as predicted by Glenn Beck, liberals will not answer the question. They will deny, deny, deny.

Remember this? Liberals said that Clinton did not have sex with that woman....

He is the POTUS. He swore under oath, of course he didn't do it. etc etc.

When it came out that he had perjured himself and was in fact guilty the liberal response was "it doesn't matter, after all it was just sex."

C'mon liberals, what if it is proven that Obama is surrounded by Marxists hell bent on dismantling the economic that has made us a great nation.

WILL IT MATTER?

Yoda

I will say this about liberals, they are loyal to their party and their guy. Doesn't matter what he does or what he says, they will deny, make, excuses, spin the argument and attack any opposition. You either fall in line with them or you are deemed a racist, bigot, homophobe, stupid, evil, angry mob or anything else to discredit. The media at large tries everything in their power to make it stick too. That's why they hate Fox so much.

I'm absolutely boggled by those comments.

Obama can't get his own people around his health care plans - not enough to be filibuster-proof anyway.

Bush ran the country into the ground while dismantling the regulations that prevented situation as we experienced that led us to the biggest recession in decades.

You complain about alleged Marxists in government. What about out and out thieves?

Warrantless wiretaps. Unprecedented use of 'signing statements'. and Cheney - one minute he's part of the Executive branch, then says he's part of the Legislative Branch - straight from the sitting VP's mouth!

Bush inherits hundreds of billions in surplus and turns it into a trillion dollar deficit (which is even worse).

Incidentally - Beck is not "news", his show is, by Fox News' admission, part of their "entertainment" schedule.

Before I go passing judgement on anyone, I'd like to hear what their specific proposals are. I mean, I had no idea John Ashcroft would be as bad as he was - his history didn't seem all that bad. Bush was a dynamic and popular governor of Texas and look what happened.

It's a phrase we used in the financial industry all the time. "Past performance does not guarantee future results".

Originally Posted by djplong

I'm absolutely boggled by those comments.

Obama can't get his own people around his health care plans - not enough to be filibuster-proof anyway.

Bush ran the country into the ground while dismantling the regulations that prevented situation as we experienced that led us to the biggest recession in decades.

You complain about alleged Marxists in government. What about out and out thieves?

Warrantless wiretaps. Unprecedented use of 'signing statements'. and Cheney - one minute he's part of the Executive branch, then says he's part of the Legislative Branch - straight from the sitting VP's mouth!

Bush inherits hundreds of billions in surplus and turns it into a trillion dollar deficit (which is even worse).

Incidentally - Beck is not "news", his show is, by Fox News' admission, part of their "entertainment" schedule.

Before I go passing judgement on anyone, I'd like to hear what their specific proposals are. I mean, I had no idea John Ashcroft would be as bad as he was - his history didn't seem all that bad. Bush was a dynamic and popular governor of Texas and look what happened.

It's a phrase we used in the financial industry all the time. "Past performance does not guarantee future results".

We get it. You hate Bush et al. That's about it.

Yoda

Originally Posted by djplong

I'm absolutely boggled by those comments.

Obama can't get his own people around his health care plans - not enough to be filibuster-proof anyway.

Bush ran the country into the ground while dismantling the regulations that prevented situation as we experienced that led us to the biggest recession in decades.

You complain about alleged Marxists in government. What about out and out thieves?

Warrantless wiretaps. Unprecedented use of 'signing statements'. and Cheney - one minute he's part of the Executive branch, then says he's part of the Legislative Branch - straight from the sitting VP's mouth!

Bush inherits hundreds of billions in surplus and turns it into a trillion dollar deficit (which is even worse).

Incidentally - Beck is not "news", his show is, by Fox News' admission, part of their "entertainment" schedule.

Before I go passing judgement on anyone, I'd like to hear what their specific proposals are. I mean, I had no idea John Ashcroft would be as bad as he was - his history didn't seem all that bad. Bush was a dynamic and popular governor of Texas and look what happened.

It's a phrase we used in the financial industry all the time. "Past performance does not guarantee future results".

