At What Point Did You Decide That You Were Against Obama No Matter What?

[Oldstyle]

Yes, you have to prove it, because your word isn't good enough.

My "word" has nothing to do with it...Harry Reid tabling legislation sent over from the House is simply fact...fact that you don't want to deal with because it refutes your notion that it's the GOP that obstructs things and not the Democrats.

What does that say about progressives, Dubya...that they can't deal with the truth about what their leaders are doing?

I ask again...why does what Harry Reid is doing, not fall under the heading of "obstruction"?

Then post a source to prove it! Prove the legislation came from the House and it wasn't just legislation designed to waste the Senate's time. If the legislation can't pass, why waste time with it? Show us what this great legislation was about!

You want me to post over 40 different bills that Harry Reid has tabled and discuss the pros and cons of each?

Funny how you've gone from denying that the bills existed...to now questioning their "worth"!

I suppose a budget was a waste of the Senate's time as well? The House sent over numerous budgets that it drafted. Why was it again that the Senate hasn't come up with a budget of their own for years now?

People like you never cease to amuse, Dubya. You come on here and actually want to argue the nonsense that you've been fed by Huffington Post and Think Progress like it has any basis in reality! Then when someone simply points out the rather glaring inconsistencies in what they've been feeding you it inevitably turns into you calling that person a "con tool" or some such tripe.

 

[Dubya]

My "word" has nothing to do with it...Harry Reid tabling legislation sent over from the House is simply fact...fact that you don't want to deal with because it refutes your notion that it's the GOP that obstructs things and not the Democrats.

What does that say about progressives, Dubya...that they can't deal with the truth about what their leaders are doing?

I ask again...why does what Harry Reid is doing, not fall under the heading of "obstruction"?

Then post a source to prove it! Prove the legislation came from the House and it wasn't just legislation designed to waste the Senate's time. If the legislation can't pass, why waste time with it? Show us what this great legislation was about!

You want me to post over 40 different bills that Harry Reid has tabled and discuss the pros and cons of each?

Funny how you've gone from denying that the bills existed...to now questioning their "worth"!

I suppose a budget was a waste of the Senate's time as well? The House sent over numerous budgets that it drafted. Why was it again that the Senate hasn't come up with a budget of their own for years now?

People like you never cease to amuse, Dubya. You come on here and actually want to argue the nonsense that you've been fed by Huffington Post and Think Progress like it has any basis in reality! Then when someone simply points out the rather glaring inconsistencies in what they've been feeding you it inevitably turns into you calling that person a "con tool" or some such tripe.

Try posting one bill that would pass in the Senate that wasn't considered and prove there was time left from Republican obstruction to consider it! The Senate was obstructed up to Jan 2013. It only wasn't obstructed for less than 6 months since Obama was elected. What is the approval of Congress now around 7%?

 

[Dubya]

They (the pubs) caused the worst recession since the great depression eh? I think Clinton and his cronies during his reign caused it, and it has been a disaster ever since. I think the pubs are guilty of diminishing the middle class in this nation (a once highly valuable base) , in which made them highly vulnerable to the left when they did this. I think it was what the left used to bring them down eventually, as wages began to suffer greatly under the pubs reign of power, it all came back to bite them hard in the end. The only way to become powerful is in numbers, and keeping those numbers strong and healthy, but when you choose greed over the stability of your future party and the nation, well you have done a huge dis-service to your own family, and it showed in the elections. Now the only thing left to do, is to rebuild the party quickly, but do it by fixing what you (the pubs) have done to the base out here, and you know who they are, and you know how you have made them suffer all due to the greed you had chosen over them. Wake up America...Good grief.. Now your family is under attack constantly, so I hope that you who have bathed in your wealth, still feel dirty inside, even though you look clean on the outside.

The economy was so good in the Clinton years that it eventually started producing budget surpluses, but there were many things going on. The only way to truly evaluate the times is to have lived it in a way to be aware of things that happened and go back using historical data to analyze what occurred. Such a subject is deserving of it's own thread or many in an economics forum. I don't see blame going to Clinton, but I see Phil Gramm and Alan Greenspan getting a lions share along with Bush and those pushing the privatization angle. Bush also opposed in place regulation that could have prevented the financial crisis.

