Who are Mitt Romney's 47 percent? A breakdown

[Openmind]

Does she always run away when people question her?

Not "running away," but understanding that there is no arguing with people addicted to only one form of thinking who are so blind and disrespecful of other's opinions that an honest straight forward answer is found "UNBELIEVABLE" and/or dragged down in the dirt.

I have spoken my mind, I have answered all reasonable questions.

I have nothing more to say on this question, and I am not masochistic or stupid, so why would I continue to submit myself to your lynching mob when we all know full well that neither I or the lynching mob will change our mind.

The only reason I even bother to drop in here once in awhile is to remind the most intelligent among you that EVERYONE doesn't think like you in the REAL world outside this forum who has succeeded in eliminating all dissensing view.

A group mind set, carefully cultivated by the likes of Limbaugh, Coulter, anf Fox News talking heads is a dangereous thing for the nation.

I have better things to do, I have other places to go, where the reality of our politics is not totally blinded by group mindset.

How deep some of you are digging to try to hold on to your shrinking hope to "make obama fail. "Skewed polls". .. . .Indeed!
LOL!

By the way, don't panic, it is time to panic if you hold on to your illusions, and if you never visited Belgium, you have NO IDEA what a Belgian waffle really is, really tastes like.

And it should be clear to even a neophite like you by now that "waffling" is the very last thing this poster ever does!

I live that to your preferred Presidential candidate!

 

[Centrehalf]

After everything that's been said to you and addressed your way in this thread, this is what prompted you to come back in early? And you write a book in response to it? Thank you for your attention but there are others who would like to speak with you, if you can find the time between now and mid-October.

BTW, you obviously have no clue what my political affiliations are or which candidates I prefer. Yep, if you can't put an accurate label on someone then by all means keep trying to pound that square peg into a round hole, maybe someday you'll succeed and then you can feel better about your analytical abilities.

 

[Texas_tea]

A group mind set, carefully cultivated by the likes of Limbaugh, Coulter, anf Fox News talking heads is a dangereous thing for the nation.

You do realize that the MSM is as bad if not worst in carefully cultivating a mindset of ignorance, right? I have watched all these programs and find that the MSNBC, CNN, ABC, CBS, NPR and likes are far more inaccurate, manipulative, and all out spin and lies than other news outlets.

And, furthermore ..... please explain how these talking heads are dangerous for the nation. It sure seems to me that the only thing that is truly dangerous to this nation is the squelching of the 1st Amendment to the US Constitution.

 

[Centrehalf]

You do realize that the MSM is as bad if not worst in carefully cultivating a mindset of ignorance, right? I have watched all these programs and find that the MSNBC, CNN, ABC, CBS, NPR and likes are far more inaccurate, manipulative, and all out spin and lies than other news outlets.

And, furthermore ..... please explain how these talking heads are dangerous for the nation. It sure seems to me that the only thing that is truly dangerous to this nation is the squelching of the 1st Amendment to the US Constitution.

The MSM is pretty bad, including Fox. Fox is just as bad as the rest of them. Fox talks a good game but they definitely favor big government republicans over all others despite their claims to the contrary. I literally laughed out loud back in 2008 when Gretchen Carlson routinely wore a McCain/Palin sweatshirt on the air and then as they were leading into commercials Steve Doocy dropped the "fair and balanced" line. They owe me at least 3 keyboards. I did finally learn to stop drinking coffee as I watched the morning news on my PC.

 

[Texas_tea]

The MSM is pretty bad, including Fox. Fox is just as bad as the rest of them. Fox talks a good game but they definitely favor big government republicans over all others despite their claims to the contrary. I literally laughed out loud back in 2008 when Gretchen Carlson routinely wore a McCain/Palin sweatshirt on the air and then as they were leading into commercials Steve Doocy dropped the "fair and balanced" line. They owe me at least 3 keyboards. I did finally learn to stop drinking coffee as I watched the morning news on my PC.

Yeah ...
That was almost as bad as all that money Keith Oberman was giving to the DNC

 

[Texas_tea]

The MSM is pretty bad, including Fox. Fox is just as bad as the rest of them. Fox talks a good game but they definitely favor big government republicans over all others despite their claims to the contrary. I literally laughed out loud back in 2008 when Gretchen Carlson routinely wore a McCain/Palin sweatshirt on the air and then as they were leading into commercials Steve Doocy dropped the "fair and balanced" line. They owe me at least 3 keyboards. I did finally learn to stop drinking coffee as I watched the morning news on my PC.

