“I'm shocked to see an article on the Huffington post that states a fact to explain away Obama' administration's lack of foreign policy.
The situation is this. They had the funds to secure the embassy in Libya, there was a request for more security. That request was denied by democrats, so now we blame them.
Here's a chart:
Funds Available > Request made > Request denied > People lose their lives > Blame those who denied request.
Regardless of any preceding actions by any party, the fact of the matter is that there was a request for more security that could've been afforded with the available funds and it was denied.”
drzoon on Oct 11, 2012 at 04:19:36
“guess what? Issa (R) and this cute little thing from Utah both outed the consulate as a CIA base today. Chaffetz was melting down in the hearing yelling "we can't talk about this, we can't show those photographs. i was briefed that this was "another agency" and it's top secret". It was all over C-span today.
what is it with the loons of the right wing?
this wasn't what it appeared to be, and anyone who knows anything about the middle east knows that is the day to day reality of everything from sun up to sun down in that part of the world.”
Taffiette Pearson on Oct 11, 2012 at 03:50:37
“what part of this statement you too illiterate to understand:For the past two years, House Republicans have continued to deprioritize the security forces protecting State Department personnel around the world. In fiscal year 2011, lawmakers shaved $128 million off of the administration's request for embassy security funding. House Republicans drained off even more funds in fiscal year 2012 -- cutting back on the department's request by $331 million.”
“5. "He's a man that accused our President of taking $716 billion from Medicare when that money will come from cuts to wasteful practice/providers, not recipients."
Well here is your masters degree in obamanomics paying for itself. Except, when you cut $716 Billion in "waste", you're saying you're taking this money from healthcare providers, and they currently have an option to refuse medicare patients, so who do you think wants to accept Medicare when there not going to be reimbursed what they've set as the "price" of their healthcare? In the same way as if you start up a business and want to charge $12 for hamburger, the government promises to pay your $12 if someone brings in a special hamburger ticket, accept now they're telling you they're only giving you $4 because that's all it's really worth, you'll stop accepting those special tickets.
6. "Our President suggested cutting billions in subsidies to Big Oil but the suggestion was rejected by our Republican Congress."
I'd be on your side if your side was on your side. 4 Democrats also voted against it.
7. "The American People are not stupid" - That's debatable.”
mcnwpb on Oct 11, 2012 at 12:36:19
“Yes, lets cull some of the greedy Doctors who scam patients and the system for a buck - I am all for it! 4 Democrats? How many Republicans and Democrats are in Congress? Don't worry, this is not a test. And really, it is not debatable - the American People will make the right choice next month by not voting for the flip flop team :)”
“3. "paid less than 13.6% in taxes"
Why golly, what a terrible man, paying only 13.6% taxes.
Wait, where does his income come from?... Well he runs a good ol' fashioned BnB in south dakota dontchaknow... That doesn't sound right.... He gets his income from "Capital gains" (Stocks ect). So what kind of taxes should he pay? Just like everyone else, "Capital gains tax". What is the current rate of that? 15%.... How much does Romney donate to charity? An average of 13.45% of his income over the last 20 years. Why sir, that sounds like nearly 27% of his income is going right back out again... How much of YOUR income do you keep?
4. "who won't submit sufficient tax returns." I suppose we could get into a debate about what "sufficient" means, but since you're wrong, we won't. He has provided the required amount of tax returns. Which regardless of the fact that you don't like it, means it's sufficient.”
mcnwpb on Oct 11, 2012 at 12:51:03
“I am a Critical Care R.N. who makes a decent living and I take the standard deductions on a 1040. Yes, it makes me sick that the wealthy can hide their money with loopholes and offshore their money. Moreover, that corporations like big oil can get off scot-free. I pay nearly 20% in taxes. I am not ashamed of the fact that I am not a financial wizard, but, you nor anyone else of like mind could ever accuse me of being a crook. As for Mitt's tax returns - nothing you could say or do would change my mind that the man is hiding something and far too many other DECENT Americans agree. Decent folks don't defend crooks unless of course they are crooks too.”
