Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

News & Politics News & Politics

 "I just don't know how the president could have come into office, facing 23 million people out of work, rising unemployment, an economic crisis at the -- at the kitchen table, and spend his energy and passion for two years fighting for Obamacare instead of fighting for jobs for the American people. It has killed jobs."

 --Mitt Romney, Oct 3 Presidential Debate

This statement resonates.

 

 

by on Oct. 6, 2012 at 8:42 AM
Replies (21-30):
Meadowchik
by Gold Member on Oct. 7, 2012 at 1:57 PM
1 mom liked this

 I get that Romney does not resonate with you, but this "changes with the wind stuff" is empty and meaningless, IMO.  Romney is far more consistent than you imply.  Obama has seemed to "tell people what they want to hear" enough times, changed his mind, apologized. 

Obama may be middle-of-the-road, but his competance is also middling.  Do you agree that economic growth is the basis for climbing out of the fiscal hole the US has dug for itself? 

Quoting Sisteract:

And to sports- How can you support a man who changes{or tailors} his stance, opinion, plan, wording, beliefs depending on the audience being addressed?

Does that convey honesty?

Does that inspire confidence?

How would that work on a foreign stage?

How do you integrate his latest revelation, that he was wrong about the 47%?

 

The most pressing social issue today is the economy

Visit Mitt Romney for President, CafeMom Group

7SportsMom7
by Bronze Member on Oct. 7, 2012 at 2:06 PM
1 mom liked this

Thanks for the explanation ... I do want to understand where you are coming from.  I also had hoped we would have had a better candidate than Romney; however, I believe that politics has become so ugly no one in their right mind would want to play this game.  Thus, the need to break apart the two party system and change things ... but as I said before, it's too late to help in this election.

I believe you also live in CA ... I couldn't be more disgusted about politics than I am about it here .  I hear nothing but complaints, our state is practically bankrupt and we still elect a legistlature that is failing us.  So many businesses leaving, so many entitlements, so much union power ... we will be moving as soon as my youngest graduates (he's a sophomore).  When I had a friend who works in Corrections tell me, "nobody is more red than me but I have to vote Democrat to keep the benefits for my job" I knew it was time to go.  Change cannot occur with a mentality like that.

I understand your "one is bad, the other is worse" comment.  I just feel the opposite.  IMO, nothing can be worse than Obama has been and the more I learn about Romney, I am giving him the benefit of the doubt that he really is a man willing to serve based on his own successes and faith.  

Quoting Sisteract:

Earlier in this thread I clearly disagreed with BO's 2010 priorities in terms of the ACA- wrong plan, wrong time.

We all know BOs failings- being too Bush like- continuing down that same path.

The GOP participants on this forum have been complaining ad nauseum for 3 years- and then they nominate a chameleon retread. WHY?

How come the GOP can not hone a decent candidate? Yes, it does anger me- then we end up with the same BS.

BO is a puppet and he is a corporatist, but down deep, IMO, he presents as more middle of the road. They are the same in terms of how they would be manipulated by their fancy donors...and the rest be darned.

One is bad, the other is worse.

I do understand that some are party only or single issue voters. I do not get that approach- and I doubt those folks understand those of us who are bold enough to say NO to both.

BO is old news- MR was suppose to be better- the onus is on MR to prove that he is better, so far that is a fail, IMO-


Quoting 7SportsMom7:

It is interesting how you comment so admantly against Romney on a regular basis.  How do you you know such?  And why only against Romney?  You have presented yourself on CM as a third party voter, which I respect.  Do you disrespect Romney and his policies so much because he comes from the party that failed you?   Why not, in your effort to educate us on a third party vote, is it only Romney you always disagree with and not Obama as well?  Your motivation behind your comments is just very interesting to me.

