What is wrong with Ron Paul? (for your Americans)

Hey ya,

I'm from Scotland so forgive me if I am not as well versed in US politics as some of you locals. That said I do keep rough tabs on what is happening with the American elections and I am utterly perplexed as to why Ron Paul is not more popular. Can someone explain it to me?

Briefly. Ron Paul is a devout Constitutionalist conservative. Philosophy makes him unworthy of leadership roll as he is against programs that have originally intended to help the lesser such as, social security, income tax, abortion, gay marriage, etc. He tends to be an isolationist and would probably alianate most nations we trade with. He of course was against our interventions in the middle and greater middle east but yet has indicated a strong military to be used at his discretion. To get a complete run down of his thoughts which are vast, you could google ron pauls policies.

A lot of people like him but I think they don't know everything about him to be intelligent enough to realize his danger to society as a whole.
NOTE; he's way farther right then I am...hahhahh

I think perhaps you need to study his policies a bit more actually, because from the few online debates I've watched of him, he doesn't stand for the things you say he does.

He is indeed a strict constitutionalist, but that doesn't mean what you think it means. He completely destroyed all other candidates in the big republican candidate debate a few years ago. In fact he was so good he had to educate some of his peers on exactly what the constitution was.

You can go here read all about him.

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

Some of the stuff you'll see;

cut the Department of Defense budget by total 15%; eliminate all foreign war funding
freeze funding for most other federal agencies at 2006 levels
eliminate all foreign aid
eliminate international drug programs
substantially reduce federal travel
eliminate international organizations and commissions
administer Medicaid and other joint federal-state social welfare programs (SCHIP, food stamps, etc.) through block-grant funding mechanisms to the states
Revenue changes:
cut the top corporate tax rate to 15% (down from 35%)
allow companies to repatriate capital without additional taxation
permanently extend the Bush administration tax cuts
eliminate capital gains and dividends taxes
eliminate estate and gift taxes
end taxes on personal savings
sell federal lands and other federal assets
Other

There's tons of info on the guy, Don't get me wrong as I do agree on lots of his thoughts but he does go to extremes and oft times becomes a little flaky in is ramblings.
You'll see however that what I originally posted although from memory was right on.

Good info, but why quote those things when almost all of them are good ideas?

Cutting military spending is a good move, as is closing almost all the overseas bases.

Foreign aid is a good thing, but when your own country is in such massive debt and your own people are struggling to survive sending aid packages to North Korea seems a bit off.

He wants to cut government involvement in peoples lives and let individual states set their laws and budgets, which is a great idea! Let the people in each state vote for the candidate they know will pass the laws they want.

Honestly, he looks like the only politician from the US who has the right idea.

I think the big reason he doesn't have much of a chance is that his views don't align neatly with one of the two major political parties in the country. We're pretty solidly a 2-party system, and have been for a long time. Any outliers tend to get brushed aside, or forced out for potentially "splitting the vote." For example, he identified as Republican I think, but most Republicans don't agree with him, and try to disassociate themselves.

Anyway. I think he has a certain amount of charm to some people, because he kind of acts like that "crazy eccentric uncle who does his own thing and says what he wants." People like that he would legalize drug use, etc. However, I think he might actually be just crazy.

He tends toward a lot of libertarian views. I can get behind some libertarianism (staying out of people's lives as much as possible) but I think it falls short in practice. It has social-Darwinist tendencies, and I think it tends to disenfranchise people who might just need extra help. I think Paul would be happy saying "everyone should fend for themselves," which ends up being a shoddy deal for anyone who happens to be poor, disabled, or otherwise unlucky.

More to the point, though, here are a few Ron Paul choice quotes, just off Wikipedia:

"... I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in [Washington, DC] are semi-criminal or entirely criminal."

"Boy, it sure burns me to have a national holiday for that pro-communist philanderer, Martin Luther King. I voted against this outrage time and time again as a congressman. What an infamy that Ronald Reagan approved it! We can thank him for our annual Hate Whitey Day!"

