Lookin' For That Apology...

[Gadawg73]

You know what!!

I don't know Obama and I plan to vote for him again!!

He is like the anti-conservative Sarah Palin!! Someone whose existance piss off rightwingers!!

Not true...in fact, I have suggested, in this very thread, that his re-electioni might be a good thing...

Let's review:

1. He has continued significant portions of Bush policy

2. He has shown that he can be rolled by the Repubs

3. He endorses and supports Bush tax cuts

4. The most frugal times in the last six decades have been those when the Congress and White House have been held by different parties.

5.His re-election would serve as a safety valve for folks who admit they don't know him, but succomb to the appearance that their wishes were being supported...you know, folks like you.

Where has he endorsed Bush tax cuts?
Otherwise, you make some good points.
However, where in US history have we been at war and the next guy not continue that war?

 

[PoliticalChic]

You know what!!

I don't know Obama and I plan to vote for him again!!

He is like the anti-conservative Sarah Palin!! Someone whose existance piss off rightwingers!!

Not true...in fact, I have suggested, in this very thread, that his re-electioni might be a good thing...

Let's review:

1. He has continued significant portions of Bush policy

2. He has shown that he can be rolled by the Repubs

3. He endorses and supports Bush tax cuts

4. The most frugal times in the last six decades have been those when the Congress and White House have been held by different parties.

5.His re-election would serve as a safety valve for folks who admit they don't know him, but succomb to the appearance that their wishes were being supported...you know, folks like you.

Where has he endorsed Bush tax cuts?
Otherwise, you make some good points.
However, where in US history have we been at war and the next guy not continue that war?

"Where has he endorsed Bush tax cuts?"

1. Reality is defined by actions, not by words.
Endorse: •back: be behind; approve of;
define:endorse - Google Search
The position of the Obama Administration is to back, be behind, and approve of the extension of the Bush Tax Cuts.



"where in US history have we been at war and the next guy not continue that war?"

Possibly you were busy, and missed this, but it was in all th papers...

2. "Nixon and Kissinger quickly agreed upon two premises about American policy in Vietnam. First, the war in Vietnam was not "winnable" in any conventional sense of the term. Public opinion would tolerate neither an escalation nor the continuation of a status quo that included over 1,000 killed per month. Second, a unilateral withdrawal was not feasible because the political costs, both domestic and international, were unacceptable. Withdrawal would dissolve Nixon's political base at home and, as Kissinger continually emphasized, undermine American credibility abroad. [2] Apart from the military situation in Vietnam, the political problem confronting President Nixon was complex. How could Nixon "buy time" to achieve his understanding of "peace with honor" without succumbing to Lyndon Johnson's fate of eroding public support? The history of his first administration reveals that Nixon's strategy consisted of four components:..."
Nixon and Vietnam

I won't spoil the surprise for you by telling you the ending.

 

[Vast LWC]

Way back when, before the election of '08, what were those of us on the right telling you guys?

We told you that the press wasn't vetting this articulate senator...

we told you you were unaware of his politics, that you were pickin,' with due respect to the President, 'a pig in a poke'...

we even suggested the dire possibilities...

did you listen? Nooooooooooo!

Then, finally, after the election, Charlie Rose and Tom Brokaw admit they don't know who he is....

Now, the Democratic Party itself is saying the same things"

"But many other Democrats, including Rep. Jim Moran (D-Va.), a member of the defense appropriations subcommittee, said they didn’t even know the provision was included.

Moran’s anger with the president boiled over in a short interview Thursday with The Hill about the provision and the tax debate held shortly after the Democratic Caucus voted to reject Obama’s tax-cut deal.

“This is a lack of leadership on the part of Obama,” fumed Moran (D-Va.) “I don’t know where the f*** Obama is on this or anything else. They’re AWOL.”

Dems show signs of abandoning Obama elsewhere after frustration with tax deal - TheHill.com

So, just so I have this straight, you're saying:

"I told you so, he's not as Liberal as you thought he was?"

Does that about sum up what you're trying to convey here?

LOL.

 

[Vast LWC]

Oh, and nice editing by the way.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Way back when, before the election of '08, what were those of us on the right telling you guys?

