OK. Enough is enough...

[Foxfyre]

I can only tell you what I told people four years ago who were all excited about the coming "change". I think you are overlly optimistic.

Optimistic? I don't think so. I've lived through too many presidencies now to get my hopes up that any one man is going to fix much of anything. But I do have faith in the American people. The current occupant of the White House has been against the interests of free people from the beginning, and has done his damndest to make government the agent of 'hope and change'. It isn't. It has never been and it can never be.

If ALL that Romney accomplishes is to rein in most of the handicaps that have been stalling the economy and then turns us loose to do what we Americans can do best, things will get better. Obama's plan so far has to reinforce those handicaps and install more of them.

A pro-business, pro free market President gives us a far better shot at prosperity than one who think more government can do it.

The last pro-business, pro free market presidency we had ended in the biggest economic crash since the great depression. Your optimism lies in the idea that the president has any control over that at all. You are wildly wrong about Obama.

But however incompetent a President he might have been, it was not his policies that caused that crash, and during the last two years of his presidency, he sent 17 appeals to Congress to deal with the growing housing bubble that did cause it. And no, the President does not have power to do Congress's job. President Bush was blown off by Barney Frank and Chris Dodd who are on record expressing how Fannie and Freddie were just fine and Congress didn't need to act on anything.

But a pro business President did make a difference under Reagan. An anti-business measure cost Bush 41 re-election. A pro-business Congress and a President willing to do anything to be loved and appreciated resulted in significant prosperity during the last six years of the Clinton presidency. Despite 9/11 and despite Katrina, two events that most Presidents never have to deal with, the pro-business policies of the Bush administration did produce a very strong economy up until the housing bubble collapse. An anti-business President and an anti-business Congress have resulted in four of the most miserable economic years under Obama that I can remember and that would include the Carter administration.

So you can pooh poo my desire for a pro-business President all you want. I can't imagine anybody being worse or more destructive in that regard than Obama has been.

 

[PratchettFan]

Optimistic? I don't think so. I've lived through too many presidencies now to get my hopes up that any one man is going to fix much of anything. But I do have faith in the American people. The current occupant of the White House has been against the interests of free people from the beginning, and has done his damndest to make government the agent of 'hope and change'. It isn't. It has never been and it can never be.

If ALL that Romney accomplishes is to rein in most of the handicaps that have been stalling the economy and then turns us loose to do what we Americans can do best, things will get better. Obama's plan so far has to reinforce those handicaps and install more of them.

A pro-business, pro free market President gives us a far better shot at prosperity than one who think more government can do it.

The last pro-business, pro free market presidency we had ended in the biggest economic crash since the great depression. Your optimism lies in the idea that the president has any control over that at all. You are wildly wrong about Obama.

But however incompetent a President he might have been, it was not his policies that caused that crash, and during the last two years of his presidency, he sent 17 appeals to Congress to deal with the growing housing bubble that did cause it. And no, the President does not have power to do Congress's job. President Bush was blown off by Barney Frank and Chris Dodd who are on record expressing how Fannie and Freddie were just fine and Congress didn't need to act on anything.

But a pro business President did make a difference under Reagan. An anti-business measure cost Bush 41 re-election. A pro-business Congress and a President willing to do anything to be loved and appreciated resulted in significant prosperity during the last six years of the Clinton presidency. Despite 9/11 and despite Katrina, two events that most Presidents never have to deal with, the pro-business policies of the Bush administration did produce a very strong economy up until the housing bubble collapse. An anti-business President and an anti-business Congress have resulted in four of the most miserable economic years under Obama that I can remember and that would include the Carter administration.

So you can pooh poo my desire for a pro-business President all you want. I can't imagine anybody being worse or more destructive in that regard than Obama has been.

I am not pooh poohing your desire. I am disgreeing with your basic premise. Had McCain won the presidency, we would be in exactly the same position we are today. If Romney wins, we will be in exactly the same position as if Obama wins. It really doens't make a heck of a lot of difference in terms of our overall economic position. Where the real difference comes in is the government's invasion of our personal lives, which seems to be some kind of fixation of the far right these days.

 

[Foxfyre]

The last pro-business, pro free market presidency we had ended in the biggest economic crash since the great depression. Your optimism lies in the idea that the president has any control over that at all. You are wildly wrong about Obama.

