Barack Obama, our next President

"The road ahead will be long. Our climb will be steep," Obama cautioned. Young and charismatic but with little experience on the national level, Obama smashed through racial barriers and easily defeated ... Read more
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#773114 Oct 16, 2012
This Is Why Conservatives Can't Have Nice Conservative Policies

Mitt Romney's story is a case study: Movement publications and think-tanks put electoral victories before principles.

Some folks at the Heritage Foundation, AEI, and National Review figure that even if Romney is lying, they'll prefer his leadership to whatever Obama would do, so getting him elected is much more important than leveling with the public about his fact-fudging. Some movement conservative pundits and think-tankers cover for his deceptions with outright hackery. More often, they write content that is technically accurate, but framed in a way that only makes sense if the intention is to obscure the fact that Romney won't be able to do everything that he is promising (and no one knows exactly which promises he'll end up breaking).

The conservative movement's election-driven, rather than truth-driven, approach may well help Republicans get elected sometimes. But it also explains how, once in office, things turn out as they did during the Bush Administration. Of course Bush responded to electoral incentives to push something like Medicare Part D, rather than staying true to fiscal conservatism -- the conservative movement was so invested in his political success, and so uninterested in fiscally prudent governance, that everyone from Paul Ryan to hackish think-tank interns were ready to give cover for any budget-busting idea Karl Rove deemed a good idea. In the long run, the dearth of truth-driven conservative opinion-making during the Bush Administration did great harm to the movement.

It looks like history is repeating itself.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2...

Since: May 11

Newville, PA

#773115 Oct 16, 2012
And so it goes wrote:
This president is such an unmitigated train wreck that his sycophants just spent a day talking about dishes.
You mean where Paul Ryan got caught lying again?. Trying to make people think he was washing pots & pans when it was all a lie.
TheIndependentMa jority

Somerset, KY

#773116 Oct 16, 2012
Are You Kidding wrote:
<quoted text>
The "16 Words"
During the State the Union Address on January 28, 2003, President Bush said:
Bush: The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.
The "16 words" in Bush's State of the Union Address on Jan. 28, 2003 have been offered as evidence that the President led the US into war using false information intentionally. The new reports show Bush accurately stated what British intelligence was saying, and that CIA analysts believed the same thing.
Why do people find it so hard to believe anyway, that just because the US didn't find "secret hordes" of WMD (especially since WMD's have such a wide range of classifications, including bio/germ ones, when in the wrong hands, would have the ability to wipe out masses of populations w/ease)...doesn't mean there "weren't" any, especially in countries mazed with connecting under ground tunnels.

Easier to think Iran has just wanted nuclear "in case the oil runs out"...and to blame that on Bush as well?

Hillary looks tired. No damn wonder.

ROMNEY/RYAN 2012!
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#773117 Oct 16, 2012
Read campaign coverage from right-leaning libertarians at Reason and elsewhere, and you'll see a commitment to conveying certain truths: that all politicians lie; that Romney is not a reliable fiscal conservative; that his policy promises, intended to compensate for his unreliability, don't add up; that even if you think he's better than Obama, vigilance and skepticism are essential. Watching Sean Hannity or reading movement conservative publications, the tenor of coverage is different. There are exceptions, but the overall takeaway is that Romney is a fundamentally honest man whose promises are so mathematically possible -- and that if elected, he'll appoint conservative judges and come through for fiscal conservatives by reining in the debt without touching the military or anyone's Medicare or raising taxes.

What's far more likely is that Romney would push through tax cuts, marginally decrease welfare spending on the poor, and leave the military alone; the national debt would keep rising; the deficit would remain alarmingly high; and nothing like the Ryan budget would pass. Three or seven years hence, conservatives would earnestly ask themselves, "How did this happen again?"

Well, what else could happen, given a conservative intelligentsia that spent the last months of the campaign persuading themselves, along with their audience, that Romney is a trustworthy man and reliable champion of fiscal responsibility? An unreality of that magnitude is bound to have costs. Movement conservative elites ought to explain how it all works to their audiences. Instead they seek to "balance" mainstream media coverage by biasing content in favor of Republican politicians. The agenda of fiscal and social conservatives isn't very popular with the electorate, which is why they're the ones that Republican politicians sell out once they're elected. The big business agenda is unpopular too, but they've got lots of money, so they often get their way. That's my prediction about what the Romney Administration would be like, anyway.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2...

Since: May 11

Newville, PA

#773118 Oct 16, 2012
Gunner wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, according to the libs it's republicans who want polluted air and water, children and poor people to starve, the elderly to die in the streets...I could go on and on.
Then the next day you'll read some lib posting that it's republicans who use scare tactics and boogeymen to influence their base.
Well we say it because Republicans want to roll back EPA regulations.

WTF do you think it means when they want government to get out of the way.
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#773119 Oct 16, 2012
Romney’s Foreign Policy: Bush 2.0

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

Somerset, KY

#773120 Oct 16, 2012
shinningelectr0n wrote:
<quoted text>
"An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or
even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate
between what you know and what you don't."
-- Anatole France
Get an education, Jerk.
Good one!(thx for sharing it!!)

