Shared publicly  - 
When a president doesn't tell the truth, how can we trust him to lead?
Kathryn Ellis's profile photoWilliam Lowery's profile photoTimothy Rust's profile photoJeffrey Pritoni's profile photo
Joe S
well, let me be the first to say  >> your comment should disqualify you to be president even before you enter the ring, so to speak!
But.....when any candidate talks about truth they are just asking for trouble. There is no way you +Mitt Romney , are not lying to Americans about something.

Go ahead and come out and tell us about all the stuff you have lied about in your campaign and then I will gladly take your accusations Obama lying seriously.
Good to see Romney debunking some of the Obama campaign's fabrications.
Joe S
show us your tax returns.... can also lie by ommision! 
People cant handle the truth!!! and as of today im sure obama is leading the campaign.
ow man i cant wait till the debate. truths will reveal themselves and lies will sink even deeper.
"Full disclosure: writing this G+ post was outsourced"
Doesn't matter if he lies.  Doesn't matter if his policies have failed America.  You are a rich, successful, white, Mormon with a history of great leadership and experience.  How could I possibly vote for you?
Joe S
_First, the Boston Globe reported that contrary to Mitt Romney's claim to have left Bain in February of 1999, documents filed with the government described Romney as Bain's "sole stockholder, chairman of the board, chief executive officer and president" as late as 2002. So Romney is either lying now or he was lying then about his affiliation with Bain.

Second, David Corn of Mother Jones reports that in 1998—during which time even Romney admits he was still running Bain—Romney invested millions in a Chinese company whose business model was to help U.S. companies outsource manufacturing. And not only that, Romney used his Bermuda shell corporation to handle a portion of the investment. So he invested in outsourcing ... while using an offshore company domiciled in an international tax haven._
So when exactly did you leave Bain again, Mr. +Mitt Romney? You don't know just like you didn't about the blind trust? Okay, no more questions for you, Sir.  *leaves the page in a trance*
+Joe Salas Economics is not a zero sum game.  Often doing the grunt work of manufacturing in China results in a less expensive product, allowing more employment in the U.S. designing or selling the product.
exactly why do u think things are so cheep in the dollar store are why they can give away stuff to kids in McDonnel's or burger king
Joe S
i would love to agree with you +Warren Dew , but since i'm a supply chain professional, i know the truth.  thanks for trying, though.  
+Casey Attaway +Joe Salas I can point to specific examples.  For example, I happen to like board games, and recently participated in a kickstarter campaign for a new board game.  Manufacturing it in China enabled them to provide more than twice as much stuff for the same price, making the campaign successful - and allowing the company to hire a full time employee in the U.S. to manage a new product line built around the game.
Great ad. I just wish that the American public knew Wash Po and FactCheck are left leaning organizations! 
Speaking of "not telling the truth"

"For one thing, there's the question of which of Romney's contradictory answers is the truth. When the editors of initially took Romney's claims at face value to reject Democratic criticisms, they said the candidate must be telling the truth about his Bain departure date, because if he didn't really leave until 2002, then 'Romney would be guilty of a federal felony by certifying on federal financial disclosure forms that he left active management of Bain Capital in February 1999.'"
+Joe Salas since your a supply chain professional and you know the truth, why dont hire me. im easy to work with, i can learn quickly. what do you say? it might help the unemployment record by 0.000000000000000000000000000001% youd support that.
Joe S
+Warren Dew 

...and who coordinates the logistics and supply for the board game company?  how much was freight?  lead times?  were there any losses of intellectual property?  did your kickstart include delivery of final product without qa defects?

ha! cost savings are always a "big" attractive part of outsourcing, but don't always materialize as planned, especially from paper to real world applications. a note, many of the OEMs have experienced and seen that while keeping the manufacturing of goods in the US may be initially more expensive, the ongoing cost to operate and continue a fluid supply chain are cheaper when kept in the US.  plus it creates jobs and strengthens our GDP.

+juan guzman martinez , send me your resume.
Show me ANY politician who has been completely and totally truthful in every case.  There is a reason why people don't trust what politicians say, because even if they are saying something truthful they will word it in such a way as to make themselves look good and be what they want people to hear.  So Mitt, can we trust you to be %100 truthful if you get elected?  Please forgive me if I doubt it.
+Joe Salas U.S. employees coordinate the logistics and supply, so there are some more U.S. jobs the Chinese manufacturing is supporting.  The lower price permitted them to ship full containers, reducing the freight cost.  Delivery is at the end of this year; these particular customers were willing to wait.  Delivery hasn't happened yet, but prototypes have been delivered and they look good; also, the game company has worked with these Chinese manufacturers before with good results.

Now, if what you are saying is that in some cases, U.S. manufacture may be more effective - such as where short lead times are required as well as low freight costs - then I would completely agree.  I'm not saying everything should be made in China.  I'm just saying that in the cases where it makes sense to do the manufacturing in China, the impact on U.S. employment is often positive as well.
Romney is calling Obama a liar???  Heh, how funny since most of his speeches are equally fact checked and found to contain more falsehoods than truths.
Coming from you?!

The guy who refuses to discuss his role at Bain Capital. The guy who cried about someone calling him out on his ridiculous statement about his (way too rich, out of touch, never worked a day in her life) wife being an economic spokeswoman for her whole gender. The guy who just bombed at the NAACP conference?! The former governor of a state that implemented the exact healthcare policy the Affordable Healthcare Act is modeled after, and then runs around screaming about how the Affordable Healthcare Act is unconstitutional and wasteful spending.

YOU?! Really?!

I would be very surprised if the Romney campaign is able to avoid complete annihilation before the election. If Romney isn't completely destroyed by November, I cannot see him getting anywhere near 40% of the vote.
Sam please provide proof......I have never seen a single piece of evidence to what you claim. 
+Faraday Defcon I never said I don't vote, I just don't believe for a minute that everything coming from one or the other candidate is 100% true.  I have heard spin doctors, read speeches from speech writers, and seen how politicians will dig as much dirt about their opponents as they can so they can blow it totally out of proportion at opportune times during campaigning.  The whole system is pretty much a sham if you ask me, yet I will vote my vote all the same.
+Steve Dale if you add up the numbers for "Mostly True" and "True" and you subtract them by "Mostly False," "False," and "Pants on Fire" you get a negative number. That's because he's lied more than he's told the truth.

Don't pretend that Politifact is a biased organization because they're a Pulitzer Prize winning organization who literally just checks the facts of what people say and analyzes them with good journalism.

+Mitt Romney is a complete joke.
Maybe that is the truth you want and only that is true.
Stand up and be that leader before you choose one.
+Steve Dale Here ya go:
MSNBC: Romney speech fails fact-check test

Nation of Change: Media Fail to Fact Check Romney's Solyndra Speech

Fact Check: Romney’s ‘Gross’ Exaggeration on ‘Obamacare’

Politicus: The 5 Biggest Lies About Obama In Mitt Romney’s Nevada Victory Speech

The American Prospect: Mitt Romney's Truth-Free Campaign

PolitiFact:Romney: Obama 'only president' to cut Medicare - False

Mother Jones:How Romney Fibs—and Gets Away With It

Heck even PolitiFact's comparisons of Romney and Obama show this;

... and I can go on.  Yes, Romney has given far more false statements in speeches when compared to Obama in every arena I've seen.  Please disprove any of this if you can.  
+Jimmy Watts Obama has been in the public eye longer than Mitt Romney. Mitt Romney has still lied more as a percentage of the statements he's made.

