Town Square

Post a New Topic

GOP candidate discusses Wealth Inequity ala the Occupy protesters - uses socialist argument

Original post made by Janet Marks, Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Jan 14, 2012

Who uttered this socialist rant, worthy of being broadcast during a Occupy Wall Street General Assembly?

“Is capitalism really about the ability of a handful of rich people to manipulate the lives of thousands of other people and walk off with the money, or is that somehow a little bit of a flawed system?” <candidate> told reporters after a visit to an electric company here. “I do draw a distinction between looting a company, leaving behind broken families and broken neighborhoods, and leaving behind a factory that should be there,” he said.

No Democrat, perhaps other than Bernie Sanders or Dennis Kucinich could get away with saying things like that!

Who said this January 9th?

None other than the self professed smartest man running to be the GOP nominee - Newt Gingrich!

Gingrich also said this last week: "As Governor, Mitt Romney raised $700 million in taxes and fees, despite a campaign pledge not to, and Massachusetts ranked 4th worst in job creation under his leadership."

Gingrich better win, he's destroying Romney.

Web Link

Comments (31)

Like this comment
Posted by digit
a resident of Barron Park
on Jan 15, 2012 at 9:44 am

So newtss a socialist and mitts a corporate fascist.

Doesn't make sense. The tea baggers told me Obama was the socialist fascist.....

Like this comment
Posted by Wally
a resident of Green Acres
on Jan 15, 2012 at 1:03 pm

Romney is unqualified to be the leader of the strongest nation in the world. We need job creation to get our economy back and get our deficit under control (more employed Americans paying taxes is the quickest and best way to balance the budget.)

Romney is probably very good (admittedly very good, $350 million personally worth of good,) at short term vulture capitalism; therefore he's good at closing factories, sending jobs to China and making lots of money for himself.

That's not what America needs.

Newt was correct when he said Romney is wrong for our country.

As soon as Romney releases his tax returns, other Republicans will understand and nominate a candidate that stands a chance in the general election.

Like this comment
Posted by Janet Marks
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jan 16, 2012 at 3:04 pm

So Jon Huntsman quits, no surprise there, but endorses Romney; no one listened to Jon's final speech, so we'll just have to refer back to what Huntsman told us about Romney previously:

* Huntsman called Romney a "perfectly lubricated weather vane on the important issues of the day," who "has been missing in action in terms of showing any kind of leadership."
* "There’s a question whether he’s running for the White House or the Waffle House."
* Campaigning in New Hampshire this month, he told voters, "Governor Romney enjoys firing people. I enjoy creating jobs."
* He told ABC News ... that "the American people, the voters, are going to have a hard time finding, I think, a gut level trust when it comes to someone who has been on so many sides of major issues."

Golly, Mitt, with friends like that ...

Like this comment
Posted by Wally
a resident of Green Acres
on Jan 17, 2012 at 5:24 pm

Romney fuels the flames of the 99 percenters at the debate last night - Newt will have fun with these statements.

Romney said "(my tax rate is) probably closer to the 15 percent rate than anything. Because my last 10 years, I’ve — my income comes overwhelmingly from some investments made in the past, whether ordinary income or earned annually."

So Romney tells the world he has an effective tax rate about half of the normal working American. Then he tells us he doesn't make much in wages - it earned him the "not very much".

The only work I know of that Romney does is getting paid for speeches. He got paid over $350,000 for speeches in the last year - and he calls a third of a million bucks earned "not very much".

I guess if $350 grand is NOT VERY MUCH, then a $10,000 bet with Perry is just spare change.

Time to take a look at his taxes for the last couple years and his tax "plan" and see what it does for working Americans.

And what it does for a guy like Mitt who is already paying taxes at half the rate of the average working stiff.

Like I said, Newt's going to have fun with this one.

Like this comment
Posted by vr
a resident of Adobe-Meadow
on Jan 17, 2012 at 11:02 pm

\mitt only pays15% on his millions?????

Like this comment
Posted by Wally
a resident of Green Acres
on Jan 18, 2012 at 11:17 am

Poor Republicans make too little, dem rich po' people make too much.

Newt and Mitt haven't a CLUE what it's like for the average working American family.

