Thanks Obama

[Guest]

for running up the debt and lowering our credit rating.

http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/downgrade-shows-demint-was-right

[Guest]

that was passed by the House would have prevented the rating decrease.

http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/demint-both-debt-plans-lead-credit-downgrade


“I will work to oppose both of these downgrade deals and continue to fight for Cut, Cap & Balance. The bipartisan House-passed Cut, Cap & Balance is the only plan on the table that will ensure we keep our AAA rating and the only plan that will ever allow us to pay down our debt instead of perpetually increasing it.”

Jim DeMint

[Guest]

:cryin2:

[Guest]

Geeez! Give me a break!



for running up the debt and lowering our credit rating.

http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/downgrade-shows-demint-was-right

[Guest]

Geeez! Give me a break!

If you want a break, do not vote for democrats in the next election.:D

[Guest]

I'm sure we'll be treated to a long rambling diatribe complete with all sorts of numbers, gleaned from somewhere, to convince us that the credit rating drop had nothing to do with the President, and instead with anyone but.

[Guest]

does anyone besides me think that we have been set up by the potus and geithner so that the new '12 apostles of congressional action committee' will be coherced into raising revenue thru taxation and any other means that the prez wants?

[Guest]

It's raining so hard here right now.....that damn Obama...it's his fault. :kiss:

[Guest]

It's raining so hard here right now.....that damn Obama...it's his fault. :kiss:

Yea, but I'm sure he will blame Bush.:cryin2:

[Guest]

I'm sure we'll be treated to a long rambling diatribe complete with all sorts of numbers, gleaned from somewhere, to convince us that the credit rating drop had nothing to do with the President, and instead with anyone but.Nope, just a single chart.
http://www.artonissues.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/National-Debt-Graph.jpg
I guess we can conclude from the chart that the presidents that did the most responsible job in fiscal policy were Truman, Ike, Kennedy, LBJ, Nixon, Ford and even Jimmy Carter. They had spending under control and if they couldn't get the economy really cranking, they cut back spending to what we could afford. Then Bush 41 and Reagan cranked up the spending and our debt, even in the face of economic growth that wasn't all that great. That was until Bill Clinton got hold of the pursestrings, really got our economy cranking again, slowed down the spending and paid off most of our debt. Now the Bush 43 and Obama administrations look like those two guys have elevated our spending and debt at an unprecedented pace and to unaffordable levels. And neither one of them did beans to get the U.S. economy to a level that was as good as when Bill Clinton left office.

Yep, it's the presidents that are doing all this. But some of those who are often remembered as the "good guys" and "bad guys" in some cases are reversed. Kind of surprising, don't you think?

[Guest]

Nope, just a single chart.
http://www.artonissues.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/National-Debt-Graph.jpg
I guess we can conclude from the chart that the presidents that did the most responsible job in fiscal policy were Truman, Ike, Kennedy, LBJ, Nixon, Ford and even Jimmy Carter. Then Bush 41 and Reagan cranked up the spending and our debt again until Bill Clinton got hold of the pursetrings, slowed down the spending and paid off most of our debt. Now the Bush 43 and Obama administrations look like those two guys are elevating our spending and debt at an unprecedented pace and to unaffordable levels.

Yep, it's the presidents that are doing all this. But some of those who are often remembered as the "good guys" and "bad guys" in some cases are reversed. Kind of surprising, don't you think?

You made me laugh out loud with the Clinton analogy. I guess Newt Gingrich and the Contract with America had nothing to do with it? ROTFLMAO:D

[Guest]

You made me laugh out loud with the Clinton analogy. I guess Newt Gingrich and the Contract with America had nothing to do with it? ROTFLMAO:DRemember what the theme of this thread is--Obama is the guy who ran up the debt and caused the recent downgrade. The president did it.

So if you're going to blame one president for things that are happening, even for things that happened before he got into elected office, it's doesn't seem right to flip back and forth and credit prior Congresses for being responsible for good times and then blame individual presidents for bad times, is it?

[Guest]

Remember what the theme of this thread is--Obama is the guy who ran up the debt and caused the recent downgrade. The president did it.