That was an absolutely ridiculous statement you made. I can't even believe I had to defend myself on that. Wow.
To all of the "Liberals" and "Conservatives" in this thread, consider that BOTH of the major presidential candidates in this race are

1. not going to be able to "make things better".  We would need a full system overhaul to do that
2. will not be able to deliver the majority of their campaign promises. They will still have to deal with the other branches of the government
3. are probably just saying things that the people want to hear so they can get more votes.
4. are going to get the presidency anyway because really individual votes don't count, only the electoral college does.

We've all been hoodwinked, and anyone who thinks otherwise is only blinded by the fancy facade.
when a profiteering shitbag like you lies to us, how can we NOT believe what Obama says.
Liberal countries:

Switzerland, the UK, France, Germany, India, Japan, Canada, Belgium. Alright cool.

Some conservative countries that suck?

Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria, Tunisia, Turkey.
+Jimmy Watts +Christian Wiesendanger Both of you seem to have your mind made-up that Romney is the best option, but please give your opinions on why he would be better than Obama.  Honestly I want to know... If you're just a die hard Republican who never votes cross lines I can respect that... 

You're right, Obama hasn't delivered on every promise, but what candidate has.  Candidate promises are goals, and with the current legislature in Congress Obama is pretty much working with one hand tied behind his back since the GOP has vowed to support nothing he or the Democrats propose.  Washington can not work like this, and where you often see Democrats crossing party lines, even in yesterday's theater vote to repeal the ACA, it seems Republicans are simply puppets of the RNC, including Romney.  You can't call them a Unified Voice, rather the GOP is one voice with many surrogates/minions.  I'm not sure who in the RNC is pulling the strings, or whether it's Boehner or Reince Priebus, but either way the GOP taking over Congress and Presidency is not what we need.
Japan is the only country in that example that has a 100% debt to GDP ratio. I don't even think they do. Prove that claim with numbers.
You're all ridiculous. lol
From the Globe Article.

The Globe found nine SEC filings submitted by four different business entities after February 1999 that describe Romney as Bain Capital’s boss; some show him with managerial control over five Bain Capital entities that were formed in January 2002, according to records in Delaware, where they were incorporated.

Romney first deployed the defense that he left the firm in February 1999 as a candidate for governor in 2002, when Democrat Shannon O’Brien featured a laid-off worker from a Kansas City steel mill that went bankrupt in 2001, after Bain Capital had reaped a handsome profit from its investment in the company. “Romney has taken responsibility for making the initial investment but has said he could not be blamed for management decisions at the company,” the Globe reported at the time.
+Christian Wiesendanger Liberalism is a very broad and organic concept, like saying a Car and a Bus are both Vehicles so they must be the same.  And when you start using labels like Liberal, Conservative, etc you're pretty much proving you're speaking from what you're hearing on talk radio or Fox News and not from personal knowledge.  I want to hear specifics on why you guys hate the current administration and why you think Romney would do any better.
+Christian Wiesendanger is it cool if I make a new post explaining myself and share it only with you? It might be easier that way.
will you just stop saying all that shit about barrack obama we all know that you hate barrack obama dumbass!
+Christian Wiesendanger Yes it is offensive. Your base ignorance of the facts is offensive. Calling the current president a liar when he himself is in part responsible for the economic situation. Good people don't steal retirement funds from other good people. Good people don't take jobs away from hard working americans in the name of profit. Good people don't have idiots hawking their ideals. Good people stand out as good people.  So yes, every thing that issues from your idiot hole is offensive.
+Sam Alexander  I don't like the current administration because there are parts of the health bill that limit our freedom. (Everyone must buy health care and everyone will pay the same price for health care). They also didn't follow through on important promises they made to give others the same freedom we have (closing guantanamo bay). I also don't like that they have supported some very dangerous fiscal moves by the fed. (quantitive easing). 

Also, for a while there it was a democratic congress and presidency and they still couldn't work together. 
Mitt Romney proving once again that he's the only adult running for president of the united states.
+Christian Wiesendanger so you don't want me to make a post explaining myself? Cuz I can do it.

The Union money comes from Union members, by the way. Those are called dues.
Alright I'll make this post and explain it to you.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHHA THIS IS HILARIOUS ROMNEY!! You are the biggest lier the presidential stage has seen sense Nixon.  
Mitt Romney versus Reality
+Christian Wiesendanger Romney has raised more money than Obama, but that does not mean he has more supporters. In fact it's not even close. The fact that Obama is doing well fund raising at all is because he has a HUGE amount of small donors. 

"Federal disclosures show that through the end of May, 11 percent of Romney's donations had come from those who gave $200 or less, according to analysis by the non-partisan Campaign Finance Institute. By comparison, 41 percent of the Obama campaign's donors had given $200 or less."

+Michael Cooke I didn't admit defeat. I simply refuse to discuss anything with anyone that won't actually take my side of the argument into consideration. I was correct in that assumption of you because, oh look, you're employing a preschool era logical fallacy. It goes something like this:

"Wahhhh you obviously are wrong because you aren't arguing anymore wahhhh."

You'd probably recognize it more like this:

One: "Are you gay?"
Two: "What a stupid question."
One: "You're obviously gay because you won't answer the question."

+Michael Cooke you're an idiot. I don't like talking to idiots. Have fun with that or whatever. ^_^
Did you not read my post, Christian. I don't think I am a liberal. I don't think you're a conservative. That has to do with the misuse of words, though.

+Michael Cooke you're an idiot.
I. Am. Not. Liberal. I'm angry because both sides keep disregarding facts. Both sides as in Democrats and Republicans. Both of them. They keep doing things that don't make any sense in light of facts.

I'm not immoral. I think morality is relative (it definitely is relative) and I don't really like picking one version of morality over another one. I'm amoral, I guess.
+Christian Wiesendanger Sure, Obama was hyped in 2008, that was his first election. All presidents don't meet unrealistic expectations. But if you think that everyone in California has changed their mind and decided to vote for Romney, you're crazy. Especially if you're talking California (a very very blue state). 

People realized that Obama isn't their savor, but he's not a bad president and he definitely didn't cause this and definitely didn't make it worse. 

Even in 2009, economists estimated it would take about 7 years to fully recover from this recession because it was both a housing collapse and banking meltdown (which perpetuate each other) despite any realistic action taken by the government. 
+Christian Wiesendanger I am what most people term an independent.  I was raised "conservative" and I remember clearly many of the arguments that were fed to me about "liberals".  I have since grown up and expanded my views.  I realize now there is much more than republican vs democrat, right vs left, and right vs wrong in politics.  I have found that news sources in the United States cannot be trusted as they operate on a huge bias.  My problem with you +Christian Wiesendanger is your inability to see the other side, to consider that there might be more options out there than just your particular point of view.  I have a problem with how you label people who don't agree with you as "liberal" and dismiss them out of hand.  I have a problem with the fact that you seem to be stuck in one mindset, and there are a lot of people out there also stuck in that one mindset.  So please, for everyone's sake find some news other than the one that always agrees with you and listen to what is said.
+Christian Wiesendanger Intolerant, angry and immoral? Intolerant because we want gay people to be treated the same as straight people. And we want rich people to have an equal playing field with poor people? Angry, sure, but who isn't angry at the government. If you cared about the government, you'd be angry regardless of what party you are in. And immoral? In what context does any of recent liberal actions show any sign of being immoral? 

