Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
@harmonus
First off thank you. But you missed my favotie romney thing he wants to be tough on china about holding dowm the yens value.
Do we know what loop.holes or how many?
Are not the policies the same that got us into this mess?
What about the environment? Will he push for wind and solar as long with american oil?
Obama has high approvL ratings over seas. We even have the support of the un and nato.
We still have isrealies back
Beyind that our allies have our back.
You're welcome, and thanks for the frubals.Frubals thanks
I think we can boil things down to whether or not you believe Romney when he spoke.He won't because he has millions invested in companies that he/Bain have overseas. SENSATA is a very, very profitable company here in the US. Bain owns 51% of the company. Romney has $8 MILLION invested in the company. The company will be closing here in the US on Nov. 5th and shipping everything (outsourcing) to China with cheap labor and selling the products back to the US. When this highly profitable US company closes and moves to China Romney stands to make millions. How can a man "get tough on China" if he stands to make residual income using cheap Chinese labor and selling made in China products back to the US?
No. Look out for many of the social programs etc. to take a hit.
Yes. Deregulate, repeal, overturn and issue massive drilling permits.
He says he will. At least that's the story he going with this month. Try here: Romney Would Not Leave Wind Energy to Dangle - Forbes
Yes. A recent worldwide survey was conducted and out of 21/22 countries all except Pakistan favored President Obama.
And they still have ours: Israeli Defense Minister Again Praises U.S.-Israeli Security Relationship | ThinkProgress
True...
Yeah, pretty much. My question boils down to why you're willing to believe him at all. He's an unrepentent liar, the most recent example being the auto ads debacle.I think we can boil things down to whether or not you believe Romney when he spoke.
During the debates, Romney said what I said about him. Obama said what you said about Romney.
I'm willing to believe Romney. Apparently, you are not.
Despite the whiff of a double standard, I'd say that Obama was ethical in not suspendingNot sure what you are saying or implying. During the 2008 campaign didn't Senator McCain want to suspend the campaigning so he could work with Congress on the fiscal issue. Also, I believe that Senator McCain wanted to reschedule the Presidential debate that was to occur on Sept 26 2008, but Obama wouldn't agree to it.
I've seen no evidence of this.Yeah, pretty much. My question boils down to why you're willing to believe him at all. He's an unrepentent liar,
the most recent example being the auto ads debacle.
I just gave you an example.I've seen no evidence of this.
I'm sorry, but the first example to spring to mind is "half the green energy businesses you invested in went out of business. Calling 8% "half" is not a slight exaggeration, it's a lie.The facts-check that called him out said that, at worst, he exaggerated a bit. Obama didn't actually deride the US on his "apology tour," but he also didn't make America look good on that tour.
Perhaps you should, or at least read up on what's being said. Romney claimed Jeep planned to move all its manufacturing jobs to China. Chrysler said otherwise, pointing plans to actually increase their manufacturing jobs in the US by over 1,000 positions, but Romney keeps running the ad and spouting the falsehood. He then started saying the same thing about General Motors, who denies the charge just as strongly. That's the most recent example.I haven't seen these ads. (I don't watch much television.)
I didn't bring up Obama. As for your examples, What did he say about the response time, and how did it differ from fact? What plans does Romney have that are remotely believable now, because I've been looking for them and haven't a clue. "Many things" is way too vague for me to address.Obama himself is an unrepentant liar. I've followed the facts-checks, and HE made up "facts" all over the place. He did use a few real facts, but he lied about response time to Osama bin Ladin being found. He lied about Romney not having plans. He lied about many things.
However, I hoped to be able to stick to speaking about Romney's strengths, rather than focusing on Obama's weaknesses.
It wasn't to be
@dirty penguin. Then why would tough on china and forcing china to play fair be romneyz big talking point.
Because "getting tough" on a foreign nation is something Americans love. You know...like when Romney said he'd like to try Ahmedenajhad as a war criminal or getting tough with Puttin. I mean really...!!! Fear and war mongering gets the base voters riled up.He brought it up over and over again. No one made him go their its his own.idea.and he seems passionate about it.
Correct and it's obvious considering both Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan agree, overall, with the way the President is handing foreign policy.And yeah obama is def best choice foreign policy wise
You mind giving us references that actually back this up?
Harm make a.new thread? Since we are derailing this one. Link me i have lots of questions and a couple of positives.
WOW....!!!!.....That dude is low...
First of all, he intends to make America energy independent. Using things like the Keystone Pipeline, drilling for oil, mining for coal, taking advantage of our homegrown renewable energy resources, and things like that will make America strong on local resources. Also, every one of those resources requires people to collect, produce, deliver, and sell the energy, so it would be supporting making more jobs, indirectly. That's always useful.....
Becoming fossil-fuel dependent is NOT being energy-independent. A "business friendly administration" that encourages more fossil fuel use instead of making a timely conversion to alternatives while we have the means and time condemns us to either a desperate last-decade attempt to turn things around or to a hot, stormy world where all the capital formation won't do anyone any good...because the corn belt has burned up.
You might want to take a gander at the Opening Post.
You missed the line you quoted of mine about taking advantage of our homegrown renewable energy resources. You know... Solar power, wind power, water power... That is part of Romney's plan. He mentioned it in all three debates. Only you seemed to miss it.
But as long as we are using fossil fuel, we might as well use domestically produced fossil fuel, as opposed to relying on foreign oil.
Romney would cut all tax credits for wind and eliminate federal assistance for renewable energy projects. He would keep the $4 billion dollars a year in tax breaks and outright federal subsidies to oil. This is one of the reasons Obama said he shows a disdain for green energy.
Face it Rev, Romney can do no good. All his actions are sinister and have ulterior motives. And there is no convincing the posters here otherwise.
To give but one example, there is a Bermuda-based entity called Sankaty High Yield Asset Investors Ltd., which has been described in securities filings as “a Bermuda corporation wholly owned by W. Mitt Romney.” It could be that Sankaty is an old vehicle with little importance, but Romney appears to have treated it rather carefully. He set it up in 1997, then transferred it to his wife’s newly created blind trust on January 1, 2003, the day before he was inaugurated as Massachusetts’s governor...
Solamere Capital—named after an exclusive neighborhood in Utah where the family had a vacation home—was incorporated in February of 2008, only weeks after the campaign ended. Its first office address was the Romney campaign headquarters in Boston’s North End. One of its first big commitments was $10 million from Ann Romney’s blind trust... According to a copy of the Solamere prospectus that The Boston Globe obtained, they promised “unique access” to lucrative deals that the partners would land thanks to their “close personal and business relationships.”