Who do you support for U.S. Senate in...
Olive

Herrin, IL

#3290 Oct 7, 2012
Romney flip-flops on his 47% statement. Did you really expect anything else? Now he is saying he is wrong but he is lying through his teeth. What a loser.
Shitt Rmoney wrote:
Shitt Romney said he was "completely wrong" when he argued that nearly half of Americans were "victims" and dependent on government.

The admission came Thursday as the GOP presidential candidate sought to clarify his controversial "47%" comments.

"Clearly in a campaign with hundreds if not thousands of speeches and question-and-answer sessions, now and then you're going to say something that doesn't come out right," Romney said on Fox News. "In this case, I said something that's just completely wrong."

Last month, secretly recorded video of Romney at a May fundraiser showed the Republican candidate saying 47% of Americans will vote for President Barack Obama "no matter what."

"There are 47% who are with him, who are dependent on government, who believe that, that they are victims, who believe that government has the responsibility to care for them. Who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing."

Romney ads: U.S. can't afford four more years of Obama

The non-partisan Tax Policy Center estimates that for tax year 2011, 46% of households will end up owing nothing in federal income taxes. But if payroll taxes are counted, the number of non-payer households drops precipitously - to an estimated 18% in 2011.

Adding to his argument about entitlement, Romney said his "job is not to worry about those people."

"I'll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives," he added.

"What I have to do is convince the 5 percent to 10 percent in the center that are independents, that are thoughtful."

After the videos, which were posted on the progressive news website Mother Jones, caught fire, Romney called a last-minute press conference with pool reporters while he was in California at the time.

The former Massachusetts governor acknowledged the comments were "off the cuff" and "not elegantly stated," but he defended the main point of the message, saying he was criticizing the increasing size of government and entitlement programs.

"We have a very different approach – the president and I – between a government-dominated society and a society driven by free people pursuing their dreams," Romney said.

The following day, Romney still stuck by his comments and elaborated on the logistical reasoning behind his remarks.

With Ryan by his side, Romney rallies Virginians in debate victory lap

"We were of course talking about a campaign and how he is going to get close to half the vote," Romney said. "I'm going to get half the vote, I hope, I want to get 50.1% or more. Frankly we have two very different views about America."

In the first presidential debate Wednesday, Obama surprised political observers by not going after Romney on the comments, as he has on the campaign trail in the last two weeks.

On Fox News Thursday night, Romney was asked what he would have said if the president had brought up the controversial statements–which is when the GOP nominee went as far as to say he was "wrong."

He then argued that, if elected, he would represent all Americans, not just half.

"I absolutely believe, however, that my life has shown that I care about 100% and that's been demonstrated throughout my life. And this whole campaign is about the 100%. When I become president, it will be helping the 100%."
beware

Chicago Heights, IL

#3291 Oct 7, 2012
Im watching the replay on line of obama getting his little butt kicked! I can't believe that he is such a coward! Can't even look at Romney as he was being critiqued! What was he writing down? Obama never even had any come backs! Weak, the whole time! Mitt dominates the whole time!
Olive

Herrin, IL

#3292 Oct 7, 2012
NEWS FLASH: UNEMPLOYMENT STILL UNDER 8%. NATION REJOICES EXCEPT FOR BUTTHURT REPUBLICANS.
paul

Sugar Grove, IL

#3293 Oct 7, 2012
Olive wrote:
NEWS FLASH: UNEMPLOYMENT STILL UNDER 8%. NATION REJOICES EXCEPT FOR BUTTHURT REPUBLICANS.
NEWS FLASH.......
Real unemployment is well over 11%.
A disgrace by any standard.

Wait till after the election and the figures are adjusted upward yet again.

Your boy is a one man wrecking crew supported by the media who will still not ask this mistake any questions that might befuddle him.

He is the worst thing that has ever happened to this country.
Popeye

Manhattan, IL

#3294 Oct 7, 2012
Olive wrote:
NEWS FLASH: UNEMPLOYMENT STILL UNDER 8%. NATION REJOICES EXCEPT FOR BUTTHURT REPUBLICANS.
Where in the hell did you get unemployment under 8%??

