From thieir OWN WORDS & ACTIONS

[Cigar]

For those who do not think that the GOP Actively Engineered this Recession I submit the following into evidence:


House Republicans may pass bits and pieces of President Barack Obama’s jobs plan, but behind the scenes, some Republicans are becoming worried about giving Obama any victories — even on issues the GOP has supported in the past.
And despite public declarations about finding common ground with Obama, some Republicans are privately grumbling that their leaders are being too accommodating with the president.


“Obama is on the ropes; why do we appear ready to hand him a win?” said one senior House Republican aide who requested anonymity to discuss the matter freely. “I just don’t want to co-own the economy by having to tout that we passed a jobs bill that won’t work or at least won’t do enough.”

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0911/63214.html#ixzz1xlnVv8nQ



On September 15, House Speaker John Boehner announced that the nation’s “job creators” — a flattering euphemism for “business owners” — were on strike. This was the proximate cause of the nation’s unemployment woes, Boehner maintained. Until those business owners received the low-tax, deregulated world they wanted, they would continue to keep their wallets in their pockets.
http://www.harpers.org/archive/2011/11/hbc-90008323

How did the GOP under Bush spend our tax money? On tax cuts for the rich and military spending---the two forms of federal spending that are least effective at improving the economy. Massive tax cuts for the rich which decrease the government’s ability to spend are actually detrimental to the economy. The most effective way to stimulate the economy through government spending? Education, followed by infrastructure and health care. This is old stuff. Every businessman and politicians knows what is good for the economy and what is bad for the economy. So, if the GOP insists upon more tax breaks for the rich and more military spending and less spending on education and infrastructure and health, it can mean only one thing---they are following Grover Norquist’s advice, which is to drain the federal bathtub so that our tax dollars can no longer do us any good. Why does Grover Norquist hate us? He doesn’t. The lobbyist is simply looking out for his alcohol and tobacco customers who do better when we are despondent.

A Georgia businessman has an ultimatum for America: Fire President Obama, or he will not hire any more workers.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/11/georgia-businessman-refuses-to-hire-until-obama-is-fired/


From the family that got its financial start selling the Union Army weapons that blew up in soldiers’ faces:


Capital must protect itself in every way...Debts must be collected and loans and mortgages foreclosed as soon as possible. When through a process of law the common people have lost their homes, they will be more tractable and more easily governed by the strong arm of the law applied by the central power of leading financiers. People without homes will not quarrel with their leaders. This is well known among our principle men now engaged in forming an imperialism of capitalism to govern the world. By dividing the people we can get them to expend their energies in fighting over questions of no importance to us except as teachers of the common herd.
~ J.P. Morgan


Now of course we all know, Conservatives will simply deny that any of this is true ... even if it's from their own words.


as always ... ready ... set ... start your denials ... :afro:

[Chris]

The causes of the recession go back as far as FDR and the creation of Fannie and Freddie. Both parties have had a hand in it. Both parties pretty much follow neo-Keynesian macroeconomic thinking that you can stimulate the economy by manipulating supply or demand.

The economy cannot be designed and manipulated. It is a social institution that emerges out of the exchange of goods and services among individuals. The only thing government can do it distort that process.

[Mainecoons]

You're wasting your time trying to educate a partisan hack here.

[Cigar]

The causes of the recession go back as far as FDR and the creation of Fannie and Freddie. Both parties have had a hand in it. Both parties pretty much follow neo-Keynesian macroeconomic thinking that you can stimulate the economy by manipulating supply or demand.

The economy cannot be designed and manipulated. It is a social institution that emerges out of the exchange of goods and services among individuals. The only thing government can do it distort that process.

I do agree with you on one thing, Banks gave Mortgages to people who shouldn't have gotten them. I started noticing that back in the 90's. I have several rental properties, and I remember Banks actually asking me why don't I take larger loans for my investment? I told them, because I don't want you and the money I borrow from you controlling me. I want to stay in control because if it's a good investment, yyou'll make money, and if you make money off of your investments, you can always borrow more.


BTW ... it looks like you just made an argument that Mitt doesn't know what he's talking about, or he's Lying.

[Chris]

I do agree with you on one thing, Banks gave Mortgages to people who shouldn't have gotten them. I started noticing that back in the 90's. I have several rental properties, and I remember Banks actually asking me why don't I take larger loans for my investment? I told them, because I don't want you and the money I borrow from you controlling me. I want to stay in control because if it's a good investment, yyou'll make money, and if you make money off of your investments, you can always borrow more.


