Who else is tired of the bush bashing?

[highway234]

where is the media? They were all over president bush when the left wing liberal pinheads were saying president bush lied to us? Now president obama is outright lying to the american people and they are silent!

show us the birth certificate!

 

[Ali777]

"I not come up with a single solitary, new idea to address the challenges of the American people," Obama said::. "I don't have a many idea that's different from George Bush's ideas ...

I guess you missed the part of his speech when he said "neither party was to blame".

Because neither party is blameless for the decisions that led to this problem, both parties have a responsibility to solve it...President Obama...

 

[Dr.Traveler]

2 points

Bush also spent like a fool

Obama hasn't accomplished anything positive so the libs have to fall back to Bush. It would be unheard of for a lib to do what I did with my first point and admit Obama is a bigger tool than Bush was.

That's why this election is starting to remind me of 2004. Common wisdom was that Bush and the Republican Congress had screwed the pooch so badly that anyone could beat him. The DNC put that theory to the test with Kerry, and it turned out just great for them.

The common wisdom now seems to be that anyone can beat Obama. The GOP seems intent to test that out with a brand new shiny version of Kerry, only with crazy Right Wing Flavor(tm).

I think if the GOP runs any kind of reasonable candidate, they'll beat Obama. It's true, Bush/DeLay/Frist left a pretty sorry mess in 2006, and Bush/Pelosi/Reid just dug a deeper hole. However, Obama/Pelosi/Reid and Obama/Boehtner/Reid just seem intent to keep digging. The problem is the GOP is poised to run Palin, and if she won't run they'll run Bachmann. And both of those candidates are hopped up on Crazy as bad (if not worse) than Kerry.

So if I was a betting man, I'd bet on Obama winning. But only because the GOP will do their very best to lose. I'd also bet on the GOP holding the House and maybe taking the Senate, meaning we get to have 4 fun filled years. I wonder how long it will take to start the impeachment talks....

 

[Dot Com]

Yeah. Nothing much happened during his watch LOL

 

[Claudette]

You are correct. It is easy to drive into the mud and bury the car up to the axels, and another thing to try and get it out. You should know the difference by now.

Oh and he's done such a stellar job of getting it out. Oh wait. Its not out yet. Hell. It ain't even close.
That must be why unemployment is at 9.1% and the buisiness community is sitting on its money afraid to hire or expand.

Must be why his stimulus package worked so well. You remember?? All those shovel ready jobs.

He's showing such leadership on the debt ceiling crisis. God, what a guy.

Food prices are up. Gas prices are up. Oh wait. I forgot. Thats Bush's fault as well. Silly me.

Yup. He's done a wonderful job. Should be re-elected no problem.

Does the "Party of NO," or the RNC talking point memo "Do whatever it takes" ring any bells in your belfry? When close to 50% of congress are pulling to keep the car stuck, you have the audacity to creep fail?? LMAO!!!

Since I'm not a Rep I couldn't tell ya.

LMAO at your continued defense of a guy who has done his best to finish what Bush started.

His polices haven't worked for shit yet here you are telling me that everything thats happened is purely Bush's fault?? Bush who's been out of office for 3 years?? That 14 Trillion dollars in debt is all Bush's fault??

Come on Shinny. Wake up and smell the coffee. This guy has been a disaster.

 

[shintao]

If Clinton had a surplus then why did the national debt go up every year? You liberals are such sheep.

Care to answer the question though. Why is Bush responsible for a recession that started six months before he took office and two and a half years after taking office Obama's not responsible for a damned thing? Would it be because your view of Obama is...

Because there was no recession start 6 months before? The recession started 3 months after Bush took office according to anyone with a wit, and if there was no surplus how did he give it away to the rich as a stimulus? Hmm?

OK, so your answer is you're going to re-write history. A recession is typically defined as starting when 2/3 quarters have negative growth. The third quarter of 2000 and the first quarter of 2001 had negative growth, the recession started six months before Bush took office.

But let's accept your revisionism. OK, so why is Bush responsible for the economy three months after he took office while Obama's not responsible for a damned thing 2 1/2 years after he took office?

No, but the right tried their damndest to rewrite history. LOL, they even sucked you in!

