On GOP friendly Fox News, Paul Ryan would not be specific about the GOP tax plan. Everyone wants to know about it. Afterall the GOP is promising the already wealthy an ADDITIONAL 20% tax cut. Since the Bush tax cuts, the already wealthy have simply gotten tremendously wealthier. Meanwhile US debt has piled up, and the 90% of everyone else have stagnated or lost traction. When asked on Fox News as to how much these additional tax cuts would cost...Ryan would not answer the question. He avoided it. He simply won't speak about the immense effect on US debt and your future. Of course last time Bush/the GOP ran big tax cuts the US debt skyrocketed. Meanwhile incomes and wealth skyrocketed for the 1%. while the rest of the nation stagnated....and then we had a recession. Not a good track record for making promises by doubling down on the policies that caused the worst recession in modern times. So when asked about the impacts of tax cuts that have confounded economists and show huge looming deficits Ryan refused to answer. And that was on Fox News, the media outlet dedicated to supporting the GOP. If the guy will not answer a simple direct question on Fox, what is he hiding from the rest of the nation??
I love it when Obama supporters accuse someone *else* of "refusing to come clean". Big O has enough skeletons in his closet to start a natural history museum and has turned lying into an art form, but if someone else is skimpy on detail they're a liar. They may be incapable of sensing irony, but iT's good to know this election hasn't ruined their sense of humor.
Rob: Paul Ryan is a self proclaimed budget "expert". The entire GOP describes him as an "expert". That is his description. When asked about the GOP teams budget/tax cutting proposals on GOP friendly Fox News and the estimates that it will add $5 trillion to the deficit the so called expert would not respond. So what is he an "expert" on? Lying??? Not coming square with Americans???? A really simple question. A Direct Question. Asked in GOP friendly and oriented Fox News. Fox News was called the Romney station during the primaries by your own Right Wing Cohorts. If he cannot give an answer there...he doesn't have an answer.
Thats one possible answer. How did you like Obama's answer in regard to who is responsible for the Libyan attacks on our embassy and the death of our Ambassador? Direct enough? Accurate enough? Truthful enough?
See my prior post. If i were arguing on behalf of a party that hadn't passed a single budget during the entire administration, I'd be too embarrassed to go down this path. And please save the obstructionist rhetoric, the biggest obstructionist is named Reid.* * speaking of liars... Didnt he assure us Romney hadnt paid taxes in a decade? Should we expect an apology soon? ?
I'm not sure if you have been paying attention, but Democrats are completely unconcerned with wrongdoing of any sort, so long as the person is faithful to the party. Conversely, if the person is not a loyal Democrat, they can be charged with anything, regardless of whether the charges have merit. Take for instance Paul Ryan's speech at the RNC, where he talked about the Jaynesville GM Plant Obama committed to keep open. Dems jumped all over the speech calling Ryan a liar, claiming the GM plant had closed in 2008, despite the fact it closed late in 2009. They basically used lies to accuse the man of lying when he was in fact telling the truth. Now that the moment has passed, and the reputation damage has been done, the matter just gets dropped. I found this discussion of a panel of left leaning poli-sci grad students fascinating. In a nutshell, their studies concluded that spreading disinformation, slander, and outright lies about a candidate invariably has a negative and long lasting effect on public opinion regarding that candidate, even if those lies are later completely debunked and retracted, and the people who hear those retractions accept the original lies as being untrue. According to their studies, slander works, even after taking into account the negative attention given to the liar (Harry Reid in this example). This is why you see people like Earlpearl, who is clearly smart enough to know the difference, out here ranting away with BS talking points strung together like some kind of choose your own ending story book. He does it because science shows it works. Pat Caddell, a Democratic Pollster for Jimmy Carter, Gary Hart and Joe Biden, gave a speech the other day that was absolutely spot on covering media involvement in these types of activities. Well worth the watch. [video=youtube;brDZJA8j-8c]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=brDZJA8j-8c&feature=player_embedded[/video]
-- The National Endowment for the Arts can FUND projects that offend Christians in the name of free speech... -- but the president calls Google seeking removal of a cheesy You-Tube video that offends Muslims. You have to love liberal logic... it is so very flexible. But then... when HAS that crew ever been intellectually honest?
No one has been a bigger friend to the wealthy than Obama. I mean, while other countries, even tiny Iceland, have been going after shady bankers, Obama's Justice Department has been sitting on their hands allowing the Wall Street criminals responsible for the 2008 economic meltdown run free. 60 Minutes, CNN, et al have been doing specials on the criminal activities engaged by Wall Street and Obama just turns a blind eye. No candidate in the history of the USA has ever accepted more money from Wall Street, or given more favors to the wealthy, than President Obama. Anyone who doesn't see that is ignorant of Obama's policies. Look, Romney and Ryan are already wealthy. They need nothing from Wall Street. But President Obama, like President Clinton, is using the White House to accumulate wealth and it's SO obvious Obama's letting Wall Street get away with anything they want.
