?

Why is he insisting on hiding most of the documents relating to them? Why has he failed to disclose his records at Bain, as MA Governor, at the Utah Olympics, and of his own personal business acumen? I thought these were all things that he felt qualified him as the next president. If he is truly qualified, why does he continue to be so opaque.

Note: For those that insist that Obama releases his college transcripts, or his "real" birth certificate, do not bother. President Obama never ran on these qualifications, and never felt that they entitled him to the office. Addressing F&F only displays your ignorance. I am just wondering why a man would proclaim to be so proud of his success but insist on hiding how he became that successful.

While in Israel, Mitt Romney said

“Do you realize what health care spending is as a percentage of the G.D.P. in Israel? Eight percent,” he said. “You spend eight percent of G.D.P. on health care. You’re a pretty healthy nation. We spend 18 percent of our G.D.P. on health care, 10 percentage points more. That gap, that 10 percent cost, compare that with the size of our military — our military which is 4 percent, 4 percent. Our gap with Israel is 10 points of G.D.P. We have to find ways — not just to provide health care to more people, but to find ways to fund and manage our health care costs.”

Israel has a low healthcare cost to GDP ratio because it has universal healthcare. Every Israeli is required to buy insurance from one of the four national HMOs, which is an individual mandate. Why is Mitt claiming he will repeal the Affordable Care Act, yet he praises the outcomes of a similar program in a different country? Does Mitt have a realistic, cogent, and competent understanding of the world and America, or does he just vomit political word soup?

It is reported that James Holmes entered the darkened theater, and released tear gas canisters seconds after entering. He was outfitted with head-to-toe body armor, and the theater was filled with hundreds of people. Even if there was a person with a concealed firearm, would he/she been very effective at neutralizing the threat, or could they have increased the number of casualties? Most gun owners are not trained for these types of situations, and firing ranges do not prepare them adequately . I was trained extensively for using firearms in tactical situations, receiving tactical training from Navy SEALS at both Blackwater, and a naval base. Even with this training I am apprehensive to say that I could have neutralized the threat without injuring or killing innocent bystanders. It was dark, and chaotic, vision would have been impaired, and he was wearing body armor. I doubt a firing range trained individual could have stopped James Holmes without injuring or killing innocents. Would an extra firearm in that theater have prevented or exacerbated the situation?

Isn't it obvious that he shares our problems with the tax man? As Americans we try as hard as we can to find whatever deduction we can on our median income of $49,000. Romney has the same problem, are you not thankful that he has been able to deduct $77,000 from his taxes for his dancing horse? Many of us have problems affording food, and he has the same problem for his horse. How can we not relate to this common man?

"I believe in the idea of amnesty for those who have put down roots and lived here, even though sometime back they may have entered illegally." It sounds very familiar, did Obama say it?

We have socialized medicine in America. Every American can receive health care. The problem arises after they receive said care when the bill must be paid. If health care was a privilege and not a right, then we would deny health care to the Americans that could not afford it. Instead, we have implicitly deemed it to be a right, as we have agreed that all people can receive it despite their ability to pay. The unpaid bills are foisted upon Americans through more expensive insurance, and procedures. Is this not an inefficient form of socialized medicine? It provides care for all people, but only succeeds at driving up the cost of that care. Why not change to an efficient system of socialized medicine? Why not switch to a system that provides health care to all, but drives down the cost?

The president is pushing for $50 billion plan for infrastructure improvement, partially paid for by cutting oil and gas subsidies. Republicans say this is too costly because America has too much debt, but they are trying to renew the Bush era tax cuts, which are worth $840 billion. Crumbling infrastructure is a public debt, the longer we let it fall apart the more expensive it becomes to fix it. Infrastructure improvements will create badly needed jobs, and we already know tax cuts do not create jobs (source:history). Are Republicans more interested in extending tax cuts for the wealthy, and not at all interested in creating jobs and improving the economy? Is their hatred for Obama so fierce that they would sacrifice the well being of our country in order to hurt his reelection chances?

Then how does this qualify Mitt Romney as a presidential candidate that will lower unemployment? He continues to tout his experience at Bain Capital as the reason he is most qualified to be president, yet job creation is not the priority of a capitalist. Has his experience in the private sector been shown to be ineffective in the public sector since Massachusetts was ranked 47th out of 50 states in job creation under his administration? Why do conservatives believe being a good business man qualifies you to be the leader of the free world? Supply side economics has been debunked, so why does Mitt Romney cling to its failed tenets?

Bush, McCain, and Obama have all provided the names of their campaign bundlers. Mitt told USAToday that he will not reveal who his campaign contribution bundlers are. Why? Do you think he has something to hide? He hasn't released his birth certificate, nor his tax information beyond the last 2 years, and now he won't release the names of the people responsible for bundling large campaign donations. Why does Mitt want to keep all these secrets? What might he be hiding from the American public?

