Mr Ryan...

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 09, 2012 2:31 AM GMT
    mrryan.jpg


    obstructionist.jpg
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 09, 2012 3:36 AM GMT
    The sign tells Mr. Ryan "you can't say the policies didn't work"

    The policies, specifically Obama's "American Jobs Act" along with the best guess for his ill-defined policies if he were to win a second term are nothing more than more stimulus. The jobs act was nothing significantly different than the first stimulus.

    The Republican "obstructionism" was simply following the will of the voters in 2010 who said enough spending. Obama wanted to continue his spending ways, however.

    If you want to suggest more stimulus would have been a good idea despite the will of the voters, there are a few questions that should be addressed regarding the first stimulus:

    How many jobs were created?

    How about the shovel-ready jobs that were not shovel-ready?

    How many stimulus dollars were spent per job?

    How many dollars went to cronys not leading to jobs?

    How many dollars went overseas?

    How much was the debt increased because of the stimulus?

    Why would any thinking person expect doing the same plan again would lead to different results?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 09, 2012 3:56 AM GMT
    "Why would any thinking person expect doing the same plan again would lead to different results?"

    WELL SAID, SAGGY!

    WHO WANTS TO GO BACK TO ........THE BUSH CATASTROPHE! ? !
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19129

    Sep 09, 2012 4:16 AM GMT
    Balancing said

    WHO WANTS TO GO BACK TO ........THE BUSH CATASTROPHE! ? !


    Who said they want to? Romney is NOT Bush. He's also quite a bit more experienced in business on an international level than Bush was. It stands to reason that, if elected, his policies would bring a fresh approach based on advice and guidance from many of the leading economists he has at his disposal to consult with and advise him. Whether those policies will be effective is anyone's guess.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 09, 2012 12:03 PM GMT
    THE BUSH ECONOMIC POLICY:

    ' tax cuts for the wealthy, while placing greater burdens on the middle class and seniors, will deliver a stronger economy, '

    THE RESULT: FAILURE.


    THE ROMNEY/RYAN PLAN:

    ' tax cuts for the wealthy, while placing greater burdens on the middle class and seniors, will deliver a stronger economy, '


    cjaz still ponders " Whether those policies will be effective is anyone's guess."

    NO GUESS NEEDED.

  • HottJoe

    Posts: 21366

    Sep 09, 2012 1:21 PM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ said
    Balancing said

    WHO WANTS TO GO BACK TO ........THE BUSH CATASTROPHE! ? !


    Who said they want to? Romney is NOT Bush. He's also quite a bit more experienced in business on an international level than Bush was. It stands to reason that, if elected, his policies would bring a fresh approach based on advice and guidance from many of the leading economists he has at his disposal to consult with and advise him. Whether those policies will be effective is anyone's guess.


    The dems didn't vote for Bush. YOU DID THAT! Time to take responsibility and stop blindly and willfully repeating the same mistakes.icon_mad.gif

    The difference between dems and repubs, is that we have reason to celebrate our past presidents. You have to make excuses for yours. It's almost like you want to blame us for Bush.icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 09, 2012 2:04 PM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ saidRomney is NOT Bush. He's also quite a bit more experienced in business on an international level than Bush was. It stands to reason that, if elected, his policies would bring a fresh approach based on advice and guidance from many of the leading economists he has at his disposal to consult with and advise him. Whether those policies will be effective is anyone's guess.

    You are supporting Romney's economic policies based on a guess, on total uncertainty? Well, at least you're consistent - you've been saying the same thing about Romney's position regarding civil rights for gays, telling us you "believe" Romney in office will do the opposite of what he's publicly said and pledged to do against gays.

    You are the first voter I've ever heard who's supporting a candidate because you contend he'll do the exact OPPOSITE of what he's campaigning on, while having no guess as to what his policies will cause.

    But if you want to have someone in the White House who has views on gay civil rights opposite to Romney's stated ones, then keep Obama there! DUH! His track record of pro-gay actions is the best of any President in US history. We don't have to rely on your long-shot guessing that Romney will instantly repudiate his Party and his supporters once he takes the oath of office. We already have a man in the White House doing those pro-gay things right now, no guesswork required.

    And as for Romney's experience in "business on an international level" would that be with outsourcing US jobs overseas? Taking over companies to cannibalize them? Hiding assets in offshore accounts? Using international tax shelters to avoid paying US taxes?

    Well, hard for us to judge, since Romney refuses to disclose the details of his business dealings, other than to tell us that they were heroic, which once again you seem willing to believe on faith. And to blindly ignore a trail of stories & claims from Romney about his business dealings that don't add up, like his convoluted "now you see him, now you don't" tenure at Bain Capital.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 09, 2012 2:08 PM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ said
    Balancing said

    WHO WANTS TO GO BACK TO ........THE BUSH CATASTROPHE! ? !


    Who said they want to? Romney is NOT Bush. He's also quite a bit more experienced in business on an international level than Bush was.
    Yeah he is.. just look at Bain! The American people want JOBS and an ECONOMY HERE in the old USofA.. not 'international'............. Mitt LOVES to outsource, remember?
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19129

    Sep 09, 2012 2:24 PM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    You are supporting Romney's economic policies based on a guess, on total uncertainty?



    Are we not ALL doing that? NOTHING is ever certain. When you cast a vote, all you can do is hope your candidate not only WINS, but is also able to accomplish what they are setting out to do. There are NO GUARANTEES on either side. Plenty of people would argue that the Obama policies, based on RESULTS, are not all that promising. Obviously, interpreting said results are subject to endless debate. Regardless, the point I am making is that nothing is a sure thing, regardless of who you're voting for.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 09, 2012 7:03 PM GMT
    Obama's "Jobs" bill was such a joke...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Sep 09, 2012 7:13 PM GMT
    Given that he has provided absolutely no specifics as to how he would help the economy, I would say his network of leading economist is failing him.


    CuriousJockAZ said
    Balancing said

    WHO WANTS TO GO BACK TO ........THE BUSH CATASTROPHE! ? !


    Who said they want to? Romney is NOT Bush. He's also quite a bit more experienced in business on an international level than Bush was. It stands to reason that, if elected, his policies would bring a fresh approach based on advice and guidance from many of the leading economists he has at his disposal to consult with and advise him. Whether those policies will be effective is anyone's guess.