Mittens is rewriting history

[bripat9643]

The point is: the recession under Bush's watch proved to be far more dangerous, far more difficult to resolve than previous economic downturns. Millions of American jobs were lost. Banks failed. Houses were foreclosed. Millions were left holding the bag. It takes strong policy decisions to kick start the economy after such a disaster. I don't think enacting the same policies that cause the disaster will prove to be a wise decision, do you?

If smoking in the powder magazine made the powder blow up, should we still permit smoking at the powder magazine?

Fires are difficult to put out when you throw gasoline on them.

 

[Unkotare]

You don't think a job saved means anything? Either to the person whose job it is, or to the economy?

LOL @ "a job saved." The newest entry in the Doublespeak Dictionary.

 

[Sallow]

[T]he Romney campaign’s whole argument is premised on the hope that the American public has developed mass amnesia about the scale of the mess Obama inherited.

And no, that doesn’t constitute making excuses for Obama: There’s no quibbling with the fact that his policies have not created jobs at the pace we would have hoped. But that doesn’t make Romney’s argument any less absurd. And it doesn’t excuse the fact that there has been no sustained media focus to speak of on the broader series of claims Romney has been making — and the larger argument they amount to — even though they are absolutely central to his whole candidacy.

Clearly Romney has embraced the fundamental republican credo: repeat a lie often enough until it’s perceived as the truth.

Well not really. It's more like throw enough shit that some of it is bound to stick. If it doesn't find different shit to throw.

At least in the good Bishop's case.

A planet in every pot!

 

[JoeB131]

You don't think a job saved means anything? Either to the person whose job it is, or to the economy?

LOL @ "a job saved." The newest entry in the Doublespeak Dictionary.

No, a job saved is a job saved. It's a job that might have been eliminated and wasn't becasue someone took action to save it.

Here's the thing your limited intellect fails to grasp. In any given year, the economy creates and destroys about 14 million jobs. If you are doing well, if you are keeping your skills up to date, you get one of the jobs created if yours is one of the ones destroyed.

So by slowing down the rate of destruction, he maintains the balance.

 

[Unkotare]

You don't think a job saved means anything? Either to the person whose job it is, or to the economy?

LOL @ "a job saved." The newest entry in the Doublespeak Dictionary.

No, a job saved is a job saved.

It is the most shameless sort of bullshit speculation, attempting to fabricate something to take credit for. Doublespeak of the highest order.

 

[Dot Com]

No matter how many times you say it, the economy did not crash under Bush. obama took a normal cyclical recession and turned it into a full blown depression.

"cyclical"? Thanks for clarifying that you are clueless

No matter how many times you say it, the economy did not crash under Bush. obama took a normal cyclical recession and turned it into a full blown depression.

Katz, that is wholly incorrect. The bubble burst in 2006, and the stock market crashed in 2008, both during The Bush Administration.

Also, this was no "normal cyclical recession".

Come on, get with it!

You are correct

 

[The Rabbi]

No matter how many times you say it, the economy did not crash under Bush. obama took a normal cyclical recession and turned it into a full blown depression.

"cyclical"? Thanks for clarifying that you are clueless

You are correct [/QUOTE]

Yeah, there's this thing called the business cycle. And we end up with recessions every so many years. Normally it isn't a big deal, like 1990 and 2001. Except when the gov't doesnt want to let an opportunity go to waste and then it becomes the longest recession post war and the weakest recovery on record.

 

[Cecilie1200]

The middle class boat is sitting on the bottom of the ocean and GOPers are still spewing tricle down economics and riasing tide lifts all boats BS.

And I'm so convinced by posts written by illiterates. Find me someone who can read "Cat in the Hat" without moving his lips, and maybe I'll be impressed.

Seriously, how am I supposed to take this shit seriously? "Truthseeker"? Ought to be "Grammarseeker". Has this japing fool ever ONCE explained how "trickle-UP economics" is supposed to work? Or who the fuck would be giving him a job - if he had the basic education necessary to hold down a job - if not for people with money?

I have had it up to my ears with dipshits mockingly parroting words they don't understand in a mocking tone of voice, just hoping everyone will go along with them. If you want us to accept that "trickle-down economics" is such a joke - you know, as opposed to any assumption that you could find your ass with both hands and a map - then perhaps you should explain WHY. I would LOVE to hear your presumed "great intellect" actually APPLY itself to answering that question.

Put up, or shut up.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Once again, Luddly...you amuse.

