Romney vows to restore 'promise of America'

@Can

The party is not over, true parties change back in forth from time to time and no doubt Bush was a big spender and a very big one at that, and didn't stay true to real conservative principles, too much for by conservative standards and also conservatives for the most part last time really lost their way, but if they just hold on to their basic principles and one of them is to be fiscally conservative, Cut spending, lower taxes for the middle class and for corporate and allow businesses to come back to the states, right now, big businesses are going elsewhere, China, Dubai, Macau because these countries are tax friendly to big business. Bring them back, these can create thousands of jobs, keep government small, reduce the size of it, increase and support the growth of the private sector, half a strong modern and updated defense, make sure all people are granted equal rights, rights that were given by their creator and NOT by government, all humans are created equal. rebuild our healthcare system, not based on the Canadian or European socialist model, I am for healthcare reform, but not the way Obama has structurally implemented, everyone should be able to have proper healthcare, but in a way that doesn't bankrupt our system. Break away from governmental "dependance!" We tried it the liberal way and look where we are now, so buddy, the GOP isn't by a long-shot over, it's just warming up.

Why is it that many Americans can't accept the fact, the Party is Over. They have been the top dog for roughly 80 years, but, you cannot continue on the path they have been on on for ever. History show that many, many countries have tried this, but it eventually comes to an end. History shows the period of time a Country sits on top is getting shorter and shorter.

@Mirai

I honestly can't believe that you believe what you're saying. I am honestly at a lost for words.

That usually happens to people that don't pay attention,

No, i don't get why you posted a link to some random story about water and fish. What's that got to do with ANYTHING? If you are trying to make a point about liberal environmentalist, at least write something that leads up to the story in the link so I can have some kind of frame of reference.

Liberals have been such a burden at every level and every angle and have single-handedly destroyed everything in California and ran it into the ground completely and that should serve as a model as to what will happen to the rest of the nation if it keeps going on this course. That is the thing that liberals don't get, they think California is fine and it's not it's broke! But liberals and liberal interest groups will never get it, never wise up.

and I suppose smog and pollution isn't...

Sure that has been a problem for a long time in CA, this is true, but it still is a waste.

Do you get the concept of public transportation? Its not suppose to be door to door service. It suppose to get you close enough to where you need to go and then you take something else to get you home or wherever you need to get to....that is unless you have a station or a runway in your backyard..

Wow, that's all I can say. If we were awash with money and didn't have these financial problems that started under Bush and has tripled under Obama and is continuing and not letting up and as a matter of fact making it worse. I don't see his little choo, choo train leaving the starting gate. I sure hope the House kills it, really. An absolute waste and absolutely no benefits, but more and more debt.

And I reiterate once again, the individual mandate, the most unpopular part of the health care law was proposed and put in by the republicans as a compromise. IT WAS A REPUBLICAN INITIATIVE!! It really should have been an option for an affordable government sponsored public health insurance program much like we have in Japan, but the corporatist republican congress threw a hissy fit about it because the health insurance companies that bought them told them that they didn't like it. It was too much competition to them.

I see, so in a nutshell, since it was a Republican initiative that makes it right? That means it's ok to force the American people to swallow something they don't want and by the way, we don't need to go back on the numbers again and go back and forth on this, the point is, how are we going to pay for this, in a bad economy and in a recession, how? Let me tell you, I know liberals for some insane, mind-boggling, mentally, certifiable reason think that we have an inexhaustible amount of money to pay for all of this, but we don't, if we keep this up, there won't be a US anymore. Look at how many cities in CA filed for bankruptcy? But when it comes to money, liberals never do, they don't have that concept for some strange reason, ah yes, because it's someone else's money.

sure, you keep telling yourself that and perhaps someday even you'll start to believe it.

Oh, I sure do without a shred of doubt.

@Bass

I honestly can't believe that you believe what you're saying. I am honestly at a lost for words.

What's the the relevancy? You really don't get it, huh? This is why liberals never, ever learn.

No, i don't get why you posted a link to some random story about water and fish. What's that got to do with ANYTHING? If you are trying to make a point about liberal environmentalist, at least write something that leads up to the story in the link so I can have some kind of frame of reference.

This bullet train an eyesore. No one will take the thing

and I suppose smog and pollution isn't...

, but what about if you are from Laguna, Newport or San Diego, you would have to commute so far just to get on a stupid train, that will be for the most part empty that will take billions of dollars, not to mention displace a lot of people and farmers, but hey, they are already getting the shaft because the Environment...

Do you get the concept of public transportation? Its not suppose to be door to door service. It suppose to get you close enough to where you need to go and then you take something else to get you home or wherever you need to get to....that is unless you have a station or a runway in your backyard..

Penalties on individuals: If you are unable to show you have purchased a government-approved health policy, you will pay a yearly penalty of $695, or up to 2.5 percent of your annual income. That's like saying, you had the idea to steal your neighbors pie from the window sill, but I take over the idea and rob a slew of pie shops get caught and blame it on you saying, it's NOT my fault, really. The idea came from you, you should be blamed for it not me.

And I reiterate once again, the individual mandate, the most unpopular part of the health care law was proposed and put in by the republicans as a compromise. IT WAS A REPUBLICAN INITIATIVE!! It really should have been an option for an affordable government sponsored public health insurance program much like we have in Japan, but the corporatist republican congress threw a hissy fit about it because the health insurance companies that bought them told them that they didn't like it. It was too much competition to them.

but I'm not wrong, it just means, you are ill-informed. ;-)

sure, you keep telling yourself that and perhaps someday even you'll start to believe it.

''I wish President Obama had succeeded because I want America to succeed.''

He didn't mean it of course. Not any more than any single one of his supporters I've heard from or read a post on this forum. It's always been, from before day 1, about taking back the White House, whatever the cost to the country.

Blind patriotism and party affiliation just constantly makes me sick. Thanks for reminding me about that Bass, neither party is going to make much of a better difference if you haven't figured it out yet. But keep fervently waving that republican flag like it means something.

