(10-12-2012 12:00 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  Romney and Ryan have clue about foreign policy.

Ok.

(10-12-2012 11:00 AM)Mr. Peanut Wrote:  

(10-11-2012 10:17 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  "When a wise man has a controversy with a foolish man, The foolish man either rages or laughs, and there is no rest." Proverbs 29:9

"foolish" Joe Biden has an IQ of 146

Hint: those numbers don't mean anything when you plagiarize your answers.

Iranian nukes don't kill people. Iranians kill people.

I've seen this rodeo before. This is 1980 all over again.

The Democrats look inept in office with the world's problems overwhelming them. The American people take a long, hard look at the Republicans and determine just prior to the election that the media is full of sh-- and the Republicans are a better alternative than extending our national nightmare.

(10-12-2012 06:57 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  I've seen this rodeo before. This is 1980 all over again.

The Democrats look inept in office with the world's problems overwhelming them. The American people take a long, hard look at the Republicans and determine just prior to the election that the media is full of sh-- and the Republicans are a better alternative than extending our national nightmare.

Oh so Romney is Reagan?

(10-12-2012 06:57 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  I've seen this rodeo before. This is 1980 all over again.

The Democrats look inept in office with the world's problems overwhelming them. The American people take a long, hard look at the Republicans and determine just prior to the election that the media is full of sh-- and the Republicans are a better alternative than extending our national nightmare.

They are depending on people that don't like to work. That is a recipe for disaster in a reelection. I have a feeling the democratic turnout is going to be WAY down from 2008. Obama praising a 7.8% unemployment rate is a joke.

(10-12-2012 08:27 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(10-12-2012 06:57 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  I've seen this rodeo before. This is 1980 all over again.

The Democrats look inept in office with the world's problems overwhelming them. The American people take a long, hard look at the Republicans and determine just prior to the election that the media is full of sh-- and the Republicans are a better alternative than extending our national nightmare.

Oh so Romney is Reagan?

Romney is a mild version of Reagan. He's against bloated government, but only because it's vastly less efficient than the private sector at creating wealth for all.

Reagan saw the bigger picture ... big government is a threat to freedom.

Biden seems not concerned if Iran doesn't get the capability in the next four years and it will be someone else's problem when that happens after that. They aren't concerned about the debt or medicare or social security because those things too won't bankrupt us in the next four years. Obama/Biden are more concerned about their next four years than what happens after 4 years. They are throwing Panetta and Hillary under the bus now because they are more concerned about Nov 6th than what happened on 9/11/12. The excuse "we didn't know" doesn't fly in a post 9/11. These people are paid to be in the know of terror threats. They are too busy campaigning to pay attention to terror threat briefings according to Biden. Too busy to meet with other world leaders to find peaceful solutions, but plenty of time for Las Vegas fundraisers with celebrities and going on the View with the family for photo ops.

(10-12-2012 08:27 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(10-12-2012 06:57 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  I've seen this rodeo before. This is 1980 all over again.

The Democrats look inept in office with the world's problems overwhelming them. The American people take a long, hard look at the Republicans and determine just prior to the election that the media is full of sh-- and the Republicans are a better alternative than extending our national nightmare.

Oh so Romney is Reagan?

If he is, then we're all f*cked.

That gets us nowhere - "Their party is dumb so ours must be right."

NO.

If you have the best idea, then that's the one we should go for. Not "it's better than his! Can't you see?". Geez.

Closest presidential candidate to 1980-Reagan is Gary Johnson.

Vote for him, or the presidency is dead. Ring in the dictatorship.

Biden clearly stated during the debate that the intelligence community was gathering information and the first accounts were incorrect. As the story developed, the accounts became more and more clear as to what actually happened. This was shared with the american public. Also, as far as he was concerned he did not hear about threats on the Embassy or other facilities throughout the world. I think that was more than clear and acceptable. There are always and obviously parts of any such act that the administration and ALL previous administrations will not share completely with the public. So one group is always going to be able to state something was not shared.

(10-12-2012 09:50 PM)TOGC Wrote:  

(10-12-2012 08:27 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(10-12-2012 06:57 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  I've seen this rodeo before. This is 1980 all over again.