“Where's your $5 Trillon deficit Mr. Obama promised AFTER he was elected?
What is his stance on Gay Marriage? Or is it still evolving?
It's like the POTus calling a kettle black.”
mcnwpb on Oct 10, 2012 at 00:48:03
“So lets vote for a man who invested a personal 11% in Stericycle (the company that disposes of aborted fetuses) then vowed to overturn Roe Vs Wade as a presumptive candidate and now he won't restrict access. He's the man who has offshore accounts, paid less than 13.6% in taxes, who wont submit sufficient tax returns. He's the man that accused our President of taking 716 billion from Medicare when that money will come from cuts to wasteful practice/providers, not recipients. Our President suggested cutting billions in subsidies to Big Oil but the suggestion was rejected by our Republican Congress - the same congress Mitt won't reproach in the name of partisan politics yet he claims to be bipartisan. Please, stop proliferating the nonsense of the Republican Party - The American People are not stupid and lying for Romney is never going to make a truth.”
Byron1436 on Oct 10, 2012 at 00:29:09
“So two wrongs actually DO make a right? Its ok to do something if someone else does it first?”
“Ok, so I've read the comments, I just want to make sure we're all clear.
Scientifically, the moment of conception, the DNA is unique. Thus that "human" has never been in existence, and never will be again. If they abort this baby, it will never be produced again. This means even if they have another one down the line, it's not the same baby.
So we're all clear that it is a unique "person". But you're all advocating for it's death based on the "mothers right to choose". I'd like to say we need to give that original and only one human being the right to choose. I'm fighting for human rights, not one mother's right.
The only reason this isn't a bigger issue is because you don't see it as a person, it doesn't have a face, or a heart yet. If a mother killed her three year old daughter because she was too burdensome you'd call this murder.
Huffington post is saying it's getting too long, I've cut out most of my post so I'll try and make it quick...
In the case of incest or rape if a woman decides to have an abortion within the first trimester, I believe law makers should leave that between her and her God or her conscience whichever one she has.
If you'd like further clarification please leave a reply and I'll respond when I am able. Thanks.”
anon004 on Oct 11, 2012 at 12:19:53
“"So we're all clear that it is a unique "person"."
Your conclusion, and nothing that can be proved scientifically. "Personhood" is an emotional concept, not a scientific one.”
dcflush on Oct 11, 2012 at 10:24:55
“This is a tricky issue that I tend to stay away from for obvious reasons. And I'm not saying your values are wrong or that you're wrong on this issue. But I need to clarify your statement that starts with "Scientifically". As others have stated, the basis of Roe v Wade was on science. It was based on viability. Or more specifically. "The Roe decision defined "viable" as being "potentially able to live outside the mother's womb, albeit with artificial aid", adding that viability "is usually placed at about seven months (28 weeks) but may occur earlier, even at 24 weeks.""
The Court decision was based on science. And while an argument can be made claiming that a fetus is a human because it has the dna of a human, that is a personal belief.
And lastly I would argue that my big problem is not with the belief that abortion is wrong. As I stated, this is a very personal belief and one that is easily justified. What I find morally wrong is the Republican hypocrisy on the issue with regard to birth control and sex education. When birth control and education are provided, abortion goes way down. Yet, the 'religious right' is generally against both providing birth control and against sex education. It's absurd, and in my opinion is a morally bankrupt position from far too many on the right.”
Dorothy Jean Fields on Oct 11, 2012 at 09:54:20
“I have 6 children, ( this was my choice) and I am a pro-choice advocate but my pro- choice is to have afforadable access to prevenative measures.
My choice to have 6 children was my choice, I don't think that gives me the right to tell any other woman what use she should put her body to.
None of my 6 children sons or daughters have 6 children, reasons being that we discussed sex, prevention and control as well as impact on health and finances when they were in their teens.”
Gynn on Oct 11, 2012 at 09:19:53
“So you believe that it Is the role of the government to investigate every woman who wants to have an Abortion to force her to prove that it was the product of rape or incest?
You believe it is the role of the government to police doctors and prohibit them from safe elective procedures?
