Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
And now we are seeing that they lied about Obama being a socialist
And now we are seeing that they lied about Obama being a socialist
Let's see. Obama's government has taken over control of the automakers. He's got a firm grip on the banking industry. AIG is in his back pocket. He's doing his best to get government controlled health care and insurance in the US. That appears to me to be pretty socialist in nature - maybe even worse. Just what is the lie being told about him not being a socialist? Could just be me, I get like this sometimes, but I think you're full of shit...
BO did not cause it, Bush did.
BO prolonged it and made it worse.
What a great POTUS he is not.
Bush did not cause this, he merely contributed to getting us here. The road that got us here has been a long one with more than one administration to blame. Obama, as far as I can tell, is doing nothing to help the situation. Rather, it seems as if his policies will only be prolonging our problems. But time will tell. So far, not so good.
It's funny, I seem to remember some folks laying the blame for 9/11 at Bush's feet, completely ignoring the policies of administrations past which, any thinking person could conclude, contributed to those events. They claim he ignored warnings in intelligence briefings that were at best vague. As if the prior administration didn't ignore the fact that Osama had essentially declared war on the U.S. in 1996. Perhaps Bush should have declared martial law based on the information at hand?
The point I'm trying to get to, or the question really, is this:
At what point does Obama get pinned with the responsibility for the stateof the union? When will people stop blaming Bush and recognize Obama's leadership? September?
The woman overseeing the tarp funds explained it best.
Before the Great Depression we had big busts and booms every 10 years. Good for the rich, bad for the masses. So we put in regulations and the New Deal and Unions came to be and we had 60 years of slow steady healthy growth.
Then Reagan became president and he started busting unions and sending jobs overseas and deregulating and giving rich people all the tax breaks, etc, and then we started getting things like the John McCain Keating 5 S&L loans scandal of the 80's, and then we got Enron and Bernie Madoff and the housing crash and the bundling of toxic assets and the bank bailouts.
I know its been going on forever and its hard to grasp, but basically it all started happening with Reagan.
And righties lied when they said Clinton was the most liberal guy ever.
And now we are seeing that they lied about Obama being a socialist. They're attacking him like they did Clinton from both angles. Is he a sellout too or is he a socialist? Hard to say for sure, so they just attack from both angles. Very effective seeing as how I have to argue against both approaches.
Meanwhile the lobbyists still run this country, but you won't see righties complaining about lobbyists. Maybe once in awhile, but they are too busy tea bagging liberal social programs that cost billions to notice the $9 trillions the bankers stole in the last 8 months.
Bush did not cause this, he merely contributed to getting us here. The road that got us here has been a long one with more than one administration to blame. Obama, as far as I can tell, is doing nothing to help the situation. Rather, it seems as if his policies will only be prolonging our problems. But time will tell. So far, not so good.
It's funny, I seem to remember some folks laying the blame for 9/11 at Bush's feet, completely ignoring the policies of administrations past which, any thinking person could conclude, contributed to those events. They claim he ignored warnings in intelligence briefings that were at best vague. As if the prior administration didn't ignore the fact that Osama had essentially declared war on the U.S. in 1996. Perhaps Bush should have declared martial law based on the information at hand?
The point I'm trying to get to, or the question really, is this:
At what point does Obama get pinned with the responsibility for the stateof the union? When will people stop blaming Bush and recognize Obama's leadership? September?
The woman overseeing the tarp funds explained it best.
Before the Great Depression we had big busts and booms every 10 years. Good for the rich, bad for the masses. So we put in regulations and the New Deal and Unions came to be and we had 60 years of slow steady healthy growth.
Then Reagan became president and he started busting unions and sending jobs overseas and deregulating and giving rich people all the tax breaks, etc, and then we started getting things like the John McCain Keating 5 S&L loans scandal of the 80's, and then we got Enron and Bernie Madoff and the housing crash and the bundling of toxic assets and the bank bailouts.
I know its been going on forever and its hard to grasp, but basically it all started happening with Reagan.
And righties lied when they said Clinton was the most liberal guy ever.
And now we are seeing that they lied about Obama being a socialist. They're attacking him like they did Clinton from both angles. Is he a sellout too or is he a socialist? Hard to say for sure, so they just attack from both angles. Very effective seeing as how I have to argue against both approaches.
Meanwhile the lobbyists still run this country, but you won't see righties complaining about lobbyists. Maybe once in awhile, but they are too busy tea bagging liberal social programs that cost billions to notice the $9 trillions the bankers stole in the last 8 months.
I'd say it all started when we went off the gold standard in 1971. Inflation is destroying the middle class.
