• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

"Romnesia".

OH, that's right. Bush wasn't president of the US as of September 11, 2001. He wasn't the Commander In-Chief of the US military, and wasn't responsible for the protection of the US. I forgot that didn't happen.

laughable... you must be incensed by the wall Clinton created between the FBI CIA and the state dept that GWB tore down.. again their was nothign GWB could do there was no credible warning of an attack on 9/11 using our aircrafts...

You should be sendingGWB a thank you card for your safety ,,.. he created the HSD..

again 9/11 was created during Clintons time and so was the first WTC attack
 
What about the economy, jobs, the price of gas, terrorism, the war in Afghanistan, Benghazi, Iran...
What about it? You think that stuff really matters?

The election's in 18 days. It's incredible that the incumbent president is slipping in all the polls and yet his campaign is stressing Big Bird, contraception, binders and "romnesia". ...Does he really think this is going to appeal to swing voters?
To Swingers... yes! He's securing his debased base.
 
OH, that's right. Bush wasn't president of the US as of September 11, 2001. He wasn't the Commander In-Chief of the US military, and wasn't responsible for the protection of the US. I forgot that didn't happen.

Hey, stop it! That was Clinton's fault! And stop blaming Bush for everything!! Myeah!
 
False, Obama has and had a body of work that informed us as well.

just for fun.. explain to me Obama's body of work prior to his election... and tell me that its not paper thin and radical... show me its not.. show me its not opaque at best.. id say empty..

now compare that to Mitts resume coming into this election...
 
jus for fun.. explain to me Obama's body of work prior to his election... and tell me that its not paper thin and radical...

now compare that to Mitts resume coming into this election...

He worked well as a lawyer, educator and community organizer, and that is fully documented. His work as a congressman is also documented. If you want links to his hsitory and biography, let me know.
 
OH, that's right. Bush wasn't president of the US as of September 11, 2001. He wasn't the Commander In-Chief of the US military, and wasn't responsible for the protection of the US. I forgot that didn't happen.

"What's that say? 'Bin Laden determined to att....' **** it... Watch this drive!"
 
He worked well as a lawyer, educator and community organizer, and that is fully documented. His work as a congressman is also documented. If you want links to his hsitory and biography, let me know.

Umm yea.. I know all that... thats kind the issue.. and ummmmm Obama was a Jr Senator.. you left out fiction writer . radical.. and drug user..

He has No Executive Experience...

If this was a real interview for the job of President.. and I had to look over Mitts resume and Obama's... Id find it hard to not laugh at Obamas resume...and we see the results of this stellar Alinsky clone...
 
Last edited:
I heard some of the new speech the president is using on this. I have to say, it sounded a lot like we are reduced to a politicized version of "You might be a redneck" jokes. He would start out with some attack and end with "then you might have romnesia". Can't say I was that impressed with POTUS using this tact, but hell, the election hasn't exactly been a marker of class on either side.
 
View attachment 67136350

An amazing descriptor for a spineless, sycophantic worm who manages to lie his way into positions of power, beating out his moral and intellectual superiors like Ron Paul and Gary Johnson in the process. The biggest liar to be nominated by a major Party since Lyndon Johnson needs a descriptor.

What's your favorite example of Romnesia?

Here's mine:

View attachment 67136352

I eagerly await being told how his 'evolution' is the result of 'soul searching' on the matter.

Loony Ron Paul Romney's intellectual superior? I'd be hard pressed to argue there is anyone who has run for president in the last 60 years who is clearly Romney's intellectual superior. Maybe GHWB. maybe Nixon.
 
Obalzheimers...there is no cure.
 
Umm yea.. I know all that... thats kind the issue.. and ummmmm Obama was a Jr Senator.. you left out fiction writer . radical.. and drug user..

He has No Executive Experience...

If this was a real interview for the job of President.. and I had to look over Mitts resume and Obama's... Id find it hard to not laugh at Obamas resume...and we see the results of this stellar Alinsky clone...

You incorrectly assume that is the only experience necessary. You also incorrectly assume we elect our presidents based on that criteria. You would be wrong on both counts.
 
