The Party of Lies and Misinformation: The New Republican Party

[Billo_Really]

Then you should not have brought it into the discussion under post 294:

Oh contraire, if Mitt is going to say 47% of the population pay no taxes and prefer to live off the government dole, then that includes GE, because they didn't pay taxes last year.

OldStyle brought up a valid point. Why does Jeffery Immelt, a great supporter of Obama, have a place within the administration while paying zero in corporate taxes. Seems that if corporate tax breaks is to become a major campaign issue to throw at Mitt Romney, Obama would start by cleaning his OWN house. Do you have an answer on that statement? ..... or do you enjoy throwing out your little comments about Romney, then change your tone and avoid the issue completely when someone brings up a valid issue concerning Obama's OWN administration? [calling the kettle black as it were, or finding yourself inside a glass house throwing stones, whichever metaphor you'd rather prefer] Do you have an answer to his claim with regard to Obama or not?

I'm against any CEO or Board of Director's member of a mulit-national corporation from being part of any government of the United States. I also do not believe corporations should have any voice whatsoever in politics and elections. I think it should be illegal for any corporation to make any campaign donation of any size to any pac at any time and it should be a law that corporations may not have any meetings with any elected officials, unless it is done in a public forum.

Yes, Obama has some house-cleaning to do. He can start by getting rid of Bush's Sec of Defense and shit-canning that neocon foreign policy agenda.

I also must add, republican's shouldn't be disrespecting CEO's of major corporations, they are far more corporate whores than the dems are. But both are owned by the multi-nationals.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

LOL...our conversation about defense cuts was pretty much over as soon as you declared that we needed a 50% cut. I'm always amused when progressives LOVE government stimulus spending on "infrastructure" and "anything green" because that's going to create jobs but then for some strange reason hate government spending on defense even though that would create as many if not MORE jobs.

You'd cut the military 50% and lay off highly skilled workers from that job sector and then turn around and try and find "shovel ready" jobs for infrastructure? You know...the jobs that Barry COULDN'T find last time? You think THAT would work?

As for jobs going over seas? You MSNBC disciples have been here for six months ranting about the jobs that Romney supposedly sent overseas when he was running Bain Capital...I simply pointed out how hypocritical that was when Barack Obama's "Jobs Czar" was sending ten times as many jobs to China with his company now...all the while paying ZERO taxes!

It wasn't over, it was just getting to the good part. But you quit, rather than face your impending doom.

More jobs are created in the commercial industry, than the defense industry. The defense industry is a private club. Only a few select companies get DOD contracts. Commercial and infrastructure projects, on the other hand, affect a wide range of companies, industry's and the communities for which they are located. More people get jobs building roads and bridges, than they do building drones.

And you still didn't address the jobs we have in Iraq and Afghanistan in the form of US troops and Blackwater mercenaries. You don't seem to be against those jobs overseas.

We don't look at the jobs in cuts defense spending effects, or the STATES that rely on them. Show me how cuts in the DOD has actually created MORE jobs and is better for the economy? Roads and bridges ..... and what do you tell the computer programmer, the commercial plumber, commercial/industrial electrician, telemetry engineer, or robotics technician who lost their job? Better luck next election cycle?

Jobs effected with cuts in only the F-22 Raptor program
2,205 jobs in Connecticut
95,000 jobs across America

GREAT JOB Obama !!!! What a way to improve the economy! I'm sure they'd all much rather pave a road under your jobs plan.

http://www.f22-raptor.com/advocacy/documents/F22_Impact_ad10.pdf

 

[Billo_Really]

I'm sure cutting back our military, scaling down funding for the department of defence, Obama spiking the ball on Bin Laden while touting our troops coming finally home under a mission accomplished messge, proved to be a wise decision with letting our nation's guard down and finding a dead US Diplomat on the anniversary of 9-11. Of course demonstrators of a video always use rocket propelled grenades on an embassy, right? Looks like all the reaching out and apologizing for the actions of previous administration, did a lot for Obama to cool down things overseas. I can tell it made a WORLD of difference.

They attack our embassy's, because they object to us bombing the shit out of their neighborhoods, murdering their families from drones, overthrowing their governments, trashing the shit out of their infrastructure and then pouring US tax dollars in there because we have this egotistical notion that they want to be like us!

