Our Federal Government is growing at an alarming rate. Our entire Federal budget is on the cusp of being consumed by entitlement spending alone. Millions of Americans have simply given up looking for work and millions more have been under employed. We have more Americans on food stamps than at any time in our country's history. Gas prices are at record levels. We have a mad leader in Iran about to obtain nuclear capability while threatening to shut off one sixth of the world’s oil supply. We have businesses drowning in burdensome government regulations, fearful of higher taxes and the uncertainty of legislation like ObamaCare.
That is just a small sample of the issues Americans are facing, and it takes George Stephanopoulos, Diane Sawyer and producers at ABC over an hour to really get into the issue of the economy? What did they choose to talk about along the way?
Gay marriage
Ron Paul newsletters from 20 years ago
Which candidate is a real conservative
Iraq
Should a state be able to make contraceptives illegal?
What else would you be doing on a Saturday night?
Contraceptives? Yes, Former Clinton staff member turned journalist actually wasted valuable time with a completely asinine line of questioning about contraception: ......I’m talking about George Stephanopoulos, who spent almost five minutes grilling Mitt Romney over whether or not he agreed with a Supreme Court ruling from 1965 that bars states from banning contraception. Are you freaking kidding me?
If you want to see the debate and the stupid questions here you go......go ahead and waste your time if you like.
8 comments:
The ABC News GOP Presidential Debate Intercourse with liberal moderators shouldn’t be attempted without protection.
by John Hayward
A surprisingly large portion of Saturday night’s ABC News debate was directed by the moderators, George Stephanopolous and Diane Sawyer, toward the most urgent crisis facing America after three years of Obamanomics: whether or not states should ban condom usage.
They spent nearly half an hour on it, as the increasingly exasperated Republican candidates observed. It was part of an effort to steer the debate away from areas damaging to President Obama, and into the badlands of purely academic discussion.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=48635
===============================
More on the priority of the National Media to ‘protect’ Obama.
Could not believe the debate, the ship is sinking and ABC wants to talk about what you had for lunch yesterday.
I honestly believe that most “journalist" think that a perfect society can be brought about if only they are in charge. Over 100 million deaths in the last century brought about by people who think this way, but they never learn, they just want their turn.
Perhaps at the next debate, the "journalist" can spend an hour trying to find out what breed of dog the canidates would take to the White House. That is more important than my finding a job and I sure would be interested in knowing.
You know, we get asked year after year to "hold our nose" and vote for the "lesser of 2 evils. Well hey... how about this year... the Democrats hold THEIR noses!!!!!!! I only say this because everytime WE hold OUR noses, we either lose or get a crap candidate.
"What else would you be doing on a Saturday night?"
I wish someone, anyone, had said "answering better questions than these stupid questions!"
Romney would not be my first choice for the Republican nominee, but he, like ALL the other candidates, is far more preferable than another 4 years of Obama.
Any of the current candidates would be so much better for this country, even Ron Paul's views on national defense will do far less damage to this country than another 4 years of Obama.
One thing that everyone seems to have lost track of is that it doesn't matter who our president is if the dems are still running the Senate or get the House back.
If the Republicans manage to keep the House and capture the Senate, especially by putting in true conservatives like in the 2010 election, then any Republican President will be inclined to go along with conservative policy.
Romney is not my favorite because I would like us to have a President that would lead the charge, and I think Romney is more of a "which way is the wind blowing" type of politician. But that also means if the wind is blowing the conservative way, he will go along.
The point is, no matter who it is, we need someone with an R behind their name in the White House next year.
Romney is no better (or worse) than Obama. End of story.
I can't wait to see the headline "the people fire obama" in november
Post a Comment