case: (Default)
Case ([personal profile] case) wrote in [community profile] fandomsecrets2012-11-19 05:26 pm

[ SECRET POST #2148 ]


⌈ Secret Post #2148 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.


__________________________________________________



13.


__________________________________________________



14.


__________________________________________________



15.


__________________________________________________



16.


__________________________________________________















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 04 pages, 080 secrets from Secret Submission Post #307.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ], [ 1 2 3 4 - doing a bit of troll-weeding ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

DA

(Anonymous) 2012-11-20 03:11 am (UTC)(link)
Oh. Thanks for selling me out on every single one of those issues because Romney promised to save you some dimes. Whatever keeps the war wheels on turning even if it's at the expense of people's rights.

Re: DA

(Anonymous) 2012-11-20 03:14 am (UTC)(link)
It's not just to save me a dime, it's to save the entire country and everyone in it from financial ruin. Priorities, nonnie, priorities. Give me a good god dammed liberal who advocates for fiscal conservatism and I'd follow them like a dog after bacon.

Re: DA

(Anonymous) 2012-11-20 03:21 am (UTC)(link)
Try again when you aren't valuing money over human lives kay?

Re: DA

(Anonymous) 2012-11-20 03:23 am (UTC)(link)
False dichotomies R Us?

(Anonymous) 2012-11-20 03:30 am (UTC)(link)
Not exactly. Wanting to cut funding to PBS rather than defend the woman's right to choose is not an example of a false dichotomy.

Women without access to safe abortions die. Romney stated he intended to overturn Roe vs. Wade.

(Anonymous) 2012-11-20 03:39 am (UTC)(link)
You do know that the President can't just waive a magical wand and reverse that, right?

DA

(Anonymous) 2012-11-20 03:42 am (UTC)(link)
No, but he can appoint the Justices who would.

Butting in here

(Anonymous) 2012-11-20 03:25 am (UTC)(link)
Serious question: what exactly was this magical plan Romney had to save the economy? Because I didn't get it. At all. Not his proposed tax cuts or his proposed spending cuts.


And, um, just because you believe Romney is better for the economy and your priorities are budget>rights doesn't mean everyone shares that belief and those priorities and that's cool.

Re: Butting in here

(Anonymous) 2012-11-20 03:37 am (UTC)(link)
A healthy economy will benefit all of us. At the top and the bottom. As a businessman, I believe he would have Managed the country better (as opposed to Obama, who I believe is an excellent Leader). Letting people and small businesses keep more of their earnings will allow them to expand, hire, buy, trade, ect. and keep the wheels of the economy turning. I think our social agenda is important too and I didn't see where Romney being president would limit any rights long term. For example, I believe that it is inevitable that gay marriage and other rights will someday be the law of the land; it's an evolution of our society that I don't see changing with one president in office. I'm OK with having a social conservative in office for a short while to sort out the fiscal mess we are in. I wouldn't vote that way if I didn't see the financial issue as the most pressing problem we face as a nation, bar none. I think we are truly heading off a cliff and are in for a very bumpy ride downhill. I thought Romney had the best chance of helping us at this time in history. At another time and place I would not have been a supporter.

DA

(Anonymous) 2012-11-20 03:42 am (UTC)(link)
...Uh. This doesn't give us his plan for the economy at all, dipshit.

Re: DA

(Anonymous) 2012-11-20 03:44 am (UTC)(link)
Dipshit, very intelligent. Oh well, guess here ends the conversation.

Re: DA

(Anonymous) 2012-11-20 03:46 am (UTC)(link)
I called you a dipshit because you avoided answering entirely. You were asked what Romney's plan was, and instead went on and on about social vs. economic importance.

The fact you're refusing to answer is telling: he had no plan.

Re: Butting in here

(Anonymous) 2012-11-20 03:57 am (UTC)(link)
1. The economy initially took a nosedive under George Bush (social and fiscal conservative, also a "businessmen"). Maybe he should've done a better job of keeping it running, and if he had the Republican party could've held onto the White House?

2. Private industry is a very, very different game from public administration. "Businessmen" skills don't automatically translate. I'm not saying they can't be helpful in improving efficiency, but certain things that government provides (parks, transportation improvements, regulations, expanding communications, public goods in general) make no sense in profit-earning terms. So I don't think there's that much of an inherent advantage in having a "businessman" running the country, especially since historically, their record is mixed.

3. There aren't just two parties/candidates out there. Gary Johnson, as a Libertarian, is socially progressive and fiscally conservative; if you wanted to vote your conscience, that's a valid alternative that wouldn't have screwed anyone over.

But look, Romeny-voting anon, don't despair. The Democratic party (and the fact that it's only really got the Executive branch and half of the Legislative) isn't going to be able to get much done. Y'all will get your chance again, if you maybe smarten up about treating minorities like crap and stop it with the rape stuff.

Re: Butting in here

[personal profile] anonymouslyyours 2012-11-20 04:04 am (UTC)(link)
That did not answer my question so I will continue being relieved my access to a safe abortion wasn't almost put in jeopardy because some people think being a CEO is totes like running a country and didn't actually examine what Romney was putting down.

Re: Butting in here

(Anonymous) 2012-11-20 04:13 am (UTC)(link)
You have not answered the question. At all.

Try again.

Also, the President gets to pick the Justices that *will* affect how laws regarding social issues will be handled.

Re: DA

(Anonymous) 2012-11-20 03:37 am (UTC)(link)
Yes, because cutting the rich people some slack like we did to get into this mess in the first place and taxing the middle class out of extinction is going to keep society running.

SA

(Anonymous) 2012-11-20 03:47 am (UTC)(link)
Er, into extinction or out of existence, I accidentally spliced them together.