Can Any Dem/lib Tell Us What Agency The Govt Has Run Efficiently?

[Harry Dresden]

USPS vs Fedex and UPS on package delivery----------------------nuff said.

and?......

USPS loses money every quarter, The others make money every quarter.

sorry to confuse you.

on package delivery you are full of shit.....the PO was just picked by Amazon for a Billion Dollar a year contract to deliver their stuff over the other guys.....the PO delivers a hell of a lot of Feds and UPS's parcels in the residential Neighborhoods for them.....since 2009 their parcel numbers have gone up just about 500%....and is expected to go up some more this year....on parcels they are making money.....what they do with it is another story....sorry to confuse you....

the USPS is in the red every year. How much stuff they deliiver is not the point. They lose money. They are a govt agency.

This has been explained to you and is patently wrong.

So at this point?

You are lying.

fish doesnt realize that until 2007 the PO was not losing no where like they are now because of that bill and that they were starting to make money up until then.....

Postal Service Net Income/Loss By Year

• 2013-$5 billion loss
• 2012 -$15.9 billion loss

• 2011 -$5.1 billion loss

• 2010 -$8.5 billion loss

• 2009 -$3.8 billion loss

• 2008 -$2.8 billion loss

• 2007 -$5.1 billion loss

• 2006 -$900 million surplus

• 2005 -$1.4 billion surplus

• 2004 -$3.1 billion surplus

• 2003 -$3.9 billion surplus

• 2002 -$676 million loss

• 2001 -$1.7 billion loss

 

[Harry Dresden]

ok Dean....i hear ya.....

In other words, you can't produce a quote of redfish saying what you claim he said.

Thanks for playing!

hey Bri.....post no.410.....Redfish said...."Ok, lets make it simple. one dollar over budget is inefficient, one dollar under budget is efficient-----------as long as the product is delivered as contracted".....so a company that has even the smallest bit of waste is too Redfish..... INEFFICIENT....yea i know its tough .....

A company can have a bit of waste and still complete its project within budget. I know that you libs really struggle with the definition of "efficient". I guess because the concept of efficiency is so foreign to your way of thinking.

so lets move those goalposts.....now because someone is questioning what you said.....lets change it...when your balls come down Fish....maybe you will stand by what you originally said....

my definition remains valid. complete the project within budget = efficient. overrun the budget = inefficient.

you can have some waste and make it up in other places and still complete under budget (efficiently). When has the government ever done that? Wake up, we are almost 18 trillion dollars in debt because of government inefficiency. But yet, those on the left want to turn more of the economy over to the government.

hey YOU are the guy who said....to make it easy......"Ok, lets make it simple. one dollar over budget is inefficient"......did you not state this?....

 

[Harry Dresden]

which is what i said dipshit....geezus .....and show me where i ever said this.... want to turn your health over to the government?.....when you cant find it i will accept your apology....

most liberals do support turning medicine over to the govt. If you don't, great.

no i dont....now prove im a Liberal....oh thats right.....i disagree with you on some stuff.....what else could i be?.....

Oh, lets see-------------an idiot?

still cant prove im a Liberal?....i dont agree with poor little Fish so i must be a Liberal or an Idiot.....you do realize that only the more ignorant among us make that kind of distinction.....

looking at your avatar and some of your posts, idiot seems more appropriate than liberal. but since most liberals are also idiots---------------------------------

oh now its what your avatar is that says what you are?......you sound like an idiot right now fish.....

 

[Redfish]

and?......

USPS loses money every quarter, The others make money every quarter.

sorry to confuse you.

on package delivery you are full of shit.....the PO was just picked by Amazon for a Billion Dollar a year contract to deliver their stuff over the other guys.....the PO delivers a hell of a lot of Feds and UPS's parcels in the residential Neighborhoods for them.....since 2009 their parcel numbers have gone up just about 500%....and is expected to go up some more this year....on parcels they are making money.....what they do with it is another story....sorry to confuse you....

the USPS is in the red every year. How much stuff they deliiver is not the point. They lose money. They are a govt agency.

This has been explained to you and is patently wrong.

So at this point?

You are lying.

fish doesnt realize that until 2007 the PO was not losing no where like they are now because of that bill and that they were starting to make money up until then.....

