Comments on: Would Romney be better for Europe? Sat, 03 Jan 2015 16:42:55 +0000 hourly 1 By: GrahamLovell Mon, 05 Nov 2012 04:33:07 +0000 Didn’t Reagan leave an enormous debt load that has not yet been paid back, despite the good times in between?

Public debt was about 23% of GDP when Reagan took office, and about 40% when he left office, rose to nearly 50% under Bush, fell to around 32% under Clinton, and kept climbing under Bush II.

How can this be construed as good Keynesian economics? Of these, only Clinton can be regarded as a Keynesian with guts (or backbone), despite the hoary rhetoric from the Reagan admirers.

By: DifferentOne Fri, 02 Nov 2012 06:59:43 +0000 Ah, the good old days of Reaganomics, when big budget deficits did “no serious harm”. It must have been so comforting to hear Reagan assure us that “the deficit is big enough to look after itself”. Yes, how innocuous. How comforting — to have a charming actor for a President.

Of course, I’m being sarcastic.

The author is right to say that deficits and fiscal stimulus make sense in a weak economy. But why should this lead anyone to support Romney? His actual intentions are not clear at all, because he has refused to specify exactly what programs he would cut to pay for his massive spending plans.

Romney is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. He will promise anything to get elected. But once in power, he will listen to Paul Ryan, who wants to gut social programs and favor the ultra rich, at the expense of the middle class.

Why then should we recall charming President Reagan, right at this point? So that we will believe that everything is okay when it’s not?

In fact there is a serious danger that a manipulative, devious liar and his right-wing extremist running mate could get elected to run the country. That’s really scary!

Now is definitely not the time to get lulled into complacency with fond memories of charming old Ron.

By: Gordon2352 Thu, 01 Nov 2012 13:49:01 +0000 I couldn’t get past this sentence in this openly biased campaign ad for Romney.

“if we focus on the issues that are preoccupying Europeans now en masse — global economic stagnation and the deepening euro crisis — then we reach a different conclusion. Maybe Europe should root for Romney, despite his social views.”

Americans are the only people who are interested in “social views” more than economics, and we are undoubtedly the greatest hypocrites on the planet in terms of those.

It is precisely those “global economic stagnation and the deepening euro crisis” that scares the hell out of Europeans.

We are too stupid and preoccupied with examining our own “navel lint” to understand the danger Romney represents, not only for this nation, but the global economy.

Not that Obama is any great bargain, but frankly four more years of Bush II would be preferable.