You and Jon Stewart are on the same wavelength, Chris. Check out the second video: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/05/jon-stewart-jabs-dems-for-lukewarm-dnc-video_n_1857344.html

AGAIN read the WHOLE ARTICLE lol:
s Mother Jones‘ Kevin Drum points out, though, the actual amount of time the Democrats held a filibuster-proof majority, when you factor in the late Sen. Ted Kennedy‘s illness and the winter recess, amounts to 14 weeks.

- 39 bills were blocked in 2009 - FACT. I notice you completely ignored this (again) since it directly refutes your claim Democrats had a 'lock' on Congress and were free to pass whatever they wanted... So should Americans be following the laws in these bills since in your right-wing media world there is no way bills could've been blocked by Republicans in 2009??

the Democrats didn’t reach that 60-seat threshold in the Senate until Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) was sworn in on July 7, 2009. They lost that majority upon the swearing-in of Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA) on Feb. 4, 2010,

OBAMA HAD A FILIBUSTER PROOF MAJORITY **FACT**

BROWN's ELECTION ENDED THAT FILIBUSTER PROOF MAJORITY **FACT**

You want to play semantic games, fine..

But at least acknowledge the facts..

BROWN's election ended the Democrats LOCK on the Senate...

At around the same time, the US stopped LOSING jobs and started GAINING jobs..

These are the facts that no amount of semantic games will erase...

Jesus H Christ!

Michale.....

Up until this point, Democrats had a filibuster-proof majority.

Nope. Again you have repeated many times about this 'filbuster-proof' nonsense and many times I have had to correct you. Do you think the 39 bills blocked from passing in 2009 (fact) magically appeared out of nowhere? Are those 39 bills block in 2009 magically still law??

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/morning-doh-chris-christie-falsely-claims-president-obama-had-filibuster-proof-majority-for-2-years/

Aside from this you really are getting into hilarious territory where you are claiming that Democrats are responsible for bad things, Republicans good things even when Democrats have a majority in both Houses and the Presidency lolololol. Your total bias and view of reality is starting to slip further and further away into a dream world...

Credit where credit is due.

You did, in fact, say how dumb a remark it was...

Kudos to you...

I think you need a history lesson. In January 2010 Republicans did not have control of any element of Congress

Actually, you are in error...

On 19 Jan 2010, Brown won the Massachusetts Special Election which effectively ended Democrats complete domination of the Senate..

Up until this point, Democrats had a filibuster-proof majority.

So, it's accurate to say that Republicans regained some of control of Congress in Jan of 2010...

Interestingly enough, it is around this time frame that the US stopped LOSING jobs and started GAINING jobs..

Of course, there is not enough data to say, unequivocally, that Republicans were responsible for the stopping of the hemorrhaging of the jobs during the Obama Administration..

But it IS an interesting coincidence.. :D If it IS in fact, a coincidence... :D

I don't think you understand how bias works. For example, would you say a site that has 95% right-wing articles and 5% left-wing is unbiased because they have 'many' left-wing articles every day? Bias is measure this way, not by 'oh a few articles that are not biased appear'. Anyway I thought we were in agreement that MSN was left, Fox was right?

Link please?? :D
http://www.chrisweigant.com/2012/08/03/ftp221/
Read post 63.

At least not with the records that Americans WANT to see... School Records, FAST Furious, etc etc etc

Nope. These are things you and other nut-job-right-wing-conspiracy-nuts want to see. Show me ANY evidence that "Americans" want to see this? (Like the many polls where >50% Americans agree that Romney should show more tax returns). My guess is you'll probably just ignore this comment, as what happens when we usually debate this and it becomes clear you are very wrong on the transparency issue...

Obama only started CREATING jobs in Jan of 2010..
Hmmmm What happened then??
Oh yea, that's right. Republicans regained some control over Congress...

I think you need a history lesson. In January 2010 Republicans did not have control of any element of Congress (although they were still filibustering like crazy, so had 'some' control in this sense...). But shhhh let's not talk about the millions of jobs created in 2010 and the fact that the trend of American job creation was heavily upwards when Republican took seat in 2011 - that is counter to your 'Democrats are at fault for all bad things, Republicans responsible for all good things' nonsensical argument lol...

