Barack Obama, our next President

Full story: Hampton Roads Daily Press

"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 ...
Comments
717,301 - 717,320 of 1,100,983 Comments Last updated 1 hr ago

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.
TheIndependentMa jority

Somerset, KY

#773134 Oct 16, 2012
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
How does a pipeline to import Canadian oil help with energy independence?
You do know that Canada is not part of this country, right?
Okay, let's simplify.

America is on a continent, we call call it the North "American" continent. So is Canada, which means for starters-neither is in or off the middle east.(cool huh?) Thus, instant reduction on dependency of middle east oil, because when things are not stable in the middle east, that poses fluctuations and risk for those nations dependent upon it. Like for example-Libya.
You're webbie search for the day-please research and then post back to us, what nations form the orginization called OPEC.

Then, research how many jobs would be opened up, due to KEYSTONE running from the top of the United States (aka the northern continental United states) from Canada (alos the northern continent) all the way down to the bottom of the United States.

That'll be enough for one day-we won't go in to the positive cause and effects on the American economy just yet.

ROMNEY/RYAN 2012
YES to American energy independence!!!!
TheIndependentMa jority

Somerset, KY

#773136 Oct 16, 2012
RealDave wrote:
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.
Well, you did good there-for a MINUTE DUHMMY.

Figured out the Saddam the catalyst thing there yet? And where did Saddam live?

Try not to overload the space between yer ears with TOO much data FACTS.

WTH we doing (bombing) in Libya?? Hillary sayz-we will not retreat, on issues involving "american interests and values" Hmmm.

KEYSTONE-YES we can have American energy independence, w/
ROMNEY/RYAN 2012!!!!!!!!!!
TheIndependentMa jority

Somerset, KY

#773137 Oct 16, 2012
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes.
The difference is Clinton did not protest FOR the war.
WTH we doing in Libya? Big black flag..as in "viva usama".

ROMNEY/RYAN 2012!

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#773138 Oct 16, 2012
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
How does a pipeline to import Canadian oil help with energy independence?
You do know that Canada is not part of this country, right?
Canada is friendly to the United States, idiot. That makes a huge difference.
Well, that was true until Obama and the Democrats enacted a law in 2009 that placed strict controls on the Canada - US border. And that's the reason the Prime Minister of Canada looked like he wanted to strangle Obama in the photo op after their meeting in 2009.
Imagine that. Obama and the Democrats seal the border with Canada and erase the border with Mexico.
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#773139 Oct 16, 2012
To the annoyance of the Romney campaign, members of Washington’s reality-based community have a habit of popping up to point out the many deceptions in the campaign’s blue-sky promises of low taxes and instant growth.[...]

Even Fox News isn’t buying it. Ed Gillespie, a senior adviser to the Romney campaign, said on Fox News Sunday that Mr. Romney would work out those details later with Congress. As the program’s moderator, Chris Wallace, pointed out, that’s like offering voters the candy of a 20 percent tax cut without mentioning the spinach they will have to eat.[...]

It is increasingly clear that the Romney tax “plan” is not really a plan at all but is instead simply a rhapsody based on old Republican themes that something can be had for nothing. For middle-class taxpayers without the benefit of expensive accountants, the bill always comes due a few years later.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/16/opinion/mit...
TheIndependentMa jority

Somerset, KY

#773140 Oct 16, 2012
Jesus H Flynt Esquire wrote:
<quoted text>
Have to put on a show for the uneducated religous kooks.Remember make a contribution and get the better seat.
How's that working out for dem dar feller constituants in chitcargo?

(what a flippin pathetic bunch of NO moral fiber what so ever)

ROMNEY/RYAN 2012!

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#773141 Oct 16, 2012
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
How does a pipeline to import Canadian oil help with energy independence?
You do know that Canada is not part of this country, right?
... and you ran away from a discussion yesterday when you got caught mindlessly repeating the indoctrinated lies invented by the Democrats about Vietnam.

RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
blah... blah... blah... indoctrinated lies invented by the Democrats... blah... blah... blah...