BTW ... it looks like you just made an argument that Mitt doesn't know what he's talking about, or he's Lying.

Mitt and Obama, any politician who claims he can do something about the economy.

[Mainecoons]

Mitt and Obama are just two versions of the same failed ruling elite. And I owned 140 very blue collar apartments in the nineties and when Clinton loosened the Fannie/Freddie requirements we started to see our deadbeat tenants who we had to squeeze the rent out of every month being sold houses with no money down. Today, those neighborhoods are boarded up waste lands.

The real beginning of the end for the U.S. started with Roosevelt and accelerated drastically under Mr. "guns and butter" Lyndon Johnson. From there, it has been a bipartisan race to the bottom. When you figure that out, Cigar, maybe we'll start taking you seriously.

[Cigar]

Mitt and Obama are just two versions of the same failed ruling elite. And I owned 140 very blue collar apartments in the nineties and when Clinton loosened the Fannie/Freddie requirements we started to see our deadbeat tenants who we had to squeeze the rent out of every month being sold houses with no money down. Today, those neighborhoods are boarded up waste lands.

The real beginning of the end for the U.S. started with Roosevelt and accelerated drastically under Mr. "guns and butter" Lyndon Johnson. From there, it has been a bipartisan race to the bottom. When you figure that out, Cigar, maybe we'll start taking you seriously.


Good landlords don't have those problems ... maybe I should write a book. :)

[Mainecoons]

Clearly you don't know anything about large rental projects either. Why am I not surprised?

We got the rent, the point is that they were selling houses to people with lousy habits and lousy work histories. That is what you get in that class of property. It was a lot of work but highly profitable as well. Oh, wait, I forgot. Profit is a dirty word to brain dead liberals. They think all wealth comes from government.

[Cigar]

Clearly you don't know anything about large rental projects either. Why am I not surprised?

We got the rent, the point is that they were selling houses to people with lousy habits and lousy work histories. That is what you get in that class of property. It was a lot of work but highly profitable as well. Oh, wait, I forgot. Profit is a dirty word to brain dead liberals. They think all wealth comes from government.

If you "knowingly" Rent or Sell to someone with Credit ... who's the one who is stupid?

Background Checks are Cheep ... Collections are Expensive.

This is true for any size structure or any amount.


Now .. I return you to; Patriotic Republicans Tanking The American Economy.

[Chris]

"Patriotic Republicans Tanking The American Economy."

Where have you shown this to be true, cig?

[Cigar]

"Patriotic Republicans Tanking The American Economy."

Where have you shown this to be true, cig?

On September 15, House Speaker John Boehner announced (http://boehner.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=26109) that the nation’s “job creators” — a flattering euphemism for “business owners” — were on strike (https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=319184354773749&set=a.116898608335659.16274.108038612554992&type=1). This was the proximate cause of the nation’s unemployment woes, Boehner maintained. Until those business owners received the low-tax, deregulated world they wanted, they would continue to keep their wallets in their pockets.


Boehner is not the first to imagine a strike by society’s well-to-do, but he is certainly the first conservative political leader to make a formal statement on the matter. In times past, a “capital strike” was a thing to deplore, not something to be announced proudly with the obvious expectation that the world would promptly surrender to capital’s demands. But times have changed.


Herewith, a brief history of the capital strike.


There were two distinct “capital strikes” during the administration of Franklin Roosevelt. The first, which is still referenced on the website of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s historical society (http://www.sechistorical.org/museum/galleries/kennedy/encouraging_a.php), consisted of a decline in new stock and bond issues in the first years of the New Deal.


The second was a more general revolt of business interests, which were supposedly struggling to preserve laissez-faire political conditions by withdrawing investment from the economy in 1937, sabotaging the recovery and the chances of President Roosevelt. Secretary of the Interior Harold Ickes delivered a ferocious iteration of this theme (http://www.progressive.org/wx041409.html) in December of that year, warning that “the United States is to have its first general sit-down strike — not of labor, not of the American people — but of the sixty families [a then-popular term for what we now call “the 1 percent”] and of the capital created by the whole American people of which the sixty families have obtained control.” Should Americans yield to the demands of the walkout, Ickes warned, “then the America that is to be will be a big-business Fascist America—an enslaved America.”