Yea, but the problem with your theory is that FNC displays MANY of those types of Pro Left articles each and every day..

Which utterly and completely blows your FNC IS RIGHT BIASED theory right out of the water.. :D

Perhaps you should read the Friday thread where this was mentioned again? I very clearly spoke out against it and called it stupid. It's just whenever I do criticise Democrats you just completely ignore it and continually accuse me of being biased...

Link please?? :D

I don't think you understand the meaning of the word 'match' lol. You see Obama is already more transparent than Romney. Romney needs to 'match' him not the other way round...

In YOUR little world, I am sure you believe that.. But here in the real world, Obama hasn't been very transparent at all..

At least not with the records that Americans WANT to see... School Records, FAST Furious, etc etc etc..

What on earth are you talking about? Want to bet that this is mentioned in almost every speak at the DNC? Or play a drinking game where you drink when you hear 'tax returns' - you'll go through a lot of alcohol!

Prove it... :D

Lol Michale you've accidentally quoated a PRO-Obama article lolol! You completely missed the point here. The point is Obama is creating private sector jobs whilst America continues to shed Government jobs. If the same amount of people were employed in the public sector as in 2008, the unemployment rate would be 7.1% today:

Obama only started CREATING jobs in Jan of 2010..

Hmmmm What happened then??

Oh yea, that's right. Republicans regained some control over Congress...

However, Obama STILL hasn't replaced all the jobs that were lost under HIS watch..

Cue the BLAME BUSH PITY PARTY...

Michale.....

Lol one real article looking at the facts does not an unbiased news make. In fact, I'd expect any biased news organisation to throw in the odd unbiased article so they can say 'Look! We aren't biased!'

Yet you didn't speak out against it when he said it.

Perhaps you should read the Friday thread where this was mentioned again? I very clearly spoke out against it and called it stupid. It's just whenever I do criticise Democrats you just completely ignore it and continually accuse me of being biased...

Of course, if Obama wants to MATCH the transparency he wants from Romney, he (Obama) could always release his school records.

I don't think you understand the meaning of the word 'match' lol. You see Obama is already more transparent than Romney. Romney needs to 'match' him not the other way round...

Funny... Since Romney tied the release of tax records to the release of school records, Team Obama has been REAL quiet about Romney's tax records..

What on earth are you talking about? Want to bet that this is mentioned in almost every speak at the DNC? Or play a drinking game where you drink when you hear 'tax returns' - you'll go through a lot of alcohol!

though that number refers only to private sector employment gains over the past 29 months and leaves out state and local government jobs that continue to disappear each month...

Obama is over his head. Democrats simply cannot fix this economy...

Lol Michale you've accidentally quoated a PRO-Obama article lolol! You completely missed the point here. The point is Obama is creating private sector jobs whilst America continues to shed Government jobs. If the same amount of people were employed in the public sector as in 2008, the unemployment rate would be 7.1% today: http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/jobs/posts/2012/08/03-jobs-greenstone-looney.

But shhhh don't mention this to the right-wingers. Government decreasing under 'socialist' Obama. Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh. Their minds will explode!

Oh gods, give me a frak'in break!!!

It's funny how the Left always condemns religious hysterical and fanaticism...

But, apparently, only when it comes from the Right....

Michale.....

Oh gods, give me a frak'in break!!!

Obama is over his head. Democrats simply cannot fix this economy...

Michale.....

Yet you didn't speak out against it when he said it.

So, you were FOR it until such time being FOR it didn't work to your benefit, so then you were against it... :D

But, if you are now AGAINST what Reid said, then you concede that Romney shouldn't have to show any more tax returns, as he has released what is customary and that should suffice..

Of course, if Obama wants to MATCH the transparency he wants from Romney, he (Obama) could always release his school records. :D

Funny... Since Romney tied the release of tax records to the release of school records, Team Obama has been REAL quiet about Romney's tax records..

I guess Obama doesn't want ANYTHING to remind Americans that Obama is still keeping secrets about his past.. :D

So, when Romney does win, will you admit that you were wrong? :D

Oh dear it seems even Fox has admitted your arguments in this thread are wrong:

It's worth it, just to see you quote Fox News...

