The Explainer in Chief on 60 Minutes

[Clocker]

Obama says Americans are much better off than they were when he took office. They just don't know it. The ungrateful little whiners.

In an interview with Steve Croft of “60 Minutes” that, at times, seemed more like an audition for press secretary than journalism, President Obama said, “The country is better off than when I came into office.” The reason for his horrible poll numbers? People don’t feel it.

When asked if people “feel it,” the President said, “They don’t feel it. And the reason they don’t feel it is because income and wages are not going up.”

In 2008, the median household income was $53,644, in 2012, that number had DROPPED to $51,017. If that’s better off, we could all use a dose of worse.

He went on to say, “When I came into office our economy was in crisis. We had unemployment up at 10 percent, it’s now down to 6.1.” That’d be great, if it were true. It’s not.

When he took office the unemployment rate was 7.8 percent. After his trillion-dollar “stimulus” package, the unemployment rate went up steadily, topping out at 10 percent in October of 2009 (long after he took office), and staying above nine percent for more than two years.

Article here. (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=5)

[Greyfox]

Obama says Americans are much better off than they were when he took office. They just don't know it. The ungrateful little whiners.



Article here. (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=5)

Mr. Dithers....I mean Mr. Hope and Change sees the world as he wants to see it, not as it is.

[cj's dad]

"In 2008, the median household income was $53,644, in 2012, that number had DROPPED to $51,017. If that’s better off, we could all use a dose of worse."

Not to worry. Before the day is out, 'Cap or Mosty will be along with their
to explain everything.:lol:

[Clocker]

In his 60 Minutes interview, Obama blamed his intelligence people for the underestimation of ISIS.

Steve Kroft: I understand all the caveats about these regional groups. But this is what an army of 40,000 people, according to some of the military estimates I heard the other day, very well-trained, very motivated.

President Obama: Well, part of it was that…

Steve Kroft: What? How did they end up where they are in control of so much territory? Was that a complete surprise to you?

President Obama: Well I think, our head of the intelligence community, Jim Clapper, has acknowledged that I think they underestimated what had been taking place in Syria

Some folks are taking issue with his blame game.

Nearly eight months ago, some of President Obama’s senior intelligence officials were already warning that ISIS was on the move. In the beginning of 2014, ISIS fighters had defeated Iraqi forces in Fallujah, leading much of the U.S. intelligence community to assess they would try to take more of Iraq.

But in an interview that aired Sunday evening, the president told 60 Minutes that the rise of the group now proclaiming itself a caliphate in territory between Syria and Iraq caught the U.S. intelligence community off guard. Obama specifically blamed James Clapper, the current director of national intelligence: “Our head of the intelligence community, Jim Clapper, has acknowledged that, I think, they underestimated what had been taking place in Syria,” he said.

Reached by The Daily Beast after Obama’s interview aired, one former senior Pentagon official who worked closely on the threat posed by Sunni jihadists in Syria and Iraq was flabbergasted. “Either the president doesn’t read the intelligence he’s getting or he’s bullshitting,” the former official said.

Full story. (http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/09/28/why-obama-can-t-say-his-spies-underestimated-isis.html)

[tucker6]

probably a bit of both. Obama doesn't seem to care enough about his job to read briefs, and he's a consummate bullshitter. I think we got a two-fer on this one.

[Tom]

Obama was the only one who didn't see SIS coming.

That is because:

a. he is an idiot
b. he is a terrorist
c. he is a terrorist enabler
d. he is a really big idiot
e. all of the above

[Clocker]

Joe Sestak is a former Rear Admiral and a former Democratic member of the House of Representatives. He was on MSNBC and was asked how our intelligence people got this wrong.

“How did the U.S. intelligence community get it so wrong on ISIS?” MSNBC host Jose Diaz-Balart asked.

“I don’t think they did,” Sestak replied bluntly, prompting Diaz-Balart’s eyebrows to nearly rocket off of his face in shock.

“If you remember back in January and February, the head — the general, the Defense Intelligence Agency, actually testified before the House and Senate that in 2014, ISIS would take over large swaths of territory,” the Navy veteran asserted. “In fact, at the time he testified, they had already seized Ramadi and Fallujah — 35 miles from Baghdad.”

Sestak noted that even DNI Clapper, who today still bears the tire marks from the bus under which he was thrown by the president, testified that ISIS maintained the capability to expand out from Syria into a wide swath of territory in Iraq.

“I think it was slow on the part of the entire administration to assess that they — what they had to do in order address the threat,” Sestak concluded.

Story here. (http://hotair.com/archives/2014/09/29/prominent-democrat-the-only-people-who-underestimated-isis-were-in-the-white-house/)

[tucker6]

The problem is that Clapper tried to inform Obama during one of his many vacation golf outings. Can't blame Obama for his subordinate's poor timing. :rolleyes:

[johnhannibalsmith]

probably a bit of both. Obama doesn't seem to care enough about his job to read briefs, and he's a consummate bullshitter. I think we got a two-fer on this one.

I'm openly vocal about what Obama has been a failure at, generally things that at one time I thought he might get right. When it comes to being commander-in-chief, that was always going to be a mess. Stuff like this he ought to just admit that he's ill equipped to lead on. He wants to live in a political world where he can bellow out rhetoric and fanciful idealism, not the gray world of choosing the best of ten horrible options because that is the reality of being in charge of a messed up world. I'd stand up and give him a rousing ovation if he just shrugged and said that he blew it because it's way outside his realm of alleged expertise.

[Greyfox]

I'd stand up and give him a rousing ovation if he just shrugged and said that he blew it because it's way outside his realm of alleged expertise.

That's an ovation that you will never have to give.

[Clocker]

I'd stand up and give him a rousing ovation if he just shrugged and said that he blew it because it's way outside his realm of alleged expertise.

I can't remember him ever admitting that he had ever done anything wrong.

I remember an interview right after his reelection (it might have been with the same guy from 60 Minutes), he was asked if he had any regrets about anything he had done in his first administration, anything that he would do differently.

His reply was that he often spent too much time making sure that he got the policy right, and not enough time explaining the policy to the country.

[tucker6]

His reply was that he often spent too much time making sure that he got the policy right, and not enough time explaining the policy to the country.
you're too stupid to appreciate what we have in Obama. Shame on you!!

[Clocker]

you're too stupid to appreciate what we have in Obama. Shame on you!!

It's Obama's fault for not 'splaining it to me good 'nough. :blush:

[TJDave]

I can't remember him ever admitting that he had ever done anything wrong.


