Obama's Economic Policy

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Show me how reducing taxes is going to help.

that is too stupid for words and 1000% liberal.

As soon as China reduced government the people began getting rich at the fastest rate in human history!!!

The difference between Florida/Cuba, East/West Germany is reduced taxes or reduced government.

Barry's soviet, Solyndra, bridge to nowhere, crony capitalist, mal-investment, liberal stimulus has produced 1900 criminal investigations and 600 convictions so far!!

See why we are 1000% positve a liberal will be slow, so very very slow!!

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

perhaps you can let us all know why you would attack education at all.

Maybe because our liberal, union, public, status quo, education has produced about the dumbest kids in the civilized world??

See why we are 100% positive a liberal will be slow? What other possible explanation is there????

 

[idb]

Well, IDB, the point is, me poor ignorant con, that education of the population has always been a key in helping the economy of any country. I was avoiding your issue of private vs public education. Perhaps that discussion belongs elsewhere. But, in terms of economic growth and economic success, perhaps you can name a couple of countries who are doing as you apparently want, i.e., providing education to the majority of their youth via private education. And of course, perhaps you can let us all know why you would attack education at all. Seems to be a con malady. Cons hate education, unless it is being delivered by a private enterprise. Which is another way of saying, me con tool, that you do not value education.
Relative to economic plans, obama's intent as far as getting the unemployment rate under control is well spelled out. You could know it if you want to. Perhaps you would like to suggest what Romney's is. It seems to change daily. So, does he want to decrease taxes by 20%, which would amount to about a $5T decrease in gov. income, or does he not? He has said he did support it when talking to a strictly con audience. Now he disavows it, though he made the statement many, many times over the past two years.
Does he fully support Ryan's s plan, or has he his own. He has said both. So, what is it. And once you can define it, then how do you suggest it will help. Seriously, how do you believe the Romney plan (whatever it is) is going to help reduce unemployment? I would take book gladly on the bet that you have no earthly idea. So, there is the challenge, again. Show me how reducing taxes is going to help. You won't, I expect, because you can not. But then, you probably do not know that you can not. Just find a time when decreasing taxes has helped during a bad economy. But of course, you can not. You simply want to post dogma. Which is a total waste of time.

Are you agreeing with me now?
You first said that Romney has been explicit in spelling out his policy while Obama hasn't, and then you reverse that in your reply to me.

You're either a Romney acolyte or things have been lost in translation.

You seem to be challenged by the queens english. I said the following:

Relative to economic plans, obama's intent as far as getting the unemployment rate under control is well spelled out.

And then I said:

Perhaps you would like to suggest what Romney's is. It seems to change daily. So, does he want to decrease taxes by 20%, which would amount to about a $5T decrease in gov. income, or does he not? He has said he did support it when talking to a strictly con audience. Now he disavows it, though he made the statement many, many times over the past two years.
Does he fully support Ryan's s plan, or has he his own. He has said both.

So, not sure if you are simply challenged by logic and the english language, or if you are just totally dishonest.

So did you "mis-speak" when you said this?

the truth of the matter is that Mitt has been explicit about his economic program while Obama has not been

 

[Rshermr]

Are you agreeing with me now?
You first said that Romney has been explicit in spelling out his policy while Obama hasn't, and then you reverse that in your reply to me.

You're either a Romney acolyte or things have been lost in translation.

You seem to be challenged by the queens english. I said the following:

And then I said:


So, not sure if you are simply challenged by logic and the english language, or if you are just totally dishonest.

So did you "mis-speak" when you said this?

the truth of the matter is that Mitt has been explicit about his economic program while Obama has not been

That was way back in post number 13 in this thread. So long ago that I must have changed my name since then. If I did not change my name, YOU ARE CREDITING ME FOR A QUOTE MADE BY THE GREAT GATSBY. Are you incompitent or dishonest. I can not tell. But here is that quote in full.

Quote: Originally Posted by TheGreatGatsby

Govt. expenditures in education is public education. And the truth of the matter is that Mitt has been explicit about his economic program while Obama has not been. Why is that? Could it be because he wants cart blanche to do whatever the hell he wants?

I would never be stupid enough to say something that stupid about Gov. etch a sketch.

 

[idb]

You seem to be challenged by the queens english. I said the following:

And then I said:


So, not sure if you are simply challenged by logic and the english language, or if you are just totally dishonest.

So did you "mis-speak" when you said this?

That was way back in post number 13 in this thread. So long ago that I must have changed my name since then. If I did not change my name, YOU ARE CREDITING ME FOR A QUOTE MADE BY THE GREAT GATSBY. Are you incompitent or dishonest. I can not tell. But here is that quote in full.

Quote: Originally Posted by TheGreatGatsby

Govt. expenditures in education is public education. And the truth of the matter is that Mitt has been explicit about his economic program while Obama has not been. Why is that? Could it be because he wants cart blanche to do whatever the hell he wants?

I would never be stupid enough to say something that stupid about Gov. etch a sketch.

You're right, I attributed the quote incorrectly when you leapt to gatsby's defence.
Nevertheless, you were standing up for his statement;

And the truth of the matter is that Mitt has been explicit about his economic program while Obama has not been.

 

[editec]

Show me how reducing taxes is going to help.

that is too stupid for words and 1000% liberal.

As soon as China reduced government the people began getting rich at the fastest rate in human history!!!

You truly are delusional.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Show me how reducing taxes is going to help.

that is too stupid for words and 1000% liberal.

As soon as China reduced government the people began getting rich at the fastest rate in human history!!!

You truly are delusional.

of course if delusional you would not be so afraid to expain why. What does your fear tell you about the liberal IQ and character??

As a liberal your IQ is good enough for name calling but nothing more. But even that basic concept is over your head isn't it?