So if you're going to blame one president for things that are happening, even for things that happened before he got into elected office, it's doesn't seem right to flip back and forth and credit prior Congresses for being responsible for good times and then blame individual presidents for bad times, is it?

Well, yes it is appropriate. Obama had both houses of Congress. That is why they passed Obamacare without even reading it. What do you think would have happened if the House wasn't taken over by fiscal conservatives last year?

[Guest]

Is there NOT a grey area in this forum.....Isn't it possible that some democrats MIGHT be right some of the time....Is it ALWAYS the conservatives that have ALL the answers....My last little prayer every night is that some of the posters on this forum and congress would meet in the middle.....Why is this forum soooooo personal!....Remember, everyone of us has just ONE vote soooooo NO bullying PLEASE!....I love a good debate and some of the posters are very balanced and I look forward to reading their posts....I agree Obama hasn't fulfilled many of his promises BUT he is NOT responsible for all the shortcomings in the world, contrary to many believers on this thread.....Try, just try, to be more open-minded and give constructive criticism....

[Guest]

Is there NOT a grey area in this forum.....Isn't it possible that some democrats MIGHT be right some of the time....Is it ALWAYS the conservatives that have ALL the answers....My last little prayer every night is that some of the posters on this forum and congress would meet in the middle.....Why is this forum soooooo personal!....Remember, everyone of us has just ONE vote soooooo NO bullying PLEASE!....I love a good debate and some of the posters are very balanced and I look forward to reading their posts....I agree Obama hasn't fulfilled many of his promises BUT he is NOT responsible for all the shortcomings in the world, contrary to many believers on this thread.....Try, just try, to be more open-minded and give constructive criticism....

Please try reading again, will you. It was not just Obama that gave us Obamacare. Reid and Pelosi carried his water.

And don't forget what she said, Hurry and pass this bill so we can read it!!!~!~

[Guest]

Nope, just a single chart.
http://www.artonissues.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/National-Debt-Graph.jpg
I guess we can conclude from the chart that the presidents that did the most responsible job in fiscal policy were Truman, Ike, Kennedy, LBJ, Nixon, Ford and even Jimmy Carter. They had spending under control and if they couldn't get the economy really cranking, they cut back spending to what we could afford. Then Bush 41 and Reagan cranked up the spending and our debt, even in the face of economic growth that wasn't all that great. That was until Bill Clinton got hold of the pursestrings, really got our economy cranking again, slowed down the spending and paid off most of our debt. Now the Bush 43 and Obama administrations look like those two guys have elevated our spending and debt at an unprecedented pace and to unaffordable levels. And neither one of them did beans to get the U.S. economy to a level that was as good as when Bill Clinton left office.

Yep, it's the presidents that are doing all this. But some of those who are often remembered as the "good guys" and "bad guys" in some cases are reversed. Kind of surprising, don't you think?

Your chart is too imprecise to mean anything to anyone trying to decipher it, but it seems to be the same lie told by Harry Reid. The beginning of the debt increase starts in Bush's term but the vast bulk of the current unbelievable debt increase is all Obama's. Knowingly or not, you're just spreading the lies of this administration. Don't know why.

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/08/05/a-few-inconvenient-truths-getting-in-the-way-of-the-inherited-meme/

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/aug/03/harry-reid/harry-reid-says-8-million-jobs-lost-during-george-/

[Guest]

Remember what the theme of this thread is--Obama is the guy who ran up the debt and caused the recent downgrade. The president did it.

So if you're going to blame one president for things that are happening, even for things that happened before he got into elected office, it's doesn't seem right to flip back and forth and credit prior Congresses for being responsible for good times and then blame individual presidents for bad times, is it?

In your defense of Obama, it almost sounds like your suggesting he has no responsibility or accountability for what happens during his watch and under his stewardship. What happens matters and leaders are ultimately responsible and accountable for the state of the union during their tenure. Responsibility and accountability cannot be passed beyond a certain point. Remember where the buck stops?