Presidents do that?

[tucker6]

It's Obama's fault for not 'splaining it to me good 'nough. :blush:
He's too busy making decisions for his cabinet members since he's better at policy in their chosen fields than they are. Once you let that sentence roll around for a while, nothing he does is a surprise. A basic lack of leadership skills from someone unused to management or leadership at any level of govt or business. We got what some of us knew we were getting.

[FantasticDan]

I can't remember him ever admitting that he had ever done anything wrong.All you have to do is google something like "Obama admits mistakes", and there's plenty of humility on display. Here's the first that pops up:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/president-obama-admits-making-mistake-day-article-1.995392

The whole "Obama is to arrogant to admit mistakes" meme is just another delusional righty fabrication.

[TJDave]

All you have to do is google something like "Obama admits mistakes", and there's plenty of humility on display. Here's the first that pops up:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/president-obama-admits-making-mistake-day-article-1.995392


Certainly a mistake to be photographed with a fat guy.

[thaskalos]

Certainly a mistake to be photographed with a fat guy.

Unless you are selling diet food.

[tucker6]

All you have to do is google something like "Obama admits mistakes", and there's plenty of humility on display. Here's the first that pops up:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/president-obama-admits-making-mistake-day-article-1.995392

The whole "Obama is to arrogant to admit mistakes" meme is just another delusional righty fabrication.
I don't see him mentioning anything specifically in that link. His answer reads like an answer someone gives in a job interview. "My biggest weakness is that I work too damned hard at making money for my employer".

[reckless]

Jokes aside, the 60 Minutes interview showed the world once again what a cowardly, clueless, petulent little child Obama really is.

The buses are about to tilt over as little boy Barry continues to throw people under, demonstrating no leadership, not to mention zero basic class and character.

What a dangerous clown he is. And to think there are people that still defend and cover up for him.

[Clocker]

I don't see him mentioning anything specifically in that link. His answer reads like an answer someone gives in a job interview. "My biggest weakness is that I work too damned hard at making money for my employer".

The job interview thing was the first thing I thought of when I read that.

[NJ Stinks]

Anybody who says our economy is not better off now than it was when Obama took office is a liar. Period.

[Track Collector]

What Obama said:

His reply was that he often spent too much time making sure that he got the policy right, and not enough time explaining the policy to the country.

What Obama meant:

....he spent all his time making sure his policies pushed his political strategy and agenda, and avoided telling the public his true motives.

[HUSKER55]

too much golf and running around in air force1

[dartman51]

Stating that you could have done some things better, is not admitting to a mistake. Like, I did a good job handicapping that race, but I could have done a little better. :lol:

[dartman51]

Anybody who says our economy is not better off now than it was when Obama took office is a liar. Period.

In reality, anyone that believes the economy IS better, IS delusional. If you want to buy in to the phony numbers that come out of Washington, I pity you. Anybody that says that the REAL unemployment number is below 8%, is a liar.
The real median household income in 2009 was $54,541, in 2013, it was $52,250. The WORKFORCE participation rate is 62.8%. That matches the lowest since March 1978. But, oh yeah, the economy is doing great. :lol: :lol:
Light up another joint, dude, and take off them silly ROSE COLORED GLASSES. :D

[Clocker]

Anybody that says that the REAL unemployment number is below 8%, is a liar.

The current U-6 rate (unemployment and underemployment) is about 12%. That doesn't reflect the millions of people that have dropped out of the labor force under this administration. Ask those people whether they are better off under Obama.

[Marshall Bennett]

Anybody who says our economy is not better off now than it was when Obama took office is a liar. Period.
Depends on who you ask and how much you agree with numbers. The market is stronger simply because investors have very little elsewhere to go. The job market has been bad for so long that millions have given up looking and have exhausted their benefits. They don't factor any longer in unemployment numbers.
That aside, but related, millions like myself now pay much more for health care with plans far less beneficial. Oil prices are higher and the cost to pump gas is more. There's more, but I think you get my drift.
Far more important is that the country, and the world for that matter, is a much more dangerous place mostly due directly with Obama and his failures as a leader. We have the resources to make the world safer, but Obama would rather do little or nothing and hope it all simply goes away. He's now attempting to make a difference, but it's probably too little too late in as far as preventing our soldiers from dying trying to right the ship.
In summary, his performance as president has been disgraceful, and it sickens me !!!

[Greyfox]

Anybody who says our economy is not better off now than it was when Obama took office is a liar. Period.

Since Obama took office:

The National Debt has doubled.
The purchasing value of the dollar has shrunk 11%.
Average wages are lower.
The number of people on Food Stamps has almost, but not quite, doubled.

Tell us how anybody who says the economy isn't better off now is lying?

[NJ Stinks]

Since Obama took office:

The National Debt has doubled.
The purchasing value of the dollar has shrunk 11%.
Average wages are lower.
The number of people on Food Stamps has almost, but not quite, doubled.

Tell us how anybody who says the economy isn't better off now is lying?

Try this for size:
______________________________

Several recent reports have given a lot of reason to feel optimistic about the economy.

At 7%, the unemployment rate is now at its lowest level in five years. The housing sector -- which got us into this mess in the first place -- is bouncing back. Home sales and prices are rising and permits for new home construction are back to 2007 levels.

Auto sales recently had their strongest growth since 2006. Gas prices have fallen dramatically this year, and stocks are up 26%.

Link: http://money.cnn.com/2013/12/06/news/economy/economy-improving/

[Greyfox]

Try this for size:
______________________________

Several recent reports have given a lot of reason to feel optimistic about the economy.

At 7%, the unemployment rate is now at its lowest level in five years. The housing sector -- which got us into this mess in the first place -- is bouncing back. Home sales and prices are rising and permits for new home construction are back to 2007 levels.

Auto sales recently had their strongest growth since 2006. Gas prices have fallen dramatically this year, and stocks are up 26%.

Link: http://money.cnn.com/2013/12/06/news/economy/economy-improving/

C'mon. Gasoline prices have fallen this year, possibly temporarily.
But still higher than 2009.
More people are buying cars?
Yeah, they are.
But they are going into debt to do that.

http://c3352932.r32.cf0.rackcdn.com/content/pice4b99f5e46f1a126b9607148e5513096.jpg (http://javascript<b></b>:void(0);)

[Mike at A+]

Nothing is ever his fault.

[Tom]

Anybody who says our economy is better off now than it was when Obama took office is a simpleton. Period.

