Drudge Retort: Red Meat for Yellow Dogs
Monday, May 04, 2009

In the span of a single week -- from the day Arlen Specter turned Democratic to the moment Congress passed the White House's budget blueprint and on through the opening of a spot on the Supreme Court -- President Obama crossed a fateful line: From now on, it's his country.

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Subscriptions

Author Info

lee_the_agent

MORE STORIES

Special Features

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in the discussion of this weblog entry should note the site's moderation policy.

Yes it still can. The stink of Bush will linger for a long time. Reminds me of my ex.

It IS Bush's responsibility for the way this country is right now. And it will be Obama's job to "untangle" the mess. If he doesn't...THAT will be his fault!! But to say it's not Bush's responsibility for the mess we are in is ridiculous and out of touch with reality.

"ridiculous and out of touch with reality. "

Well, that's a pretty good description of the Republican party.

Of course it can. It'll take decades to clean up all the shit the bush administration has scattered across the globe.

Of course it can. It'll take decades to clean up all the shit the bush administration has scattered across the globe.

How conveeeeenient.

But you can bet your bottom dollar that if decades from now historians credit Bush for something, angrygreatgranddad will be sputtering, "It wasn't Bush, it was Obama and Clinton did it credit". LOL Hacks are a foregone conclusion.

Fuck off, goatshit.

that if decades from now historians credit Bush for something

The "history will vindicate Bush" canard?

S'rsly?

Wow, yer status as a right wing hack is now a forgone conclusion.

Be Well.

Fuck off, goatshit.

#6 | Posted by Angrydad at 2009-05-03 06:59 PM

Life's too short to be angry, dad. Lighten up. Smile. Hug the kids. Life's great!

The faulting for the Great Depression has been laid at the feet of H.Hoover since it occurred. Bush better pray that Obama stops it from getting too bad or he may wind up with the same kind of legacy.

"Life's great!"

Finally, goatbrain makes an observation that's not complete bullshit.

A blind pig'll find an acorn every once in a while.

Finally, goatbrain makes an observation that's not complete bullshit.

I'm glad to see you've chilled out. Judging by your posts, you take shit WAY too seriously. I was afraid you were going to have a cerebral hemmorhage.

What ever you took, keeps it close by.

Finally, goatbrain makes an observation that's not complete bullshit.

A blind pig'll find an acorn every once in a while.

#10 | Posted by Angrydad
* * * *

Mixing up your metaphors again?

Nothing is Obama's fault. When he screws up, it's all on Bush. When he does wonderful, miraculous things and zips the bill over to the Chinese, it's because of the mystique that is Obama. He's perfection incarnate.

"Nothing is Obama's fault. When he screws up, it's all on Bush. When he does wonderful, miraculous things and zips the bill over to the Chinese, it's because of the mystique that is Obama. He's perfection incarnate."

And RiR finally sees the light. Miracles _do_ happen!

"Nothing is Obama's fault. When he screws up, it's all on Bush."

Ok. I'm going to explain something to you. It's difficult, I know, but bear with me.

No policy of Obama's is going to fix the economic mess in the near future. It's not a magic wand he's waving around to make things all of a sudden become better. If the economy continued to shrink this past quarter, that does not fall on his shoulders. It is too early into his tenure for his policies to have begun to take affect and you're an obtuse idiot if you think Bush's policies' affects won't continue to last.

Hell, I'm sure an argument could be made that Clinton share's some blame too if you try hard enough.

Why do you want your wife bumped off, LetUsBray

Goatman:
Apparently hackery fills both sides of the political spectrum, eh?

Oh yes...LOL

Apparently hackery fills both sides of the political spectrum, eh?

Yes -- Just as I've always said. Sheeple and shills know no political boundaries.

Oh yes...LOL

Never forget to laugh. There is too little laughter in the world today.

Five years ago I smashed my thumb with a hammer and messed up the nail.

At the time when i did it, I realized it was my own stupid fault, but now with the passage of time and other issues to concern myself with, I can firmly say that it was no longer my fault, but rather, that stupid hammers fault.

"Hell, I'm sure an argument could be made that Clinton share's some blame too if you try hard enough." #14 | Posted by jpw

Come on. Clinton was given credit for the improved economy 2 weeks after he was sworn in.

From now on, it's his country.

So what happened to having to wait 50 years for history to judge?

Seriously, though, it is Obama's responsibility to fix what's broken. He got elected cause McToast only offered stay the course, which people recognized as a FAIL. Now, if the NOPpers would only accept the November results.

It's like Nixon-when he was elected on promises of ending VN, it was LBJ's war. When he didn't, it became his war.

Were you even alive during Nixon?

Hell, I'm sure an argument could be made that Clinton share's some blame too if you try hard enough.

He does; mostly for NAFTA. NAFTA and other globalization efforts (as well as illegal immigration) has caused the loss of good paying jobs here in the US. I believe that it is the loss of so many good paying jobs that is the root cause of our economic problems. People defaulted on their mortgages because they weren't making enough money to pay it (especially when it increased). If people had good paying jobs, they would have been able to pay their mortgages and we might have avoided the mortgage meltdown which triggered the economic collapse.

No policy of Obama's is going to fix the economic mess in the near future. It's not a magic wand he's waving around to make things all of a sudden become better. If the economy continued to shrink this past quarter, that does not fall on his shoulders. It is too early into his tenure for his policies to have begun to take affect and you're an obtuse idiot if you think Bush's policies' affects won't continue to last.

#14 | Posted by jpw at 2009-05-03 09:14 PM

It's quite possible his policies will have a negative impact, or an impact that primarily benefits the investing and financial classes. To throw those possibilities under the rug because of an assumption that Obama is just a good soul trying to fix things or an assumption that he knows what he's doing and his plans will all work out at some indefinite point in the future is bull shit.

Everyone will blame who they want but the truth is Reaganomics killed America. Whether or not Obama can eradicate the economic insanity will determine whether or not he gets credit for leading the country towards prosperity again. It won't happen in a few months or even in a couple of years. It will probably take at least a decade to recover from the crazy notion that we could prosper without a manufacturing base, without a balanced budget, without low unemployment and rising wages....all the things Republicans believed we could do without.

... the truth is Reaganomics killed America.

Danni obediently spews the left's favorite talking point.

I guess America likes the dead. He carried 49 states his second time around.

Technically it is Bush's fault for putting everything he had behind Specter in 2004. Had he not done that, Specter likely would have lost in the Republican primary, and would not be around today to "change teams."

Maybe it's just because I'm getting older and have seen the same thing happen every 4 or 8 years but it's ridiculous how cyclically hypocritical politics is. When a new party takes control, they always blame the predecessor, and the minority party blames the new guy. In terms of any good news, the other guy never has anything to do with it and if they were in control at the time, the good stuff happened despite of him.

Both parties ignore the fact that the roots of the big problems in the world today go back decades and have been completely ignored by both parties.

Both parties ignore the fact that the roots of the big problems in the world today go back decades and have been completely ignored by both parties.

