And - yeah. THAT'S What I Can't Live With

BDBoop

Platinum Member
Jul 20, 2011
35,384
5,459
668
Don't harsh my zen, Jen!
Ten Ways Obama Can Win in 2012 - The Daily Beast

But consider this: If Barack Obama loses in November of 2012, the next President is likely to believe that climate change is a hoax, social security is a ponzi scheme, and that the separation of church and state is so 18th century.

We need to support President Obama; the alternatives are too scary. But the President’s communication style needs to change--now; “strategic ambiguity” isn’t going to win the next election.
 
Ten Ways Obama Can Win in 2012 - The Daily Beast

But consider this: If Barack Obama loses in November of 2012, the next President is likely to believe that climate change is a hoax, social security is a ponzi scheme, and that the separation of church and state is so 18th century.

We need to support President Obama; the alternatives are too scary. But the President’s communication style needs to change--now; “strategic ambiguity” isn’t going to win the next election.

Frightening is four more years of Obama! He has no clue on what to do about the economy or what advice to take, no idea but one failing idea on getting jobs back to our country and has all the wrong people in the administration.

The few things he has done in his time are about to be turned over by the SCOTUS. Governors perhaps will not have to secure their own states if we have a president who takes basic security of the US as a job of the federal government and stops trying to sue his own states!

Perhaps when we have a crisis, he can stop his vacations , get off the golf course, stop blaming Bush and deal with the crisis at hand.

Four more years is certainly frightening!
 
Interesting, they are scared of reality so they are going to vote for Obama. As if that would eliminate reality.

Maybe you just need to admit the truth to yourself.
 
Ten Ways Obama Can Win in 2012 - The Daily Beast

But consider this: If Barack Obama loses in November of 2012, the next President is likely to believe that climate change is a hoax, social security is a ponzi scheme, and that the separation of church and state is so 18th century.

We need to support President Obama; the alternatives are too scary. But the President’s communication style needs to change--now; “strategic ambiguity” isn’t going to win the next election.

Frightening is four more years of Obama! He has no clue on what to do about the economy or what advice to take, no idea but one failing idea on getting jobs back to our country and has all the wrong people in the administration.

The few things he has done in his time are about to be turned over by the SCOTUS. Governors perhaps will not have to secure their own states if we have a president who takes basic security of the US as a job of the federal government and stops trying to sue his own states!

Perhaps when we have a crisis, he can stop his vacations , get off the golf course, stop blaming Bush and deal with the crisis at hand.

Four more years is certainly frightening!

Break it down. What crisis. And how was it not dealt with..

Go!
 
Ten Ways Obama Can Win in 2012 - The Daily Beast

But consider this: If Barack Obama loses in November of 2012, the next President is likely to believe that climate change is a hoax, social security is a ponzi scheme, and that the separation of church and state is so 18th century.

We need to support President Obama; the alternatives are too scary. But the President’s communication style needs to change--now; “strategic ambiguity” isn’t going to win the next election.

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

Dream on BedPoop..... it's over.
 
Interesting, they are scared of reality so they are going to vote for Obama. As if that would eliminate reality.

Maybe you just need to admit the truth to yourself.

The essence of leftism is all built on a lie....
 
What's to hang on to. More YES WE CAN bullshit. Wake up people. We NEED CHANGE THAT"S EFFECTIVE!!!
 
Lordy you know things are bad when your lefty cohorts define your style as "Strategic Ambiguity."
That's just too funny. Wonder if Barry thinks that's better or worse than his "leading from behind" description?

Let's see...23 Dim Senators on the same ticket with the Ambiguous One. Hee hee....
 
Not that Obama's programs for economic recovery have worked that well, but the Republican plans are very likely to fall on deaf ears. Massive cuts in government spending are going to reduce unemployment? Cutting regulations on the financial sector and corporate America will restore health to the economy? Even the dimmest of voters understands big cuts in government spending means big job losses. Lack of regulations in the financial sector was a major cause of the recession. Republicans are going to have to do a lot better than this.
 
Ten Ways Obama Can Win in 2012 - The Daily Beast

But consider this: If Barack Obama loses in November of 2012, the next President is likely to believe that climate change is a hoax, social security is a ponzi scheme, and that the separation of church and state is so 18th century.

We need to support President Obama; the alternatives are too scary. But the President’s communication style needs to change--now; “strategic ambiguity” isn’t going to win the next election.

Global warming IS a hoax, SS IS a Ponzi scheme and there is no such thing as "separation of church and state". There is however a thing called the "Establishment Clause"

Fucking idiot.
 
Ten Ways Obama Can Win in 2012 - The Daily Beast

But consider this: If Barack Obama loses in November of 2012, the next President is likely to believe that climate change is a hoax, social security is a ponzi scheme, and that the separation of church and state is so 18th century.

We need to support President Obama; the alternatives are too scary. But the President’s communication style needs to change--now; “strategic ambiguity” isn’t going to win the next election.

So this is how the Dums will energize their base: Yeah Obama sucks but the GOP sucks worse!
That sounds like a winning strategy for 2012. Run with it!
 
Not that Obama's programs for economic recovery have worked that well, but the Republican plans are very likely to fall on deaf ears. Massive cuts in government spending are going to reduce unemployment? Cutting regulations on the financial sector and corporate America will restore health to the economy? Even the dimmest of voters understands big cuts in government spending means big job losses. Lack of regulations in the financial sector was a major cause of the recession. Republicans are going to have to do a lot better than this.

If that were the case then the opposite would be true: Expand government employment and unemployment will go down.
Whoops. Small problem. That doesn't work.
Most people with something more than an ability to spell economics understands that gov't is an inefficient use of resources and having less of it will benefit the economy overall.
And no, lack of regulation was not a cause of the recession. The financial sector was and is one of the most heavily regulated areas of the economy.
 

Forum List

Back
Top