Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Public Policy Bush/Obama Poll  
User currently offlinewindy95 From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 2727 posts, RR: 8
Posted (4 years 2 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 1957 times:

Public Policy Polling who is the pollster of choice for the Daily Kos just put out this nice little poll

Quote:
We'll start rolling out our Ohio poll results tomorrow but there's one finding on the poll that pretty much sums it up: by a 50-42 margin voters there say they'd rather have George W. Bush in the White House right now than Barack Obama.

Independents hold that view by a 44-37 margin and there are more Democrats who would take Bush back (11%) than there are Republicans who think Obama's preferable (3%.)

A couple months ago I thought the Pennsylvanias and Missouris and Ohios of the world were the biggest battlegrounds for 2010 but when you see numbers like this it makes you think it's probably actually the Californias and the Wisconsins and the Washingtons.

There's not much doubt things are getting worse for Democrats...and they were already pretty bad. Somehow the party base needs to get reinvigorated over the next two months or there's going to be a very, very steep price to pay.
http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2010/08/previewing-ohio.html

Add this to the Positive 10 point lead on the Rasmussen and things are not looking so good for the Dems this fall. WIth Reid, Boxer, Murray and others in trouble it could be a wild Lame Duck session...


OMG-Obama Must Go
33 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinealoges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8707 posts, RR: 42
Reply 1, posted (4 years 2 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 1942 times:

I still think Obama is going to be a one-term president due to all the necessary, but unpopular decisions that need to be made.


Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
User currently offlinewindy95 From United States of America, joined Dec 2008, 2727 posts, RR: 8
Reply 2, posted (4 years 2 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 1918 times:

Quoting aloges (Reply 1):
I still think Obama is going to be a one-term president due to all the necessary, but unpopular decisions that need to be made.

Nothing he has done was necessary. And I bet you will see much of fit undone aftere he is gone..



OMG-Obama Must Go
User currently offlineFlyPNS1 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 6608 posts, RR: 24
Reply 3, posted (4 years 2 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 1906 times:

Quoting windy95 (Thread starter):
Add this to the Positive 10 point lead on the Rasmussen and things are not looking so good for the Dems this fall.

They aren't looking good, but it won't last long. About one year of Republican control and people will quickly realize that they aren't any better off.

Quoting windy95 (Reply 2):
Nothing he has done was necessary.

Depends on whether you wanted to go into another Depression or not. If conservatives had been in charge over the past two years, we'd be in one right now.


User currently offlinealoges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8707 posts, RR: 42
Reply 4, posted (4 years 2 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 1901 times:

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 3):
Depends on whether you wanted to go into another Depression or not. If conservatives had been in charge over the past two years, we'd be in one right now.

The financial system was collapsing right before our very eyes, yet some people still think no intervention was necessary. By the way, TARP was signed into law by Bush, not Obama. Both Obama and McCain agreed with the necessity of it.



Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
User currently offlineeinsteinboricua From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2010, 3102 posts, RR: 8
Reply 5, posted (4 years 2 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 1893 times:

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 3):
About one year of Republican control and people will quickly realize that they aren't any better off.
Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 3):
Depends on whether you wanted to go into another Depression or not. If conservatives had been in charge over the past two years, we'd be in one right now.

  

I find it...idiotic...to complain about Obama's public spending. There are some things that need to be analyzed:
1. When he was a candidate, his platform revolved under bringing affordable healthcare. His whole campaign, he always stressed the idea of health care. He's elected, he delivers the promise and yet he's criticized? Forget the public option thing...he's been criticized for "inflating the public deficit".
2. Where were people when Bush sent the first bailout? OK...the bailout helped and another was needed. If Obama had not taken another stimulus act, the US might be in a depression and he would have been criticized. So he proceeds to send another stimulus, and he is still criticized?
3. Where were people when Bush started Iraq? Never mind Afghanistan which is a war that everyone supported...Iraq is a different story. So people would rather money be spent on overseas wars than at home? Let's not forget than when Bush took office, there was a surplus (never mind who brought it, whether it was a Republican controlled Congress or a Democrat president)...the fact remains that it was uncontrolled spending in things that were not supposed to have existed in the first place that brought down that surplus and turned it into a deficit.

People these days are hard to please. If the government spends on them it's bad. If it doesn't spend it's bad too. Republicans started wars and people switched to Democrats to send them a message that spending in wars is not OK. Now, that Democrats are spending for the people, people now want to switch to Republicans because public spending is also not OK.

