Wednesday, October 06, 2010
The Sharp Differences Between Kennedy & Foxx
Nowhere clearer than in these responses to questions posed by the Reidsville Review.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Up-to-date analysis of the local political landscape
15 comments:
Not only is Foxx bat_sh_t crazy, mean and nasty, she's also intellectually bereft.
She has given not ONE SINGLE specific answer about the economy other than the tired old GOP talking points.
Is Dist. 5 really full of that many morons?
Vote Kennedy. Up the IQ of Congress.
i'd settle for just some common sense and honesty.
First, while Kennedy sounds articulate and intelligent, he has at least one of his so-called "facts" wrong when he says 84% of the debt incurred since 1980 has been under Republican presidents. Simple algebra, using CBO figures, shows that he is using some other "funny" democrat math to come up with that figure. Obama is responsible for 31% of the accumulated debt since 1980 - and he did that in less than 2 years!! I did not have time to check the other figures, so I'll hold out my judgment on them until I do. Foxx may not be as articulate, but she didn't give false answers either.
The simple fact is that the previous Republican administration took over a nation at peace, with a robust economy, and a budget in the black. 8 years later the Bush administration left behind an additional debt greater by 4 trillion dollars, two incredibly expensive wars, and an economy on the brink of global meltdown.
These are the same people who want to get back in power.
While I do not like Bush, you have to admit the wars were done with the approval of both parties and that the Democrat Congress controlled the last two years and APPROVED the spending.
Not everyone in both parties supported the war. And the deficit is a direct consequence of Bush's tax cuts that make the richest Americans obscenely wealthy, while starving the rest of us of much needed services and infrastructure. Contrary to the Republican mantra, tax cuts are NOT the answer to every problem, and in fact government spending (the right kind) is the answer to many of our problems. Republicans can't wrap their brains around the idea that investing is necessary for long-term growth. Let's invest in a decent universal health care so all children can grow up healthy and smart. Let's invest in companies who build and hire in America. Let's invest in education, as we did after WWII. Let's invest in infrastructure, as did Eisenhower. Let's invest in energy independence, and alternative energy and we won't have to go to war to steal other countries' oil.
The wars have cost us over 1 trillion dollars so far, and that doesn't count the opportunity cost or the collateral costs of all the damaged children and families.
Well, why doesn't the current administration stop the wars?
Haha, you can check out Billy's grand articulation here. Yea, uuuhhhhh, healthcare, uuuhhh people get sick. This guy's a real winner!
http://www.wcnc.com/video/raw/Billy-Kennedy-on-health-care-104353724.html
The biggest difference between Kennedy and Foxx is that Foxx is going to win and Kennedy isn't.
smarter than a democrat
"Simple algebra, using CBO figures, shows that he is using some other 'funny" democrat math to come up with that figure."
Interesting the Republican Party that came up with trickle down economics and voodoo math wants to give lessons in math.
Most of our current problems can be traced to the Reagan era of know nothing politics.
Reagan did bankrupt the USSR by funding rebels in Afghanistan. We now fight many of the same Afghanistan families Reagan funded.
What did LiberlaPOV's post have to do with the difference between Kennedy and Foxx?
Liberal POV - I have not been back here since my post, and now I see you are putting forth the same kind of crap you normally do. Yes, we had a significant impact on the Russians retreating in Afghanistan in 1989, and so did several other countries, including Israel. However, the statement from Billy Kennedy is simply false, pure and simple. He should know better.
And Brushfire, do you think we started the war with Al Qaeda? I'll answer for you since you appear incapable - No, we didn't. However, we could have done more in the 90's to stem the attacks of 2001, but we didn't. We relied on the UN - BIG MISTAKE.
And, by the way, the GW Bush did not add 4 trillion to the deficit, more like 2.5 trillion - in 8 years. I am certainly not condoning adding to the federal deficit. Obama has already succeeded in adding more to the federal deficit in 2 short years than Bush did in 8.
I am sure than Brushfire and Lib POV will continue to spew the same hate they always do, even if it means spreading more lies.
Kennedy is a farmer because he could not make it as a builder when building was booming.....articulate or not he has NO idea what he is doing and we do not want someone like that running the country with the idiots in charge now!
Smarter... Are you under the impression that Al Qaeda was in Iraq before we toppled Saddam's regime? Really? Perhaps you were one of the many Fox viewers who, according to this report from PIPPA, held false beliefs that Iraq had any involvement in the 9/11 attacks.
Funny thing about Fox news... their viewers were much more MIS-informed than others.
brushfire - when did I say that Al Qaeda was in Iraq? That's right, I didn't. We didn't go into Iraq to fight Al Qaeda. And I watch Fox news among others and I am quite informed.
Post a Comment