Quoting Sisteract:

And he will do nothing about it if elected.  It will not be a priority-

Quoting Meadowchik:

 

Quoting JakeandEmmasMom:

 It is a great soundbite.  It isn't exactly true.  It indicates that he did that at the exclusion of jobs.  He did try to create jobs.  It's just that the "shovel ready" jobs are only now coming to fruition.  All of us that have a lot of road construction going on in our states right now?  That's where those jobs came from.  They took a lot longer to go through the local and state bureaucracies than we were led to believe.  This is going to be a long slog.  Anyone who thinks that Romney has some secret magic wand that he is going to wave and *poof* there will suddenly be all of these jobs is fooling herself.

Romney gave concrete reasons for why the ACA ran counter to jobs: it hindered job growth, he discussed business uncertain about their abilities to pay under the new law, for instance. 





Meadowchik
by Gold Member on Oct. 7, 2012 at 2:07 PM
1 mom liked this

 So why did not Obama focus on Simpson Bowles, why are not the reforms passed already?  It is true that government can multitask, but it is also true that time, resources, and, perhaps most of all, political capital, is limited.  Also, there are some things that are mutually exclusive.  Romney specifically said that Obamacare policies and taxes are hindering business growth and jobs.  In other words, the way that Obama did Obamacare ran contrary to other goals which should have taken atleast equal or greater priority.

Quoting shimamab:

Agree. This fallacious argument, used by both parties against each other, that only one thing can be accomplished at a time, drives me nuts. Bills of all sorts are worked on by many diff committees and introduced/voted on regarding all aspects of our society in each session. If the pres is taking heat for only doing one thing at a time, what does that say about all of congress' ability to multitask?

Quoting JakeandEmmasMom:

 It is a great soundbite.  It isn't exactly true.  It indicates that he did that at the exclusion of jobs.  He did try to create jobs.  It's just that the "shovel ready" jobs are only now coming to fruition.  All of us that have a lot of road construction going on in our states right now?  That's where those jobs came from.  They took a lot longer to go through the local and state bureaucracies than we were led to believe.  This is going to be a long slog.  Anyone who thinks that Romney has some secret magic wand that he is going to wave and *poof* there will suddenly be all of these jobs is fooling herself.

 

The most pressing social issue today is the economy

Visit Mitt Romney for President, CafeMom Group

shimamab
by on Oct. 7, 2012 at 2:17 PM
Is all of congress lined up and ready to implement Simpson Bowles? Cuz last I heard, the commission itself didn't even agree on all aspects. Just because "Romney says" Obamacare is hindering job creation doesn't make it true. I'm sure there are aspects of it that are job inhibiting...that law is a beast filled with waaaay too much info and regs to muddle through. But the focus of govt, especially when it comes to the health of its citizens, can't only be job creation. It has to be balanced with other needs, IMO.

Quoting Meadowchik:

 So why did not Obama focus on Simpson Bowles, why are not the reforms passed already?  It is true that government can multitask, but it is also true that time, resources, and, perhaps most of all, political capital, is limited.  Also, there are some things that are mutually exclusive.  Romney specifically said that Obamacare policies and taxes are hindering business growth and jobs.  In other words, the way that Obama did Obamacare ran contrary to other goals which should have taken atleast equal or greater priority.


Quoting shimamab:

Agree. This fallacious argument, used by both parties against each other, that only one thing can be accomplished at a time, drives me nuts. Bills of all sorts are worked on by many diff committees and introduced/voted on regarding all aspects of our society in each session. If the pres is taking heat for only doing one thing at a time, what does that say about all of congress' ability to multitask?


Quoting JakeandEmmasMom:


 It is a great soundbite.  It isn't exactly true.  It indicates that he did that at the exclusion of jobs.  He did try to create jobs.  It's just that the "shovel ready" jobs are only now coming to fruition.  All of us that have a lot of road construction going on in our states right now?  That's where those jobs came from.  They took a lot longer to go through the local and state bureaucracies than we were led to believe.  This is going to be a long slog.  Anyone who thinks that Romney has some secret magic wand that he is going to wave and *poof* there will suddenly be all of these jobs is fooling herself.


