Romney White Paper- Plan to take away American's Rights

reply to post by randomname

you keep electing morons and everybody suffers for it.
but like the average american has a choice in who the presidential candidates are.

All Americans 18 and over [unless committed felony/s] can vote. But [imo] nobody can realistically say that we have a choice (in the true sense of the word) in who are leaders are. The truth is, we get very little to choose from, and they always tend to be .. untrustworthy. Even if they do appear honest up front, in short time they are corrupt, and this is both [all] parties.
__________

It seems the line has been drawn in the sand now--for real, and we are at a genuine crossroads. Still our choices are few and all are unlikely to end well. I'm honestly greatly concerned for the future of this once great country.

reply to post by Wonderer2012


Don't vote for him, simple as that. He is crazy, and rich too.

Originally posted by RealSpoke
reply to post by burdman30ott6

 

Why? The pseudo liberal ideology is fascism.

And this is the same group of people that tried to go to war with Iran but was stopped

Again, it is all personal political perception. Unless the current administration falls into your definition of pseudo liberal, I would argue that the true liberal politics in the US are more internally directed fascist than the pseudo liberal (AKA "neocon') politics are. Today's liberal oligarchy is far more active in protecting Americans from themselves than any other ideological group in American politics ever has been. Every action seemingly has the goal of changing personal behavior, making it financially disadvantageous to veer from their vision of what American life should be, and/or making every American more reliant on the government and less responsible for the self. If that isn't the template for Orwelian fascism, then I honestly don't know what is.

Conversely, the pseudo liberal political ethos seems more directed in restricting the projection of Constitutional rihts outside of US borders, eliciting massive control over international affairs, and making it financially disadvantageous to stray from their business model, though not so much behavioral change driven, but rather profit driven.

Honest answer here, I "get" maximization of profit and making money. I understand greed, mostly because greed is something which every man has fully capacity to both experience and exploit. Moreso, I understand free market greed, where an individual can either pay $400 for a 'Sany' plasma screen or $1000 for a 'Sony' plasma screen, depending on what his goal is status-wise. I do not, however, understand enacting regulations which tax the bejesus out of people on the production, supply, and sin sides, ensuring that regardless of whether you buy the Sany or the Sony, ya gonna take it in the seat. I also "get" placing the onus of responsibility on the individual in all things, as well as rewarding the individual for all achievements. I don't "get" scapegoating responsibility off of the few or the have nots and onto the many or the haves and I certainly don't "get" what that leads to, aknowledgement of achievements only being granted to the whole, rather than the actual achiever. No, it does not take a vilage and yes, the weakest link in the chain is to blame when that link breaks.

Now, that said, we saw a destruction of the system with corporate bailouts on both sides of the aisle... but that is a topic for a different thread.

Romney has a "Plan to take away American's Rights"? I dunno, man. Bush and Obama are going to be hard acts to follow.

/TOA