Postal Service Net Income/Loss By Year

• 2013-$5 billion loss
• 2012 -$15.9 billion loss

• 2011 -$5.1 billion loss

• 2010 -$8.5 billion loss

• 2009 -$3.8 billion loss

• 2008 -$2.8 billion loss

• 2007 -$5.1 billion loss

• 2006 -$900 million surplus

• 2005 -$1.4 billion surplus

• 2004 -$3.1 billion surplus

• 2003 -$3.9 billion surplus

• 2002 -$676 million loss

• 2001 -$1.7 billion loss

so you are claiming that it was operated efficiently until obama took over? BTW, the USA has not had a budget in the last 7 years, only CR's and special funding bills.

is that an efficient way to operate?

 

[Redfish]

In other words, you can't produce a quote of redfish saying what you claim he said.

Thanks for playing!

hey Bri.....post no.410.....Redfish said...."Ok, lets make it simple. one dollar over budget is inefficient, one dollar under budget is efficient-----------as long as the product is delivered as contracted".....so a company that has even the smallest bit of waste is too Redfish..... INEFFICIENT....yea i know its tough .....

A company can have a bit of waste and still complete its project within budget. I know that you libs really struggle with the definition of "efficient". I guess because the concept of efficiency is so foreign to your way of thinking.

so lets move those goalposts.....now because someone is questioning what you said.....lets change it...when your balls come down Fish....maybe you will stand by what you originally said....

my definition remains valid. complete the project within budget = efficient. overrun the budget = inefficient.

you can have some waste and make it up in other places and still complete under budget (efficiently). When has the government ever done that? Wake up, we are almost 18 trillion dollars in debt because of government inefficiency. But yet, those on the left want to turn more of the economy over to the government.

hey YOU are the guy who said....to make it easy......"Ok, lets make it simple. one dollar over budget is inefficient"......did you not state this?....

yes, I did, and if your cite is correct, the USPS operated efficiently until the obama administration.

not saying I buy those figures, but

 

[Sallow]

ok Dean....i hear ya.....

In other words, you can't produce a quote of redfish saying what you claim he said.

Thanks for playing!

hey Bri.....post no.410.....Redfish said...."Ok, lets make it simple. one dollar over budget is inefficient, one dollar under budget is efficient-----------as long as the product is delivered as contracted".....so a company that has even the smallest bit of waste is too Redfish..... INEFFICIENT....yea i know its tough .....

A company can have a bit of waste and still complete its project within budget. I know that you libs really struggle with the definition of "efficient". I guess because the concept of efficiency is so foreign to your way of thinking.

so lets move those goalposts.....now because someone is questioning what you said.....lets change it...when your balls come down Fish....maybe you will stand by what you originally said....

my definition remains valid. complete the project within budget = efficient. overrun the budget = inefficient.

you can have some waste and make it up in other places and still complete under budget (efficiently). When has the government ever done that? Wake up, we are almost 18 trillion dollars in debt because of government inefficiency. But yet, those on the left want to turn more of the economy over to the government.

What an incredibly simplistic view point.

First off, the government not only does things more cheaper than the private sector, it actually gets things done. Additionally it does things that the private sector doesn't want to be involved in, at all.

Secondly, the government funds it's projects through taxation. When batshit crazy, voodoo economics, pie in the sky, kill the government conservatives come along..they cut taxes and leave massive deficits as a result. IN FACT, they get RID of programs like PAYGO so they can further fleece the federal government they "hate".

By the way, government employee, have you given up your government goodies yet?

 

[Sallow]

USPS loses money every quarter, The others make money every quarter.

sorry to confuse you.

on package delivery you are full of shit.....the PO was just picked by Amazon for a Billion Dollar a year contract to deliver their stuff over the other guys.....the PO delivers a hell of a lot of Feds and UPS's parcels in the residential Neighborhoods for them.....since 2009 their parcel numbers have gone up just about 500%....and is expected to go up some more this year....on parcels they are making money.....what they do with it is another story....sorry to confuse you....

the USPS is in the red every year. How much stuff they deliiver is not the point. They lose money. They are a govt agency.

This has been explained to you and is patently wrong.

So at this point?

You are lying.

fish doesnt realize that until 2007 the PO was not losing no where like they are now because of that bill and that they were starting to make money up until then.....

Postal Service Net Income/Loss By Year

• 2013-$5 billion loss
• 2012 -$15.9 billion loss

• 2011 -$5.1 billion loss

• 2010 -$8.5 billion loss

• 2009 -$3.8 billion loss

• 2008 -$2.8 billion loss

• 2007 -$5.1 billion loss

• 2006 -$900 million surplus

• 2005 -$1.4 billion surplus

• 2004 -$3.1 billion surplus

• 2003 -$3.9 billion surplus

• 2002 -$676 million loss

• 2001 -$1.7 billion loss

so you are claiming that it was operated efficiently until obama took over? BTW, the USA has not had a budget in the last 7 years, only CR's and special funding bills.

is that an efficient way to operate?

