not true

Obama said he'd do a Clinton. That was a successful plan with which we're all familiar.
http://www.nytimes.com/1993/02/19/us/clinton-s-economic-plan-new-spending-president-s-fine-print-asks-fundamental.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm

ahhh - the good old days

Anonymous wrote:neither candidate has a detailed and specific plan and thats scary.

both of them focus their plans on taxes (whether cutting or increasing) and somehow magically having revenue to do things based on that idea.

its almost philosophical. does cutting or raising taxes create the revenue to grow the economy and create ability to spend more? thats the question voters have to decide

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I must admit it was an outstanding presentation by an unscrupulous con man, which contradicted many of the candidate's views and positions that he held as late as last week, all resting on blatant lies and misrepresentation. He deserves some kind of prize, just not the White House.

Brilliantly said.

It took me a while to realize you were talking about Romney and not Obama.

Is it the same person making this type of remark on every single political thread?

It was almost witty the first 5 times. Almost.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I must admit it was an outstanding presentation by an unscrupulous con man, which contradicted many of the candidate's views and positions that he held as late as last week, all resting on blatant lies and misrepresentation. He deserves some kind of prize, just not the White House.

Brilliantly said.

It took me a while to realize you were talking about Romney and not Obama.

Anonymous wrote:I must admit it was an outstanding presentation by an unscrupulous con man, which contradicted many of the candidate's views and positions that he held as late as last week, all resting on blatant lies and misrepresentation. He deserves some kind of prize, just not the White House.

Brilliantly said.

Romney appeared crystal clear in beliefs and "plans" and he was right to say that he cant go to congress and say my way or the highway.... This is a man used to running things which means working with others .. Even adversaries. Thefact that he could reach comprimise in MA with 87% legislature is plain impressive. He seemed way more knowledgeable and decisive than Obama. It was his chance to debunk the OBama campaign lies and the media spin and most of the feedback from today is people liked what they saw. He controlled the debate masterfully.. Schooling obama every step of the way. His experience as a business man and governor was apparent

We are a dependent society and everyone wants their goodies--rich and poor alike. Cutting spending is not politically advantageous.

Anonymous wrote:neither candidate has a detailed and specific plan and thats scary.

both of them focus their plans on taxes (whether cutting or increasing) and somehow magically having revenue to do things based on that idea.

its almost philosophical. does cutting or raising taxes create the revenue to grow the economy and create ability to spend more? thats the question voters have to decide

WHY THE HELL CAN'T ANYONE EVER TALK ABOUT CUTTING SPENDING RATHER THAN CUTTING TAXES?