Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I see you don't like facts but when you try to push something as fact when it isn't you get all pissed. You can't changed it.That's odd, then why did Bush Jr. say in his first economic speech to Congress (February 2001) that he intended to take the "surplus" and give it back to the people? The budget surplus was $236 billion (however you, and Limbaugh, wish to spin it) and was done through a series of tax increases and spending cuts (just what Republicans SHOULD be advocating now, instead of just the latter).
You don't think Bush said that? Here ya go:
Bush Speech to Congress: 27 Feb 2001
Ironic, since the repubs stole Medicare D from the democrats, isn't it?Near every democrat in the House of representatives voted AGAINST IT....
This WAS THE REPUBLICAN medicare pill bill, NOT the democratic.
May I remind you, the House kept a 15 minute vote that came to the NO VOTES winning, opened for 3 HOURS so that they could twist republican congressmen that voted against it to change their vote to yes.... it took them 3 hours to bribe and twist arms until they finally had enough votes to pass the bill....
and that republican congressman Billy Tauzine who was in charge of the bill let PHARMA write it and also LOCKED Democrats out of the negotiations...AND Tauzine quit after he got his bill passed and went to WORK FOR PHARMA with a multi million dollar salary....for him getting PHARMA'S bill passed with no ability to negotiate with foreign countries and no ability to negotiate for bulk discounts....
Sure, since 2007. Nobody with half a brain buys that, genius.
USATODAY.com - Bush seeks to increase minority homeownership
In a bid to boost minority homeownership, President Bush will ask Congress for authority to eliminate the down-payment requirement for Federal Housing Administration loans.
You can find his speeches on that in many places. Feel free to search for yourself. Although the house of cards came crashing down on Democrats' watch, it took many years building to the crescendo, my friend. These events didn't happen as a result of only one year of Democratic control. You continue to be easy to dumb down:
The Financial Crisis Timeline
your bucket has a hole in it.........................or two
[youtube]cMnSp4qEXNM[/youtube]
[youtube]_MGT_cSi7Rs[/youtube]
the craps are covering up for ACORN which got the cheap or free loans and have been for years
Those old videos prove squat. Since nobody (NOBODY) was aware of the little securities packaging that was being done by the lending banks, with no SEC oversight, posting what lawmakers said before it all came crashing down is moot.
Great point, but lets not forget if it had not been for 9/11 we never would have went to Iraq in the first place and the events leading up to 9/11 was due to clinton and his adminastraition dropping the ball. But the biggest mess of all is the community re-envestment act that help to build the mega giants Fredy Mac and Fanny Mae. with their fall thus fell the U.S. Economy.
Oh sweet jesus, here we go. Now you want to change the subject to the blame game for 911 and the Iraq war? Holy shit, did you get dumped off another board or something and you've gotta post everything in your repertoire? Both those subjects have been debated to death, ad nauseam. I'm bored with you. Bye.
No I didn't change the subject but the subject was brought up and I addressed it.
That's odd, then why did Bush Jr. say in his first economic speech to Congress (February 2001) that he intended to take the "surplus" and give it back to the people? The budget surplus was $236 billion (however you, and Limbaugh, wish to spin it) and was done through a series of tax increases and spending cuts (just what Republicans SHOULD be advocating now, instead of just the latter).
actually the republicans touted that there was a $5 TRILLION 10 year projected surplus and they wanted to give it back to the tax payers because it was theirs.
They took the Social security projected surplus and GAVE the majority of it TO THE WEALTHIEST who do not pay SS tax on their entire earnings...only on about 95k at the time, IF they pay any AT ALL...
they should have taken the SS surplus money and given an SS tax break not an income tax break, it was SS surpluses ya know?
REVERSE ROBINHOOD.... imo.
Yes, that one speech said VOLUMES!!
Bush Speech to Congress: 27 Feb 2001
To make sure the retirement savings of America's seniors are not diverted to any other program, my budget protects all $2.6 trillion of the Social Security surplus for Social Security and for Social Security alone.
(APPLAUSE)
Most were supportive of going to Iraq hin side is 20/20 no one knew that the information that was given was flawed. but Saddam did violate the terms of the cease fire of 91.
Now as to the CRA being a villian or not would you agree that loaning money to people who could never repay the loan is a dangerous thing? If the government forced the banks to do this then it was because of the CRA.
Apparently it was a good thing, since Bush expanded the CRA concept by promoting no money down loans, with fewer qualifications for those loans.
Did bush do that or are you twisting tha fact? Now if he did do this why would he try regulate Fredy mac and Fanny Mae in 2003?
Oh sweet jesus, here we go. Now you want to change the subject to the blame game for 911 and the Iraq war? Holy shit, did you get dumped off another board or something and you've gotta post everything in your repertoire? Both those subjects have been debated to death, ad nauseam. I'm bored with you. Bye.
No I didn't change the subject but the subject was brought up and I addressed it.
and subsequently ran away from it when your lies were exposed.
your bucket has a hole in it.........................or two
[youtube]cMnSp4qEXNM[/youtube]
[youtube]_MGT_cSi7Rs[/youtube]
the craps are covering up for ACORN which got the cheap or free loans and have been for years
Those old videos prove squat. Since nobody (NOBODY) was aware of the little securities packaging that was being done by the lending banks, with no SEC oversight, posting what lawmakers said before it all came crashing down is moot.
