TexasCHLforum.com

fulano

anygunanywhere wrote:
fulano wrote: With both houses in control of the Republicans, Obama can't put a judge anywhere. Even to get a supreme court judge appointed would require approval. He would be stopped cold.
Never happen. No matter who O would nominate they would sail through the senate confirmations. No one in the senate has enough sand to stop it.

Anygunanywheere

In the past, maybe there would be no stopping a conformation, but, this is not your granddad's government.

fulano

sjfcontrol wrote:

Frankly, I don't care about any of that. He has put (and will put) more republicans into judgeships than Obama has/will. In a two-man race, he still wins.

With both houses in control of the Republicans, Obama can't put a judge anywhere. Even to get a supreme court judge appointed would require approval. He would be stopped cold.

And also, is a justice who may or may not be conservative (you never know how they will act on the bench) worth more trillions of debt and more permenate social programs??

The governmental madness has to stop. Romney will most likely just continue it. JMO

fulano

74novaman wrote:
fulano wrote: If Obama is president and the Senate and House is run by the Republicans. Nothing will get done; they will stop him from spending money, the economy will run its cycle, and we will be done with the Democrats for many terms. JMO
This would be my hope if we are forced to endure another 4 years of obamination. Govt gridlock is a wonderful, wonderful thing.

I think Rick should be elected President......this Rick
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

fulano

sjfcontrol wrote: So, what I hear you saying is, if the choice is between Obama and Romney, then you'd rather see things go left faster (Obama), because...

1) We can put enough Republicans in congress to counter him
2) 'They' won't be able to blame Republicans for Obama's failures, and
3) We'll put in a 'good guy' in 2016.

Does that correctly sum it up?

My response is.......

I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree on this one. I don't see ANY advantage to allowing Obama to have another term. No matter who is on the "R" side of the ballot. Frankly, I'm not sure the nation could survive another 4 years of this. Can you imagine the damage that 8-years of 9+ percent unemployment and the current level of Government spending would cause? My God -- it would take decades to recover even if the Democratic Party shriveled up and blew away as a result.

Here's a possible danger of having all three branches occupied by Republicans.

The Republican congress cannot say no to a Republican president. They never say no when it comes to spending money and waging wars.

If a guy like Romney is in office he will do what ever he wants. He is not a conservative. Period. Just listen to his own words; he backed the stimulus, the bailouts, the unfunded social programs, the unfunded wars; just listen to his own words. He has to lie to get elected; to get past the base of his party.

If Obama is president and the Senate and House is run by the Republicans. Nothing will get done; they will stop him from spending money, the economy will run its cycle, and we will be done with the Democrats for many terms. JMO

fulano

RPB wrote:Mitt's Greatest Hits
(on lots of issues; including guns)
[youtube][/youtube]

So who is this guy Romney?

TexasCHLforum.com

Search found 5 matches

Re: Mitt Romney talks about gun control in 2007

Re: Mitt Romney talks about gun control in 2007

Re: Mitt Romney talks about gun control in 2007

Re: Mitt Romney talks about gun control in 2007

Re: Mitt Romney talks about gun control in 2007