We told you that the press wasn't vetting this articulate senator...

we told you you were unaware of his politics, that you were pickin,' with due respect to the President, 'a pig in a poke'...

we even suggested the dire possibilities...

did you listen? Nooooooooooo!

Then, finally, after the election, Charlie Rose and Tom Brokaw admit they don't know who he is....

Now, the Democratic Party itself is saying the same things"

"But many other Democrats, including Rep. Jim Moran (D-Va.), a member of the defense appropriations subcommittee, said they didn’t even know the provision was included.

Moran’s anger with the president boiled over in a short interview Thursday with The Hill about the provision and the tax debate held shortly after the Democratic Caucus voted to reject Obama’s tax-cut deal.

“This is a lack of leadership on the part of Obama,” fumed Moran (D-Va.) “I don’t know where the f*** Obama is on this or anything else. They’re AWOL.”

Dems show signs of abandoning Obama elsewhere after frustration with tax deal - TheHill.com

So, just so I have this straight, you're saying:

"I told you so, he's not as Liberal as you thought he was?"

Does that about sum up what you're trying to convey here?

LOL.

Is this supposed to be witty?

Actually, it's only half so.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Way back when, before the election of '08, what were those of us on the right telling you guys?

We told you that the press wasn't vetting this articulate senator...

we told you you were unaware of his politics, that you were pickin,' with due respect to the President, 'a pig in a poke'...

we even suggested the dire possibilities...

did you listen? Nooooooooooo!

Then, finally, after the election, Charlie Rose and Tom Brokaw admit they don't know who he is....

Now, the Democratic Party itself is saying the same things"

"But many other Democrats, including Rep. Jim Moran (D-Va.), a member of the defense appropriations subcommittee, said they didn’t even know the provision was included.

Moran’s anger with the president boiled over in a short interview Thursday with The Hill about the provision and the tax debate held shortly after the Democratic Caucus voted to reject Obama’s tax-cut deal.

“This is a lack of leadership on the part of Obama,” fumed Moran (D-Va.) “I don’t know where the f*** Obama is on this or anything else. They’re AWOL.”

Dems show signs of abandoning Obama elsewhere after frustration with tax deal - TheHill.com

So, just so I have this straight, you're saying:

"I told you so, he's not as Liberal as you thought he was?"

Does that about sum up what you're trying to convey here?

LOL.

You picked up on it in about the 5 second time frame it took me. The hilarious irony here is that the ONE thing the Right never claimed about Obama was that he was more moderate/centrist/conservative than anyone thought he was. Something that apparently PC didn't think through before she made this thread. I'm sure she'll apologize though, seeing as that is what she thinks is the honorable thing to do.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Way back when, before the election of '08, what were those of us on the right telling you guys?

We told you that the press wasn't vetting this articulate senator...

we told you you were unaware of his politics, that you were pickin,' with due respect to the President, 'a pig in a poke'...

we even suggested the dire possibilities...

did you listen? Nooooooooooo!

Then, finally, after the election, Charlie Rose and Tom Brokaw admit they don't know who he is....

Now, the Democratic Party itself is saying the same things"

"But many other Democrats, including Rep. Jim Moran (D-Va.), a member of the defense appropriations subcommittee, said they didn’t even know the provision was included.

Moran’s anger with the president boiled over in a short interview Thursday with The Hill about the provision and the tax debate held shortly after the Democratic Caucus voted to reject Obama’s tax-cut deal.

“This is a lack of leadership on the part of Obama,” fumed Moran (D-Va.) “I don’t know where the f*** Obama is on this or anything else. They’re AWOL.”

Dems show signs of abandoning Obama elsewhere after frustration with tax deal - TheHill.com

So, just so I have this straight, you're saying:

"I told you so, he's not as Liberal as you thought he was?"

Does that about sum up what you're trying to convey here?

LOL.

You picked up on it in about the 5 second time frame it took me. The hilarious irony here is that the ONE thing the Right never claimed about Obama was that he was more moderate/centrist/conservative than anyone thought he was. Something that apparently PC didn't think through before she made this thread. I'm sure she'll apologize though, seeing as that is what she thinks is the honorable thing to do.

Now, now, Carby...that is the most diaphanous of spins...