I'm not going to repost the article.

Either read it or don't.

But you are lying or stupid.

Can't figure out which.

 

[Harry Dresden]

USPS loses money every quarter, The others make money every quarter.

sorry to confuse you.

on package delivery you are full of shit.....the PO was just picked by Amazon for a Billion Dollar a year contract to deliver their stuff over the other guys.....the PO delivers a hell of a lot of Feds and UPS's parcels in the residential Neighborhoods for them.....since 2009 their parcel numbers have gone up just about 500%....and is expected to go up some more this year....on parcels they are making money.....what they do with it is another story....sorry to confuse you....

the USPS is in the red every year. How much stuff they deliiver is not the point. They lose money. They are a govt agency.

This has been explained to you and is patently wrong.

So at this point?

You are lying.

fish doesnt realize that until 2007 the PO was not losing no where like they are now because of that bill and that they were starting to make money up until then.....

Postal Service Net Income/Loss By Year

• 2013-$5 billion loss
• 2012 -$15.9 billion loss

• 2011 -$5.1 billion loss

• 2010 -$8.5 billion loss

• 2009 -$3.8 billion loss

• 2008 -$2.8 billion loss

• 2007 -$5.1 billion loss

• 2006 -$900 million surplus

• 2005 -$1.4 billion surplus

• 2004 -$3.1 billion surplus

• 2003 -$3.9 billion surplus

• 2002 -$676 million loss

• 2001 -$1.7 billion loss

so you are claiming that it was operated efficiently until obama took over? BTW, the USA has not had a budget in the last 7 years, only CR's and special funding bills.

is that an efficient way to operate?

when that bill was passed in 06 your buddy Obama was not the President......the PO up until that point was no different money wise than any other time in their history....in the 90's they were in the black quite a bit....every year at that time they were setting a record each year for mail volume....

 

[Redfish]

most liberals do support turning medicine over to the govt. If you don't, great.

no i dont....now prove im a Liberal....oh thats right.....i disagree with you on some stuff.....what else could i be?.....

Oh, lets see-------------an idiot?

still cant prove im a Liberal?....i dont agree with poor little Fish so i must be a Liberal or an Idiot.....you do realize that only the more ignorant among us make that kind of distinction.....

looking at your avatar and some of your posts, idiot seems more appropriate than liberal. but since most liberals are also idiots---------------------------------

oh now its what your avatar is that says what you are?......you sound like an idiot right now fish.....

Redfish is a member of the salt water drum family. it is an excellent game fish and very good to eat. They live in coastal marshes as well as offshore. They can be caught on live shrimp, small croakers, or bull minnows either on the bottom, trolling, or under a cork. Each state has a size and number limit. In La they have to be over 18 inches but not more than 36 inches.

 

[Redfish]

on package delivery you are full of shit.....the PO was just picked by Amazon for a Billion Dollar a year contract to deliver their stuff over the other guys.....the PO delivers a hell of a lot of Feds and UPS's parcels in the residential Neighborhoods for them.....since 2009 their parcel numbers have gone up just about 500%....and is expected to go up some more this year....on parcels they are making money.....what they do with it is another story....sorry to confuse you....

the USPS is in the red every year. How much stuff they deliiver is not the point. They lose money. They are a govt agency.

This has been explained to you and is patently wrong.

So at this point?

You are lying.

fish doesnt realize that until 2007 the PO was not losing no where like they are now because of that bill and that they were starting to make money up until then.....

Postal Service Net Income/Loss By Year

• 2013-$5 billion loss
• 2012 -$15.9 billion loss

• 2011 -$5.1 billion loss

• 2010 -$8.5 billion loss

• 2009 -$3.8 billion loss

• 2008 -$2.8 billion loss

• 2007 -$5.1 billion loss

• 2006 -$900 million surplus

• 2005 -$1.4 billion surplus

• 2004 -$3.1 billion surplus

• 2003 -$3.9 billion surplus

• 2002 -$676 million loss

• 2001 -$1.7 billion loss

so you are claiming that it was operated efficiently until obama took over? BTW, the USA has not had a budget in the last 7 years, only CR's and special funding bills.

is that an efficient way to operate?

when that bill was passed in 06 your buddy Obama was not the President......the PO up until that point was no different money wise than any other time in their history....in the 90's they were in the black quite a bit....every year at that time they were setting a record each year for mail volume....

obozo was a senator. how did he vote? or was that one of his non-votes?

