What is wrong with Ron Paul? (for your Americans)

All this is a perfect example of the thought pattern that pervays our sociaty. these are the reasons we can't solve economic values. number one; this country is on the verge of collapse. the 6 trillion of debt added was all borrowed money. pay back is now on the children and grand children. if at all. all production worthy of name is desamated. i mentioned numbers out of work. taxes are beyond reproach. income,property,sales,commodity, use fees, fines and penilty fees late charges etc...all add up to typical working class paying over half their wages in revenues. all demos can think about to solve crises is to raise taxes more. raise taxes only on th erich? bullshit all taxes are passed on to every consumer member of sociaty from th epoor to the rich. briefly, this congress is predicting collapse by january 1, 2013 if something isn't done. The demos blame repubs for situation. they say republican grid locjk...bullshit. for 3 yars they owned both houses, Biden claimed 2 years ago the reccesion was over. and now at the edge of the abyss they turn and blame Bush, and th ehouse republicans cause they wont tax bussiness more.
i've said enough.... ts125 keep watching NBC,CBS,MSNBC and i am sure your future willl be dandy. eeesssshhh.

Tsi25*

im also watching cnn, washington post, and the government bureau of labor statistics.

i suppose that last one doesnt mean much to you if you doubt the entirety of the integrity of the government... granted i doubt it too sometimes with acts like the NDAA but still.

Gahhhhh Britt! I was almost done writing a really long, documented response, and then I accidentally got navigated away from the page and got logged out. Furious. I guess I'll paraphrase.

From my perspective, it's more about Republicans in general than just Romney; at least, that's how I've heard it. Romney and other Republicans have appeared anywhere from ambivalent to hostile on topics like:

-Equal Pay for Women
-Rape
-Access to birth control
-Abortion

Sorry all my specific examples are gone. I might have to try again later, after I'm done raging.

1. "With Congress, every time they make a joke it's a law, and every time they make a law it's a joke." - Will Rogers Here we go again with the grid lock is caused by the split in the democratic republic . I was a government employee for the last 25 years of my employed days until they took my DOD badge after a recommendation that I be removed . I still feel I was performing the best I could . I had worked for a private sector industry that sold uniforms to the government . I was confused by the thought that the government is our enemy . The tea party leaders made it clear they wanted a puppet in the white house and the electoral system rejected the candidate they thought would belong to the cause of less means more

I read a study showing that women in the Obama adminstration made considerably less money than the men in his admin, lol. I don't really get the whole equal pay for women thing.. the argument that repubs are against it. Don't we all want people to be filthy stinking rich, or is this 'lets keep the poor, poorer" thing? I'm being facetious yet serious.. lol

As for rape, omg. If that has to do with that idiot Akin from Missouri, please know he doesn't speak for everyone (or most anyone) on the right. Yikes.

The access to birth control thing confuses me, too. Every woman has access to it, but I know the Catholics don't believe and there they don't think it should be mandated on them. Maybe that's where it comes from.

Abortion... that makes sense, but I don't think that's a war on women necessarily. For me it's a faith issue and a belief thing (me personally). Most people who are against abortion believe it is murder and/or that the fetus is a human at conception, not first breath/birth. Plus what bothers me is the man has no say. He created that life just as much as she did. It's not his fault he doesn't have the opportunity to carry it, that's not how God (again, the faith thing comes into play for me) intended it. I do agree in terms of rape/incest, or if there is harm to the mothers life etc.

Again these are how I see things personally... then again, thats how almost everyone I know (that is right leaning) sees the issues, too. So I don't know.

Democrats will always choose to use a non-existent but illusionary matter to degrade opposition. Neither party has a lock on human rights. Whether it be women men, black men, or any other rich or poor group ethnicity. Most attacks by the left are designed to entice deceive and disrupt. All designed to capture the hearts of the ignorant. And to create ignorance. Why would anyone do that?
How to win the women's vote. Make it clear that republicans hate women. How to win old people votes. Make it clear that republicans want to starve and see old people die. How to win the young peoples vote. Give them dope, free collage entry loans (they'll never pay back), abortions, contraceptives. Win the latino vote. Make Latinos think republicans hate Latinos and want to send them all back. Keep the black vote because all republicans are racists.
How can a democrat pay for all this? Why just by putting their greedy friggin hands in "every body's" pockets but make the ignorant think only the pockets of the rich.

By the way who are the rich any way? Opra, gates, palosi, the kennedys, soros, gore,the roosavelts, etc all democrats. Do you think they will actually pass tax increseases on themselves? Bullshit...

