32 YEARS !! Thirty-Two Years Is Enough!! VOTE FOR ROMNEY !!!!!!!

[nick1]

Tax cuts on the top percent always leads to a recession its a myth that if we save them some cash they create more jobs


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[CRAZYDOLFAN305]

Democratic Presidents Are Better for the Economy.


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[CRAZYDOLFAN305]

Tax cuts on the top percent always leads to a recession its a myth that if we save them some cash they create more jobs


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

They don't like facts. The are conditioned to hate and vote against their best interest, it's in their genes. They just can't help it.

I know that intelligence gathering looks more romantic.... That's probably why your Hollywood producers are so crazy about James Bond types of films. But in reality the main emphasis of the KGB is NOT in the area of intelligence at all. According to my opinion, and the opinions of many defectors of my caliber, only about 15% of time, money, and manpower is spent on espionage as such. The other 85% is a slow process which we call either ideological subversion, active measures, or psychological warfare. What it basically means is: to change the perception of reality of every American that despite of the abundance of information no one is able to come to sensible conclusions in the interest of defending themselves, their families, their community, and their country.
It's a great brainwashing process which goes very slow and is divided into four basic stages. The first one being "demoralization". It takes from 15 to 20 years to demoralize a nation. Why that many years? Because this is the minimum number of years required to educate one generation of students in the country of your enemy exposed to the ideology of their enemy.

In other words, the ideology of Marxism-Leninism is being pumped into the soft heads of at least three generation of American students without being challenged or counterbalanced by the basic values of Americanism; American patriotism.... The result? The result you can see ... the people who graduated in the 1960's, dropouts or half-baked intellectuals, are now occupying the positions of power in the government, civil service, business, mass media, and educational systems. You are stuck with them. You can't get through to them. They are contaminated. They are programmed to think and react to certain stimuli in a certain pattern [alluding to Pavlov]. You cannot change their mind even if you expose them to authentic information. Even if you prove that white is white and black is black, you still can not change the basic perception and the logic of behavior. In other words for these people the process of demoralization is complete and irreversible. To rid society of these people you need another 15 or 20 years to educate a new generation of patriotically minded and common sense people who would be acting in favor and in the interests of United States society.

The demoralization process in the United States is basically completed already for the last 25 years. Actually, it's over fulfilled because demoralization now reaches such areas where not even experts would even dream of such tremendous success. Most of it is done by Americans to Americans thanks to lack of moral standards. As I mentioned before, exposure to true information does not matter anymore. A person who was demoralized is unable to assess true information. The facts tell him nothing, even if I shower him with information, with authentic proof, with documents and pictures. ...he will refuse to believe it.... That's the tragedy of the situation of demoralization.

[phins_4_ever]

Only one candidate in this presidential race has a plan guaranteed to raise taxes, and that's Obama. His own legislative affairs director, Rob Nabors, told Democratic senators during the debt limit debate last year, "You could raise all the taxes you want on millionaires ... and it would never raise enough."



In other words, the $3,500 tax hike Obama will inflict on Americans this January is just a start.

You are the a-typical target of the Romney lie campaign and Fox News spin machine.

Bush's tax cuts were temporary. They were intended to last only 10 years. It was a temporary tax reduction. The extension in 2011 was to expire and the taxes would go back to the old normal rate. It is NOT a tax increase. Obama is fighting for continuation of the temporary tax reduction for the middle class and lower class.

To say it in normal American English: If an item in a store cost $10 and a temporary sale of $8 is advertised then after the expiration of the sale it is not a price increase but it is the regular pricing. If after the temporary sale the price is $11 then it is a $1 price increase.

[Gonzo]

I would give anything for a 3rd Bill Clinton term over these two chumps.

[TheWalrus]

Obama's been a much better president than Clinton. If nothing else, he doesn't leave you wondering whether he'll be indicted for perjury or convicted of rape, which I believe Clinton could have been. Clinton also took time off from his primary campaign during a scandal over his affairs to go back to Arkansas and supervise the execution of a man so mentally retarded he left some of his last meal behind, and I quote, "for later." He repeated this sort of thing as president during the Lewinsky scandal, bombing targets in Sudan and Afghanistan on the day he was called to testify before the grand jury (the Sudanese target ended up being a medical production facility, the destruction of which killed thousands), and a three day bombing campaign of Iraq during the actual impeachment proceedings.