So, will YOU admit that FoxNews doesn't have a conservative bias??

After all, a news media with a conservative bias would NEVER post anything that was Pro Democrat, as FNC just did... :D

Michale.....

I'd say that I agree that Romney has about a 40% chance of winning, probably less - around 30% I'd say. Barring a large fall in job creation or something in Europe which slows the economy vastly between now and the election I see no path to victory for him on his current platform. I'd say the probability of him winning is strongly correlated to the probability of the economy faltering between now and the election...

I only have one question...

When we have President Elect Romney, will you admit that you were wrong??

Michale....

Michale debating you is fun, I will continue this ;)

Meanwhile, "Red Carpet for Solyndra Figure at Democratic Convention": http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/red-carpet-solyndra-figure-democratic-convention/story?id=17150368&nwltr=blotter_featureMore#.UEZw1VR8szp

Agreed. Lets call it an indefinite this time.

They are simply INCAPABLE of admitting when they are wrong...

Michale.....

Yeah, that's because you're hell bent on deceitfully mischaracterizing and misrepresenting statements, michty, in your never-ending quest to detour away from the point, or to simply mischaracterize for your own benefit. That stuff got old way long ago (I see Michale got a little sick of it, too), so, yeah, I have no problem going back to ignoring you.

Now THAT's a bitch-slap if I have ever seen one!!! :D

Michale.....

Well, at least Obama can count on the STONER vote... :^/

I still think the 'Jake Grafton' novel Under Seige has the best solution to the rampant drug problem...

Michale.....

I'll make a deal with you. I'll ignore your comments, you ignore mine? Everytime we chat about something it disintegrates into a semantics argument. This will save us both the hassle.

Michale
You have failed to acknowledge the Reid Precedent..
It's not up to the ACCUSER to prove their case

This is your problem you put 'the left' in one group. Not everyone things the same. I don't agree with what Reid said. So I will apply the normal burden of evidence on YOU the accuser. Of course this should be pretty simple, you just have to name 1 bill (I already have named 1 bill and I'm not even making the accusation!).

When your accusations are so silly and a blatant misunderstanding of your own political system I would guess (hope) that even you know how stupid they are!

WAY TO GO, OBAMA!!!

:^/

What was it that Obama said?? That Bush having an 8 Trillion Dollar Debt is "unpatriotic"???

I guess that makes Obama an out and out traitor, eh???

Michale.....

You MIGHT have better luck there... :D

"No, not really. I can't back that up"
-Dr Evil, AUSTIN POWERS: The Spy Who Shagged Me

:D

Michale.....

I'll take the just-not-bother-responding choice, since I find your game-playing beyond boring.

Michty, Michty, Michty....

You have failed to acknowledge the Reid Precedent..

It's not up to the ACCUSER to prove their case....

It's up to YOU to refute it..

So, find the evidence that SHOWS me n CB are wrong..

Until you can, you have absolutely NO CASE...

This is the Reid Precedent...

You live by the sword, you die by the sword... :D

"Ahhhh, Kirk.. My old friend, Kirk. Do you know the Klingon proverb that says 'revenge is a dish best served cold'. It is very cold in space."
-Kahn, STAR TREK II

Michale.....

Back to your tedious "do you think?" games, having nothing to do with business owners' confidence, but a handy little way to detour away from the point, as usual? That's when I go back to ignoring you, michty.

Ah sorry I didn't realise the inverted commas difference. But I am going to continue to paraphrase where possible. You can either deal with it, paraphrase back if you like or just not bother responding - I'll leave the choice to you.

It is you and Michale providing the allegation. You have yet to provide a single piece of evidence that jobs created in 2011-12 should be associated to Republicans (perhaps ONE bill might help?) but I'd love to hear it (if you actually believe this and aren't just winding me up...).

The Brits usually reverse the American quotation order, using single quotation marks first, and then double quotation marks to enclose quotations within quotations. But the point is your convenient characterizations and translations in place of what's actually said. You really need to stop doing that.

Uhm I'm going to disagree. The accused still gets to provide evidence!

If they wish. The point, however, is that the prosecutor/plaintiff has to prove the allegation, not the defendant.