Women have made great strides for equality in this country. You better belive they get equal pay but the key wording is "equal pay for equal work". I worked for the lady who was appointed CEO of Lucent a few years ago. She owned a mansion in the Bernardsville mountains. Huge salary plus she got 20 million for excepting the job. Many, many enterprising women have started and are running there own successful businesses. Teachers now are some of the highest paid. There are doctors , lawyers, scientists of all kinds, physisists. There are even women who own and operate big construction companies. And majority have made their own platforms. The ones that get attacked by the left are the self made women who created wealth without the help of a democrat...Take notice. Most of them if not all are not looking for free stuff.they want to EARN it

*****Could we not use offensive slurs? Thanks. -Sibyllene*****

"oh I listen to CNN, The Washington Post, And above all else I believe what the government tells me...eh?
just keep in mind Britt, you do not ever have to appoligize for anything the left dreams up. if you do you only support the scamming of america.

My Great great grandfather was said to have been taught by the same school teacher that taught the first republican president "Abraham Lincoln ". Lincoln had a theory that race, nor creed should separate the paths of the north and the south. My great grandfather fought to preserve the union ,but latter married a rebel. The theory 'united we stand divided we fall" latter even inspired a democrat to amend our constitution to allow women to vote . The path to prosperity was built by the minorities , but my great great grandfather had shares in the railroads which made him a little more equal than many of his descendents that worked for the railroad . The democrats that got their ass kicked in the civil war had to help pay for that war . American's have a love of labor and management but the GOP believes they built America and labor is just a necessary evil. They seem to dislike any one that is not an uncle tom or a peasant that adores their boss. The 47% that played a major role in defeating that last GOP candidate
My great great grandfather was creating wealth (at least until the republicans freed his slave . In 1920 a democrat Woodrow Wilson allowed the congress to amend the constitution to allow women to vote. The great depression was well underway when FDR proposed a New Deal, but the Japanese did not know what his deal was so they attacked pearl harbor and no republican is going to give FDR credit for WW11 and I doubt he would want it !

Hey again Britt. I tried to write for a second time this morning but made the exact same mistake again. GAH! I will save as I go this time. If it happens again, I take it as an act of God and quit forever.

First off, this was in my original post, but I didn't put it in my second. The following is simply my perception of what I think people are talking about when they refer to the "Republicans' war on women." I think these examples are somewhat isolated, but once they've been aggregated, they have made people feel nervous. I assume (or at least hope) that most of these don't represent the views of a majority of Republicans. At the same time, the fact that these views are prevalent at all is probably something that should be discussed.

1. Equal Pay - Wisconsin governor Scott Walker recently repealed the state's Equal Pay Act, which addresses what has been historically been a large pay gap in the state for people doing the same work. Another Republican backed him up, saying that "money is more important to men anyways, since they are the primary breadwinners." D'oh. Again, I would assume that most Republicans and people in general (except maybe large business owners?) are cool with equal pay. That should probably be a given.

2. Ha, yes, Akin. I realize that pretty much everyone thinks he was dumb. Romney pulled support from him (yay!), while other Republicans initially withdrew support, but then started campaigning for him again after they thought things had blown over. There was also Richard "Rape is an act of God" Mourdock (who Romney did continue to support), and Roger "Some girls rape easy" Rivard. Now, I don't think it was in the Republican platform to be a dick to rape victims, but comments like these are insensitive, ignorant, de-legitimize the experiences of actual victims, and seem to foster a sketchy sort of culture regarding women. I don't think most Republicans think these things. But if these are the policy-makers, here, and they are the ones who are going to be making decisions... Yeesh.

3. Birth control: religious organizations and religiously-founded organizations are already exempt from having to offer birth control under their insurance plans. Romney wished to make it so that any organization could choose what medications and procedures they wanted to offer, based on their beliefs. Personally, I think the issue here was mostly that such a measure could pave the way for employers to conveniently decide not to cover more expensive health problems, but that's just a hunch, it's not substantiated. Even if it's just about birth control, I mean... it's expensive. Not as expensive as a baby, but a lot of ladies need help paying for that stuff. You'd think even conservatives would be for it, since it would lead to fewer abortions. Which brings me to my next point...