Most economists agree FDR's policies extended the depression about ten years.
And hold on there.... You're painting with a pretty broad brush with the "you people" stuff. The SPEED of the jobs arriving was promised, not arbitrarily expected out of the blue. They were one of the selling points for the rush to get this bill passed no one read.
And we see that 10% unemployment rate about to hit, with no end in sight. Inflation will be right around the corner, then a full-blown depression.
Obama's made a mountain out of a molehill, just like his idol FDR did.
I'm really sorry that YOU PEOPLE (sorry, but it's fitting) choose to ONLY see the negative side of everything when there are indeed signs that the economy is slowly recovering. YOU PEOPLE demand instant results, which is ignorant.
CNNMoney.com Market Report - Jul. 1, 2009
Stock gains speed up
Wall Street rallies on rising commodity shares and upbeat housing and manufacturing reports.
Last Updated: July 1, 2009: 10:50 AM ET
They want America to fail. They said we wanted Bush to fail in Iraq so we could win the election. Not true. Just a case of I Told You So's.
But we would not let them forget Bush lied us in. After that, win god damn it. And sorry if we pointed out that it seemed like Bush was happy that Iraq was a quagmire because then his oil and defense buddies could continue to rape the tax payers. Just seemed that way to us.
But I didn't want the GOP to fail in 2002. I forgot all about the 2000 election and I rallied behind Bush, just like everyone else. I burned my Dixie Chick CD's too.
And I too was mad at Canada for not backing us up on the Iraq invasion. Boy am I embarrassed now.
And if Bushanomics worked, I'd be a god damn Republican today. I would have said, "well, the newt gingrich congress is gone and this new one is good", but the new one was even worse.
Tom Delay was a scumbag. Remember Jack Abramoff. Sure he gave Dems pennies on the dollar compared to how much the GOP got from that scumbag.
But the GOP did so much wrong in those first 4 years that they didn't deserve to lead this country. Just look at the economy today if you doubt that. The only reason they won was they scared Americans into thinking if the Dems won, we'd have another 9-11. They owned the media/spotlight back then. Dems were irrelivent. The GOP got to lead, and now they don't want to take the blame for their results? Typical.
Its in the Dems hands now. I hope they don't fuck up.
But last year was the year to fall in love. Now is the time to fall in line. We did it for you after 9-11, so now its the GOP's turn to fall in line. We didn't like Bush's radical agenda either. And he didn't have 60 seats yet still he got it done. Right wingers can't deny he got whatever he wanted passed. Not one veto in 6 years. Amazing. That's a record.
I'm really sorry that YOU PEOPLE (sorry, but it's fitting) choose to ONLY see the negative side of everything when there are indeed signs that the economy is slowly recovering. YOU PEOPLE demand instant results, which is ignorant.
CNNMoney.com Market Report - Jul. 1, 2009
Stock gains speed up
Wall Street rallies on rising commodity shares and upbeat housing and manufacturing reports.
Last Updated: July 1, 2009: 10:50 AM ET
They want America to fail. They said we wanted Bush to fail in Iraq so we could win the election. Not true. Just a case of I Told You So's.
But we would not let them forget Bush lied us in. After that, win god damn it. And sorry if we pointed out that it seemed like Bush was happy that Iraq was a quagmire because then his oil and defense buddies could continue to rape the tax payers. Just seemed that way to us.
But I didn't want the GOP to fail in 2002. I forgot all about the 2000 election and I rallied behind Bush, just like everyone else. I burned my Dixie Chick CD's too.
And I too was mad at Canada for not backing us up on the Iraq invasion. Boy am I embarrassed now.
And if Bushanomics worked, I'd be a god damn Republican today. I would have said, "well, the newt gingrich congress is gone and this new one is good", but the new one was even worse.
Tom Delay was a scumbag. Remember Jack Abramoff. Sure he gave Dems pennies on the dollar compared to how much the GOP got from that scumbag.
But the GOP did so much wrong in those first 4 years that they didn't deserve to lead this country. Just look at the economy today if you doubt that. The only reason they won was they scared Americans into thinking if the Dems won, we'd have another 9-11. They owned the media/spotlight back then. Dems were irrelivent. The GOP got to lead, and now they don't want to take the blame for their results? Typical.
Its in the Dems hands now. I hope they don't fuck up.
But last year was the year to fall in love. Now is the time to fall in line. We did it for you after 9-11, so now its the GOP's turn to fall in line. We didn't like Bush's radical agenda either. And he didn't have 60 seats yet still he got it done. Right wingers can't deny he got whatever he wanted passed. Not one veto in 6 years. Amazing. That's a record.
