For the liberals

[teapartysamurai]

It spiked prior to the stimulus package being implemented and as a result of the financial meltdown. Once the stimulus package was put into place..UE has steadily gone down.

My facts are "straigth". Straight even.

Yeah, that's why you don't have a shred of evidence to back that up (unlike myself and I gave plenty of evidence you are DEAD WRONG and LYING TO YOURSELF).

You're not really worth it aside from comic relief.

Cue smilies.

I'VE SAID IT BEFORE AND I'LL SAY IT AGAIN.

When a liberal knows they have lost a debate, because they know they can't refute the evidence, they will claim they won anyway, because of their "intellectual superiority" and thuse because they are "intellectual superior" they don't have to answer any evidence.

Never fails. Liberalism truly is a mental illness.

But a funny one!

 

[Mad Scientist]

I know the conservatives don't like the site, don't like the man, won't believe the list or the citations, but there are liberal posters here, and I am sharing with them.

A LONG List of President Obama’s Accomplishments! With Citations! | Addicting Info

Obama hasn't been "successful", his controllers who tell him what to do HAVE.

And when Romney get's in, HIS controllers will be "successful" too.

 

[Artevelde]

It spiked prior to the stimulus package being implemented and as a result of the financial meltdown. Once the stimulus package was put into place..UE has steadily gone down.

My facts are "straigth". Straight even.

The facts are that unemployment is still HIGHER than when Obama took office. That is a fact.

Well true.

The other fact is..that the Bush numbers were incorrect about the graveness of the debt and deficit and had to be revised.

Of course you won't acknowledge that.

You guys won't even acknowledge what a mess Bush left.

But lets look at the facts.

Bush came in with a surplus (again..you guys don't acknowledge that) and a minor recession that had basically worked itself out. The DotComs which went bust were largely cleared and the major problem was there was ALOT of telecommunications gear out there going for bargain basement prices. This hurt the major tech firms. So what did Bush do? Instead of spending on infrastructure..and easing the impact..he gave a huge tax cut to the rich. Then..he lowered interest rates to zero..which encouraged taking out loans. Of course he knew that was going to fire up the constuction industry. Then, after 9/11..instead of a short fast war in Afghanistan..he decided to go for a long protracted war in Iraq..to justify defense spending. With 2 wars going..and public sector hiring going up..as well as the constuction industry over building..of course things looked rosy. That came along with straving regulators of funding..because..heck..why would you want them watching people bundling sub prime derivatives. The Bush administration had plenty of warning too..and didn't act on it.. Well..not until people like Eliot Spitzer threatened to sue the Federal Government. And even then? What happened? Aside from the loss of some companies, like Arthur Anderson and Enron? Not much.

So the fake, unpaid for, economy collapsed in 2008..and it was almost a decade worth of damage.

Which left Obama..what? Three years to clean up the mess?

You guys are rich..

I'm glad you now acknowledge that your earlier assertion that unemployment went down under Obama was a lie.

 

[teapartysamurai]

I know the conservatives don't like the site, don't like the man, won't believe the list or the citations, but there are liberal posters here, and I am sharing with them.

A LONG List of President Obama’s Accomplishments! With Citations! | Addicting Info

Obama hasn't been "successful", his controllers who tell him what to do HAVE.

And when Romney get's in, HIS controllers will be "successful" too.

Okay, Ron Paul Supporters: GET OVER IT!

Ron Paul is a little kook with a bad haircut, just like Ross Perot. He's NEVER going to be president. He knows that, but as long as he can keep you guys riled up, he will never cease to make money from it. When are you going to figure that out?

 

[teapartysamurai]

The facts are that unemployment is still HIGHER than when Obama took office. That is a fact.

Well true.

The other fact is..that the Bush numbers were incorrect about the graveness of the debt and deficit and had to be revised.

Of course you won't acknowledge that.

You guys won't even acknowledge what a mess Bush left.

But lets look at the facts.

Bush came in with a surplus (again..you guys don't acknowledge that) and a minor recession that had basically worked itself out. The DotComs which went bust were largely cleared and the major problem was there was ALOT of telecommunications gear out there going for bargain basement prices. This hurt the major tech firms. So what did Bush do? Instead of spending on infrastructure..and easing the impact..he gave a huge tax cut to the rich. Then..he lowered interest rates to zero..which encouraged taking out loans. Of course he knew that was going to fire up the constuction industry. Then, after 9/11..instead of a short fast war in Afghanistan..he decided to go for a long protracted war in Iraq..to justify defense spending. With 2 wars going..and public sector hiring going up..as well as the constuction industry over building..of course things looked rosy. That came along with straving regulators of funding..because..heck..why would you want them watching people bundling sub prime derivatives. The Bush administration had plenty of warning too..and didn't act on it.. Well..not until people like Eliot Spitzer threatened to sue the Federal Government. And even then? What happened? Aside from the loss of some companies, like Arthur Anderson and Enron? Not much.

So the fake, unpaid for, economy collapsed in 2008..and it was almost a decade worth of damage.

Which left Obama..what? Three years to clean up the mess?

