If Mitt leads the ticket?

[alanmolstad]

If Mitt leads the ticket Im going to vote for him.

hey sorry if that ticks-off a few here, but that's a fact of life.

I dont consider the religion of anyone running for office....



So if Mitt leads the ticket, he is my guy.

but right now Mitt is not on the ticket and so who do i support?
I support ?.......

squat.


I dont like anyone of the guys is the race.
but then that's just too bad for me, because I HATE Obama so much I would vote for a ham sandwich over him for President.


To be honest, I miss Sarah Palin, and the circus she brings....

I like H.Cain, but why do guys like him run for the office of President their first time out?....what ever happened to running for Governor or even mayor first?

[BigJulie]

If Mitt leads the ticket Im going to vote for him.

hey sorry if that ticks-off a few here, but that's a fact of life.

I dont consider the religion of anyone running for office....



So if Mitt leads the ticket, he is my guy.

but right now Mitt is not on the ticket and so who do i support?
I support ?.......

squat.


I dont like anyone of the guys is the race.
but then that's just too bad for me, because I HATE Obama so much I would vote for a ham sandwich over him for President.


To be honest, I miss Sarah Palin, and the circus she brings....

I like H.Cain, but why do guys like him run for the office of President their first time out?....what ever happened to running for Governor or even mayor first?

I am one of those moderates who will swing to who ever I think is best for office. Cain's 9-9-9 plan is a regressive tax on the poor, so I could never support him even though I like his gumption.

[alanmolstad]

Cain's 9-9-9 plan is ....

Is an ad campaign....
The man himself is actually a guy I would love to see fixing the Union.....
The truth be told, Cain is the only guy running that has any plan at all for fixing the situation...

The rest seem to believe that just by being elected things will get better...


But Cain has no money, and when the real voting starts the real money comes into play....

[alanmolstad]

Oh and by the way...
Dont You just love this my new topic in the Mormon section????

and....

I thank you BigJulie for responding to a topic that actually is only 'slightly" Mormon related....


I have given up being able to have serious debates over non-Mormon connected topics....

(You guys win....I admit it...I give up attempting to start non-Mormon topics here...)

[BigJulie]

Is an ad campaign....
The man himself is actually a guy I would love to see fixing the Union.....
The truth be told, Cain is the only guy running that has any plan at all for fixing the situation...

The rest seem to believe that just by being elected things will get better...


But Cain has no money, and when the real voting starts the real money comes into play....

At this point, I am just watching and waiting to see who floats to the top. I have not liked the way Obama has run this country at all. I would have supported Hillary hands down. I liked her her the best out of the three last time. I knew that Obama was just way in over his head and I did not like the way Cain handled some business involvements even though he stated he wanted to clean that stuff up---at one time, he was in the thick of it.

[BigJulie]

Oh and by the way...
Dont You just love this my new topic in the Mormon section????

and....

I thank you BigJulie for responding to a topic that actually is only 'slightly" Mormon related....


I have given up being able to have serious debates over non-Mormon connected topics....

(You guys win....I admit it...I give up attempting to start non-Mormon topics here...)

I think it is good to talk in areas where we can find some common ground and Mitt Romney and John Huntsmen have certainly brought Mormonism front and center.

[alanmolstad]

I would have supported Hillary

My view of Hillery:


Hated her
Thought she was the anti-christ
actually enjoyed her being the **** of jokes.
Then she became Sec of State


and....well.....
...........

........................
.......................
,,,,,,,,,,,

I have to admit, she kept the world turning.
and there actually was a lot on her plate...for we really do live in very interesting times...
and she has shown everyone she is up to the ***.....

[alanmolstad]

have certainly brought Mormonism front and center.


let me peek into the future...........

and..........

the future is.......

hmmm...interesting, this peek is taking a longer time that normal...?


........................
.......................
...................
My prediction is that ...in the end, if Mitt wins the nomination it will be a very big plus for the Mormon church.

[Billyray]

. . . and Mitt Romney and John Huntsmen have certainly brought Mormonism front and center.Which is a great thing. And I can only hope that Mitt will win because this will bring Mormonism out in the open and will expose it's false teachings. I look forward to it.

[BigJulie]

My view of Hillery:


Hated her
Thought she was the anti-christ
actually enjoyed her being the **** of jokes.
Then she became Sec of State


and....well.....
...........

........................
.......................
,,,,,,,,,,,

I have to admit, she kept the world turning.
and there actually was a lot on her plate...for we really do live in very interesting times...
and she has shown everyone she is up to the ***.....

I looked at her voting record. While I didn't agree with everything (which I never do)---I thought she was a good combination of experience--would work as her husband did to balance the budget (which was one of his top priorities) and supported a strong America.

Obama's voting record was abysmal and then he voted "present' on too many things, never wanted to take a stand. When he did, he didn't side with American soldiers. That worried me--still does. I don't want to put men in danger with nothing to back them.

McCain was in the thick of the Keeting 5 which I thought was one of the greatest atrocities of this generation as well as he treated his first wife terribly. (And somewhere, deep in-side, I am a women's liber, even though I am an at home mom).

I like Palin as far as she just said it like it was and she made me laugh.

[BigJulie]

let me peek into the future...........

and..........

the future is.......

hmmm...interesting, this peek is taking a longer time that normal...?


........................
.......................
...................
My prediction is that ...in the end, if Mitt wins the nomination it will be a very big plus for the Mormon church.

