Usa Thread

[Hugh_Hoy]

A Harvard economist has calcultated that Barry's spending bill (ooops, I mean "jobs bill" )would cost $200,000 of taxpayer money. Barry's Secretary of the Treasury thinks that's okay. Why would anybody want to support such a crazy bullshit initiative...or anybody who proposes such a plan?

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Economy/geithner-good-chance-jobs-act-pass/story?id=14609951

 

HH

[Flashermac]

I looked up Murdock. Not surprisingly he is fairly conservative, having worked on Reagan's campaigns. However, he is clearly no fanatic.

 

<< He opposes governmental involvement in issues relating to both gay and heterosexual marriage. He also opposes the War on Drugs. >>

 

Interesting guy ... seems the liberals hate his guts, which is a good sign.

 

<< Murdock received his AB in Government from Georgetown University in 1986 and his MBA in Marketing and International Business from New York University in 1989. His MBA program included a semester as an exchange student at the Chinese University of Hong Kong. A native of Los Angeles, California, Murdock lives in New York City. Murdock is a first-generation American. His parents are from Costa Rica. >>

 

 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deroy_Murdock

[Steve]

I don't know exactly what Romney will do. Frankly, I think no one has a clue because the mess is so big. This may be one of those kind of financial messes that will just have to work itself out. In the present state where both parties don't want to compromise nothing will get done. If Romney gets in office he will likely have both houses of Congress. I am worried if that happens. I simply have zero trust with Republicans with full power. Also, their social agenda.

 

If Paul wins I'll be heartened but Paul won't have the backing of the Republicans because he's a RINO (Republican In Name Only). He scares Republicans more than Dems I think. There is no way the Republican brass wants Paul and even if he runs a strong 2nd he won't get a sniff as VP. Not sure he'd even take it. He won't stay quiet. I am glad he's getting up there though. If nothing else he asks the hard questions. He talks about and exposes the hypocracy. Even if you don't like him you have to respect that he has integrity.

 

I hope he wins the nomination. I really do. It will shake things up.

[Hugh_Hoy]

I hope he wins the nomination. I really do. It will shake things up.

 

 

I am certain that you really do hope Paul will get the GOP nomination. But it wouldn't "shake things up". Paul's nomination would assure relection for Barry, the most incompetent, inept, unprepared President in the history of the country. We need a leader who can and will get the country rolling again. Not sure who that would be, but I'm sure Obama and the likes of Pelosi and Reid aren't the ones to do it. They've turned an out-of control backyard barbeque into a raging forest fire in 2 3/4 years.

 

HH

[Flashermac]

Herman Cain Leads Republican Field In Zogby Poll

 

 

A new Zogby poll puts Herman Cain at the top of the Republican field, as the top choice of 28% of poll respondents. (IBOPE Zogby International says the polling sample consists of “all likely voters and of likely Republican primary voters.â€)

 

Rounding out the top three are Rick Perry at 18%, and Mitt Romney at 17%. Fourth place goes to Ron Paul at 11%. Paul’s the most solid performer in Zogby’s polling history for the 2012 GOP race – his 11% might as well be chiseled in stone.

 

Interestingly, this poll was conducted after the Orlando GOP debate, but before Cain won the Florida straw poll. It’s a huge surge for Cain, who was polling at 12% just two weeks previously, and was floating at a campaign low of 8% two weeks before that. Aside from that bitter 8% number, Cain has generally done quite well in the Zogby poll, usually good enough for second or third place.

 

On the other hand, Rick Perry’s numbers in the Zogby poll have cratered, falling 19% in just two weeks. His debut last month was also his high-water mark thus far, when Zogby had him at 41%.

 

Michelle Bachmann has also been slipping steadily, chugging in at 4%. That puts her just below Jon Huntsman, which is the same way she finished the Florida straw poll. Bachmann was actually the leading candidate in Zogby’s polling from June 21 through July 25… then she plunged to 9% in the next poll and continued sliding down from there after saying stupid and moronic things.

 

Romney’s been holding fairly steady in the Zogby poll. He bounces a few points up and down, but seems to hover in the 15-17% range.

 

Zogby’s also got President Obama’s approval rating at 42%, with 57% disapproval. That’s actually a bit better than his September 5 low of 39-61. His poor approval numbers seem to hold fairly steady, while his disapproval bounces around.

 

As always with poll news, the usual caveats apply: it’s one poll, it might be an outlier, Zogby’s accuracy has been questioned in the past, et cetera. Still, these numbers reflect the general shape of the race pretty well: Perry started big but fizzled fast, Romney’s been playing a careful game built around damage control, Paul’s got a loyal following but can’t reach beyond it.

 

I’d have guessed Cain would rank a bit lower than his Zogby numbers until now, but he had one of the best weekends a candidate could ask for in Orlando, and Zobgy’s poll is telling us the same thing the Florida straw poll did. It will be interesting to compare the first batch of polls from various sources to reflect that straw poll, and Cain’s reaction to it.

