Random News Observations

[SilentSnow 1]

You have never met, talked to, or read anything written by anyone in the Tea Party have you?

Why even bother to type a sentence so obviously false? At least make a lame joke or something. I understand that in theory the tea partiers reject Romney because he is too "liberal". But the problem with this is that Romney's policies are nearly indistinguishable from the other candidates on most issues. Also, the main idea of health care reform(mandates) was originally a Republican idea. Maybe Romney was unlucky enough to be caught taking the blame for the latest Republican shift rightward in policy, but it's hard to dismiss the "anyone but Romney" approach as completely unrelated to him being mormon. I mean Gingrich committed what should be a much bigger "sin" when talking about immigration, and he is doing extremely well.

[brvheart 1,752]

Why even bother to type a sentence so obviously false? At least make a lame joke or something.

How can a question be false?

[SilentSnow 1]

How can a question be false?

It's a supposition, not a question.

[mk 11]

Basically, at this point, if you drive, you are subsidizing empty train cars.

unless you live in an actual city where productive commerce takes place and every train car is packed like a can of sardines

[akoff 0]

Yeah creating the most popular, well run state healthcare system was terrible of mitt. Conservatives: where wild success is a deal breaker. It's the same reason why conservatives hate Barack's foreign policy.

for me government healthcare = dealbreaker. i don't care who thinks it is great or if it is popular and just because it is popular in one of the most liberal states doesn't make a wild success either. To take it one step more even if it is great for Mass doesn't mean it needs to be implemented by Washington accross the whole country... this a trainwreck coming but at least we know who to pin it on for future generations.Why do Democrats hate kids so much?

[CaneBrain 95]

for me government healthcare = dealbreaker. i don't care who thinks it is great or if it is popular and just because it is popular in one of the most liberal states doesn't make a wild success either. To take it one step more even if it is great for Mass doesn't mean it needs to be implemented by Washington accross the whole country... this a trainwreck coming but at least we know who to pin it on for future generations.Why do Democrats hate kids so much?

The under-lined is basically word for word Mitt Romney's stance on healthcare in America. Congrats, your own ideas are now considered "deal breakers".

and President Obama's foreign policy? What exactly is it? I mean besides "Do what Bush did", what other foreign policy does President Obama have? Please enlighten us, cause we can't see anyone other actions done independently off shores other than taking vacations

First of all, even if his policy was "to do what Bush did", that wouldn't change the fact that it was an improvement to do it better. If you wish to think of Obama's foreign policy as what Bush's foreign policy would have looked like if he hadn't ****ed it up at every turn, that's fine. Results matter.

[hblask 1]

Yeah creating the most popular, well run state healthcare system was terrible of mitt. Conservatives: where wild success is a deal breaker. It's the same reason why conservatives hate Barack's foreign policy.

I'll agree, this is about as good as the government can run health care

[akoff 0]

The under-lined is basically word for word Mitt Romney's stance on healthcare in America. Congrats, your own ideas are now considered "deal breakers".

you obviously didn't read the below part. for me government healthcare = dealbreaker. i don't care who thinks it is great or if it is popular and just because it is popular in one of the most liberal states doesn't make a wild success either.

[CaneBrain 95]

I'll agree, this is about as good as the government can run health care

I stopped reading at Cato Institute sorry.

[Balloon guy 158]

First of all, even if his policy was "to do what Bush did", that wouldn't change the fact that it was an improvement to do it better. If you wish to think of Obama's foreign policy as what Bush's foreign policy would have looked like if he hadn't ****ed it up at every turn, that's fine. Results matter.

President Obama didn't do anything per se. At least not in the sense of him making a command and following it with ;"Make it so." like a real leader would.President Bush did everything to get the results that the middle east is realizing now, the rising up of the populace to demand freedom. something you guys swore he failed at. President Obama did absolutely nothing to influence these events. In fact he was consistently two steps behind the action in Egypt, and his results are 100% identical then if he would have done nothing at all.So how you can with a straight face declare President Obama's accomplishments being better than Bush.Unless of course you have just accepted the fact that defending Obama requires you to use logic reminiscent of All_In and Silent Snow in order to make any declarative statement.Of course you could correct me by actually listing a foreign policy decision that President Obama has actually made on his own and then implemented. The following do not count:Letting Bush's plans continueTurning over the leadership to the UNMaking comments that have nothing but opinion behind them and no actual strength of action ( such as telling Egyptian president to step down 2 days after he had his bags packed and the military had told him they were backing the uprising.So, I guess the floor is yours.

[Balloon guy 158]

I stopped reading at Cato Institute sorry.

