Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501
That's all well and good, but you're then relying on people with a stubbornly rigid philosophy to lead a house and senate to implement change. Nothing will get done in congress without leadership. As much as I hate Mitt Romney the campaigner, I think it's pretty obvious that he's one of the most qualified leaders we've had in a very long time.
We saw what happened when Obama tried to jam his initiatives down America's throat. It was a major battle even with a Democratic house and it required him to cut back room deals and use Rahm the bully to push things ahead. That's why I never bought into the Ron Paul philosophy. Because it's one thing to have good ideas, but you have to have the leadership to do something with those ideas.
You mean Romney...the same person that's for shutting down businesses and outsourcing jobs to China and Taiwan? Or the Romney that essentially helped write Obamacare?
Real quick google "Mitt Romney top campaign contributors"
the first "real" search result will lead to this...
You think Romney is a true qualified "leader" when he's clearly bought and paid for?
The presidential office is nothing more than a puppet position anymore.