edgarblythe
 
  3  
Reply Thu 4 Oct, 2012 05:53 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
It was not his performance that was a surprise, as all politicians have it in them to perform that way at least once. It was the way he backtracked on his campaign-long pronouncements and blatantly lied and at least temporarily getting away with flash versus substance.
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Thu 4 Oct, 2012 06:26 pm
@edgarblythe,
A politican speaking truth wouuld be news.

What is your problem again? Sour grapes?
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Thu 4 Oct, 2012 06:31 pm
@edgarblythe,
And you were surprised that he "lied?" You've been calling him a liar for weeks.

This was the same mantra Liberals used during the Bush years.

The lies about Republicans lying is so predictable they're merely an annoying background noise.

Equally as predictable is your belief that Obama and his fellow Democrats never lie, or if they do they are merely part the truth tweaking in which "all politicians" engage.

Your devotion to the truth and disgust with lies are so tied to your politics, they can't be taken seriously.

I don't mean to single you out, though, as you have many like-minded compatriots in this forum.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  0  
Reply Thu 4 Oct, 2012 06:42 pm
@edgarblythe,
edgarblythe wrote:

It was not his performance that was a surprise, as all politicians have it in them to perform that way at least once. It was the way he backtracked on his campaign-long pronouncements and blatantly lied and at least temporarily getting away with flash versus substance.


Both candidates have altered their expressed views over the past few years as new events and revised understanding alrer one's perspective.

Was Obama lying when he forecast that unemployment would quickly fall below 8% several years ago?

Was he lying when he forecast that he would significantly reduce the deficit?

Was he lying when he promised to close the prison in Guantanamo?

Was he lying during the debate when he took credit for our currently increased domestic oil & gas producti0n, and for new trade treaties, when all of this was the direct consequence of actions taken by the previous administration, and his actions in office, in both cases, delayed these good results?

It appears to me that you are applying different standards to the truthfulness of your favored candidate and the opposition.

What substance did you see in the President's comments? Certainly he has no substantial accomplishments about which to brag.
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Reply Thu 4 Oct, 2012 07:38 pm
@georgeob1,
Come on, georgeob; the GOP has been blocking most of Obama's job creating legislation, but even with that handicap has been able to add over 4-million jobs after willingly walking into the Great Recession environment.

With the world recession going on, how do you expect American companies to be adding jobs when demand as we knew it doesn't exist any more? I think the 8.1% unemployment rate is the norm for many years to come. Europe is still struggling with too many of their partners going bankrupt.

Even China's inventory is growing, because world demand has dropped.

Macro-economics is the answer.

This goes back to 2010.
Quote:


NYDN Home→Collections

President Obama to GOP leaders: Stop 'grandstanding' and get to work on jobs legislation
BY KENNETH R. BAZINET
DAILY NEWS WASHINGTON BUREAU
Tuesday, February 09, 2010
WASHINGTON - A frustrated, tough-talking President Obama told GOP leaders Tuesday he will try to meet them halfway on a new jobs bill, but also accused them of trying to torpedo his entire policy agenda for political gain.

"We can't afford grandstanding at the expense of actually getting something done," Obama said in a surprise news conference in the White House briefing room. "What I won't consider is doing nothing."

Taking several questions from reporters for the first time since July, Obama said he "won't hesitate to embrace a good idea from my friends in the minority party, but I also won't hesitate to condemn what I consider to be obstinacy that's rooted not in substantive disagreements."
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Thu 4 Oct, 2012 10:01 pm
@cicerone imposter,
A recession is defined as two successive quarters of economic contractiuon. By that standard there is not a "world recession" going on, though there is one in Europe and growth in the rest of the worrld is certainly weaker than in five plus years ago.

Obama enjoyed two years with decisive majorities in both houses of the Congress, followed by two years with a Republican House and continued strong Democrat control of the Senate. He squandered these advantages by pushing through highly contentious health care, labor and environmental legislation favored by his most radical constituents and, with it, the possibility of political consensus with his opposition. In his first years in office his message to the political opposition was ' I won; you lost; get over it'. He publicly scolded the Supreme Court Justices during a SOU address and overall demonstrated levels of arrogance and narcissim not often seen among our Presidents. Hardly effective political leadership.

He forecast a speedy recovery from the recession that never materialized, despite his unprecedented spending and giveaways to political favorites. Now he seeks to blame his political opponents for all this. There are words used to describe this kind of behavior. None are very flattering.

