Bush is gone you'll have to find another excuse.Uh, Greenspan warned Congress long before the crash what they were doing was not sustainable. You going to blame Bush on all the lying banksters too? Why not put it back on where the problem truly lies. Start looking at where those banksters got their education. I'm wondering does MIT endorse fraud in those higher education classes. Is that like the norm of their professors there or what?
Remember when Greenspan went in front of the GOP Congress in 2001, to support Dubya's tax cuts, because we were in danger of paying down the debt to fast under Clinton policies?
Heritage said the 2001 tax cuts would actually create so much economic activity, it would pay off the debt by 2010 though.
WHAT HAPPENED AFTER 8 YEARS OF DUBYA/GOP "JOB CREATOR" POLICIES?? lol
"Uh, Greenspan warned Congress long before the crash what they were doing was not sustainable"
WTF ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? YOU DENY HE WENT IN FRONT OF CONGRESS IN 2001 TO SUPPORT GUTTING REVENUES VIA DUBYA'S TAX CUTS?
BANKSTERS LEARNED THEIR FRAUD FROM UNIVERSITIES? LOL
Hint Dubya WAS warned
FBI saw threat of loan crisis
"It has the potential to be an epidemic,"
A top official warned of widening mortgage fraud in 2004, but the agency focused its resources elsewhere
"We think we can prevent a problem that could have as much impact as the S&L crisis,"
They ended up with fewer resources, rather than more.
DUBYA GUTTED 1,800+ FROM THE WHITE COLLAR CRIME DIV INSTEAD!
FBI saw threat of loan crisis
DUBYA FOUGHT ALL 50 STATE AG'S IN 2003, INVOKING A CIVIL WAR ERA RULE SAYING FEDS RULE ON "PREDATORY" LENDERS!
Predatory lending came by way of claiming a good thing would ensue for the poor. The fact is that it was just one more way to tax the poor by using and abusing the people money to get it all started.
https://research.stlouisfed.org/wp/2012/2012-005.pdf
By the time the the late 90's hit prime bankers had sold so many bad loans it was starting to take out the banking industry but it did not fully hit until 2008. (big wheels move slow)
You really are not worth trying to educate on the matter so I'll pass on posting all the links for you.
Is wrong with liberal nut jobs like the one who started this thread? They have the memory of a goldfish...
Despite Obama calling Bush 'un-patriotic' for adding $4 trillion in debt over 8 (EIGHT) years - during 9/11/01, the economic meltdown after, and 2 wars - Bush only added 1.5 Trillion over 6 years. Democrats took over Congress and the purse strings the last 2 years and added 2.5 Trillion...IN THE LAST 2 YEARS - the time Liberals say the economy started declining. (Way to go, Liberals!)
Democtats held this near super-majority control through the end of Obama's 2nd year in office...which means, with Dems owning Congress the last 2 years of the Bush administration & 1st 2 years of Obama's term, the economy Obama 'inherited' was not Bush's economy but their own!
As already mentioned, Obama ended up adding over $6 Trillion in new debt in only 4 years and personally secured the 1st ever US Credit Rating Downgrade!
Through wonderful programs like nearly a trillion for the failed Stimulus, hundreds of billions for Obamacare and its failed web site, 7,ooo earmarks in the stimulus, and millions to train 6 terrorists...liberals have engaged in CRIMINAL fiscal irresponsibility of epic proportions!
Despite Obama calling Bush 'un-patriotic' for adding $4 trillion in debt over 8 (EIGHT) years - during 9/11/01, the economic meltdown after, and 2 wars - Bush only added 1.5 Trillion over 6 years. Democrats took over Congress and the purse strings the last 2 years and added 2.5 Trillion...IN THE LAST 2 YEARS - the time Liberals say the economy started declining. (Way to go, Liberals!)
Democtats held this near super-majority control through the end of Obama's 2nd year in office...which means, with Dems owning Congress the last 2 years of the Bush administration & 1st 2 years of Obama's term, the economy Obama 'inherited' was not Bush's economy but their own!
