You want to know why Bush and Cheney are so quiet?

[JimH52]

Yeaaa gridlock! The economy is great and we don't need solutions.?

I would bet good money that the GOP has pointedly told Bush and Cheney to stay quiet. They don't want anyone reminded of their disaster.

Yes, the GOP is Gridlock. They are the party of "NO!" Nothing changes there.

 

[JimH52]

Why are they quiet?
Because they know that if you give a democrat enough rope, they'll eventually hang themselves.

and that is exactly what the GOP under Bush and Cheney did.

 

[Sallow]

Because they don't want voters to remember what a mess they left the Country in. They would rather voters forget about their reign, and vote to return their cronies to Congress. Then the "big money" GOP can slowly make its way back to power.

Can you blame them?

Cheney's been sick. Bush basically said he was not going to comment on the Obama Administration and so far..he's kept his word.

Much as I dislike what those two did..sticking to reality is in the best interest of both sides.

 

[The Rabbi]

What can they really say?

The economy went down on their watch so if they go about the business of saying that Obama is responsible for what is happening now, they're also going to be saying that they were responsible for what they did.

You're speaking about the Democrats, of course. Yes, the economy tanked after the Dems took Congress. And I guess Obama is responsible, having pushed a lot of the crappy legislation they passed. This is why not a single Democrat is running on his record of the last 2 years. Check that, the only Democrats running on their record are those who voted against the Administration's proposals.

Rab is, of course, one of those perfect examples of partisanship gone mad.

He just cannot bring himoself to admit that the economy isn't entirely controlled by this or any government.

He just cannot bring himself to credit the other players with their share of this disaster.

No it wasn't the banks, or corporation, it wasn't the rating agencies that lied, or the banks that were selling worthless paper to unsuspecting investors, either, was it Rab?

No the whole problem was Congress, right?

Seriously, Rab, I cannot believe you are as misinformed as your posts suggest you to be.

Surely you must understand that it took more than bad policy on the part of government to get us into this mess, right?

So the economy isn't the fault of any one entity. Except when it's the Republican Party. Is that about right?

 

[Moon]

Because they don't want voters to remember what a mess they left the Country in. They would rather voters forget about their reign, and vote to return their cronies to Congress. Then the "big money" GOP can slowly make its way back to power.

Can you blame them?

How can the voters forget when Obama and his sycophants have done little more than bleat "It's Bush's fault!" for months?

 

[ClosedCaption]

Bush wiped out our surplus too! If he didn't have the surplus to rob it would have been all deficit spending, just like Obama has to. But that's ok, let's pretend money is important after you spent it all!

 

[Sallow]

Because they don't want voters to remember what a mess they left the Country in. They would rather voters forget about their reign, and vote to return their cronies to Congress. Then the "big money" GOP can slowly make its way back to power.

Can you blame them?

How can the voters forget when Obama and his sycophants have done little more than bleat "It's Bush's fault!" for months?

That's just plain untrue.

Passing stimulus, generating jobs. On February 17, 2009, Obama signed the $787 billion stimulus bill into law. In December 2009, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office issued a report estimating that "in the third quarter of calendar year 2009, an additional 600,000 to 1.6 million people were employed in the United States" due to that legislation. According to the White House Council of Economic Advisers, CBO has increased its estimate to 800,000 to 2.4 million additional employed through the fourth quarter of that year. Moreover, a November 20, 2009, New York Times article reported that the "consensus" among "dispassionate analysts" is that "the stimulus package, messy as it is, is working," citing nonpartisan analyses of gross domestic product and total employment figures by several companies specializing in economic forecasting. Further, a January 25 USA Today article stated that, according to its "quarterly survey of 50 economists," "nemployment would have hit 10.8% -- higher than December's 10% rate -- without Obama's $787 billion stimulus program," adding, "The difference would translate into another 1.2 million lost jobs."

