Developing: Pakistani Plane Escorted by UK Fighter Jets — 2 Men Arrested
Doc Thompson’s 24-hour radio marathon, ‘#24forok,’ continues until 9 am ET — Listen Live!
These Are the 20 Biggest Issues at Stake in the 2012 Presidential Election — And Why They Matter
(TheBlaze/AP) — A variety of issues are at stake in the 2012 presidential election. From abortion to the economy, these elements are diverse. And the candidates, as evidenced through the first presidential debate and ongoing campaign-trail jockeying, have starkly different views on how each issue should be confronted and handled.
Democratic presidential candidate, U.S. President Barack Obama (R) pats Republican presidential candidate, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney on the back after the Presidential Debate at the University of Denver on October 3, 2012 in Denver, Colorado. The first of four debates for the 2012 Election, three Presidential and one Vice Presidential, is moderated by PBS's Jim Lehrer and focuses on domestic issues: the economy, health care, and the role of government. Photo Credit: Getty Images
As a result, the stakes are high, as liberals and conservatives, alike, are pushing to see their vision for the future of America come to fruition. The problem? In many instances, these sentiments are radically different from one another, making the election a focal point with results that may set the stage for America’s direction for years to come.
The following issues are at the forefront of the sociopolitical landscape. Whoever is election — be it President Barack Obama or Mitt Romney — will likely implement strong views and a vision that will move America in a pointed direction on each front:
–
Abortion:
Abortion and birth control are divisive issues in politics, and they’ve flared up at times in this campaign despite the candidates’ reluctance to dwell on them (here’s more in-depth analysis about where the candidates stand).
President Barack Obama supports abortion rights. And his health care law requires contraceptives to be available for free for women in workplace health plans — a plan that has caused intense debate and claims that the president has attacked religious liberty in America.
Republican Mitt Romney opposes abortion rights, though he previously supported them. He says the Supreme Court ruling establishing abortion rights should be reversed, allowing states to ban abortion. He’s also criticized mandatory coverage for contraception as a threat to religious liberty.
Romney’s ability as president to enact federal abortion restrictions would be limited unless Republicans gained firm control of Congress. But the next president could have great influence over abortion policy if vacancies arise on the Supreme Court. If two seats held by liberal justices were filled by Romney-nominated conservatives, prospects for a reversal of Roe v. Wade would increase.
—
Afghanistan:
The stakes now are similar to what caused the U.S. to invade almost 11 years ago: the threat of more al-Qaida attacks.
Obama says U.S. forces must not leave until Afghan forces can defend the country on their own. Otherwise the Taliban would regain power and al-Qaida might again launch attacks from there. Rival Romney appears to share that view.
Photo Credit: AP
What’s often overlooked in the “al-Qaida returns” scenario is an answer to this question: Why, after so many years of foreign help, are the Afghans still not capable of self-defense? And when will they be?
The official answer is by the end of 2014, when the U.S. and its allies plan to end their combat role. The Afghans will be fully in charge, or so it is hoped, and the war will be over, at least for Americans.
—
Campaign finance:
This election probably will cost more than $1 billion. Big donors who help cover the tab could gain outsized influence with the election’s winner. Your voice may not be heard as loudly as a result.
Recent court decisions have stripped away restrictions on how elections are financed, allowing the very rich to afford more speech than the rest. In turn, super PACs have flourished, thanks as well to limitless contributions from the wealthy — including contributors who have business before the government.
US Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney speaks during a campaign event on October 5, 2012 in St. Petersburg, Florida. Fresh from a much-needed debate victory, Republican challenger Mitt Romney said his earlier remarks dismissing 47 percent of Americans as government dependents were 'completely wrong.' The admission came amid a campaign reset that shocked Democrat Barack Obama at Wednesday's debate, in which his invigorated rival for the White House vowed to fight for middle class families that Romney said were being 'crushed' by the president's policies. Photo Credit: AFP/Getty Images
Disclosure rules offer a glimpse into who’s behind the money. But the information is often too vague to be useful. And nonprofits that run so-called issue ads don’t have to reveal donors.
Obama criticized the Supreme Court for removing campaign finance restrictions. Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney supported the ruling. Both are using the lax rules with gusto.
—
China:
The U.S. accuses China of flouting trade rules and undervaluing its currency to helps its exporters, hurting American competitors and jobs. But imposing tariffs could set off a trade war and drive up prices for American consumers.
Tensions now have spread to the automotive sector: The U.S. is seeking international rulings against Chinese subsidies for its auto and auto-parts exports and against Chinese duties on U.S. autos. Romney says he’ll get tougher on China’s trade violations. Obama has taken a variety of trade actions against China, but on the currency issue, he has opted to wait for economic forces to encourage Beijing to raise values.
Cheap Chinese goods have benefited American consumers and restrained inflation. But those imports have hurt American manufacturers. And many U.S. companies outsource production to China. One study estimated that between 2001 and 2010, 2.8 million U.S. jobs were lost or displaced to China.
—
Climate change:
This year America’s weather has been hotter and more extreme than ever before, records show. Yet the presidential candidates aren’t talking about it — and debate still surrounds who’s causing the globe to heat up (i.e. is it a natural progression or is it caused by human intervention — or both?).
In the U.S., July was the hottest month ever recorded and this year is on track to be the warmest. Many scientists say that’s both from natural drought and man-made global warming. Each decade since the 1970s has been nearly one-third of a degree warmer than the previous one.
Sea levels are rising while glaciers and summer Arctic sea ice are shrinking. Plants are blooming earlier. Some species could die because of global warming.
Obama proposed a bill to cap power plant carbon dioxide emissions, but it died in Congress. Still, he’s doubling auto mileage standards and put billions into cleaner energy. Romney now questions the science of man-made global warming and says some actions to curb emissions could hurt an already struggling economy.
—
Debt:
A sea of red ink is confronting the nation and presidents to come.
The budget deficit – the shortfall created when the government spends more in a given year than it collects — is on track to top $1 trillion for the fourth straight year. The government borrows about 40 cents for every dollar it spends.
The national debt is the total amount the federal government owes. It’s risen to a shade over $16 trillion.
Republican U.S. presidential candidate Mitt Romney speaks during a campaign rally at SeaGate Convention Centre as a national debt clock runs in the background on September 26, 2012 in Toledo, Ohio. Romney continued his two-day 'Romney Plan For A Stronger Middle Class' bus tour in the state of Ohio. Photo Credit: Getty Images
Obama has proposed bringing deficits down by slowing spending gradually, to avoid suddenly tipping the economy back into recession. He’d raise taxes on households earning more than $250,000 and impose a surcharge of 30 percent on those making more than $1 million. Romney would lower deficits mostly through deep spending cuts.
—
Defense spending:
At its core, the debate over how much the U.S. spends on defense gets down to this: What is it that America should be defending against?
There are plenty of potential security threats on the horizon, not to mention an unfinished war in Afghanistan.
The size and shape of the defense budget go a long way toward determining whether the U.S. can influence events abroad, prevent new wars and be ready for those it can’t avoid. It also fuels the domestic defense industry in ways that affect the vitality of communities large and small across the country.
Obama wants more restraint in military spending, while Romney favors expansion. Obama also wants more focus on Asia-Pacific security, reflecting China’s military modernization. But that and other elements of military strategy could come apart if Washington doesn’t find a way to avoid automatic budget cuts starting in January.
—
Economy:
The job market is brutal and the economy weak. More than 12 million Americans can’t find work; the unemployment rate fell in September but is still at a recession-level 7.8 percent. It had been over 8 percent for 43 straight months. A divided Washington has done little to ease the misery.
The economy didn’t take off when the recession ended in June 2009. Growth has never been slower in the three years after a downturn. The human toll is staggering. Forty percent of the jobless, 4.8 million people, have been out of work six months or more — a “national crisis,” according to Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke. Wages aren’t keeping up with inflation.
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke. Photo Credit: AP
Obama wants to create jobs by keeping taxes low for everybody but the wealthiest and with public-works spending, clean energy projects and targeted tax breaks to businesses. Romney proposes further cuts in tax rates for all income levels; he’d also slash corporate rates, reduce regulations and encourage oil production.
—
Education:
Education ranks second only to the economy in issues important to Americans. Yet the U.S. lags globally in educating its children. And higher education costs are leaving students saddled with debt or unable to afford college at all.
State budget cuts have meant teacher layoffs and larger class sizes. Colleges have had to make do with less. It all trickles down to the kids in the classroom.
Although Washington contributes a small fraction of education money, it influences teacher quality, accessibility and more. For example, to be freed from provisions of the No Child Left Behind law, states had to develop federally approved reforms.
