The politics of Laura and George Bush

Then please explain the chart I provided you?

Explain that we are in the most anemic recovery in history, despite record federal intervention? Explain that the Eurozone is in deep trouble because of years pursuing the same policies Obama is pursuing? Explain that debt is enormous and unsustainable?
Which part do you need explained to you?
 
10 Charts You Need To See Before The Weekend

take a look at this chart you silly man

So?

<ctrl>F Obama.


Nope. Not in there. Just because the economy is recovering does not mean that Obama did it. Although many who do not take a longer view will give him credit for it.

I don't think we'll see the real impact of his economic policies for at least 4 or 5 years. This most recent downturn is all Clinton/Bush IMO, but it's too soon to say if anything Obama has done is actually helping...or if this is the natural swing of the business cycle. Get back to me in a few years when more data is compiled and we can discuss it then.

ITS A FUCKING V SINCE HE TOOK OFFICE!


He has managed to reverse OBVIOUSLY the slide Bush created.

This is why we think you people are so damned dishonest, you ignore clear facts to retain failed ideas.

The job market numbers are a CLEAR V since he took office and ignoring that clear fact make you an idiot con partisan.
 
No liberal will ever beseen as a "great President" by producers.
It is real easy to be a liberal President spending other people's $.

And yet, it's under Republican Administrations that the deficit always explodes. Odd that.

Are you still repeating this lie, despite having been shown numerous times that it is under Democratic Congresses that debt explodes?
 
ITS A FUCKING V SINCE HE TOOK OFFICE!


He has managed to reverse OBVIOUSLY the slide Bush created.

This is why we think you people are so damned dishonest, you ignore clear facts to retain failed ideas.

The job market numbers are a CLEAR V since he took office and ignoring that clear fact make you an idiot con partisan.

Pointing out the shape of the graph doesn't help your case a bit.

Correlation does not equal causation.

And I'm partisan for saying simply it's too soon to tell? And saying the downturn was due to Clinton/Bush? Please, do elaborate on this epic fail the you are demonstrating...
 
Last edited:
Then please explain the chart I provided you?

Explain that we are in the most anemic recovery in history, despite record federal intervention? Explain that the Eurozone is in deep trouble because of years pursuing the same policies Obama is pursuing? Explain that debt is enormous and unsustainable?
Which part do you need explained to you?

Look at the chart, it is not a anemic recovery.

The day he took office and laid down the law the jobs market did a 180 and started climbing.

LOOK AT THE CHARTED NUMBERS!
 
10 Charts You Need To See Before The Weekend

take a look at this chart you silly man

So?

<ctrl>F Obama.


Nope. Not in there. Just because the economy is recovering does not mean that Obama did it. Although many who do not take a longer view will give him credit for it.

I don't think we'll see the real impact of his economic policies for at least 4 or 5 years. This most recent downturn is all Clinton/Bush IMO, but it's too soon to say if anything Obama has done is actually helping...or if this is the natural swing of the business cycle. Get back to me in a few years when more data is compiled and we can discuss it then.

ITS A FUCKING V SINCE HE TOOK OFFICE!


n.

Wrong. Here is the comment from the source of the graph:
ADP Report: Private Sector Job Loss Disappoints Expectations Payrolls have yet to turn positive, despite 18 months and billions of dollars spent.
FAIL.
 
ITS A FUCKING V SINCE HE TOOK OFFICE!


He has managed to reverse OBVIOUSLY the slide Bush created.

This is why we think you people are so damned dishonest, you ignore clear facts to retain failed ideas.

The job market numbers are a CLEAR V since he took office and ignoring that clear fact make you an idiot con partisan.

Pointing out the shape of the graph doesn't help your case a bit.

Correlation does not equal causation.

This is utter bullshit, it is not some coincidence and only a partisan HACK would try and state it as such.


The numbers did a god damned ONE EIGHTY!
 
The day he took office and laid down the law the jobs market did a 180 and started climbing.

You do realize that this actually hurts your position, that Obama is solely responsible for the recovery, right?

No policy, enacted by any damn body, will have the effect of turning the economy up or down the day or month they take office. And IMO, that actually goes beyond day or month into 4 or 5 years in most cases.
 
So?

<ctrl>F Obama.


Nope. Not in there. Just because the economy is recovering does not mean that Obama did it. Although many who do not take a longer view will give him credit for it.

I don't think we'll see the real impact of his economic policies for at least 4 or 5 years. This most recent downturn is all Clinton/Bush IMO, but it's too soon to say if anything Obama has done is actually helping...or if this is the natural swing of the business cycle. Get back to me in a few years when more data is compiled and we can discuss it then.

ITS A FUCKING V SINCE HE TOOK OFFICE!


n.

Wrong. Here is the comment from the source of the graph:
ADP Report: Private Sector Job Loss Disappoints Expectations Payrolls have yet to turn positive, despite 18 months and billions of dollars spent.
FAIL.

