Who should Romney choose as a running mate?

[mavs>spurs]

Running mate for what, city council? Ron Paul is going to win the nomination unless they cheat or assassinate him.

[boutons_deux]

"She hasn't made a stupid comment in a long time."

Bachmann: Obamacare Will Force Military Personnel Out Of Their Government-Funded Health System

While the Affordable Care Act does not affect TRICARE or veterans health care, Bachmann’s proposals to curtail the government-funded program will. In January, she proposed and later withdrew a wildly unpopular plan to slash $4.5 billion in veterans services and reduce disability compensation for 150,000 veterans.

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2011...health-system/

=======

She's either profoundly ignorant or rabble-rousing liar, most likely, she's both.

[101A]

^Exactly. The tea baggers will vote for anyone not named Obama, no need to pander to the base

I have been to a Tea Party event. I will not vote for Romney. I will vote for Obama over him. Romney's election will prolong our problems, and kick the can down the road for at least four more years. Moderate Democrat back to Moderate Republican? Different sides of the same coin; not gonna get anything done, but give Democrats something to run against in 4 years, just like Obama has done for Republicans this cycle. Eventually things will get SO bad that we will be forced to choose a non-conventional candidate (and I'm not talking about the color of theirs skin, or the distribution of their chromosomes.) Reelecting Obama, IMO, hastens this, while electing Romney delays it. My logic might be all screwed up (not the first time), and I am not a Tea Partier, per se, but just letting you know - Romney is a very, very weak candidate in the eyes of many, and staying home, if not simply pulling the lever for Obama is a real possibility. , Romney can't even run against Obamacare!

[Winehole23]

but give Democrats something to run against in 4 years, just like Obama has done for Republicans this cycle. Eventually things will get SO bad that we will be forced to choose a non-conventional candidate (and I'm not talking about the color of theirs skin, or the distribution of their chromosomes.) Reelecting Obama, IMO, hastens this, while electing Romney delays it.

This comment has a gnostic/Marxian flavor to it.

It puts me in mind of the sect (forget the name) which taught that the second coming could be hastened by increasing the amount of sin in the world. They believed that deliberately acting as evil and depraved as possible we could essentially provoke God to judge the world a little sooner.

Alternately, it resembles the worse to get better dogma in Marxism. The sharper the social contradictions, the closer we are to revolution.

(But in fact, short of total annihilation there is no limit to how much worse things can get.)

[101A]

This comment has a gnostic/Marxian flavor to it.

It puts me in mind of the sect (forget the name) which taught that the second coming could be hastened by increasing the amount of sin in the world. They believed that deliberately acting as evil and depraved as possible we could essentially provoke God to judge the world a little sooner.

Alternately, it resembles the worse to get better dogma in Marxism. The sharper the social contradictions, the closer we are to revolution.

(But in fact, short of total annihilation there is no limit to how much worse things can get.)

I understand what you are saying, and I considered that tone as I typed, however, my reasoning is not about hastening collapse, but rather hastening the understanding that we are going to have to do something more dramatic than what we are doing. If I believed that there was more than a hair's breadth difference between the policies that would be enacted by a Romney vs an Obama administration, I might vote differently, but I don't. They are both company men. Public perception, however, since one swings for the blue team, and the other for the red - defines them as very different. Perceived change, when there actually is none, is an opiate the powers that be use to remain the powers that be.

It is not that I want things to get worse, I want people to understand it ALREADY IS.

[Winehole23]

Perceived change, when there actually is none, is an opiate the powers that be use to remain the powers that be.

Agreed. I probably couldn't bring myself to vote for Obama for any reason, but this is an excellent point.

[scott]

I could multiquote and +1, but instead I'll just say: Good points and perspective, 101 & WH.

