Retard

hey, leave the retarded out of this!

Original post was the best 1-paragraph summary I have seen. Clear and to the point. The responses are (unsurprisingly) subliterate.

Leah, great response, the only quibble I would have with our take is that I don't think Romney would let his faith interfere with governing. I would hope he would be up to the task of being president but I really hope this is something we don't ever have to find out.

Sadly, in any other election year Romney's continual flip flops would have disqualitfied him in the eyes of most voters. But the fact is that there is a lot of irrational hate out there for Obama and it may be enough fuel to to make him a one term president.

The opinions are very interesting about how Obama will govern in a second term. The problem is the assumption that congress will be controlled by the Democrats. This assumption is incorrect because if you look at the congress on a presidents second term it is most often the under opposition control. On Clinton's second term Republican control, Bush second term Democrat control. I suspect that Obama's second term will be Republican control. He'll have to shift to the middle or be impeached.

have to agree with much that you have written. The advantage of a 2nd term is an ability to be more like a Clinton or LBJ, of course that could be seen as a 2 edged sword for some voters. As for Romney and his religion have to agree, but what 'bothers/concerns' me more is I don't know what he thinks because one time he says 'X' and then they say 'N' and he gives me no answers or definative ideas about how he will 'change' anything except that my 'gut' says it would be worse for me under his presidency and that it would be more like George W. Bush or even worse for the average person in this country and that he would 'Bain" our country. Also if people want Obama presidency to suceed they need more Democrats or Indpendents in Congress. We need a JOBS bill and the GOP has done nothing to support that.

Yes, I completely concur! The Republican Party has become the brown shirts of Germany before Hitler rose to power with the same fanatical obssession that compromise is weakness!!!! It's really sad how the Republicans of Reagan have been over taken by right wing extremist so obsessed they will stop any efforts to move forward if it does not meet their policy's!!!!!!!!

I've voted Republican every election since Reagan but I will be voting to reelect Pres Obama because the Republican's have demonstrated they truly are about 47% or less. If the truth is know their about 20% and even though I am part of that group!!!!

I will be voting to support America by voting Democrat for the first time!!!!!

The Republican Party has become a group of fanatics that believe they built every thing all by themselves. It's really sick to go to their meetings listening to them talk like their important and everyone else like their sheep to be slaughtered!!!!!!!

Sounds like you are just repeating what you hear from MSM. give examples of where he has changed his platform. I have been watching everything for months and he has been resolute in how he wants to run the country. Only Obamas team is saying he keeps changing his mind. That is how they set out to portray him and have continued throught the campaign, even though many times Romney has given examples of how that is not true. Obama had a democratic Senate and house during his first two years in office and didnt get the things done that he said he would. Why do you still believe Him? Also Obama has very strong ties to wall street. You all keep inferring that only republicans are rich greedy people. There are allot of rich Democrats. Goldman Sacs gave more to the Obama campaign in 2008 than any company ever has. Also, there is an ex Goldman sacs executive in the white house in Obamas inner circle. Obama gave the bailout money to the banks, which in turn did nothing for the American people who are paying for the banks to continue on.

Your forgeting he had a majority the first 2 years and even many Dems wouldn't vote for his budget. No budget in 3.8 years, no wonder businesses are on hold. Four more years of the smae failed policies, no thanks. If Romney fails, I'll move on. I have no allegencies with either of these parties.

Leah, right on. We don't know what Romney will do. He has surrounded himself with all of the neocons from the Bush administration, he flip-flops on every issue, especially when he finds himself on the wrong side of the issue, and I have yet to hear the particulars of the Romney/Ryan Plan. How quickly people forget what caused the great recession and they believe the tripe from the right and are ready to go right back the things that are killing this country. We say we are a Christian nation, and yet instead of believing in God We Trust, we believe in military power and war. We have far surpassed where the Roman Empire was, so we blindly keep repeating the things that have not worked, keep thinking that we need to go to war and save the world, that the rich are actually worthy of the rewards they are reaping . . . then we will go the route of other empires!

