Borderline treasonous.


http://therepublic.com/view/story/12df5a...g-Business

http://articles.marketwatch.com/2012-07-...-employers


http://rollingout.com/politics/republica...mas-watch/

(07-10-2012 12:54 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  Borderline treasonous.


http://therepublic.com/view/story/12df5a...g-Business

http://articles.marketwatch.com/2012-07-...-employers


http://rollingout.com/politics/republica...mas-watch/

Obama had two years with 60 in the senate and a huge majority in the house... "It's their fault I can't keep my promises" is a tired refrain from Obama and his supporters.

So, the news here is that Democrats blame Republicans for the economy's poor performance because there is an election coming up? That, and firmbizzle is short on critical thinking skills that would tell him that posting three opinion articles, all saying "it's the Republicans' fault" is not very persuading at all. (Albeit the latter is hardly news...)

Quote:“In recent days, Democrats have started coming out and saying publicly what many have been mumbling privately for years — Republicans are so intent on defeating President Obama for re-election that they are purposely sabotaging the country’s economic recovery,” writes Michael Cohen of the UK Guardian. “These charges are now being levied by Democrats such as Senate majority leader Harry Reid and Obama’s key political adviser, David Axelrod.

(07-10-2012 01:08 PM)I45owl Wrote:  So, the news here is that Democrats blame Republicans for the economy's poor performance because there is an election coming up? That, and firmbizzle is short on critical thinking skills that would tell him that posting three opinion articles, all saying "it's the Republicans' fault" is not very persuading at all. (Albeit the latter is hardly news...)

Quote:“In recent days, Democrats have started coming out and saying publicly what many have been mumbling privately for years

LOL this is the tripe at those links? The dems have been "Privately" saying that the GOP is trying to destroy the economy to get rid of obama? Heck that has been their main talking point since 2010

Why would the GOP need to even try to sabotage the economy when Obama is doing such a bang-up job sabotaging it himself?

Makes no sense to me but apparently, to the other side it seems to be the intellectual answer.

(07-10-2012 01:11 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 01:08 PM)I45owl Wrote:  So, the news here is that Democrats blame Republicans for the economy's poor performance because there is an election coming up? That, and firmbizzle is short on critical thinking skills that would tell him that posting three opinion articles, all saying "it's the Republicans' fault" is not very persuading at all. (Albeit the latter is hardly news...)

Quote:“In recent days, Democrats have started coming out and saying publicly what many have been mumbling privately for years

LOL this is the tripe at those links? The dems have been "Privately" saying that the GOP is trying to destroy the economy to get rid of obama? Heck that has been their main talking point since 2010

So the truth is now a talking point?

(07-10-2012 01:12 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  Why would the GOP need to even try to sabotage the economy when Obama is doing such a bang-up job sabotaging it himself?

Makes no sense to me but apparently, to the other side it seems to be the intellectual answer.

You haven't followed the Congress very closely have you?

(07-10-2012 01:08 PM)I45owl Wrote:  So, the news here is that Democrats blame Republicans for the economy's poor performance because there is an election coming up? That, and firmbizzle is short on critical thinking skills that would tell him that posting three opinion articles, all saying "it's the Republicans' fault" is not very persuading at all. (Albeit the latter is hardly news...)

Quote:“In recent days, Democrats have started coming out and saying publicly what many have been mumbling privately for years — Republicans are so intent on defeating President Obama for re-election that they are purposely sabotaging the country’s economic recovery,” writes Michael Cohen of the UK Guardian. “These charges are now being levied by Democrats such as Senate majority leader Harry Reid and Obama’s key political adviser, David Axelrod.

You must be short on critical reading skills. Where in the title of this thread did I write Republican or Democrat? 60 democrats in the Senate doesn't mean crap if you have to water down every bill for them to keep their seat.

Survey says that the economy was already in the can when Obama took over.

(07-10-2012 01:57 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  You must be short on critical reading skills. Where in the title of this thread did I write Republican or Democrat? 60 democrats in the Senate doesn't mean crap if you have to water down every bill for them to keep their seat.

Survey says that the economy was already in the can when Obama took over.

So, you wrote 'conservative' and not 'Republican' and you are patting yourself on the back for being clever? FAIL.

We all know the economy was bad when he took over. At what point does Obama take responsibility for what HIS OWN policies have done? If his history is any indication, he will never own what he has done. He loves to take credit for the accomplishments of others and loves to blame Bush for all of his own deficiencies. He'll still be blaming Bush 30 years from now.

