Romney on Obama: I will "knock him on his heels"

LOL...this clown now says he is "severely conservative" now.

More like "severely forgetful" and he's hoping repubs are just as forgetful when it comes to his own claims of being a moderate while running in Mass.

The great pretender gets exposed every time he makes a claim about himself.

Mittens almost is rising to a threat of physical violence against the President. I suggest that Mittens' Secret Service protection detail put Mittens on a watch list....

Romney will fumigate the putrid stench of Obama. He is the only candidate capable of instituting real change in Washinton. He has spent his life proving that he's p to the task. Both Newt and Santorum are corrupt Washington bureaurocrats.

HTS wrote:

Romney will fumigate the putrid stench of Obama. He is the only candidate capable of instituting real change in Washinton. He has spent his life proving that he's p to the task.

Well, Mittens surely is capable of understanding both sides of every issue. His political career demonstrates that incontestably.

PooPoo Platter wrote:

<quoted text>
LOL!!! Shame on America???
You are no different than Jeremiah Wright, Laughing Lobotomy!

You insult Jeremiah Wright with lumping them together!

Makes sense wrote:

Sure, Mittens. Because of YOU 20 percent of Republicans are voting for Obama.
http://www.personalliberty.com/news/poll-20-p...

They are discriminating him, because he is a Mormon. But hope he will make it without that 20%. I am independent, and I will vote for him. I have faith in him. Romney and Paul, are the only ones who appear to be honest men.

HTS wrote:

Romney will fumigate the putrid stench of Obama. He is the only candidate capable of instituting real change in Washinton. He has spent his life proving that he's p to the task. Both Newt and Santorum are corrupt Washington bureaurocrats.

You are absolutely right! Romney just has to ask Obama in public to mention his achievements in life,before he hit the jackpot to the presidency, to prove that he was qualified to fix the problems we had then, and to continue 4 more years, because so far, what he has done is more harm than good. And noway Obama can match Romney's experience.

I am not Republican, nor Democrat, I am Independent.

OneRyder wrote:

LOL...this clown now says he is "severely conservative" now.
More like "severely forgetful" and he's hoping repubs are just as forgetful when it comes to his own claims of being a moderate while running in Mass.
The great pretender gets exposed every time he makes a claim about himself.

Romney is a very decent, honest man. He has to be under a lot of pressure, and it is humane that not the exact words can slip from a persons mouth while under pressure. What is the problem with the Republicans with the "conservativism"? Hypocricy, because look at that Sarah Palin claiming how "conservative" she is, and she wants to send to the WH the inmoral liar, Gingrich. Hos conservative is Obama? And he is president, how conservative was Clinton? And he was president. Isn't it enough that Romney is a more clean man than many of those asking for "conservativism"? No one, No one, has been able to find any dirty laundry on Romney, is as clean as any real good person can be.

I am not Democrat, nor Republican, I am Independent.

susi wrote:

<quoted text>
They are discriminating him, because he is a Mormon.

No, the 20% of Republicans who would vote for Obama over Romney are not the Republicans most concerned about the whole magic underpants thing.

These Republicans would be the ones thinking the Republican Party has gone way too far to the right.

The fundamentalist Republicans who would be most likely to be suspicious of a Mormon would not ever go to the left. They would stay home, hold their nose and vote for Romney anyway, or find a third party candidate.

You're not Democrat, you're not Republican, you're mixed up.

Why the physical innuendo? Is that a sign of strength and proof of qualities suited to govern a country of 300 million? I think not so there must be other reasons. I'm sure if the president were to use such innuendo, there would be an uproar of the angry Black man. A line of thought used on other occasions.

Eric Gustafson wrote:

<quoted text>
You're right, but it's not absent the conscious of Americans that $8.8 Trillion of the current $15.2 Trillion or more than half of our National Debt was run up by Republican deficit spending over the last 30 years, Ronald Reagan $1.8 Trillion, George H.W. Bush $1 Trillion and George H. Bush $6.2 Trillion.
More than half of all the accumulated debt of America since George Washington was run up just under the last three Republicans to sit in the White House.