Romney/Ryan 2012!!
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#773121 Oct 16, 2012
Does Mitt Romney’s Tax Plan Math Add Up?

Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan want you to know their presidential ticket has a tax reform plan. But they don’t want you to know what it is. Which may be because it’s impossible.

http://reason.com/blog/2012/10/15/does-mitt-r...
tffany

Ripley, MS

#773122 Oct 16, 2012
Jesus H Flynt Esquire wrote:
<quoted text>
Go cook something in the kitchen bitch,or fetch a beer for your old man.Make yourself useful.
Todd Akin
If you cannot stand the heat get out of the kitchen,the truth will set you free.Obama nothing but lies and scare tactics.
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#773123 Oct 16, 2012
On Taxes, Paul Ryan Debates Mitt Romney

The next debate should be between Romney and his running mate, about what exactly is in their tax plan.

Romney says,“My plan is not like anything that's been tried before.” Ryan says,“it’s been done before.” Vice President Biden agrees with Romney and disagrees with Ryan.

Well, guys, which one is it? It would be nice to get a clear explanation from the Romney-Ryan campaign before the election, so voters who care about the tax and budget issue can decide.

http://reason.com/archives/2012/10/15/on-taxe...
TheIndependentMa jority

Somerset, KY

#773124 Oct 16, 2012
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
Well we say it because Republicans want to roll back EPA regulations.
WTF do you think it means when they want government to get out of the way.
With so many "stop" type regs--and NO give-- in some places, and so much WASTE in others (9 bill in FAILED green-how many YEARS worth of what could've been uput towards actually USEFUL subsidations????) well, who cares if people starve out, due to lack of work, eh DUH A VEY?

WTH is with the FDA lately anyway-all these other regs in "safety concerns"...looks like some more major "keep US citizens safe" FAILURE there too.

Support AMERICA.
YES to KEYSTONE and American energy independence!!!!!!

ROMNEY/RYAN 2012!
Experience FOR America again!

Since: May 11

Newville, PA

#773125 Oct 16, 2012
EasyEed wrote:
<quoted text>
"real dumb"
You just continue to get dumber.
On line 3 of your BS you said NAFTA was signed by Bush.
On line 8 of your BS you said NAFTA was signed by Clinton.
Are you always as stoopid as you appear ti be? Do you practice being stoopid?
Peace
KMA
This is because you are stupid.

The Nafta Treaty was signed by Bush.

The Nafta legislation was signed by Clinton.

If you weren't such a moron, you would know the difference.

GFY

Since: May 11

Newville, PA

#773126 Oct 16, 2012
EasyEed wrote:
<quoted text>
Topix censors,
The word chickenshit is okay, but bullsh*t is in appropriate, particularly when the slur was aimed at an individual not a thought?
Just curious.
Peace
KMA
Whiner. Run crying to Topix.

Since: May 11

Newville, PA

#773127 Oct 16, 2012
EasyEed wrote:
<quoted text>
"real dumb"
Do call former president Clinton, chickenshit willie when he dodged the draft? No? No surprize if a democrat does something it is okay, if a conservative does the same thing in your mind it is a crime. What a hypocrite.
Peace
KMA
Yes.

The difference is Clinton did not protest FOR the war.
TheIndependentMa jority

Somerset, KY

#773128 Oct 16, 2012
FIRE THE GOP wrote:
That was years before the war.
The inspectors found nothing before the war!
Or after!
He had none!
Bush lied?
You decide!
1.5 million died!
One last thing:
ALL REPUBLICANS SUCK!
FILTHY LYING SELFISH AZZZZZZZHOLES!
<quoted text>
How's life in that perpetual statehoodie of ignorance and cluelessness working out fer ya? Had any good fungus injections lately?

(Not to worry-we won't show you the pictures!)

ROMNEY/RYAN 2012!
TheIndependentMa jority

Somerset, KY

#773129 Oct 16, 2012
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
This is because you are stupid.
The Nafta Treaty was signed by Bush.
The Nafta legislation was signed by Clinton.
If you weren't such a moron, you would know the difference.
GFY
Well...yeah Duh A Vey lol.

Since: May 11

Newville, PA

#773130 Oct 16, 2012
TheIndependentMajority wrote:
<quoted text>
With so many "stop" type regs--and NO give-- in some places, and so much WASTE in others (9 bill in FAILED green-how many YEARS worth of what could've been uput towards actually USEFUL subsidations????) well, who cares if people starve out, due to lack of work, eh DUH A VEY?
WTH is with the FDA lately anyway-all these other regs in "safety concerns"...looks like some more major "keep US citizens safe" FAILURE there too.
Support AMERICA.
YES to KEYSTONE and American energy independence!!!!!!
ROMNEY/RYAN 2012!
Experience FOR America again!
How does a pipeline to import Canadian oil help with energy independence?

You do know that Canada is not part of this country, right?
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#773131 Oct 16, 2012
Limbaugh Whitewashes Romney's 47 Percent Comments Ahead Of Presidential Debate

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/10/15/limba...

