Time to Blast Romney!!!!

[milo10]

Ron has to start building up his own image. We need ads on electability and foreign policy... I don't understand why this hasn't been done yet. Meanwhile we've got ads featuring Ron's old patients talking about how he was a good, pro-life doctor. Priorities much?

+rep

 

[spudea]

february is destroy romney month. He doesn't have a debate stage for him to look good.

 

[jolynna]

No incentive to attack Romney, everyone knows his dirt already, we won't get his supporters, and time is wasted that could be used to get our message out. We need to take advantage of the time we have to get his message out.

Romney, right NOW, is considered the "safe" choice to independents. Why wouldn't independents and cross-over democrats and moderate republicans (the ones that think Obama is a socialist so WE'VE GOT TO STICK TOGETHER) choose the guy, even some people here, consider "mild" and "not so bad"?

I was SHOCKED to find out from another thread that people on the RON PAUL forum (where I think the MOST research and thinking actually goes on) DIDN'T know that Romney is the biggest war-monger of all the candidates running.

I was SHOCKED to see on the Ron Paul forum that nobody was ready to throw tomatoes at Romney for his blatant justification of taking away liberties. I was floored when I read on Romney's National Defense page that he is going to go all out to end cyberspace piracy (nice words that mean pro-SOPA & ACTA) and that nobody else thinks calling Obama's unconstitutional killings in the middle east being "TOO TIMID" is horrific. Even Romney's defense of NDAA doesn't seem to have gotten many riled.

Romney's backers are listed on opensecrets.com. All of the guys that supported Obama before are backing Romney NOW. The majority of Romney's donors are big financial institutions that we taxpayers had to bail out ALREADY. They aren't giving Romney money without expecting SOMETHING in return. They want to make sure the money keeps coming.

I don't know how closely people here follow what is going on in the Eurozone BUT if Greece finally agrees it to pay just 30% of its debt (as expected) 5 of the major banks who are Romney's donors SHOULD crash maybe as soon as tomorrow. That is, if everything was on the up and up. Giving Greece a 70% haircut would normally be considered a credit event (default). BUT, the 5 major banks who should go under tomorrow (because they've sold 97% of the CDS--insurance AGAINST default), ALSO control ISDA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Swaps_and_Derivatives_Association), and are the "POWERS IN CHARGE" of determining what is and what is not a "credit event" (default). So while some private investors are going to LOSE a LOT of money, the crooked banks will make sure they DON'T HAVE TO PAY anybody any of the insurance owed. To make a long paragraph short, having a BOUGHT candidate like Romney in the White House is necessary to keep the Ponzi scheme going.

Romney is an unethical banker who didn't mind hurting his own company's investors and won't lose a bit of sleep over using and bleeding dry taxpayers either.

There are LOTS and LOTS of legitimate reasons that Romney is as unfit as a man can get to be POTUS. But, most of the bad stuff I have heard about Romney is just that he is a flip-flopper because he used to be fine with gays. He might secretly be pro-choice. As I am fine with gay marriage and respect that others have mixed feelings about abortion, I think that moderate republicans, independents and Democrats that are tired of Obama might also consider those stances pluses rather than minuses.

If people HERE hadn't all caught that Romney is a war-hawk that was bought to grow the industrial military complex, a puppet bought by corrupt bankers to make sure their bankrupt banks stay afloat despite the consequences to taxpayers and a stooge who HAS SAID IN ADVANCE that assaulting our freedoms can be justified (gotta keep the rowdy taxpayers paying and NOT revolting), THEN I very much doubt that most voters HAVE A CLUE about the REAL MR. ROMNEY.

How would they? The MAINSTREAM MEDIA SURE ISN'T SAYING MUCH BAD ABOUT HIM. NBC NEWS and much of Fox are practically Romny endorsement ads.

If WE don't inform people of Romney's flaws, WHO WILL?

 

[Gravik]

We need to attack ROmney, or other states are going to follow Flordida and vote Romney with the majority of the vote. FLorida proved how full retarded they are tonight, that is for sure.

 

[D.A.S.]

Time to go for the proverbial jugular. Simply calling Romney a flip-flopper will no longer do. People have heard it, and they obviously have no problem with that anymore. We need to hit him hard on the issues and use strong language: he supports NDAA, he supported the bailouts, he supports ACTA and SOPA, he is an isolationist, and there were stories circulating that one of his companies under Bain took a bailout...

It's time to get down the business.

 

[Dianne]

I disagree, Paul should be blasting Obama; not Romney. Let "lunartic" Gingrich and Frothy pay the millions to blast Romney. Paul needs to be hammering Obama, proving he can beat him this November.

 

[alucard13mmfmj]

I think Ron should save his Obama materials for when he gets the GOP nomination. I dont think Ron wants to reveal what strategy he has against Obama and what he will attack him on.

ALTHOUGH, I think it would be nice to see Ron attack Obama once or twice in the debates just to rile up the GOP.

I also thought it was silly that the RP campaign shares their strategy with the enemy lol. Even if it was obvious, we should be making our enemies second guess our plans.. instead of saying "oh we going after delegates" or "oh! we are trying to be anti-romney" in interviews =s.