1. Bush is no longer President !!

2. Regarding.."Before I go passing judgement on anyone, I'd like to hear what their specific proposals are."...REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH !

Barney Frank and Chris Dodd had nothing to do with any of the financial disaster in housing?
Yes it does matter!

Originally Posted by ejp52

Barney Frank and Chris Dodd had nothing to do with any of the financial disaster in housing?
Yes it does matter!

Now I am very confused

Yoda

Originally Posted by Yoda

Now I am very confused

Yoda

My point is the other poster was blaming Bush for the recession,and I simply wanted to include 2 of the major culprits.

Originally Posted by Bucco

1. Bush is no longer President !!

2. Regarding.."Before I go passing judgement on anyone, I'd like to hear what their specific proposals are."...REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH !

DJPlong,

Didn't anyone tell you that this group doesn't like to talk about anything prior to January 2009 and will redirect the conversation to anything else that may or may not have anything to do with the flow of the thread. Sorry, we should have told you about such little quirks.

Originally Posted by anyexit

DJPlong,

Didn't anyone tell you that this group doesn't like to talk about anything prior to January 2009 and will redirect the conversation to anything else that may or may not have anything to do with the flow of the thread. Sorry, we should have told you about such little quirks.

"This Group" is smart enough to realize that what happened before January 2009 is not relevant to correcting to future. THIS administration is the one that has the burden of governance for four years and will be responsible for any actions it makes. If the solution of the countries problems lay in the past then we'd need a time machine to go back to correct the problems.

The redirection of the conversation to the blame game towards Bush is the most common flow of these posts, not the other way around.

"Those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it".

Talking about how we got here most certainly IS relevant.

Now I should clarify something. I didn't always hate Bush - and in fact I don't think "hate" is the right word. I am, to be accurate, EXTREMELY disappointed in him. The facts speak for themselves. A large part of it has to be the increased arrogance of the GOP as time went on. It's not like Bush could do all this all by himself. The more and more I saw of Bush it became increasingly apparent that the dynamic, popular governor of Texas was becoming more and more a puppet of those he put in place around him - and Dick Cheney seemed to be at the head of the list.

What happened to the GOP from the "Contract With America" days?

It really hit home for me when we were looking at so many problems in the previous election. We were fighting two wars that weren't going the way we wanted, increasing expenditures, coming out of the dot-com bust, health care crisis, etc.. And what was the leading cry from the GOP leadership? *Arguing against gay marriage*!!!

As a good friend of mine said, "Wars, diseases, crisis all around us and what do we get from the White House: Look! Fags!"

Tell me this isn't puppetry. One day, during a press conference, President Bush says he doesn't think that gay marriage is something that should be decided in the Constitution. He was *against* a Constitutional Ammendment, saying it should be up to the states. I took him at face value for that.

TEN DAYS LATER, he came out in favor of ammending the Constitution. Tell me someone didn't get to him. Someone didn't whisper something in his ear or tell him "No, George, we have to do it THIS way".

This is just one example that I happened to pay close attention to because I have a gay aunt. In addition my adoptive mother hid her bisexuality from me for so long, I had to find out from a COUSIN - she was that fearful of what would happen if word got out. (And me having been married, had two daughters and am now engaged again also puts ammunition against the whole ridiculous 'recruiting' argument)

I can't tell you how many times I defended Bush. I had a great respect for the man despite the fact that I didn't agree with him on everything. But bit by bit, year after year, I lost that respect.

But when it comes to correcting the mistakes, I hear Reagan echoing in my head about "stay the course" and "it takes more than four years" - and he was right.

a memeber since jan 2009!!!!! If you were here during 2008 you have witnessed how the opposition behaved during that year. No matter what one sees in 2009 none will compare to the party, personal attack blitzing by the opposition.
As one told me this morning.....they may not be right all the time but they are never wrong!!!!!

btk

Unfortunately that seems to be the pattern. When people were criticizing Bush, well, let's just say I thought their tactics and methods wouldn't do them any favors.