"I miss the closet. Homosexuals, not to speak of the rest of society, were far better off when social pressure forced them to hide their activities. They could also not be as promiscuous. Is it any coincidence that the AIDS epidemic developed after they came 'out of the closet,' and started hyper-promiscuous sodomy? I don't believe so, medically or morally."

"[Magic] Johnson may be a sports star, but he is dying [of AIDS] because he violated moral laws."

He also wants to abolish minimum wage, would weaken public education, and doesn't believe in separation of church and state.

So, socially..... nope.

I think Kevin has formed his opinion admittedly " by watching 2 or 3 debates (speeches). This in it self is what inherent problems arise. 50% of American voters formed their opinions on speeches made by Obama. Obama promised all good things back in 08. Open government, compromise, cutting the debt, bringing troops home, ending the war in Afghanistan, closing Guantanamo prison, a more fair tax approach. His energy policies of solar, wind, and alternative fuels, and electric powered vehicles. Above all else promised a growing economy blaming Bush for everything bad that ever happened to this country from A to Z.
The whole of the democrat party and the news Medias joined in devising and master minding the great depression of the Bush era. Little was said or done to truth telling of the real reasons for the crumbling housing industry and bank failures.
Obama back ground never vetted. He was given a pass by those in control of th people's information highway. Even though his surroundings included like Bill Ayers a radical left wing bomb plotter. Ayres wife who blew herself up making bombs in her apartment building. Blowing up police stations. Even though his professors in school were noted communist sympathizers. Obama wife's associates like Chicago realistate magnet who she enjoyed joining in with shady realistate dealings. She also got paid for numerous no-show Chicago government contract jobs.

Bush was blamed for the housing crises when in fact it was barney frank and th democrat that implemented fanny may and Freddy Mac of th purpose of guaranteeing no documented loans for those who couldn't afford them backed by tax payer pay outs if defaulted. And thousands and thousands did. Bankrupting the mortgage industry hence the economy. All caused, bank, sales, realstate, construction, manufacturing auto failures. The lie was that Bush did nothing when in fact he went to democrat controlled congress 3 occasions to implement controls on the mortgage industry that could have prevented tragedy.

No, Ron Paul is a radical just as Obama is a radical. The United States was designed to operate moderately not radically left or right. Our system was to meet in the middle with thought offerings from all..."we the people". Not (We the government).

What's wrong with helping (funding) other nations in need. What's wrong with protecting other nations rights to exist free from tyranny. Etc. what the hell Obama funds dumb ass global warming bullcrap and he's quick to bomb away in Libya but then ignores thousands dying in Syria, Darfur as an example.... so talk is cheap

It's easy as a radical right wing to support all ron pauls philosophy but it is overall inhumane. To from an opinion one has to have followed him through the years with his voting record in congress to understand where he's at.

I've been accused by numerous internet ignorant of being a wacko right wing when in fact it seems very few understand implications of both radical entities and ignore what is in the middle because it at the moment goes against what has been washed from their brains vs what is left in its place.

Kevin, you are an astute balanced thinker and you got that way buy research and weighing facts and in most cases are well versed in human reality. That's why I am supprised you defend a ron paul. You did state however, you only saw him 3 or 4 times so you are forgiven...lol

Thanks for taking the time there Dan, and you too Sibby. Those quotes of Ron Paul's are rather damning. I actually don't agree with him on many issues, abortion being one but when he talks about it I can at least respect his opinion as a medical professional.

Pray tell Dan, who are you voting for and why? I understand from your point of view Ron is a bit of a radical, yet American appears to be in a radically bad state of affairs. Could the middle ground gentle approach you seem to think lies naturally with the country actually fix it at this point?