I think your first response, you know, that he is a 'sell-out,' is far more defensible.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I dont support it. I never supported the comprimise.

If you want to talk about it I posted in your other thread about it....or do I not fit your pre-determined mold of what I should be as a conservative american?

I was addressing the phoney fiscal conservatives, like fitz, and daveman, and PC, and boedicca, and the rest in this thread. If you oppose this, then you are genuinely fiscally conservative.

"...fitz, and daveman, and PC, and boedicca..."

Oh, wow!

We're forming teams? How exciting!

OK, let's call ours the "Get Government Out Of The Way and Let Capitalism Work Its Magic" team....

and based on the news, we also get President Obama, President Clinton, Mark Zandi, and Austan Goolsbee and Larry Summers and, of course all of the Repub leadership....


BTW, what is the name of your team?
The Troglodytes?

First of all, this is not getting the government out of the way since every time the government goes deeper in debt it ties the fortunes, or misfortunes of the people ever more inextricably TO the government.

Interest on the debt is one of the biggest government spending programs we have. You phoney fiscal conservatives claim you don't like big government programs, but you support action after action that makes the government program of debt service bigger and bigger and bigger.

You phoney fiscal conservatives rant about the government 'raiding' Social Security, and yet this payroll tax holiday does exactly that...

...which should be the next sub-topic of conversation here. Why the **** are you people supporting reducing the payroll tax?

 

[NYcarbineer]

So, just so I have this straight, you're saying:

"I told you so, he's not as Liberal as you thought he was?"

Does that about sum up what you're trying to convey here?

LOL.

You picked up on it in about the 5 second time frame it took me. The hilarious irony here is that the ONE thing the Right never claimed about Obama was that he was more moderate/centrist/conservative than anyone thought he was. Something that apparently PC didn't think through before she made this thread. I'm sure she'll apologize though, seeing as that is what she thinks is the honorable thing to do.

Now, now, Carby...that is the most diaphanous of spins...

I think your first response, you know, that he is a 'sell-out,' is far more defensible.

I've given up trying to get straight answers out of you, so you can relax.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Not true...in fact, I have suggested, in this very thread, that his re-electioni might be a good thing...

Let's review:

1. He has continued significant portions of Bush policy

2. He has shown that he can be rolled by the Repubs

3. He endorses and supports Bush tax cuts

4. The most frugal times in the last six decades have been those when the Congress and White House have been held by different parties.

5.His re-election would serve as a safety valve for folks who admit they don't know him, but succomb to the appearance that their wishes were being supported...you know, folks like you.

Where has he endorsed Bush tax cuts?
Otherwise, you make some good points.
However, where in US history have we been at war and the next guy not continue that war?

"Where has he endorsed Bush tax cuts?"

1. Reality is defined by actions, not by words.
Endorse: •back: be behind; approve of;
define:endorse - Google Search
The position of the Obama Administration is to back, be behind, and approve of the extension of the Bush Tax Cuts.



"where in US history have we been at war and the next guy not continue that war?"

Possibly you were busy, and missed this, but it was in all th papers...

2. "Nixon and Kissinger quickly agreed upon two premises about American policy in Vietnam. First, the war in Vietnam was not "winnable" in any conventional sense of the term. Public opinion would tolerate neither an escalation nor the continuation of a status quo that included over 1,000 killed per month. Second, a unilateral withdrawal was not feasible because the political costs, both domestic and international, were unacceptable. Withdrawal would dissolve Nixon's political base at home and, as Kissinger continually emphasized, undermine American credibility abroad. [2] Apart from the military situation in Vietnam, the political problem confronting President Nixon was complex. How could Nixon "buy time" to achieve his understanding of "peace with honor" without succumbing to Lyndon Johnson's fate of eroding public support? The history of his first administration reveals that Nixon's strategy consisted of four components:..."
Nixon and Vietnam

I won't spoil the surprise for you by telling you the ending.

Nixon took office in 1969 and the Vietnam war ended in 1975. You can fit our participation in WWI and WWII into that time frame.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I was addressing the phoney fiscal conservatives, like fitz, and daveman, and PC, and boedicca, and the rest in this thread. If you oppose this, then you are genuinely fiscally conservative.

