Jump to content

Welcome to Rune Tips, the first ever RuneScape help site. We aim to offer skill guides, quest guides, maps, calculators, informative databases, tips, and much more to help you get the most from the Massive Online Adventure Game, RuneScape, by Jagex Ltd © 2009.

Report Ad

Welcome to Forum.Tip.It
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

2012 U.S. Elections - President Obama Re-elected


  • Please log in to reply
638 replies to this topic

#41
Quyneax
[ Display Name History ]

Quyneax

    Aes Sedai

  • Members
  • 11,297 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Joined:21 November 2008
  • RuneScape Status:P2P
  • RSN:Mierin

as far as I know no candidate for the presidency has campaigned for, for example, gay marriage, the abolishment of death penalty and other basic things


The only one who has come close i believe, or at least heard about is Ron. What he wants to do is just get the federal government out of those decisions such as gay marriage and abortion and leave it up to individual states to decide on their stance on those issues.

You can't really come close to campaigning for something without supporting it. What Paul says is pretty much unrelated to the issues themselves.

@Enfield: I know, but it's still annoying to see the US profiling itself as 'leader of the civilized world' and still executing people >.>.

From a region of suicide bombers, do you think they care about their own destruction?

That's a cruel joke (I hope).
Supporter of Zaros | Quest Cape owner since 22 may 2010 | No skills below 99 | Total level 2595 | Completionist Cape owner since 17th June 2013 | Suggestions
99 summoning (18th June 2011, previously untrimmed) | 99 farming (14th July 2011) | 99 prayer (8th September 2011) | 99 constitution (10th September 2011) | 99 dungeoneering (15th November 2011)
99 ranged (28th November 2011) | 99 attack, 99 defence, 99 strength (11th December 2011) | 99 slayer (18th December 2011) | 99 magic (22nd December 2011) | 99 construction (16th March 2012)
99 herblore (22nd March 2012) | 99 firemaking (26th March 2012) | 99 cooking (2nd July 2012) | 99 runecrafting (12th March 2012) | 99 crafting (26th August 2012) | 99 agility (19th November 2012)
99 woodcutting (22nd November 2012) | 99 fletching (31st December 2012) | 99 thieving (3rd January 2013) | 99 hunter (11th January 2013) | 99 mining (21st January 2013) | 99 fishing (21st January 2013)
99 smithing (21st January 2013) | 120 dungeoneering (17th June 2013) | 99 divination (24th November 2013)
Tormented demon drops: twenty effigies, nine pairs of claws, two dragon armour slices and one elite clue | Dagannoth king drops: two dragon hatchets, two elite clues, one archer ring and one warrior ring
Glacor drops: four pairs of ragefire boots, one pair of steadfast boots, six effigies, two hundred lots of Armadyl shards, three elite clues | Nex split: Torva boots | Kalphite King split: off-hand drygore mace
30/30 Shattered Heart statues completed | 16/16 Court Cases completed | 25/25 Choc Chimp Ices delivered | 500/500 Vyrewatch burned | 584/584 tasks completed | 4000/4000 chompies hunted

#42
Alg
[ Display Name History ]

Alg

    Troll General

  • Editorial Panel
  • 10,880 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:California.
  • Joined:5 August 2006
At this point, other but not Ron Paul. Do not care to elaborate on that.

#43
champion
[ Display Name History ]

champion

    Dragon Slayer

  • Members
  • 6,176 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Joined:10 August 2007
  • RuneScape Status:None



impossible


Key word.



First, that's two words. Second, there wasn't a chance in hell jeb Bush was running this year, any candidate who has an actual shot is waiting for 2016 since the American people re-elect a first term president ~75% of the time. Third, Jeb Bush supports Romney fully so I doubt voting for one would be any different from the other. Fourth, why in the hell would we want another Bush in the office? We've already had two and the second one was disastrous.

I think Vezon was somehow trying to assert that it was actually impossible to get really sick or lose access to health insurance. I think he's just trolling or something.

 


#44
enfield
[ Display Name History ]

enfield

    Bear Fur

  • Members
  • 390 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Joined:30 July 2011
  • RuneScape Status:P2P
  • RSN:realitybugll

From a region of suicide bombers, do you think they care about their own destruction?


i do think very much that the government and politicians and officials care about the persistence of their countries, and would not do something knowing that it would doom them.

