Barack Obama, our next President

[sonicfilter]

fetch almighty wrote:

<quoted text>That's funny. President Bush and Putin had a good working relationship. He respected Bush as a worthy adversary. This crap you put up there is assinine. Putin thinks O'bama is a worm-an Amateur. He thinks even less of Hillary.

The Bush administration's failure to win Russia's consent to install U.S. missile defenses in its European backyard and a growing list of other disputes suggest that President Bush and his aides have misread the man whose "soul" Bush thought he'd divined when they first met six years ago.

Bush's strategy on Russia assumed that Russian President Vladimir Putin embraced democracy, wanted integration with the West and sought a "strategic partnership" in which Moscow would acquiesce to U.S. policies such as NATO expansion. Feuds could be resolved through the close personal relationship that Bush believed he had with his Russian counterpart.

Instead, fueled by record oil and natural gas prices and resentment of what he lambasted in February as Bush's "almost uncontained hyper use of force," Putin has led global opposition to the U.S. war in Iraq, hosted Palestinians on the U.S. list of terrorist groups, sold anti-aircraft missiles and other arms to Iran and stymied Bush's drive to tighten U.N. sanctions on the Islamic republic for refusing to suspend uranium enrichment.

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2007/10/12/20508/b...

Putin liked Bush. Just not his policies.

[flack]

Homer wrote:

<quoted text>Have a great weekend! Watch out for falling 50 megaton bombs!

Whole bunch of them and bigger across the river at Yorktown Naval Weapons Station. Cool place.

[Phil]

Gunner wrote:

<quoted text>
Yeah..."amazing" would be how I'd describe how ignorant your racist VP is.
Princeton Economist: The Math Behind Romney's Tax Plan Adds Up
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/princeton...
+++++
JFK speech on tax cuts
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
As to the JFK speech, there's not a single Obama democrat that would agree with its content.

LOL...suppose this happens or suppose that happens, that would mean x amount in 10 years.

It takes a lot of imagination for his plan to add up as well a more than 2 terms in office.

[Gunner]

kuda wrote:

<quoted text>
Romney’s professed religion is not the problem, it’s his lack of substance. Who knows what he actually stands for, if anything? Trying to get a straight answer from him is like trying to catch the greased pig at Kentucky’s Laurel County Fair. Soo-wee!

Good thing you're voting for the transparent Obama.

His hidden, or should I write flexible, agenda is crystal clear.

[fetch almighty]

sonicfilter wrote:

Like Ron Paul? Avoid Mitt Romney
Libertarians are better off with Obama
If Paul supporters still believe their aims can be best advanced vis-à-vis the GOP, they are deluding themselves.
Rather than continue this abusive relationship, they must reevaluate — bearing in mind Paul’s track record of fruitful cooperation with the left, most notably Rep. Dennis Kucinich and Ralph Nader. Ron Paul faithful should thus take a cue from the man himself and reject Paul Ryan’s phony entreaties.
In states like New York, where the outcome is essentially predetermined, they should instead vote for a third-party candidate: Gary Johnson of the Libertarian Party, Jill Stein of the Green Party, Rocky Anderson of the Justice Party or Virgil Goode of the Constitution Party.
In states that hang in the balance, such as Ohio, Florida or Virginia, they should pinch their noses and vote for President Obama — even if only to punish Romney, Ryan and the GOP.
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/ron-paul-a...

TEll them to vote on Wednesday too while you are at it. Geez what kind of loon says to 'punish' someone. Oh the same ones that cried over water-boarding terrorists. Really Sonic you liberals are no ones' friends. Sad state of affairs you bring to the table.

[killtaker]

"Times/Bay News 9/Herald exclusive Florida poll: Romney 51, Obama 44"

http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/nationa...

[killtaker]

"Virginia Poll: Romney Leads By 7"

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/...

[FIRE THE GOP]

killtaker wrote:

<quoted text>
You made clear your curiosity with male genitalia...not me...
Schlurp away homo...

Oh grow up nut gobbler penistaker!