Ginico we do know what Obama has done, very little, golf, The View, golf, Letterman, golf. World leaders in NY right after the Lybia attack, Obama brushes them off for The View. It was too close to the election to get into it with world leaders so elected to go on The View. Maybe he thought the ladies on The View would enlighten him on World policy.

It's not simplt a matter of candidates--it's which party has historically governed better. In that contenxt, please read the following, which is fact checked and historically true:

"Guess which president since World War II did best on these eight generally accepted measures of good management of the nation’s economy. You can choose among six Republicans: Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Bushes I and II; and six Democrats:Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Carter, Clinton, and Obama. (No peeking.)

1. The highest growth in the gross domestic product?

2. The highest growth in jobs?

3. The biggest increase in personal disposable income after taxes?

4. The highest growth in industrial production?

5. The highest growth in hourly wages?

6. The lowest Misery Index (inflation plus unemployment)?

7. The lowest inflation?

8. The largest reduction in the deficit?

The answers are 1.Harry Truman, 2.Bill Clinton, 3.Lyndon Johnson, 4.John F. Kennedy, 5.Johnson, 6.Truman, 7.Truman, 8.Clinton.

Democratic presidents trounce Republicans eight times out of eight!

If this isn’t enough to destroy the myth that economy has performed better under Republicans, the stock market has also done better under the Democrats. The Dow Jones Industrial Average during the 20th century rose 7.3 percent on average per year under Republican presidents. Under Democrats, it rose 10.3 percent-which means investors gained a whopping 41 percent more. And the stock market during George W’s two terms took a nosedive while it recovered handsomely under Obama. Moreover, since WWII, Democratic presidents have increased the national debt by an average of 3.9 percent per year and Republican presidents have increased it an average of 10.3 percent. During the same time period, Democratic presidents produced, on average, an unemployment rate of 4.9 percent; Republicans 6.4 percent. That’s the historical record."

I think it's really simple Pres Obama inherited without a doubt 8 YEARS of Bush policies!!! SO WHO ON EARTH CAN DOUBT WHAT BROUGHT ABOUT THE GREATEST RECESSION IN AMERICAN HISTORY???

Now we do have emperical evidence that Pres Obama implemented policy's that have benefited America because the disaster was averted and the country is on trajectory for a slow recovery!!!!!!!!!

Which means Obama did take action, sure it wasn't fast enough but faster would have meant more agressive action which would have upset the norms even more so.

Even though nobody admits it, or even talks about it!!!!!!!!!!!! Pres Bush and Republican policy's caused the GREATEST RECESSION IN AMERICAN HISTORY

So what exactly is reelecting a guy who is lesser than Bush like Romney going to do???????????

Please give me an example of what Obama is going to do to create jobs ect. Why do you all insist on Romney giving out every fact of his plan. You cant do that. He has given specifics. Why dont you ask the same of Obama? I have been an undecided voter and have never seen any reporter of mederator ask the Obama administration what they are going to do other than raise taxes on what they consider the "rich" 250,000 or more is not rich

Can any of you people please explain Obama's plans o reduse the 16 T, details please? Or his plan to get half the 23M back to work? Again details please.

hesea, the jobs bill voted on bipartion in the Senate, is sitting on Bohner's desk. In their secret meeting with Frank Lunz on the day Obama was Inaguarated, they made a pact to prevent Obama from doing anything. Cantor was there, Ryan was there, Grinrich stated "we will remember this day as sowing the seeds to 2012". They have filibustered and stonewalled EVERYTHING, even when it would have helped those in need . . . because power mean more to them than that 47%!

In addition, we the people had to pay the cost of reinstating those pensions that were confiscated by Romney and Bain.

Tonya, I think your thinking about GM. Obama borrows off China so we can save GM. GM closes plants in the US,saves jobs in Canada and Mexico GM China hires thousands for GM new Chinse plants. The Mexicans, Canadians and Chinse appreciate Obama generosity with our money.

The far right might be the most joyful if Romney would do all their bidding. Cutting taxes 20 percent across the board with the Bush tax cuts still in place would be terrible for our country, but some right wingers would be very happy. One in particular would be that skunk of a lobbyist Grover Norquist. The far right would think it was great as we sink into another and more dangerous recession they will blame on themselves perhaps.