@Mirai

Okay...just testing you guy....some of the things you're writing are way out there so not sure if you're just pulling my leg to be funny. LOL

I feel the same way about you and some of the other liberals on JT as well.

I have no idea what this is about and how it has any relevance to anything related to Obama. You're just finding random stories on conservative news sites to make it seem like environmentalists are crazy. I don't know the details behind this story to make a judgement, nor do I care to make a judgement because it's irrelevant

What's the the relevancy? You really don't get it, huh? This is why liberals never, ever learn.

You're going to compare Amtrak (an aging 40+ year old diesel driven train system with a poor safety record) to a bullet train? Really? If I had the choice of going to SF to NY in 3 hours by plane or 5 days by Amtrak...I think I would choose 3 hours by plane...anyone would, unless they had a lot of time or really loved trains. The bullet train would only be a bit slower than a plane and is a lot more convenient for a lot of people. I have done both plane and car trip from SF and LA and neither are fun. 8 hour trip by car sucked especially when you have family and little kids in the car, and a plane trip is just a pain in the @$$ because of the bs you have to deal with at the airport and on the plane for a relatively short flight. At least with a high speed train, you have the speed and some element of fun going really fast on land taking in the sights on the trip there. A CA bullet train would be a definite win for the state!

Here is where you are losing it with all due respect. This bullet train an eyesore. No one will take the thing, let's say again, you have a station in Vegas, L.A, and Frisco, I live in Southern CA. in the Inland Empire, it would take me more than an hour and half to get to downtown, but what about if you are from Laguna, Newport or San Diego, you would have to commute so far just to get on a stupid train, that will be for the most part empty that will take billions of dollars, not to mention displace a lot of people and farmers, but hey, they are already getting the shaft because the Environmentalists are shutting off vital water supply to many farmers in Central Cali and add to that, this Bullet train will be force a lot of people to give up their homes and land for a failed, outlandish project! Yeah, it sounds nice and all on paper, but the West Coast is NOT the East Coast, if it were in NY or Boston, I could understand, but we are a car culture in the West Coast and in CA and NV in particular. We are too, far and overly spread out, it just won't work. Even the liberal L.A. Times realize it's a huge gamble, $6 billion they said, when they get to the second phase of building this thing that they will need $27 billion more to finish it, but where are they going to get that money? They are actually going to ask Washington??? How? Federal Government doesn't have that kind of cash and especially the way Obama is spending it, NOPE, ain't gonna happen!

http://opinion.latimes.com/opinionla/2011/11/californias-bullet-train-boondoggle-or-boon.html

You don't get penalized is you are below the poverty line. And if you're above, the penalty is 1% of your net income. If you're making $45,000/ yr, you pay $450. It's probably cheaper just to get insurance. BTW, as I mentioned twice already, the individual mandate is a republican initiative, so you can thank your right winged friends in congress for that.

Penalties on individuals: If you are unable to show you have purchased a government-approved health policy, you will pay a yearly penalty of $695, or up to 2.5 percent of your annual income. That's like saying, you had the idea to steal your neighbors pie from the window sill, but I take over the idea and rob a slew of pie shops get caught and blame it on you saying, it's NOT my fault, really. The idea came from you, you should be blamed for it not me.

but who knows...you've got quite a reputation for minuses already...

So what? I can get 1000 minuses, doesn't mean anything to me, I feel good about it and wear it like a badge of honor but I'm not wrong, it just means, you are ill-informed. ;-)

All the points you listed are mere close-ups of the smoke and mirrors TPTB have foisted to keep the masses distracted from the reality of expanded state control and the degradation liberty has suffered. Perhaps you think life on the Animal Farm is Freedom?

Please elaborate....I want to know how my freedoms were degraded and state control has expanded...sounds interesting..

Most vapid speech of all time. No details on how he is going to accomplish these goals. I plan to vote for O. At least I how he goes. And, the Republicans have blocked everything he tries to do pretty much based on his race. The Civil War is being replayed before our very eyes. Sadly. How much longer can the USA last under these circumstances, I wonder?

I'm real.

Okay...just testing you guy....some of the things you're writing are way out there so not sure if you're just pulling my leg to be funny. LOL

I ponder the same thing, really!

Do you honestly believe that the republican party would let Obama get away with campagne fraud? They would jump on that so fast. But they're not because its not true. Obama is not spending campagne money to fund projects.

agriculture until the liberals (figures) and environmental groups bleed it dry over a little fish!

I have no idea what this is about and how it has any relevance to anything related to Obama. You're just finding random stories on conservative news sites to make it seem like environmentalists are crazy. I don't know the details behind this story to make a judgement, nor do I care to make a judgement because it's irrelevant.

Unlike Japan, how many stations will they make? What about the people that live in on the outskirts of the big city? Remember AmTrak? How's that working these days?

You can find more details about the propose project here: http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/trip_planner.aspx

You're going to compare Amtrak (an aging 40+ year old diesel driven train system with a poor safety record) to a bullet train? Really? If I had the choice of going to SF to NY in 3 hours by plane or 5 days by Amtrak...I think I would choose 3 hours by plane...anyone would, unless they had a lot of time or really loved trains. The bullet train would only be a bit slower than a plane and is a lot more convenient for a lot of people. I have done both plane and car trip from SF and LA and neither are fun. 8 hour trip by car sucked especially when you have family and little kids in the car, and a plane trip is just a pain in the @$$ because of the bs you have to deal with at the airport and on the plane for a relatively short flight. At least with a high speed train, you have the speed and some element of fun going really fast on land taking in the sights on the trip there. A CA bullet train would be a definite win for the state!

And pay the penalty....uhh...tax? No, thank you! Don't want that garbage. But luckily, the Repubs are hopefully not going to let it get to the Senate floor and try to starve it at least try to defund it.