 

Posted on CafeMom Mobile
7SportsMom7
by Bronze Member on Oct. 7, 2012 at 2:19 PM
1 mom liked this

I just responded to your other comments so maybe you will see where I'm coming from.  Regarding Romney, he is no different than Obama at this point ...well, except for the huge corrupt machine Obama has backing him. 

The 47% comment doesn't bother me anymore than several comments made by others in this ugly game.  There are many of us who are completely fed up with those that take advantage ... yes, there are those truly in need but there are millions who cheat this system.  I have heard enough from those that work in our State and I hear other antectodes to know it's rampant.   So, as mentioned many times on this board, it is the concept of government dependency he was referring to and yes, he didn't state it "very elegantly".

ETA:  Regarding foreign policy, I will admit I have not been very educated about this area in the past.  I am trying to learn more now and I can certainly tell you, I am not at all impressed nor in favor of the way Obama is handling foregin policy.  So again, if Romeny isn't going to be better, which you or I can't guarantee, I will be stick with someone who can't be any worse than Obama.

Quoting Sisteract:

And to sports- How can you support a man who changes{or tailors} his stance, opinion, plan, wording, beliefs depending on the audience being addressed?

Does that convey honesty?

Does that inspire confidence?

How would that work on a foreign stage?

How do you integrate his latest revelation, that he was wrong about the 47%?


Sisteract
by Socialist Hippie on Oct. 7, 2012 at 2:22 PM

I think many discount how a global economic crisis impacts each and every individual country's economy. I also think some do not accept that the solutions will involve efforts beyond our borders. No, I do not think MR is superior to BO in the global arena.

American labor is not competitive on the global stage- yet most Americans need the dollars that American salaries currently provide in order to make budget. It's a catch 22.

The economy needs money from consumers- many consumers are un or underemployed- demand more$$$ and the jobs go elsewhere- a dog chasing his tail.

Romney's plan (well, the pieces that he has divulged thus far) are eerily similar to GW's- Um, those were an all around failure. Trickle down does not work- and hasn't for the last 25 years.

Romney has a history of becoming whatever the people holding the strings want him to become. He was a liberal while the Gov of MA- of course, he worked wll with the Dems, YET did not run for a second term, which many were happy about.

The GOP could have done better.


Quoting Meadowchik:

 I get that Romney does not resonate with you, but this "changes with the wind stuff" is empty and meaningless, IMO.  Romney is far more consistent than you imply.  Obama has seemed to "tell people what they want to hear" enough times, changed his mind, apologized. 

Obama may be middle-of-the-road, but his competance is also middling.  Do you agree that economic growth is the basis for climbing out of the fiscal hole the US has dug for itself? 

Quoting Sisteract:

And to sports- How can you support a man who changes{or tailors} his stance, opinion, plan, wording, beliefs depending on the audience being addressed?

Does that convey honesty?

Does that inspire confidence?

How would that work on a foreign stage?

How do you integrate his latest revelation, that he was wrong about the 47%?

 


Separation of church and state is for the protection of BOTH church and state.
Leading with hate and intolerance only leads to MORE hate and intolerance.
blondekosmic15
by Blonde on Oct. 7, 2012 at 2:27 PM
1 mom liked this

 

Quoting 7SportsMom7:

Thanks for the explanation ... I do want to understand where you are coming from.  I also had hoped we would have had a better candidate than Romney; however, I believe that politics has become so ugly no one in their right mind would want to play this game.  Thus, the need to break apart the two party system and change things ... but as I said before, it's too late to help in this election.

I believe you also live in CA ... I couldn't be more disgusted about politics than I am about it here .  I hear nothing but complaints, our state is practically bankrupt and we still elect a legistlature that is failing us.  So many businesses leaving, so many entitlements, so much union power ... we will be moving as soon as my youngest graduates (he's a sophomore).  When I had a friend who works in Corrections tell me, "nobody is more red than me but I have to vote Democrat to keep the benefits for my job" I knew it was time to go.  Change cannot occur with a mentality like that.