I believe those are the conclusions that must be drawn from the way their governments operate, from what it does. if they operated with a suicide-bomber mentality, then perhaps one could argue differently. But I believe wealth and being alive is very important to the people who control the region - more important than sacrificing everything to wipe out a country.

Here's a quote from an A.I researcher which i like:

All else being equal, not many people would prefer to destroy the world. Even faceless
corporations, meddling governments, reckless scientists, and other agents of doom, require a
world in which to achieve their goals of profit, order, tenure, or other villainies. If our
extinction proceeds slowly enough to allow a moment of horrified realization, the doers of
the deed will likely be quite taken aback on realizing that they have actually destroyed the
world. Therefore I suggest that if the Earth is destroyed, it will probably be by mistake.


it is true that there are exceptions. but those exceptions tend to be people without much capacity to destroy the world anyway, i think. I'm realizing this quote isn't 100% relevant, but meh.

#45
Crocefisso
[ Display Name History ]

Crocefisso

    Il Barone

  • Members
  • 1,718 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:La Grande-Bretagne
  • Joined:21 March 2011
  • RuneScape Status:Retired

If the primaries had lasted through May, I would have voted for Rick Santorum. The reason being is that Romney has a millstone around his neck from Romney-care.


Wow. I've two questions here, really:
1. Why Santorum? To me, he seems like a backwards, slightly stupid and absurdly Christian political charicature, with no legitimacy as a President.
2. Why is Romney-care so awful? I've yet to see a good argument for why adopting a system that Europe has successfully had in place since, in the UK at least, the 1940s is a bad idea.


impossible


Key word.




Trolling, surely?



In this day and age, it is impossible to safely be an isolationist, and one of the primary roles for the President is Commander in Chief (which is why I could never vote for Ron Paul). If Iran gets a nuclear weapon, Israel will probably be a bit of scorched earth. I don't see Ron Paul trying to stop that from happening.


I've never understood why people think that if Iran got a nuclear weapon they would launch it at Israel. Wouldn't they be ensuring their own destruction, then? the only would way that i see it happening is if mad men got a hold of one and everything (but we know the chances of that happening from historical precedent and simple analysis - next to nothing).

From a region of suicide bombers, do you think they care about their own destruction?

That is an incredibly crass and ill-informed generalisation. Remember that 'suicide bombers' are almost without exception fundamentalist Sunni groups. Iran, on the other hand, is a well organised Shia state that uses proxies such as Hezbollah - which has enough rockets (c. 15,000) not to need suicide bombers for the most part - and has in fact waged a calculated proxy war against the USA et al. In short, Iran is not going to blow it. More likely, it seeks nuclear weapons in order that it may have them as a deterrent against Israel - let us not forget that the Netanyahu wants rocket strikes against Iran, not the other way around - and so that it can continue to assert itself as a regional power.

The problem is that our perception of Iran has been badly skewed by the media, and if one looks at Iranian rhetoric with a little more cultural context than Fox News and Sky are willing to give, the Iranian problem, though certainly a problem, becomes less of a threat.

a) Ayatollah Khomeini's famous name for the USA - the 'Great Satan' - does not mean that the USA is some demonic entity. Rather, in the context in which a Muslim cleric uses it, this term is rather less scary: in Islam, the Devil has always been thought of as something that acts from within, tempting the hearts of men. This is rather distinct from the traditional Christian view, and thus we tend to interpret the term in a Christian way. In reality, the term means, in our terminology, something more akin to 'Great Tempter' etc. Yet, without explanation, Iran suddenly seems a lot more dangerous than it really is.

b) 'Israel will be wiped off the map' does not mean Israel will be obliterated by a nuclear bomb. It is a rhetorical way of saying that Israel will not be able to withstand the pressures that come with its existence. Again, less sinister than one might originally think.

My point here is that, though I am certainly no Iranian apologist, our approach to Iran is so overblown and paranoid, thanks to the subtle misinformations of the media, that, as seen in the above posts, there is a tendency to talk of Iran as more of a threat than it is.


"Imagine yourself surrounded by the most horrible cripples and maniacs it is possible to conceive, and you may understand a little of my feelings with these grotesque caricatures of humanity about me."

- H.G. Wells, The Island of Doctor Moreau


#46
enfield
[ Display Name History ]

enfield

    Bear Fur

  • Members
  • 390 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Joined:30 July 2011
  • RuneScape Status:P2P
  • RSN:realitybugll
okay quyneax. yeah i thought you probably knew. but american politics can be frustrating to observe for sure.