Should we also prosecute mothers with still born children? Should we punish them women who had to choose between their own death or the death of their child?”
Bill Montferret on Oct 11, 2012 at 08:57:42
“The entire abortion issue should be left to a person's conscience. The freedom should be there for all and those who have a moral objection can choose to not have an abortion. That's the way things work in a democracy; freedom, followed by personal choice. We should not be in the business of curtailing freedom and by extension, personal choice. This is a secular medical issue for a lot of people, not a predominantly moral issue. If it's moral issue for you, don't do it, but don't step on the rights of others to force your personal morality on them. America doesn't work that way.”
Roelvdwegen on Oct 11, 2012 at 06:00:21
“Scenario, woman gets pregnant, has no means to take care of baby, aborts = murder in your book.
Scenario, woman gets pregnant, has no means to take care of baby but keeps it = anchor baby or wellfare moocher in your book.
Roelvdwegen on Oct 11, 2012 at 05:58:10
“It is a unique "thing", not person. Roe v Wade is based on the fundamental fact that during the time period abortion is now allowed it can not survive outside the womb and as such is not an independent being.”
“If we went over everyone's flip-flops we'd be here all week. Abortion is a difficult topic for everyone and I think the way he's handled it hasn't been the best. In fact he's probably handled it in the worst way in an election year. Me and him don't see eye to eye on everything, but I don't think you can win political office being a fair-minded and honest person one hundred percent of the time.
As for the $5 trillion tax cut, even Obama's administration has agreed that that is a stretch of the truth. The CBO agrees, the tax cuts Romney is proposing would be $5 trillion if the US was in a vacuum. However tax cuts for small business and individuals helps foster the economy and job growth. When your economy is growing you're employing more people and when more people are employed more people are paying taxes and drawing less from the government subsidies.
Also if you watched the debate, Romney did make mention that he would not lower taxes to the point where it raise the deficit. Which is definitely what I would like to hear more of. The inability to tell people exactly what's going to happen is what a President must sound like because again, he's not a dictator.
As for Barack Obama being a dictator, we'll never know how he thought he would get the deficit to half, but he made a pledge to do it. He also said he'd be closing Guantanamo”
“I've got an article for you, I'll write a short snippet here.
I pledge that this article will be twice as good as this article.
Although after reading it you may not think it's that great, but that's because you probably read an article that is not as brilliant just before this one.
In all honesty, I'd rather have someone that doesn't promise me the moon, and brings politics back to this planet.
Romney can't promise things because he knows a President isn't a dictator, he's an elected official that has to work with other elected officials to get things to work properly.
Obama doesn't know that he's not a God. He thinks he can just tell people what will happen and that it will.
Halve the deficit, failed.
Close guantanamo bay, failed.
End the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, failed.
Mr. Elisberg, please write a real article, because your underlying premise is faulty. At least with a real article I'll be able to point out the fact that you're wrong or misleading like I've done on a host of other blogs/articles today.”
pbr56 on Oct 11, 2012 at 12:21:03
“Yes, he did want to do those things, but with a congress that was more than willing to say no to everything he proposed, what chance did he have. They even voted no on bills they had proposed when Obama decided he would support them. So, who would you rather vote for, a democrat that wants to try and fix things, or a republican who is actively obstructing any and all progress.”
Pantsy on Oct 11, 2012 at 11:29:33
“um, i'm fairly certain he DID end the war in Iraq and is winding down the one in Afghanistan.”
hp blogger Robert J. Elisberg on Oct 10, 2012 at 20:50:58
“Thank you for your comments. But honestly, I don't know what in the world you're talking about.
For starters, you say you don't want someone who promises you the moon...but that's the Very Point about Mitt Romney going back-and-forth between issues, sometimes within hours. Just this week, he backtracked on his promises about being "Pro-Life" -- hours later, his staff issued a clarification, and the next day (today), Mr. Romney reversed himself. Just this week -- 17 days after blasting 47% of the country as "victims," Mr. Romney said he didn't mean it and was wrong. In the debate, Mr. Romney said he didn't want a $5 trillion tax cut. Do *you* believe that? He's been promises it for months!
