Log In Register

Mitt Romney Marijuana Views Echo Long Progressive History Of U.S. Drug War

  • Thread starter Thread starter liketosmoke
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

Mitt Romney Marijuana Views Echo Long Progressive History Of U.S. Drug War

liketosmoke 221 Replies 17,598 Views
Page 4 of 12 · Replies 61–80 of 222
Like I said... If it's "Dick Chicken Soup" throw it out, Time for A new recipe instead of trying to "cover up" that awful taste with A little sugar and spice.

Totally agree. I think I've heard way more "new" suggestions from Obama than I have from republicans. Their ideas are as old (if not older) than the person who last made them famous (Ayn Rand). I realize that's a very buzz wordy thing to say, as its the hot topic right now; but, its true. Ayn rand has long be known to be a "gateway drug" to conservatism as probably the most famous proponent of Laissez-faire economics.

The main reason you're seeing ANY fiscal conservative voting for Obama (and there are quite a few who will) is because they, also like Ayn Rand, view fundamentalism and religion as a plague on politics--regardless of their worth to the soul (if any--Ayn thought none, she hated religion).

We've already been operating under a mostly conservative legal code in most of the country for the last 60 years at least. Now we are fiscally more conservative than ever and we have been so since well before the crash.

What the hell is new about anything Romeny and co. have to say? Or I should say "likely have to say" because they've been careful not to speak a single breath of specifics on their economic plans.
 
Totally agree. I think I've heard way more "new" suggestions from Obama than I have from republicans. Their ideas are as old (if not older) than the person who last made them famous (Ayn Rand). I realize that's a very buzz wordy thing to say, as its the hot topic right now; but, its true. Ayn rand has long be known to be a "gateway drug" to conservatism as probably the most famous proponent of Laissez-faire economics.

The main reason you're seeing ANY fiscal conservative voting for Obama (and there are quite a few who will) is because they, also like Ayn Rand, view fundamentalism and religion as a plague on politics--regardless of their worth to the soul (if any--Ayn thought none, she hated religion).

We've already been operating under a mostly conservative legal code in most of the country for the last 60 years at least. Now we are fiscally more conservative than ever and we have been so since well before the crash.

What the hell is new about anything Romeny and co. have to say? Or I should say "likely have to say" because they've been careful not to speak a single breath of specifics on their economic plans.
 
I doubt we will see anything specific come out of the Romney camp. I find the news hilarious in that all the pundits seemed to have their response to the speaker of the night before the speech. The conservatives always give the same talking points regardless of reality, its interesting though as times like last night when Clint Eastwood made such an ass out of himself that even the right wing pundits are having a difficult time running away from the reality. What bothers me the most about the conservative idealism is that it is rarely defined nor defended and turns into a belief for most out of convenience to not have any critical thinking/reasoning for their policies, hence the very easy way of changing policies, i.e., medicare. The Republicans and Ryan specifically have been attempting to dismantle medicare forever, and now they are accusing of Obama of doing what they are the architect masters of.....bothersome to say the least.
 
They are targeting ignorant voters--and that is the most reprehensible thing possible. To depend on the votes that come from people who are the least informed on whats best for the country.
 
Totally agree. I think I've heard way more "new" suggestions from Obama than I have from republicans. Their ideas are as old (if not older) than the person who last made them famous (Ayn Rand). I realize that's a very buzz wordy thing to say, as its the hot topic right now; but, its true. Ayn rand has long be known to be a "gateway drug" to conservatism as probably the most famous proponent of Laissez-faire economics.

The main reason you're seeing ANY fiscal conservative voting for Obama (and there are quite a few who will) is because they, also like Ayn Rand, view fundamentalism and religion as a plague on politics--regardless of their worth to the soul (if any--Ayn thought none, she hated religion).

We've already been operating under a mostly conservative legal code in most of the country for the last 60 years at least. Now we are fiscally more conservative than ever and we have been so since well before the crash.

What the hell is new about anything Romeny and co. have to say? Or I should say "likely have to say" because they've been careful not to speak a single breath of specifics on their economic plans.

