http://www.bizpacreview.com/2013/01/20/is-mitt-romney-the-new-nostradamus-15715 (http://www.bizpacreview.com/2013/01/20/is-mitt-romney-the-new-nostradamus-15715)
So far it's looks that way.
Doesthis mean that Obama becomes liar of the year?
Quote from: kramarat on January 23, 2013, 04:24:39 AM
Doesthis mean that Obama becomes liar of the year?
"the year"? He's liar of
all years. You know how you can tell he's lying? His lips are moving.
Quote from: Turks on January 23, 2013, 04:31:19 AM
"the year"? He's liar of all years. You know how you can tell he's lying? His lips are moving.
Oh come on. He's not
always lying. When he's not, he's outlining the next way he's going to screw us. :huh:
Quote from: kramarat on January 23, 2013, 04:35:19 AM
Oh come on. He's not always lying. When he's not, he's outlining the next way he's going to screw us. :huh:
That's true, he has to eat so he has to stop long enough to chew.
Actually Husein was quite honest had people been paying attention, he said energy would sky rocket under his plan, that he planned on bankrupting coal, that he would force a Green agenda (codeword for socialism) down our throats.
Sadly, only half the country was smart enough to understand what he was saying.
Quote from: Solar on January 23, 2013, 05:35:28 AM
Actually Husein was quite honest had people been paying attention, he said energy would sky rocket under his plan, that he planned on bankrupting coal, that he would force a Green agenda (codeword for socialism) down our throats.
Sadly, only half the country was smart enough to understand what he was saying.
:thumbsup: So true.
Quote from: supsalemgr on January 23, 2013, 07:56:23 AM
:thumbsup: So true.
I'm thinking the other half is slowly waking to the fact that it was actually a night mare, not just a dream.
I still have faith in American exceptionalism and that the majority liked life 10 years ago, as opposed to the path Husein has foist upon us.
Quote from: Solar on January 23, 2013, 08:06:53 AM
I'm thinking the other half is slowly waking to the fact that it was actually a night mare, not just a dream.
I still have faith in American exceptionalism and that the majority liked life 10 years ago, as opposed to the path Husein has foist upon us.
I think people have selective memory, that is why Obama keeps blaming bush. It is no longer about what Bush actually did, it is about creating false memories of just how bad it was. He is the great campaigner and by creating this anti-Bush(anti-republican) culture, he can make it much more difficult for any pub to get elected. That is why he still plays the Bush card, he is effectively brainwashing the public into thinking things were worse than they were, and to not go there again.
Quote from: JustKari on January 23, 2013, 08:16:05 AM
I think people have selective memory, that is why Obama keeps blaming bush. It is no longer about what Bush actually did, it is about creating false memories of just how bad it was. He is the great campaigner and by creating this anti-Bush(anti-republican) culture, he can make it much more difficult for any pub to get elected. That is why he still plays the Bush card, he is effectively brainwashing the public into thinking things were worse than they were, and to not go there again.
True, but after 7 years passes, that card will be completely worn out.
Romney's not a liar. He could be wrong about some things, but he's not a liar. Not true of "That Guy." And yes, That Guy told us what he was going to do. The Demonrats knew too, and so did the media. They all worked hard to sell this inept man to the most inept and least productive of the American population (AKA, the STUPID people)
Romney was right about a lot of things but he couldn't beat the media and an administration promising cradle to grave benefits...
Quote from: JustKari on January 23, 2013, 08:16:05 AM
I think people have selective memory, that is why Obama keeps blaming bush. It is no longer about what Bush actually did, it is about creating false memories of just how bad it was. He is the great campaigner and by creating this anti-Bush(anti-republican) culture, he can make it much more difficult for any pub to get elected. That is why he still plays the Bush card, he is effectively brainwashing the public into thinking things were worse than they were, and to not go there again.
Ok, wait, "creating false memories of just how bad it was"? Lets just run down the list for second, under President Bush, we went from a national surplus of $5.6 trillion, to a deficit of $1,215 billion. September 11th happened, not saying it's his fault, just saying, it happened while he was in charge. We invaded a sovereign nation, under false pretenses, while still fighting another war in Afghanistan, where we never achieved our goal of catching Osama Bin Ladin, during his terms. Both the housing market and wall street collapsed, leading to the most serious economic crisis since the great depression. Also, have to thrown in the patriot act, no child left behind and guantanamo, none of which went well for anyone.
Lets not act like it's all spin, lol. There is a lot of truth in that, but I respect the sentiment of lets move forward. I'm all about moving forward, but not at the expense of forgetting the past.
Quote from: EHMakeup on January 23, 2013, 06:40:22 PM
Ok, wait, "creating false memories of just how bad it was"? Lets just run down the list for second, under President Bush, we went from a national surplus of $5.6 trillion, to a deficit of $1,215 billion. September 11th happened, not saying it's his fault, just saying, it happened while he was in charge. We invaded a sovereign nation, under false pretenses, while still fighting another war in Afghanistan, where we never achieved our goal of catching Osama Bin Ladin, during his terms. Both the housing market and wall street collapsed, leading to the most serious economic crisis since the great depression. Also, have to thrown in the patriot act, no child left behind and guantanamo, none of which went well for anyone.
