What do you think?

[Doug S.]

With respect when you say "a candidate who seems to have alliances with only the few who seem to be doing well". You are using the old leftist he is rich, therefore he is bad cliche.
I am sure you remember when parents used to point out successful people to their children and say " if you work really hard you can make it too".
It's sad is it not that those times seem to be gone? A reflection on what ails the World maybe.

I don't think so, Pete...we Americans aren't any different from the rest of the world, we admire hard work and we aspire to affluence. We have had a bit of bitter fruit forced down our throats by the rich now and then with their bad behavior, but that is just another form of excess...there are some very good, very rich people. One of my heroes is Bill Gates, he and his wife are donating huge percentages of their considerable fortune to charities that will benefit all of us. Before those of you who disagree will bust a gut trying to be the first to point out that the Romneys donated significantly to charity, that was a religious tithe "requirement" for their religion, not an act of generosity, so it doesn't count for me.

As for Mrs Romney's Frivolous dancing horse, it is an Olympic medal contender
Calling it frivolous is indicative of how little you know of the time, hard work and money involved in getting a horse to Olympic standard.
I understand the Romney's have a large amount invested in the animal and the tax deduction is legitimate, if indeed they got one.

The point isn't that it takes a lot of hard work and money to get a horse to Olympic standard, nor that the tax deduction was legitimate. Pete, when you make so little that you have trouble putting food on the table for your children, you'd rather eat that damned horse than watch it prancing on the parade grounds...and to know that the man who wants to represent you to the rest of the world is so heartless that he puts his priorities into that endeavor doesn't endear him to those voters...and we here in the U.S. have WAAAAY too many as the schism between the haves and the have nots gets wider and wider...another form of polarization.

I come from a background of horses...my father worked at Churchill Downs, our family was from Louisville, KY. I worked my way through high school and college on a cattle ranch, rode a horse so much the insides of my thighs were raw. I think of them as very spiritual animals, love them....but they are expensive toys and they did little to gain respect for the Romneys during a time when the largest part of our population was practically destitute.

In the end, BO made that connection with the majority of the voters and the "conservative agenda" was refuted by the vote...I know that's a bitter pill to swallow for our conservative majority around here, but if anyone believes the membership on this forum is representative of the general population in the U.S.A., you're a little more than half a bubble off :furious: !

As for BO and the current brouhaha...I'm in the same boat with Jim...not enough information to make a firm decision yet...ready to fall on either side of the fence, just need the RELIABLE, INDEPENDENT research to push me to one side or the other.

Cheers!

Doug

 

[Pete McCluskey.]

Doug I also come from an equine background and in fact still own a very accomplished dressage horse as well as having a share in a couple of thoroughbred race horses which shows how dumb I am.
However your comment the hard up people would rather eat the horse than see it prancing on the parade ground is indicative of the way politics is polarising people to resent those better off.

The redistribution of wealth has always been a left wing agenda. What was Romney supposed to do sell his horse and his assets and give them to the poor?
Would it have made any difference? I think not.
Personally I would rather have my country run by a successful business person than an ex lawyer with a dodgy past who was once a card carrying member of the Communist party. Which is what we have in Oz at the moment.

I apologise to myself for the thread drift and accept my own apology. The Patriot act ,
A good thing or a means for Government to spy on everybody?

 

[Doug S.]

I apologise to myself for the thread drift and accept my own apology.

:lol::lol::lol:

Pete, you are ONE OF A KIND!

We who are not worthy :bow: rockonsmile :chug: and :laugh4:

Cheers to PETE!

Doug

 

[Doug S.]

The redistribution of wealth has always been a left wing agenda. What was Romney supposed to do sell his horse and his assets and give them to the poor?
Would it have made any difference? I think not.

No...but those who were among the poor would no doubt rather have seen their government unemployment benefits continued (ala BO) rather than the rich given more tax breaks at their expense in a tight national budget (ala Romney).

We remember "Trickle down economics". Trickle down? It didn't. Even some of the members on here said they just pocketed the higher profits, they didn't pass them on down to their employees.

The horse was just a symbol of the disconnect...but a big one! I understand your comment regarding the polarization causing the poor to resent the rich, but greed is SO unattractive when you're eating out of the trash at the McDonalds. I know that sounds sort of dramatic, but you really would be amazed at how many of the homeless are doing just that in the city of Houston, TX, and that city seems to be thriving in the "recovery", if there really is one. I buy McDonald's gift cards and give them to the panhandlers on the street corners...they probably sell them for beer money....Oh, well....:sad:

Cheers!

Doug

 

[Doug S.]

The Patriot act , A good thing or a means for Government to spy on everybody?

Maybe a little of both? Like politics, it's not all black and white, but shades of gray.....:idea:

Cheers!

Doug

 

[Keith]

Just go and "bolt" one up your jacksie and you'll be fine....