Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

[IMG]http://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc7/64632_10150700571251083_228991957_n.jpg[/IMG]

I know it's fake, but it's still funny.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

[quote=firstdown;924115]Those [B]car companies[/B] had to be bailed out why?[/quote]
this is hysterical. you make it sound like Hertz, Davis, and Enterprise rent a car. these companies employ 10s- 1000s of Americans. to let them go by the wayside would have been ridiculous

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

[quote=NC_Skins;924178]
I know it's fake, but it's still funny.[/quote]I got a good yuk, yuk. :)

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

Whoa...when did he become an Obama surrogate or was he just playing dumb all this time?

[yt]ArRj-dQXX3Y[/yt]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

[quote=Giantone;923751]So how many companies that were bailed out have paid back the money?[/quote]Here's one account. Basically they're saying the bailouts are currently around: OUTFLOWS: $602 billion, INFLOWS: $390 billion.

[URL="http://projects.propublica.org/bailout/list/refunds"]LINK[/URL]

Keep in mind, how some money was paid back is interesting. It's no coincidence that banks which shuffle around money anyways, could "pay back" the bailout faster. And GM actually "paid back" some bailout money with other bailout money. [URL="http://www.forbes.com/2010/04/23/general-motors-economy-bailout-opinions-columnists-shikha-dalmia.html"]LINK[/URL]. The GM stock bought is supposed to be sold by the government when it reaches value enough to pay back the original "loan", which won't happen until/if the stock basically doubles in value outside of inflation and interest.

[quote=Giantone;923751]The employment #s are going south becuase of Congress hell Ray Charles can see that.[/quote]How is Congress doing that?

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

[quote=HailGreen28;924196]How is Congress doing that?[/quote]

Presidents can't pass laws, only Congress.


Have you not paid attention to anything the GOP has done over the past 3-1/2 years? It's without a doubt they've gone out of their way to gridlock anything the President wants done. Budget? Nope. Health Care? Nope. They few things he did manage is because of him scratching their backs by extending the tax cuts for the rich. They want to tank the entire economy just so they can point the finger at the man in charge and say "It's his fault!!"

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

post#160

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

[url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/11/mitt-romney-booed_n_1664900.html]Mitt Romney Booed At NAACP Convention For Saying He'd Repeal Obamacare (VIDEO)[/url]

Wrong speech, wrong place Mitt. GG.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

[quote=NC_Skins;924204]Presidents can't pass laws, only Congress.


Have you not paid attention to anything the GOP has done over the past 3-1/2 years? It's without a doubt they've gone out of their way to gridlock anything the President wants done. Budget? Nope. Health Care? Nope. They few things he did manage is because of him scratching their backs by extending the tax cuts for the rich. They want to tank the entire economy just so they can point the finger at the man in charge and say "It's his fault!!"[/quote]



...............this!

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

[quote=NC_Skins;924329][URL="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/11/mitt-romney-booed_n_1664900.html"]Mitt Romney Booed At NAACP Convention For Saying He'd Repeal Obamacare (VIDEO)[/URL]

Wrong speech, wrong place Mitt. GG.[/quote]Absolutely right speech for any place. Romney didn't change who he is or his message for the NAACP and received a standing ovation at the end of his speech.

[url=http://www.businessinsider.com/mormon-black-tension-romney-naacp-standing-ovation-2012-7]Romney's NAACP Speech Gets Standing Ovation - Business Insider[/url]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

Missed [URL="http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2012/07/04/can-americans-escape-deception/"]this[/URL] on the 4th, but still relevant:

[I]Hot Air Day is upon us. On July 4 hot air will spew forth all over the country as dignitaries deliver homilies to our “freedom and democracy” and praise “our brave troops” who are protecting our freedom by “killing them over there before they come over here.”

Not a single one of these speeches will contain one word of truth. No speaker will lament the death of the US Constitution or urge his audience to action to restore the only document that protects their liberty. No speaker will acknowledge that in the 21st century the Bush/Obama Regime, with the complicity of the Department of Justice, federal courts, Congress, presstitute media, law schools, bar associations, and an insouciant public have murdered the Constitution in the name of the “war on terror.”

