world

Romney says Obama just trying to 'hang onto power'

117 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2012 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

117 Comments
Login to comment

"Many business-friendly Republicans maintain that creating a better economic climate for top income earners and big corporations produces benefits that spread downward to lower-income workers."

The wealthy have either maintained or increased their economic status. U.S. corporations are sitting on trillions of cash, a record amount. So some valid questions are : Where are the benefits to the economy at this time? If there aren't any benefits, (and it sure doesn't appear that way) Why should the wealthy and corporations receive MORE tax breaks?

5 ( +9 / -4 )

As a non American, I do hope the american people can see through the Romney/Ryan stage show. These are just 2 puppets of the rich and powerful. Had the American comedian George Carlin still been alive, he would have been able to do a show just about these 2.

7 ( +13 / -5 )

@minello7

And yes, since you are a non-American, you really don't understand the dynamics at play here. So Romney and Ryan are NOT the problem, educate yourself and you will see, that Obama and the Democratic party will bring debt and the socialization of America. We are NOT western Europe, nor do we want to have that failed system.

-18 ( +5 / -23 )

The wealthy have either maintained or increased their economic status. U.S. corporations are sitting on trillions of cash, a record amount.So some valid questions are : Where are the benefits to the economy at this time?

See that's the problem, they're sitting on it. Just like how I'm sitting on my money and how my employeers are sitting on theirs. When you have uncertainty in the market nobody wants to risk their money.

And he're why.

Nobody knows what regulations Washington is going to pull out of its hat, we don't know what's happening with Dodd Frank, the the healthcare act is still a foggy mess, I couldn't tell you what tax rates are going to look like in the next 5 years if I had a crystal ball, all this stimulus money is tipping the scales in a million different directions at once, nobody wants to put money in Europe because thats of the flaming car wreck that continent has become, asia doesn't look much better now that China is starting to slow down, and nobody has any idea what on God's green earth is going on.

So yeah...thats why.

Businesses need a reliable set of rules to operate within. Under Clinton, Bush, and now Obama the rules have been changing so sporatically that its hard for even me to keep up with them.

Why should the wealthy and corporations receive MORE tax breaks?

Because the idea of giving the government more money makes me physically ill. I believe the entire tax system needs to be overhauled.

Here's an idea: Junk the corporate income tax. Create a formula to integrate capital gains part of ordinary income (we still want capital gains to have benefits to encourage investment afterall). Institute a flat tax of 15%. Institute a national VAT tax of 5%. Then call it good for a couple years and see how it works. No tax credits, no deductions, no waivers, no returns.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

I am American, Minello7 and I can tell you, the filthy rich in America, just like in most countries do not give a crap about anybody that has less $$$ than they do, and if they make friends etc...it is only to increase their $$$$ etc...if you have a daughter?? Are you gonna let her just elope with some poor dude?? Heck no! Same with Romney, Ryan etc..they like you just said, are smiling puppets of the filthy rich and powerful, the shameful thing is bassfunk says he is American, and he actually believes this kind of bullcrap from smiling puppets of the Tea Party/Republican Party/Rush Limbaugh Ditto heads etc...yes if that black man, Mr.Obama gets out of the office, we white folk will have nothing to worry about (like when idiot Bush, a white dude, sitting there reading picture books to kindergartners let Al Qaeda screw the USA??) and Bush did a great job of screwing the USA and making it a better kinder nation ONLY FOR THE FILTHY RICH!!!

-5 ( +6 / -11 )

Well I am an American and I do clearly see the dynamics: Protect the profit margins and let the "little people" pay for it. To an non-American this must seem very vicous poliltics, and it is. The republicans want business to be able to do the same investments that got us into this mess. They have an Agenda of Amnesia. Spread hate and lies and offer no real solution to the problems. If it took us over 12 years to get into this mess, I'm sure 4 years will not be sufficient to get it resolved. Richard from Michigan U.S.A.

2 ( +7 / -4 )

Why, oh why are some Americans so down on a fair medical service?

5 ( +9 / -3 )

And yes, since you are a non-American, you really don't understand the dynamics at play here. So Romney and Ryan are NOT the problem, educate yourself and you will see, that Obama and the Democratic party will bring debt and the socialization of America. We are NOT western Europe, nor do we want to have that failed system.

I see that Fox News rhetoric and propaganda has no boundaries....Even made it on to JT..LOL. Here is the truth: The last three and half years was about trying to recover from a failed system (brought on by Bush's failed economic and foreign policies), not creating one. If the right winged congress (whose approval rating has dipped below 10% across the board for all parties...by the way) hadn't blocked almost every single piece of legislation (EVEN THE ONES THAT THEY AGREED WITH) that the dems put forward, economic recovery would have gone a lot quicker. But fortunately, Ryan's hypocrisy and twisted budget plans are being exposed for what they are -a ponzi scheme to drastically reduce taxes for the %1, as we speak and completely destroying the political future of the entire republican party. Think I am being superfluous? We'll see..

6 ( +10 / -3 )

. . . And Romney's trying to buy it! Why is this sanctimonious empty shirt so whiny? His party is engaged in massive voter suppression - and The Koch Brothers, Adelson, et al are shoveling massive amounts of millions to attempt to wrest the Presidency from the better choice but he continues to whimper and whine.

The economy is growing - albeit at the pace of the flow of molasses in January.

Considering the depth of the abyss that Dubya dug for us, even a slow recovery is absolutely amazing.

And adding to this the fact that the Republicans have obstructed and stonewalled on every little thing, this President has accomplished miracles without one iota of help from the disloyal opposition.

The 2% are disgusting, greedy swine.

Because their views are based upon how rich a man stands

it seems that money changes minds as fast as it changes hands.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

Mitt McMorman is only after one thing, power. He has not policy really, no vision, no leadership agenda at all. He only wants to be President. That is super clear to anyone who has watched him change his tune almost daily over the last four years pandering to anyone and everyone who can help him become President.

If he does win, he will be a puppet like bush who also did not have the ability to be a leader. Just a loser.

-1 ( +4 / -4 )

The republicans want business to be able to do the same investments that got us into this mess. They have an Agenda of Amnesia. Spread hate and lies and offer no real solution to the problems.

Actually the real problems started when Clinton repealed the Glass-Steagall Act in 1999. Before it was repealed the law prevented banks whose primary pupose was looking after money from being affiliated with heavily leveraged investing companies. After it was replaced by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act banks were encouraged to leverage themselves on low income housing as part of Clintons plan to get more people into houses. Those combined lead to the housing collapse, the fall of CDO's, and every other domnio thats fallen in the past decade.

So far be it from me to tell someone not to rag on Republicans, they deserve it. But lets not pretend the Democrats are any better in any way, shape, or form.

The last three and half years was about trying to recover from a failed system, not creating one. If the right winged congress hadn't blocked almost every single piece of legislation that the dems put forward, economic recovery would have gone a lot quicker.

First off, this is not recovery. This is stagnation with a thin shell of optimism and the worst is yet to come. Nobody has offered any kind of plan to deal with the debt which has skyrocketed in recent years with no measurable pay off (the bailiouts and stimulus packages have largely been proven to have had little to no effect).

Now I'd like to know what exact legislation the Democrats, or the Republicans, have put forward that would do anything to actually address the debt problem. I will happily give my opinion on it. As it stands every piece of legislation that has come to the table from EITHER side of the aisle in the past 2 years has been political hogwash that nobody thought was going to pass anyway.

The economy is growing - albeit at the pace of the flow of molasses in January.

Please do consider my earlier post as an adequate explainaiton of why we are having such a virtually nonexistant 'recovery' especially when compared to some of the massive surge recovery's we've had in the past. The reason is volitility. I'd personally be qute happy if everyone in washington went on vacation for the next four years, give the rest of us a break.

this President has accomplished miracles without one iota of help from the disloyal opposition.

Like what? The healthcare plan written by insurance companies? The stimulus consisting of billions of dollars that is currently unaccounted for? What exactly could be considered a miracle in this?

The 2% are disgusting, greedy swine.

How many of them do you know? Most of the people that I've met in that bracket have been admirable at best and annoying at worst.

Because their views are based upon how rich a man stands

In my travels I believe I've always seen them standing upright...like most of the species.

But hey, don't let me stop your vitrol now. Wouldn't want to talk about anything productive when you can just seethe about 'the man' keeping you down and all.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

And yes, since you are a non-American, you really don't understand the dynamics at play here.

Right. And we don't understand Judo because we're not Japanese.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

@El

the filthy rich in America, just like in most countries do not give a crap about anybody that has less $$$ than they do, and if they make friends etc...it is only to increase their $$$$ etc...if you have a daughter?? Are you gonna let her just elope with some poor dude?? Heck no! Same with Romney, Ryan etc..they like you just said, are smiling puppets of the filthy rich and powerful, the shameful thing is bassfunk says he is American, and he actually believes this kind of bullcrap from smiling puppets of the Tea Party/Republican Party/Rush Limbaugh Ditto heads etc...yes if that black man, Mr.Obama gets out of the office, we white folk will have nothing to worry about (like when idiot Bush, a white dude, sitting there reading picture books to kindergartners let Al Qaeda screw the USA??) and Bush did a great job of screwing the USA and making it a better kinder nation ONLY FOR THE FILTHY RICH!!!