You can always tell when a Democrat is lying, they are speaking.
The Emperor

Chicago, IL

#3295 Oct 7, 2012
Popeye wrote:
<quoted text> Where in the hell did you get unemployment under 8%??
You can always tell when a Democrat is lying, they are speaking.
Good

Goooooooooooooooood

Let the butthur flow though you
UninformedOhio Republican

Chicago, IL

#3296 Oct 7, 2012
Popeye wrote:
<quoted text> Where in the hell did you get unemployment under 8%??
It's simple mathematics. 7.8% < 8.0%

Got it?

No?

Okay, here you go...

If the values in question are elements of an ordered set, such as the integers or the real numbers, they can be compared in size.

The notation a < b means that a is less than b.
The notation a > b means that a is greater than b.

In either case, a is not equal to b. These relations are known as strict inequalities. The notation a < b may also be read as "a is strictly less than b".

So this is what it has come to with republicans? Just straight out denial.

Instead of just bashing the factual numbers, now they just put their hands over their eyes and ears and pretend it didn't happen.
paul

Sugar Grove, IL

#3297 Oct 7, 2012
UninformedOhio Republican wrote:
<quoted text>
It's simple mathematics. 7.8% < 8.0%
Got it?
No?
Okay, here you go...
If the values in question are elements of an ordered set, such as the integers or the real numbers, they can be compared in size.
The notation a < b means that a is less than b.
The notation a > b means that a is greater than b.
In either case, a is not equal to b. These relations are known as strict inequalities. The notation a < b may also be read as "a is strictly less than b".
So this is what it has come to with republicans? Just straight out denial.
Instead of just bashing the factual numbers, now they just put their hands over their eyes and ears and pretend it didn't happen.
Dumbass.
beware

Chicago Heights, IL

#3298 Oct 7, 2012
UninformedOhio Republican wrote:
<quoted text>
It's simple mathematics. 7.8% < 8.0%
Got it?
No?
Okay, here you go...
If the values in question are elements of an ordered set, such as the integers or the real numbers, they can be compared in size.
The notation a < b means that a is less than b.
The notation a > b means that a is greater than b.
In either case, a is not equal to b. These relations are known as strict inequalities. The notation a < b may also be read as "a is strictly less than b".
So this is what it has come to with republicans? Just straight out denial.
Instead of just bashing the factual numbers, now they just put their hands over their eyes and ears and pretend it didn't happen.
60% of these so called jobs were temporary, part time with no benefits. They were low waged and last less than 90 days. The real factual unemployment number u6 is about 15%. There were only 114000 jobs added in a month for a population of 310million. This is a laughable number. GDP is less than 1.5. That is terrible and this is the worst recovery since the end of WW2. These are facts that matter.
Liberal BS

Spring Grove, IL

#3299 Oct 7, 2012
UninformedOhio Republican wrote:
<quoted text>It's simple mathematics. 7.8% < 8.0%

Got it?

No?

Okay, here you go...

If the values in question are elements of an ordered set, such as the integers or the real numbers, they can be compared in size.

The notation a < b means that a is less than b.
The notation a > b means that a is greater than b.

In either case, a is not equal to b. These relations are known as strict inequalities. The notation a < b may also be read as "a is strictly less than b".

So this is what it has come to with republicans? Just straight out denial.

Instead of just bashing the factual numbers, now they just put their hands over their eyes and ears and pretend it didn't happen.
Underemployment 14.2%. Unchanged from August
Liberal BS

Spring Grove, IL

#3300 Oct 7, 2012
Olive wrote:
NEWS FLASH: UNEMPLOYMENT STILL UNDER 8%. NATION REJOICES EXCEPT FOR BUTTHURT REPUBLICANS.
25 million unemployed. 14.2% underemployed trying to support families on part time hours. And the "rejoicing" is where?
remembering Bush

Waterloo, IL

#3301 Oct 7, 2012
If you want to piss off the pubs...just mention Cheney/ Bush. Base your facts on his 8 years. That just kills'em. They can't face the facts of just why we are in a failng economy. How's that Irag war thing going. Thousands of soldiers killed, billions spent. Don't mention that stuff. It infuriates them as they have no defense. No one could direct a recovery in 4 years, but their hero romney will. I mean, they got put out of office for a reason didn't they. It's called inept leadership, but they want to lead again. I sure hope not.lol
Olive