As in medieval times, American citizens can be thrown into dungeons and never accounted for. No evidence or charges need be presented to a court. No trial is required, and no conviction.

As in tyrannies, US citizens can be executed at the sole discretion of the despot in the Oval Office, who sits there drawing up lists of people to be murdered.

Protestors exercising their constitutionally guaranteed rights to freedom of speech and freedom of association are attacked by armed police, beaten, tasered, tear-gassed, pepper sprayed, and arrested.

Whistleblowers who report the government’s crimes are prosecuted despite the statute that protects them.[/I]

I'd disagree with the Medieval times comment and his position on Manning but overall I like the attitude.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

[quote=Giantone;924157][quote=firstdown;924085]


Yeah bad choice of words there the numbers went north(in this case)I don't mind loaning money to the "green energy Co's" we need to invest in this for the future no doubt,I know it didn't work out .I was under the impression that most of the car companys have paid back part of the loans ...I believe it is in the 50% range and the banks ..well some have paid back almost all ,AIG did about 2 weeks ago.By Congress fighting Obama on everything it is they that are sending unemployment numbers through the roof.[/quote]

I don't have a problem with spending money on green energy but Obama has throwning money at them just so he can say he has invested in green energy. You say congress is sending unemployment through the roof but the way I see it they are just keeping Obama from throwing more money at a problem with no/poor results. When will people realize that throwing money at problesm does not always solve then it just waste more money.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

Remember back in the early 90's how all the GOP were screaming that the tax hike on the rich would stifle the economy and jobs would be lost. They were very wrong then and they are VERY wrong now.


[url=http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/economic-intelligence/2012/05/02/refusing-more-revenue-adds-to-deficit-without-spurring-growth]Tax Increases to Reduce Deficit Will Help, Not Hurt, Growth - Economic Intelligence (usnews.com)[/url]


I love how politicans (both alike) like to pump fear into their constitutes all for the sake of gaining leverage.


I feel dirty for posting this, but here goes. It's a well thought out talking point and if anybody can find fault (or any biased slant) to it, I'll pull it.

[url=http://www.cagle.com/2012/07/republicans-were-wrong-in-1993-on-the-effect-of-upper-income-tax-increases/]Cagle Post » Republicans Were Wrong in 1993 On The Effect Of Upper-Income Tax Increases[/url]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

[quote=NC_Skins;924412]Remember back in the early 90's how all the GOP were screaming that the tax hike on the rich would stifle the economy and jobs would be lost. They were very wrong then and they are VERY wrong now.


[URL="http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/economic-intelligence/2012/05/02/refusing-more-revenue-adds-to-deficit-without-spurring-growth"]Tax Increases to Reduce Deficit Will Help, Not Hurt, Growth - Economic Intelligence (usnews.com)[/URL]


I love how politicans (both alike) like to pump fear into their constitutes all for the sake of gaining leverage.


I feel dirty for posting this, but here goes. It's a well thought out talking point and if anybody can find fault (or any biased slant) to it, I'll pull it.

[URL="http://www.cagle.com/2012/07/republicans-were-wrong-in-1993-on-the-effect-of-upper-income-tax-increases/"]Cagle Post » Republicans Were Wrong in 1993 On The Effect Of Upper-Income Tax Increases[/URL][/quote][URL="http://blog.heritage.org/2011/05/25/the-graph-that-all-tax-hike-mystics-need-to-grapple-with/"]The Graph That All Tax Hike Mystics Need to Grapple With[/URL]

from the link: "Economic growth, measured as real Gross Domestic Product (GDP), was a moderate 3.3 percent in the period from 1993 through 1996, and real wages actually fell for the entire period. In contrast, the 1997 tax cuts, which significantly lowered the capital gains tax rate, coincided with a period of strong business investment, strong real GDP growth at 4.4 percent, and strong real wage growth of 1.7 percent."

