Presidential Debate #2

  • Thread starter Thread starter Robert_Bay
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
They are only ‘very serious’ when there is an ability to use them against the other side.

I’m not defending either side. I’ve seen how it works for a long time now. No matter who gets control, they will blame the other side for blocking any genuine progress.

Our problem is that the majority of Americans have bought into the system.
But wouldn’t you agree that there is a difference between blaming someone and stating “Elections have consequences, and I won”?

I think that was Ridge’s point.
 
Food stamps enrollment has hit a new record high. 46,681,833 million are now enrolled in the social welfare program, according to the United States Department of Agriculture, the federal department that runs the program.

Just one more reason to change the occupant of the White House.
 
Kind of like we went after Iraq for the WMDs?
No, its a question of the Obama knowing that it wasn’t the video at all that caused the attack but a terrorist group. But the references to the video as the cause went on for weeks. This is not the case with WMD’s in Iraq: Bush and the Democrats - including President Clinton two years earlier believed there were WMD’s. Clinton even said, "and make no mistake he (Saddham Hussein) will use them.

So your partisan attempt to protect Obama is out of line.

Ishii
 
Food stamps enrollment has hit a new record high. 46,681,833 million are now enrolled in the social welfare program, according to the United States Department of Agriculture, the federal department that runs the program.

Just one more reason to change the occupant of the White House.
And let’s not forget after 40 years of OSHA making the workplace safe for American workers, guarding them from even the smallest hazards, this administration has created more permanently disabled workers then the economy has generated new jobs. This administration is A#1 in so many things.
 
Excellent entertainment. About one-third of the way through the debate, I covered my head and let out a primal scream – some of the questions had become Obama lite and some of his responses had become the same. I cannot put it well how Obama affected me last night, but he seemed to be carrying on (going over his allotted time, being “forceful”) just for the sake of carrying on. During one such time near the end, he was almost nonsensical, repeating from the same answer and from previous ones, in a circular fashion. He obviously knew he had a friend in the moderator Crowley.

Gov. Romney seemed at ease and, except on the Bengazi question, had the words at the ready. On Bengazi, he stumbled at first and then got back into rhythm. The only faults I had with him were 1) that he gave in to Crowley too easily and 2) I didn’t understand his (necessarily) brief statement that he would never let employers deny contraception to employees. This has probably been discussed here and I apologize for not reading all of the posts; but that seems to me to indicate that he would not fight for the Church’s position in this regard. Another possible explanation might be that, even if Catholic employers will not include contracetion, etc., for their employees, employees who desire such things are not thereby “denied” access to them as they can pay for them themselves. I hope and pray he meant the latter.
 
But wouldn’t you agree that there is a difference between blaming someone and stating “Elections have consequences, and I won”?

I think that was Ridge’s point.
There is a degree of agreement. The communications lack any genuine solutions to the problem. There is so much condescension, smugness, righteousness, and negativity, that it seems no one is really interested in solutions as much as they are in belittling each other.

So one side will win, and blame the other side for nothing getting done, and the American people will be stuck right where they are now.
 
They are only ‘very serious’ when there is an ability to use them against the other side.

I’m not defending either side. I’ve seen how it works for a long time now. No matter who gets control, they will blame the other side for blocking any genuine progress.

Our problem is that the majority of Americans have bought into the system.
The Dems had the white house and both houses of congress for the first two years. Why people buy their lies about being block is astounding. Their own party voted unanimously against Obamas budgets also. But of course it’s the Republican’s fault anyway. :rolleyes:
 
Kind of like we went after Iraq for the WMDs?
I wasn’t aware Bush was on the ballot this time around, but nice try to try and change subject. That really is the only effective way to defend obama’s foreign-policy-talk about something else.
 
No, its a question of the Obama knowing that it wasn’t the video at all that caused the attack but a terrorist group. But the references to the video as the cause went on for weeks. This is not the case with WMD’s in Iraq: Bush and the Democrats - including President Clinton two years earlier believed there were WMD’s. Clinton even said, "and make no mistake he (Saddham Hussein) will use them.

So your partisan attempt to protect Obama is out of line.

Ishii
Thanks for the example of real partisanship. Twist what is said to be support of one of the candidates, that’ll show him. Drive the wedge in deep and then they’ll see my view is right!!!

Come on, show me where I have supported either of the candidates, or there is no honesty at all in that tactic.
 
There is a degree of agreement. The communications lack any genuine solutions to the problem. There is so much condescension, smugness, righteousness, and negativity, that it seems no one is really interested in solutions as much as they are in belittling each other.

So one side will win, and blame the other side for nothing getting done, and the American people will be stuck right where they are now.
There is so much condescension, smugness, righteousness - in the Obama administration. Look - believe what you want - but Obama never had a record of cooperating with others across the aisle. Romney, on the other hand, does - he worked with Democrats in Massachussetts. So once again, your point is wrong.