Voters sent Republicans in to put the brakes on O's policies in 2010, michty. And that's what they did. Yeah, interesting timing, all right. Or "cause and effect" might be another way of looking at it.

You seriously think economies work in 1-2 year cycles? Or short-term cycles? What about the jobs added in 2010? And the jobs trend going into 2011?

I don't believe you guys are stupid enough to actually believe this and I think you're just winding me up - although I'm kind of getting scared that you do actually believe this... If you are winding me up well played indeed, you win and I fell for it.

Voters sent Republicans in to put the brakes on O's policies in 2010, michty. And that's what they did. Yeah, interesting timing, all right. Or "cause and effect" might be another way of looking at it.

Sorry but inverted commas are usually intended to paraphrase. Quotation marks look like this " " and, from what I gather, the standard procedure on this site is to put quotations in italics or even say "I quote". But if you're going to play semantical crap again lets just end the debate now this is the last time I bother responding to one of your stupid posts about language and being 'misquoted' 'misinterpreted' or 'misunderstood' (PS. these single quotes once again indicate paraphrasing not quoting).

Uhm I'm going to disagree. The accused still gets to provide evidence! What happens is one side makes an allegation and provides evidence in support of said allegation - before the court stage, the judge decides if this is enough evidence to even proceed with to court. Then, in court, the evidence is presented in further detail by the prosecution before the other side firstly rebuts this evidence but also provides evidence of their own.

This is different to you and Michale's courtroom where one side can make a rhetorical, nonsensical statement without providing any evidence and then demand that the other side be required to provide evidence to disprove it... and even then such evidences is glanced over, ignored and the final verdict is 'Republicans are responsible for good things, Democrats bad things!'.

I thought the Left looked down on the use of "retarded" as a slur. Or does that only apply if the Right uses it?

I love how one person is 'the left' in you and Michale's world. Again - not quite how things work in real life...

But I actually agree with this although I still find myself throwing the word in occasionally. My apologies for any offence in using this word.

Wow, I get quotation marks around something I never said this time. You've got a real bad habit of using your own personal characterizations and convenient translations to describe what others have said, michty. Keep doing that, and I'll keep ignoring you, k?

You're kidding right? My God the American education system is badly failing you guys.

Ok let me start with what you do know.
- You know bills take quite a long time to write?
- Also quite a long time to pass? That passing a bill isn't a simple process that takes minutes?
- And once passed, bills take quite a long time to enact? A good example for you might be that the larger sections of the ACA don't start until 2014...
- Also that the US Government doesn't need to pass bills everyday for the country to function?
- So a bill passed a long time ago could still be helping to function the country today?
- Like the Government doesn't get together today, the 4th Sept and say 'what bills should we pass for tomorrow the 5th of Sept so the country doesn't shut down'?

Some info: http://kids.clerk.house.gov/grade-school/lesson.html?intID=17

NO incumbent has EVER won re-election with Unemployment past 7.2% since FDR....

DEMs in government has been shrinking steadily since the Great Democrat Shellacking Of 2010

Lol exactly - you should be betting your house and everything on In-Trade getting such great odds if you believe this. The point is: I am looking at the numbers. They tell me that whatever the Republicans are doing isn't working. And when Mitt Romney says he is 'preparing for the debates' I would guess he is actually drawing up a plan C...

Last I checked, the prosecutor, or plaintiff, making the allegation, gets to prove his case, not the defendant who's being accused.

I thought the Left looked down on the use of "retarded" as a slur. Or does that only apply if the Right uses it?

OK.... Then how would YOU explain the FACT (since you can't dispute it) that jobs started being created to the DAY that Democrats lost their golden majority???

Luck??? Happenstance?? Pixie Fairy Dust???

Yea, would love to see the FACTS that support THAT contention! :D

PS. Michale - Romney is down to 41.8% on In-Trade. I would suggest you make a bet given your 89% confidence (the source of which you never provided) on a Romney victory... but in fact I think it is better that you wait until the end of this week when he might have dropped below 40% and you'll get an even bigger (possibly even a full 50%) edge!

Sounding a tad desperate there, ain'tcha?? :D

NO incumbent has EVER won re-election with Unemployment past 7.2% since FDR....

DEMs in government has been shrinking steadily since the Great Democrat Shellacking Of 2010...