Roosevelt’s future Attorney General, Robert Jackson, hit upon the same theme (http://www.roberthjackson.org/the-man/bibliography/the-philosophy-of-big-business/), denouncing the “capital strike” and deploring monopoly and the concentration of wealth. It was, suggests historian Alan Brinkley, “the bitterest attack on private wealth and corporate power ever to have come from the New Deal.” Reading Jackson’s words today and understanding that they came from the mouth of a high government official is a startling experience:
Our democratic forms of government offer a periodical chance at election time to check and change political administrations. But there is no practical way on earth to regulate the economic oligarchy of autocratic, self-constituted and self-perpetuating groups.


With all their resources of interlocking directors, interlocking bankers and interlocking lawyers, with all their power to hire thousands of employees and service workers throughout the country, with all their power to give or withhold millions of dollars worth of business, with all their power to contribute to campaign funds, they are as dangerous a menace to political as they are to economic freedom.

Perhaps this was the historical episode that inspired Ayn Rand to write Atlas Shrugged, the thousand-page 1957 novel in which politicians badmouth business, and business leaders launch a vast counterattack — a capital strike — that does indeed bring the nation to its knees. As Rand’s entrepreneur-hero John Galt announces in one of the book’s most famous passages: “We are on strike, we, the men of the mind. We are on strike against self-immolation. We are on strike against the creed of unearned rewards and unrewarded duties. We are on strike against the dogma that the pursuit of one’s happiness is evil. We are on strike against the doctrine that life is guilt.”


Historians, for their part, have generally regarded the Roosevelt Administration’s talk of a “capital strike” as either a gross exaggeration or a conspiracy theory. David Kennedy, in his landmark 1999 book, Freedom From Fear (http://books.google.com/books?id=cL85ggyT9oYC&pg=PA134&dq=David+Kennedy+Fear+Itself&hl=en&ei=fzDETrXLB8ba0QGMzfXlDg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CC4Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=capital%20strike&f=false), says the theory had “little basis in fact.” According to Brinkley’s Liberalism and Its Discontents (http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674001855) (1998), Roosevelt himself once asked the FBI to investigate a conspiracy of business leaders on evidence Brinkley calls (http://books.google.com/books?id=E4vcSknZc5IC&pg=PA314&dq=) “extraordinarily frail: an unsubstantiated letter from a hotel waiter in Chicago who reported overhearing a conversation among railroad executives.” Conrad Black, no mainstream historian, seems to represent the consensus in describing “capital strike” talk as a “conspiracy theory” (http://books.google.com/books?id=lYVCi70HaigC&pg=PA431&dq=conrad+black+franklin+roosevelt+capital+strike&hl=en&ei=XTHETuOCBanc0QH2y7jqDg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CDEQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=capital%20strike&f=false) in his 2005 biography of Roosevelt.


Now, let us historicize the historians. When those books were written, the idea of a “capital strike” was something you denied, something everyone knew could not really be taking place. Markets didn’t work that way: economic power was (and always will be) too diffused and decentralized for such a concerted effort. But let us get a few years into the Big Recession and see how the consensus changes. Here is columnist Amity Shlaes, telling us in 2009 that a capital strike really did happen back in 1937, and that capital strikes will happen again (http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:0RsdtNLbcaAJ:www.pittsburghlive.com/x/valleynewsdispatch/obituaries/s_658492.html) whenever governments treat banks too badly, tax too assertively, or spend too liberally: “Today, too, capital ponders going on strike,” she writes. “And without big policy changes the economy will face similar consequences.

[roadmaster]

I don't believe they are on strike. They are building overseas at an alarming rate and raking in money at our taxpayers expense.

[Chris]

"Patriotic Republicans Tanking The American Economy."

Where have you shown this to be true, cig? Repeating the OP doesn't do that. Pols say a lot of things, most of it BS, and irrelevant. Show us how their actions are tanking the economy--something you agreed earlier can't be done, so good luck.

[Cigar]

"Patriotic Republicans Tanking The American Economy."

Where have you shown this to be true, cig? Repeating the OP doesn't do that. Pols say a lot of things, most of it BS, and irrelevant. Show us how their actions are tanking the economy--something you agreed earlier can't be done, so good luck.