Did you even read the blog you cite? After going on about Mitt Romney's camp "rewriting" history when claiming that Barack Obama's policies hadn't helped with job creation, the author of that blog admits the following:

"And no, that doesn’t constitute making excuses for Obama: There’s no quibbling with the fact that his policies have not created jobs at the pace we would have hoped."

The fundamental problem for even the most ardent Obama supporter still remains that Barry's policies HAVEN'T created jobs. You don't come up with a new economic statistic "jobs saved" if your policies HAVE created jobs. You come up with that statistic if you've FAILED to create jobs and want to obscure that fact with a number that can't be verified...which is exactly what the Obama camp did. THEY are the ones who are really trying to rewrite history.

Reagan got reelected with high unemployment, but he had more "TV show" appeal than Obama; it is too late to blame Bush for high unemployment, a lot of the extra debt is his, but NOT 8.0%+ jobless.

Really? We were losing 700,000 jobs a month when Bush left office and yet Bush doesn't get blamed for our unemployment? How do you figure?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Bush left office THREE-AND-A-HALF-YEARS AGO. I'm pretty sure THAT'S why he doesn't get blamed for today's unemployment: if you can't fix a problem in that amount of time, you don't deserve to be President of the fucking Rotary Club, much less President of the United States.

When you're staring down the barrel of election time, you'd better not still be pissing and sniveling about your predecessor, losers.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Really? We were losing 700,000 jobs a month when Bush left office and yet Bush doesn't get blamed for our unemployment? How do you figure?

That was 3 years ago. What has Owebama done since then?
We didnt have downgraded credit and 1.3T deficits when Bush left office either. Yet somehow that's still Bush's fault.
Owebama: The child president. Nothing is his fault.

You can't fix 30 years of Reaganomics in 3 years.

What, you didn't have 8 years of Clinton in amongst all of that? Did we just forget him? And hey, are you telling me that the Congress - you know, the branch of government that ACTUALLY controls the purse strings - has been run by Republicans ever since Reagan? Really? You liberal twats have been fucking helpless ever since I graduated high school?


Whine a little more, you pack of sniveling girls. That's JUST the way to convince the American people they want to vote for you. Let me get you some more Tampax for those bleeding vaginas of yours.

 

[Cecilie1200]

You don't think a job saved means anything? Either to the person whose job it is, or to the economy?

I think the entire "jobs saved" thing is complete bullshit quite frankly, Carbineer. I think it was a number that people in the Obama Administration invented to try and mitigate the damage from how few jobs their stimulus actually created...a number that was impossible to verify or to quantify.

If people like you REALLY cared about people's jobs you'd be asking Barack Obama why he wasn't doing more to CREATE jobs for the 13 million plus Americans that are currently unemployed.

The thign being that at least Obama did things to crete jobs while tGOP advocaites kiling jobs

What jobs did he "create"? When did employment ever increase under Obama? Last time I checked, this economy has been in the crapper ever since that useless waste of a suit took office.

Oh, I know. The left thinks you "create jobs" by giving everyone government jobs, right?
Doesn't work that way, sweet cheeks.

 

[Truthseeker420]

The middle class boat is sitting on the bottom of the ocean and GOPers are still spewing tricle down economics and riasing tide lifts all boats BS.

And I'm so convinced by posts written by illiterates. Find me someone who can read "Cat in the Hat" without moving his lips, and maybe I'll be impressed.

Seriously, how am I supposed to take this shit seriously? "Truthseeker"? Ought to be "Grammarseeker". Has this japing fool ever ONCE explained how "trickle-UP economics" is supposed to work? Or who the fuck would be giving him a job - if he had the basic education necessary to hold down a job - if not for people with money?

I have had it up to my ears with dipshits mockingly parroting words they don't understand in a mocking tone of voice, just hoping everyone will go along with them. If you want us to accept that "trickle-down economics" is such a joke - you know, as opposed to any assumption that you could find your ass with both hands and a map - then perhaps you should explain WHY. I would LOVE to hear your presumed "great intellect" actually APPLY itself to answering that question.

Put up, or shut up.

Being a grammar nazi on a message board is like being a PETA activist at a circus,nor does it make your point anymore valid. And if you are waiting to hear some "pearl of wisdom"(that hasn't been pointed out already) you will be waiting a long time.But if you are looking for redundancy I suggest you read this article:

The Epic Failure of Republican Trickle Down Economics | Crooks and Liars

 

[Truthseeker420]

That was 3 years ago. What has Owebama done since then?
We didnt have downgraded credit and 1.3T deficits when Bush left office either. Yet somehow that's still Bush's fault.
Owebama: The child president. Nothing is his fault.

You can't fix 30 years of Reaganomics in 3 years.

What, you didn't have 8 years of Clinton in amongst all of that? Did we just forget him? And hey, are you telling me that the Congress - you know, the branch of government that ACTUALLY controls the purse strings - has been run by Republicans ever since Reagan? Really? You liberal twats have been fucking helpless ever since I graduated high school?


Whine a little more, you pack of sniveling girls. That's JUST the way to convince the American people they want to vote for you. Let me get you some more Tampax for those bleeding vaginas of yours.

Clinton? Clinton was pretend foe of conservatives to get dupes to vote for him. With Clinton we got a liitle lube before they fuck us. Democrats can't agree on anything but Republicans are united in their destruction of America.

 

[The Rabbi]

You can't fix 30 years of Reaganomics in 3 years.

What, you didn't have 8 years of Clinton in amongst all of that? Did we just forget him? And hey, are you telling me that the Congress - you know, the branch of government that ACTUALLY controls the purse strings - has been run by Republicans ever since Reagan? Really? You liberal twats have been fucking helpless ever since I graduated high school?


Whine a little more, you pack of sniveling girls. That's JUST the way to convince the American people they want to vote for you. Let me get you some more Tampax for those bleeding vaginas of yours.

Clinton? Clinton was pretend foe of conservatives to get dupes to vote for him. With Clinton we got a liitle lube before they fuck us. Democrats can't agree on anything but Republicans are united in their destruction of America.

That's why Dems voted overwhelmingly for every one of Obama's policies?

 

[Truthseeker420]

What, you didn't have 8 years of Clinton in amongst all of that? Did we just forget him? And hey, are you telling me that the Congress - you know, the branch of government that ACTUALLY controls the purse strings - has been run by Republicans ever since Reagan? Really? You liberal twats have been fucking helpless ever since I graduated high school?


Whine a little more, you pack of sniveling girls. That's JUST the way to convince the American people they want to vote for you. Let me get you some more Tampax for those bleeding vaginas of yours.

Clinton? Clinton was pretend foe of conservatives to get dupes to vote for him. With Clinton we got a liitle lube before they fuck us. Democrats can't agree on anything but Republicans are united in their destruction of America.

That's why Dems voted overwhelmingly for every one of Obama's policies?

I don't see much difference between Clinton and Obama.

 

[The Rabbi]

Clinton? Clinton was pretend foe of conservatives to get dupes to vote for him. With Clinton we got a liitle lube before they fuck us. Democrats can't agree on anything but Republicans are united in their destruction of America.

That's why Dems voted overwhelmingly for every one of Obama's policies?

I don't see much difference between Clinton and Obama.

Because Clinton spoke out against NAFTA? Clinton opposed welfare reform? Clinton refused to work with GOP leaders like Gingrich?
You see what your mind lets you. And that's precious little.

 

[Sallow]

Reagan got reelected with high unemployment, but he had more "TV show" appeal than Obama; it is too late to blame Bush for high unemployment, a lot of the extra debt is his, but NOT 8.0%+ jobless.

Really? We were losing 700,000 jobs a month when Bush left office and yet Bush doesn't get blamed for our unemployment? How do you figure?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Bush left office THREE-AND-A-HALF-YEARS AGO. I'm pretty sure THAT'S why he doesn't get blamed for today's unemployment: if you can't fix a problem in that amount of time, you don't deserve to be President of the fucking Rotary Club, much less President of the United States.

When you're staring down the barrel of election time, you'd better not still be pissing and sniveling about your predecessor, losers.

You economic acumen is astonishing. In that..it doesn't exist and still you comment.

 

[Truthseeker420]

That's why Dems voted overwhelmingly for every one of Obama's policies?

I don't see much difference between Clinton and Obama.

Because Clinton spoke out against NAFTA? Clinton opposed welfare reform? Clinton refused to work with GOP leaders like Gingrich?
You see what your mind lets you. And that's precious little.

Can you expound on that?

 

[The Rabbi]

I don't see much difference between Clinton and Obama.

Because Clinton spoke out against NAFTA? Clinton opposed welfare reform? Clinton refused to work with GOP leaders like Gingrich?
You see what your mind lets you. And that's precious little.

Can you expound on that?

Why?

 

[Sallow]

That's why Dems voted overwhelmingly for every one of Obama's policies?

I don't see much difference between Clinton and Obama.

Because Clinton spoke out against NAFTA? Clinton opposed welfare reform? Clinton refused to work with GOP leaders like Gingrich?
You see what your mind lets you. And that's precious little.

The Republicans impeached Clinton and Gingrich didn't work with Clinton. He shut down the government, twice.