Your numbers are inaccurate. But one thing is for certain...the national debt will be over $25 trillion by the end of a second Obama term. But, again, it matters not to the liberal left.
This is what is needed to get everyone on the public dole.

There is no candidate that is going to knock Obama on his heels.

That is the sole duty and privilege of the American people.

And are we going to enjoy doing it!

Ron Paul Revolution 2012.

Join or die!

Ron Paul 4 Pres wrote:

Ron Paul Revolution 2012.
Join or die!

That fusty old man is going to start knocking non supporters off? What, Kevorkian style?

Many people see Willard Romney as a stuffed shirt but in truth he enjoys riding his motorcycle whenever times allows.

http://www.joe-ks.com/archives_may2006/1stHyb...

DanielGagnon wrote:

<quoted text>
Your numbers are inaccurate. But one thing is for certain...the national debt will be over $25 trillion by the end of a second Obama term. But, again, it matters not to the liberal left.
This is what is needed to get everyone on the public dole.

Let's review the Numbers.

In 1981 the National Debt was $880 Million, in 1989 the Debt was $2.6 Trillion, Reagan introduced the nation to Trillion Dollar Debt. Reagan added a cool $1.6 Trillion

In 1992 the National Debt was $3.6 Trillion, George W.H. Bush raised taxes, and he was sent out to pasture after adding a cool $1 Trillion to the Debt.

In 2001 the National Debt was $5.8 Trillion in Jan 2009 the National Debt was $10.6 Trillion, with a $1.3 Trillion 2009 Budget Deficit left behind for the incoming President. That's George H. Bush's $6.2 Trillion addition to the debt.

A combined total of $8.8 Trillion after just the last three Presidents, the total debt today is $15.2 Trillion.

Where is the mistake?

Eric Gustafson wrote:

<quoted text>
Let's review the Numbers.
In 1981 the National Debt was $880 Million, in 1989 the Debt was $2.6 Trillion, Reagan introduced the nation to Trillion Dollar Debt. Reagan added a cool $1.6 Trillion
In 1992 the National Debt was $3.6 Trillion, George W.H. Bush raised taxes, and he was sent out to pasture after adding a cool $1 Trillion to the Debt.
In 2001 the National Debt was $5.8 Trillion in Jan 2009 the National Debt was $10.6 Trillion, with a $1.3 Trillion 2009 Budget Deficit left behind for the incoming President. That's George H. Bush's $6.2 Trillion addition to the debt.
A combined total of $8.8 Trillion after just the last three Presidents, the total debt today is $15.2 Trillion.
Where is the mistake?

Trickle down economics .......... my ass !

Romney is losing his support. Romney is not competent to be President. Obama has more experience than Romney. Obama will be re-elected not doubt.

Eric Gustafson wrote:

<quoted text>
Let's review the Numbers.
In 1981 the National Debt was $880 Million, in 1989 the Debt was $2.6 Trillion, Reagan introduced the nation to Trillion Dollar Debt. Reagan added a cool $1.6 Trillion
In 1992 the National Debt was $3.6 Trillion, George W.H. Bush raised taxes, and he was sent out to pasture after adding a cool $1 Trillion to the Debt.
In 2001 the National Debt was $5.8 Trillion in Jan 2009 the National Debt was $10.6 Trillion, with a $1.3 Trillion 2009 Budget Deficit left behind for the incoming President. That's George H. Bush's $6.2 Trillion addition to the debt.
A combined total of $8.8 Trillion after just the last three Presidents, the total debt today is $15.2 Trillion.
Where is the mistake?

It appears it held kind of a low yearly rise from 1995-2007.
I wonder why?
The mistake will be continuing with $3.8 trillion budgets that will never bring down the debt.