As already mentioned, Obama ended up adding over $6 Trillion in new debt in only 4 years and personally secured the 1st ever US Credit Rating Downgrade!
Through wonderful programs like nearly a trillion for the failed Stimulus, hundreds of billions for Obamacare and its failed web site, 7,ooo earmarks in the stimulus, and millions to train 6 terrorists...liberals have engaged in CRIMINAL fiscal irresponsibility of epic proportions!
CONservative "logic", Dems are responsible for Dubya's final 2 years, but the GOP Congress for the final 6 years of Obama, have zero culpability, it's 100% on Obama *shaking head*
Like usual, you're using GOP/CONservative "math" and reasoning Bubba
THE POLICY THE DEMS GAVE US THAT CHANGED DUBYA'S POLICIES 2007-JAN 2009 PLEASE? lol
We already have a failing economy you moron.
Despite Obama calling Bush 'un-patriotic' for adding $4 trillion in debt over 8 (EIGHT) years - during 9/11/01, the economic meltdown after, and 2 wars - Bush only added 1.5 Trillion over 6 years. Democrats took over Congress and the purse strings the last 2 years and added 2.5 Trillion...IN THE LAST 2 YEARS - the time Liberals say the economy started declining. (Way to go, Liberals!)
Democtats held this near super-majority control through the end of Obama's 2nd year in office...which means, with Dems owning Congress the last 2 years of the Bush administration & 1st 2 years of Obama's term, the economy Obama 'inherited' was not Bush's economy but their own!
As already mentioned, Obama ended up adding over $6 Trillion in new debt in only 4 years and personally secured the 1st ever US Credit Rating Downgrade!
Through wonderful programs like nearly a trillion for the failed Stimulus, hundreds of billions for Obamacare and its failed web site, 7,ooo earmarks in the stimulus, and millions to train 6 terrorists...liberals have engaged in CRIMINAL fiscal irresponsibility of epic proportions!
CONservative "logic", Dems are responsible for Dubya's final 2 years, but the GOP Congress for the final 6 years of Obama, have zero culpability, it's 100% on Obama *shaking head*
Like usual, you're using GOP/CONservative "math" and reasoning Bubba
THE POLICY THE DEMS GAVE US THAT CHANGED DUBYA'S POLICIES 2007-JAN 2009 PLEASE? lol
What GOP Congress for Obama's 6 years? The Democrats held the Senate until less than a year ago. What Obama did began from day 1 when he had both houses.
You can't get enough of kissing black ass can you?
Despite Obama calling Bush 'un-patriotic' for adding $4 trillion in debt over 8 (EIGHT) years - during 9/11/01, the economic meltdown after, and 2 wars - Bush only added 1.5 Trillion over 6 years. Democrats took over Congress and the purse strings the last 2 years and added 2.5 Trillion...IN THE LAST 2 YEARS - the time Liberals say the economy started declining. (Way to go, Liberals!)
Democtats held this near super-majority control through the end of Obama's 2nd year in office...which means, with Dems owning Congress the last 2 years of the Bush administration & 1st 2 years of Obama's term, the economy Obama 'inherited' was not Bush's economy but their own!
As already mentioned, Obama ended up adding over $6 Trillion in new debt in only 4 years and personally secured the 1st ever US Credit Rating Downgrade!
Through wonderful programs like nearly a trillion for the failed Stimulus, hundreds of billions for Obamacare and its failed web site, 7,ooo earmarks in the stimulus, and millions to train 6 terrorists...liberals have engaged in CRIMINAL fiscal irresponsibility of epic proportions!