I don't see the existence and use of a death penalty as being anything like the epitome of american hypocrisy though - sure there are those for which the punishment inflicts much suffering, but then there are those wishing they could get it which can't, and there are those for who the punishment of living out their lives in jail would be worse. ideally, probably the convict should be able to choose to have a lethal injection if he wants, and it shouldn't be mandatory for anyone.

i do think the death penalties' ability to make a statement is interesting. you know, there was this milk scandal in China a while back, where to get the watered-down milk though the quality insurance measures it was doped with this toxic, nitrogenous compound, which simulated the protein content of pure milk. And 1000's of kids got sick, and a handful died, and there was public outcry, and so on.

and what did the chinese government do? They ended up sentencing a number of the people involved to death. I feel that is probably a much better anti-corruption measure then sentencing them to life would have been. of course, one has to wonder how much it was done to appease the public, and how much it was done to prevent such atrocities from happening in the future. nonetheless my immediate reaction to hearing that was - yeah! they got what they deserved. way to go!

#47
sees_all1
[ Display Name History ]

sees_all1

    Ice Giant Melter

  • Members
  • 4,961 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Joined:26 June 2007
  • RuneScape Status:None


If the primaries had lasted through May, I would have voted for Rick Santorum. The reason being is that Romney has a millstone around his neck from Romney-care.


Wow. I've two questions here, really:
1. Why Santorum? To me, he seems like a backwards, slightly stupid and absurdly Christian political charicature, with no legitimacy as a President.
2. Why is Romney-care so awful? I've yet to see a good argument for why adopting a system that Europe has successfully had in place since, in the UK at least, the 1940s is a bad idea.

Santorum isn't progressive, and doesn't have Romney-care
Big government is always a bad idea.



In this day and age, it is impossible to safely be an isolationist, and one of the primary roles for the President is Commander in Chief (which is why I could never vote for Ron Paul). If Iran gets a nuclear weapon, Israel will probably be a bit of scorched earth. I don't see Ron Paul trying to stop that from happening.


I've never understood why people think that if Iran got a nuclear weapon they would launch it at Israel. Wouldn't they be ensuring their own destruction, then? the only would way that i see it happening is if mad men got a hold of one and everything (but we know the chances of that happening from historical precedent and simple analysis - next to nothing).

From a region of suicide bombers, do you think they care about their own destruction?

That is an incredibly crass and ill-informed generalisation. Remember that 'suicide bombers' are almost without exception fundamentalist Sunni groups. Iran, on the other hand, is a well organised Shia state that uses proxies such as Hezbollah - which has enough rockets (c. 15,000) not to need suicide bombers for the most part - and has in fact waged a calculated proxy war against the USA et al. In short, Iran is not going to blow it. More likely, it seeks nuclear weapons in order that it may have them as a deterrent against Israel - let us not forget that the Netanyahu wants rocket strikes against Iran, not the other way around - and so that it can continue to assert itself as a regional power.

I don't understand your point... "Iran won't nuke Israel because it already has Hezbollah to send rockets for them." That's reassuring.

99 dungeoneering achieved, thanks to everyone that celebrated with me!

 

♪♪ Don't interrupt me as I struggle to complete this thought
Have some respect for someone more forgetful than yourself ♪♪

♪♪ And I'm not done
And I won't be till my head falls off ♪♪


#48
stevepole
[ Display Name History ]

stevepole

    Ace of Spades

  • Members
  • 8,477 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California
  • Joined:20 June 2004
I'm going to vote for Obama again. I only hope that John Boehner fails to be re elected as Speaker of the house in the fall. The guy is just one giant [rooster] block to progression.
Posted Image

#49
Crocefisso
[ Display Name History ]

Crocefisso

    Il Barone

  • Members
  • 1,718 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:La Grande-Bretagne
  • Joined:21 March 2011
  • RuneScape Status:Retired



If the primaries had lasted through May, I would have voted for Rick Santorum. The reason being is that Romney has a millstone around his neck from Romney-care.


Wow. I've two questions here, really:
1. Why Santorum? To me, he seems like a backwards, slightly stupid and absurdly Christian political charicature, with no legitimacy as a President.
2. Why is Romney-care so awful? I've yet to see a good argument for why adopting a system that Europe has successfully had in place since, in the UK at least, the 1940s is a bad idea.

