Shared publicly  - 
 
I commend those who planned and conducted the bin Laden raid a year ago, and I applaud President Obama for approving the mission. 
90
3
Manaf Rojo's profile photoMichael W. Moore's profile photoMichael Smith's profile photoUlf Karlsson's profile photo
80 comments
 
See, now that is a good political move.
 
Unfortunately, +Mitt Romney I cannot be that generous toward Obama. Signing an order does not mean you are committed to the mission.
 
Chinese netizen is watching the Presidential Election Show of USA,justing passing by and stepping on your pageO(∩_∩)O~
 
Clinton didn't like to use the military, he only retaliated with missile strikes and was very hesitant to get involved militarily. Obama, if anything, has stepped up what Bush started. Drone strikes are up, he approved a troop surge in Afghanistan, got bin Laden and many other terrorist operatives, got spec op troops in Africa going after the LRA leadership, etc.

I know it's only politics but I'm glad to see a Republican give credit where it is due for a change.
 
+Travis Cobb I think the LRA stuff is just another excuse for us to be in Africa... AfriCOM, they have oil! must give them democracy!
 
I wonder how anyone would think this is a commendation from Mitt to Obama other than some kind of political mockery to score some political point. Lmao
 
+Nuel Akhue oh it's most def politics as usual... but at least it's funny... and he's not perpetuating the bs back and forth hypothetical that cannot be proven of who would have done what given the situation.
 
+Mitt Romney you know the president is in trouble with common sense Americans when it isn't his Health Care Plan, the economy, or even if one is better off today than they were 4 years ago that he is flaunting. Rather it is a covert op to take down the worlds most wanted terrorist that he is using as his marquee accomplishment.
 
you have to ask people... are you better off than you were a few years ago... now take inflation into consideration... same answer?
 
It's about time you acknowledge something good that the president has done
 
+Claudette Rothman well, it's kind of a short list, makes it tough, that, and it's politics they don't do a whole lot of that, especially from opposing parties
 
But it does make me wonder how politics can be so off. Some months ago when the raid was carried out by the navy seals that killed bin laden, both republicans and democrates where on the same page rejoicing and praising the outstanding effort of the president and the seal team that conducted the raid. Only a year later, it's now becoming a political tool to score some political point because anything can be sold to the gullible voters.
 
+Gary Brisson He also bombed Iraq in retaliation for the assassination attempt of Bush Sr., and, with NATO support, got involved in a bombing campaign in Kosovo. I don't doubt he wanted to distract from his problems at home, but I also don't blame him for not getting OBL. If anyone knew what he was capable of they would've taken him out. Everyone underestimated him and we pay for it.
 
+Nuel Akhue well just like Obama is still blaming bush, I'm sure this mess is bigger than he thought it was but he simply hasn't gotten much done, whether you can put all that blame on him or not... this has been a very slow recovery if a recovery at all. He can't really run on his record!
 
apapun tujuannya .,apapun sifatnya
kalau berbentuk kekerasan itu harus di basmi .,.
Translate
 
Four years ago we were witness to the same political scenario, everybody blames the other and promises change but four years after we're back at it again. Promises upon promises with no I intention or no clue as to solving the massive problem
 
"It's not worth moving heaven and earth and spending billions of dollars just trying to catch one person." - Mitt about Osama bin Laden, apparently even Jimmy Carter would make a better president than Mitt.
 
+Ira Burton apparently it's dawned on Romney that he gaffed when he made that statement and he's trying effortlessly to reverse it lol
 
+Nuel Akhue, nobody wants to be called a waffler, but that is what Mitt is. I don't think Obama should be re-elected, but given the choices that our two party system presents to me, I would rather have the guy who does nothing (Obama), than the guy who is going to make everything worse because he is clueless (Mitt).
 
+Ira Burton in an economic sense I think we're talking about wrong direction vs pretty clueless... we're headed for the "fiscal cliff" under the obama admin, with bernanke at the wheel... I'm not sure Mitt would be all that much better?
 
+Mitt Romney is as big of a tool as +Barack Obama . +Mitt Romney has no intention to improving the current conditions in the united states. the united states government no longer represents the american people; only corporations. This can be verified by the current agenda, executive orders, and campaign contributors.
 