CONservative "logic", Dems are responsible for Dubya's final 2 years, but the GOP Congress for the final 6 years of Obama, have zero culpability, it's 100% on Obama *shaking head*
Like usual, you're using GOP/CONservative "math" and reasoning Bubba
THE POLICY THE DEMS GAVE US THAT CHANGED DUBYA'S POLICIES 2007-JAN 2009 PLEASE? lol
What GOP Congress for Obama's 6 years? The Democrats held the Senate until less than a year ago. What Obama did began from day 1 when he had both houses.
You can't get enough of kissing black ass can you?
So NO you CAN'T give ANY policies the Dems passed Jan 2007-Jan 2009 that changed Dubya's policies
GOP will have had the House for 6 of Obama's 8 years and the Senate for 4..
LOL
Day 1 on Obama? Oh when he was blocked on almost EVERYTHING as the US economy was tanking?
Debunking the Myth: Obama's Two-Year Supermajority
A supermajority is a filibuster-proof 60 or more Senate seats, allowing one party to pass legislation without votes from the other,
Don't forget: the president needed a supermajority because of the Republicans' unprecedented use of the filibuster as an obstruction tactic -- they've used it more than 400 times.
But here's the deal -- the real deal -- there actually wasn't a two year supermajority.
This timeline shows the facts.
President Obama was sworn in on January 20, 2009 with just 58 Senators to support his agenda.
He should have had 59, but Republicans contested Al Franken's election in Minnesota and he didn't get seated for seven months.
The President's cause was helped in April when Pennsylvania's Republican Senator Arlen Specter switched parties.
That gave the President 59 votes -- still a vote shy of the super majority.
But one month later, Democratic Senator Byrd of West Virginia was hospitalized and was basically out of commission.
So while the President's number on paper was 59 Senators -- he was really working with just 58 Senators.
Then in July, Minnesota Senator Al Franken was finally sworn in, giving President Obama the magic 60 -- but only in theory, because Senator Byrd was still out.
In August, Senator Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts died and the number went back down to 59 again until Paul Kirk temporarily filled Kennedy's seat in September.
Any pretense of a supermajority ended on February 4, 2010 when Republican Scott Brown was sworn into the seat Senator Kennedy once held.Do you see a two-year supermajority?
I didn't think so.
Debunking the Myth: Obama's Two-Year Supermajority
Despite Obama calling Bush 'un-patriotic' for adding $4 trillion in debt over 8 (EIGHT) years - during 9/11/01, the economic meltdown after, and 2 wars - Bush only added 1.5 Trillion over 6 years. Democrats took over Congress and the purse strings the last 2 years and added 2.5 Trillion...IN THE LAST 2 YEARS - the time Liberals say the economy started declining. (Way to go, Liberals!)
Democtats held this near super-majority control through the end of Obama's 2nd year in office...which means, with Dems owning Congress the last 2 years of the Bush administration & 1st 2 years of Obama's term, the economy Obama 'inherited' was not Bush's economy but their own!
As already mentioned, Obama ended up adding over $6 Trillion in new debt in only 4 years and personally secured the 1st ever US Credit Rating Downgrade!
Through wonderful programs like nearly a trillion for the failed Stimulus, hundreds of billions for Obamacare and its failed web site, 7,ooo earmarks in the stimulus, and millions to train 6 terrorists...liberals have engaged in CRIMINAL fiscal irresponsibility of epic proportions!
CONservative "logic", Dems are responsible for Dubya's final 2 years, but the GOP Congress for the final 6 years of Obama, have zero culpability, it's 100% on Obama *shaking head*
Like usual, you're using GOP/CONservative "math" and reasoning Bubba
THE POLICY THE DEMS GAVE US THAT CHANGED DUBYA'S POLICIES 2007-JAN 2009 PLEASE? lol
What GOP Congress for Obama's 6 years? The Democrats held the Senate until less than a year ago. What Obama did began from day 1 when he had both houses.
You can't get enough of kissing black ass can you?
So NO you CAN'T give ANY policies the Dems passed Jan 2007-Jan 2009 that changed Dubya's policies
GOP will have had the House for 6 of Obama's 8 years and the Senate for 4..