You guys are rich..

I'm glad you now acknowledge that your earlier assertion that unemployment went down under Obama was a lie.

He will admit it, until he can get more talking points from his masters, that is.

 

[Mad Scientist]

I know the conservatives don't like the site, don't like the man, won't believe the list or the citations, but there are liberal posters here, and I am sharing with them.

A LONG List of President Obama’s Accomplishments! With Citations! | Addicting Info

Obama hasn't been "successful", his controllers who tell him what to do HAVE.

And when Romney get's in, HIS controllers will be "successful" too.

Okay, Ron Paul Supporters: GET OVER IT!

Ron Paul is a little kook with a bad haircut, just like Ross Perot. He's NEVER going to be president. He knows that, but as long as he can keep you guys riled up, he will never cease to make money from it. When are you going to figure that out?

Ron Paul doesn't "rile me up". Politics as usual and choosing "the lesser of two evils" every 4 years does.

Wall Street Moves from Obama to Romney:
Wall Street Bankers Support Romney, Not Obama in 2012 | Video | TheBlaze.com

When are you gonna' figure this out?:

 

[teapartysamurai]

Obama hasn't been "successful", his controllers who tell him what to do HAVE.

And when Romney get's in, HIS controllers will be "successful" too.

Okay, Ron Paul Supporters: GET OVER IT!

Ron Paul is a little kook with a bad haircut, just like Ross Perot. He's NEVER going to be president. He knows that, but as long as he can keep you guys riled up, he will never cease to make money from it. When are you going to figure that out?

Ron Paul doesn't "rile me up". Politics as usual and choosing "the lesser of two evils" every 4 years does.

Wall Street Moves from Obama to Romney:
Wall Street Bankers Support Romney, Not Obama in 2012 | Video | TheBlaze.com

When are you gonna' figure this out?:

And what is Paul? An independent??????

How guillible can you get?

 

[Article 15]

Why do you lie about unemployment? It went up during Obama's presidency.

The economy shed three quarters of a million jobs in January 2009.

Is it your assertion that that is something that can be turned around into a net positive instantly by an incoming POTUS?

 

[peach174]

It spiked prior to the stimulus package being implemented and as a result of the financial meltdown. Once the stimulus package was put into place..UE has steadily gone down.

My facts are "straigth". Straight even.

The facts are that unemployment is still HIGHER than when Obama took office. That is a fact.

Well true.

The other fact is..that the Bush numbers were incorrect about the graveness of the debt and deficit and had to be revised.

Of course you won't acknowledge that.

You guys won't even acknowledge what a mess Bush left.

But lets look at the facts.

Bush came in with a surplus (again..you guys don't acknowledge that) and a minor recession that had basically worked itself out. The DotComs which went bust were largely cleared and the major problem was there was ALOT of telecommunications gear out there going for bargain basement prices. This hurt the major tech firms. So what did Bush do? Instead of spending on infrastructure..and easing the impact..he gave a huge tax cut to the rich. Then..he lowered interest rates to zero..which encouraged taking out loans. Of course he knew that was going to fire up the construction industry. Then, after 9/11..instead of a short fast war in Afghanistan..he decided to go for a long protracted war in Iraq..to justify defense spending. With 2 wars going..and public sector hiring going up..as well as the construction industry over building..of course things looked rosy. That came along with staving regulators of funding..because..heck..why would you want them watching people bundling sub prime derivatives. The Bush administration had plenty of warning too..and didn't act on it.. Well..not until people like Eliot Spitzer threatened to sue the Federal Government. And even then? What happened? Aside from the loss of some companies, like Arthur Anderson and Enron? Not much.

So the fake, unpaid for, economy collapsed in 2008..and it was almost a decade worth of damage.

Which left Obama..what? Three years to clean up the mess?

You guys are rich..

Bush went to congress many times and told them that Fannie and Freddie and the housing market needed regulations on them.
It was 3 Dem's in the Housing and Banking Committee that held up any bills proposed, saying that Fannie and Freddie were doing fine and did not need regulations.
When Dem's took over in 2008 then, they did regulations. By then it was too late.

In 2003, the Bush administration, recognizing that the current regulators for Fannie and Freddie were inadequate, proposed that a new agency be created to regulate the GSE's. This new agency would have been tasked specifically with setting capital reserve requirements, (removing that authority from Congress), approving new lines business for the GSE's, and most importantly, evaluating the risk in their ballooning portfolios. It was in specific response to this regulatory effort that Barney Frank made his now infamous statement "These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis, the more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing." Had this new regulatory agency been put in place in 2003, it likely would have uncovered the accounting fraud regarding executive bonuses which was occurring at that time at Fannie Mae. This accounting scandal would later force the resignation of Franklin Raines and others executives. This new agency may also have slowed or stopped the further movement of the entire mortgage industry into subprime loans by exposing the full extent of the risks then taken by Fannie and Freddie, who at this time, controlled nearly half of all subprime loans being issued.

 

[BDBoop]

Not without laughing my ass off!

Yeah, well; it's already been established you're a hyena.