Santorum isn't progressive, and doesn't have Romney-care
Big government is always a bad idea.

My great grandmother also isn't progressive, nor does she have Romney-care. Is she a valid Presidential candidate?
And precisely why is big government always a bad idea? I'm sure a small government would have struggled to bail out banks in 2008-9 etc, a problem caused by a lack of regulation and small government approach to banking.




In this day and age, it is impossible to safely be an isolationist, and one of the primary roles for the President is Commander in Chief (which is why I could never vote for Ron Paul). If Iran gets a nuclear weapon, Israel will probably be a bit of scorched earth. I don't see Ron Paul trying to stop that from happening.


I've never understood why people think that if Iran got a nuclear weapon they would launch it at Israel. Wouldn't they be ensuring their own destruction, then? the only would way that i see it happening is if mad men got a hold of one and everything (but we know the chances of that happening from historical precedent and simple analysis - next to nothing).

From a region of suicide bombers, do you think they care about their own destruction?

That is an incredibly crass and ill-informed generalisation. Remember that 'suicide bombers' are almost without exception fundamentalist Sunni groups. Iran, on the other hand, is a well organised Shia state that uses proxies such as Hezbollah - which has enough rockets (c. 15,000) not to need suicide bombers for the most part - and has in fact waged a calculated proxy war against the USA et al. In short, Iran is not going to blow it. More likely, it seeks nuclear weapons in order that it may have them as a deterrent against Israel - let us not forget that the Netanyahu wants rocket strikes against Iran, not the other way around - and so that it can continue to assert itself as a regional power.

I don't understand your point... "Iran won't nuke Israel because it already has Hezbollah to send rockets for them." That's reassuring.

You know that wasn't the point. I was pointing out how derogatory and wrong your entire discourse about the Iranian problem was, because it is based in the popular misconception of Iran which comes from leaving cultural factors unexplained, and is best surmised in your comment on how the Middle East is a "region of suicide bombers". Aside from it being a very silly generalisation, it also fails to factor in the difference between the Sunni suicide bombers and subtler Shia terrorism, and implies that Iran is a self-destructive state. The reference to Hezbollah was merely illustrative of the point that Iran is too well-coordinated to need suicide bombers. My aim was only to inform you, not reassure you.


"Imagine yourself surrounded by the most horrible cripples and maniacs it is possible to conceive, and you may understand a little of my feelings with these grotesque caricatures of humanity about me."

- H.G. Wells, The Island of Doctor Moreau


#50
Randox
[ Display Name History ]

Randox

    The Consultant

  • Administrators
  • 6,603 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Joined:21 June 2006
  • RuneScape Status:Semi-Retired
  • RSN:Randox
  • Clan:All Friendly
I can't vote in the states, not being a citizen and all...

But if I could I think I would sign up as a Democrat and never watch another political discussion again for a decade. America hits me as the most conservative democratic country in the world, so I figure the rest of the developed world as a whole is probably happier when a democrat is in office (because it probably means less world policing and wars). Also, as an issue I can't abide, the Republicans seem to be pro religion. I like my religion and state as far away from each other as possible, and I like my politicians to be moderates or atheists.

b6brc9.jpg


#51
sees_all1
[ Display Name History ]

sees_all1

    Ice Giant Melter

  • Members
  • 4,961 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Joined:26 June 2007
  • RuneScape Status:None

My great grandmother also isn't progressive, nor does she have Romney-care. Is she a valid Presidential candidate?
And precisely why is big government always a bad idea? I'm sure a small government would have struggled to bail out banks in 2008-9 etc, a problem caused by a lack of regulation and small government approach to banking.

If your great grandmother was running, I'd consider voting for her.

Housing bubble was caused by a push for getting everyone a house, starting in the 1990's. Banks were given a carrot and a stick - they were penalized for not making sub prime loans to low income, high risk people. They were allowed to offload those mortgages into Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Big government caused the problem.

99 dungeoneering achieved, thanks to everyone that celebrated with me!

 

♪♪ Don't interrupt me as I struggle to complete this thought
Have some respect for someone more forgetful than yourself ♪♪

♪♪ And I'm not done
And I won't be till my head falls off ♪♪


#52
Celt23
[ Display Name History ]

Celt23

    Demon Vanquisher

  • Members
  • 2,357 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:Washington State, USA
  • Joined:5 January 2007
  • RuneScape Status:None
  • RSN:Celt23
If Paul wins the nomination (brokered convention etc) then I'll vote for him. If not, it will be Romney or Obama and I'd rather have Obama.