Newt Gingrich said:

" New York City pays their janitors an absurd amount of money because of the union . You could take one janitor and hire 30-some kids to work in the school for the price of one janitor, and those 30 kids would be a lot less likely to drop out. "

How much? Salary of the "absurd amount" New York City janitors - $37,710, after two years on the job. In New York CITY.

Mitt Romney said:

"And then I get speaker’s fees from time to time, but not very much .

What is the pittance that Romney received from speeches? $362,000 .

So to recap, a gazillionaire vulture capitalist making ten times that much from nine speeches is "not very much."

And a "historian" making $1.8 million for providing "advice" to Freddie Mac, at an hourly rate of $27,500 is perfectly okay.

But if a union member makes $37,000 a YEAR, that's "absurdly high".

Like this comment
Posted by dd
a resident of Nixon School
on Mar 6, 2012 at 3:42 pm

Mitt's tax plan cuts his taxes by millions. Raises taxes on the poorest working Americans.

He can't afford to pay that 13% on $40 million!!!

What a great guy!! And his wife, too, suffering so much, only driving a couple Cadillacs. She even said "I don’t even consider myself wealthy"

Poor thing. At least polygamy is outlawed so she won't have to share.

Like this comment
Posted by digit
a resident of Barron Park
on Mar 7, 2012 at 8:42 am

Mitt wears jeans and tells a group of unemployed people that he's been unemployed for years, just like them.

He doesn't get that no one likes him.he outspends Santorum 12x1 with killer negative ads and can't barely beats him by a couple voted.

No love fot Mitt the unemployed.

Like this comment
Posted by dd
a resident of Nixon School
on Mar 7, 2012 at 11:51 am

No love for Mitt from conservatives.

He runs further to the right and destroys his chances for independents in November because they see him flipflopping. All because the party can't run a decent candidate.

Like this comment
Posted by digit
a resident of Barron Park
on Mar 8, 2012 at 3:20 pm

Now someone put photos on the web of Mitt and his 12 pairs of jeans and asked "why is Mitt wearing 'mommy jeans'? "


Like this comment
Posted by Jimbo Jones
a resident of Stanford
on Mar 9, 2012 at 10:11 am

Here's some inequality for ya - which is the inferior candidate?

We know Gin-rich the Moon Base Man, by-product Ricky and DOCTOR Paul are the worst set of candidates ever. Incredibly, they've outlasted Sleepy Pawlenty, Crazy Michelle and too-sane-for-his-own-party Huntsman. Surprisingly, the Cain Train isn't still in the mix with the bozoid three left.

And who knew Ricky Corndog Perry was three things: dumb as a stump, possibly medicated, and ummm, I forgot the third thing.


As bad as they all are, the proof for the title "worst gop candidate" is in, and the answer is obvious: Mitt (I'm just a normal guy") Romney.

The proof? Here ya go... start with a question: how much work should it take to beat those bozo's listed above? Virtually none, right? A qualified candidate should barely break a sweat.

I know, I know, the thought of Mittens actually sweating is pretty funny.

So any normal candidate should have it wrapped up, signed sealed and delivered by now, given the complete morons he's running against. Like McCain in 2008, G W Bush in 2000, etc.. because there is no competition.

So here it is, the punch line of the day:

How bad do you have to be to spend ONE HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS in negative advertising to beat those bozoids???? Romney has no ideas of his own (or conflicting ones, of course) so he bombs the others with $100 million in negative ads.

Incredibly, with all that cash, he's barely be ahead, with a shot at not having the 1,144 delegates by the convention!!!!!

Williard Mittens Romney - Worst. Candidate. Ever.

Inequality to a whole new level, but I guess some want to talk about his jeans.

Like this comment
Posted by dd
a resident of Nixon School
on Mar 10, 2012 at 11:49 am

"Poor thing. At least polygamy is outlawed so she won't have to share."

I guess that was an inelegant thing to say.

Really applies to Newt and his request to his second wife, that she be in an open marriage with Newt's cheat, Calista.

They seem more the sharing kind. Newt, real family values. No wonder the GOP is losing women voters in droves these days.

Jimbo: you summed up quite well the stooges that are the GOP candidates. And sadly it's too late for a real candidate to step in.