Perhaps I'll start a thread on this subject sometime, because I have dealt with all these issues in detail before, but why do you think Clinton and his cronies caused a crisis that happened all those years later? Just saying you believe it doesn't mean much, so what exactly was done and who did it?

Ah but what does Bill Clinton have to do with Barack Obama? I ask that question because to be quite frank they are polar opposites when it comes to economic policy. Bill Clinton was in many ways a fiscal conservative while Barry is a classic tax and spend liberal.

I'm always amused when progressives such as yourself bring up Clinton as "proof" that letting Obama go forward with his totally misguided economic policies will somehow result in what happened during Clinton's time in office.

When Clinton took a beating in HIS first mid-term and was faced with a GOP controlled House led by Newt Gingrich, he declared that the era of "big government" was over and that he was ready to work with Republicans...and it wasn't simply rhetoric...Clinton actually DID work with the GOP.

Now contrast that with Barack Obama. He took a shellacking in HIS first mid-term but facing another GOP controlled House he dug in his heels and refused to budge on his agenda. Barry hasn't worked with the GOP...Barry has used them as the scapegoats for why his failed economic policies failed. We've raised taxes in the midst of an economic downturn on the very people that we needed to encourage to invest in the country and we've cut nothing from the bloated, inefficient monstrosity that our Federal Government has become.

I don't blame Clinton for causing a crisis by the way...I thought his handling of the economy was done quite well generally. It seems that Slick Willie was paying attention during his college Econ classes. Barry on the other hand either never took one...or he was stoned to the gills when he did...because HIS grasp of economics is appalling.

We weren't discussing Obama.

 

[beagle9]

They (the pubs) caused the worst recession since the great depression eh? I think Clinton and his cronies during his reign caused it, and it has been a disaster ever since. I think the pubs are guilty of diminishing the middle class in this nation (a once highly valuable base) , in which made them highly vulnerable to the left when they did this. I think it was what the left used to bring them down eventually, as wages began to suffer greatly under the pubs reign of power, it all came back to bite them hard in the end. The only way to become powerful is in numbers, and keeping those numbers strong and healthy, but when you choose greed over the stability of your future party and the nation, well you have done a huge dis-service to your own family, and it showed in the elections. Now the only thing left to do, is to rebuild the party quickly, but do it by fixing what you (the pubs) have done to the base out here, and you know who they are, and you know how you have made them suffer all due to the greed you had chosen over them. Wake up America...Good grief.. Now your family is under attack constantly, so I hope that you who have bathed in your wealth, still feel dirty inside, even though you look clean on the outside.

The economy was so good in the Clinton years that it eventually started producing budget surpluses, but there were many things going on. The only way to truly evaluate the times is to have lived it in a way to be aware of things that happened and go back using historical data to analyze what occurred. Such a subject is deserving of it's own thread or many in an economics forum. I don't see blame going to Clinton, but I see Phil Gramm and Alan Greenspan getting a lions share along with Bush and those pushing the privatization angle. Bush also opposed in place regulation that could have prevented the financial crisis.

Perhaps I'll start a thread on this subject sometime, because I have dealt with all these issues in detail before, but why do you think Clinton and his cronies caused a crisis that happened all those years later? Just saying you believe it doesn't mean much, so what exactly was done and who did it?

Ah but what does Bill Clinton have to do with Barack Obama? I ask that question because to be quite frank they are polar opposites when it comes to economic policy. Bill Clinton was in many ways a fiscal conservative while Barry is a classic tax and spend liberal.

I'm always amused when progressives such as yourself bring up Clinton as "proof" that letting Obama go forward with his totally misguided economic policies will somehow result in what happened during Clinton's time in office.

When Clinton took a beating in HIS first mid-term and was faced with a GOP controlled House led by Newt Gingrich, he declared that the era of "big government" was over and that he was ready to work with Republicans...and it wasn't simply rhetoric...Clinton actually DID work with the GOP.

Now contrast that with Barack Obama. He took a shellacking in HIS first mid-term but facing another GOP controlled House he dug in his heels and refused to budge on his agenda. Barry hasn't worked with the GOP...Barry has used them as the scapegoats for why his failed economic policies failed. We've raised taxes in the midst of an economic downturn on the very people that we needed to encourage to invest in the country and we've cut nothing from the bloated, inefficient monstrosity that our Federal Government has become.