Sure, we want everyone to have health care instead of just the people making 60k+ a year. Sure, we'd like to see taxes raised on upper income since wealth is perpetual and if there is no throttle on wealth then wealth gaps widen and the rich own the world. (in fact, they already do).

Republicans value capitalism over livelihood. Cost of living trumps yacht's and golden shower caps any day of the week. That's why we aim to make sure taxes on dollars that aren't necessary for living should be taxed higher than money that people use to live. Republicans often think money is more important than livelihood, and that's where we disagree. I don't care about capitalism vs socialism vs w/e if people are dying on the streets out of starvation while next door people are racing their Yachts.

And rich people don't create jobs because they have more money to spend, they create more jobs because they need to because sales are up. And the people that bring up sales in any company is middle class. 

This idea that "companies won't hire if A, B and C" is bogus. They won't hire if they don't need to. And if they do need to, they will do it regardless of what the current tax rate is.
Obama blows. He has spent more money than ANY other president in the past! Blames everything bad on someone else, we still have a shit economy, lowest unemployment rate etc.

America has to be uneducated, and blind to reelect his ass. If he does get reflected don't botch about how hard life's your own damn fault. 
+Christian Wiesendanger you're saying the government should legislate based on religious beliefs? Say yes so I can point you to the first amendment :P
+Cory Lu Lu If you're angry at the government, perhaps you should consider voting against the incumbents that made it that way - like Obama.
Leo T
As if you always tell the truth +Mitt Romney . Pot calling the brother black!
But you agree that the government shouldn't legislate based on religious beliefs. How is banning abortion and gay rights constitutional then?
+Christian Wiesendanger 

So you say...
Pro - life
No Gun Regulation
No social help
No separation of Church and State
Religion in public schools
Support the death penalty
No distribution of wealth
Free Market

By saying 'morality' I guess you mean morality as it's viewed by the church.  With that assumption most of the countries in the Middle East fit what you're looking for quite well, so why don't you move there.

You my friend are what's wrong with this country because you have no tolerance for anyone who doesn't follow your deity or 19th century beliefs.  Sad thing is you are virtually a laughable oxymoron in your conflicting beliefs.  Pro Life yet Pro Death Penalty.  Don't you think all life is important?  What about taking care of those in need?  I guess you skipped the Bible study that went over that bit.

Thanks for posting this, because now I know I can ignore everything you say since it's pretty much as far on the side of lunacy as anything I've seen on here to date.
Tax everyone. Raise taxes on everyone. There's a HUGE DEFICIT. The only way to cut that deficit out is to spend less and raise revenue. Tax me more, tax rich people more. Don't tax poor people because they can't eat if you take their money away. That's not too hard to figure out. Also, I am gay and you're inflammatory and don't understand what you're talking about.

I don't know what Apple or Steve Jobs has to do with what we're talking about. At all.

I don't know how the idea that no god exists automatically means no police exists. You're just as crazy as the other dude. Open up your mind and read a few books on economics and world history and the European Governance Model will start to make a little sense. You'll also see that the policies that Republicans would like to put in place kind of fall in line with ancient democracies right before they fell. The United States is teetering on implosion. Wake up.
+Warren Dew The president didn't break the government. It's campaign finance that broke the government and poor regulation of congressmen. 

If you DO think it's the president, please explain. Because Obama hasn't been able to do much at all with congress. He is stuck just doing things that is within his power to help jobs. 

Congress is much more to blame. They are the ones that get away with murder and outright lying. 
I'm muting this post.. too many Right-wing, religiously fanatical quacks in here.  Why does Romney's posts always attract the nuts in G+?  
+Dave Hardee If you are an independent, when was the last time you voted for a Republican?  Or are you the kind of "independent" that always votes the straight Democrat ticket?
+Christian Wiesendanger In your opinion the bible doesn't teach hate. In my opinion it does. But regardless, it's not factual. Kids should be able to make up their own mind without their parents indoctrinating them. There aren't "anti-gay" atheists or agnostics. There aren't "anti-evolution" / "anti-science" atheists or agnostics. Atheists and agnostics don't make arguments because they fear an eternal firey hell, they establish morality individually. But honestly, all of the bibles teaching and just moral codes can all be summed down to 1 rule. "Don't do to others as you wouldn't want done to you.", the golden rule. Sometimes examples get more complex and those aren't obvious, but that is the basis of ALL morality. 

If you want moral kids, then teach them morals. Explain to them WHY something is bad to do to others, don't just threaten them with Hell. 

 I challenge you to read the verses around those texts and would agree with all the things that passages like Leviticus 18 wrote. 

Do you think homosexuality is a sin, but still masturbate? Those two passages are practically in the same sentence. 

"22 ‘You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination.
23 ‘Also you shall not have intercourse with any animal to be defiled with it, nor shall any woman stand before an animal to mate with it; it is a perversion.
24 ‘Do not defile yourselves by any of these things; for by all these athe nations which I am casting out before you have become defiled."

Do you think that homosexuals should be put to death? For if you disagree, you disagree with the word of God. 

Or if you are following Corinthians 6, do you detest homosexuality, but have no problem cursing or drinking? 

"9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals,
10 nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God."

Are you now a hypocrite? I think many of you are.

Don't accuse me of cherry picking the bible, these passages to oppose homosexuality have been cherry picked, carefully tip-toeing around all the other "detestable" acts that Christians perform every day.

Let's all just calm down and wait for the presidential debates.  I'm sure it will be clear which candidate has the most evidence for their ideas.
+McPherson White I think the way they say it has to do with how budgets take place over time. The budget grows because of inflation and other stuff but if you can grow them by a smaller rate than before, you may be able to cut the deficit.

Just as an explanation, if you cut a budget's growth from 10% to 1% and the GDP is growing by 5% (we'll say for the sake of argument that both numbers were the same originally), you will have gone from a deficit to a surplus. I think. It's complicated but that makes sense in my head. I might be wrong.

I think we should tax everyone that can afford it. And if someone can afford to pay more, they should pay more. I don't  really think they should pay more if they don't have to, obviously. However, these circumstances are not normal. This is kind of an emergency. Make rich people pay as much as they can without cutting their quality of life. That's not the only solution. We should also be working to balance the budget by cutting the growth in different areas of our budget.

I think we should also get rid of the penny and the nickle and also maybe the dime, but that's another story. Those things are really wasteful. We should also possibly get rid of paper $1 bills and replace them with the $1 coin.

Anyway, that was fun.
And +Christian Wiesendanger. Liberals aren't anti-regulation, anti-cop, anti-rules. That has never been a majority opinion of liberals. If anything liberals are PRO regulation and rules. 

As far as Godless countries, their are plenty of them. Just look at most of Europe. And look, they have less crime, are healthier, are more environmentally friendly, insure all their citizens have healthcare, do better in science and math and are outpacing us. 