You don't get penalized is you are below the poverty line. And if you're above, the penalty is 1% of your net income. If you're making $45,000/ yr, you pay $450. It's probably cheaper just to get insurance. BTW, as I mentioned twice already, the individual mandate is a republican initiative, so you can thank your right winged friends in congress for that.

"Centrist", huh? I want to say something to that so badly, but I know the MODS wouldn't let it through. ROFL

speak your mind! as long as you're as respectful as I am, I don't think they'll moderate you...but who knows...you've got quite a reputation for minuses already...

@mirai hayashi: from the several posts of yours I've read, it's very clear to see that what you support is deep within the statist camp. Whether a person is deemed left or right is nonsense as the entire paradigm is errant. All the points you listed are mere close-ups of the smoke and mirrors TPTB have foisted to keep the masses distracted from the reality of expanded state control and the degradation liberty has suffered. Perhaps you think life on the Animal Farm is Freedom?

So, it's easier for her than others to say "There is no monopoly on becoming a millionaire."

And it's totally irrelevant. Neither can one pretend that the millions of Americans who live below the poverty line are not trying hard enough.

Bass, i don't know if you're for real or if you're doing this to make me laugh.

I'm real.

If this were true. Obama would not be president, he'd be in jail, because that's campaign fraud which is illegal. LOL

I ponder the same thing, really!

I wish he were trying to build a bullet train from Las Vegas to Los Angeles to San Francisco! That would be awesome at so many levels. Construction jobs that would last about a decade or more (because building a high speed train line takes about a decade for something that distance). Jobs for operators and maintenance crews for several more years after that. Better economy from increased tourism. Smaller carbon foot print from less cars and planes that would otherwise travel that same distance. Possible lower airfares due to competition. Better accessibility to the cities could mean people being able to find jobs further away. That would be a long term boost for the economy....nothing wrong there....too bad it isn't true though...its still Obama's green dream because congress ain't having it.

That's right. Now you're making me laugh. California was the breadbasket of the west high in agriculture until the liberals (figures) and environmental groups bleed it dry over a little fish!

http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/us/2010/April/CA-Water-Wars-Leave-Farmers-High-and-Dry/

As for the Bullet train another wasteful project just like our "RedLine" Subway, hardly anyone uses it. Unlike Japan, how many stations will they make? What about the people that live in on the outskirts of the big city? Remember AmTrak? How's that working these days?

http://www.cnbc.com/id/40827203/Is_California_s_Train_to_Nowhere_a_Waste_of_Tax_Dollars

Sorry, wrong again Bob...all it does is make it accessible for those who can't get or don't have health insurance. For those who already have insurance, they need not care unless they want to change providers...then it'd probably cheaper for them.

And pay the penalty....uhh...tax? No, thank you! Don't want that garbage. But luckily, the Repubs are hopefully not going to let it get to the Senate floor and try to starve it at least try to defund it.

Probably because facts and reality tends to side with the liberals (except I am not a liberal...I am a centerous. I just look like a liberal to you because you are an extreme.)

"Centrist", huh? I want to say something to that so badly, but I know the MODS wouldn't let it through. ROFL

@Herve Nmn L'EisaAu

Conservatives favor Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, farm subsidies, education grants, foreign aid, the drug war, an overseas empire of military bases, the vast military-industrial complex, the CIA, and all the other aspects of the big welfare-warfare state that liberals embrace. The only difference between conservatives and liberals is over the size of all these programs. Conservatives say they want to downsize them (in actuality they usually vote to expand them) while liberals want to grow them.

Well said. The massive military budget in particular is pushing America to the brink. We are borrowing money from China (and printing it) to pay for it.

bass4funk: "Not for banning Gays, I guess you didn't know there are many Gay conservatives, I work with quite a few that are nice, decent and honorable people."

For someone who chides another poster for 'not reading my comment correctly' you certainly refuse to do so for others. I did not say "banning gays", I said "banning all things gay", like gay marriage, and I'm willing to bet any progress made towards getting rid of the DADT rule in the military will be rolled back, among other things. People who think that marriage is 'the sacred institution between man and woman' need to get with the times, not roll them back; 10% or so of the world's population is homosexual, and they have as much right to love each other as any man loves a woman and vice-versa, and they should have the right to marry as such.

"No, I leave that to liberals to spew garbage, next?"

No, clearly you DO make things up, as you did with the "Obama wants to take away our 2nd amendment" rubbish. Now, is the statement you made correct or incorrect? (rhetorical), and given that it's incorrect were you making it up or just poorly informed and chose to go with it? Which one, for it can't be anything else but one of those choices.

Conservatives were right along - Mitt Romney is the wrong candidate for president.

Congratulations - now you're stuck with a loser. :-)

ROTFLMFAO

Bass, i don't know if you're for real or if you're doing this to make me laugh.

For the most part, using public campaign funds to fund his faltering green energy projects, there is a whole slew of them that all went bankrupt. Again, wasted money!

If this were true. Obama would not be president, he'd be in jail, because that's campaign fraud which is illegal. LOL

Trying to make a Bullet train from Las Vegas to Los Angeles to San Francisco, beyond a wasted of money, it will displace many farmers and would cost a few million a mile, an astronomical obscene amount!

I wish he were trying to build a bullet train from Las Vegas to Los Angeles to San Francisco! That would be awesome at so many levels. Construction jobs that would last about a decade or more (because building a high speed train line takes about a decade for something that distance). Jobs for operators and maintenance crews for several more years after that. Better economy from increased tourism. Smaller carbon foot print from less cars and planes that would otherwise travel that same distance. Possible lower airfares due to competition. Better accessibility to the cities could mean people being able to find jobs further away. That would be a long term boost for the economy....nothing wrong there....too bad it isn't true though...its still Obama's green dream because congress ain't having it.

Yeah, that was a good idea, but to mess with people that have a great healthcare as I do, not at all! If you want to fix the 33 million that don't have access to healthcare, I am all for it, but changing it for the entire country?! I'm talking about now.