[Robert Goren]

Anybody who says our economy is better off now than it was when Obama took office is a simpleton. Period.Of the dumb things has posted here this perhaps the dumbest. You have forgotten what happened in the fall of 2008. The 4th quarter of 2008 had GDP growth of 8.9%.The worst since 1958.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-07-29/recession-took-bigger-bite-out-of-u-s-economy-than-previously-estimated.html

[davew]

Of the dumb things has posted here this perhaps the dumbest. You have forgotten what happened in the fall of 2008. The 4th quarter of 2008 had GDP decline (plunge) of 8.9%.The worst since 1958.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-07-29/recession-took-bigger-bite-out-of-u-s-economy-than-previously-estimated.html


FYP

[Tom]

Of the dumb things has posted here this perhaps the dumbest. You have forgotten what happened in the fall of 2008. The 4th quarter of 2008 had GDP growth of 8.9%.The worst since 1958.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-07-29/recession-took-bigger-bite-out-of-u-s-economy-than-previously-estimated.html

Guess what?
THIS post is dumber.
Obama did not take office in 2008, now did he? :lol::lol::lol:

[ArlJim78]

This one really takes the cake. President "JV Squad" took all the credit for hastily getting out of Iraq against the recommendations of everyone with a brain, now he throws Clapper under the bus? Remember "we leave behind a stable and secure Iraq". No you didn't, you screwed it up.


President Obama's Asinine Abdication of Responsibility on Iraq (http://www.redstate.com/2014/09/29/president-obamas-asinine-abdication-responsibility-iraq/)

[Robert Goren]

Guess what?
THIS post is dumber.
Obama did not take office in 2008, now did he? :lol::lol::lol:Obama took office on January 20, 2009. The economy on that day was far worse than it is now. We have been digging ourselves out that hole ever since. You don't like Obama. We get that. Obama handling of the economy can be criticized in several ways, but to say it worse now than it was when he took office is just not factually correct.

[Tom]

Overall, it is worse off today than then.
The trauma is over, but the infection continues to grow.
We are too deep to ever get out now.
It is only a matter of time until the funeral.

[Robert Goren]

Overall, it is worse off today than then.
The trauma is over, but the infection continues to grow.
We are too deep to ever get out now.
It is only a matter of time until the funeral.You may be right about the infection growing. We still do not keep a close enough eye on the banks. Every attempt to keep an eye on them has repelled by republicans and conservatives in Congress. The sad thing is what regulatory oversight we had has been crippled even further by budget cuts. The only sure thing is that the gamblers inside the banks aren't betting on horse races, but they probably are on everything else.

[Clocker]

This one really takes the cake. President "JV Squad" took all the credit for hastily getting out of Iraq against the recommendations of everyone with a brain, now he throws Clapper under the bus? Remember "we leave behind a stable and secure Iraq". No you didn't, you screwed it up.


President Obama's Asinine Abdication of Responsibility on Iraq (http://www.redstate.com/2014/09/29/president-obamas-asinine-abdication-responsibility-iraq/)

From the article linked:

In case you missed it last night, President Obama acknowledged (sort of) that mistakes were made [by everyone but himself] in assessing the threat level that ISIS posed to the stability of Iraq and the entire region. Some low level employees in a rogue office in Cincinnati have once again conspired to create bad headlines for the President, but definitely no one should suggest that Obama himself has done anything wrong. The most galling portion of the interview was when Obama claimed that those who specifically predicted that a precipitate withdrawal from Iraq would create a power vacuum were somehow wrong.

How does he know that the intelligence community got it wrong? He must have read about it in the media, the same way he learns about everything else that happens on his watch.

A new Government Accountability Institute (GAI) report reveals that President Barack Obama has attended only 42.1% of his daily intelligence briefings (known officially as the Presidential Daily Brief, or PDB) in the 2,079 days of his presidency through September 29, 2014.

Full story. (http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2014/09/29/Report-Obama-Has-Missed-Over-Half-His-Second-Term-Daily-Intel-Briefings)

[dartman51]

Quote:
A new Government Accountability Institute (GAI) report reveals that President Barack Obama has attended only 42.1% of his daily intelligence briefings (known officially as the Presidential Daily Brief, or PDB) in the 2,079 days of his presidency through September 29, 2014.


At least, as Senator, he voted present. As President, he's not even PRESENT. :faint:

[tucker6]

Quote:
A new Government Accountability Institute (GAI) report reveals that President Barack Obama has attended only 42.1% of his daily intelligence briefings (known officially as the Presidential Daily Brief, or PDB) in the 2,079 days of his presidency through September 29, 2014.


At least, as Senator, he voted present. As President, he's not even PRESENT. :faint:
How does that compare to predecessors?

[Lono]

Obama says Americans are much better off than they were when he took office. They just don't know it. The ungrateful little whiners.



Article here. (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=5)
He means 48 million on food stamps are better off.

[Clocker]

How does that compare to predecessors?

Apparently, "daily" means 6 days a week. According to a Washington Post story in 2012, Bush rarely missed one, and regularly held expanded meetings.

More here. (http://hotair.com/archives/2014/09/30/report-semi-retired-president-has-skipped-more-than-half-of-his-daily-security-briefings-this-year/)

[Tom]

You may be right about the infection growing. We still do not keep a close enough eye on the banks. Every attempt to keep an eye on them has repelled by republicans and conservatives in Congress. The sad thing is what regulatory oversight we had has been crippled even further by budget cuts. The only sure thing is that the gamblers inside the banks aren't betting on horse races, but they probably are on everything else.

The banks didn't dig a 19 trillion dollar hole for us.

[Clocker]

He means 48 million on food stamps are better off.

Nancy Pelosi says that food stamps are a major source of economic stimulus, and help create jobs.

CNN story. (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/10/06/pelosi-fires-back-at-gingrich-over-food-stamps/)

[tucker6]

Nancy Pelosi says that food stamps are a major source of economic stimulus, and help create jobs.


That's just stupid. Taking money from one person and giving it to another creates nothing. Absolutely NOTHING.

[Clocker]

That's just stupid.

I said it was Nancy Pelosi. Don't be redundant. :rolleyes:

[tucker6]

I said it was Nancy Pelosi. Don't be redundant. :rolleyes:
sorry :blush:

[ArlJim78]

3 Times Obama Administration Was Warned about ISIS Threat
http://news.yahoo.com/3-times-obama-administration-warned-isis-threat-192100956.html

President "Beyoncé" was most likely not paying attention or at a fundraiser. In any case it's never his fault. Successes he handles by himself like how he nearly single handedly hauled in Bin Laden. Failures are always due to some rogue office or an intelligence failure.