Point taken, all I can say to that is when did Obama ever explain in great detail how or what he was going to do. He just does it. Remember the Helth Care Act, Have to pass it to know what's in it is the first of many things that come to mind. What if I told you you have to by my car or house or whatever I have for sale before you can know anything about it? Would you buy that bullshit line for one minute, Hell No you wouldn't. Why do we expect detailed step by step instructions from everyone else? Does everyone else have to be held to A higher standard than Obama? All Obama had to say about his detailed plan was "Hope and Change" to get in office and everyone bought it. Are the standards higher now to the point we need exact instructions of what people propose to change? He hasn't even proposed any type of plan after that let alone A budget. Like someone said earlier, you run A household or A business with Zero Budget and you might as well pre file for bankruptcy. Is that the way you or your family would run you household or business? Spend untill it's gone and borrow and beg so you can pay the bills that you missed because you blew your wad before takin care of business? Go deeper in debt to keep your home or business when you know beyond A shadow of A dobt you will loose it all if you don't quit wrecklessly spending money that you borrow to pay for your wastefull spending? All I can say is Romney isn't Bush any more than Obama is Jimmy Carter. You are not your brother or father and what you do is not what they do. If your brother gets A trophy, Does that make you great? If he failed at A job He had are you destined to fail? All great ideas don't come from democrats or Obama believe it or not. One point of view will only accomplish the same end result Squiggs...
 
I doubt we will see anything specific come out of the Romney camp. I find the news hilarious in that all the pundits seemed to have their response to the speaker of the night before the speech. The conservatives always give the same talking points regardless of reality, its interesting though as times like last night when Clint Eastwood made such an ass out of himself that even the right wing pundits are having a difficult time running away from the reality. What bothers me the most about the conservative idealism is that it is rarely defined nor defended and turns into a belief for most out of convenience to not have any critical thinking/reasoning for their policies, hence the very easy way of changing policies, i.e., medicare. The Republicans and Ryan specifically have been attempting to dismantle medicare forever, and now they are accusing of Obama of doing what they are the architect masters of.....bothersome to say the least.
I dont think Ryan was responsible for siphoning 730 billion out of medicare for any of his proposed plans... That's all their is to say about that. Fact is Fact.
 
I dont think Ryan was responsible for siphoning 730 billion out of medicare for any of his proposed plans... That's all their is to say about that. Fact is Fact.
No YOU are absolutely wrong. All of Ryans plans used the same deduction from medicare....if you like I can post many different sources or you can simply google it on your own, oh shit here is one for you:
 
I dont think Ryan was responsible for siphoning 730 billion out of medicare for any of his proposed plans... That's all their is to say about that. Fact is Fact.

I see you didn't read the link I posted.

I'll paste an excerpt here (this is from FOX News mind you):

I bolded the important parts the red section is specifically for you Socal.

2. Deceiving

On the other hand, to anyone paying the slightest bit of attention to facts, Ryan’s speech was an apparent attempt to set the world record for the greatest number of blatant lies and misrepresentations slipped into a single political speech. On this measure, while it was Romney who ran the Olympics, Ryan earned the gold.

The good news is that the Romney-Ryan campaign has likely created dozens of new jobs among the legions of additional fact checkers that media outlets are rushing to hire to sift through the mountain of cow dung that flowed from Ryan’s mouth. Said fact checkers have already condemned certain arguments that Ryan still irresponsibly repeated.

Fact: While Ryan tried to pin the downgrade of the United States’ credit rating on spending under President Obama, the credit rating was actually downgraded because Republicans threatened not to raise the debt ceiling.

Fact: While Ryan blamed President Obama for the shut down of a GM plant in Janesville, Wisconsin, the plant was actually closed under President George W. Bush. Ryan actually asked for federal spending to save the plant, while Romney has criticized the auto industry bailout that President Obama ultimately enacted to prevent other plants from closing.

Fact: Though Ryan insisted that President Obama wants to give all the credit for private sector success to government, that isn't what the president said. Period.

Fact: Though Paul Ryan accused President Obama of taking $716 billion out of Medicare, the fact is that that amount was savings in Medicare reimbursement rates (which, incidentally, save Medicare recipients out-of-pocket costs, too) and Ryan himself embraced these savings in his budget plan.

Elections should be about competing based on your record in the past and your vision for the future, not competing to see who can get away with the most lies and distortions without voters noticing or bother to care. Both parties should hold themselves to that standard. Republicans should be ashamed that there was even one misrepresentation in Ryan’s speech but sadly, there were many.

3. Distracting

And then there’s what Ryan didn’t talk about.

Ryan didn’t mention his extremist stance on banning all abortions with no exception for rape or incest, a stance that is out of touch with 75% of American voters.

Ryan didn’t mention his previous plan to hand over Social Security to Wall Street.

Ryan didn’t mention his numerous votes to raise spending and balloon the deficit when George W. Bush was president.

Ryan didn’t mention how his budget would eviscerate programs that help the poor and raise taxes on 95% of Americans in order to cut taxes for millionaires and billionaires even further and increase — yes, increase —the deficit.