Sorry, wrong again Bob...all it does is make it accessible for those who can't get or don't have health insurance. For those who already have insurance, they need not care unless they want to change providers...then it'd probably cheaper for them.

Yeah, I know, liberals always say the same exact thing. Hmmm...wonder why?

Probably because facts and reality tends to side with the liberals (except I am not a liberal...I am a centerous. I just look like a liberal to you because you are an extreme.)

Oh, so you're agreeing with me that the republican congress activiely and knowingly conspired to block everysingle legislation presented by Obama, hence hindering progress....great!

Not at all, if you took the time to read my comment properly. And why not? I would too. He wants the debt ceiling raised, but doesn't want to cut anything, just spend, spend, there was a reason why the Dems got a shellacking in 2010 that was a clear message from the people to STOP the spending. Yes, it was the Dems that were, ARE hindering real progress, by deflecting the issues and wanting to engage in debates other than the economy. If we don't get financially discipline, we will never get out of this debt, never!

And enlighten me,,,what are the dems spending so much money on? Porn? Strip clubs? prositiutes?...ooops that was the republicans too..

For the most part, using public campaign funds to fund his faltering green energy projects, there is a whole slew of them that all went bankrupt. Again, wasted money!

Trying to make a Bullet train from Las Vegas to Los Angeles to San Francisco, beyond a wasted of money, it will displace many farmers and would cost a few million a mile, an astronomical obscene amount!

That's more than enough.

Sound numbers, but they don't tell the whole truth. People were against a health care MANDATE (which was a republican initiative)...when asked if they like the health care program if it wasn't mandated, 66% said that they did.

Yeah, that was a good idea, but to mess with people that have a great healthcare as I do, not at all! If you want to fix the 33 million that don't have access to healthcare, I am all for it, but changing it for the entire country?! I'm talking about now.

Face it bass, you can't win against me. Unlike most republicans, I believe in facts and the facts are on my side. You should really do a fact check...it might help you...or maybe not...

Yeah, I know, liberals always say the same exact thing. Hmmm...wonder why?

Title should be, "Romney promises to restore white power"

I had to fact check bass's numbers because they looked fishy. For the most part, he "almost" got it right, but not quite..

Here are the real numbers:

Health care support numbers were consistently between 25% -45% (approve) between Jan 2010 and Jul 2012. Not very good.

HOWEVER, when polled on individual components of the health care law, things looked dramatically different:

Individual Mandate (a republican initiative) 35% unpopular Limit age rating 52% moderately popular Guaranteed Issue 60% pretty popular Prohibit gender rating 61% pretty popular Medicaid expansion 66% very popular Extend depependant coverage (republicans in congress love and use this but are ashamed to admitt it) 71% VERY popular Close Medicare donut hole 78% Extremely popular!

So overall, Americans love the health care reform, when they knew what it was. But when they made it a mandate (again, a republican initiative), and called it a socialist program, Obamacare, etc, then they say they hate it.

@latienda: "I still go for Obama. 4 years term's is too short to achieved the promises of any president. Beside the world financial crisis causes many problems and headaches."

Soetoro has not punished one Wall St banker who helped create the crisis. Nor has Jon Corzine been prosecuted.

Look at GM and look at Solyndra. GM IPO'ed near $40 and now it can barely stay above $20. Has to break $55 for the U.S. taxpayer to break even. And nice work with Solyndra.

Yeah, taxpayer money well spent.

sure was, but it was Difficult when you are swimming in a sea of sharks and being opposed at every angle and turn by the opposition.

Yup....that's how the republican congress works, and that's why Obama's progess has been slow*

.....oh. sorry...you were talking about Romney weren't you..

Excuse me! 2 years of total rule and control of all 3 branches and What do they have to show for it? And NO, sorry, I was definitely talking about Mr. Obama.

Oh, so you're agreeing with me that the republican congress activiely and knowingly conspired to block everysingle legislation presented by Obama, hence hindering progress....great!

But on the other hand, Dems do work fast, fast at spending and spending other peoples money like a drunken sailor and you think that the Rupubs are going to hand over a blank check to this President, did that with Bush, Obama is on a steroid spending spree, but give him what he wants? Of course, they need to block him, otherwise, he will never, ever cut spending, Obama doesn't care about our rising debt as do most liberals.

And enlighten me,,,what are the dems spending so much money on? Porn? Strip clubs? prositiutes?...ooops that was the republicans too..

45% of the country hates it 49% of the people want it repealed. Only 36% really love it.

Sound numbers, but they don't tell the whole truth. People were against a health care MANDATE (which was a republican initiative)...when asked if they like the health care program if it wasn't mandated, 66% said that they did.

Face it bass, you can't win against me. Unlike most republicans, I believe in facts and the facts are on my side. You should really do a fact check...it might help you...or maybe not...

Romney offers promises of jobs, renew America's credibility ...what Obama has not been able to deliver under his presidency. The 4D's: debt (largest deficit), Doubt (unemployment, welfare dependency..), decline, and division are the result of Obama's broken promises. Whatever your special interest maybe, the fact is that Obama's policy is not working; especially the economy. The excitement of hope and change has faded away, where are they now? Obama lacks of business experiences will not forwarding America To better future, rather into the danger zone over the cliff. Deficit, entitlements, jobs and economy should be the issues for this election, for the numbers speak for themselves.

@Mirai

Yup....that's how the republican congress works, and that's why Obama's progess has been slow

.....oh. sorry...you were talking about Romney weren't you..

Excuse me! 2 years of total rule and control of all 3 branches and What do they have to show for it? And NO, sorry, I was definitely talking about Mr. Obama. But on the other hand, Dems do work fast, fast at spending and spending other peoples money like a drunken sailor and you think that the Rupubs are going to hand over a blank check to this President, did that with Bush, Obama is on a steroid spending spree, but give him what he wants? Of course, they need to block him, otherwise, he will never, ever cut spending, Obama doesn't care about our rising debt as do most liberals.