That goes for all of you!

Especially you little bttttttt holes for Romney!

HE WILL LOSE IN NOVEMBER!

gfy!

(Funny stuff today! Must be debate hangovers? Vote for Obama! Have fun. It's all for fun. Don't hate! It's just fun with words! Like this: Mitt Romney is the greeeediest schittttt ffffffck on earth! See? Just words. Or: penistaker is a nut gobbler from way back, the old country! Likes his nuts wrapped in magic undies----Mitt style! See? No harm. Vote better: All Democrat Ticket. Vote for Obama!)

[EasyEed]

flack wrote:

<quoted text> Sorry to disagree with you Easy but there is no right to vote for president. The states are free to chose the method of selecting the electoral representatives. The representatives are not even bound to follow the wishes of the state. The state legislative can appoint them. It can be done by lottery. Hell the governor can just say who he wants as long as that is the way it is set up. Just as the Senate was once appointed by the states not elected. Which by the way it should go back to. That would be the 17th amendment. Needs repealed. The 16th as well.

"flack"
Have to disagree. Term limits on congress folks could ease many of the countries problems. How many states do not use the vote of the people to determine who is elected president? When was the last time a governor of one of the several states said we will not have a statewide election for president I will select the person who will get our vote? You want politicians selecting other politicians to the senate? Why not do the same for the house? Why not take away the right of the folks to elect those who govern them?
Peace

[sonicfilter]

Gunner wrote:

<quoted text>
Yeah..."amazing" would be how I'd describe how ignorant your racist VP is.
Princeton Economist: The Math Behind Romney's Tax Plan Adds Up
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/princeton...
+++++
JFK speech on tax cuts
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
As to the JFK speech, there's not a single Obama democrat that would agree with its content.

Rosen finds that Romney's plan could work if tax reform causes the economy to grow 3 percentage points more over a given period of time than it would have grown without tax reform.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/princeton...

I think I've heard the like before. Must have been in 2001.

And how did that work out?

I only trust one economist. Bruce Bartlett.

If Romney Wins, Will His Tax Plan Survive?

One big problem in analyzing the Romney tax plan is that he hasn’t put enough specifics on the table to allow it to be properly evaluated.

Read more at http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2012/10...

[fred]

leosnana wrote:

<quoted text>At the White House, spokesman Jay Carney responded Friday by saying Biden's remarks on Libya correctly reflected that any requests for diplomatic security are handled by the State Department. According to Carney, Obama and Biden were unaware of the specific requests mentioned at the House Oversight Committee hearing.
Biden "certainly was aware" of the congressional testimony when he responded to questions at the debate, which showed that the vice president was referring to himself and Obama in saying that they didn't know about the request for more security, Carney said.
The White House spokesman also repeated earlier assertions that there was no "actual intelligence" beforehand indicating that a terrorist attack on the Benghazi compound was imminent, and noted a formal State Department review was underway.

Of the Kenyan was unaware. The lizard can't be bothered with national security matters while he campaigns and hob knobs with Hollywood sluts.

[dem]

Chicagoan by Birth wrote:

<quoted text>Where you live boy... 37th & Shields??

You couldn't afford to live there.

[sonicfilter]

fetch almighty wrote:

<quoted text>TEll them to vote on Wednesday too while you are at it. Geez what kind of loon says to 'punish' someone. Oh the same ones that cried over water-boarding terrorists. Really Sonic you liberals are no ones' friends. Sad state of affairs you bring to the table.

I know a lot of local conservatives who're writing in Paul.

No friend of Romney they are. But I think it was the VP pick that really did the trick. Something about Ryan being a big government 'conservative'. Stimulus and all that.

[sonicfilter]

Biden vs. Ryan

Ryan’s limited experience on foreign policy was on display all night. Perhaps the most painful moments were when he attacked the administration’s response to the Green movement. This was the clearest example of Ryan’s reliance on standard movement conservative talking points on foreign policy for the entire debate, and it was clear that he thought that everyone was supposed to find this damning so that all he had to do was mention it. For almost all voters, Ryan’s lack of experience and preparation won’t matter, but he did nothing to reassure worried voters that a Romney administration would not keep U.S. forces in Afghanistan well into the future or that it wouldn’t pursue a more aggressive policy in Syria.