First of all you have no idea of what you are talking about. As leaning thinking Conservative who has a daughter, I could care less who she marries as long as he's not a violent person that's her choice, not mine. Second, I am an American and no, I don't believe any propagated crap that this President and WH spews. I do my own extensive research, you should try it sometime. You say, the Tea party, Repubs, Rush are racists? Say it, El! You know that's a total cop out! Liberal always use the race card as their "tap out" to take the fight out of every argument. You disagree with liberal policies, invoke the race card, that'll shut them up! Who do you think put NObama in the WH? Not Blacks and Not Hispanics, so get off the race card debacle, please! And you want to blame 9/11 on Bush? Not to get off track, but you CAN make the argument that BOTH Clinton and Bush could've done more to trying to prevent 9/11 from happening. Clinton had in 1998 the chance to put a bullet in OBL head and scraped the opportunity. 9/11 happened on Bush's watch, neither is really to blame, both tried to do their best given the circumstances, depending on if you want to take a partisan position on the issue, I do not! Back on track, Under Bush we had a 4.7% unemployment rate, which by Economist standards equate to Full Employment. 2008, the economy started to tank, NObama took the Baton, ran with it, injected a "TRILLION" dollar stimulus into the economy to keep the unemployment rate from falling below 8% and where are we now? 8.3% How did that work out? Oh, and one last thing, El, if there at no more rich people wanting to invest in America and take their money elsewhere to invest (like Dubai) what do you think will happen to our economy then? Who can sustain it? Who will pay your salary? You are NOT getting the bigger picture.

-6 ( +3 / -9 )

@Mirai

I see that Fox News rhetoric and propaganda has no boundaries....Even made it on to JT..LOL. Here is the truth: The last three and half years was about trying to recover from a failed system (brought on by Bush's failed economic and foreign policies), not creating one. If the right winged congress (whose approval rating has dipped below 10% across the board for all parties...by the way) hadn't blocked almost every single piece of legislation (EVEN THE ONES THAT THEY AGREED WITH) that the dems put forward, economic recovery would have gone a lot quicker. But fortunately, Ryan's hypocrisy and twisted budget plans are being exposed for what they are -a ponzi scheme to drastically reduce taxes for the %1, as we speak and completely destroying the political future of the entire republican party. Think I am being superfluous? We'll see..

Please not with the FOX news bashing, it just make you look like you can't hold a rational, FOX is to blame. The Presidency is a performance job, you don't try, we don't award trying, you fail, you step down. NObama is always trying, trying, trying, it's Bush's fault, give him more time, he's trying. The majority of Americans are tired of hearing that. NObama cannot get the car out of the ditch, the unemployment rate is slowly rising. How about keeping the focus where it belongs? Or are you insinuating that all of NObama's failures are because of Bush, therefore, we need to understand 4 years is not enough, so in order for me to screw up...er...I mean, fix the economy(chuckle)I need another 4 years. Ryan's plan has already been debunked, on CNN the other day even when Debbie Wasserman Schultz tried to spin Ryan's budget plan, Wolf Blitzer called Shultz on her lies, WOLF!!! Liberals know, they know that Ryan has a detailed plan that will save, not destroy SS, what do the liberals have? Nothing, but rhetoric.

-6 ( +3 / -9 )

@the Question

Good points

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Obama is a committed Marxist intent on destroying America's capitalist economy in order solidify the control of Americas Socialist (formerly the Democratic) Party. Most people do not understand that the Socialist program was already on the move as early as 2007 under a Democratic Congress with a President (Bush) who did not veto any of their initiatives. The financial collapse was not the result of lack of regulation but rather inept regulators who did not do their job, giving them more power will not prevent reoccurrence. So of course Obama wants to hold on to power, it is all he has pursued his whole life.

-6 ( +4 / -11 )

@Bass4funk

And yes, since you are a non-American, you really don't understand the dynamics at play here. ..

I have often found that non-Americans understand the politics and geography of the US better than most Americans.

5 ( +10 / -4 )

@bruin

Maybe bass was using the term "non-American" in the same way as the Tea Party knuckle-draggers use it about Obama ;)

1 ( +4 / -3 )

America is so divided and the campaign rhetoric is at all time low. Thanks to divider in chief. If Obama is so desperate for creating jobs for Americans same as maintain his own job, there would not be consistency over 8% unemployment, and piling biggest deficit. He broke his promises for the numbers do not lie; cause his program has not working. America needs a fresh new start to deal with serious problems including deficit and entitlement. Cheers.

-5 ( +3 / -9 )

Having read the comments , me I just don't like politicians,period. It doesn't matter your nationality, politics and politicians are all the same. Here is a clip I think puts things in perspective about politicians worldwide. http://youtu.be/acLW1vFO-2Q enjoy ,I did.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

@luca

Maybe bass was using the term "non-American" in the same way as the Tea Party knuckle-draggers use it about Obama ;)

...or the way Obama refers to Romney as "Romneyhood"

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

@bruin

I have often found that non-Americans understand the politics and geography of the US better than most Americans.

Really, I have often, actually mostly found quite the opposite.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

I have cousins who are sworn Republicans, they complain that just some people here that Mr.Obama is a Marxist etc...and I as them what do they dislike so much about Mr.Obama and his policies, I will never forget one of my cousins in California going and on about health care reform, he was angry that he was being forced to cover the health insurance for HIS WORKERS?? If i am not mistaken, under Mr.Obama his plan would pay half?? And one of my RICH cousins, whose family immigrated from Mexico feels the pain under Marxism under President Obama. I asked my cousin, who calls himself a Christian, a preacher, what would JESUS CHRIST think about giving your workers minimum wage salaries, when they deserve more working in the hot son, cold rain etc..and not caring if they have ANY KIND OF HEALTH BENEFITS?? So, Mitt Romney and all of these so called religious folk are just a bunch of GREEDY HYPOCRITES in my eyes, and we all know what

-7 ( +3 / -10 )

oops, Jesus Christ would think about all of these filthy rich, greedy folk who are never satisfied and do not care about their workers, and only about $$$$$$. Just hypocrites dressed in clothing of they holier than though BS.

-7 ( +2 / -9 )

I almost hope these two clowns win just so the average Joe American can see how bad it can really get.

1 ( +3 / -1 )

But then I guess the Republicans will just blame everything on the mismanagement of the Obama Administration and round and round the wheel will turn.

1 ( +4 / -2 )

Your Republicans are promoting an idea Voting Right is a previledge.

Romney/Ryan Republicans are taking a RIGHT to VOTE away from voters living in "Swing" states. PA has just passed a Bill today requiring a NEW photo ID to vote for this election. On 8/15 today, I declare that the Republican won this election. Very sad.

This is unconstitutional and more than likely this bill will be reversed but not before this election. Many cannot afford $20 for a NEW photo ID today.The $20 will be spent for food. Many seniors do not drive or cannot drive.

Why can't they just use current photo ID for this election? The Republicans are using every trick on book to win.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

We are NOT western Europe, nor do we want to have that failed system.

Bass4funk - You mean those systems that leave the US in the dust as far as standard of living every year?

8 ( +10 / -1 )

Romney talks like Obama is some despot.The U.S. has a democratic,electoral system. The only clinging is Romney in trying to remain viable and relevant which he's not.

2 ( +6 / -3 )

If the outcomes of America's elections didn't so greatly effect the rest of the world I wouldn't really be bothered.

It is quite frightening the lengths the republicans seem to be going to this time so that they can ensure that they will emerge on top. I hope everyone can see through it.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

But then I guess the Republicans will just blame everything on the mismanagement of the Obama Administration and round and round the wheel will turn.

No, usually we leave the blame game to the liberals, they practically invented it?

-9 ( +2 / -11 )

@horse

You mean those systems that leave the US in the dust as far as standard of living every year?

Yes, the same ones that are virtually bankrupt, blaming the government for running out of money,that can't pay for their huge socialist, out of control pensions, 6 weeks vacations and 5 hour, 4 day a week work days. Now panicking because the well is becoming dry from taking other peoples money. Exactly, that same system.

-8 ( +1 / -9 )

What an absolutley moronic statement. I really despair for the quality of political debate and discourse in the States (well actually, pretty much anywhere these days).

1 ( +2 / -1 )

@global

Romney/Ryan Republicans are taking a RIGHT to VOTE away from voters living in "Swing" states. PA has just passed a Bill today requiring a NEW photo ID to vote for this election. On 8/15 today, I declare that the Republican won this election. Very sad.

This is unconstitutional and more than likely this bill will be reversed but not before this election. Many cannot afford $20 for a NEW photo ID today.The $20 will be spent for food. Many seniors do not drive or cannot drive.

Why can't they just use current photo ID for this election? Because they are easier to fabricate.

The Republicans are using every trick on book to win. No, that's Obama and the party of lies. There, I fixed it for you.

Global, how is it unconstitutional? Do you know how rampant voter fraud is, illegal voting, re- registering dead votes? So what's wrong with it? You want anyone to vote at anytime regardless of who they are, where they come from, just as long as they vote Democratic, right. If this bill were passed by the Dems, I honestly think you guys wouldn't have a problem with it. While you're at it, let's open our borders to EVERYONE, regardless of their history. Even Mexico has a tighter immigration law than the US, but we have a revolving door policy?!