[cj's dad]

3 Times Obama Administration Was Warned about ISIS Threat
http://news.yahoo.com/3-times-obama-administration-warned-isis-threat-192100956.html

President "Beyoncé" was most likely not paying attention or at a fundraiser. In any case it's never his fault. Successes he handles by himself like how he nearly single handedly hauled in Bin Laden. Failures are always due to some rogue office or an intelligence failure.

Harry S. Truman- "The buck stops here"

This jerkoff of a president probably never heard that saying.
Good Lord, how did we get into this situation ?

[Clocker]

Failures are always due to some rogue office or an intelligence failure.

If this was true, why does Director of National Intelligence Clapper still have a job?

[Tom]

Harry S. Truman- "The buck stops here"

Barack Hussein Obama-

"The buck starts here."
"That, ah, that, that, ah, buck, that's not mine. I didn't do that."
"If you want your buck, you can keep your buck. Just don't bring it here."
"Buck you."

[reckless]

Harry S. Truman- "The buck stops here"
This jerkoff of a president probably never heard that saying.
Good Lord, how did we get into this situation ?

The next question is how do you get out of this situation, especially with the clowns, nitwits and cowards in the Republican Party?

[ArlJim78]

If this was true, why does Director of National Intelligence Clapper still have a job?
With President "Bieber" he's probably in line for a promotion. He's a valuable asset as a fall guy. Get in a jam? no problem, blame the Clapper.

[mostpost]

Obama says Americans are much better off than they were when he took office. They just don't know it. The ungrateful little whiners.



Article here. (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=5)
We are better off. If people don't know it, it is because of the Republican propaganda machine. Here are some facts.
In Jan. 2009 the unemployment rate was 7.8%. Today it is 6.1%. That's better
In 2009 the U6 rate was 14.2%. Today it is 12.0%. Better.

In January 2009 there were 142,152,000 people employed.
Today there are 146,368,000 Employed.
Today is better.

Among Black youth (16-19) in Jan. 2009 the unemployment rate was 35.9%
Today it is 32.8%. Still bad, but improving.

Among all blacks in Jan. 2009 the Unemployment rate was 12.7%
Today it is 11.4%
Again, not great, but again, improving.

In the twelve months ending 12-31-09 there were 1,473,675 bankruptcies filed.
In the twelve months ending 12-31-13 there were 1,070,514 bankruptcies filed. A 28% drop.

In 2009 there were 3,457,643 foreclosures; 2,920,000 foreclosure filings; and 945,000 house repossessions.
in 2013 those numbers were: 1,364,405, 921,064 and 463,108.
In case you did not notice or were incapable of figuring it out, the 2013 numbers were less than half the 2009 numbers.
Finally Dow Jones Average in Jan. 2009- 6547
Today 16,750.
I know. The QE inflated the Dow. But not by 10,000 points.

[mostpost]

In reality, anyone that believes the economy IS better, IS delusional. If you want to buy in to the phony numbers that come out of Washington, I pity you. Anybody that says that the REAL unemployment number is below 8%, is a liar.
The real median household income in 2009 was $54,541, in 2013, it was $52,250. The WORKFORCE participation rate is 62.8%. That matches the lowest since March 1978. But, oh yeah, the economy is doing great. :lol: :lol:
Light up another joint, dude, and take off them silly ROSE COLORED GLASSES. :D
You don't like the numbers so they are phony? What a joke. The numbers are correct. It is your philosophy that is delusional. Everyone knows there are different ways of looking at unemployment. And everyone knows that by every one of those different ways, the situation is better today than it was when Obama took office.

It seems odd to me that a person who is so outraged at the drop in median household income is also is a person who is so opposed to policies which would reverse that drop. Policies like encouraging and strengthening unions.
Policies like punishing companies for moving jobs overseas.

[Mike at A+]

Listen carefully libs: THE ONES DOING "BETTER" ARE FOR THE MOST PART THE ONES WHO DIDN'T EARN IT.

[mostpost]

Guess what?
THIS post is dumber.
Obama did not take office in 2008, now did he? :lol::lol::lol:The post from our detective friend is not dumb at all. RG was talking about conditions leading up to the Obama inauguration. Put bluntly, they sucked.

Since you admit Obama was not in office, I guess we can't blame him for that 8.9% decline.

[mostpost]

The banks didn't dig a 19 trillion dollar hole for us.
No, we can thank Reagan and the Bushes for most of that.

[Clocker]

You don't like the numbers so they are phony? What a joke. The numbers are correct.

The issue is not that the numbers are not factual. The issue is that the spin on them fails to prove what the party line claims. Like the numbers in your previous post.

A decrease in bankruptcies and foreclosures says nothing about cause and effect. After most of the people in financial trouble go under, only the strong survive, and obviously the numbers have to go down. Survival of the fittest and thinning the herd are hardly the marks of a strong economy.

An increase in the absolute number of jobs means nothing in and of itself. Those numbers are not good news if they do not even keep up with population growth. I don't believe they do, which means things are getting worse, not better.

[Clocker]

Harry S. Truman- "The buck stops here"



Barack Obama - "The buck stops at my office door."

[Mike at A+]

The post from our detective friend is not dumb at all. RG was talking about conditions leading up to the Obama inauguration. Put bluntly, they sucked.

Since you admit Obama was not in office, I guess we can't blame him for that 8.9% decline.
And there is no escaping the FACT that the begin of the decline coincided with the run up to the 2006 midterms when everyone and their brother knew that Democrats would control Congress.
Democrats = Bad for business
And if you are going to play the "Clinton Card", who controlled Congress then? Hint: Contract with America

[mostpost]

Listen carefully libs: THE ONES DOING "BETTER" ARE FOR THE MOST PART THE ONES WHO DIDN'T EARN IT.
93% of the gains during the recovery have gone to the top 1%. The ones who didn't earn it.

[Clocker]

93% of the gains during the recovery have gone to the top 1%. The ones who didn't earn it.

I am not going to even bother pointing out the improbability of those numbers meaning anything. I would be interested on how you reached the conclusion that those evil bastages "didn't earn it".

[mostpost]

I am not going to even bother pointing out the improbability of those numbers meaning anything. I would be interested on how you reached the conclusion that those evil bastages "didn't earn it".
I never reached any such conclusion. Mike at F- is the one who said "THE ONES DOING "BETTER" ARE FOR THE MOST PART THE ONES WHO DIDN'T EARN IT."
I merely provided the identity of the ones who were doing better. Mike at F- is the one who said they didn't earn it.