You are absolutely right, Katie. The theory of chaos applies to politics as well as economics, the shape of shorelines, the weather, and everything else in this world.

There may have been a long forgotten minor political happening decades ago whose butterfly effect made things as they are today. It's far too complicated to ever know with certainty.

When Ronnie saddled us with 3 trillion dollars of debt it started the long, slow, descent. Sure other things happened too but with the debt rising in such huge amounts our eventual collapse was inevitable. The same people who are now saying we can't borrow our way back to prosperity are probably right but they should have been saying it back when Ronnie was president.

There may have been a long forgotten minor political happening decades ago whose butterfly effect made things as they are today. It's far too complicated to ever know with certainty.

#29 | Posted by goatman

I think you need to ask danni on this one, she knows everything and speaks for everyone.

When Ronnie saddled us with 3 trillion dollars of debt it started the long, slow, descent. Sure other things happened too but with the debt rising in such huge amounts our eventual collapse was inevitable. The same people who are now saying we can't borrow our way back to prosperity are probably right but they should have been saying it back when Ronnie was president.

#30 | Posted by danni at 2009-05-04 11:06 AM

At least you admit that we probably can't borrow our way back to prosperity.

When Ronnie saddled us with 3 trillion dollars of debt it started the long, slow, descent. Sure other things happened too but with the debt rising in such huge amounts our eventual collapse was inevitable. The same people who are now saying we can't borrow our way back to prosperity are probably right but they should have been saying it back when Ronnie was president.

Maybe they were Danni, but you hear only what you want to hear...

"Maybe they were Danni, but you hear only what you want to hear..."

Baloney. I'd love to be able to say that fixing the economy would be easy but you can't fix 30 years of rot overnight and without significant tax increases.
Them's the facts, Republicans don't like the fact and they contrived an economic shell game to avoid them. But guess what....they're back and still undeniable. No shell game with fix their mess.

It IS Bush's responsibility for the way this country is right now. And it will be Obama's job to "untangle" the mess. If he doesn't...THAT will be his fault!! But to say it's not Bush's responsibility for the mess we are in is ridiculous and out of touch with reality.

How about some specifics there? Did Bush force banks to make loans to people who could not pay them back, or did the dems have something to do with that practice? Is it Bush's fault that you libs have seriously fucked up the brains of young people so that they feel they are "entitled" and don't have to work hard becuase the Government is going to take care of them? You people make me sick. You really think Bush is the Devil and he alone destroyed this country? Wake up and smell the starbucks asshole....

"At least you admit that we probably can't borrow our way back to prosperity."

I've advocated tax increases forever. I think Obama understands but is only trying to stabilize the economy, I do not believe he thinks more borrowing can bring real prosperity. Personally, I doubt we will ever return to real prosperity because the right will fight too hard against any attempt to make a real fix for our economy and the big corporations will sabotage any attempt just as credit card companies are doing today. They raised interest rates to the point that most money which might have been spent by consumers will not be sucked up by interest. I don't think even they believe this is smart busines because it will dramatically increase defaults and bankruptcies but it may destroy the Obama presidency which is their goal. they simply do not want to see changes to bankrupcy laws, usury laws, etc.

Ronnie simply signed rather than challenged the porky budgets submitted by the Democratic-controlled house and senate. He signed them in order to save his political capital for more important issues, such as cleaning up the mess that Carter left behind, restoring the USA's military, and growing the economy. All of which he succeeded in doing.

But now it's Dems all around, spending like never before. Bush's record spending had already been superseded by Obama in less than three months in office. Obama's "solutions" are making things worse and more drawn-out, and that will be his legacy. Historic president, my ass.

If you have a small fire in your house, and the firemen proceed to break every window, door and wall in the place, it's the firemen who are responsible for the excessive damage.

"Ronnie simply signed rather than challenged the porky budgets submitted by the Democratic-controlled house and senate."

Baloney. He lowered the top rates of income tax and thus created a huge (all previous president's added together would still not be as large) deficit.

...she knows everything and speaks for everyone.

#31 | POSTED BY CHICKENRANCHER
---------

Hilarious and true. But that too is Reagan's fault. He and Bush Sr. colluded years ago to destroy the middle class, kill the hippies, and eat the poor all for the diabolical purpose of creating a super pissed liberal apologist in southern Florida who would have complete understanding of one half of every issue, and be a spokes person for fools and ignorants alike.

"such as cleaning up the mess that Carter left behind, restoring the USA's military, and growing the economy."

Cleaning up the mess Carter left???
Nice rewrite.
Try Nixon/Ford left after the Vietnam war.
Try the fact that REagan kept Carter's economic policies and the same Fed. Chief Volker who raised interest rates very high to combt the inflation left after Vietnam.

Anyone still remember Gerald Ford introducing the WIN button???
What was WIN???

He lowered the top rates of income tax

It's the legislative branch of the government that makes our laws -- including tax laws -- not the executive branch, Danni. Under Reagan the legislative branch had a Democratic majority.

What was WIN???

#40 | Posted by danni

Whip Inflation Now

What was WIN???

Whip Inflation Now

Who said that there wasn't inflation under Ford? I said that it was much greater under Carter. And it was.

I thought September 12th marked the start of a new presidency. Or at least it has since the first term of the previous administration.

I think Obama understands but is only trying to stabilize the economy, I do not believe he thinks more borrowing can bring real prosperity. They raised interest rates to the point that most money which might have been spent by consumers will not be sucked up by interest. I don't think even they believe this is smart busines because it will dramatically increase defaults and bankruptcies but it may destroy the Obama presidency which is their goal.

Make up your mind Danni...Does borrowing lead to prosperity or not? Commenting on the second part of your post, If you are borrowing money to pay obligations for money that you had previously borrowed, you SHOULD be declaring bankruptcy. Extending more credit to those who are overextended is not the answer.

You honestly think bankers have any issue with Obama? Please...they love him in there. He cuts them blank checks with no questions asked...and refuses their money when they try and pay it back.

"Who said that there wasn't inflation under Ford? I said that it was much greater under Carter. And it was."

But the problem started under Nixon/Ford, Carter got stuck with their mess. At first he did not have the right strategy to combat it but later he appointed Volker (who Reagan kept on) and they began succeeding so it is just plain wrong to pretend it was "Carter's mess." If only we had listened to Carter about energy and not elected that fool Reagan. This country would be energy independent and not broke today. But that's ok, y'all go on back to your belief in the Reagan myth, created BTW, during the Clinton administration to combat his popularity.

He lowered the top rates of income tax and thus created a huge (all previous president's added together would still not be as large) deficit.

All Presidents added together...LOL

Danni, that's so 1988.

"If you are borrowing money to pay obligations for money that you had previously borrowed, you SHOULD be declaring bankruptcy."

That is one approach but unfortunately it would result in a worldwide depression we might never recover from.

Ten Seconds after President Obama was sworn in, the Right Wing Republican Party was in deep taught as to how to blame Obama for this financial mess.

