxes and 36% to actually get money back through the unearned income tax credit.

[Czernobog]

It was not PC. But there is much truth to it. He should have said that Some of the 47% who don't pay federal income taxes....

The point is that the current tax code is a recipe for national suicide. On that he is correct. And it is a discussion that must be had in this nation.

No, no. Fuck PC! You claimed that he didn't say the things I claimed he said. So we are going point by point to establish that actually yes, he did say exactly what I claimed he said. Whether you agree with what he said, or not, is an entirely different issue. However we are going to clear up, once and for all, that he did, in fact, say these things.

[Czernobog]

Yes.

Good. Then he did say that they take from the government without giving back - that would be being a leech. So, he did call them leeches.

Finally, did he say, "I cannot convince them to be responsible, and take care of their lives,"? yes, or no.

[Peter1469]

No, no. Fuck PC! You claimed that he didn't say the things I claimed he said. So we are going point by point to establish that actually yes, he did say exactly what I claimed he said. Whether you agree with what he said, or not, is an entirely different issue. However we are going to clear up, once and for all, that he did, in fact, say these things.

Someone posted the video of what he said. That is not in question. Now back to reality. Do you support a tax code that allows 47% of the population to not pay federal income taxes?

What Romney was doing was discussing campaign strategy. He said that 47% don't pay federal income taxes thus will not vote for Romney because Romney wants to lower taxes. That does not help those that pay not taxes - they would not benefit from a tax cut. Correct?

Watch your language.

[Czernobog]

Someone posted the video of what he said. That is not in question. Now back to reality. Do you support a tax code that allows 47% of the population to not pay federal income taxes?

What Romney was doing was discussing campaign strategy. He said that 47% don't pay federal income taxes thus will not vote for Romney because Romney wants to lower taxes. That does not help those that pay not taxes - they would not benefit from a tax cut. Correct?

Watch your language.

No. You do not get to do that. You do not get to make this about "47% of Americans do not pay taxes" as if that was the important part of what he said. It wasn't. if that had been all that he said, then this story wouldn't be a story. But, he didn't. He went on to characterise those people in the most vile, hateful, resentful way possible.

And you should read my intro. I'm 48 fucking years old. My own mother doesn't censor me. if you have a probelm with the way I talk feel free to not talk to me. But, trust me, every fucking time that you try to fucking censor me, all you will accomplish is derailing whatever topic we are discussing, because I will happily take the time to tell you to fuck off about how I talk.

And again, I am still waiting, then, for you to apologise for calling me a liar when I pointed out that he called nearly half of the population irresponsible, indulgent leeches.

[Peter1469]

No. You do not get to do that. You do not get to make this about "47% of Americans do not pay taxes" as if that was the important part of what he said. It wasn't. if that had been all that he said, then this story wouldn't be a story. But, he didn't. He went on to characterise those people in the most vile, hateful, resentful way possible.

And you should read my intro. I'm 48 fucking years old. My own mother doesn't censor me. if you have a probelm with the way I talk feel free to not talk to me. But, trust me, every fucking time that you try to fucking censor me, all you will accomplish is derailing whatever topic we are discussing, because I will happily take the time to tell you to fuck off about how I talk.

And again, I am still waiting then, for you to apologise for calling me a liar when I pointed out that he called nearly half of the population irresponsible, indulgent leeches.


You do not get to make this about "47% of Americans do not pay taxes"

A clever misrepresentation of the truth. Your mother would call it a lie. We are talking about federal income taxes and you know that very well.


He went on to characterise [sic] those people in the most vile, hateful, resentful way possible.

No he didn't. He may have used un-PC language, but it certainly was not "the most vile, hateful, resentful way possible." And you know that too.


And again, I am still waiting then, for you to apologise for calling me a liar when I pointed out that he called nearly half of the population irresponsible, indulgent leeches.

You are a lair. Why should I apologize for your failures?

Again, watch your language. If you can't debate without going crazy perhaps you should hit the power button on your computer and go relax.

