Yeah, saving the auto industry sure was a stupid move, not to mention killing that nice man, Osama bin Laden...which, incidentally, are two things that Romney said he would not have done.
What he would have done is continued the same economic policies that siphon off the nation's money to a very select few, the same policies that have been utter failures for the past 30 years.
You guys would have voted for Santorum, or God forbid even Gingrich, had he got the nomination...at least admit that your selection has nothing to do with policies or logic, but are entrenched in that "R" after Romney's name...he's got nothing to offer but utter failure.
Fish on...
Todd
P.S. Since you tools on the right accept Krauthammer, Limbaugh, Hannity, and those other windbags as bastions of truth and the 'Merican way, you assume that we on the left accept their left wing analogs in the same way...which, obviously, we don't.
You guys are the masters of projection. You act like total asswipes, and assume that everyone else does, too.
How often do you see us copying and pasting up Ed Schultz, or Rachel Maddow, here?
How often do you wingnuts post up Krauthammer, Ollie, and the like?
Todd's got the cons by the short and curlies today.
I'll most likely vote for Obama. Not because he is saving the nation; he isn't. However, he is saving the nation from more Reaganomics and Bushco policies. So despite Obama's shortcomings, which are numerous, having him in the Whitehouse prevents additional destructive Republican policies, as Todd noted above.
When the Republican platform works for the national interest instead of the <1%er's interests, that's when I switch. Meanwhile Illy and Hank and anyone else who imbibes the swill of Krauthammer, Ollie, etc., are the ones suffering from extreme cerebral rectal inversion.
Previous Topic
Index
