2012 Presidential Election (free for all edition)

[Giantone]

Originally Posted by firstdown

No my good credit got my loan.

So ,the bank ,taking a chance on you is not someone ......helping you?Had you not gotten the loan,what would have happen?

[Slingin Sammy 33]

This can happen at the Federal level as well, just need to put adults in charge. A Balanced Budget amendment (49 states have it) and entitlement reform wouldn't hurt either.

McDonnell announces $448.5 million budget surplus | HamptonRoads.com | PilotOnline.com

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Giantone

So ,the bank ,taking a chance on you is not someone ......helping you?Had you not gotten the loan,what would have happen?

Helping me? Was I not their customer who they made money by loaning me money? I actually did not really need a business loan to open my business but I did open a line of credit just in case I needed additional capital.

[firstdown]

The reason we laugh at what Obama says is that he thinks Gov. is the answer to everyones problems. He has a pattern of this thinking so when he says those things it just in line whith his thinking that gov. knows best. We know what he said and that statement alone is no big deal but if you look over his history for every problem he has a gov. solution.

[Dirtbag59]

And the ironic thing is a tax increase would do almost nothing to help reduce the deficit.

Review & Outlook: The Obama Rule - WSJ.com

The Obama Treasury's own numbers confirm that the tax would raise at most $5 billion a year—or less than 0.5% of the $1.2 trillion fiscal 2012 budget deficit and over the next decade a mere 0.1% of the $45.43 trillion the federal government will spend. When asked about those revenue projections, White House aide Jason Furman backpedaled from Mr. Obama's rationale by explaining that the tax was never intended "to bring the deficit down and the debt under control."

The Buffett rule is really nothing more than a sneaky way for Mr. Obama to justify doubling the capital gains and dividend tax rate to 30% from 15% today. That's the real spread-the-wealth target. The problem is that this is a tax on capital that is needed for firms to grow and hire more workers. Mr. Obama says he wants an investment-led recovery, not one led by consumption, but how will investment be spurred by doubling the tax on it?

The only investment and hiring the Buffett rule is likely to spur will be outside the United States—in China, Germany, India, and other competitors with much more investment-friendly tax regimes. The Buffett rule would give the U.S. the fourth highest capital gains rate among OECD nations, according to a new study by Ernst & Young, to go along with what is now the highest corporate tax rate (a little under 40% for the combined federal and average state rate). That's what happens when politicians pursue fairness over growth.

[NC_Skins]

ROFL. This was almost as good as the BushJr blunders. Wow, this guy is something else. *grabs popcorn*




I particulary loved the part at the beginning where this reporter calls him out on lobbyist running his campaign and Mitty gets mad as hell. LOL

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

ROFL. This was almost as good as the BushJr blunders. Wow, this guy is something else. *grabs popcorn*




I particulary loved the part at the beginning where this reporter calls him out on lobbyist running his campaign and Mitty gets mad as hell. LOL

Funny you go back to 1994 on Romney and you seem to give Obama a pass on his promise on these things just 3 yrs back.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

ROFL. This was almost as good as the BushJr blunders. Wow, this guy is something else. *grabs popcorn*




I particulary loved the part at the beginning where this reporter calls him out on lobbyist running his campaign and Mitty gets mad as hell. LOL

It's which side is conservative. Is it the flip side or the flop?

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by firstdown

Funny you go back to 1994 on Romney and you seem to give Obama a pass on his promise on these things just 3 yrs back.

Have you seen me supporting Obama? Just because I'm killing Romney doesn't mean I'm voting or support Obama. In fact, you've seen my posts in regards to his faults but you chose to ignore it.


Unlike some of you guys, I plan on following through with my ideology on who to vote for. Many of you (and the rest of the US) are going to vote for one of these two jerkoffs because you don't want the other guy to win. If you would like a picture of my vote come election day, I will present it.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by firstdown

The reason we laugh at what Obama says is that he thinks Gov. is the answer to everyones problems. He has a pattern of this thinking so when he says those things it just in line whith his thinking that gov. knows best. We know what he said and that statement alone is no big deal but if you look over his history for every problem he has a gov. solution.

This is funny, not because you said it but because I've probably heard...mmm..over a hundred Obama speeches and he's said over and over...and over again that he doe not think government is the answer to all of our problems. Happen to catch him online just yesterday and said those exact words. In fact, I'm willing to bet he'll make that point yet again during his big convention speech next month.

I get it though, it's something conservatives have to say to sharpen differences with liberals. But as it's been pointed out, President Obama is the smallest gov't spender since Dwight Eisenhower. Now, that's a fact. So no, Obama's not in love with federal spending and he doesn't think government is the answer to everything.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

But as it's been pointed out, President Obama is the smallest gov't spender since Dwight Eisenhower.

Just for clarification, it's the smallest percentage of increased spending since Eisenhower. He's a between 1-2% increase spending which is low. The problem is here, that the dummy before him jacked spending through the roof which makes the overall numbers huge.

[12thMan]

Fair point and a distinction I didn't bother to make again, because it's been pointed out here before. The simply reality is Obama's not the boogeyman big gov't spender the right makes him out to be. Even if you consider the stimulus, 40% of were tax cuts. So again, it's a big fail when the drag that into the argument.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

Fair point and a distinction I didn't bother to make again, because it's been pointed out here before.

Yeah, it's been pointed out many times by you and me, but the same crew keeps claiming the wrong stat in regards to that particular fact. Seems that "lowest percentage of increased spending" is obviously the same as "total overall spending".

[drew54]

Obama may be the best Republican president in my lifetime.

[Dirtbag59]

So does anyone think Obama will dump Biden and make Hillary his running mate? I think if that happens Obama is a lock to win. Ironically if I could go back to 2008 as far as the Primaries and pick anyone from both parties to be President I probably would have gone with Hillary.

I mean I don't think Obama getting reelected will be anywhere close to the doomsday scenario Republicans will have you believe will take place but at the same time I feel like Romney has more potential to get the economy going again. Also my main beef with Obama is he's basically embraced the whole Occupy Wall Street movement and engaged in some warped form of class warfare, which is disappointing because he started out as a moderate.

Either way I hope Hillary runs in 2016 just so we can have more options should the economy stay stuck in it's current bout of limbo.