Slowly becoming All_In in your logic...

[CaneBrain 95]

So how you can with a straight face declare President Obama's accomplishments being better than Bush.

Less terrorist attacks on American soil allowed, actually killed Bin Laden, made every correct decision to help the Libyan rebels unseat Ghaddafi without putting a single American troop into Libya, killed anwar al-alaki, ended the iraq war as scheduledvs.started the Iraq War for reasons that were untrue, was President when 9-11 happened, didn't kill Bin Laden, got in trouble for torturing people.easy.

[mrdannyg 274]

President Obama didn't do anything per se. At least not in the sense of him making a command and following it with ;"Make it so." like a real leader would.President Bush did everything to get the results that the middle east is realizing now, the rising up of the populace to demand freedom. something you guys swore he failed at. President Obama did absolutely nothing to influence these events. In fact he was consistently two steps behind the action in Egypt, and his results are 100% identical then if he would have done nothing at all.So how you can with a straight face declare President Obama's accomplishments being better than Bush.Unless of course you have just accepted the fact that defending Obama requires you to use logic reminiscent of All_In and Silent Snow in order to make any declarative statement.Of course you could correct me by actually listing a foreign policy decision that President Obama has actually made on his own and then implemented. The following do not count:Letting Bush's plans continueTurning over the leadership to the UNMaking comments that have nothing but opinion behind them and no actual strength of action ( such as telling Egyptian president to step down 2 days after he had his bags packed and the military had told him they were backing the uprising.So, I guess the floor is yours.

So, Bush was President. He did a bunch of things. None had good results. Obama came in, did those same things. Many good results have been seen.Obviously, Bush was a fantastic leader.

[hblask 1]

I stopped reading at Cato Institute sorry.

Ah yes, the leftist theory of politics: If they may disagree with me, cover your eyes, cover your ears, and chant la-la-la-la-la.Good luck with that. You'll go far.

[CaneBrain 95]

Ah yes, the leftist theory of politics: If they may disagree with me, cover your eyes, cover your ears, and chant la-la-la-la-la.Good luck with that. You'll go far.

Actually, I think pretty much every think tank is really just a PR firm at this point. Left or right.I don't think it's a coincidence that half your links come from them.

[Balloon guy 158]

Less terrorist attacks on American soil allowed, actually killed Bin Laden, made every correct decision to help the Libyan rebels unseat Ghaddafi without putting a single American troop into Libya, killed anwar al-alaki, ended the iraq war as scheduledvs.started the Iraq War for reasons that were untrue, was President when 9-11 happened, didn't kill Bin Laden, got in trouble for torturing people.easy.

'every correct decision in Libya'?So you feel America's role in the world is to bomb from 35,000 feet and let whatever happens happen?And I wish I was as optimistic of the chances radical islamics don't gain power in Libya.As far as Bush; the war was started for many reasons, some were found to be untrue after the war was started, is that what you meant?President when 9-11 happened? Like President Obama was president when the entire banking industry almost collapsed?Didn't kill one guy, but killed 20,000 al qeda members?And I think you mean the people ordered by their commander after getting signed off by the Attorney General were aggressively investigated by President Obama regardless of how incredibly irresponsible that action was and how the ramifications will get many many people killed just like Clinton's few actions in regard to foreign policy did?

So, Bush was President. He did a bunch of things. None had good results. Obama came in, did those same things. Many good results have been seen.Obviously, Bush was a fantastic leader.

I wish all actions had immediate actions that got rated then and never got looked at again.Unfortunately for you, they aren't.Bush got rid of a really bad guy, forced all terrorist into their own back yards and put armed and trained Marines in their face resulting in a demand for freedom across the entire middle east.President Obama watched others 'do' while he followed, and while the countries are still in high states of flux, is getting credit for something that he basically did nothing about.Reminds me of the clip I heard on Rush ( this was to give Cane his out so he can ignore how relevant this clip is in order to protect his make believe world where the left isn't corrupt and inept. )A reporter named Robertson with CNN was interviewing the crowd in Egypt trying so hard to get some credit for President Obama who did nothing during the revolt:

ROBERTSON: Achmed, you've been here down here on the Square for many days. The United States and the international community has just listened to President Obama saying that America will support Egypt if it wants help and assistance, and hopes that there will be a good transition for jobs for the young people. What would be your message for President Obama?ACHMED: We don't know, actually, who he supports. He serves for his own purposes, and the Egyptian people serve for our freedom and democracy. Any democratic country should see for the people, not for its own purposes.ROBERTSON: Mustapha is joining me now. We just heard President Obama say that he wants to extend, eh, support and assistance to Egypt and Egyptians if they want any, and he hopes that there are more jobs for the young people in the future. What's your message for President Obama?MUSTAPHA: Well, my message to President Obama is just, "We started this revolution without any outside help, and we are going to finish it also without any outside help."