[Guest]

Your chart is too imprecise to mean anything to anyone trying to decipher it....Knowingly or not, you're just spreading the lies of this administration. Don't know why....Richie, it's a simple line chart with information from 1940 thru 2007 sourced from President Bush's whitehouse.gov. It's not a complicated chart. It plots total national debt as a percentage of GDP. That's the same ratio that was an important factor in S&P's decision to downgrade our sovereign debt. What's "imprecise" about that?

And "spreading the lies of this administration"? What in the world does that mean?

Remember what the theme of this thread is, as posted by villagegolfer. It's short. It said "Thanks Obama for running up the debt and lowering our credit rating."

I'm not defending Obama or this administration, but I am responding that the allegation which is the basis of this thread is not only inaccurate, but simply preposterous!

[Guest]

Richie, it's a simple line chart with information from 1940 thru 2007 sourced from President Bush's whitehouse.gov. It's not a complicated chart. It plots total national debt as a percentage of GDP. That's the same ratio that was an important factor in S&P's decision to downgrade our sovereign debt. What's "imprecise" about that?

And "spreading the lies of this administration"? What in the world does that mean?

Remember what the theme of this thread is, as posted by villagegolfer. It's short. It said "Thanks Obama for running up the debt and lowering our credit rating."

I'm not defending Obama or this administration, but I am responding that the allegation which is the basis of this thread is not only inaccurate, but simply preposterous!

Beg your pardon.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/2011/08/obama-partisans-ignore-facts-when-bashing-bush

[Guest]

Nope, just a single chart.
http://www.artonissues.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/National-Debt-Graph.jpg
I guess we can conclude from the chart that the presidents that did the most responsible job in fiscal policy were Truman, Ike, Kennedy, LBJ, Nixon, Ford and even Jimmy Carter. They had spending under control and if they couldn't get the economy really cranking, they cut back spending to what we could afford. Then Bush 41 and Reagan cranked up the spending and our debt, even in the face of economic growth that wasn't all that great. That was until Bill Clinton got hold of the pursestrings, really got our economy cranking again, slowed down the spending and paid off most of our debt. Now the Bush 43 and Obama administrations look like those two guys have elevated our spending and debt at an unprecedented pace and to unaffordable levels. And neither one of them did beans to get the U.S. economy to a level that was as good as when Bill Clinton left office.

Yep, it's the presidents that are doing all this. But some of those who are often remembered as the "good guys" and "bad guys" in some cases are reversed. Kind of surprising, don't you think?

Tell me how Bill Clinton got ahold of the purse strings. Wasn't it a Republican House that voted to reduce spending?? Remember the Contract with America?

[Guest]

Tell me how Bill Clinton got ahold of the purse strings. Wasn't it a Republican House that voted to reduce spending?? Remember the Contract with America?

Just more spin from within.:D

[Guest]

In your defense of Obama, it almost sounds like your suggesting he has no responsibility or accountability for what happens during his watch and under his stewardship. What happens matters and leaders are ultimately responsible and accountable for the state of the union during their tenure. Responsibility and accountability cannot be passed beyond a certain point. Remember where the buck stops?Geez, how many times do I have to say it? I'm not defending Barack Obama...period! I'm not going to vote for his re-election...period.

Of course he is accountable. But did everything that is now the basis for our fiscal and economic crisis happen during his 30-month presidency? Of course it didn't. Is everything that lead to the debt downgrade things that he personally concocted or did? I think not. Does he have the broad responsibility for what's happened on "his watch". Yes, certainly he does.

But for crying out load, unless we all take the time to see and understand what really caused this problem, we'll have no chance whatsoever to elect people to represent us who will have the experience, ability and leadership qualities to begin to get us out of this mess. If everyone were to follow the simple solution offered so frequently on this forum...vote Republican or vote Tea Party...we'll very likely wind up with the same kind of dysfunctional government that we have now.

[Guest]

Geez, how many times do I have to say it? I'm not defending Barack Obama...period! I'm not going to vote for his re-election...period.

Of course he is accountable. But did everything that is now the basis for our fiscal and economic crisis happen during his 30-month presidency? Of course it didn't. Is everything that lead to the debt downgrade things that he personally concocted or did? I think not. Does he have the broad responsibility for what's happened on "his watch". Yes, certainly he does.