I think if Mitt wins it will be very good for this economy. He turned M***. around (uped their credit rating), turned the SLC olympics around and he is very educated both in the academic setting and the world business setting. He is lacking in the military experience and is more liberal than very-right conservatives.

Cain is experienced with the business setting. And I laughed very hard when he said "if 10% is good enough for God, 9% should be good enough for the U.S."

[Libby]

I think Romney and Huntsman are the only respectable candidates on the GOP ticket. If Romney isn't the pick, the Republicans are going to lose big time, next year.

I'm a left leaning Independent, and will be voting for Obama.

[Billyray]

I think Romney and Huntsman are the only respectable candidates on the GOP ticket.
Huntsman has absolutely no chance to win. It is between Cain and Romney IMO and I prefer Cain over Romney at this point in time. But as I said before I would welcome a Romney win because I think it will be a good way to expose the false teachings of Mormonism.

[Libby]

Huntsman has absolutely no chance to win. It is between Cain and Romney IMO and I prefer Cain over Romney at this point in time. But as I said before I would welcome a Romney win because I think it will be a good way to expose the false teachings of Mormonism.

Like I said, on another thread, I don't think having a President, who is LDS, is going to hurt the church, as the critics seem to believe. So far, anyone who has dared to publicly criticize Mitt's religion, calling it a "cult", has gotten badly beaten up by the press. The majority of people don't want religion to be an issue in political campaigns.

Agree that Huntsman has no chance, but he is still miles better than most of the other candidates (from my perspective).

[Billyray]

Like I said, on another thread, I don't think having a President, who is LDS, is going to hurt the church, as the critics seem to believe.
I completely disagree with you Libby. Just look at the last election where the whole Jesus being the brother of Satan was brought up. Most people had never heard about that before but then it became a well know fact. This will expose Mormonism and their false teachings so more people will be more aware of what they really believe. Will they still have converts despite this? Of course. They will attract people such as yourself who disregard what the Bible teaches and rely on their mental intellect or their feelings.

[Libby]

I completely disagree with you Libby. Just look at the last election where the whole Jesus being the brother of Satan was brought up. Most people had never heard about that before but then it became a well know fact. This will expose Mormonism and their false teachings so more people will be more aware of what they really believe. Will they still have converts despite this? Of course. They will attract people such as yourself who disregard what the Bible teaches and rely on their mental intellect or their feelings.

It may bring more attention to the religion (both positive and negative attention, most likely), but I'm just saying, bringing it up during the campaign (in a negative light) is definitely detrimental. Just ask Rick Perry.

[Billyray]

. . . but I'm just saying, bringing it up during the campaign (in a negative light) is definitely detrimental. Just ask Rick Perry.
Sure but once Mitt gets elected this won't be the case. And despite the negative reaction for Rick Perry what stays in people's mind is that Mormonism is a cult.

[Libby]

Sure but once Mitt gets elected this won't be the case. And despite the negative reaction for Rick Perry what stays in people's mind is that Mormonism is a cult.

The reaction I have seen, both in the media and among my friends (who are a pretty diverse group) is that it's a lie and they are just trying to slander Mitt, using his religion to do so (which is not cool). Even my liberal friends took that at***ude, and many of them do not like the church's stance on ****sexuality...but they still think bringing up (attacking) his religion is not right.

[Billyray]

The reaction I have seen, both in the media and among my friends (who are a pretty diverse group) is that it's a lie and they are just trying to slander Mitt, using his religion to do so (which is not cool). Even my liberal friends took that at***ude, and many of them do not like the church's stance on ****sexuality...but they still think bringing up (attacking) his religion is not right.
Right or not it doesn't matter if Mitt gets into office. Then it won't be fellow candidates but talk show hosts and the like which will expose all of the warts of Mormonism. Most people ***ume that Mormonism is just another Christian sect because they don't really know what LDS believe, but this will change as their doctrine is given More and more airtime.

[Libby]

Right or not it doesn't matter if Mitt gets into office. Then it won't be fellow candidates but talk show hosts and the like which will expose all of the warts of Mormonism.

We'll see, Billy.

Personally, I don't think, even Romney, can beat the President, so we may never get to find out how it would have played out.

[Billyray]

We'll see, Billy.


It wouldn't surprise me to see a Sa****ay Night Live skit especially given the popularity of the B of M Broadway play.

[Libby]

It wouldn't surprise me to see a Sa****ay Night Live skit especially given the popularity of the B of M Broadway play.

That I could see. But, I don't think people are going to take that particularly seriously.

I had to laugh, when Mitt said, he wanted to get out to see the Book of Mormon play! I think he has no idea what is in it (the language, etc). :D

[Billyray]

That I could see. But, I don't think people are going to take that particularly seriously.

I do. And nothing like humor to get people to watch. I can see it now, Mitt is in the White House trying to make a decision about the middle east peace process and Joseph Smith and the Angel Moroni appear to him.

[Libby]

I do. And nothing like humor to get people to watch. I can see it now, Mitt is in the White House trying to make a decision about the middle east peace process and Joseph Smith and the Angel Moroni appear to him.

Oh brother..lol....maybe you should apply for a *** as comedy writer. ;)

[alanmolstad]

Now as for the NEXT question.....
If Mitt is on the ticket will he win the election?.....

again let me take a moment and dip my thoughts into the future and see what I see....

.................................................
..............................................
.................................................. ...

nope.
I do not believe that if Mitt gets on the ticket there is a likelihood that he is able to win the election.

Now I would vote for him....But there is a HUGE problem with Mitt that the Republicans have to deal with, ie:.....he is not conservative.