+Jason W. Lewis I pretty much agree with ya, so what's your suggestion? Ron Paul! Gary Johnson! right? :)
 
+Ira Burton in a situation where you are faced with the possibility or choices of either remaining stagnant or gamble with the choice of electing someone that's clueless and bound to set the entire back into the dungeon, it becomes a very difficult choice to make
 
+Ira Burton Romney was right: it wasn't worth moving heaven and earth to kill one guy. It was, however, worth moving a couple dozen SEALs. It's a sad situation when the electorate thinks "I won't move heaven and earth to do this" means "I won't bother with this no matter how easy.
 
+Warren Dew been nice in politics isn't what the voters are looking for but one who can get the job done but in this case, I don't foresee any rather what they're good at is making some political speech that won't change anything
 
This is one string of comments that I actuallly enjoy reading. Sparks some thought on my part. Thanks for keeping it somewhat intellectual.
 
+Jason W. Lewis Why shouldn't Romney have intention to improve the current conditions in U.S.? Perhaps he doesn't care so much about the people but he wants to be reelected - so, he can't ignore the problems to much either. I think the question is more about if he really has that competence and personality to improve the situation or not. He had some problems coping with the other Republican candidates - and that gave some signs of his ability to handle the Presidency.
 
+Eric Skillingstad Maybe my standards are too high, but I think Obama is pretty weak on foreign policy. Yes, he killed one, admittedly pretty important, person, but he let the entire nation of Iraq, which we basically rebuilt and which should have ended up as our ally, become the ally of our enemy Iran instead. Afghanistan is also a disaster: Obama surged troops in, and all it caused was more casualties; now we're negotiating on exactly how the Taliban is going to win. The intervention in Libya was likewise pointless.

Maybe my problem is that my ideal on this is Reagan, and he's too high a standard. Every president since has made strategic foreign policy missteps.
 
+Eric Skillingstad

Its because Mitt Romney isn't really THAT smart. He knows how to make HIMSELF money. He doesn't know how to help make OTHER people money...

He isn't actually running for president. He is just a face with lots of money and lots of donors. He is advised, and then attempts to convey his advising to the people. He is like a computer that is being programmed by the billionaires right before your very own eyes. He is a total joke. This post for example, was the idea of some adviser. Mitt actually has no real ideas of his own, he is just a delivery boy for Corporate America. Mitt only knows how to make himself money, he doesn't know how to run a country. That is why he is the perfect candidate for Republicans. Just tell him what to do and he will do it because he doesn't know any better. If the programming backfires, his words backfire, the code is rewritten and Mitty speaks a different tune to coddle the limbo voters.

You can see it in his face when he talks. Every thought & every word that leaves his mouth is not generated out of passion, belief or morals, but from the memory of a previous advisory meeting.
 
+Eric Skillingstad that's probably were an intelligent politicians takes the battle from. Instead of Romney focusing on Obama's foreign policy which is going to be detrimental to his campaign I think he needs to focus on the economy if he is to stand a chance
 
+Dave Hansen I'm pretty sure Romney's work at Bain Capital was all about making money for other people.
 
+Brad Dillon i honestly dont have any suggestions. I just know that the system is completely broken. I cant say that +Ron Paul 2012 is the answer. As I recall, 4 years ago we all heard about change. There has certainly been change, none for the better. The problems are there is too much television, playoffs, facebook, youtube, and mainstream tihsllub. There are too many distractions and the general population has too much ignorance pounded into their head. If anyone mentions anything outside what is taught from main stream is dismissed as conspiracy.
 
+Warren Dew better than taking money from hard working people to support those who refuse to support themselves like big O has been doing.
 
+Ed Snell Agreed. In fact, it seems like Romney's entire career has been about helping other people: as a consultant, helping other people manage their companies; at Bain capital, helping other people make money; helping the Olympics out of the hole they were in; helping Massachusetts out of a fiscal crisis.
 
Big O didn't do anything but say the mission is a go! The SEALS did the work period! Anybody can say yes go do it. Everyone seems to think Big O was the planner in all this.
 