But however incompetent a President he might have been, it was not his policies that caused that crash, and during the last two years of his presidency, he sent 17 appeals to Congress to deal with the growing housing bubble that did cause it. And no, the President does not have power to do Congress's job. President Bush was blown off by Barney Frank and Chris Dodd who are on record expressing how Fannie and Freddie were just fine and Congress didn't need to act on anything.

But a pro business President did make a difference under Reagan. An anti-business measure cost Bush 41 re-election. A pro-business Congress and a President willing to do anything to be loved and appreciated resulted in significant prosperity during the last six years of the Clinton presidency. Despite 9/11 and despite Katrina, two events that most Presidents never have to deal with, the pro-business policies of the Bush administration did produce a very strong economy up until the housing bubble collapse. An anti-business President and an anti-business Congress have resulted in four of the most miserable economic years under Obama that I can remember and that would include the Carter administration.

So you can pooh poo my desire for a pro-business President all you want. I can't imagine anybody being worse or more destructive in that regard than Obama has been.

I am not pooh poohing your desire. I am disgreeing with your basic premise. Had McCain won the presidency, we would be in exactly the same position we are today. If Romney wins, we will be in exactly the same position as if Obama wins. It really doens't make a heck of a lot of difference in terms of our overall economic position. Where the real difference comes in is the government's invasion of our personal lives, which seems to be some kind of fixation of the far right these days.

Well I'm sorry but I don't have a crystal ball or clairvoyant guru who can provide me such clarity on what would have happened if McCain had won. One thing I'm pretty damn sure of is that he wouldn't have signed off on a bloated, budget busting, pork laden appropriations bill shortly after his election. He would not have seized banks and automobile companies and put them under government control. He would not have signed Obamacare. He would not have passed an almost trillion dollar stimulus bill that went mostly to prop up irresponsible Democratic state governments, pay off political cronies, and wasted on non-job-creating projects or projects doomed to fail such as Solyndra.

And he wouldn't have been constantly threatening job producers with higher taxes during almost every speech. He's so left in some ways he should probably be a Democrat, but he could never in a million years be as anti-business as Obama has been.

 

[hortysir]

The last pro-business, pro free market presidency we had ended in the biggest economic crash since the great depression. Your optimism lies in the idea that the president has any control over that at all. You are wildly wrong about Obama.

But however incompetent a President he might have been, it was not his policies that caused that crash, and during the last two years of his presidency, he sent 17 appeals to Congress to deal with the growing housing bubble that did cause it. And no, the President does not have power to do Congress's job. President Bush was blown off by Barney Frank and Chris Dodd who are on record expressing how Fannie and Freddie were just fine and Congress didn't need to act on anything.

But a pro business President did make a difference under Reagan. An anti-business measure cost Bush 41 re-election. A pro-business Congress and a President willing to do anything to be loved and appreciated resulted in significant prosperity during the last six years of the Clinton presidency. Despite 9/11 and despite Katrina, two events that most Presidents never have to deal with, the pro-business policies of the Bush administration did produce a very strong economy up until the housing bubble collapse. An anti-business President and an anti-business Congress have resulted in four of the most miserable economic years under Obama that I can remember and that would include the Carter administration.

So you can pooh poo my desire for a pro-business President all you want. I can't imagine anybody being worse or more destructive in that regard than Obama has been.

I am not pooh poohing your desire. I am disgreeing with your basic premise. Had McCain won the presidency, we would be in exactly the same position we are today. If Romney wins, we will be in exactly the same position as if Obama wins. It really doens't make a heck of a lot of difference in terms of our overall economic position. Where the real difference comes in is the government's invasion of our personal lives, which seems to be some kind of fixation of the far right these days.

If a frog had wings he wouldn't be constantly bumping his ass.

IF McCain had won???

Same position today??


Paralyzed hiring out of fear of what new tax/reg is around the corner?

You think Pelosi/Reid would have had such free reign?

You don't think 2010 wouldn't have garnered even more congressional seats?




ok

 

[candycorn]

Romney wants Roe V. Wade overturned.