I will vote republican. I do so with complete confidence in my decision. To say why is not simply conveyed as it is a life time of weighing rights and wrongs. Concluding the why reasons there are rights and there are wrongs. There is never enough room to satisfy the whys on a site such as this. I will however say only that I am not the loony tune I am made out to be. I am perhaps more practical with age for what is, then youth is for what may be.

as for america being in a radical condition, it is a false observation perpatrated by politicians. The talent in this country is endless and solving any and all problems is a pause only in advancement once the freaken politicians step aside and let the water flow. human beings are the masters of their own.not governments.

Voting for ROmney eh, scary biscuits.

it might be good for the economy, but it sure as shit won't be good for people's rights and freedoms.

The rights and freedoms that may be damaged completely depends on who you're talking to lol, what do you believe is bad about Romney's views on rights/freedoms? I'm curious of an outsiders perspective.

Well Romney doesn't appear to be able to form a decent sentence when it comes to women's rights to birth control, abortion and other support and equal pay in the workplace.

He isn't in favour of gay marriage, he believes sex education should be focussed on abstinence, he is against the legalisation of marijuana, he is against the occupy movement, he doesn't think felons should be able to vote.

So I'd say he isn't the best choice when it comes to personal freedoms.

(source)

http://2012election.procon.org/view.source-summary-chart.php?topic=64

He might be amazing for the economy but at what cost? (pun intended)

One president can't put through multiple bills banning gay marriage, abortion etc... you have to have the help of the house and senate. I don't think those things are top priority right now (oh I'm going to get flamed for this). To me, the economy is top priority.. we have to have a country able and strong before we can start on other social issues. I guess that's a matter of my priority.

I completely disagree and think Obama would be the worst choice for our personal freedoms, but I doubt I will be able to change your mind on that on.

Sib has it 100% with the Ron Paul business. He scares the crap out of me. I'm no doubt a Conservative, no surprise to anyone, and I don't feel he aligns well with either of the 2 party systems to be honest. He is just... scary.

I don't understand this women's right to birth control argument.. I must have definitely missed something.. this war on women kills me. I read an article, I want to say by the left leaning Huffington Post, that the women that are in the Obama administration make much less than the men in his admin. I will try to find the article, it was pretty interesting and showed a lot of "credible" sources. I use the term credible lightly, because.. you just don't really know.

The way I see it, if a candidate doesn't have the good sense and understanding to vote correctly on such a massive no brainer like gay marriage or abortion, then I just can't trust their judgement on more important issues like starting wars. I know that is a simplistic view, but really all we have to go on is gut feelings and our own very simple understandings.

For the record, I've watched every presidential debate so far and Romney has lost them all hands down in my opinion. The dude couldn't be any more detached and insincere if he tried, not that I'd vote on their personalities, but what they say and I don't like what comes out of his mouth either.

I tend to agree with them on gay marriage and abortion, so obviously that's where we definitely differ. I think we probably couldn't be more opposite on our political views, Kev lol.

And see now I think Romney has won all the ones against Obama. I really identify with him and I feel he is genuine and sincere (as much as you can be for a politician I suppose). I despise Obama and feel like everything that comes out of his mouth is a load of bull. I honestly didn't watch Romney closely in the beginning before he was the Repub nominee.. I liked someone else, but your head would probably roll lol.

I think it's funny how two people can see the exact opposite in people like this. That goes to show the major divide going on in America now.

I always think it's interesting how people can have such completely different views. I'm conscious of the fact that most of the information that gets filtered to me tends to come from Democratic sources - maybe because a majority of my friends and family are Democrats, and those are the ones posting links to things that I've read. A lot of links to conservative sites make me feel like my brain is bleeding, but I expect it's possible that I'm getting pointed to the worst of what the Republican party has to offer, rather than the more rational, intelligent discussion that I'm sure has to be out there. (If anyone has any good blogs or sites, I'd be interested to read them.)

