No, Todd doesn't think that.

Todd thinks exactly what Todd wrote above...that investments, profits, personal income, and deficits are all better served when there are Democratic administrations, and the facts back that up.

Todd also thinks that the GOP uses incredibly stupid social issues to get people to vote for them because their very simple minded base likes to be told those lies, and will vote for them based on those lies.

Todd also thinks that Hank knows all the above is true but can't help voting in direct contradiction to his own well-being as a taxpayer and investor because he's a fool.

Fish on...

Todd

Hank,

There is zero credible evidence of that, and a veritable pile of evidence that is directly contrary to that.

Under Democratic administrations we have enjoyed lower deficits, better returns on our investments, better corporate profits, higher personal incomes.

If you don't believe that, then you are an idiot. Feel free to be an idiot, just realize that you are being just that.

What makes you believe, against all evidence and facts, that during times of Republican administrations you get those things?

Fish on...

Todd

P.S. This is your chance to actually come up with numbers that refute every credible source that ever looked at these things...not your chance to make pithy and irrelevant, and wrong, stupid comments. You do that all the time...this is time to do something that goes against every GOP bone in your body...

Use facts.

P.S. Please note above that I said "credible source"...some blog called "TeaBagPost" or something like that were some dude posting from his mom's basement in Kentucky, along with his eighth grade education, who gets his "economics education" from FoxNews, is not a "credible source".

"Credible Sources" are like those I posted above...sources where actual economists talk about actual economies, not where fantasy economists talk about fantasy economies, and hold fantasy opinions like yours.

Like I said...you believe in your ideology more than you believe in facts. You are a model GOP voter, and they thank you for your service.

Fish on...

Todd

Wow, I’m almost overwhelmed, but not quite. Ive learned that even an elephant can be consumed one bight at a time.

OK, in your first response post you say that the opinion that I expressed in the post you quoted is incorrect. You then proceed to attempt to impeach my statement with statements of your opinions, some of which are valid and some which are not, but none of which are directly related to the statements in my post, to which you are supposedly responding to.

BTW, While I most certainly don’t agree with all of Mr. Krauthammer’s opinions, it’s more than funny to hear YOU accuse HIM of blathering.

You then say that Republican's irresponsible spending and tax cuts hurt us all. I ask you are irresponsible spending, and tax cuts more beneficial under Democratic administrations?
As far as the improvements we are currently undergoing, well, even our President admits that they are to small and to slow.

Your second response post is so idiological(sp) that it does not even deserve the response that I just gave it.

Your third response post provides links to articles that have no bearing on the opinions that I expressed in the post that you are supposedly responding to.

In four fourth response post, you start with the deficit, and it is clear that you lack understanding of it. I have a link to an article here, that if you were to take the time to read and comprehend, might clear up some of your misconceptions. http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder/...I.-Is-that-true As far as your idiot-liar conundrum goes, I prefer to let you and your followers play in the pigsty.

Your fifth response is revealing, in that is shows that you think the economy is a zero sum game, and no one who understands basic economics believes that.
Hum just where does that leave you? Are you one of those who is simply ignorant of basic economics or are you one of those who are seeking to, *"to create permanent dependency on government (and fealty to the party of government)".
The rest of post five, is your typical rant/blather that I have grown accustomed to, and as such deserves no further response.

Buuurrrp.


*source, The Republican Embrace of the Welfare State, by Andrew C. McCarthy

Hank, this is you when you insist, against all facts to the contrary, that you are helping the economy, the stock market, corporate profits, or personal incomes when you vote for Republicans.

blackmouth, your comment regarding "dependence on government" doesn't even rise to the level of an "opinion"...it is a right wing talking point, one that Republicans have been saying for decades, which is apparently long enough for some of them to actually believe it when there are no facts whatsoever to support it.

Fish on...

Todd

Todd, Just what would "dependence on government" look like to you?
Would you say that a person or a family that has no resources, and does not have a paying job, and whose sole means of support is government programs, such as welfare and or food stamps is dependent on government?.....I would.

I agree with McCarthy's premise, "The New Deal and its Great Society successor programs, by contrast, are frauds designed to create permanent dependency on government (and fealty to the party of government)." and the data in this article in The American Thinker supports it.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/10/does_government_dependency_influence_voting_behavior.html

Quoting McCarthy? Ferreal?

Do you really think that welfare and food stamps will support an entire family, and they will have no other means of support? Not likely...as a matter of fact, not even close at all.

Like I said, it's just another right wing talking point that the dittoheads parrot back all the time with nothing to support it, similar to "Democrats are anti-business" or giving tax breaks to zillionaires because they are "job creators", and that supply side economics does anything at all beyond redistributing wealth from all of us, you included, to a very, very, very small few of people.

Check out Hank for a perfect example of this...show him the variety of sources...many of them primary sources, and the rest scattered amongst all the "right wing" and "left wing" and "no wing" commentators...all of which show the undeniable fact that having Democratic administrations is better for the economy, the stock market, corporate profits, and personal incomes, and he still just holds an opinion to the exact opposite, with nothing to support it except that right wing commentators have been telling him this for years so he believes it...still.

Fish on...

Todd

I left out the link that i referred to so here it is.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/10/does_government_dependency_influence_voting_behavior.html


If you are correct, would that then mean that they are not dependent on government?

Todd, It's quite strange, surreal in fact, to hear you accuse others of close mindedness.

How about this, blackmouth?

Come up with some facts to support your opinion...and, no, unsupported opinions of others are not "facts".

Fish on...

Todd

So you seriously base your political beliefs on an article that came out a week ago?

Lame.

Fish on...

Todd

And...to define "votes for Obama because the Democrats favor maintaining the social safety net" instead of voting for the GOP who is in favor of maintaining the corporate welfare state as "dependent on Government" is exactly the kind of bullschit that is not supported by any facts beyond hearing an opinion you like.

Fish on...

Todd

You have to give Todd that point. The right is just as guilty as the left taking taxpayer dollars . The rationalization is the only difference. It's a sore spot with my teasak farmer friends when I bring up their subsidies and tax breaks. They ship their wheat down the snake and Columbia on a taxpayer built transportation network that their grandfathers fought to build.

Todd,

You asked me to provide facts to support my expressed opinion, I provided them. I did not provide you with the base of my political beliefs.

Frankly, having a discussion with you is akin to trying to get a hold of a Hagfish. I don't know why anyone bothers.

blackmouth, as I noted above, they aren't "facts", you are citing someone else's baseless opinion as evidence to support yours.

Fish on...

Todd

I think it's a fair position to hold if someone is against all forms of welfare and "government dependence", but if you are only going to be against one form of it, be against the one that hurts the economy, corporate welfare, and support the one that helps the economy, the social safety net.

If you vote for Republicans based on "welfare" then you are either the very, very, very top of the scale who actually gets the benefits of corporate welfare, or you are, like Hank, voting for a talking point instead of reality.

Fish on...

Todd

I think not, because as usual his premise is faulty.



Now that I can agree with.

You can agree with it all you want...just know that you are agreeing with something that is a right wing talking point, rather than a fact.

Fish on...

Todd

The article that I posted a link to three times is full of "facts", perhaps you don't like them so you choose to ignore them.