also: [URL]http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/apr/19/bill-clinton/bill-clinton-takes-credit-flowering-economy-1990s/[/URL]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;924427][URL="http://blog.heritage.org/2011/05/25/the-graph-that-all-tax-hike-mystics-need-to-grapple-with/"]The Graph That All Tax Hike Mystics Need to Grapple With[/URL]

from the link: "Economic growth, measured as real Gross Domestic Product (GDP), was a moderate 3.3 percent in the period from 1993 through 1996, and real wages actually fell for the entire period. In contrast, the 1997 tax cuts, which significantly lowered the capital gains tax rate, coincided with a period of strong business investment, strong real GDP growth at 4.4 percent, and strong real wage growth of 1.7 percent."

also: [URL]http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/apr/19/bill-clinton/bill-clinton-takes-credit-flowering-economy-1990s/[/URL][/quote]


The Graph That All Tax Hike Mystics Need to Grapple With? Wow...the absurdity of this graph and its claim are quite insulting, even to a 9th graders intelligence.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;924427][URL="http://blog.heritage.org/2011/05/25/the-graph-that-all-tax-hike-mystics-need-to-grapple-with/"]The Graph That All Tax Hike Mystics Need to Grapple With[/URL]

from the link: "Economic growth, measured as real Gross Domestic Product (GDP), was a moderate 3.3 percent in the period from 1993 through 1996, and real wages actually fell for the entire period. In contrast, the 1997 tax cuts, which significantly lowered the capital gains tax rate, coincided with a period of strong business investment, strong real GDP growth at 4.4 percent, and strong real wage growth of 1.7 percent."

also: [url=http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/apr/19/bill-clinton/bill-clinton-takes-credit-flowering-economy-1990s/]PolitiFact | Bill Clinton takes credit for "flowering" of economy in 1990s[/url][/quote]


Neither one of your links disprove the affects the tax cut bill had on the economy. Not that I remotely gave Clinton credit for it, but even in the politifact link. That first link is just LOL. Last time I checked, we were on the road to removing our deficit and having a surplus, which is exactly what the GOP is screaming for.

They don't want it, and it's obvious by their actions they don't.




[quote]
Here are some of the key indicators we looked at:

• Gross domestic product. Between the third quarter of 1993 and the fourth quarter of 2000, the economy culumatively grew by just about one-third, or approximately 4.4 percent per year. By comparison, growth between the first quarter of 1991 and the third quarter of 1993 was just under 3 percent per year.

So growth was strong in both periods, but it was stronger after passage of the bill.

• Unemployment. Unemployment fell from 6.8 percent to 3.9 percent between passage of the bill and the end of Clinton's term, a period of seven and a half years. That continued a decrease that was already under way: Unemployment fell a full point between a peak of 7.8 percent in June 1992 and August 1993.

So, once unemployment turned a corner, it fell noticeably during both periods. But the period after passage of the bill was especially impressive. During those 90 months, there was only a single occasion when unemployment rose for two consecutive months -- and even that was an exceedingly modest gain, rising from 4.3 percent to 4.4 percent and then 4.5 percent between April 1998 and June 1998.

• Personal income. After the bill's passage, personal income increased by about 7.5 percent a year, compared to about 5.2 percent a year prior to passage. So income growth was strong in both periods, but it was stronger after the bill passed.

• Industrial production. Industrial production followed a similar pattern. It rose by about 5.6 percent per year after passage, compared to 3.2 percent per year before passage.

• House prices. The same goes for the real estate market. House prices rose about 4.7 percent a year after passage, compared to 2.4 percent per year prior to passage. (If you thought housing prices rose faster than 4.7 percent per year under Clinton, you may be mistaking his presidency for George W. Bush's; during the first seven years of the Bush administration, housing prices grew by almost 8 percent annually.)