Lets not act like it's all spin, lol. There is a lot of truth in that, but I respect the sentiment of lets move forward. I'm all about moving forward, but not at the expense of forgetting the past.
We had legal right to invade Iraq.
Quote from: The Boo Man... on January 23, 2013, 06:44:10 PM
We had legal right to invade Iraq.
A whole list of things, and you pick one thing? Let alone the one thing that has been shown to have been inaccurate intelligence that misrepresented the facts? We may have had a legal right, but that doesn't make it the right choice in retrospect.
Quote from: EHMakeup on January 23, 2013, 06:52:10 PM
A whole list of things, and you pick one thing? Let alone the one thing that has been shown to have been inaccurate intelligence that misrepresented the facts? We may have had a legal right, but that doesn't make it the right choice in retrospect.
Of course it does. The intel might have been "faulty" But it should never have come to that. It was not our responsibility to prove he had WMD's...
We cal always finish the list next...
Quote from: The Boo Man... on January 23, 2013, 06:54:49 PM
Of course it does. The intel might have been "faulty" But it should never have come to that. It was not our responsibility to prove he had WMD's...
We cal always finish the list next...
Why was it our responsibility? I'm curious about how, out of all the nations in the world, it became our responsibility, when no one asked us to do it?
Quote from: EHMakeup on January 23, 2013, 06:59:25 PM
Why was it our responsibility? I'm curious about how, out of all the nations in the world, it became our responsibility, when no one asked us to do it?
The first gulf war. It was our responsibility along with every other country in the coalition involved in the first gulf war.
Quote from: The Boo Man... on January 23, 2013, 07:06:34 PM
The first gulf war. It was our responsibility along with every other country in the coalition involved in the first gulf war.
OK, just checking the logic here. So because we did it once before to protect a sovereign nation from invaders, we invaded a sovereign nation decades later? Do I have that right?
Quote from: EHMakeup on January 23, 2013, 07:21:39 PM
OK, just checking the logic here. So because we did it once before to protect a sovereign nation from invaders, we invaded a sovereign nation decades later? Do I have that right?
Nope. You obviously have no understanding of the first gulf war.
Quote from: The Boo Man... on January 23, 2013, 07:24:28 PM
Nope. You obviously have no understanding of the first gulf war.
I take some offense to that considering my step dad was there and we have talked at length about it, but I'll go with you here. Did we not get into the gulf war, because Iraq invaded Kuwait?
Quote from: EHMakeup on January 23, 2013, 07:50:48 PM
I take some offense to that considering my step dad was there and we have talked at length about it, but I'll go with you here. Did we not get into the gulf war, because Iraq invaded Kuwait?
You poor little thing.
You can contact management and file a harassment claim against Bert.
Quote from: taxed on January 23, 2013, 07:53:18 PM
You poor little thing.
You can contact management and file a harassment claim against Bert.
What was your point? You clearly had nothing constructive, or insight to contribute to conversation, so does it just make you feel better about yourself to be rude to people? I have a thick skin, I can take it, keep 'em coming. Clearly you need to insult people to feed your ego. I'm cool with being your target. Insult away, and have fun with it!!!
Quote from: EHMakeup on January 23, 2013, 07:50:48 PM
I take some offense to that considering my step dad was there and we have talked at length about it, but I'll go with you here. Did we not get into the gulf war, because Iraq invaded Kuwait?
No reason to take offense. You have been assuming what my arguments are. The first gulf war was never actually finished. There was a cease fire in which the coalition agreed to cease military actions in return for certain provisions. One of which Saddam would build not posses WMD's. We know he had them. 1) We gave them to him in the 1980's and 2) He used them on his own people (The Kurds) So since he had them it was his responsibility to prove to us when asked that he no longer had them. He did not do so we had no alternative but to restart military operations.
Quote from: EHMakeup on January 23, 2013, 07:57:57 PM
What was your point? You clearly had nothing constructive, or insight to contribute to conversation, so does it just make you feel better about yourself to be rude to people? I have a thick skin, I can take it, keep 'em coming. Clearly you need to insult people to feed your ego. I'm cool with being your target. Insult away, and have fun with it!!!
I was being serious. Bert clearly intellectually assaulted you by saying you don't understand the Gulf War. I can tell you're thick skinned, getting offended by that.
I hope you stay and post and attempt to support liberalism.
Quote from: taxed on January 23, 2013, 08:01:39 PM
I was being serious. Bert clearly intellectually assaulted you by saying you don't understand the Gulf War. I can tell you're thick skinned, getting offended by that.
I hope you stay and post and attempt to support liberalism.
