Captain Plastic

Because the voting public re-elected George W. Bush. Enough said.

 

Uh.. no, Tom.

The american public looked at GWB's opponent and saw a REAL Captain Plastic, then went, like I said, for the 'lesser of the evils'... under the precept, "He broke it, he needs to fix it"

I dont agree with the 'American Public' on that... I'm just stepping back and taking in the picture as dispassionately as I can.

 

More of a compliment, but probably the back-handed variety. My apologies if that was out of line, Senator.

I think have shown my disgust for Romney sufficiently for now.

 

Yes, I do.

 

Wow, Don has a way with words many times, and he hit the nail on the head and drove it clean thrpough to the other side with that one.

EXACTLY, Don. I see the nightmare continuing with that a-hole.

 

Ah... the hate and bile is streaming out.

All based on what... more I read, the more it's frustration.

REALLY guys! dubya IS NOT RUNNING!!!

The rest of you looking on with amusement, do what I do.... do a search for EITHER of those two EVER criticizing a Dem... Few and far between unless it's for going along with Dubya.

I suggest search Lieberman and them as author.

Then look for me criticizing Repubs, including Dubya.

What's REALLY happening here is that those two are afraid of Romney more than anyone else in the GOP.
'Fear and Loathing' is a common phrase for a good reason.

They sure's hell aint afraid of Huck-a-bubba. And Rudy has shot himself in the foot.

McCain? They could handle McCain.

 

McCain took several days to refuse Kerry's bid to have him join the race in 04.
Reference this!!!

McCain essentially set up 'Campaign Finance Deform' {Feingold}
McCain co-authored the 'no-teeth' {I use that in interest of non-divisive rhetoric} Illegals bill. {Kennedy}
McCain was against the Bush tax cuts..{Now says 'Economics isnt his strong suit... no kidding!} {Feingold/Kennedy influence}
He was FOR the Medicaid Prescription Bill corporate giveaway.. see above.
He was FOR Corn ethanol program {Harkin} after he was against it, before he was against it. See above, again.

My guess on who the Dems prefer:
To run against - Huckabee
As Pres - McCain

Enough said.

- - -- - - - --
And Don... I didnt say a damn thing about 'who you vote for'.

I addressed what you say on here.

I dont even address what you actually THINK, but DONT post on here. I dont have a freakin CLUE... I have suspicions, but not a solid clue.

 

Romney is going right for Republican strategery 101 with his latest attack on McCain. Romney has pointed out that, gasp, McCain has worked with Democrats on getting things passed through the Senate, and he, gasp, may have considered a split ticket with Kerry against BuSh's re-election.

The world would come to an end in the eyes of Republicans if we ever considered the idea of, GASP, Guffah, *feint*, working together.

"Working together", would kind of take all the fun out of the Republican/Consrvative approach, wouldn't it 'fog?

 

EXACTLY WHAT I SAID, PCB!!!

And McCain just spun what Romney said about the probability of Bush admin having a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq.

McCain, if ANYONE does, understands exactly what Romney meant. Will any reporter ask John if HE believes the admin has a 'plan timetable'?

"working together" results: See above AGAIN!!!!

 

EVERY FREAKING POINT you made buttressed my opinion!

McCain put NO thought into ANY of those! If he had, he wouldnt be saying the american people were smarter than he was on the border issue.

He wouldnt be dodging and ducking Finance DEFORM same as you are... now YOUR party is in the thrall of an international criminal and money manipulator.

 

If I say white, are you going to say black, just because?

Sorry, I didn't say any of what you are attributing to me. As I have seen you say to many on many a messageboard, GO BACK AND READ MY PREVIOUS POST, AND THINK about what I actually said.

 

I thought I'd check out what this "Captain Plastic" thing was all about, since the post number was rising so rapidly.

First, I'll lay my cards on the table:
1. I am a registered Democrat and consider myself a Conservative Democrat
2. I voted for Kerry and Gore in the last two elections
3. I am a Latter-Day Saint (aka Mormon)

When I began looking at the field across both parties, I looked at Romney - I knew that he had the same conservative (but not ultra conservative) views on Social issues that I hold - our church is specifically a-political, but does take an official stand on certain social & moral issues.

[as a quick aside - I'm a social conservative and don't see Romney as "flip-flopping" as governor of MA. He took the most conservative stance you could take on those issues and still be electable in Massachusetts. He was therefore able to influence things more toward a more conservative direction, even if those changes would be considered in some states, as going from Ultra-Liberal to Liberal - it's still a move in the "right" direction]

Anyway, back to Romney, while socially he passed muster with me, I'm not a big fan of his foreign policy views. I was against our invasion of Iraq, though at this point admit that its our responsibility to clean up the mess we caused, at least to some degree. I'm against many aspects of the Patriot Act and I'm against Gitmo. Economically, there wasn't much to go on at the time.

I looked at the other candidates, from both parties, and no one really stood out. (well, except Huckabee and his support for the "Fair Tax", but that's another story)

However, as the economy has gotten worse, I've started to look more and more at the qualifications of the candidates to fix the recession that we're in.

Romney has taken failing companies and made them profitable, usually without job cuts.

Romney has taken a failing organization (the SLC Olympics) and made it successful and profitable.

Romney has taken a government in the red (Mass) and turned it black, without raising taxes.

I'm just not seeing anyone else with those economic credentials in the race. At this point, we need a CEO, not a politician. No, I won't be happy with all of his foreign policy decisions, but the economy is more important right now - he won't make things worse internationally (and did serve his two-year church mission in France, so should be able to mend a few bridges).

One other thing that caught my attention:

Mormon "Missions" are large geographical areas presided over by a full time volunteer (the Mission President), someone with decades of experience in the church. The Maryland, Baltimore Mission, for example, covers the area from PA over to parts of WV and down to the DC suburbs and includes over 50 full time missionaries (the 19-26 year olds who knock on your doors). When Mitt was serving his mission in France, he was assigned,after a while, to the Mission Offices (the missionaries normally rotate assignments every few months throughout and within the Mission area). As such, part of his responsibilities included being the driver for the Mission President, along with various paper-work, reports, etc. One time, when driving the Mission President and his wife, their car was struck by another car. Mitt was lightly injured, but the Mission President was more seriously hurt and his wife was killed. The French Police reports confirmed that it was the fault of the other driver. The Mission President went back stateside to bury his wife and the Church sent the Area Authority (the head guy in Europe - about 3rd tier level of leadership in the Church) to run the mission until a new Mission President could be called. The area authority arrived, met with Mitt and his companion (the two Mission Office missionaries) and then flew back home the next day- leaving the Mission under the control of those two young Missionaries (very early 20s).

Now, this may not mean anything to anyone else on this board, but the fact that Mitt and his companion were deemed both capable and trustworthy to take the role normally held by a senior church member says something.

So yeah, Mitt's too good looking, and too Bush-like in his foreign policy, but I feel more confident about the future for my children with him in charge than anyone else running.

 

Good input, Andy. I agree he is probably a shrewd business man, but I would need much more convincing on his social and international awareness to be convinced he wouldn't be a potentially dangerous head of state.

 

PCB. If you have any specifics on the "awareness" issues, I can try to tell you how what I know about him would influence how he would handle them (i.e., I understand the influences of a church upbringing, what's involved in missionary training, and have a bit of insight into how he handled his CEO roles).

 

I am going to assume that you did not mean to say that I do not understand the influences of a church upbringing.

It appears he has flip-flopped on Iraq and abortion issues, so those are just two issues that immediately come to mind. I'll provide more as I remember or research them.