Only a partisan hack would call a 180 turning point and a precipitus climb a fail.

It really sucks to be a con huh?
 
ITS A FUCKING V SINCE HE TOOK OFFICE!


He has managed to reverse OBVIOUSLY the slide Bush created.

This is why we think you people are so damned dishonest, you ignore clear facts to retain failed ideas.

The job market numbers are a CLEAR V since he took office and ignoring that clear fact make you an idiot con partisan.

Pointing out the shape of the graph doesn't help your case a bit.

Correlation does not equal causation.

This is utter bullshit, it is not some coincidence and only a partisan HACK would try and state it as such.


The numbers did a god damned ONE EIGHTY!

You still aren't helping your case. And repeating an accusation that has already been shown to be patently false kinda puts you in the partisan hack category yourself.
 
The former first lady has written a book which I look forward to reading where she states that she supports gay marriage and a woman's right to choice.
Now say what you want about W's politics and term at the helm but I respect greatly a married couple that may differ on certain issues and continues to have such a strong relationship as a married couple. Both of them are to be commended and respected for this. I respect the former President even more on this.
Many men sit back and simply dictate to their wives how and what they should think. Clearly, this is not the case with the former President.

Agreed. I find the more I delve into Bush's political legacy the more im disappointed in his cabinet, as his original rhetoric was so much more in line with the guy we needed those past eight years. It's unfortunate he turned out the way he did.

I agree with you two gadawg, Bush seemed like the type of guy in college who enjoyed partying with anyone and wasn't all judgmental, "anti-black" or "anti-gay" as people tried to spin it, he just played some stances up because that's what politics are. It's like going to an interview, who the fuck would tell the interrogator all the bad things about them??
 
The day he took office and laid down the law the jobs market did a 180 and started climbing.

You do realize that this actually hurts your position, that Obama is solely responsible for the recovery, right?

No policy, enacted by any damn body, will have the effect of turning the economy up or down the day or month they take office. And IMO, that actually goes beyond day or month into 4 or 5 years in most cases.

Bush was just that bad baby.

The world hated him and breathed a sigh of relief when he left office.

Obama came in and did the RIGHT things to quell the fears.

It worked just like it did in FDRs time and now the con label is going to be stuck with the democratic success for it entire future.

YOUR con ideas failed and its been proven twice now in one lifetime, the dems have had to come in and clean it up twice now.

The republican brand better change or die.

Get some new ideas that might work instead of hanging onto ideas that have been proven failures twice in one lifetime now.

Grow up, man up and face facts YOUR IDEAS HAVE FAILED!
 
The day he took office and laid down the law the jobs market did a 180 and started climbing.

You do realize that this actually hurts your position, that Obama is solely responsible for the recovery, right?

No policy, enacted by any damn body, will have the effect of turning the economy up or down the day or month they take office. And IMO, that actually goes beyond day or month into 4 or 5 years in most cases.

Bush was just that bad baby.

The world hated him and breathed a sigh of relief when he left office.

So? That doesn't stimulate a recovery.

Obama came in and did the RIGHT things to quell the fears.

Too soon to tell if the recovery is due to his policies, or due to a natural economic cycle. The fact that the recovery, according to you, started as soon as he entered office suggests that it was the natural cycle. Economies don't recover simply because people "like" the guy in office. So try again.

YOUR con ideas failed and its been proven twice now in one lifetime, the dems have had to come in and clean it up twice now.

The republican brand better change or die.

Get some new ideas that might work instead of hanging onto ideas that have been proven failures twice in one lifetime now.

Grow up, man up and face facts YOUR IDEAS HAVE FAILED!


My ideas?

I started this thread saying that Bush was horrible as a president. But don't let that stop your demonstration of what an epic fail looks like.
 
Do you understand consumer confidance?

Consumer confidence doesn't solely lift an economy out of a downturn. It also takes policies and growth facilitated by those policies. Both of which are very slow to take effect and "turn the ship" so to speak.


Obama did all of that fella and the numbers say it worked.

Go ahead and deny the numbers because they dont fit your world view.

Obama did as much as could be done and now the results are coming in and the numbers say it worked
 
Do you understand consumer confidance?

Consumer confidence doesn't solely lift an economy out of a downturn. It also takes policies and growth facilitated by those policies. Both of which are very slow to take effect and "turn the ship" so to speak.


Obama did all of that fella and the numbers say it worked.

Go ahead and deny the numbers because they dont fit your world view.

Obama did as much as could be done and now the results are coming in and the numbers say it worked

Keep drinking the kool-aid.

And nevermind on that conversation a few years from now to actually discuss whether or not Obama's policies worked or not. It's obvious that you have no interest in anything that does not reinforce your worldviews already.
 
You will rewrite this history in your own little worlds just like you rewrote the History of FDR fixing the last mess.


The American people who lived through it knew who saved them, now that many of them are dead you think you can rewrite the history.

We will not let you rewrite history anymore.
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top