Federal is federal and he can't touch it. The council can't touch it. He can't do anything about the current policies and those are the ones that have caused the situation. He admits he can't do anything about them.
When he talks about a moratorium he's just using flowery language that's been proven to get the vote of a certain segment of the population to vote for him. What's his moratorium on increasing the availability of affordable housing going to do to fix the current problems?
He almost sounds like he's taken a class on what to say to get elected.
Both inexperienced know nothings.
Obama's campaign involved a ton of promises he has chosen to break. McDonald is campaigning on promises he has no way of keeping.
Main selling point: They aren't the last guy.
Seem pretty similar to me.
How's it working for me? Pretty good job, nice home, best financial status I've been in my entire life.
Of course I have a college education, a phenomenal work ethic and refuse to blame other people (or the government) when things aren't looking rosy.
And aren't we supposed to be trying to get rid of those people?
And how's that been working for us? Obama is a prime example of why voters should stay the heck away from people like McDonald.
Since he has no control over what he's campaigning on... what changes are you expecting?
Or in this case...
Campaigning on an issue + having no control or ability to make changes to the issue = No change will get made and he's just a wanna be career politician saying whatever he thinks you want to hear in order to get him a government check for doing nothing.
So we have a candidate that flat out admits that he can in no way shape or form, under any circumstances carry through with anything he says... And people support him and say his plans are amazing.
You people scare the ever loving crap out of me.
I've never seen a "large" venue have free parking. Not when I lived in NE Texas and traveled to the DFW or Shreveport, LA or Little Rock, not here in Maine, not anywhere in New England that I've ever seen a show at.
I feel no sympathy for people that are having a hard time because of their bad choices. They screwed up, and most likely their screw up hurt someone else (physical, property, etc) so they should pay. The victims don't get off without a hitch so why should they?
Are they charging the kid's father with negligence and child endangerment?
Are they charging him for not taking care of his kid and nearly allowing it to get killed?