4 Abortion. I'm actually personally on the "abortion is bad, let's avoid it before it ever gets to that point" side of things. I would much rather see better education in schools and easier, cheaper access to birth control. I also think fathers should have an equal (or at least near-equal) say. I realize that many take a different view than me, however, and I think (cynical sibyllene again) that abortions will be sought whether they are legal or not (Actually, I think countries with greater access to abortion have fewer actual abortion rates, don't they?), and it's best to plan for that eventuality. I think where the "war on women" feeling comes in is that women aren't being included in the policy-making as much as they could be. For example, Congress had a panel on Women's Health this year and... there were no women on the panel. What? Now, this might be an extreme situation, but if there is a chance that a panel of old white guys are telling a pregnant raped woman that she NEEDS to have this baby, things have gotten sketchy.

Overall, I think it would be healthy for the Republican party to shift a little towards the center again. There are some Republicans that I'm rather a fan of (John McCain, Colin Powell, Chris Christie, lately) but they are being drowned out by the Michele Bachmanns and Todd Akins of the world. So, on behalf of the Democrats, I just want to say "thank you" to all the Republicans out there who aren't complete loonies. You give me hope.

Ok syballllinia;
why is it I am always edited(censored) others can write f**k all day on another thread I was called an a**h***..no one bothered...?????

I haven't time right now to repond to negativity drawn out of context but I will be back.
I will say quickly however one should research not only track records of republicans but include democrats negativity. the read what socialism eventually does to a country(all the european problems accured and the whys.)..etc why some can not recieve individual privledge over the other...
I will add, taking care of the poor and the underprivledged, the ones deserving is a noble cause. a republican always considers these goals first it takes nothing from that philosophy.

EDITED profanity.
Donald,
Normally other members voluntarily self-edit. If you will restrain you won't be edited.
Larry

The Dust Bowl, or the Dirty Thirties, was a period of severe dust storms causing major ecological and agricultural damage to American and Canadian prairie lands in the 1930s, particularly in 1934 and 1936. I think FDR remained popular in hard times because the average American felt that he care about the hungry in our nation. Millions of acres of farmland were damaged, and hundreds of thousands of people were forced to leave their homes; many of these families (often known as "Okies", since so many came from Oklahoma) migrated to California and other states, where they found economic conditions little better during the Great Depression than those they had left. Owning no land, many became migrant workers who traveled from farm to farm to pick fruit and other crops at starvation wages. Author John Steinbeck later wrote The Grapes of Wrath, which won the Pulitzer Prize, and Of Mice and Men, about such people. I believe my mothers father remain a loyal republican through the great depression. The Vietnam War (Vietnamese: Chiến tranh Vi�t Nam) was a Cold War-era military conflict that occurred in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia from 1 November 1955 was inhereted by a long line of democrates Tricky Dick resigned and Ronald Regan had alzheimers with means he was not lying when he said he did not recall any envolvement in the Iran Cantra deal . Is that an over simplification of the republic track record?

Mike. Wilson actually rejected women's right to vote. Even said he would veto any bill that was put before him. Later1920 changed his mind when he decided he needed women's vote. Also it wasn't a democrat's bill originally it was first submitted by a republican senator and rejected. I believe th senator offered it on 3 occasions and was rejected by democrats and Wilson. That's from memory you can check it out of course.
Also on several occasions in the 50s and 60s equal pay for equal work legislation was also denied by democrats until Kennedy and Johnson again needed support from women and republicans . Also Eisenhower proposed first civil rights bill in th e50s and was rejected by demos. I.e. ...Robert birdbrain, and then and enough to defeat it. PS... Did you know Martin Luther King was a republican?

Digging into Scott Walkers decisions is controversial only to the point that if one believes in balanced budgets or not. Reducing costs saved a lot of teachers and government workers their jobs. They won't of course admit it. But recall vote proved it. And more then that staved off default for Wisconsin which could have meant huge tax increases for its citizens. This in turn could have meant more foreclosures. A way to controversial subject to skim over on this site. And by the way by demos fleeing the state rather then confront problems shows again their inability for compromise. A bunch of cry babies.

This country can not go on borrowing trillions and billions and expect to stay an economic leader. But, alas who really gives a shit we're too greedy anyway let's just let China be the economic giant. You know what I mean...more coal powered generators, disintegrating underwear, more world possessed nukes...