I don't blame Clinton for causing a crisis by the way...I thought his handling of the economy was done quite well generally. It seems that Slick Willie was paying attention during his college Econ classes. Barry on the other hand either never took one...or he was stoned to the gills when he did...because HIS grasp of economics is appalling.

Oh he grasp economic policy ok I think or has those who do, but could it be that the massive scale of it keeps getting in the way of his social agenda or rather (the overall economy) is being ignored due to his social agenda?

Is his social agenda more important to him and his crew, than any good economic policy could be for all in America, and so his focus stays on his social agenda while ignoring the overall economy as a whole maybe?

 

[Oldstyle]

Then post a source to prove it! Prove the legislation came from the House and it wasn't just legislation designed to waste the Senate's time. If the legislation can't pass, why waste time with it? Show us what this great legislation was about!

You want me to post over 40 different bills that Harry Reid has tabled and discuss the pros and cons of each?

Funny how you've gone from denying that the bills existed...to now questioning their "worth"!

I suppose a budget was a waste of the Senate's time as well? The House sent over numerous budgets that it drafted. Why was it again that the Senate hasn't come up with a budget of their own for years now?

People like you never cease to amuse, Dubya. You come on here and actually want to argue the nonsense that you've been fed by Huffington Post and Think Progress like it has any basis in reality! Then when someone simply points out the rather glaring inconsistencies in what they've been feeding you it inevitably turns into you calling that person a "con tool" or some such tripe.

Try posting one bill that would pass in the Senate that wasn't considered and prove there was time left from Republican obstruction to consider it! The Senate was obstructed up to Jan 2013. It only wasn't obstructed for less than 6 months since Obama was elected. What is the approval of Congress now around 7%?

This notion of yours that Harry Reid only tabled those 40 bills because the Senate didn't have time to consider them because of GOP obstruction is ludicrous. Seriously...do you REALLY believe that nonsense? I suppose they didn't have "time" to do a budget either? (eye-roll) And in that six months that they DID have super majorities, Dubya? What job creation legislation did the Democrats pass besides ObamaCare...something that is going to put more people OUT of work then create new jobs for those that don't have any?

What's the plan going forward to put people back to work? Does this Administration even have one? If so it's news to me.

 

[theliq]

Clearly, this is directed to The Republicans and self-proclaimed Conservatives of USMB.

When, exactly, did you realize that you really didn't like Obama and were going to be against him no matter what?

I'll answer the question in the reverse as an example. Some years ago, when Bush was first elected, I disliked him. I didn't like what he stood for, didn't like what he said, I didn't even like the way he sounded, he sounds dumb and he's proven himself to be such. Anyway, I wasn't totally or automatically against him. What turned me against him permanently, was what he did with the good will of The American People after the country was attacked.

He lied about the WMDs, he kept the country in state of constant fear, and he waged two unnecessary wars. To top it off, he didn't pay for it at the time and sent the bill to our kids and grandkids.

To be precise, from the instant he began that fear campaign war campaign, he lost me forever. I will NEVER forgive him for that.

So, when did you Republicans, Conservatives and other assorted RWers of USMB decide to be against Obama no matter what?

C'mon, be honest.

Look here Marc,I have told you before YOU SHOULD NEVER USE THE WORDS "HONEST AND REPUBLICAN" IN THE SAME SENTENCE.steve

 

[Oldstyle]

The economy was so good in the Clinton years that it eventually started producing budget surpluses, but there were many things going on. The only way to truly evaluate the times is to have lived it in a way to be aware of things that happened and go back using historical data to analyze what occurred. Such a subject is deserving of it's own thread or many in an economics forum. I don't see blame going to Clinton, but I see Phil Gramm and Alan Greenspan getting a lions share along with Bush and those pushing the privatization angle. Bush also opposed in place regulation that could have prevented the financial crisis.

Perhaps I'll start a thread on this subject sometime, because I have dealt with all these issues in detail before, but why do you think Clinton and his cronies caused a crisis that happened all those years later? Just saying you believe it doesn't mean much, so what exactly was done and who did it?