I understand your "one is bad, the other is worse" comment.  I just feel the opposite.  IMO, nothing can be worse than Obama has been and the more I learn about Romney, I am giving him the benefit of the doubt that he really is a man willing to serve based on his own successes and faith. 

I concur with your sentiments and concerns. Well stated! 

Quoting Sisteract:

Earlier in this thread I clearly disagreed with BO's 2010 priorities in terms of the ACA- wrong plan, wrong time.

We all know BOs failings- being too Bush like- continuing down that same path.

The GOP participants on this forum have been complaining ad nauseum for 3 years- and then they nominate a chameleon retread. WHY?

How come the GOP can not hone a decent candidate? Yes, it does anger me- then we end up with the same BS.

BO is a puppet and he is a corporatist, but down deep, IMO, he presents as more middle of the road. They are the same in terms of how they would be manipulated by their fancy donors...and the rest be darned.

One is bad, the other is worse.

I do understand that some are party only or single issue voters. I do not get that approach- and I doubt those folks understand those of us who are bold enough to say NO to both.

BO is old news- MR was suppose to be better- the onus is on MR to prove that he is better, so far that is a fail, IMO-


Quoting 7SportsMom7:

It is interesting how you comment so admantly against Romney on a regular basis.  How do you you know such?  And why only against Romney?  You have presented yourself on CM as a third party voter, which I respect.  Do you disrespect Romney and his policies so much because he comes from the party that failed you?   Why not, in your effort to educate us on a third party vote, is it only Romney you always disagree with and not Obama as well?  Your motivation behind your comments is just very interesting to me.

Quoting Sisteract:

And he will do nothing about it if elected.  It will not be a priority-

Quoting Meadowchik:

 

Quoting JakeandEmmasMom:

 It is a great soundbite.  It isn't exactly true.  It indicates that he did that at the exclusion of jobs.  He did try to create jobs.  It's just that the "shovel ready" jobs are only now coming to fruition.  All of us that have a lot of road construction going on in our states right now?  That's where those jobs came from.  They took a lot longer to go through the local and state bureaucracies than we were led to believe.  This is going to be a long slog.  Anyone who thinks that Romney has some secret magic wand that he is going to wave and *poof* there will suddenly be all of these jobs is fooling herself.

Romney gave concrete reasons for why the ACA ran counter to jobs: it hindered job growth, he discussed business uncertain about their abilities to pay under the new law, for instance. 


 


 

 

Sisteract
by Socialist Hippie on Oct. 7, 2012 at 2:27 PM

Demand is what creates and sustains jobs.

I am glad that there is less demand for boots on the ground.

IMO, that is a positive change-


Quoting blondekosmic15:

 

Quoting gsprofval:

The "shovel ready jobs" basically don't exist; at the most those are very short temporary jobs.

Fours years is quite long enough to make a difference; now the liberals say he is just now getting to it sometime in the quite distant future maybe.

Giving billions to bankrupt companies is not a smart move at all and created absolutely NO JOB at all.

Now companies are laying off in great numbers. The only jobs to be found right now are part time Christmas help; those will be very temporary too since predictions  are that Christmas gift sales will be low this year because of the fiscal cliff we are facing.

And let's not forget the 80,000 troops being laid off because of Obama policy.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2012/01/10/reminder_obama_to_lay_off_80000_us_soldiers

Quoting JakeandEmmasMom:

 It is a great soundbite.  It isn't exactly true.  It indicates that he did that at the exclusion of jobs.  He did try to create jobs.  It's just that the "shovel ready" jobs are only now coming to fruition.  All of us that have a lot of road construction going on in our states right now?  That's where those jobs came from.  They took a lot longer to go through the local and state bureaucracies than we were led to believe.  This is going to be a long slog.  Anyone who thinks that Romney has some secret magic wand that he is going to wave and *poof* there will suddenly be all of these jobs is fooling herself.