Here's a Q. for you, Firm.

Why has the media not looked at Obama's explicit campaign promises to see how he's doing? Why no reporting on it?

We all know that politicians lie. We all know that they promise vague things that they will never deliver on. Here's 5 explicit promises that Obama made;

1. He promised to create 5 million new energy jobs.

2. He said that by the end of his first term, Obamacare would “bring down premiums by $2,500 for the typical family.”

3. Obama claimed that his financial rescue plan would help stop foreclosures.

4. He pledged to "cut the deficit we inherited in half by the end of his first term in office."

5. He said he would "lift two million Americans from poverty” and would “jolt our economy back to life.”


Have you seen ANY media reporting on any of these five broken promises? I haven't. Instead, we hear about the GOP war on women, dogs on top of cars, and other non-story stories. No holding Obama to account by the lapdog media for his many (now laughable) promises to the gullible.

Your so called 'story' is just another in the long line of distractions away from Obama's failed record by his media enablers.

(07-10-2012 12:57 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 12:54 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  Borderline treasonous.


http://therepublic.com/view/story/12df5a...g-Business

http://articles.marketwatch.com/2012-07-...-employers


http://rollingout.com/politics/republica...mas-watch/

Obama had two years with 60 in the senate and a huge majority in the house... "It's their fault I can't keep my promises" is a tired refrain from Obama and his supporters.

I don't give Obama any leeway for not keeping his promises, as I can point to at least a few major ones that required no approval from congress to do (taking forever to get out of Iraq and his reneging on his word re:states rights on marijuana), but I feel the same way towards the republicans who have no problem acting like children to prove a point.

In short, neither party is nearly as concerned with doing what's best for the country as they are with making sure the other party is looking as bad to their constituency as possible.

Honest Q. UFC

On balance, has Obama as President been good for this country or bad for it? Please explain why you feel that way.

(07-10-2012 02:56 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  Honest Q. UFC

On balance, has Obama as President been good for this country or bad for it? Please explain why you feel that way.

The only possible answer he can give is that Obama has been good for this country in spite of the challenges he faced having to undo all the terrible things Bush did. After all, it's never Obama's fault.

(07-10-2012 02:24 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 01:57 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  You must be short on critical reading skills. Where in the title of this thread did I write Republican or Democrat? 60 democrats in the Senate doesn't mean crap if you have to water down every bill for them to keep their seat.

Survey says that the economy was already in the can when Obama took over.

So, you wrote 'conservative' and not 'Republican' and you are patting yourself on the back for being clever? FAIL.

We all know the economy was bad when he took over. At what point does Obama take responsibility for what HIS OWN policies have done? If his history is any indication, he will never own what he has done. He loves to take credit for the accomplishments of others and loves to blame Bush for all of his own deficiencies. He'll still be blaming Bush 30 years from now.

Here's a Q. for you, Firm.

Why has the media not looked at Obama's explicit campaign promises to see how he's doing? Why no reporting on it?

We all know that politicians lie. We all know that they promise vague things that they will never deliver on. Here's 5 explicit promises that Obama made;

1. He promised to create 5 million new energy jobs.

2. He said that by the end of his first term, Obamacare would “bring down premiums by $2,500 for the typical family.”

3. Obama claimed that his financial rescue plan would help stop foreclosures.

4. He pledged to "cut the deficit we inherited in half by the end of his first term in office."

5. He said he would "lift two million Americans from poverty” and would “jolt our economy back to life.”


Have you seen ANY media reporting on any of these five broken promises? I haven't. Instead, we hear about the GOP war on women, dogs on top of cars, and other non-story stories. No holding Obama to account by the lapdog media for his many (now laughable) promises to the gullible.

Your so called 'story' is just another in the long line of distractions away from Obama's failed record by his media enablers.

Failed record? While we haven't had the economic growth of the Clinton years. We are growing, we are creating jobs, we are better off than we were 4 years ago. You want to bring up campaign promises, please. They all make promises to get elected. Do you really thing they would get elected if the said "Yeah, not so sure how good I'll be but I'll try."
Could things be better? Maybe, I don't know. What I do know is that we were in the greatest economic debacle of my lifetime caused by Wall St and Obama at least plugged the leak. Now your conservative brethren want to put somebody from Wall St in the oval office to recreate what we did from 2000-2008. Nominate anybody but Mitt. Huck, McCain, Jeb, Etc.

(07-10-2012 02:56 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  Honest Q. UFC

On balance, has Obama as President been good for this country or bad for it? Please explain why you feel that way.