DBWriter educated reality-challenged Dave thusly:

We knew who he was, like we know who anyone of significance is. Ho Chi Minh didn't become a concern until he asked the Soviet Union to help him in the war he started against the French after he went to Paris and asked them to come back to Veitnam. The Soviet Union used this as an opportunity to expand their influence during the Cold War. He didn't become significant until the Soviet Union was supporting his invasions of South Vietnam. If he never invaded South Vietnam, he'd be about as significant as some other small-pond bullshit dictator with too big of an ego in the world.
Listen carefully to this. This is the key ingredient to understanding the US involvement in Vietnam:
As the Soviet Union increased its involvement in the invasions of South Vietnam, the US increased its involvement in the defense of South Vietnam.
That means the US involvement didn't become significant until after Ho Chi Minh asked the Soviet Union to petition the UN to divide the country.
Let's say that again:
Ho Chi Minh asked the Soviet Union to petition the UN to divide the country.
Immediately after the UN authorized the creation of North Vietnam and South Vietnam, Ho Chi Minh began invading South Vietnam.
This is exactly like how the proxy war in Korea started.
Now, idiot, here's the key:
As the Soviet involvement in the communist invasions of South Vietnam increased, the US involvement in the defense of South Vietnam increased.
US involvement didn't become direct until AFTER the UN divided the country.
The Soviet Union involvement was already at a significant level prior to this. In fact, as I told your ignorant ass previously, the communist used Soviet weapons at the battle of Dien Bien Phu, which was before the Soviet Union petitioned the UN to divide Vietnam into two separate countries.
The Cold War is a global war.
The Soviet Union is engaged in Vietnam.
The communists divide Vietnam into two countries.
The communists begin invading free South Vietnam.
The US assists South Vietnam.
The strategy of the United States during the Cold War was not to abandon our allies and run away.
You seem to be ignorant of all of this.
As for Nixon winning the war, the war was all but over in 1970 when the NVA ran away to avoid destruction when the US forces entered the Parrot's Beak in 1970. They waited until US ground forces left Vietnam in 1971 to launch the largest communist invasion of the war. They were defeated by the South Vietnamese WITHOUT ASSISTANCE FROM US GROUND COMBAT UNITS.
Now, I want you to begin your next post with one of the lies in the system of lies the Democrats invented about Vietnam:
"The South Vietnamese wouldn't fight for themselves."
Then tell us about how the communists defeated the South Vietnamese in 1972 when they mounted the single largest invasion of the war, the Easter Offensive of 1972.
... got a problem, don't you....
It seems the single largest invasion of the war wasn't successful, and there is no history of any US ground combat units fighting against the communists.
Was it aliens from space that beat the communists?
Or, was it the South Vietnamese?
Now, tell us how the Democrat-controlled congress of 1973 helped the ally of the United States after they defeated a massive communist invasion during the Cold War.
Nobama

Allentown, PA

#773142 Oct 16, 2012
Queen Moosebutt Claims Two More Victims.....

DELAWARE, Ohio - Two law enforcement officials were injured in a crash while part of a motorcade escort for First Lady Michelle Obama on Monday.

According to the Delaware County Sheriff's Office, the motorcycles crashed at about 4:15 p.m. along U.S. Route 36/ state Route 37 and South Old State Road.

It was unknown if the motorcyclists collided or were struck by another vehicle.

One Genoa Township police officer and one Ohio State Highway Patrol trooper were transported to Grant Medical Center in Columbus with unknown injuries.

Michelle Obama spoke at about 2:45 p.m. at Ohio Wesleyan University in Delaware.

U.S. 36/S.R. 37 was backed up because of the crash.

Obama was not injured in the crash, and her motorcade continued on after the crash.
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#773143 Oct 16, 2012
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
... and you ran away from a discussion yesterday when you got caught mindlessly repeating the indoctrinated lies invented by the Democrats about Vietnam.
RealDave wrote:
<quoted text>
blah... blah... blah... indoctrinated lies invented by the Democrats... blah... blah... blah...
DBWriter educated reality-challenged Dave thusly:
We knew who he was, like we know who anyone of significance is. Ho Chi Minh didn't become a concern until he asked the Soviet Union to help him in the war he started against the French after he went to Paris and asked them to come back to Veitnam. The Soviet Union used this as an opportunity to expand their influence during the Cold War. He didn't become significant until the Soviet Union was supporting his invasions of South Vietnam. If he never invaded South Vietnam, he'd be about as significant as some other small-pond bullshit dictator with too big of an ego in the world.
Listen carefully to this. This is the key ingredient to understanding the US involvement in Vietnam:
As the Soviet Union increased its involvement in the invasions of South Vietnam, the US increased its involvement in the defense of South Vietnam.
That means the US involvement didn't become significant until after Ho Chi Minh asked the Soviet Union to petition the UN to divide the country.
Let's say that again:
Ho Chi Minh asked the Soviet Union to petition the UN to divide the country.
Immediately after the UN authorized the creation of North Vietnam and South Vietnam, Ho Chi Minh began invading South Vietnam.
This is exactly like how the proxy war in Korea started.
Now, idiot, here's the key:
As the Soviet involvement in the communist invasions of South Vietnam increased, the US involvement in the defense of South Vietnam increased.
US involvement didn't become direct until AFTER the UN divided the country.
The Soviet Union involvement was already at a significant level prior to this. In fact, as I told your ignorant ass previously, the communist used Soviet weapons at the battle of Dien Bien Phu, which was before the Soviet Union petitioned the UN to divide Vietnam into two separate countries.
The Cold War is a global war.
The Soviet Union is engaged in Vietnam.
The communists divide Vietnam into two countries.
The communists begin invading free South Vietnam.
The US assists South Vietnam.
The strategy of the United States during the Cold War was not to abandon our allies and run away.
You seem to be ignorant of all of this.
As for Nixon winning the war, the war was all but over in 1970 when the NVA ran away to avoid destruction when the US forces entered the Parrot's Beak in 1970. They waited until US ground forces left Vietnam in 1971 to launch the largest communist invasion of the war. They were defeated by the South Vietnamese WITHOUT ASSISTANCE FROM US GROUND COMBAT UNITS.
Now, I want you to begin your next post with one of the lies in the system of lies the Democrats invented about Vietnam:
"The South Vietnamese wouldn't fight for themselves."
Then tell us about how the communists defeated the South Vietnamese in 1972 when they mounted the single largest invasion of the war, the Easter Offensive of 1972.
... got a problem, don't you....
It seems the single largest invasion of the war wasn't successful, and there is no history of any US ground combat units fighting against the communists.
Was it aliens from space that beat the communists?
Or, was it the South Vietnamese?
Now, tell us how the Democrat-controlled congress of 1973 helped the ally of the United States after they defeated a massive communist invasion during the Cold War.
yawn
sonicfilter

