With 11 days of experience....

[Oldandtired]

You might be correct. And the republican party needs a new face so it's about time

I thought his rebuttal was good.

First....I voted for McDonnell. I lke his ideas FOR VIRGINIA. However, you and another poster talked about how McDonnell provided substance. I heard McDonnell wander through some tlaking points on education. Can you please point out the substance that he provided, as I did not hear any?

There was none.
ANd by no means an effort to say it was okay that he offered no substance, as it was quite disappointing, I found that Obamas SOTU adddress also offered no substance.
It seemd to me that he offered a vision.....but with little to no concrete ideas.

A jobs bill? Explain exactly what you want to see.
Healthcare? Explain what needs to be in it for support and approval

Instead he pretty much spent the better part of 70 minutes saying...

'there will be food on every table, healthcare in every household, unemployment will decrease, deficit will decrease, debt will decrease, taxes will not go up, defense will be strong...etc...etc...etc...

Well......duh? Of course that is what we all want....but to date it has never been achevied by anyone...exactly how do you plan to get bi partisan support to make that happen?

Results are arbitrary...methods is what we need to hear and debate.

If he discussed methods, I would say he offered substance.

 

[Truthmatters]

You didnt listen very well then

 

[VaYank5150]

You might be correct. And the republican party needs a new face so it's about time

I thought his rebuttal was good.

First....I voted for McDonnell. I lke his ideas FOR VIRGINIA. However, you and another poster talked about how McDonnell provided substance. I heard McDonnell wander through some tlaking points on education. Can you please point out the substance that he provided, as I did not hear any?

There was none.
ANd by no means an effort to say it was okay that he offered no substance, as it was quite disappointing, I found that Obamas SOTU adddress also offered no substance.
It seemd to me that he offered a vision.....but with little to no concrete ideas.

A jobs bill? Explain exactly what you want to see.
Healthcare? Explain what needs to be in it for support and approval

Instead he pretty much spent the better part of 70 minutes saying...

'there will be food on every table, healthcare in every household, unemployment will decrease, deficit will decrease, debt will decrease, taxes will not go up, defense will be strong...etc...etc...etc...

Well......duh? Of course that is what we all want....but to date it has never been achevied by anyone...exactly how do you plan to get bi partisan support to make that happen?

Results are arbitrary...methods is what we need to hear and debate.

If he discussed methods, I would say he offered substance.

I wholeheartedly agree that Obama's speech was simply a "vision" statement, with little to no concrete details. I did give him kudos for kida-sorta admitting his back room deals on healthcare helped to sink the legislation. And while I know McDonnell could not have given concrete information on a National agenda for education if his life depended on it, I just wanted to correct the people who stated that he did.

 

[Oldandtired]

you guys crashed the economy twice in one lifetime.

Our ideas fixed them once and now are working on fixing it again.

History connot be revised to fit your views.

You guys?
Our?

So it was only those with republican leaning that signed mortgage applications with lies about income and job status since they were NINJA loans?

It was only those with republican leaning that did not read credit card applications?

It was only the republican leaning that spent more than they had?

Or are you admitting that the republicans had believed that they can expect the american people to be responsible for themselves and the democrats believe that the american people need to be guided and controlled by government as the american people are not to be trusted to watch their personal steps in life?

 

[Oldandtired]

First....I voted for McDonnell. I lke his ideas FOR VIRGINIA. However, you and another poster talked about how McDonnell provided substance. I heard McDonnell wander through some tlaking points on education. Can you please point out the substance that he provided, as I did not hear any?

There was none.
ANd by no means an effort to say it was okay that he offered no substance, as it was quite disappointing, I found that Obamas SOTU adddress also offered no substance.
It seemd to me that he offered a vision.....but with little to no concrete ideas.

A jobs bill? Explain exactly what you want to see.
Healthcare? Explain what needs to be in it for support and approval

Instead he pretty much spent the better part of 70 minutes saying...

'there will be food on every table, healthcare in every household, unemployment will decrease, deficit will decrease, debt will decrease, taxes will not go up, defense will be strong...etc...etc...etc...

Well......duh? Of course that is what we all want....but to date it has never been achevied by anyone...exactly how do you plan to get bi partisan support to make that happen?

Results are arbitrary...methods is what we need to hear and debate.

If he discussed methods, I would say he offered substance.

I wholeheartedly agree that Obama's speech was simply a "vision" statement, with little to no concrete details. I did give him kudos for kida-sorta admitting his back room deals on healthcare helped to sink the legislation. And while I know McDonnell could not have given concrete information on a National agenda for education if his life depended on it, I just wanted to correct the people who stated that he did.

I am sure you were a bit taken back when he blamed the back room deals on congress and that he had no control over it when, in fact, he held at least 3 major back room deals during the process.....Pharma, AMA and Unions.

 

[VaYank5150]

There was none.
ANd by no means an effort to say it was okay that he offered no substance, as it was quite disappointing, I found that Obamas SOTU adddress also offered no substance.
It seemd to me that he offered a vision.....but with little to no concrete ideas.

A jobs bill? Explain exactly what you want to see.
Healthcare? Explain what needs to be in it for support and approval

Instead he pretty much spent the better part of 70 minutes saying...