"...fitz, and daveman, and PC, and boedicca..."

Oh, wow!

We're forming teams? How exciting!

OK, let's call ours the "Get Government Out Of The Way and Let Capitalism Work Its Magic" team....

and based on the news, we also get President Obama, President Clinton, Mark Zandi, and Austan Goolsbee and Larry Summers and, of course all of the Repub leadership....


BTW, what is the name of your team?
The Troglodytes?

First of all, this is not getting the government out of the way since every time the government goes deeper in debt it ties the fortunes, or misfortunes of the people ever more inextricably TO the government.

Interest on the debt is one of the biggest government spending programs we have. You phoney fiscal conservatives claim you don't like big government programs, but you support action after action that makes the government program of debt service bigger and bigger and bigger.

You phoney fiscal conservatives rant about the government 'raiding' Social Security, and yet this payroll tax holiday does exactly that...

...which should be the next sub-topic of conversation here. Why the **** are you people supporting reducing the payroll tax?

Watch your language.

1. "...this is not getting the government out of the way..."
Of course it is. By holding the line on taxes, cutting Social Security taxes on both workers and employers, along with a two year guarantee, the government gives more security to the business community.

Whether you are willing to admit it or not, the reason that the Obama administration went with the deal is the implicit admission that lower taxes increases the possibility of less unemployment, and a better chance of his re-election.

2. "...government goes deeper in debt..."
Where was that argument when Social Security, Medicare, Obamacare were passed????

The differnce here is that this policy increases the chances of adding to the fisc, rather than the depletions that those programs cause.

You will find somewhere in this never-ending thread, my suggestions that the only way to ever, ever reduce the $13 trillion debt is to lower taxes, lower spending, decrease red tape and regulation, and honor initiative and innovation, i.e. business.

3. "...misfortunes of the people..."
That is the legacy of Progressive policies!

" Under capitalism, the standard of living of all was improving: prices falling, incomes rising, health and sanitation improving, lengthening of life spans, diets becoming more varied, the new jobs created in industry paid more than most could make in agriculture, housing improved, and middle class industrialists and business owners displaced nobility and gentry as heroes."
From a speech by Rev. Robert A. Sirico, President, Acton Institute for the Study of Religion and Liberty.
Delivered at Hillsdale College, October 27, 2006

4. "Interest on the debt is one of the biggest government spending programs..."
Wrong.
Let's take this year's interest, as per Obama 2011 budget: $251 billion.
The budget is $3,575.94
Obama?s 2011 Budget Proposal: How It?s Spent - Interactive Graphic - NYTimes.com

Do the math.

But...by 2052, the three entitlements alone will take up every penny of revenue:
“Spending on the three major entitlements, Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, will more than double in the next 40 years. Without major reforms, entitlement spending will consume all federal tax revenues by 2052.” http://www.issues2010.com/pdf/Entitlements.pdf


5. "...but you support action after action that makes the government program of debt service bigger and bigger and bigger."

And who brought us the three entitlements mentioned in #4 above?
Progressives/liberals.

You know, folks who don't know how to count, or use accounting procedures.

6. I support cutting of any and all taxes other than those required to pay for and support those constitutionally allocated to the federal govenment.

Don't even ask: I'm not going to summarize the post 'in one sentence.'

 

[PoliticalChic]

You picked up on it in about the 5 second time frame it took me. The hilarious irony here is that the ONE thing the Right never claimed about Obama was that he was more moderate/centrist/conservative than anyone thought he was. Something that apparently PC didn't think through before she made this thread. I'm sure she'll apologize though, seeing as that is what she thinks is the honorable thing to do.

Now, now, Carby...that is the most diaphanous of spins...

I think your first response, you know, that he is a 'sell-out,' is far more defensible.

I've given up trying to get straight answers out of you, so you can relax.

You sound like such an infant: you know my answers are specific, pointed, well documented.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Where has he endorsed Bush tax cuts?
Otherwise, you make some good points.
However, where in US history have we been at war and the next guy not continue that war?

"Where has he endorsed Bush tax cuts?"