Little advise next time: Read the f*****g platform before voting!! Voted for Obama...he brought you what he promised. Not what you wanted? Learn to read and vote next time!



"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
User currently offlineNIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (4 years 2 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 1880 times:

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 3):
Depends on whether you wanted to go into another Depression or not. If conservatives had been in charge over the past two years, we'd be in one right now.

Definately not true at all. The main thing keeping us flat right now and on the verge of a double dip is the health care bill that people are finding out will cost us much more than advertised and the looming tax cuts being being allowed to expire. These two points have everyone sitting on their hands.If the GOP had won the election McCain would not have allowed to this happen. He would have forced congress to slash everything tax wise, not passed a huge helath care bill and rest of spending. His priority would have been to get the banks lending and people hiring before the health care and regulations. This would have given us a shot in the arm and got us on the right track. It's why Obama is going to be a one termer and why congress will look very different in a few months. Every good economist said you can't tax and spend your way out of a recession yet Obama listened to Pelosi and not them. Which is why he will go down as the modern day Jimmy Carter. Nobody is spending money, nobody is working and nobody is hiring or expanding their businesses and it would not have been worse if the GOP was in power last two years it would have have been a hell of a lot better.


User currently offlineFlyPNS1 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 6608 posts, RR: 24
Reply 7, posted (4 years 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 1850 times:

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 6):
The main thing keeping us flat right now and on the verge of a double dip is the health care bill that people are finding out will cost us much more than advertised and the looming tax cuts being being allowed to expire.

Neither one of these items will actually cost people that much money. The big problem is that people aren't spending because they HAVE nothing to spend. They've spent the better part of 2 decades living beyond their means and they are all tapped out. People are now paying the price for living beyond their means.

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 6):
He would have forced congress to slash everything tax wise,

Except that most American's are worse off after the Bush tax cuts than they were before. The Bush tax cuts were just a temporary way to hide more fundamental problems with the economy. They did nothing to address rising healthcare costs, education costs and energy costs. What little people gained was quickly eaten up by these costs, except for the very wealthy.


Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 6):
He would have forced congress to slash everything tax wise, not passed a huge helath care bill and rest of spending.

And to do so would have required massive cuts in government spending and laying off millions of workers.


User currently offlineUAXDXer From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 765 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (4 years 2 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 1795 times:

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 7):
Neither one of these items will actually cost people that much money. The big problem is that people aren't spending because they HAVE nothing to spend.



... and businesses are not hiring because of rising taxes and health care costs. Vicious little circle isn't it? Better hurry and find a newly created government job.



It takes a bug to hit a windsheild but it takes guts to stick
User currently offlineltbewr From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13115 posts, RR: 12
Reply 9, posted (4 years 2 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 1791 times:

This week, President Obama is talking about the end of the Combat actions in Iraq and what will probably be a futile start of peace talks as to Isreal. Most Americans want something done ASAP to turn our economy around, to bring back good paying jobs, to not raise and rather decrese taxes. No one has any easy asnwers, no one wants cuts to any programs that help subsidise their lives. That has meant that the Republicans have an opening, and as typical for many mid-term elections, the minority party will gain seats and even become the majority. The most motivated voters are supported of the Republcans general beliefs, they will the ones to vote, atrracting enough 'independent-Republican leaning voters. The Democrat-leaning independents won't be out voting.

Longer term, especially as to 2012, the Republicans need to find a sufficently centerist and non-conterversial leader to run for President and VP. Pailn won't be the choice for a variety of reasons, but I don't really see many any real leading person who doen't have have some serious problems.


User currently offlineAustrianZRH From Austria, joined Aug 2007, 1385 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (4 years 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 1773 times:

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 5):

This, sir, was one of the best and mostly thought out posts I've ever read on a.net! Think I'll add you to my RU list, FWIW from a member like me  .



WARNING! The post above should be taken with a grain of salt! Furthermore, it may be slightly biased towards A.
User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6658 posts, RR: 11
Reply 11, posted (4 years 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1760 times:

Once in France, we had legislative elections on a calendar, and presidential elections on another calendar. Mitterrand was elected in 1981, in an election with lots of hope, much like Obama's election. The left never had a president since the 1958 constitution. So much hope led inevitably to deception, and in the 1986 legislatives, the right won and had the power. Mitterrand got reelected easily in 1988, with a better score than in 1981 !