He has enjoyed very favorable relations with an often sycophantic press and been unusually careful to avoid free folwing encounters with independent members of the media - far more than any recent president. Indeed in this he may have helped set himself up for the unpleasant surprise he encountered in the recent debate. Welcone to the real world Emperor, and by the way, the new clothes are imaginary.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 4 Oct, 2012 10:25 pm
@georgeob1,
I have criticized Obama for many things including some on your list, but applying the definition to this world recession doesn't make much sense. What we have are a world economy in contraction, and blaming Obama on his inability to "create jobs" belongs on the laffer curve.

The only time companies will expand their workers is when demand meets supply. As most of us know, many rich companies holding trillions in cash aren't spending their treasure; there's a reason for that. The economic future has too many negatives to begin spending money on workers and machinery.

When McConnell broadcast his goal to make Obama a one term president is what counts; not that Obama had the majority in both houses of congress during the first two years of his first term. There's a reason why the performance rating of congress is at historical lows.

Here again, how do you expect any president to perform when congress doesn't cooperate? As for promising a "speedy recovery," we really don't know what would have happened if congress was more cooperative.

Even with this handicap, the stock market is doing fine; it seems investors have confidence in US commerce.

The press can be fickle; that's been proven by history in this country.

The debate may be over, but more American are realizing that Romney is a liar and can't be trusted. He said that 47% are dependent on government for their health care, homes, food, and everything else. In the debate, Romney said he's for 100% of Americans.

Those lies will not stand, and his campaign just turned out worse - even with the media agreeing after fact checking everything he said during the debate.

Bye, bye, Romney.

cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 4 Oct, 2012 10:29 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Here's the latest from the Romney camp.
Quote:
Romney says his 47 percent remark was 'completely wrong' - 1 hour ago
Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney has described his disparaging remarks about the 47 percent of Americans who don't pay federal income taxes as "not elegantly stated." Now he...


flip-flopper in almost everything he tells one group or another.

Who wants that kind of president?
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Thu 4 Oct, 2012 10:31 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Something like 50% of the electorate
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 4 Oct, 2012 10:33 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
They need to have their brains examined, because can they also tell us what Romney stands for? Please list what Romney stands for?
hawkeye10
 
  -3  
Reply Thu 4 Oct, 2012 10:34 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

They need to have their brains examined, because can they also tell us what Romney stands for? Please list what Romney stands for?


NOT OBAMA
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Thu 4 Oct, 2012 10:39 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Why? So you can tell me it's all bullshit?
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 4 Oct, 2012 10:46 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
So, you've already concluded it's bull ****? LOL

Come on! Give us a list. It'll be fun discussing your list. Mr. Green Drunk Drunk Drunk Drunk
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Thu 4 Oct, 2012 11:10 pm
@cicerone imposter,
With this reply you've reinforced why I would be foolish to comply with your dishonest request.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Thu 4 Oct, 2012 11:24 pm
@edgarblythe,
By the way, what do you think of Debbie Wasserman Schultz?
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Oct, 2012 04:27 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
I don't know what you are getting at, re Schultz. I haven't read anything detrimental about her.
snood
 
  3  
Reply Fri 5 Oct, 2012 06:44 am
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/10/05/162352854/unemployment-rate-drops-to-7-8-percent-114-000-jobs-added-to-payrolls

Unemployment Rate Drops To 7.8 Percent; 114,000 Jobs Added To Payrolls

First Time Below 8 Percent Since January 2009...

But yeah, Romney did beat Obama's ass in the first debate. Absolutely. No doubt about that.

Stay tuned...
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Oct, 2012 09:03 am
@snood,
Came here to post that. Some good news for sure -- 8% is a major benchmark and has been bandied about a fair amount.
0 Replies
 
revelette
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Oct, 2012 09:30 am
@snood,
It's not just because people have stopped looking for work, but more people actually went and looked for work and found jobs.


Quote:

The rate declined from 8.1 percent because the number of people who said they were employed soared by 873,000 — an encouraging sign for an economy that’s been struggling to create enough jobs.


The number of unemployed Americans is now 12.1 million, the fewest since January 2009.


The Labor Department said employers added 114,000 jobs in September. It also said the economy created 86,000 more jobs in July and August than the department had initially estimated.


Wages rose in September. And more people started looking for work.


source



0 Replies
 
revelette
 
  1  
Reply Fri 5 Oct, 2012 09:37 am
Conservative are claiming cooked books.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Why Romney Lost - Discussion by IRFRANK
Route to the sea. - Question by raprap
Two bad moments for Romney in second debate - Discussion by maxdancona
Romney vs. Big Bird - Discussion by maxdancona
Mitt Romney, the bane of Sesame Street - Discussion by DrewDad
It looks like it's Paul Ryan!!! - Discussion by maxdancona
Who will be Romney's running mate? - Discussion by Robert Gentel
When will Romney quit the race? - Discussion by edgarblythe
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Romney 2012?
  3. » Page 98
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 07/08/2025 at 05:12:53