http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...u8ZL_blog.html

We are just biding time until the election. This guy is the worst ever in history.

http://pajamasmedia.com/richardferna...broken-dreams/

Originally Posted by villagegolfer

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...u8ZL_blog.html

We are just biding time until the election. This guy is the worst ever in history.

http://pajamasmedia.com/richardferna...broken-dreams/

I can think of someone who is easily worse that President Obama.
Thankfully, he has zero influence and is delusional.

Originally Posted by DaleMN

I can think of someone who is easily worse that President Obama.
Thankfully, he has zero influence and is delusional.

Who is that? Bill Clinton?

Originally Posted by DaleMN

I can think of someone who is easily worse that President Obama.
Thankfully, he has zero influence and is delusional.

Must be Jimmy Carter.

I'm starting with the man in the mirror,
I'm asking him to make the change.

If you want to make the world a better place,
Take a look at yourself and make that change.

Originally Posted by DaleMN

I'm starting with the man in the mirror,
I'm asking him to make the change.

If you want to make the world a better place,
Take a look at yourself and make that change.

If the man in the mirror thinks wealth redistribution is the answer, we should be asking better questions.

Originally Posted by DaleMN

I'm starting with the man in the mirror,
I'm asking him to make the change.

If you want to make the world a better place,
Take a look at yourself and make that change.

Good point! Now let's just hope that you have a mirror!

Originally Posted by KatzPajamas

Good point! Now let's just hope that you have a mirror!

Originally Posted by Figmo Bohica

Must be Jimmy Carter.

Must be Bush,Jr.

Originally Posted by villagegolfer

If the man in the mirror thinks wealth redistribution is the answer, we should be asking better questions.

Just a quick question...Rick Perry created the Texas Enterprise Fund and gave it $440 million Texas' taxpayer dollars to distribute. The objective...and now the claim...was thousands of new jobs would be created.

So what do you call this fund? Is this "income redistribution"? Or is it government injecting itself into the economy that would be best managed by the private sector?

Tell me what the differences are between what Barack Obama has done, albeit on a larger scale, than what Rick Perry has done in Texas?

By the way, the Wall Street Journal (a long way from a pinko, left-leaning rag) has analyzed the Texas Enterprise Fund and has determined that money was directed to Perry's political supporters and that the job growth that Perry claims as the result of the fund is no where near what Perry claims. Here's the article...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...rry+texas+fund

As I've said many times before, don't listen to what the candidates say...they'll say what they think we want to hear. Rather, watch what they do and what they have done. That's a much better predictor of how they'll govern than anything they say in a campaign stump speech.

Those who claim that Perry is a conservative surely must not be considering how he has governed in Texas as governor. He's a religious conservative for sure. But fiscally, I can't see very much space between him and Obama, based on how they have actually governed.

VK, you just proved your point. Government can not create jobs of any kind. I see that Perry's bill worked as good as Obama's bill. Now, do we want either of them to occupy the WH?

Figmo: You obviously weren't around Boston during the heyday of the Big Dig. Coming into Boston from the south there was a FOREST of construction cranes (I've never seen anything like it before or since) too numerous to count. There was a LOT of the "multiplier effect" from those construction jobs.

Originally Posted by Figmo Bohica

VK, you just proved your point. Government can not create jobs of any kind. I see that Perry's bill worked as good as Obama's bill. Now, do we want either of them to occupy the WH?

I don't necessarily agree. Dplong makes a good point above. The funding of infrastructure projects can create new jobs while at the same time producing the construction or replacement of infrastructure that will ultimately enhance further economic activity and development. There are all kinds of successful examples...the interstate highway system, all the CCC projects of great depression times, and so forth.

But it's important that the infrastructure projects that government funds actually be needed, and the cost of the projects properly planned and managed. Many projects sought by government don't meet those tests. The bridge to nowhere or the museum in an Iowa cornfield were pure pork and don't meet the test. Frankly, neither does the "Big Dig" in Boston. That was a needed infrastructure project and created thousands of jobs, but for a variety of reasons cost the taxpayers a multiple of original cost estimates.

To answer your question though...no, I don't want either one in the White House on January 20, 2013.

I agree with the above Perry is very dangerous and yes so is Obama. I like Cain but as a vise president with his foreign policy talent that can hurt him

Originally Posted by DDoug

I agree with the above Perry is very dangerous and yes so is Obama. I like Cain but as a vise president with his foreign policy talent that can hurt him

Cain is an honest financial/economic brain, and since most of our country's foreign policy boils down to THROWING MONEY at problems in foreign lands, and at wars in them, Cain's good sense of money management would be a breathe of fresh air.