My Eyes, My Ears, My Common Sense .. but most importantly The Republican GOPs own Words and Actions confirm the Obvious.

[MMC]

My Eyes, My Ears, My Common Sense .. but most importantly The Republican GOPs own Words and Actions confirm the Obvious.


Funny I don't see Ryan tanking the economy, nor Coburn and there hundreds others who's actions and words just don't confirm what you are talking about. Althought they have pointed out about why this President cannot get full support from his Democrats. Now why is that?

[Chris]

My Eyes, My Ears, My Common Sense .. but most importantly The Republican GOPs own Words and Actions confirm the Obvious.

Explain how. Go beyond repeating your opinion.

[coolwalker]

In the beginning I saw a want and desire from both sides of congress to work together...but then within days, Obamas arrogance started rearing its ugly head and IMO the GOP said (inwardly and privately) this guy is too big for his britches and wants us to do exactly what he says, or else...they chose the or else so he could eat his words along with his attempt at a move solidly to the Left for the entire nation.

Congress is like a tennis match. One person hits the ball and the other guy hits it back and on and on until one guy hits it for the last time ...that's when it becomes a bill. Obama wanted to be the only guy with a tennis racket. Not acceptable.

[Cigar]

Explain how. Go beyond repeating your opinion.

Ok so you don't see any obstruction ... wow, what a surprise.

And just so there's no hard feelings, if Conservatives win in November, I really do hope they get their America Back exactly the way they left it in 2008. :) Because we all know how great their plan was and is.

[JohnAdams]

For those who do not think that the GOP Actively Engineered this Recession I submit the following into evidence:


House Republicans may pass bits and pieces of President Barack Obama’s jobs plan, but behind the scenes, some Republicans are becoming worried about giving Obama any victories — even on issues the GOP has supported in the past.
And despite public declarations about finding common ground with Obama, some Republicans are privately grumbling that their leaders are being too accommodating with the president.



On September 15, House Speaker John Boehner announced that the nation’s “job creators” — a flattering euphemism for “business owners” — were on strike. This was the proximate cause of the nation’s unemployment woes, Boehner maintained. Until those business owners received the low-tax, deregulated world they wanted, they would continue to keep their wallets in their pockets.
http://www.harpers.org/archive/2011/11/hbc-90008323

How did the GOP under Bush spend our tax money? On tax cuts for the rich and military spending---the two forms of federal spending that are least effective at improving the economy. Massive tax cuts for the rich which decrease the government’s ability to spend are actually detrimental to the economy. The most effective way to stimulate the economy through government spending? Education, followed by infrastructure and health care. This is old stuff. Every businessman and politicians knows what is good for the economy and what is bad for the economy. So, if the GOP insists upon more tax breaks for the rich and more military spending and less spending on education and infrastructure and health, it can mean only one thing---they are following Grover Norquist’s advice, which is to drain the federal bathtub so that our tax dollars can no longer do us any good. Why does Grover Norquist hate us? He doesn’t. The lobbyist is simply looking out for his alcohol and tobacco customers who do better when we are despondent.

A Georgia businessman has an ultimatum for America: Fire President Obama, or he will not hire any more workers.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/11/georgia-businessman-refuses-to-hire-until-obama-is-fired/


From the family that got its financial start selling the Union Army weapons that blew up in soldiers’ faces:




Now of course we all know, Conservatives will simply deny that any of this is true ... even if it's from their own words.


as always ... ready ... set ... start your denials ... :afro:

Hmm gee wonder why they are on strike...

oh thaaaat's right it's because the GOP "engineered it".

Never mind any FACTS like the fact employers actively have stated, that they aren't hiring because of this President's economic policies. IE: They dont know if he's going to tax them out of business next month, or worse yet, just un-Constitutionally assume control of their business. Or illegally divert Federal Money to their competitors....solyndra anyone.

Never mind any FACTS like the fact employers and economists alike are very concerned we may not have a nation left after they way the Obammy's more than quadrupled national debt spending like he's printing the money in the basement of the Whitehouse.

No, no, no, it's all Bush's fault damn it, and well lets just twist and misquote and flat out lie all we have too, to make it Bush's fault damn it! :rolleyes:

Yes please do keep blaming Bush for all your mistakes, mishaps, and gross negligence and inadeqaucy as President Mr. The Obammy.