As far as personality goes, I don't have a strong personal like for either candidate. I tend rather socially liberal, so I agree much more with the official platform of Obama. I think he's very charismatic, a good speaker, seems thoughtful, and I appreciate his educational background. That said, do I trust him as a person? No. I honestly don't think you can get this far in politics today without sacrificing whatever integrity you started out with. We're not looking for the person with the best heart, who works the hardest, who is the most clever... we're voting for the person who knows how to say all the right things in the right way. Both candidates have changed stances on issues, probably based purely on what their advisers told them would be the best position to take. I appreciate that Obama has taken a stance in favor of gay marriage, but I have my doubts about whether he would have still taken that stance publicly if the majority of Democrats didn't expect it of him. I mean, it's better than nothing, but it still makes me sad that it all comes down to money, exposure, and a shallow perception. And I'm saying this about the person I voted for!

On the subject of gay marriage and other social issues, it really infuriates me that it's even involved with this election at all. I would tend to disagree with Britt on the level of importance; I think you can tell a lot about the health of a country by how its least prioritized members are treated - the poor, minorities, homosexuals, etc. Even if it turned out that Romney would be somehow better for the economy (though I have doubts that one person, president or not, can individual make or break a nation) I would be uncomfortable voting in favor of financial comfort, at the cost of basic human rights and freedoms. So, I'm not mad that it's being talked about, because I think it IS of high importance. I don't think it would have to be mutually exclusive compared to finance, either. Do gay people marrying have an effect on the economy? If anything, how much money has been wasted by Republicans campaigning for the marriage amendment, and Democrats reacting against it?

Anyway, what I'm mad about is the fact that it's had to become a part of this election at all. In Minnesota, there is a proposed Constitutional amendment on the ballot trying to make marriage between only one man and one woman. There was a former Republican staffer who was recently fired for having an affair with a superior of his (long story), but he has since been talking about the Republican parties methods with this election. He has come out and said that this proposed amendment is only on the ballot to try and get more conservatives out to vote. This is coming from a guy who -worked to get it on there.-

Anyway, I think these social issues are just a huge distraction policy. Gay marriage is -already- illegal in Minnesota. If the amendment fails, it doesn't mean that gay people will all-of-a-sudden be allowed to get married. If it passes, it will just make it harder to undo when, down the line, it eventually becomes legal. So, in order to get more butts in the seats, we have politicians espousing a view that they might not even care about, just so they can win, and in the meantime, human rights are losing out. I'm sure similar things happen on the Democrat side (maybe with less rights at stake, but still.)

I'm not trying to turn this into a gay marriage debate. I've just turned cynical and mad.

"though I have doubts that one person, president or not, can individual make or break a nation) "

You're 100% right, it's not just one person.. it's the people in their administration, and better yet, the people pulling the puppet strings... and I say this about both Obama and Romney. They obviously are highly advised and worked into "perfection" for either side.

The whole thing makes me sick, really.

It's funny because honestly, I don't care about care marriage. Not that it's a non-issue, but in the fact that it's one of those things that doesn't really affect me personally, so it's not something I spend much time thinking about, as opposed to things that do directly affect me. That probably makes me sound ridiculously terrible but I don't mean it the way it's coming out lol. Here, more so as a 'wanna get married? whatever'. I just... don't care. Do I prefer to see one man, one woman? Yes. But I understand life isn't that way, and my preferences don't mean crap. I find myself going 'round and 'round. ANYWAY.. what I mean to say sans rambling: I don't agree with it, but to each their own.

I don't agree with smoking, but I don't care to see it banned (as an example of how I feel).

I'll not vote for any candidate agreeing with abortion or same sex marriage.

This is equal to killers and stagnation!

What is the worst part about killing unborn babies?
Getting blood on your clown suits, Queerly!

Despite what some think, our concerns are not abortion, gay marriage, smoking dope, or what ever. Our concerns are getting this nation back to a viable self sufficient country. Our concerns are getting 23 million people back to work. Our concerns are getting manufacturing into the plus column. Our concerns are getting 47 million off food stamps and welfare rolls where they once again can have self esteem and the feeling of self worth. Our concerns are keeping this country energy efficient and our natural resources where they can be utilized as should be.
We are not in a position to install windmills and solar crap that is so inefficient it has to be subsidized with our tax dollars. We are not in the mood to drive little Mickey Mouse autos that run on double A batteries. And above all else we are not for putting corn in a gas tank. Corn is a food product.
We are not in th mood to give millions of tax dollars because some a-holes think the world is being cooked by Americans whose cows are allowed to fart. We are tired of this administration subsidizing bank rupt entities that have little or no social value except to line the pockets of union bosses and demo campaign funding.
We are tired of demos blaming Bush for all Obama failures and unprecedented wasteful spending.