President Obama, make no mistake will be judged by how he cleans up the mess that the Bush Administration has left. For those who wish to absolve the Bush Administration for this historical blow to our Economy, two words 'FAT CHANCE"....

The Morons on the Right an Fox News simply cannot control History, THIS WAS BUSH'S MESS AN OBAMA WAS ELECTED TO CLEAN IT UP!!!! History will Judge Mr. Obama on how well he does that job. What the RIGHT is afraid of is that President Obama will succeed, an in doing so will put the Republican Party of Bush/Cheney in to Garbage heap of History.

Maybe then the Republican Party can admit their responsibility for the Financial breakdown, an move on to create a New Republican Party, one that includes all Americans not just the wealthy WHITE ones....

But the problem started under Nixon/Ford, Carter got stuck with their mess.

Danni -- the rate of inflation started increasing the very month that Carter took office.

"Danni, that's so 1988."

If only we had a "do over".

"Danni -- the rate of inflation started increasing the very month that Carter took office."

And you think his taking office did that???
That is idiotic.
BE honest, what could he have done in his first month to raise inflation???
You prove my point. Thanks.

WIN!!!

errata

the rate of inflation started increasing the very month that Carter took office =

the rate of inflation started increasing the first full month after Carter took office.

And I'll add:

It started to decline the first full month after Reagan took office.

lol...if I were a democrat, my first order of business would be to muzzle Danni...her recklessly cavalier attitude towards tax policy and economics combined with her partisan-for-the-sake-of-
partisan worldview are exactly what, if anything, will start to sink this new democratic super-majority.

I personally think the republicans need to lose at least a few more election cycles to get their house in order (i.e. purge the social retards). But with old guard, tax-and-spend morons like Danni out in front on the left side of the isle, their majority may be much shorter lived than anyone had hoped.

"THIS WAS BUSH'S MESS AN OBAMA WAS ELECTED TO CLEAN IT UP!!!!"

I think we let Bush 1, Clinton and Reagan off the hook when we say this is Dubya's mess. IMHO all the presidents from Nixon on created this mess. Nixon did the most by inventing the Southern Strategy which allowed a bunch of ignorant rednecks to choose presidents, the rest is history.

"BE honest, what could he have done in his first month to raise inflation???"

He was a Democrat! Isn't that enough?

Sincerely,
Rtards

That is one approach but unfortunately it would result in a worldwide depression we might never recover from.

#48 | Posted by danni

do you know what filing bankruptcy means?

That is one approach but unfortunately it would result in a worldwide depression we might never recover from.

Let's see...we cut a check for Chrysler and they still had to declare bankruptcy. So at this point, your "cut the checks or it will be worse" defense holds little water.

The recession is the first part of the recovery. Until that happens, bankers continue to eat our lunch.

KEVIN until those economic policies that I talk about are done we will continue to decline as a world economic power. It is only extreme to those used to hearing the Republicans preach what they thought people wanted to hear even though they knew positively it would destroy the middle class which was their intention. Unfortunately, they forgot that when they succeeded the whole economy would collapse because no one has money to spend.
The law of unintended consequences destroyed the Republican Party.

Here's the numbers Danni. You can't spin around them, though I'm sure you'll try.

The numbers clearly show that the inflation rate fell monthly for two years from jan 1975 until Jan 1977. Then they started to go up again almost every month for four years. Reagan took office and they started falling again.

inflationdata.com

You can't argue otherwise with these numbers in front of you

-if I were a democrat,

We would all get over it eventually.

No matter who was elected last Nov, Keynesian economics would have won out and we would still have been in a position to have to spend our way out of a recession.

Those who pretend not to understand the difference between that spending and spending on an elective war and the cost of deregulating the financial industry are the partisan hacks.

I think we let Bush 1, Clinton and Reagan off the hook when we say this is Dubya's mess. IMHO all the presidents from Nixon on created this mess.

#55 | Posted by danni at 2009-05-04 11:45 AM

Amazing reading this from Danni.

Say whatever you want Goat, Carter appointed Volker, Volker cured the inflation. Reagan did keep him on, that was a smart move.

"Amazing reading this from Danni."

I got off the Clinton bus quite a while ago.
NAFTA
loud sucking sound
I should have voted for Perot.
Hind sight is 20/20.

Happy Birthday Ronald Reagan (Thanks for Ruining America)

Reagan rolled back a century of progressive advances. And now we're seeing the results of his terrible policies more clearly than ever.

www.alternet.org

Carter appointed Volker, Volker cured the inflation.

???

How can you say that when I presented you with a chart that CLEARLY shows inflation increasing for the four years of Carter's term from 5.22% (jan 1977) to 13.58% (dec 1980) ? You call this curing inflation?

You're nuts.

"You call this curing inflation?"

Did you expect inflation to just abruptly end???
Taht's stupid.
It took several years to bring it under control but the man who did it was Volker and Carter appointed Volker.
You can play with statistics but the truth is still the truth.

Happy Birthday Ronald Reagan (Thanks for Ruining America)

Voters love a ruinous America. That's why 49 of the 50 states re-elected him in '84

Did you expect inflation to just abruptly end???

Danni

Inflation was decreasing for 2 years.
Carter came into office -- it started to increase and continued to do so for four years
Reagan came into office and it started decreasing again.

I don't know how much plainer it can be.

Yet you claim Carter whipped inflation even though it was 5.22% when he took office and 13.58% when he left.

You are crazy.

"That's why 49 of the 50 states re-elected him in '84"

And that proves what???

Read Corky's article. It clearly lays out what I have been saying but in a much better way.

He hadn't finished in '84..... obviously. And his policies have been shown to be ruinous ever since.

"You are crazy."

You're dishonest.

Tell me Volker didn't do what needed to be done to combat inflation....tell me who appointed him....tell me you're not arguing dishonestly as usual.
I really don't care, I've watched so many of your debates with others, and the way you argue. It isn't politics or economics with you, it's usually a personale attempt to make yourself feel superior.
I don't need to build up my ego, I'm just fine so I just argue the economics and politics and I do it honestly. When I'm wrong I admit I'm wrong and have done so on more than one occasion here.

You can play with statistics but the truth is still the truth.

#66 | Posted by danni

classic.

Tell me Volker didn't do what needed to be done to combat inflation....

Well, since inflation went from 5.22% to 13.58%, I think I can easily do that.

"Volker didn't do what needed to be done to combat inflation"

There

That's why 49 of the 50 states re-elected him in '84"

Gee, I dunno. Maybe that he was a very popular president? Just a guess, of course.

Blah blah blah Goatman.

Blah blah blah Goatman.

Danni with fingers in both ears:

LALALALALALALALA

I'm just fine so I just argue the economics and politics and I do it honestly.

Then explain how you can claim that Carter whipped inflation when it went from 5.22% to 13.58% in his term.

Please. It's an honest question.

"When I'm wrong I admit I'm wrong"

Actually, you usually just disappear.