LOL
Day 1 on Obama? Oh when he was blocked on almost EVERYTHING as the US economy was tanking?
Debunking the Myth: Obama's Two-Year Supermajority
A supermajority is a filibuster-proof 60 or more Senate seats, allowing one party to pass legislation without votes from the other,
Don't forget: the president needed a supermajority because of the Republicans' unprecedented use of the filibuster as an obstruction tactic -- they've used it more than 400 times.
But here's the deal -- the real deal -- there actually wasn't a two year supermajority.
This timeline shows the facts.
President Obama was sworn in on January 20, 2009 with just 58 Senators to support his agenda.
He should have had 59, but Republicans contested Al Franken's election in Minnesota and he didn't get seated for seven months.
The President's cause was helped in April when Pennsylvania's Republican Senator Arlen Specter switched parties.
That gave the President 59 votes -- still a vote shy of the super majority.
But one month later, Democratic Senator Byrd of West Virginia was hospitalized and was basically out of commission.
So while the President's number on paper was 59 Senators -- he was really working with just 58 Senators.
Then in July, Minnesota Senator Al Franken was finally sworn in, giving President Obama the magic 60 -- but only in theory, because Senator Byrd was still out.
In August, Senator Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts died and the number went back down to 59 again until Paul Kirk temporarily filled Kennedy's seat in September.
Any pretense of a supermajority ended on February 4, 2010 when Republican Scott Brown was sworn into the seat Senator Kennedy once held.Do you see a two-year supermajority?
I didn't think so.
Debunking the Myth: Obama's Two-Year Supermajority
Despite Obama calling Bush 'un-patriotic' for adding $4 trillion in debt over 8 (EIGHT) years - during 9/11/01, the economic meltdown after, and 2 wars - Bush only added 1.5 Trillion over 6 years. Democrats took over Congress and the purse strings the last 2 years and added 2.5 Trillion...IN THE LAST 2 YEARS - the time Liberals say the economy started declining. (Way to go, Liberals!)
Democtats held this near super-majority control through the end of Obama's 2nd year in office...which means, with Dems owning Congress the last 2 years of the Bush administration & 1st 2 years of Obama's term, the economy Obama 'inherited' was not Bush's economy but their own!
As already mentioned, Obama ended up adding over $6 Trillion in new debt in only 4 years and personally secured the 1st ever US Credit Rating Downgrade!
Through wonderful programs like nearly a trillion for the failed Stimulus, hundreds of billions for Obamacare and its failed web site, 7,ooo earmarks in the stimulus, and millions to train 6 terrorists...liberals have engaged in CRIMINAL fiscal irresponsibility of epic proportions!
CONservative "logic", Dems are responsible for Dubya's final 2 years, but the GOP Congress for the final 6 years of Obama, have zero culpability, it's 100% on Obama *shaking head*
Like usual, you're using GOP/CONservative "math" and reasoning Bubba
THE POLICY THE DEMS GAVE US THAT CHANGED DUBYA'S POLICIES 2007-JAN 2009 PLEASE? lol
What GOP Congress for Obama's 6 years? The Democrats held the Senate until less than a year ago. What Obama did began from day 1 when he had both houses.
You can't get enough of kissing black ass can you?
So NO you CAN'T give ANY policies the Dems passed Jan 2007-Jan 2009 that changed Dubya's policies
GOP will have had the House for 6 of Obama's 8 years and the Senate for 4..
LOL
Day 1 on Obama? Oh when he was blocked on almost EVERYTHING as the US economy was tanking?
Debunking the Myth: Obama's Two-Year Supermajority
A supermajority is a filibuster-proof 60 or more Senate seats, allowing one party to pass legislation without votes from the other,
Don't forget: the president needed a supermajority because of the Republicans' unprecedented use of the filibuster as an obstruction tactic -- they've used it more than 400 times.
But here's the deal -- the real deal -- there actually wasn't a two year supermajority.