But for crying out load, unless we all take the time to see and understand what really caused this problem, we'll have no chance whatsoever to elect people to represent us who will have the experience, ability and leadership qualities to begin to get us out of this mess. If everyone were to follow the simple solution offered so frequently on this forum...vote Republican or vote Tea Party...we'll very likely wind up with the same kind of dysfunctional government that we have now.

Unfortunately, complicated explanations do not hold water with voters of today. Did you not observe how a Community Organizer won an election for the Presidency? What did they vote for? Hope and Change jingle? Executive experience? Color of skin? Racists guilt?
Please tell us what they voted for or was it a little of everything above?

People told me if I voted for McCain, it would be disastrous for the USA. Huh?

[Guest]

Unfortunately, complicated explanations do not hold water with voters of today. Did you not observe how a Community Organizer won an election for the Presidency? What did they vote for? Hope and Change jingle? Executive experience? Color of skin? Racists guilt?
Please tell us what they voted for or was it a little of everything above?

People told me if I voted for McCain, it would be disastrous for the USA. Huh?

Think that "mavericky" thing would have worked out good for us huh? :(

[Guest]

Unfortunately, complicated explanations do not hold water with voters of today....What did they vote for? Hope and Change jingle? Executive experience? Color of skin? Racists guilt?
Please tell us what they voted for or was it a little of everything above?

People told me if I voted for McCain, it would be disastrous for the USA. Huh?It's been awhile, but I think I can remember why I voted for Obama. Actually, it was more a vote against McCain-Palin than it was a vote for Obama.

Initially, John McCain was going to get my vote. He was a cancer-survivor, which was a bit of a concern given the economic and foreign relations problems we were facing, but when he chose a VP running mate who seemed to me to be woefully unprepared to be POTUS if she had to, I began to consider Obama. Then at one point, McCain responded in an interview that he really didn't know much about economics and would have to appoint other people who did, I began to really have doubts. His hawkishness with regard to continuing the wars and his seemingly sole focus on supporting anything the Pentagon wanted also began to be an issue with me. He was beginning to look sadly one-dimensional as the potential leader of the free world. Then when he so clearly permitted his political handlers make his campaign a totally negative affair, Joe the Plumber, etc., he pretty much lost my vote.

Did I think Barack Obama was a terrific alternative? No.He was too inexperienced and too liberal for me, but he was very smart, understood the Constitution, young, healthy and he had backed himself with one of the more experienced and respected Senators in Washington as his VP running-mate. If I had one major concern, particularly as the depth of the financial crisis became more apparent as we got close to the election, it was whether Obama would be smart enough to deal with the crisis and then be fiscally conservative enough to begin to reverse the trend of increased spending and debt we had seen since 2000.

My decision to give him my vote was conditioned with the thought that if he didn't work out in four years, I'd vote to have him replaced. That's pretty much what has happened, and that's what I'll do.

So did I vote for him based on any of the factors you cited above? No, I didn't. Like I will be in the 2012 elections, I think I was thoughtful and unemotional in choosing who would get my vote. Others may disagree, but that's what elections are for, I think.

[Guest]

It's been awhile, but I think I can remember why I voted for Obama. Actually, it was more a vote against McCain-Palin than it was a vote for Obama.

Gee, that worked out swell.

[Guest]

It's been awhile, but I think I can remember why I voted for Obama. Actually, it was more a vote against McCain-Palin than it was a vote for Obama.

Initially, John McCain was going to get my vote. He was a cancer-survivor, which was a bit of a concern given the economic and foreign relations problems we were facing, but when he chose a VP running mate who seemed to me to be woefully unprepared to be POTUS if she had to, I began to consider Obama. Then at one point, McCain responded in an interview that he really didn't know much about economics and would have to appoint other people who did, I began to really have doubts. His hawkishness with regard to continuing the wars and his seemingly sole focus on supporting anything the Pentagon wanted also began to be an issue with me. He was beginning to look sadly one-dimensional as the potential leader of the free world. Then when he so clearly permitted his political handlers make his campaign a totally negative affair, Joe the Plumber, etc., he pretty much lost my vote.