So you were serious, but not about anything that had to do with the topic? I do understand the Gulf War, and that is what we were seriously discussing, until you decided a harassment comment was more applicable to the conversation, then actually explaining what I got wrong. As I've said before, I am happy to admit when I'm wrong, but you can't just say I'm wrong with nothing to back it up.
Quote from: EHMakeup on January 23, 2013, 08:05:10 PM
So you were serious, but not about anything that had to do with the topic? I do understand the Gulf War, and that is what we were seriously discussing, until you decided a harassment comment was more applicable to the conversation, then actually explaining what I got wrong. As I've said before, I am happy to admit when I'm wrong, but you can't just say I'm wrong with nothing to back it up.
Having a relative in the Gulf War doesn't make you know more about the Gulf War. I hope I'm not being too harsh.
Quote from: The Boo Man... on January 23, 2013, 08:01:11 PM
No reason to take offense. You have been assuming what my arguments are. The first gulf war was never actually finished. There was a cease fire in which the coalition agreed to cease military actions in return for certain provisions. One of which Saddam would build not posses WMD's. We know he had them. 1) We gave them to him in the 1980's and 2) He used them on his own people (The Kurds) So since he had them it was his responsibility to prove to us when asked that he no longer had them. He did not do so we had no alternative but to restart military operations.
Fair enough, however I take issue with some of your facts. He used chemicals weapons on the Kurds, yet the Bush administration claimed the metal tubes they saw being moved through Jordon was evidence of an atomic weapon, and that was reasoning for going into Iraq. The second thing I would say, is it's my understanding that Iraq agreed to the UN's authority on the matter, I don't know that they ever acknowledged our authority. Did I miss something on that?
Quote from: EHMakeup on January 23, 2013, 08:09:56 PM
Fair enough, however I take issue with some of your facts. He used chemicals weapons on the Kurds, yet the Bush administration claimed the metal tubes they saw being moved through Jordon was evidence of an atomic weapon, and that was reasoning for going into Iraq. The second thing I would say, is it's my understanding that Iraq agreed to the UN's authority on the matter, I don't know that they ever acknowledged our authority. Did I miss something on that?
I don't think so but my point still stands. if Saddam owned up to that we would never had gone back in. If he allowed the inspectors full access the Iraq war would never have happened. We would not have invaded and the UN would still be making money off the food for oil deal...
Quote from: taxed on January 23, 2013, 07:53:18 PM
You poor little thing.
You can contact management and file a harassment claim against Bert.
Are you really that insecure you can only make snide remarks as opposed to debating? You're surrounded by your compatriots here, you're secure.
Quote from: Capt.Obvious on January 23, 2013, 08:32:43 PM
Are you really that insecure you can only make snide remarks as opposed to debating? You're surrounded by your compatriots here, you're secure.
I'm already tired of you.
Quote from: The Boo Man... on January 23, 2013, 08:27:29 PM
I don't think so but my point still stands. if Saddam owned up to that we would never had gone back in. If he allowed the inspectors full access the Iraq war would never have happened. We would not have invaded and the UN would still be making money off the food for oil deal...
I think we are getting into some more philosophical differences here. I get what your saying, I would only say that it what not intrinsically our responsibility, based on a completely different conflict, that didn't have to do with WMD's in the first place. It seems like it should have the UN's decision, but I totally agree the UN has a lot of idiocy ruling it's decisions.
Quote from: taxed on January 23, 2013, 08:33:57 PM
I'm already tired of you.
Damn! So it's over? This forum is pointless without you.
*Deletes account*
Quote from: EHMakeup on January 23, 2013, 08:42:23 PM
I think we are getting into some more philosophical differences here. I get what your saying, I would only say that it what not intrinsically our responsibility, based on a completely different conflict, that didn't have to do with WMD's in the first place. It seems like it should have the UN's decision, but I totally agree the UN has a lot of idiocy ruling it's decisions.
If these were just philosophical differences then there would not have been all those UN resolutions giving Saddam the chance to comply.
Quote from: EHMakeup on January 23, 2013, 06:40:22 PM
Ok, wait, "creating false memories of just how bad it was"? Lets just run down the list for second, under President Bush, we went from a national surplus of $5.6 trillion, to a deficit of $1,215 billion. September 11th happened, not saying it's his fault, just saying, it happened while he was in charge. We invaded a sovereign nation, under false pretenses, while still fighting another war in Afghanistan, where we never achieved our goal of catching Osama Bin Ladin, during his terms. Both the housing market and wall street collapsed, leading to the most serious economic crisis since the great depression. Also, have to thrown in the patriot act, no child left behind and guantanamo, none of which went well for anyone.
Lets not act like it's all spin, lol. There is a lot of truth in that, but I respect the sentiment of lets move forward. I'm all about moving forward, but not at the expense of forgetting the past.
After reading too many of this posters posts it is clear it is just the same old libtard BS. Obama can do no wrong and it is all Bush's fault.