Eliminating wasteful spending. Obama was able to achieve some significant cuts to wasteful spending -- most notably, the elimination of the F-22 fighter jet program after he successfully lobbied the Senate to vote to strip out financing for more jets from a defense funding authorization bill. The Washington Times reported on January 14 that Obama won "60 percent of his proposed cuts" and also managed "to get Congress to ax several programs that had bedeviled President George W. Bush for years."

Sotomayor nomination. On May 26, 2009, Obama nominated Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court to replace the retiring Justice David Souter. She was confirmed by the Senate on August 6, 2009, and sworn in August 8, making her the first Hispanic justice, and only the third woman, on the court.

Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. The first bill President Obama signed into law, on January 29, 2009, was the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which expands the rights of workers to sue employers over wage discrimination claims.

SCHIP expansion. On February 5, 2009, Obama signed a bill expanding the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) to cover 4 million more lower-income children.

Public lands bill. On March 30, Obama signed an omnibus public lands bill, which The New York Times reported "allows for 2 million more acres to be declared wilderness... [with] more than 1,000 miles designated as scenic rivers, and adds land for national trails."

Credit card reform. On May 21, 2009, Obama signed into law a bill providing what USA Today called the "most sweeping changes to the credit card industry in 40 years," adding restrictions on interest rate increases and fees and restricting the marketing of credit cards to college students.

Transparency. The Washington Post reported that moves by the Obama administration to improve government transparency "included a ban on lobbyist gifts; restrictions on the hiring of lobbyists; publication of White House visitor logs and other records; and a move to bar lobbyists from serving on advisory boards." A report by Common Cause, Democracy 21, the League of Women Voters, and U.S. PIRG stated that: "The cumulative effect of the Administration's actions has been to adopt the strongest and most comprehensive lobbying, ethics and transparency rules and policies ever established by an Administration to govern its own activities."

Tobacco regulation. On June 22, 2009, Obama signed the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, which, for the first time, gave the U.S. Food & Drug Administration the authority to regulate the manufacturing, marketing, and sale of tobacco.

National service. On April 21, 2009, Obama signed the Edward M. Kennedy Serve America Act, which expands the scope of AmeriCorps and provides opportunities for young people and senior citizens to join in service programs.

Stem cell research. On May 9, 2009, Obama signed an executive order easing restrictions on the use of federal money for embryonic stem cell research.
Media ignore Obama's accomplishments to claim he has "little to show for '09" | Media Matters for America

 

[Missourian]

What can they really say?

The economy went down on their watch so if they go about the business of saying that Obama is responsible for what is happening now, they're also going to be saying that they were responsible for what they did.

In both cases, of course, both Bush II and Obama, their responsibility for what's happened, and for what is happening to the economy is rather limited.


Given the near meltdown of the entire economic system we were facing, I think giving both admins credit for preventing that needs to be done.

Since partisans on both sides of this debate cannot admit that the other team did a fairly good job given how bad things were, I think it falls to somebody like me to point this out.

If the Bush II team hadn't acted when it did, and had the Obama team not continued acting as it did, we wouldn't be writing to each other right now, folks.

Yeah, it was, I am informed, that bad.

Well aren't you the buzz kill.

You need to be stopped before you cause serious damage.

Should common sense break out, that would take all the fun out of politics.

Do you want to bear the responsibility for that?


.
.
...
.

.
.
.
P.S. - Vocabulary lesson of the day Bare vs. Bear...http://www.trackerpress.com/reference/bear-or-bare.php

I had to look it up.

 

[Claudette]

Because they don't want voters to remember what a mess they left the Country in. They would rather voters forget about their reign, and vote to return their cronies to Congress. Then the "big money" GOP can slowly make its way back to power.

Can you blame them?

How can the voters forget when Obama and his sycophants have done little more than bleat "It's Bush's fault!" for months?

Your so right Moon.

Bush doesn't have to say a word.

Every other word out of OL'BO's mouth is Bush's administration did this and Bushs administration did that.

Of course his is so much better. NOT. Guys a ******* disaster.