Of course the right wing hates Romney, they just need him to sign things and pretend he's leaning to the middle while they use congress to pass their legislation.

Then by that time it will be to late to do anything about their policy's....

It's about time for Americans to understand that most politicians run for office for an economic benefit. THAT IS ALL

Why on earth do you think the Republicans are constantly harping on Defense spending????????? It's all about making money for the MILITARY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX and getting a kick back on the side

What planet are you living on. Someone had to interrupt the lying republican propaganda machine. The republicans just hate it when they are called out for their lies

If Romney and Ryan were so smart, they would figure out a way of telling the American people exactly how they plan to pay for the $5 trillion tax cut.

I don't agree that Ryan is the second smartest person in the country. He may well be the smartest Republican (faint praise). Romney changes his story about everything so often, it's impossible to tell what he thinks about anything. Genius? Idiot? Who could tell?

As a point of contention here, you can't interrupt the "Republican propaganda machine." When no facts are presented only one side is truly debating. Since Paul Ryan failed in presenting any platform-related numbers, facts, or hard evidence and instead fell back on fear-mongering, blame-shifting, and vagueness, he proved that that machine has no moving parts.

That is what a debate is about, both sides articulating a posture in an argumentative format!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This wasn't about being polite, nor was it ever intended on being about courtesy.

It's about who is the most believable candidate you would want representing America to foreign leaders?????????

I voted Republican my whole life up to today for 50 years

But let me say one thing, Ryan got took to school and spanked in the corner then Biden put a DUNCE HAT on him!!!!!!!!

I may support Republicans but I'm not going to lie or drink Republican KOOL AID and say Ryan won!!!!!

Ryan got the floor wiped with his head and looked like a kid with a false sense of entitlement!!!!!!

WHO ON EARTH EVER THOUGHT RYAN HAS ACCOMPLISHED ANYTHING IN HIS LIFE???? WHAT HAS RYAN EVER DONE EXCEPT GIVE A FEW SPEECHES IN FRONT OF CAMERA'S??????????

NAME ONE THING RYAN OR ROMNEY HAVE EVER ACCOMPLISHED????? ONE!!!!

What are you talking about??? Is that a joke? or are you reading a copy of Mein Kampf?????

What has Ryan every accomplished??? Name one thing

Please tell me anything that Ryan has ever done other than give ridiculous speeches on a REPUBLICAN UTOPIA WHERE THERE ARE NO REGULATIONS other than a police state to enforce security

Ryan sleeps with a cot in his congressional office???? That is weird, it has nothing to do with being a good representative it sounds more like he's obssessed with political power!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What about this Ryan is an intellectual giant, can you explain that to all of us ignorant???? Please demonstrate to me any evidence you have Ryan has the intelligence above an acorn?????

A debate goes way back in history, it's a discussion whereby an argumentative format is utilized to express opposing view points!!!!!!!!!

Historically speaking if you do not argue you will be percieved as weak!!!

Ryan is a grown man he could have made an argument instead of play Mr. Polite and get ran over by Biden.

Ryan was out matched and he knew it, so he played polite and read from his script!!!!!!!!!!! THAT IS WHY HE DID NOT ARGUE WITH BIDEN

Ryan has nothing to argue about, he's done nothing he's been no where, all he's good for is to repeat talking points!!!!!!!!! WHAT A JOKE

RYAN IS A JOKE, that was the problem

Whatever.

Stephen Colbert can change easily because he is a comedian who is not a right wing republican. He is much more a reasonable person who is a Democrat. I hope so anyway.

Whatever.

Hi hesea,

Imagine that you are standing on the deck of the Titanic. there is a hole in the hull, but up on deck your shoes aren't wet, so you feel pretty good. Your captain's term runs out, and the new captain takes charge, and says hay, I ran on reforming health care, but there is a hole in our ship, and we are sinking, so let's do both.

Four years later, the fix it crew has plugged the hole, stopped the sinking, and even begun bailing, and we know have a national health care program. (National health care is great by the way. dot let big business scare you into thinking otherwise.)