[akoff 0]

Honestly the only good thing i can think of BHO doing is having the balls to go in and get Osama regardless of the borders...his pretty much 0 for 3 years other then that.

[mrdannyg 274]

I wish all actions had immediate actions that got rated then and never got looked at again.Unfortunately for you, they aren't.Bush got rid of a really bad guy, forced all terrorist into their own back yards and put armed and trained Marines in their face resulting in a demand for freedom across the entire middle east.President Obama watched others 'do' while he followed, and while the countries are still in high states of flux, is getting credit for something that he basically did nothing about.Reminds me of the clip I heard on Rush ( this was to give Cane his out so he can ignore how relevant this clip is in order to protect his make believe world where the left isn't corrupt and inept. )A reporter named Robertson with CNN was interviewing the crowd in Egypt trying so hard to get some credit for President Obama who did nothing during the revolt:

But the economy is all Obama's fault? Because it makes sense that political and warring actions somehow take several years to have an effect, but fiscal and economic ones are immediately effective.As per the quote, I think it reflects very well on Obama. Pretty sure most countries like to think they act without the United States' intervention, even though we can all agree they very rarely do. I wonder if it is a coincidence that the US has been less prone to attacks under a President who is viewed as non-interventionist?

[mk 11]

...resulting in a demand for freedom across the entire middle east.

i guess it's unsurprising that the right would try to give credit to dubya for the arab spring but you know, lol and stuff. mark zuckerberg's about a billion times more responsible.

[Balloon guy 158]

i guess it's unsurprising that the right would try to give credit to dubya for the arab spring but you know, lol and stuff. mark zuckerberg's about a billion times more responsible.

You can lie to yourself all you want, but your basic misunderstanding of foreign policy isn't an excuse to continue your leftist revision of history and using your mental disorder that prevents you from seeing reality in order to continue your irrational "Bush is bad" mania that fills all your life.You should try to keep these silly notions confined to silly leftist propaganda sites, because in the real world, this kind of stupidity doesn't fly.

[Balloon guy 158]

But the economy is all Obama's fault? Because it makes sense that political and warring actions somehow take several years to have an effect, but fiscal and economic ones are immediately effective.

Ahh..you are seeing it, but you aren't seeing it.

As per the quote, I think it reflects very well on Obama. Pretty sure most countries like to think they act without the United States' intervention, even though we can all agree they very rarely do. I wonder if it is a coincidence that the US has been less prone to attacks under a President who is viewed as non-interventionist?

? America is getting burned in effigy more now than ever.And President Obama using intel found through torture to implement plans created under Bush resulting in a one time action of killing Osama is one thing. Doing it over and over until a nuclear power made up of 95% muslims who hate the US is another.President Obama is largely believed to be so willing to conduct military operations because its the only thing that's happened in his administration that didn't result in his poll number falling a little bit more.Goota love democrats and their hypocrisy about the use of the military.

[hblask 1]

Actually, I think pretty much every think tank is really just a PR firm at this point. Left or right.I don't think it's a coincidence that half your links come from them.

If you are dismissing data based on who published first, you will miss out on a lot of good info.Many of my links come from there because they are the premier free market think tank, collecting data from around the world to empirically show what most people already know in their hearts. You know it's not OK to steal for others just because you want something, you know that in your heart. By the same token, you know it's not OK to hire someone to steal from others for you, just because you want something. Collecting data that shows why that's a bad idea is a valuable service.

[hblask 1]

Honestly the only good thing i can think of BHO doing is having the balls to go in and get Osama regardless of the borders...his pretty much 0 for 3 years other then that.

He had that Somalian pirate killed that time, too.Plus, now we can eat horse meat.

[CaneBrain 95]

If you are dismissing data based on who published first, you will miss out on a lot of good info.Many of my links come from there because they are the premier free market think tank, collecting data from around the world to empirically show what most people already know in their hearts. You know it's not OK to steal for others just because you want something, you know that in your heart. By the same token, you know it's not OK to hire someone to steal from others for you, just because you want something. Collecting data that shows why that's a bad idea is a valuable service.

When they do that, let me know so I can not read it.

[Balloon guy 158]

Looks like Canada might not be interested in 'saving the environment' as much as they claimed.Cliffs: Canada will likely quit Kyoto Protocol and save $6.7 billion in fines.