• The stock market. From the passage of the bill until the end of Clinton's term, the Dow Jones Industrial average rose from 3,651 to 10,788 -- a stunning 26.7 percent per year. That dwarfs the historically healthy increase of 10 percent a year for the two and a half years prior to passage.[/quote]

I don't think anybody is saying that raising the tax rates on the rich was solely responsible for the economy. However, it is (and was) apparent that the bill had a major affect on the economy and in a good way.


We've tried cutting taxes since 2001 (bush and obama) and it hasn't work. Why in the **** would you continue with such reckless behavior and decisions? Oh, I know what, let me continue doing exactly what's drove us into the ground!!

We have to raise taxes (especially the rich). It's about time those .0001% (not the 1%) pay their fair percentage of taxes that most of us had to pay over the past 15 years. For to long, they've dodged taxes through various loopholes and legislation that the normal people couldn't, so it's a fair play of turnabout. Too bad you can't buy that 6th home overseas or that 3rd yacht.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

[quote=NC_Skins;924444]Neither one of your links disprove the affects the tax cut bill had on the economy. Not that I remotely gave Clinton credit for it, but even in the politifact link. That first link is just LOL. Last time I checked, we were on the road to removing our deficit and having a surplus, which is exactly what the GOP is screaming for.

They don't want it, and it's obvious by their actions they don't.






I don't think anybody is saying that raising the tax rates on the rich was solely responsible for the economy. However, it is (and was) apparent that the bill had a major affect on the economy and in a good way.


We've tried cutting taxes since 2001 (bush and obama) and it hasn't work. Why in the **** would you continue with such reckless behavior and decisions? Oh, I know what, let me continue doing exactly what's drove us into the ground!!

We have to raise taxes (especially the rich). It's about time those .0001% (not the 1%) pay their fair percentage of taxes that most of us had to pay over the past 15 years. For to long, they've dodged taxes through various loopholes and legislation that the normal people couldn't, so it's a fair play of turnabout. Too bad you can't buy that 6th home overseas or that 3rd yacht.[/quote]You intrepret what you want. If hard numbers and stats don't back up your point you demean the source as "biased". Of course Heritage is biased, but their research and numbers are accurate. I don't see how an impartial person would look at these numbers and blow them off.

Oh well, the links and responses aren't for you and others that aren't impartial anyway.

P.S. BTW, how do you explain away the improvement in economic numbers from '93-'96 to '97-'00.....after GOP driven tax cuts were put in place?

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;924455]You intrepret what you want. If hard numbers and stats don't back up your point you demean the source as "biased". Of course Heritage is biased, but their research and numbers are accurate. I don't see how an impartial person would look at these numbers and blow them off.

Oh well, the links and responses aren't for you and others that aren't impartial anyway.

P.S. BTW, how do you explain away the improvement in economic numbers from '93-'96 to '97-'00.....after GOP driven tax cuts were put in place?[/quote]


You're wielding water pistols and spewing water all over the board with your links to blog posts discussing serious matters and making lofty claims without any depth or analysis.



If you're going do something be good at it. Stop with the pew pew pew, and sounding off with pop pop pop.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

SS, ...this is from March but it's #'s are about negatives.



[url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/post/romneys-negatives-change-the-race/2012/03/28/gIQArGiQgS_blog.html]Romney’s negatives change the race - PostPartisan - The Washington Post[/url]


Cohen reports that while Obama is viewed favorably by 53 percent of Americans, Romney is viewed favorably by only 34 percent. Even more significantly, Obama is viewed unfavorably by only 43 percent of Americans, compared with 50 percent who view Romney unfavorably. Thus, Obama’s net favorable is plus-10, Romney’s is minus-16.
Cohen’s bottom line about Romney: “As he has become better known, his unfavorables shot up far more rapidly than his positive numbers. Negative impressions are up eight percentage points in the past week, nudging past the precious high….”

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

[quote=NC_Skins;924204]Presidents can't pass laws, only Congress.