This lack of being conservative means the only way he wins is to run on the fact that he is not Obama...not a Democrat.

The trick for him will be to have enough conservatives like myself, to overlook who he is and only see the big "R" after his name.

So in reality, I will not so much be voting for Mitt, as I will be voting for the "Republican Party" this next time around.

But like I said....Mitt is not conservative, and the Republicans have shown in the last few elections that you need to appear very conservative to get the needed support of the conservative voters that get a Republican elected.

Right now, Mitt appears a worse choice for conservatives than even McCain was in the last election.

[BigJulie]

I think Romney and Huntsman are the only respectable candidates on the GOP ticket. If Romney isn't the pick, the Republicans are going to lose big time, next year.

I'm a left leaning Independent, and will be voting for Obama.

Libby, I was taking an economics cl*** (actually took two back to back) when Obama was in the White House with his democratic house and senate. If you knew what I learned about what policies he was p***ing and what that meant for our economy----you would not take a second look at him-regardless of how you feel on other issues. There is a reason with the billions the government and Fed is pumping into the economy, it is still slugging along. We should have been having record inflation, but instead, he is killing the system and it shows. The banking collapse was long in coming and started with policies implemented by Clinton (which I liked), but got out of hand under Bush with the Barney Frank, Dodd combo.

[BigJulie]

Huntsman has absolutely no chance to win. It is between Cain and Romney IMO and I prefer Cain over Romney at this point in time. But as I said before I would welcome a Romney win because I think it will be a good way to expose the false teachings of Mormonism.

I am not sure Rick Perry is out of the running yet. He has a lot of money and is an aggressive campaigner.

[BigJulie]

Now as for the NEXT question.....
If Mitt is on the ticket will he win the election?.....

again let me take a moment and dip my thoughts into the future and see what I see....

.................................................
..............................................
.................................................. ...

nope.
I do not believe that if Mitt gets on the ticket there is a likelihood that he is able to win the election.

Now I would vote for him....But there is a HUGE problem with Mitt that the Republicans have to deal with, ie:.....he is not conservative.

This lack of being conservative means the only way he wins is to run on the fact that he is not Obama...not a Democrat.

The trick for him will be to have enough conservatives like myself, to overlook who he is and only see the big "R" after his name.

So in reality, I will not so much be voting for Mitt, as I will be voting for the "Republican Party" this next time around.

But like I said....Mitt is not conservative, and the Republicans have shown in the last few elections that you need to appear very conservative to get the needed support of the conservative voters that get a Republican elected.

Right now, Mitt appears a worse choice for conservatives than even McCain was in the last election.

Mitt's chances will have a lot to do with what is happening in the economy next summer and into the election. And Obama is having a struggle with the a house that controls the money that is against him. I think that is why he is trying to scour through old bills to see exactly what they can implement as fast as they can---he has to get the money out there so things appear okay. But anyone who is paying attention can see that this is a short term gig and without long-term solutions, the economy will stay on its sluggish track. Obama has pitted himself against business leaders. He has changed the laws in a such a way that businesses are pulling away and moving away. He has shut down much of our gas resources. This election really will be about capitolism verses marxism. It will be interesting to see what the people want.

[Billyray]

I am not sure Rick Perry is out of the running yet. He has a lot of money and is an aggressive campaigner.
He did a terrible *** in the last debate.

[BigJulie]

He did a terrible *** in the last debate.

I know. He just sat there and did very little if anything other than ask Romney a question that gave Romney a chance to shine.

[alanmolstad]

If Mitt leads the ticket , I will vote for him..

But because he is not a conservative I do not give him much of a chance

[BigJulie]

If Mitt leads the ticket , I will vote for him..

But because he is not a conservative I do not give him much of a chance

Because Mitt is not hard right and knows how to make businesses running again, I think he has the best chance against Obama.

We shall see. I think of all the candidates, Romney has the strongest resume as far as well-rounded and ready to deal with the issues. His more central leaning on social issues may harm him. We shall see.

[alanmolstad]

His more central leaning on social issues may harm him. We shall see.

yes...

The point is that we already have a person in Obama that appeals to the more liberal/central voter...

The thing lacking in the last election was someone who appealed to the strong pro-life voter...the true conservative.

at this point if Mitt gets the lead position on the ticket it may come down to the person he picks to be VP?

at that point, Mitt has a chance to swing hard for the conservatives and pick Herman Cain as his VP.

At that point the last republican doubters like Rush will jump on board and we would finally have a ticket people like myself can support.

[BigJulie]

yes...

The point is that we already have a person in Obama that appeals to the more liberal/central voter...

The thing lacking in the last election was someone who appealed to the strong pro-life voter...the true conservative.

at this point if Mitt gets the lead position on the ticket it may come down to the person he picks to be VP?

at that point, Mitt has a chance to swing hard for the conservatives and pick Herman Cain as his VP.

At that point the last republican doubters like Rush will jump on board and we would finally have a ticket people like myself can support.

I don't think Roe vs Wade is going to be overturned in the next four years, and Mitt is conservative enough he is not going to take it further left. I think this year will be determined on the economy and Obama's only shot is if he can flood enough money into the economy to make it "appear" that it is doing better. The underlying fundamentals of the economy right now speak to the fact that money in the system right now will only be temporary and even Obama's economist say that his ***s bill will be short-lived as it only does more of the same (which only works temporarily).

