so ... Mitt Romney.

[Macfistowannabe]

Originally posted by MrsSpringsteen
Yeah but all of us aren't running for the position of "leader of the free world". And all of us aren't screwing people over in the process, to be blunt.

You don't honestly think John Kerry was hypocrisy-free, do you?

[Macfistowannabe]

Originally posted by Ormus
say anything just to get elected.

Welcome to politics.

[U2Girl1978]

Originally posted by diamond
i see hatred in some of these posts.

dbs

Yea well, you don't live in a state where you have a governor that is not even there half the time. Usually he has his head up his own ass and is constantly being negative towards Massachusetts. He's so concerned about being President that he isn't doing his duty to make sure people are taken care of. He's cut spending, etc. etc.

Do you really want to elect someone like that for president? Of course you do.

I would suggest living here for a week to see what I mean. So since you don't you really have no freakin idea what he's like only what you've read online.

[diamond]

You have to admit he has that Reagan moxxie thing going for him.

[Irvine511]

Originally posted by diamond
You have to admit he has that Reagan moxxie thing going for him.

[diamond]

[coemgen]

Isn't this the "tar baby" quote guy?

[MrsSpringsteen]

Originally posted by coemgen
Isn't this the "tar baby" quote guy?

Yes

And yeah, if moxie equals being a pompous two faced hypocrite he's got that down.



Moxie, a carbonated beverage, is considered to be the USA's first mass produced soft drink.

Created in 1876 by Dr. Augustin Thompson of Union, Maine, Moxie was first marketed as a patent medicine in Lowell, Massachusetts, under the product name “Moxie Nerve Food”.[1] Moxie was said to cure ailments ranging from softening of the brain to “loss of manhood.”

Softening of the brain? Check. I won't even comment on the loss of manhood..but as far as I'm concerned and how I define what a man is, Mitt lost that a long time ago.

[deep]

Originally posted by Varitek


pretty much. The man conned the voters (admittedly his opponent wasn't overwhelming), then proceeded to spend 4 years becoming more and more conservative, going on a disproportionate trips out of state often costing the state money for his statie detail, trips on which he bashed the state to various groups while promising folks back home he was trying to make it more attractive for business.

Meanwhile we're the only state to have lost population 2 years running (so much so that we are poised to lose a seat in congress, which I'm sure will make Mitt's national Republican constituency proud...did I say conspiracy theory.....),

the state is hemorhaging jobs and companies (Gillette, Fleet, Hancock...) and murder rates are spiking in the urban areas while he's cut funding to police forces.

But I guess this thread was just supposed to be about religion and the American public.

Utah seeks fourth seat in U.S. House

By JENNIFER TALHELM
Associated Press writer

WASHINGTON -- Utah lawmakers must beat the clock -- and overcome a distracted Congress -- to push a bill through Washington that would give the state a fourth House seat. Backers say they still hope it can be done in a lame-duck session of Congress next week.

Utah lawmakers are pushing hard for the new seat, which would give the state added clout in Washington. The plan is half a proposal that would also grant the District of Columbia a voting member in the U.S. House.

[Varitek]

Go enfranchisement for DC! Does the article say why Utah thinks they deserve another seat over other states?

[deep]

Originally posted by Varitek
Go enfranchisement for DC! Does the article say why Utah thinks they deserve another seat over other states?

they claim an undercount in the last census

Because thousands? of their residents were not counted because they were out of state serving as missionaries for the Mormon church.

During the 2000 reapportionment Utah barely missed out on picking up one additional seat.

I believe that seat went to W VA.

[MrsSpringsteen]

Originally posted by Macfistowannabe
You don't honestly think John Kerry was hypocrisy-free, do you?

What does he have to do with any of this? We can play hypocrisy tit for tat all day-but that won't change what a phony user Mitt is.

John Kerry never bad mouthed MA and its' people as soon as he got what he wanted by using his position as a stepping stone when he was running for President-from what I can remember, he did nothing but praise it. He wasn't going to South Carolina or anywhere else and mocking it and the people he served as Senator.

John Kerry never stood around ranting about gay marriage literally while people were in danger of freezing to death on the streets because of his imaginary created budget crisis and cuts.

John Kerry didn't rant about illegal immigrants for political purposes all the while using them to manicure his golf course lawn.