 

[Samson]

Because they don't want voters to remember what a mess they left the Country in. They would rather voters forget about their reign, and vote to return their cronies to Congress. Then the "big money" GOP can slowly make its way back to power.

Can you blame them?

They didn't leave stains on Monica's dress?

Then they'd be more popular

 

[Sallow]

Because they don't want voters to remember what a mess they left the Country in. They would rather voters forget about their reign, and vote to return their cronies to Congress. Then the "big money" GOP can slowly make its way back to power.

Can you blame them?

They didn't leave stains on Monica's dress?

Then they'd be more popular

Gosh I love this song..

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfv3kBzJZgU&feature=related[/ame]

 

[The Rabbi]

Because they don't want voters to remember what a mess they left the Country in. They would rather voters forget about their reign, and vote to return their cronies to Congress. Then the "big money" GOP can slowly make its way back to power.

Can you blame them?

How can the voters forget when Obama and his sycophants have done little more than bleat "It's Bush's fault!" for months?

That's not true. They've been very busy.
They have massively increased the deficit. They have increased taxes. THey have increased regulations. They have created massive new bureaucracies to write even more regulations. They have thrown gulf oil workers out of work. They have trashed the dollar. They have emboldened North Korea, Russia, and Iran and pissed off Israel, Poland, and Britain. And i the process broken every campaign pledge they ever made (and I don't just mean Obama here).
And if that isn't "progress" I don't know what is!

 

[bodecea]

Because they don't want voters to remember what a mess they left the Country in. They would rather voters forget about their reign, and vote to return their cronies to Congress. Then the "big money" GOP can slowly make its way back to power.

Can you blame them?

2 years after Bush left office and you retards are still claiming it is his fault OBAMA spent 3 trillion dollars in less then 2 years. Guess what dumb ****, the people know who spent that money and who plans to keep on spending like a drunk sailor on shore liberty.

Lets put it in prospective shall we? Bush deficit was 5.7 trillion in 8 YEARS. Obama has already spent 3 trillion in deficit in less then 2 years. And has announced a budget as big as this year or bigger for next year if he retains the House and Senate. Lets do the math shall we?

Lets pretend Obama can get reelected and spends 8 years as President. In 8 years at the rate he is spending now he will have amassed a 12 TRILLION dollar deficit, more then TWICE Bushes deficit. Hell in 2 years he has almost spent as much as Bush in 8 years.

Bush still has him beat with 8 years of blaming Clinton.

 

[The Rabbi]

Because they don't want voters to remember what a mess they left the Country in. They would rather voters forget about their reign, and vote to return their cronies to Congress. Then the "big money" GOP can slowly make its way back to power.

Can you blame them?

2 years after Bush left office and you retards are still claiming it is his fault OBAMA spent 3 trillion dollars in less then 2 years. Guess what dumb ****, the people know who spent that money and who plans to keep on spending like a drunk sailor on shore liberty.

Lets put it in prospective shall we? Bush deficit was 5.7 trillion in 8 YEARS. Obama has already spent 3 trillion in deficit in less then 2 years. And has announced a budget as big as this year or bigger for next year if he retains the House and Senate. Lets do the math shall we?

Lets pretend Obama can get reelected and spends 8 years as President. In 8 years at the rate he is spending now he will have amassed a 12 TRILLION dollar deficit, more then TWICE Bushes deficit. Hell in 2 years he has almost spent as much as Bush in 8 years.

Bush still has him beat with 8 years of blaming Clinton.

And Clinton was blaming 12 years of Reagan/Bush for all his problems.

 

[Mr Natural]

2 years after Bush left office and you retards are still claiming it is his fault OBAMA spent 3 trillion dollars in less then 2 years. Guess what dumb ****, the people know who spent that money and who plans to keep on spending like a drunk sailor on shore liberty.

Lets put it in prospective shall we? Bush deficit was 5.7 trillion in 8 YEARS. Obama has already spent 3 trillion in deficit in less then 2 years. And has announced a budget as big as this year or bigger for next year if he retains the House and Senate. Lets do the math shall we?