Quote from: EHMakeup on January 23, 2013, 06:40:22 PM
Ok, wait, "creating false memories of just how bad it was"? Lets just run down the list for second, under President Bush, we went from a national surplus of $5.6 trillion, to a deficit of $1,215 billion.
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fzfacts.com%2Fsites%2Fall%2Ffiles%2Fimage%2Fdebt%2FUS-national-debt-GDP.png&hash=7c88caa0eb2022dd82450ff28a680843f4dd31a0)
From a lib site, no less. You will notice that Bush's debt was holding fairly steady with only a slight rise until the end. Hmmm what happened at the end of Bush's presidency to cause that? Oh, right, a Democrat majority in house and senate. While this does not release him of some culpability, you must remember that at that time, the libs were screaming for his resignation, posting threats to his life on youtube, selling t-shirsts of his head being being blown off...He was under a bit of duress, and doing what he thought the nation wanted, at that time.
QuoteSeptember 11th happened, not saying it's his fault, just saying, it happened while he was in charge. We invaded a sovereign nation, under false pretenses, while still fighting another war in Afghanistan, where we never achieved our goal of catching Osama Bin Ladin, during his terms.
You say out one site of your mouth that it wasn't his fault, yet you blame him for it in the same phrase. Make up your mind, is it his fault, or not. We did not catch Osama on his watch, mores the pity. He had the backing of House, Senate and the UN, I am not sure whom else you would have liked him to ask permission.
QuoteBoth the housing market and wall street collapsed, leading to the most serious economic crisis since the great depression.
The housing collapse? Bush warned congress many times of a coming collapse and no one listened. The housing market fall can be linked very easily to Clinton and his penchant for fairness in housing. http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/hotproperty/archives/2008/02/clintons_drive.html (http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/hotproperty/archives/2008/02/clintons_drive.html)
As to the actual collapse, unlike our current "rule by fiat" president, Bush warned (as I said) and the congress refused to act. http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2010/05/pelosi-caught-in-major-lie-says-bush-didnt-warn-congress-about-financial-crisis-records-show-he-warned-congress-17-in-2008-alone/ (http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2010/05/pelosi-caught-in-major-lie-says-bush-didnt-warn-congress-about-financial-crisis-records-show-he-warned-congress-17-in-2008-alone/)
I know, conservative site, but it actually liinks to sources.
QuoteAlso, have to thrown in the patriot act, no child left behind and guantanamo, none of which went well for anyone.
Lets not act like it's all spin, lol. There is a lot of truth in that, but I respect the sentiment of lets move forward. I'm all about moving forward, but not at the expense of forgetting the past.
The patriot act was not a smart move, however he truly felt he was doing good. Obama expanded the Act, so apparently he does not feel it is so bad. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/27/patriot-act-extension-signed-obama-autopen_n_867851.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/27/patriot-act-extension-signed-obama-autopen_n_867851.html)
No child left behind was again, foolish. The problem was, at that point, he was looking at problems like liberals do, make it a little better for the one suffering, at the expense of anyone who is not. It just does not work.
Gitmo, well I really don't see any issue with Gitmo, and apparently neither does PINO because four years after he signed an EO stating Gitmo will be closed within one year, it is still open.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jan/20/obamas-first-term-promise-close-gitmo-prison-still/ (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jan/20/obamas-first-term-promise-close-gitmo-prison-still/)
So, yes let's move beyond the Bush Blaming, shall we?
Quote from: JustKari on January 24, 2013, 07:36:10 AM
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fzfacts.com%2Fsites%2Fall%2Ffiles%2Fimage%2Fdebt%2FUS-national-debt-GDP.png&hash=7c88caa0eb2022dd82450ff28a680843f4dd31a0)
From a lib site, no less. You will notice that Bush's debt was holding fairly steady with only a slight rise until the end. Hmmm what happened at the end of Bush's presidency to cause that? Oh, right, a Democrat majority in house and senate. While this does not release him of some culpability, you must remember that at that time, the libs were screaming for his resignation, posting threats to his life on youtube, selling t-shirsts of his head being being blown off...He was under a bit of duress, and doing what he thought the nation wanted, at that time.
You say out one site of your mouth that it wasn't his fault, yet you blame him for it in the same phrase. Make up your mind, is it his fault, or not. We did not catch Osama on his watch, mores the pity. He had the backing of House, Senate and the UN, I am not sure whom else you would have liked him to ask permission.
The housing collapse? Bush warned congress many times of a coming collapse and no one listened. The housing market fall can be linked very easily to Clinton and his penchant for fairness in housing. http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/hotproperty/archives/2008/02/clintons_drive.html (http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/hotproperty/archives/2008/02/clintons_drive.html)
As to the actual collapse, unlike our current "rule by fiat" president, Bush warned (as I said) and the congress refused to act. http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2010/05/pelosi-caught-in-major-lie-says-bush-didnt-warn-congress-about-financial-crisis-records-show-he-warned-congress-17-in-2008-alone/ (http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2010/05/pelosi-caught-in-major-lie-says-bush-didnt-warn-congress-about-financial-crisis-records-show-he-warned-congress-17-in-2008-alone/)
I know, conservative site, but it actually liinks to sources.