Romney wants more state and local control over education. But he supports some of Obama’s proposals, notably charter schools and teacher evaluations. So, look for them to be there whoever wins the White House.
—
Gay marriage:
Both sides of the gay marriage debate agree on this much: The issue defines what sort of nation America will be.
Half a dozen states and the District of Columbia have made history by legalizing it, but it’s prohibited elsewhere and 30 states have placed bans in their constitutions.
Obama supports legal recognition of same-sex marriage, as a matter decided by states. Romney says same-sex marriage should be banned with a constitutional amendment.
Photo Credit: FILE
The debate divides the public down the middle, according to recent polls, and stirs up passion on both sides.
In November, four states have gay-marriage measures on their ballots. In Minnesota, the vote is whether to ban gay marriage in the state constitution. Voters in Maine, Maryland and Washington state are voting on whether to legalize gay marriage.
Thus far, foes of gay marriage have prevailed in all 32 states where the issue reached the ballot.
—
Guns:
Gun violence has been splayed across front pages with alarming frequency lately: the movie theater killings in Colorado, the Sikh temple shootings in Wisconsin, the gunfire outside the Empire State Building and more. Guns are used in two-thirds of homicides, according to the FBI. But the murder rate is less than half what it was two decades ago.
Neither Obama nor Romney has had much to say about guns during the campaign. Obama hasn’t pushed gun control measures as president; Romney says new gun laws aren’t needed.
It’s getting harder to argue that stricter gun laws are needed when violent crime has been decreasing without them.
But the next president may well fill at least one Supreme Court seat, and the court is narrowly divided on gun control. An Obama appointee could be expected to be friendlier to gun controls than would a Romney nominee.
—
Health care:
America’s health care system is unsustainable. It’s not one problem, but three: cost, quality and coverage.
The U.S. has world-class hospitals and doctors. But it spends far more than other advanced countries and people aren’t much healthier. And in an aging society, there’s no reliable system for long-term care.
Obama’s expansion of coverage for the uninsured hits high gear in 2014. Obama keeps today’s Medicare while trying to slow costs. He also extends Medicaid.
Democratic presidential candidate, U.S. President Barack Obama (R) and Republican presidential candidate, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney. Photo Credit: Getty Images
Romney would repeal Obama’s health care law — but he hasn’t entirely spelled out what he’d do instead. On Medicare, he favors the option of a government payment to help future retirees get private coverage.
The risk of expanding coverage: Health costs consume a growing share of the stressed economy. The risk of not: Millions continue uninsured or saddled with heavy coverage costs as the population grows older.
—
Immigration:
An estimated 11.5 million illegal immigrants are living and often working in the United States. Figuring out what to do with them has confounded Washington for years.
Lax enforcement could mean more illegal immigrants competing with citizens for jobs and some social services, without necessarily paying income taxes. A too-tight policy could mean farmers and others in industries that rely on the cheaper labor of illegal immigrants are left begging for workers, passing higher costs on to everyone else or going out of business.
Obama backed the DREAM Act, a failed bill that would have provided a path to legal status for many young illegal immigrants. In June, Obama decided to allow as many as 1.7 million of them to stay for up to two years. Romney supports completing a fence at the Mexican border and other tough security measures while pledging to veto the DREAM Act.
—
Income inequality:
The income gap between the rich and everyone else is getting larger, while middle incomes stagnate. That’s raised concerns that the middle class isn’t sharing in economic growth as it used to.
Obama would raise taxes on households earning more than $250,000 a year, plus set a minimum tax rate of 30 percent for those earning $1 million or more. He also wants to spend more on education, “a gateway to the middle class.” Romney would cut taxes more broadly and says that will generate enough growth to raise all incomes.
Income inequality has risen for three decades and worsened since the recession ended. The Census Bureau found the highest-earning 20 percent earned 51.1 percent of all income last year. That was the biggest share on records dating to 1967. The share earned by households in the middle 20 percent fell to 14.3 percent, a record low.
—
Iran:
With the Iraq war over and Afghanistan winding down, Iran is the most likely place for a new U.S. military conflict.
Obama says he’ll prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. He hopes sanctions alongside negotiations can get Iran to halt uranium enrichment. But the strategy hasn’t worked yet. Obama holds out the threat of military action as a last resort.
Romney accuses Obama of being weak on Iran. He says the U.S. needs to present a greater military threat.
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Photo Credit: AP
Attacking Iran is no light matter, however. That is why neither candidate clearly calls for military action.
Tehran can disrupt global fuel supplies, hit U.S. allies in the Gulf or support proxies such as Hezbollah in acts of terrorism. It could also draw the U.S. into an unwanted new war in the Muslim world.
—
Supreme Court appointments:
With four justices in their 70s, odds are good that whoever wins in November will fill at least one Supreme Court seat. The next justice could dramatically alter the direction of a court split between conservatives and liberals.
One new face could mean a sea change in how millions get health care, shape gay rights and much more.
Obama already has put his stamp on the court by selecting liberal-leaning Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor, 50-somethings who could serve a quarter-century or more. Romney has promised to name justices in the mold of the court’s conservatives.
Since the New Deal, Supreme Court decisions have made huge differences in American lives, from rulings to uphold Social Security, minimum wage laws and other Depression-era reforms to ringing endorsements of equal rights. Big decisions on health care, gun rights and abortion have turned on 5-4 votes.
—
Social Security:
Unless Congress acts, the trust funds that support Social Security are on pace to run out of money in 2033, triggering an automatic 25 percent cut in benefits that millions of older Americans rely on for most of their income.
That may seem far off. But the sooner Congress acts, the more time to phase in changes slowly.
Social Security could be preserved for generations with modest but politically difficult changes to benefits or taxes, or some of both.
Obama hasn’t laid out a detailed plan for addressing Social Security. Romney proposes a gradual increase in the retirement age and, for future beneficiaries, slower growth in benefits for the wealthy.
But nothing will happen without White House leadership.
For millions of retired and disabled workers, Social Security is almost all they have to live on. Monthly retirement benefits are $1,237; average disability benefits, $1,111.
—
Syria:
Syria’s conflict is the most violent to emerge from last year’s Arab Spring. Activists say at least 23,000 people have died over the last 18 months.
Obama wants Syrian President Bashar Assad to leave power. But he won’t use U.S. military force to make that happen.
Romney says “more assertive” U.S. tactics are needed, without fully spelling them out.
The future of Arab democracy could hinge on the crisis. After dictatorships fell in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and Yemen, critics say Assad’s government has resorted to torture and mass killings to stay in power.
Syrian demonstrators shout slogans against the regime during a protest in the northern city of Aleppo on October 5, 2012. Thousands of people demonstrated across Syria despite ongoing violence, calling for the arming of the rebel Free Syrian Army and condemning the international community's inaction, monitors reported. Photo Credit: AFP/Getty Images
Its success would deny the U.S. a major strategic victory. Assad long has helped Iran aid Hamas and Hezbollah, destabilizing Lebanon while threatening Israel’s security and U.S. interests in the Middle East.
But extremists among the opposition, Assad’s weapons of mass destruction and worries about Israel’s border security have policymakers wary about deeper involvement.
—
Taxes:
Almost every U.S. taxpayer faces a significant tax increase next year, unless Congress and the White House agree on a plan to extend a huge collection of tax cuts expiring at the end of the year.
And there’s a huge debate over how to overhaul the tax code to make it simpler, with lower rates balanced by fewer deductions.
Obama wants to extend Bush-era tax cuts again, but only for individuals making less than $200,000 and married couples making less than $250,000.
Romney wants to extend all those tax cuts and enact new ones, dropping all income tax rates by 20 percent. Romney says he would pay for that by eliminating or reducing tax credits, deductions and exemptions. But he won’t say which ones would go.
Most lawmakers want a simpler tax code, but millions count on the mortgage interest deduction, child tax credit and more, making progress all but impossible.
—
Wall Street regulation:
The debate over banking rules is, at its core, a dispute about how to prevent another economic cataclysm.
The financial crisis that peaked in 2008 touched off a global economic slowdown. Four years later, the recovery remains painfully slow.
After the crisis, Congress passed a sprawling overhaul of banking rules and oversight. The law gives regulators new tools to shutter banks without resorting to emergency bailouts. It restricts risky lending and establishes a new agency to protect consumers from misleading marketing and other traps.
The new rules also boost companies’ costs, according to Romney and many in the business community. Romney believes the law is prolonging the nation’s economic agony by making it harder for companies to invest and grow. He has pledged to repeal it. Obama fought for and supports the law.