[boutons_deux]

"we are going to have to do something more dramatic than what we are doing"

won't happen ever.

the unchallengeable power of the UCA and 1%, the purchased corruption, obstruction, paralysis, esp from the Repugs (who we know have NO INTEREST in governing, only politicking and pocket stuffing) will keep the jobs and mortgage crises dragging on for years, perhaps America's own Lost Decade, or more.

[101A]

"we are going to have to do something more dramatic than what we are doing"

won't happen ever.

the unchallengeable power of the UCA and 1%, the purchased corruption, obstruction, paralysis, esp from the Repugs (who we know have NO INTEREST in governing, only politicking and pocket stuffing) will keep the jobs and mortgage crises dragging on for years, perhaps America's own Lost Decade, or more.

Nevermind

[boutons_deux]

figured you wouldn't have clue or suggestion about how to there from here.

[101A]

figured you wouldn't have clue or suggestion about how to there from here.

No, it's that I share many of your beliefs about what the problems are (as frightening as that may be). I am not, however, as pessimistic as you are that the people can take power back from the intrenched interests. It's not even that hard. Get mad enough, don't allow ourselves to get distracted by trivial crap and divisive issues that don't amount to a hill of beans - and vote the bums out. Just hope we do it before the hole gets too much deeper.

[101A]

As for what dramatic things need to happen? Massive cuts and significant tax increases; a national determination to not live beyond our means.

[spursncowboys]

as for what dramatic things need to happen? Massive cuts and significant tax increases; a national determination to not live beyond our means.

+1

[boutons_deux]

Regugs won't govern, ever. We saw that 2000-2008. Their candidates and current Congressional leaders only talk about more tax cuts for the wealthy and businesses, increased taxes for the 99%.

Dems can't get the unCons utional 60 in the Senate with "Dems" Lieberman, Nelson, etc always voting against the Dems. The Senate is the corrupt blockade of progress.

the Fox Repug Propaganda network, and associated hate media, the VRWC stink tanks, the scientists, willl distract and polarize and slander and lie enough to block everything.

So all the talk here is purely academic, airy-fairy bull .

[101A]

The Democrats have their own sacred cows; untouchable items in the agenda. , they held the congress for six years; and never passed any meaningful legislation to deal with the deficit - or any real financial regulation with teeth. Stop defending them, and blaming Republicans alone; the Dems deserve as much.

[boutons_deux]

"they held the congress for six years"

which 6 years did Dems hold both the House and 60 in the Senate?

[cantthinkofanything]

Sammy Jankis

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

As for what dramatic things need to happen? Massive cuts and significant tax increases; a national determination to not live beyond our means.

I agree. Unfortunately there isn't a candidate out there man enough to admit we need tax raises AND spending decreases. Every candidate wants to cheese around as if one or the other is good enough.

[Wild Cobra]

As for what dramatic things need to happen? Massive cuts and significant tax increases; a national determination to not live beyond our means.

I disagree with the tax increases. We are already taxed enough. Besides, as long as we are exporting jobs, it won't matter. Nothing will save us but bottoming out and starting over. We either address the root problems, or we fail as a nation.

[LnGrrrR]

I don't think "bottoming out" is a realistic platform for any politician to run on, WC.

[SnakeBoy]

Unfortunately there isn't a candidate out there man enough to admit we need tax raises

I'm ok with raising taxes as long as my taxes don't go up.

[spursncowboys]

I'm ok with raising taxes as long as my taxes don't go up.

Agreed. Also I don't want to lose any benefits I recieve from the government.

[scott]

i agree. Unfortunately there isn't a candidate out there man enough to admit we need tax raises and spending decreases. Every candidate wants to cheese around as if one or the other is good enough.

+1

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

I'm ok with raising taxes as long as my taxes don't go up.

I'm OK with my taxes (granted I don't exactly have a high income job) going up as long as the national deficit is going down.

[Wild Cobra]

I don't think "bottoming out" is a realistic platform for any politician to run on, WC.

I didn't imply any such thing. I am saying unless we bring enough of these outsourced jobs back, we have no place to go but down.