This timeline shows the facts.
President Obama was sworn in on January 20, 2009 with just 58 Senators to support his agenda.
He should have had 59, but Republicans contested Al Franken's election in Minnesota and he didn't get seated for seven months.
The President's cause was helped in April when Pennsylvania's Republican Senator Arlen Specter switched parties.
That gave the President 59 votes -- still a vote shy of the super majority.
But one month later, Democratic Senator Byrd of West Virginia was hospitalized and was basically out of commission.
So while the President's number on paper was 59 Senators -- he was really working with just 58 Senators.
Then in July, Minnesota Senator Al Franken was finally sworn in, giving President Obama the magic 60 -- but only in theory, because Senator Byrd was still out.
In August, Senator Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts died and the number went back down to 59 again until Paul Kirk temporarily filled Kennedy's seat in September.
Any pretense of a supermajority ended on February 4, 2010 when Republican Scott Brown was sworn into the seat Senator Kennedy once held.Do you see a two-year supermajority?
I didn't think so.
Debunking the Myth: Obama's Two-Year Supermajority
You really are stupid.
The Republicans took the House in 2011. That's
Despite Obama calling Bush 'un-patriotic' for adding $4 trillion in debt over 8 (EIGHT) years - during 9/11/01, the economic meltdown after, and 2 wars - Bush only added 1.5 Trillion over 6 years. Democrats took over Congress and the purse strings the last 2 years and added 2.5 Trillion...IN THE LAST 2 YEARS - the time Liberals say the economy started declining. (Way to go, Liberals!)
Democtats held this near super-majority control through the end of Obama's 2nd year in office...which means, with Dems owning Congress the last 2 years of the Bush administration & 1st 2 years of Obama's term, the economy Obama 'inherited' was not Bush's economy but their own!
As already mentioned, Obama ended up adding over $6 Trillion in new debt in only 4 years and personally secured the 1st ever US Credit Rating Downgrade!
Through wonderful programs like nearly a trillion for the failed Stimulus, hundreds of billions for Obamacare and its failed web site, 7,ooo earmarks in the stimulus, and millions to train 6 terrorists...liberals have engaged in CRIMINAL fiscal irresponsibility of epic proportions!
CONservative "logic", Dems are responsible for Dubya's final 2 years, but the GOP Congress for the final 6 years of Obama, have zero culpability, it's 100% on Obama *shaking head*
Like usual, you're using GOP/CONservative "math" and reasoning Bubba
THE POLICY THE DEMS GAVE US THAT CHANGED DUBYA'S POLICIES 2007-JAN 2009 PLEASE? lol
What GOP Congress for Obama's 6 years? The Democrats held the Senate until less than a year ago. What Obama did began from day 1 when he had both houses.
You can't get enough of kissing black ass can you?
So NO you CAN'T give ANY policies the Dems passed Jan 2007-Jan 2009 that changed Dubya's policies
GOP will have had the House for 6 of Obama's 8 years and the Senate for 4..
LOL
Day 1 on Obama? Oh when he was blocked on almost EVERYTHING as the US economy was tanking?
Debunking the Myth: Obama's Two-Year Supermajority
A supermajority is a filibuster-proof 60 or more Senate seats, allowing one party to pass legislation without votes from the other,
Don't forget: the president needed a supermajority because of the Republicans' unprecedented use of the filibuster as an obstruction tactic -- they've used it more than 400 times.
But here's the deal -- the real deal -- there actually wasn't a two year supermajority.
This timeline shows the facts.
President Obama was sworn in on January 20, 2009 with just 58 Senators to support his agenda.
He should have had 59, but Republicans contested Al Franken's election in Minnesota and he didn't get seated for seven months.
The President's cause was helped in April when Pennsylvania's Republican Senator Arlen Specter switched parties.
That gave the President 59 votes -- still a vote shy of the super majority.
But one month later, Democratic Senator Byrd of West Virginia was hospitalized and was basically out of commission.