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

What an absolutley moronic statement. I really despair for the quality of political debate and discourse in the States (well actually, pretty much anywhere these days)

As do I. Back in the day, you could agree to disagree without the vitriol and the name calling, but now both sides can't stand each other and both have said scandalous things, however, liberals take name calling to a different level, that's the problem! They can't just get to the point, they need to insult the person they don't like. That's the sad reality of today's politics.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

@crac

Romney talks like Obama is some despot.The U.S. has a democratic,electoral system. The only clinging is Romney in trying to remain viable and relevant which he's not.

Yeah, that WOULD be every Liberals wishful thinking, but it is just that, wishful thinking.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

One other observation. Saying that the "western European system" (whatever that might be, althiough think it means social welfare, healthcare provision, gun control, greater state involvement in the economy for a start) is broken or worse than the US one ignores a number of facts US Govt is deeply involved in the economy with bailouts, tariffs,QE and so on. US is no longer the land of the free with much greater state intrusion in people's private lives and much greater security measures which interfere with citizens in all sorts of ways. Gun crime - 'nuff said. Level of poverty among the bottom 20% in the US way worse than anything in Western Europe - and n ot much hope of these poor ever sharing in the American dream.

Neither Obama nor Romney is going to change any of these things - ergo this election is all gloss and no substance. Name calling, personal attacks and misinformation are all that these 2 muppets have to resort to.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

bass4funk: " Say it, El! You know that's a total cop out! Liberal always use the race card as their "tap out" to take the fight out of every argument."

Says a guy who starts his first comment on the thread by saying someone is not American and therefore has less knowledge on the issue.

You guys really don't like it when what you have been dishing out for ages comes back at you, do you? Romney has ZERO plans, and cannot even spell them out despite claiming he will create miracles, and all he does is attack Obama. The guy is clueless and would do more harm, especially with that moron Ryan, than even GWB did to the US. But hey, he'll tell you his plans "after he is elected".

3 ( +4 / -1 )

minello7Aug. 16, 2012 - 08:48AM JST : As a non American, I do hope the american people can see through the Romney/Ryan stage show. These are just 2 puppets of the rich and powerful.

If you are going to make a statement like that about Romney and Ryan then apply it to Obama too. Otherwise it shows that you are being prejudiced and lack credibility.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

If the outcomes of America's elections didn't so greatly effect the rest of the world I wouldn't really be bothered. It is quite frightening the lengths the republicans seem to be going to this time so that they can ensure that they will emerge on top. I hope everyone can see through it.

So you are saying that if the US were to follow the Western European socialist model, heavy entitlements is the way to go then all will be better off. Is that what you are telling me????

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Romney sounds desperate. His choice of Ryan is not working out as he'd hoped - the small bounce in the polls has already begun dissipating as voters get to know him - just as they are by Romney.

It must be difficult for a guy so used to the ability to purchase anything to not be able to purchase this election, so his frustration is understandable. I hope he is able to contain himself through this rejection and not say things that will embarrass America too much; it is one thing when these comments come from GOP fringers but entirely another when they come from the candidate himself.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

the filthy rich in America, just like in most countries do not give a crap about anybody that has less $$$ than they do, and if they make friends etc..

That is just plain wrong. I quote the Chronicle of Philanthropy:

America's top 50 donors gave a total of $10.4-billion in 2011, up from $3.3-billion the previous year, according to a Chronicle study. One big bequest boosted the total significantly; excluding that gift, the philanthropists on The Chronicle's list of the most generous Americans contributed $4.4-billion.

To read where the "filthy rich" are giving their money :

http://philanthropy.com/article/America-s-Wealthy-Made-More/130625/

2 ( +2 / -1 )

:Global, how is it unconstitutional? Do you know how rampant voter fraud is, illegal voting, re- registering dead votes? So what's wrong with it? You want anyone to vote at anytime regardless of who they are, where they come from, just as long as they vote Democratic, right. If this bill were passed by the Dems, I honestly think you guys wouldn't have a problem with it. While you're at it, let's open our borders to EVERYONE, regardless of their history. Even Mexico has a tighter immigration law than the US, but we have a revolving door policy?!

bass4funk, please find it your own and tell me what it means.

Again you are not carefully reading my post. Voters already have a photo ID for driving license. Thats good enough for voting in Colorado. We are very civilized.

My question to you is why another PHOTO ID at DMV for this election? When police stop you, you need to show a regular driving license with photo id, that is okay with many states. That is a valid paper. Why now?

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Bass, you say: So you are saying that if the US were to follow the Western European socialist model, heavy entitlements is the way to go then all will be better off. Is that what you are telling me????

It is arguable that many of the US' current budget provblems come from welfare systems which pay for medical treatment, provide food stamps, subsidise industries (e.g. the motor industry), subsidide agricultural production and so on. The myth that the US doesn't operate many of these (what you call) socialist mechanisms is just plain wrong.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

globalwatcherAug. 16, 2012 - 12:58PM JST : PA has just passed a Bill today requiring a NEW photo ID to vote for this election. On 8/15 today, I declare that the Republican won this election. Very sad.

Where did it say that the bill passed required "NEW photo ID to vote for this election?" The bill required a proper ID to vote.

This is unconstitutional and more than likely this bill will be reversed but not before this election. Many cannot afford $20 for a NEW photo ID today.The $20 will be spent for food. Many seniors do not drive or cannot drive.

If you feel that this is unconstitutional then a lot of people feel that requiring them to buy health insurance is unconstitutional. Some people can not afford to buy health insurance even if they are making a little more than the poverty line. What's more expensive a $20 ID good for 7 years depending on the state vs paying $350 (subject to change) for a single person every month for health insurance. Under Obama's Affordable Care Act it is requiring poor people to buy health insurance unless they meet the poverty line then their health insurance gets a tax break (credit).

According to you, "Many cannot afford $20 for a NEW photo ID today.The $20 will be spent for food." It's a one time fee of $20 good for 7 years depending on the state. Alcohol or cigarettes cost more than the $20 ID which an ID is required to purchase alcohol or cigarettes.

According to you, "Many seniors do not drive or cannot drive." What happened to friends, family member, or a group driving them?

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

It's a one time fee of $20 good for 7 years depending on the state.

This is just an example in regards to how long the ID is good for. PA may have it valid for a shorter period of time or longer period of time.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Laguna: "Romney sounds desperate. His choice of Ryan is not working out as he'd hoped - the small bounce in the polls has already begun dissipating as voters get to know him - just as they are by Romney."

Not only that, Romney is AVOIDING Ryan, and not bringing him to some of the states he's campaigning in because he knows the fallout that Ryan's cutting Medicare has. In trying to shore up votes by taking on Ryan, the guy is doing a lousy job of improving his reputation.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

zenkanAug. 16, 2012 - 10:07AM JST : Why, oh why are some Americans so down on a fair medical service?

The Affordable Care Act is not about controlling cost or healthcare quality it is about everyone buying health insurance. Those two things are very different from one another.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

The Affordable Care Act is not about controlling cost or healthcare quality it is about everyone buying health insurance.

That is not entirely true. Preventive healthcare (which being insured encourages) is widely known to be more cost-effective than treating acute cases. Also, hospitals will be relieved of the burden of caring for the uninsured (something Reagan of all people mandated); in place of this mandate, hospitals will have to accept a $770 billion cut in Medicare reimbursements over a decade. For hospitals, this should roughly equal out. Interestingly, Ryan's budget keeps the $770 billion cut while still requiring hospitals to treat the uninsured for free, which is one reason the hospital industry is not keen on Ryan at all.

More importantly, the ACA puts medicine in America on the road towards rewarding results, not simple services. More work clearly needs to be done in this area, but rewarding healthcare providers for keeping patients healthy rather than for simply the number of procedures they perform is a sure long-term method for reducing healthcare costs.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

hospitals will have to accept a $770 billion cut in Medicare reimbursements over a decade.

Obama took the money Seniors paid into the system that they expected to provide them healthcare in their old age and put it into funding Obamacare instead. He raided the fund and has changed the Medicare system using Seniors citizens money.

Ryan's budget keeps the $770 billion cut while still requiring hospitals to treat the uninsured for free, which is one reason the hospital industry is not keen on Ryan at all.

Ryan is one rare politician that actually deals with budget realities and not budget fantasies. His budget had to keep the 700 billion gutting of the system to fund Obamacare in his budget. It's the law of the land and until it is repealed it is now part of the Federal budget and has to be addressed in any budget that is based on current fiscal reality.

I suppose he could just assume that it would be repealed and base his budget on the fantasy that it will be restored to Medicare, as this is exactly the trick that Obama did with his budget proposals. He bases his budgets it on the presumption that the Bush tax rates will expire and uses those fantasy numbers for his federal budget incoming revenue baselines. The Bush tax rates have been extended over and over again, to base a budget on the hope that tax rates will go up after all the previous levels is nothing more than smoke and mirrors and the budget Obama proposes is nothing more than future fantasy and not fiscal reality.

-4 ( +1 / -6 )

Please not with the FOX news bashing

They and the people who believe the rubbish that they spew deserve to be bashed. Fox is a right wing propaganda mill.

The Presidency is a performance job, you don't try, we don't award trying, you fail, you step down. NObama is always trying, trying, trying, it's Bush's fault, give him more time, he's trying.