The Democrats look inept in office with the world's problems overwhelming them. The American people take a long, hard look at the Republicans and determine just prior to the election that the media is full of sh-- and the Republicans are a better alternative than extending our national nightmare.

Oh so Romney is Reagan?

If he is, then we're all f*cked.

Yes, we wouldn't want all that economic growth that we had with Reagan. We could use a little more big government, European-style, economic meltdown.

(10-13-2012 07:09 AM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(10-12-2012 09:50 PM)TOGC Wrote:  

(10-12-2012 08:27 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(10-12-2012 06:57 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  I've seen this rodeo before. This is 1980 all over again.

The Democrats look inept in office with the world's problems overwhelming them. The American people take a long, hard look at the Republicans and determine just prior to the election that the media is full of sh-- and the Republicans are a better alternative than extending our national nightmare.

Oh so Romney is Reagan?

If he is, then we're all f*cked.

Yes, we wouldn't want all that economic growth that we had with Reagan. We could use a little more big government, European-style, economic meltdown.

Reagan was not small government. He was not Shrub or Obama either.

(10-13-2012 06:40 AM)Vewb1 Wrote:  Biden clearly stated during the debate that the intelligence community was gathering information and the first accounts were incorrect. As the story developed, the accounts became more and more clear as to what actually happened. This was shared with the american public. Also, as far as he was concerned he did not hear about threats on the Embassy or other facilities throughout the world. I think that was more than clear and acceptable. There are always and obviously parts of any such act that the administration and ALL previous administrations will not share completely with the public. So one group is always going to be able to state something was not shared.

That's a beautiful piece of fiction you've created. Worthy of the administration you follow blindly.

Read most any news report on this matter and it would tell you your version is pure fiction. They knew 24 hours after the attack it wasn't the video. They continued to lie and say it was. That is an incontrovertible fact.

(10-12-2012 09:46 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(10-12-2012 08:27 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(10-12-2012 06:57 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  I've seen this rodeo before. This is 1980 all over again.

The Democrats look inept in office with the world's problems overwhelming them. The American people take a long, hard look at the Republicans and determine just prior to the election that the media is full of sh-- and the Republicans are a better alternative than extending our national nightmare.

Oh so Romney is Reagan?

Romney is a mild version of Reagan. He's against bloated government, but only because it's vastly less efficient than the private sector at creating wealth for all.

Reagan saw the bigger picture ... big government is a threat to freedom.

Oh really? That's interesting because as Governor he made government much bigger. He even promoted the role of larger government as late as 2009.

(10-13-2012 07:25 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(10-12-2012 09:46 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  

(10-12-2012 08:27 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(10-12-2012 06:57 PM)UConn-SMU Wrote:  I've seen this rodeo before. This is 1980 all over again.

The Democrats look inept in office with the world's problems overwhelming them. The American people take a long, hard look at the Republicans and determine just prior to the election that the media is full of sh-- and the Republicans are a better alternative than extending our national nightmare.

Oh so Romney is Reagan?

Romney is a mild version of Reagan. He's against bloated government, but only because it's vastly less efficient than the private sector at creating wealth for all.

Reagan saw the bigger picture ... big government is a threat to freedom.

Oh really? That's interesting because as Governor he made government much bigger. He even promoted the role of larger government as late as 2009.

RR was not a small government guy. I would though gladly revert to his big government today as opposed to what we now have.

(10-13-2012 06:40 AM)Vewb1 Wrote:  Biden clearly stated during the debate that the intelligence community was gathering information and the first accounts were incorrect. As the story developed, the accounts became more and more clear as to what actually happened. This was shared with the american public. Also, as far as he was concerned he did not hear about threats on the Embassy or other facilities throughout the world. I think that was more than clear and acceptable. There are always and obviously parts of any such act that the administration and ALL previous administrations will not share completely with the public. So one group is always going to be able to state something was not shared.

Are you in La-La land? Totally fallacious, a fantasy. Just as Biden accuses the GOP of budget cuts causing the Libyan lack of security. That was totally debunked. It's lie, lie, lie. blame, blame, blame.