1. Reality is defined by actions, not by words.
Endorse: •back: be behind; approve of;
define:endorse - Google Search
The position of the Obama Administration is to back, be behind, and approve of the extension of the Bush Tax Cuts.



"where in US history have we been at war and the next guy not continue that war?"

Possibly you were busy, and missed this, but it was in all th papers...

2. "Nixon and Kissinger quickly agreed upon two premises about American policy in Vietnam. First, the war in Vietnam was not "winnable" in any conventional sense of the term. Public opinion would tolerate neither an escalation nor the continuation of a status quo that included over 1,000 killed per month. Second, a unilateral withdrawal was not feasible because the political costs, both domestic and international, were unacceptable. Withdrawal would dissolve Nixon's political base at home and, as Kissinger continually emphasized, undermine American credibility abroad. [2] Apart from the military situation in Vietnam, the political problem confronting President Nixon was complex. How could Nixon "buy time" to achieve his understanding of "peace with honor" without succumbing to Lyndon Johnson's fate of eroding public support? The history of his first administration reveals that Nixon's strategy consisted of four components:..."
Nixon and Vietnam

I won't spoil the surprise for you by telling you the ending.

Nixon took office in 1969 and the Vietnam war ended in 1975. You can fit our participation in WWI and WWII into that time frame.

Did Nixon and Kissenger negotiate so as to "not continue the war"????

 

[Gadawg73]

Not true...in fact, I have suggested, in this very thread, that his re-electioni might be a good thing...

Let's review:

1. He has continued significant portions of Bush policy

2. He has shown that he can be rolled by the Repubs

3. He endorses and supports Bush tax cuts

4. The most frugal times in the last six decades have been those when the Congress and White House have been held by different parties.

5.His re-election would serve as a safety valve for folks who admit they don't know him, but succomb to the appearance that their wishes were being supported...you know, folks like you.

Where has he endorsed Bush tax cuts?
Otherwise, you make some good points.
However, where in US history have we been at war and the next guy not continue that war?

"Where has he endorsed Bush tax cuts?"

1. Reality is defined by actions, not by words.
Endorse: •back: be behind; approve of;
define:endorse - Google Search
The position of the Obama Administration is to back, be behind, and approve of the extension of the Bush Tax Cuts.



"where in US history have we been at war and the next guy not continue that war?"

Possibly you were busy, and missed this, but it was in all th papers...

2. "Nixon and Kissinger quickly agreed upon two premises about American policy in Vietnam. First, the war in Vietnam was not "winnable" in any conventional sense of the term. Public opinion would tolerate neither an escalation nor the continuation of a status quo that included over 1,000 killed per month. Second, a unilateral withdrawal was not feasible because the political costs, both domestic and international, were unacceptable. Withdrawal would dissolve Nixon's political base at home and, as Kissinger continually emphasized, undermine American credibility abroad. [2] Apart from the military situation in Vietnam, the political problem confronting President Nixon was complex. How could Nixon "buy time" to achieve his understanding of "peace with honor" without succumbing to Lyndon Johnson's fate of eroding public support? The history of his first administration reveals that Nixon's strategy consisted of four components:..."
Nixon and Vietnam

I won't spoil the surprise for you by telling you the ending.

One of my best friends was brought home in a box in 1969 from Viet Nam.
Were you even born yet?
TWENTY THOUSAND TROOPS DIED IN VIET NAM AFTER NIXON TOOK OFFICE.
"Buy time"?
If my friends and family had not served and died over there that would be laughable.
You are real good at one liners and cut and paste but can you take it when proven wrong?
Nixon CONTINUED the war.
Again, for the deaf, dumb and blind as I can cut and paste also:
"where in US history have we been at war and the next guy NOT CONTINUE that war?"

 

[Gadawg73]

Not true...in fact, I have suggested, in this very thread, that his re-electioni might be a good thing...

Let's review:

1. He has continued significant portions of Bush policy

2. He has shown that he can be rolled by the Repubs

3. He endorses and supports Bush tax cuts

4. The most frugal times in the last six decades have been those when the Congress and White House have been held by different parties.

5.His re-election would serve as a safety valve for folks who admit they don't know him, but succomb to the appearance that their wishes were being supported...you know, folks like you.