The president cannot write and pass legislation on his own (otherwise it would be a dictatorship) He has to rely on congress to pass the legislation into. However, congress is bought by corporation and so corrupt, that Obama literally cannot pass any economy stimulating legislation. This is the BIGGEST problem with the government right now. Otherwise, Obama wouldn't be just "trying", he'd be getting things done.

the unemployment rate is slowly rising

Not quite...Unemployment actually went down in July, but since there was an increase in the number of people who are looking for jobs (which is a good thing) the percent unemployed went up...(you should read more into this instead of just looking into the percentage and making assumptions.

they know that Ryan has a detailed plan that will save, not destroy SS, what do the liberals have?

Paul Ryan is the BIGGEST hypocrite when it comes to SS. He actually funded his whole college education on his father's SS payment after he died, even though he didn't need to. Now he wants to cut the very program that he used to get through college. Sure, what's good for him is good for him only, and no one else (sounds like Ayn Rand philosophy). Moreover, he constantly criticizes Obama's health care act claiming that it "steals" $700M from medicare (sounds familiar? It should because it's a Fox News and republican talking point). In actuality, while the health care law reduces the amount of future spending growth in Medicare, the law doesn't actually cut Medicare. Savings come from reducing money that goes to private insurers who provide Medicare Advantage programs, among other things.

As an additional not to his hypocrisy, Ryan's plan DOES actually cut 700 Billion dollars from Medicare, which Romney is trying to distance himself from after all of the attack ads against the Affordable Health Care Act aka obamacare claiming that Obama "stole" 700 billion dollars from Medicare.

Lastly, it seems that there are a quite a few republicans who are NOT happy about Ryan and are going so far to say that the may have cost Romney the election. Example:

“I think it’s a very bold choice. And an exciting and interesting pick. It’s going to elevate the campaign into a debate over big ideas. It means Romney-Ryan can run on principles and provide some real direction and vision for the Republican Party. And probably lose. Maybe big,” said former President George W. Bush senior adviser Mark McKinnon.

“Very not helpful down ballot — very,” said one top Republican consultant.

“This is the day the music died,” one Republican operative involved in 2012 races said after the rollout. The operative said that every House candidate now is racing to get ahead of this issue.

“He just doesn’t seem like he can step into the job on Day One,” said the strategist, who professed himself a Ryan fan.

“Whether or not they [the Romney campaign] want to say that they have their own plan on Day One, or whatever they’re doing, it doesn’t change the reality of them having to own the Ryan plan. How is that in the wheelhouse of creating jobs?” added a GOP consultant.

2 ( +4 / -1 )

@global

Voters already have a photo ID for driving license. Thats good enough for voting in Colorado. We are very civilized.

I never said, you were not civilized. Just that liberals are quite often misguided.

My question to you is why another PHOTO ID at DMV for this election? When police stop you, you need to show a regular driving license with photo id, that is okay with many states. That is a valid paper. Why now?

I already explained that to you, now who is not reading who's post properly?

@Wakarimasen

The myth that the US doesn't operate many of these (what you call) socialist mechanisms is just plain wrong.

To a small point you are right, but NOT on a massive scale and now it's gotten to a point where you choices and rights being slowly eroded by a President that wants to create a giant government apparatus. Socialism on steroids.

@smith

"Romney sounds desperate. His choice of Ryan is not working out as he'd hoped - the small bounce in the polls has already begun dissipating as voters get to know him - just as they are by Romney."

Again, not true. One basic reason is Romney's campaign funds cannot be touched until he's the official nominee after Aug. 30th, he can use his campaign funds and counter-attack the Obama machine. Right now it's a waiting game. Polls are not always consistent and Romney has a very positive outlook.

Not only that, Romney is AVOIDING Ryan, and not bringing him to some of the states he's campaigning in because he knows the fallout that Ryan's cutting Medicare has. In trying to shore up votes by taking on Ryan, the guy is doing a lousy job of improving his reputation.

How can you say that when Obama cut and gutted 718 billion dollars from medicare!!? Your President-BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA in trying to score votes and to cover this new Obamacare, once Ryan clarifies this to the American people, they will be able to see and realize for themselves who is really looking out for the elderly.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Yes, the same ones that are virtually bankrupt, blaming the government for running out of money,that can't pay for their huge socialist, out of control pensions

You may be cherry picking here. Those socialist countries such as Germany, Norway, Sweden, and Denmark should be considered too. These countries are all in better fiscal shape than the US, in terms of national debt, per capita national debt, trade deficits and other economic measurements.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

@bruin

You may be cherry picking here. Those socialist countries such as Germany, Norway, Sweden, and Denmark should be considered too. These countries are all in better fiscal shape than the US, in terms of national debt, per capita national debt, trade deficits and other economic measurements.

As I am aware of that, which is the reason why I never mentioned that. But the US is not the above mentioned countries. Which practiced a more stricter form of financial discipline. Where the US for years has not! And continues to not practice it. There is absolutely NO WAY on God's green Earth that we can have a Socialized system that will work on that kind of massive scale. 350+ million people and not to mention how many undocumented people that are residing in the states illegally. It will not happen. We don't have the money, pure and simple.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Do you know how rampant voter fraud is, illegal voting, re- registering dead votes?

A major probe by the Justice Department between 2002 and 2007 failed to prosecute a single person for going to the polls and impersonating an eligible voter, which the anti-fraud laws are supposedly designed to stop. Out of the 300 million votes cast in that period, federal prosecutors convicted only 86 people for voter fraud – and many of the cases involved immigrants and former felons who were simply unaware of their ineligibility. A much-hyped investigation in Wisconsin, meanwhile, led to the prosecution of only .0007 percent of the local electorate for alleged voter fraud. "Our democracy is under siege from an enemy so small it could be hiding anywhere," joked Stephen Colbert. A 2007 report by the Brennan Center for Justice, a leading advocate for voting rights at the New York University School of Law, quantified the problem in stark terms. "It is more likely that an individual will be struck by lightning," the report calculated, "than that he will impersonate another voter at the polls."

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-gop-war-on-voting-20110830#ixzz23h9gJHUS

4 ( +4 / -0 )

How can you say that when Obama cut and gutted 718 billion dollars from medicare!!?

Every time I read how Obama took 7xx Billion dollars from Medicare to fund the Affordable Health Care Act, it makes me giggle.

Because it's totally unfounded and untrue. (polifact.com) Because its a republican talking point that the right wingers are trying into simple minds of their ditto head followers they would repeat over and over again in chat rooms and in comment sections on news sites. Because the number is never exact and ranges from 500 to 750 Billion dollars...the actual number is 716 Billion (according to Politifact.com) and doesn't take money out of medicare AT ALL. (according to factcheck.org)...and it doesn't add to the deficit either (another republican talking point. )
2 ( +3 / -1 )

Thanks for the link, billyshears. It is clear that "voter fraud" has nothing to do with GOP schemes to make voting difficult for certain groups of people.

It is a clear sign of GOP desperation; if they can't buy the election, they will steal it.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Heh, Mitt's thrown Florida by picking Ryan.

The GOP campaign and chances at election victory are gasping for air.

Any chance of a narrow victory are now toast, as are Ryan (and Romney).

Ryan was possibly the worst pick of the bunch - even the Republican strategists are picking up on this.

The GOP needs to win a good third of the Hispanic vote to win.

They've now blown that.

They would have given themselves a far better chance by being competitive in Florida.

They've gone and blown that too.

At first I thought Mitt might have been a little smarter than the average conservative candidate.

Turns out I was wrong - he's screwed up and - amazingly - it wasn't an accident.

Mitt only barely managed to win the primaries after battling possibly the worst field of candidates in history.  That pretty much says it all.

Mitt has just blown the election for the GOP.

Heh, Mitt's thrown Florida by picking Ryan.

The GOP campaign and chances at election victory are gasping for air.

Any chance of a narrow victory are now toast, as are Ryan (and Romney).

Ryan was possibly the worst pick of the bunch - even the Republican strategists are picking up on this.

The GOP needs to win a good third of the Hispanic vote to win.

They've now blown that.

They would have given themselves a far better chance by being competitive in Florida.

They've gone and blown that too.

At first I thought Mitt might have been a little smarter than the average conservative candidate.

Turns out I was wrong - he's screwed up and - amazingly - it wasn't an accident.

Mitt only barely managed to win the primaries after battling possibly the worst field of candidates in history.  That pretty much says it all.

Mitt has just blown the election for the GOP.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

LagunaAug. 16, 2012 - 04:12PM JST : That is not entirely true. Preventive healthcare (which being insured encourages) is widely known to be more cost-effective than treating acute cases. Also, hospitals will be relieved of the burden of caring for the uninsured (something Reagan of all people mandated); in place of this mandate, hospitals will have to accept a $770 billion cut in Medicare reimbursements over a decade. For hospitals, this should roughly equal out. Interestingly, Ryan's budget keeps the $770 billion cut while still requiring hospitals to treat the uninsured for free, which is one reason the hospital industry is not keen on Ryan at all.

The $770 billion medicare cut have nothing to do with people who work full-time and have health insurance through their employers. It has nothing to do with mandating people buying health insurance who are not subsidized by the governent. The ACA have not done away with lowering the health insurance premium rather it has and continue to go up. The taxpayers are tripple dipping when it comes to paying for healthcare like medicare, medicaid, and their own health insurance.

The uninsured and the poor will be required to buy health insurance through the mandate of the ACA. Everyone will pay for healthcare one way or another.

Preventive care applies to a few things only.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Heh, Mitt's thrown Florida by picking Ryan.

The GOP campaign and chances at election victory are gasping for air.