Did I think Barack Obama was a terrific alternative? No.He was too inexperienced and too liberal for me, but he was very smart, understood the Constitution, young, healthy and he had backed himself wit one of the more experienced and respected Senators in Washington as his VP running-mate. If I had one major concern, particularly as the depth of the financial crisis became more apparent as we got close to the election, it was whether Obama would be smart enough to deal with the crisis and then be fiscally conservative enough to begin to reverse the trend of increased spending and debt we had seen since 2000.

My decision to give him my vote was conditioned with the thought that if he didn't work out in four years, I'd vote to have him replaced. That's pretty much what has happened, and that's what I'll do.

So did I vote for him based on any of the factors you cited above? No, I didn't. Like I will be in the 2012 elections, I think I was thoughtful and unemotional in choosing who would get my vote. Others may disagree, but that's what elections are for, I think.
Well,I give you credit for giving thought before you voted. Unfortunately, for every thoughtful vote, there was probably 10 unthoughtful votes. Do you think that 97% of the blacks that voted for Obama gave it second thought? My sister-in-law, who I always thought as reasonable, said she voted for Obama because she liked the way he talked. Can you believe it? When I asked her for any qualifications he might have, I got a blank stare.
Seems to me there are many reasons someone voted for Obama, not many made very much sense.

Here, relax and have a mint:
http://www.philosophersguild.com/index.lasso?page_mode=Product_Detail&cat=food&skip=3&item=2123&sortby=rank%20DESC

5 dollars, looks like inflation to me.

[Guest]

VK-- Just some observations. You say Palin was unprepared to be President, in your opinion. What about Obama? He was a community organizer. She certainly had more experience than he did.
McPain said he didn't understand economics. No President is an expert in every field. That is why they have advisers.
You say Obama was very smart. How do you know? Have you seen his school records? If so you are the only one.
You said in four years we can vote him out, if he doesn't produce. Unfortuantely, in four years a lot of damage can be done.
Just for the record, I literally held my nose when voting for McPain. As is so often the case, it was the lesser of two evils, in my opinion.

[Guest]

VK-- Just some observations. You say Palin was unprepared to be President, in your opinion. What about Obama? He was a community organizer. She certainly had more experience than he did.
McPain said he didn't understand economics. No President is an expert in every field. That is why they have advisers.
You say Obama was very smart. How do you know? Have you seen his school records? If so you are the only one.
You said in four years we can vote him out, if he doesn't produce. Unfortuantely, in four years a lot of damage can be done.
Just for the record, I literally held my nose when voting for McPain. As is so often the case, it was the lesser of two evils, in my opinion.I don't need to see his transcript, Sally Jo. To be admitted to the Harvard Law School, a student has to have an impeccable academic record. Then those selected to write for the Harvard Law Review--those students are the best of the best. And of coruse, he was further recognized by being chosen to serve as the president of the Law Review.

Sorry, Sally Jo, I really don't need to see a transcript.

And by the way, people seem to forget that Obama served two years as an Illinois State Senator and then two more as a United States Senator. Compared to Palin's year and a half as Governor of Alaska and two terms as Mayor of a town of 7,800 people, I'd say their experience was pretty comparable. Should we talk about the experience and ability of both candidates to deal with the foreign relations of the U.S.? Palin didn't even apply for a passport until 2006 and before her nomination to run for the vice presidency, she only traveled outside North America once. In 2007 she visited members of the Alaska National Guard in Kuwait. And of course, we now all know that she knew where Russia was.

[Guest]

Geez, how many times do I have to say it? I'm not defending Barack Obama...period! I'm not going to vote for his re-election...period.

Of course he is accountable. But did everything that is now the basis for our fiscal and economic crisis happen during his 30-month presidency? Of course it didn't. Is everything that lead to the debt downgrade things that he personally concocted or did? I think not. Does he have the broad responsibility for what's happened on "his watch". Yes, certainly he does.