The patriot act was not a smart move, however he truly felt he was doing good. Obama expanded the Act, so apparently he does not feel it is so bad. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/27/patriot-act-extension-signed-obama-autopen_n_867851.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/27/patriot-act-extension-signed-obama-autopen_n_867851.html)
No child left behind was again, foolish. The problem was, at that point, he was looking at problems like liberals do, make it a little better for the one suffering, at the expense of anyone who is not. It just does not work.
Gitmo, well I really don't see any issue with Gitmo, and apparently neither does PINO because four years after he signed an EO stating Gitmo will be closed within one year, it is still open.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jan/20/obamas-first-term-promise-close-gitmo-prison-still/ (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jan/20/obamas-first-term-promise-close-gitmo-prison-still/)
So, yes let's move beyond the Bush Blaming, shall we?
Well done Kari, but something tells me this will go in one ear, and out the next.
Quote from: Solar on January 24, 2013, 07:40:30 AM
Well done Kari, but something tells me this will go in one ear, and out the next.
Well with nothing in the middle it's to be expected. :lol:
Quote from: Solar on January 24, 2013, 07:40:30 AM
Well done Kari, but something tells me this will go in one ear, and out the next.
Well, at least you read it so I didn't drag myself out to the PC for nothing. :lol:
Quote from: JustKari on January 24, 2013, 07:36:10 AM
(https://conservativepoliticalforum.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fzfacts.com%2Fsites%2Fall%2Ffiles%2Fimage%2Fdebt%2FUS-national-debt-GDP.png&hash=7c88caa0eb2022dd82450ff28a680843f4dd31a0)
From a lib site, no less. You will notice that Bush's debt was holding fairly steady with only a slight rise until the end. Hmmm what happened at the end of Bush's presidency to cause that? Oh, right, a Democrat majority in house and senate. While this does not release him of some culpability, you must remember that at that time, the libs were screaming for his resignation, posting threats to his life on youtube, selling t-shirsts of his head being being blown off...He was under a bit of duress, and doing what he thought the nation wanted, at that time.
You say out one site of your mouth that it wasn't his fault, yet you blame him for it in the same phrase. Make up your mind, is it his fault, or not. We did not catch Osama on his watch, mores the pity. He had the backing of House, Senate and the UN, I am not sure whom else you would have liked him to ask permission.
The housing collapse? Bush warned congress many times of a coming collapse and no one listened. The housing market fall can be linked very easily to Clinton and his penchant for fairness in housing. http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/hotproperty/archives/2008/02/clintons_drive.html (http://www.businessweek.com/the_thread/hotproperty/archives/2008/02/clintons_drive.html)
As to the actual collapse, unlike our current "rule by fiat" president, Bush warned (as I said) and the congress refused to act. http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2010/05/pelosi-caught-in-major-lie-says-bush-didnt-warn-congress-about-financial-crisis-records-show-he-warned-congress-17-in-2008-alone/ (http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2010/05/pelosi-caught-in-major-lie-says-bush-didnt-warn-congress-about-financial-crisis-records-show-he-warned-congress-17-in-2008-alone/)
I know, conservative site, but it actually liinks to sources.
The patriot act was not a smart move, however he truly felt he was doing good. Obama expanded the Act, so apparently he does not feel it is so bad. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/27/patriot-act-extension-signed-obama-autopen_n_867851.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/27/patriot-act-extension-signed-obama-autopen_n_867851.html)
No child left behind was again, foolish. The problem was, at that point, he was looking at problems like liberals do, make it a little better for the one suffering, at the expense of anyone who is not. It just does not work.
Gitmo, well I really don't see any issue with Gitmo, and apparently neither does PINO because four years after he signed an EO stating Gitmo will be closed within one year, it is still open.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jan/20/obamas-first-term-promise-close-gitmo-prison-still/ (http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jan/20/obamas-first-term-promise-close-gitmo-prison-still/)
So, yes let's move beyond the Bush Blaming, shall we?
My point was not to blame former President Bush, but there are simple facts that exist, that do not go away. Financially speaking, President Bush did contribute to the economic failures we are suffering from now. Tax cuts, in conjunction with two wars, an now new revenue coming in, is a recipe for disaster. Add in the deregulation of the financial sector by the Secretary of Treasury, and we were doomed to end up here.
I would also like to state for the record, I am not a supporter of President Obama. I didn't vote for him, nor would I given another opportunity. In my perfect world someone like Jon Huntsman would be President, but because of our current electoral system, candidates like him don't have a shot. My point is that I am not some leftist, follow the dems like a sheep, progressive. I do, however think that ignoring the past dooms you to repeat it, and I'm not going to forget what President Bush or President Obama has done to hurt this country. But I'm not going to blame one or the other singularly.