 


Separation of church and state is for the protection of BOTH church and state.
Leading with hate and intolerance only leads to MORE hate and intolerance.
Sisteract
by Socialist Hippie on Oct. 7, 2012 at 2:31 PM

Hence, third party.

I can not gamble that MR might be better- The people of MA would disagree, it seems, and they actually lived under his leadership. I realize that BO is the frying pan and I fear that MR is the fire. Sorry, can not do it.

I see nothing that indicates MR would succeed on an foreign stage- again fire.

I played the lesser of 2 evils the last 2 Presidential election cycles and the country lost both times.

Quoting 7SportsMom7:

I just responded to your other comments so maybe you will see where I'm coming from.  Regarding Romney, he is no different than Obama at this point ...well, except for the huge corrupt machine Obama has backing him. 

The 47% comment doesn't bother me anymore than several comments made by others in this ugly game.  There are many of us who are completely fed up with those that take advantage ... yes, there are those truly in need but there are millions who cheat this system.  I have heard enough from those that work in our State and I hear other antectodes to know it's rampant.   So, as mentioned many times on this board, it is the concept of government dependency he was referring to and yes, he didn't state it "very elegantly".

ETA:  Regarding foreign policy, I will admit I have not been very educated about this area in the past.  I am trying to learn more now and I can certainly tell you, I am not at all impressed nor in favor of the way Obama is handling foregin policy.  So again, if Romeny isn't going to be better, which you or I can't guarantee, I will be stick with someone who can't be any worse than Obama.

Quoting Sisteract:

And to sports- How can you support a man who changes{or tailors} his stance, opinion, plan, wording, beliefs depending on the audience being addressed?

Does that convey honesty?

Does that inspire confidence?

How would that work on a foreign stage?

How do you integrate his latest revelation, that he was wrong about the 47%?



Separation of church and state is for the protection of BOTH church and state.
Leading with hate and intolerance only leads to MORE hate and intolerance.
7SportsMom7
by Bronze Member on Oct. 7, 2012 at 3:16 PM

At least there is still one good thing about America ... we both get to vote on which path (to hell - LOL) we want!

Quoting Sisteract:

Hence, third party.

I can not gamble that MR might be better- The people of MA would disagree, it seems, and they actually lived under his leadership. I realize that BO is the frying pan and I fear that MR is the fire. Sorry, can not do it.

I see nothing that indicates MR would succeed on an foreign stage- again fire.

I played the lesser of 2 evils the last 2 Presidential election cycles and the country lost both times.

Quoting 7SportsMom7:

I just responded to your other comments so maybe you will see where I'm coming from.  Regarding Romney, he is no different than Obama at this point ...well, except for the huge corrupt machine Obama has backing him. 

The 47% comment doesn't bother me anymore than several comments made by others in this ugly game.  There are many of us who are completely fed up with those that take advantage ... yes, there are those truly in need but there are millions who cheat this system.  I have heard enough from those that work in our State and I hear other antectodes to know it's rampant.   So, as mentioned many times on this board, it is the concept of government dependency he was referring to and yes, he didn't state it "very elegantly".

ETA:  Regarding foreign policy, I will admit I have not been very educated about this area in the past.  I am trying to learn more now and I can certainly tell you, I am not at all impressed nor in favor of the way Obama is handling foregin policy.  So again, if Romeny isn't going to be better, which you or I can't guarantee, I will be stick with someone who can't be any worse than Obama.

Quoting Sisteract:

And to sports- How can you support a man who changes{or tailors} his stance, opinion, plan, wording, beliefs depending on the audience being addressed?

Does that convey honesty?

Does that inspire confidence?

How would that work on a foreign stage?

How do you integrate his latest revelation, that he was wrong about the 47%?




Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)