Republican Party, Teabag Party and the Libertarian Party absolutely SUCK!

[Exterminator]

Mitch  got bitch slapped by a door and took 16 stitches to the forehead today!

I heard it was a door that opens to the left!   

[me]

Indeed.  You can't fix stupid.

Explain to me old wise one how you can reach a factual conclusion with some vital facts missing which may change the entire picture.  If you plug incorrect data into the equation based on just the what you know and don't have all of the actual facts you can arrive at an invalid conclusion.  Problem with that kind of reasoning is it gives you the impression you know it all when you really don't.  People sure waste a lot of money on classes like that and if they would just use some actual reasoning would realize it.  People like you can be brain washed into believing anything.

[Palehorse]

I heard it was a door that opens to the left!   

[Exterminator]

Explain to me old wise one how you can reach a factual conclusion with some vital facts missing which may change the entire picture.  If you plug incorrect data into the equation based on just the what you know and don't have all of the actual facts you can arrive at an invalid conclusion.  Problem with that kind of reasoning is it gives you the impression you know it all when you really don't.  People sure waste a lot of money on classes like that and if they would just use some actual reasoning would realize it.  People like you can be brain washed into believing anything.

Who said anything about using incorrect data or filling in for missing facts?  The problem with people like you is that you have deluded yourself into believing that "street smarts" or "common sense," of which you have neither, are a substitute for education and you might be able to make a solid argument for that point if you were more intelligent...but, alas, you're not.  That you think it's everyone else that is brainwashed while you possess some profound insight is nothing if not pathetic.  Republicans rely on stupid, uneducated people because thinking people can see right through their obvious bullshit and lies.

[Exterminator]

Feel free to check the Department of the Treasury to verify these facts.

[Palehorse]

. . .

Feel free to check the Department of the Treasury to verify these facts.

Oh yeah. . . that'll happen! 

[me]

YES!!!!!!  Herman Cain threw his hat in the ring in Atlanta earlier....Sure hope he can do the job 'cause so far he really sounds like a great candidate.  More tomorrow after he does his interview which I don't figure any of you will be able to discuss 'cause you probably won't watch it. This man has brains and common sense.

[Exterminator]

You don't fool anyone; pretending to support a black candidate who you know will never get the nomination is the weakest attempt to try to hide your blatant racist leaning ever.  FAIL!

[Palehorse]

YES!!!!!!  Herman Cain threw his hat in the ring in Atlanta earlier....Sure hope he can do the job 'cause so far he really sounds like a great candidate.  More tomorrow after he does his interview which I don't figure any of you will be able to discuss 'cause you probably won't watch it. This man has brains and common sense.

This guy has LESS political experience than the current POTUS, (a point you doomsayers have used to front-load your endless yammering and hammering of the current POTUS), but because he spews the tea party propagandist line(s) all of a sudden he is a viable candidate? He has held NO elected office what-so-ever. . . And he wants to start as commander in chief? 

Running Godfather's pizza, Coke, Pillsbury, and Burger King do not necessarily arm this guy with the experience base required to deal with the dynamic attributes that come with the office of POTUS; and I don't see any kind of foreign policy or diplomacy experience that would place this guy anywhere near the top of any voter's list surrounding candidacy.

His endorsement of the tea party targeting of social security and medicare for the chopping block already takes the entire baby boomer generation, (those with any level of critical thought that is), out of the pool surrounding support. (Should he get through the primaries watch for the AARP membership).

I already see a TON of reasons NOT to support this guy. . . That you do not speaks volumes surrounding your motivation(s).

So tell me, just exactly why is it that you consider an experienced senator and political office holder as being "inexperienced and unable to fulfill the requirements of the office", but yet this guy with ZERO experience is????

[Palehorse]

This guy has LESS political experience than the current POTUS, (a point you doomsayers have used to front-load your endless yammering and hammering of the current POTUS), but because he spews the tea party propagandist line(s) all of a sudden he is a viable candidate? He has held NO elected office what-so-ever. . . And he wants to start as commander in chief? 

Running Godfather's pizza, Coke, Pillsbury, and Burger King do not necessarily arm this guy with the experience base required to deal with the dynamic attributes that come with the office of POTUS; and I don't see any kind of foreign policy or diplomacy experience that would place this guy anywhere near the top of any voter's list surrounding candidacy.

His endorsement of the tea party targeting of social security and medicare for the chopping block already takes the entire baby boomer generation, (those with any level of critical thought that is), out of the pool surrounding support. (Should he get through the primaries watch for the AARP membership).