Herrin, IL

#3302 Oct 7, 2012
remembering Bush wrote:
If you want to piss off the pubs...just mention Cheney/ Bush. Base your facts on his 8 years. That just kills'em. They can't face the facts of just why we are in a failng economy. How's that Irag war thing going. Thousands of soldiers killed, billions spent. Don't mention that stuff. It infuriates them as they have no defense. No one could direct a recovery in 4 years, but their hero romney will. I mean, they got put out of office for a reason didn't they. It's called inept leadership, but they want to lead again. I sure hope not.lol
If Bush would have killed Osama bi Laden they would have carved his face on Mount Rushmore. When Obama killed Osama bin Laden they were concerned about bin Laden's rights. Talk about hypocritical douche bags!
Liberal BS

Spring Grove, IL

#3304 Oct 7, 2012
Olive wrote:
<quoted text>If Bush would have killed Osama bi Laden they would have carved his face on Mount Rushmore. When Obama killed Osama bin Laden they were concerned about bin Laden's rights. Talk about hypocritical douche bags!
What the hell are you talking about?

And by the way, if we are choosing who will be president based on who killed bin Laden, you need to vote for a Navy Seal. Obama killed bin Laden? Which helicopter was he on?
Olive

Herrin, IL

#3305 Oct 7, 2012
Liberal BS wrote:
<quoted text>
What the hell are you talking about?
And by the way, if we are choosing who will be president based on who killed bin Laden, you need to vote for a Navy Seal. Obama killed bin Laden? Which helicopter was he on?
^Sheepfucker.^
GaveUpOnSociety

Earlville, IL

#3307 Oct 7, 2012
who cares who is in office when they are both bought and paid for by the same bank. same corporation=same agenda
Olive

Herrin, IL

#3308 Oct 7, 2012
Liberal BS wrote:
<quoted text>
Great response you uncouth loser.
Wow, that really hurt coming from a sheepfucker and all.
GaveUpOnSociety

Earlville, IL

#3310 Oct 7, 2012
Does an internet arguement end when one member of said arguement says something so clever and witty that the other member is forced to retire? Does the "winner" feel some level of intellectual satisfaction and pride over this win? Primitive.
Good Question

Spring Grove, IL

#3311 Oct 7, 2012
GaveUpOnSociety wrote:
Does an internet arguement end when one member of said arguement says something so clever and witty that the other member is forced to retire? Does the "winner" feel some level of intellectual satisfaction and pride over this win? Primitive.
I don't know. What do you think?

Seems to be a step better than people physically beating the tar out of each other. What's disturbing is that almost every one of these "threads" degenerates to the level above fairly quickly. A dozen posts or so. Nobody changes anyone's mind. It is indeed a kind of battle, but if wits, or in some cases, half wits.

Is there a solution you have to offer, or is your statement also exactly what you are ruminating over?
GaveUpOnSociety

Earlville, IL

#3312 Oct 7, 2012
The only solution is to get over the fact that somebody has a different belief than you. I have come to realize that opinions are usually not based on solid facts and people are ignorantly stubborn even when shown proof. The point is don't waste your time arguing online about who is right or wrong to boost your intellectual ego, if your smart then utilize it and fix the problems around you and collaborate with like-minded individuals, don't argue with those that wont be convinced anyway, its counter-productive.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Rockford Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Prosser teacher charged in sexual assault of teen (Mar '07) Sun E Pina 16
Rockford Is For Losers It Is Where They End Up Sat nOgOd 3
News Catholic Charities refuses to place children wi... (Jun '11) Sat nOgOd 1,689
Roy c. Johnson..R.I.P. Aug 22 shazbotbaru0 2
News Murder charges filed in case of missing Bartlet... Aug 21 Bponch1234 1
Harkness (Dec '12) Aug 16 Chuck 16
Quail Eggs Aug 15 ZHJS 1
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Rockford Mortgages