This president had 3 years of demo domination and could have implemented all his salvation. He claims Bush destroyed economy ,but he failed in every attempt except how to rip th heart out of a once great nation... and I am scorned for voting a Romney... eesshhh

4 dedicated honorable patriots died in Libya . 3 trying to save an ambassador of which our president failed to read his e-mails of a pending attack by al queada and his excuse was "it was a video that insulted a muslem people" eh? What the f**k are we grade school stupid. He should be impeached immediately. He to this day still wont acknowledge what really happened. (he is the only dork in this country that doesn't know.

Occupiers??? Come to America and see and smell what the "occupiers left behind in our parks after they were done "occupying."

Dan, correct me if I'm wrong here but aren't a vast portion of the problems still plaguing America right now down to the previous Bush administration? When Obama took office the country was right on the verge of the worst financial crisis since the great depression. You can't very well then point the finger at Obama and say "you've done nothing for the country in your 4 years because things are still bad".

Romney tried to say much the same thing in the 2nd debate. He accused Obama's fuel policy of not working because gas prices were about $1.48 just before he took office, and now they are over $4 a gallon. What he didn't say is that was because the country was about to go in a meltdown and nothing Obama could have done would have prevented that.

I don't know as much about the state of the economy over there as you do clearly, but it seems kinda obvious that Obama took office with a bum deck of cards and has been playing a very careful game to break even.

maybe you can point me to some of the mistake Obama has made in terms of mispending taxpayer money. You mentioned green energy etc, but that is an investment in the future and in jobs. Fossil fuels are not to be relied upon long term. The president understands that even if it is a hard lesson for an oil dependant country like America. I would like to know what you think he has done wrong though, specifically, and also how you think Romney would fix it.

I would like to make the note that while the numbers are still lower than everyone would like, they are increasing under the obama administration.

http://www.ere.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/Employment-Trends-Index-Augu-2010.jpg

http://static.seekingalpha.com/uploads/2009/7/22/saupload_tnx_pic_1.jpg

http://static.seekingalpha.com/uploads/2009/7/22/saupload_us_gdp_pic_4.jpg

http://static.seekingalpha.com/uploads/2009/7/22/saupload_spx_pic_3.jpg

while there is some debate over inflation, i think some one should at least acknowledge the growth trend.

Like said, there is not enough room fo rdetail so I will touch briefly and of interest can research at will.
Demos devised a method where those who couldn't afford housing would be given loans anyway. That is too insure mortage loans with government garentees. Anyone applying for a loan got it with out any prove of income. Demos organized and out in place Fanny Mae/Freddy Mac. These entities were the sole purpose of taking tax dollars to insure payments to banks to avoid collapse in case of defaults on these loans. Millions of homes were bought with these shallow tools. However most laons were under the adjustable rate methods. Banks could not satisfy investers. Bundles were sold as junk uses. When rates went up do to business cycles which caused inflation these loans were called. These loans became below market value...in other words useless. FannyMae/Freddy Mac ran out of insurance money and on th everge of collapse was bailed out with more tax dollars. Bush had no choice but to start bailing out Fanny and Fraddy. It was the law. Banks were settling on cents to the dollar. Billions were poured into this foolhardy venture. Houses ran into foreclosures by the thousands, soon because of no housing demand there was an excess of units. Prices started to drop as banks tried to unload defaulted loans at discounts. Still because of mass flooding the market with under priced unit's a chain reaction took place. First people lost jobs... construction suffered, manufacturing suffered, auto industry, furniture, lumber industry, tools, and anything related. The country began to suffer stagnation which turned to reduced govnment revenue collection (collapse)
Yes Bush gave the first batch of funding to try and bail out to pop up and hope it worked.