Like this comment
Posted by Wally
a resident of Green Acres
on Mar 13, 2012 at 4:17 pm

looks like Rick Santorum is going back to the Occupy argument:

On Tuesday, Santorum blasted Romney’s private-sector record at Bain Capital. “Gov. Romney has a career as an investment banker and someone who's a private equity guy on Wall Street. I'm not too sure that necessarily commends you well to be president of the United States,” Santorum said in an interview on the nationally syndicated show “Kilmeade & Friends.”

“I don't know of one group of people that's more disliked than politicians -- it may be the folks who gave us the Wall Street bailout. And that's where Mitt Romney comes from.”

Web Link

Like this comment
Posted by Perspective
a resident of Greater Miranda
on Mar 20, 2012 at 5:51 am

Thomas Sowell says it well here. Web Link

I was a socialist until I travelled to Europe and East Germany 30 years ago and saw that the poorest lived in the most socialist/communist countries. Made me wake up and study...and realize that the poor get poorer in the socialist and communist models. Yes, they are not the same model, but they are on the same continuum.

I am a conservative because I care about the poor. The poor do better under economic freedom, consistently.

Read anything by Sowell, and wake up.

Like this comment
Posted by Wally
a resident of Green Acres
on Mar 20, 2012 at 10:32 am

Looks like Rep Paul Ryan is doubling down - cutting Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, education programs for keeping America strong on the world markets, programs for feeding poor kids and more, all of which are austerity measures that extend recessions instead of stimulating growth to get out of recession.

The reason?

To cut taxes for millionaires and billionaires.

A sound election year strategy.

Before perspecctive and the other "I used to be a socialist and now I care about the poor so much I want to cut food and education programs" crowd responds, a simple question that has been asked by others on these boards: why are we asking everyone to sacrifice except billionaires?

When have income taxes on millionaires and billionaires ever been significantly lower than they are under Obama and Bush?

Like this comment
Posted by Wally
a resident of Green Acres
on Mar 20, 2012 at 10:42 am

Let's review what the GOP candidates think of wealth inequality and their tax cuts for the poor billionaires.

Romney said: "I'm not concerned with the very poor. We have a safety net there." So let's cut the net?

Romney: "Corporations are people, my friend." So let's build a safety net for corporations, I guess.

Romney and his closest, most special corporations, ummmm, people - banks: " The banks are scared to death, of course ... they're feeling the same thing that you're feeling."

Santorum, yesterday: "I don't care what the unemployment rate's going to be. Doesn't matter to me."

Romney on Santorum's comment: I do care about unemployment, because I've hinged my whole campaign on a bad economy getting worse.

Romney: "the economy's getting better"


Like this comment
Posted by dd
a resident of Nixon School
on Apr 24, 2012 at 2:27 pm

Mitt wants everyone else's returns.

Mitt's father released 12 years of returns.

Mitt gave McCain 23 years of tax returns in 2008 (what was in them that forced McCain to choose Palin???)

Mitt wants everything from others, via CNN:

"We really haven't had a discussion yet of putting together a list or of evaluating various candidates. That’s a process where we're looking at various legal resources to help in the process, accounting staff and so forth to take a look at tax returns and things of that nature."

What is Mitt hiding in his own returns?

We already know about the Cayman Islands and Swiss bank accounts.

How bad is it, Mitt?

Like this comment
Posted by Perspective
a resident of Midtown
on Apr 26, 2012 at 5:42 am

Perspective is a registered user.

Cayman Islands and Swiss bank accounts? All legal, all in plain view. Nothing wrong with the way Romney placed his money. All in plain sight, all taxed, all legally visible. Now THAT is transparency!

Hmmm....darn, hate to rain on your parade, but there you have it.

Newt, btw, lost me when he went all stupid on us, the way he attacked Romney ( who I don't really like, either, but c'mon, Newt, you were trying to get us to vote for you, and what we are sick to death of is the smearing of success, the innuendos of the left..and you fit right in with the most leftist silly templates with your attack on Romney. You sounded like dd!)

Like this comment
Posted by Perspective
a resident of Midtown
on Apr 26, 2012 at 6:06 am

Perspective is a registered user.

Wally: "Why are we asking everyone to sacrifice except millionaires and billionaires?"..

Um..49% pay nothing in fed taxes. Half of them GET money back in welfare, food stamps, subsidized housing, EITC, etc.