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/lariso...

[sonicfilter]

"reliance on standard movement conservative talking points"

[fred]

sonicfilter wrote:

<quoted text>
Rosen finds that Romney's plan could work if tax reform causes the economy to grow 3 percentage points more over a given period of time than it would have grown without tax reform.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/princeton...
I think I've heard the like before. Must have been in 2001.
And how did that work out?
I only trust one economist. Bruce Bartlett.
If Romney Wins, Will His Tax Plan Survive?
One big problem in analyzing the Romney tax plan is that he hasn’t put enough specifics on the table to allow it to be properly evaluated.
Read more at http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2012/10...

MICHAEL WALSH:“The lefty sneer was on full display last night during the vice-presidential debate.... In perhaps the most personally disgraceful performance in the history of debates, Joe Biden smirked, mugged, snorted, and sneered his way through 90 minutes of heckling his opponent, Paul Ryan — often aided and abetted by the moderator, Martha Raddatz, who was every bit as bad as we all feared the ex-wife of president Obama’s Harvard Law School classmate, Julius Genachowski, would be.”

UPDATE: Lanny Davis: Ryan Hit Home Run in Debate Against Biden.

[fred]

sonicfilter wrote:

<quoted text>
I know a lot of local conservatives who're writing in Paul.
No friend of Romney they are. But I think it was the VP pick that really did the trick. Something about Ryan being a big government 'conservative'. Stimulus and all that.

Ryan is a small government conservative. duh

The Kenyan mau mau is a communist. duh duh

[leosnana]

Gunner wrote:

<quoted text>
Yeah..."amazing" would be how I'd describe how ignorant your racist VP is.
Princeton Economist: The Math Behind Romney's Tax Plan Adds Up
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/princeton...
+++++
JFK speech on tax cuts
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
As to the JFK speech, there's not a single Obama democrat that would agree with its content.

Paul Ryan finally had enough time to go through the math of the Romney tax plan during the vice-presidential debate. He didn't use it. Ryan filibustered instead. About the most specific he got was citing "six studies" he said vindicate the plan's mathematical plausibility.

Except they don't.

Romney's tax plan is a three-legged stool that doesn't stand. Here's how it works -- or doesn't. Romney wants to 1) cut tax rates across the board by 20 percent, 2) cut tax expenditures to pay for these tax cuts, and 3) maintain progressivity. The problem, as the Tax Policy Center pointed out, is there aren't enough tax expenditures for the rich to pay for all the tax cuts for the rich. Romney's plan only works if he cuts out the tax cuts for the rich, raises taxes on the middle class, or explodes the deficit. In other words, Romney can pick two, and only two, of his tax goals -- what Matt Yglesias of Slate calls the "Romney Trilemma".

That sound you hear is the three-legged stool falling down.

[fetch almighty]

Chicagoan by Birth wrote:

<quoted text>Where you live boy... 37th & Shields??

that or 67th and Drexel.

[EasyEed]

leosnana wrote:

<quoted text>At the White House, spokesman Jay Carney responded Friday by saying Biden's remarks on Libya correctly reflected that any requests for diplomatic security are handled by the State Department. According to Carney, Obama and Biden were unaware of the specific requests mentioned at the House Oversight Committee hearing.
Biden "certainly was aware" of the congressional testimony when he responded to questions at the debate, which showed that the vice president was referring to himself and Obama in saying that they didn't know about the request for more security, Carney said.
The White House spokesman also repeated earlier assertions that there was no "actual intelligence" beforehand indicating that a terrorist attack on the Benghazi compound was imminent, and noted a formal State Department review was underway.

"leosampleanusz"
Way to dodge and dance. You do that well. The question why did president nobama blame the attacks on our embassy on the video? Please think before you respond so0 your answers are not so inane.
Peace
KMA