Any chance of a narrow victory are now toast, as are Ryan (and Romney).

Ryan was possibly the worst pick of the bunch - even the Republican strategists are picking up on this.

The GOP needs to win a good third of the Hispanic vote to win.

They've now blown that.

They would have given themselves a far better chance by being competitive in Florida.

They've gone and blown that too.

At first I thought Mitt might have been a little smarter than the average conservative candidate.

Turns out I was wrong - he's screwed up and - amazingly - it wasn't an accident.

Mitt only barely managed to win the primaries after battling possibly the worst field of candidates in history.  That pretty much says it all.

Mitt has just blown the election for the GOP.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

bass4funk. No, the U.S. does not have the money. The U.S. only has a lot of money when it is time to bomb and occupy some middle eastern country or to develop some new weapons technology. Then it has trillions. But for a social program? Never a dime to spare.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

@Mirai

They and the people who believe the rubbish that they spew deserve to be bashed. Fox is a right wing propaganda mill.

Just because you don't like it and it is watched by the majority of Americans doesn't mean it is right wing, just because you say it is. -Sorry.

The president cannot write and pass legislation on his own (otherwise it would be a dictatorship) He has to rely on congress to pass the legislation into. However, congress is bought by corporation and so corrupt, that Obama literally cannot pass any economy stimulating legislation. This is the BIGGEST problem with the government right now. Otherwise, Obama wouldn't be just "trying", he'd be getting things done.

No, he cannot, yet a few times he tried to threaten to use executive order to bypass congress. Obama swept into office on a magic carpet and had everything, the WH, the House and the Senate, the Repubs were marginalized and couldn't even get a wedgie through and what did he do in those first 2 years....Nothing, this is why 2010 Obama got a shellacking, he had a GREEN light and just spent like a drunken sailor and now that the Repubs are in, of course they will not give this President a blank check, that ain't gonna happen and rightfully so, Dems will dig their heels on some bills as will Repubs, so expect to see a lot of gridlock for awhile. And don't give me that BS, "he's trying" garbage! You don't try when you are in the Presidency, you do or you fail, he himself said, if he can't get the job done, bring done the unemployment, then he should be a one term President and I totally wholeheartedly agree with him (for once)

Not quite...Unemployment actually went down in July, but since there was an increase in the number of people who are looking for jobs (which is a good thing) the percent unemployed went up...(you should read more into this instead of just looking into the percentage and making assumptions.

Uh, uh, uh, wrong again! Unemployment went down because many people took themselves out of the job market, which means not looking or giving up. Unemployment for Blacks is through the roof and for Hispanics as well. Never have Blacks or Hispanics suffered financially so bad as with this President. This is why Obama sends Biden to speak at the NAACP gathering because he knows, he would get spanked.

http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/unemployment-going-up-in-black-community-under-obama/question-2189975/

http://exposethemedia.com/2011/06/21/michelle-bachman-obama-has-failed-the-african-american-and-hispanic-communities/

U.S. payrolls expanded by just 80,000 net jobs in June keeping the unemployment rate flat at 8.2 percent, new data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics shows.

The private sector only expanded by some 84,000 positions.

Economists polled by Bloomberg had forecast a gain of 100,000 positions during the month, with private payrolls advancing 106,000.

Adding further pressure to President Obama heading into the election, Hispanic and Latino unemployment remained essentially unchanged at 11.0 percent.

The unemployment rate for white men and women was unchanged at 7.4 percent, while 184,000 more black American’s went without a job in June, for an unemployment rate of 14.4 percent.

Paul Ryan is the BIGGEST hypocrite when it comes to SS. He actually funded his whole college education on his father's SS payment after he died, even though he didn't need to. Now he wants to cut the very program that he used to get through college. Sure, what's good for him is good for him only, and no one else (sounds like Ayn Rand philosophy). Moreover, he constantly criticizes Obama's health care act claiming that it "steals" $700M from medicare (sounds familiar? It should because it's a Fox News and republican talking point). In actuality, while the health care law reduces the amount of future spending growth in Medicare, the law doesn't actually cut Medicare. Savings come from reducing money that goes to private insurers who provide Medicare Advantage programs, among other things. As an additional not to his hypocrisy, Ryan's plan DOES actually cut 700 Billion dollars from Medicare, which Romney is trying to distance himself from after all of the attack ads against the Affordable Health Care Act aka obamacare claiming that Obama "stole" 700 billion dollars from Medicare.

Another typical, typical liberal Ueber-spin to the max! Again, sorry, Mirai!

http://www.forbes.com/sites/aroy/2012/08/16/fact-checking-the-obama-campaigns-defense-of-its-716-billion-cut-to-medicare/

Just because some Conservatives are not happy with the Ryan pick doesn't necessarily mean that he is A BAD choice. Erskine Bowles former "Clinton Chief of staff", thought Ryan is a genius when it comes to crunching numbers. When a Liberal admits that a rival conservative is good, you know he/she means it. Bottom line is, this President is a spend all, do nothing President. The one thing I will give Obama credit for is how fast he can rack up our debt, day by day. No one can beat him at that, on that part, he takes the golden prize!

-4 ( +1 / -6 )

@Mirai

Every time I read how Obama took 7xx Billion dollars from Medicare to fund the Affordable Health Care Act, it makes me giggle.

Because it's totally unfounded and untrue. (polifact.com) Because its a republican talking point that the right wingers are trying into simple minds of their ditto head followers they would repeat over and over again in chat rooms and in comment sections on news sites. Because the number is never exact and ranges from 500 to 750 Billion dollars...the actual number is 716 Billion (according to Politifact.com) and doesn't take money out of medicare AT ALL. (according to factcheck.org)...and it doesn't add to the deficit either (another republican talking point. )

I thought you might try to spin it, so I made sure to back it up. ;-) Seeing is believing. Giggle!

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Every time I read how Obama took 7xx Billion dollars from Medicare to fund the Affordable Health Care Act, it makes me giggle.

You can not only read it and can also watch the video at the link.

As Democrats attack Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan for their proposals regarding Medicare, Republicans are circulating this clip from a November 9, 2009 interview we had with President Obama in which he not only acknowledged that one third of his health care bill was paid for by cuts to Medicare, but that he would veto attempts to undo those cuts.

Watch the video below. The exchange on Medicare occurs at 2:15:

TAPPER: One of the concerns about health care and how you pay for it — one third of the funding comes from cuts to Medicare.

PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: “Right.

TAPPER: A lot of times, as you know, what happens in Congress is somebody will do something bold and then Congress, close to election season, will undo it.

OBAMA: Right.

TAPPER: You saw that with the ‘doc fix.’

OBAMA: Right.

TAPPER: Are you willing to pledge that whatever cuts in Medicare are being made to fund health insurance, one third of it, that you will veto anything that tries to undo that?

OBAMA: Yes. I actually have said that it is important for us to make sure this thing is deficit neutral, without tricks. I said I wouldn’t sign a bill that didn’t meet that criteria

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/08/president-obama-in-2009-pledged-to-veto-attempts-to-undo-medicare-cuts/

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

@Laguna

It is a clear sign of GOP desperation; if they can't buy the election, they will steal it.

Hmm, the Obama camp Calling Romney "a Tax Cheat, a Bigot, a Murderer, Felon and now Enslaver?" If that's not desperation, then I don't know what is!

-4 ( +1 / -6 )

Gee, sailwind - Do you now suddenly support Obama? What he said in the transcript you provided makes a lot of sense.

The ACA will basically make moot the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act, which requires hospitals to treat the uninsured free of charge. This will save the care providers billions and allow them to provide the same level of Medicare treatment at a lower cost. Their net revenue/expense mix will remain the same, even with the reimbursement cuts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_Medical_Treatment_and_Active_Labor_Act

This was precisely the cornerstone of the conservative argument for an insurance mandate back when conservatives made occasional sense.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

No, the U.S. does not have the money. The U.S. only has a lot of money when it is time to bomb and occupy some middle eastern country or to develop some new weapons technology. Then it has trillions. But for a social program? Never a dime to spare.

It's called Military budget. But thanks to Obama, we really don't have much of that, since he desperately needs to allocate and juggle the budgets to pay for these entitlement programs, money is draining fast and he doesn't know where else to take it, but he, he can always raise taxes. Taxes he promised he wasn't going to raise. There 's your dime.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

Gee, sailwind -Do you now suddenly support Obama?

No.

What he said in the transcript you provided makes a lot of sense.

If you want to fund a boondoogle like Obamacare by raiding Medicare to the tune of 716 billion dollars it would make a lot of sense.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

@Sushi, your posts always give me a chuckle.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

...a Tax Cheat, a Bigot, a Murderer, Felon and now Enslaver...

Wow, from Willy Horton through swiftboating to birtherism - you must have drawn that list straight from the GOP slander handbook! It may not be pretty, but at least for once it is not one-sided.

Your boy's mistake, though, bass, is that he's letting it get to him. Voters already know him as "the man who fired your dad," and he is aware of that, which is why he made such efforts (however futile) to appear approachable. A clearly peeved Mitt is even less attractive to voters than his normal wooden self.

Now, about those taxes....

1 ( +3 / -1 )

It's Obama's fault. It's Bush's fault. Really? Has no one paid any attention at all to what's happened in this country the past 7 years?

If an iota of argument can be made as to 'who's' fault it is, it would be Bush. But it's not even credible in my opinion.