Where has he endorsed Bush tax cuts?
Otherwise, you make some good points.
However, where in US history have we been at war and the next guy not continue that war?

"Where has he endorsed Bush tax cuts?"

1. Reality is defined by actions, not by words.
Endorse: •back: be behind; approve of;
define:endorse - Google Search
The position of the Obama Administration is to back, be behind, and approve of the extension of the Bush Tax Cuts.



"where in US history have we been at war and the next guy not continue that war?"

Possibly you were busy, and missed this, but it was in all th papers...

2. "Nixon and Kissinger quickly agreed upon two premises about American policy in Vietnam. First, the war in Vietnam was not "winnable" in any conventional sense of the term. Public opinion would tolerate neither an escalation nor the continuation of a status quo that included over 1,000 killed per month. Second, a unilateral withdrawal was not feasible because the political costs, both domestic and international, were unacceptable. Withdrawal would dissolve Nixon's political base at home and, as Kissinger continually emphasized, undermine American credibility abroad. [2] Apart from the military situation in Vietnam, the political problem confronting President Nixon was complex. How could Nixon "buy time" to achieve his understanding of "peace with honor" without succumbing to Lyndon Johnson's fate of eroding public support? The history of his first administration reveals that Nixon's strategy consisted of four components:..."
Nixon and Vietnam

I won't spoil the surprise for you by telling you the ending.

"Second, a unilateral withdrawal was not feasible"
from YOUR SOURCE.

If an invading army DOES NOT "withdraw" the war CONTINUED.
Real men do not need apologies.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Where has he endorsed Bush tax cuts?
Otherwise, you make some good points.
However, where in US history have we been at war and the next guy not continue that war?

"Where has he endorsed Bush tax cuts?"

1. Reality is defined by actions, not by words.
Endorse: •back: be behind; approve of;
define:endorse - Google Search
The position of the Obama Administration is to back, be behind, and approve of the extension of the Bush Tax Cuts.



"where in US history have we been at war and the next guy not continue that war?"

Possibly you were busy, and missed this, but it was in all th papers...

2. "Nixon and Kissinger quickly agreed upon two premises about American policy in Vietnam. First, the war in Vietnam was not "winnable" in any conventional sense of the term. Public opinion would tolerate neither an escalation nor the continuation of a status quo that included over 1,000 killed per month. Second, a unilateral withdrawal was not feasible because the political costs, both domestic and international, were unacceptable. Withdrawal would dissolve Nixon's political base at home and, as Kissinger continually emphasized, undermine American credibility abroad. [2] Apart from the military situation in Vietnam, the political problem confronting President Nixon was complex. How could Nixon "buy time" to achieve his understanding of "peace with honor" without succumbing to Lyndon Johnson's fate of eroding public support? The history of his first administration reveals that Nixon's strategy consisted of four components:..."
Nixon and Vietnam

I won't spoil the surprise for you by telling you the ending.

One of my best friends was brought home in a box in 1969 from Viet Nam.
Were you even born yet?
TWENTY THOUSAND TROOPS DIED IN VIET NAM AFTER NIXON TOOK OFFICE.
"Buy time"?
If my friends and family had not served and died over there that would be laughable.
You are real good at one liners and cut and paste but can you take it when proven wrong?
Nixon CONTINUED the war.
Again, for the deaf, dumb and blind as I can cut and paste also:
"where in US history have we been at war and the next guy NOT CONTINUE that war?"

Well, since you dropped the first item on your list, I guess I win on that one, huh?

As for "...but can you take it when proven wrong?"

You don't seem to be able to handle having been proven wrong...

As for whether or not I had been born...here's a suggestion that no one seems
to have given you yet: learn how to read, then the premise is obviated.

 

[Chris]

Way back when, before the election of '08, what were those of us on the right telling you guys?

We told you that the press wasn't vetting this articulate senator...

we told you you were unaware of his politics, that you were pickin,' with due respect to the President, 'a pig in a poke'...

we even suggested the dire possibilities...

did you listen? Nooooooooooo!

Then, finally, after the election, Charlie Rose and Tom Brokaw admit they don't know who he is....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzMas1bVidw


Now, the Democratic Party itself is saying the same things"

"But many other Democrats, including Rep. Jim Moran (D-Va.), a member of the defense appropriations subcommittee, said they didn’t even know the provision was included.

