Comments on: Will The World Test A President McCain?

By: Big Dog

Big Dog — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 19:41:45 +0000

Good Point SpideyTerry,

By: SpideyTerry

SpideyTerry — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 19:01:54 +0000

“Will The World Test A President McCain?”

Well, yes. Being tested by the world is part of the job description. The thing is, McCain would get an A and Obama would get an F (or maybe even an incomplete).

I mean, just look at Obama’s initial response to Russia invading Georgia or his “gutless retreat from Iraq” plan or his overall pathetic approach to terrorists. Contrast all of that with McCain’s positions. ‘Nuff said.

By: Big Dog

Big Dog — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 18:41:35 +0000

The unemployment numbers under each president were nearly identical. They have gone up a bit in the last year.

This will not be the second recession under Bush though i am sure libs would love to pin it on him. The first one started in 2000 before he took office. He inherited a recession.

There needs to be 2 consecutive quarters of negative growth. It is possible that a recession will not hit until the next president takes office. Who will own that?

By: Clay Garland

Clay Garland — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 15:53:03 +0000

Obama is no JFK, because JFK, a democrat who I can at least respect for understanding what it is to be an American, said, “Ask not what your country can do for you. . .” and all Obama seems to talk about to his supporters is what their country can do for/give to them.

By: Adam

Adam — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 13:15:27 +0000

You consider unemployment close because numerically it’s close. Person wise it’s a significant difference. There’s just about a 1.5 million workers difference between 4% and 5% and about 3 million difference between 4% and 6%.

GDP has been OK, but it’s looking like it could be a 2nd recession under Bush if we get another quarter of negative growth.

You fail to mention the national debt though.

By: David Kirk

David Kirk — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 03:06:25 +0000

The only real way to balance the budget is a constitutional amendment for a cap on income taxes. The Government is addicted to spending our money and will never reign themselves in. It has to be done for them. I propose a maximum of 20% on income. A tax raise in the middle of a recession is ludicrous. It will cost jobs in an economy that is already losing thousands of them. I agree with Dog. I will support my country regardless of who the President is. The number of Democrats I have heard referring to President Bush as stupid or derogatorily as Shrub instead of Bush is a shame. It is bitterness over lost elections and does nothing but bring our country down. You can disagree with policy as much as you want but don’t denegrate the office of the Presidency. Back to the point. Rogue countries or entities are much more likely to test Obama than McCain. Do we really want that?

By: Big Dog

Big Dog — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 01:53:47 +0000

Monroe, The information came from the Treasury. Perhaps you should have looked through the links. The numbers came from the US Treasury.

Evolution is phony but I don’t know if it is a liberal invention. It is just a theory that has never been proven.

The economy was good when the Republicans were in charge. You admitted it when you said that Clinton gave us great stuff because that happened with a Republican majority.

But, look at the numbers, the unemployment rate, GDP, and economic indicators were all just as good or better than Clinton’s reign during the Bush years.

By: Monroe Anderson

Monroe Anderson — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 01:09:40 +0000

Dog: You’re quoting a fellow wingnut as proof that the surplus never existed under the Clinton administration. Got anyone on hand for a quote that evolution is a phony liberal invention or that the world is REALLY flat?

And can that silly fallacious argument about the Democrats being in charge of the Congress for the last two years. The wasn’t enough time nor votes to undo the mess the Republicans made during their sorry years of reign.

By: Big Dog

Big Dog — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 23:30:13 +0000

I think if the Dems get 60 in the Senate Lieberman will caucus with Republicans to preserve the filibuster.

By: Adam

Adam — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 23:26:59 +0000

I don’t disagree with split control of the branches. But if the Dems have to run everything I want it to be a narrow margin so they have to work at least somewhat with the other side. Unfortunately it looks like Dems could gain a filibuster proof majority in the senate and add to the vast gains in the House from 2006.