Not that i'm sticking up for Wall streeters but....have you considered what will happen if Wall street gets taken out? If the system is brought back into reality? Let's all knock another 90% off what we own...after all it is just still a bubble. Okay, so now we got nothing, the world is in bigger shit and we still got huge debts that needs paying, now what? I can get that 100,000 house for 10,000 now yippee.. but that's not enough to mortgage and get my new car. The dishwasher costs more than the house next door. Looks like it will be a while before I can afford that again. Do we really want to take it down?
Only a few lunatics are actually proposing "Taking Wall Street Down", and they are mostly the Occupy Wall St. movement. What there is likely widespread support for is ending the incestuous relationship between Wall St. and government that provides tax breaks for the top of the fortune 500 while piling more regulations and burdens on small business. I think people, regardless of political stripe, were absolutely sickened by the necessity of TARP. I think most people, regardless of political affiliation, would like to make sure that the need for something like TARP never happens again. When you hear Republicans and ex-CEOs from the business community asking why the President has done NOTHING to deal with the root causes of the financial melt down, it is a cause for concern. Under Obama, the big banks that helped create this mess are bigger than ever. Fannie and Freddie now underwrite 90% of the mortgages in America. If big business had us by the balls in 2008, forcing a half trillion dollar taxpayer bailout, the situation has only gotten worse under Obama. This isn't something that can be fixed quickly or easily, mind you. It will take gradual changes in legislation, regulation, and enforcement. The problem is, none of those changes are being made. NONE. ZERO. NOTHING. Obama supporters talk about how nobody could have fixed this mess in four years. I would be happy if someone was actually trying. How about this. Kick it off by breaking up one big bank or investment firm. Take your pick. AIG? Goldman? Chase? Wells? BofA? Any of the above. All of the above. Why did it take a Republican to break up AT&T? I thought Democrats were the champions of the people when it came to the people vs. big business monopolies? Isn't all this "Too big to fail" Bush's fault? Why are the Democrats defending the status quo?
But Obama has failed to bring any changes to Wall Street. Look, part of the reason for the 2008 crash is that there were securities instruments being traded that were not regulated or even overseen. When instruments are traded and overseen by the government, that's called securities trading. When instruments (mortgage default swaps) are traded that are not overseen and are seen only by the two trading partners, that's called GAMBLING. Obama, his SEC, and his Justice Department have allowed the gambling to continue. And despite the tremendous evidence that fraud occurred, there have been no serious investigations by the Obama administration. That 100% the responsibility of President Obama and the Executive branch. To me, the fact that liberals aren't outraged by Obama's impeachable lack of action here proves to me that liberals don't really stand for that they pretend to stand for. It's all just a game to them.
Let's DO talk about honesty We've been being fed a steady diet of White House officials pretending the burned consulate in Libya was just a "spontaneous protest" that got out of hand. It wasn't about our foreign policy... it was just some really disgruntled movie critics that brought along mortars and RPGs. Turns out it was a web of lies, and DC turned down repeated requests for increased security from the Libyan diplomats. So tell me... how many people DIED as a result of Paul Ryan's tax projections? RELATED LINKS: NPR: House Committee: Washington Denied More Security For Libyan Consulate Congressional Oversight Committee: Oversight Presses for Answers: Diplomats in Libya Requested Additional Security, Washington Officials Denied the Resources CBS: House committee: security requests denied in Libya RobJonesforPresident: DC Denied Repeated Security Requests from Libyan Mission
I thought Fox News was a joke to everyone? It's very sad that people don't read and just go off of what they saw in an interview on Fox News... Are we comparing Ryan to this guy? [video=youtube;nlvqqNG4hr8-8c]http://youtu.be/nlvqqNG4hr8[/video] If so, get him the f*ck out of office, ASAP !!!!! Joe "I forgot to take my angry pills" Biden.
Fox simply gives air time to things that other networks won't show. It is one of the large reasons liberals remain so uninformed. One can make their own assessments about how relevant the information is, but to simply not give it airtime or to avoid watching it because it is on Fox is just stupid. I spend far more time watching Maddow than every other Fox show combined. This video, if you take away all the surrounding commentary speaks volumes all on it's own. [video=youtube;Efi0bg97T5s]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Efi0bg97T5s[/video]
Saw this video last night --- appalling isn't it? A council, a friend and a great leader? Wow.... It's amazing to me that his accent changes, depending on the group he's speaking to.