By the way, how's Obama's progress looking on Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon since he has been in office? Any chance that Ahmadinejad has backed away at all, from his progress on uranium enrichment and defiance to the UN? I'm sure Obama has the situation well under control, doesn't he? No possible threats to be found to warrent any need to have a US military presence. Cutting our Department of Defence has proved to be the wiser, and of course makes us look more stronger and threatening (like the United States is serious what it's demanding from Iran and means business). Wait ...... we need more talks. Perhaps Ahmadinejad would like to sit down to some tea and crackers as well? A drink then perhaps? As Tony Stark would say ...... no, no, no, .... threatening. lol

Before we get into this discussion, why don't you pony up some evidence that their nuclear program has been weaponized?

 

[Billo_Really]

We don't look at the jobs in cuts defense spending effects, or the STATES that rely on them. Show me how cuts in the DOD has actually created MORE jobs and is better for the economy? Roads and bridges ..... and what do you tell the computer programmer, the commercial plumber, commercial/industrial electrician, telemetry engineer, or robotics technician who lost their job? Better luck next election cycle?

Jobs effected with cuts in only the F-22 Raptor program
2,205 jobs in Connecticut
95,000 jobs across America

GREAT JOB Obama !!!! What a way to improve the economy! I'm sure they'd all much rather pave a road under your jobs plan.

http://www.f22-raptor.com/advocacy/documents/F22_Impact_ad10.pdf

It's a simple basic fact, money spent in this country, benefits this country's economy. Money spent re-constructing some other fucking country, only affects those companies related to DOD contracts.

Money spent in this country, we get a return for our investment. Money spent over there, we can't even track.

Do the fuckin' math!

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

Then you should not have brought it into the discussion under post 294:

Oh contraire, if Mitt is going to say 47% of the population pay no taxes and prefer to live off the government dole, then that includes GE, because they didn't pay taxes last year.

OldStyle brought up a valid point. Why does Jeffery Immelt, a great supporter of Obama, have a place within the administration while paying zero in corporate taxes. Seems that if corporate tax breaks is to become a major campaign issue to throw at Mitt Romney, Obama would start by cleaning his OWN house. Do you have an answer on that statement? ..... or do you enjoy throwing out your little comments about Romney, then change your tone and avoid the issue completely when someone brings up a valid issue concerning Obama's OWN administration? [calling the kettle black as it were, or finding yourself inside a glass house throwing stones, whichever metaphor you'd rather prefer] Do you have an answer to his claim with regard to Obama or not?

I'm against any CEO or Board of Director's member of a mulit-national corporation from being part of any government of the United States. I also do not believe corporations should have any voice whatsoever in politics and elections. I think it should be illegal for any corporation to make any campaign donation of any size to any pac at any time and it should be a law that corporations may not have any meetings with any elected officials, unless it is done in a public forum.

Yes, Obama has some house-cleaning to do. He can start by getting rid of Bush's Sec of Defense and shit-canning that neocon foreign policy agenda.

I also must add, republican's shouldn't be disrespecting CEO's of major corporations, they are far more corporate whores than the dems are. But both are owned by the multi-nationals.

Then unions should not be spending millions of dollars into campaign elections either. If you want to come down on corporations investing their influence into campaigns, then you have to also do the same to the other side. Why are Democrats so quickly to come down on Corporations but then clam up on unions' influence? Ahhhhh ..... votes! Can't demonize one without recognizing the other. Then again, I thought Obama was against catering towards special interest groups or holding close dooor discussions with them? Does the AFL-CIO give millions to see Obama elected? How much exactly did green energy coporations get for their contributions to Obama, like Solyndra or US Geothermal? Do we really want to have a discussion into campaign donations now?

Personally, I'd rather it be about only the issues (the economy, Iran obtaining nukes, reliance on a foreign interest like China for financing our debt. Cant be disgruntled towards a nation who has you by the balls because you depend on them for a "bailout" - talk about OUTSOURCING the fate of your own country!) than: what geen energy executives or CEO's contribute into the campaign, or free contraception, or making an executive decision on immigration because it's an election cycle and you need votes.

 

[Billo_Really]

Then unions should not be spending millions of dollars into campaign elections either. If you want to come down on corporations investing their influence into campaigns, then you have to also do the same to the other side. Why are Democrats so quickly to come down on Corporations but then clam up on unions' influence? Ahhhhh ..... votes! Can't demonize one without recognizing the other. Then again, I thought Obama was against catering towards special interest groups or holding close dooor discussions with them? Does the AFL-CIO give millions to see Obama elected? How much exactly did green energy coporations get for their contributions to Obama, like Solyndra or US Geothermal? Do we really want to have a discussion into campaign donations now?