Just so I understand the left. Bush is responsible for everything wrong in the world. He is to blame for the housing bubble, it wasn't really the Dems who pushed to force banks to lend money to people with no hope of ever paying it back. It is his fault if you personally bought a home you couldn't afford with money you didn't have. It is his fault you didn't read the part of the loan which said Interest Only, or 3 year ARM and your rate would rise rapidly after that.

Bush is responsible for all terrorism in the world including 911. He is to blame for not stopping it from happening. I guess if he had water boarded or listened in on phone conversations in the first 7 months of his administration he would have stopped it but that would have violated the rights of the terrorists. He couldn't authorize water boarding back then because all the shit bags from the prior administration took all the W's off all the keyboards.

Bush is responsible for every aspect of global warming. He was responsible the last time global warming melted the planet out of the last ice age. He is responsible for China and India's pollution even though they consume more oil today than the entire planet did in 1985. It is all his fault.

It is Bush's fault that people are using Wall Street as their own Las Vegas vacation. People make trades and have no clue about what they are gambling on.

Gun violence his all Bush's fault even though 90% of all violent crime is committed by repeat offenders, those who probably should not have been let out of jail for their last crime. Most crimes involving guns are done with illegally acquired weapons.

Bush is responsible for the Arab/Palestinian/Israel conflicts. After all Islam loved the Jews prior to 2000.

I will concede a couple big ones. Bush made a mistake going into Iraq to oust Hussein. This is because he didn't get anymore support from other countries. We shouldn't have done it basically alone.

Bush owns the deficit spending and outrageous growth of government under his watch especially with his party controlling Congress for the first 6 years. This colossal irresponsible spending spree doesn't justify the Big O from doing it times 3.

hahaha

Joe and Goat. Co-Founders of the Original Pettifoggers Club.

Motto: No Petty Irrelevant Trivia Too Unimportant to Argue Over

Actually, you usually just disappear.

I bet that will be her response to my #77

Motto: No Petty Irrelevant Trivia Too Unimportant to Argue Over

That Danni claims Carter whipped inflation when it rose from 5.22% to 13.58% is trivial? Corky, you crack me up. If a rightie had made a similiar claim that clearly contradicted posted data, you'd be all over him like a chicken on a June bug and you know it.

It's really sad to see blind partisianship trump the truth.

That Danni claims Carter whipped inflation when it rose from 5.22% to 13.58% is trivial? Corky, you crack me up.

name a measurable data from GWB's tenure that both danni and corky won't quote to substantiate his failures.

stock market
wages
foreclosures
unemployment
jobs sent overseas
etc.....

Yes, it is "blind partisianship".

"That Danni claims Carter whipped inflation when it rose from 5.22% to 13.58% is trivial?"

I said he appointed the guy who whipped inflation. He did. Did he not??? You play with statistics but never deal with the fact that it was Volker who whipped inflation and he was appointed by Carter.

said he appointed the guy who whipped inflation. He did. Did he not??? You play with statistics but never deal with the fact that it was Volker who whipped inflation and he was appointed by Carter.

OK, Danni. My bad. I said Carter instead of VOlker. But you are avoiding the gist of my question and you know it.

How can you claim that inflation was whipped when it indeed rose from 5.22% to 13.58%?

(and this isn't even considering that it had been in a steady decline for the previous two years)

-Corky, you crack me up.

It's pretty obvious that that happened a long time ago, (prolly dropped on the head as a child) and that I had nothing to do with it.

You can argue the trivia as much as you like (with someone else), but Reagan is as discredited economically as is Bush. Only he really was the kind of guy people wanted to have a beer with. Bush, more like have a Quaalude with.

Bush made huge blunders that will resonate for decades.

I think Obama has done so already as well.

You can't just point to a map and say "As of this date, President X's policies no longer affect us....."

Even an idiot can see that we are still in Iraq. That has nothing to do with Bush anymore?

I honestly believe that party membership makes people a little retarded.

"You can't just point to a map and say ....."

Would have made more sense had I typed "calendar" instead of "map".

You can argue the trivia as much ...

Election and poll numbers are trivial? LOL. I'll remember that next time you or one of your leftie cohorts use them to support an argument.

Funny how numbers work for you when you want them to, Corky, but you consider them trivial when they don't say what you want them to. LOL

Would have made more sense had I typed "calendar" instead of "map".

A calendar is simply a map of time. *grin*

As the big picture, the failure of Reaganomics, continues to evade you, I suggest you continue looking for specks of dust in the desert.

As the big picture, the failure of Reaganomics, continues to evade you, I suggest you continue looking for specks of dust in the desert

Show me some numbers that prove it. I, of course, will follow your lead and say they are trivial. LOL

What Bankrupted America?

NAFTA....

Fair Housing Bill otherwise known as The National Homeownership Strategy which began in 1994.....

Spending 300 Billion a year on Illegal Aliens....

What Bankrupted America?

NAFTA....

Except we were already 4.5 trillion in debt after Reagan and Bush 1 but before NAFTA. However, NAFTA has done its part to destroy American's jobs.

Danni -- my #85?

"Danni -- my #85?"

I'm not reentering the tail chase.

I'm not reentering the tail chase.

#96 | Posted by danni at 2009-05-04 01:28 PM | Reply | Flag: Maybe Bob will play with him

I'm not reentering the tail chase.

LOL. Smart move, girl, because you were busted.

There is no way you can claim that Volker had inflation under control when it went up from 5.22% to 13.58%.

Sometimes you just have to have your feet shoved into the fire to be forced into seeing the truth.

With some folks he who posts last wins.
Some others just want to discuss issues etc. without needing the ego massage.

There is no way you can claim that Volker had inflation under control when it went up from 5.22% to 13.58%.

#98 | Posted by goatman

If one only considers the work Volcker did during the Carter admin, then you are correct.

However, this leaves out the other half of the story, as Volcker was reappointed by Reagan:

Paul Volcker, a Democrat[5], was appointed Chairman of the Federal Reserve in August 1979 by President Jimmy Carter and reappointed in 1983 by President Ronald Reagan.[6]

Volcker's Fed is widely credited with ending the United States' stagflation crisis of the 1970s. Inflation, which peaked at 13.5% in 1981, was successfully lowered to 3.2% by 1983.


Source

"However, this leaves out the other half of the story, as Volcker was reappointed by Reagan:"

I told him that at least three times but he never acknowledged it, just wants to play with statistics. He isn't really interested in a discussion about what really happened it's more like some kind of "gotcha" contest with him.

What the whole country should be discussing is the value of Reaganomics and whether or not it is primarily responsible for the demise of the American economy. I contend it is with the help of some other things like NAFTA, etc. Basicly it could be said that the Tea Parties were a protest against the idea that Reaganomics is wrong though I don't know if most attendees realize that. That is why many of us think that the majority of the attendees do not really understand the issues much less the solutions.

What the whole country should be discussing is the value of Reaganomics and whether or not it is primarily responsible for the demise of the American economy. I contend it is with the help of some other things like NAFTA, etc. Basicly it could be said that the Tea Parties were a protest against the idea that Reaganomics is wrong though I don't know if most attendees realize that. That is why many of us think that the majority of the attendees do not really understand the issues much less the solutions.

