Did you vote today?

[BARNEYII]

guest wrote:

This issue was settled long ago by the Ballot Law Commission of the State of Massachusetts...
"The Commission finds, rules and concludes that the Respondent’s testimony was credible in all respects regarding the fact that the Respondent intended Massachusetts to be his domicile from 1971 to the present. The Commission further finds that the Objectors have failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the Respondent ever abandoned his Massachusetts domicile and established domicile in Utah. The Commission finds, rules and concludes, as a matter of fact and law, that the Respondent has been a continuous inhabitant of Massachusetts from 1971 to present. The Respondent therefore has met the inhabitancy qualification of the Massachusetts Constitution and is eligible to appear on the ballot as candidate for the office of Governor of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts."
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2012/images/07/1... ...
"To anger a conservative, lie to him. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth"~Theodore Roosevelt

The webpage cannot be found.

[guest]

BARNEYII wrote:

<quoted text>
My Supplicant Worships Me”

We know you are narcissist.

[guest]

BARNEYII wrote:

<quoted text>
The webpage cannot be found.

I had no problem at all, it is the court case results, look, you can find it. The judges ruled the plaintiffs case was without merit, that Romney had done no wrong. His situation was similar to Hillary, voted in Arkansas, held positions outside the state. You haven't given us your evidence against Romney, I can find a few MSNBC type sites with the story but nothing that you would call mainstream.

[BARNEYII]

guest wrote:

This issue was settled long ago by the Ballot Law Commission of the State of Massachusetts...
"The Commission finds, rules and concludes that the Respondent’s testimony was credible in all respects regarding the fact that the Respondent intended Massachusetts to be his domicile from 1971 to the present. The Commission further finds that the Objectors have failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the Respondent ever abandoned his Massachusetts domicile and established domicile in Utah. The Commission finds, rules and concludes, as a matter of fact and law, that the Respondent has been a continuous inhabitant of Massachusetts from 1971 to present. The Respondent therefore has met the inhabitancy qualification of the Massachusetts Constitution and is eligible to appear on the ballot as candidate for the office of Governor of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts."
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2012/images/07/1... ...
"To anger a conservative, lie to him. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth"~Theodore Roosevelt

And that was nothing more than a dog an pony show;

35B. He further testified that all the family’s investment accounts were located in Massachusetts.All personal records, including birth and marriage certificates, family albums and portraits, remained at the Respondent’s Belmont home. The Respondent testified that his medical records remained in Massachusetts with his primary care physician.The Respondent testified and evidence was introduced showing that the Respondent used a local insurance agent from Belmont to maintain insurance coveragefor all properties, including the houses in Utah and New Hampshire, and all automobiles

http://www.scribd.com/doc/99951135/Romney-Bal...

You see when you are wealthy and own half the town, you can afford a dog and pony show.

[BARNEYII]

guest wrote:

<quoted text>We know you are narcissist.

You really have a problem recognizing comments made figuratively, do you not?

[guest]

BARNEYII wrote:

<quoted text>
And that was nothing more than a dog an pony show;
35B. He further testified that all the family’s investment accounts were located in Massachusetts.All personal records, including birth and marriage certificates, family albums and portraits, remained at the Respondent’s Belmont home. The Respondent testified that his medical records remained in Massachusetts with his primary care physician.The Respondent testified and evidence was introduced showing that the Respondent used a local insurance agent from Belmont to maintain insurance coveragefor all properties, including the houses in Utah and New Hampshire, and all automobiles
http://www.scribd.com/doc/99951135/Romney-Bal...
You see when you are wealthy and own half the town, you can afford a dog and pony show.

Then Obamacare was illegitimate because I disagreed withthe supreme court, anytime the court rulings don't suit you, it is a dog and pony show. You evidently don't understand residency either, people move for extended periods of time without giving up there residency. you might have to be a dual resident in some cases, but it is legal. I still want to know if our president attended school as a FES, that is a lot more of a residency issue than what state a person was working in and it would be so simple to provide the documentation, but being like you, since he won't, Obama must be guilty. You would have been a big hit in Salem, if you don't float,you must be guilty, of course in your case feces generally floats.

[guest]

BARNEYII wrote:

<quoted text>
You really have a problem recognizing comments made figuratively, do you not?

And you have problems with four syllable words, that was the reason I used a small word.

[BARNEYII]

guest wrote:

<quoted text>
If Obama is only willing to do the minimum required by law, why would Romney do otherwise? We both no there is nothing to any of the questions on Obama, but all he has to do is let the proper authorities release the birth certificate and college records, they could redact the grades if that is an embarrassment, it would stop all the guessing, just like Romney releasing his tax returns. The way the IRS questioned the 401 status of conservative groups, you know that they would be all over Romney if he hadn't paid any taxes. You get Obama to fess up and I will call our fire chief and see if he can get Romney to release his records.