[Libby]

There is a revolution going on, in this country, (and around the world) and I don't think I can even speculate about where we are going to be, this time next year. I do know conservative answers have not been very popular, because they tend to protect the rich, and that is just not going over well, right now. Unless this new House can do something effective, I predict they will all be out in November of 2012. All of the new members will be up for re-election, at that time. Depending on what's going on, I can see the elections going in several different directions. It will be an interesting year, that's for sure.

[alanmolstad]

We shall see, it's hard to predict the future....

Right now all we can do is make a guess, and add a bit of wishful thinking to the mix.
and on that note:


My wishful thinking is thus>

Mitt fails to do well in the future, and after Iowa and New Hampshire and Florida have their say, Mitt drops out of the race.

Cain does stunningly well in the first 3 tests, and by the Florida vote is seen as the go-to guy for all the Republican and conservative base voters.

Cain wins the nomination and will lead the ticket, and picks...as his VP........

Condoleezza Rice!

[BigJulie]

There is a revolution going on, in this country, (and around the world) and I don't think I can even speculate about where we are going to be, this time next year. I do know conservative answers have not been very popular, because they tend to protect the rich, and that is just not going over well, right now. Unless this new House can do something effective, I predict they will all be out in November of 2012. All of the new members will be up for re-election, at that time. Depending on what's going on, I can see the elections going in several different directions. It will be an interesting year, that's for sure.

It is interesting to me that you say that the GOP "protects the rich." This is a talking point for the democratic party, but in truth--there is very little to back it up. The bailouts did more to protect the rich than not and there is a reason people like Jeffrey Immelt and Warren Buffet are smoozing up to Obama. The way I see it, all politicians have and still protect the rich. That is part of the problem. As long as the Dems can get you to believe it is the GOP's fault, they can laugh all the way to the bank.

[BigJulie]

We shall see, it's hard to predict the future....

Right now all we can do is make a guess, and add a bit of wishful thinking to the mix.
and on that note:


My wishful thinking is thus>

Mitt fails to do well in the future, and after Iowa and New Hampshire and Florida have their say, Mitt drops out of the race.

Cain does stunningly well in the first 3 tests, and by the Florida vote is seen as the go-to guy for all the Republican and conservative base voters.

Cain wins the nomination and will lead the ticket, and picks...as his VP........

Condoleezza Rice!

That will be interesting to see. I have alway slike Condoleezza Rice. She is a smart woman.

[alanmolstad]

if Mitt leads the ticket....pick a person to be his VP.....

but dont pick anyone in the race now.....

pick a name you think would actually be on the list of people that could add a lot to the ticket....

[Libby]

It is interesting to me that you say that the GOP "protects the rich." This is a talking point for the democratic party, but in truth--there is very little to back it up. The bailouts did more to protect the rich than not and there is a reason people like Jeffrey Immelt and Warren Buffet are smoozing up to Obama. The way I see it, all politicians have and still protect the rich. That is part of the problem. As long as the Dems can get you to believe it is the GOP's fault, they can laugh all the way to the bank.

Oh, I think plenty of Democrats protect the rich. I am not a Democrat and I do vote across the aisle. But, generally speaking, it is the Republicans who want to give tax breaks to the rich, and remove consumer protections.

I voted for George Bush, his second term, because I believed we needed a strong military, at that time. But, now, we need someone to help us out of this financial crisis. I don't see any Republican that would be up for that ***. Mitt would be the lesser of the many evils, IMO, but still the conservatives (IMHO) are going in the exact opposite direction that we need to go. We do need to cut gov't, but not on the backs of the poor...not during an economic meltdown (and not ever, IMO). And, we need to stop giving the rich so many tax breaks, to the point where some of them pay no Federal taxes, at all. That's not right. Obama is not my ideal, but at least is kind of moving in the right direction.

[BigJulie]

Oh, I think plenty of Democrats protect the rich. I am not a Democrat and I do vote across the aisle. But, generally speaking, it is the Republicans who want to give tax breaks to the rich, and remove consumer protections.

I voted for George Bush, his second term, because I believed we needed a strong military, at that time. But, now, we need someone to help us out of this financial crisis. I don't see any Republican that would be up for that ***. Mitt would be the lesser of the many evils, IMO, but still the conservatives (IMHO) are going in the exact opposite direction that we need to go. We do need to cut gov't, but not on the backs of the poor...not during an economic meltdown (and not ever, IMO). And, we need to stop giving the rich so many tax breaks, to the point where some of them pay no Federal taxes, at all. That's not right. Obama is not my ideal, but at least is kind of moving in the right direction.

Libby, I can see your reasoning, but the reason the rich are getting richer is not because of tax breaks. One of the best things we could do would be to get rid of all cooperate taxes so that companies want to be here rather than overseas.

That said, the main reason that the rich are getting richer is because of government protections. For example, many sugar farmers are protected. As a result, our sugar farmers are billionaries and the cost to the country is about 28,000 ***s (straight from my economics text) to other countries as candy companies, etc. go over seas.

Immelt (who paid no cooperate taxes) who is the very rich CEO got a ton of stimulus money under Obama and a lot of that money went straight overseas.

One of the biggest scams that has occured recently is that the GOP and the Dem leaders took a bill to Obama to close these "cooperate" loopholes that offer protection to large companies and it was Obama who balked at the bill. The news does not tend to report all the details, but if you read enough papers and keep up on the stuff (I read both liberal and conservative papers)--you start to see what is going on.

Another large scam, Boeing hired 1,000 people in S.C. only to be told by government that they could not open a factory in a non-union state (they are suing, I believe) right now.