I'm going to laugh a heck of a lot more in November (Lord Willing), the way things are going!

Yup. You hold that 'lord willing' thought. No sense counting your chickens before they are hatched.

 

[BDBoop]

Why do you lie about unemployment? It went up during Obama's presidency.

Lie?

It initially went up..before the stimulus was implement.

Or do you disagree with that?

Initially??????????

BWAHAHAHAA!

I already gave the evidence that it's really over 14%.

Keep on lying. It's getting pathetically funny!

Really? Then I'll want to see a graph with your way of measuring going back to the beginning of said things being measured. You don't just just to substitute your new-fangled math where it works in your favor.

 

[BDBoop]

There is no way on earth you read that article.

None.

Not without laughing my ass off!

How can anyone take the article seriously when it starts off telling the reader that their opinion may be wrong because they haven't been paying attention the past couple years. The problem for Obama is that people have been paying attention, even to the point of reading about many things through alternate sources because the liberal media has been very choosy about what they print. They sugar coat the negatives, if they don't ignore them altogether, and exaggerate anything even remotely positive.

Even those who don't follow the news closely know well how their personal situation is. Millions are still out of work and have given up, millions have lost their homes and are still in dire straits. All the pretty rhetoric out of Washington doesn't make that go away.

Look, I get that you're a delicate hot house flower, but try to step outside your comfort zone.

 

[BDBoop]

Obama's "accomplishments" aren't necessarily good for the nation. That's the problem.

Why on earth would it be good trumpet achievement when your achievement leads to problems in the nation?

There is no way on earth you read that article.

None.

I started to read it... until it credited Obama with 'taking out' Bin Laden. He did not 'take out' Bin Laden, that was SEAL Team 6. He just signed off the order. I find it offensive that politicians take credit for actions undertaken by our military.... unless, of course, you have evidence that Obama actually went on the raid. He's a politician.... the most dangerous thing he does on any given day is disagree with Michelle. I don't count that as anywhere near as dangerous as what our military face daily.

For the record... I would say the same thing no matter who the President is.

Read the last post I made. If you can't make it through an entire article unless you agree with every word? There's a problem.

 

[BDBoop]

Why would any conservative bother to read the OP article? They don’t need facts, they have dogma; post #2 is proof of that.

That's what I am in fact seeing. If they absolutely and adamantly refuse to give him credit for anything, then he's not the problem. They're the problem, for deciding he's the antichrist.

 

[BDBoop]

Why would any conservative bother to read the OP article? They don’t need facts, they have dogma; post #2 is proof of that.

Another example of liberal projection, or as I have always put it, liberals condemn in others what they refuse to see in themselves.

Nope. And it's hysterically funny when you practice projection, because it's like announcing that suddenly Boop is an ignorant redneck who hates gays and is pro-life, and has found herself back in church, substituting a Bible for cognitive thought.

 

[BDBoop]

got bored

did it list him murdering a US citizen w/o a trial?
Or going to war w/o Congressional say so?

Of course you got bored, this article required you to think instead of just react.

Yeah, let's do the war crimes thing, shall we? Start with Bush. He goes first, then Obama. How's that.

 

[BDBoop]

Why do you lie about unemployment? It went up during Obama's presidency.

The economy shed three quarters of a million jobs in January 2009.

Is it your assertion that that is something that can be turned around into a net positive instantly by an incoming POTUS?

No, it's even better. Despite the fact that he was sworn in January 20th, they want to give him full credit for those 750,000 jobs lost.

 

[Article 15]

Why do you lie about unemployment? It went up during Obama's presidency.

The economy shed three quarters of a million jobs in January 2009.

Is it your assertion that that is something that can be turned around into a net positive instantly by an incoming POTUS?

No, it's even better. Despite the fact that he was sworn in January 20th, they want to give him full credit for those 750,000 jobs lost.

They also want to pretend the sub $2 gas we had when he was inaugurated had been that way all along up and a sign of "better" times.

Their whole fuel prices and unemployment attack line is disingenuous to the umpth degree.

 

[BDBoop]

The economy shed three quarters of a million jobs in January 2009.

Is it your assertion that that is something that can be turned around into a net positive instantly by an incoming POTUS?

No, it's even better. Despite the fact that he was sworn in January 20th, they want to give him full credit for those 750,000 jobs lost.

They also want to pretend the sub $2 gas we had when he was inaugurated had been that way all along up and a sign of "better" times.

Their whole fuel prices and unemployment attack line is disingenuous to the umpth degree.

Truly, truly. It's hard to view reality when you're wearing bitter-ass colored glasses.

 

[Article 15]

No, it's even better. Despite the fact that he was sworn in January 20th, they want to give him full credit for those 750,000 jobs lost.

They also want to pretend the sub $2 gas we had when he was inaugurated had been that way all along up and a sign of "better" times.

Their whole fuel prices and unemployment attack line is disingenuous to the umpth degree.

Truly, truly. It's hard to view reality when you're wearing bitter-ass colored glasses.

What's sad is that no matter how many times their nonsense is exposed they are sure to come back with the same tired shit as if yesterday never happened.