Let's fact check some of Romney's speech shall we:

Romney says Americans need jobs. Indeed. So far, the private sector has added 4.5 million jobs during the last 29 months.

Romney claims that he will create 12 million new jobs. In reality, the proposal would kill 360,000 jobs next year alone. For instance, the plan includes tax incentives for outsourcing that would actively undermine U.S. employment.

Economists have characterized Romney’s job growth goal as “pretty close to what’s already expected.” under Obama.

Romney says we should “put aside the divisiveness and the recriminations.” Perhaps his campaign should stop making blatantly dishonest attacks and calling Obama a foreigner?

Romney is trying to whitewash his horrible record for women by bragging about all of the women he’s worked with. Remember when the Romney campaign didn’t know if he supported equal pay for women?

Romney talks about the Americans who are in debt and still paying back student loans. Rather than support government-backed student loans, Romney has told students to “borrow money if you have to from your parents.”

Romney claims that America came “together” after Obama’s election, ignoring the GOP’s orchestrated effort to filibuster and defeat Obama’s policies. Republicans held secret meetings to mount an “all-out resistance to a popular President-elect during an economic emergency.” As former Ohio Sen. George Voinovich (R) put it, “If he was for it, we had to be against it.”

“President Obama promised to slow the rise of the oceans.” Big laugh line. It’s too bad Romney and most of the GOP delegates don’t believe in global warming.

Romney pledges to “respect the institution of marriage,” by refusing to acknowledge the marriages of loving same-sex couples.

Romney believes Obama went on an apology tour — he didn’t.

Romney promised to increase the deficit by $109 billion. A Freudian slip? or did he mean it?

Source: thinkprogress.org

@Smith

Are you just making things up as you go along, or did the Republicans feed you this garbage and you bought and respout it without actually bothering to check the facts?

No, I leave that to liberals to spew garbage, next?

As for banning rights, just look at the candidates you favour: they want to ban anything gay, completely ban abortion (as in, deny women the right to choose), and these are but two examples of Romney/Ryan's trying to impose their beliefs and enforce their wills on the people while Obama prefers the people have a choice.

Not for banning Gays, I guess you didn't know there are many Gay conservatives, I work with quite a few that are nice, decent and honorable people. I and most conservatives want equal rights for all, just the word "marriage" should be defined as a Sacrament between a man and a woman, but have no problems with Same sex marriage and "Civil Unions" other than that, it is not an issue. Yes, most conservatives are Pro-life, that doesn't mean that you want to or you will impose your beliefs on someone else, that is the talking points mantra of liberals, I woman has the right to choose, but in extreme cases, partial, late term, incest, life or death situation, most conservatives don't have a problem with it. I think our current President forcing us to adopt his healthcare and shove it down our throats is more than imposing, we didn't have a choice in that, since he didn't care that 45% of the country hates it 49% of the people want it repealed. Only 36% really love it.

....who passionately hate their country. slap each other on the backs and say how great America is while doing everything possible to weaken and undermine it without having a clue about the damage they are causing.

Of course conservatives will never admit this, but the GOP is a nothing more than a frat club for white people.

After watching that display of Americans, it's no wonder America's reputation plummets every time the GOP/conservatives do anything big.

Glad the GOP's Humilate America clown show is finally over.

Time to sweep out the garbage, put the cat out and turn off the lights in Tampa.

Next week we'll see how the Dems - a party that actually puts America first and that is led by a president who has a greater IQ than that of the entire GOP combined - present their plan for the country's future.

Romney's speech could be summed up as: he fed red meat to whoever he pretends to represent today, and they bought it without even having to think because - hey - the GOP tells them how to.

Must be a breeze to be a conservative in America thees days.

You are going off point. I know the system, I was just saying, he can speak out, of course he can, wise up. He can speak off the cuff and he likes speaking anyway. It would be constructive as well as a PR move.

No you don't get it...why would the POTUS speak out for or against his hometown/state....he cannot/ should not micro manage every detail of what's going on in the country, otherwise he wouldn't have the time to tackle the macro issues. This is purely the job of the mayor or chief of police, or maybe even the govenor if its a state-wide issue. President needn't get involved and any localized issue unless it affected the majority of the country. Also, it wouldn't be good politics for a President to speak for/against the people of any town let alone his hometown (although the GOP tend to do it like all of the time)

The US is in steady decline under Obama...Mitt Romney is going to be the next POTUS,you can bank on that! Americans have had enough of this whinning little whimp named Barrak.....Obama has done nothing to improve the US economy,people are done listening to him complain and blame everyone and everything for the hard times we are going through,if Obama would man up and admit his policies are not working and lean a little to the center,he might have a chance,but he won't. Obama is a has been!

@Mirai

C'mon Bass...as Obama would say, You can't just make things up and expect it to be true!!! This is sooo wrong! First of call US Senators don't write legislation for their own home state or hometown. And as president, he's not suppose to write legislation for his hometown. It just doesn't work that way!! They write, voteon, and pass legislation for the entire country. You obviously don't know how local, state, and federal level government works!

You are going off point. I know the system, I was just saying, he can speak out, of course he can, wise up. He can speak off the cuff and he likes speaking anyway. It would be constructive as well as a PR move.

Herve: "Both candidates are nearly identical..."

That is incorrect in SOOOOO many ways I don't even know where to begin, and since Mirai did a pretty good job of showing you the tip of the iceberg in where you are wrong, I'll leave it at that.

bass4funk: "Obama wants to pass judgment on everyone wants to make excuses, wants to ban our rights to bear arms, of so, then why not start with his home state, and yes, it has EVERYTHING to do with it as a (so called) role model and a (so called) leader."

Are you just making things up as you go along, or did the Republicans feed you this garbage and you bought and respout it without actually bothering to check the facts? As for banning rights, just look at the candidates you favour: they want to ban anything gay, completely ban abortion (as in, deny women the right to choose), and these are but two examples of Romney/Ryan's trying to impose their beliefs and enforce their wills on the people while Obama prefers the people have a choice.