One of the most dangerous thing that has happened currently is the banking situation. Frank and Dodd's bill will basically mean the demise of small banks and these big (too big to fail) banks will be all that is left. While it appears to be regulation to save us from these big banks, it is actually going to make them richer.

Next is the whole "cash for clunkers" debacle. While it was billed as saving the car companies that were going under, who it helped the most was the rich--because only the rich can afford to buy brand new cars (and they got to do it with tax payer dollars). Then, all the old cars were junked making used car prices go up.

In every way possible, Obama has given lip-service to the middle cl*** while lining the pockets of the rich. Don't just believe what he says--watch what he does and how it affects the middle cl***. I personally think he is the greatest president for saying what sounds good and then smoozing with the rich and doing just the opposite as he claims. It makes me ill, really.

[alanmolstad]

all that stuff is way over my head...

What I know for sure is that I dont care what you look at, this country is not better off than we were 4 years ago, and seems to be sinking fast.

The only answer the this president seems to have is to take a vacation, and send up bills to Congress that dont do a darn thing and actually end up making things worse.

The bills for the last Obama ***s bill came to well over $800 BILLION!

that one "green" power company alone that went broke still got over 1/2 a Billion dollars$$$ from Obama.....and still went flat broke?

Now lets face it......if I had a company and the Goverment just gave me 1/2 a Billion bucks, there is no way my company would have went broke.

Give me that kind of money and I can tell you one thing, I would not be broke later on...LOL

Yet the company visited by Obama and handed 1/2 a billion in cash went totally broke?

So who is to blame for such a ****py investment of our money?.......Oh that's right, Obama put his VP Biden in charge to make sure "Every last dime " was spent wisely and accounted for.

Obama simply is like President carter, who sat around and kept his coffee warm while the country fell into a hole.

Obama is like the New Carter....




WHAT I SEE....
What I see is that we clearly are going in the wrong direction as a country.

What I see is that this president is just not up to the ***...
That the chair is just too big for him.

What I also see is a lot of fear of the liberals when they think about this next election.
Liberals are looking at Obama's time in office and the shape of the country and are just shaking their heads....

They know the Obama just did not work out.

The Liberals I know personally just keep asking, "Where did it all go so wrong?"

and,

What I see on the conservative side when looking to the next election is a lot of eagerness ......and .....the use of the word "Landslide" when thinking about their dream of tossing Obama out of office, and a take over of both houses of Congress.

[alanmolstad]

Of all the things I truly HATE about this President's actions?.....Its the way he has single-handedly destroyed our whole country's dream to reach out into space.

NASA has been reduced to a small time 'actor" in the very programs we owned not long ago.

We now have to rent a seat just to get into space.

HOW DARE we claim to have a plan to do anything in space, when we have seen this president strip away all the support needed to even reach out to the moon in our lifetimes.

I had a hope of seeing an American flag on Mars before I died...

Now this President has successfully kill that dream, and has replaced it with silly ideas like being able to visit the "The Lagrangian point" one day....

What the &#*&^$#@.....?????

Our new dream is not to reach Mars anymore, but now we are to feel the same inspiration about being able to travel millions of miles so we can look out the window at?..........dead space?
a vacuum?

Or whats that other silly idea that Obama suggested?...oh yah, He said we should one day send men to visit an asteroid?

Boy, thats going to make a great photo-op.....looking out the window at a rock.....
Thats worth risking lives on.....sure Obama...sure....

What ever happened to American Leadership around here?

By the time we get this guy out of office, will there be anything left to NASA to save?

Even Neil Armstrong, (who never take a political stand) came out and openly warned us that this President's actions were destroying NASA.

In the end.......
In the end.....If Mitt is against Obama in the next election, I will fully and 100% support Mitt, because the faster we fire Obama the better off this country will be.

[BigJulie]

Of all the things I truly HATE about this President's actions?.....Its the way he has single-handedly destroyed our whole country's dream to reach out into space.

NASA has been reduced to a small time 'actor" in the very programs we owned not long ago.

We now have to rent a seat just to get into space.



My brother is an engineer for Boeing---worked on space station and space shuttle stuff. First off--he is forced to pay union dues, which he HATES because they give money to politicians he doesn't want. And they are not protecting his ***. His has a graduate degree from MIT. The reason he stays put is so that his family doesn' t have to up and move while his kids are growing up. So, he is donating money to candidates he doesn't want. That is not freedom, that is not protection, that is like inner-gang thuggery. You have to give us money and in return we will give you "protection."

Secondly, when I asked him about the space station and why we put so much money into it, he said, because when you work with another country to create something, you don't go to war. Working together in a creative project helps resolve differences and space is a neutral place where death is on the line if you don't cooperate. No country wants a national disaster because of their own pride or stubborness when working on a project.

Alan, I agree with you. This president appears to want to take us away from peaceful exploration to war. He has been in three years and it feels like our wars are just growing, not shrinking.

[Libby]

I think it is unreasonable to support space programs, when there are so many people who are struggling just to survive (here in our country and elsewhere). President Obama has his priorities straight, in that regard.

As for the economy, there is only so much the gov't can do to help. Mainly, what the gov't MUST do, is try to support those people who are without work and needing help, until the economy improves. Big businesses need to invest more in this country, instead of running off to other countries and hiring slave labor. That is nothing but greed, in operation.

[BigJulie]

I think it is unreasonable to support space programs, when there are so many people who are struggling just to survive (here in our country and elsewhere). President Obama has his priorities straight, in that regard.