Have you not paid attention to anything the GOP has done over the past 3-1/2 years? It's without a doubt they've gone out of their way to gridlock anything the President wants done. Budget? Nope. Health Care? Nope. They few things he did manage is because of him scratching their backs by extending the tax cuts for the rich. They want to tank the entire economy just so they can point the finger at the man in charge and say "It's his fault!!"[/quote]I think your analogy falls flat. The Republican House has passed budgets. It's the Democratic Senate that has consistently failed to pass anything of their own, during the Obama administration.

Carrying this "logic" further", were Democrats in Congress were responsible for the economy under Bush II? Were Newt Gingrich and the Republicans responsible for the good economy lasting as long as it did under Clinton? Or are you just trying to say that opposition to the current President automatically equals "tank the entire economy"?

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

[quote=Giantone;924462]SS, ...this is from March but it's #'s are about negatives.

[URL="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/post/romneys-negatives-change-the-race/2012/03/28/gIQArGiQgS_blog.html"]Romney’s negatives change the race - PostPartisan - The Washington Post[/URL]


Cohen reports that while Obama is viewed favorably by 53 percent of Americans, Romney is viewed favorably by only 34 percent. Even more significantly, Obama is viewed unfavorably by only 43 percent of Americans, compared with 50 percent who view Romney unfavorably. Thus, Obama’s net favorable is plus-10, Romney’s is minus-16.
Cohen’s bottom line about Romney: “As he has become better known, his unfavorables shot up far more rapidly than his positive numbers. Negative impressions are up eight percentage points in the past week, nudging past the precious high….”[/quote]Since the GOP base has rallied around Romney his rating have improved, but he's till got work to do. Fundraising has gone quite well, particularly since the SCOTUS decision on Obamacare, so Romney's got some positives to build on.

[URL="http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/polls/236337-poll-romney-favorability-rating-remains-low"]Poll: Romney favorability rating remains low - The Hill's Ballot Box[/URL]

I think this will certainly be a close race, not Bush/Gore close, but close.
Here's some latest polling info:

[URL="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012_elections_electoral_college_map.html"]RealClearPolitics - 2012 Election Maps - Electoral Map[/URL]

[URL="http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll"]Daily Presidential Tracking Poll - Rasmussen Reports™[/URL]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

Apparently it is possible to be Sole Stockholder, Chairman of the Board, CEO, and President and not be responsible for the actions of a company. Either I'm really fcking stupid or someone thinks I'm really fcking stupid.

[url=http://articles.boston.com/2012-07-12/politics/32633322_1_bain-capital-mitt-romney-financial-disclosure]Mitt Romney stayed at Bain 3 years longer than he stated - Boston.com[/url]

It's also possible to put money in a blind trust and not be responsible for how an IRA managed to be valued 100 million.


Apparently being able to say "I don't know" and "I am not responsible" are the mark of a leader these days.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

So Mr Obama decides to vist out area today and from what I have heard there is a 10 mile back up because they closed several main roads. Friday what timing.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

[quote=saden1;924547]Apparently it is possible to be Sole Stockholder, Chairman of the Board, CEO, and President and not be responsible for the actions of a company. Either I'm really fcking stupid or someone thinks I'm really fcking stupid.

[URL="http://articles.boston.com/2012-07-12/politics/32633322_1_bain-capital-mitt-romney-financial-disclosure"]Mitt Romney stayed at Bain 3 years longer than he stated - Boston.com[/URL]

It's also possible to put money in a blind trust and not be responsible for how an IRA managed to be valued 100 million.


Apparently being able to say "I don't know" and "I am not responsible" are the mark of a leader these days.[/quote]Shame on the Obama campaign for these accusations, shame on Obama for not rupudiating them, and shame on you for going pew, pew , pew all over the board and not doing your homework.
[URL="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/do-bain-sec-documents-suggest-mitt-romney-is-a-criminal/2012/07/12/gJQAlyPpgW_blog.html"]Do Bain SEC documents suggest Mitt Romney is a criminal? - The Washington Post[/URL]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