When everyone pays SOMETHING, even a buck/week,including a buck/week drop in each entitlement per person, THEN I will consider "raising" taxes on the 5% who pay over 50% of the Fed Tax bill. Or the top 10% who pay over 70%. Fair is fair..we all need to have skin in the game.

America is done with the class warfare bull. We could take EVERY PENNY made by anyone who earns 1 million per year or more, and not make a dent in our deficit spending. Not a dent.$300,000,000,000 would be the total. That is 300 Billion dollars. Our DEFICIT spending alone is at least 5 times that per year. Our spending, including all we borrow, and interest paid on the "loan", is 9 times that per year. In other words, taking everything from everyone who earns more than 1 million/year would run our government for about 1 1/2 months. And, of course, nobody would be stupid enough to earn more than a million the next year, which would anhilate our tax revenue and cause us to collapse.

We are done with the "class envy" routine and 'fairness' routine. Fair is the freedom of each of us to have the equal opportunity to take risks and work hard and "win", or the freedom to take risks and work hard and "lose" without bailouts from others.

Like this comment
Posted by Perspective
a resident of Midtown
on Apr 26, 2012 at 6:08 am

Perspective is a registered user.

Forgot to put the link for others to figure out the tax bill of "millionaires and billionaires". Web Link

Like this comment
Posted by dd
a resident of Nixon School
on Apr 26, 2012 at 10:28 am

"All legal, all in plain view. Nothing wrong with the way Romney placed his money. All in plain sight, all taxed, all legally visible. Now THAT is transparency!"

Yeah, Perspective, Americans understand Swiss and Cayman Island bank accounts as "nothing wrong"!!

What is Mitt Romney hiding?

Why won't Mitt release ten years like Obama?

Release 12 years like his father did?

Release the 23 years of returns he gave to McCain? (and McCain said "whew boy, wotta mess!" and picked the worst possible VP over Mitt!)

Why did Mitt lie about John Kerry releasing only two years, when Kerry in fact released over 20 years of returns?

Perspective is correct when he says it should be visible and transparent - any millionaire can clean up taxes for a couple years to look like an angel.

What was in the 23 years of returns that even John McCain (owner of 11 'homes') couldn't abide?

What is Mitt hiding? Why doesn't he take the issue off the table and just release the 23 years? Didn't he learn months ago in the primary that it just makes him look like he's hiding something?

Mitt, Mitt, Mitt, it isn't going to go away, you're going to have to sooner or later. Take your medicine and release the records.

Show us "legal, plain view, nothing wrong, in plain sight, all taxed, all legally visible, transparency"

What is Mitt hiding?

Like this comment
Posted by Perspective
a resident of Greater Miranda
on Apr 27, 2012 at 9:17 am

dd: perhaps Romney has learned from Obama the value of hiding whatever he can...transcripts, birth certificates, passports, associations( though to anyone who could read, he was, to be fair, honest about his idols, mentors and associates in Dreams of My Father)..hey, if it worked for Obama, maybe it will work for Romney.

With any luck, Romney will be POTUS, and then WE can abuse the power of the WH office like Obama has. Won't that be great? Even to intimidating private, can't wait. What is good for the goose, is good for the gander.

Web Link

Like this comment
Posted by Jimbo Jones
a resident of Stanford
on Apr 27, 2012 at 9:58 am

Perspective is a birther?

"Obama the value of hiding whatever he can...transcripts, birth certificates"

I always assumed birthers and the tea baggers were a Southern phenomenon, you know, the , ummmmmmmmm, uhhhhhhh, what do they call it, yeah that's it, what they call in polite company "low information" voters.

Apparently a birth certificate coupled with birth announcements printed in a newspaper fifty years ago aren't good enough for the tin foil hat crowd. A vast conspiracy by a poor, single mother in an American territory has announcements printed in the newspaper so she can trick us all decades later when her son runs for president.

On a related note, did you see the President's birth video that he released at the last correspondents dinner?

At the same time his orders were being carried out.

To kill Bin Ladin.

He destroyed Trump also that night, while he was on the podium. Trump has to sit there squirming. Priceless.


Some folks never learn.

Like this comment
Posted by Jimbo Jones
a resident of Stanford
on Apr 27, 2012 at 10:06 am

Almost let it go - Perspective, you don't think transparency is a good thing?

Obama should be transparent, but Romney doesn't have top be?