 

[Redfish]

on package delivery you are full of shit.....the PO was just picked by Amazon for a Billion Dollar a year contract to deliver their stuff over the other guys.....the PO delivers a hell of a lot of Feds and UPS's parcels in the residential Neighborhoods for them.....since 2009 their parcel numbers have gone up just about 500%....and is expected to go up some more this year....on parcels they are making money.....what they do with it is another story....sorry to confuse you....

the USPS is in the red every year. How much stuff they deliiver is not the point. They lose money. They are a govt agency.

This has been explained to you and is patently wrong.

So at this point?

You are lying.

fish doesnt realize that until 2007 the PO was not losing no where like they are now because of that bill and that they were starting to make money up until then.....

Postal Service Net Income/Loss By Year

• 2013-$5 billion loss
• 2012 -$15.9 billion loss

• 2011 -$5.1 billion loss

• 2010 -$8.5 billion loss

• 2009 -$3.8 billion loss

• 2008 -$2.8 billion loss

• 2007 -$5.1 billion loss

• 2006 -$900 million surplus

• 2005 -$1.4 billion surplus

• 2004 -$3.1 billion surplus

• 2003 -$3.9 billion surplus

• 2002 -$676 million loss

• 2001 -$1.7 billion loss

so you are claiming that it was operated efficiently until obama took over? BTW, the USA has not had a budget in the last 7 years, only CR's and special funding bills.

is that an efficient way to operate?

I'm not going to repost the article.

Either read it or don't.

But you are lying or stupid.

Can't figure out which.

was obama elected in 2008? look at the data, fool. The big loses were on him. or are only republican presidents responsible for what happens during their terms?

 

[Sallow]

the USPS is in the red every year. How much stuff they deliiver is not the point. They lose money. They are a govt agency.

This has been explained to you and is patently wrong.

So at this point?

You are lying.

fish doesnt realize that until 2007 the PO was not losing no where like they are now because of that bill and that they were starting to make money up until then.....

Postal Service Net Income/Loss By Year

• 2013-$5 billion loss
• 2012 -$15.9 billion loss

• 2011 -$5.1 billion loss

• 2010 -$8.5 billion loss

• 2009 -$3.8 billion loss

• 2008 -$2.8 billion loss

• 2007 -$5.1 billion loss

• 2006 -$900 million surplus

• 2005 -$1.4 billion surplus

• 2004 -$3.1 billion surplus

• 2003 -$3.9 billion surplus

• 2002 -$676 million loss

• 2001 -$1.7 billion loss

so you are claiming that it was operated efficiently until obama took over? BTW, the USA has not had a budget in the last 7 years, only CR's and special funding bills.

is that an efficient way to operate?

I'm not going to repost the article.

Either read it or don't.

But you are lying or stupid.

Can't figure out which.

was obama elected in 2008? look at the data, fool. The big loses were on him. or are only republican presidents responsible for what happens during their terms?

The loses were the result of legislation not a business model.

And funny you guys chalk up every loss to Obama and every gain to some magical other thing.

 

[Redfish]

This has been explained to you and is patently wrong.

So at this point?

You are lying.

fish doesnt realize that until 2007 the PO was not losing no where like they are now because of that bill and that they were starting to make money up until then.....

Postal Service Net Income/Loss By Year

• 2013-$5 billion loss
• 2012 -$15.9 billion loss

• 2011 -$5.1 billion loss

• 2010 -$8.5 billion loss

• 2009 -$3.8 billion loss

• 2008 -$2.8 billion loss

• 2007 -$5.1 billion loss

• 2006 -$900 million surplus

• 2005 -$1.4 billion surplus

• 2004 -$3.1 billion surplus

• 2003 -$3.9 billion surplus

• 2002 -$676 million loss

• 2001 -$1.7 billion loss

so you are claiming that it was operated efficiently until obama took over? BTW, the USA has not had a budget in the last 7 years, only CR's and special funding bills.

is that an efficient way to operate?

I'm not going to repost the article.

Either read it or don't.

But you are lying or stupid.

Can't figure out which.

was obama elected in 2008? look at the data, fool. The big loses were on him. or are only republican presidents responsible for what happens during their terms?