During an appearance on Fox News' Hannity the night after the first presidential debate, Romney told Sean Hannity that his "47 percent" comments were "completely wrong." The next day, Limbaugh expressed his displeasure that Romney was walking away from his comments to donors.

It makes sense that Limbaugh is upset with Romney for backing down. Limbaugh had repeatedly tried to cover for Romney's statement in the past. Last month, Limbaugh aired a clip of Obama referring to the Mother Jones video, then claimed that Romney "never talked about" 47 percent of Americans "being victims." Limbaugh also declared Romney's remark a "golden opportunity" and "could be a slam dunk" for conservatism.
TheIndependentMa jority

Somerset, KY

#773132 Oct 16, 2012
Voter wrote:
<quoted text>
Your Amazed ?
1. The National Debt
You must be easily amazed or easily fooled. Our national debt of $16 trillion is not from President Obama, it’s from many Presidents, Congressmen and Senators over many years Republicans and Democrats alike. The largest increase to the debt is from tax cuts for the wealthy,$2 billion a week for foreign wars lasting 12 years and wall street bailouts. There are over 400 Congressmen and over 100 Senators in Washington DC but only one President. Our country has many issues, don’t blame one man for them unless his name ends in Bush.
2. ObamaCare
ObamaCare will bring better health care to everyone and will allow more people to get health care coverage.
Their are two groups of people who are concerned about ObamaCare, the health care industry itself. They have spent many years and millions of dollars making the health care game just the way they want it, against you and me, financially. When it comes to price increases, the sky is the limit. Not anymore.
The other group of people is anyone and everyone the health care industry can scare and make afraid of change. ObamaCare is actually called - The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Maybe you just don’t know much about it.
www.barackobama.com/health-care...
3. Your statement about people on welfare and food stamps.
With Mitt Romney and other big business men sending jobs to China so they can cut the throat of American workers to save a buck, with his making it in China and sell it in America business plan. With Mitt Romney more people will be on welfare and food stamps. This man is not presidential material – at all.
4. Middle Class - News Flash
Mitt Romney cares nothing for the middle class or the 47% of Americans he bad-mouth’s often in his $50,000.00 a plate fundraisers with the rich. How much food do you get for fifty thousand dollars a plate? Middle class people he will raise your taxes to pay for a tax cut for the wealthy , end of story. It’s your money $$$$ who should spend it you or Mitt Romeny and Paul Ryan?
Now go vote .
*
*
*
NO new robbinghoodie TIC TAX n' FINE for nothing-- on the UNinsured WORKING CLASS POOR!!!!

ROMNEY/RYAN 2012!!
EXPERIENCE for ALL of America again-NOT just some!!

(and please turn in your obammmerfone-it's unaffordable)

Since: May 11

Newville, PA

#773133 Oct 16, 2012
posting this again.

All you right whiners want a surplus & fiscal responsibility.

We had it!!!!!

We were on track to have a 5.6 trillion dollar SURPLUS in 2012.

Then Bush took office in 2001.

In June 2012, CBO summarized the cause of change between its January 2001 estimate of a $5.6 trillion cumulative surplus between 2002 and 2011 and the actual $6.1 trillion cumulative deficit that occurred, an unfavorable "turnaround" or debt increase of $11.7 trillion. Tax cuts and slower-than-expected growth reduced revenues by $6.1 trillion and spending was $5.6 trillion higher. Of this total, the CBO attributes 72% to legislated tax cuts and spending increases and 27% to economic and technical factors. Of the latter, 56% occurred from 2009 to 2011.[38][39]
The difference between the projected and actual debt in 2011 can be largely attributed to:
$3.5 trillion – Economic changes (including lower than expected tax revenues and higher safety net spending due to recession)
$1.6 trillion – Bush Tax Cuts (EGTRRA and JGTRRA), primarily tax cuts but also some smaller spending increases
$1.5 trillion - Increased non-defense discretionary spending
$1.4 trillion – Wars in Afghanistan and Iraq
$1.4 trillion - Incremental interest due to higher debt balances
$0.9 trillion - Obama stimulus and tax cuts (ARRA and Tax Act of 2010)[40]
The U.S. budget situation has deteriorated significantly since 2001, when the CBO forecast average annual surpluses of approximately $850 billion from 2009–2012. The average deficit forecast in each of those years as of June 2009 was approximately $1,215 billion. The New York Times analyzed this roughly $2 trillion "swing", separating the causes into four major categories along with their share:
Recessions or the business cycle (37%);
Policies enacted by President Bush (33%);
Policies enacted by President Bush and supported or extended by President Obama (20%); and
New policies from President Obama (10%).
Several other articles and experts explained the causes of change in the debt position.

So there Tea Party members. We had what you wanted.

Look who took us off that path.

Paul Ryan, voting yes yes yes.

Republicans did this.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Chicago Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 2 min red and right 185,983
Amy 3-30-15 46 min miss ann elk 40
{keep A word drop A word} (Oct '11) 1 hr RACE 5,829
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 1 hr SpaceBlues 52,423
News Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 1 hr CDC 51,890
News Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 3 hr scirocco 69,322
Word (Dec '08) 3 hr Red_Forman 5,161
Chicago Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]