Did not like the limited answers! It is rather REMARKABLE that the Democrats would even ALLOW a convict to be posted against the President... that is in itself disrespectful yet plain stupid!
The fact that DEMOCRATS were the ONLY ones allowed to vote in this election and greater than 4 out of 10 choose a CONVICT over obama perhaps tells the rest of us just how much OBAMA is disliked.... even by his own party?
Is the 'Anyone But Obama' Tactic Smart or Silly?
SodaHead News
2012/05/09 19:00:00
|
|
|||||
|
280 votes
|
|
42% | |||
|
393 votes
|
|
58% | |||
If you think Mitt Romney is President Obama's only hurdle in the upcoming election, you're wrong. It's Mitt Romney, and... pretty much anyone with $2,500. In Tuesday's West Virginia Democratic primary, inmate Keith Judd trailed by just 18%. That's right, inmate. As in, behind bars. One West Virginia voter explained, "I voted against Obama ... I don't like him. He didn't carry the state before and I'm not going to let him carry it again." So, he voted for Judd. Or, as he put it, "That guy out of Texas."
A little more about Judd. According to Politico, Judd has run for president in every election since 1996, and actually finished third in the 2008 Idaho Democratic primary with 1.7 percent of the vote. He's a former Hollywood musician who claims to be a "Rastafarian-Christian," and lists Richard Nixon as his favorite president because "he got us out of Vietnam, and began world peace with China and the Soviets." Sounds pretty solid. But we've got to ask: Is the "anyone but Obama" tactic a good idea?
A little more about Judd. According to Politico, Judd has run for president in every election since 1996, and actually finished third in the 2008 Idaho Democratic primary with 1.7 percent of the vote. He's a former Hollywood musician who claims to be a "Rastafarian-Christian," and lists Richard Nixon as his favorite president because "he got us out of Vietnam, and began world peace with China and the Soviets." Sounds pretty solid. But we've got to ask: Is the "anyone but Obama" tactic a good idea?
Top Opinion
-
Old Salt 2012/05/09 20:48:45
How pathetic. Are you aware that you also have a male name?
I am backing up plenty and it is not so much about defending Bush as Bashing Odumba.
You guys just cannot stop bashing Bush even when he has been gone 4 years and is no longer relevevant sad thig is that's all you have due to Odumba abyssmal record.
Obama chose to continue the tax cuts after they expired.
Obama signed NDAA and backed it up with EO's further strengthening it.
Obama spent and spent with no payback plan in place.
We lost our AAA credit rating because he was unable to cut spending and reduce the defecit.
The downgrade reflects our opinion that the fiscal-consolidation plan that Congress and the administration recently agreed to falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilize the government's medium-term debt dynamics," S&P said.
The debt-ceiling deal was projected to lop off about $2 trillion from America's deficit over the next decade, but S&P had previously warned it would downgrade the credit rating if the cut didn't reach $4 trillion.
Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/...
All happened on Obama's watch if he 'manned up' and admitted it I might have more respect for him but blaming others for his mistakes just compounds his failure.
You look top heavy and might tip over in a strong wind. How much you pay for those double D implants?
So your the partisan prick for not taking responsibility for the things you party does.
Make that an arrogant prick too thinking you know more about the economy than anyone. The S&p warned them what would happen if they did not reduce the deficit and they chose to ignore the warning.
Do try to back up you little opinions with facts every once in a while.
I know you liberals consider 'facts' a dirty word but people in the real world want proof not ametuer opinions.
I knew explaining Moody's role and total stupidity would be way over your head. Oh well, I tried to educate you, but you want none of that, it would interfer with your endless ranting and raving.
Over the last couple years, the following points on Moody's were made public, there's many more, just a sample how useless they are:
The California Public Employees’ Retirement System, the largest U.S. public pension fund, sued the three major bond-rating companies for $1 billion in losses it said were caused by “wildly inaccurate” risk assessments. The law suit charges Standard & Poor’s, Moody’s Investors Service and Fitch Ratings used methods to analyze medium-term notes and commercial paper that were “seriously flawed in conception and incompetently applied".
Another example: The CEO and former president of Moody's Investors Service offered regret for the abysmal performance of their ratings on complex bonds backed by U.S. mortgages but denied any wrongdoing.