So we aren't sinking but, because the hole in the hull was so big, and because the previous captain was so feckless, and because some of his loyal ideologues cronies have refused to come to grips with the fact that they almost sunk us, half of the ship is underwater, and yes, your shoes have gotten wet.

Your question "are the middle class better off now" deals with present belatedly felt fears, versus, blissful ignorance of what was actually happening four years ago.
Yeah, your shoes are wet, but the ship is still afloat. Four years ago you were about to drown; you just didn't know it, because your shoes were still dry.

Repeat, the hull has been repaired, and we are bailing out water. Yet you think that we can somehow magically regain our former status by going back to what got us into trouble in the first place, (driving full speed ahead in the dark, with out enough life boats, and by favoring only some of the passengers).

Even Romney, says that it would take time for his plan to start taking effect, shucks, Bush had eight years using the same techniques and look how good he did.
So if Romney takes 3.5 years to undo what 44 has accomplished, and we have not added enough jobs (I assume that this will be the case, since you and the would be leader of our country are saying that the present president has been a hopeless failure that has made things worse in his term) Since there is no way that you can turn the ship around and go back around the world and get the Titanic to America (by sailing east), I'm assuming that you will be happy to ask Romney to step aside after one term and let the next guy or woman have a go.

The recession and the wars that President Bush 43 left us and the rest of the world, were huge. But our fellow Americans on the right were complaining from before President Obama took office. Are we where we want to be? No. Do all of us think that things were perfect back in the day? No. Are things getting better? Yes.

I think we can all agree that we wish things would get better faster, but they are getting better. As to changing horses in mid stream, why would you want to get back on the horse that got us in this mess in the first place. Underline this please; President Obama did not cause the economic melt down (global, not just national) the Bush policies did. If you do not like President Obama's policies should be honest and admit that a large part of your complaint is that he hasn't managed to clean up the Bush mess fast enough.

And there are those little matters of having a Republican House that has sworn to stand in the way of everything including their own ideas, and the global economic woes that were triggered by Bush's lax fiscal policies. And bye the way, Gov. Romney still hasn't shown any daylight between his ideas and Bush 43's, so are you sure you want to make the "when something isn't working" argument? We all know that pre-Obama Republican policy was a disaster.

Peace.

Understand but my biggest issue with Obama is it's everyone fault but his. The Lybia issue would have passed but his denial after the entire world knew what was going on is classic Obama. Finally it's a terrorist attack but then they try blame it on a budget issue. A leader would say puck the budget get them help. Now Biden says it was poor security, get the pattern. evybodies fault but their. No one would pass blame on the attack itself but when they continued to try to balme it on a video it only got worse.

OK,

I'm beginning to see what your ticked off about. Well, think of it this way. Back in the Iran hostage day, we (average Joes and Janes) had no idea of what was happening, until we were given well edited briefs. Now we can sometimes learn of things before the CIA know about them. So we see the event evolve. This includes the mistakes that we would not have known about 10 or perhaps even 4 years ago. News travels fast these days.

On top of this, we have Gov. Romney inserting himself into a sensitive and still evolving situation, and the Executive Branch responded. And yes we did have riots in Egypt and other parts of the world because of that video.

But to your point; did Ms. Rice git it wrong? Yep I guess so. Was this a part of some awful conspiracy? Um.... To what ends? I don't get it? THe truth was going to come out,
so what would the point of a cover-up be?

There is an ongoing investigation. We do know that there was not enough security and we also know that the House of Reps did deny funding that had been requested for that security. So, I don't think that this was the post that Paul Ryan should have chosen to hang his hat on, but the Romney team said that they were looking for a foreign emergency to exploit, and this was it.

THe world is a big, complex and dangerous place. Mitt Romney's suggestion that we can just step back in time to those fictional happy colonial days where we could dictate what happened in the rest of the world is just plain naive and scary, because those are the policies that set up the resentments that have finally boiled over. and once again,
The world has moved on, technology is available to everyone, you can't put the genie back in the bottle, and if elected, I will predict now, the Mitt Romney would spend a great deal of time talking about how screwed up things were when he took office.

Hesea,

I think that you need to get over this irrational fixation with our president. The whole world is dealing with what our economic melt down caused after eight years and two wars under the Bush term.