Benghazi, IRS, AP...What's next? Only TheBlaze TV offers the truth from Glenn Beck, Andrew Wilkow, and Real News from TheBlaze. Get instant access and a free trial here.
Popular Stories
John McCain Lectures Tea Party Senator on How ‘Business’ Gets Done in Congress: ‘That’s What We’ve Been Doing for a Couple Hundred Years’ 499 Comments
Pope Francis’ Sermon Sparks Debate: ‘Even the Atheists’ Have Been Redeemed ‘With the Blood of Christ’ 460 Comments
Boy Scouts of America Vote to Allow Gay Members 452 Comments
Anti-Gay Bias or Fair Punishment? New Details Emerge About High School Student’s Lesbian Relationship With a Minor 339 Comments
Piers Morgan Bans Dana Loesch From His Show Following Twitter Spat: ‘Show Some Bloody Respect’ 323 Comments
Faith
-
MSNBC Hosts Martin Bashir and Chris Hayes Claim London Machete Killers Aren’t Terrorists: ‘These Are Just Murderers’
Read More
- Did You Catch the Possibly Policy-Changing Ft. Hood Reference in Obama’s Terror Speech? Read More
-
Dem. Rep. Apologizes for Attending ‘Racist, Anti-Semitic and Homophobic’ Speech
Read More
-
Church vs. State Complaint Leads City to Remove Christian Crosses on Water Tower — Now See What They’ve Been Replaced With
182 Comments
- Faith-Healing Parents Charged With Murder for Refusing Kids’ Medical Care — Should They Go to Prison? 117 Comments
Business
-
Have You Had Scotch at a NJ TGI Friday’s Lately? You Might Have Been Drinking Rubbing Alcohol
Read More
-
Venezuelan President Blames Toilet Paper Shortage on the Rich
Read More
-
This Terrible Chart Shows the Change in Food Stamp Participation Over the Last 10 Years
Read More
- Disney Makes Absolutely Mortifying Photoshop Mistake Read More
-
Trey Gowdy at It Again — This Time with a Jack Bauer Reference!
115 Comments
Technology
-
6 Fascinating Spy Gadgets You’ll Probably Want (and Can Have) After Seeing
Read More
-
How Would a 3D-Printed Shotgun Slug Hold Up? Here’s the Test
Read More
-
The Incredible Role Facebook Played in the Aftermath of Devastating Okla. Tornado
Read More
-
Tech Company Demonstrates Remote Disabling of a ‘Smart Gun’
130 Comments
-
Meet the Blind Man Nicknamed ‘Midnight Gunslinger’ Who Has 80% Shot Accuracy
Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (173)
HumbleMan
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 5:02pmWho wrote this list, Chris Matthews? I don’t like the way it’s worded because between the lines there’s a liberal undercurrent. This July is not the warmest month in history … Oh, unless you believe NASA chief, an environmental-”activist” James E. Hansen, who reported in a journal article published on Monday that recent extremes of hot weather have been so pronounced that scientists can say with near-certainty that events like the Russian heat wave of 2010 or the Texas heat wave of 2011 would not have happened unless global warming was under way.” . Unfortunately (for us) he’s a “hack” who has biased the monitoring to eliminate monitoring stations from high altitudes and rural areas. It just steams me when I read what this guy writes.
Report this comment
HumbleMan
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 5:05pmAlso, where is “preserving the constitution”?
Report this comment
John 1776
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 5:16pmSo who’s tax plan really taxes the rich?
Take some guy making 10 million and having 4 million in deductions. At 15%, he is currently paying $900k in taxes.
Obama wants to SURCHARGE the rich an extra 1% (moving him to 16%) That would add $60k in taxes to our guy.
Romney wants to reduce the tax rate by 20% (moving our guy to 12%) but also wants to limit deductions to $17k per person. That would ADD $297,960 in new taxes to our guy! That’s almost 5 times as much!
(10m – 17k x 0.12 = $1,197,960)
Best of all, the middle income people would get a tax break and small businesses (S-corp) would be left alone!
Report this comment
HumbleMan
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 5:37pmJohn (I think may know you), There’s a lot I don’t like about Mitt’s proposals on taxes. It still has a “smell” of Class Warfare …
But I know what Obama has up his sleeve. The big surprise will be “who is rich”. The numbers don’t work for Obama if his definition of “rich” remains at the $200-250K level. He has to go all the way to $60K a year to get the kind of revenues he needs. The middle-class we really be crushed.
Report this comment
John 1776
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 7:49pmOh, I think you are right about the descending definition. I just find it Ironic that he screams about Romney giving tax breaks to “millionaires and billionaires” when Romney’s plan will actually be harder on the uber rich George Soros’s of the world, while allowing businesses to grow.
I suspect Obama wants to make it miserable for anyone who works hard (except maybe Union members) and tries to talk as if “You don’t have it because they (the rich) do!”
What he really wants to do is kill private industry. Everyone should work for the state (in his vision of the world.) where they will be nice and controllable.
Report this comment
truthnstuff
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 8:20pmHumbleman I had the same reaction as you. Maybe they were stating the leftist view and that Romney doesn’t believe it???? I don’t know.
Report this comment
Kathleen
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 9:42pmI agree. I thought, surely this is not The Blaze.
Report this comment
Cemoto78
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 10:13pmI’ve got a better plan on taxes. How about we quit paying any federal taxes at all until these spend happy fools quit thinking money grows on trees.
Report this comment
BIGWUN
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 11:17pmAnd, importantly, O changed NASA’s prime directive to Muslim Outreach! As McCoy would say: Dammit, Jim, I’m a scientist, not a terrorist lover1
Report this comment
soybomb315_II
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 11:31pmthis article was written by John McCain and it is from 10 years ago…
Report this comment
GETLIFE
Posted on October 7, 2012 at 4:30amCampaign Contributions
So where is the info about how Obama is suddenly raising millions and millions in anonymous (under $50) donations– all magically appearing as untraceworthy contributions.
Any “electronic” donation should have to have a name attached to it.
Report this comment
The Third Seal Patriot
Posted on October 7, 2012 at 6:10amSeems like another story that has been taken from the Huffpo and reposted …. Notice the by line states “posted by.” Sadly, the blaze has increasingly become sloppy, plagarized journalism.
Report this comment
poorrichard09
Posted on October 7, 2012 at 9:09amIMHO, all the economic malpractice that has gone on the last 4 years is gonna land like a big, steamin’ pile of you-know-what on Pres. Romney’s desk, probably in the form of an economic collapse. 0bummer and his friends like $oros have it planned that way.
Report this comment
ladytaz25
Posted on October 7, 2012 at 10:11amBilly Hallowell :) Go gt him Hunbleman.
Report this comment
williemcd
Posted on October 7, 2012 at 10:49amTo repeat what others have said on here..I too had to look up at the URL to insure I was reading the blaze and not the huffpoop… Again, where was the comparison on adherence to the Constitution?
Report this comment
Anamah
Posted on October 7, 2012 at 6:04pmI agree! I find The Blaze has changed and is not for the better… When when what is at stake is our own soul, our Constitution, and the American spirit of freedom and prosperity for all, risks to disappear is shocking to read this article…it’s simply amazing. to me; where is Glenn? Perhaps he grew too fast and it was not everything for the better. I feel like he is losing some essential part.
Report this comment
HI_Don
Posted on October 8, 2012 at 10:17pmWho wrote this is right, my thoughts exactly. How does this post on the Blaze? Was the environmental global warming paragraph written by Al Gore? There are so many misrepresentations of the facts, false statements on where the two candidates stand, missing vital info, and enough straw men to protect all of Nebraska’s corn fields.
How about a real top 20 list with something a little closer to a representation of journalism and valid research?
This is one of the worst postings I’ve ever seen on the Blaze. Did they get hacked into by the Huff-Po?
Report this comment
Mahtoska
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 4:36pmGuns? If you come for mine, don’t forget two things: kiss your family goodbye; bring body bags. Income redistribution? Keep your hand out of my wallet unless you want to pull back a bloody stump. Gay marriage? Bwa ha ha ha ha ha… there’s no such thing… call it what you will, but its not marriage; do they deserve all the rights of inheritance, hospital visitation, etc….? Of course, why is that a question? Global warming….. bwa ha ha ha ha ha ha…. There’ve never been prolonged or extended periods in global history with heat spikes and drought? Birth control…. pay for it yourself. Can’t afford it? Keep your pants on. Do I have to go on? There is no logic, no common sense… let Uncle Sam wipe my a$$ for me ’cause I can’t do it myself…… WTF?