I'm not claiming that this is because they don't believe in God at large, just saying that your wrong if you think that somehow we will go into anarchy and kill people if we were all godless.
+Faraday Defcon Liberals are not more left, they are less left. We are now fighting about a government mandate for private insurance for healthcare. That was a REPUBLICAN position, not a liberal one. If we were more left, we'd all be arguing for single payer / public options. 

Conservatives are WAY more right than before. Reagan wouldn't even be let into the party now. 
"Make rich people pay as much as they can without cutting their quality of life.".  This is where liberal logic and mentality really fail.  What is a comfortable quality of life?  Making 100k/year?  So lets take all the money in excess of 100k that anybody makes and give it to the government.  Well, who makes more than 100k/year?  Dr's, lawyers, business execs etc...Jobs that require LOTS of schooling, experience and risk.  Why take the risk when you can just get a 4 year degree and work for the federal government instead?  Who is going to work that hard to make a 500k/year salary knowing that 400k of it will be taken away for the fat, lazy welfare folks getting high and drunk watching cable TV all day?
And what happens when there are no more rich people?  Who is going to pay for the lazy liberals on welfare then?
+Christian Wiesendanger there is a difference between a liberal and a hippie.  Hippies are generally anti-rules and anti-cops but mainly because they want to smoke thier grass in peace. 

A common liberal, I think, is a left-leaning centrist that believes that cops and rules are good, markets are good, money is good.  The difference between this type of liberal and you, Christian, is that liberals believe that society, being in the state that it is today cannot allow itself to let people go hungry or cold or sick nomatter who is at fault.

Notwithstanding, let me say I do not object to your idea of faith based morality.  unfortunately, my faith happens to be significantly different from your faith.  please tell me, christian, which faith should we choose to build our morality laws on?  personally, I prefer mine since I think its the only right one ...
+Ben Smith Raising tax rates is not the same as raising tax revenues.

For example, in 2009, 1470 returns with over $1 million in gross income were able to take so many deductions that their taxable income was near zero, and they paid not a penny in tax.

Raising the tax rates, as Obama proposes, is not going to make any of those people pay taxes, because their taxable income remains near zero.

Broadening the tax base by removing loopholes, as Romney proposes, actually will raise tax revenues by taxing some of those returns, even without raising percentage tax rates.

If you really believe what you claim to believe - rather than just using it as an excuse to justify your political persuasion - you should be supporting Romney rather than Obama.
+Warren Dew ...wat. If someone is paying 10% of their income in taxes and then you raise it to 20% on the same income.. You just doubled tax revenue. Right? Wait why should I be supporting Romney!? Obama has proposed to also remove loopholes and broaden the tax rate. Romney wants to repeal the AFA while the CBO says the AFA will decrease the deficit. How are you making sense?!
I love how people post links to random pages on the internet to make their points.  One of the biggest problems with the internet is that anyone can publish anything without having any sort of fact checking, peer review, or really any standard of truthfulness.  So basically one can do a search for whatever and find at least 1 or 2 "sources" that completely agree with one's point of view.  Heck, one could write one oneself.  It doesn't make one any more credible though.
That was Politico. Politico is regarded as pretty moderate if not conservative.. Come on. The story about Romney possibly committing a felony is not something only democrats are talking about (I didn't know about it). It's something everyone in the media is talking about. It's kind of a big deal.
+Christian Wiesendanger lol, no i did not think you were going to say mormonism :-).  I was hoping you would consider what I actually said and give me an answer so I can try to understand how you think.
+Cory Lu Lu I agree that if anything liberals tend to believe that more government will solve all our problems, so I think the anti-regulation charge is false. Do you see yourself as someone who should pay more and have your own decisions more regulated? That is often where the rhetoric deviates from reality. It is almost always someone else who has to change.

I can't say that looking to Europe as an answer to our problems makes sense. If they are leading I don't want to follow. I believe that most of the areas where they are "better" are very subjective. There are trade-offs they have made in freedom that we currently wouldn't stomach.

Finally, I'm not in favor of letting children decide for themselves what they are taught at an early age - the reason - it is a fallacy to think that someone else isn't already whispering in their ear. As a parent you feel that pull when they are still very young. That being said, I challenge +Christian Wiesendanger to more rightly describe his beliefs as fundamentalist, not merely Christian. There are many true believers that would not feel many of the things Christian takes for granted.
Most law's are based on some type of faith based morality.  Consider murder.  Killing is only considered wrong within humanity. Animals kill each other all the time.  So why do we consider it wrong?  Against what moral code do we live?  Some people believe there is no God or hereafter so if we all cease to exist after death and we will all die eventually, in the end we will all cease to exist and nothing anybody does has any lasting worth, then what does it matter in the grand scheme of things if someone dies sooner rather than later?  Some believe in reincarnation.  So when you die you just move on to your next form of existence.  Why is murder bad?  Because we live by a faith based moral that says murder is bad.  
I know many of you still following this thread will find it hard to believe, but I am a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, or more commonly known as Mormon.  Just because I am a member of the same faith as Mitt Romney does not mean I will vote for him automatically.  It also doesn't mean that I take the right wing propaganda as being the truth.  I just hope that people study carefully before making their choices.
+Christian Wiesendanger so whats Romneys plan for JOBS then?  I heard "cutting taxes" and I heard "deregulation".  Exactly what taxes are going to be cut and what gets deregulated I have yet to hear.  That is, I still want the government to pay for my grandma's medical bills. Are we still going to be able to afford it?  if so what will be cut from the budget instead?  as far as deregulation, what exactly is meant by it?  I dont want a chemical plant dumping wasted into the water my children drink, do you?  even if it creats a crapload of jobs, i dont want that.  I dont want the repeat of the bank blowout we just had, do you?  can we still keep those regulated? how minimum wage?  should we deregulate that too?  if we do, can you survive on $1.50/hr?  oh and ofcourse, businesses dont need to provide medical insurance for employees since that will leave more money in their pockets to create JOBS.  but wait, how are those newly hired americans working for $1.5/hr gong to afford private medical insurance for you and your kids if we are to repeal obamacare and leave things the way they are?
I don't believe in God or morality and I don't kill people because I'm biologically programmed to not want to do it. Social beings don't kill people of the same species because it threatens the survival of the species.

However, if murder is wrong, why do we go to war? Wars are just a whole bunch of people killing a whole bunch of other people. How is that justifiable?
+Ben Smith Obama has never proposed closing any tax loopholes.  With the recent tripling in the estimated cost for Obamacare, it's clear that it will increase, not reduce, the deficit.
Did you not watch the last State of the Union? Because he did. I watched him do it. The Congressional Budget Office has said that it will decrease the deficit in the next 10 years. Look at the numbers. It costs money initially but in time it ends up saving money. That's a fact. The CBO is not a partisan organization. LOOK AT IT!
+Christian Wiesendanger but you pay taxes right?  are those not imposed on you?  did you break any laws to have them make you pay taxes?  how about jury duty?  did you break any laws to get a notice to show up for that?  how about car insurance?  do you have to first get a speeding ticket to be forced to purchase one?
+Warren Dew yes he did propose closing tax loopholes, warren!  it was in his state of the union speech last year.  why not actually pay attention to what the man says?  love or hate him, he is the president and deserves at least token respect
+Anton Slutsky Obama talks about lots of things he doesn't actually believe in.  It counts as "proposed" when he submits legislation, or something specific enough to become legislation, which he hasn't done.  He has only proposed raising taxes rates for certain taxable income brackets - he's never specified any tax loopholes to close.

