And now that he is known he is bought just like a majority of other big name politicians and part of problem, this obviously includes Romney.

but bought by whom? there are obviously many different people and insudtries donating to each candidate,,,

so which 'owners' should we be concerned about?

Piers Morgan: “Mitt Romney might just save America”


By: John Hayward
10/15/2012 10:41 AM



CNN host Piers Morgan, who is not generally high on Republicans’ list of favorite talk show hosts, wrote a very lengthy editorial for the UK Daily Mail over the weekend, in which he lambasted Mitt Romney as “Mr. Flip Flop” and called him “the least principled politicians I’ve ever met”… but says that unprincipled flip-flopping son-of-a-gun might just be the man who can “save America.”

This might not be the most eagerly embraced endorsement to float across the transom over at Romney HQ, but given Morgan’s audience among American liberals, it’s an interesting development. Morgan’s characterization of Mr. Flip Flop’s adjusted political positions is not entirely fair – Romney was never “firmly pro-choice,” for example, and Morgan unreasonably oversimplifies the Romney critique of ObamaCare by saying that “On healthcare, he was the first governor to bring in a compulsory ‘mandate’ health insurance scheme. But when Obama did the same thing, he lambasted it as a terrible idea.” And I doubt the Tea Party feels quite as pampered by Romney’s outreach efforts as Morgan thinks they should.

But the conclusion Morgan reaches is that Romney’s personal character is so impeccable that he can be forgiven for a bit of political maneuvering. (Obama’s not exactly innocent of adjusting his positions, after all.) Morgan calls Romney “the squeakiest-clean man ever to run for the presidency in any country in the world,” hails his enormous personal donations to charity, and is particularly convinced that Romney’s proven ability to turn failing ventures around makes him the right man to clean up after Obama:


But how much does Romney’s flip-flopping actually matter to the result of the election? The main concern for Americans right now is the economy, after all. I asked Bill Clinton recently if he felt Romney was a ‘principled man’ and Clinton smiled: ‘That’s not the issue to me.’

And I suspect it’s not for most voters either. They just want to know which man, Romney or Obama, is going to revive the economy faster.

Obama is not a hated figure among most Americans by any means, which is why he may still scrape home. But there’s definitely a distinct disillusionment about his performance, even among many of his diehard supporters.

The great messianic tidal wave of optimism Obama swept in on has been replaced by harsh reality.

He promised Americans tremendous ‘hope’ and ‘change’ and, frankly, they don’t feel he’s given them much hope, or changed very much.

Morgan sums up his estimation with a quote from a “senior Republican figure,” who told him during the Republican convention, “Mitt’s not the kind of guy you’d go for a beer with, mainly because he doesn’t drink beer. But he’s the kind of guy who gets stuff done.” If his editorial reflects a growing sentiment among Left-leaning persuadable voters, Obama is in deep trouble.


http://www.humanevents.com/2012/10/15/piers-morgan-mitt-romney-might-just-save-america/

Im not ruthless and I have won at monopoly, cause everyone plays the same game by the same rules,,,starts out with the same, has the literal same odds,,,,


unlike life,,,

but you are right, people with money rule things, and our best bet is that more DECENT and JUST persons make up that class of folks sometime in the near future,,,

Piers Morgan: “Mitt Romney might just save America”


By: John Hayward
10/15/2012 10:41 AM



CNN host Piers Morgan, who is not generally high on Republicans’ list of favorite talk show hosts, wrote a very lengthy editorial for the UK Daily Mail over the weekend, in which he lambasted Mitt Romney as “Mr. Flip Flop” and called him “the least principled politicians I’ve ever met”… but says that unprincipled flip-flopping son-of-a-gun might just be the man who can “save America.”

This might not be the most eagerly embraced endorsement to float across the transom over at Romney HQ, but given Morgan’s audience among American liberals, it’s an interesting development. Morgan’s characterization of Mr. Flip Flop’s adjusted political positions is not entirely fair – Romney was never “firmly pro-choice,” for example, and Morgan unreasonably oversimplifies the Romney critique of ObamaCare by saying that “On healthcare, he was the first governor to bring in a compulsory ‘mandate’ health insurance scheme. But when Obama did the same thing, he lambasted it as a terrible idea.” And I doubt the Tea Party feels quite as pampered by Romney’s outreach efforts as Morgan thinks they should.

But the conclusion Morgan reaches is that Romney’s personal character is so impeccable that he can be forgiven for a bit of political maneuvering. (Obama’s not exactly innocent of adjusting his positions, after all.) Morgan calls Romney “the squeakiest-clean man ever to run for the presidency in any country in the world,” hails his enormous personal donations to charity, and is particularly convinced that Romney’s proven ability to turn failing ventures around makes him the right man to clean up after Obama:


But how much does Romney’s flip-flopping actually matter to the result of the election? The main concern for Americans right now is the economy, after all. I asked Bill Clinton recently if he felt Romney was a ‘principled man’ and Clinton smiled: ‘That’s not the issue to me.’

And I suspect it’s not for most voters either. They just want to know which man, Romney or Obama, is going to revive the economy faster.

Obama is not a hated figure among most Americans by any means, which is why he may still scrape home. But there’s definitely a distinct disillusionment about his performance, even among many of his diehard supporters.

The great messianic tidal wave of optimism Obama swept in on has been replaced by harsh reality.

He promised Americans tremendous ‘hope’ and ‘change’ and, frankly, they don’t feel he’s given them much hope, or changed very much.

Morgan sums up his estimation with a quote from a “senior Republican figure,” who told him during the Republican convention, “Mitt’s not the kind of guy you’d go for a beer with, mainly because he doesn’t drink beer. But he’s the kind of guy who gets stuff done.” If his editorial reflects a growing sentiment among Left-leaning persuadable voters, Obama is in deep trouble.


http://www.humanevents.com/2012/10/15/piers-morgan-mitt-romney-might-just-save-america/

Look at their donors, its a whose who of corporations. This is who they work for and pass laws for, when a law is written by corporate lawyers and eventually signed by the president it does not bode well for us and this is what needs to stop. This is why 3rd party candidates MUST be included in all debates.

their donors are independent donors
and educational
and corporate
and military
and law

etc,,,

there are too many different sources to say which one will get a preference or which wont,, they all give big donations

I know military made up Ron Paul top 3 donors, but I don't know about military donating to either Obama or Romney.

The top two candidates top 10 donors are all corporate.

Tell me why you don 't have a problem with mega corporations donating to campaigns?

Do right wingers ever have any ideas of their own, or can they only cut and paste?