Incomes Obama after demos and media blaimed housing collapse on Bush. Ignorant americans just assumed with out knowing. Obama went right to work adding to the give -away. Only he selected what was to subsidize those who were important to his (demos) power greed. Auto Union members and their bosses. Bonuses to Freddy and Fanny whos CEOs are appointed democrats. Incidently th ebonuses given to a failed entity were in the millions 90 million alone went to a Jeff Reigns a democrat ceo that headed Fanny Mae.
Funding was voted for by house and senate members to tand get this country out os a hole but in fact gave the money with no restrictions on its use. Obama went right to work giving it to his finds in industries such as Solar, Wind, and electric cars. All failures and most went ban-rupt with-in a year. More lost tax dollars. Thee is still moneys unaccounted fo. GM claims profits because of bailouts but has yet to pay back 25 billion of th e55 billion it received.
I could write a book on Obamas failures, and thee have been numeouse books written. Uncanny books that have made numbers 1 2 3 top 10 for over 3 years that aren't worthy of media reporting on but are truths th eleft tries to bury.
All this is of course considered by the left as mere wacko right wing wacko popaganda but yet can all be tract to truths.
The reason the left has so much trouble with finace is the fact that no demacrat in govnment has ever run a business, worked for a living,or aquired any wealth by legal means. They consistently attack republicans as "rich " but stutter when reminded that , Th Kennedys, Roosevelts, Johnsons, Al Gores, John Kerrys, etc...are also "the Rich". all democrats.
I pause here.........
except^ to answer, numbers are improving???who says so the internet, obama, the news perhaps???? eeesshhh

Maybe you wouldn't be accused of "wacko right wing wacko popaganda" if you didn't say things like:

"no demacrat in govnment has ever run a business, worked for a living,or aquired any wealth by legal means."

NO Democrat? EVER? ANY wealth? Man, I never knew the case was so extreme.

I'm definitely not saying Democrats are blameless, but sheesh.

Dan, I hope Sandy did not blow you away

^^^

money.cnn.com

washingtonpost.com

csmoniter.com

tradingeconomics.com

all seem to indicate a generally improving economy.

bls.gov (bureau of labor statistics) even pegs the unemployment rates in the US as being 7.4274, and falling.

Interesting. So what Obama has been saying, which is that his plans and policies are bringing slow, steady and more stable change appears to be true.

And my favorite one from

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/PAYEMS

for a close up of the part we are talking about

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/fredgraph.png?&id=PAYEMS&scale=Left&range=Custom&cosd=2000-01-01&coed=2012-10-01&line_color=%230000ff&link_values=false&line_style=Solid&mark_type=NONE&mw=4&lw=1&ost=-99999&oet=99999&mma=0&fml=a&fq=Monthly&fam=avg&fgst=lin&transformation=lin&vintage_date=2012-11-03&revision_date=2012-11-03

Sorry for delay Kev. .. We got hit with the windy storms. No power 8 days. The shore area got blasted, but we, 40 miles inland got mostly downed trees that tore out power lines. Power companies from all over U.S. did a great job considering. Obama came to N.J. and hugged a lady and sat with gov. Christie for a half hour and then left. A couple 100,000 people lost all possessions, houses cars, etc. Donations are pouring and always need more.