Quote from: EHMakeup on January 24, 2013, 08:04:24 AM
My point was not to blame former President Bush, but there are simple facts that exist, that do not go away. Financially speaking, President Bush did contribute to the economic failures we are suffering from now. Tax cuts, in conjunction with two wars, an now new revenue coming in, is a recipe for disaster. Add in the deregulation of the financial sector by the Secretary of Treasury, and we were doomed to end up here.
I would also like to state for the record, I am not a supporter of President Obama. I didn't vote for him, nor would I given another opportunity. In my perfect world someone like Jon Huntsman would be President, but because of our current electoral system, candidates like him don't have a shot. My point is that I am not some leftist, follow the dems like a sheep, progressive. I do, however think that ignoring the past dooms you to repeat it, and I'm not going to forget what President Bush or President Obama has done to hurt this country. But I'm not going to blame one or the other singularly.
Then we stand on some common ground.
Quote from: JustKari on January 24, 2013, 08:40:51 AM
Then we stand on some common ground.
Do we? It doesn't seem like that from your previous post and breakdown. It sounded to me like the only failures you acknowledge from the previous administration is the Patriot Act, and no child left behind. I'm not saying that President Bush deserves all the blame for government failures, but would you accept the idea that there was some serious negligence by his administration? Or have I headed to far to the left? lol :popcorn:
Some great replies there Justkeri. It is pretty scary the hypocritical distortions and misrepresentations that are constantly tossed around like they are facts. Obama is in year 5 and he still is not responsible for a damn thing that is going on yet bush is blamed for 911. Then he gets no credit that the economy got over that. He did spend like a sailor on leave with the help of the Dems so I think that part of where our economy is should be laid at his feet too. Guantanamo is still alive and well and do not recall it being mentioned much in the inaugural speech.
I still scratch my head when a Rep talks about the patriot act in a positive way. It really has faded from the collective memory that the invasion of Iraq was discussed with everyone and prior to the invasion the majority of the people in this country were all for it. I was against it and was certain that the issue was not WMD. Most of what was said had long been proven to be false. I still believe that if our country is going to be at war we need a draft. Everyone needs some skin in the game. I think the same thing about taxes, everyone has a minimum membership fee that can be paid in taxes or services to the country. No free rides.
I am glad you did such a great job because as I read the post you responded to I could feel my head wanting to explode because it clearly was just fabrications that get said so often that the Libs now think they are true. Bush was no fiscal conservative but he was not even in the same book as obama when it comes to spending money.
Quote from: EHMakeup on January 24, 2013, 08:56:26 AM
Do we? It doesn't seem like that from your previous post and breakdown. It sounded to me like the only failures you acknowledge from the previous administration is the Patriot Act, and no child left behind. I'm not saying that President Bush deserves all the blame for government failures, but would you accept the idea that there was some serious negligence by his administration? Or have I headed to far to the left? lol :popcorn:
I also said that he warned of the financial crisis, but left it up to congress to do something about. He certainly could have ruled by EO, he had the option available, but chose to do it "the old fashioned way". Since I really am not a fan of the EO (it's a conservative thing) I can't really fault him for not doing it. I do see your point though, he had the knowledge, passed it on to those that did nothing, if he was going lib, he might as well have forced something. Not sure if it would have worked, I can't predict the future, the last election proved that.
We highlight Bush's spending but never mention the money wasted on the stimulus. Solyndra? And a lot of it was wasted and used as payback.
Quote from: Turks on January 24, 2013, 09:06:31 AM
We highlight Bush's spending but never mention the money wasted on the stimulus. Solyndra? And a lot of it was wasted and used as payback.
I know, we have gone over Bush's faults, and why each of them happened ad nausium even in the short time I have been here. I can't imagine how tired the guys are who have been here have had to provide links to the same info. We should just have a thread with all the links in one place proving that while Bush was no conservative, awesome, bastion of conservatism, he wasn't satan either. By the looks of the graph I posted Obama's spending just might reach FDRs. :ohmy: It is certainly on the same trajectory.
I agree and I'd like to know at what point does Obama own what he does?
Four years in and it's still Boooooooooosh. He bears responsibility no doubt, but if you listen to the other side...Obama bears none. Somewhere between 4.5 and 6 trillion of "it's not my fault...ever"is getting real old.
It's Official: Worst. Recovery. EVER
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-01-24/its-official-worst-recovery-ever (http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-01-24/its-official-worst-recovery-ever)
And The Reason For Today's Five Years Initial Claims Low Is...
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-01-24/and-reason-todays-five-years-initial-claims-low (http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-01-24/and-reason-todays-five-years-initial-claims-low)
The same way liberals discount or overlook Obama's failures, you're doing the same to Bush JustKari.
Call him for what he is, a shit president. Same as Obama.