As for the economy, there is only so much the gov't can do to help. Mainly, what the gov't MUST do, is try to support those people who are without work and needing help, until the economy improves. Big businesses need to invest more in this country, instead of running off to other countries and hiring slave labor. That is nothing but greed, in operation.


Although most people today will never set foot on the moon, everyone likely comes in contact with a NASA by-product every day. Partnering with various research teams and companies, NASA continues to spawn a vast array of new technologies and products that have improved our daily lives. Basic steps in health, safety, communications and even casual entertainment find their ro*ots in the government branch commonly ***ociated with rocket ships and floating people. In fact, NASA has filed more than 6,300 patents with the U.S. government [source: NASA Scientific and Technical Information].

Each year since 1976, NASA has published a list of every commercialized technology and product linked to its research. The NASA journal "Spinoff" highlights these products, which have included things like improved pacemakers, state of the art exercise machines and satellite radio. Each product was made possible thanks to a NASA idea or innovation.

But it doesn't take a rocket scientist to use many of these so-called spinoffs. Read on to learn about ten of these familiar products.

In fact, NASA has filed more than 6,300 patents with the U.S. government [source: NASA Scientific and Technical Information].http://curiosity.discovery.com/topic/physics-concepts-and-definitions/ten-nasa-inventions.htm

So, ten products you most likely use because of NASA:
1) Invisible braces
2) scratch resistent contact lenses
3) Memory Foam
4) Ear thermometers
5) Shoe insoles
6) Long-distance telecommunications.
7) Adjustable smoke detectors
8) Safety grooving concrete to keep our roads safe.
9) Cordless tools
10 Water filters.

Keep in mind, 6,300 patents working with private companies means many many ***s.

Yes, our government should back research (which NASA is) because then, instead of getting a government handout, people can get ***s in new technologies that lead the world.

And this is just another reason why Obama is taking our country one giant step backward.

[Libby]

Julie, as far as I know, it was only the Shuttle program that is being phased out (and that may be temporary, as well). Obama didn't make that decision by himself. That was a part of the budget negotiations and I don't recall Republicans making much of a fuss over this. Times are hard and THEY are the ones who want to do the "deep cuts". Obama's hands are more or less tied, unless they agree to the cuts.

[alanmolstad]

Julie, as far as I know, it was only the Shuttle program that is being phased out

You dont really pay attention to NASA do you?

President Bush set a goal, and NASA designed a new ship to reach that goal.

Please go study the "Constellation program" to see the thing that Obama has done.


Obama killed that goal,
He has no clue about a new goal,
and when asked about the future of NASA all this President can say is that "private enterprise " will have to pick up the slack.

In the meantime, all we have left of our once proud space agency is a rented seat on the old Soviet space ships left over from the cold war.

Lets look at what this ridiculous president Obama has done.
http://spaceflightnow.com/news/n1002/01nasabudget/

[Libby]

This was a very good move, Alan. If it had been the social security program, the right would be jumping up and down for joy.


Going commercial frees NASA for deeper space
May 14, 2010|By S. Alan Stern | Guest columnist

Fortunately, the Obama administration has proposed a game-changing solution that uses private industry to more cost-effectively take on the more mundane aspects of human transportation to low-Earth orbit, freeing up needed funds to send astronauts to explore deep space.

The administration's wise commercialization approach echoes an immensely successful path taken by NASA in the past. Consider: At the dawn of the Space Age, all satellites were built and launched by governments. But early on, communications satellites were encouraged to go commercial. The result: a $100 billion-plus spinoff industry that employs thousands of workers to build the satellites, their ground stations, launchers and ***ociated command and control infrastructure. It also launches more satellites annually than any other form of spaceflight. The money saved frees NASA to do other things with its resources.

Go Here (http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2010-05-14/news/os-ed-alan-stern-spaceflight-051410-20100513_1_human-spaceflight-orbit-private-industry)

[alanmolstad]

No the decision Obama made was wrong, and Im not surprised to see a political hack hired to try to put the best spin on it,.


But I would trust the words of Neil Armstrong over the Liberal press any day of the week!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CaH41IPf0us


This is man who gives us the truth...

We sit back and comment on History, but here is a man who "IS" history.

Obama will soon be forgotten, and Im sure that the next president in 2012 will try his best to repair the damage that Obama has done.

But this generation has lost its moment.....

[BigJulie]

This was a very good move, Alan. If it had been the social security program, the right would be jumping up and down for joy.



Go Here (http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2010-05-14/news/os-ed-alan-stern-spaceflight-051410-20100513_1_human-spaceflight-orbit-private-industry)

Libby, I am personally related to someone who is involved in commercial rocketry (not my brother) and it still has a long way to go. In the meantime, we have spent millions of dollars on a space-station that our only access to will be through other countries.

While it sounds like a wise move, what it really is is a move from government back innovation and research money to en***lement programs. While you say that the right would jump up and down if social security was cut--I don't think anyone in politics at all is under the delusion that without some changes, Social Security is doomed. That is coming from the right and the left. I for one, have accepted that I cannot retire at 65 like my parents before me and that rising medical costs are going to keep me from accessing the same health care system that my parents have. That is the cold hard facts. Anyone who wants to hang on to the status quo is hanging on to a sinking ship. I keep wondering who the politician will be that will face that bear and do what painfully needs to be done. Raise the retirement age, cut the benefits---something will have to happen or the system will be bankrupt---let alone the federal government has been dipping into the trust for so many years, that the money that should be there is not.