Do the math, michty....

Michale.....

Especially when you're making retarded claims like 'Republicans, despite never passing a single economic bill, are responsible for the recovery and all the jobs - look at the timing!' (lol). Obviously this, and Republicans economic plans as a whole, totally forget why a recovery was necessary in the first place - in the style of Michale:

"Don't mention the Bush. I mentioned him once, but I think I got away with it!"
- Basil Fawlty

Luckily most Americans don't view reality like you both do (my rule I presented in [68]) or President Romney and the subsequent destruction of American social values would be a shoe-in.

LOL. Gotta love how the rules are always bass-akwards on Planet Liberal. They've created such a neat little world for themselves.

He never said otherwise, in the first place. It's just another case of the Left hearing what it wants to hear instead of what was actually said.

Ryan: Speech didn’t say Obama responsible for GM plant closure

"Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) on Tuesday defended his Republican National Committee speech and said he had not accused President Obama of being responsible for the closure of an auto plant in Janesville, Wis.

"What they're trying to suggest is that I said that Barack Obama was responsible for our plant shutdown in Janesville," Ryan said Monday on NBC's "Today" show. "That is not what I was saying. Read the speech. What I was saying is the president ought to be held to account for his broken promises...."
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/247273-paul-ryan-janesville-story-was-about-obamas-broken-promises

http://www.g4tv.com/videos/60531/what-to-expect-in-madden-nfl-13/?quality=hd

Anyone see the gameplay for Madden 13??

I am not much of a gamer anymore and haven't played a Madden game since 10.. But my gods, look at the graphics!!!

WOW

Michale.....

Harry Reid has established (and even won an award for it) that when an accuser makes an accusation, it's up to the ACCUSE'EE to prove it wrong....

I just KNEW that was gonna come back and bite ya'all on the arse!!! :D

Michale.....

Ahhhh Ahhhhh Ahhhh....

Harry Reid has established (and even won an award for it) that when an accuser makes an accusation, it's up to the ACCUSE'EE to prove it wrong....

But let me crystallize it for you...

Were there any jobs added during the Obama administration prior to Scott Brown's election?

If you can show that there were, then CB's source is in error...

If you can't show that there were, then the conclusion stands as factual..

Gods bless Harry Reid... :D

Btw Mr Ryan admitted today the plant closed in December 2008

Ahhh So NOW Ryan is a reliable source??? :D

Michale.....

I hope your right-wing fact-checkers rate his new comments as 'totally false' given their previous claims that the plant wasn't 'closed' until 2009 lol.

You are always big on "facts"

Well the burden of proof is not on me. CB is saying 'Obama is responsible for the bad stuff but Republicans the good stuff that happened the last 4 years!' (lol) so the burden of proof is on her.

I'd point to the stimulus bill as being the main driver of any jobs creation or economic recovery. Since the Republicans didn't actually pass any economic bills, to suggest they are responsible for the jobs creation (and Democrats the jobs destruction) is, quite frankly, laughable. It is really trying to stretch reality.

I think the kid is an Obama supporter and he was so desperate to convince himself that the last 3+ years has been a bad dream... :D

Michale.....

Do you have any FACTS to back up that CB is WRONG in her conclusion???

You are always big on "facts"....

So, is what CB said factual or not???

Michale.....

Obama had a VIRTUAL LOCK on ALL facets of government for the first two years of his administration.. He HAD the chance to REALLY help this country..

So those 70 bills during 2009-2010 (an all time record high of all time at that point in time) that were blocked and did not pass due to the filibuster don't exist in your made up world?

Those 70 bills actually passed in your made up world where Obama had a lock on Government?

Those 70 bills are in fact law in your made up world where Obama had a lock on Government? So we should act as if they are law because they must've actually passed since Obama had a lock on Government?

OPEN YOUR EYES. STOP BELIEVING THE RHETORIC.

Lol CB you just proved my post in [68] perfectly. I'm just going to refer back to this when dealing with you guys now. I should add a new rule:

(5) Anything good that happens during a Democratic Presidency is due to Republicans; anything bad that happens is due to Democrats.