You incorrectly assume that is the only experience necessary. You also incorrectly assume we elect our presidents based on that criteria. You would be wrong on both counts.

you are right=Obama was the first elected due in large part to white guilt
 
you are right=Obama was the first elected due in large part to white guilt

That's just the excuse you use to justify the republican failure. it says something about a person who can see no other reason for a minorites success other than it being given to him in some way. :coffeepap
 
You incorrectly assume that is the only experience necessary. You also incorrectly assume we elect our presidents based on that criteria. You would be wrong on both counts.

Im making a simple point.. given a choice objetivley between Obama and Mitt as far as who can do this job, Mitt is more then qualified , certainly much more then Obama was...simple point.. and you have not proven otherwise and to be honest you cant, and thats not your fault, its just the simple fact that Mitt is far more qualified then Obama was.. again the job is President...

and I know people vote for whatever reason.. I know all that.. its just a simple point
 
Last edited:
That's just the excuse you use to justify the republican failure. it says something about a person who can see no other reason for a minorites success other than it being given to him in some way. :coffeepap

I am telling it like it is. Bush fatigue played a roll as well. so did the Obamaphone nitwits. but lots of overly sensitive whites figured they could prove to themselves they weren't racist if they voted for a black guy-especially one of dubious qualifications
 
Im making a simple point.. given a choice objetivley between Obama and Mitt as far as who can do this job, Mitt is more then qualified , certainly much more then Obama was...simple point.. and you have not proven otherwise and to be honest you cant, and thats not yoru fault, its just the simple fact that Mitt is far more qualified then Obama was.. again the job is President...

Hardly. Romney made business decisions that might benefit a small number of people, stockholders, but not everyone (employees). His charge will be different as president. If he has the same mindset, he would be a failure as a president, unable to unstand or represent the majority.
 
I am telling it like it is. Bush fatigue played a roll as well. so did the Obamaphone nitwits. but lots of overly sensitive whites figured they could prove to themselves they weren't racist if they voted for a black guy-especially one of dubious qualifications

A lot of things played a role. Bush. A poor republican candidate who made a foolish move in his vice ppresidential choice, a good run by Obama who showed some skill. But to try and pass it off as a race thing? I wish you could see clearly the problems with that.
 
Hardly. Romney made business decisions that might benefit a small number of people, stockholders, but not everyone (employees). His charge will be different as president. If he has the same mindset, he would be a failure as a president, unable to unstand or represent the majority.

Thats not true.. all business does whats best to stay profitable period, to stay in business.. if those Cos went down more people would have been hurt period... he saved many... he deserves credit and not scorn , unless you truly hate capitalism..and just want to stand in a bread line..

and now we have Mitt the Governor.... and he took care of all... I trust Mitts empathy and character...period..
 
A lot of things played a role. Bush. A poor republican candidate who made a foolish move in his vice ppresidential choice, a good run by Obama who showed some skill. But to try and pass it off as a race thing? I wish you could see clearly the problems with that.

I never said that was the only reason professor. the "obama will pay my mortgage" was a big reason as well
 
Thats not true.. all business does whats best to stay profitable period, to stay in business.. if those Cos went down more people would have been hurt period... he saved many... he deserves credit and not scorn , unless you truly hate capitalism..and just want to stand in a bread line..

and now we have Mitt the Governor.... and he took care of all... I trust Mitts empathy and character...period..

Not really. That's the ideal Sometimes they worry more about short term profits than they do long terms success. And sometimes they do it at the expense of the people. That's bad when a government does that.
 
I never said that was the only reason professor. the "obama will pay my mortgage" was a big reason as well

It is the only one you mentioned, giving it a certain importance, one it doesn't derserve. You also need some evidence that would verify it (not some idiot's opinion either). That you think it this direstion says something.
 
such a devastating article
destroys romney's repetitive insistence that he knows how to create jobs
kudos to krugman

Krugman's a pimp. He's also a lying hack

its like quoting Ann Coulter
 
Krugman's a pimp. He's also a lying hack

its like quoting Ann Coulter

Perhaps, but better than NRO or the American NonThinker. To me, he sounds like he makes a good case. I'd love to hear a rebuttal.
 
Krugman's a pimp. He's also a lying hack

its like quoting Ann Coulter

then disprove what he has to say

you won't

because you can't

the facts are against you
 
Back
Top Bottom