#53
obfuscator
[ Display Name History ]

obfuscator

    Tanned Caveman

  • Members
  • 20,231 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Joined:6 March 2008
  • RuneScape Status:Retired


My great grandmother also isn't progressive, nor does she have Romney-care. Is she a valid Presidential candidate?
And precisely why is big government always a bad idea? I'm sure a small government would have struggled to bail out banks in 2008-9 etc, a problem caused by a lack of regulation and small government approach to banking.

If your great grandmother was running, I'd consider voting for her.

Housing bubble was caused by a push for getting everyone a house, starting in the 1990's. Banks were given a carrot and a stick - they were penalized for not making sub prime loans to low income, high risk people. They were allowed to offload those mortgages into Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Big government caused the problem.

They were allowed to offload those mortgages because there were no regulations preventing it - not big government...

polvCwJ.gif
"It's not a rest for me, it's a rest for the weights." - Dom Mazzetti


#54
The Dark Lord
[ Display Name History ]

The Dark Lord

    Dragon Slayer

  • Members
  • 6,517 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Joined:8 June 2006
  • RuneScape Status:Retired
  • Clan:S.W.A.G.
@sees_all

Why not vote for Ron Paul?
SWAG

Mayn U wanna be like me but U can't be me cuz U ain't got ma swagga on.

#55
sees_all1
[ Display Name History ]

sees_all1

    Ice Giant Melter

  • Members
  • 4,961 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Joined:26 June 2007
  • RuneScape Status:None



My great grandmother also isn't progressive, nor does she have Romney-care. Is she a valid Presidential candidate?
And precisely why is big government always a bad idea? I'm sure a small government would have struggled to bail out banks in 2008-9 etc, a problem caused by a lack of regulation and small government approach to banking.

If your great grandmother was running, I'd consider voting for her.

Housing bubble was caused by a push for getting everyone a house, starting in the 1990's. Banks were given a carrot and a stick - they were penalized for not making sub prime loans to low income, high risk people. They were allowed to offload those mortgages into Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Big government caused the problem.

They were allowed to offload those mortgages because there were no regulations preventing it - not big government...

They offloaded the mortgages to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which were Government Sponsored Enterprises. I think its something like 90% of all housing loans are owned or backed by the U.S. government. Anyhow, if banks couldn't sell their mortgages to the government (big government's fault), and didn't have incentives to loan to people who couldn't pay them back (again, big government's fault), we wouldn't have had to bail them out.

@sees_all

Why not vote for Ron Paul?

Like I said before, I don't like his foreign policy.

99 dungeoneering achieved, thanks to everyone that celebrated with me!

 

♪♪ Don't interrupt me as I struggle to complete this thought
Have some respect for someone more forgetful than yourself ♪♪

♪♪ And I'm not done
And I won't be till my head falls off ♪♪


#56
jasignhagj
[ Display Name History ]

jasignhagj

    Black Knight Trainer

  • Members
  • 3,183 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Joined:16 July 2007
What do those of you who are Ron Paul supporters think of Gary Johnson? He's running for the Libertarian Party's nomination. His views are like Ron Paul's, although he is more socially progressive. I know third party candidates are never taken seriously in American elections, but he does seem like a good alternative to Obama and Romney.

If I were American I would probably reluctantly vote for Obama or a third party candidate depending on whether my state was a guaranteed Democrat win or not.

#57
obfuscator
[ Display Name History ]

obfuscator

    Tanned Caveman

  • Members
  • 20,231 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Joined:6 March 2008
  • RuneScape Status:Retired




My great grandmother also isn't progressive, nor does she have Romney-care. Is she a valid Presidential candidate?
And precisely why is big government always a bad idea? I'm sure a small government would have struggled to bail out banks in 2008-9 etc, a problem caused by a lack of regulation and small government approach to banking.

If your great grandmother was running, I'd consider voting for her.

Housing bubble was caused by a push for getting everyone a house, starting in the 1990's. Banks were given a carrot and a stick - they were penalized for not making sub prime loans to low income, high risk people. They were allowed to offload those mortgages into Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Big government caused the problem.