 

[BigByrd47119]

My biggest concern with confronting Romney is that if we do it too early he will squash us with his wallet and, with two other campaigns running beside ours and Romney, there may be no course for regress. I think it is an agreement between the two campaigns not to destroy each other while there are still Santorum and Gingrich in the mix. It makes fiscal sense to have Paul/Romney v. Gingrich/Santorum, at least for us. Then consider that Gingrich and Santorum spend 75% or more of their time attacking Romney and it seems like a good deal to me...

 

[jolynna]

Time to go for the proverbial jugular. Simply calling Romney a flip-flopper will no longer do. People have heard it, and they obviously have no problem with that anymore. We need to hit him hard on the issues and use strong language: he supports NDAA, he supported the bailouts, he supports ACTA and SOPA, he is an isolationist, and there were stories circulating that one of his companies under Bain took a bailout...

It's time to get down the business.

Perfect.

Except for the part about Romney being an isolationist.

Romney said, in a debate, that the first trip he wants to take after being elected is to Israel. He also said, in a debate, that Obama has been "too timid" (not aggressive enough) against the Muslims. He has said in speeches, on his website, and in debates, that he intends to add 100,000 to active duty. Build more planes & build more ships AND increase the percentage of GDP spending so MORE will go to building the MILITARY. Romney's advisers INCLUDES 23 of George W. Bush's ex-staff to ADVISE him on FOREIGN POLICY. Nobody, not Obama and not even Bush COMES EVEN CLOSE to being as gung-ho for WAR as Mr. Romney.

It is like he is getting ready for Armageddon or something.

 

[CogWheeler]

I don't know how closely people here follow what is going on in the Eurozone BUT if Greece finally agrees it to pay just 30% of its debt (as expected) 5 of the major banks who are Romney's donors SHOULD crash maybe as soon as tomorrow. That is, if everything was on the up and up. Giving Greece a 70% haircut would normally be considered a credit event (default). BUT, the 5 major banks who should go under tomorrow (because they've sold 97% of the CDS--insurance AGAINST default), ALSO control ISDA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Swaps_and_Derivatives_Association), and are the "POWERS IN CHARGE" of determining what is and what is not a "credit event" (default). So while some private investors are going to LOSE a LOT of money, the crooked banks will make sure they DON'T HAVE TO PAY anybody any of the insurance owed. To make a long paragraph short, having a BOUGHT candidate like Romney in the White House is necessary to keep the Ponzi scheme going.

We're all Monica Lewinski in the eyes of Goldman and the ISDA members.

..."that depends on what your definition of default is."
..."and while we're at it, that depends on what your definition of insurance is."

I've become more Libertarian because I'm not sure enough people will ever understand what happened when the Senate tabled Dorgan's amendment to put credit default swaps back in the closet. There was no debate.

[Sorry for going OT]

 

[jolynna]

I disagree, Paul should be blasting Obama; not Romney. Let "lunartic" Gingrich and Frothy pay the millions to blast Romney. Paul needs to be hammering Obama, proving he can beat him this November.

Gingerich and Santorum CAN'T attack Romney on the IMPORTANT real reasons Romney isn't fit to lead.

They've got to stick with sucky ads because their hands aren't all that clean.

They are all into that Romny used to be more pro-gay and has sent out a confusing message on his abortion stance. Considering where the world is at now, nobody give a rat's behind about sorting out how Romney feels on those subjects either way. But those are the only areas Gingerich or Santorum can attack without people looking in THEIR direction.

Both Gingerich or Santorum are both using Iran to scare people away from Ron Paul so they can't be anti-war. Romney may be MORE pro-war (with the big banks and especially the Fed giving him his marching orders, Romney can spend and war and build nations with abandon), BUT neither Gingerich OR Santorum can use THAT against him because they need to USE the jihad threat so they can say Ron Paul is dangerous and scary.

They were both in with lobbyists just like Romney, SO they can't attack Romney for being a dirty crony capitalist banker AFTER they've also done some little dirty dabbling.

Neither of them has come out AGAINST the patriot act or NDAA. The hard line Republican base is BEHIND THOSE. Republicans, not Democrats are the ones who made them come about. Only TWO Republican Senators voted AGAINST IT...RAND PAUL AND KIRK from IL. The rest that voted AGAINST NDAA were Democrats. Santorum and Gingerich, LIKE ROMNEY, have to tow the official GOP party line and assault liberty with the same vengeance, lest they end up being pariahs to the GOP establishment all of them court (except for Ron Paul).

The media, in case anyone hasn't noticed, is BIASED. Watching NBC News is like watching an infomercial for Romney and Obama. Fox is the same for Romney most of the time.

Voters DESERVE to know where any candidate they might be considering stands on every issue. Nobody needs to be mean about it. Calling names and discussing off-topic, non-leader type points like religion or social issue stances, I think, makes the person doing the posting look petty and trivializes stuff like...ummmm...we are out of money and running on FUMES.

Facts and links to the facts, are needed and our duty (imo).

Dr. Paul is the ONLY pro-liberty, anti-war, anti-unfair and misleading banking practices, anti-big government and genuine anti-big spending candidate in the RACE. Nobody BUT Ron Paul or his followers CAN speak out against ANY of those practices. The rest of them are buried over their heads in the piles of those kinds of poop.

 

[jolynna]

All Gingerich and Santorum can say against Romney on important issues is that he believes in them MORE or that he is WORSE.

You've got three dirty pigs in a pen that hasn't been cleaned out for years squabbling over who stinks the most.

ONLY a clean animal has the right to accuse others of not being "fresh".