Clinton had the good fortune of become president at a time where the economy was on an upswing, and he took that good fortune and "reformed" Medicare and failed to pass meaningful health care reform. For some reason people just remember the good economy and forget that the .com bubble burst just as he was leaving.

Obama has done more "triangulation" than I care to see but Clinton was an utter traitor to liberal ideals by comparison, especially since he should have been negotiating from a place of strength. The one thing I'll give him credit for is having much more of a taste for the down and dirty negotiating that gets laws passed than Obama does. It's ugly but necessary work. But he also had a talent for sabotaging things, as he did by letting Hilary Clinton take the lead on health care reform, which her inflexibility utterly destroyed.

So yeah, Clinton was a bad president. And I think an even worse human.

[Tetragrammaton]

In many ways Bill Clinton was worse than George Bush. He just happened to be President during an economic upswing. Regardless of who wins in ten days, the economy is going to be in an upswing for the next few years, and Obama will get credit for his policies working or Romney will get credit for the overnight turnaround.

[PhinsFreak]

In many ways Bill Clinton was worse than George Bush. He just happened to be President during an economic upswing. Regardless of who wins in ten days, the economy is going to be in an upswing for the next few years, and Obama will get credit for his policies working or Romney will get credit for the overnight turnaround.

The next president ALWAYS gets the credit for what the previous president did while in office, of gets the blame. Obama blames everything on Bush, and Bush can blame Clinton and it keeps going and going all the way back to Carter, and even further if they choose.

FACT: There is not one single president that could have done a "great" job as president after the attacks of 9/11. (Attacking Afghanistan should have been priority one, but Clinton dropped the ball on killing bin Laden SEVERAL times) The attacks "should' be to blame for the mess we where in. Killing people was not their primary goal. We are currently living in their goal, many American lives have been lost and our economy sucks. At the pace we are going "they" are winning. We need to turn this country around, in every area. It will take a long time but I don't see many, if any, changes from 2008 until now.

[TheWalrus]

The next president ALWAYS gets the credit for what the previous president did while in office, of gets the blame. Obama blames everything on Bush, and Bush can blame Clinton and it keeps going and going all the way back to Carter, and even further if they choose.

FACT: There is not one single president that could have done a "great" job as president after the attacks of 9/11. (Attacking Afghanistan should have been priority one, but Clinton dropped the ball on killing bin Laden SEVERAL times) The attacks "should' be to blame for the mess we where in. Killing people was not their primary goal. We are currently living in their goal, many American lives have been lost and our economy sucks. At the pace we are going "they" are winning. We need to turn this country around, in every area. It will take a long time but I don't see many, if any, changes from 2008 until now.

Apparently you've never heard of Franklin Delano Roosevelt or the attack on Pearl Harbor.

[JackFinfan]

The next president ALWAYS gets the credit for what the previous president did while in office, of gets the blame. Obama blames everything on Bush, and Bush can blame Clinton and it keeps going and going all the way back to Carter, and even further if they choose.

FACT: There is not one single president that could have done a "great" job as president after the attacks of 9/11. (Attacking Afghanistan should have been priority one, but Clinton dropped the ball on killing bin Laden SEVERAL times) The attacks "should' be to blame for the mess we where in. Killing people was not their primary goal. We are currently living in their goal, many American lives have been lost and our economy sucks. At the pace we are going "they" are winning. We need to turn this country around, in every area. It will take a long time but I don't see many, if any, changes from 2008 until now.

Did 9/11 force Bush to invade Iraq or did it merely give him excuse? I think any President would have had it rough after 9/11, but Bush's reaction to the tragedy was less than stellar. He created a whole new segment of the gov't, violated the constitution, and lowered tax cuts while engaging in two wars. You can't blame 9/11 for those decisions.