 

[Inthemiddle]

We've all heard enough mud-slinging ads from both Presidential candidates. I'm ready to hear some ads that very specifically tell me what each of the Presidential candidates intend to do if they are elected President.

I think you misunderstood. Those adds ARE what each candidate intends to do if elected.

 

[Peach]

Mmmmmmm....makes me think of "Blaine, Blaine, liar of Maine". Too much on taxes & Bain, not enough on policy. Obama still has 8.2% unemployment around his neck, slogans cannot explain that away.

 

[Sarah G]

We've all heard enough mud-slinging ads from both Presidential candidates. I'm ready to hear some ads that very specifically tell me what each of the Presidential candidates intend to do if they are elected President. None of the "generalized" political garble. Tell me in very easy to understand truthful language what you intend to do for the American population if you win the White House.

Who's with me?

It was that America The Beautiful one that got to ya, isn't it..

 

[blackhawk]

We've all heard enough mud-slinging ads from both Presidential candidates. I'm ready to hear some ads that very specifically tell me what each of the Presidential candidates intend to do if they are elected President. None of the "generalized" political garble. Tell me in very easy to understand truthful language what you intend to do for the American population if you win the White House.

Who's with me?

Probably 95% of us are with but it's not going to happen.

 

[Big Black Dog]

I think Romney should make a deal with Obama... At exactly 12 noon on such and such a date, Romney will release all of his past tax filings and Obama will release all of his past college transcripts and the real copy of his birth certificate.

 

[Shelzin]

I think Romney should make a deal with Obama... At exactly 12 noon on such and such a date, Romney will release all of his past tax filings and Obama will release all of his past college transcripts and the real copy of his birth certificate.

Did anyone else get that wispy whistle tune in their head and a movie in your had of a tumbleweed blew across a dirt road?

 

[Sallow]

Romney wants Roe V. Wade overturned.

And the good Bishop wants our souls.

He's a harvester..

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjXwzXHTDIc]The Harvester Of Souls - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Foxfyre]

I think Romney should make a deal with Obama... At exactly 12 noon on such and such a date, Romney will release all of his past tax filings and Obama will release all of his past college transcripts and the real copy of his birth certificate.

Seems fair but let's include his college entrance papers too so he can lay to rest once and for all the theory that he got into all those fancy schools as a foreign student. (cough)

 

[Claudette]

Spin meisters and liars. Why should I believe anything either side says? No, Obama has a record as president, and it ain't a good one IMHO. I am voting for Romney on the principle that if you fuck up, you're gone. We need a change at the top.

Big assed Bingo.

My sentiments exactly. Barry is a disaster as POTUS. Don't need another four years to figure that out.

Time for a new player in the WH and it looks like it will be Romney.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

We've all heard enough mud-slinging ads from both Presidential candidates. I'm ready to hear some ads that very specifically tell me what each of the Presidential candidates intend to do if they are elected President. None of the "generalized" political garble. Tell me in very easy to understand truthful language what you intend to do for the American population if you win the White House.

Who's with me?

obama doesn't have anything to say because he has already shown what he can do. All he has is attack ads.

 

[Claudette]

I think Romney should make a deal with Obama... At exactly 12 noon on such and such a date, Romney will release all of his past tax filings and Obama will release all of his past college transcripts and the real copy of his birth certificate.

Seems fair but let's include his college entrance papers too so he can lay to rest once and for all the theory that he got into all those fancy schools as a foreign student. (cough)

Does anyone think he's withholding his transcripts just for the hell of it??

I sure don't. Loads of unaswered questions on this dude and I for one wonder if anyone will ever find out the truth about Barry??

The LSM sure isn't in any hurry to investigate, really investigate, this guy. Something they should have done back in 2008. The same LSM that sent 200 reporters to Alaska to dig up any dirt they could find on Palin didn't bother to dig into Barry.

As for Romney and his tax returns. If I were him I'd release em all, Then I'd make a point of pointing out Barry's college transcripts on the campaign.

Its gonna be a fun campaign season.

 

[PratchettFan]

But however incompetent a President he might have been, it was not his policies that caused that crash, and during the last two years of his presidency, he sent 17 appeals to Congress to deal with the growing housing bubble that did cause it. And no, the President does not have power to do Congress's job. President Bush was blown off by Barney Frank and Chris Dodd who are on record expressing how Fannie and Freddie were just fine and Congress didn't need to act on anything.