Indianapolis, IN

#773145 Oct 16, 2012
No one disagrees that cutting taxes will stimulate the economy, just as no one contests that throwing gasoline on a campfire will cause it to temporarily burn hotter. The more important question is whether such stimuli are sustainable - whether putting more wood on a fire or blowing on its embers might be a better way to keep it going than fueling it with "liquidity," just as whether it really makes sense (if ones goal is more jobs and economic growth in this country) to give finite tax dollars to wealthy investors who might plant it overseas as Mitt Romney has done with his Bain Capital investments in China.

If the problem with our economy is not inadequate demand, as Democrats say, but rather that the rich do not have enough money in their hands, as Republicans contend, then what were we to make of the record $2 trillion in free cash currently sitting idle with America's banks and corporations - a large portion of which I would submit is being sequestered so as to deliberately suppress the economy to Obama's disadvantage in order that America's plutocracy can get the compliant Romney puppet regime these oligarchs so obviously desire.[...]There is a reason Paul Ryan did not bring up Ronald Reagan's name in his debate with the Vice President last seek. It's because when Reagan jumped into the deep end of the supply-side pool he immediately found himself underwater as deficits began to rise - eventually increasing from $700 billion when Reagan came into office in 1980 to $3 trillion when he left.

History shows that right after passing the largest tax cut in American history, Reagan raised taxes eleven times throughout his term, including the largest corporate tax increase in history, which Joshua Green said would be "utterly unimaginable for any conservative to support today."

http://open.salon.com/blog/ted_frier/2012/10/...

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#773147 Oct 16, 2012
RealDave wrote:
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.
... and that explains how the Republicans turned over all the purse strings of the government to the Democrats in January, 2007, and a declining 0.16 (that's zero point one six) trillion dollar deficit; and the Republicans turned over to the Democrats a total debt of 5 trillion dollars to the Democrats in January, 2007.
What have the Democrats done to that deficit since?
Did you say they increased it by ONE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED PERCENT?
And what have the Democrats done to that total debt since?
Did you say they more than tripled it to the 16 trillion dollars it is tocay?

And what kind of plan do the Democrats have to reverse the economically suicidal course they put us on in January, 2007?

Did you say the Democrats don't even have a plan?
Did you say we haven't even had a budget since Obama took office?
Did you say the only two budgets Obama submitted to Congress in the 4 years he's been in office couldn't get even one goddam vote in the entire Congress?
Wouldn't you conclude after being informed of these facts that every Democrat in Congress thinks Obama is an idiot?

So, please tell us why the Democrats in Congress think Obama is a nutcase and they still put him on the ballot to run for another term.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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
Word (Dec '08) 1 hr andet1987 4,662
Ping G20 Irons Compared With Cheap G15 Irons (May '12) 1 hr lucy 2
chief keef 1 hr sd 1
Israeli troops begin Gaza pullout as Hamas decl... (Jan '09) 1 hr voice of peace 68,393
Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) 3 hr JOEL 69,030
Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 3 hr Louis Slungpoo 46,358
ISIS Plans to Blow Up an Entire American City a... 3 hr bing 9662 51
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 4 hr LRS 177,461
•••
•••
•••

Chicago Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Chicago News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Chicago
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••