[Czernobog]

A clever misrepresentation of the truth. Your mother would call it a lie. We are talking about federal income taxes and you know that very well.
No. You want it to be about taxes. Then you get to ignore that he characterised these people as irresponsible, indulgent leeches. That is the tactic of the Modern Republican Party: when we get caught saying something unacceptable, let's change the subject, rather than admit that what we said was unnacceptable.


No he didn't. He may have used un-PC language, but it certainly was not "the most vile, hateful, resentful way possible." And you know that too.
The very fact that you cannot see that calling 47% of Americans irresponsible, indulgent leeches is part of the problem.


You are a lair. Why should I apologize for your failures?

Again, watch your language. If you can't debate without going crazy perhaps you should hit the power button on your computer and go relax.

Actually, as has been proven point, by point, it is you that is the liar. Welcome to the adult world. Adults fucking swear. If that makes your poor virgin ears bleed, then I suggest you carry your happy ass on back over to the Disney forum, where you get to censor the other kiddies. As for me, you can gods damned well deal with the way I fucking talk, or you can put me on ignore. I don't really give a rat's ass.

[Akula]

Semantics, rhetoric and word games.....distractions.

A flat tax would be best. 15% sales tax for everyone.
That way EVERYONE has a stake in the game. People who currently pay no taxes will suddenly be included on the tax roll...if a poor man buys a bicycle, he pays 15% tax..If a rich man buys a Bentley, he pays 15%... Everyone shares the burden...
Drastic spending reforms should be next.

Which is better?
Bigger government, higher taxes and more "entitlements", or smaller government, more jobs and more opportunities?

If we all got together next week in a parking lot and all the "rich" people gave all their money to all the "poor" people, chances are the "rich" people would be able to rebuild their wealth in a few years. Smart, productive people tend to be able to do that.

Government confiscation of money at gunpoint from people who EARNED it and then giving it away to less motivated people who expect government handouts isn't going to work...not for much longer anyway.

The answer to 2012 is 1776.

[Peter1469]

Semantics, rhetoric and word games.....distractions.

A flat tax would be best. 15% sales tax for everyone.
That way EVERYONE has a stake in the game. People who currently pay no taxes will suddenly be included on the tax roll...if a poor man buys a bicycle, he pays 15% tax..If a rich man buys a Bentley, he pays 15%... Everyone shares the burden...
Drastic spending reforms should be next.

Which is better?
Bigger government, higher taxes and more "entitlements", or smaller government, more jobs and more opportunities?

If we all got together next week in a parking lot and all the "rich" people gave all their money to all the "poor" people, chances are the "rich" people would be able to rebuild their wealth in a few years. Smart, productive people tend to be able to do that.

Government confiscation of money at gunpoint from people who EARNED it and then giving it away to less motivated people who expect government handouts isn't going to work...not for much longer anyway.

The answer to 2012 is 1776.

You don't seem to be talking about a flat tax- that would be an income tax with a fixed rate for all. You are talking about a sales tax like the Fair Tax. I agree with that.

[Trinnity]

Good. Then he did say that they take from the government without giving back - that would be being a leech. So, he did call them leeches.
He did not. You're playing a word game.

YOU
FAIL

[Akula]

You don't seem to be talking about a flat tax- that would be an income tax with a fixed rate for all. You are talking about a sales tax like the Fair Tax. I agree with that.

I obviously am not an economist and it's VERY likely I confuse terms...I did mean a sales tax, though. Thanks for clarifying for me.

As I said, that way EVERYONE is participating fairly.

Poorer people with less income will buy less...that's just how it is..but they'll pay the same rate as the richest who obviously buy more things and and more expensive things.

In that regard it is "automatically" fair. You're only taxed for what you purchase and everyone therefore pays taxes.

[Peter1469]

I obviously am not an economist and it's VERY likely I confuse terms...I did mean a sales tax, though. Thanks for clarifying for me.

As I said, that way EVERYONE is participating fairly.

Poorer people with less income will buy less...that's just how it is..but they'll pay the same rate as the richest who obviously buy more things and and more expensive things.

In that regard it is "automatically" fair. You're only taxed for what you purchase and everyone therefore pays taxes.