Report this comment
Gorp
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 5:36pmI agree 100% and then some.
Report this comment
TheCalmOne
Posted on October 7, 2012 at 1:28amThe vast majority of the world’s climate scientists – virtually 100% of the people who actually understand what they are talking about – agree on climate change, you ignorant, deluded twit.
Report this comment
Jenasus
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 4:34pmOBAMA; THE ROTHSCHILDS CHOICE.
Is a must watch video on You Tube that all Americans need to watch.
Exposes the truth of Obama and our government.
Watch the video and spread the word.
Report this comment
The-Monk
Posted on October 7, 2012 at 12:24pm@KC1
“You mock him but neither of you can challenge his point….”
Oh….. I’ve challenged his “points” plenty of times. He just never replies or counters.
When it comes to having a discussion with BWS…..well, it just “never” happens.
Report this comment
The-Monk
Posted on October 7, 2012 at 1:50pmI don’t know how this ended up here. Supposed to be on the post below.
Report this comment
Brother Winston Smith
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 4:33pmAbortion:
Obama – pro-choice
Romney – pro-choice (unless he’s campaigning)
Afghanistan:
Obama – chickenhawking, UNCONSTITUTIONAL intervention
Romney – chickenhawking, UNCONSTITUTIONAL intervention
Campaign finance:
Obama – bankrolled by TARPED-UP, bailed-out croni-capitalists
Romney – bankrolled by TARPED-UP, bailed-out croni-capitalists
China:
Obama – outsourcer
Romney – outsourcer
Climate change:
Obama – yes, and the “fix” is UNCONSTITUTIONAL government intervention
Romney – yes, and the “fix” is UNCONSTITUTIONAL government intervention
Debt:
Obama – UNCONSTITUTIONAL spending, TARP, ANTI-American collectivism
Romney – UNCONSTITUTIONAL spending, TARP, ANTI-American collectivism
Defense spending (MILITARY spending)
Obama – INCREASED chickenhawking, UNCONSTITUTIONAL intervention
Romney – INCREASED chickenhawking, UNCONSTITUTIONAL intervention
Economy:
Obama – UNCONSTITUTIONAL Central Government Planning
Romney – UNCONSTITUTIONAL Central Government Planning
Education:
Obama – UNCONSTITUTIONAL Central Government Planning
Romney – UNCONSTITUTIONAL Central Government Planning
Gay “marriage”:
Obama – INSTITUTED gay “marriage”
Romney – INSTITUTED gay “marriage” (and tried to blame in on courts)
Guns:
Obama – gun-grabber
Romney – gun-grabber
Healthcare:
Obama – Obamacare – (UNCONSTITUTIONALLY bankrolled by feds)
Romney – Romneycare – (UNCONSTITUTIONALLY bankrolled by feds)
Report this comment
Brother Winston Smith
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 7:52pmImmigration:
Obama – amnesty (Dream Act, non-enforcement)
Romney – amnesty (Dream Act, non-enforcement)
“pledging to veto the Dream Act” – Romney has said HE WILL HONOR OBAMA’S AMNESTIED ALIENS, allowing him to POSE as “tough,” because Obama’s Executive Order has done his dirty work.
Income equality:
Obama – COMPULSORY redistribution of wealth (socialism)
Romney – COMPULSORY redistribution of wealth (socialism)
Iran:
Obama – chickenhawking, UNCONSTITUTIONAL intervention
Romney – chickenhawking, UNCONSTITUTIONAL intervention
Supreme Court appointments:
Obama – leftist judges
Romney – leftist judges
Syria:
Obama – chickenhawking, UNCONSTITUTIONAL intervention
Romney – chickenhawking, UNCONSTITUTIONAL intervention
Taxes:
Obama – MORE – taxes, borrowing (hidden tax), printing money (hidden tax)
Romney – MORE – taxes, borrowing (hidden tax), printing money (hidden tax)
Wall Street regulations:
Obama – Wall Street PARTNER
Romney – Wall Street PARTNER
Report this comment
TIME_2_END_THE_PAUL_CAMPAIGN_IN_12
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 8:19pmHEY……… It’s Jimmy Twotimes from Goodfellas… lol.
Bro’… you’re one of a kind… one of a kind.
Report this comment
The-Monk
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 9:04pmHi Time,
Every time I open a new pack of cards I always have that “one of a kind” card….
And it always has a picture of BWS on it. : )
Report this comment
KC1
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 10:25pm@Monk and Time
You mock him but neither of you can challenge his point of the interchangeable progressives running for pres.
One whom you defend constantly but only when being attacked from the other side. When Brother points out that they agree on virtually everything you simply mock him with no challenge to any of his points. I think that speaks louder than any humorless joke you may throw at him.
Dont tell me you value your time to much to respond because Ive read your posts and you continuously respond to the liberals on this site but when it comes to defending the idea the candidates are indistinguishable its silence or ridicule.
Granted if your failed attempts at humor are part of a larger on going joke to show the irony of hope and change mentality from Romney supporters then bravo.
I doubt that is the case.
Report this comment
Individualism
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 10:43pmnothing at stake since Obama = Romney. Gary Johnson through election or like Iceland did.
Report this comment
TIME_2_END_THE_PAUL_CAMPAIGN_IN_12
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 11:00pmSorry KC1… neither you or (Jimmy Twotimes) BRO’ WINSTON SMITH it seems got the memo. At this late date, our national security is at risk and the survival of our nation is in peril… voting for Obama (or enabling him) very, very bad. Voting for Romney… a very good start. Even McCain would have been a better choice for this nation than Obama (who btw was enabled by BRO’ and ilk)
Mocking BRO’ WINSTON also good. Debating BRO’ WINSTON an exercise in futility, a complete circle-jerk and an absolute waste of time and energy at this late date. But he’s got you to give him a reach around eh??
Report this comment
whiterightwingchristianmale
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 11:04pm@ BROTHER WINSTON and every other ding bat and liberal, have you every asked yourself, why you hang out on right wing sites? It is because even you don’t like hanging out with leftist. NO conservative ever wastes one second on a lefty site.
Report this comment
soybomb315_II
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 11:33pmIf McCain won in 2008, we would have never had the Tea Party and we would have had a war with Iran (in addition to the massive debt)
Report this comment
KC1
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 11:41pm@Time, Classy as always. You have no character and obviously no sense. I agree with you on one point, the state of the republic is in peril. Where we part ways is I dont believe continuing the central planning of the economy and adventurism over seas is the answer. Both candidates support a euro socialist system and neither are offering a constitutional solution, Hope and Change thats all you Romney folk have to go on and that is why you cannot address Winstons comparisons.
@WhiteChristianBlahBlahBlah
Your right, I agree completely agree. We are wasting our time on sites like this. Our mistake was assuming your proclamations of a constitutionally limited Govt were not said in passing but came from a deep rooted belief of limited govt. Obviously we were wrong, considering your current support for a candidate that has described himself as a progressive.
I also believe that it is you who would find more belonging on a progressive web site, not supporters of limited govt like myself or Winston. You and Liberals share the same ideology of Big Govt solutions and we ie Tea/Liberty movement believe it should be restrained and dismantled.
Again any of you die hard RINOs care to take up the challenge of verbalizing a legitimate difference between the progressives running for pres? I understand they’re rhetoric differs slightly but as Winston points out legislatively they are mirror images of each other, is there an honest person among you willing to admit it?
Report this comment
Anonymous T. Irrelevant
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 11:46pm@BRO WINSTON
You can’t really equate Obama with Romney, because Romney doesn’t have four years of being a failed president under his belt. You don’t REALLY know what Romney and Congress will do in the future, you can only speculate, and you do THAT badly.
Report this comment
KC1
Posted on October 7, 2012 at 12:01am@Anonymous
So if you refuse to look at Romneys record and derive a conclusion, you must be HOPING that he will CHANGE the consistency of big govt legislation coming from DC.
You are correct I will vote for HOPE and Change! Romney Ryan 2012-2020!
You are no better than Obama supporters, fool.
Report this comment
Norm D. Plume
Posted on October 7, 2012 at 12:37am@Time:
Think of it this way. Your audience isn’t BWS. It’s me. I started liking Romney during the debate. Then, when he waffled on the 47% bit, I pegged him as the same old *****-*ss Flipp Floppney I’d read about.
But for a moment there, I might have been able to be turned to the dark side, to embrace Willard’s message (before he destroyed it himself.)
So, please. For the children. Please make credible, cogent arguments against BWS’ observations and well-groomed litany of how Willard McBain is, in fact, a less-tanned version of The Big O.