Moran’s anger with the president boiled over in a short interview Thursday with The Hill about the provision and the tax debate held shortly after the Democratic Caucus voted to reject Obama’s tax-cut deal.

“This is a lack of leadership on the part of Obama,” fumed Moran (D-Va.) “I don’t know where the f*** Obama is on this or anything else. They’re AWOL.”

Dems show signs of abandoning Obama elsewhere after frustration with tax deal - TheHill.com

As soon as the Republicans apologize for destroying America.

 

[Gadawg73]

"Where has he endorsed Bush tax cuts?"

1. Reality is defined by actions, not by words.
Endorse: •back: be behind; approve of;
define:endorse - Google Search
The position of the Obama Administration is to back, be behind, and approve of the extension of the Bush Tax Cuts.



"where in US history have we been at war and the next guy not continue that war?"

Possibly you were busy, and missed this, but it was in all th papers...

2. "Nixon and Kissinger quickly agreed upon two premises about American policy in Vietnam. First, the war in Vietnam was not "winnable" in any conventional sense of the term. Public opinion would tolerate neither an escalation nor the continuation of a status quo that included over 1,000 killed per month. Second, a unilateral withdrawal was not feasible because the political costs, both domestic and international, were unacceptable. Withdrawal would dissolve Nixon's political base at home and, as Kissinger continually emphasized, undermine American credibility abroad. [2] Apart from the military situation in Vietnam, the political problem confronting President Nixon was complex. How could Nixon "buy time" to achieve his understanding of "peace with honor" without succumbing to Lyndon Johnson's fate of eroding public support? The history of his first administration reveals that Nixon's strategy consisted of four components:..."
Nixon and Vietnam

I won't spoil the surprise for you by telling you the ending.

One of my best friends was brought home in a box in 1969 from Viet Nam.
Were you even born yet?
TWENTY THOUSAND TROOPS DIED IN VIET NAM AFTER NIXON TOOK OFFICE.
"Buy time"?
If my friends and family had not served and died over there that would be laughable.
You are real good at one liners and cut and paste but can you take it when proven wrong?
Nixon CONTINUED the war.
Again, for the deaf, dumb and blind as I can cut and paste also:
"where in US history have we been at war and the next guy NOT CONTINUE that war?"

Well, since you dropped the first item on your list, I guess I win on that one, huh?

As for "...but can you take it when proven wrong?"

You don't seem to be able to handle having been proven wrong...

As for whether or not I had been born...here's a suggestion that no one seems
to have given you yet: learn how to read, then the premise is obviated.

Nope, you are not partly wrong.
Someone else schooled you on that one already.
You are completely wrong.

The war continued and there are 10,000 of our boys in the ground to prove it.
Shame on you but you are young and do not know any better.
Next time govern yourself accordingly.

 

[daveman]

"...fitz, and daveman, and PC, and boedicca..."

Oh, wow!

We're forming teams? How exciting!

OK, let's call ours the "Get Government Out Of The Way and Let Capitalism Work Its Magic" team....

and based on the news, we also get President Obama, President Clinton, Mark Zandi, and Austan Goolsbee and Larry Summers and, of course all of the Repub leadership....


BTW, what is the name of your team?
The Troglodytes?

And the Trogs are 0-Everything.

 

[The T]

I dont support it. I never supported the comprimise.

If you want to talk about it I posted in your other thread about it....or do I not fit your pre-determined mold of what I should be as a conservative american?

I was addressing the phoney fiscal conservatives, like fitz, and daveman, and PC, and boedicca, and the rest in this thread. If you oppose this, then you are genuinely fiscally conservative.

"...fitz, and daveman, and PC, and boedicca..."

Oh, wow!

We're forming teams? How exciting!

OK, let's call ours the "Get Government Out Of The Way and Let Capitalism Work Its Magic" team....

and based on the news, we also get President Obama, President Clinton, Mark Zandi, and Austan Goolsbee and Larry Summers and, of course all of the Repub leadership....


BTW, what is the name of your team?
The Troglodytes?

This is quite funny. Lovin' the witticism. Good form!