As bad as Dubya was

bush did not have to whine. He had lots of pundits and worshippers to do that for him.

exactly, I have said so and so have lefty pundits & media types believe it or not, you employ surrogates to rough up the opposition, the pres. stays out of it and above it.....

Yep the right is far more organized and in lockstep than the right. A political strength, but a fatal weakness. The strengths that built up america is in united diversity and adapting to a changing world.

the left is far more disorganized but represent far more diverse views.


Was that supposed to be a laugh line? Or was it just a "Pun intended" moment for you?
 

Hookay.

"If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator." --Washington, D.C., Dec. 19, 2000 (Listen to audio clip)

"I'm the decider, and I decide what is best. And what's best is for Don Rumsfeld to remain as the Secretary of Defense." --Washington, D.C. April 18, 2006 (Read more; listen to audio clip; watch video clip)

"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we." --Washington, D.C., Aug. 5, 2004 (Watch video clip)

"My answer is bring them on." --on Iraqi insurgents attacking U.S. forces, Washington, D.C., July 3, 2003
Bush Quotations - The 10 Dumbest Things Bush Ever Said

The takeaway here..is that "The Decider" wanted an autocratic state he was bent on destroying.

Now why did you guys support that?

I realize you are incapable of reading and understanding simple statements and this is what makes you a Democrat. But even you cannot tease the idea that Bush wanted to be a dictator from any of those statements.
The only "takeaway" you have is some bad Chinese food.

I miss Bush. Bush was presidential. Bush didnt have interns sucking his cock in the Oval Office. Bush didn't go around calling his political opponents "enemies". Bush didnt blame other people for difficult situations. Bush actually cared about the Secret Service people guarding him and didn't use them as personal servants. Yeah, he made some bad calls but he made lots of calls and not all of them were going to be right.

Feel free.

You guys love "exact words", most of you are "textualists". These are the EXACT WORDS.

What did I misread?

These are pretty simple statements.
 
Bush was no Whiner. He had a lot of faults but he wasn't a Whiner. This current President is such a whiny baby. He has a completely compliant Boot-Licking MSM yet he still cries all the time. People are getting pretty sick of it. He really does need to grow a pair.
 
As bad as Dubya was, I don't ever remember getting a whiny email from him complaining about his political enemies, the NYTimes, CBS or anybody!

He made one off mic remark about some reporter being an asshole, but publicly he knew POTUS was a big job and people were going to complain about his policies.

Obama on the other hand --HOLY FUCKING SHIT!

Everyday is a new whine and complaint about how unloved he is and how his enemies are out to get him! EVERYDAY OFA sends a whiny email to anyone who singed up.

For god sake you're President, you have to accept not everyone is madly in love with you! GROW UP!

"Friend --

A couple things are going to happen in the next half hour.

Partisan attack ads funded by big banks and big oil will air over and over on national cable television.

Outrageous right-wing smear messages will arrive in inboxes around the country."

Can you imagine Bush sending out an email talking about "Outrageous left wing smears"?

Barry, please resign! The Job is too big for you! You're an Iowa Class embarrassment!

You're with us or with the terrorists.


That is an excellent example of the difference between Bush and the Big 0.

Bush speaking to those who might aid the terrorists says that you can aid them or you can side with ALL AMERICANS. Not just the Dems, not just the Reps. ALL AMERICANS.

The Big 0 on the other hand exhorts his followers to attack their enemies (the Republicans) and to invite the Republicans along for the ride, but to make them sit in the back of the bus.

Which leader tried to unite and lead all of the people and which one tried to splinter the people into factions?

I wonder what % of the public self identifies as Terrorists...
 
He has one message, and has played this message from day one - and has not strayed from it whatsoever.... It is the Republicans fault.

It is all he knows.
 
As bad as Dubya was, I don't ever remember getting a whiny email from him complaining about his political enemies, the NYTimes, CBS or anybody!

He made one off mic remark about some reporter being an asshole, but publicly he knew POTUS was a big job and people were going to complain about his policies.

Obama on the other hand --HOLY FUCKING SHIT!

Everyday is a new whine and complaint about how unloved he is and how his enemies are out to get him! EVERYDAY OFA sends a whiny email to anyone who singed up.

For god sake you're President, you have to accept not everyone is madly in love with you! GROW UP!

"Friend --

A couple things are going to happen in the next half hour.

Partisan attack ads funded by big banks and big oil will air over and over on national cable television.

Outrageous right-wing smear messages will arrive in inboxes around the country."

Can you imagine Bush sending out an email talking about "Outrageous left wing smears"?

Barry, please resign! The Job is too big for you! You're an Iowa Class embarrassment!

You're with us or with the terrorists.


That is an excellent example of the difference between Bush and the Big 0.

Bush speaking to those who might aid the terrorists says that you can aid them or you can side with ALL AMERICANS. Not just the Dems, not just the Reps. ALL AMERICANS.

The Big 0 on the other hand exhorts his followers to attack their enemies (the Republicans) and to invite the Republicans along for the ride, but to make them sit in the back of the bus.

Which leader tried to unite and lead all of the people and which one tried to splinter the people into factions?

I wonder what % of the public self identifies as Terrorists...

Nice. Thought provoking. The answer is easy.
 
As bad as Dubya was, I don't ever remember getting a whiny email from him complaining about his political enemies, the NYTimes, CBS or anybody!

He made one off mic remark about some reporter being an asshole, but publicly he knew POTUS was a big job and people were going to complain about his policies.

Obama on the other hand --HOLY FUCKING SHIT!

Everyday is a new whine and complaint about how unloved he is and how his enemies are out to get him! EVERYDAY OFA sends a whiny email to anyone who singed up.

For god sake you're President, you have to accept not everyone is madly in love with you! GROW UP!

"Friend --

A couple things are going to happen in the next half hour.

Partisan attack ads funded by big banks and big oil will air over and over on national cable television.

Outrageous right-wing smear messages will arrive in inboxes around the country."

Can you imagine Bush sending out an email talking about "Outrageous left wing smears"?

Barry, please resign! The Job is too big for you! You're an Iowa Class embarrassment!

You're with us or with the terrorists.


That is an excellent example of the difference between Bush and the Big 0.

Bush speaking to those who might aid the terrorists says that you can aid them or you can side with ALL AMERICANS. Not just the Dems, not just the Reps. ALL AMERICANS.

The Big 0 on the other hand exhorts his followers to attack their enemies (the Republicans) and to invite the Republicans along for the ride, but to make them sit in the back of the bus.

Which leader tried to unite and lead all of the people and which one tried to splinter the people into factions?

I wonder what % of the public self identifies as Terrorists...

Hopey Changey is no "Uniter." That was all such Bull Shit. This guy declares War on his fellow Americans on a daily basis. He is a Saul Alinsky-trained Marxist "Community Organizer." There is nothing in Alinsky's 'Rules for Radicals' that promotes uniting the People. In fact it only promotes the opposite. Bush was not nearly as partisan and divisive as this guy is. But don't look for the MSM to be honest about that though. They're far too busy licking his boots to be honest. This guy's no Uniter. Nuff said.
 
and no frank....i dont miss bush

Nor do I, but I agree that Obama has been far worse than he was.

By a few more trillion in debt and servitude to the gubmint to pay off their greed.


It's worse than you think.

The last year that the Congress was controlled by the Republicans, the deficite was 1.14% of the GDP. This continued a trend of reduction down from 1.85% the previous year which was down from the year before.

Then Harry met Nancy.

The spending since they took control has resulted in deficites of 3.18%, 9.91% and, this year, the estimate is for 10.64%.

They haven't even given budgets for approval. They just pass continuing resolutions.

This is insanity, people. They don't know what they are doing, they have never known what they are doing and they never will know what they are doing. They talk like they have the answers, but they don't even know the questions.

They might know how to drive the car that Obama keeps referring to. They just aren't very good at it.

US Federal Deficit As Percent Of GDP in United States 1900-2010 - Federal State Local
 
Last edited:
Hookay.



The takeaway here..is that "The Decider" wanted an autocratic state he was bent on destroying.

Now why did you guys support that?

I realize you are incapable of reading and understanding simple statements and this is what makes you a Democrat. But even you cannot tease the idea that Bush wanted to be a dictator from any of those statements.
The only "takeaway" you have is some bad Chinese food.

I miss Bush. Bush was presidential. Bush didnt have interns sucking his cock in the Oval Office. Bush didn't go around calling his political opponents "enemies". Bush didnt blame other people for difficult situations. Bush actually cared about the Secret Service people guarding him and didn't use them as personal servants. Yeah, he made some bad calls but he made lots of calls and not all of them were going to be right.

Feel free.

You guys love "exact words", most of you are "textualists". These are the EXACT WORDS.

What did I misread?

These are pretty simple statements.
Obviously too simple for you to understand. There is no suggestion that Bush wanted to become a dictator.
 
You really want to compare the quotes of President Obama and those of President Bush?

Gosh..really?

sure.

Hookay.

"If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator." --Washington, D.C., Dec. 19, 2000 (Listen to audio clip)

"I'm the decider, and I decide what is best. And what's best is for Don Rumsfeld to remain as the Secretary of Defense." --Washington, D.C. April 18, 2006 (Read more; listen to audio clip; watch video clip)

"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we." --Washington, D.C., Aug. 5, 2004 (Watch video clip)

"My answer is bring them on." --on Iraqi insurgents attacking U.S. forces, Washington, D.C., July 3, 2003
Bush Quotations - The 10 Dumbest Things Bush Ever Said

The takeaway here..is that "The Decider" wanted an autocratic state he was bent on destroying.

Now why did you guys support that?


you know I am caught in a dilemma...I am left asking myself, are you just incapable of employing basic reading comprehension skills , or just completely out of it? Or, well, you could be yanking chain. whatever...........
 
No, I honestly think some people are incapable of reading a sentence or paragraph and deriving the correct meaning from it. In this case he sees the words "dictatorship" or somesuch and immediately cottons on to it and thinks it means what he wants it to mean.
It's an issue of intelligence. And many liberals simply don't have it.
 
Nor do I, but I agree that Obama has been far worse than he was.

By a few more trillion in debt and servitude to the gubmint to pay off their greed.


It's worse than you think.

The last year that the Congress was controlled by the Republicans, the deficite was 1.14% of the GDP. This continued a trend of reduction down from 1.85% the previous year which was down from the year before.

Then Harry met Nancy.

The spending since they took control has resulted in deficites of 3.18%, 9.91% and, this year, the estimate is for 10.64%.

They haven't even given budgets for approval. They just pass continuing resolutions.

This is insanity, people. They don't know what they are doing, they have never known what they are doing and they never will know what they are doing. They talk like they have the answers, but they don't even know the questions.

They might know how to drive the car that Obama keeps referring to. They just aren't very good at it.

US Federal Deficit As Percent Of GDP in United States 1900-2010 - Federal State Local

Digging the current fossils out on Tuesday is the first critical step at reversing course.
 
This current President is far more partisan & divisive than Bush was. The corrupt MSM just doesn't report that though. They instead call him a "Uniter." If he had an (R) by his name and was this partisan,that's all the corrupt MSM would be talking about. It's just a matter of whether you have an (R) or a (D) by your name. The partisan (D) always gets the free pass from the MSM. Bush wasn't nearly as petty & bitter as this current President is. That's the truth.
 
This current President is far more partisan & divisive than Bush was. The corrupt MSM just doesn't report that though. They instead call him a "Uniter." If he had an (R) by his name and was this partisan,that's all the corrupt MSM would be talking about. It's just a matter of whether you have an (R) or a (D) by your name. The partisan (D) always gets the free pass from the MSM. Bush wasn't nearly as petty & bitter as this current President is. That's the truth.

Or as two past Democrat Presidents continue to be. And I mean Clinton, and Jimmah Catah. Both violate the unspoken rules of Ettiquite reguarding Ex-Presidents.

BOTH fossils remain equally divisive...and are given the spotlight by the same leftist media.
 
i dont get these emails....i wonder why you do?
I don't get them, either. And although I've never seen one I will assume the "whining" that Frank is talking about is a report of things the voters should know about. If the Republicans are doing sneaky tricks, I want to know about it.

If Bush never had occasion to do the same it's because he never had cause. The Democrats, much to their ultimate disadvantage, have never assumed an obstructionist posture.

and no frank....i dont miss bush
The only two possible categories who would miss George W. Bush are the super-rich and the useful idiots who swallow right-wing propaganda.
 
i dont get these emails....i wonder why you do?
I don't get them, either. And although I've never seen one I will assume the "whining" that Frank is talking about is a report of things the voters should know about. If the Republicans are doing sneaky tricks, I want to know about it.

If Bush never had occasion to do the same it's because he never had cause. The Democrats, much to their ultimate disadvantage, have never assumed an obstructionist posture.
.

Are you stupid, forgetful, or just a Democratic tool bag?
Senate Democrats block Bush's Judicial Nominees - Democratic Underground
Original article from WashPost deleted.
 
No, I honestly think some people are incapable of reading a sentence or paragraph and deriving the correct meaning from it. In this case he sees the words "dictatorship" or somesuch and immediately cottons on to it and thinks it means what he wants it to mean.
It's an issue of intelligence. And many liberals simply don't have it.

No.

This is a ridiculous thread..and something conservatives wholeheartly support. Hyperbole and rote extremism.

When you get it thrown back in your faces..you then question intelligence.

Gosh.

Embrace something else..empathy.
 
No, I honestly think some people are incapable of reading a sentence or paragraph and deriving the correct meaning from it. In this case he sees the words "dictatorship" or somesuch and immediately cottons on to it and thinks it means what he wants it to mean.
It's an issue of intelligence. And many liberals simply don't have it.

No.

This is a ridiculous thread..and something conservatives wholeheartly support. Hyperbole and rote extremism.

When you get it thrown back in your faces..you then question intelligence.

Gosh.

Embrace something else..empathy.

If it's so ridiculous? WHY on Earth are you here?

There's nothing extreme of what CF wrote. Only an appropriate analogy. But that would require cogent logical thought. [Which you have yet to demonstrate since you've been here].
 
No, I honestly think some people are incapable of reading a sentence or paragraph and deriving the correct meaning from it. In this case he sees the words "dictatorship" or somesuch and immediately cottons on to it and thinks it means what he wants it to mean.
It's an issue of intelligence. And many liberals simply don't have it.

No.

This is a ridiculous thread..and something conservatives wholeheartly support. Hyperbole and rote extremism.

When you get it thrown back in your faces..you then question intelligence.

Gosh.

Embrace something else..empathy.

If it's so ridiculous? WHY on Earth are you here?

There's nothing extreme of what CF wrote. Only an appropriate analogy. But that would require cogent logical thought. [Which you have yet to demonstrate since you've been here].

Sure it's ridiculous. He even calls him "Barry".

And yes..politicians complain about attacks from the other side..that's what they do. Especially during elections.

President Bush did it. President Obama does it. Nothing new under the sun.
 

Forum List

Back
Top