I don't hear our President "whining" about what he was left with, But when policy is being discussed, and the Republican side wants to pretend that nothing happened, and that the global recession fell out of the sky on the day that President Obama took office, well then, I think its fair to set the record straight.

The rest of the world knows this, believe me.

As for this election, we have a choice of President Obama who is slowly pulling us out of the hole that we were in (I know some folks don't like to talk about how we got there, or how deep the hole was/is, or about how many other nations fell in it with us, but hey, reality is hard), and then there's the challenger, Gov. Romney, who wants to reenact the same policies that caused the mess that we are finally getting out of.

I'm curious. Do you believe that we should have just kept on with what Bush was allowing to happen, and that somehow, we wold have fallen off the cliff, and not only survived, but we'd all be richer, happier, and healthier?

I don't see it, please explain.

Mani, While Obama slowly pulling us out he is rapidly putting us into the same mess as Greece. What are his plans to reduce the 16 T debt, details please.

Why do you feel you know what the rest of the world knows?

Hi Hesea,

I don't know what the rest of the whole world knows. Sorry, I should tone that down a bit. Hmmm, Let's say I travel a lot.

Yes we do need to reduce the debt. But you can kill your economy by starving your work and buyer force. I don't see Romney's plan either. He is all theory, that as I have said, this stuff did not work under Bush, and the world was not in disaster mode (until he pushed us in).

As to the Presidents plans, well, much hinges on getting the Republicans to forget their pledge to Grover, and the anti tax cult, compromising on cutting spending while also increasing revenue. The President has already gone further right than the Democrat base feels comfortable with, and the Republicans are saying "My way or the High way."

And I get so tired of the "Obama raised your taxes" talking point.
It just never happened. I've had people screaming at me, who can't name a tax.
They have just heard this talking point so many times that they have accepted it as true.

Mani. I also have been lucky enough to travel extensively including living in the middles east for three years but that hardly makes me an authority on what they think. Romney has a plan to reduce taxes and spending. Details on cutting the spending he wants to do in a bi-partisian way not ram it doen our throuts like Obama care.

HI hesea,

So Romney's plan is to add to the deficit by reducing taxes, and reduce the deficit bycutting spending. Sounds like a plus minus nothing scenario to me.

What Romney want s to do is get elected. Since he can't say what he wants to cut, we have all been inferring. and the numbers just don't add up.

We are in debt because of the Tax cuts that Bush put in place. That and a war or two that was put on the nations credit card.

We are the great country that we are because of the programs that Romney wants to cut. And, wait for it....... we still won't be able to balance the budget because we have been doing this "2 steps backwards" dance since Bush decided to declare that we could "eat cake and lose weight" The math does not work.

I went to public schools. I swam in public pools. I learned to drive on public roads. I was protected by a publicly funded police and military forces. I was also protected by a government that stepped in and made businesses stop putting PCB in cattle feed, and put safety precautions on oil drilling, and regulated auto exhaust and protected the national parks that I visit and love.

If you want to dance, you've got to pay the band. This isn't big government, this is America. If you want small gov't where the rich are fine and everyone else scrapes, try Haiti.

By the way Hesea,

I think it is clear the President also hoped and hopes for a bi-partisan collaboration.
But what do you do when it doesn't happen? Do we just throw everyone out after 4 years?

I think its clear that the Republicans have decided that a 4 year long stone wall was a fair sacrifice to make if they could convince people like you to dump Obama; not because of his policies, but because "enough wan't achieved". I don't think you can argue this. House Republicans have been pretty open about this plan, and there are too many videos on Youtube.

So, what is enough anyway? and what happens if the Democrats decide to be just a s destructive and spiteful? Obstruction is obstruction, and the Republicans have already pleaded guilty.

STOP . . . YOU don't know the facts yet and neither do the Republicans. They are being thoroughly investigated and when you hear from people who were actually there at the time - you cannot judge on heresay being promoted by the right to provoke fear! It took quite awhile for all of the facts to surface on 911, it took until after Bush took office for the facts to come out on the Cole, we DON'T have a magic mirror to tell us things . . . the facts WILL come out, and Obama WILL go after them . . . that you can count on!