+Jason W. Lewis I quite agree with your honest submission and thoughts about everyone been indifferent about the situation and ignorant, that's why the politicians will always and continue to play on our collective intelligence every four years when it's time to get elected
 
Big Bush false flagged 911 then attacked Iraq who had nothing to do with 911. Dirty Dickie Cheeney made billions and all it cost us was a few thousand troops.
 
+Warren Dew ; that's why Massachusetts was 47th out of the 50 states in job creation under Romney....

From the Wall St. Journal...

"Amid anecdotal evidence on both sides, the full record has largely escaped a close look, because so many transactions are involved. The Wall Street Journal, aiming for a comprehensive assessment, examined 77 businesses Bain invested in while Mr. Romney led the firm from its 1984 start until early 1999, to see how they fared during Bain's involvement and shortly afterward.

Among the findings: 22% either filed for bankruptcy reorganization or closed their doors by the end of the eighth year after Bain first invested, sometimes with substantial job losses. An additional 8% ran into so much trouble that all of the money Bain invested was lost.

Another finding was that Bain produced stellar returns for its investors—yet the bulk of these came from just a small number of its investments. Ten deals produced more than 70% of the dollar gains.

Some of those companies, too, later ran into trouble. Of the 10 businesses on which Bain investors scored their biggest gains, four later landed in bankruptcy court."

Romney is in business for himself, not the people
 
70% of all his earnings came from TEN deals. FOUR of those TEN later went BANKRUPT.

so 6 out of 10 major investments are a total success from 14 years of work.. D Grade - Fail -

what he does with america will be the same...D Grade. After all, Romney still wins with a D grade, he always get his pay day first. So for him this is OK, his books look good so HE is good. Well it is NOT OK with me.
 
+Dave Hansen Massachusetts already had a low unemployment rate thanks to previous Republican governors, so there wasn't much room for it to go down further. The financial crisis in Massachusetts was a state budget crisis, not an employment crisis.

Most startups fail; that's a fact of life. The strength of the free market is that the failures are small and the successes are big. The fact that Romney recognizes that is a plus, not a minus.
 
+Eric Skillingstad Romney may not have explained his immigration policy well, but it does make sense if you look at it. If you prevent employers from employing illegal immigrants, you remove the incentive for illegals to immigrate or stay here because they can't get the jobs they came here for.

That said, I'm sure Romney would not have a problem with states helping out with illegal immigrants. Contrast that with Obama's interference with state initiatives on the subject.
 
Those who hire the illegals are 99% at least corporations, and you can't put them in jail for breaking the law.... and the slap on the wrist fines are laughable. Put teeth in such a law as you propose and make it hurt where it gets their attention in the pocketbook.
 
+Warren Dew

So Romney inherits a bad "budget" state and cant turn it around? What do you think he will do with the country when you add on the load of dealing with Foreign Affairs?

no job growth = poor tax revenue = budget crisis
its all related buddy.

2nd note:

Small start ups shouldn't be expected to fail unless they return a huge profit. People should be able to start a business and have it thrive to the point where you can sustain a reasonable healthy living. The government should do everything it can to help that process, NOT helping a billionaire move money around to shelter profits for tax savings. Myself, a small business owner, It shouldn't be expected I fail unless I hit it big.

Like you said, most startups fail, but fail small...some make it big. That is what the problem is today.

Lots of people investing in lots of small things that fail, now lots of people who didn't have much have even less and when you add up lots and lots and lots of little failures you have lots and lots of poor people and ONE BIG PROBLEM. Meanwhile those who hit it big ask, whats the problem fellas it worked for me? And generally those are the people who have fat pockets to begin with so they can absorb hits.


+Eric Skillingstad , I'm sure Romney has a great IQ, i just don't like how he uses it.
Lance G
+
1
2
1
 
+Dave Hansen let's see... Who do I want as CEO of the United States?

A Community Organizer from South Chicago? What kind of shape is South Chicago still in?

Or a guy who actually has experience as a CEO running troubled companies and a problemed state?
 