These aspects of Ryan’s resume and ideology are sticky to say the least. He would have been wise to tackle them head on and try and explain them away in his first real introduction to voters. But instead of Ryan airing his own dirty laundry, Democrats will get the chance.

At the end of his speech, Ryan quoted his dad, who used to say to him, “"Son. You have a choice: You can be part of the problem, or you can be part of the solution."

Ryan may have helped solve some of the likeability problems facing Romney, but ultimately by trying to deceive voters about basic facts and trying to distract voters from his own record, Ryan’s speech caused a much larger problem for himself and his running mate.

END ARTICLE

Hope that clears things up a bit.
 
Ryan or the republican party for that mater isn't responsible for side stepping congress to pass A law to suit their own agenda or Obama and his cronnies would be moaning about that to. He has no Plan, He had -0- business experence, always worked in politics, that is A fact. What kind of resume' is that. Nothing to brag about in my opinion. I have no experence in business what so ever, I'll just wing it if thats ok. That wouldn't even land you A job in Obama land, you have to admit. Obama and politicians are the one percent
 
The bottom line is the Obama adiministration has pulled 730billion from medicare to fund ObamaCare. That is A fact that can not be denied, Obama himself has confirmed this.
 
Peace, Out... Blue Man Group. I know how this goes, been here before.
 
who side stepped congress? How does that happen? Facts please, which I have never really seen any from you. Adios muchacho!
 
The bottom line is the Obama adiministration has pulled 730billion from medicare to fund ObamaCare. That is A fact that can not be denied, Obama himself has confirmed this.

Fact: Though Paul Ryan accused President Obama of taking $716 billion out of Medicare, the fact is that that amount was SAVINGS in Medicare reimbursement rates (which, incidentally, save Medicare recipients out-of-pocket costs, too) and Ryan himself embraced these savings in his budget plan.
I don't know if I can clarify that any further.

The above is not only a matter of fact and a matter of record, it is a matter of law.

That is what that sum refers to, and any insistence to the contrary is willful blindness to irrevocable facts.
 
who side stepped congress? How does that happen? Facts please, which I have never really seen any from you. Adios muchacho!

I think he's talking about that, you know, common practice used by nearly every presidency in the past 50 years (and used extensively by GOP presidents)--that was used to make the senate/house financial numbers match without a vote such that Obamacare could pass the obstructionist GOP filibuster after Ted Kennedy died losing the dems a supermajority.

What was done there is common practice, that he believes it is not betrays his devotion to fox news or the opinions of people who hold it in high esteem. The only people who report badly on that practice were conservative media groups, and all of them neglected to mention the extensive use of the same practice by the GOP.
 
There are people here that post their opinions and then back it with A little bullshit from here and there and claim their opinions to be fact. I tend to dismiss their oppinions because they have little or nothing in the way of political or business experence. If these people are the all powerfull and knowing of everything healthcare and government, medical business and medicare, why are they here instead of out saving our world... Go figure.
I tend to trust the opinions of people that back their statements with validated facts not hearsay...

You wouldn’t know it from listening to the Obama campaign, but there’s only one Presidential candidate in 2012 who has cut Medicare, Barack Obama, whose Affordable Care Act cuts Medicare by 716 Billion from 2013-2022. Today, the Romney campaign reiterated its pledge to repeal Obamacare, and promised to “restore the funding to Medicare [and] ensure that no changes are made to the program for those 55 and older.
It’s an important point of policy clarity. Left-of-center writers, such as Ezra Klein of the Washington Post, accurately points out that Paul Ryan’s 2011 and 2012 budgets repeal Obamacare while preserving Obama’s cuts to Medicare. “The difference between the two campaigns is not in how much they cut Medicare,” he writes, “but in how they cut Medicare.”
When it comes to comparing Obamacare to the Ryan plans, Ezra is right. I’ve long argued the same thing: that the way to understand the difference between Ryancare and Obamacare is not in the scale of the cuts to Medicare, which are roughly similar, but in the competingmechanisms used in reform.
Obamacare emphasizes government control and central planning. The law empowers a panel of 15 unelected government officials, called the Independent Payment Advisory Board, to make changes to the Medicare program that will reduce Medicare spending: primarily paying doctors and hospitals less, as is done with the Medicaid program. Over time, liberal health-policy types hope that IPAB can be used tointroduce rationing into Medicare, using the panel to determine what types of procedures and treatments that Medicare will and will not pay for.
The Wyden-Ryan Plan, co-authored by liberal Sen. Ron Wyden (D., Ore.) and Paul Ryan, preserves the Obamacare targets for future Medicare spending, but employs an entirely different mechanism: premium support and competitive bidding. Seniors would enjoy exactly the same benefits that they do now, but along with the traditional Medicare program, they would enjoy the option of choosing among a selection of government-approved private insurance plans.
House Republicans, led by Paul Ryan, passed something very similar to Wyden-Ryan in their 2012 budget. One notable difference are that the GOP budget targets Medicare growth of GDP plus 0.5 percent, just as the FY 2013 Obama budget does. (Wyden-Ryan targeted GDP plus 1 percent.) Importantly, as I noted above, the GOP budget repeals Obamacare, but preserves that law’s Medicare cuts.
However, as Romney noted in his 60 Minutes interview over the weekend, his plan and Ryan’s plan are not identical. In response to a question about the Ryan budget, Romney responded, “I have my budget plan, as you know, that I’ve put out. And that’s the budget plan we’re going to run on.”
And the Romney campaign has explicitly stated that it will not preserve Obamacare’s cuts to Medicare. “Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan have always been fully committed to repealing Obamacare, ending President Obama’s $716 billion raid on Medicare, and tackling the serious fiscal challenges our country faces,” said Romney policy director Lanhee Chen in a Monday statement. “A Romney-Ryan Administration will restore the funding to Medicare, ensure that no changes are made to the program for those 55 or older, and implement the reforms that they have proposed to strengthen it for future generations.

