Ended the Iraq War.
We want release student records!:mad:
Obama has a long list of accomplishments that would easily thwart Newt.
For instance, if Newt tried his “socialist anti-business” crap - Obama has the biggest point gain in the S&P 500 Index ever, the lowest interest rates, the highest exports, the lowest inflation rate, etc,
On capitalism and budgets, Obama is a clear winner compared to Newt.
I think the debate will turn into a Newt name calling out of desperation - in his clever wordy way - all the while lying.
Will Obama call out Newt for the liar he is? That is the crux here.
He doesn’t exactly have to lie about the current state of the economy or the unemployment figures (though I saw earlier that there was a significant drop in unemployment, which is certainly going to help Obama, assuming that trend continues). Again, you seem to be deluding yourself as to what he would say. He’s not going to focus on ‘socialist anti-business crap’, he’s going to hammer away at peoples fears about the economy and unemployment. THAT is going to be the major Republican theme (again, assuming things remain relatively unchanged between now and the election), no matter if it’s Newt, Romney or some other clown they nominate. Anything outside of that theme is going to just be a garnish…sauce for the various Republican factions to elbow up to the trough for.
-XT
You’re laughing because you don’t understand the issues.
Obama has accomplished a lot. Especially if you consider that the Senate Republicans are obstructing more than any congress ever. Ever. Seriously. They’re filibustering at record rates.
Now if Paul were elected, and wanted to do something stupid like abolishing the EPA, it’d get filibustered by Republicans *and *Democrats. Paul’s nonsense ideology would never pass through congress.
No president but Bush would have gone into Iraq. It was an elective war.
He wants to destroy the EPA, he wants to destroy the Federal Reserve, he wants to destroy the Food and Drug Amin. His destruction of the US economy would shit can the whole world. He’s a complete lunatic and people would die like they did in the 19th century if he were given dictator’s powers.
Like I said, he’d be an utter failure as president. And if he had magic powers to do what he wants, he’d make the country much, much worse.
Newt is a piece of shit. But he’s ultimately rational. Paul thinks his economic policies are magic.
Well, Newt has called Obama the “food stamp president” who hands food stamps out for Hawaiian vacations (Pants on Fire Lie by Politifact). The issue is how Obama will call Newt out when he refers to him as a “Kenyan anti-colonial” - does that lie score points with the mushy middle? Or do independents believe Newt?
Kenyan Anti Colonial? That is the what Newt will run on?
You are too tolerant of feces.
You’re not the first person to tell me that.
[QUOTE=Linden Arden]
Well, Newt has called Obama the “food stamp president” who hands food stamps out for Hawaiian vacations (Pants on Fire Lie by Politifact). The issue is how Obama will call Newt out when he refers to him as a “Kenyan anti-colonial” - does that lie score points with the mushy middle? Or do independents believe Newt?
[/QUOTE]
A cite would be helpful, as I hadn’t heard anything like that. Regardless, we are talking about a debate here, not some speach he might give to a Republican audience. I find it hard to believe that Newt would say something like this in a nationally televised debate against Obama. It would hardly score him any points with anyone except his base, and they are ALREADY going to vote for him, no?
:dubious: To me this is along the lines of what people thought Bush II would say or do…i.e. they vastly underestimated him, and dismissed everything he said as complete bullshit (which much of it was). Then were shocked when he won. And Newt is in a whole 'nother league from GW.
I still don’t think he has a chance, but I also believe that you are vastly underestimating what he could or would do here.
-XT
easy cite, xtisme.
And no one is underestimating Newt. My thesis is that they are overestimating him.
Thanks for the cite. It doesn’t say exactly what you said, but it’s close enough. However, again, that was a speech to a Republican audience. I seriously doubt he’d be bringing up the whole food stamps for Hawaii trips in a debate.
And I’m not seeing a lot of overestimation in this thread, or by Democrats in general, to be honest. Hopefully Obama and his team won’t underestimate him, in the highly unlikely event that Newt wins the nomination.
-XT
Exactly what did he accomplish that you can say, “this” sets Obama apart from all other Presidents?
As for Federal Reserve - read this and come back and tell me it is a useful institution. Of course, provided that you actually understand any of it.
But Affordable Care Act, the Stimulus and OBL are some good places to start.
It’s a useful institution. Someone can do something bad and still be useful.
Anyway, since you ignored the rest of my post, I’m assuming you accept all of that as correct, right?
This type of question is a major indicator of how the general public can be so easily duped and corralled to live their lives in a pig-sty that the most capable demagogue sets up for them.
A President can send our children to die at a moment’s notice, and order the mass death of countless other people. Instead of wondering whether a presidential candidate will have no problem of doing this for the benefit of mega corps (see: all recent history Republicans) is not the most important thing to consider?
The impact of a tv reality show is as important?
Sad.
It doesn’t matter how alike or unalike Obama and Gingrich are. Kerry voted for plenty of Bush’s policies before he was against them (remember that?) and Cain and Obama were on the same side of the aisle more than once.
I am very familiar with the Bloomberg article you cite.
$13 billion in lost interest? when our economy contracted $15 TRILLION in Gross Net worth in 2008? Are you kidding?
The $13 billion was not even a loss - it was merely a lost opportunity on low interest rates. Like if you bought an HDTV for $100 below market - you didn’t PROFIT a hundred - you merely SAVED it.
Bernanke deserved his Time award. I can squash any Austrian here on the subject.
Well, there you go. Do you think Gingrich does not want to repeal Obamacare? Are you somehow looking into his soul to see his true feelings independent of what he says now? I’d wager that a desire to repeal Obamacare differentiates him from Obama, who, I am pretty sure, supports Obamacare.
Gingrich supported invading Iraq in 2003. Gingrich is explicitly in favor of bombing Iran, if necessary, to effect regime change. Gingrich opposes Obama’s stance on the Israel-Palestine peace process (for no particular reason, seemingly, other than that Bibi doesn’t like it either). That’s with just a few minutes of thought, and covering only one region of the world. I’m sure given more time I could think of more.
Your arguments seem to be of the flavor, “In some situations, Obama has positions fleetingly similar to positions that Gingrich once might have held, therefore there is no difference between the two.”
That’s not the point.
The point is that a fraud has been committed at a grand level where one story was managed for public and legislative consumption and another for “taking care of business”.
Feds were presenting one version of numbers they wanted Congress to see while doing something entirely different behind the scenes. General problem is that people think that somehow they are saved at individual level, that somehow their world would come to an end if too big to fail failed. So, people, mostly out of fear, fed by lies and end-of-the-world scare akin to Rupture play along and enable those who screw them daily to continue screwing them.
If you cannot make a connection between small business and regular folks current situation with this fraud then yeah, all you can do is cheer.
It’s hard to argue with assumption like that.