Paul Ryan VP pick

I will definitely give you that Bush made mistakes as well. I think we could have afforded a 1-2% increase in taxes when the economy was booming. I also have said that Chairman Greenspan deserves some of the blame for leaving rates too low for too long.

The reason Clinton was so successful is that he realized that he would have to compromise with Republicans. Republicans were willing to take the higher taxes across the board with him agreeing to reduce spending levels. But Clinton never said "just increase taxes on the wealthy" and I'm going to keep spending levels where they're at like Obama. That is what causes the partisanship in Washington. Clinton was also responsible for the North American Free Trade Agreement which was great for business. Obama has done nothing for American businesses and has not stood up for us against our foreign trade partners.

 

Maybe.
But I'm voting for Elmo. Because he's awesome. And he likes crayons!
See how simple that is?

 

All Bush needed to do was not invade Iraq and keep banks regulated. Both he and Clinton were guilty of deregulations that allowed the subsequent implosion, because they were both beholden to the investment class.

As for Obama having done nothing for US businesses, I beg to differ. Even his signature achievement, the healthcare legislation under attack, was drafted in a way designed to mollify the insurance and pharmaceutical industries, hence the closed door sessions. He has done a lot to work with them, but the other side's hostility toward him meant that "working with" had to be synonymous with "capitulate to". As for his reticence to wage trade wars with foreign nations, remember that he was told not to engage in those trade wars by the business community and held off to protect their foreign business interests rather than support his own base of working people, who have been clamoring for greater trade restrictions since the 1980s. So the argument that he's anti-business is specious at best.

 

You have to remember that after the 9/11 attacks over 90% of Americans were in support of the war. The problem came when they realized the difficulty in introducing a new sustainable democracy in the middle east. People are being monday morning quarterbacks in this situation. You're correct that Bush and Clinton could have done more with regulatory policy with the banks.

Obama has done closed door sessions, but they never result in anything because most leaders internationally view him as we weak. Being diplomatic means you're very likeable, but it does no good to our American manufacturers who are crippled with trade restrictions.

 

This is a total smear. What would have Obama been able to accomplish internationally that he hasn't thus far because world leaders view the goddam POTUS as 'weak'??

What the hell does that even mean???

The things you conservatives say about Obama in private sometimes is complete looney toons.:toimonster:

 

It means that nobody believes him when he says he's going to get tough on trade sanctions with China. The other countries continue doing what they're doing because they know he won't do anything.

It's like when a parent says "Don't make me come over there" 20 times to their kid but actually does nothing. The kid keeps doing the same thing because they know their parent won't do anything.

 

That doesn't make it right. And besides, the only justified war was Afghanistan, not Iraq, and the justification for it was ended last spring when they put a bullet in their own version of Pat Robertson, Osama bin Laden, another true 'conservative'. During that vote for war, I was the only one on staff who urged my boss to vote against the Iraq War resolution and was overruled by my Chief of Staff, the other two district directors and her committee staffer, all rural-based, conservative Democrats. So I'm not Monday morning quarterbacking, I'm telling you where I stood in 2001-2002 and where I continue to stand on the issue.

As for Obama's closed door sessions, they're usually closed because he doesn't want his base to see how much kowtowing he does to the right. I refer you again to the healthcare debate as a prime example of this. I agree with you 100% about those trade restrictions - we should have a much more ordered trading regime, where we give as much market access as we receive in return. You are aware, however, that the conservative business lobby - the US Chamber - opposed and continues to oppose get-tough measures because they're concerned about their profits? They (large Chamber businesses) don't care about tariffs because they use FDI to skirt those regulations and take advantage of cheap labor. So again, the US worker is victim to the rapaciousness of the business class and their political managers.

 

Bullshit. The 'tax cuts pay for themselves' ploy won't fly any longer.

 

Congressional Republicans impeached Bill Clinton. Yet your claim is taxes and spending are the root cause of partisanship in D.C.? Hilarious. Remember when every single Republican candidate raised their hands and pledged they would deny a 10-1 deal? How's that for compromise.

Obama gave small businesses how many additional tax cuts? The same president that cut taxes for small business has levied some heavy tariffs on Chinese products to reverse the disastrous policy decisions of Clinton.

This idea that he wants to raise taxes but keep spending levels the same is yet another example of your taking liberties with factual reality.

But, of course, you live in a fact-free universe where tax cuts pay for themselves and Republicans are deficit hawks.

 

Tax cuts work amazingly if you maintain low levels of spending, especially when you are in recessions. In 2007-2008, the Democrats took control of the house and senate. Spending went through the roof from that point forward. Obama has had a Democratic house and senate since he's been in office, yet still blames Repbulicans for not getting things done. Look at the deficit while Clinton was in office with Republicans in control of the house and senate. PLEASE CLICK THE LINK AND SEE FOR YOURSELF. It's not a ploy...numbers don't lie.

http://home.adelphi.edu/sbloch/deficits.html

 

1. Taxes and spending are the major cause of partisanship in Washington. Obama's completely refusal for spending cuts and not lowering taxes is a huge chasm between the parties. Republicans aren't going to agree to a bad deal just to make Obama happy.

2. I'm not taking liberties; these are his beliefs. And I said he has left taxes the same but increased spending which is a horrible combination. In our two previous recessions, Reagan and Bush had America out of it within 18 months. We are still at over 8% unemployment 4 years later.

 

Lmao...

You should go on the road..

Pure comedy..

 

Your entire comment is entirely false.

He has proposed spending cuts:

1. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/14/u...aises-taxes-on-the-rich-to-spend-on-jobs.html

2. http://money.cnn.com/2011/04/13/news/economy/budget_cuts_obama/index.htm

He's been proposing spending cuts as of last year, but the GOP refuse to let military cuts take action, though it would help with the deficit and debt. That's the gridlock here.

 

Interesting quote from Paul Ryan:

“College graduates,” he said, “should not have to live out their 20s in their childhood bedrooms, staring up at fading Obama posters and wondering when they can move out and get going with life.”

Let's see how far this goes in getting the young vote that Obama enjoyed four years ago.

 

Thanks! I'll be performing at Chick Fil-A's across the country. But only in rich white neighborhoods...keep out the riff raff. lol

 

Great quote but I don't think it will help with the youth vote. For many young people this will be their first or second time voting and I think Obama connects with that generation far better. He has used social media and entertainment outlets to really leverage that audience.

 

You should be ashamed to call yourself human.

Seriously.

 

Can't be any worse than Romney telling HS graduates to borrow money from their parents to pay for college and take an extra job.smh.

Remember Romney/Ryan criticized the POTUS for revamping the Pell Grant program so the federal government became a direct interest fee lender to students and removed commercial banks from the equation.
What do people think the unemployment rate under the best scenario would be right now after four years?? 4%??lol

Obama's unemployment numbers are 1-1.3 percentage points off from where most economists estimated they would be if ALL his jobs programs were implemented.

 

Obama was HANDED the worst recession in American history, excluding the Great Depression. Reagan and Bush didn't have a fraction of the economic problems to deal with that Obama did.

It's like comparing WWII to the 'invasion' of Grenada.

About jobs, this is the dirty little secret the GOP won't admit; they may add more jobs to the economy, but those 'jobs' are going to be low wage positions barely above salaries at fast food restaurants.
Middle class income jobs that vanished after the recession aren't coming back anytime soon.
I wonder how many people are going to be content with the GOP for being employed in a job that pays a third of what they earned in 2005??

 

I dignify serious comments with a serious response. If I'm told that I'm a comedian...then I make a joke.