Self edited

also mike, vietnam was eisenhowers warning because China was preparing fo rsouth east invasion. Kennedy saw the danger and sent support troops. After they started to get killed instead of pulling out, Johnson started putting in thousands of troops. "tricky Dicky, started to bomb in cambodia for the purpose of disrupting nv's using cambodia for milatary hardware supplies.
your age is showing young man.

what the heck did republicans have to do with the dust bowl? the dust bowl was caused by the ignorance in farming knowledge.its called land protection.
also roosevelt had double digit unemployment until world war 2. All his policies where centered around socialist solutions and they were quickly eating up this nations incentives. Also he was devoutly against free enterprise and made it hard for this country to expand industry and manufactureing. all his so called acomplishments were placed for easy access for public view and the back roads of this nation starved and wallowed in poverty for his whole reign as KING. he croaked and the country came back. fact

Saybalinia... walker couldn't have repealed equal pay because it is a federal mandate not a local. its another demo lie.

Don, he repealed the -state's- Equal Pay enforcement act (which I said above), not the nation's, of course. It's the law that smooths the way for people to take action against unfair payment. I've linked to one news story about it here, from a source you might trust:

http://radio.foxnews.com/2012/04/10/wi-gov-walker-signed-three-regressive-bills-just-before-easter-holiday/

The point in bringing up the dust bowl was that FDR kept getting reelected in spike of the acts of God such as a drought and a flood in 37 making times hard for a lot of folks . It seems FDR tried to stay out of WW11

Even though it was costly I believe being Bush senior got us in the middle of an eastern conflict he was right in clearly defining his mission in compliance with the UN. There was nothing between the general and Bagdad when Kuwait was liberated. Bush junior just attacked Iraq over the UN'S head to show force.Originally he was just telling Hussien to get out of Dodge.

Mike... Bush Senior gathered a coalition force of over 65 nations to include, men, military hardware, money, land use for staging for the purpose of liberating a country that had been invaded by IRAQ.Included in this coalition were Arab/Muslim countries. Saudi Arabia provided air force and ground force staging and supplied its air force as support. Others provided air space for coalition fly over's. Most of the Arab world agreed at what was happening as far as liberating Kuwait. By the way It was Kuwait that was invaded by Iraq you know. And, 180 thousand Kurdish women and children who were poisoned bombed by Hussein. (WMDs)?
As for Iraq being on USA hit list. After the seize fire agreements agreed to by All involved including Iraq as principle Iraq consistently violated rules. These rules were not only USA (Bush) rules these were rules written out by The United Nations and agreed to terms by 65 nations. Including our congress.
Now, this is where bias news media comes in. All through Clintons presidency, Majority of democrats, ie Kerry, Kennedy, Feinstein, Schumer, all democrats urged Clinton because of (get ready ) Iraqis harboring an threatening use of Weapons Of Mass Destruction all democrats urged Clinton to invade Iraq. There are for the record signed partitions and official letters on record issued to Clinton from democrats. When GW Bush did it all the demos ran for the hills and used it against the republican party as their baby. It's called in my circle of friends, and Larry must forgive me, it's called BULLSHIT disgusting low life dirt ball politics and the news media kept it dirt ball politics in order to enhance its anti-republican agenda. They demos and media spent 8 years denying that they voted for and supported and funded the war on Hussein and the ignorant sheeple eat it up like pigs wallowing in sh.*t
Same with policy on abortion. If someone is against abortion therefore they must hate women when in reality its life we love and protecting those who can't protect themselves is priority not ridicules claims of hating women to satisfy. Which incidentally is impossible. No republican could ever be satisfying to a demo. They'd make up something else to vomit about.
As far as Fox reporting someone trying to take away equal anything laws is again BS. Some reporters just get it wrong. Or have an agenda.

...See Syballinia... Fox news believe it or not has versatility unheard of on other net works. Alan Colmes is a devout communist and an anti-American (free society) crumb ball. He distorts and reconfigures what is ego-satisfying for Alan Colmes in order to mis-represent. Still, he persists blaming Benghazi on a movie instead of an attack by terrorists as an example of his punistic abbreviation for a brain.
I'm sure and completely confident that if you get access to what it was that Walker signed you would understand motives were in play not reality for Alan Colmes

"Saudi Arabia, Saudis, September 11, 9/11, hijackers, suicide bombers, terrorist attacks, terrorist, jihadist, Al Qaeda, Iraq," How much do you think it would cost to build a memorial to those who have been killed by terrorist? I sat face to face with an old school mate of mine while he told me of his brother in law being killed in Saudi Arabia and I wonder if he will be remembered lke the ones killed in Libya along with an Ambassador

"I'm sure and completely confident that if you get access to what it was that Walker signed you would understand motives were in play not reality for Alan Colmes"

I guess my feelings are... however the information gets relayed, does it really change the effect of the action? Despite whatever angle left-leaning journalists want to take with it, Walker still made it harder for women to take action if they feel they are being unfairly treated. Them's the facts.