[quote=firstdown;924572]So Mr Obama decides to vist out area today and from what I have heard there is a 10 mile back up because they closed several main roads. Friday what timing.[/quote]Not to mention the $$$$ the City of VB spent on prettying up Green Run H.S. for the campaign stop.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;924591]Shame on the Obama campaign for these accusations, shame on Obama for not rupudiating them, and shame on you for going pew, pew , pew all over the board and not doing your homework.
[URL="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/do-bain-sec-documents-suggest-mitt-romney-is-a-criminal/2012/07/12/gJQAlyPpgW_blog.html"]Do Bain SEC documents suggest Mitt Romney is a criminal? - The Washington Post[/URL][/quote]


I'm not sure anything criminal went on (I am sure Obama's A team is on truthiness of it all) but I truly believe the whole mess needs to be clarified. It boggles the mind to think that a man who wore all the possible executive hats didn't know and wasn't involved in the happenings of his company. That's just not leadership.

Plus it just came out that he signed a bunch of SEC filings during that time and made a statement under oath that said "[T]here were a number of social trips and business trips that brought me back to Massachusetts, board meetings, Thanksgiving and so forth." Bottom line, his he seems to be absent a lot when it suits him or he thinks we are absent minded.


[URL="http://politicker.com/2012/07/romney-bain/"]Mitt Romney’s Shifting Bain Story | Politicker[/URL]

[quote]“Romney, who was CEO of Bain Capital until 2001, has repeatedly said he was on leave from the company in 1994, when strikes erupted at Ampad’s now- closed Indiana paper plant, and again in 2001, when GST Steel, a Kansas City plant, laid off workers and closed,” wrote [I]Globe[/I] reporter Yvonne Abraham.[/quote]I don't know...I wasn't there...I left...I'm on leave...It's a blind trust, blah blah blah...It all seems quite convenient but shit like this doesn't go away easily. You should just pay me now!

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

Now this isn't something you see everyday.

[url=http://news.yahoo.com/gop-governor-calls-mitt-romney-release-additional-tax-223443345--abc-news-politics.html]GOP governor calls on Romney to release more tax returns - Yahoo! News[/url]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

Man, she's pretty and smart which makes for a pretty deadly attack dog...scary.

[url=http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-3460_162-57472580/dem-aide-on-bain-if-romney-wasnt-in-charge-who-was/?tag=showDoorLeadStoriesAreaMain;ftnLeadHero]Dem aide on Bain: If Romney wasn't in charge, who was? - CBS News[/url]


The full episode is even more deadly...the guy working for Romney is not having a good time that's for sure.

[url=http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7414964n&tag=showDoorFlexGridLeft;ftnImageStack]July 15: Cutter, Madden, Ryan & more - CBS News Video[/url]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

This says it all, straight from Obama:

[URL="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/07/15/obama-dashes-american-dream-suggests-nobody-achieves-success-alone/"]Obama to business owners: 'You didn't build that' | Fox News[/URL]

[B]To this I say BS[/B]. The gov't doesn't put in 50+ hour (many put in 60-70 hours) workweeks. The gov't didn't give me travel vouchers for my family to be with me when it was necessary to be on the road for work. The gov't doesn't study for you to make strong academic achievement. The gov't doesn't come up with inventive or more productive ideas (sometimes defense R & D has made breakthoughs....but Obama and the Ds are ready to hammer defense spending). The gov't doesn't guarantee investment risks (unless its Solyndra or another Obama bundler). The gov't certainly has never bailed me out of anything. All the while folks who have [I][B]worked and sacrificed[/B][/I] for their own success are mandated to pay an even higher percentage of taxes????

I paid a hell of alot more for those roads than most, is there a special HTP (Highly Taxed Person) lane so I don't need to sit in traffic? BTW most roads are funded either by state funds or the FHWA which is funded primarily from gasoline taxes. As far as education goes that comment is complete BS as only 6% of education funding comes from the feds and it comes with a lot more strings than it's worth. The internet was originally a comm system funded by DOD between universities.....the mass expansion was funded by private investments and I pay monthly for my internet service.