Vote for Mitt for President and you will regret it. But at least if he ever becomes President he won't be using it as a stepping stone, unless he has the desire to become King Of The World (which he probably does). His Lt Gov lost the election for governor to a man with no political experience that I know of other than his civil rights job under Clinton (great job and nothing wrong with that, but it's not running a state or even a city or town) partially due to her association with Romney-what does that tell you? She lost for other reasons (mainly her nasty negative ads) but the Mitt thing was still important. People were desperate for a change from life under Mitt. People in MA don't take kindly to feeling used and abused and are intelligent and savvy.

[diamond]

anger
anger
anger

coming from those who usually espouse:

acceptance
tolerence
diversity.

[BVS]

Originally posted by Macfistowannabe
Hypocrisy can be an ongoing factor in beltway politics, right or left.

Does that license us to hate hypocrites? Without exception, all of us have been hypocritical at some point.

Who said anything about hating hypocrites? Read my post again.

[MrsSpringsteen]

Originally posted by diamond
anger
anger
anger

coming from those who usually espouse:

acceptance
tolerence
diversity

Yeah that's right diamond, and you live where exactly? You know what exactly about Mitt by actually living under his rule? Or do you just like his hair...

Justified anger about important matters including job performance and ethics is righteous and our responsibility. Espousing acceptance and tolerance and diversity about certain matters has absolutely nothing to do with this, if you can't see that well....Having issues with Mitt being a Mormon would be directly comparable- and I have ZERO. I know very little about the Mormon faith, but I would assume that protecting the poor and homeless might be a priority. But alas Mitt is suddenly preoccupied with right wing conservative issues-with the poor and homeless, not so much. Read the editorial I posted, it says it all.

[U2Girl1978]

Originally posted by diamond
anger
anger
anger

coming from those who usually espouse:

acceptance
tolerence
diversity.

Well, like I said why don't you come live out here and see how swell of a job ole Mitt Romney is doing.

Like MrsS. said you will regret voting for him if it comes down to it.

[Zoocoustic]

As a practicing member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (i.e. Mormon) I can say that, unfortunately, Mitt Romney won't get the republican nomination BECAUSE he is a Mormon.

I'm really pleased to see that the general majority here at interference doesn't seem to care, and this would not be a factor in their decision. That shows a level of maturity and tolerance that I personally can really appreciate.

However, the unfortunate reality is that most "Christians" of other faiths have a MAJOR problem with my religion (and that's a whole other topic) and because of this, any Mormon running for president hasn't got a chance. It's pretty shallow and discriminatory, but it's reality.

[BVS]

Originally posted by Zoocoustic
As a practicing member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (i.e. Mormon) I can say that, unfortunately, Mitt Romney won't get the republican nomination BECAUSE he is a Mormon.

I'm really pleased to see that the general majority here at interference doesn't seem to care, and this would not be a factor in their decision. That shows a level of maturity and tolerance that I personally can really appreciate.

However, the unfortunate reality is that most "Christians" of other faiths have a MAJOR problem with my religion (and that's a whole other topic) and because of this, any Mormon running for president hasn't got a chance. It's pretty shallow and discriminatory, but it's reality.

You are probably right. The christian right usually don't recognise much outside of their Protestant denominations.

[U2Girl1978]

It's too bad religion always has to be a problem in an election or anywhere for that matter. I don't care what kind of religion you are, as long as you can do the job that's all that matters. Mitt will not be able to do the job because he couldn't produce results in Massachusetts. What makes anyone think he can produce results for the U.S. and the rest of the world? I could list alot of things that I felt that he bungled but it would take up half the page. If Romney gets in he'll make Bush look like a saint.

[Dreadsox]

I am laughing my ass off. I do not like the guy, and I was a delagate to the convention that gave him the nomination for Governor.

People are criticizing him becuase the LAWN COMPANY he hired to do his lawn had illegals. PLEASE!!!!!

Someone tellme how the fuck anyone is going to run for office if this is the issue. What I am supposed to screen the employees of a COMPANY?

There is not a flipping small business around that is not employing illegals.

The Cranberry industry in Massachusetts would fall apart.

I suppose all of the democratic candidates must screen the employees of a PRIVATE company before they eat out in a restaraunt.

Give me a break. FYM is too intelligent to evolve into this.