Report this comment
RJJinGadsden
Posted on October 7, 2012 at 8:12amTIME, I’m behind you all of the way here, and I’ll go ahead and jump into this thread although late. The few of you Libertarians who want to act so hateful here, so be it. I have a lot of honest respect for the rest of you guys though. You guys are really going to have to take a look at your history as a party. Ever since the party came to fruition being founded inside David Nolan’s home 11 December 1971 just how far have you gotten in this country politically? 42 years, you’ve come a long way, baby! I have read the continually changing planks in your party’s platform. While I do like many, I still find a good number of them would make for some funny one liners if George Carlin were still with us to do updated stand up of Hippie Dippy Weatherman. If any of you really want to grow your party you might want to take up another recruiting tactic rather than calling us fools along with a number of other nasty names. Unless, BROTHER1984, SOYBOMB, and others have just decided to go to war with us much like the Dem-wit trolls here. BROTHER1984 can’t do anything but repeatedly cut and paste his book sized posts over and over. Not bugging you for making a cut and paste job, but if you are typing all of that every time, then I might just become concerned for your mental health. Bash, bash, bash, blame, blame, blame, is about all you can do. Why not explain your platform and it’s individual planks sometime. Shoot for some of those that many of us see as truly controversial. Conti
Report this comment
RJJinGadsden
Posted on October 7, 2012 at 8:29amExplain to us what you see in your own platform and put some meat on the bone for us. I know all too well that so many of our RINOs have let us down in the past. Furthermore, while in office they do have to work with the all too well entrenched Democrats who jumped off the Constitutional trail the day they were formed. Andrew Jackson attempted to rule by fiat much like 0bama, and there has been far too much of that since. Although, Jackson did 1 thing right as far as I am concerned by breaking up the federal bank. So, we know that the Democrat Party will violate the Constitution on a daily basis, our current president wipes his **** with daily, the SCOTUS has forgotten that there primary job when taking on cases regarding laws is to determine if they are or are not Constitutional, and that’s it. And the Republicans who all too often were left out of the Democrat reindeer games in the legislature and were happy to play golf and goof off for over a century with the minor exception of a few years here and there.
Oh yeah, many of the things that David Nolan was doing before his death in 2010 actually inspired the inception of the Tea Party Movement. I personally prefer more of the Republican Platform over that of the Libertarians, but I also have to admit not all of it either. I plan to continue to put my trust and effort with Tea to make major changes with the Republican Party, but I know it will take years to come. Hopefully not 42.
Report this comment
soybomb315_II
Posted on October 7, 2012 at 8:36am@RJ
I dont know what you are talking about with this party platform stuff. I have no party because none of the parties represents me. I voted for Bush in 2000/2004, constitution party in 2008, and libertarian party in 2012. I used to vote for whoever the republican was but i learned my lesson and vote for the best person on the ballot (like everybody should)
Report this comment
RJJinGadsden
Posted on October 7, 2012 at 9:01amSOYBOMB315_II, then I do humbly apologize to you. You have given me the impression that you were a dyed in the wool Libertarian. But, if you are voting Republican, you may want to look up the Republican Platform and read it’s planks. But, if you do not know what a platform is, or what the planks are that make up the platform, then you have me worried. Frankly, I hope this has just been my mistake.
Oh yeah, BTW, Gary Johnson has been chosen by the Libertarian Party in their run for the presidency. You can easily look that up. He may be running as a faux Republican.
Sorry for the mix up.
Report this comment
RJJinGadsden
Posted on October 7, 2012 at 9:18amSOYBOMB315_II, I do agree with you about voting for the right “person” When I originally registered to vote in 1971, I did so as an independent. Even as much as I leaned to the right even back then. A few years later I changed it to Republican, but have never felt completely stuck and beholden to a single party. I’ve had the sense enough to never, ever vote for a Democrat, and not because of the name of the party. I have never found anything agreeable in the political views of each and every one of them, and I have looked. Back near the end of my last tour in Germany I did take a look at Perot, and listened to what he had to say. It was what he had to say that finally turned me away from the guy. But he fooled enough people to get Clinton elected twice. Even if I saw enough that I liked about Ron Paul, or Gary Johnson, and I have looked, and don’t like what I see. But if I did, I also have to take a look to see if I were just throwing my vote into the eventual favor of the person I was most against. I would have to take a more pragmatic view of how to cast my vote. The writings of BROTHER1984 just show me that his as much in blind lockstep as the majority of Dem-wits. He illustrates no true thought process other than bash and blame. Reading his posts are hardly any different than reading the silly ranting of PROGRESSIVEPETE. Except BROTHER has written the same thing over, and over, and over, and over….
Report this comment
soybomb315_II
Posted on October 7, 2012 at 9:20amI dont know about libertarians but when it comes to republicans, the party platform is meaningless compared to what the candidate believes. If Romney wins, the republican party will do Romney’s will, not necessarily the party platform. Do you remember John Boehner saying that nobody really cares about the party platform?
Report this comment
RJJinGadsden
Posted on October 7, 2012 at 9:41amSOY, now that you mention that about Boehner, I do remember. He has certainly been a huge let down as the Speaker and as well being a Congressman. I give him credit for being much better than Hastert, but that is about it. I pretty well have to agree with Rush’s wondering what is in the water they are drinking inside the beltway. As I have pointed out in the past, Ron Paul is not exactly as pure as the wind driven winter snow either. And, I disagree with too much of what Gary Johnson has said in the recent past. But, the main thing about them, is that there is no way for either to win. Something Reagan said still rings true.
“Politics is supposed to be the second oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first.”
Report this comment
Belwraith
Posted on October 7, 2012 at 10:01amhttp://americaneedsmitt.com/2012/07/gov-mitt-romney-national-defense-authorization-act-ndaa/
Here’s one….
Report this comment
MikeCPA
Posted on October 7, 2012 at 11:01amYou have it right, Brother.
And you even look like my guy, Ron Paul.
If I can’t vote for Gary Johnson, I may vote for you.
Report this comment
KC1
Posted on October 7, 2012 at 5:23pm@RJ Ha, agreeing with TIME and then calling us rude and hatful? He is one of the crudest, most despicable people who comment on here.
I dont quite understand your point of looking at the party platform, I have looked at it and found no discrepancy from the platform and what Johnson/Paul says.
While you and TIME compare Libertarians to a cult, it is Ron Paul who said vote for who you wish. The movement itself is still arguing on the correct nominee to vote for. While in comparison Santorum supporter were told who to support and they fell in line without a question, and for a progressive too!
So how you could compare us to a cult like mentality and not apply the same logic to the Republican base which is much more deserving of the comparison imo, it shows intellectual dishonesty or partisanship on your part. With that being said its no surprise you would blindly follow a progressive like Romney without questioning any aspect of his history or even hearing out the idea that he is a mirror image of Obama. You seem to be afraid to let your thoughts drift in a direction that Santorum would disapprove of and that my friend is much more like a cult mentality than the individualistic freedom movement.
Romney and Obama are indistinguishable, the only difference is rhetoric and as I am ashamed to admit I have been fooled by this before but this time I will make up for my past ignorance at vote for what I believe is the best form of govt and thats is a constitutional govt .
Report this comment
Verceofreason
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 4:21pmI love the way you rubes buy into ‘global warming is a myth’ put out by folks
who profit by polluting and pols who get contributions from them.
Dumb IS forever.
Report this comment
68Patriot
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 10:02pmAl Gore, is that you?
Report this comment
whiterightwingchristianmale
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 10:34pmTry writing the opposite of what you think……that way you will actually say something smart.
Report this comment
Belwraith
Posted on October 7, 2012 at 10:16amVerse: I love the way you buy into ‘global warming is a fact’ put out by folks
who profit by “green” products/energy and pols who get contributions from them. Solyndra, ECOtality, Abound Solar, Nevada Geothermal Power, Amonix, Ener1…there…I’ve named specifics…can you?
Dumb IS forever.
Report this comment
Zurich
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 4:17pmWhat about freedom of religion: like Christianity? And freedom to celebrate Christmas!
Report this comment
HumbleMan
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 5:03pmI agree with you ZURICH … this list is not my list.
Report this comment
justangry
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 5:24pmYou can’t celebrate Christmas?
Report this comment
Norm D. Plume
Posted on October 7, 2012 at 12:42amI likewise never saw anything about “Civil Liberties” on that list.
That is probably one of the biggest problems a President is going to face soon. The problem Willard has, is that he is no better on that issue than The Big O, and some of us have taken notice.