They were protesting banker bailouts, AIG and the Federal Reserve. Not Reaganomics, not Clinton, not left or right...taxes going to banks and AIG.

They said they were protesting rising tax rates which most of them will never have to pay anyway.
All of it still comes back down to Supply Side economics vs. Keynesian economics.

What the whole country should be discussing is the value of Reaganomics and whether or not it is primarily responsible for the demise of the American economy.

Furthermore, what we should be talking about is should we be enabling those who are primarily responsible by giving them whatever they want...and the significance of propping up that which was responsible for the demise of the American economy.

What the whole country should be discussing is the value of Reaganomics and whether or not it is primarily responsible for the demise of the American economy.

Like I have said, Reagan's presidency touched danni's personal life very directly.

"Like I have said, Reagan's presidency touched danni's personal life very directly."

Either you know it or you don't it touched every American's life very directly. A few it made wealthier but the majority it made poorer than they would have been otherwise.

Either you know it or you don't it touched every American's life very directly. A few it made wealthier but the majority it made poorer than they would have been otherwise.

See, who said Reagan and Obama had nothing in common?

-He isn't really interested in a discussion about what really happened it's more like some kind of "gotcha" contest with him.

Where's that Moment of clarity Award?

And Uncle Jeb suggests the GOP forget about Reagan anyway...

www.drudge.com

A few it made wealthier but the majority it made poorer than they would have been otherwise.

how can you say that? I guess it made me wealthier but then, I went to school, worked my ass off and developed a skill worth $$$.

I don't really give Reagan credit for that. Any more than I would give him credit for somebody who made poorer choices and found themselves in worse situations either.

In any case, he (his presidency) touched your life more personally than you are willing to admit.

There is something very specific and very bad that you attribute to him.

Yes it still can. The stink of Bush will linger for a long time. Reminds me of my ex.

#1 | Posted by dxlingr at 2009-05-

thats only because leftists keep thier heads stuck up obamas ass........???

what??

well you get the point.

And Uncle Jeb suggests the GOP forget about Reagan anyway...

www.drudge.com

#109 | Posted by Corky at 2009-05-04 02:10 PM | Reply

and that is a fatal mistake which is why the media is going to play this until the tape or whatever is worn out.

"There is something very specific and very bad that you attribute to him."

Baloney. I have followed politics since LBJ and Nixon and I recognized that the decline of our economy started with Ronnie. That can be demonstrated by looking at our national debt, the stagnation of wages, the concentration of wealth, outsourcing of jobs, etc.

They said they were protesting rising tax rates which most of them will never have to pay anyway.
All of it still comes back down to Supply Side economics vs. Keynesian economics.

#104 | Posted by danni at 2009-05-04 02:01 PM

It is the same old same old. The uber wealthy get the mouth breathers out en masse to demand tax cuts for the uber wealthy by threatening taxes that they will never have to pay in the first place.

But what they hay, saying "increased taxes" on television is fun even if it is a lie. Gots to give all the rednecks some evil boogeyman to rally against and distract them from the fact the these same people are shipping their good jobs away in under the lie of "free trade".

It was the same with the lies told about the "death tax" which 99% of America will never pay. But it sounds good to say American farms are being destroyed by the evil "death tax".

BTW tax rates will still be lower than under Ronnie Raygun.

That frigging commie.

#114 | Posted by 726

Well, I agree with you and Danni on that point. People protest tax rates they aren't exposed to.

Doesn't mean the taxes are right but it begs the questions as to whether or not those folks realize this doesn't directly affect them. Of course, the argument that high tax rates will take more money out of the economy and can hurt them......I would say that higher tax rates on the wealthy forces them to distribute funds (before they become taxable income to them) back into their business in the form of more jobs or capital investments etc...

It doesn't mean higher wages though.

"It doesn't mean higher wages though."

Not automatically but if outsourcing were taxed, if immigration laws were enforced then there would be more demand for American workers and wages would start to rise.

However, this leaves out the other half of the story, as Volcker was reappointed by Reagan:

Fair enough. I'll accept that. But that takes us full circle where I claimed that Carter was to blame for inflation during his term. The only difference in the equation is the president.

So I maintain my original position: Carter is to blame for the inflation during his term. Some say it was at artifact of the Vietnam war (bOoB loves this one) but that can't be the case since inflation was clearly falling steadily for two full years before Carter took office.

I think if you are going to blame Carter then it is only fair that you explain what Carter did to create the inflation.

Not automatically but if outsourcing were taxed, if immigration laws were enforced then there would be more demand for American workers and wages would start to rise.

Neither of those can be remedied by raising income taxes on the wealthy.

You are talking about Trade policies.

think if you are going to blame Carter then it is only fair that you explain what Carter did to create the inflation.

I don't know, hon -- I just look at the numbers.

Inflation fell steadily from January 1975 to December, 1976. (Ford) It rose steadily from 5.22% in January 1977 to 13.54% in December, 1980. (Carter)

inflationdata.com

But thanks for the strawman. That's like saying, "If you think an atomic bomb was to blame for the leveling of Hiroshima, explain to me how fission works".

The war on the middle class began with Nixon when he introduced HMOs. Its bipartisan.

Shrub, however, is extraordinarily callous and corrupt in the head. We will feel his ruinous policies for decades.

Let me ask you a question, Danni. If neither Carter nor Volker are to blame for the inflation during the four years of Carter's presidency, who is?

You can't use the Vietnam war/Ford strawman because inflation fell steadily from January 1975 to December 1976.

inflationdata.com

Shrub, however, is extraordinarily callous and corrupt in the head. We will feel his ruinous policies for decades.

Posted by nutcase

which ones.

"I would say that higher tax rates on the wealthy forces them to distribute funds (before they become taxable income to them) back into their business in the form of more jobs or capital investments etc..."

More jobs puts means more demand for labor which would result in rising wages provided that demand wasn't diluted by outsourcing and illegal immigration.

"I don't know, hon -- I just look at the numbers."

We don't have a dispute about there being inflation during Carter's presidency but about what caused it.
I say the Vietnam War and the oil embargo which forced us to buy oil at much higher prices. Neither thing was something Carter could control but his energy play could have played a big role in preventing further inflation due to high cost imported oil.

I say the Vietnam War and the oil embargo which forced us to buy oil at much higher prices.

The oil embargo was '73-'74.
Vietnam was over in '73

At any rate, inflation was falling steadily from January 1975 through December 1976

inflationdata.com

Any other guesses?

Yes, we agree that inflation rose during the Carter administration. Can we also agree that it was falling for the two years previous to his taking office?

I have followed politics since LBJ and Nixon and I recognized that the decline of our economy started with Ronnie. That can be demonstrated by looking at our national debt, the stagnation of wages, the concentration of wealth, outsourcing of jobs, etc.

#113 | Posted by danni

Now you are just flat out lying. What is it with you, Danni, that makes it to where you always leave out the democrat presidents when discussing the economy? Or, you will skip right over Clinton. Carter started outsourcing and he trashed the entire economy. Yet you choose to start the decline with Reagan. It's flat out bullshit is what it is.