Now they're reaping what they'd sown.

You can disagree and debate and be civil. If I had to put my finger on the leading reason why it's gotten so bad, I would have to say it's because of news going from "information" to "entertainment" and there fore being a slave to ratings. It's not the ONLY reason, not by a longshot - but if I had to pick #1 with a bullet, that would be it.

Calling George Bush a 'moronic monkey' is about as productive as painting a Hitler moustache on Obama.

Originally Posted by billethkid

a memeber since jan 2009!!!!! If you were here during 2008 you have witnessed how the opposition behaved during that year. No matter what one sees in 2009 none will compare to the party, personal attack blitzing by the opposition.
As one told me this morning.....they may not be right all the time but they are never wrong!!!!!

btk

I lurked as a GUEST for a lot longer!

So, then two wrongs make a right? Okay, now I understand.

Actually Bucco challenged me the other day to provide him with the post that said that he didn't want to discuss anything thing before January 2009. I was too lazy to take up the challenge and it really wasn't worth the effort. It was his post that I was mostly responding to when he stated:

Originally Posted by Bucco

1. Bush is no longer President !!

2. Regarding.."Before I go passing judgement on anyone, I'd like to hear what their specific proposals are."...REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH !

I thought it was really appropriate to point it out to him. The broad-brush generally fits others as well.

Originally Posted by djplong

"Those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it".

Talking about how we got here most certainly IS relevant.

Now I should clarify something. I didn't always hate Bush - and in fact I don't think "hate" is the right word. I am, to be accurate, EXTREMELY disappointed in him. The facts speak for themselves. A large part of it has to be the increased arrogance of the GOP as time went on. It's not like Bush could do all this all by himself. The more and more I saw of Bush it became increasingly apparent that the dynamic, popular governor of Texas was becoming more and more a puppet of those he put in place around him - and Dick Cheney seemed to be at the head of the list.

What happened to the GOP from the "Contract With America" days?

It really hit home for me when we were looking at so many problems in the previous election. We were fighting two wars that weren't going the way we wanted, increasing expenditures, coming out of the dot-com bust, health care crisis, etc.. And what was the leading cry from the GOP leadership? *Arguing against gay marriage*!!!

As a good friend of mine said, "Wars, diseases, crisis all around us and what do we get from the White House: Look! Fags!"

Tell me this isn't puppetry. One day, during a press conference, President Bush says he doesn't think that gay marriage is something that should be decided in the Constitution. He was *against* a Constitutional Ammendment, saying it should be up to the states. I took him at face value for that.

TEN DAYS LATER, he came out in favor of ammending the Constitution. Tell me someone didn't get to him. Someone didn't whisper something in his ear or tell him "No, George, we have to do it THIS way".

This is just one example that I happened to pay close attention to because I have a gay aunt. In addition my adoptive mother hid her bisexuality from me for so long, I had to find out from a COUSIN - she was that fearful of what would happen if word got out. (And me having been married, had two daughters and am now engaged again also puts ammunition against the whole ridiculous 'recruiting' argument)

I can't tell you how many times I defended Bush. I had a great respect for the man despite the fact that I didn't agree with him on everything. But bit by bit, year after year, I lost that respect.

But when it comes to correcting the mistakes, I hear Reagan echoing in my head about "stay the course" and "it takes more than four years" - and he was right.

Just what in your whole post addresses the solution of today's problem? You just repeated the tired old "blame Bush" and said not one thing the current administration is doing right to solve those problems. Whatever generation or political party of the past did or didn't do to screw up our country, is not going to be the one to undo it. Today's problems lay squarely on the back of BO and the Democratic party to correct.

The "blame the past" game is not going to work, as far as convincing the conservatives amongst the population, that BO and the current Congress can and will do the job without turning our country into a semi socialist state or driving us into generational debt. And blaming the past is what your whole post was about.

The only thing that has happened so far is that Bo and Congress have spent massive amounts of tax dollars (actually borrowed money) with little tangible results.