Report this comment
ProgressivePete
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 4:08pmTime to break down who has the advantage in the issues mentioned in this article
Abortion: Obama has the advantage because he secured majority of the female vote and they agree with his views of contraception
Afghanistan: Obama has the advantage because he is ending the war there
Campaign finance: Obama has the advantage due to his recent fundraising records in August and September
China: Obama has the advantage because he is making an effort to stop them from manipulating their currency
Climate change: Obama has the advantage because he was endorsed by Al Gore, who has an authority in his knowledge of climate change
Debt: Obama has the advantage because he can point out that the GOP would not pass any of his bills to reduce the deficit while the GOP do not have plans of their own to reduce the debt
Defense spending: Romney has the advantage because he does not plan on cutting defense spending
Economy: Romney has a slight advantage. However, the new jobs numbers are in Obama’s favor
Education: Obama has the advantage because Romney plans to cut education and fire Big Bird
Gay marriage: Obama has the advantage
Guns: It is hard to tell who has the advantage since different people have different views of this topic
Health care: Obama has the advantage because his plan gives health care to people with pre existing conditions and it allows college students to share their parent’s insurance till the age of 26
Immigration: Obama has the advan
Report this comment
ProgressivePete
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 4:18pmContinuing from my previous post
Immigration: Obama has the advantage due to his executive order, even Ronald Reagan allowed amnesty for immigrants
Income inequality: Obama has the advantage because majority of the middle class agree with his plan to tax higher income workers
Iran: It is inconclusive who has an advantage on this issue
Supreme Court appointments: Obama has the advantage because they are the ones who passed Obamacare
Social Security: Obama has the advantage because Romney plans to cut social security
Syria: It is inconclusive who has the advantage in this issue
Taxes: Obama has the advantage because majority of lower income voters and middle class voters agree with his plan to tax wealthy workers
Wall Street regulation: Obama has the advantage because he doesn’t allow them to abuse their power
Report this comment
damon_k
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 4:21pmProgressive Pete is a typically delusional. Progressives want to take this country backward by pushing windmills(15th century technology), trains (19th century technology) and a total reduction in energy use, which means no growth in the economy. Read more insights at: http://smallcraftadvisorychronicles.blogspot.com/
Report this comment
Snuph
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 4:41pmDo you make the Koolaide or just ingest vast quantities of the stuff?
Report this comment
italy2007
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 5:01pmRomney NEVER said he was going to cut education. Not sure where you got that idea from. And, he said he would like to end the Governement subsidy for PBS which is only 15% of their budget. I am sure they will do just fine without the government
Report this comment
HumbleMan
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 5:12pmI will refrain from addressing every one of your ludicrous assertions, and address only one:
“Income inequality: Obama has the advantage because majority of the middle class agree with his plan to tax higher income workers”
You and the rest of the liberal drones will soon learn what Obama means by “rich”. Surprise!
Report this comment
NeoFan
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 5:41pm@pete what are you going to do when Obama loses the election and you have to find an honest way to make a living?
Report this comment
SunTzuYou
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 5:57pmprogressive in name only
Report this comment
whiterightwingchristianmale
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 10:36pmDebating…..advantage Romney
Report this comment
whiterightwingchristianmale
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 10:58pmSmoking dope: Advantage Obama
Report this comment
Pucci
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 11:02pmobama considers anybody above a Kenyan villager to be rich. so get ready.
Report this comment
The Third Archon
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 3:55pm“Wages aren’t keeping up with inflation.”
That’s been true for almost half a century…well true for everyone in the bottom 3/5ths of income earners.
“Romney supports completing a fence at the Mexican border and other tough security measures while pledging to veto the DREAM Act.”
LOL–he’s either stupid or pandering, because the vast majority of illegal immigration doesn’t occur by crossing the border illegally–the vast majority occurs by immigrants who come in LEGALLY (usually through some kind of guest worker program or student visas, etc.) then overstay the duration of their allowed stay, thus BECOMING illegal immigrants. So a border fence (stupid, expensive, and easy to bypass without additional, more effective besides, efforts such as supervising agents) would be ineffective in the majority of cases.
“The income gap between the rich and everyone else is getting larger, while middle incomes stagnate. That‘s raised concerns that the middle class isn’t sharing in economic growth as it used to.”
You think?
“Income inequality has risen for three decades and worsened since the recession ended. The Census Bureau found the highest-earning 20 percent earned 51.1 percent of all income last year. That was the biggest share on records dating to 1967. The share earned by households in the middle 20 percent fell to 14.3 percent, a record low.”
Yes, capitalism IS designed to centralize wealth–conservatives can hardly complain about the SUCCESS of their polici
Report this comment
drs1969
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 4:02pmI onced watched a Mexican wade the Rio Grande at Brownsville on Christmas day. He put all his clothes, except undershorts in a black trash bag. Held it on his head. Easy Peesy.
Report this comment
Exrepublisheep
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 5:16pmArchon. Where are the usual responders who usually show up to debunk your ideas with insults and rhetoric? Is Ted Nugent playing somewhere?
Report this comment
resme
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 3:49pm“Rival Romney appears to share that view.”
Billy should add that line to the end of all 20 issues.
Report this comment
The-Monk
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 3:48pm“This year America’s weather has been hotter and more extreme than ever before, records show. ”
Yep, we’ve been breaking 100 year old records.
Wait a minute…. we didn’t have SUV’s 100 years ago. How did it get so warm back then?
We don’t have a Living and Breathing Constitution; we have a Living and Breathing Planet.
Report this comment
SagebrushRebel
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 4:52pmYep…climate changes…
Report this comment
The-Monk
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 5:08pmHi SagebrushRebel
We have this weird “climate issue” here in Florida that I just can’t figure out…..
During the day it gets real warm and 12 hours later it gets cooler.
Sure beats the hell out of me (scratching head).
Report this comment
2MINUTESTOMIDNIGHT
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 6:21pmMonk: Thats strangest thing I have ever heard. We have a weird deal going on here too – the last few weeks the weather has been getting colder. Its almost like we are moving towards an ice age. The leaves on the trees are also turning strange colors. It is all way too confusing. Maybe I WILL go buy that Prius. That should help.
Report this comment
HumbleMan
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 7:27pmWhere’s the “like” button.
Report this comment
The-Monk
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 9:09pmHi 2MINUTESTOMIDNIGHT,
Yeah!!!! And sometimes it’s dry outside and later it’s wet!!!!!
What the hell is going on????
I’m just scared out of my mind….. LOL
Report this comment
RJJinGadsden
Posted on October 7, 2012 at 8:52am2MINUTESTOMIDNIGHT, LOL, as somebody else here brought up yesterday, how many miles do you expect that Prius to get per scuttle of coal?
Its funny to me that so many of the Dem-wit trolls here all so often point fingers at us in (false) accusation of us not believing the world is over 2,000 years old. Of course it is millions of years old if not in the billions. The planet shows it’s history of scars caused by the changes in the climate, ice ages, periods of warming over and over. Shifting land masses, and caves found in desert complete with fossils of ancient sea life. But, as THE-MONK points out, let the temperature shift by one to three degrees overall in a 100 years, and damn! Its all of a sudden man’s fault. Its also so funny that in years past The History Channel, and Discovery ran TV programs that told the stories of how archaeologists have mapped out the changes in the earth from time before it was recorded until now. The thing is, now that they have jumped on the Global Whining war path, they no longer run these shows. Hell, it might encourage some people actually think for themselves and avoid becoming a new member of the Chicken Little Brigade.
Report this comment
Belwraith
Posted on October 7, 2012 at 9:47amAll the pavement and swimming pools have absolutely no effect on the heat or humidity either…because, here, where 1/3 of the single family homes have pools and appx 50% of the pools water usage is due to evaporation..well, that certainly wouldn’t have any effect….and given the fact that 100 years ago, all the roads were blacktop…we all know there’s no additional heat from the pavement…I mean…in the middle of the summer, go stand in the natural landscape (if you can find any), then go stand on the pavement…no difference there…right?
Report this comment
RJJinGadsden
Posted on October 7, 2012 at 10:01amHey MONK, SAGEBRUSHREBEL, 2MINUTESTOMIDNIGHT, and HUMBLEMAN, Here is what finally happened to Chicken Little:
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a319/fladj11/Al%20Gore%20Global%20Warming%202/GWchickenlittledinner.jpg
Report this comment
RJJinGadsden
Posted on October 7, 2012 at 10:09amBELWRAITH, For that matter stand on a Florida white sandy beach in the summer. Bet nobody can really tell the difference with their bare feet if there is any difference from the white sand to the blacktop parking lot.