What brought America to it's financial knees, is 1. Investors. 2. The banks and mortgage companies. 3. Wall street. 4. The feeble minded Americans who thought it would be a great idea to buy a house at prices so inflated they'd need twice thier current pay to even remotely afford the homes they bought.

It started with home prices being driven up, in 2005 mostly by investors buying up homes in states where housing prices were comparatively cheap. They were buying up everything in sight in these states. Then flipping them for a crazy profit. As real estate goes goes, sold houses effects the 'prices' of other homes in the neighborhood. So all the other homes start going up in 'inflated' value. This keeps going until it got to the point where investers could only sell to investors. However they were too expensive for the average Joe to buy anymore. Many cities started reporting shortages of people applying for police, fire, and governmental jobs because they couldn't afford to buy, or rent homes in the areas they would have to move too. This is a problem for banks and mtg companies as they're not selling enough loans. So the banks had a great idea. Let's not ask for any down payment. Let's not even bother checking credit, or even verifying employment. The banks also thought it would be a great idea to help sell these homes by getting everyone "qualified" by selling them arms, interest only, and low cost balloon payment types of loans. The banks and mtg companies new full well this wasn't going to last. I even saw the problem coming. I had no idea as to the extreme finanical impact it would have, but I knew the prices homes were selling at was not sustainable. Now, almost anyone could qualify for a 450k loan. This runs rampant across the states. However, the state governments are loving it. They've more than doubled "housing sales tax" revenue income, with the houses selling at 60% or higher increase in sales, and people going nuts buying homes, because they couldn't qualify before. The government of course builds this newfound revenue increase into their budgets.. State government gets bigger. Developers start going nuts, building new homes to cash in on the freefor all. Many new employees hired to help in the mass building of homes. However, in 2008 as prices leveled, when the 2-3 year arms and ballons start coming due, the banks and mtg companies noted the payment issues immediately. People that were easily making payments of 900.00 - 1200.00 a month, all of a sudden had to start paying 2700 - 4000.00 a month. They can't do it. The writing was on the wall. It was time to sell. So banks and mtg companies started to package these ill fated loans, mixed in with many 'good' investment schemes, and sold them to the powers that be in New York. Wall street. The banks and mtg companies couldn't sell these things fast enough. Wall street is now trading these worthless loans with the rest of the finacial investment world including the feds. , hiding as deeply as possibly into the profiles of "good" investments as possible. Yes, wall street figured it out quickly too. Now, almost every credible financial instituion in the country has an ugly share of these bad loans. Talk about 'trickle down economics", this was the grand daddy of them all, as people started losing homes, businesses started letting go of employees, because people couldn't afford to buy much at all anymore. People are losing jobs left and right. Governments, all of sudden, aren't getting these incredible home sales revenue anymore, and as well burning through unemployment funds faster than any other time in history. So government has to start letting go of employees. The feds are also now losing revenue in tax funding because of the job loses, business losses, (how many major companies have gone by the wayside during this time?) 10's of thousands of businesses failed during this time. The stocks of course start crashing, almost 6000 points because of this, devaluing companies out of business. This in turn, came to be the financial crises that American is now in. States are in financial trouble almost having to consider bankruptcy, the banks and mtg companies and all the other "suckers" that bought the bad loans are also falling apart losing because so much revenue is now disappearing, the jobs keep going away, businesses start failing from loss of sales due to the lost jobs and everyone else that does have a job is scared to death to spend a dime they don't have to.

What did Bush have to do with this? What did Obama have to do with this? Nothing. It's not Bushes or Obamas fault. And yet of course it's Obama's mantra to throw his inability to bring on a recovery on the "Bush administration". As if Bush had anthing to do with housing meltdown. The argument that I see here about how "republicans" fought Obama on everything and that's why he couldn't get anything done is also bunk. The house and senate were both democratically ruled. For 2 years, Obama had the chance to offer something reasonable to congress as far as budgets, health care, etc etc etc. His "own" people refused to pass his budgets. What's that say about Obama?

This is why we are where we are. Not because of Bush, or politics.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

From the article:

A day earlier, Biden told a mostly black audience in Virginia that Republicans seeking less regulation of the financial industry wanted to “unchain Wall Street” and “put y’all back in chains.”

Speaking later Tuesday, Biden said he had meant to use the term “unshackled.” But he did not apologize, and he mocked the Romney campaign for showing outrage at his remark.

I'm trying my best but his excuse is pretty well out there for his vile remarks.

He meant to say that the financial industry wanted to “unshackle Wall Street” and “put y’all back in unshackles.”............???????????

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

"and he mocked the Romney campaign for showing outrage at his remark."

Yeah, it's fun the faux outrage y'all, obviously ignoring the fact these comments were in reference to House Speaker John Boehner's use of the word "unshackled" when talking about Ryan's House budget proposal that Romney is already doing his best to distance himself from.

Heh, the honeymoon period was pretty short-lived I have to say.

The unveiled racism from the Birther crowd just highlights to what level of stupidity and hypocrisy the GOP can get to in an election cycle, the comments on this thread yet again a testament to the partisan stupidity that prevails in America's stale two-party system.

Kerry lost to Dubya because they refused to stoop to the despicable Rovian levels of mudslinging. Apparently the Democrats have finally cottoned-on to the technique, and it has the GOP shrieking like a new-born infant.

2 ( +4 / -1 )

Yeah, it's fun the faux outrage y'all, obviously ignoring the fact these comments were in reference to House Speaker John Boehner's use of the word "unshackled"

Obviously the word unchained and unshackled can easily be mixed up. Telling a largely African American audience that Republicans want to “put y’all back in chains.” is a pretty crass hatemongering vile remark but if it was told properly since it's really about shackles instead of chains and just a polite misunderstanding I'm sure if he would have just said Republicans just want to "put y'all back in shackles" it would be taken soooo much better by folks like Jesse Jackson's eldest daughter:

Jackson’s daughter Santita Jackson professed Biden’s comments were “profoundly insulting” to her and that Biden should apologize.

"I found these remarks to be profoundly insulting. It’s one thing to become familial. It’s another thing to become familiar. And familiarity breeds contempt. And, this is very very close to being contemptuous. These remarks were insulting. Not only does he need to dial them back, he needs to apologize."

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Kerry lost to Dubya because they refused to stoop to the despicable Rovian levels of mudslinging.

I thought McCain lost due to the despicable mudslinging by Axelrod and company, they did stoop pretty low last election don't you think?

-1 ( +1 / -3 )

"I thought McCain lost due to the despicable mudslinging by Axelrod and company, they did stoop pretty low last election don't you think?"

They got Palin on the Veep ticket?

Heh, you guys are losing it...

2 ( +3 / -1 )

It's funny to see the GOP like a child in a tantrum getting a taste of their own sleazy medicine.

Let's not forget the years where Kerry was compared to a Frenchman, and Bush's own military record through the draft was scrutinized to partisan displeasure. What was Romney's excuse for avoiding the draft to Vietnam?

"Mitt Romney Spent The Vietnam War In A French Palace"

http://www.nationalmemo.com/strange-true-mitt-romney-spent-vietnam-war-french-palace/

Come November the role reversal will be complete, Mr Romney joining by de facto the exclusive losers millionaire club.

1 ( +3 / -1 )

Well it seems that no matter what I say, the Fox News rhetoric tends to bounce around in that little head of yours. But allow me to prove you wrong...again

The National Conference of State Legislators' web site pretty much echos what I say said above. July 2012 saw more jobs added than any other month (163,000 jobs to be exact -which isn't terrific, but what can you do when you have a corrupt congress?) But it is still higher than the annual average (151,000)

Source: http://www.ncsl.org/issues-research/labor/national-employment-monthly-update.aspx

Just because some Conservatives are not happy with the Ryan pick doesn't necessarily mean that he is A BAD choice

NO, he IS a bad choice, and over the next few days we'll start to see even more conservatives distance themselves from him INCLUDING Romney, as a matter of fact, it's already starting to happen. He's fundamentally very radical right, who got his ideology from Ayn Rand, a total nut job in her own right, believing in a TOTALLY free and unregulated economy -everything privatized -no taxes -microscopic or non-existent government. See this Ayn Rand interview http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1RxKW-P5V8 if you don't believe me. And I suppose you're thinkin...Paul Ryan doesn't believe in Ayn Rand's philosophy, he just likes some of her writing and some of her ideal principal..okay..well click here to here what Paul Ryan says about Ayn Rand her "morality of capitalism" and how much he agrees with her and LOVES her: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XYw9RtDbU8 and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqO5JnvQSm0 .

But now that the dems got wind what Ayn Rands REALLY about and her views on capitalism, religion, individualism, love for your fellow man, helping others, etc...Ryan has put some serious distance between himself and Rand...a serious flip flop. What Ryan thinks of Rand (his idol) now: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYurUUSBkBE

So what is Paul Ryan's true world view?

1 ( +4 / -2 )

Just because you don't like it and it is watched by the majority of Americans doesn't mean it is right wing, just because you say it is. -Sorry

Watched by majority of Americans? ...haha hardly...That's what Fox News likes to toot on their show, buts its just another lie among many. Fox has hemorrhaged tons of their viewers because their news is simply unreliable. Glenn Beck lost ALL of his sponsors and subsequently lost his show completely and it was all down hill from there for Fox.