[Libby]

Libby, I am personally related to someone who is involved in commercial rocketry (not my brother) and it still has a long way to go. In the meantime, we have spent millions of dollars on a space-station that our only access to will be through other countries.

While it sounds like a wise move, what it really is is a move from government back innovation and research money to en***lement programs. While you say that the right would jump up and down if social security was cut--I don't think anyone in politics at all is under the delusion that without some changes, Social Security is doomed. That is coming from the right and the left. I for one, have accepted that I cannot retire at 65 like my parents before me and that rising medical costs are going to keep me from accessing the same health care system that my parents have. That is the cold hard facts. Anyone who wants to hang on to the status quo is hanging on to a sinking ship. I keep wondering who the politician will be that will face that bear and do what painfully needs to be done. Raise the retirement age, cut the benefits---something will have to happen or the system will be bankrupt---let alone the federal government has been dipping into the trust for so many years, that the money that should be there is not.

I haven't seen anyone on the left say that SS needs to be cut. It's actually quite solvent, right now. It's one of the best programs our gov't has ever supported and I hope it continues. Changes to retirement age have already been made. My generation, for example, has to be 66 to retire with full benefits, and future generations will have a higher age, most likely. That is needed, because people are living much longer, today, than they did in the past, and that will, likely, continue to go up, as medical advances are made.

As for health care, we need a gov't health care plan that includes a single payer benefit!!! That is not going to be a luxury, in the next few years, but a necessity!

[BigJulie]

I haven't seen anyone on the left say that SS needs to be cut. It's actually quite solvent, right now. It's one of the best programs our gov't has ever supported and I hope it continues. Changes to retirement age have already been made. My generation, for example, has to be 66 to retire with full benefits, and future generations will have a higher age, most likely. That is needed, because people are living much longer, today, than they did in the past, and that will, likely, continue to go up, as medical advances are made.

As for health care, we need a gov't health care plan that includes a single payer benefit!!! That is not going to be a luxury, in the next few years, but a necessity!

Libby, I have not seen an Act that changes the S.S. retirement age. Can you send me the link to it?

In 2009/2010 (approx.) the White House put together a bi-partisan committee to figure out ways to help the federal budget crisis (which once again, both sides do not dispute.)

Here is a couple of paragraphs from that report. If you look at it, you will see that it is from the White House.


Unless we act, these immense demographic changes will bring the Social Security program to its knees. Without action, the benefits currently pledged under Social Security are a promise we cannot keep. Today, the program is spending more on beneficiaries than it is collecting in revenue. Although the system’s revenues and expenditures are expected to return to balance temporarily in 2012, it will begin running deficits again in 2015 if interest from the trust fund is excluded and in 2025 including interest payments. After that point, the system’s trust fund will be drawn down until it is fully exhausted in 2037.

Unfortunately, the default plan in Washington is to do nothing. The do-nothing plan would lead to an immediate 22 percent across-the-board benefit cut for all current and future beneficiaries in 2037. Over the next 75 years, the program faces a shortfall equal to 1.92 percent of taxable payroll. Seventy-five years from now, that gap will increase to 4.12 percent of payroll. http://www.fiscalcommission.gov/sites/fiscalcommission.gov/files/documents/TheMomentofTruth12_1_2010.pdf

Interestinly, Obama has deep-sixed these recommendations and currently is bowing down to the AARP and stating that the new "Super Committee" recently is not to touch S.S.

I don't believe I have yet seen anything on the table to change the Society Security retirement age. If it has p***ed, please show me the bill. I would be interested in seeing it. Thanks.

[alanmolstad]

from the numbers i have read about...when SS was set up you had about 147 people working full-time ***s for every person getting SS payments....

Today we have about 1.7 people working at full-time ***s to support that same person who collects SS payments.

Clearly that situation is doomed, and that there is no way in the world 1.7 workers can pay in enough SS withholding to cover the one person receiving.

[alanmolstad]

I once watched a TV comercial where a young black child was sitting with his grand parents doing his school home work,,,then I learn during the ad that the child's parents were killed in an accident, but thanks to SS payments, the child has enough money to go to school and pay for his education.

As I listened I kept think that this seems to be getting way outside the 'retirement" plan that was sold to us....

I was a bit upset to learn that my SS withholding was being sucked away to pay for this kid's whole life and future education.

Hey, I fell sorry for the kid, but I also want to protect SS from being used as the great Cash Cow that gets used to pay for fixing every problem in the world.

If the state wants to set up a fund to help orphans?..fine, set it up as such,
But you should not be dipping into my retirement funds to pay for such things that are not connected in any way, shape of form to my retirement.

[BigJulie]

I once watched a TV comercial where a young black child was sitting with his grand parents doing his school home work,,,then I learn during the ad that the child's parents were killed in an accident, but thanks to SS payments, the child has enough money to go to school and pay for his education.

As I listened I kept think that this seems to be getting way outside the 'retirement" plan that was sold to us....

I was a bit upset to learn that my SS withholding was being sucked away to pay for this kid's whole life and future education.

Hey, I fell sorry for the kid, but I also want to protect SS from being used as the great Cash Cow that gets used to pay for fixing every problem in the world.

If the state wants to set up a fund to help orphans?..fine, set it up as such,
But you should not be dipping into my retirement funds to pay for such things that are not connected in any way, shape of form to my retirement.