Report this comment
The-Monk
Posted on October 7, 2012 at 12:17pm@Belwraith
“All the pavement and swimming pools have absolutely no effect on the heat or humidity either…”
WOW! I just found a photo showing all those paved roads and swimming pools…..
I just had no idea there were soooooo many. I tried to count but lost track. : )
http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=planet+earth+photo&view=detail&id=6777268FB6BC5AD143351D0E18FF90F2E706A72A&first=1
Report this comment
KidCharlemagne
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 3:37pmSyria:
Syria‘s conflict is the most violent to emerge from last year’s Arab Spring. Activists say at least 23,000 people have died over the last 18 months.
Obama wants Syrian President Bashar Assad to leave power. But he won’t use U.S. military force to make that happen.
Romney says “more assertive” U.S. tactics are needed, without fully spelling them out.
================================================
Romney has already said that he wants to give money and weapons to the “rebels” in Syria:
Boston Globe (May 29, 2012): “Mitt Romney urges US to arm Syrian rebels, lead effort to oust Bashar Assad”
So it’s a bit disingenuous to say that Romney hasn’t “spelled it out”.
Report this comment
The Third Archon
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 3:33pm“and debate still surrounds who’s causing the globe to heat up (i.e. is it a natural progression or is it caused by human intervention — or both?).”
A moot debate, since if it’s established that the climate is changing, it doesn’t matter WHAT caused it–it’s enough that it’s BEEN CAUSED to be a problem worthy of our attentions if it’s likely to have substantive impact upon human welfare.
“The national debt is…over $16 trillion.”
A non-issue fabricated to waste time, distract from real issues, and justify stupid short-sighted conservative economic policies. The debt doesn’t matter so long as the deficit is not net negative more than the rate of inflation, because inflation causes the “real value” of a fixed principle of debt to decrease over-time (hence why capitalists favor anti-inflationary economic policies). So long, then, as the deficit is not net negative beyond the point of inflation, the real value of the debt decreases over time–and the deficit could be solved TOMORROW if they really WANTED to. All it would take is a simple balancing of spending cuts and tax increases–the ratio preferred (and specific cuts made and taxes levied) depending upon one’s political persuasion, but regardless the deficit could easily be eliminated with a new budget, and its existence by NO MEANS necessitates draconian austerity, or any particular policy for that matter; the sense of urgency is manufactured for political expediency.
Report this comment
drs1969
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 3:46pmInflation is a tax on everyone to enrich bankers.
So long as the currency doesn’t collapse, they can extort the money. If everyone loses faith in the currency, game over.
Report this comment
lyooser
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 3:56pm“The national debt is…over $16 trillion. A non-issue fabricated to waste time” AND is [climate change] a natural progression or is it caused by human intervention — or both?) is A moot debate, since if it’s established that the climate is changing, it doesn’t matter WHAT caused it.”
yowzers. it does matter if climate change is manmade or not, because since we didn’t cause it, also means we can’t stop it, all this money and effort being dumped into the lost cause is wasted.
it could instead be used to relieve the debt. talking debt also means addressing the deficit. well before we reach the cataclysm of deficit outpacing inflation (how close do you want to cut it?) we hit the point where deficit dwarfs growth and gdp and our ability to pay the interest which turns us into another greece etc.
Report this comment
The Third Archon
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 3:57pmInflation hurts creditors more than debtors generally. Obviously, given that it is only one among a complex multitude of interacting factors it isn’t the ONLY means of judging the desirability of a given socioeconomic arrangement, but it primarily a problem for those who wealth comes by majority from dividends not wages.
Report this comment
drs1969
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 4:19pmThink about a guy who’s everyday expenses get so high he becomes homeless because his wages didn’t keep up. I’ve seen beggars in Mexico, 25 years ago, who never had a clue what a dividend was. There was a time Mexicans were renting U-Hauls here and taking them back to Mexico, to live in. That’s what inflation does.
The bankers (Central Planners) don’t live in U-hauls. Especially in Mexico, where they got a bailout from the Baker bonds. Who’s gonna bail us out?
Report this comment
Snuph
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 4:46pmThere is no “debate”. The left has been repeatedly caught manufacturing their data to meet their desired hypothetical hockey stick.
Report this comment
DSOTTILARE
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 3:26pmIf Obama was a man of his word he would not run for president as he said in 2008!!!!
“Simple math”. Not sure why Romey wont explain? Maybe he expects people to connect the dots. But this is not the case>>>>>
government spends an extra
1 trillion a year that we dont have, so
8.3 billion a month.
put 12million back to work at 45,000 year avg with 20% tax = 9billion a month.
defecet goes down with no cuts 7 hundred million a month reduce defecet 8 billion a year just putting people back to work! now cut whats not important and it should not be NASA or our MILITARY.
Report this comment
The Third Archon
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 3:21pm“If two seats held by liberal justices were filled by Romney-nominated conservatives, prospects for a reversal of Roe v. Wade would increase.”
Yeah, THAT wouldn’t blow up in his face.
“The U.S. accuses China of flouting trade rules and undervaluing its currency to helps its exporters, hurting American competitors and jobs.”
The low cost of imports also helps American business interests, which is why it’s been tolerated. Given where the candidates OSTENSIBLY stand, it’s a bit surprising to hear the “get tough on China” rhetoric coming from Romney not Obama, considering Romney, Mr. Leveraged Buyout, of ALL people should understand that American capitalism (and capitalists of course) benefits greatly from the mutual relationship of manufacturing exportation to China. True, the MAJORITY don’t see these net benefits–but then, admitting that would call into question the whole logic of “trickle-down economics,” and by proxy capitalism itself. This is something neither candidate wants to point out–neither is COMPLETELY politically ignorant. But its an easy way to score political points for Romney by using antagonistic rhetoric on China–nothing substantive will ever come of it.
Report this comment
drs1969
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 3:31pmChina is communist slave labor. There are four times as many of them. Their average pay per day is less than their our’s is for 1 hour.
Do Americans want to work their whole day for 1 hour’s pay. We’re being ‘sold into slavery’ by DC. Romney won’t change that, I’m afraid.
Report this comment
The Third Archon
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 3:39pmSlave labor? Yes. Communist? HA! That’s rich–they’re HARDLY collectivist in their public policy–they are every bit as economically stratified as any other capitalist country.
Romney probably won’t do anything about it, nor will Obama–both are beholden to the same interests for their political survival. But it would be absolutely easy to eliminate the comparative advantage gained by exporting externalities to foreign countries with lax labor or environmental laws–simply pass a law requiring all goods and services sold in U.S. markets to be produced in accordance with U.S. regulatory at minimum law–then, they only comparative advantage one could have would be genuine superior productive efficiency on a good or service; not a race to least common denominator practices.
Report this comment
drs1969
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 3:57pmMy money’s on least common denominator practices.
Report this comment
drs1969
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 9:51pmAlso, US corp’s give the Chinese gov. a 51% stake in their slave plants. So China gets to capture more than half the profits.
A country that builds ‘ghost cities’ is already in trouble. If that ain’t Central Planning, then those cities must have built themselves. I don’t believe the USSR was ever so stupid.
Report this comment
drphil69
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 3:10pm“Income inequality has risen for three decades and worsened since the recession ended.”
Rising income inequality is a good thing. If everyone makes 10% more, the income gap increases, and vice-versa. These idiots would rather have the poor more poor as long as the rich aren’t so rich… unfortunately it only really hurts the poor and middle class, the rich will continue to do just fine on 10% less, while someone trying to make the bills and stretch that last dollar to their next paycheck will be devastated.
Report this comment
drs1969
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 4:09pmThat way they have monopolies in markets, just like the Communist countries enjoyed inside their borders.
Report this comment
galicant wiseword
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 3:09pm1. The declining faith of our country.
2. Communism nearly complete.
3. NDAA indefinite detention (supported by both)
4. Government telling you what to eat, wear, drive, buy, sleep on and sleep with etc. etc. brought to you courteous of the tiny obamacare travesty that we had to pass to see what was in it.
That’s my top 4. Unfortunately Romney is just telling us what we want to hear when it comes to gun control, NDAA and obamacare.
Not unlike the debates, all the important stuff and the things that both of them have supported by words and actions is ignored.
Report this comment
cessna152
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 3:06pmMy daughter brought up an excellent point regarding gay marriage and abortion. The people that want these issues can have them however, not to be paid by government. If they want they want to have these issues exist then have at it but with their own funding. Then we discussed should the government fund Christian organizations? How about funding the kkk? Government needs to get out of these issues.
Report this comment
drs1969
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 3:18pmSpecial interests have control. Gay marriage is a total fabrication of the Dem’s and trial lawyers. They will also become a ‘protected species’ under Hate Crimes laws.