The justification is that repealing the enforcement law will stop business getting "tied up in frivolous cases" (like wage discrimination suits). Now, either you think having ways to fight wage discrimination is serious business, or you don't. If you don't, there's nothing I'm going to be able to say to convince you, so we might as well call it a day.

-Sibyllene

Not that I'm overly concerned with the Elections that took place because I belive that the outcome will forever be one,
More crimes regardless of what race or human being is elected
And as I look into the opinions of some of the above posters I can't help but ponder why would anyone with a moral of sanity defend bush, and his policies, words leave me there

But you need to stare at the world from your rare view sometimes, all this talk about tax payers and fundings, your country spends more $$ on milltary use more than the world combined,
So all of this political chitchat and enthasuism about people and their darn rights to marry whomever shouldn't be your main concern to begin with, not when Africa suffers from unevatible death due to reasons and I can count many, not when kids in Brasil at the age of 4 becomes introduced to absolute slavery, and not when kids are dying with bullets just like 3 days ago in ghazza, it gets old but, it never sinks in well with you, but your government is responsible for a lot of things that you seem not to even care about.

Dan, an overdose of reality, call your lost ones
In libya whatever you want, it's unfortunate and all but the factor of sympathy you don't get to stress upon
Not when millions of people continue to die of famine because of views you so proudly defend, the world suffers everyday

I agree with your priorities, Rab. I'd gladly see the military budget slashed. (I'm no military strategist, but) I think less focus on dumb force could improve our relations abroad, as well as allow that money to be diverted to domestic or humanitarian concerns.

At the same time, I don't believe that marriage equality/women's rights and world peacemaking efforts are mutually exclusive. Yes, the fact that we can even argue about this is evidence that we live in a privileged place. But I think some of these rights shouldn't be overlooked. In the US, some of those rights include fair payment and people being allowed to marry who they love. They're a part of our right to "pursue happiness." I don't think working towards those things takes away from helping impoverished kids in Africa. If anything, progressive views on these topics are a better sign for world-wide humanitarianism. If people are working to diminish these sort of "privileged, high-level" rights, who's to say they would balk at taking away more fundamental rights like access to food, medical care, religious freedom, or life itself?

Unfortunately th people of the united states are consistently being pitted against one another on frivolous accounts. One says he did that and another says he did that. All designed to keep one side against the other. Let's take equal pay for equal work. A subject and legislation of value. All support "equal pay for equal work" period. Th problem comes in when the law is written in such a way as to create confusion. Confusion that becomes on design to confuse and disrupt for the benefit outcome of the rule makers. Most cases depending on the court make up, liberal, conservative can have political effect. Professional receptors (lobbyists and staffs) full time job is "how to write a law that could be so confusing as to make it indefensible to argument outcome. Therefore lays open rulings by courts depending how liberal or conservative it be. In other words anyone can sue anyone for anything at anytime. Each and every law/ruling designed by congress and then altered to effect enhancement of th party implemented designed its legal confusions fro argument and seemingly law interpretation by the court at hand. Typical; sybellene decides because joe blow gets 10 dollars and hour cleaning parrot cages that she should get 10 dollars cleaning parrot cages. Fair. Let's say joe blow had been cleaning parrot cages for 25 years and sybalene 2 years. Then fair? Let's all go to court and find out. Civil arbitration or criminal? Court decides. Courts now become frivolously occupied and how liberal court is will judge against Joe blows company because law says the word "equal".
Question, what is frivolous? Court ruled in syballenas favor because company failed to submit in advance that the job requires length of time to become expert parrot cage cleaner. Joe blows company appeals to a higher court and is given rights to do so. Higher court being conservative rules in joe blows companies favor.??? Syballina appeals to supreme court. Supreme court is stacked with congresses approved judges and their all liberal....joe blows company loses for final time.55 million dollars spent and syballina gets a 50 cent an hour raise. Plus 25 million in damages.
Sybalina now has enough money to hire a lawyer to sue company for sexual harassment because frank blow whistled at her at lunch break.... You know the rest of the story...

Holy crap now the United States is the cause of "world hunger..hhahahhahahah oh god take me soon please...

Oh one more thing, syballene now votes democrat... Goal !

sometimes laws can self-defeat what is otherwise solvable without. majority of companies do not segragate man over women. its a national illusion again designed for the gain of votes. Racism, man women, young old, right wing , left wing,etc...look at all thh etools of deseption the can be created with simple using words.
one man clan^^didn't you kmow our goal is to kill all peoples of the world who do not have our way of thinking...eeeshhh whats th eword..mmmm it escapes me now...