Well, it looks like Cain is leading the ticket (back to the original subject). I know you like him. This worries me because his 9-9-9 plan will be slaughtered. This will mean we have a losing ticket against Obama. This just makes me sick. So many other candidates would have had a better chance against Obama. Cain will go down because people will be afraid of a federal sales tax and a regressive tax. It is a deadly combination and I know I could never vote for it.

[alanmolstad]

Well, it looks like Cain is leading the ticket (back to the original subject). I know you like him. .
..Yes, of all the guys running I like him the most,

Hands down.

I actually could not care less about all the other people in the race.

If I got a chance to vote in a primary (I live in ND so we tend to get overlooked up here) I would vote for Cain over everyone else.

Cain is the only guy I think has anything near my views, and my way of thinking.

Now don't get me wrong, I will vote for anyone over Obama.

But if I had my chance to support Cain in a primary I would.

[Libby]

Alan, I was wondering what you think of Cain, now? The personal stuff about him must have been a huge disappointment...

[alanmolstad]

Alan, I was wondering what you think of Cain, now? The personal stuff about him must have been a huge disappointment...

My views.....

Cain made this election a lot more fun.

Almost every time Cain spoke you could count on a song, or a Bible verse, or a quote picked up and played on YouTube.

so with Cain there was a lot to like in him ...''as a fun person to have at the party"


But from the start I put Cain into the same box as Ross Perot and Alan Keys...
They are nice enough guys, but they tried to run for the White House before we knew how well they could handle a *** like this.

I wish such men would run for a State Governor or for Congress first, so we can see how they take to the *** in Washington.

Now, as for Cain's marriage problems and the other women?...I dont care about that stuff.

I am not voting for "Husband of the year"

Im voting for a guy i want to be president....I dont care what faith he is, or who he sleeps with...I dont want to get in to the personal stuff....

i think we all have a right to our personal privacy in such matters.

BUT......BUT......BUT...
But what kind of fool is so busy for years cheating on his wife, and then decided to run for the White House?

it strikes me as about the most foolish thing for a cheating man to do...

it is so foolish, that it sorta strikes me also as a way he could "tell the wife' and confess his cheating, without having to say it first.

getting CNN to tell his wife might have seemed at the time, to be an easy way out...

So there is a type of "Self Destruct" mentality to that moment cain decided to run for President.

He HAD to know that word of his girlfriend would get out.

He HAD to know this would happen just as it happened....

I mean really....the men that never want their wives to find out about a girlfriend, keep their names out of the news as best they can.
You lead a low-profile life when you are in the middle of cheating on your wife....

Running for president?
thats not the smartest move.....

[Libby]

Yeah, I hear ya. I kind of feel the same way about Newt Gingrich. Surely, he must know, his past is going to be a big detriment in his run for the White House....and detrimental to him and his party. So, why would he even put himself in that position. He really needs to retire from politics.

Cain was much too conservative, for my tastes. But, I did like him, personally, until I found out about his cheating. That does matter, to me, because it speaks to a person's character.

[alanmolstad]

The end result of this past election shows us that you dare not try to win if you are a Republican and walk away from the conservatives.

Mitt ran more and more away from Christian conservatives...and this was the same thing that Dole did and lost...and McCain did and lost...

Now Mitt Romney has joined them in their little club of people who tried to win without us....

[alanmolstad]

I pay attention to a lot of the chat that came out of the Conservative meetings after the election, and there is a ground movement to try to make sure via the Party Rules, that another Mitt Romney does not happen next time.

The error in the Party is that it is so open to people getting into the race.
This allowed a liberal like Mitt to simply be the only guy left standing in a race that bhad way more interest from Conservatives that it had from Mitt supporters on the Left.
But due to the manner that the Conservatives split their votes amoung 8 different people at the start of this primary season, it left Mitt with the largest share of votes.....

and with no support among core conservatives, Mitt had to run the say style of election that doomed McCain and Bob Dole.
All 3 guys now have tried to not be strongly connected to the core Conservative part of the Party, and all 3 of them lost doing this.

The fact is that appealing to Conservatives is the only way to get elected as a republican....

You need a strong pro-Life person to lead the ticket....Strong church-goer....and with a great history of supporting Conservative issues.

In other words.....No More Mitt Romneys!

[alanmolstad]

this time around I see Bush leading the ticket.

will Bush pick Mitt as the VP running mate?....I dont think so.
However I do see Mitt picked to be named the Sec of State should Bush win.

[alanmolstad]

the key thing to watch in this next election will be the push to keep conservatives OUT of the race to lead the ticket.
last time we have 5 or 6 good conservatives in the race and they split the vote and allowed Mitt to win...

[alanmolstad]

this time around I see Bush leading the ticket.

will Bush pick Mitt as the VP running mate?....I dont think so.
However I do see Mitt picked to be named the Sec of State should Bush win.

as it turned out...Bush fell completely apart during the next election, and well...Mitt tried very hard to steal the lead spot on the ticket a bunch of times.

As for why Bush failed?...how could a guy who had well over 130 million to spend , ending up with only 3 people to vote for him at the convention?......thats a good question for big brains to answer.

What actually happened is that a revolution happened within the Party and that forces connected to the rise of the tea party wing were able to take over the lead spot on the ticket against the will of the establishment of the Party leadership.

In this election I ended up strongly supporting Trump from the moment he announced his run, and so this has been the first time I have supported a guy who won the whole show.
This did cause me a loss of a few Facebook friends, as not only Liberals but also many conservatives considered Trump to be a joke,,,,,until it was clear he had won it all.


right now I believe Trump is off to a good start, and look forward to the next few years