produced balanced budgets working with one of the most Democratic legislatures in the US. Do you have any idea what it would do for this country if our federal government did this? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitt_romney#Governor_of_Massachusetts
Obama doesn't have a majority in Congress. Obama wasn't as "socialist" as FDR. Obama only has had four years so far. Roosevelt turned the economy around with Keynesian economics and deficit spending. Before he turned to Keynesian, he stuck with a quasi-conservative economic approach and it just made the depression worse. That's solid proof that what Romney wants to do (let everything die, let the free market follow through, FULL ON laissz-faire) is going to pile drive the American economy into the ground. Not to mention if you consider Obama a socialist now-a-days, FDR must have been the founder of evil communist nazi soviet socialism. His New Deal was the most leftist presidential policy that this country has ever seen. So you're basically getting FDR without the alleged socialist policies, a moderate democrat, and yet the Republicans want to go back to a practice that has failed time and time again.
They’ll have to make do. But conservative House Republicans are having a hard time finding anything praiseworthy to say about their party’s presumptive presidential nominee. Fourteen GOP conservatives sat together Tuesday on a Capitol Hill panel to field questions from a few dozen reporters and other attendees about the political issues of the day. When asked, predictably, to provide their thoughts about Mitt Romney, they turned decidedly lukewarm. Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) summed up the conservative mood with a joke that won laughter from the audience, but might have hit too close to home for many in the GOP. “Whether you’re liberal, whether you’re very conservative,” he said, “you ought to be excited [about Romney] because he’s been on your side at one time or another.”
Keep in mind though Mass. has to have a balance budget so it's not particularly extraordinary that Romney produced one. Every governor has had to. Anyway if I knew for certain that Romney was going to govern like he did in Mass. I would look upon him far more favorably. The problem with Romney is that he has pretty much thrown the Mass governor Mitt under the bus in the primaries and we have no idea how President Romney would actually govern.
So does Texas. If Rick Perry brags, "I've produced a balanced budget every year that I've been Govenor," you could reply, "Yeah, because it's the law." (nevermind that the Governor has little to do with producing the state's budget)
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/QFIlYt3NO3Y" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Yup, Mitten have under went personality transformation since he started this campaign, no one knows what he will do if elected.
For all the talk about Obama pissing off the Catholic Church with the contraception issue, the Catholic Bishops basically just obliterated the GOP budget: http://www.usccb.org/news/2012/12-063.cfm Excerpt of note: On April 4, Bishop Blaire cautioned that “at a time when the need for assistance from [affordable housing] programs is growing, cutting funds for them could cause thousands of individuals and families to lose their housing and worsen the hardship of thousands more in need of affordable housing.” He also reminded Congress that the Catholic community is one of the largest private, nonprofit providers of affordable housing in the country and is deeply involved in meeting the health housing and nutrition needs of families across the nation. Bishops Blaire and Pates reaffirmed the “moral criteria to guide these difficult budget decisions” outlined in their March 6 budget letter: 1.Every budget decision should be assessed by whether it protects or threatens human life and dignity. 2.A central moral measure of any budget proposal is how it affects “the least of these” (Matthew 25). The needs of those who are hungry and homeless, without work or in poverty should come first. 3.Government and other institutions have a shared responsibility to promote the common good of all, especially ordinary workers and families who struggle to live in dignity in difficult economic times… Just solutions, however, must require shared sacrifice by all, including raising adequate revenues, eliminating unnecessary military and other spending, and fairly addressing the long-term costs of health insurance and retirement programs.
Oh no! maybe the Romney campaign should have vetted their "real Americans" a little better. What's really funny is Romney tries and tries to steer the conversation towards tired talking points of the GOP but just can't seem to dispense with reality. via ThinkProgress -- Real Americans Tell Romney It May Be ‘Necessary’ To Raise Their Taxes As part of his attempt to appear more relateable, presumed GOP nominee Mitt Romney sat with a handful of regular, working Americans in Pennsylvania today to discuss their plight in the struggling economy. But the Romney campaign may not have vetted the attendees to make sure they were sufficiently anti-tax before giving them access to the candidate and his picnic table full of lemonade and pretzels. One woman at the gathering said she was scared about the fate of her public schools, given deep cuts to the state budget (incidentally, the man who pushed those cuts, Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Corbett, endorsed Romney today). “I don’t like to see cuts made in anything in education,” she said, citing her daughter’s experience. Another man chimed in, noting that “the fat” had already been trimmed and now important education programs were being hit. He went on to say, “None of us like to pay more taxes, but sometimes that’s necessary.” Another woman added, “It’s a necessary evil.” “Right, right,” a third person said as everyone in the group nodded. <iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/NqtQSC8Y5fI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
very interesting.... Poll: Condoleezza Rice top GOP voter pick for Romney running mate A new CNN poll finds Republican voters split over whom presumptive nominee Mitt Romney should select as his running mate, with former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice leading a crowded pack. A CNN/ORC poll released Wednesday found that 26 percent of likely voters would like to see Romney tap Rice as his vice president. Former Sen. Rick Santorum, who challenged Romney for the nomination before ending his campaign earlier this month earned 21 percent support, followed by New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and Tea Party favorite Sen. Marco Rubio (Fla.) both tied at 14.
Damn libral media! Media Favored Romney Over Obama During the bruising Republican primaries, there was one candidate whose coverage was more relentlessly negative than the rest. In fact, he did not enjoy a single week where positive treatment by the media outweighed the negative. His name is Barack Obama. That is among the findings of a study by the Project for Excellence in Journalism, a Washington nonprofit that examined 52 key newspaper, television, radio, and Web outlets. “Day in and day out, he was criticized by the entire Republican field on a variety of policies,” Mark Jurkowitz, the group’s associate director, says of Obama. “And he was inextricably linked to events that generated negative coverage”—including rising gas prices, the ailing economy, and the renewed debate over his health care law. In short, while the president was being hammered on both fronts, his message was somewhat drowned out by the volume of news coverage surrounding the GOP candidates. Not that the Republicans were faring all that well with the press. Mitt Romney’s news coverage “vacillated between mixed and unflattering,” depending on whether he was winning primaries, the report says. “He was constantly dealing with this meme of not being able to close the deal,” Jurkowitz says. Overall, it was no contest. From Jan. 2 through April 15, Romney’s coverage was 39 percent positive, 32 percent negative, and 29 percent neutral, the researchers found. Obama’s coverage was 18 percent positive, 34 percent negative, and 34 percent neutral. That means Romney’s depiction by the media was more than twice as positive as the president’s. So much for liberal bias.