You are absolutely correct. Additionally, it is immoral to tax productivity. Taxing consumption is much more logical.

[Czernobog]

He did not. You're playing a word game.

YOU
FAIL

Really? So what do you call a person who takes without giving anything in return? Do try to avoid the obvious smart-ass responses, answer honestly.

[Carygrant]

Mumble Mumble --- Clunt is a dumble . Sorry Mutant is .
But the OP is , How is Mutant's campaign going ?
The very asking of that question gives you the answer .
He is approaching disaster status .

[Jenda]

Peter1469 posts in this thread are correct. He rocks. :bow:

Czernobog's posts in this thread are lies and distortions. :bs: Fail.

[Peter1469]

No. You want it to be about taxes. Then you get to ignore that he characterised these people as irresponsible, indulgent leeches. That is the tactic of the Modern Republican Party: when we get caught saying something unacceptable, let's change the subject, rather than admit that what we said was unnacceptable.


The very fact that you cannot see that calling 47% of Americans irresponsible, indulgent leeches is part of the problem.



Actually, as has been proven point, by point, it is you that is the liar. Welcome to the adult world. Adults fucking swear. If that makes your poor virgin ears bleed, then I suggest you carry your happy ass on back over to the Disney forum, where you get to censor the other kiddies. As for me, you can gods damned well deal with the way I fucking talk, or you can put me on ignore. I don't really give a rat's ass.

It was about campaign strategy. Is Romney going to win the vote of people who don't pay federal income taxes when his platform includes cutting taxes. No. Not likely.

Watch your language.

Romney tells the truth, and you fly off the wall like a Muslim who is told about some movie that makes Muhammad look stupid....

Romney was essentially correct, if un-PC.



The very fact that you cannot see that calling 47% of Americans irresponsible, indulgent leeches is part of the problem.

The problem is our tax code exempts 47% from paying their fair share. Get it straight.


Actually, as has been proven point, by point, it is you that is the liar. Welcome to the adult world. Adults fucking swear.

Are you confusing two very separate issues here? You have the foul mouth. I have not lied and you have not shown me to lie. In fact I showed that you lied- above. Remember. Go back and look. It is where I said your mother would call you a lair.


I don't really give a rat's ass.

We finally agree on something, Sally.

How does it feel to be ridden hard and put away wet? Tool.

[Czernobog]

It was about campaign strategy. Is Romney going to win the vote of people who don't pay federal income taxes when his platform includes cutting taxes. No. Not likely. My asss. Again, you are trying to focus on any part of his statement except his characterzation of them, as if that were just incidental. Well, guess what? It wasn't. And the fact that you want to keep avoiding that only emphasizes the fact that not only do you know what he said, you also know how offensive it was and will go to any lengths to try to retend that it wasn't said. Pathetic.


Watch your language.Uh...fuck off? is this gonna be our thing? You constantly trying to censor me, and me having to constantly remind you that you can fuck off? Because that is the anly resonse that "Watch your language" is ever going to fucking get. Every time you say it, I will make a fucking oint of using fuck, just to annoy you, and make it clear that you are not going to censor me.


Romney tells the truth, and you fly off the wall like a Muslim who is told about some movie that makes Muhammad look stupid.... No. I absolutely love the fact that he called 47% of Americans irresponsible, indulgent leeches. As his plummeting polling numbers show, that little speech of his is the best gift he could have given to the Obama re-election.


Romney was essentially correct, if un-PC.Well, I, for one, certainly hope that he decides to say it often.


The problem is our tax code exempts 47% from paying their fair share. Get it straight. Well...actually your party's biggest problem is trying to figure out how to get 47% of Americans to forget that he just called them irresponsible, indulgent leeches. But, hey, you guys focus on whatever makes you feel good about yourseles.


Are you confusing two very separate issues here? You have the foul mouth. I have not lied and you have not shown me to lie. In fact I showed that you lied- above. Remember. Go back and look. It is where I said your mother would call you a lair. We went line by line, and you admitted, each, and every, time that Romney said exactly what I said he said, and then tried to change the subject by talking about the "...pays no taxes..."bullshit, as if that was really the important part of his statement, not calling nearly half of the population irresponsible, indulgent leeches.

