The recovery is slow due to obamas failed policies. He and the environmentalists continue to black the pillions from Canada that would create jobs and improve the economy. Libs think only government spending can make the economy to but you are mistaken.
The recovery was slow because the collapse was so deep. It was slow because the Republicans tried to kill Obama's policies in the cradle (offering nothing of their own other than tax cuts), and then severely weakened it and watered it down. Keystone XL is not the key to reviving the US economy. The idea is silly. Besides, most of those jobs do exist, as major parts of the pipeline ARE under construction.
Heck even Zimmy is polling high as 2016 GOP Prez hopeful amongst the rabble of the this thing called todays' conservatism ... POLLING FIRM INCLUDES GEORGE ZIMMERMAN IN LIST OF POTENTIAL 2016 GOP CANDIDATES http://www.theblaze.com/blog/2013/0...man-in-list-of-potentail-2016-gop-candidates/ Public Policy Polling, a Democratic polling firm, published a recent survey of Alaskans in which George Zimmerman is included as a possible Republican contender in the 2016 presidential election. Given the choices of Jeb Bush, Chris Christie, Ted Cruz, Sarah Palin, Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, Paul Ryan, Rick Santorum, and George Zimmerman, who would you most like to see as the GOP candidate for President in 2016? reads the survey. Two percent of respondents picked Zimmerman. Hes had high favorability ratings with Republican voters in some national polls so we were just curious how he would do, Tom Jensen, PPPs director, told TheBlaze by email. Its true that a Fox News poll from July showed that Zimmerman had a 45 percent favorability rating among Republicans whereas President Obama only had 14 percent. But a Florida voter registration document released in 2012 showed Zimmerman registered as a Democrat in 2002. So, why not see how Zimmerman would stack up in a list of potential Democratic contenders ? Jensen didnt answer that question specifically, but did reply: [Zimmermans favorability with Democrats is 14/64 compared to 45/27 with Republicans.
That's nonsense. The deeper the collapse the stronger the comeback ought to be. But Obama is clueless welfare baby who does not understand the private sector.
There is no 'comeback' plan from the two party scam, just a orchestrated effort to keep the rich, rich, and the working middle class spiraling towards poverty.
Since he has had every policy initiative blocked for the last 3 years, how can you now blame him for "failed policies"?
The GOP killed themselves when they became as big government as the democrats, giving no real alternative and alienating half of its base. If an average person has 2 big government choices, one blatantly for corporations and the other covertly for corporations, they are going to choose the latter. This choice does not validate the righteousness of the latter. We are simply in a corrupt country, everyone knows it, but people are too scared to fight, so they keep on voting the lesser of 2 evils and pray some great messiah will come down and save us all. The only thing Obama has done is pass a health care act created by republicans in the 90s, and reneged on everything else from transparency to the Patriot Act. And I voted Obama. There is nothing to be proud of if you're a democrat.
You're on block dujac. From years ago. If one has to argue with shills in our "free society", he is at least going to pick the smarter of them.
I doubt the USA is even in the running for least corrupt, since it is completely corrupt when it comes to the abuse of public office for private gain, and measures the degree to which corruption is perceived to exist by public officials and politicians. But anyway here are a list of the top ten least corrupt countries in the world. New Zealand Denmark Singapore Sweden Switzerland Finland Netherlands Australia Canada Iceland Read more: The Top Ten: Least Corrupt Countries | Infoplease.com http://www.infoplease.com/toptens/leastcorruptcountries.html#ixzz2bDDRqY31
the usa ranks 19th out of 176 other countries and the countries that rank higher than the usa are significantly smaller than we are the list at the link below is more complete and current http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2012/12/05/map-the-most-and-least-corrupt-countries-in-the-world/
So if we were smaller our politicians would be less corrupt? I think it has more to do with how much power we have handed over to the two party scam, and complacent (self imposed ignorance) we have become as a people.
You forgot the point that no one making such a list would have the balls to place us where we should rank. Haha
Not necessarily. Really, kind of a fallacy. There's nothing more corrupt than a small 3rd world nation with a dictator, giving land to his supporters for 3 camels, 13 sheep, and their 7th daughter. The last thing you want is to make conmen and crooks feel like their sneaky ways are perfectly acceptable given the size of the nation. Our problem is good men don't want to try and change the system from the inside for fear of death. Whether that death be social, financial or in the last resort of the top, physical.
Not necessarily, some of those countries are small, and corrupted because they are easier to manipulate therefore control. The point is we have lost our way, declining in so many categories, our checks and balances are no longer significant or effective, and we are no longer the shining example the world should try to emulate. It is all relevant to the leeway we have given our elected officials to control us rather than lead.
I would definitely have to agree. I never knew that and after reading your post it explains a hell of a lot. Which I found to be absolutely amazing given the fact that the president rarely attended services at that church and even if he were a faithful follower that showed up every Sunday, the man had no control over the reverends attitudes, thoughts, feelings or actions. Mentioning Fox no matter how true your statements may be is completely useless as the Fox faithful will never detach themselves from a medium they rely on to validate their negative feelings towards the president. I used to have a tremendous amount of respect for John McCain because I truly saw him as an outsider who thought for himself……………………………silence. The Republican Party seems to be split on this issue with half of them agreeing to try to truly make the party a big tent party by encompassing everyone, while the rest of the party (because of their hatred & disdain for any person/s of color) are willing to throw the baby out with the wash. Very, Very True............
Historically, no. Corruption is a function of power, or more accurately relative power. What stops people in positions of power from abusing it, is counterbalancing power. This comes in two forms: political power, and publicity. Look at any coup, or any tinpot dictator, and you find the first thing they did to come to power was to sieze the newspaper, radio, TV station, etc. And the second thing they did was to exterminate anyone with any ties, even indirectly, with anyone who might gain popularity. When it comes to corruption, size doesn't matter. Even high school cliques are hopelessly corrupt, down to as few as three people. What helps minimize corruption is checks and balances, but those techniques are limited. Ultimately, corruption is avoided by people in power who place their country above their personal interests. What keeps a cop from taking bribes? His boss? What keeps his boss from taking even larger bribes? The Major? What keeps HIM from accepting bribes? In most nations today, arrests are for-profit matters, unless you irritated someone in power. In Russia, if anyone is accused of anything, the only thing people ask is who he offended. NOT what he did, which he probably didn't anyway. Bureaucracies are not inherently corrupt. Bureaucracies are inherently rule-bound, locked into precedent and tradition and procedure. They are highly resistant to change, to new ideas. And this means if they are corrupt, they will perpetuate corruption. If they are not corrupt, they are almost impossible to corrupt. Either change means doing things differently, and bureaucracies don't do that.
>>>MOD EDIT: OFF TOPIC<<< Obama should have put the stimulas money he got in the first two years when Dems controlled everything to better use.
Only among the Low Information Voters and the other Stupids that vote DemocRAT. Everyone else knows why the country is falling apart...too many Stupids.