Ah but what does Bill Clinton have to do with Barack Obama? I ask that question because to be quite frank they are polar opposites when it comes to economic policy. Bill Clinton was in many ways a fiscal conservative while Barry is a classic tax and spend liberal.

I'm always amused when progressives such as yourself bring up Clinton as "proof" that letting Obama go forward with his totally misguided economic policies will somehow result in what happened during Clinton's time in office.

When Clinton took a beating in HIS first mid-term and was faced with a GOP controlled House led by Newt Gingrich, he declared that the era of "big government" was over and that he was ready to work with Republicans...and it wasn't simply rhetoric...Clinton actually DID work with the GOP.

Now contrast that with Barack Obama. He took a shellacking in HIS first mid-term but facing another GOP controlled House he dug in his heels and refused to budge on his agenda. Barry hasn't worked with the GOP...Barry has used them as the scapegoats for why his failed economic policies failed. We've raised taxes in the midst of an economic downturn on the very people that we needed to encourage to invest in the country and we've cut nothing from the bloated, inefficient monstrosity that our Federal Government has become.

I don't blame Clinton for causing a crisis by the way...I thought his handling of the economy was done quite well generally. It seems that Slick Willie was paying attention during his college Econ classes. Barry on the other hand either never took one...or he was stoned to the gills when he did...because HIS grasp of economics is appalling.

We weren't discussing Obama.

This whole string is a discussion about Obama, you buffoon! Can you possibly get any more lame?

 

[Oldstyle]

The economy was so good in the Clinton years that it eventually started producing budget surpluses, but there were many things going on. The only way to truly evaluate the times is to have lived it in a way to be aware of things that happened and go back using historical data to analyze what occurred. Such a subject is deserving of it's own thread or many in an economics forum. I don't see blame going to Clinton, but I see Phil Gramm and Alan Greenspan getting a lions share along with Bush and those pushing the privatization angle. Bush also opposed in place regulation that could have prevented the financial crisis.

Perhaps I'll start a thread on this subject sometime, because I have dealt with all these issues in detail before, but why do you think Clinton and his cronies caused a crisis that happened all those years later? Just saying you believe it doesn't mean much, so what exactly was done and who did it?

Ah but what does Bill Clinton have to do with Barack Obama? I ask that question because to be quite frank they are polar opposites when it comes to economic policy. Bill Clinton was in many ways a fiscal conservative while Barry is a classic tax and spend liberal.

I'm always amused when progressives such as yourself bring up Clinton as "proof" that letting Obama go forward with his totally misguided economic policies will somehow result in what happened during Clinton's time in office.

When Clinton took a beating in HIS first mid-term and was faced with a GOP controlled House led by Newt Gingrich, he declared that the era of "big government" was over and that he was ready to work with Republicans...and it wasn't simply rhetoric...Clinton actually DID work with the GOP.

Now contrast that with Barack Obama. He took a shellacking in HIS first mid-term but facing another GOP controlled House he dug in his heels and refused to budge on his agenda. Barry hasn't worked with the GOP...Barry has used them as the scapegoats for why his failed economic policies failed. We've raised taxes in the midst of an economic downturn on the very people that we needed to encourage to invest in the country and we've cut nothing from the bloated, inefficient monstrosity that our Federal Government has become.

I don't blame Clinton for causing a crisis by the way...I thought his handling of the economy was done quite well generally. It seems that Slick Willie was paying attention during his college Econ classes. Barry on the other hand either never took one...or he was stoned to the gills when he did...because HIS grasp of economics is appalling.

Oh he grasp economic policy ok I think or has those who do, but could it be that the massive scale of it keeps getting in the way of his social agenda or rather (the overall economy) is being ignored due to his social agenda?

Is his social agenda more important to him and his crew, than any good economic policy could be for all in America, and so his focus stays on his social agenda while ignoring the overall economy as a whole maybe?

