Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mitt has signed on with Grover, like all Republicans he is whoring himself out to whoever will pay the price and bring a block of vote. First, the Super PAC's, Karl Rove et al, The Koch brothers, now Grover. Republicans have decided that we the people aren't important.
Anyone really believe that tax cuts for the wealthiest 0.001% are going to create jobs? If you do, please step away from the Fox News Kool Aid dispenser, you've OD'ed at the Tea Party

This sums up the wonderful jobs report resulting from our wonderful Obama leader

I realize that accuracy is probably not your strong suit, nor even a goal for you. However, Obama has presided over 27 months of job growth. As dismal as the 69K jobs created last month is, the number is still greater than the average of 66K created from 2001-2009. Romney called the jobs numbers "devastating". I guess that means the entire Bush presidency was worse than devastating. That might not be important were it not for the fact that Romney wants to reinstitute the Bush policies. So, while I understand that most of us are not pleased by the 66K number, I am sure we can all agree that we don't want a return to policies that produce even less jobs.

Basically Bush created more jobs than obama could lose so thats why we're up a little

Again, Republican logic. Do you even use the same mathematical system as the rest of us? Bush's job creation numbers averaged less that what is considered a "devastating" month for Obama. In fact, more private-sector jobs were created in just one year of the Obama administration then were created during the entire 8 years of the Bush administration. Bush simply didn't create jobs.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mitt has signed on with Grover, like all Republicans he is whoring himself out to whoever will pay the price and bring a block of vote. First, the Super PAC's, Karl Rove et al, The Koch brothers, now Grover. Republicans have decided that we the people aren't important.
Anyone really believe that tax cuts for the wealthiest 0.001% are going to create jobs? If you do, please step away from the Fox News Kool Aid dispenser, you've OD'ed at the Tea Party

This sums up the wonderful jobs report resulting from our wonderful Obama leader

I realize that accuracy is probably not your strong suit, nor even a goal for you. However, Obama has presided over 27 months of job growth. As dismal as the 69K jobs created last month is, the number is still greater than the average of 66K created from 2001-2009. Romney called the jobs numbers "devastating". I guess that means the entire Bush presidency was worse than devastating. That might not be important were it not for the fact that Romney wants to reinstitute the Bush policies. So, while I understand that most of us are not pleased by the 66K number, I am sure we can all agree that we don't want a return to policies that produce even less jobs.

Basically Bush created more jobs than obama could lose so thats why we're up a little

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mitt has signed on with Grover, like all Republicans he is whoring himself out to whoever will pay the price and bring a block of vote. First, the Super PAC's, Karl Rove et al, The Koch brothers, now Grover. Republicans have decided that we the people aren't important.
Anyone really believe that tax cuts for the wealthiest 0.001% are going to create jobs? If you do, please step away from the Fox News Kool Aid dispenser, you've OD'ed at the Tea Party

This sums up the wonderful jobs report resulting from our wonderful Obama leader

I realize that accuracy is probably not your strong suit, nor even a goal for you. However, Obama has presided over 27 months of job growth. As dismal as the 69K jobs created last month is, the number is still greater than the average of 66K created from 2001-2009. Romney called the jobs numbers "devastating". I guess that means the entire Bush presidency was worse than devastating. That might not be important were it not for the fact that Romney wants to reinstitute the Bush policies. So, while I understand that most of us are not pleased by the 66K number, I am sure we can all agree that we don't want a return to policies that produce even less jobs.

Anonymous wrote:Mitt has signed on with Grover, like all Republicans he is whoring himself out to whoever will pay the price and bring a block of vote. First, the Super PAC's, Karl Rove et al, The Koch brothers, now Grover. Republicans have decided that we the people aren't important.
Anyone really believe that tax cuts for the wealthiest 0.001% are going to create jobs? If you do, please step away from the Fox News Kool Aid dispenser, you've OD'ed at the Tea Party

This sums up the wonderful jobs report resulting from our wonderful Obama leader

Mitt has signed on with Grover, like all Republicans he is whoring himself out to whoever will pay the price and bring a block of vote. First, the Super PAC's, Karl Rove et al, The Koch brothers, now Grover. Republicans have decided that we the people aren't important.
Anyone really believe that tax cuts for the wealthiest 0.001% are going to create jobs? If you do, please step away from the Fox News Kool Aid dispenser, you've OD'ed at the Tea Party

jsteele wrote:Today, Jeb Bush criticized Glover Norquist's anti-tax pledge -- a pledge that Romney has taken.

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entries/video-jeb-bush-criticizes-norquist-anti-tax-pledge

Rational Republicans are abandoning the Tea Party-beholden Romney due to his extremist position.

(Note: two can play this game).

Let me guess, you voted for hope and fail

Anonymous wrote:So sorry, but there's no real point here.

Oh, there was a point alright. You just didn't get it.

Norquist PP here, sorry I was unclear upthread. I meant every Republican elected official signs Grover Norquist's bullshit pledge. I couldn't care less if you, or my Dad, or any other non-Tea Party Republican, signs it, since you are not crafting legislation or otherwise trying to make this country better.

Anonymous wrote:Grover Norquist =/= "The Tea Party." he is an establishment Republican and every Republican, whether they identify with the Tea Party or not, signs his bullshit pledge.

MOST REPUBLICANS ARE NOT MEMBERS OF THE TEA PARTY. Ok?

AMERICANS FOR TAX REFORM = STUPID. NORQUIST = STUPID. is he even a tax lawyer? (I am, and republican).

I doubt many people give 2 shits about ATR or Norquist. Bullshit pledge or not - it's stupid, who cares.

the only pledge I want to hear is that the Bush Tax Cuts will not expire.


Norquist is a lunatic, okay? CARES about him (nobody really does).

I doubt anybody with half a brain takes him seriously. It's more like getting him to go away.

OK? And frankly, the pledge is a bullshit pledge, I could give a crap about Norquist, and most Republicans feel the same way.

I'm a republican, and I'm not a member of the tea party, and I didn't sign G.N.'s "B.S." pledge.

Grover Norquist =/= "The Tea Party." he is an establishment Republican and every Republican, whether they identify with the Tea Party or not, signs his bullshit pledge.

Not all, not even a majority, of republicans espouse the Tea Party.

Just like how most Democrats wouldn't consider themselves "left wing" or "liberals."

And I don't think even Romney is active in the Tea Party - granted I'm sure they support him because the alternative is to support Obama, which obviously they aren't going to do.

So sorry, but there's no real point here.

Anonymous wrote:OP of the other thread. Jeff, you know it's not the same thing. Clinton basically repudiated the number one thing Obama had going for him. Norquist is actually considered a bit fringe by a number of republicans but Clinton went to the heart of Obama's reasoning for re-election.

I'm the LOL poster from above. What is it that you see as "the number one thing Obama had going for him" and "the heart of Obama's reasoning for re-election"?

OP of the other thread. Jeff, you know it's not the same thing. Clinton basically repudiated the number one thing Obama had going for him. Norquist is actually considered a bit fringe by a number of republicans but Clinton went to the heart of Obama's reasoning for re-election.

Today, Jeb Bush criticized Glover Norquist's anti-tax pledge -- a pledge that Romney has taken.

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entries/video-jeb-bush-criticizes-norquist-anti-tax-pledge

Rational Republicans are abandoning the Tea Party-beholden Romney due to his extremist position.

(Note: two can play this game).