like i said we are not going to get anywhere i am going to stop with the Benghazi thing
i did not say it was not an important issue i said it is a lower tier issue of this election. The economy and foreign affairs are the larger issues.. Plus the fact that abortion can be handled through senators and other avenues where as national security is the top priority of the Commander in Chief.
Then there is the whole women's rights statement that i hate. What about the right of the unborn child or the father of the unborn child (if the pregnancy is not through rape or causing harm to the mother).. The current approach on Abortion has been largely religious driven and again division church and state, that line gets more destorted when it needs to be.. - SabresFaninIndiana
Well, since Romney can't even to begin to tell people how he plans on fixing the economy... how can you justify voting for him?
Well, since Romney can't even to begin to tell people how he plans on fixing the economy... how can you justify voting for him? - Feeling Glucky?
Romney has a plan consisting of cutting loopholes in taxes and cutting wasteful spending to balance the budget just like he has stated. Obama has already proven he can't do anything but spend money we don't have... If i felt Gary Johnson had a shot would strongly consider him.
dont go show me the studies that have been done about how it wont work becuase none of those take into account stopping useless funding.. it will take some time but he has proven over his entire career that he can balance budgets and work within confindes set forth by others
Romney has a plan consisting of cutting loopholes in taxes and cutting wasteful spending to balance the budget just like he has stated. Obama has already proven he can't do anything but spend money we don't have... If i felt Gary Johnson had a shot would strongly consider him.
dont go show me the studies that have been done about how it wont work becuase none of those take into account stopping useless funding.. it will take some time but he has proven over his entire career that he can balance budgets and work within confindes set forth by others
- SabresFaninIndiana
Increased the number of jobs, decreased the deficit. Yup, hasn't proven anything.
Romney has gone into no detail at all about what he'll cut out, and it's a big enough question that if he had any answers he'd do very well to reveal them.
Location: Matt FRICKIN ELLIS, IN Joined: 01.17.2007
Oct 30 @ 8:57 PM ET
Increased the number of jobs, decreased the deficit. Yup, hasn't proven anything.
Romney has gone into no detail at all about what he'll cut out, and it's a big enough question that if he had any answers he'd do very well to reveal them. - Feeling Glucky?
Increased the number of jobs by less than that of the population growth. Congrats on being sooooo successful in that regard. Decreased the defecit of what, you might want to check your numbers on that one
Increased the number of jobs by less than that of the population growth. Congrats on being sooooo successful in that regard. Decreased the defecit of what, you might want to check your numbers on that one - IndianaSabresFan
Aren't you supposed to be taking the opposite side?
Increased the number of jobs, decreased the deficit. Yup, hasn't proven anything.
Romney has gone into no detail at all about what he'll cut out, and it's a big enough question that if he had any answers he'd do very well to reveal them. - Feeling Glucky?
You're just so full of left wing progressive Spin aren't you.
What you fail to realize is that people who read your crap, can easily find the facts to prove you're wrong again.
It's clearly obvious that all you do is listen to, and then simply repeat Obama's talking points as if they were true.
Try a little research before you prove your total lack of grasp of the truth.
You're just so full of left wing progressive Spin aren't you.
What you fail to realize is that people who read your crap, can easily find the facts to prove you're wrong again.
It's clearly obvious that all you do is listen to, and then simply repeat Obama's talking points as if they were true.
Try a little research before you prove your total lack of grasp of the truth.
The Deficit for Obama's first three, and this years projected are.
2009 $1413 Billion
2010 $1294 Billion
2011 $1299 Billion
2012 $1100 Billion total = $5106 Billion$3920 BILLION HIGHER than Bush
Now please explain how Obama "decreased the deficit" from Bush's last four years of 1185 Billion to Obama's four year total of 5106 Billion.
- Doppleganger
Increased the number of jobs is quite the smoke and mirrors statement too...
If we were to add 650,000 new jobs every four years and the working class increases by 800,000 every four years that is a net loss in jobs.. Therefore saying he added jobs, although it is a true statement is a very short sighted statement and poor arguement for a bettering economy
By JONAH GOLDBERG
Posted: 9:52 PM, October 30, 2012
Where is the Benghazi media feeding frenzy?
I don’t think there’s a conspiracy at work. Rather, I think journalists tend to act on their instincts. And, collectively, the mainstream media’s instincts run liberal.
In 2000, a Democratic operative orchestrated an “October surprise” attack on George W. Bush, revealing that 24 years earlier, he’d been arrested for drunken driving. The media went into a feeding frenzy.
“Is all the 24-hour coverage of Bush’s 24-year-old DUI arrest the product of a liberal media almost drunk on the idea of sinking him, or is it a legitimate, indeed unavoidable news story?” asked Howard Kurtz on his CNN show “Reliable Sources.” The consensus among the guests: It wasn’t a legitimate news story. But the media kept going with it.
One could go on and on. In September 2004, former CBS titan Dan Rather gambled his entire career on a story about Bush’s service in the National Guard. His instincts were so powerful, he didn’t thoroughly check the documents he relied on, which were forgeries.
Oh, there have been conservative feeding frenzies: about Barack Obama’s pastor, John Kerry’s embellishments of his war record, etc. But the mainstream media usually tasks itself with debunking and dispelling such “hysteria.”
Last week, Fox News correspondent Jennifer Griffin reported that sources on the ground in Libya say they pleaded for support during the attack on the Benghazi consulate that led to the deaths of four Americans. They were allegedly told twice to “stand down.” Worse, there are suggestions that significant military resources were available to counterattack, but requests for help were denied.
If true, the White House’s concerted effort to blame the attack on a video crumbles, as do several other fraudulent claims. Yet, last Friday, the president boasted, “The minute I found out what was happening” in Benghazi, he ordered that everything possible be done to protect our personnel. That’s either untrue, or he’s being disobeyed on grave matters.
Yet Fox News is alone in treating the story like it’s a big deal. During the less significant Valerie Plame scandal, reporters camped out on the front lawns of Karl Rove and other Bush White House staff. Did Obama confiscate those journalists’ sleeping bags?
Of the five news shows last Sunday, only “Fox News Sunday” treated this as a major story. On the other four, the issue came up only when Republicans mentioned it. “Meet the Press” host David Gregory shushed a guest who tried to bring up the subject, saying, “Let’s get to Libya a little bit later.” He never did, but he saved plenty of time to dive deep into the question of what Indiana Senate candidate Richard Mourdock’s comments on abortion and rape mean for the Romney campaign.
I’m willing to believe that journalists like Gregory are sincere in their desire to play it straight. But among those who don’t share his instincts, it’s hard to distinguish between conspiracy and groupthink. Indeed, it’s hard to think why one should even bother trying to make that distinction at all.
You're just so full of left wing progressive Spin aren't you.
What you fail to realize is that people who read your crap, can easily find the facts to prove you're wrong again.
It's clearly obvious that all you do is listen to, and then simply repeat Obama's talking points as if they were true.
Try a little research before you prove your total lack of grasp of the truth.
Is Obama's total deficit spending over four years of $5106 BILLION HIGHER than Bush's last four year total deficit spending over four years of $1186 Billion???
Is Obama's total deficit spending over four years of $5106 BILLION HIGHER than Bush's last four year total deficit spending over four years of $1186 Billion???