In March 2001, the U.S. economy went into recession for the first time in ten years, according to the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER.) NBER -- the private, nonpartisan organization whose business cycle announcements have long been considered the definitive word on the topic -- announced its determination on November 26, 2001:

COLMES: But let me also get on this issue of the recession, the National Bureau of Economic Research's business cycle dating committee is the one that the president's own economic advisers say is the arbiter of when a recession begins. They say it began in March of 2001. And that is a group the president himself has said he respects as the arbiter of that kind of thing. So why do we keep saying it is a Bush-Gore -- Clinton-Gore recession?

Backdating the Recession: A Report by Media Matters for America ; Release date: May 3, 2004 | Media Matters for America

 

[Hope_and_change]

Bush has been bashed by the left for over 10 years...

 

[kaz]

the fact that the cons are so eager to sweep bush under the rug speaks volumes about his sad legacy, and the sad, failed legacy of the contemporary american right, however.

I didn't see anyone making that point. I always enjoy pompous indignation from liberals over points they just made up.

 

[kaz]

it's going to take a generation to fix the horrific damage bush did to this country, if it ever can be, which i doubt. so get used to hearing about bush. getting sick of hearing about bush would be like someone in 1864 getting sick of hearing about how james buchanan helped start the civil war.

So I'm curious. I opposed Bush's policies, I oppose our great leader's policies. Since they are actually the same policies, I'm coinsistent.

You think Bush did "horrific damage ... to this country" and yet you support Obama who has the same policies. Hypocrisy anyone? But I'm curious why you think Obama can fix the country with the same policies Bush used to destroy it. How is that so? Educate me, oh enlightened one...

 

[Full-Auto]

it's going to take a generation to fix the horrific damage bush did to this country, if it ever can be, which i doubt. so get used to hearing about bush. getting sick of hearing about bush would be like someone in 1864 getting sick of hearing about how james buchanan helped start the civil war.

So I'm curious. I opposed Bush's policies, I oppose our great leader's policies. Since they are actually the same policies, I'm coinsistent.

You think Bush did "horrific damage ... to this country" and yet you support Obama who has the same policies. Hypocrisy anyone? But I'm curious why you think Obama can fix the country with the same policies Bush used to destroy it. How is that so? Educate me, oh enlightened one...

Obama has done two things differently. He has greatly increased regulation and has screwed over investors. That has to help doesnt it?

 

[kaz]

No, but the right tried their damndest to rewrite history. LOL, they even sucked you in!

In March 2001, the U.S. economy went into recession for the first time in ten years, according to the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER.) NBER -- the private, nonpartisan organization whose business cycle announcements have long been considered the definitive word on the topic -- announced its determination on November 26, 2001:

COLMES: But let me also get on this issue of the recession, the National Bureau of Economic Research's business cycle dating committee is the one that the president's own economic advisers say is the arbiter of when a recession begins. They say it began in March of 2001. And that is a group the president himself has said he respects as the arbiter of that kind of thing. So why do we keep saying it is a Bush-Gore -- Clinton-Gore recession?

Backdating the Recession: A Report by Media Matters for America ; Release date: May 3, 2004 | Media Matters for America

Shucking and jiving. Or is that still sucking and jiving? The third quarter of 2000 was pretty close to zero, arguing it was a tiny bit on one side of the line or the other is fine, so I said you can have it. So answer the question.

BOK, so why is Bush responsible for the economy three months after he took office while Obama's not responsible for a damned thing 2 1/2 years after he took office?

 

[BrianH]

President George W. Bush had been blamed for more of the world’s wrongs than even global warming was. Comparing Bush to Adolf Hitler became part of the national dialogue. Surely, the media and the left would have to find a new target, someone different to attach their outrage claims on, with a new President, and a new party, in power.

Exactly: He was responsible for sending Hurricane Katrina to New Orleans too.......
Every president has some kind of "screw up" during their presidency. Some have more than others. However, I think Obama has surpassed Bush in screw-ups and bad decisions. Before everyone bashes Bush about the Iraq war. Let's not forget that the war came after 18 UN resolutions and an APPROVING VOTE FROM CONGRESS. Where are all the left-wing critics when Obama started bombing the hell out of Libya after 1 UN resolution and NO VOTE FROM CONGRESS??? I could go on and on about the double-standards between the two presidents. Bush may have screwed up numerous times, but the fact is the majority of his screw-ups were backed by congressional vote...........