Yes it still can. The stink of Bush will linger for a long time. Reminds me of my ex.

typical liberal "EX" sure she was quite the skank liberal...

Well, I agree with you and Danni on that point. People protest tax rates they aren't exposed to.

#117 | Posted by eberly

Well, by that logic then most of the abortion protesters should shut up as well. Hell, most of the protesters PERIOD aren't directly affected by what they are protesting.

But thanks for the strawman. That's like saying, "If you think an atomic bomb was to blame for the leveling of Hiroshima, explain to me how fission works".

#122 | Posted by goatman

I was thinking the same thing. Who else would be responsible for the inflation that occurred during Carter's administration? Is there someone out there we don't know about? Or, more than likely, is it that you don't cast blame on a dem president for a bad economy, or portions of the economy?

I say the Vietnam War and the oil embargo which forced us to buy oil at much higher prices. Neither thing was something Carter could control but his energy play could have played a big role in preventing further inflation due to high cost imported oil.

#126 | Posted by danni

Sure, when a dem is president that means outside forces have an effect on our economy, but when it comes to what we are dealing with now..... All Bush.

It's too early to blame Obama for this mess.
It's Bush.

When did Bush ruin the economy? Which year?

He was president for 8 years.

When did Bill Clinton's mistakes end and Bush pick it up?

You could say that the mistakes of Bill Clinton caused the first two years of Bush's problems.
Add 9/11, and Bush had a rough start - and worsened it?

Well, Since obama hasn't yet created jobs for the people it begins to be his fault.

well, since obama hasn't pushed any laws to prevent this from happening again it certainly is his fault now.

When we begin to see his words of rhetoric "**change**" begin to happen obama will remove himself from the fault side and into the solving of the problem side.

giving banks and corporations billions which have created no jobs is the problem.

How is your 26 dollar deferal for the obama """"tax credit"""""" plan helping you out?

I agree with this article, everyday that goes by this economy belongs to obama and not bush's.

We are going to get alot worse and we will end up throwing obama out before we get better.

Clinton shipped all jobs overseas.Cut the military to nothing.Bush had a weak US to work with and now Obama the clown will finish us off

JJD-
We spend more on the military than the next hundred countries combined, and did so under Clinton as well.

Obama will always pawn off the blame for whatever he does. Obama actually tried to blame Bush for Obama's own budget saying it was carry-over from the prior administration. What?!!!!! His spending plan passsed by Democrats in Congress and he blames Bush.

Obama is just another politico who enjoys power over others.

Everything used to be Bill Clinton's fault. Now it's Obama's fault.

- Karl Rove

we really should get rid of our pesky military. just costs so much to maintain!

IDIOTS!!!

"When did Bush ruin the economy? Which year?"

The year he invaded Iraq andgot his tax cut passed. First tax cut during wartime in our history. Even Republicans now admit it was totally irresponsible. But hey, we got the benefits of that great invasion right??? Oh we're still stuck there??? Still spending billions there???

JayBay-
You're a fuckin' idiot. Obama's budget for the military is an INCREASE from Bush's budget last year.

Where the fuck do you get your bullshit?

"...Oh we're still stuck there??? Still spending billions there???"

#142 | Posted by danni at 2009-05-04 05:27 PM | Reply | Flag:

Danni, don't hate the new President. Give hime a chance.

Danni, once 16 months go by and we are still in Iraq will you blame Obama for us still being there? I don't see how you can not. And it will happen.

Some people seem to be quite busy blaming Obama for the future things that haven't happened, and yet have no comment on the past things they ratified at least twice.

Danni, once 16 months go by and we are still in Iraq will you blame Obama for us still being there? I don't see how you can not. And it will happen.

#145 | Posted by everlong at 2009-05-04 05:50 PM | Reply | Flag:

Will that be before or after he confiscates your guns and implements Sharia Law?

How is the housing loan market, oops....you mean we are going to do this all over again with FHA?

What, you mean obama isn't making laws to prevent this from happening again......OBAMA isn't setting policy to prevent this again but is giving the financial institutions billions.

Some people just can't seem to hold their representative leaders up to common prudent sense.

Well, Since obama hasn't yet created jobs for the people it begins to be his fault.

well, since obama hasn't pushed any laws to prevent this from happening again it certainly is his fault now.

When we begin to see his words of rhetoric "**change**" begin to happen obama will remove himself from the fault side and into the solving of the problem side.

giving banks and corporations billions which have created no jobs is the problem.

How is your 26 dollar deferal for the obama """"tax credit"""""" plan helping you out?

#135 | Posted by moneywar at 2009-05-04 04:45 PM | Flag: Liberal of the non-sheeple variety

Hay T-Bag Author:

Obama gets at least 3-5 years to get us out of the Crap Whole that Bush / Cheney put us in - and it is deep. It may even take longer. Who the hell do you think you are? No Tabula Rasa for the Bush admin. They did this to US, and they will be defined by what they did! I hope they are prosecuted for their crimes, both by the USA and the UN. I Loved Condi Rice's Nixon quote about waterboarding not being a crime -- if the President authorized it...see you tube. Criminals and liars, the whole lot of them! That is why the GOP is now irrelevant and Specter made the move. Expect more to follow, and then be removed from office for people with better morals. Ha ha -- (I'm not a Dem.) and by that I mean Independents! I pray for a 3rd, 4th and 5th party for this county -- Unified coalition Rule rather that 1 or the other. Scull and Bones and the Shadow Gov. must be extracted, and no Agency / CIA official should ever be able to run for office again. GW only happened because his evil father was on the inside and pulled all the strings. Why else would Nixon's fellow criminals, like Cheney and (D)umsfeld get back into Power? You do the math! Prosecute them and change the laws. Protect our County from the Shadow Government. But Obama, like Clinton is powerless in this regard, because the Protestant Republican Military Infrastructure has Democrats on a need to know, "and curiosity is not a need to know," George Bush he when denying a President Carter disclosure request...s head of the CIA.!!! Time for a little Jeffersonian revolution, I think!

Will that be before or after he confiscates your guns and implements Sharia Law?

#147 | Posted by BetelG at 2009-05-04 06:00 PM

I believe he has to enslave the entire White Race and declare America a Socialist Country first. But, that's OK we me as long as he wears a flag pin.

But you can bet your bottom dollar that if decades from now historians credit Bush for something...

#5 | Posted by goatman at 2009-05-03 04:07 PM

Yes, Bush will always be remembered as the guy who helped elect a Black Man to the White House. So, think about it, even if Obama totally bombs his time in office (which he won't) we can STILL blame it on the Rthugs...LOL! Get over it...Obama blew your socks off and is doing an awesome job as President of the United States...so far!

Poor Rethugs, they lost this election so badly that even if the Dems blew it for 8 years in a row (which they won't) then it will somehow STILL be the Bush's fault for screwing things up so badly that we had to elect a black "janitor" to clean things up.