One more example: The SEC scolded Moody's, when federal regulators said they would not sue the company for fraud this time despite finding evidence that the firm misled investors on purpose.
...
I knew explaining Moody's role and total stupidity would be way over your head. Oh well, I tried to educate you, but you want none of that, it would interfer with your endless ranting and raving.
Over the last couple years, the following points on Moody's were made public, there's many more, just a sample how useless they are:
The California Public Employees’ Retirement System, the largest U.S. public pension fund, sued the three major bond-rating companies for $1 billion in losses it said were caused by “wildly inaccurate” risk assessments. The law suit charges Standard & Poor’s, Moody’s Investors Service and Fitch Ratings used methods to analyze medium-term notes and commercial paper that were “seriously flawed in conception and incompetently applied".
Another example: The CEO and former president of Moody's Investors Service offered regret for the abysmal performance of their ratings on complex bonds backed by U.S. mortgages but denied any wrongdoing.
One more example: The SEC scolded Moody's, when federal regulators said they would not sue the company for fraud this time despite finding evidence that the firm misled investors on purpose.
The Securities and Exchange Commission said Moody's executives discovered they had issued overly optimistic ratings but decided not to correct them out of concern that "downgrades could negatively affect Moody's reputation."
You being a right winger, know what that means, trying to cover your ass. Know you screwed-up, but try to bury it. That's the kind of sleaze company you come running to defend?
Again, I remind everyone you're an idiot and would be wise to shut-up rather than blubbering on topics you know nothing about.
True once upon a time Moody's other credit rating companies had excellent reputations. Well, once upon a time so did the GOP. Today neither do and both are laughing stocks.
Still not seeing any backing of your rediculios little opinions with links or facts and calling me names only weakens your position because it verifies that you do not have any facts behind it and are just trying to bully your way. A common tactic of the un-intelligent to belittle another's intelligence to try to make you seem superior.
What the S&P did was not because of some imagined grudge, in fact we chastized them for giving credit ratings too easily and recommended the criteria for the AAA rating then we could not fulfill it.
There actions were standard loan practices just as they would be for a home wner who could not make his payments and had to refinance a lower payment, but at a higher interest rate.
You just do not want to admit that your democrats could not control thier spending beyond the countries income habits and we were all punished for it.
LOL
Not to mention every single budget he has ever put forward would have added trillions to the deficit. Most so bad his own party voted against them.
The last one no one in his party even voted for.
FACT: About 20 cents out of every dollar of revenue that the Feds collect goes to paying interest on money they borrowed. Things like Bush's One trillion dollar war in Iraq, and the stupidity of giving the rich a tax cut.
Come back to further your education any time Bubba.
By the way are you this Barry, the clueless putz that keeps paying thousands for storage lockers with less than $50 worth of content on Storage Wars?
The Debt rose $4.899 trillion during the two terms of the Bush presidency. It has now gone up $4.939 trillion since President Obama took office.
The latest posting from the Bureau of Public Debt at the Treasury Department shows the National Debt now stands at $15.566 trillion. It was $10.626 trillion on President Bush's last day in office, which coincided with President Obama's first day.
The National Debt also now exceeds 100% of the nation's Gross Domestic Product, the total value of goods and services.
The federal budget sent to Congress last month by Mr. Obama, projects the National Debt will continue to rise as far as the eye can see. The budget shows the Debt hitting $16.3 trillion in 2012, $17.5 trillion in 2013 and $25.9 trillion in 2022.
My saying still rings true Obama is responsible for more debt in one term than Bush was in 2 terms with the same 2 wars and more natural disasters.
It is BECAUSE Bush ran up obscene costs in his Iraq war and including the rich in a windfall tax break that the deficit is growing so fast combined with the aging of baby boomers now taking advantage of Social Security and Medicare, which would have happened regardless who was president.
You must enjoy trying to spread lies. You never stop trying.
Obama continued those wars so takes his share of the responsibility.
Obama continued those tax cuts so shares that part of the responsibility.
With Obama's first budget he increased mandatory spending by 3% of the GDP and discretionary spending by 1.8% of the GDP bringing mandatory spending to a record high and discretionary spending to it's highest in 20 years.
Put on your reading glasses grandpa the chart starts in 2000.