 

[BrianH]

Because there was no recession start 6 months before? The recession started 3 months after Bush took office according to anyone with a wit, and if there was no surplus how did he give it away to the rich as a stimulus? Hmm?

OK, so your answer is you're going to re-write history. A recession is typically defined as starting when 2/3 quarters have negative growth. The third quarter of 2000 and the first quarter of 2001 had negative growth, the recession started six months before Bush took office.

But let's accept your revisionism. OK, so why is Bush responsible for the economy three months after he took office while Obama's not responsible for a damned thing 2 1/2 years after he took office?

No, but the right tried their damndest to rewrite history. LOL, they even sucked you in!

In March 2001, the U.S. economy went into recession for the first time in ten years, according to the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER.) NBER -- the private, nonpartisan organization whose business cycle announcements have long been considered the definitive word on the topic -- announced its determination on November 26, 2001:

COLMES: But let me also get on this issue of the recession, the National Bureau of Economic Research's business cycle dating committee is the one that the president's own economic advisers say is the arbiter of when a recession begins. They say it began in March of 2001. And that is a group the president himself has said he respects as the arbiter of that kind of thing. So why do we keep saying it is a Bush-Gore -- Clinton-Gore recession?

Backdating the Recession: A Report by Media Matters for America ; Release date: May 3, 2004 | Media Matters for America

This makes ZERO sense. Your expecting Bush to except the blame for the economy when he took office in January of 2001. The economy was "officially" in recession in March of 2001 (according to your link)-3 months later. HOWEVER, It's been going on 3 years since Obama took office and somehow, miraculously, he's not responsible for what's happened to the economy since he took office??? Your logic is severely flawed and your bias shows. If your going to hold someone to one standard, hold everyone to the same standard.

 

[Antiderivative]

meh....there is plenty of others to bash given the 2 1/2 years of misguided Obama policies which are driving America over a cliff....

 

[kaz]

Bush has been bashed by the left for over 10 years...

He's been bashed by more then the left. He was a horrible President. One of the worst in our history.

- He never submitted a budget that cut spending
- He never vetoed a spending bill
- He supported Tarp
- He added a massive prescription drug wealth redistribution plan to medicare
- He added a massive new government agency by creating the TSA
- He signed a law regulation free political speech going into elections
- His attorney general John Ashcroft shit on State Rights (e.g., Oregon Euthanasia)
- He invaded Iraq and Afghanistan. Attacking the Taliban and Osamababy I support, that's defense of the US. We don't belong in the Middle East propping up dictatorships or changing governments or securing oil supplies at all.
- He facilitated illegal immigration

And worst of all, by his steadfast refusal to ever defend Republicans or his policies he gave the complete microphone to the Left, which made his bad policies even worse and lead to the 2008 election debacle which gave us Obama and Obamacare.

W and liberty go together like anchovies and caramel. He blew and if it weren't for him things wouldn't be as terrible as they are now.

 

[BrianH]

If there was no surplus, then where did those $300 checks come from?

From one of the loans from China?

That's one possibility.

That's the bad thing about our money...it's backed by nothing....They just keep printing and crediting, devaluing the dollar at every turn.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Who else is tired of the bush bashing?

As already noted, the issue isn’t ‘Bush Bashing’ per se, but the inane and idiotic effort on the part of the right to lay the blame for the December 2007 recession and its devastating aftermath at Obama’s feet.

If the right wishes an end to ‘Bush Bashing,’ then they need to be truthful in that neither the recession nor its consequences are the fault of Obama.

And liberals would be glad to debate the idea that the December 2007 recession wasn’t GWB’s fault – one can blame Clinton or GHWB or FDR, for that matter; whomever ends up with the blame, however, it isn’t Obama.

 

[Full-Auto]

As already noted, the issue isn’t ‘Bush Bashing’ per se, but the inane and idiotic effort on the part of the right to lay the blame for the December 2007 recession and its devastating aftermath at Obama’s feet.


The recession ended in early 09.

How much longer do democrats need an excuse before accepting ownership

 

[Synthaholic]

I'm not tired of it.

 

[hellofromwarsaw]

"Worst president ever-get used to it" LOL!

Yes, Obama did END the recession...THAT he owns...