VP DEBATE TONIGHT

[ArmedProgrammer]

I will not allow the GOP to turn the United States into China or Mexico even if they are more pro-gun. Right now there are more pressing issues regarding the future of our country and I happen to disagree more with the rest of the GOP agenda than I do with the rest of the Obama agenda.

Now if gun ownership is at stake, I am still a loud pro-gun voice. If the 2nd Amendment is the only reason to vote republican it is short-sighted. Gun owners should stop putting all their eggs in the Republican basket.

While I respect your right to feel that way, I have to say that I disagree all to heck... I can see the Libertarian argument, and I can see the Republican argument - but I'm afraid that I would self-destruct under the inner conflict of supporting Obama and any form of Liberty (2A being one great example).

Further - if the R's are "turning the US into Mexico" what are the D's doing? More of the same and faster??? I don't follow your argument here.

 

[sepe]

I will not allow the GOP to turn the United States into China or Mexico even if they are more pro-gun. Right now there are more pressing issues regarding the future of our country and I happen to disagree more with the rest of the GOP agenda than I do with the rest of the Obama agenda.

Now if gun ownership is at stake, I am still a loud pro-gun voice. If the 2nd Amendment is the only reason to vote republican it is short-sighted. Gun owners should stop putting all their eggs in the Republican basket.

Ehh...we need to remember that they're working together to ruin the country.

 

[cobber]

Finally MSNBC is spinning Ryan's comment on abortion and 'women's issues' (how patronizing is that anyway). Stating that Romney and Ryan would support legislation to overturn Roe v. Wade. I think he literally said that this was not the courts' job to legalize abortion.

And now, finally, they're stating that Ryan did not allow for any exceptions for abortion. What debate were they watching.

MSNBC =

 

[88GT]

So the nuke isn't the dangerous thing it is the delivery system

Yeah, cuz you know, they can't walk a nuke anywhere. They all have to be launched with ICBMs.

...and Biden is back to class warfare.

He went on record (and we all know he says what he means) that people who EARN their money don't deserve to keep it.

And we have a winner.

If you can not win the argument, change the subject.

Or as the Kenyan said, if you don't have a record to run on, make the people afraid to vote for the other guy. (I'm paraphrasing a bit.)

CNN says Biden has spoken for 40+ minutes and counting and Ryan for 38. this before closing statements.

I wonder if that includes all his attempts to interrupt. I doubt it.

Is this your own arbitrary qualification. No one cares about income when defining the wealthiest Americans. Bill Gates doesn't even draw a salary. Is he not in your top 1%?

The top 1% have an average net worth of $8.4 million. That is 69 times higher than the net worth of the average American.

I'm going to keep posting this every time one of you hauls out this tired nonsense: snopes.com: Free 'ObamaPhones' for Welfare Recipients

Not that it matters. The Right loves their disinformation. I was laughing right along with Biden at Ryan's constant stream of lies, but maybe I should be crying. People seem to eat up whatever falsehoods R/R spit out without even a modicum of research to check their "facts."

Pop quiz:

AWBs signed by Romney: ?
AWBs signed by Obama: ?

AWB signed by Romney? That would be zero. Looks like you need to check your snopes source. Adding language that creates exemptions is not the creation of a AWB.

But let's be clear, friend, Obama would **** his pants and throw his own wife under the bus (he might do this for a heck of a lot less in return though, now that I think about it) for a chance to use one pen per letter on the bill that banned all guns.

 

[cobber]

Yeah, cuz you know, they can't walk a nuke anywhere. They all have to be launched with ICBMs.



He went on record (and we all know he says what he means) that people who EARN their money don't deserve to keep it.


Or as the Kenyan said, if you don't have a record to run on, make the people afraid to vote for the other guy. (I'm paraphrasing a bit.)



I wonder if that includes all his attempts to interrupt. I doubt it.





AWB signed by Romney? That would be zero. Looks like you need to check your snopes source. Adding language that creates exemptions is not the creation of a AWB.

But let's be clear, friend, Obama would **** his pants and throw his own wife under the bus (he might do this for a heck of a lot less in return though, now that I think about it) for a chance to use one pen per letter on the bill that banned all guns.

 

[melensdad]

REGISTERED VOTERS WHO ACTUALLY WATCHED TONIGHT

RYAN 48%
BIDEN 44%

CNN said the poll was a national poll, 4% margin of error.

 

[sepe]

Yeah, cuz you know, they can't walk a nuke anywhere. They all have to be launched with ICBMs.



He went on record (and we all know he says what he means) that people who EARN their money don't deserve to keep it.


Or as the Kenyan said, if you don't have a record to run on, make the people afraid to vote for the other guy. (I'm paraphrasing a bit.)



I wonder if that includes all his attempts to interrupt. I doubt it.





AWB signed by Romney? That would be zero. Looks like you need to check your snopes source. Adding language that creates exemptions is not the creation of a AWB.

But let's be clear, friend, Obama would **** his pants and throw his own wife under the bus (he might do this for a heck of a lot less in return though, now that I think about it) for a chance to use one pen per letter on the bill that banned all guns.

Depending on when you ask Romney, he has thought the MA ban needs to be national...until he needed to pander on a national level.

Also +1 for staying classy with your ignorant Kenyan comment. I knew you could be counted on for that.

 

[Tsigos]

China would almost be a better alternative than the EU. They actually have a form of capitalism there, and their MSM is no more biased than ours.

Yes. Extreme wealth for a select few and desperate poverty for the rest. What a utopia.