They were allowed to offload those mortgages because there were no regulations preventing it - not big government...

They offloaded the mortgages to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which were Government Sponsored Enterprises. I think its something like 90% of all housing loans are owned or backed by the U.S. government. Anyhow, if banks couldn't sell their mortgages to the government (big government's fault), and didn't have incentives to loan to people who couldn't pay them back (again, big government's fault), we wouldn't have had to bail them out.


Then it's only the bad half of "big government". Canada's government is bigger than the states, yet the much stricter regulations we have over the banking industry prevented banks from handing out these kinds of mortgages.

polvCwJ.gif
"It's not a rest for me, it's a rest for the weights." - Dom Mazzetti


#58
Crocefisso
[ Display Name History ]

Crocefisso

    Il Barone

  • Members
  • 1,718 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:La Grande-Bretagne
  • Joined:21 March 2011
  • RuneScape Status:Retired


My great grandmother also isn't progressive, nor does she have Romney-care. Is she a valid Presidential candidate?
And precisely why is big government always a bad idea? I'm sure a small government would have struggled to bail out banks in 2008-9 etc, a problem caused by a lack of regulation and small government approach to banking.

If your great grandmother was running, I'd consider voting for her.

Housing bubble was caused by a push for getting everyone a house, starting in the 1990's. Banks were given a carrot and a stick - they were penalized for not making sub prime loans to low income, high risk people. They were allowed to offload those mortgages into Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Big government caused the problem.

Come on sees, stop dodging the question: what is there about Santorum that's worth voting for?

As for the big/small govt debate, obfuscator has answered what I would in a clearer manner. Point being that the big/small govt dichotomy is not as one-sided or clear-cut as many make out.


"Imagine yourself surrounded by the most horrible cripples and maniacs it is possible to conceive, and you may understand a little of my feelings with these grotesque caricatures of humanity about me."

- H.G. Wells, The Island of Doctor Moreau


#59
Jonanananas
[ Display Name History ]

Jonanananas

    Varrock Guard

  • Members
  • 1,308 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Germany
  • Joined:14 November 2009
  • RuneScape Status:Retired
  • RSN:Jonanananas
  • Clan:World60pengs
While I am not a big fan of Obama (My biggest issue with him is that he's not serious enough about reducing debt, but then again, with such low tax levels and all tax raises for the rich being blocked by republicans...), I would most certainly vote for him if I was a US citizen, simply because the republican candidates are just a lot worse.

While Romney is still bearable(I am glad that he's become the republican candidate, considering what most of the others were like), I believe America would really be in need of some social reforms, and Obama is just so much more likely to deliver those. Obviously no system is perfect, but I can just say that personally I by far prefer the system here in germany over that in america, even if we pay way higher taxes.

#60
sees_all1
[ Display Name History ]

sees_all1

    Ice Giant Melter

  • Members
  • 4,961 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Joined:26 June 2007
  • RuneScape Status:None

Then it's only the bad half of "big government". Canada's government is bigger than the states, yet the much stricter regulations we have over the banking industry prevented banks from handing out these kinds of mortgages.

Croce's point was that big government couldn't effectively deal with failing banks. What he didn't mention is that big government caused the problem in the first place, which is why I brought it up. I could bring up dozens of more examples of big government failing in a spectacular way, but that isn't the point of this thread. If you still need an example of why small government is better than big government (which there are very few examples of), look at Taiwan.

Come on sees, stop dodging the question: what is there about Santorum that's worth voting for?

Are you disagreeing with his positions or his experience?
He was a US Representative for 6 years, and was a US Senator from Pennsylvania for 12 years. That makes him more qualified than Barack Obama was in 2008.

In my mind, Santorum has been much more consistent with his positions than Romney. When asked about bad legislation (or endorsement), he apologizes for it. When Romney is asked about Romneycare, he makes a small distinction. Santorum was also able to pull his campaign from obscurity 6 months ago into the national spotlight, while to date spending about a sixth of what Romney spent.

The Republican Presidential candidate needs to be able to stand next to Obama and describe everything wrong with his policies, without worrying about Obama saying "his legislation inspired me."

99 dungeoneering achieved, thanks to everyone that celebrated with me!

 

♪♪ Don't interrupt me as I struggle to complete this thought
Have some respect for someone more forgetful than yourself ♪♪

♪♪ And I'm not done
And I won't be till my head falls off ♪♪





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users