And you know what? I see no point in continuing, as you are just a liar, and thus have nothing of value to add to any conversation. Back to the kiddie table with you. Try again, when you are able to put forth an argument without relying on lies, and distraction.

Dolt.

[Peter1469]

My asss. Again, you are trying to focus on any part of his statement except his characterzation of them, as if that were just incidental. Well, guess what? It wasn't. And the fact that you want to keep avoiding that only emphasizes the fact that not only do you know what he said, you also know how offensive it was and will go to any lengths to try to retend that it wasn't said. Pathetic.

Uh...fuck off? is this gonna be our thing? You constantly trying to censor me, and me having to constantly remind you that you can fuck off? Because that is the anly resonse that "Watch your language" is ever going to fucking get. Every time you say it, I will make a fucking oint of using fuck, just to annoy you, and make it clear that you are not going to censor me.

No. I absolutely love the fact that he called 47% of Americans irresponsible, indulgent leeches. As his plummeting polling numbers show, that little speech of his is the best gift he could have given to the Obama re-election.

Well, I, for one, certainly hope that he decides to say it often.

Well...actually your party's biggest problem is trying to figure out how to get 47% of Americans to forget that he just called them irresponsible, indulgent leeches. But, hey, you guys focus on whatever makes you feel good about yourseles.

We went line by line, and you admitted, each, and every, time that Romney said exactly what I said he said, and then tried to change the subject by talking about the "...pays no taxes..."bullshit, as if that was really the important part of his statement, not calling nearly half of the population irresponsible, indulgent leeches.

And you know what? I see no point in continuing, as you are just a liar, and thus have nothing of value to add to any conversation. Back to the kiddie table with you. Try again, when you are able to put forth an argument without relying on lies, and distraction.

Dolt.

Are you a little girl? With such a mouth.... What should we do with you?....

Nevertheless you are way off track with what Romney said. Perhaps you read the characterization of what Romney said from the MSM. That is likely what got your panties in a wad.

And you still don't get it. He isn't looking for the lower 47%'s votes. He is looking for the top 53% vote. And he can win if he gets 50%+1.

Did that sink in, Ms. Panty-in-a-wad?

[Shoot the Goose]

Cz. Just STFU you stupid moron. Move to Europe. Or Mexico. Take a poster of Obama with you to put on the bathroom wall or something.

Jeeezus your posts are stupid ... always.

[Czernobog]

Are you a little girl? With such a mouth.... What should we do with you?....

Nevertheless you are way off track with what Romney said. Perhaps you read the characterization of what Romney said from the MSM. That is likely what got your panties in a wad.

And you still don't get it. He isn't looking for the lower 47%'s votes. He is looking for the top 53% vote. And he can win if he gets 50%+1.

Did that sink in, Ms. Panty-in-a-wad?

You are a liar. he said what he said. constantly saying over and over that he didn't doesn't make it magically true. I know it sucks for you to have such a oron for a candidate, bu I guess you should have thought of that before you nominated him. have dun come November.

[Czernobog]

Cz. Just STFU you stupid moron. Move to Europe. Or Mexico. Take a poster of Obama with you to put on the bathroom wall or something.

Jeeezus your posts are stupid ... always.

LOL :smiley_ROFLMAO: Brilliant as always. When the Right has no rational response, they just demand you shut up, and go away. :owned:

[Peter1469]

You are a liar. he said what he said. constantly saying over and over that he didn't doesn't make it magically true. I know it sucks for you to have such a oron for a candidate, bu I guess you should have thought of that before you nominated him. have dun come November.

And you are confused. We have already established that your mother would call you a liar for your posts here. Get it straight.

I am not a Romney supporter. Again, get it straight. Little girl with a dirty mouth. What should we do with you?

[Czernobog]

And you are confused. We have already established that your mother would call you a liar for your posts here. Get it straight.

I am not a Romney supporter. Again, get it straight. Little girl with a dirty mouth. What should we do with you?

