Mitt Romney Criticizes Defense Cuts That Paul Ryan Voted For

Romney and Ryan unlike Obamination and Biden want to cut the entitlement bullshit that is driving us off the cliff, that will allow us to keep a strong DoD budget where there won't be late night votes to prevent default.

Obamination is ignoring the entitlement problem because it is his plan to destroy this country in the end. Spend, spend and spend some more until we can no longer pay the bills. The only solution at that point is to steal money from people to pay the bills (socialism).

Crash the system then go on TV demanding the "rich" pay to help save the country.....then they come for your money next.
 
"I thought it was a mistake on the part of the White House to propose [the defense cuts]. I think it was a mistake for Republicans to go along with it," Romney said.

Among the Republicans who supported the deal was Paul Ryan, the chair of the House budget committee and Romney's running mate. Paul not only voted for the cuts, he bragged about them afterwards.

Clearly Romney hasn’t even been briefed as to Ryan’s positions, statements, and voting record.

The Romney campaign is a mess.

Imagine the disaster he’d be as president.

Romney/Ryan hypocrisy knows no bounds.

It’s not only hypocrisy, but incompetence.


The Romney people have shown themselves to be not one iota better at vetting a VP candidate than McCain's nattering nabobs of negativism were.


Ryan said that “almost 44,000 jobs” are at stake if the cuts go through, breaking with his usual small-government argument that federal spending does not spur employment.

Despite Ryan’s new attack, he not only voted for the bill containing the cuts, he went out of his way to tout just how difficult it is to undo them.

“What conservatives like me have been fighting for, for years, are statutory caps on spending, legal caps in law that says government agencies cannot spend over a set amount of money,” Ryan told FOX News’s Sean Hannity shortly after the agreement was reached last August. “And if they breach that amount across the board, sequester comes in to cut that spending, and you can’t turn that off without a super-majority vote. We got that in law.” ~ Paul Ryan, August 2011

:lmao: It was just a few weeks ago you low life were throwing fits about the GOPs willingness to follow through with the cuts.
 
That's your job, Windbag - not mine. Apparently Obama wasn't too worried about that mushroom cloud Bush was selling. Turns out Obama was right.

If Obama was right why did he try so hard to keep troops in Iraq past the date that Bush negotiated?

Please explain with "credible" facts. BTW, the Bush Administration assumed an extension would be negotiated to keep troops in Iraq past the deadline. Also, as I understand it, Obama had all or some of the former Bush negotiators trying to negotiate the extension.

You're a major dumbass.

All facts, by definition, are credible, even the ones you don't like. You don't want credible facts, you want a source you consider credible because your bias prohibits you from accepting facts unless they come from someone with the same bias you have.

To accomplish that I go to the New Your Times.

On Nov. 27, 2008, the Iraqi Parliament ratified a Status of Forces agreement with the United States that set a course for an end to the United States’ role in the war and marks the beginning of a new relationship between the countries. The pact called for American troops to pull out of most Iraqi cities by the summer of 2009 and set the end of 2011 as the date by which the last American troops must leave the country.

Status of Forces Agreement News - Breaking World Status of Forces Agreement News - The New York Times

In case you have a trouble with dates, in November of 2008 Bush was still president, but Iraq had already approved the status of forces agreement that would have all troops out of the country by the end of 2011. On 21 Oct 2011 Obama announced that all troops would be out of Iraq by the end of 2011. I think all rational people will agree that proves they were withdrawn on the exact same schedule Bush negotiated.

Now to the rest of what I said. In September of 2011, Obama was president, and the US was trying to negotiate an extension allowing US troops to stay in Iraq. Iraq insisted on a provision that would have subjected US troops to Iraqi law. Obama, quite properly, rejected that provision, and announced that he would be withdrawing all troops from Iraq.

From the same link I posted before.

In September 2011, administration officials said that Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta had proposed a plan that would keep 3,000 to 4,000 American troops in Iraq after a deadline for their withdrawal at year’s end, but only to continue training security forces there.
Then in October, Iraq’s leaders announced that they had agreed on the need to keep American military trainers in the country in 2012, but they declared that any remaining troops should not be granted immunity from Iraqi law, a point the United States said would be a deal breaker.

The facts exist, the source is credible, your insistence that Obama didn't want the extension is ridiculous. Not sure how that makes me a dumbass, but I don't base my definitions of intelligence on a individual's political opinions.
 

Forum List

Back
Top