DescentBB

Could be he is saying our National Sovereignty is gone.

I saw the first post in this thread just now...gee, only 5 electoral votes from 270? How far is Obama from 270 now, Slick?

Latest Gallup Poll; Romney 52 and Obama 45

I can see how this is really bothering Vision.

I really would like to see how the guy who managed to insult several of our closest allies on a single trip manages to say anything coherent about foreign policy.

ThunderBunny wrote:I can see how this is really bothering Vision.

Yes, please imagine I'm bothered by the pending election rather than see a funny cartoon that applies to all parties and polls. Single minded, simple minded.

I don't see Romney as being real capable of keeping peace. We live in tenuous times and that guy is not real careful with his rhetoric. Obama, he goes to far the other way.

flip wrote:I don't see Romney as being real capable of keeping peace. We live in tenuous times and that guy is not real careful with his rhetoric.

They said the same thing about Reagan

woodchip wrote:

flip wrote:I don't see Romney as being real capable of keeping peace. We live in tenuous times and that guy is not real careful with his rhetoric.

They said the same thing about Reagan

But did they say the same thing about Carter?

Did you notice how quick the Iranians released the hostages when Reagan took office?

woodchip wrote:Did you notice how quick the Iranians released the hostages when Reagan took office?

Right... Except the Algiers Accord was negotiated by Carter's administration and had just as much to do with Khomeini's tiring of the situation as the United States. Regan had nothing to do with it and had not even been sworn in yet. Also, Iran-Contra.

But if you want Romney to keep the peace by selling arms to our enemies, well that's your right to vote for him.

vision wrote:

But if you want Romney to keep the peace by selling arms to our enemies, well that's your right to vote for him.

Boy did you step into this one. Three words in reply...Fast and furious

woodchip wrote:

vision wrote:

But if you want Romney to keep the peace by selling arms to our enemies, well that's your right to vote for him.

Boy did you step into this one. Three words in reply...Fast and furious

I think the person comparing a gun running investigation to MILITARY HARDWARE sales to potential national actors is the one stepping in something.
Not that it's a surprise from the fountain of Obama hate. Woody, you might want to read Fortune magazine's analysis of F and F. You might find it
re-arranges certain cherished assumptions. Likely not, but it ought to.

I think you have more love for Obama than you do for this country. Maybe it's gullibility. I dunno

elaborate, Flip. The way I see it, I'm coming from a position of taking the less-than-perfect leader we have over a clear buffoon, who changes mind over REALLY important matters on a weekly basis, and is backed by the forces that brought my nation a near-depression and two stupid wars. What are you talking about?

woodchip wrote:

vision wrote:But if you want Romney to keep the peace by selling arms to our enemies, well that's your right to vote for him.

Boy did you step into this one. Three words in reply...Fast and furious

I made the statement because there was a loose comparison between Regan/Romney and Carter/Obama and that seemed fitting on a night where we just had a debate about foreign policy.

However, I do agree with you about F&F. I think that stuff needs to stop and I think jail time needs to be served by someone. Probably not Obama, that seems like overkill because it almost certainly wasn't his idea. He probably approved it after hearing a sales pitch about the operation's projected effectiveness. But that whole incident is just one of many things that piss me off about this administration.

I repeat, for Vision's benefit: read the Fortune magazine assessment of F and F. A lot of misinformation has been spread as to the nature, the obstacles and the deliberative process involved.

callmeslick wrote:

woodchip wrote:

vision wrote:

But if you want Romney to keep the peace by selling arms to our enemies, well that's your right to vote for him.

Boy did you step into this one. Three words in reply...Fast and furious

I think the person comparing a gun running investigation to MILITARY HARDWARE sales to potential national actors is the one stepping in something.
Not that it's a surprise from the fountain of Obama hate. Woody, you might want to read Fortune magazine's analysis of F and F. You might find it
re-arranges certain cherished assumptions. Likely not, but it ought to.

The military hardware went to combatants far from our boarders, much the same as we supplied other govt. and rebel forces for decades. F&F was supplying criminals with arms and, while the supposition that tracking the arms might be laudable, the end results were the killing of US citizens and Mexican nationals. I'm sorry if you cannot see the difference.

what I don't get about this whole fast and furious mess is how it is linked to Obama. Didn't the whole program start in 2006, under Bush's reign? So do you blame Obama primarily for not stopping it?

callmeslick wrote:certain about that?

Yes:
"The son of Rep. Jim Moran, D-Va. – who serves as the field director for his father’s campaign – has been caught on video advising an undercover reporter how to fraudulently cast ballots in the name of registered voters by forging utility bills and relying on the assistance of Democrat lawyers."

http://www.wnd.com/2012/10/video-captur ... ote-fraud/

I wonder if Romney having his highest numbers yet is making Republicans too comfortable and relaxed: Romney Adviser Sparks Controversy

Foot in mouth disorder is one of the reasons I left the party, even if something is true, sometimes you just need to keep your mouth shut.

having John Sununu as a 'spokesperson' is asking for trouble, based on past history(and it is an extensive history).

Well Slick, I think you have to much confidence in that man. He is no different than any other except he's going full steam ahead. I'd rather a Ron Paul type had gotten elected this go around. Give us more time to think.

We're so evenly split in this election, that we could actually have a situation that would put John Boehner in as President. See if you can follow the logic, even if it is from Rachel Maddow.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#49544853