Quote from: redlom xof on January 24, 2013, 09:18:58 AM
The same way liberals discount or overlook Obama's failures, you're doing the same to Bush JustKari.
Call him for what he is, a shit president. Same as Obama.
I think I am pretty honest that Bush was not a fantastic president, but he just is not as bad as libs paint him.
Quote from: JustKari on January 24, 2013, 09:40:14 AM
I think I am pretty honest that Bush was not a fantastic president, but he just is not as bad as libs paint him.
He was far from perfect but if he was indeed a "shit" President where does that leave Obama?
Quote from: EHMakeup on January 23, 2013, 06:52:10 PM
A whole list of things, and you pick one thing? Let alone the one thing that has been shown to have been inaccurate intelligence that misrepresented the facts? We may have had a legal right, but that doesn't make it the right choice in retrospect.
See, this is where liberals don't get or deserve respect.
You start by using all the buzzwords to suggest illegal invasion, then when corrected, you quickly change your stance to something squishy and undefinable, just "it's wrong no matter what you prove to me about it".
And the complaint about "one thing". Each and every thing can be spoofed, in your little diatribe.
All it is, is dipsey doodle, duck and dodge, rope-a-dope with you guys. Always one more turn away from the actual truth or logic.
It wouldn't be as bad if it was just random jokers on the internet. But as we saw yesterday, the people at the very top of our governmnet have become dedicated experts at it, even in matters of death, crime, and treason.
Quote from: EHMakeup on January 24, 2013, 08:04:24 AM
My point was not to blame former President Bush,
...usually when a lib says this, they are about to post inaccurate information on the subject...
Quote
but there are simple facts that exist, that do not go away. Financially speaking, President Bush did contribute to the economic failures we are suffering from now.
How did Bush hurt the economy? Please elaborate.
Quote
Tax cuts,
Tax cuts NEVER hurt the economy. Libs desperately want this to be true, but have never been able to explain how people will spend more with less money. If you use this logic, then we would be in a boom economy with a 90% tax rate. Letting people keep their income they earned will NEVER hurt the economy.
Quote
in conjunction with two wars,
More false propaganda. Read #2:
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2010/06/the-three-biggest-myths-about-tax-cuts-and-the-budget-deficit (http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2010/06/the-three-biggest-myths-about-tax-cuts-and-the-budget-deficit)
Quote
an now new revenue coming in, is a recipe for disaster.
In 2007, federal revenue was the highest in HISTORY. When taxes are reduced, federal revenues increase. This very simple, basic concept causes liberals to go into a meltdown when they are forced to discuss it.
Quote
Add in the deregulation of the financial sector by the Secretary of Treasury, and we were doomed to end up here.
Do you know what deregulation is? Please research it so you can understand it.
Quote
I would also like to state for the record, I am not a supporter of President Obama.
You can't parrot his propaganda down the line, line by line, and say you don't support Obama. You are a devout Obama supporter, simply by being uninformed.
Quote
I didn't vote for him, nor would I given another opportunity. In my perfect world someone like Jon Huntsman would be President, but because of our current electoral system, candidates like him don't have a shot. My point is that I am not some leftist, follow the dems like a sheep, progressive. I do, however think that ignoring the past dooms you to repeat it, and I'm not going to forget what President Bush or President Obama has done to hurt this country. But I'm not going to blame one or the other singularly.
Young lady, you can't compare Bush to Hussein Obama. Bush couldn't have destroyed our country like Hussein Obama has if he tried. Please get up to speed on the fiscal destruction between the two, because they don't compare.
Quote from: redlom xof on January 24, 2013, 09:18:58 AM
The same way liberals discount or overlook Obama's failures, you're doing the same to Bush JustKari.
Call him for what he is, a shit president. Same as Obama.
Don't compare the two. Bush was bad. Obama is a destructive menace devoted to our destruction.
Quote from: redlom xof on January 24, 2013, 09:18:58 AM
The same way liberals discount or overlook Obama's failures, you're doing the same to Bush JustKari.
Call him for what he is, a shit president. Same as Obama.
Bush did stupid stuff, such as falling for the liberal scams on stimulus, medicaire and immigration.
But his tax cuts did work, and even helped defray the costs associated with the dotcom bust and 9-11.
He undertook 2 wars with the approval of the dems and UN, who all agreed on WMD. So you have NOTHING there but a menu of your favorite lies from the left.
His military and intel during the wars set the table for Obama to come in on the tale end, and give himself huge credit for some good things.
He was a decent, patriotic, reverent American who didn't use the White House to push his beliefs on anyone.
NOW......you can pretty well flip every one of these and illustrate with real data how Obama has done just about the opposite, ass-backwards.
Quote from: taxed on January 24, 2013, 10:00:57 AM
Don't compare the two. Bush was bad. Obama is a destructive menace devoted to our destruction.
It's their mythology. No matter how many times they are corrected or spoofed with the details, they will just say it again as though it's true if they say it.