But a pro business President did make a difference under Reagan. An anti-business measure cost Bush 41 re-election. A pro-business Congress and a President willing to do anything to be loved and appreciated resulted in significant prosperity during the last six years of the Clinton presidency. Despite 9/11 and despite Katrina, two events that most Presidents never have to deal with, the pro-business policies of the Bush administration did produce a very strong economy up until the housing bubble collapse. An anti-business President and an anti-business Congress have resulted in four of the most miserable economic years under Obama that I can remember and that would include the Carter administration.

So you can pooh poo my desire for a pro-business President all you want. I can't imagine anybody being worse or more destructive in that regard than Obama has been.

I am not pooh poohing your desire. I am disgreeing with your basic premise. Had McCain won the presidency, we would be in exactly the same position we are today. If Romney wins, we will be in exactly the same position as if Obama wins. It really doens't make a heck of a lot of difference in terms of our overall economic position. Where the real difference comes in is the government's invasion of our personal lives, which seems to be some kind of fixation of the far right these days.

Well I'm sorry but I don't have a crystal ball or clairvoyant guru who can provide me such clarity on what would have happened if McCain had won. One thing I'm pretty damn sure of is that he wouldn't have signed off on a bloated, budget busting, pork laden appropriations bill shortly after his election. He would not have seized banks and automobile companies and put them under government control. He would not have signed Obamacare. He would not have passed an almost trillion dollar stimulus bill that went mostly to prop up irresponsible Democratic state governments, pay off political cronies, and wasted on non-job-creating projects or projects doomed to fail such as Solyndra.

And he wouldn't have been constantly threatening job producers with higher taxes during almost every speech. He's so left in some ways he should probably be a Democrat, but he could never in a million years be as anti-business as Obama has been.

You mean, he would have allowed the banks to crash and the auto industry to go down the toilet? He would have sat by and watched the run on banks and let hundreds of thousands lose their jobs, probably sending us into another depression? I would prefer to think that McCain, who I voted for btw, would have been smarter than that. In fact, I doubt Romney would have hanlded it any differently.

The difference between someone running for president and someone being president is that the latter actually has to make decisions based upon the circumstances. They don't get to choose the circumstances. There are some exceptions to that, of course. The invasion of Iraq for example.

 

[JoeB131]

He'd also like to repeal Roe v Wade.

Mitt Romney Flip Flop Collection - A Hilarious Video Compilation - YouTube

Yet, unlike Obamacare, Romneycare included abortion services. Go figure.

And Bain invested in a company that disposed of aborted fetusus...

 

[Caroljo]

He'd also like to repeal Roe v Wade.

Mitt Romney Flip Flop Collection - A Hilarious Video Compilation - YouTube

Yet, unlike Obamacare, Romneycare included abortion services. Go figure.

So did Obamacare....
You don't remember Obama had to bribe Senator Stupak to vote FOR the healthcare? Stupak was holding out because of the Abortion clause in it, he didn't want the taxpayers to be paying for this and he didn't believe in abortion. Obama promised to remove it if he voted for it.....so he did.

I never have heard if Obama kept his promise to remove it......anyone know???

 

[JoeB131]

I think Romney should make a deal with Obama... At exactly 12 noon on such and such a date, Romney will release all of his past tax filings and Obama will release all of his past college transcripts and the real copy of his birth certificate.

Seems fair but let's include his college entrance papers too so he can lay to rest once and for all the theory that he got into all those fancy schools as a foreign student. (cough)

Does anyone think he's withholding his transcripts just for the hell of it??

I sure don't. Loads of unaswered questions on this dude and I for one wonder if anyone will ever find out the truth about Barry??

The LSM sure isn't in any hurry to investigate, really investigate, this guy. Something they should have done back in 2008. The same LSM that sent 200 reporters to Alaska to dig up any dirt they could find on Palin didn't bother to dig into Barry.

As for Romney and his tax returns. If I were him I'd release em all, Then I'd make a point of pointing out Barry's college transcripts on the campaign.

Its gonna be a fun campaign season.

I'm still wondering what you birthers think is in his college transcripts that could possibly be so damning.