Also, did you miss the "health care cost going up" part of +Christian Wiesendanger's post?  That's an example of where Obamacare is limiting hiring.
+Dale Burgess You should teach your kids how to think for themselves. If someone else does whisper in their ear, they should be taught how to objectively examine claims and figure it out themselves. 

This idea that "parents must get there first" so they know to blindly trust what you taught them while knowing full well that there isn't ANY evidence to support your claims over others. 

+Nate Cook Murder is not a common practice in any social animal. Chimpanzees very rarely kill members of their own colony. Is that because they are religious? No, it's because they don't want to be killed themselves. 

Golden rule is what every social creature follows. But humans do it at a higher level because we have bigger brains and do more daily activities. Sure it's true that this doesn't stop things like stealing or killing, but consensus matters. And as a society, we have a consensus to not kill, steal, rape, etc. And that is why people follow it. Because we are social creatures. 

+Christian Wiesendanger If you don't have money to hire, but need more people, then your business economic model doesn't fit your employment model. 

If you at high demand, your gains from the high demand should automatically pay for another employee. If it doesn't then it's a failing business. If employees  are charging more, then you should be prepared to pay them more, if that's not possible, cut their pay slightly to offset it. If you are paying out minimum wage, then I have no sympathy for you because you are complaining about taxes while your employees are struggling to keep a roof over their heads working 2 jobs at minimum wage. But since employees don't often get to set their own rates, mandated health care benefits isn't much to ask for considering you wouldn't have a business without your employees. 
+Warren Dew "Obama talks about lots of things he doesn't actually believe in."  And that's why you don't like him? If that's the case, WHY ON EARTH WOULD YOU VOTE FOR MITT ROMNEY?
+Warren Dew And he has proposed several bills specific and written bills to congress. His jobs bill is still sitting on the floor waiting for a vote. 

In fact, Congress is willing to spend 1 Billion Dollars to symbolically vote on Obamacare while knowing full well it's symbolic and won't do anything, but won't even put the presidents bills to a vote.
+Cory Lu Lu I guess that just goes to show how bad Obama's actual proposals are, if they can't even get to a vote.
He's never uttered a single truth in 3 years.
"This morning Minority Leader Sen. Mitch McConnell R-Ky. made a motion asking the Senate for unanimous consent to vote on a version of the President Obama’s plan to extend tax cuts for earners making under $250,000, but raising tax rates on everyone else.

McConnell’s condition, however, was that they agree to vote on a Hatch/McConnell amendment to extend the Bush tax cuts for everybody."
+Warren Dew Yeah, because if people in congress don't like an idea. It must truly and genuinely be a bad idea. Because republicans want the country to do well right now. They want Obama to fix things. Truly. Obviously republicans will win congress and the White House if they pass Obama's jobs bill and the economy does do better. 


You're delusional or your just a troll. You should know full well that congress has no intentions of passing ANYTHING that would allow any short term growth to the economy or would be painted as a victory to Obama. They only care about getting him out of office. They don't give a rats ass if that means we all have to suffer to get there. 
+Dave Hardee, thank you for posting a link to that.  It's good to see someone else knows the rules.
(not nearly as black and white as you're making it seem)
+McPherson White Obama laid out very specific plans for health care, foreign policy, jobs / stimulus bill / etc during debates with Hillary. Romney laid out nothing. Only positions he took are the ones Obama didn't or the GOP wanted him to take. 

Inconveniently, most of those positions he took were ones that both Obama and him supported just a couple years ago. 

I'm sure Romney has some honest and good ideas, but we can never know because he cares more about opinion polls and partisan rhetoric than a genuinely good idea. Obama has proposed extremely moderate bills, and he still gets painted as a socialist. If Obama's a socialist, then why is the left so mad at him for being to right?   
Yeah. Congress is getting worse but that has nothing to do with political parties and Presidents enforcing laws partially or not at all is a constitutional power the Executive branch has. I just found a decent write up on it, even though it's boring.
+McPherson White The problem is that Obama is refraining from enforcing laws that the Supreme Court does consider constitutional, like the immigration laws.  Even Bush didn't do that.
Oh charming!  I see the Obama trolls are out tonight to spread all the rumors of the day.  +Ben Smith , I think if you will google around a bit, you will find Politico neither conservative or moderate.  That site is considered a strong Lefty one.
We can't. Not that hard.
I had no idea. I Googled a little and found a few discussions that said it was conservative. I don't really care all that much. I happen to like Obama now but I didn't vote for him. I didn't like him at the time he was running. I like him because I've been following the news and I agree with him. For you to call me a troll because I have an opinion on something based on observation is really petty.
+Ben Smith Just liking the president doesn't mean he's fit to lead. He is actually the more likable candidate, as polls show. He does have a friendly manner around him. I personally don't have any faith in his leadership skills........which some people think he has.
Fine if you're going to parse words, when I said I "like" the president, I meant I think he's more fit to lead than Romney. I was using like in the sense that I favor him over Romney in the aspects that are important to being President.
+Ben Smith . I was only correcting your source, as it has been pointed out many times before on Romney's threads of Politico's political leaning.  You are certainly welcome to state your Presidential choice and opinions any time here, just as other do.
+Ben Smith Please define what my "parse words" were. Thanks bro.
I guess after defining the word "like" how I meant it to be defined, you didn't really parse any words. You simply defined the word I used with the meaning I didn't intend. It's kind of like me assuming that you meant "bro" as in biological brother, when it's kind of clear that you didn't. Idiot.
Name calling is a sad state of debate and discussion.  Surely there are other, more intelligent ways stating your opinions.
Shocking!  Even CNN tonight is reporting tonight that the Obama camp is making a big mistake by saying Romney's records need to be scrutinized and he didn't commit a felony. 2 spokesmen from CNN have now confirmed that Romney has done nothing wrong on the Bain side and the DEMS owe him an apology!  Amazing!  Has CNN turned around lately?
Seems these accusations were a diversion after all.  Ummmm....
+Ben Smith .......what? Not that funny, calling me an idiot. It's like I can't even post on here. Liberals are everywhere. It's like visiting LA....Don't go North, you get shot. Don't go east, you get shot. Don't fo South, you get shot. You can go west for about 1 mile, but after that you get shot. Heck, how well armed do I have to be? Oh, wait, I just used "heck" and ouch, that bullet in my brain hurts.
+Ben Smith more thing....sorry for party rocking
im just tired of owebama, his cronies, and the national debt...
Maybe something about throwing rocks at glass houses?  lol
don't blame ya this is stupid. "Change" doesn't mean change for the better. And, for as much as he golfs, Obama hasn't gotten the idea yet that LESS IS BETTER. Big numbers in the national debt are like big numbers in golf.
+Marty D'Arcy Except the houses happen to be made with "organic glass" and have solar panels on top
+Ryan Mar Unfortunately all that wonderful investment of "solar" fell flat on it's face.....and now WE will have to pay for it for years to come. In taxes!
Look Mitt, you're our hope right now. I would do that hand symbol from the Hunger Games, but obviously that doesn't work in text. Keep fighting, and remember, many people think we're in a "Pax Americana." Pull us out.
Has everyone seen the latest news? 
Between Romney's financial knowledge and expertise and Condi's International experience, America may get it's strength and muscle  back again!!!
+Marty D'Arcy I swooned for the brilliant and beautiful Dr. Condi Rice early-on in the Bush Presidency. As valuable as her Russian expertise would be during this new Putin led Autocracy, I fell hard out of love with her when she strong-armed Israel into allowing Hamas to participate in the Palestinian elections. This blunder led to the fall of Gaza into Islamic-facist rule. I'd be much happier if Colin Powell could be lured back to the GOP and out of retirement to serve as VP with Mitt.
+Michael Cooke I know she did, Michael, but she wouldn't be the first one to decline then accept later.
+Bruce Goren That headline only said "frontrunner" not final choice. Time will tell.
The best part is that most of you don't realize it's the people that say things like "Owebama" and "Damn liberals" that end up costing Republicans the moderate vote. Which, hey, look at that! I'm a moderate! Why would I ever want to vote for someone who's this divisive?!
I'd go for Rice.  I hadn't previously thought she was a good choice since she would not guarantee a swing state, but the evidence someone posted that women do seem to favor female politicians seems like a good reason.  Plus, she is remarkably sensible and intelligent - an unusual but nice bonus in a VP.