+Dave Hansen So what? If a company doesn't manage to make and marketing products or services that can compete on the market, it will fail. One problem is that there are too many companies with products people seem less interested in - and then they won't buy those products.
 
+Ulf Karlsson , large companies force out small business with their cash not better products & services. Large companies cant possibly employ the available workforce because their goal is profit. More employees = less profits. Its what Romney did at Bein.

Small business can and need to employ more people. We just need a government that works toward that goal and not the goal of Romney's world.

We used to have a strip mall that was flooded with traffic. About a hundred people and their families made their living running their own business. Wal-mart came in and priced everyone out. Now we have an empty strip mall, out of work familes, and only a crappy Wal-mart and the minimum wage out of state college kids for employees.

The real problem is people like yourself comparing small business with big business. When rural areas are overtaken by big business it RUINS the local economy. Multiply hundreds of small local economies destroyed by profit hungry S&P 500 companies and you get what we have now. A few wealthy, and lots of struggling people.

You are misinformed by there being too many companies. There are not enough. Just too many massive companies competing against each other selling the same crap. We need more small businesses that offer their own flavor, twist & style. Its whats happening, take the micro-brew phenomenon for example. More and more people want to buy local brews.. Although they are more expensive, the product is better and they are sick of deciding between a crappy Bud, a crappy Miller or a crappy Coors.

More businesses = more jobs. You can never have too many businesses.

People need to take a vacation and visit the country, to see what the real world is like outside of the big billboards, big buildings, big deals, flashy lights and fake promises of the City.
 
I really like this post. If Mitt Romney keep this attitude, he will demonstrate that he can unite Americans to fight for an even more prosperous future.
 
+Dave Hansen Romney inherited a bad budget in Massachusetts and he did turn it around: he fixed it by cutting the fat that had crept in through pork barrel spending and union favoritism. I'm hoping he'll do exactly the same thing with the country.
 
+Eric Skillingstad I agree that enforcement is the tough part. I do think Romney's private sector experience will help him in knowing how to enforce effectively against employers of illegal aliens.

I think drug gangs are more an issue of criminal law, not just illegal immigration.
 
I agree +Gary Brisson...so why vote for private sector sucker Mitt Romney?

He is not going to help the private sector by removing government. he is going to help the private sector by using the government. This help will only be felt by those who are like him. He understands big business, he doesn't understand small business. That is why a large part of his Bein work resulted in failures. (failure for the company purchased and restructured but not for Romney) The real world doesn't work like that.

Pretend I hire consultant Mitt Romney to help me run my business and he does a shit job and I go under, he still keeps his consulting fee. This is not understanding how the economy works, this is understanding how to make yourself money. This is also why small businesses don't do things like that, only large ones that want to get bigger. In the real world, people like myself are too busy working to try and muscle out some blockbuster deal by restructuring. Rom is good at his job, but not good for us.

Just because I say the government needs to work for small businesses I don't mean I want them to control it. Just make the playing field a little more honest and reasonable. This way the average person can be successful without resorting to being a slave of big business.
 
+Dave Hansen I'm not saying that there are too many small business. What I'm saying is that many of them lacks interesting products or abilities to market those products. You are right when you say that big business with huge financial resources limit the opportunities of smaller business. But companies still need products that stand out from the rest in some way. Actually, you are saying this yourself when you talk about "own flavor, twist and style". Even big companies risk being put out of business because of lack of interesting products - just look at Microsoft and Nokia. Or look at the neverending patent issues between Apple, Google and Samsung. This is the nature of the free market, and will continue to be it for a long time.
 
+Dave Hansen Your post is filled with misinformed biases. If Romney did a bad job as you suggest in your example he would have gone out of business in no time. Furthermore, only 4 out of 400 businesses that Bain Capital worked with under Romney's tenure went under. Perhaps you should go educate yourself on the subject a little more.
 
I agree with everything you just said +Ulf Bjolin , I just want the government to work equally for big and small business. We don't have lobbyists. My families print shop and rental business don't get representation like Nokia Microsoft. Granted we are small, there is a HUGE network of small print shops and rental businesses. These people are ignored by government because their voice is small, individualized and fractured, by nature. But this shouldn't reduce its value to the economy and the decisions the government makes.
 