I just finished watching Romney's speech.

My god that was boring.

There were a few rhetorical flushes (thanks to his speechwriters), but overall not really worthy of note.

What was disturbing now that I think back on Romney's speech, was not the politicians, but the people.

As someone called them above - knuckleheads.

How can America get ahead when the people think what they are told to think by media and politicians?

It would have been very easy for a more inspiring speaker to incite a crowd like the one watching Mitt to violence.

Very easy.

That crowd was little more than a mob in suits and fancy dresses.

I still go for Obama. 4 years term's is too short to achieved the promises of any president. Beside the world financial crisis causes many problems and headaches. Whether a country rich or poor. The citizenry will continue to have the wealthy and the poor gap. Not all will be rich but only few have the luck to be rich and wealthy through hard work and LUCK.

sure was, but it was Difficult when you are swimming in a sea of sharks and being opposed at every angle and turn by the opposition.

Yup....that's how the republican congress works, and that's why Obama's progess has been slow

.....oh. sorry...you were talking about Romney weren't you..

@Bass

Obama . . . wants to ban our rights to bear arms,

Where do you pull this nonsense from? There has been no such action from Obama, and no such talk. In fact, it's a mark of Obama's centrism that he has declined to re-introduce common sense regulations on assault weapons (to the chagrin of many to his "left"). Or do you believe the NRA's conspiracy theory that Obama's going to wait until his second term to set up a Stalinist dictatorship?

and...

Either you want Big government that intrudes and involves itself in all aspects of your life or small government that empowers you, lower taxes, personal freedom and doesn't penalize you or your success.

It must be easy to live in a world without nuance. I envy you.

Obama wants to pass judgment on everyone wants to make excuses,

How? Examples??

wants to ban our rights to bear arms, of so, then why not start with his home state, and yes, it has EVERYTHING to do with it as a (so called) role model and a (so called) leader. He shouldn't be a hypocrite, if he wants to limit gun laws, then he needs to look at his home state first. I wasn't talking about what he did in the past, I am talking about that what he can do NOW.

C'mon Bass...as Obama would say, You can't just make things up and expect it to be true!!! This is sooo wrong! First of call US Senators don't write legislation for their own home state or hometown. And as president, he's not suppose to write legislation for his hometown. It just doesn't work that way!! They write, voteon, and pass legislation for the entire country. You obviously don't know how local, state, and federal level government works!

Obama's stance on gun control:

"I – like most Americans – believe that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual the right to bear arms, I think we recognize the traditions of gun ownership passed on from generation to generation, that hunting and shooting are part of a cherished national heritage. But I also believe that a lot of gun owners would agree that AK-47s belong in the hands of soldiers and not in the hands of crooks. They belong on the battlefield of war, not on the streets of our cities."

Doesn't sound like he wants to repeal the second ammendment to me. As a matter of fact, the NRA and over 80% of gun owners agreed with this statement. And this makes him insane? Sounds like the most sane, reasonable, and centerous statement in te world.

" I know you hate Romney so you are really going to hate Gina Rinehart who really tells it like it is:

Let's get through the class warfare smokescreen. We need to regain our roots and encourage people to invest and build. There is no monopoly on becoming a millionaire. If you're jealous of those with more money, don't just sit there and complain; do something to make more money yourself spend less time drinking, or smoking and socializing, and more time working."

That's great and I agree with a lot of it. But, just so the non-Australians know....Gina Rinehart inherited her fortune from Lang Hancock one of the richest men in Australia, and was involved in a 14yr court case with her stepmother over his fortune.

So, it's easier for her than others to say "There is no monopoly on becoming a millionaire."

Are Americans getting stupid! Do they really think that one person can change America and bring it back to full pace as it once was? Too many variables. Like running a car at full throttle 24 hours a day seven days a week for years...Make businesses selling unneeded goods just to make money. All Americans have to change before America can change.

Promises of America sanctioned by the Republicans! The total destruction of the environment all in the name of construction and housing, the reinstitution of slavery and the annhilation of Labor Unions for a worker to get a fair share! The increase of no-holds barred manipulation of the commercial media by those who could afford it to practice tyranny on the citizens who try to live an upstanding life! To manipulate the established laws by lobby efforts and campaign contributions in order to favor the Corporation rather than Joe Consumer!

@Mirai

Obama wants to pass judgment on everyone wants to make excuses, wants to ban our rights to bear arms, of so, then why not start with his home state, and yes, it has EVERYTHING to do with it as a (so called) role model and a (so called) leader. He shouldn't be a hypocrite, if he wants to limit gun laws, then he needs to look at his home state first. I wasn't talking about what he did in the past, I am talking about that what he can do NOW.

Speaking of which, Romney was Governor of Massechusettes, and was 47th out 50 states in job creation. This was ON HIS WATCH...and this is the man who is suppose to create more jobs save the economy?...really? Please explain!

sure was, but it was Difficult when you are swimming in a sea of sharks and being opposed at every angle and turn by the opposition.

The only hope is Change and Change is hard to find -Marco Rubio

It's true 100% or are you implying that Obama is playing with a full deck?

And you're implying he's NOT? How is he crazy? Please eleborate.

But his hometown is Chicago, doesn't mean he can speak out. He'll talk all day about foreign countries and their wars and conflicts, but can't talk about Chicago?? Not buying it!

COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT! He was in the US Senate reperesenting Illinois. He had no control over crime rates in Chicago. Blaming the governor of Illinois or mayor of Chicago for the crimes would have been a more valid argument.

Speaking of which, Romney was Governor of Massechusettes, and was 47th out 50 states in job creation. This was ON HIS WATCH...and this is the man who is suppose to create more jobs save the economy?...really? Please explain!

(grabs popcorn and awaits the regurgitated Fox News rhetoric)

It is just beginning, if you are with Obama, we can still move mountain in solidarity. America is not on sale.