Ishii
 
There is so much condescension, smugness, righteousness - in the Obama administration. Look - believe what you want - but Obama never had a record of cooperating with others across the aisle. Romney, on the other hand, does - he worked with Democrats in Massachussetts. So once again, your point is wrong.

Ishii
There is a difference in state and federal politics. Romney will have just as much trouble as Obama has had, and we’ll be stuck in the middle.

Oh, the adjectives I used were aimed more at the ‘sheepole’ who have bought into being led by politicians, and I don’t care which side they are on.
 
I wasn’t aware Bush was on the ballot this time around, but nice try to try and change subject. That really is the only effective way to defend obama’s foreign-policy-talk about something else.
BAH, I’m out. I’m using examples of how it’s politics as usual. There is no clean side to politics. There is no righteous party. I have not tried to defend anyone.
 
Thanks for the example of real partisanship. Twist what is said to be support of one of the candidates, that’ll show him. Drive the wedge in deep and then they’ll see my view is right!!!

Come on, show me where I have supported either of the candidates, or there is no honesty at all in that tactic.
actually it is a example of the sheer incompetence of barack obama.

Stage I-have the egyptian ambassador apologize for offending rioters with an obscurevideo posted on the Internet.

Stage II-dismiss the murder of the US ambassador and three members of his staff as simply another negative reaction to the aforementioned video.

Stage III-before the ambassadors bodies even been secured again decry and apologize the video and then head to Las vegas to party with the rich and famous and collect money for his campaign

Stage IV-have his press Secretary go out on a daily basis and deny that there was any terrorist group involved in the murder of the ambassador

Stage V send ambassodor to the un on five national tv shows to deny the murder was a terrorist attack and again blame the youtube video.

Stage VI-after two weeks of lieing acknowledge it was a terrorist attack but claim the only real fallout from this attack was caused by people like Mitt romney pointing out that it was a terrorist attack.

State VII-with the help of a compliant liberal media moderator make the outrageous claim that prior to going to las vegas to party you acknowledged that the ambassador’s murder was a terrorist attack.
 
Ears always help…“ya see…” Where is Dana Carvey, when we need him?

Back when Southwest Airlines was more fun, I remember a flight attendant who did the entire pre-flight spiel in Ross Perot’s voice. 😃
They don’t do the funny stuff on Southwest anymore? Say it ain’t so!

I love humor in everyday circumstances. THere was this subway operator in Boston who was nuts! And hilarious!
 
There is a degree of agreement. The communications lack any genuine solutions to the problem. There is so much condescension, smugness, righteousness, and negativity, that it seems no one is really interested in solutions as much as they are in belittling each other.

So one side will win, and blame the other side for nothing getting done, and the American people will be stuck right where they are now.
Well, I can certainly understand your cynicism. I do miss the days of Reagan’s “Disagree without being disagreeable”
 
😃

Yeah…she’s the Green Party candidate. She beat out Roseanne Barr in a fierce cat fight. 😛

If Virgil Goode gets 0.1% of the vote, Stein will get 0.0001%.
I’ve heard of Stein but not Goode.

What happened to the “rent is too damn high!” guy. Looked like a black Martin Van Buren.
 
There is a difference in state and federal politics. Romney will have just as much trouble as Obama has had, and we’ll be stuck in the middle.

Oh, the adjectives I used were aimed more at the ‘sheepole’ who have bought into being led by politicians, and I don’t care which side they are on.
Agreed there is a difference. That difference being Obama has not learned it on any level while Romney has shown he can do it in private business and the state level as well as anyone, so there is not indication he will be the failure on the federal level that Obama has been.
 
Agreed there is a difference. That difference being Obama has not learned it on any level while Romney has shown he can do it in private business and the state level as well as anyone, so there is not indication he will be the failure on the federal level that Obama has been.
I will say it for the one thousandth time: Obama never ran so much as a lemonade stand before becoming President. Obama’s abysmal record speaks for itself. Experience is critical and Governor Romney has it! :amen:
 
Agreed there is a difference. That difference being Obama has not learned it on any level while Romney has shown he can do it in private business and the state level as well as anyone, so there is not indication he will be the failure on the federal level that Obama has been.
He’s going to be a better ‘decider’? 😛

We have witnessed pure politics over the interest of the American people and it’s only getting worse and worse.
 
I will say it for the one thousandth time: Obama never ran so much as a lemonade stand before becoming President. Obama’s abysmal record speaks for itself. Experience is critical and Governor Romney has it! :amen:
And Romney is not onboard with abortion for any reason, at any stage of pregnancy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top