He's got a Secretary of the Treasury that couldn't figure out Turbo Tax, Beagle and his two main advisers on the economy, Larry Summers and Christina Romer both abandoned ship when the Obama Stimulus failed miserably. To be honest with you, I don't think Barry knows diddly about economics. If he DID he would have taken the advice of both Christina Romer and Bill Clinton about how raising taxes on "anyone" in this kind of an economy wasn't a good idea. Barack Obama comes from a background where vague notions like "social justice" hold more importance than sound fiscal policy. Community organizers don't deal with economic theory.

 

[Dubya]

Ah but what does Bill Clinton have to do with Barack Obama? I ask that question because to be quite frank they are polar opposites when it comes to economic policy. Bill Clinton was in many ways a fiscal conservative while Barry is a classic tax and spend liberal.

I'm always amused when progressives such as yourself bring up Clinton as "proof" that letting Obama go forward with his totally misguided economic policies will somehow result in what happened during Clinton's time in office.

When Clinton took a beating in HIS first mid-term and was faced with a GOP controlled House led by Newt Gingrich, he declared that the era of "big government" was over and that he was ready to work with Republicans...and it wasn't simply rhetoric...Clinton actually DID work with the GOP.

Now contrast that with Barack Obama. He took a shellacking in HIS first mid-term but facing another GOP controlled House he dug in his heels and refused to budge on his agenda. Barry hasn't worked with the GOP...Barry has used them as the scapegoats for why his failed economic policies failed. We've raised taxes in the midst of an economic downturn on the very people that we needed to encourage to invest in the country and we've cut nothing from the bloated, inefficient monstrosity that our Federal Government has become.

I don't blame Clinton for causing a crisis by the way...I thought his handling of the economy was done quite well generally. It seems that Slick Willie was paying attention during his college Econ classes. Barry on the other hand either never took one...or he was stoned to the gills when he did...because HIS grasp of economics is appalling.

We weren't discussing Obama.

This whole string is a discussion about Obama, you buffoon! Can you possibly get any more lame?

The point he made wasn't about this thread and I said a thread should be started in economics to discuss it. His whole point only involved Clinton, buffoon! Can't you read?

 

[Dubya]

You want me to post over 40 different bills that Harry Reid has tabled and discuss the pros and cons of each?

Funny how you've gone from denying that the bills existed...to now questioning their "worth"!

I suppose a budget was a waste of the Senate's time as well? The House sent over numerous budgets that it drafted. Why was it again that the Senate hasn't come up with a budget of their own for years now?

People like you never cease to amuse, Dubya. You come on here and actually want to argue the nonsense that you've been fed by Huffington Post and Think Progress like it has any basis in reality! Then when someone simply points out the rather glaring inconsistencies in what they've been feeding you it inevitably turns into you calling that person a "con tool" or some such tripe.

Try posting one bill that would pass in the Senate that wasn't considered and prove there was time left from Republican obstruction to consider it! The Senate was obstructed up to Jan 2013. It only wasn't obstructed for less than 6 months since Obama was elected. What is the approval of Congress now around 7%?

This notion of yours that Harry Reid only tabled those 40 bills because the Senate didn't have time to consider them because of GOP obstruction is ludicrous. Seriously...do you REALLY believe that nonsense? I suppose they didn't have "time" to do a budget either? (eye-roll) And in that six months that they DID have super majorities, Dubya? What job creation legislation did the Democrats pass besides ObamaCare...something that is going to put more people OUT of work then create new jobs for those that don't have any?

What's the plan going forward to put people back to work? Does this Administration even have one? If so it's news to me.

Why don't you just admit your an Obamaholic and can't come up with one example to what you claim were 40 cases? It's just a whole lot of talk until you can deal with a specific example to back your claims.

 

[thereisnospoon]

The economy was so good in the Clinton years that it eventually started producing budget surpluses, but there were many things going on. The only way to truly evaluate the times is to have lived it in a way to be aware of things that happened and go back using historical data to analyze what occurred. Such a subject is deserving of it's own thread or many in an economics forum. I don't see blame going to Clinton, but I see Phil Gramm and Alan Greenspan getting a lions share along with Bush and those pushing the privatization angle. Bush also opposed in place regulation that could have prevented the financial crisis.

Perhaps I'll start a thread on this subject sometime, because I have dealt with all these issues in detail before, but why do you think Clinton and his cronies caused a crisis that happened all those years later? Just saying you believe it doesn't mean much, so what exactly was done and who did it?