'there will be food on every table, healthcare in every household, unemployment will decrease, deficit will decrease, debt will decrease, taxes will not go up, defense will be strong...etc...etc...etc...

Well......duh? Of course that is what we all want....but to date it has never been achevied by anyone...exactly how do you plan to get bi partisan support to make that happen?

Results are arbitrary...methods is what we need to hear and debate.

If he discussed methods, I would say he offered substance.

I wholeheartedly agree that Obama's speech was simply a "vision" statement, with little to no concrete details. I did give him kudos for kida-sorta admitting his back room deals on healthcare helped to sink the legislation. And while I know McDonnell could not have given concrete information on a National agenda for education if his life depended on it, I just wanted to correct the people who stated that he did.

I am sure you were a bit taken back when he blamed the back room deals on congress and that he had no control over it when, in fact, he held at least 3 major back room deals during the process.....Pharma, AMA and Unions.

I DID find it rather ironic that he attempted to blame "Congress" for these deals. However, Obama is not a stupid man. He has to know he has egg all over his face on this one. MOST of us Americans are smart enough to see through the bullshit.

 

[xsited1]

Before anyone says it, YES, I got this from MSNBC. However, I found it rather intriguing. Why is it that the GOP picked Bob McDonnell, a guy with 11 days of Governor experience to deliver the rebuttal to the President's SOTU address? And then, within his rebuttal, the only other Republican he mentioned was Scott Brown, who so far has zero days of experience in the senate? Does anyone else find this odd? Are the Republicans trying to put a new face on their party?

Why bring in the big guns when you're rebutting Obama? He's just a rank amateur. They could've chosen a 6th grader for the rebuttal.

 

[VaYank5150]

Before anyone says it, YES, I got this from MSNBC. However, I found it rather intriguing. Why is it that the GOP picked Bob McDonnell, a guy with 11 days of Governor experience to deliver the rebuttal to the President's SOTU address? And then, within his rebuttal, the only other Republican he mentioned was Scott Brown, who so far has zero days of experience in the senate? Does anyone else find this odd? Are the Republicans trying to put a new face on their party?

Why bring in the big guns when you're rebutting Obama? He's just a rank amateur. They could've chosen a 6th grader for the rebuttal.

Yeah, but they used Piysuh Jindal last time....

 

[Oldandtired]

I wholeheartedly agree that Obama's speech was simply a "vision" statement, with little to no concrete details. I did give him kudos for kida-sorta admitting his back room deals on healthcare helped to sink the legislation. And while I know McDonnell could not have given concrete information on a National agenda for education if his life depended on it, I just wanted to correct the people who stated that he did.

I am sure you were a bit taken back when he blamed the back room deals on congress and that he had no control over it when, in fact, he held at least 3 major back room deals during the process.....Pharma, AMA and Unions.

I DID find it rather ironic that he attempted to blame "Congress" for these deals. However, Obama is not a stupid man. He has to know he has egg all over his face on this one. MOST of us Americans are smart enough to see through the bullshit.

Sadly....so many people who watched that address walked away feeling that he has already taken the steps to create the utopia he described.

His speechwriters have an outstanding way of having him say one thing and having people hear another....but when presented with the "discrepency" he can respond with "look at the treanscript of what I said" as Gibbs has said many times in the press conferences.

If you were to ask my sister.....she truly believes that Obama is at odds with the democratic caucus over their "back room dealing".....

Likewise, she is 100% convinced that the SCOTUS ruling allows foreign companies to influence campaigns.

 

[Oldandtired]

Before anyone says it, YES, I got this from MSNBC. However, I found it rather intriguing. Why is it that the GOP picked Bob McDonnell, a guy with 11 days of Governor experience to deliver the rebuttal to the President's SOTU address? And then, within his rebuttal, the only other Republican he mentioned was Scott Brown, who so far has zero days of experience in the senate? Does anyone else find this odd? Are the Republicans trying to put a new face on their party?

Why bring in the big guns when you're rebutting Obama? He's just a rank amateur. They could've chosen a 6th grader for the rebuttal.

In 11 days, he had 11 days more executive experience than Obama did on his first day as President.

Did you refer to Obama as a rank amatuer?

I bet not.....but that is just an hypothesis.

 

[Oldandtired]

Before anyone says it, YES, I got this from MSNBC. However, I found it rather intriguing. Why is it that the GOP picked Bob McDonnell, a guy with 11 days of Governor experience to deliver the rebuttal to the President's SOTU address? And then, within his rebuttal, the only other Republican he mentioned was Scott Brown, who so far has zero days of experience in the senate? Does anyone else find this odd? Are the Republicans trying to put a new face on their party?

Why bring in the big guns when you're rebutting Obama? He's just a rank amateur. They could've chosen a 6th grader for the rebuttal.

Yeah, but they used Piysuh Jindal last time....

LMAO...I was waiting for Jindal to put on his sneakers and cardigan...and start singing "its a wonderful day in the neighborhood".

Anyone else think fo Mr. Rogers when Jindal spoke last year?