Looks like it's going to be the end quite possibly, that Mountain can't be moved by him, because there are no jobs to get the companies out there to move it. Solidarity is that we as a nation can get out of this financial quagmire that Obama put us in. God bless the US. Now, gotta watch Clint....

bass4funkAug. 31, 2012 - 10:54AM JST

No, bass, you again do not understand what Hayashi is saying. You do not understand Romney's political record. It is beyond my comprehension. I am actually speechless, bass.Check his political records before making such comments.

@Herve

Pretty good points, I agree about 85%

Its funny how republicans like to criticize Chicago. "Obama's Chicago style politics", "Obama -Chicago gangsta", "Obama -the bully from Chicago"....ROTFLMAO

It's true 100% or are you implying that Obama is playing with a full deck?

I don't how Republican's expect to get the respect and the votes of Illinois residents, with all of these degrading rhetoric against the people of Chicago.

It's hard, but we will all manage.

BTW, if you need to blame the "out of control murder rate in Chicago" on someone, blame it on Rahm Emmanual (Chicago mayor) not Obama.

But his hometown is Chicago, doesn't mean he can speak out. He'll talk all day about foreign countries and their wars and conflicts, but can't talk about Chicago?? Not buying it!

It wud Mitt ole boy if you wud be at least kind enough to give even SINGLE example of what you wud want to do as prez..................

Come on were waitin, aint got all day, how about it eh....................... thought not

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0512/76849.html

GOP (ROMNEY/RYAN) RAISED 1 BILLION FOR SUPER PAC MONEY

That total includes previously undisclosed plans for newly aggressive spending by the Koch brothers, who are steering funding to build sophisticated, county-by-county operations in key states. POLITICO has learned that Koch-related organizations plan to spend about $400 million ahead of the 2012 elections - twice what they had been expected to commit

And American Crossroads and the affiliated Crossroads GPS, the groups that Rove and Ed Gillespie helped conceive and raise cash for, are expected to ante up $300 million, giving the two-year-old organization one of the election’s loudest voices.

By contrast, Priorities USA Action, the super PAC supporting President Barack Obama’s reelection, has struggled to raise money, and now hopes to spend about $100 million. Obama’s initial reluctance to embrace such groups constrained fundraising on the Democratic side, which is now trying to make up for lost time.

It is all about money.

The convention is a political advertisement. As I said many times on JT that "America" is on sale. Romney/Ryan are political prostitutes for the Riches. But we, the Middle Class Americans can still try to refuse to be raped.

I will take notes what Romney has to say tonight. I hope you will too.

It is just beginning, if you are with Obama, we can still move mountain in solidarity. America is not on sale.

@Herve Nmn L'Eisa

There are so many things that are inaccurate in your comment, I don't know where to start. First of all, Obama IS NOT a liberal in any sense of the word. He is a self-proclaimed centerous democrat. Many of his positions coincide with the positions of the conservatives in the 1980's. As a matter of fact, Obama is more to the right than Ronald Reagan and George Romney were on MANY issues. Unfortunately, because the republican party are so extreme right, and continually move to the right, the democratic party are seen as being a party of "socialists", and the whole political spectrum has shifted needlessly to the right. So, in some ways, you are correct in that the current democratic party are not progressive enough, hense being very similar to the republican party (policy-wise).

Here's where you are wrong (or misguided to be more accurate):

Conservatives favor Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, farm subsidies, education grants, foreign aid, the drug war, an overseas empire of military bases, the vast military-industrial complex, the CIA, and all the other aspects of the big welfare-warfare state that liberals embrace. The only difference between conservatives and liberals is over the size of all these programs.

Conservatives don't favor ANY of these programs. Their goal is shut them down so they can be taken over by the private sector. Privatized SS, MC, MCD, would be a disaster because a corporation's number one mission is to pull a profit. They are mandated by law to continuously optimize themselves so they can pull profits. If they don't, the CEO gets fired. That's why, contrary to some people's beliefs, corporations are NOT people, my friend; they are mindless, ruthless, emotionless machines tuned to do one thing and one thing only: MAKE MONEY. So, if your mother is unable to get medication and is dying, don't expect a corporate controlled health care program to be compasionate, step in, and help her. They'll only do what's in their best interests and that is to MAKE MONEY.

Obama's health care program (although very far from being perfect or the solution to end all sickness and big pharma corruption) is still a step in the right direction. Japan has a pretty successful public health care program, as well as other European and Asian countries. The US is suppose to lead in these areas, and they don't; they trail far behind. I believe the last number was 37th in the world in health care, which is pretty poor. Costa Rica and Cuba even has a successful universal health care system. The best thing to have done (or do in the future -hopefully) is to add a public option (or a government ran health insurance company -as Japan does) to keep these private insurance companies honest and prevent them from over charging or dropping coverage due to illness or pre-existing conditions.

Finally, the dems don't favor "big" government. This is what the republicans want you think to scare you into thinking we're moving to an Orwellian society. In reality, they are the ones who faver big government, but that's another post. The dems believe in government where government is needed (police depts, hospitals, fire depts, schools, health care, public transportation, post offices, defense, etc). Make sense right? However, if given the opportunity, the republicans would find some way to privatize all of it. Can you imagine a privatized police or fire department? Well its happening believe it or not. There have been incidents where a privatized fire department didn't put out a fire on a buring home, because the owners didn't pay their fire protection bill.

So yeah, far from perfect. Two party political system does suck, but until we can grow a more progessively thinking political party, we are stuck with choosing the lesser of two evils. But completely equating them is not accurate...you have to examine where each party really stands,and where each politician stands.

"Come on people, wake up! Both candidates are nearly identical, just with slightly different rhetoric."

Herve, if the Republicans take both the presidency and the senate, you will quickly see the differences, and it will be like a slap in the face to most people. Who will reign in the far right? Mitt Romney? Mitch McConnell? John Boehner?