More to the point -- no one is asking Mitt Romney to "promise" what he WILL do with his tax plan. At issue is him saying what he would LIKE to do as his starting position. Virtually ALL candidates tell you what they like, what their proposals are. Not Mitt Romney.
And only in your contorted dreams does Barack Obama think he is "dictator." When you are willing to deal with reality, then there is something to discuss.
Thanks though for telling me what to write. I'll stick with the real article at hand.”
1. If the tax cuts are what you're against, then your man Obama extended them, so you can take that off your list.
2. "Republicans ALSO created about 90% of that 16 trillion dollar debt they like to talk about."
I'm guessing you've just typed this up and take a duck and cover approach hoping nobody calls you on it. Well I am. When Bush got into office there was $5.76 trillion dollars in debt, bush raised it to approx $10.6 trillion, and now Obama has raised it to approx $16 trillion.
$10.6 - $5.76 = $4.84
$4.84 trillion is only 30% of the current national debt.
So just remember, when you're posting facts, make sure they're accurate, and actually help your case.”
NomD on Oct 11, 2012 at 02:13:14
“1) Obama tried repeatedly to get rid of the Bush Tax cuts, at least for the well-to-do making more than 200k, but the Republicans blocked it.
2) Your command of ARITHMETIC is impressive (Bill Clinton would be proud), but you completely missed my point. Reagan inherited a 1 Trillion dollar debt, and the vast majority of the red ink since then was created by Republicans.
So I consider about 90% of the 10.6 Trillion you mentioned to be owned by the Republicans. What about Obama's 5.7 Trillion? - THAT was the point of the CBO numbers I posted, which show very clearly that more than 90% of Obama's 5.7 Trillion debt figure was due to unavoidable aftereffects of the Bush administration (and therefore ALSO owned by the Republicans).
Here's a chart of our historical debt as a percentage of the GDP -
1) Reaganomics DOES NOT WORK - All the 'iconic' Reaganomics Presidents, Reagan, Bush1, and Bush2 - RAISED OUR DEBT, BOTH IN REAL DOLLARS AND AS A PERCENTAGE OF GDP.
2) EVERY Democratic president back to Truman has LOWERED the Debt as a percentage of GDP, and Obama also would have done this, were it not for the horrible mess Bush left behind, and the obstructionist actions of the Republicans (like not letting Obama eliminate the Bush Tax cuts for the wealthy).”
RootsWings on Oct 10, 2012 at 21:09:00
“When Bush took office, there was a surplus, NOT a deficit. Don't understand your post.”
Tom Iarossi on Oct 10, 2012 at 20:24:03
“1. He didn't extend them, that action was forced on him by the corporate lapdogs in Congress so he could get UI benefits extended for the people who really needed it.
2. See my response earlier. Bush and the GOTP are indeed responsible for the majority of the increased spending,”
MoNeek on Oct 10, 2012 at 20:19:20
“uuhh, ummm..OK..little math problem there..do u understand "inheritence"”
BlueBird55 on Oct 10, 2012 at 20:09:55
“1. You and your ilk held unemployed people hostage, and Prez O was pragmatic enough not to throw millions of people off unemployment and left destitute. YOU own that.
2. Economists across the board attribute a full 75% (yes, that's seventy-five percent) of the $6 trillion you and your ilk are always blaming Prez O for on the ShrubbyJr tax cuts without spending cuts, unfunded wars (2 of them), unfunded Medicare D, unfunded TARP, lost revenue from the recession.
3. So just remember, when you and your ilk are posting "facts," you need to make sure you give the whole story and make them accurate. It may just help your case. Simply because you ignore and/or refuse to accept the realities of how we ended up with this record debt, that doesn't make the facts any less truthful and accurate.”
stateretiree on Oct 10, 2012 at 20:07:58
“You also need to remember that every President when taking office is under the budget of the previous President!!”
“I'm a conservative and I agree with the claim that Obama reduced the deficit this year. However, the rest of your statement is just not true.
"conservatives want the middle class to pay all of the taxes".