Couldn't the same thing happen here ?



New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11657 posts, RR: 15
Reply 12, posted (4 years 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1753 times:

When Bush's poll numbers were this low (lower?) no one gave a flying fig about the numbers. They were just numbers and poll numbers don't mean anything. He was simply doing what he thought was right and just for the nation. Funny how one little letter (D as opposed to R) behind someone's name changes the whole game....


Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlineMudboy From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 1167 posts, RR: 5
Reply 13, posted (4 years 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1746 times:

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 7):
The big problem is that people aren't spending because they HAVE nothing to spend. They've spent the better part of 2 decades living beyond their means and they are all tapped out. People are now paying the price for living beyond their means.

This is the biggest problem. I would like to know what percentage of Americans are up to their necks in debt? People should stop looking to the Government to solve there problems, and stop buying their 12 y/o kids I phones, and their own PCs, and taking trips they cannot afford, and learn some self control when it comes to spending, saving, and if there is anything left investing for their future.


User currently offlineavent From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (4 years 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1737 times:

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 6):
Definately not true at all. The main thing keeping us flat right now and on the verge of a double dip is the health care bill that people are finding out will cost us much more than advertised and the looming tax cuts being being allowed to expire. These two points have everyone sitting on their hands.

I seriously doubt the limited healthcare reform has had any significant impact yet. Look to the waging of two wars for the primary cause.


User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6658 posts, RR: 11
Reply 15, posted (4 years 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1734 times:

Quoting Mudboy (Reply 13):
This is the biggest problem. I would like to know what percentage of Americans are up to their necks in debt? People should stop looking to the Government to solve there problems, and stop buying their 12 y/o kids I phones, and their own PCs, and taking trips they cannot afford, and learn some self control when it comes to spending, saving, and if there is anything left investing for their future.

But without that consumption frenzy, would the country not collapse ? Isn't that your so dear "way of life" ?



New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlineFlyPNS1 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 6608 posts, RR: 24
Reply 16, posted (4 years 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 1721 times:

Quoting Aesma (Reply 11):
Couldn't the same thing happen here ?

Same thing happened with Clinton. His approval ratings in 1994 were as low as Obama's are now (actually a bit lower) and the Republicans easily won Congress. However, in 1996, Clinton easily won reelection.

Not saying the same thing will happen with Obama, but it definitely could.


User currently offlineea772lr From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2836 posts, RR: 10
Reply 17, posted (4 years 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 1712 times:

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 7):
The big problem is that people aren't spending because they HAVE nothing to spend. They've spent the better part of 2 decades living beyond their means and they are all tapped out. People are now paying the price for living beyond their means.

I do agree with you on people spending beyond their means. However, in a time where the gub'ment is telling folks to tighten their belts, the feds are spending more, faster than any other time in U.S. history. What do they care...our grand kids will still be paying back their spending spree. It's a lie that you can spend you're way out of a recession/depression, or that you can tax your way out. This is now Obama's recession, what I like to call his Oppression. His big government, anti-private sector policies are to blame for the sharp turn around in what the people feel about the Democrats. In a time we've seen unprecedented pain in the private sectors, we've seen huge growth in the Federal government.



We often judge others by their actions, but ourselves by our intentions.
User currently offlineFlyPNS1 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 6608 posts, RR: 24
Reply 18, posted (4 years 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1699 times:

Quoting ea772lr (Reply 17):
It's a lie that you can spend you're way out of a recession/depression,

The final straw that really wiped out the Great Depression was the MASSIVE spending by the U.S. government for WWII. During that time the U.S. piled up debt and spent like crazy, this created millions of jobs and kept people busy even though the average consumer during WWII actually kept a pretty tight pocketbook.

I'm not saying we should start a world war, but to say you can't spend your way out isn't historically true.

Quoting ea772lr (Reply 17):
In a time we've seen unprecedented pain in the private sectors, we've seen huge growth in the Federal government.

True. But is the other option any better? Imagine if Obama said, "I'll keep tax rates just where they are, but instead I'll slash government spending by $800 Billion (what it would take to balance the budget)."

