smitty

Romney is 1,000% better than obama.  But he's no Ronald Reagan.  And yes, I voted for him.  BTW -- his religion never entered into the picture. 

Chicago style thuggery...   [Hidden Content]    

True, but with a slight correction:  "Actually they can't. "Low Information Voters" on this forum blatantly make up false claims in every single topic then try baiting you to defend a position you don't even hold. It's comical"      ;)       

Sometimes one has to get on the same level to debate.  You complained about the TEA party so just wondering why you would complain about an organization that would fight to stop you from being overly taxed ...   :huh:

TEA Party;  Taxed Enough Already.   Since you are against the TEA party, then you must feel you need to be taxed more?     :huh:

Don't confuse me with a hypocrite.  I am an equal opportunity buster of waste.  Regardless of who's doing it.  Wrong is wrong!  That makes us different than the kool-aid drinkers...

Never compared him personally to Hitler.  I'm comparing tactics to rally the masses.  Hitler had a boogie man, so does obama.  To control people, you need to have someone or something to blame.  Right now, the democrats are using the recent Supreme Court smack-down of obama concerning business' and religious freedom.  They are gearing up the "war on women" rouse.  They are not stating what actually happened.  But -- they need another boogie man!

BigGirl -- the War On Poverty -- poverty is winning.  So, government is obviously not the answer, right??

WOW!!  And we still have people here, and across America, that think MORE government is the answer to everything.  Incredible!!    [Hidden Content]

What would you call voters that voted for a an empty suited, non-qualified community organizer?   The media would not vet him because they knew he really had nothing to offer other than the old Democratic playbook of scare tactics and to gain more government control.  Seriously, who in their right mind would believe obamacare was actually gonna cost less??  Show me where anything government has done has been efficient and cost less than they said it would??  So, really, I'm being generous in my phrasing of "Low Information Voters!".    ;)

I was outraged.  This cost him his re-election.  Bush 1 was not a conservative.  All he had to do was follow Reagan's lead.  But, as MODERATES usually do they screw it up...

The U.S. has spent 15 Trillion dollars since the "War On Poverty" was instituted.  After 50 years, the poverty rate basically remains the same, percentage wise.  In 1969, just 2.8 million Americans received food stamps. Today, over 47 million Americans are on food stamps.  It all sounds touchy-feely.  But, is it working?  When government gets involved it usually doesn't. 

More proof the Democrats do not have a core and is void of any meaningful debate.  Like I've said before -- liberals need a boogie man.  And it always translates into control in one fashion or another.  Hitler needed it.  Obama needs it (evil rich people).  Now the liberals want to run against the Washington Redskins as an advantage to win the Senate.  Really?  This is all they got?  Sad part -- the "Low Information Voters" will fall for it.  Their plight is ALWAYS someone else's fault...   [Hidden Content]

BigGirl, let's say that it's true.  SOMEBODY is paying that difference!  Is it right that somebody else should pay!?

I just heard that obamacare requires employers to offer FDA approved contraceptives to every employee without any co-pay.  In other words free to their employees.  Right or wrong? 

More proof that obama knows NOTHING about business in America!!   [Hidden Content]

obama offers few solution (doesn't have a clue) but went to the standard boogie man:  BLAME BUSINESS'...   [Hidden Content]

Not much difference between obama and Hillarious Rodman Clintonista.  So, if she is elected, it'll be done by the same "Low Information Voters" that elected obama.  Hoops -- name one accomplishment she had as Secretary Of State.

Just following the first lady...   [Hidden Content]

WESTEND -- it's NOT about the ability of making recess appointments.  What obama was doing was illegal.  And the Supreme Court agreed.  The illegal part was that obama was deciding when the Senate was in recess whether they were or not.  The Senate decides when they are in recess NOT the President.   Bush RESPECTED when the Senate said they were in recess for him to make recess appointments. 

Actually, it was the liberal's favorite socialist -- FDR...

It's amusing when liberals get caught in what they believe, which is usually wrong, the first thing that is said:  "That's not what I said or you misunderstood what I said."  Just like when you tried to convince us you aren't a liberal. And wouldn't say who you voted for.  Like it's a big secret who you voted for.   ROFLMAO...

Tragic, they don't know this about the Bush years.  That's why they are "Low Information Voters!" 

You are sitting there in solidarity with what the other liberals have been saying concerning the 9-0 decision. They have been confused.  So you are in support or confused about what's being said.  Let me refresh your memory: Your words: "Ppl will complain when its not their guy. That's how it works on here."  Unless you haven't a clue of what's been said here concerning this topic, then I'll take it back.  But liberal is as liberal does!   Hence the teaching lesson...    ;)

Steve, just like most of the stuff they believe!