Nice straw man argument there, Donald. Here's the actual text:

"(1) No employer having employees subject to any provisions of this section shall discriminate, within any establishment in which such employees are employed, between employees on the basis of sex by paying wages to employees in such establishment at a rate less than the rate at which he pays wages to employees of the opposite sex in such establishment for equal work on jobs the performance of which requires equal skill, effort, and responsibility, and which are performed under similar working conditions, except where such payment is made pursuant to (i) a seniority system; (ii) a merit system; (iii) a system which measures earnings by quantity or quality of production; or (iv) a differential based on any other factor other than sex: Provided, That an employer who is paying a wage rate differential in violation of this subsection shall not, in order to comply with the provisions of this subsection, reduce the wage rate of any employee."

So the real-life scenario would be that Frank has been working for 5 years and makes 10 dollars an hour. Sibyllene has been working for 5 years, with the same skill level, and makes $8.9 (factoring the average rate of discriminatory pay disparity, which is more obvious at higher pay rates) Suddenly you've got a difference of almost $2,300 a year. If you're only job is "parrot-poop cleaner," that makes a big difference. Frivolous litigation?

When a court or rights law is put in place to protect people, you have to provide those avenues, even if some people decide "they're not convenient." Sometimes doing the right thing takes money.

Except where such payment is made pursuant to (i) *"a seniority system"; (ii) a merit ...

*was my point exactly. Like teachers tenure... Sadly or more like politically expedient... courts today are packed with mostly liberal judges who interpret, rule, confuse real law, and sometimes create counter laws to benefit an agenda. Tort laws must be alleviated. Our courts are jammed to the hilt. And the money wasted on lawyers and judges is despicable.

"Except where such payment is made pursuant to (i) *"a seniority system"; (ii) a merit ...

*was my point exactly."

In your example, someone would go to court because they weren't making as much, even though they've only been working 2 years compared to 25. I'm saying that it's a poor example; it wouldn't have gone to court, because seniority-based pay is clearly exempt.

Believe me. in the united states of america someone would will and do try and in some cases succeed on technicalities, people get away with murder on Technicalities ie OJ, "the glove didn't fit. tons of evidence but the "glove didn't fit"????

That's what happens in law, man. Every day. It doesn't mean we just stop allowing people to take things to court.

Siby, I do not know if you were corrected on those racist comments from Ron Paul's newsletter. But they were not him saying those quotes, it was the editorial staff. As Ron Paul has said many times, he didn't do his due diligence by reading the article before trusting his staff to release it.

In my opinion Ron Paul is to radical for people who are not libertarians and do not understand what the federal reserve, federal government and military industrial complex have done to rot a nation to it's core.

I truly think Ron Paul isn't extreme enough, get rid of the government entirely let the free market REIGN!

"all demos can think about to solve crises is to raise taxes more. raise taxes only on th erich?"

Dan, do not forget they like to use the federal reserve for quantitative easing 1,2 and 3. So, they can inflate the money supply and have artificially low interest rates. Which in turn is another tax on your savings as well as your green backs. Then bail out companies that are "too big to fail." They could have given every American over 15,000 dollars with all those bailouts. The government always cries about needing to save these companies through stimulus packages. Well, why not give the money to the people and let them decide who gets to keep their company and who doesn't? Or further more just have those companies sell off their assests so people who can actually run a business can run it properly?

But no they can't do that because their friends work in these business and half the CEOs are ex-government officials themselves. It's all corrupt to the core. There are two types of people in this world those that work for the government and those that slave to support it.

I think this Romney suppoter had an interesting meltdown
please do not use the link below if you are offended by strong language and hateful remarks
About 4 minutes in, she starts to go off on Ron Paul & Gary Johnson supporters. She also blames people who didn't thumb up her youtube videos and accuses Republicans of not having technological prowess. She really sounds unhinged.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=1f3_1352328148

Ryan, the reason they try to keep businesses alive is because they dont want those companies going under and firing all their employees. if enough jobs go away it just starts a vicious cycle where the economy keeps plummeting.

It starts a cycle of deflation, which they do not want. Having to pay back interest and finding out the hard way that fiat currency is not the answer to a stable economy.

Furthermore, government regulation in wage laws cause companies a lot of stress to the point they couldn't save these jobs if they wanted to.

The bailouts here in Canada lead to a town of people getting fired. And CEOs getting huge bonuses. Yep, keep those jobs coming.