But for crying out load, unless we all take the time to see and understand what really caused this problem, we'll have no chance whatsoever to elect people to represent us who will have the experience, ability and leadership qualities to begin to get us out of this mess. If everyone were to follow the simple solution offered so frequently on this forum...vote Republican or vote Tea Party...we'll very likely wind up with the same kind of dysfunctional government that we have now.

VK....while you and I had many discourse on who to vote for back when, and you repeated quite openly exactly what you said at that time during our many back and forths, may I suggest one thing to you...

Over the last months, you DO IN FACT defend Obama, if not directly, then indirectly by shifting blame to the Tea Party, etc. But you DO defend this President on a regular basis and I know I have even agreed with him on some minor points but please dont say you are not a defender because you actually get into full speed defense at times.

To those who question VK's comments on his last vote.....back 3 years ago or more even before Obama was even the candidate, VK said basically what he has says tonight in why he voted for Obama....we had a few conversations over what might happen in 4 years as a result of that.

My question for VK.....someone asked you this earlier and I didnt catch any response....you seem to save yourself an out when you say you wont vote for incumbents....by saying DEPENDS on who the Republicans nominate...and that actually makes sense, but my question to you is this.....Obama versus a Repub you cannot support...do you abstain on the vote for President ?

[Guest]

Give Obama credit for having come a long, long way.

When he was a senator he voted against raising the debt ceiling … meaning, he used to be a terrorist!

[Guest]

It’s something I’ve never seen in national politics.

It is that nobody loves Obama. This is amazing because every president has people who love him, who feel deep personal affection or connection, who have a stubborn, even beautiful refusal to let what they know are just criticisms affect their feelings of regard. At the height of Bill Clinton’s troubles there were always people who’d say, “Look, I love the guy.” They’d often be smiling—a wry smile, a shrugging smile. Nobody smiles when they talk about Mr. Obama. There were people who loved George W. Bush when he was at his most unpopular, and they meant it and would say it. But people aren’t that way about Mr. Obama. He has supporters and bundlers and contributors, he has voters, he may win. But his support is grim support.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904800304576474620336602248.html

[Guest]

....My question for VK.....someone asked you this earlier and I didnt catch any response....you seem to save yourself an out when you say you wont vote for incumbents....by saying DEPENDS on who the Republicans nominate...and that actually makes sense, but my question to you is this.....Obama versus a Repub you cannot support...do you abstain on the vote for President ?My wife and I have agreed, neither of us will vote for Obama as we both did in 2008.

From that point we differ...and yet agree. Neither of us would vote for either Michelle Bachmann or Sarah Palin (both are so far out on the right fringe that we both believe that all either would accomplish is another four years of partisan acrimony). I would vote for Mitt Romney, she won't (she was really put off by Romney seeking political safety and not taking any position on the debt ceiling debate). But neither of us think he'd ever get conservative Christian support for the nomination anyway. She might vote for Rick Perry, I won't (anyone who relies principally on prayer to solve economic problems and the issues of state isn't for me).

So where does that leave us? I had forgotten until my wife reminded me--in two previous Presidential elections she was so put off by the available candidates, she wrote my name in. Hmmm, maybe I'll get two votes!

[Guest]

Do you think that 97% of the blacks that voted for Obama gave it second thought?

Yeah - those "darkies" all hang together...just like strange fruit. Do you bleach your sheet before you put it on or after?

[Guest]

Yeah - those "darkies" all hang together...just like strange fruit. Do you bleach your sheet before you put it on or after?

Oh, he comes out at night. Sorry, but the polls said that the blacks voted for Obama over 90%. Look it up, Mr. Personality.

[Guest]

Yeah - those "darkies" all hang together...just like strange fruit. Do you bleach your sheet before you put it on or after?

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1108/15297.html


You don't have a clue, do you?

[Guest]

I may not "have a clue" but, I can recognize racism when I see it, Herr Himmler.

[Guest]

I may not "have a clue" but, I can recognize racism when I see it, Herr Himmler.

Pointing out the exit poll data that showed that an incredible 96% of a racial group voted for someone of their own race is racist?

Is taking that exit poll by the news media racist?

Or would it be the local conclusion, by even the most casual observer, that the 96% to 4% margin of votes by "African-Americans" for an "African-American" candidate must be the result of "racial voting", racist?

