So, I guess that was some else posting under your ID that used the word SLEAZE. None the less, it was you choice of words.

No sir, I did not call him a racist. I alluded that his post seemed extremely slanted but I made no accusation concerning race. But sense you apparently do not understand the word prejudice very well. Know this: The word is not confined to race. There are many forms of prejudice. I don’t recall bringing up race, nor did I mention Bush's name.

So in retro-spec, what I really meant is Smooth Operator reminds me of a 6 year old looking through a used toilet paper tube and trying under stand all the things he can not see beyond the edges of the tube.

Again, if you are naive enough to believe that something that took several years to develope can be undone in a just of 3 years, I still think you need to grow up.

I guess it would be pointless to suggest you look back at events leading up to the economic mess we got our selves into with our own greed before Obama’s name was ever known to the voting public. Do you really support the people who gambled on your future in order to secure the own fortunes?

Also you seem to think he (Obama) has enough authority to be held accountable for food prices that are rising because of the weather. News flash… as much as our government would like, they can’t control things like droughts and floods.

Gasoline? Are you serious? Were you even in the US when Bush was in office? Or were you not old enough to drive back then?

Easy Henry, wasn't it you that said:

>Nothing but the facts as opposed to so much rhetoric....
>Amazing how easy it is to brainwash folks these days... It's a shame when one is limiting themselves to only one side of the story!

Don't fall for the Dem's version of the Mitt/Bain relationship....check back into the actual facts, not their brainwashing commercials of Mitt killing people.

respectfully we can disagree about our current President and his direction for our country, so I'll stop commenting for now.
take care,

Umm, his half brother still lives in extreme poverty in Kenya. He has changed his tune about Pres. Obama also. Saw an interview with him recently. He is not impressed with his half brothers performance.

I do not view a person that voted against BAIPA several times as a humanitarian.

While a state senator in Il. Mr. Obama voted to withhold medical treatment to babies that survived botched abortions.
Just let them die.
No, Pres. Obama lost all credibility with me when I researched that and found it to be the truth.
Picture the scenario, if you will, how that plays out. Baby is born after failed abortion. Baby now has the same constitutional rights as you and I. Dr., nurses just walk away, let it starve, suffocate or probably die from the cuts, poison and other tools of the trade to kill the baby. Baby suffering until it succumbs to death.
Senator Obama on several occasions votes to just let the baby die!!! That is called infanticide!!!

Pres. Obama=humanitarian my A** 

I am respectful of the office of the president regardless of who holds it. I preface his name with Mr., Senator or Pres. as a show of respect but make no mistake, I do not respect what he stands for and sleaze is a nicer term than baby killer.
I didn't actually call Mr. Obama a sleaze, I was referring to Al's calling Romney a sleaze and setting forth an argument that Mr. Obama has chinks in his armor as well so if Romney is a sleaze for 'this, then Pres. Obama is a sleaze for 'that'.

For the record, I'm not a Romney fan. Did not want him to be the Republican candidate, I mean, they put up the guy that lost to McCain...who lost to Sen. Obama in 2008.
But I certainly prefer him over the incumbent.

RonG,
See my post to Henry.
You need to get some thicker skin if you want to endure this election. The President has failed on pretty much ALL of HIS campaign promises from 4 years ago. That's the reality of the situation.

Calling me a sleaze and childish was a nice touch. Shows your maturity level.

BTW: Does the Infanticide-in-Chief have within his power to help his half brother in Kenya.....crickets. Then do tell why has he allowed his half brother to live in extreme poverty when all he has to do is send him some money from the sell of his books that reveals his communist mentor in Hawaii and his Marxist and radical friends in college.

Your selective outrage is revealing though, you fully support Al's calling Gov. Romney a sleaze bag for hiring a contractor that had an illegal  (with falsified documents) working for him, then demanded he fire him.
I guess you have a low 'criteria' for calling people sleaze bags.

I was referring to illegals not the 1% I love the rich I ain't NEVER work for an illegal, or burger flipper at McNasty, s

Way to go Tommy.  Wish there was a "like" button under your post!

This describes Our problem:

http://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/EW5IdwltaAc?rel=0

Nobody on the ballot even has the balls to talk about it, let alone doing what it takes to fix it.

On a lighter note:

I can agree that it was not Obama's shining moment, but it did reveal more about Romney than we knew before. He's pulling the old pivot routine. Agree to all the demands of the Tea Party while standing in front of them, agree to the demands of the rich contributors while standing in front of them by deriding 47% of the population, try to moderate his stance when all of America is watching. It was another Etch-a-sketch moment. Romney can be best described in one word; chameleon.

Does anyone really know what he’s going to do or what his plans are? From the debates it is impossible to tell if you listened to what he said during the debate and what has said on the campaign trail. Sack Obama Care, no, let’s think that over, after all it was modeled after his Massachusetts program. Sack Barney Frank, no wait, we need to hold Wall Street in check.

Details of his plans; little to none. We did find out that he plans to broaden the tax base by reducing the rates and eliminating deductions. What deductions we don't know because he would not tell us what his plans really are. The only way his math works is if you look at the deductions he could sack. I believe it is safe to say that the deduction for home mortgages will fall to the wayside. That is the largest deduction working families currently take. Deductions for medical costs are probably gone. That is the one deduction that families with large medical expenses can use to defray the cost of medical bills. That deduction has a lower threshold, so the medicals costs needed to take that advantage means you really have some high bills (in excess of 7% of your income if I remember correctly). Who would fall into that category? People without health insurance and people with serious illnesses not covered by health insurance or that exceed the limitations imposed by the insurance carrier (that is no longer allowed by Obama Care) or expenses incurred by people that could not get coverage because of preexisting conditions (again, insurance companies cannot deny coverage for preexisting conditions, but there is no cap on what the insurance company charges for preexisting conditions under Obama Care).  The deduction for education is another deduction that is most likely affected. People that are trying to better their occupational skills or need to maintain their skills will no longer be able to deduct the cost of training. That is the way you broaden the tax base, remove the deductions. Unfortunately those deductions represent a larger share of the individual’s income if you are on the lower rung of the economic ladder. It does not mean much to the individual that is part of high income crowd. Eliminating the deductions hit the lower income brackets the hardest. Deductions for expenses incurred for business travel, more than likely a thing of the past.

Now, reducing the deductions used by the majority of the population is not new, but I believe it is safe to say the Chameleon will do more than whittle away at the edges. It is the only way he can cut the tax rate across the board and still increase revenue. This doesn't hurt the upper income households that earn incomes that greatly exceed their basic needs, i.e., food, housing, medical, it hurts the lower half of the population that is squeaking by and have little left over to invest. There is no plan to change the rate of investment income which is how the upper half earns their income. The wage earner; screw the slackers, they are part of the 47%ers.

To Romney we are all just companies to be harvested for profits. Harvest Big Bird and serve him for the Thanksgiving at the White House. Elmo, you’re next!

By the way, I was referring to Romney's housekeeper/nanny when I said he failed to pay the federal withholding taxes and Medicare. There is no question he was aware of what he was or was not paying for her services.

Best regard - Al