Lets pretend Obama can get reelected and spends 8 years as President. In 8 years at the rate he is spending now he will have amassed a 12 TRILLION dollar deficit, more then TWICE Bushes deficit. Hell in 2 years he has almost spent as much as Bush in 8 years.

Bush still has him beat with 8 years of blaming Clinton.

And Clinton was blaming 12 years of Reagan/Bush for all his problems.

And reagan blamed Carter for all his economic woes.

Just how far back do you want to go with this game?

 

[The Infidel]

Because they're retired, and unlike Carter and Clinton, they show a little dignity and don't need to run their pie holes endlessly?

Exactly!


Oh, and I seen a billboard in East Texas this weekend that had a pic of Doofus Carter, and it said MISS ME YET?

It had to be a joke, b/c I laughed my ass off!


You libturds can bash Boosh all ya want, but he has more class on his little finger than Obama-dinijhad, BJ Clinton, and peanut brain Carter all put together.

I applaud him for keeping his mouth shut
But I would'nt hold it against him if he decided to speak up (at least once).

OBAMA and all his cultists are a bunch of bitchy little pussies if ya ask me.

 

[editec]

You're speaking about the Democrats, of course. Yes, the economy tanked after the Dems took Congress. And I guess Obama is responsible, having pushed a lot of the crappy legislation they passed. This is why not a single Democrat is running on his record of the last 2 years. Check that, the only Democrats running on their record are those who voted against the Administration's proposals.

Rab is, of course, one of those perfect examples of partisanship gone mad.

He just cannot bring himoself to admit that the economy isn't entirely controlled by this or any government.

He just cannot bring himself to credit the other players with their share of this disaster.

No it wasn't the banks, or corporation, it wasn't the rating agencies that lied, or the banks that were selling worthless paper to unsuspecting investors, either, was it Rab?

No the whole problem was Congress, right?

Seriously, Rab, I cannot believe you are as misinformed as your posts suggest you to be.

Surely you must understand that it took more than bad policy on the part of government to get us into this mess, right?

So the economy isn't the fault of any one entity. Except when it's the Republican Party. Is that about right?

You really cannot imagine that some of us are reality based thinkers, can you?

It's just beyond your ability believe that to some of us partisanship like yours is just freaking stupid.

I'm on record in this board constantly pointing out the problems that BOTH parties are responsible for.

You?

You're a freaking tool.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Bush and Cheney should remind people of the <5% unemployment and $300Billion and shrinking deficits when Republicans ran everything

Now we have $1.3 TRILLION deficits and states with unemployment >20%

 

[The Rabbi]

Rab is, of course, one of those perfect examples of partisanship gone mad.

He just cannot bring himoself to admit that the economy isn't entirely controlled by this or any government.

He just cannot bring himself to credit the other players with their share of this disaster.

No it wasn't the banks, or corporation, it wasn't the rating agencies that lied, or the banks that were selling worthless paper to unsuspecting investors, either, was it Rab?

No the whole problem was Congress, right?

Seriously, Rab, I cannot believe you are as misinformed as your posts suggest you to be.

Surely you must understand that it took more than bad policy on the part of government to get us into this mess, right?

So the economy isn't the fault of any one entity. Except when it's the Republican Party. Is that about right?

You really cannot imagine that some of us are reality based thinkers, can you?

It's just beyond your ability believe that to some of us partisanship like yours is just freaking stupid.

I'm on record in this board constantly pointing out the problems that BOTH parties are responsible for.

You?

You're a freaking tool.

I can't imagine you are a "reality-based thinker" when you post that the Bush/Cheney is responsible for the economy and then post after me that no one is really responsible for the economy. Hello?
Actually I can't imagine that you can think at all, given the mindless shit you are forever posting here.

 

[bodecea]

Bush still has him beat with 8 years of blaming Clinton.

And Clinton was blaming 12 years of Reagan/Bush for all his problems.

And reagan blamed Carter for all his economic woes.

Just how far back do you want to go with this game?

It's Washington's fault! Blame George!