[mostpost]

And there is no escaping the FACT that the begin of the decline coincided with the run up to the 2006 midterms when everyone and their brother knew that Democrats would control Congress.
Democrats = Bad for business
And if you are going to play the "Clinton Card", who controlled Congress then? Hint: Contract with America
The Democrats did not have a veto proof majority in the 110th Congress.
George W. Bush could have vetoed anything he did not like.
In both FY 2007 and FY 2008 the Democratic controlled Congress passed spending bills that were smaller than what was requested by the Bush White House.
The economy crashed in large part because of the collapse of the housing bubble. Republicans controlled both houses of Congress for eight years prior to 2007. They introduced one piece of legislation dealing with the housing problem. It did not have one single committee hearing.

And no, Barney Frank did not block it.

[Mike at A+]

93% of the gains during the recovery have gone to the top 1%. The ones who didn't earn it.
And you know this how? Ever hear the expression "Money goes to money"? Let me explain it to you. People who have earned serious money in the past usually did so because they figured out "the formula". Entrepreneurship, work ethic, education, honesty and integrity usually pay off with big bucks. Once one knows that "formula", earning money becomes second nature. Now on the other end of the spectrum you have the low information, low intelligence, low work ethic 0bama voter who thinks that hope and change is going to punch their ticket to the big time. Free food, free housing and increased handouts with every illegitimate baby they squirt out. Daddy is nowhere to be found and off spreading his seed elsewhere. So mom gets an increase and the cycle continues. She's home eating Twinkies and watching Oprah. So you tell me - who are the earners and who are the leeches? And guess what - your hero 0bama is actually helping the rich get richer. Those evil rich people, being smart enough to prosper under any circumstances, understand that all this money 0bama is printing is finding its way into the stock market because no one is happy with a 0.1% interest rate the banks are offering. So the rich get their share of the QE bucks and that's a BIG share because as I said above, money goes to money. The $100 win ticket pays a lot more than the $2 show ticket. You may say that this isn't really "earning" money but the government wrote the rules and the smart people (aka the evil rich) know how to prosper under those rules. But you knew all that mostie, right?

[cj's dad]

I never reached any such conclusion. Mike at F- is the one who said "THE ONES DOING "BETTER" ARE FOR THE MOST PART THE ONES WHO DIDN'T EARN IT."
I merely provided the identity of the ones who were doing better. Mike at F- is the one who said they didn't earn it.

Why is it that you have to make derogatory comments in nearly every post you respond to? Really, that is not a very adult position IMO.

I have seen you post ignorant, stupid, etc... what is the point?

Nothing that is posted here will ever change ANYTHING.

[cj's dad]

[QUOTE=Mike at A+]And you know this how? Ever hear the expression "Money goes to money"? Let me explain it to you. People who have earned serious money in the past usually did so because they figured out "the formula". Entrepreneurship, work ethic, education, honesty and integrity usually pay off with big bucks. Once one knows that "formula", earning money becomes second nature. Now on the other end of the spectrum you have the low information, low intelligence, low work ethic 0bama voter who thinks that hope and change is going to punch their ticket to the big time. Free food, free housing and increased handouts with every illegitimate baby they squirt out. Daddy is nowhere to be found and off spreading his seed elsewhere. So mom gets an increase and the cycle continues. She's home eating Twinkies and watching Oprah. So you tell me - who are the earners and who are the leeches? And guess what - your hero 0bama is actually helping the rich get richer. Those evil rich people, being smart enough to prosper under any circumstances, understand that all this money 0bama is printing is finding its way into the stock market because no one is happy with a 0.1% interest rate the banks are offering. So the rich get their share of the QE bucks and that's a BIG share because as I said above, money goes to money. The $100 win ticket pays a lot more than the $2 show ticket. You may say that this isn't really "earning" money but the government wrote the rules and the smart people (aka the evil rich) know how to prosper under those rules. But you knew all that mostie, right?[/QUOTE

Well said Mike- you will soon be classified as a racist. Welcome to the club.

[FantasticDan]

Why is it that you have to make derogatory comments in nearly every post you respond to? Really, that is not a very adult position IMO. :rolleyes: Could you be any more of a laughable hypocrite? Shall I provide you with a tally of the personal (and completely unprovoked) insults you constantly lob my way?

[PaceAdvantage]

Yeah, but you deserve every one of them. :p

[dartman51]

No, we can thank Reagan and the Bushes for most of that.


That, sir, is a LIE. Show me some FACTS to back your LIE. :faint:

[dartman51]

(CNSNews.com) - The total federal debt of the U.S. government has now increased more than $7 trillion during the slightly more than five and a half years Barack Obama has been president.

That is more than the debt increased under all U.S. presidents from George Washington through Bill Clinton combined, and it is more debt than was accumulated in the first 227 years of this nation's existence--from 1776 through 2003.

The total federal debt first passed the $7-trillion mark on Jan. 15, 2004, after President George W. Bush had been in office almost three years.

But, oh yeah, it was all Reagan and the Bush's fault. :lol: :lol:

[Tom]

Originally Posted by mostpost
93% of the gains during the recovery have gone to the top 1%. The ones who didn't earn it.

Obama sre screwed up didn't he?
After all, he railroaded Porkulus through.
If it were the other way around, YOU would giving him all the credit.
So man up, put the blame where it belongs - at the doorstep of the biggest loser this country has ever seen - Barack Hussein Obama. :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Clocker]

Obama sre screwed up didn't he?
After all, he railroaded Porkulus through.

As big a train wreck as the stimulus bill was, it was small potatoes in the scheme of things. The libs are right that income inequality is a big problem and that it is increasing. Somehow they ignore the fact that it is increasing more under this administration than under any other.

They gleefully point to the stock market as an indication of the booming economy, failing to understand that the stock market does not necessarily reflect the real economy, and that increases in the market not resulting from real growth (as is happening now) generally serve only to make the rich richer. And this is happening under whose administration? And as a result of whose policies?

The libs also ignore the fact that the same federal policies that are inflating the stock market are stifling the growth of small businesses, which is essential for a strong middle class, for job creation, and for decreasing income inequality.

Be careful what you wish for. And vote for. You just might get it.

[davew]

Obama says Americans are much better off than they were when he took office. They just don't know it. The ungrateful little whiners.