Or is it that you just like to call people you disagree with names you think shames them, and that you think that will silence them? (Except it kind of backfires here, actually)

[Guest]

I may not "have a clue" but, I can recognize racism when I see it, Herr Himmler.

All I said is that over 95% of blacks voted for Obama. What is it with you liberals that you can not look at the numbers? There is no racism in numbers.Have you noticed that I have an opportunity to call you names and have taken the high road?

[Guest]

Pointing out the exit poll data that showed that an incredible 96% of a racial group voted for someone of their own race is racist?

Is taking that exit poll by the news media racist?

Or would it be the local conclusion, by even the most casual observer, that the 96% to 4% margin of votes by "African-Americans" for an "African-American" candidate must be the result of "racial voting", racist?

Or is it that you just like to call people you disagree with names you think shames them, and that you think that will silence them? (Except it kind of backfires here, actually)

Yup, facts do not lie. I guess this individual did not get the memo that the racist card does not apply anymore.

[Guest]

Pointing out the exit poll data that showed that an incredible 96% of a racial group voted for someone of their own race is racist?

Is taking that exit poll by the news media racist?

Or would it be the local conclusion, by even the most casual observer, that the 96% to 4% margin of votes by "African-Americans" for an "African-American" candidate must be the result of "racial voting", racist?

Or is it that you just like to call people you disagree with names you think shames them, and that you think that will silence them? (Except it kind of backfires here, actually)

Hey, girlfriend -- you are the kind of bully who likes to call folks out. but then gets all prissy when he is given the same treatment?

Examples of your rhetoric:

"All I can say about your statement above is that it is buffoonish. You are wrong in your analysis and you're rude on top of it."

"What put us in debt, Mr. Buffoon, is all the spending that did not result in any noticeable increase in revenue. Wake up and smell the Obama. He absolutely blew it, or he did it on purpose. There's no other explanation."

https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/showthread.php?t=40708&page=2

I'll fess up to being less than kind on this forum. That is because my original opinions were greeted -- from the get-go -- with rudeness and sarcasm. Moreover, I don't take kindly to offensive remarks from folks who don't read serious political journals --whether from the right or left.

As a result, I figured that this is a tough place where playing rough is accepted.

Wanna play rough? Game on.

Wanna try to discuss things in a rational way...well, that's why I originally started to post here.

But please ... don't whine when you get better than you give.

Harbor

[Guest]

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article/580712/201108051904/Confidence-Crashes-Through-Lows-Set-In-2008-Meltdown.htm

[Guest]

Quite blaming the POTUS and the Congress for the mess that we are in. Right now, go into your bathroom, look in the mirror. That is who is to blame for the mess that we are in. You, Me, Each and Everyone one of us. We did not do our jobs and keep an eye on those we elected to represent us. So quit complaining, start doing your job and maybe we can get out of this mess before we complete crash and go under.

[Guest]

Hey, girlfriend -- you are the kind of bully who likes to call folks out. but then gets all prissy when he is given the same treatment?

Examples of your rhetoric:

"All I can say about your statement above is that it is buffoonish. You are wrong in your analysis and you're rude on top of it."

"What put us in debt, Mr. Buffoon, is all the spending that did not result in any noticeable increase in revenue. Wake up and smell the Obama. He absolutely blew it, or he did it on purpose. There's no other explanation."

https://www.talkofthevillages.com/forums/showthread.php?t=40708&page=2

I'll fess up to being less than kind on this forum. That is because my original opinions were greeted -- from the get-go -- with rudeness and sarcasm. Moreover, I don't take kindly to offensive remarks from folks who don't read serious political journals --whether from the right or left.

As a result, I figured that this is a tough place where playing rough is accepted.

Wanna play rough? Game on.

Wanna try to discuss things in a rational way...well, that's why I originally started to post here.

But please ... don't whine when you get better than you give.

Harbor

Excuse Me; you're the rational one? You're the one who without real evidence is calling people racist and "herr Himmler". You got to be devoid of mental mirrors to see yourself in.

