Previous 11 - 20 Next
Mr. Obama inherited an imploding economy. Without any help from the Republican side of the aisle, he has done as much as anyone could to halt the disintegration and to begin the process of cleaning up. Please note: The exploding deficits are a result of the economic implosion coupled with legally mandated spending (for Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, payments on the debt, and a host of other expenditures). Had McCain (or anyone else) been elected, the deficit would have exploded just as much. But I don't think we would have seen the economic growth that we have actually experienced since the Great Recession actually ended in late 2009. The European experiments with austerity have not worked. Nor would ours have!
Yeah, it really troubles me that Mr. Romney won't release more of his income tax returns. He has known that he was going to be running for president for a good many years. Why not manage his affairs in 2007, 2008, and 2009 so as to not have anything to hide while campaigning in 2012? I just don't get it.
I don't think I have ever changed a position BECAUSE I have been called a name by the opposition. But I have changed many of my positions because a member of the opposition has treated me kindly and has patiently kept working to help me see something I had overlooked before.
The political markets at Intrade, IEM, and Betfair disagree with you fairly emphatically, and as much as I don't like to admit it (for all sorts of moral and metaphysical commitments), my research has found the political markets to be unnervingly excellent predictors of election outcomes.
I appreciate the gifts Mr. Romney has made to charity, but I do want to point out that charity is not the same thing as justice. Charity preserves the social inequality of giver and receiver. Charity, while it may be gracious and desperately needed, fosters dependency and subservience. Justice calls for a revamping of the social and economic systems that create an underclass to begin with. So while I am impressed with and grateful for Mr. Romney's charitable giving, I want to say that we should all be doing much, much more to create the sort of society where every child is free from want and has every possible opportunity to achieve his or her God-given potential.
I sure don't see things the way you do, ErickSmithX. Mr. Bush took us into a horribly expensive and completely unnecessary war in Iraq. He turned handsome budget surpluses into incredible deficits, and he oversaw the dissolution of the American housing and financial industries. During Mr. Obama's three years and eight months, we have stopped the hemorrhaging of jobs, we have stabilized the banking system, we have brought the housing market back, saved the automobile industry, brought the troops home from Iraq, and enacted landmark health care reform. Pretty remarkable achievements. I think Mr. Obama is going to go down in history as one of the most successful presidents.
I suppose it is logically possible that all the polls showing Obama ahead may be skewed. But I want to ask, "Do we have any good reasons to believe they are?" What sort of evidence is available to show such a bias? Nate Silver at tried to answer this question by looking at the results of the past several elections and comparing them to individual pollsters' predictions. What he found is that there is indeed a "house effect" for each polling organization, but this house effect is sometimes to the Republicans' advantage and sometimes to the Democrats'. The average of all polls tends to be pretty remarkably accurate in predicting election outcomes--especially the closer we are to the election.
You may be right, RedRum, but all the evidence available to me at this time points to Obama winning handily. The Republican Party has picked a weak candiate, but--even worse--the Republican Party has alienated so many people that it is undermining its own chances of victory both now and in the foreseeable future. Who wants to vote for a party that has nothing to offer but "No!"?
I don't get this concern about the mainstream media among readers of Townhall. Fox and the Wall Street Journal are as much a part of the mainstream media as are NBC, CBS, and the New York Times. The mainstream media doesn't speak with one voice. It isn't anti-Romney. It's owned by the people who want Romney to win (even if they don't think that much of him). Romney is just a weak candidate, and the president is not. Don't blame the media. Blame the folks who nominated Romney.
I'm not lying. I may be wrong. There's a difference. To lie is to intentionally deceive. To be wrong is just to have a false belief. I am doing my dead-level best not to deceive and not to lie.
No, DevilDog0311, I have to disagree. Government research and development has fueled much of America's economic success. Consider, for example, the computer. It has its origins in ENIAC--a government-funded research project. Or the passenger jet. It has its origins in government-development of bombers during and after WWII. Or the integrated circuit. And good accounting standards, good bankruptcy laws, a stable currency, a sound financial system... all these things--on which businesses thrive--are the work of government.
Previous 11 - 20 Next