In other news, Romney got to -0.1 in the RCP average after the convention so, so, so, so close to taking the lead in 2012 for the first time. Unfortunately he's back to -0.3 today. Shame. Could've had his first 2012 lead in the post convention bounce but now that's going to be pretty unlikely to happen...

Oooooo good find!!! :D

"That oughta clinch up their sphincters!"
-Rachael Phelps, Major League II

:D

Michale.....

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1_lCc4UfUvUHimoeAv9UTOMvYtferO5EaO9wKHj4GFeE/edit?pli=1#slide=id.p13

Good summary: Did his policies work, as the President claims? Only if his goal was to come in last place.

In John Kerryesque fashion, his policies worked - as soon as they were stopped.

Michael Clarke Duncan passed away at age 54..

It's sad times we live in.

Michale

There's no need, says Team Obama. What could possibly go wrong!!? :D

Someone pass the popcorn!! :D

Michale......

Yep, it's like Obama's campaign seal that was a near duplicate of the Presidential Seal..

That's our POTUS....

A legend in his own mind...

Michale.....

I like the pic with the chair on Mount Rushmore. It reminds me of the Obama Mt. Rushmore sand shrine: http://www.examiner.com/article/giant-sand-obama-sculpture-damaged-by-rain

BBBWWWWAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

LOL! I like the one of the chair on Mount Rushmore. It reminds me of the shrine constructed of sand.
http://www.examiner.com/article/giant-sand-obama-sculpture-damaged-by-rain

Excellent! From your perspective, at least. :)

In any case, come back only when you have something worthwhile to say. Okay, dear? Heh.

Gosh, more insults. What, pray tell, were the chances.

BBBWWWWAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Once again Republicans prove that they can motivate the American people, while Democrats will always prove that they can bloviate to the American people... :D

This is one of those times I wish I could say I am a Republican...

Michale...

Michale.....

So, how do you explain the Romney/Ryan aversion to financial regulatory reform?

We won't know there is any actual aversion until Romney and Ryan begin actual governing..

Remember, Obama said a LOT of things in 2008-2009 that never came to pass..

On the other hand, I think that we definitely should follow Obama's advice he gave in Feb of 2009...

"If I can't turn this economy around in 3 years, I don't *DESERVE* a second term."

We should ALL heed Obama's advice....

I understand that Chris1962 likes the nickname, CB ... why don't you just use that and then any confusion between Chris and Chris1962, God forbid, will be avoided. Deal?

"None of these facts are in dispute, Mr President!!"
-Klingon Ambassador, STAR TREK VI The Undiscovered Country

Michale......

Okay, now I know you're a girl ... no guy would be so hypersensitive or so repetitive, ad nauseam ... oh, wait ...

In any case, come back only when you have something worthwhile to say. Okay, dear? Heh.

Are you trying hard to come across as being thick-skulled or does it just come naturally?

That was about as clear as mud.

:-)

The video says it all, Liz. I think there ever even pics of Biden in there.

Sorry please read Chris as Chris62...

Unless, of course it's one of my comments where I start off with Chris, ...

What am I going to do with you?!

I understand that Chris1962 likes the nickname, CB ... why don't you just use that and then any confusion between Chris and Chris1962, God forbid, will be avoided. Deal?

(1) All Republican Presidents are not responsible for any economic problems or recession - those were created by their Democratic predecessors/Democratic Congress.
(2) All Republican Presidents are, however, responsible for economic successes. These are very rare though - which is the fault of the Democrats (see (1), definitely not the Republican policies which are not worthy of being re-considered.
(3) Democratic Presidents economic successes are due to Republicans in general (see (2)). The fact that Democrats followed different economic policies than Republicans is nothing to do with the success. Or, they are not really successes, just future problems passed on to Republicans (see (1)).
(4) Democratic Presidents economic failures are completely their fault. A Democratic President blaming their predecessor or Republican House is just trying to make excuses that Republicans see right though(see Obama).

Why don't you want to share your own thoughts about any of this?

It's PBS, Liz. You're safe. It even has lots of pics of Geithner in there. G'head, learn some facts.

Are you addressing your comments to CW or to Chris1962?

It could be terribly confusing to newcomers here. I'm just sayin' ...

Maybe you didn't get the memo. I'm not interested in your links. I'm interested in what YOU have to say about this.

