Joe Donnelly: Stop Running From Your Record.

Joe Donnelly said that he did not vote for Nancy Pelosi. Is he running from his record as a way to distance himself from the failed policies of Pelosi and her liberal friends? This video exposes the truth behind Donnelly's vote for Speaker of the House. Should he be Indiana's next Senator?

• Category

  Nonprofits & Activism

[ohmario1882]

Vote Mourdock? You're a dumbass

[poet4you]

Of course he will run from his record. That is what Democrats do. Instead they attack their opponent. They can't win on the merits of their agenda or ideas so of course they personally attack their opponent. Mourdock misspoke and frankly I would too. Abortion is a tough one to explain. But what isn't hard to understand is the facts. A vote for Donnelly is a vote for Obama and his sick agenda including the farse obamacare. Vote Mourdock and try and save this country!

[von lmo]

Blue Dog Dems like Joe Donnelly lie just as much as their Republican buddies. How can you tell? They are breathing...but how can you tell they're breathing? Their mouths are open.

[WesSeid]

The '94 Republicans are the main ones who (nearly) balanced the budget, though I will give Clinton for doing his part as well.

Bush was a big-government big spender, so just because he sucked doesn't mean Obama doesn't also suck. And Democrats helped push to invade Iraq. You can look up their quotes from the time.

ALL the big-government establishment people on both sides need to be voted out.

[Scientologists4Angle]

You guys are ridiculous.

Reagan started the trillion dollar deficit plans.

Clinton was able to have a budget SURPLUS.

Bush spent it, and another $3.5 Trillion PLUS an unneeded war in Iraq.

I've had it with you Republicans.

Ever hear of disease called Bipolar? The Republicans have got it bad.

[RichardMNixon]

"Going back" to 2006 spending makes no sense. Spending has gone up every year in our history. It went up at about the same rate under Ronald "deficits don't matter" Reagan as it has under Obama. Only decreased revenue is new.

Deficit spending is unfortunate, but it's also necessary to get the economy to recover. A permanently stalled economy is less fortunate still.

No, "taxing the rich" won't fix the deficit by itself: nothing will. We need a combination of solutions and that's one of them.

[WesSeid]

People like to blame Bush for everything, and he deserves plenty of blame including on spending too much, but people forget things like the repeal of Glass-Steagall happening with a bipartisan Congress and Clinton happily signing it.

And then there's Obama's reappointment of Bernanke, and people like Barney Frank who stopped Bush from stopping Fannie and Freddie.

Bottom line: "stimulus spending" is deficit spending. Stop stealing from your own kids.

[WesSeid]

Deficit spending is literally stealing money from your own kids.

If we raise taxes back to Clinton-era levels on everybody, what happens? We still have deficits is what happens. And the really crazy people pretend we can raise taxes on only "the rich" and somehow that would fix everything. We'd still have trillion-dollar deficits doing that.

Revenues actually went up after the Bush tax cuts until all the stuff that had been building up including under Clinton and Carter kicked in.

[WesSeid]

Come on. Anyone can look up Obama's past gun statements, including as a Senator, and see he's a gun grabber. He's not big on it as President because he's smart enough to know a direct attack on guns isn't politically smart.

The debt is from spending too much. Look up the total budgets of the past years. They want to make 3.4 or so trillion the new "baseline" for spending. Even with low revenue, if we went back to 2006 spending levels, the budget would be immediately balanced.

[RichardMNixon]

Obama wasn't in office in 1994.

The debt is because of falling revenue from the recession, spending has been pretty constant except for the stimulus, which was smaller than either the Iraq War or JGTERRA. The stimulus took us out of the nosedive Bush left us in, but wasn't enough to actually recover. Now Romney insists that he's going to reduce tax revenue by more than half. How many trillions of dollars in debt do you think we'll have with even less revenue?