Empty
posted by Spencerblog at
10:08 AM
Friday, February 3, 2012
Friday, February 3, 2012
RSS Feeds© Copyright The Delaware County Times, a Journal Register Property & part of Journal Register PA -- All rights reserved | Our Publications | About Our Ads | Privacy Policy/Terms of Service
32 Comments:
The economy is growing stronger and the Presidents approval ratings are going up. Seems to me like the gas tank is now half full.
Bob, I love ya man, but you are deluded.
I thought it was a Volt and Obama didn't know it doesn't take gas, it needs a electric outlet, which burns more coal, which the greenies hate.
Danny - I love you too man, but this looks more like a Prius to me.
Delusional? According to the NY Times, he's at 51% now.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/01/obamas-approval-ratings-suggest-2012-nail-biter/
And even Romney admits that the economy is improving.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/01/20/1056851/-Mitt-Romney:-Of-course-the-economy-is-getting-better!
NYTimes.......Really.........
There is a surprise.
Danny - I'd be interested in what you're hearing. Are you hearing that Obama's approval rating is going up or down? Are you hearing that we are making economic gains or not?
If the economy is getting better, then why did new home sales in the United States hit a brand new all-time record low during 2011?
If the economy is getting better, then why are there 6 million less jobs in America today than there were before the recession started?
If the economy is getting better, then why is the average duration of unemployment in this country close to an all-time record high?
If the economy is getting better, then why has the number of homeless female veterans more than doubled?
If the economy is getting better, then why has the number of Americans on food stamps increased by 3 million since this time last year and by more than 14 million since Barack Obama entered the White House?
If the economy is getting better, then why has the number of children living in poverty in America risen for four years in a row?
If the economy is getting better, then why is the percentage of Americans living in “extreme poverty” at an all-time high?
Danny,
You can't deal in facts.
Obama-world, which locally is known as Bob-world, only wants to deal in feelings.
Danny & Jake - OK. Maybe you're right. So how do you explain this?
INGRAHAM: You’ve also noted that there are signs of improvement on the horizon in the economy. How do you answer the president’s argument that the economy is getting better in a general election campaign if you yourself are saying it’s getting better?
ROMNEY: Well, of course it’s getting better. The economy always gets better after a recession, there is always a recovery. […]
INGRAHAM: Isn’t it a hard argument to make if you’re saying, like, OK, he inherited this recession, he took a bunch of steps to try to turn the economy around, and now, we’re seeing more jobs, but vote against him anyway? Isn’t that a hard argument to make? Is that a stark enough contrast?
ROMNEY: Have you got a better one, Laura? It just happens to be the truth.
This comment has been removed by the author.
it just goes to show that Obama hasn't been able to totally stop the free market from recovering on its own Bob.
Steve - You're starting to sound like Jake. He won't even give Obama credit for getting Bin Laden. Obama could find a cure for cancer, broker peace in the Middle East, build the most robust economy in the world, and you guys would still hate him.
Danny - Like Romney said. Obama inherited this economic problem. If you remember, when he took office the economy was like a runaway freight train on a down grade. You can jam on the brakes, but you ain't stoppin for a while!
But I can't understand why Romney, who will likely be your choice, can see the situation for what it is, and you can't.
Bob,
If we're reluctant to give the worst President in history any credit, it's only because you refuse to give him any blame.
How about Solyndra, Fast and Furious, the Keystone Pipeline? How are any of these fiascos defensible?
More government rules and programs are not the answer. You can't spend your way to prosperity. Food stamps and unemployment compensation are no way to grow the economy.
When you call a 'stimulus' putting borrowed money into government departments AND when you promote tax 'fairness' over economic growth in troubling times, you deserve no credit. This clown was a mistake from the beginning.
I think Steve and Jake handled my work for me today!
Thanks boys!!
Jake - I'm responsible for your refusal to acknowledge Obama accomplishment's? That's an interesting excuse. So what you're saying is that you believe Obama has done some good, but you won't say it in front of me? That's mature.
Steve - I believe it's tax fairness to assist economic growth.
Yeah Bob, that's exactly what I said...(That's sarcasm, just in case you are about to misrepresent my comments once again)
There's no need for you to interpret the blog comments for us. As immature as we are, we all can read.
Jake - That's pretty funny. You interpret your blog comment, and then you tell me not to interpret blog comments. Now, the part about being imature. Was that sarcasm too?
Jake - BTW, show me where I defended Obama on Fast & Furious, Solyndra, or the pipe line. The archives are available to you. Good luck.
Jake - I owe you an apology. I missed the part where you said "The worst president in history" Obviously you were referring to Bush.
There you go again, Bob.
There can be no worthwhile dialogue when you insist upon misrepresenting your fellow bloggers' comments.
I specifically stated that you "refuse to give him any blame". That is entirely different than saying you "defended" him. Your understanding of the English language is sufficient for you to appreciate the difference, isn't it?
You need to put down your DNC playbook and focus on accuracy.
Jake - Oh OK. I get it. Accuracy! You mean like calling sailors soldiers. Right? Or like claiming Michelle Obama spent 100 million on her Spanish vacation. Or maybe like blaming the Sandusky thing on the liberal permissive college environmet. Or like Danny citing polls that don't exist. Or like Danny claiming that no living in Chester works at Harrahs. Yea! I get it! Accuracy!
Jake - You did write this didn't you? "How about Solyndra, Fast and Furious, the Keystone Pipeline? How are any of these fiascos defensible?"
Jake - Seems as though all of my replies to your comments are a misrepresentation of what you said! You're starting to sound like a Republican presedential candidate!
If you believe that "tax fairness" will lead to economic growth, you're much more naive than I had assumed.
It's nothing more than a re-election strategy.
Thank you, Bob.
We have a wonderfully qualified group of exceptional people vying to be the Republican nominee for President. I'm honored to mentioned with them.
Jake - Don't mention it. First time I saw you I said to Gil "now that guy over there....what's his name....look's just like Romney"
But nobody seem's to want to answer my question. Whay did Romney say this? Is he a liar?
INGRAHAM: You’ve also noted that there are signs of improvement on the horizon in the economy. How do you answer the president’s argument that the economy is getting better in a general election campaign if you yourself are saying it’s getting better?
ROMNEY: Well, of course it’s getting better. The economy always gets better after a recession, there is always a recovery. […]
INGRAHAM: Isn’t it a hard argument to make if you’re saying, like, OK, he inherited this recession, he took a bunch of steps to try to turn the economy around, and now, we’re seeing more jobs, but vote against him anyway? Isn’t that a hard argument to make? Is that a stark enough contrast?
ROMNEY: Have you got a better one, Laura? It just happens to be the truth.
If any political party attempt's to abolish social security, eliminate labor laws, you won't hear of that party again in our political history. There's a group that believes you can do these things. Among them are a few other Texas oil millionaires and an occasional politician or business man. They are stupid.
The problem lies in that somewhere/someone needs to admit that Social Security is not solvent anymore, and change needs to happen. But as soon as ANYONE mentions looking at it, it's "toss Grandmom down the stairs in her wheelchair."
It's hard to have an adult conversation when the politicians act like children. Both sides lie, and the middle ground is not always the best ground either.
Danny,
Walter Russell Mead alluded to it in his article about the need to evolve to meet the changing times. Gil posted it a week ago:
http://gilspencerblog.blogspot.com/2012/01/end-is-here.html#links
Excellent point de vue que je partage en tout points.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home