We don't, and Romney/Ryan don't. The idea is to grow the economy, and increase job growth. Having a lower tax rate on small business, allows you to have a growing economy and fosters an environment of job growth. The US takes in more money with more people working and lower taxes than it would with higher taxes and few people working as we have now.”
OurSaySo on Oct 11, 2012 at 05:47:44
“You seem a reasonable person until you say that Romney/Ryan don't (want the middle class to pay all the taxes). THEY WON'T TELL us their plans. Mitt even said, if I tell you what I'm going to do, you won't elect me.
The 'simple' fix is to leave the rates alone but charge all income as 'ordinary' income.
No more 'deferred interest'/'capital gains'/'interest income'.
Further, lower the SS/Medicare rates, but apply them to ALL INCOME brackets.”
grainysmith on Oct 10, 2012 at 20:03:26
“We have had tax cuts for a decade. Where are the jobs? We should have never had tax cuts during our two longest wars in history. That should have been a law. No tax cuts during wars.”
Political sniff tester on Oct 10, 2012 at 19:59:13
“Republicans have bought enough votes in Congress to ensure they do not have to pay any significant income tax, and they have done everything they can in the last four years to make sure unemployment remained high in order to defeat President Obama. The president will encourage small business with tax breaks and FINALLY make big business pay its fair share of the tax burden. Sorry, a lot of us have seen through the "trickle down" theory.”
“If the insurance I pay for doesn't cover what I want, you know what I do? I get new insurance.
I would not think that providing viagra to men would be appropriate either.
Our tax dollars need to be going to things that help the collective, not the individual that's why we have jobs. Our jobs dictate what we can afford. I'm not a rich man, in fact I'm probably in the bottom 10%. I understand things can be tough, but also I understand what is right and what is fair.
Tax dollars going to things that are elective and not required is not appropriate. So other than in the case of medicinal purposes (some medical situations do require what would traditionally be used as birth control), I'm wholeheartedly against birth control being paid for by our tax dollars in any way.”
enhancedvibes on Oct 18, 2012 at 11:31:37
“Spoken by someone who doesnt fully understand how health insurance works.”
Russell C Crawford on Oct 11, 2012 at 07:23:47
“What is "elective" and what is not are simply personal opinion. What good are roads, airports, the military and other things that are important to you if a person is living with a pregnancy they do not want and being forced to pay a quarter million dollars to raise a child they did not plan.
Your problem is that you are only interested in paying for what "you" personally think is important and not what half the people in the world (women) think is important. Birth control is far more important than any thing else on earth -- if you are a woman. As a man, who gives a flip.
The sad fact is that women pay half their wages in taxes to states, local and federal authorties and get very little of value to them in return.”
“@blackwednesday: Your lack of factual arguments is quite frankly...embarrassing.
You, very much like Obama, make statements as if they were arguments. I could say elephants are green. Does this mean then that yes, in fact, elephants are green?. No, I just said something and hoped you would take it as a reasonable and rational argument, which it is not.
I'm sure you've got plenty of your fans from stating things without any information to back them up, but that is what Huffington Post is all about.
“In the same way as PBS and Big Bird can make it on their own, our taxes don't need to go to what women "want". If I wanted a new pair of headphones, do I get them from the government just because that's what I want my tax dollars to pay for?
As I replied to someone else, tax dollars go to the needs of the collective, not the individual. (Or at least they should).
Otherwise, like PBMax said, you want birth control covered? Get a health insurance plan that covers it without the government forcing it on them.”
Dorothy Moody on Oct 10, 2012 at 23:41:27
“Birth control isn't a "want". It's a need, and that's what too many men don't understand. We're criticized for taking control of our reproduction; we're criticized for not doing it.”
“"Women have made it clear they want some of their taxes to cover their needs."
Air is a need, food is a need, shelter is sort of a need, birth control, not a need.
What I'm saying is that our tax dollars, should be going to help the collective, not the individual. That is what taxes are for by the way. We pay taxes as a way of collecting a small portion from each individual to get things that may not be done by the individual.