The loses were the result of legislation not a business model.

And funny you guys chalk up every loss to Obama and every gain to some magical other thing.

do you have the vote count by party on that vote? just curious. How did obama vote? clinton?

 

[Redfish]

This has been explained to you and is patently wrong.

So at this point?

You are lying.

fish doesnt realize that until 2007 the PO was not losing no where like they are now because of that bill and that they were starting to make money up until then.....

Postal Service Net Income/Loss By Year

• 2013-$5 billion loss
• 2012 -$15.9 billion loss

• 2011 -$5.1 billion loss

• 2010 -$8.5 billion loss

• 2009 -$3.8 billion loss

• 2008 -$2.8 billion loss

• 2007 -$5.1 billion loss

• 2006 -$900 million surplus

• 2005 -$1.4 billion surplus

• 2004 -$3.1 billion surplus

• 2003 -$3.9 billion surplus

• 2002 -$676 million loss

• 2001 -$1.7 billion loss

so you are claiming that it was operated efficiently until obama took over? BTW, the USA has not had a budget in the last 7 years, only CR's and special funding bills.

is that an efficient way to operate?

I'm not going to repost the article.

Either read it or don't.

But you are lying or stupid.

Can't figure out which.

was obama elected in 2008? look at the data, fool. The big loses were on him. or are only republican presidents responsible for what happens during their terms?

The loses were the result of legislation not a business model.

And funny you guys chalk up every loss to Obama and every gain to some magical other thing.

is the president responsible for what happens during his term (good or bad) or not?

 

[Harry Dresden]

no i dont....now prove im a Liberal....oh thats right.....i disagree with you on some stuff.....what else could i be?.....

Oh, lets see-------------an idiot?

still cant prove im a Liberal?....i dont agree with poor little Fish so i must be a Liberal or an Idiot.....you do realize that only the more ignorant among us make that kind of distinction.....

looking at your avatar and some of your posts, idiot seems more appropriate than liberal. but since most liberals are also idiots---------------------------------

oh now its what your avatar is that says what you are?......you sound like an idiot right now fish.....

Redfish is a member of the salt water drum family. it is an excellent game fish and very good to eat. They live in coastal marshes as well as offshore. They can be caught on live shrimp, small croakers, or bull minnows either on the bottom, trolling, or under a cork. Each state has a size and number limit. In La they have to be over 18 inches but not more than 36 inches.

ok.....Curly was a guy who many people used to enjoy watching,including millions of Conservatives.....and you are saying im an idiot because i have him as an Avi?....i bet more Conservative men would rather kick back and watch the 3 Stooges then go fishing for your Redfish....

 

[Harry Dresden]

the USPS is in the red every year. How much stuff they deliiver is not the point. They lose money. They are a govt agency.

This has been explained to you and is patently wrong.

So at this point?

You are lying.

fish doesnt realize that until 2007 the PO was not losing no where like they are now because of that bill and that they were starting to make money up until then.....

Postal Service Net Income/Loss By Year

• 2013-$5 billion loss
• 2012 -$15.9 billion loss

• 2011 -$5.1 billion loss

• 2010 -$8.5 billion loss

• 2009 -$3.8 billion loss

• 2008 -$2.8 billion loss

• 2007 -$5.1 billion loss

• 2006 -$900 million surplus

• 2005 -$1.4 billion surplus

• 2004 -$3.1 billion surplus

• 2003 -$3.9 billion surplus

• 2002 -$676 million loss

• 2001 -$1.7 billion loss

so you are claiming that it was operated efficiently until obama took over? BTW, the USA has not had a budget in the last 7 years, only CR's and special funding bills.

is that an efficient way to operate?

when that bill was passed in 06 your buddy Obama was not the President......the PO up until that point was no different money wise than any other time in their history....in the 90's they were in the black quite a bit....every year at that time they were setting a record each year for mail volume....

obozo was a senator. how did he vote? or was that one of his non-votes?

i have no idea.....the bill was written by a Republican and co-sponsored by 1 Republican and 2 Democrats....as i have been telling many Democrats here for the last few years in the postal threads....their party is just as responsible for the PO's finacial problems as are the Republicans....

 

[Redfish]

Oh, lets see-------------an idiot?

still cant prove im a Liberal?....i dont agree with poor little Fish so i must be a Liberal or an Idiot.....you do realize that only the more ignorant among us make that kind of distinction.....

looking at your avatar and some of your posts, idiot seems more appropriate than liberal. but since most liberals are also idiots---------------------------------

oh now its what your avatar is that says what you are?......you sound like an idiot right now fish.....