I am gonna start a new thread on this topic!

https://www.houseofpolitics.com/threads/bias-in-the-news-media.15881/

 

[Centrehalf]

Yeah ...
That was almost as bad as all that money Keith Oberman was giving to the DNC

I see what you did there! I think what Olbermann did was worse.

 

[GenSeneca]

I am asking if you think the "large" arms should be regulated among a militia.

No I do not. The 2nd states that the militia itself should be regulated, "A well regulated militia... " it does not say the arms used by the militia should be regulated, well or otherwise. It further states that "...the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." Our individual right to keep and bear arms has only limitation - you cannot use your right to violate the rights of others.

Since none of this has anything to do with Romney's 47%.... I recommend we move the discussion to a thread I posted on the topic:

Magazine Restrictions

It seems, from your comments so far, that your position is very similar to Pocket's as you both seem to view the 2nd in much the same way. Give that thread a read and we can continue this conversation there.

 

[dogtowner]

No I do not. The 2nd states that the militia itself should be regulated, "A well regulated militia... " it does not say the arms used by the militia should be regulated, well or otherwise. It further states that "...the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." Our individual right to keep and bear arms has only limitation - you cannot use your right to violate the rights of others.

Since none of this has anything to do with Romney's 47%.... I recommend we move the discussion to a thread I posted on the topic:

Magazine Restrictions

It seems, from your comments so far, that your position is very similar to Pocket's as you both seem to view the 2nd in much the same way. Give that thread a read and we can continue this conversation there.

Tex reminds me of a fairly typical police officer's viewpoint. They are where the rubber meets the road with bad people with arms and that is no enviable position. However that is no reason to discard rights. Free speech is also uncomfortable but Phred Phelps or OCCs or whoever is saying stuff you don't agree with is not reason to stave off this right either.

 

[Texas_tea]

Tex reminds me of a fairly typical police officer's viewpoint. They are where the rubber meets the road with bad people with arms and that is no enviable position. However that is no reason to discard rights. Free speech is also uncomfortable but Phred Phelps or OCCs or whoever is saying stuff you don't agree with is not reason to stave off this right either.

Do not act as if I do not not understand this topic! And, DAMN sure do not compare my comments to PfOS ... those would be fighting words my conservative friend "GenSenca" ....

I am simply looking for intellectual debate on responsible government regulations. Why does my next door neighbor who has never been convicted of a crime yet takes prozac by the dozens need a RPG ....

 

[dogtowner]

Do not act as if I do not not understand this topic! And, DAMN sure do not compare my comments to PfOS ... those would be fighting words my conservative friend "GenSenca" ....

I am simply looking for intellectual debate on responsible government regulations. Why does my next door neighbor who has never been convicted of a crime yet takes prozac by the dozens need a RPG ....

Why does he need freedom of religion ? security in his own home ?
This has nothing to with need and everything to do with rights.
You can't convict someone for what you presume they may do. No thought crime here.
Yet.

 

[Texas_tea]

Why does he need freedom of religion ? security in his own home ?
This has nothing to with need and everything to do with rights.
You can't convict someone for what you presume they may do. No thought crime here.
Yet.

The right to own large arms like a RPG .... Land mines, nuclear bombs? Are you suggesting no regulation on arms at all?

I am just askin ...

 

[dogtowner]

The right to own large arms like a RPG .... Land mines, nuclear bombs? Are you suggesting no regulation on arms at all?

I am just askin ...

its against the law to possess the nuclear material that is required to make a nuclear bomb so lets just get over that one.

there are laws regarding the possession of the high explosives that make the other two go boom so there is no need to regulate vessels they might go into either.

 

[Texas_tea]

its against the law to possess the nuclear material that is required to make a nuclear bomb so lets just get over that one.

there are laws regarding the possession of the high explosives that make the other two go boom so there is no need to regulate vessels they might go into either.

That is my very point ...

But, apparently GenSeneca disagrees ....

No I do not. The 2nd states that the militia itself should be regulated, "A well regulated militia... " it does not say the arms used by the militia should be regulated, well or otherwise. It further states that "...the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." Our individual right to keep and bear arms has only limitation - you cannot use your right to violate the rights of others.

Since none of this has anything to do with Romney's 47%.... I recommend we move the discussion to a thread I posted on the topic:

Magazine Restrictions

It seems, from your comments so far, that your position is very similar to Pocket's as you both seem to view the 2nd in much the same way. Give that thread a read and we can continue this conversation there.

 

[dogtowner]

That is my very point ...

But, apparently GenSeneca disagrees ....

correct me if I'm wrong but I thought you wished to regulate/ban/? AK's and their ilk due to some lack of need then you seem to agree with me that its not valid to regulate/ban/? nuclear weapons, RPGs or land mines. this seems contradictory to me.