So while the President's number on paper was 59 Senators -- he was really working with just 58 Senators.
Then in July, Minnesota Senator Al Franken was finally sworn in, giving President Obama the magic 60 -- but only in theory, because Senator Byrd was still out.
In August, Senator Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts died and the number went back down to 59 again until Paul Kirk temporarily filled Kennedy's seat in September.
Any pretense of a supermajority ended on February 4, 2010 when Republican Scott Brown was sworn into the seat Senator Kennedy once held.Do you see a two-year supermajority?
I didn't think so.
Debunking the Myth: Obama's Two-Year Supermajority
I've figured out why you support Liberal policies. You can't support the three kids you have and want someone else to do it for you.
Despite Obama calling Bush 'un-patriotic' for adding $4 trillion in debt over 8 (EIGHT) years - during 9/11/01, the economic meltdown after, and 2 wars - Bush only added 1.5 Trillion over 6 years. Democrats took over Congress and the purse strings the last 2 years and added 2.5 Trillion...IN THE LAST 2 YEARS - the time Liberals say the economy started declining. (Way to go, Liberals!)
Democtats held this near super-majority control through the end of Obama's 2nd year in office...which means, with Dems owning Congress the last 2 years of the Bush administration & 1st 2 years of Obama's term, the economy Obama 'inherited' was not Bush's economy but their own!
As already mentioned, Obama ended up adding over $6 Trillion in new debt in only 4 years and personally secured the 1st ever US Credit Rating Downgrade!
Through wonderful programs like nearly a trillion for the failed Stimulus, hundreds of billions for Obamacare and its failed web site, 7,ooo earmarks in the stimulus, and millions to train 6 terrorists...liberals have engaged in CRIMINAL fiscal irresponsibility of epic proportions!
CONservative "logic", Dems are responsible for Dubya's final 2 years, but the GOP Congress for the final 6 years of Obama, have zero culpability, it's 100% on Obama *shaking head*
Like usual, you're using GOP/CONservative "math" and reasoning Bubba
THE POLICY THE DEMS GAVE US THAT CHANGED DUBYA'S POLICIES 2007-JAN 2009 PLEASE? lol
What GOP Congress for Obama's 6 years? The Democrats held the Senate until less than a year ago. What Obama did began from day 1 when he had both houses.
You can't get enough of kissing black ass can you?
So NO you CAN'T give ANY policies the Dems passed Jan 2007-Jan 2009 that changed Dubya's policies
GOP will have had the House for 6 of Obama's 8 years and the Senate for 4..
LOL
Day 1 on Obama? Oh when he was blocked on almost EVERYTHING as the US economy was tanking?
Debunking the Myth: Obama's Two-Year Supermajority
A supermajority is a filibuster-proof 60 or more Senate seats, allowing one party to pass legislation without votes from the other,
Don't forget: the president needed a supermajority because of the Republicans' unprecedented use of the filibuster as an obstruction tactic -- they've used it more than 400 times.
But here's the deal -- the real deal -- there actually wasn't a two year supermajority.
This timeline shows the facts.
President Obama was sworn in on January 20, 2009 with just 58 Senators to support his agenda.
He should have had 59, but Republicans contested Al Franken's election in Minnesota and he didn't get seated for seven months.
The President's cause was helped in April when Pennsylvania's Republican Senator Arlen Specter switched parties.
That gave the President 59 votes -- still a vote shy of the super majority.
But one month later, Democratic Senator Byrd of West Virginia was hospitalized and was basically out of commission.
So while the President's number on paper was 59 Senators -- he was really working with just 58 Senators.
Then in July, Minnesota Senator Al Franken was finally sworn in, giving President Obama the magic 60 -- but only in theory, because Senator Byrd was still out.
In August, Senator Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts died and the number went back down to 59 again until Paul Kirk temporarily filled Kennedy's seat in September.