I wish Obama and the Dems would just change their party name to Democratic Socialist Party and be who they really are.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

Hit the link for the 35 questions

[url=http://www.forbes.com/sites/tjwalker/2012/07/14/35-questions-mitt-romney-must-answer-about-bain-capital-before-the-issue-can-go-away/]35 Questions Mitt Romney Must Answer About Bain Capital Before The Issue Can Go Away - Forbes[/url]

Unfortunately for the Romney Campaign, the slew of TV interviews did little to satisfy the media. In times of crisis, a strong candidate will come up with answers that satisfy the basic questions surrounding the controversy and will make people want to move on to another subject. Romney, however, could not seem to come up with basic messages that resolved the controversies. Many of his answers seemed evasive or overly legalistic. The biggest problem for Romney is that all of his interviews have only increased the questions that political observers, voters and the media have regarding the subject of Bain Capital.
Specifically, Romney is going to have to answer the following 35 questions before this issue subsides:

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

It does not matter what Romney did so many years back it what he can do for us now that matters.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

[quote=Giantone;924801]Hit the link for the 35 questions

[URL="http://www.forbes.com/sites/tjwalker/2012/07/14/35-questions-mitt-romney-must-answer-about-bain-capital-before-the-issue-can-go-away/"]35 Questions Mitt Romney Must Answer About Bain Capital Before The Issue Can Go Away - Forbes[/URL]

Unfortunately for the Romney Campaign, the slew of TV interviews did little to satisfy the media. In times of crisis, a strong candidate will come up with answers that satisfy the basic questions surrounding the controversy and will make people want to move on to another subject. Romney, however, could not seem to come up with basic messages that resolved the controversies. Many of his answers seemed evasive or overly legalistic. The biggest problem for Romney is that all of his interviews have only increased the questions that political observers, voters and the media have regarding the subject of Bain Capital.
Specifically, Romney is going to have to answer the following 35 questions before this issue subsides:[/quote]

Why aswer the questions when fact check can answer the question?

[url=http://factcheck.org/2012/07/romneys-bain-years-new-evidence-same-conclusion/]FactCheck.org : Romney’s Bain Years: New Evidence, Same Conclusion[/url]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

[quote=Giantone;924801]Hit the link for the 35 questions

[URL="http://www.forbes.com/sites/tjwalker/2012/07/14/35-questions-mitt-romney-must-answer-about-bain-capital-before-the-issue-can-go-away/"]35 Questions Mitt Romney Must Answer About Bain Capital Before The Issue Can Go Away - Forbes[/URL]

[/quote][SIZE=4]“”If you don’t have a record to run on, then you paint your opponent as someone people should run from….You make a big election about small things,” ” – [/SIZE][URL="http://uspolitics.about.com/od/speeches/a/obama_accept_5.htm"][SIZE=4][COLOR=#000080]Barack Obama 08/28/08[/COLOR][/SIZE][/URL]


All these questions have been answered in the WaPo link and FD's Politifact link. The Dems in MA tried the lame Bain attacks when Romney was vetted for Gov. Shall we revisit Jeremiah Wright, Tony Rezko, Bill Ayers, etc.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

im starting to get effing sick of all these damn commercials every turn of the dial. Political attack ads are just lame from both sides.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

[quote=Chico23231;924820]im starting to get effing sick of all these damn commercials every turn of the dial. Political attack ads are just lame from both sides.[/quote]

We in Va are seeing a large number of these ads because we are a swing state and they are not going away.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

Speaking of Obama. My daughter lost her first tooth while eating chunky strawberry Ice Cream. Figured she swallowed it so my wife wanting it for a scrap book has been going through her crap.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;924816][SIZE=4]“”If you don’t have a record to run on, then you paint your opponent as someone people should run from….You make a big election about small things,” ” – [/SIZE][URL="http://uspolitics.about.com/od/speeches/a/obama_accept_5.htm"][SIZE=4][COLOR=#000080]Barack Obama 08/28/08[/COLOR][/SIZE][/URL]


All these questions have been answered in the WaPo link and FD's Politifact link. The Dems in MA tried the lame Bain attacks when Romney was vetted for Gov. Shall we revisit Jeremiah Wright, Tony Rezko, Bill Ayers, etc.[/quote]

