Cage Match: Jeb Bush vs Scott Walker vs Romney vs McCain

Jeb is a Bush Bye and Romney is so mean he is giving it to him. Playboy nope. Rubio is so weak he can't speak. Barb said no more Bushes but here he goes.
 
If that were true, slavery would have died out long before the Civil War. It survived because it was very profitable.

Naaah. The overhead for women, children, and geezers was awful. Twenty-five years after emancipation my ancestor continued to support her old darkies who had disabilities. The overhead for failed cotton crops was high. People gotta eat regardless of what storms do to cotton.

Lincoln did 2 things that scared the shit outta slaves: He sold captured slaves to Central America planters, and he murdered slaves who refused to leave their masters. Lincoln excused both actions as his right to dispose of livestock captured in war. He used the same premise to excuse emancipation...the slaves belonged to him by right of conquest.
 
I gave examples with sources of Gov. Scott Walker's "accomplishments". Feel free to refute any of them, if you can.



again, you are a fucking idiot. the state employee are raping the tax payers. the pension system, aka ponzi plan needs to be 86'd

property taxes in Wisc are way out of line with REALITY

since you don't own property, who the fuck would you know about property taxes.

did you get new wheels yet for your home?
 
I don't own a mobile home NeverEndingDumbass. I rented one once around 1986 or so.. Now I own two houses as I explained in the other thread. I'm beginning to think you have some sort of learning disability. Have you been evaluated?

Walker shifted health care and pension costs to state employees thanks to ACT 10, costing state employees $700 million in take home pay per year.

Rather than just spew constant nonsense why not take a shot at refuting any of the "accomplishments" of Scott Walker listed earlier in the thread if you can. Hell, you can even choose to explain how Wisconsin's property taxes are "way out of line with reality" and why Gov. Scott Walker hasn't done anything to fix that.

Also, are my taxes still subsidizing your flood insurance?
 
Last edited:
No one gives a shit about the poor baby union state employees.
 
No refutations Vetteman?

Color me surprised. :cool:

Well, another 3 days have drifted by. I saw my workplace through a NYC Dept. of Buildings inspection and an FDNY inspection with zero violations and still not a single refutation of Walker's "accomplishments". I'm beginning to think your argument is as weak as Walker's chin, Vette.

Maybe you would rather endorse Brownback, Vetteman? I mean, if you're going to throw your weight behind a loser it might as well be the losingest loser. :cool:
 
Oh look...another thread of brilliant political commentary from liberals about who conservatives should vote for...
 
Oh look...another thread of brilliant political commentary from liberals about who conservatives should vote for...

Go ahead Eyer the Liar, enlighten us. Who do you, being a "real conservative™", think that conservatives should vote for?

Because the GOP is the one floating the names listed in this thread.. Not "liberals".
 
Go ahead Eyer the Liar, enlighten us. Who do you, being a "real conservative™", think that conservatives should vote for?

Because the GOP is the one floating the names listed in this thread.. Not "liberals".

Eyer will vote for any candidate that talks about legitimate rape and abusing women. he'll vote twice if someone repeals sexual harassment laws.
 
Jeb’s clueless Bush privilege: The arrogant dynasty debacle he won’t get away with.

There’s something quaint about the way Jeb Bush is trying to get around critiquing or endorsing his big brother’s disastrous presidency, especially when it comes to the unpopular wars President George W. Bush began and mishandled. It’s almost as if the commoners are trying to get him to gossip about family matters, and voters will understand if he’s too much of a gentleman to do so.


Asked by the Washington Post’s Philip Rucker whether his foreign policy speech next week would deal with his brother’s wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Bush wouldn’t answer:

“I won’t talk about the past. I’ll talk about the future. If I’m in the process of considering the possibility of running, it’s not about re-litigating anything in the past. It’s about trying to create a set of ideas and principles that will help us move forward.”

Does Bush really think he’s going to get away with not talking about his brother’s wars – or his tax policies or the surplus he spent into a deficit or the economy that cratered on his watch? And how will the Florida governor square the fact that he rips President Obama regularly – in 2013 he called him a “complete and utter failure” – with his unwillingness to weigh in on the presidency that preceded Obama’s?

While Bush is talking about creating “a set of ideas and principles” for his foreign policy, I hope journalists remember that he was one of just 25 signatories to the original “statement of principles” issued by the hawkish Project for a New American Century — alongside Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Scooter Libby, Elliott Abrams, Norman Podhoretz, Frank Gaffney and other card-carrying neocons. He didn’t sign subsequent PNAC declarations, but as a first-term Florida governor and son of the last president, Bush’s name stood out on that founding document.
 
More on Walker, from Paul Krugman.

Scott Walker, the governor of Wisconsin, is said to be a rising contender for the Republican presidential nomination. So, on Wednesday, he did what, these days, any ambitious Republican must, and pledged allegiance to charlatans and cranks.

For those unfamiliar with the phrase, “charlatans and cranks” is associated with N. Gregory Mankiw, a professor at Harvard who served for a time as George W. Bush’s chief economic adviser. In the first edition of his best-selling economics textbook, Mr. Mankiw used those words to ridicule “supply-siders” who promised that tax cuts would have such magic effects on the economy that deficits would go down, not up.

But, on Wednesday, Mr. Walker, in what was clearly a rite of passage into serious candidacy, spoke at a dinner at Manhattan’s “21” Club hosted by the three most prominent supply-siders: Art Laffer (he of the curve); Larry Kudlow of CNBC; and Stephen Moore, chief economist of the Heritage Foundation. Politico pointed out that Rick Perry, the former governor of Texas, attended a similar event last month. Clearly, to be a Republican contender you have to court the powerful charlatan caucus.

So a doctrine that even Republican economists consider dangerous nonsense has become party orthodoxy. And what makes this political triumph especially remarkable is that it comes just as the doctrine’s high priests have been setting new standards for utter, epic predictive failure.
 
Ron Paul:

I would like to start off by talking about the subject and the subject of course, is secession and nullification, the breaking up of government, and the good news is it’s gonna happen! It’s happening!

And it’s not gonna be because there will be enough people in the U.S. Congress to legislate it. It won’t happen. It will be de facto. Ya know, you’ll have a gold standard when the paper standard fails and we’re getting awfully close to that. And people will have to resort to taking care of themselves. So when conditions break down, ya know, there’s gonna be an alternative. And I think that’s what we’re witnessing.

That's Ron Paul, mind you, but he doesn't seem to care one little bit about making things easier for Rand.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top