dayman

Yet another shooting outside Texas A&M. CNN reporting several people including officers shot.

Gingrich actually led strongly against his party at the time when he push started a backlash, behind the scenes he was a straight "traitor". Of course that was abandoned when the stupid sex scandal broke. But that's besides the point. I know you are a fool tea party man who thinks that is what we have been on the GOP side throughout our success and claim Reagan as your hero and look to Gingrich for a claim to fame in the 90s. But the bottom line is it's your own historical interpretation and not reality. And while I do like Clinton, the tech boom and natural market ebbs and flows were a significant part of his success. Nobody will deny that not even Clinton himself. What you don't seem to understand is what made Clinton successful is Gingrich caving. To Boehners credit he probably would have had somewhat of a similar deal had the 2010 elections put him as speaker but not with the same freshman class riding that particular political whim. But that said, he couldn't move. Not that he wouldn't, he couldn't and everybody knows that. As he likes to say you can only keep so many frogs in a barrel. And the failure is on Obama as well no doubt. But the short of it is really quite simple, one is a story of great disagreement, partial sabotage, and eventual humility before self inflicted scandal... the other is a story of great disagreement and complete and utter sabotage as intended. Now you sit here and blame fully Obama for not being Clinton? Clinton...be it Hillary or Bill...would have been stalemated by anyone working with the class of 2010 as Boehner himself was ultimately hampered. Most GOP leaders of the past would not succeed much w/ that lot under the circumstances as even Jeb Bush has said. Had Newt himself been speaker working as he did...he'd have been broiled but that wouldn't have happened b/c he wouldn't have done it in 2010 as Boehner didn't. Of course this is all about Obama blaming others. There's no place to point the finger in the WH unless it's a seemingly Dem House or Senate working against a strong, wise, principled GOP President. The bottom line is yo fail to see things from a neutral standpoint and understand the dynamic of federal government. Understand the politics and how they effect the policy we are able to contemplate. And understand how all that has broken Washington over the past 2 years. You say "Obama sucks." Fair enough. You are the idiot the tea party idiots want. You are the person that the people in Washington w/ no business in Washington depend on. And the worst thing is you don't understand, this doesn't make you a Republican. This makes you an idiot. EDIT: And by the way I'm completely smashed right now and you couldn't be more retarded in general. I'm sorry LA and Alaska boy aren't around to chime in with their valuable contributions to aid your idiocy in not understanding what actually goes on. There are intelligent comments to made on both sides. You make none of them. Plain and simple you are a terrible poster. Of course I don't care about that or anyone else really so I usually don't obsesses over it. But I've cracked my 3rd bottle of wine and don't have to wake up tomorrow so why not. You are an idiot. Some conservatives I've thought were, and still are in many ways...but have said some things that are somewhat legitimate. You and a few others, nope. Not one. Just absolute garbage. Literal conservative (it should be offensive to actual conservatives to hear me characterize it that way and I hope it is) idiot garbage. Go to the reality show trail threads (as if those don't happen every single day) and the culture warrior religion and gay and so on threads. That is where you belong.

You are 20 years old or don't read newspapers or have no education. Plain and simple. It's sad. I hope nobody you work with or know in real life knows your user nam e on this board I suspect they do not. For someone interested in politics, you don't seem to understand them.

For 1 I did support the surge enthusiastically, and I supported the war in the first place with most of America b/c I didn't know **** about what was there or the future of the war and all I had was what everybody had. For 2, I voted for Hillary in the primary but that's besides the point. For 3, Simpson-Bowles was a great idea the problem is it should be the end result of of the compromise (or close to it). T the weakness of simpson-bowles as nothing to do with itself and everything to do with Washington politics on both sides. For 4, Hillary would have "led the compromise herself"....lol...pay attention to Washington idiot. There IS no compromise if the Dem President leads a budget debate with the Republicans. That's a one way ticket to to GOP members being ostracized and Dem leaders turning on the President. Furthermore, there is no compromise period. Hence the thing was doomed before it began. The bottom line is you, LABillz and the guy from Alaska are retarded. Every bit as retarded as as the absolute most retarded "liberals" on this board plain and simple. But you will never know that, b/c nobody says "hey, dude, you are retarded" except me. But rest assured, you are. No hard feelings of course perhaps you will obtain an ability to think like a normal human one day and lay down the sword of partisan hackery or at least become someone with an intelligent view on anything.