In asking you to explain yourself in your accusatory diatribe to Villagegolfer in calling him racist, I'm playing rough? You couldn't even do it. Where is your explanation on what was exactly racist in Villagegolfers post or in my questions to you?

You can take any quote of mine you want out of context, but it still just make you the bully, not me. There's no whining here and I couldn't care less what you think of me. You dish it out and get furious when challenged. Very classy.

So far, your comments are far more offensive that any I've seen. You're off to a great start on this forum, let me tell you.

Now you're the arbiter of what is a serious political journal, and you belittle people when you have no idea who they are or what they read or don't read.

I'm thinking you need an intervention.

[Guest]

Quite blaming the POTUS and the Congress for the mess that we are in. Right now, go into your bathroom, look in the mirror. That is who is to blame for the mess that we are in. You, Me, Each and Everyone one of us. We did not do our jobs and keep an eye on those we elected to represent us. So quit complaining, start doing your job and maybe we can get out of this mess before we complete crash and go under.

I don't know about you, buddy, but I do my homework before I vote. Unlike my sister-in-law who said she voted for Obama because he is a good talker, or my black neighbor who said he voted for Obama because he is a "Brother".

[Guest]

I'm thinking you need an intervention.
:BigApplause:

[Guest]

All these personal attacks are accomplishing is to drive people away from this forum who might read and get more information to develop informed political opinions. Or worse, be so turned off by the vitriolic exchanges between members that they might choose not to make a contribution themselves.

[Guest]

All these personal attacks are accomplishing is to drive people away from this forum who might read and get more information to develop informed political opinions. Or worse, be so turned off by the vitriolic exchanges between members that they might choose not to make a contribution themselves.

Instead of a blanket condemnation; if you take the time to read the progression of the posts, it is obvious that the aggressor is Harbor53. Villagegolfer made a rational observation on election exit polls and was immediately and scurrilously attacked with vile intent.

When I asked the aforementioned Harbor53 to explain his calling Villagegolfer "racist" and "Herr Himmler", he got furious and referred to me as "girlfriend" (maybe a little Freudian) and coupled with some other epithets, he dragged out some previous statements out of context in an attack that did not answer the question at hand. (He's checking up on me which is a little creepy, I must say)

Where have I, above, acted like the bully that Harbor53 revealed himself to be? (He wants to play rough by his own admission)

[Guest]

Richie is correct. I have complained about personal attacks since I started here rather recently. I may be ridiculed for saying this, and I have lurked before posting, but almost all the personal attacks are from the left side of the aisle. This is not a new phenomenon since I was a member of another political forum long ago.
When one has no reasonable comeback, instead of not posting, they come back with ridicule. It is immature. Of course I may mutter to myself that this so and so is an idiot, but I do not type it on a post.

Please everybody, aim your insults to the people we hire, the politicians. They deserve it.

[Guest]

Nope, just a single chart.
http://www.artonissues.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/National-Debt-Graph.jpg
I guess we can conclude from the chart that the presidents that did the most responsible job in fiscal policy were Truman, Ike, Kennedy, LBJ, Nixon, Ford and even Jimmy Carter. They had spending under control and if they couldn't get the economy really cranking, they cut back spending to what we could afford. Then Bush 41 and Reagan cranked up the spending and our debt, even in the face of economic growth that wasn't all that great. That was until Bill Clinton got hold of the pursestrings, really got our economy cranking again, slowed down the spending and paid off most of our debt. Now the Bush 43 and Obama administrations look like those two guys have elevated our spending and debt at an unprecedented pace and to unaffordable levels. And neither one of them did beans to get the U.S. economy to a level that was as good as when Bill Clinton left office.

Yep, it's the presidents that are doing all this. But some of those who are often remembered as the "good guys" and "bad guys" in some cases are reversed. Kind of surprising, don't you think?

I agree on this one.....just how many debt ceiling raises was there under the previous admin?

[Guest]

I agree on this one.....just how many debt ceiling raises was there under the previous admin?

Doers that make it right?:mad:

[Guest]

but he was very smart, understood the Constitution, young, healthy...
Knowing the Constitution and believing in it, defending it, and operating under it's principles are apparently two seperate things...