+Bruce Goren As I recall, Israel once tried to give the Gaza back to Egypt but was refused.  Now with the Muslim Brotherhood's rise in Egypt, maybe they'll change their minds.  Then Israel can annex the West Bank without a demographic crisis and finally get international recognition of Jerusalem instead of Tel Aviv as the capital.
+Ben Smith If you're a moderate, that should mean you split your vote sometimes.  So when was the last time you voted for a Republican?
I voted for a libertarian in 2010 in North Carolina.

Even with that, your premise is incorrect. I can be a moderate and never have voted for one party or another. Moderates aren't defined by their voting record. They're defined by their views on issues.

Inb4 "What do you mean not defined by their voting record."

Politicians are defined by their voting record because they're voting on specific legislation and issues. Voters are voting for politicians. Politicians may misrepresent their future actoins, so the ideology of a voter isn't really correlated to the candidates they've voted for in the past.

Now watch you completely miss the point of this and argue some more.
+Warren Dew  I'm with you on originally being questionable on a Condi Rice choice, Warren. But she far exceeds VP Biden in every respect. The Vice Presidential debate would certainly be an interesting one!  lol
+Marty D'Arcy as much as I agree with you that Biden isn't very .. good at not making a bunch of gaffes let's say. The man is really good at debates. I think that might be the entire reason Obama picked him. He's a genius with debates. Go watch some of his past debates he's craaaazy.

I actually like Rice a lot, but I think Biden might beat her in a debate just because, like I said, he's craaaaazy.
+Ben Smith Surely they would be debating policy and thoughts on international situations tho, Ben, and I personally don't think VP Biden can compare to Condi's Rice's experiences in that area.  But your point is taken.
Oh yeah I'll even concede that she's smarter than Biden and has more experience. The dude is just a monster at debating lol. It's like a freak talent he has.
you lied about when you left bain capital you fucking thief
+Scott Bourne Romney was running the Salt Lake City Olympics starting in 1999.  It's a matter of public record.

He's still getting money from some of his Bain investments now, and he's never denied that.  Getting money from something is not the same as running it.
+Ben Smith The problem is, a lot of people claim to be moderates or independents, and perhaps even think they are, but they're not.  Lacking any moderate positions, which you haven't taken, voting record is another possible indicator.  In your case, that doesn't really indicate that you're a moderate either, so barring actual proof, it looks like an empty claim to me.
Oh okay you're doing that thing Republicans have just started doing in the last ten years. I actually liked some of the Republican ideas of the 90s. I don't like any of the Republican ideas since Bush, though. I didn't change my views that much. The Republican message changed. A lot. 
Geez, it appears some of the late comers tonight haven't read the entire thread or seen any news tonight.  They are way behind on recent political happenings!  They just pop in to leave a sarcastic remark before doing any research.
Ouch +Nick Rogers !  Can't you come up with some adjetives that aren't  so objectionable?
+Ben Smith Actually I'm a registered independent who voted for both Republicans and Democrats in 2010, so I know what an actual independent is.

Not a huge fan of Bush or his years of big government Republicans, but Romney isn't Bush.
How can we expect you, Mitt Romney, to lead us, when you yourself lie, have no tolerance for others, and can't stand by what you say?
+Allen Kwok What a very independent thing to say! Clearly you have no bias regarding party.
+Christopher Boguslawski "No tolerance for others?" A Republican governor of a hugely blue state has no tolerance? I can't wait to hear the reasoning behind that claim.
+Scott Bourne Check out who led the Salt Lake City Olympics starting in 1999.  Bain may have left Romney's seat open hoping he would come back, but he never did.
u guys should hope you win but if u lose just try again in 4yrs
Romney's initial post on this is just about beyond parody, given the revelations of the past two days and the lies he told regarding his time at Bain. 
+Chris Allbritton Unlike Obama, Romney hasn't lied.  Or do you think all the news reports about his taking over the reins at the Salt Lake City Olympics in 1999 were lies too?

The fact that the Bain paperwork didn't catch up is like the fact that the Obama birth certificate had a nonmatching green background.
That's the best we can do?

Reopen the Jeremiah Wright wound, that's what I say.
LOL Allen, try posting a link from a neutral site! That has already been proven false by links posted earlier tonight.
+Allen Kwok I think you need to read +Marty D'Arcy's link.

If I own stock in Apple, that doesn't mean I make their business decisions.  Granted business intricacies like that may be tough for the left to understand.
Who is the liar now, Mitt?

You claim you left the company in 1999 and never had any involvement in it again? How does being the sole stockholder, president, and ceo and raking in a six figure salary until 2002 fall under the "no involvement" category?

You're either insane, stupid, or both. Or you could be a felon, which may put a damper on your dreams of the Presidency.
+Kerry Jesberger Actually, Romney still makes money from his Bain investments even now - he's completely upfront about that.  That doesn't change the fact that he left active management at Bain in 1999 to take over the Salt Lake City Olympics.

Read +Marty D'Arcy's link above if you want details.  I'm afraid it's yet another case of the Obama campaign distorting the truth and the leftist press lapping it up.
+Allen Kwok Sorry, but you're mistaken.  Separation of management and ownership is key to the structure of most corporations.
At some point, people demanded that I care more about how Mitt earns and spends his personal money then how Barrack earns and spends my personal money.
+Warren Dew That's just not true. Romney said, and this is his own words on his disclosure form:

"Mr. Romney retired from Bain Capital on February 11, 1999 to head the Salt Lake Organizing Committee. Since February 11, 1999, Mr. Romney has not had any active role with any Bain Capital entity and has not been involved in the operations of any Bain Capital entity in any way."

In 2002 he gave testimony that he was on the board of a company owned by Bain in 2001-2002. 

