Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

cookinwithgas

Romney is apparently also kind of an idiot foreign policy wise

Recommended Posts

And Obama has been the worst President since Carter. What's your point?

Lmao

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


In your opinion, which is fair, but he has accomplished a hell of a lot with an obstructionist congress whose only focus is voting against anything the President offers, and with blatently no regard to the peoples wishes...case in point, women working for equal wages....no my friend Regan was the worst President since Carter, that whole trickle down economic theory your team has been spewing for years is a bunch of crap. Hasn't worked, won't work

while no fan of Regan, had he kept status quo and followed Carter's blueprint for an economy i highly doubt you are typing on the internet right now. typewriter maybe.

he had NO choice but to alter the way the US economy was operating. as for health care. getting it passed is only a political success. in 5 years or so, if it stays intact, we will then know if it was a "success".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

while no fan of Regan, had he kept status quo and followed Carter's blueprint for an economy i highly doubt you are typing on the internet right now. typewriter maybe.

he had NO choice but to alter the way the US economy was operating. as for health care. getting it passed is only a political success. in 5 years or so, if it stays intact, we will then know if it was a "success".

Seriously, I thought better of you, than a personal attack, not sure where that came from, I've always respected your opinions no matter whether I agree with them or not. That being said your teams blue- print has been a return to reagnaomics for years, and as I said it didn't work then and won't work now. You and your team constantly make excuses for the mistakes of the past. Unlike the republicans now, I am not functioning with blinders (was a Republican until Bush II) I can blame both parties for the situation we are in (by the way I am a Black Man which makes me more of an anomoly) I have no problem bringing Clinton into the conversation (NAFTA) as well I have no problem including Bush I and Bush II in their overt attempts to capitulate to the demands of China, Taiwan, etc in their efforts to evicerate manufacturing within good ole Merica". And last but not least , and most defintely Reagan, the founder of trickle down, let's make the rich richer and to hell with the poor, the idol of the Publican part. Let's be honest here, the Reagan era set our country on a pathway that has proved conclusively that Americans are lemmings. Since Reagan, we vote based on fear rather than on fact, we (the middle class) vote constantly to support the rights of big business and big individual investors in hopes that by making them successful will hopefully enrich our lives. Hell trickle down economics really stiflles growth for small business, why, because trickle down economics provides choice, who do I choose, not really a about the merits of the busines but rather the connection to the have. Please, do we really believe the sewage that is spun to us, I can tell you that among new small business owners (one's that have opened sine 95') that I know, that garbage is not bought. Sorry this is so long, but I am getting tired of the Kool-Aide, bottom line is both parties are shitty, but the idea that this President somehow is causing the downfall of America is bull-poo....just saying

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites




put the over reacting horse back in the barn man. im hardly a rep. again, it's down right silly the very nano second someone says something counter to someones post it just has to mean they vote for the opposing party all the time. critical thinking much?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seriously, I thought better of you, than a personal attack, not sure where that came from, I've always respected your opinions no matter whether I agree with them or not.

Where is the personal attack?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

put the over reacting horse back in the barn man. im hardly a rep. again, it's down right silly the very nano second someone says something counter to someones post it just has to mean they vote for the opposing party all the time. critical thinking much?

So, you consider my response to your quote an over-reaction.....okay, that's fair but aren't you currently in an issue with a large business that is causing you an issue that you do not feel is in your favor....trickle down economics... do you want to continue...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where is the personal attack?

Personal attack is I am typing on a typewriter, I.E. I am out of touch with reality that doesn't extend beyond the 80's. Our if your prefer, my views our outdate, our if you prefer, I am not for whatever reason not in touch with current reality, for some reason I know nothing of current affairs. Like I said, he and I, even though politics may not necessarily be congruent, have always respected each others opinion. That comment was something different. To put it into perspective, I don't always agree with you politically, but I am not going to say to you that you are out of touch, I acknowledge your opinion and if we have a disagreement, then it is what it is, you have the right to your beliefs, without making mine seem cooky our out of touch.......does that make sense to you (no disrespect, just asking)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

keep your eye on the ball. personal attack and big banks and trickle down are two lanes.

to stay in the trickle down lane. has not the US GDP grown in the last 30 years? Do we not have more billionaires and millionaires than ever before? Do not more African Americans have an increase in home ownership as well as net worth?

in a democracy, there is a winner and a loser. also in the last 30 years this notion of everybody gets a trophy has also not served us so well.

by no means does trickle down get off scot free. it has it's foils like any other system. i do not think you wish to debate me on anything Keynesian or monetarist or why the S&P oscillator or baltic dry index are turned on their ears nowadays.

i would venture that ceo pay, while insane, is more of a product of greed on the ceo's part and shareholders having a very very myopic view of balance sheets and online statements.

so money supply issues and junk and stupid % in the early 80's caused so much drama that a nice paradigm had to happen. ask Clinton if he appreciates supply side verses just raising taxes.

then, yawn, there is JFK who the Reps may try to lump with Regan on supply side and usually overlook the Keynesian multiplier effect his team used.

The argument is tri fold. Do you let the govt put the money in the hands of biz to stimulate the economy or the people? Or do you put more money in the govt? Of course not on that.

The supply side now is jobs. The lack of that supply is such a heavy drag overall that most politicans are too lazy to slowly job growth your way out of a recession. More workers equal more payroll taxes equal more spenders equal more taxes(are you keeping up with this?) and yada yada yada.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×