OK,

Sorry Ginico, I meant to post this bellow,

HI Hesea,

The problem with your argument is that you keep focusing on very specific situations, while ignore the problem of dealing with our check and balance American system. If Obama had gotten his way, and there had been enough money for the extra security, then the right would be yelping about the deficit. (This is assuming that with extra funding the attack could have been thwarted). Remember, you don't know when the White house heard which brief. THings were happening in other parts of the middle east, and to assume that Lybia should have been first on everyones list is great in hind sight.

Note, it is ironic that the House of Reps. both denied this request for funding, and is supporting a candidate for the presidency that would increase military spending with out saying how he will pay for it.

Sounds like someone wants to win an argument even if it means losing the war.

HI Hesea,
Ooops, I put my text in the wrong place...m(— _)m
Sorry about that.

The problem with your argument is that you keep focusing on very specific situations, while ignore the problem of dealing with our check and balance American system. If Obama had gotten his way, and there had been enough money for the extra security, then the right would be yelping about the deficit. (This is assuming that with extra funding the attack could have been thwarted). Remember, you don't know when the White house heard which brief. THings were happening in other parts of the middle east, and to assume that Lybia should have been first on everyones list is great in hind sight.

Note, it is ironic that the House of Reps. both denied this request for funding, and is supporting a candidate for the presidency that would increase military spending with out saying how he will pay for it.

Sounds like someone wants to win an argument even if it means losing the war.

So you feel the President should deny requested security to protect an Embassy because of budget cuts. Intersting priorities.

Um,

I've been following this pretty closely, and I have yet to read that the president denied a request for security. I have heard that the request had not gotten all the way up the chain. Unfortunately, this is the way bureaucracies work, slowly and inefficiently.

Also, you are talking about career diplomats. This isn't a Dem vs. Rep thing. The person who made the decision not to pursue the request might have been a Republican. It doesn't matter. He or she was dealing with the budget that was given, and the facts as they appeared, and beyond that, I think you are making a mistake in politicking a tragic situation in which the "blame" and the pain must be shared.

Ginico there are as many wealthy dems as Repubs. Obama is a 1 % er just like his Hollywood buddies, Wake up. Did Obama introduce a bill to close those tax loopholes him and the 1 % Dems enjoy?

He has be asking for months for higher revenues from the rich like himself . . . where have you been?

Ginico wasn't asking about higher revenues, I was asking about closing tax loopholes.

Understand the revenues side, what about the cuts in spending, you can take every penny of the Rich and it won't run the Gov for a month. I have no problem with increased taxes if there is a plan to cut spending. What are Obama's plan to cut spending, details please. Are you from Greece?

Nice post Ginco,

I think that Hesea just has an ax to grind. Stuff happens, and those things need to be dealt with. I think that Hesea wants a fast fix, but the real world doesn't work that way.

I'm rooting for President Obama. But if Mr. Romney should get into office some how,
I hope that he gets a more realistic view of the world. the Neo-con model got us
("us" meaning the whole world) into an awful lot of trouble. I pray that no-one tries to take us back there again.

Peace.

Don't assume Romney is Bush. If at then end of 4 years we're still in this mess I'll be looking to replace Romney. I do not follow either party blindly, that's why this country is so polarized.

OK,

I'm glad that you are a free spirit, but I think some problems take more than 4 years to solve.

As to the Romney not being Bush thing...
THen who is he? He is preaching the Neo-con doctrine, and he is pedaling the smaller the better gov't thing, and the no regulations on businesses that might require some effort, even when we're talking about clean water, air, and the health and welfare of our citizenry.

He has also surrounded himself with Bush 43's staff, and like Bush, he is constantly envying folk tales about the Republican hero (not mine I assure you) Reagan.

So if Romney isn't Bush, then who is he? Do you know? Does he know?
I'll be honest, I have no idea. But I'll bet you he'll be somebody else by next week.

And Romneys "present" facts will be altered to fit his next speaking engagement.
Come on Hesea. That post is bellow you. I really want to know why you dislike Our president, enough to elect someone who doesn't have a constant stance on anything except promoting policies that will favor his business potential.