 

[xsited1]

Before anyone says it, YES, I got this from MSNBC. However, I found it rather intriguing. Why is it that the GOP picked Bob McDonnell, a guy with 11 days of Governor experience to deliver the rebuttal to the President's SOTU address? And then, within his rebuttal, the only other Republican he mentioned was Scott Brown, who so far has zero days of experience in the senate? Does anyone else find this odd? Are the Republicans trying to put a new face on their party?

Why bring in the big guns when you're rebutting Obama? He's just a rank amateur. They could've chosen a 6th grader for the rebuttal.

Yeah, but they used Piysuh Jindal last time....

I'm sure that was for comedy relief. But at that time, who knew Obama was an absolute idiot? Obama is such an embarrassment, he makes George W. Bush look good.

 

[xsited1]

Before anyone says it, YES, I got this from MSNBC. However, I found it rather intriguing. Why is it that the GOP picked Bob McDonnell, a guy with 11 days of Governor experience to deliver the rebuttal to the President's SOTU address? And then, within his rebuttal, the only other Republican he mentioned was Scott Brown, who so far has zero days of experience in the senate? Does anyone else find this odd? Are the Republicans trying to put a new face on their party?

Why bring in the big guns when you're rebutting Obama? He's just a rank amateur. They could've chosen a 6th grader for the rebuttal.

In 11 days, he had 11 days more executive experience than Obama did on his first day as President.

Did you refer to Obama as a rank amatuer?

I bet not.....but that is just an hypothesis.

I did, but I was being too kind. I doubt he's even good at getting coffee.

 

[Oldandtired]

Why bring in the big guns when you're rebutting Obama? He's just a rank amateur. They could've chosen a 6th grader for the rebuttal.

In 11 days, he had 11 days more executive experience than Obama did on his first day as President.

Did you refer to Obama as a rank amatuer?

I bet not.....but that is just an hypothesis.

I did, but I was being too kind. I doubt he's even good at getting coffee.

Wow...talk about completely misreading who you were referring to as the rank amatuer.
Sorry about that.

 

[Claudette]

you guys crashed the economy twice in one lifetime.

Our ideas fixed them once and now are working on fixing it again.

History connot be revised to fit your views.

Your right. You can't revise history. Here's a little you seem to have forgotten about.

Apparantly you have forgotten the mess Carter, a Dem left all over when he mercifully left office. I'm sure President Ragean, if he were still alive, would be more than happy to know who the hell cleaned up that mess if it wasn't him. A Rep. Short memory there Truth.

Clinton had the first balanced budget in years. He didn't do that with the help of a Dem Congress. He couldn't work with them. He did it with the help of the Reps when they took over in 94. He was way more savvy than Obama will ever be.

 

[VaYank5150]

Why bring in the big guns when you're rebutting Obama? He's just a rank amateur. They could've chosen a 6th grader for the rebuttal.

Yeah, but they used Piysuh Jindal last time....

I'm sure that was for comedy relief. But at that time, who knew Obama was an absolute idiot? Obama is such an embarrassment, he makes George W. Bush look good.

I am sincerely hoping you said this for effect. NO ONE can make Bush look good.

 

[xsited1]

Yeah, but they used Piysuh Jindal last time....

I'm sure that was for comedy relief. But at that time, who knew Obama was an absolute idiot? Obama is such an embarrassment, he makes George W. Bush look good.

I am sincerely hoping you said this for effect. NO ONE can make Bush look good.

I didn't think so, either, but Obama is certainly on his way.

 

[Truthmatters]

Only to partisan hacks

 

[Murf76]

There was none.
ANd by no means an effort to say it was okay that he offered no substance, as it was quite disappointing, I found that Obamas SOTU adddress also offered no substance.
<snip for brevity>

I'll find myself in agreement with you on nearly every post, O&T, but i can't agree that McDonnell offered no substance. His speech was brief, yes, and he only had time to touch briefly on some of the issues.. but he offered both praise and criticism for current WH policies, expansion of charter schools and teacher accountability, a firm declaration of the right course in processing terrorists, facts and figures on unemployment and troop deployment, an outline of the Republican goals for healthcare, etc.

Bob McDonnell Speech (FULL TEXT): Republican State Of The Union Response

Overall, it was a good little speech for the time allowed.

 

[VaYank5150]

There was none.
ANd by no means an effort to say it was okay that he offered no substance, as it was quite disappointing, I found that Obamas SOTU adddress also offered no substance.
<snip for brevity>

I'll find myself in agreement with you on nearly every post, O&T, but i can't agree that McDonnell offered no substance. His speech was brief, yes, and he only had time to touch briefly on some of the issues.. but he offered both praise and criticism for current WH policies, expansion of charter schools and teacher accountability, a firm declaration of the right course in processing terrorists, facts and figures on unemployment and troop deployment, an outline of the Republican goals for healthcare, etc.

Bob McDonnell Speech (FULL TEXT): Republican State Of The Union Response

Overall, it was a good little speech for the time allowed.

OK, Murf....please show me in this text where McDonnell explained HOW he planned to increase teacher accountability. Or, please show me in this text where McDonnell explained WHAT the Republican goals for healthcare were and HOW he planned to get them implemented.