Article here. (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/newthread.php?do=newthread&f=5)


Obama just needs to give more speeches - if he says it enough times, he starts to believe it and then all his disciples do.

[Marshall Bennett]

Many that voted for this disfunctional disaster of a president would have a difficult time admitting they were wrong about him, including those here. I'd be ashamed to know I was a part of his success at ruining this country.
They'll try anything to shift the blame and prevent them from looking like complete idiots for putting him in charge.
Way to go !!! :ThmbDown:

[NJ Stinks]

Many that voted for this disfunctional disaster of a president would have a difficult time admitting they were wrong about him, including those here. I'd be ashamed to know I was a part of his success at ruining this country.
They'll try anything to shift the blame and prevent them from looking like complete idiots for putting him in charge.
Way to go !!! :ThmbDown:

This post fits GWB voters to a T.

[Marshall Bennett]

Was sorta waiting for that. :)

[mostpost]

This post fits GWB voters to a T.
You have a knack for stating great truths in a few words. For fourteen years, Republicans/conservatives/Libertarians on this board have refused to blame George W. Bush for anything.
9/11 wasn't his fault even though he failed to read or attend any intelligence briefing the first nine months of his Presidency. Condeleeza Rice said that nobody could have imagined flying a commercial air liner into a government building like the Pentagon. Well, Condy sweetheart, Tom Clancy wrote an entire novel about that very thing.

Ten years of war in Iraq wasn't his fault even though he cooked the books to get us into that war.

The disastrous response to Hurricane Katrina wasn't his fault even though he appointed a total incompetent to head FEMA, and cut its budget.

And the great recession wasn't his fault; it was the fault of Congress. What a joke.

[Greyfox]

You have a knack for stating great truths in a few words. For fourteen years, Republicans/conservatives/Libertarians on this board have refused to blame George W. Bush for anything..

Yes. George W. Bush will go down in history as one of America's poorest Presidents.
Unfortunately, he was followed into power by an even worse one.
That America can survive two of these incompetents driving the bus for 16 years speaks highly of those who aren't in government.

But this thread is about Barack Hussein Obama.
Your last post is an attempt to derail and sidetrack the spirit of this thread.

[Clocker]

Well, Condy sweetheart, Tom Clancy wrote an entire novel about that very thing.

Finally, a relevant criticism of the Bush administration, straight and to the point. How could anyone claim to be an authority on foreign affairs without reading the works of Tom Clancy? :eek:

Here's a little clue for you. Tom Clancy didn't read a lot of the books he "wrote".

Here's another little clue. I and a number of other "righties" have posted here that, among other faults, the invasion of Iraq was a major error in judgement.

Here's another little clue: Bush is ancient history. He and the evil neocons aren't pulling the levers any more, and haven't been for nearly 6 years. You can't blame Bush any more for the mistakes of the previous administration. The previous administration was Obama's.

[Tom]

Congress want Oama to turn over his daily PB's so they can see where the intelligence community failed. Or whre Obama failed.

Bush did this after 9/11.

Will Obama have the balls? Not gold balls.

btw mostie, your post about Bush - pure hog wash.
Every point.

[Clocker]

Congress want Oama to turn over his daily PB's so they can see where the intelligence community failed. Or whre Obama failed.



How is it that the guy in charge of the most transparent administration in the history of the universe never seems to know what is going on?

And how is it that whenever there is a screw up, the media knows about it before the guy in charge?

And how is it that all the people that screwed up still have jobs?

[tucker6]

Here's another little clue. I and a number of other "righties" have posted here that, among other faults, the invasion of Iraq was a major error in judgement.


I'm always amazed when the lefties bring out that red herring for yet another round of flogging. You are completely correct. Many of us did not like his invasion of Iraq nor his lack of budgetary control over govt spending nor his Patriot Act diminishing of our liberties. There's tons not to like about Bush, but Obama makes him look like a Rhodes Scholar in comparison.

[mostpost]

Yes. George W. Bush will go down in history as one of America's poorest Presidents.
Unfortunately, he was followed into power by an even worse one.
That America can survive two of these incompetents driving the bus for 16 years speaks highly of those who aren't in government.

But this thread is about Barack Hussein Obama.
Your last post is an attempt to derail and sidetrack the spirit of this thread.
Yes, there are a number of you who will call Bush a poor president. At the same time you refuse to acknowledge how his policies are still affecting the current President. Not only that, but you refuse to acknowledge that the Obama policies (where he could get them enacted in the face of obstinate Republican opposition) have improved the situation. You want to continue the policies of lax regulation that precipitated the crisis.

[Clocker]

I'm always amazed when the lefties bring out that red herring for yet another round of flogging.

That's the problem with the left: they are always flogging their herring. :eek:

[mostpost]

Finally, a relevant criticism of the Bush administration, straight and to the point. How could anyone claim to be an authority on foreign affairs without reading the works of Tom Clancy? :eek:

Here's a little clue for you. Tom Clancy didn't read a lot of the books he "wrote".

Here's another little clue. I and a number of other "righties" have posted here that, among other faults, the invasion of Iraq was a major error in judgement.

Here's another little clue: Bush is ancient history. He and the evil neocons aren't pulling the levers any more, and haven't been for nearly 6 years. You can't blame Bush any more for the mistakes of the previous administration. The previous administration was Obama's.
The previous administration was the Bush administration. The Current administration is the Obama administration. Somewhere on your computer you will find a page explaining the difference.

I see no reason to stop pointing out the flaws of George W. Bush or any other Republican back to Abraham Lincoln. After all, the passage of time has not stopped any of you from blaming Clinton for not killing bin Laden; from blaming FDR for not ending the great Depression; or even from blaming Buchanan for not stopping the Civil War.

Of course my criticisms have much more validity than yours.

[Clocker]

I see no reason to stop pointing out the flaws of George W. Bush or any other Republican back to Abraham Lincoln.

There is a difference between pointing them out and using them as a lame excuse for Obama's ineptitude.

Obama inherited a mess in Iraq from Bush. He made it worse.

Obama inherited a bad economy. His policies resulted in the longest, slowest recovery in modern times. The recovery reflects the strength of the American private sector, that it could eventually come back in spite of Obama.

[Clocker]

The previous administration was the Bush administration. The Current administration is the Obama administration. Somewhere on your computer you will find a page explaining the difference.

If you hold your hand out in front of you and count on your fingers, you will see that the previous administration was Obama's first administration, and the current one is his second.

Obama uses the same terminology. Like when he explained to the Russians that he would have more flexibility to deal with them in his second administration. How's that working out?