Tax returns are a test of honesty. Romney has failed that test, the very test his poppa passed.

Failed it the same way Mitt fails foreign policy affairs and tests of national security.

In 2007, Obama said he would get Bin Ladin. At the same time, Little Willard Mittens Romney said he wouldn't go after Bin Ladin:

"It's not worth moving heaven and earth spending billions of dollars just trying to catch one person."

Failure. Just another George Bush.

Like this comment
Posted by Perspective
a resident of Greater Miranda
on Apr 27, 2012 at 2:10 pm

I don't believe in hypocrisy. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

And, frankly, it ISN'T worth billions to catch one person who has become totally ineffectual and out of the loop.

But, hey, fortunately, at least Obama DID give the go ahead to "get him"...with a lot of CYA caveats and after hours of gnashing of the teeth, after he was pulled off the golf course. But at least he did it.

And, again, can't let it I WISH we still had George Bush in office! I might have my business still, my home might not be underwater, and we might have something in our retirement. I was vehemently opposed to the deficit spending under Bush and the Repub controlled Congress ( 170 billion), I felt sickened by the more than doubling of it under the Dem controlled Congress when Bush finally found his veto pen and kept it to "only" 500 Billion, but I have no words to describe how I feel about over 1 1/2 trillion of deficit spending, while simultaneously destroying the private businesses, employment and economy, and rushing us even faster off the cliff into a nation of bankruptcy in Social Security and Medicare. Greece, anyone? Again, I don't care how much Romney made, I don't care how much he legally sheltered, I don't care about any of that. I just want some economic literacy back in the WH. Romney ain't perfect, far from it, but he is a lot better than what we have now.

Can't wait to vote in November, truly.Perspe

Like this comment
Posted by Jimbo Jones
a resident of Stanford
on Apr 27, 2012 at 3:00 pm

1. Perspective admits to being a birther.

2. Perspective wishes Bush was in charge.

3. Perspective doesn't think it was worth it to get Bin Ladin, wishes Romney had his way and Bin Ladin was still alive, planning operations against Americans.

All your opinion, so it is what it is, no matter how silly the first one is, how moronic the 2nd one is, or how unpatriotic the 3rd is. But the lies and misinformation runs deep in just one paragraph!

- I love this canard most of all: "...we might have something in our retirement." When Obama was inaugurated, the Dow was at 8000. It's been hovering up around 13,000 for months. If your retirement is shot, blame it on Bush, or on your bad choices - if you had a diversified retirement plan that included stocks, you might still "have something in our retirement."

- Another canard (or just another lie:) "my home might not be underwater" Again, sorry, you're blaming the wrong president - the market tanked under Bush. National real estate prices: Web Link

- Deficits? You conveniently ignore the fact that budget surpluses are the sole property of a democrat president (Clinton ran several surpluses, including leaving Bush a surplus) and Bush left office by giving America it's first trillion dollar deficit, simultaneous with massive job losses of millions from June 2008 through June 2009.

- "What is good for the goose is good for the gander." You insist on birth certificates and transcripts for your silly little tin foil hat conspiracy theories, but when it comes to the most basic test of honesty for a candidate, you don't care.

Mitt needs to release his records of the same period as his father, as Obama did, or even the 20 years Kerry gave.

"dd" asked it right: "What are you hiding, Mitt?"

Like this comment
Posted by Perspective
a resident of Greater Miranda
on Apr 27, 2012 at 7:22 pm

Jimbo: You are quite good at stereotyping, judging with no knowledge, leaping over the obvious to jump to a conclusion, and ignoring any dots that don't connect a picture your way. Congratulations, you win the prize for loyalty to your guy... I am not one to defend "my guy" blindly, so Obama is lucky to have you.