Furthermore, in a 2001 SEC filing, Mitt Romney was named as the "sole stockholder, chairman of the board, chief executive officer, and president." Does that sound like "not involved" to YOU? Being the CEO seems to me to be "active management."

This is not just about making money from investments. This is a bare-assed lie. He claims he left the company for good in 1999 and had nothing further to do with the company or its entities after that, when his own testimony and SEC filings in 2001-2002 prove that to be blatantly untrue. 

It is what it is. He's a liar. Plain and simple.
+Scott Bourne I teach my kids to understand the details of a situation before reaching a conclusion.  In this case, the prospectuses issued by Bain Capital clearly show that Romney was not actively involved in management of its investments after 1999, exactly as Romney said.  Again, see +Marty D'Arcy's link above for details.

+Kerry Jesberger You can have 100% ownership and still be a "passive investor", and in fact you can go to jail if you tell the IRS you're actively managing such an investment when you're not.  Plus, there's the fact that Romney was never even a majority investor in the Bain Capital investments like Staples or Sports Authority even while he was managing them.

Directorships are representatives of the owners, and do not actively manage the operation of a company.  Usually they just show up every few months for board meetings.
Are we all so pure in character that we are able to hold our country's political leaders to such high standards?

They are human like the rest of us, but with the one common purpose that they both want to make this country great again. Anyone who is prepared to step up to meet that challenge has incredible character, no matter what side of the political fence they lean on...
Mitt you never tell the truth so you're basically telling us that we should not trust you to lead. 
+Christiaan McPherson Romney has the integrity to stick to his positions even in front of unpopular audiences - things like telling millionaires he's going to cut their tax deductions for fancy second homes, and telling the NAACP he's going to repeal Obamacare.  Meanwhile, Obama specializes in telling people what they want to hear - then quietly putting in place policies that funnel patronage money to his supporters instead.
+Warren Dew, I am genuinely not sure if you're a troll or not. Because the stupid crap that is coming out of your mouth is just astounding to me.

You realize that.... while Mitt Romney said he would get rid of those tax deductions, in the same breath he told them how he wanted to cut the income tax rate by 20%? So really, those millionaires are getting a pretty cushy deal. Then he told the NAACP (read: minorities) that he is going to take away their access to affordable health care, and then went ahead and called them a bunch of freeloaders (when the Affordable Care Act's individual mandate was established so that everyone HAS to buy health insurance and NOT be a freeloader). Meanwhile, the Affordable Care Act is almost identical to the health care law that Mitt Romney himself passed and touted as a major victory, including the individual mandate.

If you don't believe me on that:
See Mitt Romney Promote an Individual Mandate

It's his words, not mine.

Obama's been talking about ending the tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans from the very beginning and has never wavered from that position. He talks openly about not minding paying extra in taxes (since he would be affected by this policy). Mitt Romney wants to cut all these tax rates permanently, and he personally benefits from that. It amounts to him giving himself a pay raise.

You realize why they call Mitt Romney a flip-flopper, right? It's because he is constantly saying what he needs to say in order to get the votes. 
+Kerry Jesberger Romney's proposed top rate of 28% is still 28% more than these millionaires are paying:

Meanwhile, Obama's plan would allow those millionaires to continue paying no taxes.

As for the NAACP speech, Romney also explained how Obamacare is depressing employment.  Many in the 15% of blacks who are unemployed - or in the 40% of black teens who are unemployed - would probably be happy with an Obamacare repeal since it would give them a better chance at a job.  Granted those blacks were probably not in the NAACP audience.
u will never be prez cuz of ur massachusetts record. U FAILED THEM
It's unfortunate people like Alistair get a vote. He reads one excerpt from a leftist publication and bases his vote on that... should be a law against that. 
+Kevin Bromby yeah there should totally be a law against freedom of speech. That sounds like a great idea :P
Terrible low grade negative ad. I hope that you, sir, will do some good action to compete with Mr Obama.
Mitt, why did you take a 6 figure salary from Bain Capital as an executive in 2001 and 2002 if you had zero influence on the operations?  That seems pretty dishonest to me.
And your record of at least 16 big lies and now one that might actually be considered tax fraud?
+Allen Kwok As someone who lived in Massachusetts throughout Romney's term and since, I can tell you that Romney was a far better governor than the Democrat who replaced him.  Of the three Republican governors that preceded him, there may have been some that were even better, though not his immediate predecessor; before that, there was the Democrat Dukakis, who was far worse.
Mitt, You need to realize that just because the 95% of people you deal with are the 1%, means that you are doing the class warfare, not Obama's tax plans. I can see through all of the republican debates and now the ads that you are a liar, and you're not even a good one. Admit defeat and let Ron Paul take the nomination, I'll vote for him before you or Obama, but if you make it my vote is for Obama!
+James Dobbins I would happily have voted for Ron Paul in November, but expecting him to win the nomination at this point is, how do I put it, not very realistic.

If you're a Ron Paul supporter you'd be shooting yourself in the foot supporting Obama.  Ron Paul is for smaller government in almost every way; Obama is for bigger, more intrusive government in almost every way.  Romney may not cut back on government excesses as well as Ron Paul would, but he'll do way better than Obama.
+James Dobbins If you would vote for Obama there is no way that I would believe that you are a TRUE Ron Paul supporter.
So Mitt, when you don't want to be tied to Bain, you testified that you retired in 1999, BUT when it helped you establish MA citizenship for gubernatorial candidacy, you testified that you remained active with Bain through 2002 and drew a 6 figure salary from Bain as an executive in 2001 and 2002.

You can't have it both ways, Mitt.
+Nicholas Yannacci it's the great comedy of the entire election season that both candidates are debating their impact on the economy.  Presidents don't control the economy/jobs.  The difference they can make is infinitesimally small compared to the normal ebbs and flows of the free market.
Too little, too late Mitt.  If you're not going to go on the offensive, the parasitic liberals will eat you alive.
+Warren Dew Sorry to disappoint you, but I'm voting against both Obama and Romney.  The GOP spent 8 years ostracizing the fiscal wing of the party, calling me and mine idiots, liberals, terrorist sympathizers, truthers, nutters....etc etc etc.  

But now they need our votes, but the best they can do is threaten us with an Obama victory if we don't vote for their guy?  Let me know how that works out.

Until the GOP can actually at least pretend to care about how we TEA Partiers think the platform should look, I'll gladly keep them in their  Bataan Death March.  
ABO! We can't afford another 4 years...
Obama 2012's new slogan:
Do you really want him to be president?
And that's all Obama has.  We can't afford 4 more years
I don't know.... you might need to answer that yourself, Mittens.
Agreed 100%.  And, this isn't the first lie that has been perpetuated by the Obama administration against others.  In fact, the Obama campaign's lies started even before he began his race to the White House.  He, and his campaign, has painted a new history for Obama, and I hope that before people to the ballot box in November that they take some time to discover the "real" Obama!!!
I'm concerned that Governor Romney may follow the same track that John McCain followed. McCain, a good man, tried the soft and gentle approach and got pummeled as a result.Romney needs to take off the gloves and begin counter-punching.