Help me understand all this stuff you keep posting...am I to understand that:


It is possible for someone to be 100% owner, chariman of the board, CEO and president and not be responsible for their company's actions but it is possible to build a company all on your own and take 100% responsibility for all of its success.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;924816][SIZE=4]“”If you don’t have a record to run on, then you paint your opponent as someone people should run from….You make a big election about small things,” ” – [/SIZE][URL="http://uspolitics.about.com/od/speeches/a/obama_accept_5.htm"][SIZE=4][COLOR=#000080]Barack Obama 08/28/08[/COLOR][/SIZE][/URL]


All these questions have been answered in the WaPo link and FD's Politifact link. The Dems in MA tried the lame Bain attacks when Romney was vetted for Gov. Shall we revisit Jeremiah Wright, Tony Rezko, Bill Ayers, etc.[/quote]

Sammy just answer one,

If it wasn't Mitt at the helm,who was it and why did Mitt sign the papers?

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

[quote=saden1;924723]Man, she's pretty and smart which makes for a pretty deadly attack dog...scary.

[url=http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-3460_162-57472580/dem-aide-on-bain-if-romney-wasnt-in-charge-who-was/?tag=showDoorLeadStoriesAreaMain;ftnLeadHero]Dem aide on Bain: If Romney wasn't in charge, who was? - CBS News[/url][/quote]


She clowned that guy...lol Romney better get on the phone and hire that woman ASAP.


I'll say this about the whole "Bain Captial" thing. Romney can't have it both ways, he can't claim to be in charge of Bain during the good years, and not in charge when they ship jobs overseas and other businesses go bankrupt. You can't have you cake and eat it to.

Fact of the matter is, if your name is on that SEC document saying you are in charge, you are in charge and are responsible whether you are making decisions or not. It's like she said, either you are lying to the American people or you are lying to the SEC.

I personally believe he was lying to the SEC. Was he running the ship during those 3 years? Most likely not, but had his company been a beacon of light during those years he's claiming to be absent, you can rest assure he would be saying he was in charge.

Re: 2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)
 

[quote=Giantone;924861]Sammy just answer one,

If it wasn't Mitt at the helm,who was it and why did Mitt sign the papers?[/quote]Read the links FD and I posted, all the answers are there. If this is all the Ds have.....saden needs to get his checkbook out.

Since FD & I have answered questions (quite effectively), how about someone answer a question for me:

- What exactly was Obama's role in approving the Solyndra loan when their financial model was $hit and they had a failed IPO? $ 535M in TAXPAYER money stolen from the American people by Obama and his cronies. While you guys are trying to tie Romney to Bain (private corporation) to say he outsourced some jobs, you're OK with Obama funneling hundreds of millions to crooks that steal taxpayer money and cost over 1000 jobs.

[URL="http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/solyndra-e-mails-show-obama-fundraiser-discussed-lobbying-white-house/2011/11/09/gIQAqPsq5M_story.html"]Solyndra e-mails show Obama fundraiser discussed effort to win White House help - The Washington Post[/URL]

[URL="http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/obama-fundraiser-pushed-solyndra-deal-inside/story?id=14691618"]Obama Fundraiser Pushed Solyndra Deal From Inside - ABC News[/URL]

and Solyndra is just the tip of the iceberg:
[URL="http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/forget-bain-obamas-public-equity-record-is-the-real-scandal/2012/05/24/gJQAXnXCnU_story.html"]Forget Bain — Obama’s public-equity record is the real scandal - The Washington Post[/URL]

from the above link: All that cronyism and corruption is catching up with the administration. [URL="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/67444.html"][COLOR=#000080]According to Politico[/COLOR][/URL], “The Energy Department’s inspector general has launched more than 100 criminal investigations” related to the department’s green-energy programs.

Answers?

and so NC Skins, 12th, and saden can't complain about "partisan" links....the links are from left-leaning media outlets.