No one wants america to fail. You don't get to play that card every time we don't worship your boy-king. sorry.
They want America to fail. They said we wanted Bush to fail in Iraq so we could win the election. Not true. Just a case of I Told You So's.
But we would not let them forget Bush lied us in. After that, win god damn it. And sorry if we pointed out that it seemed like Bush was happy that Iraq was a quagmire because then his oil and defense buddies could continue to rape the tax payers. Just seemed that way to us.
But I didn't want the GOP to fail in 2002. I forgot all about the 2000 election and I rallied behind Bush, just like everyone else. I burned my Dixie Chick CD's too.
And I too was mad at Canada for not backing us up on the Iraq invasion. Boy am I embarrassed now.
And if Bushanomics worked, I'd be a god damn Republican today. I would have said, "well, the newt gingrich congress is gone and this new one is good", but the new one was even worse.
Tom Delay was a scumbag. Remember Jack Abramoff. Sure he gave Dems pennies on the dollar compared to how much the GOP got from that scumbag.
But the GOP did so much wrong in those first 4 years that they didn't deserve to lead this country. Just look at the economy today if you doubt that. The only reason they won was they scared Americans into thinking if the Dems won, we'd have another 9-11. They owned the media/spotlight back then. Dems were irrelivent. The GOP got to lead, and now they don't want to take the blame for their results? Typical.
Its in the Dems hands now. I hope they don't fuck up.
But last year was the year to fall in love. Now is the time to fall in line. We did it for you after 9-11, so now its the GOP's turn to fall in line. We didn't like Bush's radical agenda either. And he didn't have 60 seats yet still he got it done. Right wingers can't deny he got whatever he wanted passed. Not one veto in 6 years. Amazing. That's a record.
No one wants america to fail. You don't get to play that card every time we don't worship your boy-king. sorry.
Why not? You guys used it for 8 years and I explained how you were wrong.
Now Rush admits it and the CIA director says it is true that Cheney wants us to get hit again.
That's two of your leaders buddy. Sorry if the truth hurts.
And yes, you guys would LOVE to see a prolonged recession. For one, it will allow you to send more jobs overseas, suck on the tax payers tit, kill more important government/social programs, win elections, lower wages.
As long as profits are up, you don't give a fuck about anything else.
No one wants america to fail. You don't get to play that card every time we don't worship your boy-king. sorry.
Why not? You guys used it for 8 years and I explained how you were wrong.
Now Rush admits it and the CIA director says it is true that Cheney wants us to get hit again.
That's two of your leaders buddy. Sorry if the truth hurts.
And yes, you guys would LOVE to see a prolonged recession. For one, it will allow you to send more jobs overseas, suck on the tax payers tit, kill more important government/social programs, win elections, lower wages.
As long as profits are up, you don't give a fuck about anything else.
I didn't know Rush was our leader. I guess Michael Moore is yours. the only people who make the claim that those who disagree with them are wanting america to fail or supporting her enemies are you and Maggie. I certainly never said anyone who disagrees with iraq wants america to fail. I don't want a recession and I don't want to send jobs overseas, even though your boyking does. I loved it when he called laid off steel-workers in Ohio "clingers to anti-trade"
I am not saying they are equivalent.Why not? You guys used it for 8 years and I explained how you were wrong.
Now Rush admits it and the CIA director says it is true that Cheney wants us to get hit again.
That's two of your leaders buddy. Sorry if the truth hurts.
And yes, you guys would LOVE to see a prolonged recession. For one, it will allow you to send more jobs overseas, suck on the tax payers tit, kill more important government/social programs, win elections, lower wages.
As long as profits are up, you don't give a fuck about anything else.
I didn't know Rush was our leader. I guess Michael Moore is yours. the only people who make the claim that those who disagree with them are wanting america to fail or supporting her enemies are you and Maggie. I certainly never said anyone who disagrees with iraq wants america to fail. I don't want a recession and I don't want to send jobs overseas, even though your boyking does. I loved it when he called laid off steel-workers in Ohio "clingers to anti-trade"
Rush Limbaugh = Michael Moore? I don't think so, in anybody's eyes.
Most economists agree FDR's policies extended the depression about ten years.
Here's one, though I don't expect leftist worshipers of FDR to accept the truth.Most economists agree FDR's policies extended the depression about ten years.
Have you ever noticed that this BS never has a name or substantive article attached to it?
BO did not cause it, Bush did.
BO prolonged it and made it worse.
What a great POTUS he is not.