It seems clear that President Obama will go to any lengths, including lying, to retain office. Romney needs to bring the fight to Obama's doorstep and make clear to America that Obama is a committed socialist radical.
So I'm supposed to believe a man who won't release his tax info? So Far you've only demonstrated that you are a Draft Dodging, Tax Evading, Job Killer. This just looks like another attempt to hide your felonious activities.
Then he sent out an ad saying he never said Obama was lying.
You are right to ignore all the Obama claims against you. We all know they are falsehoods and lies to only deflect off the real issues. I honestly believe the average american citizen sees through all of what the Dems are trying to stick to your name and are failing. Please just stay the course and remain calm until the election and save up your ammo for the debates. Remember that Obama is one cool character in his demeanor, but you can win if you just remind him of his failed record and policies. I lived in Birmingham, MI for many years and we are freinds of the Stodards. We always remember what a good family you came from and you have our sincere hopes and prayers to take down the Obama empire in November!
Joe S
ammo for the debates?  please +Tom Gilmore ...explain to me what the 100k salary for two years after 1999 from bain was to r'money..  retroactive retirement pay?  explain to me what ol' mittens was doing sitting on board meeting on bain's behalf after 1999...  he knew the secret password?

the more this guy talks the worse he digs himself into his lie hole.  

then you hear this "small government" this "less tax" that, but the whole time his buddies in the house and senate are voting on things just the opposite.  why would small government care what a woman chooses to do with her body?  why would the gop hold hostage the tax cuts initiated under bush for those making less than 250k a year?  small businesses they say?  ...BS!  90+% of small businesses fall under the 250k mark.

obama is going to karate chop romney in the debates...i can't wait for the fight...and i'm glad obama in the meantime will continue to hold mitten's feet to the fire...because we already know mitt's pants are fully engulfed.
Joe S
_On the ABC roundtable, Republican strategist Matthew Dowd had a similar take.

“There’s obviously something there, because if there was nothing there, he would say, ‘Have at it,’” Dowd said. “So there’s obviously something there that compromises what he said in the past about something.”

“Many of these politicians think, ‘I can do this. I can get away with this. I don’t need to do this, because I’m going to say something and I don’t have to do this,’” Dowd said. “If he had 20 years of ‘great, clean, everything’s fine,’ it’d all be out there, but it’s arrogance.”

In the last week, several Republicans have advised Romney to release his returns. That list includes former Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, former RNC chairman Michael Steele and Alabama Gov. Robert Bentley, who called for “total transparency” and said he releases all his tax returns. On “Fox News Sunday,” the Weekly Standard’s editor Bill Kristol added his voice to the list as well, calling for Romney to “release the tax returns tomorrow” and “take the hit for a day or two.”_
+Peter Archer I agree with the sentiment, but not with the tactics.  Obama has an undeservedly clean reputation that could allow him to sling mud like this without getting dirty.  Romney needs to bounce some of it back to show that Obama is just a politician like the rest of the Washington DC crew - and worse than most.
Because there are no jobs, we now have welfare reform law with
How can we trust you when you don't tell the truth? Romney on Boy Scouts

And come on, like any politician or presidential candidate is innocent in this. You're just as guilty, Mitt. Both sides need to grow up when it comes to attacks. Though I highly doubt you're actually telling the truth here.
how about another country?
Romney is misleading to Mitt Romney, if he cannot follow his own self, how can he lead  "HE IS UNPREPARED" his whole resume had been shot to hell, and nothing in it passes scrutiny, and he balks at us, the interviewers, verifying and certifying his record, his resume raises more questions than answers and You or I went into an interview like this our resume would hit the garbage can before our seat lifted from the interview chair.
+Mark Allemand Hi Mark  What am I talking about. This election as with all elections, we are holding an interview, and we are siting in the interviewer's chair.  Romney gave us an embellished resume and said , hey look at my resume, hire me to be president, but when we look closely at it and investigate and seek to verify it, we are stonewalled, mislead and misdirected.  He thinks he's entitles and we should just let him slide into office.  An the that which he gave us has raised more questions than answers, his tax returns were incomplete, that's like handing in half a resume.  he has been resistant, evasive, secretive and untruthful. Mitt Romney had 18 years to resolve this tax issue, yet he failed to do solve it, so "He Is Unprepared..  If I interview someone for a job and the candidate acted like Romney has, His resume would be in the garbage, before he could lift his butt off of the interview chair I hope I cleared I that up. Thanks for your input, I didn't mean to be unclear or confusing.  Have a great week.
Michael Dennis, Hi guy. Just wanted to note that your entire premise seems to be a falsehood. The tax return that Romney released was not incomplete, it just didn't have anything in it that Democrats could use against him so there's a lot of complaining.

Romney has already met every legal requirement and has agreed to provide even more. There is no "tax issue." There has never been a "tax issue." Just a left wing talking point. 

The last guy that applied for the job of President refused to even provide ID and you didn't have any problem hiring him. Now he's stealing all the money and giving it to the people who recommended him for the job and you're still happy with that. 

So let's not pretend here that you are concerned about the quality of the job candidate. 
Mitt Romney questioning thre President's integrity....hmmmm...what a honest about why he will not release tax honest about when he really stop working at Bain....Mitt has an honesty problem
Mr. Romney
   Or Mr. President
I congratulate you on your assumption of the President of the United States of America  I know you will be President
This news certainly
When a presidential candidate flip flops whenever it's politically expedient, how can you expect him to do anything but shovel BS?
Good question, Mitt. How about you tell the truth about your tax returns? And stop lying about Obama and welfare reform! Your latest attack ad claims Obama is "gutting" welfare reform by eliminating work requirements. Here's the truth - some state governors have been asking for years to have more flexibility in running welfare. Obama said yes to the governors, provided they didn't change the work requirements. So Romney's ad isn't just a barefaced lie, it's the exact opposite of the truth. What's worse is, one of those governors who wanted more flexibility? Mitt Romney. If there's a single person in this country less trustworthy than Mitt Romney, I hope I never meet him.
Just a thought: is it possible for presidential candidates to run for office without degrading and vilifying the opposition. I realize that it's a trend that repeats itself every four years, but I find it absolutely outrageous that our "highly esteemed" leaders stoop to such childish schemes. I, for one, am not willing to support a candidate whose primary aim is defamation rather than actual leadership. A man is truly praised when he "loves [his enemy, and prays] for those who persecute [him]" (Matt 5:44).
This video shows him telling the truth....people weren't paying attention. If they had, he wouldn't be President today. Now's our chance to correct a mistake Presidency.
Not Natural Born -- TRUTH MATTERS
+Kay Bader That's a link to a conspiratorial YouTube video FYI. Do you also believe that the Illuminati are taking over the world for devil? Cause I find those videos all over YouTube as well, and they're a lot like that video.
It appears to me that you can't identify the difference between a lie and the truth.  Otherwise you might not engage in so many misquotes, misstatements and half-truths.  It seems to me that Mr. Romney has a problem here, not Mr. Obama.
During the nearly 15 years that Romney was actively involved in running Bain, a private equity firm that he founded, it owned companies that were pioneers in the practice of shipping work from the United States to overseas call centers and factories making computer components, according to filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
its not a "lie",if you cant remember..i think he has got oldtimers..or multiple personality disorder...not joking..serious...
Add a comment...