and no doubt, Obama got a bad situtation even though not from Bush.Whomever you blame prior to 2009, does not matter.Does anyone not think the economy would be better with a leader experienced in business? Does any serious person believe if we had a leader who had been wise enough to wait to impose new monstrous bureaucratic uncertainties on a weakened economy, things would remain this bad?Obama said give his experient three years, it failed, only a fool would grant more time to a failure.Time is up.
Ask Paul Ryan if he is better off today than 4 years ago. Under Pres Obama his net worth increased by about 200k, from 2004-2008 his net worth only increased by about 100k, as for Mitt we don't know what he was worth.
well said. liberals are too stupid for words. all they want to know is:1) when will my next check from the gov't arrive.2) who is on dancing with the stars this season?these people are all takers.
""The government does not give anything it does not first take, while skimming some for the bureaucrats.""Rephrasing your stupid little quote does not impact the result.I did not say otherwise, do you have a point???????
does anyone think that the economy is the only consideration.