The American people don't buy it, and that is the surest way there is, to ensure they vote you and your fat wife and ugly kids, right out of their WhiteHouse.

[Cigar]

Hmm gee wonder why they are on strike...

oh thaaaat's right it's because the GOP "engineered it".

Never mind any FACTS like the fact employers actively have stated, that they aren't hiring because of this President's economic policies. IE: They dont know if he's going to tax them out of business next month, or worse yet, just un-Constitutionally assume control of their business. Or illegally divert Federal Money to their competitors....solyndra anyone.

Never mind any FACTS like the fact employers and economists alike are very concerned we may not have a nation left after they way the Obammy's more than quadrupled national debt spending like he's printing the money in the basement of the Whitehouse.

No, no, no, it's all Bush's fault damn it, and well lets just twist and misquote and flat out lie all we have too, to make it Bush's fault damn it! :rolleyes:

Yes please do keep blaming Bush for all your mistakes, mishaps, and gross negligence and inadeqaucy as President Mr. The Obammy.

The American people don't buy it, and that is the surest way there is, to ensure they vote you and your fat wife and ugly kids, right out of their WhiteHouse.

OH Yea that's a Credible Argument for Big Time Business Executive; I'm "Afraid" of what the Future may bring.

Why is it everything that has to do with Conservationism involves "fear-of-the-future" and "what-may-happen"?

Kinda like Conservatives have been saying for Four (4) Year; Obama is going to take your Guns ... :rolleyes: I don't think The President has even talked about Guns since he was President.

Yep ... he was right; Fear = Guns & God

any think that has to do with the future; Conservatives are afraid of. :)

[Peter1469]

Ok so you don't see any obstruction ... wow, what a surprise.

And just so there's no hard feelings, if Conservatives win in November, I really do hope they get their America Back exactly the way they left it in 2008. :) Because we all know how great their plan was and is.


Going back to 2008 would not have anything conservative about it.

[Chris]

Ok so you don't see any obstruction ... wow, what a surprise.

And just so there's no hard feelings, if Conservatives win in November, I really do hope they get their America Back exactly the way they left it in 2008. :) Because we all know how great their plan was and is.

But you're assuming the obstructionism is hurting the economy. How? And you're assuming what they're obstructing would benefit the economy. How?


As stated earlier I don't think Republicans generally have any better plan.

[JohnAdams]

OH Yea that's a Credible Argument for Big Time Business Executive; I'm "Afraid" of what the Future may bring.

Why is it everything that has to do with Conservationism involves "fear-of-the-future" and "what-may-happen"?

Kinda like Conservatives have been saying for Four (4) Year; Obama is going to take your Guns ... :rolleyes: I don't think The President has even talked about Guns since he was President.

Yep ... he was right; Fear = Guns & God

any think that has to do with the future; Conservatives are afraid of. :)

The President you support creates that fear by and through his un-Constitutional,negligent, reckless, lack of real leadership and policies. But yeah yeah yeah, it's everyone else's fault.

In this case that of the GOP and Bush damn it!

Can we say typical liberal argument anyone? After all it's not as if we have not heard that argument before...can anyone say Obama 2008 election? http://youtu.be/Ka_tjPLJwVI

However that said, as I sad previously please do keep making that argument leftists liberals, I really really mean that.

It's the surest way to ensure, that the American people replace this President, and even more liberals in our Congress come November 2012. ;)

[JohnAdams]

But you're assuming the obstructionism is hurting the economy. How? And you're assuming what they're obstructing would benefit the economy. How?


As stated earlier I don't think Republicans generally have any better plan.

Chris I would just point out, that "obstructionism" was also the very same claim these leftist liberals made in the (sings) mmmmmhmmmhmmm Barack Hussein Obammy! 2008 campaign election.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/sep/09/ewen-macaskill-in-washington

No matter and despite the facts like the fact they controlled and had the majority in BOTH houses of Congress at the time, and thus the GOP could not "obstruct" so much as a piece of paper let alone their failed political policies.

In fact, the leftists imposition of the Un-constitutional tyranny known as Obamacare, despite objections by, and the contrary will of the American people is a clear cut example of that.

[JohnAdams]

Ok so you don't see any obstruction ... wow, what a surprise.

And just so there's no hard feelings, if Conservatives win in November, I really do hope they get their America Back exactly the way they left it in 2008. :) Because we all know how great their plan was and is.