For instance, I'm not planning on buying an assault rifle and going to Libya to fight terrorists, so that's where my tax dollars need to go. I'm not planning on renting a paving truck and buying gravel to pave a new highway, so that's where my tax dollars need to go.
However, Sandra Fluke can get an insurance policy that covers her for birth control without the government forcing them to do so, or she can pay for it herself.
So to summarize, I need a military, I need highways, I don't need Sandra Fluke to have birth control.”
Russell C Crawford on Oct 11, 2012 at 06:40:04
“I read your explanation and it logically fails. You are attempting to force a woman to live by your standards. And you standards fail even for you.
The point I made is that a women pay taxes. And men spend those taxes the way that men, like me, want to spend HER taxes. Sure, birth control is not as important to you as roads or other things, so you want to spend HER money on what you need help with and deny her what she needs help with. She should have birth control if that is more important to her than your assault rifle.
Oct 10, 2012 at 18:44:15
“I wasn't arguing against Michelle Obama's comments. I'm just pointing out that playing the race card in a negative way can lead to mud slinging that doesn't further the discussion. I was more or less answering the articles' question of the appropriateness of playing the race card.”
“"This is my body, not yours."
Absolutely agree, 100%. If you want to have an abortion, that's between you and your God, if you have one.
If you want to eat a ton of food and get real fat, then you pay the consequences right?
But, somehow, in this magical land of "this is my body, not yours", if you "sleep with whoever" you want, I'm supposed to pay for your birth control?
This is your body, and it's yours. This is my money, and it's mine.
Romney / Ryan 2012”
SmileAndActNice on Oct 11, 2012 at 00:32:09
“I don't wany my money paying to put unwanted kids in orphanages. Thats my money and its mine.
There is no way out of this. One of us is going to have to pay for something we don't like.
Looks like its you. Because what I want costs a fraction of the idiocy you are advocating.”
hcshugalicious on Oct 10, 2012 at 14:16:35
“You want to talk about a cost that gets passed on to the rest of us through higher insurance premiums, let's talk about obesity. We all pay those consequences. When you provide birth control you're cutting the (not insignificant) costs associated with maternal care, delivery, and health care for unplanned babies and their mothers. Birth control is a great investment. I thought Republicans enjoyed a good ROI.”
hp blogger Soraya Chemaly on Oct 10, 2012 at 12:06:26
“Actually, we all pay for people's obestity. We pay for their driving when drunk. We pay for all sorts of things. It's my money, but I still buy insurance that pays for other people's decisions. I'm not sure what your point is.”
CJWebber on Oct 10, 2012 at 11:54:48
“You need to reread the Romney / Ryan agenda.”
Caedwyn on Oct 10, 2012 at 07:27:15
“No, YOU are not supposed to pay for our birth control - the INSURANCE that WE PAY for ourselves through a deduction in our weekly pay at our jobs is supposed to cover our birth control.
Kind of like the insurance that YOU pay for covers medicine that you need - like insulin for diabetes, viagara, etc etc etc.”
Russell C Crawford on Oct 10, 2012 at 06:16:08
“"But, somehow, in this magical land of "this is my body, not yours", if you "sleep with whoever" you want, I'm supposed to pay for your birth control?"
Your money is not the question, it is tax money that is the question. Every woman pays taxes either directly or indirectly through higher prices or direct fee tax. This is a question of you denying a person the ability to get a return on their tax dollar. What pro lifers are advocating is taxation without representation. Women have made it clear that they want some of their taxes to cover their needs. And largely male dominated legislatures deny them what they demand. Why should you be able to deny women what they have already paid for?”
Dorothy Moody on Oct 10, 2012 at 05:15:58
“You are a shining example of what's wrong with this country. Abortion is between a woman and her doctor. She doesn't need to consult a deity because she's not doing anything wrong. And the issue isn't getting you to pay for birth control, we just want it accessible and covered by health insurance.”
Oct 10, 2012 at 00:43:03
“I don't see why anyone should be "allowed" to play the race card. In what way does that advance the political discussion? Who decides who can and cannot play the race card?