Imagine being responsible for getting a Black Man elected to the Presidency!

Obama's fault.

Poor Rethugs, they lost this election so badly

That's absolutely correct. The republicans lost. The democrats did not win.

Not many lefties acknowledge that fact.

The republicans lost. The democrats did not win.

Not many lefties acknowledge that fact.

#152 | Posted by non-partisan goatman at 2009-05-04 08:05 PM | Reply | Flag: Retarded

And now queuing up the inevitable whine...

Hi, trollifidian!

Even though you haven't been the best of trolls lately and are probably falling behind in troll-school, I'm going to give you the same treat I always give you. And you will take it as you always do. At least you are still an obedient little troll.

So obey my command and have the last word on this thread.

But you have to promise to come sooner when I call. I called out for you yesterday and you didn't show! But the last 27 out of 28 times you have (including this one) so I forgive you.

Now have your last word and wait for me on another thread my obedient little troll.

LOL

"Mostly agree with you, GOAT."

You agree that "the democrats did not win"? Remember, this is literal-minded Goatman who said that, who wants his words taken literally. He said so. Take him at his word. If he said "the democrats did not win" he must think they lost.

And now queuing up the inevitable whine...

#154 | Posted by nullifidian at 2009-05-04 08:12 PM

LOL

#156 | Posted by goatman at 2009-05-04 08:26 PM

As predicted. You can always make Goatman type 10 or 20 words for every one of yours. It's easy. Anybody can do it. Watch:

Hey Goatman, you're a blithering idiot!

Everything a person does is likening to taking a rock and throwing it at a problem in a pool of water.
When he does, ripples radiate out in all directions and continue outward far beyond the zone the person was targeting.

FDR threw the rock that targeted poverty and the ripples created the entitlement class.
Reagan threw the rock that ended the Cold War and the ripples created the era of eternal debt.
Clinton threw the rock that was supposed to destroy the healthcare system in the U.S. but the rock was intercepted before it hit the water.
GWB threw the rock that took on terrorism head on and the ripples are creating a permanent U.S. presence in the mid-east and eternal conflict between the U.S. and radical Islam.
Barney Frank threw the rock that made home ownership possible for the poor and the ripples created the housing and financing market crashes.
BHO is throwing the really, really big rock that will attempt to stabilize those collapsed markets and merger big business with Federal government chairmanship. Those ripples are yet to be realized.

Ripple patterns are fairly predictable though.

That's absolutely correct. The republicans lost. The democrats did not win.

Not many lefties acknowledge that fact.

#152 | Posted by goatman

Uh.

Careful. Or people are going to start confusing you with BL2.

" that made home ownership possible for the poor and the ripples created the housing and financing market crashes."

Home ownership was always possible for the poor. But until fairly recently, lenders knew better than to loan to someone who couldn't pay it back.

"Careful. Or people are going to start confusing you with BL2."

Yep, sounds like something AKAstupid would say. The democrats didn't win? What kind of horseshit is that?

The republicans lost. The democrats did not win.

The 2008 election was more complex. It was a sound verdict against Bush and Cheney, and unlike in 2004, the Democratic ticket was worth putting faith in.

"If you've played or followed sports a phrase like that is understood as something not to be literally interpreted. "

Of course not, Oohrah. But Literal-Minded Goatman said his words should be taken literally, so I'm just taking him at his word.

Actually,
I think we can twist it so that both Al Gore and John Kerry are at fault.

So the Democratic Party's fault, by default, then.

If they had put up a candidate that would have seriously beaten George W Bush, then who knows?

Yep...it has to be the Democratic Leadership's fault for the current economy and state of world affairs.

(I'm just using Liberal Logic in reverse, here....)

I thought Obama had until September 12th of his first term before anything was his fault!

Seems Bush had it that way, why not Obama?

I thought Obama had until September 12th of his first term before anything was his fault!

If it's bad news, yes, that is true. If it is good news, no

You should know this by now.

Considering that Hoover, FDR, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Carter, Reagan, Bush I, and Clinton ALL still get the blame for some things, among various factions of the DR crowd, I don't know how anyone could possibly expect W to stop taking blame when he hasn't even been gone for 4 months.

"Nothing is Obama's fault. When he screws up, it's all on Bush."

Ok. I'm going to explain something to you. It's difficult, I know, but bear with me.

No policy of Obama's is going to fix the economic mess in the near future. It's not a magic wand he's waving around to make things all of a sudden become better. If the economy continued to shrink this past quarter, that does not fall on his shoulders. It is too early into his tenure for his policies to have begun to take affect and you're an obtuse idiot if you think Bush's policies' affects won't continue to last.

Hell, I'm sure an argument could be made that Clinton share's some blame too if you try hard enough.

#14 | Posted by jpw

Money says JPW believes that Obama's policies are to credit for the current market up tick. So Obama's policies haven't had time to take effect to hurt the economy, but to him they have had enough time to positively impact it!

JayBay-
You're a fuckin' idiot. Obama's budget for the military is an INCREASE from Bush's budget last year. Where the fuck do you get your bullshit?

hey dickhead, I was replying to an earlier post by one of your liberal fuck buddies who thinks we spend too much on military....

Nonsense. Any arbitrary number of days, especially only 100, is ridiculous. However, with each passing day, it is obviously more "Obama's economy."

So if we had soup lines in 1938, six years after FDR took office, that was NOT the fault of the Hoover depression? It will be Bush's depression through the eight Obama years. herm

It will be Bush's depression through the eight Obama years

If we are in a depression in 2012, there will not be eght obama years.

all you idots blaming bush need to take the blue pill, your way out of touch with reality.

The other night during his press conference, Obama claimed that his economic stimulus bill had "already saved or created 150,000 jobs."

For most of the dumb-masses out there, no one thought twice about this statistic. Considering the fact that our economy has lost well over a million jobs since Obama took office, one might wonder ... where in the heck did he get 150,000 jobs from?

It turns out that the president is basing this number on estimates of what his economic advisers THINK the economic stimulus bill is doing, rather than what it is actually doing.

An Obama spokesman explains, "... the estimate does not mean that employment has risen by 150,000. Rather, it means that employment is 150,000 higher than it otherwise would have been." The figure is simply an estimate of the number of people hired to work directly on stimulus-funded projects, as well as "jobs created by the tax cuts, aid to the states, and other parts of the ARRA." Question .... What tax cuts did the Obama administration provide that would allow for jobs to be created?

Doesn't really matter, though. You've seen those bumper stickers out there, haven't you? "Obama said it. I believe it. That settles it." liberal twisted truths. obama=omistake. change we can't believe in.

and if the above is not sufficient. chew on this libtards..

Obama's first two major bills alone, the "stimulus" and "omnibus," cost nearly twice as much as was spent on Iraq over six years $1.2 trillion vs. $650 billion.

Obama abandoned his campaign promise of "a net spending cut," his first annual deficit not counting bailouts being three times the worst deficit under President George W. Bush.

Obama's objective in his first G20 summit commitments to spend our way to prosperity with massive stimulus boondoggles across the G20 was rejected out of hand.