An article on Fox News: http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/03/28/fox-news-and-cnn-take-nosedives-in-march-ratings/

Personally, I read what makes sense, whether it be Fox, NBC, ABC, Huff Post, CNN, and of course JT..(but I read JT mostly for entertainment purposes and don't really consider it a credible news outlet. ...sorry JT) Having said that, its tons more credible than Fox. I read differing points of views and decide what is the most objective and least corrupt. And on occasions (not very often though) Fox comes out on top. But most of it is rubbish. I find Huff Post to be the most credible source but admittedly very left leaning so I try to balance it out by seeing what the righties say. So I thing my knowledge is pretty well rounded..and if you don't think FN is right winged, they've thoroughly brain washed you!

1 ( +3 / -1 )

It would be nice if BOTH sides started to get back to the issues. Romney didn't kill anyone's wife, and Obama isn't a Marxist born in Africa. Both are intelligent and basically decent men who have fundamentally different views of how to fix the economy. And the economy should be the issue.

Personally, I like Paul Ryan. I don't care what he thinks of social issues, since most of them are decided at the state level not the federal level. He's a bit soft on financial issues, and doesn't show enough vigour in balancing the budget, but at least he has/had a plan. But nobody's perfect. I think the Democrats are making a mistake in directing their fire at him and his plan- Ryan isn't the presidential candidate. Romney and HIS plan are being given a free pass in the rush to crap all over Ryan. I don't see the GOP wasting much time or energy going after Joe Biden.

3 ( +2 / -0 )

The Banks were giving money away on Bush's watch... Alan Greenspan should have noticed the parallels to Japan in the late 80's but he did nothing. Greenspan could have tightened money supply but he did zilch. To me.... the FED should have seen what was happening and it should have made adjustments. When a bank lends $200k to a guy with no job then there is a major problem with the system.... Greenspan should be behind bars!

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

All I needed to see was the headline and I bust out laughing. Mitt trying to claim power (I've got the wealth, why not the power?) and accusing Obama of trying to "cling" to power! Is that what we call the election for a 2nd term now Mr. Mittens?

0 ( +2 / -1 )

ALL politicians want to "cling to power". It's their raison d'etre. I think perhaps Romney was making a jibe about one of President Obama's more infamous speeches in the 2008 campaign, when he referenced bitter people "clinging" to guns or religion.

I for one would rather see the issues discussed rather than the personalities. I'm particularly looking forward to the debate between Paul Ryan and Joe Biden. Should be entertaining....

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Just because you don't like it and it is watched by the majority of Americans doesn't mean it is right wing

Oh, come on, bass, you can do better than this. I read the Guardian newspaper and the New Satstesman magazine. I recognise that they're both left-wing. (I also read the Spectator magazine which is fascist, but fun). Point is, I'm prepared to admit the bias in my news sources. Why not you??

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Watched by majority of Americans? ...haha hardly...That's what Fox News likes to toot on their show, buts its just another lie among many. Fox has hemorrhaged tons of their viewers because their news is simply unreliable. Glenn Beck lost ALL of his sponsors and subsequently lost his show completely and it was all down hill from there for Fox.

sorry, Mirai, ummmm, Nope.

Fox is the most trusted TV news source for 34% of voters, followed by PBS at 17%, CNN at 12%, ABC News at 11%, CBS News at 8%, MSNBC at 5%, and Comedy Central and NBC each at 4%.  Sixty-eight percent of Republicans pick Fox as their most trusted source, with no one else even hitting double digits. Democrats split closely three ways with PBS at 21%, ABC News at 19%, and CNN at 17%. Despite having a reputation for appealing to the left MSNBC actually polls in only 6th place among Democrats at 8%, finishing slightly behind even Fox News' 9%. Independents split almost evenly between Fox News (29%) and PBS (27%) Democrats trust everything- except Fox News. NBC does the best with them at +50 (67/17), followed by PBS and CNN at +49 (66/17 and 65/16 respectively), ABC at +38 (57/19), CBS at +35 (58/23), MSNBC at +33 (56/23), and even Comedy Central at +4 (36/32). Fox News comes in at -36 (25/61). -Republicans meanwhile don't trust anything except Fox News. PBS comes the closest to breaking even among non-Fox outlets, although not very close, at -30 (26/56).  Republicans meanwhile don't trust anything except Fox News. PBS comes the closest to breaking even among non-Fox outlets, although not very close, at -30 (26/56).

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

@luca

Oh, come on, bass, you can do better than this. I read the Guardian newspaper and the New Satstesman magazine. I recognise that they're both left-wing. (I also read the Spectator magazine which is fascist, but fun). Point is, I'm prepared to admit the bias in my news sources. Why not you??

I'm not going to beat around the Bush and say that FOX doesn't have a slight Right leaning agenda, it's not off the charts, but it NOT every anchor and commentator is Right leaning for sure. I never boasted that it didn't. But even if it were FULL on Right leaning. You have one network that listens to both sides of opposing views and lets people whether they be Conservative, Traditional and Liberal all have a say. Before that, there were really none, except for talk radio, so since the TV is dominated 95% Left leaning and Left wing, what is wrong with having a channel that lets the other side speak out? But one thing is, I do know how the news outlets work. I used to work for NBC in Burbank, CA. So, I know first hand at and how the news operations work, I'll leave that for a different topic.

-1 ( +2 / -4 )

@Mirai

Fox comes out on top. But most of it is rubbish. I find Huff Post to be the most credible source but admittedly very left leaning so I try to balance it out by seeing what the righties say

Very, very true!

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

@bass4funk

I actually gave you a thumbs up on one comment for your honesty. I wouldn't mind seeing each US State have a minimum health plan to cover some of the costs of health maintenance. I still think the US needs to cut its military budget by about 30% and be lean and trim, but I doubt you would agree...

0 ( +1 / -1 )

@bruin

I actually gave you a thumbs up on one comment for your honesty. I wouldn't mind seeing each US State have a minimum health plan to cover some of the costs of health maintenance. I still think the US needs to cut its military budget by about 30% and be lean and trim, but I doubt you would agree...

If we could do it without putting us further into debt and over burdening the tax payer, I'd wouldn't object to that. Im not a heartless guy, I do think our healthcare system in many areas needs to severely be overhauled. As far as the military budget is concerned 30%? Lean? Hmmm, I wold like to have it a bit more like a Thanksgiving Turkey, plump and heavy.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

what is wrong with having a channel that lets the other side speak out?

Ask the guy in DC. Apparently, if conservatives get their message out, it so enrages and unhinges the left, they become violent. Apparently there is nothing more offensive then truth, nothing more evil then having your own opinion.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

I'd prefer the military budget to be efficient and effective as possible on a decent budget. An over paid budget means a lot of money is wasted on uneccessary programs. A lean budget means we have soldiers having worn out and even non-existant equipment. Funding a military is a constant R&D situation that always requires them to be one step ahead (if not light years ahead) of any potential enemy. Plus lots of training for new stratagies to deal with all types of situations.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

what is wrong with having a channel that lets the other side speak out?

There is NOTHING wrong with letting both the left and right give their opinion. That's the whole principal behind free speech. BUT there is something wrong when a so-called "trusted news organization" spread lies blatantly, skew facts, quote people completely out of context to try prove unfounded claims and accusations, etc. There are VERY respectful and accurate right leaning news outlets out there...I'm just saying Fox News is DEFINITELY not one of them.

I'm not going to beat around the Bush and say that FOX doesn't have a slight Right leaning agenda, it's not off the charts, but it NOT every anchor and commentator is Right leaning for sure

Its funny how you capitalized bush...but that's okay. Anyways, Fox is beyond "right leaning", they are the radical right. Glenn Beck was so insane and radical, ALL of his sponsors dropped him. He went months without sponsors, until Roger Ailes finally had to pull the plug on him. Sean Hannity actually offered to pay for George Zimmerman (the man who stalked and killed an unarmed black teenager after racially profiling him as a criminal) entire defense. Scott Roeder (a radical right ringed extremist) killed George Tiller (an abortion doctor) after Bill O'Reily would chant "Tiller Tiller the baby killer" on his program on NUMEROUS occasions egging on the mentally unstable to take action.

They have Sarah Palin, Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter, and Mike Huckabee (all right winged anti-gay extremist) as frequent contributors on their show. Right "leaning" .REALLY? They don't get anymore right winged than Fox.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

There is NOTHING wrong with letting both the left and right give their opinion. That's the whole principal behind free speech. BUT there is something wrong when a so-called "trusted news organization" spread lies blatantly, skew facts, quote people completely out of context to try prove unfounded claims and accusations, etc. There are VERY respectful and accurate right leaning news outlets out there...I'm just saying Fox News is DEFINITELY not one of them.

That is YOUR PERSONAL OPINION and you are entitled to that.

Its funny how you capitalized bush...but that's okay. Anyways, Fox is beyond "right leaning", they are the radical right. Glenn Beck was so insane and radical, ALL of his sponsors dropped him. He went months without sponsors, until Roger Ailes finally had to pull the plug on him. Sean Hannity actually offered to pay for George Zimmerman (the man who stalked and killed an unarmed black teenager after racially profiling him as a criminal) entire defense. Scott Roeder (a radical right ringed extremist) killed George Tiller (an abortion doctor) after Bill O'Reily would chant "Tiller Tiller the baby killer" on his program on NUMEROUS occasions egging on the mentally unstable to take action.

That is YOUR PERSONAL OPINION and you are entitled to that.