St125 what ever. Part of being brainwashed in th United States is th job th media is perpetrating on th people. Example, you think this country is progressing. Fact, millions of homes are in foreclosure do to democrats forced sub premium loans to no doc. Owners who couldn't qualify any other way but to have tax payer dollars support bad and defaulted loans to th banker friends of politians such as Barney Frank, Chris Dodd and the Jimmy Carters. All went down th tubes and bankrupted the entity salvaged by bail outs with tax dollars that should have gone to infrastructure rebuilding.(job creation). Also Obama took stimulus money and invested into solar companies that went bankrupt within a year because they had no takers. Windmill farms had to be subsidized because they are way to expensive of what they achieve. And that is Zero results. Some Eco companies under failure were bailed out by china and mover over seas again loss of jobs. Obama gave 5 billion dollars invested in Brazils off shore oil drilling projects and then put a moratorium on ours.ie the Gulf. Which losses thousands of jobs. Obama denied construction of a Canadian pipe line which would have put thousands to work and given us more energy efficiency.
Obamas energy dept, EPA restricted coal mining in Virginia putting thousands more out of work.
1 out of 6 Americans are now at poverty level. The average wage earner has lost 4 to 5000 dollars of income this last year alone. This country has for 3 years never gone above 1.2 percent growth. Compared to average 3to 4 percent is dismal at best.
There are over 23 million chronically unemployed right now. There are millions more who have just dropped out because can't find meaningful jobs. 47 million are getting food stamps. up from 24 million.
All this justified by Obama bullshit,... " I saved the auto industry" ( electric cars can't be given away).billions lost.... General Motors owes tax payers 25 billion it can't pay back. But Union auto workers and union bosses got big bonuses. .. " I put 5 million to work" where? "its Bushes Fault"... " the economy was worse then I thought".... All bullshit excuse for ineptness. No other president in U.S.History (republican) has ever blamed the previous president for its own failures.
Obam is an egotistical maniac. A little kid who is in way over his head and knows it now. He is an empty gun with no defense left. He has ripped the heart out of this country . Devastated the constitution with his excusions around congress. He will be voted out today.
Government statistics??? who is government...why obama is!!!

Are you saying Dan, that every statistic post in this thread by other people besides you, are false? I don't live in the US so I wouldn't know but why should I believe your facts and figures over someone else?

I think you have a case for how bad things are in the US, but to call Obama "a little kind who is in way over his head and knows it now", just seems like you are angry and not thinking clearly.

What i'm saying kevin is, statistics read from a news paper or a news outlet that is obviously biased is not viable. at least read into all offers befor ea conclusion.old saying; "STATISTICS ARE LIES, USED BY LIARS"
Do you believe the BBC is always the truth teller?...i doubt it.
I can only suggest one does home work befor econclusions are made.

Also
My comment referring to demos not ever working or running businesses goes way beyond the first mile marker my friend. Congressional demos are quick to know what is ailing economy with out knowing what is ailing economy because simply have no knowledge of economy.
Congressional demos have Are quick to point to global warming with little or no knowledge of climatology and its history.
Congressional demos are quick to blame republicans for not compromising when in fact demos never compromise. Compromise to a demo is to agree to a demo.(fact)
I have not seen a lumber truck or a cement truck on a highway in 3 years. I see no new construction of meaning anywhere. Home depot parking lots are for all purposes empty.
Each year since obamas election my business gets smaller and smaller to the point of no worth now. I make zero income from it. All revenue goes to expenses only.
The Black unemployed rate is 15%.
Since obams great health care plan my insurance rates went from 7000.00 a year to 12000.00.
Gas has gone from 1.84 gal to 3.60 gal average.
Those of you who food shop has food pies climbed disproportionately? You bet your asses.
Those electric cars? Average cost is 45000.00...but obams gives a tax break of 8000.00 to buy one. How many do you own public? And how efficient are they? How far do you get on a charged battery? Can you fit your fat mother in-law in for a ride?
Windmills? Rutgers University just chopped down over 100 trees to make room for ran array of solar panels. Environmentally friendly? Ted Kennedy (senator) made ocean windmills off limits to where he lived in Massachusetts and Hyannis port his vacation area but ok for your backyards.

Here's a question for mikey and all,... what has a demo done for your existence besides take away your freedom to be a human being in america instead of a ward of the state.????
You youngsters better wake up soon.