 

 

My link

[Flashermac]

A Harvard economist has calcultated that Barry's spending bill (ooops, I mean "jobs bill" )would cost $200,000 of taxpayer money. Barry's Secretary of the Treasury thinks that's okay. Why would anybody want to support such a crazy bullshit initiative...or anybody who proposes such a plan?

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Economy/geithner-good-chance-jobs-act-pass/story?id=14609951

 

HH

 

 

Why not give $50,000 to each unemployed person. The money would go 4 times as far and would get right back into circulation.

[Hugh_Hoy]

Why not give $50,000 to each unemployed person. The money would go 4 times as far and would get right back into circulation.

 

Because that would not enable the politicians to target/benefit the money to their supporters?

 

HH

[Bangkoktraveler]

A Harvard economist has calcultated that Barry's spending bill (ooops, I mean "jobs bill" [color:red]would cost $200,000 of taxpayer money.[/color] Barry's Secretary of the Treasury thinks that's okay. Why would anybody want to support such a crazy bullshit initiative...or anybody who proposes such a plan?

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Economy/geithner-good-chance-jobs-act-pass/story?id=14609951

 

HH

[color:white]

.

.

[/color]

Sounds like a bargain.

 

Can a Republican do it for less? :rotl:

[Steve]

I am certain that you really do hope Paul will get the GOP nomination. But it wouldn't "shake things up". Paul's nomination would assure relection for Barry, the most incompetent, inept, unprepared President in the history of the country. We need a leader who can and will get the country rolling again. Not sure who that would be, but I'm sure Obama and the likes of Pelosi and Reid aren't the ones to do it. They've turned an out-of control backyard barbeque into a raging forest fire in 2 3/4 years.

 

HH

 

HH, you don't want me to vote for Obama, right? If Paul won I'd vote for him. I'm not married to any party. The country is in too big of a mess I believe for any of us to be tied to a party.

 

I don't like this any one but Obama thinking as well. You and I agree on his presidency. I don't think he's nearly as bad the right paints him. Basically he's blamed for not fixing a Republican made problem. If any one thinks the issue was fixable in 3 or 4 years, I have anohter bridge to sell with yours. We teetered on the edge of national insolvency. How its going to be fixed will take years. Much longer than even a 2 term president. The problem is we need a long term solution and since the white house changes hands every 4 to 8 years, nothing consistent can occur. Good ideas often aren't kept by a new president if he's from the other party.

 

I didn't expect Obama to fix the problem but I expected him to get the ball rolling. Things haven't improved much but I don't think they are much worse either. Unemployment went up but the trend of it was going up when he took office. Economic forces can't be stopped, they often have to bottom out. Reagan on elected in '80 but the recession that was blamed on Carter got worse under Reagan initially and bottomed out in '82. Just about the time for relection things picked up in '84.

 

The infrastructure focus by Obama is a great idea. It needs time though...and support. Which he either won't get from the Republicans or they'll be slow to offer it because they'll choose party over the country...again.

[Steve]

I looked up Murdock. Not surprisingly he is fairly conservative, having worked on Reagan's campaigns. However, he is clearly no fanatic.

 

<< He opposes governmental involvement in issues relating to both gay and heterosexual marriage. He also opposes the War on Drugs. >>

 

Interesting guy ... seems the liberals hate his guts, which is a good sign.

 

<< Murdock received his AB in Government from Georgetown University in 1986 and his MBA in Marketing and International Business from New York University in 1989. His MBA program included a semester as an exchange student at the Chinese University of Hong Kong. A native of Los Angeles, California, Murdock lives in New York City. Murdock is a first-generation American. His parents are from Costa Rica. >>

 

 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deroy_Murdock

 

EVERY black conservative will be against Obama...or any Democrat. The media often things all blacks supports Obama. Even conservatie blacks because he's black. Its never been that way with conservative blacks. Maybe they got the idea from Powell who was being principled. He was not supporting Obama because he was black. He'd have come out as a Democrat if that's how he felt. Black conservatives have been speaking out about Jackson, Sharpton and black pols for years they just didn't get any notice.

 

If someone accused most blacks of voting for Obama because he's black they'd be right. However, Republicans have also supported some blacks for the same reason and hence the hypocracy. Supreme court nominee Thomas was woefully unqualified at the time and I read an article at the time that Bush threw out all candidates that were't black because he wanted to replace Thurgood Marshall with a black conservative.

The Republican party threw Alan Keyes into the race against Obama for senate because he was black.

The previous Republican party chairman, Michael Steele, was elected to the post to put a black face on the party to counter Obama. He was thoroughly incompetent to run the national party.

 

Its all BS. We need to get back to principles. Ideas.