For instance, why do you think Romney/Ryan are so against effective fin reg reform? Why do they want to repeal Dodd-Frank?

Oh, I'll say: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/warning/view/?utm_campaign=viewpage&utm_medium=grid&utm_source=grid

Michale in July: I take it you didn't read the factcheck.org report, eh?

You this week LOL at the "independent fact checkers."

Funny how FactCheck is fine to quote when it supports you, but when it doesn't 'lol it's not independent'. It's just the usual right-wing response, when they disagree the media becomes the 'biased liberal media' and when they agree it becomes 'look at what the media say, Obama is desperate!'

Michale
I noticed how ya are utterly incapable of addressing points 4, 5 ,6 and er.. 6 in comment #32..

Sure
4. Agree - all the fact-checkers do too.
5. Agree - all the fact-checkers do too.
6. Agree - all the fact-checkers do too.

I don't really have much else to say other than you and Chris has proved your inability to actually read what the independent fact-checkers have said, even when I quote it on here.

Chris
Does "effectively" mean "permanently"? No?

I am not sure what you are attempting to argue here but let's take it to it's logical conclusion:

You believe mothballing a place isn't shutting it down - since 'effectively closing' a place isn't 'permanently' closing a place! Fine lets go with it.

You posted under point (6) in your list of points that the plant is still mothballed today.

So basically it still isn't permanently closed today, it is only 'effectively closed'. And since you don't believe being mothballed or effectively closed is the same as closed then, under your logic, the plant is still open today!

So Ryan is wrong about the plant closing full stop, the date doesn't even matter, since your logic shows you believe a mothballed plant isn't a closed plant.

In addition to this, Obama's promise of keeping the plant open for 100 years is still on as, in your world, the plant is still 'open' today.

Congratulations, you just completely destroyed your argument. Fwiw I don't believe this, since I know that mothballing is effectively closing. I am just showing you how stupid your argument is when you take it to it's logical conclusion...

Michale
The fact that a Democrat happened to be POTUS when the PLUS happened and a Republican happened to be POTUS when the NEG happened is purely happenstance

Amazing! I'd love to hear you actually apply your logic to Obama. Because in you and Republicans world Obama is responsible for EVERYTHING - you completely ignoring the fact he had the worst House of all time, because it suits you to do so. Yet when it is pointed out the records of Clinton and Bush, all of a sudden you want to have your cake and eat it, so the argument changes to 'well you can't blame the President for everything!'. Well played.

:-)

So, how do you explain the Romney/Ryan aversion to financial regulatory reform?

"Mr Gambini? That was a lucid, intelligent and well thought-out objection.. OVERRULED!"
-Fred Gwynne, MY COUSIN VINNY

:D

Not necessarily..

Clinton had the Dot Com bubble which was a HUGE plus to the economy...

Further, Bush had 9/11 which was a HUGE negative to the economy...

Without the huge impact that both events had on the US economy, there is no telling WHAT may have happened..

The fact that a Democrat happened to be POTUS when the PLUS happened and a Republican happened to be POTUS when the NEG happened is purely happenstance..

It's impossible to draw any accurate conclusion of economic prowess of any given political ideology based on those two limited and highly isolated examples..

Michale....

I find it amazing that O's trying to run on Bill's record.

That's not quite the way to interpret what Obama is trying to do and what Clinton will do Wednesday night at the convention.

Let me put this as simply as I can ...

Under Clinton's stewardship, the pro-growth economic policies put in place resulted in job creation and a budget surplus. Granted, the repeal of Glass-Steagall in the absence of an effective financial regulatory regime helped to set the stage for the financial crisis of 2007/2008.

During the Bush/Cheney era, on the other hand, economic policies severely curtailed job creation while the deficit and debt rose exponentially as a result of two wars off the books, tax cuts skewed toward the wealthiest Americans (in the midst of two wars, no less) and a very expensive and ineffective prescription drug policy, not to mention the financial crisis of 2007/08.

And, so, a simple comparison between the Clinton and Bush years is quite instructive when trying to determine which economic policies are effective and lead to economic growth.