Bass4funk

Big government that intrudes and involves itself in all aspects of your life

Your fun damentalist republican want to tell you: who you can marry, when rape is legitimate, what marriage is. Big government is scary but religious nutters like the ones Mitt cohorts with are dangerous.

semperfi

Given Romneys PROVEN genuine success at daunting taks of shoring up floundering enterprises - like the Winter Olympics, - he is the FAR BETTER CHOICE ...........................

He used public money for that but said that GM should fold. GM which is making a profit and owes the American tax payers nothing( they paid back the bail out money). Salt Lake Olympics still owes the tax payers 600 million. Where do you get your facts from?

Come on people, wake up! Both candidates are nearly identical, just with slightly different rhetoric.

To quote FFF: One of the favorite mantras of conservatives is “We favor small government.” As the conservative Wall Street Journal put it, “Rep. Paul Ryan took the national political stage Wednesday as the Republican Party’s vice presidential candidate, giving a televised speech that laid out one of the GOP’s sharpest cases yet … for Republicans as the party of small government. ” The liberal Washington Post echoed the sentiment: “Representative Paul Ryan … accepted the Republican vice-presidential nomination … as his party embraced the gamble that the small-government principles he represents have more political payoff than peril.”

What exactly do conservatives mean by “small government”? What they mean by the term is simply that they embrace all the socialist, interventionist, and imperialist programs of the liberals albeit in a reduced size.

Conservatives favor Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, farm subsidies, education grants, foreign aid, the drug war, an overseas empire of military bases, the vast military-industrial complex, the CIA, and all the other aspects of the big welfare-warfare state that liberals embrace. The only difference between conservatives and liberals is over the size of all these programs. Conservatives say they want to downsize them (in actuality they usually vote to expand them) while liberals want to grow them.

To put it another way, liberals favor big statism while conservatives favor small statism. But the important point to recognize here is that they both ardently embrace a statist philosophy."

Romney is starting to make Japanese politicians look like saints; the guy makes extremely large boasts and promises but fails every time to say HOW he's going to realize them. Any monkey can go in and say they're going to 'save the world' and 'bring about peace and a stable economy' or what have you without a plan or intent of doing so. Let me guess... he promises to explain how he's going to do it all after being elected?

or how about the out of control murder rate in Chicago.

Its funny how republicans like to criticize Chicago. "Obama's Chicago style politics", "Obama -Chicago gangsta", "Obama -the bully from Chicago"....ROTFLMAO

I don't how Republican's expect to get the respect and the votes of Illinois residents, with all of these degrading rhetoric against the people of Chicago.

BTW, if you need to blame the "out of control murder rate in Chicago" on someone, blame it on Rahm Emmanual (Chicago mayor) not Obama.

President Obama's priorities are for all of the people. Not just the 1%, the birthers, bigots and misogynists.

Well all you liberal whining posters out there I know you hate Romney so you are really going to hate Gina Rinehart who really tells it like it is:

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/gina-rinehart-tells-people-to-drink-less-work-more-2012-8#ixzz253nn6MUv

Here is a quote since most of you are too busy swimming in your self-righteous ether:

Let's get through the class warfare smokescreen. We need to regain our roots and encourage people to invest and build. There is no monopoly on becoming a millionaire. If you're jealous of those with more money, don't just sit there and complain; do something to make more money yourself spend less time drinking, or smoking and socializing, and more time working. Become one of those people who work hard, invest and build, and at the same time create employment and opportunities for others. Australia needs such people. AND BY THE WAY America does, too (my addition)

Hey, I'm deeply proud to be an American, just ain't proud of our President and I want to be proud of our Candidate, so I hope Romney can make me prouder than I already am. Other than that, wouldn't want to trade places with anyone. As I said before, I don't trust ANY politician, but this election is a serious turning point for us. Either you want Big government that intrudes and involves itself in all aspects of your life or small government that empowers you, lower taxes, personal freedom and doesn't penalize you or your success.

The wealthy are jumping up and down in their seats.

The headline should be: Romney tells knuckleheads what they want to hear.

Given Romneys PROVEN genuine success at daunting taks of shoring up floundering enterprises - like the Winter Olympics, - he is the FAR BETTER CHOICE ...........................

stripping companies down, retrenching the majority of staff, giving huge payouts to the executives (the 1%) and then relisting the company on the stock exchange for his own profit and benefit is a skill that America needs... just wait till he applies the same theory to the whole country and see what the jobless queues look like then.....

Obama?

Or Romney?

That's it?

That's the choice?

I'm glad I'm not American.

@El

Maybe you should be throwing your frustrations that the unemployment rate for Blacks is 14.4% in CA and 11% for Hispanics and you don't think anything is wrong with that? Are they not hard working and yet, they are suffering under this President or how about the out of control murder rate in Chicago. Obama is the one keeping people down, especially minorities, so I think you are a bit misguided. Ani-business, Obama should be and go back where he came from, working in a Law office or in some university and giving speeches, that would be the best for him. Governing is just not his thing.

Not only USA - but most countries if one looks around - are experiencing (social/ exonomic ) upheavals .................... Given Romneys PROVEN genuine success at daunting taks of shoring up floundering enterprises - like the Winter Olympics, - he is the FAR BETTER CHOICE ........................... under Obama, rather than the HOPE he promised there is a growing HOPELESNESS - and an almosrt surreptitious systematic undermining of the American way.

Not sure who can do the job to restore America 100% and get it back on track, but 4 more years of the current President will erode America into an unrecoverable abyss.

Which promise?? To which America?? Let me guess, filthy rich greedy bastards like Romney want to keep the promise of screwing the hard working men and women of America and to keep the rich greedy bastards richer and richer?? Keep the poor and working poor like slaves?? Nice promise Mitt! Go to hell! If Mormons do believe in it, not too sure.

The American dream means that you reap the rewards of your hard work, not you work 10x harder and still recieve a barren field. I prefer to work smart, not hard.

The promise of government in the bedroom telling people who and when and how they can live their lives. Fundamentalist conservatism is scary. Obama or Romney? Better the devil you know without the secret past.

Yeah... RIGHT.