Barack Obama

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by randolph

Since Canada seems to know how to run their finances, why don't we let the Canadians take over the country.

Dude, you are so much like these people
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S13LwVDJb0E

We are perfectly able to handle the mess we're in if the politicians would either get back to the basics or get out of the way. FYI... I was on a telecon with some Canadians today, and they said their economy sucks too.

[randolph]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

Dude, you are so much like these people
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S13LwVDJb0E

We are perfectly able to handle the mess we're in if the politicians would either get back to the basics or get out of the way. FYI... I was on a telecon with some Canadians today, and they said their economy sucks too.

That tube is very funny!
However you ignored the last sentence of my post. "Meanwhile the Republicans deny the train is coming and believe the car will start by itself!" Again, what would McCain do if he was president?

[randolph]

By Ed Rollins
CNN Contributor

Editor's note: Ed Rollins, who was political director for President Reagan, is a Republican strategist who was national chairman of former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee's 2008 presidential campaign.
Ed Rollins says the Republican Party has lost its relevance amid very low favorable ratings from voters.

Ed Rollins says the Republican Party has lost its relevance amid very low favorable ratings from voters.

(CNN) -- The cold winds of March have obviously affected the intelligence and thought processes of people who need to get their thinking straight.

The idiotic debate raging in Washington this week around Michael Steele, the newly elected chairman of the nearly defunct Republican Party, and Rush Limbaugh, a conservative icon for the past 35 years, is beyond foolish.

The battle to be the "de facto leader" of this party is akin to the question of who wants to steer the Titanic after it hit the iceberg. Who represents the party or its values is not relevant when only 26 percent of voters have a positive impression of the party at all and only 7 percent very positive, according to the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News survey.

The Democratic Party is the reverse, with 49 percent positive. When 60 percent of the country approves of the job President Obama is doing, every Republican leader is going backward.

Are Republicans able to get their act together? With Rush Limblab going at it, its very doubtful.

[CreativeMind]

Originally Posted by randolph

...The battle to be the "de facto leader" of this party is akin to the question of who wants to steer the Titanic after it hit the iceberg. Who represents the party or its values is not relevant when only 26 percent of voters have a positive impression of the party at all and only 7 percent very positive, according to the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News survey.

The Democratic Party is the reverse, with 49 percent positive. When 60 percent of the country approves of the job President Obama is doing, every Republican leader is going backward.

Are Republicans able to get their act together? With Rush Limblab going at it, its very doubtful.

Too bad that's ALSO incredibly creative and deceptive math at work.
Then again, the article came by way of CNN, which speaks volumes...

See, the problem is the Democratic number is 49%, BUT what CNN did (and let the record show that CNN is notorious for doing this, in order to spin whatever argument they're trying to push) is that they broke the other number APART, to try and make it look smaller. So, in truth, you have to ADD the 26 (positive) and 7 (very positive) for the Republicans together, at which point you come up with 33%.

Now, at first you might say "Well, that's still 49% for the Democrats against 33% for the Republicans, so that's still a wide gap." Except THAT wouldn't be true EITHER since election surveys showed that going into the Bush/Kerry election there was about an 8-10 point divide between registered Democrats and Republicans ANYWAY.

So REALLY what we're talking about here is that the Republican base is still what it has been for years (a number roughly in the mid thirties, sometimes breaking 40), meanwhile the Democrats are more solidly in the forties...and the rest are Independents and Libertarians and whatever else. In fact, just for the record, despite any crowing by the Obama crowd over voter registrations going into the last election, in truth the FASTEST and LARGEST growing political affiliation are actually people renouncing BOTH parties and officially listing themselves as Independents now.

In fact, here's a better example of how fast and loose CNN always plays with the facts and with numbers...

Recently, CNN issued a report talking about how "Red State Republicans" were the biggest buyers of porn, far more than Blue states. They came to this conclusion by looking at the bank transaction records for where the most porn was being bought or downloaded, etc. As a result, the assertion that CNN and Left leaning commentators then made was that Republicans or conservative Red States were hypocrites and not the traditionalists they claim to be.

HOWEVER...over at NewsBusters (which is a great site for debunking journalistic crocks), they posted a response from a Harvard Business School Professor who hit the nail on head by noting it was faulty math right from the start. For example, using Utah as an example, the STATE could be considered "red" because it is composed of 51% Republicans and 49% Democrats...so Republicans are in the majority...but the actual majority of PORN buyers could still statistically come entirely from the 49% Democratic pool. The point being, that since you DIDN'T actually study or break down "who" was actually buying the porn...and since they ONLY looked at the state where it was going...the numbers were deceptive from the start.

Not to mention, the Limbaugh thing has actually now been revealed to be an actual White House orchestrated PR stunt to desperately divert attention from the day's daily news -- which is the fact that Obama is likewise quickly being revealed to be an utter idiot when it comes to dealing with the economy. Not to mention, it's become clear that Obama is LESS worried about our money and our savings, and he's MORE interested in being a one-term president, if that's what it comes to, so long as he manages to ram through his various Liberal programs and gets them made into law. After only a month in office, it seems clear that the number one thing Obama wants is to turn the country DRASTICALLY left and to set certain things into law, even if it means he doesn't get reelected.

[randolph]

Although the piece was published by CNN, it was written by Ed Rollins who was Regan's political director. As a Republican, I assume he knows what he is talking about.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by randolph

That tube is very funny!
However you ignored the last sentence of my post. "Meanwhile the Republicans deny the train is coming and believe the car will start by itself!" Again, what would McCain do if he was president?

I answered you about McCain in post 385. And about that sentence...

Originally Posted by randolph

Meanwhile the Republicans deny the train is coming and believe the car will start by itself!

Republicans have been warning about the oncoming train called Obama since before he was elected. This huge pork filled debt he's generating comes as no surprise to us. And the effect it will have on the economy also will come as no surprise.

Democrats' strategy for the economy is like a car that has run out of gas on a train track. They borrow someone else's gas to restart the car and then turn to drive it straight into the on coming train.

Or like a swimmer who has swam out from shore into the ocean. After a while he starts to become very tired. Instead of swimming back to the shore, he swims with all his might further out to sea until he can't swim another stroke and drowns.