Yes we all do know how great it is to live under Constitutional governance and be free and libertine. Rather than living under leftist liberal socialism and the nanny state they seek to impose upon us all.

Oh wasn't supposed to say that was I....:rolleyes:

[Chris]

Chris I would just point out, that "obstructionism" was also the very same claim these leftist liberals made in the (sings) mmmmmhmmmhmmm Barack Hussein Obammy! 2008 campaign election.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/sep/09/ewen-macaskill-in-washington

No matter and despite the facts like the fact they controlled and had the majority in BOTH houses of Congress at the time, and thus the GOP could not "obstruct" so much as a piece of paper let alone their failed political policies.

In fact, the leftists imposition of the Un-constitutional tyranny known as Obamacare, despite objections by, and the contrary will of the American people is a clear cut example of that.

Yes, it was.

In fact, iirc, Obama has presented Congress several budgets and the Dems have kept them from the floor.

[Smartmouthwoman]

I don't understand how they can even use the term 'obstructionists' when Republicans are doing exactly what we elected them to do midterm 2010... stop Obama's out of control spending. If he didn't tack a trillion dollar trinket onto every friggin bill, maybe something would get done.

Otherwise, Reps are doing what we expect them to do. The fact Dims don't like it is immaterial.

[Trinnity]

Five trillion in new debt since Obama came into office. He should run on that. Haha.

[Cigar]

Hummm where do you think that money went?

Because the facts say Obama made Gov smaller ... hummm, someone is lying right?

[Trinnity]

Facts? His facts are weasel words and accounting gimmicks.

Why do you even bother with this bullshit, Cigar?

[Peter1469]

Obama hasn't made government smaller. The federal government has not really shrunk. Local governments may have, but that is because they ran out of money.

[MMC]

Hummm where do you think that money went?

Because the facts say Obama made Gov smaller ... hummm, someone is lying right?

Can you show those links that prove Obama made Government smaller? :wink:

[Chris]

Hummm where do you think that money went?

Because the facts say Obama made Gov smaller ... hummm, someone is lying right?

Yes, someone is lying.

See image in Trinnity's post below. --Damn right I can foretell the future!!

[Trinnity]

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-VELMuaTwaz4/T9aPC4Fq9kI/AAAAAAAAx7A/Y6D_sEoBuA8/s1600/120611-private-sector.jpg

[Cigar]

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-VELMuaTwaz4/T9aPC4Fq9kI/AAAAAAAAx7A/Y6D_sEoBuA8/s1600/120611-private-sector.jpg



Thanks for proving my point ... in the Year 2008?

[Mainecoons]

Do we need to teach you how to read a graph too?

[Chris]

I think he's stuck on 2008 and...

http://i.snag.gy/9gfV6.jpg

[Trinnity]

We'll see who gets the blame this fall.
And you're not worried a bit, are you Cigar?
well, your boss is...

[Cigar]

We'll see who gets the blame this fall.
And you're not worried a bit, are you Cigar?
well, your boss is...

Not at all ... I wish all Conservatives could get "their" America Back ... just as they left it in 2008 after a Decade of their Administration.

[Cigar]

I think he's stuck on 2008 and...

http://i.snag.gy/9gfV6.jpg

http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b137/chasc5/stop_bitching.jpg

[Peter1469]

Bush the Younger was as conservative as Obama is.

[Chris]

http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b137/chasc5/stop_bitching.jpg

Wish the Bush blamers would. When is Obama going to take responsibility? He's been President nearly 4 years now.

[Cigar]

Wish the Bush blamers would. When is Obama going to take responsibility? He's been President nearly 4 years now.

I think he's beginning to understand ... but every time he does .. guess who cry's that he's going around their obstructions?

Can't have it both ways :)

[Cigar]

Bush the Younger was as conservative as Obama is.

No way ... you don't really believe that ... do you?

[Chris]

I think he's beginning to understand ... but every time he does .. guess who cry's that he's going around their obstructions?

Can't have it both ways :)

Do you mean the Democrats who won't bring Obama's budgets to the floor for a vote?

[Peter1469]

No way ... you don't really believe that ... do you?

For the most part, yes. Look at Bush the Younger's spending- he spent like Ted Kennedy on a bender. He created Medicare Part D, the largest expansion of the welfare state since LBJ.