I'd say he's been lukewarm, took a few decent steps but most of them either lacked true teeth or took too damn long for him to take much credit on, however that isn't really a pertinent question in our system unfortunately. The only real issue one needs to truly concern themselves with is whether or not you think the other guy will be worse/better, and I don't see his economic policies helping us.

(07-10-2012 03:30 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 02:56 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  Honest Q. UFC

On balance, has Obama as President been good for this country or bad for it? Please explain why you feel that way.

I'd say he's been lukewarm, took a few decent steps but most of them either lacked true teeth or took too damn long for him to take much credit on, however that isn't really a pertinent question in our system unfortunately. The only real issue one needs to truly concern themselves with is whether or not you think the other guy will be worse/better, and I don't see his economic policies helping us.

What economic policies?

(07-10-2012 01:57 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(07-10-2012 01:08 PM)I45owl Wrote:  So, the news here is that Democrats blame Republicans for the economy's poor performance because there is an election coming up? That, and firmbizzle is short on critical thinking skills that would tell him that posting three opinion articles, all saying "it's the Republicans' fault" is not very persuading at all. (Albeit the latter is hardly news...)

Quote:“In recent days, ...

You must be short on critical reading skills.

You make it appear as if you did not read the articles you posted.

To be clear, I didn't give any attribution to the above quote, but it is:

Republicans Purposely Holding Up Economy on Obama's Watch

http://rollingout.com/politics/republica...mas-watch/ Wrote:“In recent days, Democrats have started coming out and saying publicly what many have been mumbling privately for years — Republicans are so intent on defeating President Obama for re-election that they are purposely sabotaging the country’s economic recovery,” writes Michael Cohen of the UK Guardian. “These charges are now being levied by Democrats such as Senate majority leader Harry Reid and Obama’s key political adviser, David Axelrod.

(07-10-2012 01:57 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  Where in the title of this thread did I write Republican or Democrat? 60 democrats in the Senate doesn't mean crap if you have to water down every bill for them to keep their seat.

Survey says that the economy was already in the can when Obama took over.

The reason my post was somewhat personal is this line, which is pretty absurd given the very partisan nature of your post, your history, and the character of all three opinion diatribes that you posted as rationale to your attack on fiscal conservatism.

(07-10-2012 12:54 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  Borderline treasonous.

(07-10-2012 03:27 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  Failed record? While we haven't had the economic growth of the Clinton years. We are growing, we are creating jobs

No, were not



The few jobs getting created here and there are not enough to raise hte percentage of Americans with jobs..

(07-10-2012 03:27 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  Failed record? While we haven't had the economic growth of the Clinton years. We are growing, we are creating jobs, we are better off than we were 4 years ago. You want to bring up campaign promises, please. They all make promises to get elected. Do you really thing they would get elected if the said "Yeah, not so sure how good I'll be but I'll try."
Could things be better? Maybe, I don't know. What I do know is that we were in the greatest economic debacle of my lifetime caused by Wall St and Obama at least plugged the leak. Now your conservative brethren want to put somebody from Wall St in the oval office to recreate what we did from 2000-2008. Nominate anybody but Mitt. Huck, McCain, Jeb, Etc.

You question the failed record? OK then, list all of the glorious accomplishments of Dear Leader. You won't need much space.

I can see that you are obviously a member of the 'reality crowd' that believes that <2% growth is great. Maybe nobody told you that Romney is not from Wall St. but worked in business and was a Governor of a state.

Last month, 80,000 new jobs were created in the U.S. Yay!! But 85,000 people began receiving SS disability payments. Oops. Did you know that they redefined 'disability' recently to make it easier to qualify? Just another way for the government to get people hooked on the gov teat.

Do you realize that the government is spending $3 Million in an advertising campaign for the Food Stamp program? They want to encourage enrollment and try to de-stigmatize it, painting it as a good thing. The more people that are tethered to government "benefits" the harder it will be to turn this country around and get people working again - and that is their plan. Dependency.

My point is that the media wants, just like the big O, to talk about ANYTHING except Obama's record. You obviously know that but are just grasping at any straws to support your guy.

(07-10-2012 12:54 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  Borderline treasonous.


http://therepublic.com/view/story/12df5a...g-Business

http://articles.marketwatch.com/2012-07-...-employers


http://rollingout.com/politics/republica...mas-watch/

I don't see anything remotely treasonous here. I did see some mistakes by your authors...but you seemed to ignore those. Why is that?