It would stand to reason that as editor of the Harvard Law Review(as he was) would need his grades redacted.

IRS- Simple..........TAX AMNESTY'

[BARNEYII]

guest wrote:

<quoted text>
Then Obamacare was illegitimate because I disagreed withthe supreme court, anytime the court rulings don't suit you, it is a dog and pony show. You evidently don't understand residency either, people move for extended periods of time without giving up there residency. you might have to be a dual resident in some cases, but it is legal. I still want to know if our president attended school as a FES, that is a lot more of a residency issue than what state a person was working in and it would be so simple to provide the documentation, but being like you, since he won't, Obama must be guilty. You would have been a big hit in Salem, if you don't float,you must be guilty, of course in your case feces generally floats.

Comparing the Supreme Court to a State Ballot commission, you really have a firm grasp on this don't you.

[BARNEYII]

I've waited a few days to lay out my analysis of the selection of Paul Ryan for the VP slot on the Romney ticket. Unlike politicos like Dick Morris who bad-mouths the selection privately and shills for it publicly, I'll tell you what I really think. My sources tell me David Koch played a key role in Ryan's selection and that Koch's wife Julia had been quietly lobbying for Ryan. The selection was cemented at the July 22nd fundraiser Koch held for Romney at the former's sumptuous Hamptons estate.

Koch pledged $100 million more to C-4 and Super PAC efforts for Romney for Ryan's selection.

The upside of Ryan's selection is clear. Romney, distrusted by party conservatives, won't have to worry about his right flank or the base throughout the fall as John McCain did, theoretically leaving Romney free to seek independent swing voters in the middle. The downside is Ryan may be so tattooed by the Democrats for his "extreme" positions that Romney's ability to win these votes may be limited. The shift of the debate from jobs and the economy to entitlement funding is not beneficial to the Republicans as it will allow the campaign to play out on the Democrats strong suit issue.

Meanwhile the idea of Ryan as a radical is laughable. Ryan put forth a budget proposal which did nothing to curtail Social Security and military spending. His famous budget allows the deficit to continue to grow. Ryan has worked almost his entire adult life (the last twenty years) cashing a government check in D.C. Ryan supported the auto and bank bailouts, voted for the Troubled Asset Relief Program in 2008 and for increasing the debt ceiling in 2011. Ryan voted for the Iraq War resolution in 2002, keeping troops in Iraq indefinitely, against withdrawal of U.S. troops from the Balkans in 1999 and for the authorization for use of military force against Afghanistan in 2001. He also voted for the re-authorization of the Patriot Act in 2006 and 2011 and for the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 which allows the federal government to arrest and incarcerate a US citizen without bail, charges or a trial.

The idea of Paul Ryan as a libertarian is a joke. Ryan is a big government, Washington DC Republican who votes to fund foreign interventionism and the erosion of our civil liberties. Ryan began his political career as an acolyte of one of my heroes, Rep. Jack Kemp. Yet Ryan has wandered far from Kemp's genuine concern about the poor and disadvantaged. Ryan has become more of a faux deficit hawk and less of a pro-growth proponent.

http://stonezone.com/

[guest]

BARNEYII wrote:

<quoted text>
It would stand to reason that as editor of the Harvard Law Review(as he was) would need his grades redacted.
IRS- Simple..........TAX AMNESTY'

I didn't realize that as editor for a law review that you would need a security clearance, and I would like to see the records with the grades redacted, no one has mentioned tax amnesty until you, I am not even going to try to guess where you are going with an amnesty program. You do realize that all your heroes take advantage of every tax deduction, exemption that they are entitled to, the big difference is that your heroes voted for the deductions and exemptions whereas Romney has never legislated a single IRS regulation.

[SAC Warrior]

BARNEYII wrote:

I've waited a few days to lay out my analysis of the selection of Paul Ryan for the VP slot on the Romney ticket. Unlike politicos like Dick Morris who bad-mouths the selection privately and shills for it publicly, I'll tell you what I really think. My sources tell me David Koch played a key role in Ryan's selection and that Koch's wife Julia had been quietly lobbying for Ryan. The selection was cemented at the July 22nd fundraiser Koch held for Romney at the former's sumptuous Hamptons estate.
Koch pledged $100 million more to C-4 and Super PAC efforts for Romney for Ryan's selection.
The upside of Ryan's selection is clear. Romney, distrusted by party conservatives, won't have to worry about his right flank or the base throughout the fall as John McCain did, theoretically leaving Romney free to seek independent swing voters in the middle. The downside is Ryan may be so tattooed by the Democrats for his "extreme" positions that Romney's ability to win these votes may be limited. The shift of the debate from jobs and the economy to entitlement funding is not beneficial to the Republicans as it will allow the campaign to play out on the Democrats strong suit issue.
Meanwhile the idea of Ryan as a radical is laughable. Ryan put forth a budget proposal which did nothing to curtail Social Security and military spending. His famous budget allows the deficit to continue to grow. Ryan has worked almost his entire adult life (the last twenty years) cashing a government check in D.C. Ryan supported the auto and bank bailouts, voted for the Troubled Asset Relief Program in 2008 and for increasing the debt ceiling in 2011. Ryan voted for the Iraq War resolution in 2002, keeping troops in Iraq indefinitely, against withdrawal of U.S. troops from the Balkans in 1999 and for the authorization for use of military force against Afghanistan in 2001. He also voted for the re-authorization of the Patriot Act in 2006 and 2011 and for the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 which allows the federal government to arrest and incarcerate a US citizen without bail, charges or a trial.
The idea of Paul Ryan as a libertarian is a joke. Ryan is a big government, Washington DC Republican who votes to fund foreign interventionism and the erosion of our civil liberties. Ryan began his political career as an acolyte of one of my heroes, Rep. Jack Kemp. Yet Ryan has wandered far from Kemp's genuine concern about the poor and disadvantaged. Ryan has become more of a faux deficit hawk and less of a pro-growth proponent.
http://stonezone.com/