Will he destroy jobs or will he create jobs? if he creates jobs, will he be just as mediocre as previous Republicans? BGOV has shown that Democrats are better job creators, and have created twice as many jobs over the past 50 years. So which side will Romney embrace, mediocre job creator, or adept job destroyer?

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-05-08/private-j...

If you are, and the next time these "too big to fail" banks make terrible, short-sighted investment decisions that send our economy spiraling into an abyss, will you volunteer to pay for the bailout? That way the rest of America doesn't have to suffer at the hands of your Randian philosophical beliefs. Will you, personally, volunteer to bear the financial burden that will be necessary to avoid an economic death-spiral, and exempt all the citizens that believe in financial regulation?

If by some incredible chance Ron Paul was nominated as the Republican presidential candidate, would you vote for him, or Gary Johnson, an actual? Libertarian candidate? Just curious.

If it was headed towards Earth and 99% of all scientists came to the same conclusion. After decades of calculations, the consensus was that this giant rock would indeed hit our planet in the near future. Would you believe them and demand that something be done about it? What if 1% of the scientists said that there was no way the meteor would hit, and gave trivial reasons as to why it would not hit? What if large corporations paid this small cadre of scientists, and other non-believers to broadcast this message because it is in the corporations' best interests for you to carry on with life as you have always lived it? Who would you believe, would you side with the 1% of scientists that insisted this event would not happen, or trust in the centuries of combined knowledge of the rest of the science community and insist that everything possible must be done?

The CBO just released their analysis of the Senate version of the American Jobs Act, and have concluded that it would reduce the deficit over the next decade by $6 billion. We all know that reducing the deficit and creating jobs would be a "win" for Democrats. This automatically means Republicans hate it, even if it is actually a 'win" for America. How can you people continues supporting these A*holes? They don't care about you, they only care about their donors, and will do whatever they can to protect their interests.

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/124xx/doc12471/s1660.pd...

I watched last night's debate, and at one point a soldier's youtube question was aired. At the end of his question, some members of the audience booed this soldier, who is stationed in Iraq, and defending our freedom. The candidates that answered the question not only failed to thank this hero for his service, they also failed to defend him against the Republican audience members that vocalized their hatred. Is the hatred for our fighting men and women the new GOP platform, or has it always existed and is only now coming to light?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mguDdsmCylU&feature...

She has recently claimed that if she were to *snicker* win the presidency, she would lower gas prices to $2 a gallon. So she apparently does not understand how capitalism, and oil speculation works. Even if you decided to massively increase energy negative prospects like the tar sands, and to open up drilling in every backyard in the United States, you can't guarantee a drop in gas prices. OPEC can decide to halt supply, and instantly, gas prices rise again. Oil has become a commodity, and much of the price has become dependent on speculators, does her ignorance know no bounds?

Here is her magic way of completing this objective (hint: there is no actual plan).

http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/Bachmann-gasoli...

It must make a conservative beam with pride and joy to watch adults call a bunch of kids "dorks" and "little bastards." I guess you can't count on a group of conservatives to react in an adult fashion.

http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201108110002

Prior to the Great Depression, the Stock Market became shaky, and investors began pulling out all their money. The federal government added to that uncertainty by contracting the money supply, and massively cutting spending. This sent us spiraling into a depression. We find ourselves once again at the precipice of financial collapse. The Dow Jones dropped over 500 points today, and what has the federal government done? Well, they have decided that the answer is to once again cut spending. If it happened once before, why do Republicans insist on making it happen again?

So as soon as this bill was signed into law the President, the Democrats, and the Republicans all took to their respective media microphones. The President and the Democrats summarized their next agenda, which would be job creation. They are backing an extension of the payroll tax holiday, and the establishment of an infrastructure bank. An infrastructure bank would get the ailing construction sector back to work, increase manufacturing, improve the economy by creating demand in most sectors, and fix a public debt (yes, crumbling infrastructure is a public debt). Septuagenarian Ninja Turtle Mitch McConnell took to the mic, and explained the next Republican manufactured crisis, which is, surprise surprise, the upcoming budget. Could this be because Republicans have no plans to actually create jobs, so they must continue to maintain crisis status until after the 2012 elections? Jobs, and employment are the issues that matter, that is what the 2010 election was about, so where are the jobs, Speaker Boehner?

It is a mistake to harbor extremists. While it may seem like a good idea at the beginning, you may believe that by giving them shelter and support, and they will not turn on you; but ultimately extremists turn on everyone. This was exemplified by Saudi Arabia's acceptance of Muslim extremists, everything was great until bombs started exploding within their borders. Now Boehner is being bitten by the tea baggers. It reminds me a little of the frog and scorpion parable, you think you can trust them, up until they sting you, and they will sting you because it is their nature; and they will express their nature even if it results in total destruction.

http://allaboutfrogs.org/stories/scorpion.html