This may be a conservatives dream, but doing so would require massive cuts to Social Security, Medicare, defense and everything else. You would have millions in layoffs to meet these budgetary requirements. Plus, the consumers would take another hit as the reductions in federal spending on Medicare, education and healthcare, would require more money out of pocket. Your local/state taxes would skyrocket as states would struggle to fill the gaps left by the reduction in federal aid. Or the states would be forced to initiate even more layoffs.

That's my fundamental problem with Conservatives. They perpetually lie and say that they will make all these cuts and balance the budget, but they fail to mention the pain it will cause. They don't mention the pain and in the end they never actually go through with the cuts because they know how bad the backlash would be.


User currently offlineea772lr From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2836 posts, RR: 10
Reply 19, posted (4 years 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1697 times:

Quoting FlyPNS1 (Reply 18):
That's my fundamental problem with Conservatives. They perpetually lie and say that they will make all these cuts and balance the budget, but they fail to mention the pain it will cause. They don't mention the pain and in the end they never actually go through with the cuts because they know how bad the backlash would be.

But that's the problem. We haven't had any real Conservatives in office in how long?? Will we ever have politicians who will cut spending the way they said they would? An intriguing thing that also assuredly has a hand in these recent polls is Obama touted he'd slash the deficit...is this man smoking fu%&ing crack!? Can you imagine Bush making this speech, then spending the way he has??

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UAZnRCtzkCI



We often judge others by their actions, but ourselves by our intentions.
User currently offlineeinsteinboricua From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2010, 3102 posts, RR: 8
Reply 20, posted (4 years 2 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 1651 times:

Quoting AustrianZRH (Reply 10):
This, sir, was one of the best and mostly thought out posts I've ever read on a.net! Think I'll add you to my RU list, FWIW from a member like me .

I'm honored. Thank you very much.   



"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
User currently offlineFlyDeltaJets87 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (4 years 2 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 1636 times:

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 5):
Quoting AustrianZRH (Reply 10):
Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 5):

This, sir, was one of the best and mostly thought out posts I've ever read on a.net! Think I'll add you to my RU list, FWIW from a member like me

What was well thought about it? What was good about it? Seriously?
We were promised transparency, especially during the healthcare debate. Was that delivered? How many meetings ended up behind closed doors? I love Nancy Pelosi's ""We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it" quote. Just wonderful.   
Not that I supported it anyway, but we were promised the healthcare bill would stay below a certain amount. I don't know whether to    or    when I see the most recent figures, which are already WELL ABOVE what was promised, and know it will only get worse.
The Stimulus Money? Most conservatives were against it, and did not support Bush passing it through, so don't pretend that all Republicans supported this thing even Bush proposed it. The Obama Stimulus was a disaster. Almost all jobs created were government jobs. I fail to see how that's a good thing. It was also shown that the numbers were being severely fudged, such as Census personnel would be hired, laid off, and then re-hired and that would count as "2 jobs" instead of "2 job gains and 1 loss for a total of 1 job". Additionally, each "job" created by the stimulus cost somewhere between $100,000 and $200,000 a piece. Yet this was a good thing?
The War in Iraq? While it may have cost a lot of money, it's a known fact that wars are economic boosts, and much of that money stayed right here in the US, so from a financial standpoint it wasn't the disaster that Democrats love to paint it as. Much of that money was pumped into the US economy to buy supplies, equipment, etc.
We're sick of seeing government handouts being extended as well. How many times are unemployment benefits going to extended so our favorite people like ProPilot83 can continue to abuse the system?

Let's also remember that part of the Obama campaign was attacking Bush for the amount of spending done under the Bush Administration. Yet the deficit during Obama's first year in office alone was already more than all 8 years under Bush, and it's only going to get worse. So again, will you please tell me what was right or good about his (einsteinboricua's) post?

Quoting seb146 (Reply 12):
When Bush's poll numbers were this low (lower?) no one gave a flying fig about the numbers. They were just numbers and poll numbers don't mean anything. He was simply doing what he thought was right and just for the nation. Funny how one little letter (D as opposed to R) behind someone's name changes the whole game....

Except since you criticize Bush and the Republicans and the right more than anyone else on this forum and in just about every post, this post coming from you is nothing but 100% Hypocrisy.    Can you show me a post by you from the Bush years where you said "Bush is just doing what he believes is best" and you showed your support? Based on your track record, I would be truly shocked...

[Edited 2010-09-02 17:57:37]

User currently offlineeinsteinboricua From Puerto Rico, joined Apr 2010, 3102 posts, RR: 8
Reply 22, posted (4 years 2 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 1603 times:

Quoting FlyDeltaJets87 (Reply 21):
it's a known fact that wars are economic boosts

and how has that worked out lately? Either CNBC has been manipulating facts these past couple of years or this statement is (as Judge Judy would "nicely" put it) baloney  
Quoting FlyDeltaJets87 (Reply 21):
Let's also remember that part of the Obama campaign was attacking Bush for the amount of spending done under the Bush Administration.

I'd like to point out something, which I already stated in my post. Let's compare two things. For starters one drove the nation into a deficit and the other is making it worse. We can pretty much agree on that, even I think Obama should put a stop for the time being and wait until the US budget is balanced so that any domestic program can be efficiently run.

But let's look at other things:
Bush spent on wars. What did War in Afghanistan and War in Iraq bring to the US? Economic growth? Doubt it. Maybe during the first year or so. If growth is all it brings, then the US wouldn't have plunged into recession and China should be in a depression...yet it's the other way around. Tell me of a successful domestic program that Bush did to help the middle class.

Obama is spending on domestic things. Health care is the most notable topic. He has been keeping funds alive for the Afghanistan War and that's until troops start coming home in 2011, but that's a war everyone believes must be brought to an end, but ensure that the Afghan Government is well put.

So you're telling me you rather have the government spend on wars than on domestic programs?

Quoting FlyDeltaJets87 (Reply 21):
We're sick of seeing government handouts being extended as well.

This is what I mean. I don't care if ProPilot83 is abusing the system or not (if you're so confident that he is, then why don't you report him?). Right now, you think it's bad to give handouts because people will get used to having everything subsidized to a level that they will do anything to not work. I agree with you on that. I have seen how that is and I know people abuse of the system. In PR there's also government housing and it's amazing to see how people who claim to have no money can go to Best Buy on Black Friday and purchase 5 plasma TVs, then go to Toys R Us and purchase Wii and PS3s and such...

So let's scrap the handouts...oh wait, YOU just lost your job...job hunting is going bad...you need to feed a family. You spouse's income is not enough...bet you wish you had the handouts, right?

Get the point? It's bad if it's there. It's bad if it's not. To me, it's not whether the government is overspending; it's that it's not regulating and observing for any loopholes people might use to abuse the system. Don't sink a ship just because there's a leak. Plug it and if necessary overhaul it.



"You haven't seen a tree until you've seen its shadow from the sky."
User currently offlineFlyDeltaJets87 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (4 years 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 1593 times:

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 22):
Tell me of a successful domestic program that Bush did to help the middle class.

His tax cuts early in his administration were pretty nice, and our family benefited pretty well from the tax breaks that remained throughout his administration. In fact those tax-cuts were helping turn around the minor recession that was occurring when Bush took office in January 2001 (I'm not assigning blame to Clinton for it, before you accuse me of doing so). The tax-cuts he passed through were helping to turn around the economy (well, until September 11th came along.) And growing up in a military family, I would hardly consider myself beyond "Middle Class".   This "Bush didn't do anything for the middle class" is nonsense (probably nonsense you're picking up from CNBC and other similar news outlets).

So who's Presidency did/is my family doing better under financially? The answer is pretty simple and clear-cut: Bush. And yet with the Bush tax cuts set to expire, under the current administration, it looks like it's only going to get worse for people like me - not better. Man I can't wait to see more taxes go out of my paycheck to people who don't work!   

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 22):
Bush spent on wars. What did War in Afghanistan and War in Iraq bring to the US? Economic growth? Doubt it. Maybe during the first year or so.

What "economic growth" have we seen under the Obama Administration and Democratically controlled Congress? Please enlighten me because I have yet to see it. By this point in his administration, Bush was already a year into dealing with September 11th - not just the war that followed but also the economic downturn that ensued. Yet it (the economy) never got this bad. So please enlighten me on what economic growth the current administration and Congress are helping along because I'm not seeing it, and Obama's been in office 18 months.

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 22):
Obama is spending on domestic things. Health care is the most notable topic.

Yea. Hardly what I would call a good thing. The money is being spent on people who can deliver votes - not going back in ways to help the people who pay the taxes. Funny how that works out.

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 22):
So you're telling me you rather have the government spend on wars than on domestic programs?

Look at my career field. Not war directly but I'd rather seen money spent on Defense than on "domestic programs". But then again, with the way Democrats keep passing more and more social programs like healthcare, unemployment extensions, etc, I begin to ask myself more and more "Why work when I can vote Democrat?"

Quoting einsteinboricua (Reply 22):
Get the point? It's bad if it's there. It's bad if it's not. To me, it's not whether the government is overspending; it's that it's not regulating and observing for any loopholes people might use to abuse the system. Don't sink a ship just because there's a leak. Plug it and if necessary overhaul it.

One problem - the current policies being rammed through are only adding more leaks to your metaphorical boat, not stopping them.

[Edited 2010-09-02 20:09:20]

User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11657 posts, RR: 15
Reply 24, posted (4 years 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1572 times:

Quoting FlyDeltaJets87 (Reply 21):
Except since you criticize Bush and the Republicans and the right more than anyone else on this forum and in just about every post, this post coming from you is nothing but 100% Hypocrisy. Can you show me a post by you from the Bush years where you said "Bush is just doing what he believes is best" and you showed your support? Based on your track record, I would be truly shocked...

In other words, no one dare criticize a Republican president because he is doing what is right for the nation? Give me a break. Why can't we criticize a Republican president? Why is that such a shameful thing to do? Hypocracy, thy name is Republican



Life in the wall is a drag.
25 Post contains images FlyDeltaJets87 : And your post is "No one dare criticize a Democrat because he is doing what is right". Why can't there be criticism of a Democratic president just as
26 mt99 : Until late 2008 right? When Bush house of cards fell down. So, where is your unconditional support for Obama? Right, wrong or otherwise he is also do
27 FlyDeltaJets87 : On foreign policy and military issues, because as a member of the US Armed Forces, it has to be, and it's why now that I've commissioned, you won't s
28 FlyPNS1 : Except that what Bush did in the early 00's helped contribute to the problem we are in now. Bushes solution to the recession of the early 00's was to
29 mt99 : Prove to us that you are not - and dig up a post where you criticized Bush regarding any of his policies when he was President.
30 seb146 : Because when there was criticism of Bush, those that were patriotic enough to speak out were told to be quiet because supporting Bush was patriotic.
31 Post contains images FlyDeltaJets87 : How about voting for the Democratic candidate for Senate in my state in 2006 over the Republican (the '06 mid-terms were the first election I could v
32 Post contains images dxing : Which he hasn't done. What he has done is signed into a law a bill that places another layer of cost between the consumer and the provider whether it
33 Mudboy : I am sorry, do you know me? I was raised not to owe anything. I have no debt, and a large amount of savings, that is my way of life, so before you tr
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
The Hidden Truth Behind Bush's Low Poll Numbers? posted Sun May 14 2006 01:47:12 by SATX
Obama Taps Bush, Clinton To Lead Haiti Fundraising posted Sat Jan 16 2010 10:32:10 by Falcon84
Death Threats Against Obama Vs Bush, Clinton posted Fri Dec 4 2009 07:09:26 by Dreadnought
Obama's Foreign Policy Reviews posted Tue Dec 1 2009 13:11:45 by Dreadnought
Facebook Pulls "Kill Obama" Poll posted Mon Sep 28 2009 16:55:47 by FuturePilot16
WSJ: Obama Admin Immigration Policy Out Of Sight posted Wed Aug 19 2009 17:10:03 by Aaron747
Obama Defending Bush On Illegal Wiretapping posted Wed Apr 8 2009 11:27:09 by PPVRA
Letter From Bush To Obama? posted Wed Jan 21 2009 17:11:24 by Poadrim
Bush Sneaks Through Host Of Laws, Undermine Obama posted Mon Dec 15 2008 16:20:22 by Mortyman
Obama's Mid-East Policy posted Mon Dec 1 2008 16:21:47 by Bravo45
Facebook Pulls "Kill Obama" Poll posted Mon Sep 28 2009 16:55:47 by FuturePilot16
WSJ: Obama Admin Immigration Policy Out Of Sight posted Wed Aug 19 2009 17:10:03 by Aaron747
Obama Defending Bush On Illegal Wiretapping posted Wed Apr 8 2009 11:27:09 by PPVRA
Letter From Bush To Obama? posted Wed Jan 21 2009 17:11:24 by Poadrim
Bush Sneaks Through Host Of Laws, Undermine Obama posted Mon Dec 15 2008 16:20:22 by Mortyman