Obama's objective in his first NATO summit commitments to combat troops for Afghanistan from "our European allies," which Obama and his party imagined were ready and willing to fight if only someone "enlightened" like him were running things was predictably refused, with some more European non-combat contingents offered as a token.

Obama's Defence Department announced cuts of $1.4 billion to missile defence, the day after North Korea test-fired its long-range, multi-stage ballistic missile.

Obama's economics were criticized by Warren Buffet, whose endorsement had been candidate Obama's highest economic credential.

Obama reversed the free trade Bush policy that had allowed about 100 Mexican tractor-trailers into the United States, which the Mexican government immediately used as an excuse to levy tariffs on 90 American goods amounting to $2.4 billion in U.S. exports.

Obama's "tax cuts for 95 per cent" turned out to mean $13 a week from June to December, to be clawed back to $8 a week in January as compared with President Bush's 2008 tax rebates of $600 to $1,200 plus $300 per child, which were notably scoffed at during the election campaign by Michelle Obama.

Obama's campaign promise of a $3,000-per-employee tax credit for businesses that hired new workers repeated ad nauseam for weeks before the election was discreetly retired even before inauguration day.

Obama abandoned his campaign promise that "lobbyists won't work in my White House," waiving his no-lobbyist executive order or conveniently re-

defining his appointees' past lobbying work to allow 30 lobbyists into his administration.

Obama abandoned his campaign promise to reform earmarks, signing the omnibus bill which contained 8,816 of them.

Obama took more money from AIG than any other politician in 2008 over $100,000 and signed into law the provision guaranteeing the AIG bonuses which later had him in front of the cameras "shaking with outrage" and siccing the pitchfork crowd on law-abiding citizens who had fulfilled their end of a contract and had their payment upheld by Obama's own legislation.

It will be Bush's depression through the eight Obama years. herm

#173 | Posted by herm
In contrast, it's always depressing when you show up HERM.

So by that theory, the economic "boom" during the Clinton years must be attibutable to Reagan/Bush right tool? Go back and put your teeth in so you can eat your oatmeal idiot.

Get over it...Obama blew your socks off and is doing an awesome job as President of the United States...so far!

#150 | Posted by donnerboy at 2009-05-04 07:01 PM

Donnerboy supports welfare for Wall Street.

Considering that Hoover, FDR, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Carter, Reagan, Bush I, and Clinton ALL still get the blame for some things, among various factions of the DR crowd, I don't know how anyone could possibly expect W to stop taking blame when he hasn't even been gone for 4 months.

#169 | Posted by Whatsleft at 2009-05-04 10:53 PM

Yeah, anyone who thinks that is a complete fucking hack, and retarded. But it's really no worse than O'tards (see Herm, Donnerboy, etc...) pretending Obama won't be responsible for the economy throughout his 8 years.

yet 9/11 was clinton's fault

Yeah! But Obama closed GTMO! DOH!

Yeah! But Obama closed GTMO! DOH!
#181 | Posted by JeffnDenmark

"House Democrats have rejected a request from President Obama for $80 million to close the US prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. House Democrats removed the funding request from a $94 billion emergency spending bill to cover the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. House Appropriations Chair David Obey said the funding wasn't included because Obama has not yet outlined a concrete plan to close Guantanamo."

Strange... does this give Obama a plausible excuse for not closing Gitmo?

Like it or not, disagree with it or not, the way history works is that Hoover is blamed for the Great Depression and Bush will be blamed for this recession. Of course, every historian realizes that those are labels for reference and various other factors come into play. Hoover retains his distinction because he did nothing for the first three years of the Depression. If Obama's efforts prove counterproductive, he will wind up sharing the blame with Bush. Otherwise, he will be given credit for the recovery - and in fifty years will be blamed by Republicans for prolonging it.

Isn't history fun?

Same old guns out in full force I see.

Republicans are all the same. They're all brainwashed and I'm always right! Never mind that I have the same eye for facts as the vindictive homeless guy down the street who last read a newspaper in 1982.
-Danni

I have absolutely no clue why or how its relevant, but I'm going to bash a caricature and call it a day.
-Corky

Donnerboy supports welfare for Wall Street.

#178 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2009-05-05 09:37 AM

oops! you forgot to mention how I was also an anti-gun anti-bible Socialist that believed in enslaving the white race.

I didn't say I agreed with everything Obama is doing. I did say he is doing a great job...overall. Have you peeked at the stock market lately....my but things seem to have stabilized a bit....but shhh! don't look to hard... you might scare the poor thing!

Hey LoD..its all good as long as you got yer R-tard FLAG PIN on today! Right?

I have absolutely no clue whatsoever, and really am totally irrelevant, so I think I'll go bash myself and call it a day. - Lil' Kevie

oops! you forgot to mention how I was also an anti-gun anti-bible Socialist that believed in enslaving the white race.

I didn't say I agreed with everything Obama is doing. I did say he is doing a great job...overall. Have you peeked at the stock market lately....my but things seem to have stabilized a bit....but shhh! don't look to hard... you might scare the poor thing!

Hey LoD..its all good as long as you got yer R-tard FLAG PIN on today! Right?

#185 | Posted by donnerboy at 2009-05-05 03:00 PM

Oops, you earn a stupid flag for that one.

I wonder how many times I have to say republicans are worse than democrats on the economy before retards like Donnerboy understand that I don't oppose Obama's welfare for Wall Street on partisan grounds.

Try again retard.

But again, Donnerboy doesn't really oppose Obama's Wall Street welfare. He can only bring himself to drool over how "awesome" a job Obama's doing, and never to think critically about his economic policies. So, he at least tacitly supports Obama's Wall Street welfare.

"If we are in a depression in 2012, there will not be eght obama years" vs. "In contrast, it's always depressing when you show up HERM. "

With the first, El Cabron joins the tiny rightie majority that argues issues with facts. Sadly for him, the fact is that the Hoover depression was still in full swing in 1936, when FDR won re-election by one of the most sweeping landslides ever. With the second Guillermo El Cid pokes his head out of the toilet to respond by calling a name. I do fear that in GOPdom, the Cids prevail. herm

Sadly for him, the fact is that the Hoover depression was still in full swing in 1936...

????

Sadly for you we are not in a depression now. We are in a recession. SO if we go into a depression before 2012, it will happen in Obama's term.

Remember all the Chimptards on this blog blaming Carter for the 10.8% unemployment rate at the end of Beirut Bonzo's second year. How quickly they forget.

"Sadly for you we are not in a depression now. We are in a recession."

Predictable, cabron. We are in whatever anyone opts to call it. It's not good. herm

Years from now they will still say 'Bush's fault' to cover their ineptitude.

I have absolutely no clue whatsoever, and really am totally irrelevant, so I think I'll go bash myself and call it a day. - Lil' Kevie

And I'm made of rubber, your made of glue...blah blah blah.

Comments are closed for this entry.


Drudge Retort

Home | News | Comments | User Blogs | Nooner | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Copyright 2012 World Readable