No, we established that you are a liar, and obviously never knew my mother, or you wouldn't make such stupid comments. Well, for starters you should stop lying, and making assumptions. They really do make you look stupid.

[Peter1469]

No, we established that you are a liar, and obviously never knew my mother, or you wouldn't make such stupid comments. Well, for starters you should stop lying, and making assumptions. They really do make you look stupid.
You got it wrong again. Go back and read our conversation. You tried to mischaracterize Mitt's position, and I caught you. Then I said, your mother would call that a lie. Remember?

Thanks for watching your language.

[Czernobog]

You got it wrong again. Go back and read our conversation. You tried to mischaracterize Mitt's position, and I caught you. Then I said, your mother would call that a lie. Remember?

Thanks for watching your language.

uh. No. Go back and reread the conversation. I went through point by int, and admitted that Romney said exactly what I claimed he did. I will not even give you the benefit of using the excuse that you are confused, because no one is that stupid. Therefore, there is only one conclusion left - you are a liar.

I asked did he say "They are entitled". You said yes. Entitled means indulgent, look it up. So, when I say that Romney called them indulgent you admitted that was true. I asked if he said they expcte the government to give these things to them, you admitted yes. So, you admitted that he called them leeches. The only part you didn't admit to was irresponsible. Well, that is easy. he said, "I cannot convince them to be responsible..." Guess what? One does not have to convince responsible people to be responsible, because they're, well, responsible. One must only convince irresponsible people to be responsible. Thus he called them irresponsible. he called half of the population irresponsible, indulgent leeches.

And now you are lying, and trying to claim that you didn't admit exactly what you did. Before making any more of an ass of yourself, you do know that people need only read the thread, to see that you are lying, right?

Since you are incapable of even being honest about your own admissions, you may respond however you like. This will my last comment, as you are obviously incapable of honest debate. Congratulations on being the very first person to make my ignore bin. I'll check in with you in a few months, to see if you have learned how to debate without resorting to lies.

[Peter1469]

uh. No. Go back and reread the conversation. I went through point by int, and admitted that Romney said exactly what I claimed he did. I will not even give you the benefit of using the excuse that you are confused, because no one is that stupid. Therefore, there is only one conclusion left - you are a liar.

I asked did he say "They are entitled". You said yes. Entitled means indulgent, look it up. So, when I say that Romney called them indulgent you admitted that was true. I asked if he said they expcte the government to give these things to them, you admitted yes. So, you admitted that he called them leeches. The only part you didn't admit to was irresponsible. Well, that is easy. he said, "I cannot convince them to be responsible..." Guess what? One does not have to convince responsible people to be responsible, because they're, well, responsible. One must only convince irresponsible people to be responsible. Thus he called them irresponsible. he called half of the population irresponsible, indulgent leeches.

And now you are lying, and trying to claim that you didn't admit exactly what you did. Before making any more of an ass of yourself, you do know that people need only read the thread, to see that you are lying, right?

Since you are incapable of even being honest about your own admissions, you may respond however you like. This will my last comment, as you are obviously incapable of honest debate. Congratulations on being the very first person to make my ignore bin. I'll check in with you in a few months, to see if you have learned how to debate without resorting to lies.


This will my last comment,

That is a relief. Now go clean your panties.

You are pathetic.

[BooHoo]

Are you a little girl? With such a mouth.... What should we do with you?....

Nevertheless you are way off track with what Romney said. Perhaps you read the characterization of what Romney said from the MSM. That is likely what got your panties in a wad.

And you still don't get it. He isn't looking for the lower 47%'s votes. He is looking for the top 53% vote. And he can win if he gets 50%+1.

Did that sink in, Ms. Panty-in-a-wad?

So many funny posters on this site and you are one of them! ROFLMAO!!!!

[Conley]

Seems like there's a panty fixation in this thread :shocked:

[Czernobog]

Seems like there's a panty fixation in this thread :shocked:

You notice that, did you? Kinda makes you wonder what's in his underwear drawer...

[Conley]

You notice that, did you? Kinda makes you wonder what's in his underwear drawer...