I did, and I never read what your telling me.
 
+Dave Hansen I think you may have a misapprehension about Romney's economic plan. I think he does plan to help the private sector by removing, or at least reducing, government, not by "helping" the private sector in intrusive ways. He has said repeatedly that what he wants to do is "get government out of the way".

Personally I'd like to see things go even further, for example by restricting software patents so big companies can't use them as a way of throttling startups. However, I haven't seen any candidate proposing anything like that. As a small business owner myself, I think Romney will be a lot better for small business than is Obama.
 
+Warren Dew ,

I must say what Romney says as candidate and what he would do as president will be totally different. Just look how much has changed from nomination seeking Romney to president seeking Romney.

Romney says what his advisory's tell him to say to get votes. What happens after he is done fooling everyone...time will only tell.

I'm looking at chart of MA spending, it has gone UP and is trending up. I don't see how you think he is cutting out all the waste while at the same time spending more each year...

We will just have to agree to disagree... I have wasted enough time today talking about this anyway
 
and i dont want the government to simply get out of the way, without regulation companies will do anything to make extra profit.

For example dumping fracking waste used in Marcellus shale drilling in small streams that are used to support local farms instead of processing it properly. Its done because they get away with it...

If government just got out of the way even more, the wealthy ones would be able to do whatever they wanted to make more money on behalf of others. Government needs to get in the way, but in a good way.

I agree with you that what can be patented these days is a joke and is killing start ups, but its not the root of the problem. If we trim the bush, the bush will still grow back just the way it was. We need change to occur at the root - where the problem is. That problem being too much concentrated wealth up top controlling everything that effects everyone else.

Mitt wont dig the root out, he is one of the bigger branches on that bush.
Mary M
 
Isn't it wonderful +Mitt Romney that they have Billy boy doing the commercial for BHO about what you "may or may not have done" when Bill let him get away more than once. Talk about giving you ammo, they couldn't have done better if they loaded the gun and cocked it for you. Roll with it, brother! ;-)
 
+Dave Hansen Romney did pretty much what he promised in Massachusetts, and his actual positions have stayed pretty consistent throughout this campaign so far. He does emphasize different aspects of his positions for different audiences, but that's only because the positions are not so simplistic that they can be entirely summed up in one sound bite. If you want to understand the details of his positions, though, a bit of web searching or looking around on Romney's site will find them.

I actually agree that the multibillionaires are too powerful and are able to manipulate government in their favor - just look at how Buffett got Obama to tout Buffett's tax plan, that leaves all of Buffett's billions immune to taxation. That's what happens when some players get so big that you have an oligopoly instead of a free market.

Romney is nowhere near that level of wealth, though. He's far from having even a single billion, let alone having tens of billions.
 
buffet rule is a joke. I'm not happy with either candidate.
 
I have read Mitt's website and what his stances are, yet I struggle to find anything I agree with.
 
True, I just think this is bogus considering all the crap that got swung at Obama for whatever reason. Romney didn't say anything until he was done with primaries. 
 
I don't congratulate a rooster for taking credit for making the sun rise.
 
You do congratulate the rooster for waking you up...
 
Bring the jobs back to USA. Mary Wilcox, Where is the $950,000. Please pay it ASAP.
 
Of course, and this is because YOU are a carbon copy of Obama....but less likeable and more stuck up.
 
If you really gave a hoot about this country, you would pick Ron Paul as your running mate...because that's the only way youre going to get my vote!
 
Suma Chatterjee ...3rd May ...John Splater --- White House is such a building of Power that , even if we settle there , we may think as Heroes / Heroines . Those , who want to serve as Constitutional Head , will take this Official Bungalow / Palace seriously .
 
You should. You business style in the past scares my vote away Sir.
 
 fouk you mother foker    fouk you mother foker    fouk you mother foker    fouk you mother foker    fouk you mother foker    fouk you mother foker    fouk you mother foker    fouk you mother foker    fouk you mother foker    fouk you mother foker    fouk you mother foker  
 
I will admit that credit were credit is due and on this matter I agree with Mr Romney. 
Add a comment...