Unless you can be honest and tell me that if Mitt Romney put on a southern accent in front of a southern all white group of supporters and nobody would call it racism, than I think this is a two way street that the Obama White House would do best not to travel down.”
hp blogger Brittney Bullock on Oct 10, 2012 at 10:34:06
“I decided!! haha Insofar as "playing the race card" is defined as giving a relevant and accurate historical account which is what Michelle was doing.
I agree, I don't think it advances the political discussion but I don't think that was the point of it. I think Michelle was putting the fact of her family living in the white house into historical context, and I don't think she should feel barred from talking about slavery because it makes certain people uncomfortable. That is all of our history, but as a black woman, it has an added significance to her so she didn't hold back.
I'll speak for myself, I don't think if Mitt Romney put on a southern accent, that would be racist since there are southerners with accents of all different races. But I don't think the slavery comments were a matter of racism, just that some feel, like Bill O'reilly, that she was bringing up issues of race in politics. But like I said, so does everyone, even Mitt Romney who touts his family's roots in Mexico and jokes about how it would be helpful if he was a Latino. It's jokes like that and criticisms like those of Bill O'reilly that give power to a relatively powerless statement. I heard Michelle's comments, I didn't get the big deal about them and why O'reilly had to dedicate a segment of his show to them. She states a historical fact and suddenly some people are up in arms.”
AbrasivelyYours on Oct 10, 2012 at 09:15:45
“When the first Mexican candidate runs I hope they use the race card. When the first Asian runs for office I hope they use the race card. I hope every nonwhite candidate uses the race card as a reminder that racism runs deep in this country and will not go away until those who use race to discriminate against others have died out or stop teaching that mess to their children. I embrace my black heritage and won't sweep it under the rug for anyone.”
“I don't get it Jennifer, for all this "American values" stuff you'd like to say Obama has, he's gone against the one thing he agrees with you on. He said that the amount of debt that President George W. Bush ran up was "Unpatriotic". And now, within his first term, he took a debt that was at $10 Trillion to $16 Trillion!
George W. Bush over 8 years raised a deficit of nearly $4 trillion, from $5.78 Trillion deficit left by the Clinton and previous administrations to $10 Trillion which Obama became the President of whether he likes it or not.
On February 23, 2009 Obama made his pledge to cut the deficit in half, this was 3 1/2 months into his presidency. He had his financial advisors, he had the facts, the economic date, all of it. Yet, he made a pledge to cut the deficit in half to the American public, and not only did this pledge go unfulfilled he did something that was the exact opposite. Instead of cutting the deficit by $5 trillion, he raised it by $6 trillion.
When I see one democrat like yourself take Mr. Obama to task on the handling of the economy, then maybe, just maybe, I'll be able to take your claims of "American Values" seriously. Until then Jennifer, have a great week and enjoy the next two debates.”
Chopin on Oct 10, 2012 at 06:16:22
“FYI, the US national debt is rising at exponential rate, regardless of who is President, or which party has majority in Congress. That's the mathematical nature of debt explosion.
Here, experiment with various simulation input values in this illustration of realtime exponential graph. Click on "run applet", and watch the graph trace the reatime growth at exponential rates:-- http://www.otherwise.com/population/exponent.html
Every American needs to understand that the US national debt essentially is an American problem, not a partisan issue.”
cincinnati on Oct 10, 2012 at 04:18:23
“Vote for warmonger Romney.....No Way !
No new Neocon WAR'S $$$$$$$$$”
wkb2texans on Oct 10, 2012 at 02:32:42
“Amazing how hypocritical they are, no? Just wrap yourself in the American Flag, Mr President and you'll be okay. Amazing. But typical.”
NaaJane on Oct 10, 2012 at 02:07:18
“You guys fail to understand that the two wars are not one time charge. We are still paying, they are still adding to the deficit. Those unpaid for tax cuts adds to the deficit. You can't accuse Obama of increasing the deficit without acknowledging what is causing the increase.”
blackwednesday on Oct 10, 2012 at 01:47:00
“@Brandon Rising: Your lack of economic understanding is quite frankly...embarrassing.”