Report this comment
Verceofreason
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 4:14pmAre you saying gays want the government to pay for their weddings.
what the freak ARE you saying?
Report this comment
soybomb315_II
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 3:04pm#1: Constiution
For all other issues, see Constitution
Report this comment
galicant wiseword
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 3:09pmthank you. let me rephrase my previous comment to ditto.
Report this comment
Scottsman
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 3:10pmThis entire article reads like a good case to write in Ron Paul. :)
Report this comment
drs1969
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 3:21pmTrue, but the Constitution is silent on deficit spending, which has allowed all the phony items above to be inserted into an article that must have been written in the Kremlin(DC).
The out of control deficit will make all these junk issues go away.
Report this comment
soybomb315_II
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 3:26pm@drs1969
Not true. The reason the government can deficit spend is because of the unconstitutional federal reserve. If you get rid of the federal reserve (like it used to be), then the government cannot run deficits….Problem solved
Report this comment
drs1969
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 3:35pmWell, then the Constitution was voided in 1913. Personally, I think it died in 1865.
Report this comment
soybomb315_II
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 3:37pmagreed
Report this comment
drs1969
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 3:41pmAlso, there’s nothing, except runaway inflation, to stop the Treasury from selling debt into the open market, absent the FED.. They’ve done it before. No Constitutional constraint on debt sales or deficits.
Report this comment
LoveMyFreedom
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 3:02pmThe rest of the debates should be fun… Odumbell and JoeTheClown are on the wrong side of every issue!
Report this comment
Verceofreason
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 4:15pmOnly in your Bizarro universe.
Report this comment
justangry
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 2:45pmNot my biggest issues. Our government molesting our children, drones watching our every move, secret service declaring us felons for peacefully protesting, and throwing us away without a trial are the issues of the day. I don’t care how the Blaze tries to spin this ****. Gay marriage, really?!
Report this comment
soybomb315_II
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 3:09pmyea no mention of spending, entitlements, NDAA, or Federal Reserve? Sounds like an Obama 2nd term
Report this comment
resme
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 3:38pmGay marriage, AHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!
Report this comment
Carol1955
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 2:34pmSorry, stopped reading after at about half, wondering who is putting this crap out? Pretty biased if you ask me, look at the climate change info. The idea of a comparison was good, putting in a bunch of slanted information before the viewpoints isn’t.
Report this comment
ModerationIsBest
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 3:01pmI knew the facts on climate change would anger some people here.
Report this comment
Diane TX
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 3:57pmI agree with you Carol 1955. This piece, by Billy Hallowell, is written with a “progressive” slant and assumes things that are in contention – such as global warming, stating, “In the U.S., July was the hottest month ever recorded and this year is on track to be the warmest. Many scientists say that’s both from natural drought and man-made global warming. Each decade since the 1970s has been nearly one-third of a degree warmer than the previous one.”
The thing is, we know now, that the “data” was manipulated in order to prove their preconceived conclusions. So how can it be known what the actual truth is?
Report this comment
ModerationIsBest
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 5:33pmBill Maher was right.
He’s not sure which is scarier, when uber republicans are in power, of when they are out of power.
When they’re out of power, the conspiracies compound on top of each other.
Report this comment
Gary_K
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 2:29pmMy#1 is; there are communists in the White House.
Report this comment
BehindBlueEyes
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 2:52pm@Gary
You hit the nail on the head. That is truly America’s #1 problem right now. If that issue isn’t solved the country is toast.
Report this comment
drs1969
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 3:24pmAlso at the FED, the Senate and all beaurocracies except the Pentagon, to a certain extent.
Report this comment
Gary_K
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 5:03pmNothing can or will get fixed until the commies are purged.
Mc Carthy ( http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/353904/Joseph-R-McCarthy ) was right !
Report this comment
justangry
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 5:26pmYou think replacing a commie with a fascist will help anything?
Report this comment
bdandsl
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 2:28pmNo matter how you slice it, obama equals America’s decline and defeat in every way; Romney equals America with a fighting chance to restore and revive.
Report this comment
NV Patriot
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 3:41pmYou hit it on the head. Our choice is to either continue down the road to communism, or stay a constitutional republic (hopefully). Romney is not the perfect candidate by any means, but Obama’s agenda is clear and it is not an “American Agenda”. Romney will give us a chance to reclaim our country. Obama will let us all watch our country and freedoms (the few we have left) die.
Report this comment
Verceofreason
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 4:18pmYou’re as clueless as Romney “Want to go to college, ask your parents for money”
“Need healthcare? Go to an emergency room.” “Bet you $10,000″
Report this comment
justangry
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 5:29pmNo it doesn’t. It means they’ll drill a little bit more, finish a pipeline and gays won’t get be allowed to get married.
Report this comment
neverending
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 2:25pmSupreme court appointments to be sure. Criminal in chief barry will most definitely be putting holder in the next vacancy and then downhill even from there – probably Van Jones. WE are about to lose our country if Governor Romney does not win.
Report this comment
2MINUTESTOMIDNIGHT
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 2:20pmIf the hoax climate change is on the list, we also need to include altitude induced stupidity. Both of which flow from the imaginary world of Al “How About a Happy Ending” Gore.
Report this comment
Dauh
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 3:01pmIndeed. The climate is not changing. Why people fall for this lie is beyond me.
Report this comment
soybomb315_II
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 3:21pmisnt Romney a former supporter of carbon tax???
Report this comment
Verceofreason
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 4:19pmYou must be creationists too.
Report this comment
The-Monk
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 5:02pmHi Soybom315,
Had to look that up and found this…
http://2012election.procon.org/view.answers.election.php?questionID=001767
Mitt Romney, former Governor of Massachusetts, stated the following on July 14, 2011 during a town hall event in Derry, New Hampshire, available at http://www.thinkprogress.org:
“I believe we should keep our air and our water clean. And that we don’t want to have pollutants that are interfering with our health and damaging the ability of our children to enjoy good health…
I think we may have made a mistake, we have made a mistake is what I believe, in saying that the EPA should regulate carbon emissions. I don’t think that was the intent of the original legislation [Clean Air Act], and I don’t think carbon is a pollutant in the sense of harming our bodies. We can agree to disagree…
My view is that the EPA getting into carbon and regulating carbon has gone beyond the original intent of the legislation. I do believe we should reduce the pollutants that harm our health.”
July 14, 2011 Mitt Romney
Report this comment
2MINUTESTOMIDNIGHT
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 5:14pmHi Soyburger: Do you ever read the idiotic comments of ProgressivePete or Voice of Treason etc… and feel discouraged or ashamed that you are supporting the same POS candidate as they are?
Report this comment
soybomb315_II
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 6:04pmi was thinking something he said around 2007 but i cant find it
Report this comment
TIME_2_END_THE_PAUL_CAMPAIGN_IN_12
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 7:44pm@2MINUTES… SOY is a prime example of one of those cult-like followers of the Ron Paul ideology who literally defies the imagination in the deification and revisionism they / he participates in as they / he go about their Paulestinian business. You can’t convert them / him, and nobody should hold out any hope for effecting change in their / his thought process.
They / he are incorrigible. There is no empirical observation that will sway them / he a different way. There is no reconsideration of ideology… let alone strategy… that is effective. They can’t be shamed by fact, nor by common sense.
They / he are pesky little fella’s who are more interested in biting at the ankle. They / he are trying to win something… anything… even if it’s just a political argument because they aren’t winning much else and never have. That’s the legacy of Ron Paul… a ne’re-do-well… supported enthusiastically mostly by ne’re-do-wells and ankle biters.
Keepers of The Constitution my @ss…. insurgents or Che / Castro Revolutionaries more like it…
Report this comment
resme
Posted on October 6, 2012 at 7:50pm“I believe that climate change is occurring — the reduction in the size of global ice caps is hard to ignore. I also believe that human activity is a contributing factor. I am uncertain how much of the warming, however, is attributable to man and how much is attributable to factors out of our control. … Internationally, we should work to limit the increase in emissions in global greenhouse gases, but in doing so we shouldn’t put ourselves in a disadvantageous position that penalizes American jobs and economic growth.” ~ Mitt Romney’s Book No Apology
“Comparative analyses of the tax-swap plan with a cap-and-trade system have demonstrated that the tax swap is likely to be five times as effective in reducing carbon dioxide emissions and, presumably, five times as effective in reducing energy consumption.” ~ Mitt Romney’s Book No Apology
A random article about Carbon Tax Swap.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/aug/23/regardless-of-swap-carbon-tax-too-expensive-harms-/
Report this comment