Ah but what does Bill Clinton have to do with Barack Obama? I ask that question because to be quite frank they are polar opposites when it comes to economic policy. Bill Clinton was in many ways a fiscal conservative while Barry is a classic tax and spend liberal.

I'm always amused when progressives such as yourself bring up Clinton as "proof" that letting Obama go forward with his totally misguided economic policies will somehow result in what happened during Clinton's time in office.

When Clinton took a beating in HIS first mid-term and was faced with a GOP controlled House led by Newt Gingrich, he declared that the era of "big government" was over and that he was ready to work with Republicans...and it wasn't simply rhetoric...Clinton actually DID work with the GOP.

Now contrast that with Barack Obama. He took a shellacking in HIS first mid-term but facing another GOP controlled House he dug in his heels and refused to budge on his agenda. Barry hasn't worked with the GOP...Barry has used them as the scapegoats for why his failed economic policies failed. We've raised taxes in the midst of an economic downturn on the very people that we needed to encourage to invest in the country and we've cut nothing from the bloated, inefficient monstrosity that our Federal Government has become.

I don't blame Clinton for causing a crisis by the way...I thought his handling of the economy was done quite well generally. It seems that Slick Willie was paying attention during his college Econ classes. Barry on the other hand either never took one...or he was stoned to the gills when he did...because HIS grasp of economics is appalling.

We weren't discussing Obama.

Have you checked the title of the thread?
You are getting buried. You may want to just stop arguing.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Try posting one bill that would pass in the Senate that wasn't considered and prove there was time left from Republican obstruction to consider it! The Senate was obstructed up to Jan 2013. It only wasn't obstructed for less than 6 months since Obama was elected. What is the approval of Congress now around 7%?

This notion of yours that Harry Reid only tabled those 40 bills because the Senate didn't have time to consider them because of GOP obstruction is ludicrous. Seriously...do you REALLY believe that nonsense? I suppose they didn't have "time" to do a budget either? (eye-roll) And in that six months that they DID have super majorities, Dubya? What job creation legislation did the Democrats pass besides ObamaCare...something that is going to put more people OUT of work then create new jobs for those that don't have any?

What's the plan going forward to put people back to work? Does this Administration even have one? If so it's news to me.

Why don't you just admit your an Obamaholic and can't come up with one example to what you claim were 40 cases? It's just a whole lot of talk until you can deal with a specific example to back your claims.

Reid blocks Senate vote on Obama's deficit-reduction plan - The Hill's Video

Here ya go...Dummy..Reid Laughs at Prospect of Bringing GOP Bills Up for Votes in Senate | CNS News
Don't you ever get tired of being wrong all the time?

 

[thereisnospoon]

We weren't discussing Obama.

This whole string is a discussion about Obama, you buffoon! Can you possibly get any more lame?

The point he made wasn't about this thread and I said a thread should be started in economics to discuss it. His whole point only involved Clinton, buffoon! Can't you read?

Deflection again...

 

[thereisnospoon]

Progressive policies have worked fine in an economy and your regressive policies haven't. You've screwed the economy for more than a hundred years and it goes all the way back to the Civil War.

Progressive policies have given us the worst recovery from a recession since the The Great Depression, Dubya. The US economy has outgrown any other country on the planet since the Civil War. If that's your definition of "screwing" the economy then you're being even more ignorant than usual!

The worst recovery comes from keeping those Republican regressive policies in place that caused the worst recession since the Great Depression. The Republicans haven't been trying to make the economy improve, because they oppose Obama.

"The Republicans haven't been trying to make the economy improve, because they oppose Obama.".....Ok. what does that mean?

 

[Samson]

Progressive policies have given us the worst recovery from a recession since the The Great Depression, Dubya. The US economy has outgrown any other country on the planet since the Civil War. If that's your definition of "screwing" the economy then you're being even more ignorant than usual!

The worst recovery comes from keeping those Republican regressive policies in place that caused the worst recession since the Great Depression. The Republicans haven't been trying to make the economy improve, because they oppose Obama.

"The Republicans haven't been trying to make the economy improve, because they oppose Obama.".....Ok. what does that mean?