Truly, I mean this sincerely from the bottom of my heart, I really wish we could divide the country in half, with you and all who think like you living in one half, ruled by the Statist Dems, led by the Statist Obama, living out your dreams of a central government ruling all the land, taking from those who have more, giving to those who have less, you know "from each his ability, to each his need", making sure everyone had equal type of health care, government run schools, government housing,..etc. I would wish you well, really, like I wish all people living in such nations well, as their economies and cultures deteriorate, and their lives become more miserable. I have seen how that worked out for too many other countries around the world, from the lesser Statist nations like Greece and Italy, to the greater Statist nations of the last 100 years, like..well, you know the list. I would choose to live in the other half. The half that was the country of laws based on our Constitution, of limited federal government,the land of individual opportunity, individual freedom to reap your rewards (good and bad), individual freedom to donate to charities that actually work to help people improve their lives instead of helping them stay down, a live and let live mentality that judges on merit, character, and actions, not color, gender, "class" or sexual orientation for schools, jobs, advancement and elections. A land with elected officials who think of the future generations of their country, not their short term "political career", all while lining their pockets with insider trading and millions in speaking and writing fees ( and please don't think I am partisan in this view!) A land where the people would not vote more debt on their children, and instead would vote to keep them free from the shackles of slavery to an indebted nation, free to live their OWN lives, instead of paying for their parents and grandparents' mistakes. ( Again, don't think I am partisan in this view!). It would be interesting to watch the countries, side by side, and see where they are in 30-40 years, about the time I suspect you would be ready for retirement. It would be interesting to compare the lives of split families, much like the families torn apart by the Berlin Wall compared their lives when at last they could meet again.

But, we are stuck with each other, and have to figure out how to tolerate each other. The best I can say is I can't fix you or your destructive to humanity political beliefs,but I CAN work to vote your ideology out of power in every way possible...And I suspect I am not alone.

Mitt is not perfect, by a long shot. He does not have people who faint at his feet, sing songs about him, build him Greek columns to speak from, or write speeches about how his election will change the levels of the oceans and he will bring us "out of the dark, into the light'. His supporters know he is just a person, and an imperfect one. We don't idolize our politicians. They are human and subject to all the temptations and "sins" ( if I may say that word) of anyone, pride, greed,envy, sloth, lust, deceit to name a few common ones in our politicians. The difference is that those of my ilk try to hold our politicians to a standard which disdains such areas.

We don't idolize Romney, or any of our "picks". He wants to cut far too little ( 500 billion) from the yearly deficit spending in 4 years. That is STILL FAR TOO MUCH DEBT for our kids, and the BIGGEST problem I had with Bush and the Dem Congress. That is STILL double the deficit spending of 2008, and double again of 2005. He still plays that darn "class warfare" card too much for me and most Repubs ( more taxes on those who earn more, and not one word about equalizing taxes out so more people have skin in the game, not one word about revamping the tax code).But, given he isn't economically developmentally delayed, he ALSO wants to make changes to help keep Medicare and Social Security at least alive, changes that make sense. ( I won't bother outlining them, if anyone is interested they can look it up). At least there would be hope for SOME form of health care for the elderly in 20 years, whereas right now there is no plan from any Democrat except "raise taxes" and "no, Medicare is fine". One of the biggest crises to face us in the next 20 years, and you want to pretend all is fine and leave us hanging out with nothing in 20 years. Social Security is also going broke, with nothing left by the time I am there. At least Romney has a plan that will help. Again, it isn't perfect, but it is better than "No, we don't have a problem" or "just raise taxes". I prefer much more ( like letting me keep at least some of my social security payments in a PRIVATE investment, which is MINE and under no threat by the government to cut it or take it at the last minute, AND I am able to pass it to my kids or donate it as I wish on my death)..but at least there is SOMETHING left in 20 years. His Health Care idea is also milquetoast, ( look it up), but again, a step in the right direction. Frankly, most of his plans are very moderate, not far enough to fix us fast enough for my liking. BUT, at least they are baby steps in the right direction.

If we can get the Senate to turn over to a majority that will actually even consider some of the Congressional Bills that have passed ( like the Penny Mack plan or Ryan's plan), maybe, just maybe, we can push Romney to sign one of the bills, and get out of debt in 28 years, and pass an economically stable country to our kids and grandkids. NEVER would happen under Dem control of the Senate, or WH.

That is all I want. A stable country for my kids and grandkids. And moving in the direction of Greece does not let me sleep peacefully at night.

Like this comment
Posted by dd
a resident of Nixon School
on Apr 28, 2012 at 9:41 am

Perspective - I can't speak for Jimbo, but one notes that all he did was use your posts as evidence in declaring you a birther who worships Bush and thinks going after bin Laden was a waste of money.

