Originally Posted by jimmac
1994: Republicans take both houses. Hello?
As with all these dumb smokescreens small but loud.
I don't know how loud they are. The media likes to build these kinds of people up as "examples" of the GOP. Lately I've not heard that much about them.
As NoahJ would say : " Thanks for the verification ".
Let me be clear: I am not
saying that no matter Obama does, I won't give him credit. I'm saying that looking at what he's actually doing
...I don't see anything that could be considered "helpful to the economy." What I see is a boatload of spending. As if that weren't bad enough, it's not even Keynesian spending on infrastructure projects (which I don't think works for long term job growth anyway). I see confiscatory taxation on businesses. I see yet more proposed spending on social programs.
What I am saying here, jimmac, is that these policies will not be beneficial, even if and when the economy recovers. No one in his right mind believes they will be. Yet, I have no doubt that Obama will get credit if things turnaround.
Can you supply a link that really shows this?
This has been established in various forms ad nauseam, but OK;
Source 1 shows a solid Republican lead. In January of 2009, the lead was +10 democrat.
Source 2 shows a narrow Democratic lead, but again the GOP is closing in.
Source 3 shows a virtual stalemate.
Keep in mind: These are merely generic ballot polls. Issues polls show a far more dire situation for the Democrats:www.pollingreport.com
Right Track/Wrong Track (DailyKos 11/30/09). 39 right 58 wrong
"Overall, are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the way things are going in our country today?"
Congress Job Approval: http://www.pollingreport.com/CongJob.htm
And yet who's in the Whitehouse? One of the reasons is those same GOP members didn't either support or voted against their own party last time.
Why? Because of the zoo specimens I was talking about. The notion that anyone would let that pair into power is frightening! Hell I'd rather have Nixon! Come to think of it I'd rather have " Dick " than any of their recent choices. At least he was intelligent.
Right, because Obama has been much less frightening. The Republicans lost for several reasons, none of which are complicated.
1. McCain ran a terrible campaign and was not in step with the base of the party.
2. Bush was unpopular
3. Obama ran a great campaign
4. Party fatigue.
5. The GOP congress lost its way.
This was almost an ad-hom SDW and even though I usually don't report other members I might make an exception for you. As you saw when you tried this before it didn't take me long to find errors in your writing.
It's not an ad-hom at all. You brought it up, actually. I just opined that your posts demonstrate a lack of skill in using the English language. I also opined that in the real world, people (in general) are judged by this.
By the way that's Climate Gate not climategate.
Actually it's not. Watergate started all of these 'gate names. Ergo, Climategate. Don't believe me? See this link. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...gate%22_suffix
Spelling has nothing to do with the content of what one is trying to say. God! What bull shit.
You know I really don't care how you spell things SDW it's what you're saying that counts.
I disagree. I've already explained this is due to the nature of the spelling errors. In fact, they are generally not just spelling errors. They are major grammar errors that are repeated quite a bit. Or, if they are spelling errors, they are ones that would cause someone to fail a high school term paper.
Oh, and you're wrong: How you say/write something is nearly as important as what you say/write.
But as usual you'd rather we pay attention to little things out in front and not pay any attention to what's really going on behind the cutain.
You know? The facts.
You have no idea what the facts are in nearly any situation. Global Warming? Check! The Economy? Check! 2010 Election Polling? Check!
If you're talking about Rush, Beck, or Palin I've heard enough! I'd rather listen to Moe, Larry, and Curly-Joe!
Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck are talk show hosts, not political leaders. I suppose Palin is closer to a "leader," though since she is not in power at the moment, it's a grey area. I was more referring to both rank-and-file Republicans and people in Congressional leadership...as well as governor, for that matter.