OC you are a terrible contributor to this board just leave. It's ridiculous. And nobody is a supporter of a simpson/bowles approach more than I and everyone that knows 1 thing and 1 thing only about the last 2 years in Washington knows exactly why it didn't get adopted by anyone. B/c it never could have been. Plain and simple. Simpson himself said in multiple interviews if Obama adopted it, it would be rejected unanimously by Repubs and he knew that as fact. That said I still wish he would have done it anyway...but the bottom line is now is the time for this debate. Sadly the country's approach is that we can only do this once every 4 years now...but that's better than never.

Ryan is articulate, smart, and likable if you watch him speak. Obama can crush him on it by highlighting the downfalls and actually establishing a more gradual balanced approach w/ some concrete details. If he doesn't, Ryan WILL sell his plan as the only plan. Hence, this is a win for the country not just Romney. IT's made the election somewhat real.

Well I actually would hate that. What I would like to see it as is putting the Ryan budget front and center as what Ryan is calling it...a starting point to a negotiation...then as a country we actually negotiate. I don't know where you get the "not changing it for anyone" part...but that would make this election worthless and I would then hate the Romney/Ryan combo. Either way I've had almost 2 full bottles of wine right now so I may be reading your post wrong....but as far as I know Ryan doesn't say anything about "not changing his position" and that's why I like the pick so much.

Not the way I see it. He's out there w/ the "starting point" talking point already marginalizing his position. It's actually good for the country. If they see that plan as a "starting point" it immunizes his position from this sort of attack. To assert he is trying to destroy certain valuable policies to people Obama Co. has to come up w/ a way a way this could be done that doesn't while still addressing the problems we have (and time is fine but something must be said). Then when they start debating the differences the real fight begins. Then magically we have a real election. It's a win/win for both sides b/c let us be real...Dem or Repub it's time to have this debate. We couldn't when we spent 2 years preparing for the election and to "defeat Obama at all costs" but maybe we can now. This is hopeful thinking but either way... I like the Ryan pick.

lol just a burn I do hope you did well IDK if you know yet or not man no bad wishes lol

OC literally quoting a post I explain how debates are crucial and ranting about me saying they are no big deal out of fear? I think when it comes to reading comprehension you "just don't get it." (that feels good I think it is a tool of mine now wow)

I actually agree. Now the Obama squad has to attack him and his plan to attack Mitt and he's excellent at defending it...plus it puts the best man to defend it in front of the microphone to answer all the attacks. In the end while some pundits say it opens them up to a hot button attack target...he was open anyway and now he has someone good to answer for it. Someone who basically will know more about everything budget related than almost anyone else. Plus...it turns everything into budget talk. Ultimately I think Ryan will go down as a good pick. Win or lose.

LMFAO at you. Do you actually read my posts? No wonder it's taking you time after time to still fail that accounting test or whatever you can't pass. BURN And for the record it's about connecting with anyone in terms of political skill I was discussing in the inspiring bit I said a while ago to which I basically said every president in resent times did to some people Dem or Rep and that I wasn't sure who Romney was speaking to aside from teh "not Obama crowd." It was a political discussion but I get that you all are so defensive you can't understand what a discussion about political skill is or recognize that Romney is at best below average. And you seem to not even be able to recognize that when someone says that...it says just that...and has nothng to do with ability to be president it's a different question entirely just one that so happens to directly correlate with who gets to actually be president.