Bush was average to good. He did some things that he shouldn't have, that really hurt his credibility as a conservative.
But the logic of bitching about deficits during the dotcom recession, 9-11 recession, and 2 wars (fully approved by dems and UN) is moronic. You may as well complain about the spending during WW2.
But you see, there must be a fake narrative to avoid the truth of Obama as worst president ever, and his instant 6 trillion in bigger deficit from just profligate spending, and wars that he swore he would end on day 1.
The liberals' narrative is so incredibly stupid that they have now announced that the recession probably can't be corrected for another 4-8 years, giving Obama convenient cover for sucking for 8 full years. They also will be blaming Bush for the full 8 years (16 total lol), and even heaping more idiocy on top with various blames for.......get this......Reagan !!!
Quote from: AndyJackson on January 24, 2013, 10:15:21 AM
It's their mythology. No matter how many times they are corrected or spoofed with the details, they will just say it again as though it's true if they say it.
Bush was average to good. He did some things that he shouldn't have, that really hurt his credibility as a conservative.
But the logic of bitching about deficits during the dotcom recession, 9-11 recession, and 2 wars (fully approved by dems and UN) is moronic. You may as well complain about the spending during WW2.
But you see, there must be a fake narrative to avoid the truth of Obama as worst president ever, and his instant 6 trillion in bigger deficit from just profligate spending, and wars that he swore he would end on day 1.
The liberals' narrative is so incredibly stupid that they have now announced that the recession probably can't be corrected for another 4-8 years, giving Obama convenient cover for sucking for 8 full years. They also will be blaming Bush for the full 8 years (16 total lol), and even heaping more idiocy on top with various blames for.......get this......Reagan !!!
I'll never understand the liberal hypocrisy. They blame Bush for doing far less of what Hussein does. I don't get it.
Just because points out that Bush was a terrible president doesn't make them a liberal or an Obama supporter.
You are both living in this world where you have to be either a liberal or republican.
QuoteBush was average to good.
A man that puts trillions of dollars into the deficit and you call him average to good. You're a funny sort of conservative.
I laid it all out for you.....dotcom recession, 9-11 recession, two wars approved by both houses, dems, UN.
But you'll have none of that....all you need is snarky smarmy quips to soothe your wrongness.
And THAT is what shows that you're a liberal at least as much as your skewed beliefs.
Ignore facts and data, make it up as you go.
Quote from: taxed on January 24, 2013, 10:18:06 AM
I'll never understand the liberal hypocrisy. They blame Bush for doing far less of what Hussein does. I don't get it.
It is interesting that libs always want to blame Bush because of the tax cuts. However, they never mention the real reason. He allowed the Congress to spend like crazy when he could have vetoed so much of the wasteful spending.
Quote from: redlom xof on January 24, 2013, 10:24:25 AM
Just because points out that Bush was a terrible president doesn't make them a liberal or an Obama supporter.
You are both living in this world where you have to be either a liberal or republican.
A man that puts trillions of dollars into the deficit and you call him average to good. You're a funny sort of conservative.
Do not think so young man. Independent, Communist, Scholastic.
:cry:
Why wasnt this man elected, why? He couldve been the band aid to our suffering.
Quote from: supsalemgr on January 24, 2013, 12:02:12 PM
It is interesting that libs always want to blame Bush because of the tax cuts. However, they never mention the real reason. He allowed the Congress to spend like crazy when he could have vetoed so much of the wasteful spending.
Totally...
Quote from: AndyJackson on January 24, 2013, 10:15:21 AM
It's their mythology. No matter how many times they are corrected or spoofed with the details, they will just say it again as though it's true if they say it.
Bush was average to good. He did some things that he shouldn't have, that really hurt his credibility as a conservative.
But the logic of bitching about deficits during the dotcom recession, 9-11 recession, and 2 wars (fully approved by dems and UN) is moronic. You may as well complain about the spending during WW2.
But you see, there must be a fake narrative to avoid the truth of Obama as worst president ever, and his instant 6 trillion in bigger deficit from just profligate spending, and wars that he swore he would end on day 1.
The liberals' narrative is so incredibly stupid that they have now announced that the recession probably can't be corrected for another 4-8 years, giving Obama convenient cover for sucking for 8 full years. They also will be blaming Bush for the full 8 years (16 total lol), and even heaping more idiocy on top with various blames for.......get this......Reagan !!!
I totally agree with this post and am sick to death of the victimology of Pres. Bush.
Nothing he ever did or didn't do should be judged as harshly as it has been by the likes of liberals.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/25/romney-jeep-ad_n_2551403.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/25/romney-jeep-ad_n_2551403.html)
Fact check still says NO!
Quote from: The Stranger on January 26, 2013, 07:05:33 AM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/25/romney-jeep-ad_n_2551403.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/25/romney-jeep-ad_n_2551403.html)
Fact check still says NO!
You mean the leftist sock puppet that claims everything the Right does is a lie, that so called Factcheck?