In response to:

Without Deep Spending Cuts, the Republicans Lose the House in 2014

billyderka Wrote: Jan 19, 2013 8:07 AM
What is the difference both parties are the same they cater the our in place Fascist Crony Capitalists. Yeah that's right. If Ron Paul were elected we would have had a chance, now the chance is gone forever. In 50 years or less we will be a third world country with a "Dictator." Oh I am sorry we have a Dictator now our El Presidente Barrack Obama and congress is to blame the gave the power away.
Ginger12 Wrote: Jan 19, 2013 9:38 AM
If we can contain the House in 2014, I believe that his son, Rand Paul, will run...there are rumors and I believe that Rand has a very good chance, especially after the fiasco we endured in 2012. Of course, Obama won in every state that did not have a voter ID required....this is something we need to work on between now and 2014 because voter fraud was everywhere this last election and no one is investigating.
Okay, it’s official. According to the Treasury Department, the U.S. debt jumped to $16.1 trillion in 2012 from $14.8 trillion in 2011. That’s a $1.3 trillion deficit for the last year. Remarkable. During President Obama’s first term, the federal debt rose by roughly $6 trillion.
 
Now, if they are bold, House Republicans will take advantage of these dismal numbers. Bold means bold spending cuts, as in cut spending like there’s no tomorrow. Bold means implementing the $1.2 trillion spending sequester. Bold means an absolute rock-solid commitment to spending cuts. A new Rasmussen survey shows that 62 percent of Americans favor across-the-board...
Related Tags: House Republicans