[Greyfox]

Of course my criticisms have much more validity than yours.

:lol: :lol:
That belongs in the Humor Thread.

:lol: :lol: :ThmbUp:

[Clocker]

:lol: :lol:
That belongs in the Humor Thread.

:lol: :lol: :ThmbUp:

Or the religious thread. :rolleyes:

[tucker6]

Of course my criticisms have much more validity than yours.
Well of course they do. You're smarter than we are.

[tucker6]

If you hold your hand out in front of you and count on your fingers, you will see that the previous administration was Obama's first administration, and the current one is his second.

Obama uses the same terminology. Like when he explained to the Russians that he would have more flexibility to deal with them in his second administration. How's that working out?
Mostie's smarter than you, that's why. Leave him alone and stop the bullying... :rolleyes:

[mostpost]

If you hold your hand out in front of you and count on your fingers, you will see that the previous administration was Obama's first administration, and the current one is his second.

Obama uses the same terminology. Like when he explained to the Russians that he would have more flexibility to deal with them in his second administration. How's that working out?
Antics with Semantics and not very well done at that . The Bush Administration began January 20, 2001 and ended January 20, 2009. The Obama Administration began January 20, 2009 and will end January 20, 2017. Each administration had two terms of four years. Two terms, one administration; not two administrations.

To carry the example one step further, the Hillary Clinton Administration will begin on January 20, 2017........................... :lol: :lol: :lol:

ETA: I don't need to use my fingers to count.

[reckless]

The Current administration is the Obama administration.

I see no reason to stop pointing out the flaws of George W. Bush or any other Republican back to Abraham Lincoln.

In a political debate there is nothing 'wrong' in trying to blame Bush to justify the numerous failures of Obama.

Except, by using this ploy all the time as he has done -- as well as you and many other left wingers -- tells us this: Obama only shows the world that he lacks basic class, character, common sense and simple leadership.

Also, it isn't sporting to say the least but then, again, Obama has never once simply did the 'right thing'.

Your undying willingness to destory any credibility you might have on Obama's behalf is of little concern here because conservatives laugh at people like yourself and your president.

[Marshall Bennett]

Yes. George W. Bush will go down in history as one of America's poorest Presidents.

One day history will put him in a much better light than you and many others do. His numbers are already better. He was victimized by a blitzkrieg media and transformed into some sort of modern day Hitler. Angered by the results of the prior two elections, democrats used all means of burying his name to insure victory in 2008. Much of the economic collapse followed the mid-term elections of 06 when democrats took charge. His position with Iraq and the middle east though seen as negative then, has become more clear now that he had it right.
He wasn't the best, but he had the nation's safety with regards to foreign threats true to heart. It's a shame many like yourself can't see that, hopefully one day you will. I don't expect anything but hate by liberals regardless how history goes. That's simply how they are...at heart!!

[reckless]

Of course my criticisms have much more validity than yours.

Sometimes even I forget that horse race handicapping and betting is what brought me and many of us here to this great site in the first place.

Knowing you a little now, mostpost, from your 'skills' (?) as a communicator, political maven, debater and even human being, in light of your above notation, I ask you this:

Do you use real money when you gamble and bet on a horse race? :lol: :lol:

[Greyfox]

It's a shame many like yourself can't see that, hopefully one day you will. I don't expect anything but hate by liberals regardless how history goes. That's simply how they are...at heart!!

First of all I'm not a liberal. Get that straight.

Secondly, I saw what happened when Bush Jr. was in power.
No revisionist historian is going to shine a better light on him in the future than what was present in front of us. He was poor, Obama is worse.

Thirdly, you've fallen into Mostposts trap.
This thread is about Obama and how shitty he is.
We're now living in 2014, the Bush years are over.
Let's deal with the present incompetent.

[thaskalos]

One day history will put him in a much better light than you and many others do. His numbers are already better. He was victimized by a blitzkrieg media and transformed into some sort of modern day Hitler. Angered by the results of the prior two elections, democrats used all means of burying his name to insure victory in 2008. Much of the economic collapse followed the mid-term elections of 06 when democrats took charge. His position with Iraq and the middle east though seen as negative then, has become more clear now that he had it right.
He wasn't the best, but he had the nation's safety with regards to foreign threats true to heart. It's a shame many like yourself can't see that, hopefully one day you will. I don't expect anything but hate by liberals regardless how history goes. That's simply how they are...at heart!!

Why jump on Greyfox for an opinion which is shared by about 75% of the population?

[NJ Stinks]

I'm always amazed when the lefties bring out that red herring for yet another round of flogging.

If somebody burned my house down (GWB) and I didn't have the resources to rebuild it shortly thereafter (Obama), I think I might hold a grudge for a long time after the fire. My one hope going forward is that my family (Congress & the people) are patient and persevere through the tough times as I try to get the new house built from the ground up. Of course, I understand some of the children (who might they be!) will sulk and whine incessantly but what are you gonna do?

That's kids for you. ;)

[tucker6]

If somebody burned my house down (GWB) and I didn't have the resources to rebuild it shortly thereafter (Obama), I think I might hold a grudge for a long time after the fire. My one hope going forward is that my family (Congress & the people) are patient and persevere through the tough times as I try to get the new house built from the ground up. Of course, I understand some of the children (who might they be!) will sulk and whine incessantly but what are you gonna do?

That's kids for you. ;)
So your solution is to blame the guy who burned your house down when somebody else (Obama) steals your belongings laying street side??

[Clocker]

If somebody burned my house down (GWB) and I didn't have the resources to rebuild it shortly thereafter (Obama), I think I might hold a grudge for a long time after the fire. My one hope going forward is that my family (Congress & the people) are patient and persevere through the tough times as I try to get the new house built from the ground up. Of course, I understand some of the children (who might they be!) will sulk and whine incessantly but what are you gonna do?

That's kids for you. ;)

Gee, Uncle Stinks, that was a great bed time story. Now tell us the one about green energy and the millions of jobs created or saved. Pleeease! :D

[thaskalos]

I'm always amazed when the lefties bring out that red herring for yet another round of flogging. You are completely correct. Many of us did not like his invasion of Iraq nor his lack of budgetary control over govt spending nor his Patriot Act diminishing of our liberties. There's tons not to like about Bush, but Obama makes him look like a Rhodes Scholar in comparison.
A bit of a hyperbole...IMO.