Redfish is a member of the salt water drum family. it is an excellent game fish and very good to eat. They live in coastal marshes as well as offshore. They can be caught on live shrimp, small croakers, or bull minnows either on the bottom, trolling, or under a cork. Each state has a size and number limit. In La they have to be over 18 inches but not more than 36 inches.

ok.....Curly was a guy who many people used to enjoy watching,including millions of Conservatives.....and you are saying im an idiot because i have him as an Avi?....i bet more Conservative men would rather kick back and watch the 3 Stooges then go fishing for your Redfish....

I enjoyed the stooges. as far as I know they never took a political stand. just entertained. Too bad our current batch of entertainers can't do that.

 

[Iceweasel]

It isn't the president, look who took over the house. Congress spends the money. Presidents play a role as far as agendas but the congress critters have the pocketbook. And look at what happened when Pelosi and Reid took over. There's your downturn in the economy. The only thing helping now is the Republican house. We would be way over the cliff if the Dems had control over both houses and presidency.

 

[Redfish]

This has been explained to you and is patently wrong.

So at this point?

You are lying.

fish doesnt realize that until 2007 the PO was not losing no where like they are now because of that bill and that they were starting to make money up until then.....

Postal Service Net Income/Loss By Year

• 2013-$5 billion loss
• 2012 -$15.9 billion loss

• 2011 -$5.1 billion loss

• 2010 -$8.5 billion loss

• 2009 -$3.8 billion loss

• 2008 -$2.8 billion loss

• 2007 -$5.1 billion loss

• 2006 -$900 million surplus

• 2005 -$1.4 billion surplus

• 2004 -$3.1 billion surplus

• 2003 -$3.9 billion surplus

• 2002 -$676 million loss

• 2001 -$1.7 billion loss

so you are claiming that it was operated efficiently until obama took over? BTW, the USA has not had a budget in the last 7 years, only CR's and special funding bills.

is that an efficient way to operate?

when that bill was passed in 06 your buddy Obama was not the President......the PO up until that point was no different money wise than any other time in their history....in the 90's they were in the black quite a bit....every year at that time they were setting a record each year for mail volume....

obozo was a senator. how did he vote? or was that one of his non-votes?

i have no idea.....the bill was written by a Republican and co-sponsored by 1 Republican and 2 Democrats....as i have been telling many Democrats here for the last few years in the postal threads....their party is just as responsible for the PO's finacial problems as are the Republicans....

OK, but earlier you and carbon head were blaming republicans for the PO losing money. I guess you are backing away from that foolish claim.

 

[Harry Dresden]

fish doesnt realize that until 2007 the PO was not losing no where like they are now because of that bill and that they were starting to make money up until then.....

Postal Service Net Income/Loss By Year

• 2013-$5 billion loss
• 2012 -$15.9 billion loss

• 2011 -$5.1 billion loss

• 2010 -$8.5 billion loss

• 2009 -$3.8 billion loss

• 2008 -$2.8 billion loss

• 2007 -$5.1 billion loss

• 2006 -$900 million surplus

• 2005 -$1.4 billion surplus

• 2004 -$3.1 billion surplus

• 2003 -$3.9 billion surplus

• 2002 -$676 million loss

• 2001 -$1.7 billion loss

so you are claiming that it was operated efficiently until obama took over? BTW, the USA has not had a budget in the last 7 years, only CR's and special funding bills.

is that an efficient way to operate?

I'm not going to repost the article.

Either read it or don't.

But you are lying or stupid.

Can't figure out which.

was obama elected in 2008? look at the data, fool. The big loses were on him. or are only republican presidents responsible for what happens during their terms?

The loses were the result of legislation not a business model.

And funny you guys chalk up every loss to Obama and every gain to some magical other thing.

is the president responsible for what happens during his term (good or bad) or not?

i say yes they are.....if its their policy then obviously yes....if they added or subtracted from a previous policy yes.....at this point in time Obama should be getting accolades as well as criticism for the things happening in this country.....but all i see is many on the right not giving him credit when he may deserve it,but giving him grief for just about everything he does or says.....and many on the left never criticizing him even when he deserves it..... and it was the same for Bush in his second term only the roles reversed.....now mind you, there are many out there who give the guy both and who realize....Bush aint President anymore....