It means the poster is a retard....


and I mean that in the kindest, politically correct way.

 

[thereisnospoon]

You're lecturing me and you don't know legislation is drafted in both houses of Congress. Most legislation starts in the House, but not all and I do know how the government works.

The only part of government that you "know" of how it works is the entitlement sector.

Per capita, the red states get more entitlement money and especially for disability. You're talking out of your ass when it comes to me getting money from the government, fool!

Here are some links, prove otherwise!

http://www.census.gov/prod/2011pubs/fas-10.pdf

http://www.census.gov/prod/2011pubs/cffr-10.pdf

http://www.census.gov/prod/2010pubs/p60-238.pdf

Please stop the nonsense.
First, many of those states are retirement havens in the warmer parts of the country.
Hell, FL,TX,CA. AZ. AL.SC and NC are home to probably half the people over the age of 65 right now. Stands to reason Medicare and other entitlement money would flow to these places.
And besides . I was referring to YOU personally. YOU are only concerned about entitlements.
I have just looked at those links with more close examination.
You are full of shit.
You may as well go ahead and place me on ignore because I have about had with you. I am about to unload a barrage of insults that will make you cry.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I see you're too young for Ding Dong School. My background is Chemistry,[

Jr. High?

but I've wondered into business.

If you've wondered about business, why not at least attempt to educate yourself?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Wow. That is incredible. Now I am racist because I didn't vote for this communist. Funny, I never realized that me (a black man) could be accused of being a "racist" against a bi-racial man. I guess it is true. The times, they are a changing.....

However, just to set the record straight....I dislike ALL liberals, be they white, brown, black, yellow or the new "in" color....Bi-Racial. 99.999% of your don't have the sense to pour piss out of your boots.

Careful Randall, they'll start calling you "race traitor" and "Uncle Tom." The lefties are vile people, particularly to those who dare challenge their party.

 

[Oldstyle]

Progressive policies have given us the worst recovery from a recession since the The Great Depression, Dubya. The US economy has outgrown any other country on the planet since the Civil War. If that's your definition of "screwing" the economy then you're being even more ignorant than usual!

The worst recovery comes from keeping those Republican regressive policies in place that caused the worst recession since the Great Depression. The Republicans haven't been trying to make the economy improve, because they oppose Obama.

"The Republicans haven't been trying to make the economy improve, because they oppose Obama.".....Ok. what does that mean?

It means that after four years of Barack Obama running the show...we've got the worst recovery from a recession since FDR gave us the Great Depression...and Obama syncophants are running out of excuses for why things aren't better.

You had a President coming into power with a high approval rating...and supermajorities in the House and Senate but instead of dealing with the issues that the American people were most concerned about...unemployment and the economy...the progressives running things decided that what we REALLY needed to do was "reform" health care and add another massive entitlement program to the ones we already couldn't pay for!

THAT is the reason why our economy is still lagging badly and millions are still out of work six years after the start of the Great Recession not because Republicans haven't been trying to make the economy improve! The uncertainty that ObamaCare has created with it's thousands of pages of regulations and added costs are what has put a stranglehold on our economy. That and the runaway debt that we're adding because Barry, Harry and Nancy won't even consider cutting the size of government.

 

[deltex1]

Clearly, this is directed to The Republicans and self-proclaimed Conservatives of USMB.

When, exactly, did you realize that you really didn't like Obama and were going to be against him no matter what?

I'll answer the question in the reverse as an example. Some years ago, when Bush was first elected, I disliked him. I didn't like what he stood for, didn't like what he said, I didn't even like the way he sounded, he sounds dumb and he's proven himself to be such. Anyway, I wasn't totally or automatically against him. What turned me against him permanently, was what he did with the good will of The American People after the country was attacked.

He lied about the WMDs, he kept the country in state of constant fear, and he waged two unnecessary wars. To top it off, he didn't pay for it at the time and sent the bill to our kids and grandkids.

To be precise, from the instant he began that fear campaign war campaign, he lost me forever. I will NEVER forgive him for that.

So, when did you Republicans, Conservatives and other assorted RWers of USMB decide to be against Obama no matter what?

C'mon, be honest.

There has been no "no matter what".