They have Sarah Palin, Michelle Malkin, Ann Coulter, and Mike Huckabee (all right winged anti-gay extremist) as frequent contributors on their show. Right "leaning" .REALLY? They don't get anymore right winged than Fox.

That is YOUR PERSONAL OPINION and you are entitled to that.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

That is YOUR PERSONAL OPINION and you are entitled to that.

Mirai made several good points. Merely repeating the above mantra doesn't really address them. It's like covering your ears and chanting "I can't hear you."

You're losing your touch, bass.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

@Luca

Not at all, listened to his opinion and I respect them, if you ask me if I agree with him, that is a totally different manner, but he is allowed to make his opinions known. ;-)

0 ( +1 / -1 )

-Republicans meanwhile don't trust anything except Fox News.

This statement is......AWESOME...LOL. but I doubt that it's true; I'd like to give some republicans the benefit of the doubt by thinking that some are intelligent enough not to buy into the whole Fox News nonsense mill. I'm sure there are MANY republican's who read and trust multiple news sources (left and right leaning)...otherwise that would make republicans look REALLY dumb...hahaha LOL

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Romney is wrong here.

Obama and his party are now reduced to simply trying to hang onto credibility and relevance. Since late 2009 all the energy has been on the right or, even better, been generated by the growth of the Libertarian movement.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

BUT there is something wrong when a so-called "trusted news organization" spread lies blatantly, skew facts, quote people completely out of context to try prove unfounded claims and accusations, etc.

That would be almost all of the Mainstream Media who try to deny they have a left wing bias and claim to report the news fairly. The exception is Fox that leans right and all its viewers know it that is why they turn to it as a balance to the MSM. Textbook case in point .

You mentioned Zimmerman, the MSM fell all over itself protraying Zimmerman as a racist and a profiler. Going so far as to doctor facts and lie to paint him as the most evil man in America.

Article Excerpt:

The producer's dismissal followed an internal investigation that led to NBC apologizing for having aired the misleading audio.

NBC's "Today" show first aired the edited version of Zimmerman's call on March 27. The recording viewers heard was trimmed to suggest that Zimmerman volunteered to police, with no prompting, that Martin was black: "This guy looks like he's up to no good. He looks black."

But the portion of the tape that was deleted had the 911 dispatcher asking Zimmerman if the person who had raised his suspicion was "black, white or Hispanic," to which Zimmerman responded, "He looks black."

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-04-07/nbc-zimmerman-call/54098132/1

Secondly, George Zimmerman is not a racist, never was and the FBI investigation that was launched after the Left wing biased Media lynched him as such proves he's not.

FBI report: No evidence George Zimmerman is racist

An FBI investigation into the shooting of black teenager Travyon Martin concluded that there's no evidence the suspect, George Zimmerman, was motived by racial bias or hatred

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2012/0712/FBI-report-No-evidence-George-Zimmerman-is-racist

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Where did it say that the bill passed required "NEW photo ID to vote for this election?" The bill required a proper ID to vote.

A proper ID to vote on the BILL means a proper (PHOTO) ID to vote.

On 8/15, the Democracy in America is going down the hill. This is a violation of the Civil Rights and will be reversed.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Almost funny coming from Gov. etch-a-sketch who'll say anything, do anything to get power.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

@Mirai

This statement is......AWESOME...LOL. but I doubt that it's true; I'd like to give some republicans the benefit of the doubt by thinking that some are intelligent enough not to buy into the whole Fox News nonsense mill. I'm sure there are MANY republican's who read and trust multiple news sources (left and right leaning)...otherwise that would make republicans look REALLY dumb...hahaha LOL

I think we get the picture, you don't like FOX, next....

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

@Sailwind

Excellent point!

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

We only have 81 days to go for election while there are 870,000 people need to register (Photo0 to vote in PA. How do they do that? I hae no clue.... And the registration offices open "One day a Week".

Democracy in America is in danger and that's how these Rich get POWER. This is something I want the rest of world to know about America. Pff, Democracy, America is far from the truth. Shame.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Your President-BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA in trying to score votes and to cover this new Obamacare...

(blah, blah, blah...)

bass4funk - I think this sad attempt to point out Obama's Islamic heritage (and therefore evil, eh?) is a good indication of your hatred for the man. Can't wait to see how the right-wing loonies pussyfoot around their bigotry for another 4 years!

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

That would be almost all of the Mainstream Media who try to deny they have a left wing bias and claim to report the news fairly. The exception is Fox that leans right and all its viewers know it that is why they turn to it as a balance to the MSM. Textbook case in point .

Of course..I get that...Every news organizations is biased. That's why I don't commit to one news source so my info, like bass claims most republicans do (still LOL). What I'm saying is that Fox takes it to a whole new level.

Secondly, George Zimmerman is not a racist, never was and the FBI investigation that was launched after the Left wing biased Media lynched him as such proves he's not. FBI report: No evidence George Zimmerman is racist

Sure. What the FBI says is always fact, so it must be so.... except:

“I dont miss driving around scared to hit mexicans walkin on the side of the street, soft ass wanna be thugs messin with peoples cars when they aint around (what are you provin, that you can dent a car when no ones watchin) dont make you a man in my book. Workin 96 hours to get a decent pay check, gettin knifes pulled on you by every mexican you run into!” -George Zimmerman on his Myspace page

Sure...he's half Mexican so he has immunity right...LOL

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I'm just wondering what the hell George Zimmerman has to do with this?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

The MSM (especially that related to Rupert Murdock) is very pro-corporation. From this angle, it is "conservative". One might have an argument that it is "liberal" on some issues . I am not a fan of the MSM but I recognize the corporate influence behind much of it. Also what many people don't realize is that the corporation itself desperately needs government to exist (e.g. corporate charter) and also the courts to protect its interests. So corporations are not a pure "free market" entity.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Of course..I get that...Every news organizations is biased. That's why I don't commit to one news source so my info, like bass claims most republicans do (still LOL). What I'm saying is that Fox takes it to a whole new level.

That's your PERSONAL OPINION and you are entitled to that.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

I'm just wondering what the hell George Zimmerman has to do with this?

Absolutely nothing

That is YOUR PERSONAL OPINION and you are entitled to that.

C'mon Bass! Are you growing limp on me? You started off so strong and now you're not counter punching. Google is your friend...prove me wrong ...if you can.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

@Mirai

C'mon Bass! Are you growing limp on me? You started off so strong and now you're not counter punching. Google is your friend...prove me wrong ...if you can.

Trust me, Mirai, I am not ignoring you, but I know what you are trying to do and it won't work. You were giving good arguments for awhile, but then when you went on your FOX diatribe, meltdown, you started to sound childish, so I am not going to stoop to that level. You hate it, I get it, doesn't change the fact that it is the most watched news network and whatever temper tantrum you have won't change that or most American peoples opinions. Whatever you believe, you believe and that's fine, but I will go on facts, not on anyones emotional tirade. You can say whatever you like, I am really fine with it. I know liberals such as yourself hate to be proven wrong and hate it when someone disagrees with your radical, looney logic. I could go on for a year about MSNationalBarackChannel, but I won't. Not this time. My job is not to prove anything to you, my job is to make sure I can get the anointed one out of office, that is my main focus. Now can we please get back to talking about Obama and Mitt.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Mitt is doomed to fail just like his father George did in the 1968 presidential race. Naturally, Mitt would want to try and make his Dad proud but it ain't going to happen......thank goodness.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

@bass4funk...I wish the GOP supporters, like yourself, could make an argument or a political statement about the future without mentioning liberals or the POTUS. I don't think you can, but I'd like to see you try. Only then will you get the honest debates you say you remember.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

The MSM (especially that related to Rupert Murdock) is very pro-corporation. From this angle, it is "conservative".

And the professional left in America is also very "conservative", in that it has become as reactionary as the 1950s McCarthy-era Repubs it constantly trots out as the bogeyman.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

This means more to me than listening to each candidate speak for an hour:

Top Contributors to 2012 Presidential Race: (D) Obama 1) Microsoft $304,690 2) DLA Piper $302,527 3) University of California $243,486 . (R) Romney 1) Goldman Sachs $564,580 2) JPMorgan Chase & Co. $400,675 3) Bank of America $364,850 . via PAC's, their members, employees, owners, etc. Source: Center for Responsive Politics

1 ( +1 / -0 )

It's rather embarrassing and pointless to read about this mud-slinging match. The REAL stuff is the debates in October. I'm stockpiling the popcorn cuz I reckon it's gonna be intense!

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I wish the GOP supporters, like yourself, could make an argument or a political statement about the future without mentioning liberals or the POTUS. I don't think you can, but I'd like to see you try. Only then will you get the honest debates you say you remember.

Honest debate?

A majority of comments on this board are about attempting to neutralize differing opinions.

Since most of the sources of information used on this site have obvious left-leaning bias, together with a majority of posters aimed at stifling opposition, by voting "plus" or "minus" by ideology rather than point, the slant is there, from the beginning.

Honest debate?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Well DUH! Of course he is. Anybody would want to keep control of that kind of budget, wouldn't they?

The only real difference between the Dems and Reps any more is where the money gets spent. Bush talked a good game but spend like a drunken sailor. Obama is busy transferring wealth like he said he would. Clinton (OMG!) was the only recent president who worked with congress and got something done. Government just keeps getting bigger and more hungry for cash no matter what. Would Romney change things? I don't know.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites