Willard Mitt Romney--The Outsourcer-in-Chief

Postby Jack Roper » Fri Jun 22, 2012 3:16 pm

There is an excellent article in today's Washington Post going into the details of Mitt Romney and Bain Capital's outsourcing of American jobs. is this what we can expect if he is elected President?
OutsourcerInChief[1].jpg
Last edited by Jack Roper on Mon Jun 25, 2012 10:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Re: Mittens--The Outsourcer-in-Chief

Postby drawscore » Fri Jun 22, 2012 4:51 pm

If Mitt is outsourcing so many jobs, why is it, that under Obama, the national unemployment rate was 7.8% when he took office, and rose to over 10% on his watch, before dropping back to 8.2%?

And those figures may not accurately reflect the unemployment situation, since it reflects only those looking for work. Throw in those who have given up trying to find a job, whose unemployment benefits have run out, and who have moved back in with their parents, the unemployment rate could be at least 15%, and possibly as high as 21%.

Obama and his pals want to grow government, but growing government doesn't solve the unemployment problem. Grow the private sector, and unemployment will drop .

And Jack, when you reply, as I know you will, please try and stick to the argument. Offer your facts and opinions. But your constant disparagement - "Oh, he's in his Rush clone mode again," first gets real old, real quick. Second, I have not done it to you, and I expect the same courtesy and respect in return. If one cannot make an argument or a point without disparaging the individual arguing the opposing position, then that individual is displaying, first, a weak argument, and second, a lack of debating skills.

Ronald Reagan and "Tip" O'Neal vehemently disagreed while Reagan was president, and O'Neal was the Speaker of the House. But they respected each other, and never allowed their arguments to get personal. Hell, Reagan used to invite O'Neal to the White House for dinner and drinks, and they'd argue some more. And at the end of the evening, O'Neal would thank Reagan for a wonderful evening.

Drawscore

Re: Willard Mitt Romney--The Outsourcer-in-Chief

Postby Jack Roper » Fri Jun 22, 2012 11:44 pm

Dear Drawscore,

I will stop disparaging you when you cease disparaging the President. Just giving you what you give him. You display an alarming lack of decency--indeed citizenship, similar in kind to much of the right-wing reactionary Republicans these days, whose stated goal was to destroy Obama from the day he was elected.

By the way, the Bush depression was going full blast when Obama was inaugurated in January 2009, with 750,000 jobs being lost every month. You can't turn the Titanic around in one month. Unemployment went up to over 10%, and would have been far worse if the government had not passed the stimulus, passed with no Republican support, even though 1/3 of it was agreed to by Obama for tax cuts (which don't do much to stimulate the economy, as you no doubt know), insisted on by the two Maine Republicans, who proceeded to vote against it. So much for "loving your country" in a time of emergency.

If the private sector is failing then it is the government's job to step in and save the country--my definition of patriotism. Left to the capitalist class, their greed would probably have destroyed the entire world economy. Of course, as soon as the big banks went belly up with their nefarious schemes on housing they ran to Uncle Sam for a bailout.

While the economy is still not anywhere near full recovery, the depression may be over and we have experienced 27 months of private sector job growth. The reason unemployment is over 8% has a lot to do with all of the state jobs lost--teachers, firemen, constrction workers, and Police officers-- all let go due to State's having to balance their budgets. The stimulus also aided the states to keep these jobs, but that has also run out. The Republicans refuse to support the President's jobs program, which would go a way to alleviating the unemployment picture. And you were probably also against helping the auto industry avoid bankruptcy, which would have led to more lost jobs.

Obama had Speaker Boehner and the House leadership over to negotiate a budget deal to avoid their debt ceiling showdown, only to have them renege and cause the ratings agencies to downgrade the US credit worthiness. More unpatriotic behavior. God forbid that a millionaire or billionaire pay a dime more in taxes!

Finally, Mitt Romney will return us to the policies of George W. Bush, which got us into this mess in the first place. Nothing he has said indicates otherwise.
Last edited by Jack Roper on Mon Jun 25, 2012 10:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Re: Mittens--The Outsourcer-in-Chief

Postby drawscore » Sat Jun 23, 2012 4:20 am

>>>I will stop disparaging you when you cease disparaging the President. Just giving you what you give him. You display an alarming lack of decency--indeed citizenship, similar in kind to much of the right-wing reactionary Republicans these days, whose stated goal was to destroy Obama from the day he was elected.<<<

The difference, is that the president is not arguing his position with me. You are. Now, when he and his attorney general stop stonewalling congress, and issuing edicts, rather than working with congress, then I might back off. If I am face to face with him, I will show him the courtesy and respect his office deserves, but I want it clearly understood, that the office of the president deserves respect. The person that occupies the office must earn it. There is a difference.

And don't confuse me with others that say they want him to fail. I don't. I do want his policies to fail, because I do not agree with them. There is a difference there, too.

>>>By the way, the Bush depression was going full blast when Obama was inaugurated in January 2009, with 750,000 jobs being lost every month. You can't turn the Titanic around in one month. Unemployment went up to over 10%, and would have been far worse if the government had not passed the stimulus, passed with no Republican support, even though 1/3 of it was agreed to by Obama for tax cuts (which don't do much to stimulate the economy, as you no doubt know), insisted on by the two Maine Republicans, who proceeded to vote against it. So much for "loving your country" in a time of emergency.<<<

Three and a half years later, and it's still "all Bush's fault." That might have worked for the first couple of years, but not any more. I'm not buying it, and a lot of others, even on the left, aren't buying it, either. Obama told those with legal claims against General Motors, to "take a hike," and turned it over to the UAW as a part of the "stimulus" you tout.

>>>If the private sector is failing then it is the government's job to step in and save the country--my definition of patriotism. Left to the capitalist class, their greed would probably have destroyed the entire world economy. Of course, as soon as the big banks went belly up with their nefarious schemes on housing they ran to Uncle Sam for a bailout.<<<

No, the government's job is to stay the hell out of the private sector, except where necessary, as in inspecting foods, and preventing or regulating insider trading in the stock market. Bailing out big banks, Wall Street firms, and auto makers, is not a function of government, nor should it be. Telling banks or other lending institutions that they must loan money to uncreditworthy customers, is also not a function of government, despite what Chris Dodd and Barney Frank think.

>>>While the economy is still not anywhere near full recovery, the depression may be over and we have experienced 27 months of private sector job growth. The reason unemployment is over 8% has a lot to do with all of the state jobs lost--teachers, firemen, constrction workers, and Police officers-- all let go due to State's having to balance their budgets. The stimulus also aided the states to keep these jobs, but that has also run out. The Republicans refuse to support the President's jobs program, which would go a way to alleviating the unemployment picture. And you were probably also against helping the auto industry avoid bankruptcy, which would have led to more lost jobs.<<<

States have constitutions that require a balanced budget, something the federal government does not have. And teachers, firefighters, and most police officers are all local hires by city and county governments. Please explain how Georgia's requirement for a balanced budget, affects the hiring of teachers by Ware County (Waycross), or has affected it in the past.

>>>Obama had Speaker Boehner and the House leadership over to negotiate a budget deal to avoid their debt ceiling showdown, only to have them renege and cause the ratings agencies to downgrade the US credit worthiness. More unpatriotic behavior. God forbid that a millionaire or billionaire pay a dime more in taxes!<<<

Did you miss the part where the Senate rejected the proposed Obama budget by a vote of 99-0? He couldn't even get votes from members of his own party, not even from Harry Reid. And yet, it''s the Republicans that are the obstructionists. Yeah, right.

>>>Finally, Mitt Romney will return us to the policies of George W. Bush, which got us into this mess in the first place. Nothing he has said indicates otherwise.<<<

And Obama brought us the second term of Jimmy Carter, who, despite his public pronouncements of support for Obama, must surely be pleased that there is no longer the possibility that he (Carter) will go down as the worst president in the history of the nation. "W" was not the sharpest tool in the shed, but he was a far sight better than Obama. The other difference, is that Romney will do what he thinks is good for the country. Obama will do what he thinks is good for Obama.

Drawscore

Re: Mittens--The Outsourcer-in-Chief

Postby Chris12 » Sat Jun 23, 2012 4:38 am

The other difference, is that Romney will do what he thinks is good for the country. Obama will do what he thinks is good for Obama.


Yeaaaaaah, i bett those voting for Obama have the exact opposite opinion :roll: In fact the more people would think Romney would do whats good for himself since he's ''pro rich'' (And no, before you say it i'm not one of those people)

And don't confuse me with others that say they want him to fail. I don't. I do want his policies to fail, because I do not agree with them. There is a difference there, too.


Thats basickly the same thing but with a different reasoning. If his policies fail, Obama fails.

Three and a half years later, and it's still "all Bush's fault." That might have worked for the first couple of years, but not any more. I'm not buying it, and a lot of others, even on the left, aren't buying it, either. Obama told those with legal claims against General Motors, to "take a hike," and turned it over to the UAW as a part of the "stimulus" you tout


True, it does seem like an excuse now. I don't know what exactly is going on at the other end of the pont but if your still in Bush his mess then it means Obama has failed to fix that mess. Wheter its because of himself or the republicans depends on who you vote for.

No, the government's job is to stay the hell out of the private sector, except where necessary


I wouldn't say that's exactly the goverments job, since when has not doing things been a job? :lol: Seriouly though thats just what you believe not a fact and define necessary, when is it necessary and who are you to judge when that time has come? With all the things happening behind closed doors i'd trust a policiants opion of when its necessary more then that of an avarage citizen.

Lastly, we need to dump this all in one topic! seeing half of the jump in the fire page deticated to American politics depresses me! :x The political situation in other countries is having some interesting things too!.

Re: Mittens--The Outsourcer-in-Chief

Postby Kyle » Sat Jun 23, 2012 11:14 am

I don't really trust Romney. In many ways he seems very similar to Obama (he's farther left than even most Democrats here in the South, a product of being in a far-left state like Massachusetts I'm sure and this being a far-right region) yet in one sense is very much a typical (almost stereotypical, really) rich Republican as well.

But people have been saying for a while now things similar to "Obama can't fix the economy in a few weeks" or months, or even a year. I've seen things like that said here more than once, read it in multiple other places, and heard it said a time or two. It's been nearly an entire term at this point. Exactly when IS it going to be his responsibility? He may not have started it but he sure hasn't gotten things moving in the right direction. While I do think Congress has ultimately been the bigger failure in this area, you could say the same when Bush was in office.

If it's not Obama's responsibility now, it never will be. He could very well be out of office next January. I don't think he will be but that's another story.

Re: Willard Mitt Romney--The Outsourcer-in-Chief

Postby Jack Roper » Sat Jun 23, 2012 4:40 pm

BLSPayrollChangeJan2012[1].jpg
Unemployment loss and jobs since 2008


Here are the jobs lost under Pressident Bush (and Obama) since 2008 with the jobs gained since 2009, under Obama.

Hardly a picture of "doing nothing."
Last edited by Jack Roper on Mon Jun 25, 2012 10:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Re: Mittens--The Outsourcer-in-Chief

Postby drawscore » Sat Jun 23, 2012 5:12 pm

There is a reason that falsehoods fall into three categories: Lies, damned lies, and statistics. For the same reason, polls are next to worthless. The only polls I pay attention to, are the ones from Quinipiac, as they seem to be fairly straightforward and non partisan.

And I wonder about Bill McBride, who runs the calculated risk blog, from where you got your chart. I can't determine if this is the same Bill McBride, and freely admit that they could be two different people, but I do seem to recall a Democrat gubernatorial candidate named Bill McBrida, that lost the Florida governorship to Charlie Crist in 2006.

If it is the same one, and he is a loyal Democrat, he would have an interest in "fudging the figures."

Drawscore

Re: Mittens--The Outsourcer-in-Chief

Postby Kyle » Sat Jun 23, 2012 6:19 pm

So where are all these supposed new jobs, exactly? I haven't seen anything but jobs keep disappearing.

This blog is run by a different Bill McBride than the one you're thinking of Drawscore.

Re: Willard Mitt Romney--The Outsourcer-in-Chief

Postby Jack Roper » Mon Jun 25, 2012 2:25 pm

image001.jpg
Mitt Romney--Patriot



This is kinda fun--perhaps not entirely fair but given what Drawscore is saying about Obama, I say touche!

Incidentally, if you have a more accurate graph of the job losses since Bush's great recession and Obama's recovery of over 4 million of those jobs I'd love to see it.
Last edited by Jack Roper on Mon Jun 25, 2012 10:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Re: Mittens--The Outsourcer-in-Chief

Postby Chase Ricks » Mon Jun 25, 2012 7:07 pm

Mr Roper I can stand so much to have you mock Mitt Romney but when you go after our same faith then I must step in. Missionary service is a calling above that of government service we are taught as children in Primary. When polygamy was outlawed in the United States it is true that some of the Latter Day Saints fled to Mexico and Central America and Canada in order to avoid the persecution this caused to be heaped uponthe faithful by the United States Government. However in 1890 President Wilfred Woodruff received a revelation saying the need had passed for polygamy and he made it Official Declaration Number 1 as is found in our Doctrine and Covenants. http://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/od/1?lang=eng I had ancestors who practiced it too and in fact my great great grandfather on my father's side had eight wives.

Am I ashamed of this period in my church's history? Yes I am but it was allowed at the time because so many male Saints had perished in the persecutions and tribulations that haunted our tracks from Missouri to Nauvoo, Illinois. We were following the commandment of Heavenly Father himself as was given through his son Jesus Christ to the prophet Joseph Smith. Now please stop digging into such ancient backgrounds as this and try to rely on recent information as long as you leave my church out of it.

Thank you
Last edited by Chase Ricks on Fri Jun 29, 2012 2:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.
From whence I came and whence I went heaven said I was too evil and sent me to hell. Demons and devils succeeded in breaking my soul.

Image

Re:Willard Mitt Romney--The Outsourcer-in-Chief

Postby Jack Roper » Mon Jun 25, 2012 10:46 pm

Mr. Ricks;
I regret your sensitivity about your religion. However, if there is one thing untrue in that piece I will gladly retract it.
After all, the Truth will set you free.
JR

Re: Willard Mitt Romney--The Outsourcer-in-Chief

Postby Chris12 » Mon Jun 25, 2012 10:54 pm

I...do not agree with the Mormons but i see nothing wrong with Missionary service. Still Missionary service is something you can do any time and any age so going to convert people in the time a war is going on does seem like a nice ''coincidance'' doesn't it?

Re: Re:Willard Mitt Romney--The Outsourcer-in-Chief

Postby Chase Ricks » Mon Jun 25, 2012 11:04 pm

Jack Roper wrote:Mr. Ricks;
I regret your sensitivity about your religion. However, if there is one thing untrue in that piece I will gladly retract it.
After all, the Truth will set you free.
JR


By 1892 polygamy had been declared to no longer be a commandment and therefor the laws against it were only for those excommunicated members of the Latter Day Saints who still practiced it. Therefor unless you see that as a lie about the date that Brother Romney's ancestors fled to Mexico, I suggest you study the history of my religion a bit more.
From whence I came and whence I went heaven said I was too evil and sent me to hell. Demons and devils succeeded in breaking my soul.

Image

Re: Willard Mitt Romney--The Outsourcer-in-Chief

Postby Jack Roper » Tue Jun 26, 2012 5:22 pm

Perhaps you should study that history more yourself: polygamy was outlawed in 1890; Romney's family fled to Mexico to avoid this new rule. Romney's grandfather was not, himself, a polygamist, nor is Mitt Romney.

However, how do you explain a man in his 30's, Mitt Romney, accepting the refusal of his Church to ordain black men, due to the curse of Cain, which was LDS policy until the late 1970's?

Further, when Romney "took out his endowments" he swore, with his wife, to keep the "law of Consecration": a vow to consecrate time, erergy, talents, and material possessions to his Church for the purpose of 'building up the Kingdom of God on the earth and the establishment of Zion." Further, his "calling" to be a bishop in the Mormon Church required that he render absolute loyalty to the LDS Church and its prophet.

This would appear to violate any Oath he would take to uphold the Constitution of the United States. Which Oath would he abide by?

Re: Willard Mitt Romney--The Outsourcer-in-Chief

Postby Chase Ricks » Wed Jun 27, 2012 7:49 am

Endowments are extremely secretive and sacred matters and as such I am unable to even discuss that topic with fellow members of my church who have been endowed as long as I have not yet been. Therefor it will be a very long time indeed before I can answer your question. As for the Law of Consecration, originally when my church settled in Kirtland , Ohio it was called the United Order and was a revelation from Heavenly Father. However due to the actions of dissenters and other persecuters it was dissolved until such a time as the Saints were righteous enough to fully live it in their daily lives.

The last question is something I personally have difficulties answering because it will force me to question everything I have been taught. What you are saying is honest truth but did you know that it took at least one hundred and forty years after the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints was reorganized upon this Earth for the Lord to finally grant permission to the Prophet Spencer W. Kimball to allow the Melchezidek Priesthood to be spread among African males of rightful age as long as they were worthy to receive it? You are probably wondering why it was not allowed earlier. This is what I have been told on the matter. The 1970's was when civil rights movements had gotten stronger and there was more freedom from most oppression everywhere around the world besides in communist countries. This added to the pressures my church was undergoing from political and religious detractors who didn't seem to understand still that only those who are worthy can receive the Melchezidek Priesthood.

Many are called but few are chosen, and why are they not chosen? Because their hearts are set so much upon the things of this world, and aspire to do the honors of men, that they do not learn this one lesson-

That the rights of the priesthood are inseperably connected with the powers of heaven, and that the powers of heaven cannot be controlled nor handled only upon the principles of righteousness.

That they may be conferred upon us, it is true; but when we undertake to cover our sins, or to gratify our pride, our vain ambition, or to exercise control or dominion or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men, in any degree of unrighteousness, behold, the heavens withdraw themselves; the Spirit of the Lord is grieved; and when it is withdrawn, Amen to the priesthood or the authority of that man.

Behold, ere he is aware, he is left unto himself, to kick against the pricks, to persecute the Saints, and to fiught against God.

We have learned by sad experience that it is the nature and disposition of almost all men, as soon as they get a little authority, as they suppose, they will immediately begin to exercise unrighteous dominion.

Hence many are called, but few are chosen.

Yes I know I did not mention the Aaronic Priesthood earlier and that is because it has less responsibilities and callings compared to the Melchezidek Priesthood. In fact there is a reason it is referred to as the lesser priesthood. Just as Aaron was the lesser known brother to Moses, so is the Aaronic Priesthood the preparatory one that all young men and adult must be worthy to hold. Only if a priest is declared worthy to advance by the order of a Stake President, after being interviewed by him, and the majority of worthy priesthood holders in that stake can he do so. This can only be followed through at twice yearly Stake Conferences so sacred is the occasion. For all male teenagers, this is the most important thing they can work for before they can receive their endownments and go on a mission. From an Elder to the Quorum of the Seventy and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles to the President first councilor and second councilor of the church this is the order of callings in the Melchezedik Priesthood.
From whence I came and whence I went heaven said I was too evil and sent me to hell. Demons and devils succeeded in breaking my soul.

Image

Re: Willard Mitt Romney--The Outsourcer-in-Chief

Postby Jack Roper » Wed Jun 27, 2012 4:08 pm

Dear Chase,

Your response, although thorough in an eclesistical way, basically avoided my last post, except for the last point, and the one about blacks in the LDS Church (which I find reprehensible), one that Mitt Romney himself has skirted so far. In order to answer whether he would hold his Church higher than any mere oath to the U.S. Constitution, he would have to get into his religious beliefs and practices, to satisfy a voter like me, and I'm sure many others in America. So far, he has not done so.

Obama had his own pastor problems, which he resolved by condemning Rev. Wright. Perhaps Romney should do the same with the LDS Church, insofar as they have any direct hold on his loyalty.

By the way, Woodrow Wilson was not President in 1892, just as an aside.
Last edited by Jack Roper on Wed Jun 27, 2012 6:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Re: Willard Mitt Romney--The Outsourcer-in-Chief

Postby drawscore » Wed Jun 27, 2012 6:17 pm

Actually, Wilson, a Democrat, was a plurality president, having received less than 50% of the popular vote in the election of 1912, running against incumbent Republican William Howard Taft, and "Bull Moose" Teddy Roosevelt.

He served for eight years (1913-1921); actually six and a half, as during the last year and a half of his presidency, he was incapacitated by a stroke. His wife and doctor conspired to to keep his condition from the press, and his Vice President, Thomas Riley Marshall. All communications with him, went through his wife, who, in effect, became president. But there are some reports that say he was barely able to write his own name, and was confined to his bed for his last 17 months in office.

http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/wilsonstroke.htm

Drawscore

Re: Willard Mitt Romney--The Outsourcer-in-Chief

Postby Chase Ricks » Thu Jun 28, 2012 6:35 am

Jack Roper

If you looked at my post yesterday I answered everything you asked me about to within reason as long as I had the actual knowledge and was allowed to talk about it.

I never once was referring to the US president Woodrow Wilson but instead to the Church of Jesus Chris of Latter Day Saints Prophet and President Wilfred Woodruff. The US Constitution says nowhere that a person's religion forbids them from serving as President of the United States. Therefor I bid you both adieu and look forward to meeting again in a friendly discussien elsewhere not as opponents but friends.
Last edited by Chase Ricks on Fri Jun 29, 2012 2:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
From whence I came and whence I went heaven said I was too evil and sent me to hell. Demons and devils succeeded in breaking my soul.

Image

Re: Willard Mitt Romney--The Outsourcer-in-Chief

Postby Jason Toddman » Thu Jun 28, 2012 9:54 am

People thought that electing JFK would be a bad idea because he was Catholic, and they felt he would kowtow to the Pope.
But they were wrong.
Nixon was a Quaker, but their pacifistic beliefs sure as Hell didn't rub off on *him* (notwithstanding that the Viet Nam War ended - eventually, anyway - during his administration, it was only after years of wasteful effort)
I don't believe in Mormonism myself and I don't support Romney, but his faith in the LDS system has nothing to do with why I won't be voting for him. Nor do I see that Mormonism is any worse (or different) from any other religion I don't believe in (which is ALL of them).
Btw I *do* believe in God; just not in organized religion (Christian or otherwise).
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...

Re: Willard Mitt Romney--The Outsourcer-in-Chief

Postby Jack Roper » Fri Jun 29, 2012 1:10 pm

Jason, I am not a Mormon or an ex-Mormon, but am fascinated by organized religions and the amazing, almost hypnotic hold they have over their adherents. From my limited exploration of Mormonism, or, as they prefer, the Church of Latter Day Saints, it very much resembles a rigid form or Catholicism or worse, Islam (with it's Sharia Law governing all aspects of a believer's life, even to the extent that they are not allowed to divulge things about their religion). It would seem that there are many people who refuse to examine the faith claims of their Churches, Synagoge's, etc. and would rather just follow along blindly.

When it comes to Mitt Romney, you have to realize he was a Mormon missionary and a Bishop in his Church, and is still actively involved. My point, I guess, is that Mormonism may not be equivalent to JFK's Catholicism, with its cafeteria style believers or Nixon's Quaker faith but perhaps something more demanding of his loyalty that would supercede the Oath as President. Before anyone considers voting for him they need to consider this possibility, that's all.

And Chase, actually you did refer to Woodrow Wilson--on June 25th. But the names are so similar, so I can't obviously hold it against you as you wrote: "However in 1890 President Woodrow Wilson received a revelation saying the need had passed for polygamy..."

My motto is "question authority and seek the truth."

Re: Willard Mitt Romney--The Outsourcer-in-Chief

Postby drawscore » Fri Jun 29, 2012 2:47 pm

Thomas Woodrow Wilson (December 28, 1856 – February 3, 1924), 28th president of the United States. (Wikipedia)

>>>"However in 1890 President Woodrow Wilson received a revelation saying the need had passed for polygamy..."<<<

That falls within the realm of possibility, considering Wilson was 33 years old in 1890. But it would be another 23 years before Wilson assumed the office of the presidency on March 4, 1913. (And yes, I know he was elected in 1912, and that today, inauguration day is January 20. It was moved from March 4, to January 20 during the FDR administration.)

Drawscore

Re: Willard Mitt Romney--The Outsourcer-in-Chief

Postby Jack Roper » Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:43 pm

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/2 ... 95960.html

Here's another amazing account of Bain Capital's remarkable insensitivity to American workers, while using the tax code to ship jobs to Puerto Rico!

Romney should be ashamed.

Re: Willard Mitt Romney--The Outsourcer-in-Chief

Postby RightAway » Sun Jun 29, 2014 6:48 pm

Mormonism has nothing to do with Romney. Being Mormon isn't going to make him evil. But being a Mormon isn't bad, and Mormons aren't bad people. Do I seem like a bad person? I'm Mormon. He's no polygamist either, so should we judge him for his religion. I'd say that we should judge whether or not he coule get us out of debt, or get people jobs. Efficiency, not background.

Re: Willard Mitt Romney--The Outsourcer-in-Chief

Postby Chris12 » Mon Jun 30, 2014 2:34 am

I smell a thread Necromancer :big:

Image

Re: Willard Mitt Romney--The Outsourcer-in-Chief

Postby xtc » Mon Jun 30, 2014 2:39 am

I appreciate what you mean, Chris, but I simply think this is a new member who has found something relevant to them.
That's why I didn't make a sarky remark about bumping when I approved it.

However: love the cartoon!
Boxer shorts are cool,
but little speedos rule!

More by the same author: viewtopic.php?f=5&t=22729

Re: Willard Mitt Romney--The Outsourcer-in-Chief

Postby Jason Toddman » Mon Jun 30, 2014 4:29 am

I've only personally known one Mormon in my life, but he's a much nicer fellow than any 'mainstream christians' I ever knew. He detests Romney himself as being a grade-A phony who has no real regard for the Mormon church.
Dare to be different... and make a difference.
To boldly go where no one in their right mind has gone before...