I'm just skimming the topic but LOL @ that "just don't get it" being a "lefty" attack. And that debate she gave pulled her back into the "somewhat reasonable to ultra conservatives" realm...away from slipping off the edge all together with everybody. They are not debate no question about that...but they are hugely important in the scheme of things. They are the most important speeches candidates give.

Only skimming first page but in response to the $15 a question at town hall...I would actually like that. People going to think about the question and if they still ask a dumb one then I'll give a $15 response and not brush it off. I like it. Once again skimming front page but I agree w/ this. One way or the other both parties have to get in the dirt and deal with issues that aren't so easy to get people excited about and regardless of who you vote for this will help to that end.

Meh it's bull **** you should be able to brink your 5 year old there. Most other cities you can.

I didn't watch but did Merriman look better than Mario? Sign that man now?

Everyone that knows what they're talking about does. It IS the God of cable news. And that's the point. You would think they aren't by FAR the most watched cable news network the way they talk about the "mainstream media."

It is strange how much you conservatives bash MSNBC and say it drives the conversation....then you make fun of it for having no viewers and taut Fox News as the God of Cable News (and it is) and act like Fox News doesn't drive it's own conversation? People who B word about the media should B word that nobody reports well, that the people talking on most of these shows don't have a deep understanding of anything. People who just B word about an MSNBC slant, or even a Fox slant...are retarded.

MILFs def. aren't a rare breed. But you got to have those babies early while their body can still bounce back otherwise they lose the ability to become milfs.

I will agree to disagree is we accept that I am from Earth and you are from Mars where no tax expenditures for anything exist. And btw also, on Mars that's what Mitt Romney believes too.

Join me LA

Tell that to Iowa GOP It's not subsidizing. If it is then so is everything we do in every other industry and dealings w/ oil and coal. And yes it is true we can't compete with direct subsidizing China offers w/ free land, free worker training and 20 year tax holidays. But given that we can and have been helping our domestic production of green energy with credits, and creating jobs, and accelerating the innovation curve, and increasingly furthering our independence and CO2 output...it's a no brainer. It's important to keep these credits. These credits ARE INVESTMENT IN TECHNOLOGY. Direct investment in R&D is something I support as well! Obama supports that! That is actually something we all agree on! But helping provide tax credits to make it more economically viable for domestic companies to get in the game IS CRUCIAL.

Join me Gungy. Join the liberal PPP brigade. But to do so, you must calm yourself. Go into the energy thread and read the debate and join opposing Romney's backwards energy policy. Join the debate on writing down mortgage interest. Make a thread about how he's the golden boy of economics but his policies (vague as they may be) are indistinguishable from standard GOP dogma. Hell make a general thread on how he stands for nothing. And yes, it is acceptable to post in opposition if someone claims that he is more self made than Obama...but remain calm in your dealings with the right here. Remember you will never change anybody's mind here on the candidate but you can have discussion on some issues and learn more about why Romney supporters believe in certain policies...you can even find areas where you can convince them there is valid argument for the other side (though you won't change their mind overall and your mind won't be changed). In general just represent opposition to Romney policy well. They all think we're idiots and love to bash all policy not in line with right wing dogma...but show them it isn't true. And you can also find out there are some issues where they aren't evil or completely retarded either (wind tax credits not going to be one of them) but the point is...don't allow yourself to be fuel for the "liberal idiot" fire they love to see. Join me my gungified brother, walk with me to the promise land of PPP as we reign fire upon the heathen Rush Limbaugh minions and take our rightful seat at the throne of wisdom and leadership and all things wise in this world.

What I'm saying you don't understand is not that intervention in markets is good. It's that there are a few special instances where market forces are not going to take us to the promise land. With all the global competition for clean energy, CO2 reductions efforts, and the status quo....if we are going to stay competitive and be a leader in both energy independence and CO2 reduction then these tax credits are a good thing. And their elimination (to sound like a broken record) without the elimination across the bar off all other credits (including oil, coal, etc) is nothing more than backwards energy and environmental policy.

Me and gungy v. the world. Get w/ it.