142592Re: [evol-psych] Mitt Romney Explain How Jesus Will Reign for 1,000 Years When He Returns, in Jerusalem... and Missouri
- Nov 4, 2012At 04:53 PM 11/4/2012, Anna wrote:
Both candidates are bad, but Romney is a catastrophe. Economical and moral. Obama is better economist after all and he has no illusions. But at least he knows how to play his cards. Romney is a crook, he will drag this country into a deeper hole and a war at the same time too. (...) Also, how can any rational person vote for him.....
Well, Anna - we agree on something. :)))
The emperor has no clothes - this man is a horror.
Romney has 5 wars in mind...
What I find, in speaking to those who support Romney, is that they can only create a case
for him which is based on deception and a kind of mental illness. I don't believe that
Romney is psychologically healthy. Even his wife said that she was worried about his
emotional health if he were to become president.
From: Robert Karl Stonjek
Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2012 8:17 AM
Subject: [evol-psych] Re: Mitt Romney Explain How Jesus Will Reign for 1,000 Years When He Returns, in Jerusalem... and Missouri
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2012 11:33 PM
Subject: Re: Mitt Romney Explain How Jesus Will Reign for 1,000 Years When He Returns, in Jerusalem... and Missouri
Yes, we are electing a new "administration," a turnover in the executive
branch of government. Nonetheless, my reference to the
Constitutionally-mandated secular operation applies to not only all 3
branches of the federal government, but to every single governmental
entity from school districts to the Presidency.
As you will learn when the votes are counted, it is incorrect to say
that the "vast majority" of Americans mistrust Romney, that they believe
he lies more than Obama. The populace is split right down the middle.
Yes, sadly, all politicians lie, or rather free themselves from earlier
commitments once elected.
Yes, I trust Romney more than Obama to handle the unexpected. His
experience vastly outweighs Obama's, whose experience is limited to
social work at the street level...and in Chicago of all places. I have
lived and worked there, and it is a real viper pit.
It is interesting that you would count only Obama's experience when he ran for the presidency the first time. He now has four years experience of running the country as president so, as far as experience goes, a sitting president always has more experience than a candidate who has never been part of a presidential administration in any capacity.
I note also that Mitt Romney was passed over in favour of Sarah Palin as the vice presidential running mate in the last presidential election, which seems to indicate how much confidence the Republican party hierarchy had in him at that time...
It will be all over in a couple of days, thank goodness :) (I hope you Americans are happy with your choice regardless of whom you choose :)
The selection of a Republican candidate for the presidency of this globalized and expansive empire is - and I say this seriously - the greatest competition of idiocy and ignorance that has ever been. Fidel Castro. January 2012
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>