I am happy to see you have service after Sandy

To begin with, there you be no social security or min wage W/O democrats

Many democrats are giving the Republican Governors who signed bills to make voting harder in the battleground States credit for motivating their base . Tennessee made it easier to vote early and Romney got the electoral votes here

If you begin questioning the wide news media, as well as government bureaus whose job it is to report these figures accurately, then im really not sure to what reality you prescribe, however if that reality is the real one, then the implications of that kinda indicates that the USA is wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyy too far gone for this election to make a difference.

Ts125... Statistics are chosen from the source that gives the best support to what it is you're trying to pervey. Unemployment statistics comes under that rule. there is the credited calculations by unemployment registras and then coupled with who has used up but are still unemployed. Add unemployed who just gave up and are collecting government assistance ie food stamps, income assistance atc. When records are shifted to favor what isn't these figures can be neatly configured. Then there is the un-official but well used phone surveys for those who may have gotten jobs but took jobs to supplement incomes such as a trained individual taking a job in a Walmart just to survive.
In other words we could then say, Obama created 160,000 jobs this month or we could also say a republican lost 160,000 jobs this month. Get it? Works the same with anything surveyed. Truth of the matter is 23 million Americans are with-out jobs. That number (official) has remained for almost 3 years which keeps it at 9 % of work force. Nothings changed. millions are and have lost their homes, that number has not changed. there are more people now below poverty level then any time in the history of this country. FDR was accredited with saving this nation. (a democrat) when in fact unemployment remained in double digit numbers until ww2 when factories became manufactures of war material and put those who didn't go to war to work.
Yesterday the majority of people spoke and re-elected the king of mediocrity. How is that possible with all the inept moves that have been made. And not only that they then go on to re-elect the same house of reps and senate? Does all that make sense? The house and senate had a 13% favoritism. Eh?..wtf. So get ready for 4 more years of the same ol' same ol'.
Kinda like what Europeans are doing to themselves all over. Why does the guy hit himself in the head with a hammer???... answer, cause it feels good when he stops. Sad when people in a down economy vote for, dope smoking and abortions and gay marriages rather then economic woes. Tsk tsk shame on the american voter.
And to mikey; all that supposed democrat credit was not possible with out both sides compromising and executing a system that was beneficial to all. Unlike what we have today with a man who circumvents congress with little known powers that are being misused. If a republican did half of what Obama did he'd been impeached 3 years ago. Wanna talk about civil rights legislation? Still waiting to hear why 4 americans died with-out protection in Benghazi. Was it a movie or and act of terrorism that was responsible?

So... you personally went and did a hand count of everyone who doesnt have a job? who has lost their home?

bullshit.

youre pulling this information from somewhere and its got the same logical flaw in terms of bias that my information has. however my information came with 5 independent and generally legitimate sources, and yours came with your assurance that it was "official".

If the GOP ever wants the white house again they can start with losing Rush. I think it was the message and not the messenger

Not everyone listens to, or agrees with Rush, though. I don't think one person does (or should) have that kind of power.. if that makes sense.

Barack Obama is the lesser of two evils. Romney would have
let women and homosexuals stand out in the rain and wind for
as long as he could have gotten away with it (8 years). I'd say
cause and effect hit him right in the political balls. He acted like
king of the hill when he spoke about his "plans" but he had
pretty much nothing positive or substantial to say about women
or their rights. I mean in the 2nd debate he all but smirk and
winked when he was asked about fair pay in the workplace and
even if he'd had a good answer, his record doesn't back up
reaching for that ROMNEY voting card.

Can someone please explain how/why/where Romney discussing stripping womens rights? Okay not specifically that, but I keep hearing this Romney war on women... well, I'm a woman and I voted for him. I don't see the war. Every time I ask, no one tells me, so I'm totally in the dark on this one.

On August 26, 2008 (Women's Equality Day) Lilly Ledbetter spoke at the Democratic National Convention, on the topic of pay equity.
I believe his running mate took a harder stance on a womens right to choose . Romney lightened up on any stance he ever took because he wanted the votes of 47% of the folks he had no intention of fighting for