Any pretense of a supermajority ended on February 4, 2010 when Republican Scott Brown was sworn into the seat Senator Kennedy once held.Do you see a two-year supermajority?
I didn't think so.
Debunking the Myth: Obama's Two-Year Supermajority
You really are stupid.
The Republicans took the House in 2011. That's
Despite Obama calling Bush 'un-patriotic' for adding $4 trillion in debt over 8 (EIGHT) years - during 9/11/01, the economic meltdown after, and 2 wars - Bush only added 1.5 Trillion over 6 years. Democrats took over Congress and the purse strings the last 2 years and added 2.5 Trillion...IN THE LAST 2 YEARS - the time Liberals say the economy started declining. (Way to go, Liberals!)
Democtats held this near super-majority control through the end of Obama's 2nd year in office...which means, with Dems owning Congress the last 2 years of the Bush administration & 1st 2 years of Obama's term, the economy Obama 'inherited' was not Bush's economy but their own!
As already mentioned, Obama ended up adding over $6 Trillion in new debt in only 4 years and personally secured the 1st ever US Credit Rating Downgrade!
Through wonderful programs like nearly a trillion for the failed Stimulus, hundreds of billions for Obamacare and its failed web site, 7,ooo earmarks in the stimulus, and millions to train 6 terrorists...liberals have engaged in CRIMINAL fiscal irresponsibility of epic proportions!
CONservative "logic", Dems are responsible for Dubya's final 2 years, but the GOP Congress for the final 6 years of Obama, have zero culpability, it's 100% on Obama *shaking head*
Like usual, you're using GOP/CONservative "math" and reasoning Bubba
THE POLICY THE DEMS GAVE US THAT CHANGED DUBYA'S POLICIES 2007-JAN 2009 PLEASE? lol
What GOP Congress for Obama's 6 years? The Democrats held the Senate until less than a year ago. What Obama did began from day 1 when he had both houses.
You can't get enough of kissing black ass can you?
So NO you CAN'T give ANY policies the Dems passed Jan 2007-Jan 2009 that changed Dubya's policies
GOP will have had the House for 6 of Obama's 8 years and the Senate for 4..
LOL
Day 1 on Obama? Oh when he was blocked on almost EVERYTHING as the US economy was tanking?
Debunking the Myth: Obama's Two-Year Supermajority
A supermajority is a filibuster-proof 60 or more Senate seats, allowing one party to pass legislation without votes from the other,
Don't forget: the president needed a supermajority because of the Republicans' unprecedented use of the filibuster as an obstruction tactic -- they've used it more than 400 times.
But here's the deal -- the real deal -- there actually wasn't a two year supermajority.
This timeline shows the facts.
President Obama was sworn in on January 20, 2009 with just 58 Senators to support his agenda.
He should have had 59, but Republicans contested Al Franken's election in Minnesota and he didn't get seated for seven months.
The President's cause was helped in April when Pennsylvania's Republican Senator Arlen Specter switched parties.
That gave the President 59 votes -- still a vote shy of the super majority.
But one month later, Democratic Senator Byrd of West Virginia was hospitalized and was basically out of commission.
So while the President's number on paper was 59 Senators -- he was really working with just 58 Senators.
Then in July, Minnesota Senator Al Franken was finally sworn in, giving President Obama the magic 60 -- but only in theory, because Senator Byrd was still out.
In August, Senator Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts died and the number went back down to 59 again until Paul Kirk temporarily filled Kennedy's seat in September.
Any pretense of a supermajority ended on February 4, 2010 when Republican Scott Brown was sworn into the seat Senator Kennedy once held.Do you see a two-year supermajority?
I didn't think so.
Debunking the Myth: Obama's Two-Year Supermajority
I've figured out why you support Liberal policies. You can't support the three kids you have and want someone else to do it for you.
Yep, GOP took the House for the last 6 years of Obama. Weird they control the spending right?
No rebuttal. You must be a democrat.
just spreading the love ain't he (please note the sarcasm).