Bush did not cause this, he merely contributed to getting us here. The road that got us here has been a long one with more than one administration to blame. Obama, as far as I can tell, is doing nothing to help the situation. Rather, it seems as if his policies will only be prolonging our problems. But time will tell. So far, not so good.
It's funny, I seem to remember some folks laying the blame for 9/11 at Bush's feet, completely ignoring the policies of administrations past which, any thinking person could conclude, contributed to those events. They claim he ignored warnings in intelligence briefings that were at best vague. As if the prior administration didn't ignore the fact that Osama had essentially declared war on the U.S. in 1996. Perhaps Bush should have declared martial law based on the information at hand?
The point I'm trying to get to, or the question really, is this:
At what point does Obama get pinned with the responsibility for the stateof the union? When will people stop blaming Bush and recognize Obama's leadership? September?
Democwats got a 60 seat majority.. know what that means asswipes?? it happened on your fucking watch.. obamalama ding dong said.. "quick pass the stimulus.. if you don't unemployment will reach 8%.. so congress did,, democwat congress did.. the party of KNOW voted NO.. guess what???? unemployment is now at 9.4% and headed for double digits.. guess what else???? it happened on your fucking watch.. guess what,, democwats been in control since 2006,,,,, guess what?? it's the democwats fault.. the US OF KKKA is going down and it's the democwats fault..
And now we are seeing that they lied about Obama being a socialist
Let's see. Obama's government has taken over control of the automakers. He's got a firm grip on the banking industry. AIG is in his back pocket. He's doing his best to get government controlled health care and insurance in the US. That appears to me to be pretty socialist in nature - maybe even worse. Just what is the lie being told about him not being a socialist? Could just be me, I get like this sometimes, but I think you're full of shit...
Bush did not cause this, he merely contributed to getting us here. The road that got us here has been a long one with more than one administration to blame. Obama, as far as I can tell, is doing nothing to help the situation. Rather, it seems as if his policies will only be prolonging our problems. But time will tell. So far, not so good.
It's funny, I seem to remember some folks laying the blame for 9/11 at Bush's feet, completely ignoring the policies of administrations past which, any thinking person could conclude, contributed to those events. They claim he ignored warnings in intelligence briefings that were at best vague. As if the prior administration didn't ignore the fact that Osama had essentially declared war on the U.S. in 1996. Perhaps Bush should have declared martial law based on the information at hand?
The point I'm trying to get to, or the question really, is this:
At what point does Obama get pinned with the responsibility for the stateof the union? When will people stop blaming Bush and recognize Obama's leadership? September?
The woman overseeing the tarp funds explained it best.
Before the Great Depression we had big busts and booms every 10 years. Good for the rich, bad for the masses. So we put in regulations and the New Deal and Unions came to be and we had 60 years of slow steady healthy growth.
Then Reagan became president and he started busting unions and sending jobs overseas and deregulating and giving rich people all the tax breaks, etc, and then we started getting things like the John McCain Keating 5 S&L loans scandal of the 80's, and then we got Enron and Bernie Madoff and the housing crash and the bundling of toxic assets and the bank bailouts.
I know its been going on forever and its hard to grasp, but basically it all started happening with Reagan.
And righties lied when they said Clinton was the most liberal guy ever.
And now we are seeing that they lied about Obama being a socialist. They're attacking him like they did Clinton from both angles. Is he a sellout too or is he a socialist? Hard to say for sure, so they just attack from both angles. Very effective seeing as how I have to argue against both approaches.
Meanwhile the lobbyists still run this country, but you won't see righties complaining about lobbyists. Maybe once in awhile, but they are too busy tea bagging liberal social programs that cost billions to notice the $9 trillions the bankers stole in the last 8 months.
I'd say it all started when we went off the gold standard in 1971. Inflation is destroying the middle class.
No one wants america to fail. You don't get to play that card every time we don't worship your boy-king. sorry.
Why not? You guys used it for 8 years and I explained how you were wrong.
Now Rush admits it and the CIA director says it is true that Cheney wants us to get hit again.
That's two of your leaders buddy. Sorry if the truth hurts.
And yes, you guys would LOVE to see a prolonged recession. For one, it will allow you to send more jobs overseas, suck on the tax payers tit, kill more important government/social programs, win elections, lower wages.
As long as profits are up, you don't give a fuck about anything else.
I didn't know Rush was our leader. I guess Michael Moore is yours. the only people who make the claim that those who disagree with them are wanting america to fail or supporting her enemies are you and Maggie. I certainly never said anyone who disagrees with iraq wants america to fail. I don't want a recession and I don't want to send jobs overseas, even though your boyking does. I loved it when he called laid off steel-workers in Ohio "clingers to anti-trade"