At least you didn't try to defend your previous falsehoods about the stock market, the trillion dollar deficit left by Bush, or Bush's recession causing your plummeting house value. Truly amazing that you assign all that to Obama when it is such recent history. Has everyone on the right been that brainwashed in 3 short years? Wow, Fox really is effective of a propaganda machine?!?! And it's the righties that compare the NYT or WashPost to Pravda!

"That is all I want. A stable country for my kids and grandkids"

As do we all.

Let's go back to Clinton job creation. Clinton levels of spending. Clinton tax rates. the Clinton economy of the Nineties.

A Clinton balanced budget.

I would say a "Reagan balanced budget" or a "Dubya Bush balanced budget" or a "Daddy Bush 1 balanced budget" or a "Nixon balanced budget", but of course, those never happened.

As far as "I really wish we could divide the country in half", please feel free to move to Texas and encourage Perry's talk of secession. I'd suggest the other red states, but they are all part of the "red state welfare" coalition, that take more federal dollars than they contribute, and you can't have that kind of socialism.

Would offend your sensibilities.

Like this comment
Posted by Perspective
a resident of Greater Miranda
on Apr 30, 2012 at 11:01 am

dd: the level of ignorance in your reply ( so many wrong points, so little time..but I will start with your belief that Red States take more "welfare"...look up where the most military bases are, then rethink why there are so many federal dollars going to the "Red States". And ask yourself WHY most military bases are in Red States..hmmmmm...then ask yourself how you think it is socialism to support a national military?).. has finally made me realize that there is no way to teach you, just defeat your Party and its President. However, feel free to keep posting, the more you and your fellow Party members write, the more you show the rest of the nation what the Democrats have become. Be sure to participate in the OWS rally today! And while you are there, be sure to find a news agency to interview you. That would be fun to watch. What else...Oh, maybe write letters to the Editors in papers to teach the rest of us. There, that would be a great start.

Like this comment
Posted by Jimbo Jones
a resident of Stanford
on Apr 30, 2012 at 1:35 pm

Perspective throws in the towel, unable to substantiate any of his feeble claims. So let's review:

1. Perspective admits to being a birther. (see above, 4/27 9:17 am)

2. Perspective wishes Bush was in charge. (4/27 2:10 pm)

3. Perspective doesn't think it was worth it to get Bin Ladin, wishes Romney had his way and Bin Ladin was still alive, planning operations against Americans. (same post above)

Looking at another thread, we find Perspective desecrating the memory of 5,000 brave American soldiers killed in Iraq while searching for WMD: "the usual canard about the Clinton "surplus" and "No WMD in Iraq".....hahahaha)!! " Web Link

Perspective should have quit with the hat trick at three - the fourth is the straw that breaks the camel's back. Disgusting.

Desecrating our military losses by laughing them off, the screed above, clearly show Perspective is off the rails.

Seek help.

Like this comment
Posted by dd
a resident of Nixon School
on May 1, 2012 at 9:58 am

Well, at least one good thing about these political posts is that eventually the fringe wingnuts come out with their true feelings:

- tea bagger tin foil hat conspiracies about birth certificates, wanting Bush, the father of the worst recession in 80 years, back in charge, etc..

- they don't care about brave Americans, using them as cannon fodder in Iraq and then laughing about it "No WMD in Iraq".....hahahaha)!! "

One imagines we've seen the last of the Perspective handle, he'll have to think up a new name now.

Then he'll be back telling us Saddam was involved in 9/11, they really did find WMD and that Bush was REALLY responsible for getting Bin Ladin.

Even though Bush said this a year after 9/11: "Who knows if he’s hiding in some cave or not. We haven’t heard from him in a long time. … I don’t know where he is. I really just don’t spend that much time on him, to be honest with you."

The same Bush who pranced across an aircraft carrier with a sock stuffed you-know-where declaring 'Mission Accomplished'.

Good riddance P, but we'll see ya around under a new moniker. This time, try not to be blinded by your political views.

Happy May Day, y'all.

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Burger chain Shake Shack to open in Palo Alto
By Elena Kadvany | 19 comments | 5,045 views

The Cost of Service
By Aldis Petriceks | 1 comment | 1,233 views

This time we're not lying. HONEST! No, really!
By Douglas Moran | 11 comments | 877 views

Couples: When Wrong Admit It; When Right; Shut Up
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 772 views

One-on-one time
By Cheryl Bac | 0 comments | 578 views