So there it is in A nut shell. Now The Blue Man Group will go Blah, Blah, Blah, Zip zap zippity do dah, yada yada yada, and they will spout what they are trained to belive within their narrow field of vission with their oh so better than thou blue sunglasses on. :cool:

I am not supprised nor do I have any belief in your reality what so ever... Have A Good One Blue Man Group ;)
 
You're totally right dude.

Ryan and Romney can pull money out of thin air that doesn't exist without printing any more and whilst reducing taxes.

Math and object permanence are both irrelevant.

Or maybe you're coming at this from a quantum possibilities perspective. Because everything has an equal chance to happen, eventually everything, including crazy outlandish things, that can happen will happen. A flimsy theoretical position to take, but an interesting one.

Bravo on your bravery to look the truth in the face and change it.

Like the republican slogan at the RNC the other night, "We can change it."

You sure can, you can change the meaning of words and the properties of reality. Been selling that angle for the last 12 years pretty consistently I'd say.
 
Don't get me wrong I like Obama, He provides me with endless amounts of comedy, He just isn't the right guy for the Job... Not that Romney is perfect, but the guy has skill reguardless of what you or any one else says. If I were to seek advice on self made wealth I would speak with him before Obama any day. If you had 200 million in net assets vs Obama's few, who would you bet is in it for the money and perks?

Obama fart
Obama dogs
Obama caddy job
Biden obama 57 states
Biden obama china white house
Cheney biden hunting
Pelosi penis
 
Just for the record, as I have stated before, I have never voted Republican nor Democrat either for that matter... "None of the Above" has voting power in larger numbers than both parties mentioned above just not organized enough yet. The number of people that refuse to define themselves via. party affiliation far surpass Dem or Rep voting power they just haven't provided A strong enough candidate to tap into the shear volume of people sick of the same old bullshit that could win an election decisively via their numbers
 
You're totally right dude.

Ryan and Romney can pull money out of thin air that doesn't exist without printing any more and whilst reducing taxes.

Math and object permanence are both irrelevant.

Or maybe you're coming at this from a quantum possibilities perspective. Because everything has an equal chance to happen, eventually everything, including crazy outlandish things, that can happen will happen. A flimsy theoretical position to take, but an interesting one.

Bravo on your bravery to look the truth in the face and change it.

Like the republican slogan at the RNC the other night, "We can change it."

You sure can, you can change the meaning of words and the properties of reality. Been selling that angle for the last 12 years pretty consistently I'd say.

Quantum Possibilities Perspective... I guess you could call it that, I just call it A budget. Ever hear of one? Every administration has opperated within one (or attempted to) untill now. Its when you subtract the cost of opperation , Bussiness, Home, Government, basicly the same just larger numbers vs. net income / Tax Revenue. Pretty simple, tells you if you need to trim the pork or have money to burn. Grade school kids can do it on calculators but big government can't? Give me A break. The money is there, It's being mismanaged. Tax more and spend more is not the correct answer.
 
pot isn't even in my presidential candidates pros and cons, actually i don't really have a list, well i kinda do and in the pros for obama is he isn't mitt, how could we let a mormon lead us? i mean come on, have you heard how the book or mormon was written? he actually believes that, i thinks maybe joseph smith at some magic mushrooms when he wrote that shit. ned i say anymore?
 
Page 4 of 12 · Replies 61–80 of 222
Back
Top Bottom