Unfortunately, Romney/Ryan and the rest of the Republicans have not learned these lessons. They want to return to the failed policies of the Republican cult of economic failure. Even President Clinton learned the lesson of how important financial regulatory reform is to the health of the financial system as a whole whereas Romney/Ryan want to repeal Dodd-Frank.

So, it's not a case of Obama running on Clinton's record. It's just a recognition of what works to improve the economy and what doesn't. I think you will continue to hear more about the comparison of economic policies that have been put in place over the course of the last couple of decades and how they have impacted economic growth. And, perhaps, some lessons will be learned.

'Iran must steer clear of US interests in Gulf'

Washington reportedly sends Tehran indirect message saying it will not back Israeli strike on nuclear facilities as long as Iran refrains from attacking American facilities in Persian Gulf
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4276276,00.html

Michale.....

Too tortured syntax..

Amend that to read:

Of course, the Hysterical Left would label this professor a bigot. Which is ironic because, if the study had gone the OTHER way, this professor would be labeled a hero....

Michale

Thanksgiving is just around the corner when the spewing will be good!

"It's guuuuuuudd"
-Jim Carrey, BRUCE ALMIGHTY

:D

Michale....

This is why hysterical activists are so dangerous..

They don't care about the facts or science..

They just want to further their own agenda, by hook or by crook...

Of course, most everyone here would label this professor a bigot.. Of course, if the study when the OTHER way, this professor would be labeled a hero....

Such is the case with the political bigots...

Michale.....
Michale.....

Sorry for the spewage.. I am practicing for the Holiday Drive.. :D

Don't ever apologize for that! Just keep on keeping on, as they say ... :)

Thanksgiving is just around the corner when the spewing will be good!

To be fair, the '-R' is just as important to the Hysterical Right..

Ahhhh to be a political atheist....

Ya'all should try it sometime. :D

Jump in, the water's fine!!!

Michale.....

While I feel somewhat "dirty" agreeing with such a blatant Hollywood elitest, he does sum up completely why I can't understand the support Obama engenders from the Left...

When it comes to many of the Left's "values", Obama seems to be as bad as Bush..

I guess they must have spiked the Obama kool-aid with a mind-numbing agent....

It's the only explanation that makes sense...

Either that, or the '-D' after the name is even MORE important to the Left than I realize...

Michale.....

As I said above, a picture is worth a thousand words..

http://a.abcnews.go.com/images/Politics/ht_TNCZ_sux_obama_banner_jt_120901_wblog.jpg

SOME Iowans doesn't think too highly of Obama.. :D

Michale

What?? No worries?? :D

Of course, polls don't mean anything when they don't support Democrats... :D

What WAS I thinking???

Michale...

This is why Owen's revelations aren't any big deal compared to the leaks that the White House engineered...

Barring a worst case scenario previously described, it's doubtful that anything said by Owen will get anyone imprisoned, tortured or killed, except maybe the SEAL himself...

"Shit, lady.. That's the business I'm in"
-General Ira Potter, THE FINAL OPTION

The White House cannot make the same claim of no consequences..

Michale.....

"A few years ago, this guy would have been carrying our bags."
President Bill Clinton, 2008

Once again, because the guy has a '-D' after his name, that is ignored.

Michale.....

Speaking of Clinton... http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/how_clinton_plans_to_upstage_the_2FwMFHFfkOGNT8OfwaFkmO

I find it amazing that O's trying to run on Bill's record.

BTW, that Politifact quote has a typo. It's 2008, not 2000. I didn't catch it before I had posted it. This board doesn't have an editing gizmo, so I thought I'd alert folks: "Politifact:The plant was effectively shut down on Dec. 23, 2008..."

When I wore my Pro-Obama tee, I had one of the worst weekends on record..

When I wore my Pro-American Business Owner tee.....

http://sjfm.us/temp/workweek.jpg

.....well... A picture is worth a thousand words....

Now, I am not saying there is a correlation....

Or is there?????

"Mom! Make Dad quit talking like that!"
-Lisa Simpson

Michale.....

It's Clinton with his, "It depends on what the definition of 'is' is" all over again..

What IS it about the Left that they have to equivocate up the arse???

Probably because they know that if they actually talk straight, everyone will realize what a bunch of bunk their foundation really is...

Michale.....