[tucker6]

A bit of a hyperbole...IMO.
Probably not the best description since neither has impressed me for their intellectual prowess. However, even Obama supporters must be tired of his aloofness and lack of effort by now. No?? That's a description I could never pin on Bush. He may not have been a brightly burning bulb, and he may have made plenty of mistakes, but I never thought he stopped trying.

[thaskalos]

Probably not the best description since neither has impressed me for their intellectual prowess. However, even Obama supporters must be tired of his aloofness and lack of effort by now. No??

I voted for Obama the first time...and refused to render a vote the second time. He had said during his first term in office that he didn't feel he deserved a reelection vote from the public if no marked improvement was made during his first term...and I agreed with him.

To me...the worst thing about Obama as president isn't the state of the economy, the mess in the Middle East, or our approval rating in other countries of the world. That stuff can be readily explained and largely excused...since he inherited a big mess to begin with. I remember as if it were yesterday when he declared that he would bring "transparency" back to the White House...and yet, he has been the most aloof president we can think of...his administration has spied on American citizens like no other...and his administration has also gone after whistleblowers with a zeal that betrays his "transparency" promises.

This is the stuff that I can't stomach, or blame on anyone else.

[NJ Stinks]

To me...the worst thing about Obama as president isn't the state of the economy, the mess in the Middle East, or our approval rating in other countries of the world. That stuff can be readily explained and largely excused...since he inherited a big mess to begin with. I remember as if it were yesterday when he declared that he would bring "transparency" back to the White House...and yet, he has been the most aloof president we can think of...his administration has spied on American citizens like no other...and his administration has also gone after whistleblowers with a zeal that betrays his "transparency" promises.

This is the stuff that I can't stomach, or blame on anyone else.

I'll add to the list above that saying "Syria and Iraq caught the U.S. intelligence community off guard" on 60 Minutes was pretty pathetic too. The guy is far from perfect....

[tucker6]

Looks like we have a little detente going. There used to be a difference between the DEMS and GOP until the early 90's. Nowadays, despite the rhetoric, what you'll get when elected is just about the same either way. Yeah, there are differences with the freak show issues like abortion, but the mainstream economic, privacy rights, and foreign policy initiatives are just about indecipherable between the two parties.

[Marshall Bennett]

First of all I'm not a liberal. Get that straight.

Secondly, I saw what happened when Bush Jr. was in power.
No revisionist historian is going to shine a better light on him in the future than what was present in front of us. He was poor, Obama is worse.

Thirdly, you've fallen into Mostposts trap.
This thread is about Obama and how shitty he is.
We're now living in 2014, the Bush years are over.
Let's deal with the present incompetent.
I never said you were a liberal. Many conservatives share your sentiment.
I don't fall into traps. As a matter of fact my post was in response to yours regarding Bush. See post #83. Were you trapped?

[Tom]

Originally Posted by mostpost

I see no reason to stop pointing out the flaws of George W. Bush or any other Republican back to Abraham Lincoln.

You prefer Blacks to be in chains, out in the fields?
Must be, because DEMOCRATS at that time sure went out of their way to try to keep them there. KKK - Democrats in action.

[Tom]

A bit of a hyperbole...IMO.

Obamba makes Joe Biden look like a Rhodes scholar.

[Greyfox]

I never said you were a liberal. Many conservatives share your sentiment.
I don't fall into traps. As a matter of fact my post was in response to yours regarding Bush. See post #83. Were you trapped?

Get over it.
My post was pointing out that Mostposts was an attempt to derail this thread by talking about Bush Jr.
Your subsequent post showed that you rose to his bait and he played you like a fiddle when you started defending GWB.
It's looking more and more to me that people who defend either of those two Presidents have a lot in common - wilful blindness.

[Marshall Bennett]

Why jump on Greyfox for an opinion which is shared by about 75% of the population?
I didn't jump on anybody. I was simply defending Bush who I happened to like.
75% sounds about right. So 25% got it right, as Bush did, and 75% got it wrong as the current president has admitted to himself. This is with regards to the current crisis abroad. I mentioned the economy briefly in my prior post which by the way, is still shit!!

[Marshall Bennett]

Get over it.
My post was pointing out that Mostposts was an attempt to derail this thread by talking about Bush Jr.
Your subsequent post showed that you rose to his bait and he played you like a fiddle when you started defending GWB.
It's looking more and more to me that people who defend either of those two Presidents have a lot in common - wilful blindness.
You get over it. You just don't get it. Sort of like a lot of liberals, you're without flexibility in trying to adjust or understand anything different than you've trained yourself to go with. I haven't responded to a thing mostpost posted here, you did. You took the bait, tried to dump it on me, and now that it isn't working out you're crying about it.

[thaskalos]

I didn't jump on anybody. I was simply defending Bush who I happened to like.
75% sounds about right. So 25% got it right, as Bush did, and 75% got it wrong as the current president has admitted to himself. This is with regards to the current crisis abroad. I mentioned the economy briefly in my prior post which by the way, is still shit!!

You are free to like Bush...if that's what you want to do. But others are also free to call Bush a rotten president...if that's what THEY want to do. And, to be honest, there is a lot more proof backing the OTHERS' opinion, than there is backing yours...as far as Bush is concerned.

Not only is there no big difference between the Democrat and the Republican politicians...there is also no big difference between the Republican and the Democrat voters...IMO. Both groups compare their candidate to the "other" guy...in order to make their guy look good.

As far as I am concerned, both presidents were an embarrassment...and the worst part of it is that they are both allowed to ride off into the sunset after their tenure is up...while leaving their loose ends for the next guy to tie up. And then they have the balls to go on the lecture circuit...where they presume to teach the "art of leadership" to others. :rolleyes:

There should be some sort of fitting punishment for some of these presidents, in the end...

[tucker6]

You are free to like Bush...if that's what you want to do. But others are also free to call Bush a rotten president...if that's what THEY want to do. And, to be honest, there is a lot more proof backing the OTHERS' opinion, than there is backing yours...as far as Bush is concerned.

Not only is there no big difference between the Democrat and the Republican politicians...there is also no big difference between the Republican and the Democrat voters...IMO. Both groups compare their candidate to the "other" guy...in order to make their guy look good.

As far as I am concerned, both presidents were an embarrassment...and the worst part of it is that they are both allowed to ride off into the sunset after their tenure is up...while leaving their loose ends for the next guy to tie up. And then they have the balls to go on the lecture circuit...where they presume to teach the "art of leadership" to others. :rolleyes:

There should be some sort of fitting punishment for some of these presidents, in the end...
bravo :ThmbUp: