Obama not responsible after 2 yrs. They blame Bush after 8 mos.

[Cuyo]

well jillian this is your time to shine explain what was so wrong with the economy before the democrats took contol of congress.
What was the unemployment number before 2008?
What did the stock market look like in 2007?
Just how bad were things jillian

explain how the democrats taking control of congress could possibly have anything to do with the meltdown. Dollars to donuts you don't even understand even the basics of the meltdown, so i'm confident you will be unable to comply to my request.

This has been bubbling below the surface for years.

nope i asked first.
So fuck off and die

Don't get agitated because I prove you don't know shit about shit. Try instead to learn something so you won't sound so dumb all the time.

 

[Dr Grump]

Well Jillian this is your time to shine explain what was so wrong with the economy before the democrats took contol of Congress.
What was the unemployment number before 2008?
What did the stock market look like in 2007?
Just how bad were things jillian

Once again you are out of your depth.

Think on this. Do you think the crisis started the day the Dems won congress? You don't think any actions before that time had any effect?

If your answer is no, you are a bona fide moron....

 

[Dr Grump]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Cuyo again.

 

[Cuyo]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Cuyo again.

my #1 as always Grumps!

Big Red is aware that he has no understanding of the recession, or even economics or politics in general. He can't even be adequately called an ideologue (e.g., Oddball). He's a know-nothing except that he thinks being anti-Democrat is "Cool" for the moment, and enjoys a venue such as USMB where he can accumulate soundbytes from people who share his ideology, but aren't quite so dumb.

Put him in a 1-on-1 conversation with any one of us, in real-time, he'd be a fuckin' deer in the headlights.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Well Jillian this is your time to shine explain what was so wrong with the economy before the democrats took contol of Congress.
What was the unemployment number before 2008?
What did the stock market look like in 2007?
Just how bad were things jillian

Once again you are out of your depth.

Think on this. Do you think the crisis started the day the Dems won congress? You don't think any actions before that time had any effect?

If your answer is no, you are a bona fide moron....

And fuck you too I asked my question and I will not answer one God damn thing until my question is answer goit that bitch?

Well Jillian this is your time to shine explain what was so wrong with the economy before the democrats took contol of Congress.
What was the unemployment number before 2008?
What did the stock market look like in 2007?
Just how bad were things jillian

I will add the democrats pet projects cause the mess so hell yes it's all on the democrats.

 

[Intense]

Obama is still not accepting responsibility. Yet the progressive libs blame Bush for 9/11 after he was in office for 8 months.

Barry will never be responsible! It is beyond his abilities.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Cuyo again.

my #1 as always Grumps!

Big Red is aware that he has no understanding of the recession, or even economics or politics in general. He can't even be adequately called an ideologue (e.g., Oddball). He's a know-nothing except that he thinks being anti-Democrat is "Cool" for the moment, and enjoys a venue such as USMB where he can accumulate soundbytes from people who share his ideology, but aren't quite so dumb.

Put him in a 1-on-1 conversation with any one of us, in real-time, he'd be a fuckin' deer in the headlights.

Making an ass out you face to face would be my pleasure. Sad thing about it is you lose get pissed then I would get pissed and kick your ass. And there wouldn't be a damn thing you could do to stop it.

 

[Cuyo]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Cuyo again.

my #1 as always Grumps!

Big Red is aware that he has no understanding of the recession, or even economics or politics in general. He can't even be adequately called an ideologue (e.g., Oddball). He's a know-nothing except that he thinks being anti-Democrat is "Cool" for the moment, and enjoys a venue such as USMB where he can accumulate soundbytes from people who share his ideology, but aren't quite so dumb.

Put him in a 1-on-1 conversation with any one of us, in real-time, he'd be a fuckin' deer in the headlights.

Making an ass out you face to face would be my pleasure. Sad thing about it is you lose get pissed then I would get pissed and kick your ass.

LOL, internet toughy!

Your frustration sustains me!

 

[bigrebnc1775]

my #1 as always Grumps!

Big Red is aware that he has no understanding of the recession, or even economics or politics in general. He can't even be adequately called an ideologue (e.g., Oddball). He's a know-nothing except that he thinks being anti-Democrat is "Cool" for the moment, and enjoys a venue such as USMB where he can accumulate soundbytes from people who share his ideology, but aren't quite so dumb.

Put him in a 1-on-1 conversation with any one of us, in real-time, he'd be a fuckin' deer in the headlights.

Making an ass out you face to face would be my pleasure. Sad thing about it is you lose get pissed then I would get pissed and kick your ass.

LOL, internet toughy!

Your frustration sustains me!

Nope, just giving you some wisdom to live by. Do not judge me by my board manner. I am a whole lot worse in person.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Obama is still not accepting responsibility. Yet the progressive libs blame Bush for 9/11 after he was in office for 8 months.

Early 2001: Bush Staffers Less Concerned with Terrorism

Voices in the Wilderness Are Turning Into a Chorus - Los Angeles Times

Voices in the Wilderness Are Turning Into a Chorus

---

Clinton and Bush staff overlap for several months while new Bush appointees are appointed and confirmed. Clinton holdovers seem more concerned about al-Qaeda than the new Bush staffers.

Los Angeles Times, 3/30/2004] Army Lieutenant General Donald Kerrick, Deputy National Security Adviser and manager of Clinton’s NSC (National Security Council) staff, still remains at the NSC nearly four months after Bush takes office. He later notes that while Clinton’s advisers met “nearly weekly” on terrorism by the end of his term, he does not detect the same kind of focus with the new Bush advisers: “That’s not being derogatory. It’s just a fact.

Try using facts and not talking points...

 

[Cuyo]

Making an ass out you face to face would be my pleasure. Sad thing about it is you lose get pissed then I would get pissed and kick your ass.

LOL, internet toughy!

Your frustration sustains me!

Nope, just giving you some wisdom to live by. Do not judge me by my board manner. I am a whole lot worse in person.

What, dumber? You can't possibly be a whole lot dumber than we all already think you are.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Obama is still not accepting responsibility. Yet the progressive libs blame Bush for 9/11 after he was in office for 8 months.

Early 2001: Bush Staffers Less Concerned with Terrorism

Voices in the Wilderness Are Turning Into a Chorus - Los Angeles Times

Voices in the Wilderness Are Turning Into a Chorus

---

Clinton and Bush staff overlap for several months while new Bush appointees are appointed and confirmed. Clinton holdovers seem more concerned about al-Qaeda than the new Bush staffers.

Los Angeles Times, 3/30/2004] Army Lieutenant General Donald Kerrick, Deputy National Security Adviser and manager of Clinton’s NSC (National Security Council) staff, still remains at the NSC nearly four months after Bush takes office. He later notes that while Clinton’s advisers met “nearly weekly” on terrorism by the end of his term, he does not detect the same kind of focus with the new Bush advisers: “That’s not being derogatory. It’s just a fact.

Try using facts and not talking points...

 

[WillowTree]

explain how the democrats taking control of congress could possibly have anything to do with the meltdown. Dollars to donuts you don't even understand even the basics of the meltdown, so i'm confident you will be unable to comply to my request.

This has been bubbling below the surface for years.

nope i asked first.
So fuck off and die

Don't get agitated because I prove you don't know shit about shit. Try instead to learn something so you won't sound so dumb all the time.

We knows there's lots o flies landing on yer particular pile of shit.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

LOL, internet toughy!

Your frustration sustains me!

Nope, just giving you some wisdom to live by. Do not judge me by my board manner. I am a whole lot worse in person.

What, dumber? You can't possibly be a whole lot dumber than we all already think you are.

If thats what you think. But thats not what I said or meant. I am a whole lot worse as in you would be in the danger zone within arms reach.

 

[Cuyo]

Nope, just giving you some wisdom to live by. Do not judge me by my board manner. I am a whole lot worse in person.

What, dumber? You can't possibly be a whole lot dumber than we all already think you are.

If thats what you think. But thats not what I said or meant. I am a whole lot worse as in you would be in the danger zone within arms reach.

Sure I would.

 

[Sallow]

Yes...The Democratx are responsible for TARP

At a time when the financial markets were in a panic, the stock market had lost 7000 points, companies were shedding workers at 700,000 a month...TARP showed that the US Government would stand behind the banks

Once TARP passed, the panic subsided and the economy was saved from a Depression

Actually for passing TARP. It was in fact a program of the Bush Administration.
Do you miss him already, Nutwinger?
Two dangerous myths about the stimulus Rex Nutting - MarketWatch

The only person to miss George Bush was that Iraqi guy with a shoe

 

[bigrebnc1775]

explain how the democrats taking control of congress could possibly have anything to do with the meltdown. Dollars to donuts you don't even understand even the basics of the meltdown, so i'm confident you will be unable to comply to my request.

This has been bubbling below the surface for years.

nope i asked first.
So fuck off and die

Don't get agitated because I prove you don't know shit about shit. Try instead to learn something so you won't sound so dumb all the time.

Looks like jake starkey has another person living in his world. Dude you really need to graspe a load of reality. You have never proven one thing to be right.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

What, dumber? You can't possibly be a whole lot dumber than we all already think you are.

If thats what you think. But thats not what I said or meant. I am a whole lot worse as in you would be in the danger zone within arms reach.

Sure I would.

Is that a Self portrait?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Obama is still not accepting responsibility. Yet the progressive libs blame Bush for 9/11 after he was in office for 8 months.

Early 2001: Bush Staffers Less Concerned with Terrorism

Voices in the Wilderness Are Turning Into a Chorus - Los Angeles Times

Voices in the Wilderness Are Turning Into a Chorus

---

Clinton and Bush staff overlap for several months while new Bush appointees are appointed and confirmed. Clinton holdovers seem more concerned about al-Qaeda than the new Bush staffers.

Los Angeles Times, 3/30/2004] Army Lieutenant General Donald Kerrick, Deputy National Security Adviser and manager of Clinton’s NSC (National Security Council) staff, still remains at the NSC nearly four months after Bush takes office. He later notes that while Clinton’s advisers met “nearly weekly” on terrorism by the end of his term, he does not detect the same kind of focus with the new Bush advisers: “That’s not being derogatory. It’s just a fact.

Try using facts and not talking points...

Richard A. Clarke - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

At the first Deputies Committee meeting on Terrorism held in April 2001, Clarke strongly suggested that the U.S. put pressure on both the Taliban and Al-Qaeda by arming the Northern Alliance and other groups in Afghanistan. Simultaneously, that they target bin Laden and his leadership by reinitiating flights of the MQ-1 Predators.

To which Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz responded, "Well, I just don't understand why we are beginning by talking about this one man bin Laden." Clarke replied that he was talking about bin Laden and his network because it posed "an immediate and serious threat to the United States."

According to Clarke, Wolfowitz turned to him and said, "You give bin Laden too much credit. He could not do all these things like the 1993 attack on New York, not without a state sponsor. Just because FBI and CIA have failed to find the linkages does not mean they don't exist."[9]

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Early 2001: Bush Staffers Less Concerned with Terrorism

Voices in the Wilderness Are Turning Into a Chorus - Los Angeles Times

Voices in the Wilderness Are Turning Into a Chorus

---

Clinton and Bush staff overlap for several months while new Bush appointees are appointed and confirmed. Clinton holdovers seem more concerned about al-Qaeda than the new Bush staffers.

Los Angeles Times, 3/30/2004] Army Lieutenant General Donald Kerrick, Deputy National Security Adviser and manager of Clinton’s NSC (National Security Council) staff, still remains at the NSC nearly four months after Bush takes office. He later notes that while Clinton’s advisers met “nearly weekly” on terrorism by the end of his term, he does not detect the same kind of focus with the new Bush advisers: “That’s not being derogatory. It’s just a fact.

Try using facts and not talking points...

Richard A. Clarke - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

At the first Deputies Committee meeting on Terrorism held in April 2001, Clarke strongly suggested that the U.S. put pressure on both the Taliban and Al-Qaeda by arming the Northern Alliance and other groups in Afghanistan. Simultaneously, that they target bin Laden and his leadership by reinitiating flights of the MQ-1 Predators.

To which Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz responded, "Well, I just don't understand why we are beginning by talking about this one man bin Laden." Clarke replied that he was talking about bin Laden and his network because it posed "an immediate and serious threat to the United States."

According to Clarke, Wolfowitz turned to him and said, "You give bin Laden too much credit. He could not do all these things like the 1993 attack on New York, not without a state sponsor. Just because FBI and CIA have failed to find the linkages does not mean they don't exist."[9]

Are you micheal moore?