I'll tell ya right now I haven't given Peter's underwear a single thought, ever :laugh:

[Captain Obvious]

Peter's a commando guy I'm betting.

[Conley]

I used to be a commando fan but I've gotta say the boxer-brief hybrid is one of the best inventions of the past fifteen-twenty years or so. The boys are living in comfort!

[Captain Obvious]

Yeah - same here, we must be twins.

I did commando when I was younger then switched to boxers for a while. Got tired of my junk popping out of that opening in the front and switched to boxer-briefs.

[Conley]

:laugh: yep, I know what you mean. By the way, that "opening in the front" is called a fly. Just lettin ya know.

http://putitinyourface.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/nbc_the_more_you_know.jpg

[Captain Obvious]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nzY2Qcu5i2A

[Shoot the Goose]

I used to be a commando fan but I've gotta say the boxer-brief hybrid is one of the best inventions of the past fifteen-twenty years or so. The boys are living in comfort!

Yup. At least then, when the wind blows, it is appreciated. Mother Nature luvs ya long time.

Back to topic. Romney is doing just fine. He's on course to send Obama packing.

Into oblivion I hope.

[Cigar]

Willard Mitt Romney will never ever be President of The United States ... Bank on it!

[Akula]

Willard Mitt Romney will never ever be President of The United States ... Bank on it!

Link?
Source?
Proof?

[Cigar]

Link?
Source?
Proof?

http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b137/chasc5/119139_600_zps9ac1f45d.jpg

[Akula]

Like I said...lacking the ability to have a mature discussion you revert to posting cartoons.

TNB

[Cigar]

Like I said...lacking the ability to have a mature discussion you revert to posting cartoons.

TNB

I like Cartoons ... :)

... and I'm in no hurry to grow up. :)

[Trinnity]

You're sure Obama will win, Cigar. I'm pretty darn sure he won't. Well, we'll just have to wait and see, won't we?

[Akula]

I like Cartoons ... :)

... and I'm in no hurry to grow up. :)

Right..
Are you acknowledging an inability to think linearly and have mature, on topic discussions, then?

[Cigar]

Right..
Are you acknowledging an inability to think linearly and have mature, on topic discussions, then?

Dude ... it's not a job, it's an adventure :)

[Akula]

Dude ... it's not a job, it's an adventure :)

Every day is an "adventure" to a chicken, too. They have no verbal skills or memory. Everything is new to them every time they wake up.
You clearly aren't very bright, but possibly a little smarter than a chicken...Somewhere in between chimp and chicken, perhaps.

[Cigar]

Every day is an "adventure" to a chicken, too. They have no verbal skills or memory. Everything is new to them every time they wake up.
You clearly aren't very bright, but possibly a little smarter than a chicken...Somewhere in between chimp and chicken, perhaps.


Thanks for the complement ... I think the world of you also? :)

[Akula]

Thanks for the complement ... I think the world of you also? :)

That's "compliment", for your edification, affirmative action "college grad"...again you demonstrate cluelessness about word usage....

[Cigar]

That's "compliment", for your edification, affirmative action "college grad"...again you demonstrate cluelessness about word usage....

Yep ... I guess I'll never have to worry about beating you out in an interview :)

[Akula]

Yep ... I guess I'll never have to worry about beating you out in an interview :)

Correct.

[Cigar]

Correct.


Now go eat your Peanut-butter and Jelly Sandwich like a good little boy. :)

[Akula]

Now go eat your Peanut-butter and Jelly Sandwich like a good little boy. :)

Haven't you heard? peanut butter and jelly is "racist"...are you a racist?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/11/is-peanut-butter-and-jelly-racist_n_1874905.html

[Cigar]

Haven't you heard? peanut butter and jelly is "racist"...are you a racist?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/11/is-peanut-butter-and-jelly-racist_n_1874905.html

Don't choke :)

Wash it down with Milk ... White of course :)

[Akula]

Don't choke :)

Wash it down with Milk ... White of course :)

The white way is the right way, boy.

[Cigar]

The white way is the right way, boy.


If you say so Son

[Akula]

If you say so Son

Correct, boy.