Personally, I'd rather it be about only the issues (the economy, Iran obtaining nukes, reliance on a foreign interest like China for financing our debt. Cant be disgruntled towards a nation who has you by the balls because you depend on them for a "bailout" - talk about OUTSOURCING the fate of your own country!) than: what geen energy executives or CEO's contribute into the campaign, or free contraception, or making an executive decision on immigration because it's an election cycle and you need votes.

I'm okay with taking unions out of the loop as well.

Solyndra was started by the Bush Administration.

Investing in alternative fuels generates jobs for American's.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

I'm sure cutting back our military, scaling down funding for the department of defence, Obama spiking the ball on Bin Laden while touting our troops coming finally home under a mission accomplished messge, proved to be a wise decision with letting our nation's guard down and finding a dead US Diplomat on the anniversary of 9-11. Of course demonstrators of a video always use rocket propelled grenades on an embassy, right? Looks like all the reaching out and apologizing for the actions of previous administration, did a lot for Obama to cool down things overseas. I can tell it made a WORLD of difference.

They attack our embassy's, because they object to us bombing the shit out of their neighborhoods, murdering their families from drones, overthrowing their governments, trashing the shit out of their infrastructure and then pouring US tax dollars in there because we have this egotistical notion that they want to be like us!

What would be your response to 9-11 and terrorism against the United States exactly? Ignore the problem and hope they don't do it again? Scold them before the United Nations? We killed Bin Laden, then Obama touted about it by saying HE accomplished something no one else has been able to do. How has that worked out?

By the way, how's Obama's progress looking on Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon since he has been in office? Any chance that Ahmadinejad has backed away at all, from his progress on uranium enrichment and defiance to the UN? I'm sure Obama has the situation well under control, doesn't he? No possible threats to be found to warrent any need to have a US military presence. Cutting our Department of Defence has proved to be the wiser, and of course makes us look more stronger and threatening (like the United States is serious what it's demanding from Iran and means business). Wait ...... we need more talks. Perhaps Ahmadinejad would like to sit down to some tea and crackers as well? A drink then perhaps? As Tony Stark would say ...... no, no, no, .... threatening. lol

Before we get into this discussion, why don't you pony up some evidence that their nuclear program has been weaponized?

Those sanctions and talks are for what exactly? Just some simple disgruntled name calling against another country - Isreal? Why IS Iran building it's facilities underground, if Iran honestly believes that any attack upon them wouldn't be tolerated by any Muslim nation in the region? Are you suggesting Iran, after all that, has zero intentions, or couldn't profit AT ALL from obtaining a nuclear weapon? All these concerns, threats from Iran, Un inspectors, and sanctions are just a complete waste of our time? Lets be honest ... were you the type of child that had to actually TOUCH the hot burner before you could be convinced that.... yes it was hot.... and maybe I shouldn't be doing that again.

 

[Lakhota]

 

[Lakhota]

Setting the record straight on the auto rescue - The Maddow Blog

 

[Lakhota]

 

[Chris]

Republicans don't believe in evolution, global warming, or the presidency of George W. Bush.

 

[Listening]

Republicans don't believe in evolution, global warming, or the presidency of George W. Bush.

Democrats only believe in spending money that is not theirs.

 

[LibertyLemming]

cALM DoWN Bros you're on THe SaME TEAM!

 

[Lakhota]

 

[Lakhota]

 

[Lakhota]

 

[candycorn]

Romney and Ryan are both world class liars! It's like a sickness with them - and this sickness now permeates the entire Republican Party. They are desperate - and truth is irrelevant to them. Fact-checkers be damned.

What is the Difference Between a Sociopath, a Compulsive, a Pathological, a Chronic, and a Habitual Liar?

Mitt Romney tells 533 lies in 30 weeks, Steve Benen documents them

Pants On Fire Mitt Romney tells 616 Lies in 33 Weeks | Addicting Info

One of the things that I think maybe subliminally injured the Romney campaign was, again, his campaign staff saying something to the effect of "Fact Checkers aren't going to run our campaign". The meaning of that is subject to the reader but I think most people would see such a statement as an intent to tell "their version" of the truth.

 

[Lakhota]

 

[Lakhota]