I already see a TON of reasons NOT to support this guy. . . That you do not speaks volumes surrounding your motivation(s).

So tell me, just exactly why is it that you consider an experienced senator and political office holder as being "inexperienced and unable to fulfill the requirements of the office", but yet this guy with ZERO experience is????

And, in recognition of his weaknesses he states he'll "hire the best experts". . . something (again) your group hammers the current POTUS for endlessly when he has done this. . .

[me]

 Have you heard any of this mans ideas?  Did you watch the debates?  If you answered no to these questions then you should withhold any judgment of him IMO. 

And once again you are coming to a wrong conclusion Ex.  This man has accomplished a lot in his lifetime and is, at this point, a very good potential candidate.  He has a lot of very workable ideas on some of our problems and Ex if you'll remember you made an ass out of yourself with your comment when I first brought him up so I suggest you either go take a refresher course in your class you mentioned or quit trying to draw conclusions on theoretical evidence.   

You make me think of that car salesman who ignored a friend of ours one time because he was dressed in a pair of ratty overhauls and work boots when he went in to look at a car and one of the other salesmen treated him right and ignored his appearance and he was the one who got the commission when the guy pulled out cash money for a brand new Cadillac.  You'd be the salesman standing there kicking your butt 'cause you jumped to the wrong conclusion.  Cognitive reasoning needs common sense to go along with it and I'm thinking at this point that you have none. 



Bush was also hammered for it.

And, in recognition of his weaknesses he states he'll "hire the best experts". . . something (again) your group hammers the current POTUS for endlessly when he has done this. . .

[Palehorse]

Have you heard any of this mans ideas?  Did you watch the debates?  If you answered no to these questions then you should withhold any judgment of him IMO. 

. . .

Who says I am judging? I am stating an opposing opinion that is based upon my initial research of the individual in question, and asked the questions of you that the research posed!

I pay VERY little attention to debates. I liken it to going to church on Sunday and hearing the minister's message of the week. It contains a "message" intended to stir an emotional response; and one that typically lasts a day or two, or serves to drive mental instability in the weak-willed. Both undesirable results.

Some candidates deliver their messages well and are excellent public speakers, but the proof is in the doing, and their ability to remediate challenges in progress toward the stated goals and milestones along the way.

I see nothing arming this man for any such endeavor on a national/global scale. . . outside of being a "yes man" that is. . .

[Palehorse]

On another front, Mitch decided. . . "I love my country. . . but I love my family more. . ." (media paraphrase) He's NOT running.

Finally, a decision out of him that I can agree with! 

[Nighthawk]

Fact check from the Treasury Department:

When Clinton left office the national debt was $5,727,776,738,304.64

When Bush left office the national debt was $10,626,877,048,913.00

That is an increase of $4,899,100,310,608.36 over 8 YEARS

As of May 20, 2011 the national debt under Obama is $14,345,510,847,235.20

This is an increase of $3,718,633,798,322.20 over 2 YEARS and 5 MONTHS

In less than 2 1/2 years Obama has added almost as much as Bush did over a period of 8 years.

What I did was go here:

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np

Entered the date each president took office and used he last column, Total Public Debt Outstanding, to find the differences.

[me]

Who says I am judging? I am stating an opposing opinion that is based upon my initial research of the individual in question, and asked the questions of you that the research posed!

I pay VERY little attention to debates. I liken it to going to church on Sunday and hearing the minister's message of the week. It contains a "message" intended to stir an emotional response; and one that typically lasts a day or two, or serves to drive mental instability in the weak-willed. Both undesirable results.

Some candidates deliver their messages well and are excellent public speakers, but the proof is in the doing, and their ability to remediate challenges in progress toward the stated goals and milestones along the way.

I see nothing arming this man for any such endeavor on a national/global scale. . . outside of being a "yes man" that is. . .

Hum, read what you just wrote PH. I know it won't sink but read it again anyway. 

One thing Cain has is proven leadership ability and very good business experience at analyzing a problem and knowing what to do about it to turn things around.  Granted he would have to deal with congress and all their BS but when he talks it isn't just double speak mumbo jumbo it's actual ideas that make sense and he knows how to explain them.  He isn't trying to appease one group or another because he has a accepted a political favor and owes them he has thought about a certain problem and came up with a real solution.  Like I said earlier it's early in the campaign and I may change my mind as things progress but as it stands now he seems like a good man to have in the White House.