 

[Dybber]

This chic is a joke. Ryan kept his cool. Biden seemed angry and loud an didnt know what he was talking about most of the time. Biden only interrupted because he knew he was being beat. Awesome job by Ryan!

 

[cobber]

Yes. Extreme wealth for a select few and desperate poverty for the rest. What a utopia.

What do you base your superior knowledge on, and do you grok purple?

That would not be an accurate portrayal of China.

Yes, better to have 1984-style Democrat utopia with a few party insiders and a vast proletarian "middle class".

 

[88GT]

Yes. Extreme wealth for a select few and desperate poverty for the rest. What a utopia.

The only utopia being espoused around here (IOW, by you) is the one the Democrats and socialists think they can fabricate. Inequalities will ALWAYS exist.

Which would you prefer? The inequalities that exist based on the effort(s) made by the individuals or the inequalities that exist based on the preferences of the government?

 

[cobber]

The only utopia being espoused around here (IOW, by you) is the one the Democrats and socialists think they can fabricate. Inequalities will ALWAYS exist.

Which would you prefer? The inequalities that exist based on the effort(s) made by the individuals or the inequalities that exist based on the preferences of the government?

I'm sure our friend is comfortable with the government choosing winners and losers based on fairness. The only problem is, when the government liquidates all the kulaks, who will feed the workers? (You didn't build that, etc.)

 

[Tsigos]

What do you base your superior knowledge on, and do you grok purple?

That would not be an accurate portrayal of China.

Yes, better to have 1984-style Democrat utopia with a few party insiders and a vast proletarian "middle class".

All I'm saying is that there is a place that has low taxes, almost no corporate regulations, no government healthcare, and many Fortune 500 companies are located there. It's Tiajuana, Mexico. Not sure you would want to live there but capitalists love it.

 

[Hiker1911]

The debate re-affirmed my vote for Gary Johnson, Biden was the winner here but not by much.

A vote for Mr. Johnson is a vote for President Obama for a second term.

 

[printcraft]

This just in from Joe..............

 

[88GT]

All I'm saying is that there is a place that has low taxes, almost no corporate regulations, no government healthcare, and many Fortune 500 companies are located there. It's Tiajuana, Mexico. Not sure you would want to live there but capitalists love it.

It has taxes. In America we call them by another name: protection.

 

[cobber]

All I'm saying is that there is a place that has low taxes, almost no corporate regulations, no government healthcare, and many Fortune 500 companies are located there. It's Tiajuana, Mexico. Not sure you would want to live there but capitalists love it.

I have lived in China. It's not a mass groaning peasantry lorded over by a tiny number of robber barons. It is a developing country, so the comparison is rather inapt.

While there are big corporations, like everywhere in the world (and why complain about them not being regulated there, since the Dems think the corporations in America aren't regulated or taxed much either), there is an incredible amount of small business, with almost no regulation or tax on the small shop or sole proprietor. Much easier to start a business there than here, where you have to have licenses, permits, subject yourself to myriad regulations to provide payroll, unemployment, etc.

Plenty of risk, but a much more active entrepreneurial landscape than here.

Go back in time to China in 1971 for a view of 2016 America, if we get another four years of BHO.

 

[hoosierdoc]

Is this your own arbitrary qualification. No one cares about income when defining the wealthiest Americans. Bill Gates doesn't even draw a salary. Is he not in your top 1%?

The top 1% have an average net worth of $8.4 million. That is 69 times higher than the net worth of the average American.

I don't have a 1%. That number was defined by liberals. Are you talking about income or wealth? They are not the same and are not interchangable. Please define your terms and then we can debate.

Your numbers seem to come from a NYT article in 2007.

The Times had estimated the threshold for being in the top 1 percent in household income at about $380,000, 7.5 times median household income, using census data from 2008 through 2010. But for net worth, the 1 percent threshold for net worth in the Fed data was nearly $8.4 million, or 69 times the median household’s net holdings of $121,000.

What is your point about the top 1% of wealth families having average of 69 times more than "average" net worth folks? Is it your goal to lower that number by punishing the wealthy? Should that number be lower? Would you prefer the denominator be increased to lower the ratio instead? How would you encourge the denominator to increase their wealth? Poor people generally continue to make poor people decisions, and wealthy people generally continue to make decisions that helped them become wealthy. It's like fat people and skinny people. In shape people and not in-shape people. Sure there are genetic issues and other factors beyond control for some, but the majority are where they are based on the sum total of decisions made and actions taken in their lives.

If there are no rich, then there is no incentive for those to strive for success. No reason to risk personal assets or your time on earth in exchange for a shot at success. The top 1% (income or wealth, doesn't matter) is who creates the jobs. The median income folks are not the ones creating jobs. If you hit the ultra rich with specialized taxes like on the yacht industry, you destroy that industry and put tons of "average" families out of work and push them into poverty. If you allow the rich to continue the business practices that made them rich and enjoy the fruits of their labors, this requires employees and growth of their business which leads to job growth and economic expansion.

You point out numbers as if they prove some point for you.

 

[Caldad]

I think one thing will overshadow the entire debate by tomorrow morning... 'Joe behaved like an @$$hat.'

 

[Cerberus]

Is this your own arbitrary qualification. No one cares about income when defining the wealthiest Americans. Bill Gates doesn't even draw a salary. Is he not in your top 1%?

The top 1% have an average net worth of $8.4 million. That is 69 times higher than the net worth of the average American.

So, should we redistribut it?