This makes allot of sense. I always thought Romney/Ryan was a turd of a ticket for the Repubs. But if Romney comes off as a centerist, they may have a chance. If you look at their political views there isn't much difference in Obama-Romney.

[BARNEYII]

guest wrote:

<quoted text>
I didn't realize that as editor for a law review that you would need a security clearance, and I would like to see the records with the grades redacted, no one has mentioned tax amnesty until you, I am not even going to try to guess where you are going with an amnesty program. You do realize that all your heroes take advantage of every tax deduction, exemption that they are entitled to, the big difference is that your heroes voted for the deductions and exemptions whereas Romney has never legislated a single IRS regulation.

The Koch brothers "never legislated a single IRS regulation" either, they have the lobbyist to do that for them.

"no one has mentioned tax amnesty until you"

Do a web search, you will find out you are wrong, now I will save you some time and say this for you,

I meant nobody on this thread.

Being most regulars on here are anti Obama, I do not suspect that they would bring it up.


"I didn't realize that as editor for a law review that you would need a security clearance"


That makes two of us that did not know that.

Do you think maybe he had a background check before being sworn in as a Senator.

Do you think our government would turn a nuclear arsenal over to one who has not been properly vetted?

[guest]

BARNEYII wrote:

<quoted text>
The Koch brothers "never legislated a single IRS regulation" either, they have the lobbyist to do that for them.
"no one has mentioned tax amnesty until you"
Do a web search, you will find out you are wrong, now I will save you some time and say this for you,
I meant nobody on this thread.
Being most regulars on here are anti Obama, I do not suspect that they would bring it up.
"I didn't realize that as editor for a law review that you would need a security clearance"
That makes two of us that did not know that.
Do you think maybe he had a background check before being sworn in as a Senator.
Do you think our government would turn a nuclear arsenal over to one who has not been properly vetted?

You were the first to type the word amnest, show me where I brought it up. I can't be responsible for all your faults.

[BARNEYII]

guest wrote:

<quoted text>You were the first to type the word amnest, show me where I brought it up. I can't be responsible for all your faults.

Did you happen to read this line from that post;

"Being most regulars on here are anti Obama, I do not suspect that they would bring it up".


That included you.

[guest]

BARNEYII wrote:

<quoted text>
Did you happen to read this line from that post;
"Being most regulars on here are anti Obama, I do not suspect that they would bring it up".
That included you.

No one has mentioned a tax amnesty until you insinuated it, now since you have, document it. That is no more than you demand from us. And while you are documenting Romney's amnesty give a look towards how a poor black kid, with no obvious talents until he gets to Harvard, ever got to Harvard. If you can insinuate anything that little brain thinks up, we should be allowed to have you enlighten us about real matters, as you said, he has his finger on a nuclear trigger.

[BARNEYII]

No I did not "insinuated" tax amnesty. I flat out suggested tax amnesty was a possibility.
Only one person can, "document it" that person is Romney.
Now if want to know how President Obama got to Harvard, I suggest you read some of his books.

[guest]

wow

[guest]

BARNEYII wrote:

No I did not "insinuated" tax amnesty. I flat out suggested tax amnesty was a possibility.
Only one person can, "document it" that person is Romney.
Now if want to know how President Obama got to Harvard, I suggest you read some of his books.

It takes a conspiracy for tax amnesty and you are the only source so far. As far as the validity of his books, I would gain as much reading Grisham.

[guest]

BARNEYII wrote:

No I did not "insinuated" tax amnesty. I flat out suggested tax amnesty was a possibility.
Only one person can, "document it" that person is Romney.
Now if want to know how President Obama got to Harvard, I suggest you read some of his books.

You mean his "autobiographies" with, like most of his speeches, proven lies that the left is now downplaying as "literature?"