What are you smoking? Those old video's as you call them prove plenty. that there was a problem and the Republicans tried to address but listen to what the democrats had to say abnout it. I would imagine that if the Republicans would have had a super majority we would not have been in this mess.The democrats could have fillabustered because the Republicans did not have a 60 majority to stop a fillabuster.
Is there something incorrect that I may have said? Or is it the truth that you hate to see?
As CaliforniaGirl said regarding people's opinions based on whatever their choice of media tells them, you've so obviously ONLY listened and watched and read from right wing media that it's laughable. My truth's better'n your truth.
Then show us something specific. Nothing wrong with "right wing media" if the truth is there. Disagreeing does not equate to having your facts wrong.
not the same bill, but certainly the democrats wanted a pill bill, just NOT this one that catered to pharma and is bankrupting us.Ironic, since the repubs stole Medicare D from the democrats, isn't it?Near every democrat in the House of representatives voted AGAINST IT....
This WAS THE REPUBLICAN medicare pill bill, NOT the democratic.
May I remind you, the House kept a 15 minute vote that came to the NO VOTES winning, opened for 3 HOURS so that they could twist republican congressmen that voted against it to change their vote to yes.... it took them 3 hours to bribe and twist arms until they finally had enough votes to pass the bill....
and that republican congressman Billy Tauzine who was in charge of the bill let PHARMA write it and also LOCKED Democrats out of the negotiations...AND Tauzine quit after he got his bill passed and went to WORK FOR PHARMA with a multi million dollar salary....for him getting PHARMA'S bill passed with no ability to negotiate with foreign countries and no ability to negotiate for bulk discounts....
Poison Pill - Barbara T. Dreyfuss
read it if you will...one reason i could never be a republican.....
and yes, i know the democrats have had their scummy times too...but i doubt anyone could outdo the republican sleaziness recorded in the article.
What...You really think there aren't scads of dems who aren't in the pockets of BigPharm, and equally adept at giving them their own sweetheart deals?not the same bill, but certainly the democrats wanted a pill bill, just NOT this one that catered to pharma and is bankrupting us.Ironic, since the repubs stole Medicare D from the democrats, isn't it?
Poison Pill - Barbara T. Dreyfuss
read it if you will...one reason i could never be a republican.....
and yes, i know the democrats have had their scummy times too...but i doubt anyone could outdo the republican sleaziness recorded in the article.
Don't be naïve.
I see you don't like facts but when you try to push something as fact when it isn't you get all pissed. You can't changed it.
You don't think Bush said that? Here ya go:
Bush Speech to Congress: 27 Feb 2001
Why is it that you refuse to take Bush at his word in regards to Iraq but take him at his word in regards to a surplus?
Here are the facts address them please address them.
Government - Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 1950 - 1999
Just a bump of liberal horseshit.
And what exactly would that make yours? Conservative purity?
facts vs. horseshit. you do understand which is better?
Okay, I have been trying to decide whether or not I should even bother getting into this thread, but decided I may as well.
I have to ask... blame Republicans for what?
If you think I am going to take your OP and say, you are right the blame lies on Democrats, you have another thing coming. My personal feeling is that the blame lies on both parties regardless of who had control at any given time and for how long. The fact is, in my opinion, that there is not a lot of difference in whether or not a politician is a Republican or a Democrats. They still want our freedoms the only difference is which freedom do they want to take first.
So you tell me what issue(s) are you talking about, but don't expect me to say, I blame only this or that party for most of the issues as blame lies more in the politicians rather than the parties.
Immie
You are one of the few maybe you haven't noticed though that there is a lot of blame being pushed off on the Republicans.
How about Freddy Mac and Fanny Mae failures?
Why is it that you refuse to take Bush at his word in regards to Iraq but take him at his word in regards to a surplus?
Here are the facts address them please address them.
Government - Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 1950 - 1999
Start another thread. PLEASE. Again, with no sourced background to support simple "numbers," they mean nothing.
Are you also aware that the Republicans tried to regulate Freddy Mac and Fanny Mae in 2003,2005,2006? But they did not have enough power to stop any Democratic fillabuster.Okay, I have been trying to decide whether or not I should even bother getting into this thread, but decided I may as well.
I have to ask... blame Republicans for what?
If you think I am going to take your OP and say, you are right the blame lies on Democrats, you have another thing coming. My personal feeling is that the blame lies on both parties regardless of who had control at any given time and for how long. The fact is, in my opinion, that there is not a lot of difference in whether or not a politician is a Republican or a Democrats. They still want our freedoms the only difference is which freedom do they want to take first.
So you tell me what issue(s) are you talking about, but don't expect me to say, I blame only this or that party for most of the issues as blame lies more in the politicians rather than the parties.
Immie
You are one of the few maybe you haven't noticed though that there is a lot of blame being pushed off on the Republicans.
How about Freddy Mac and Fanny Mae failures?
Oh sorry, I have noticed it.
I simply don't agree that it should be entirely pushed off on Republicans nor do I believe that Republicans are entirely without fault.
It is that way in most issues as far as I can tell.
Now, please don't ask me where I find fault with the Republicans in this case, because that is a big issue and quite frankly I'm not sure I can lay my fingers on a good answer to it. Although, I have little doubt that some blame can be placed with the Republicans in regards to the issue.
Immie
What...You really think there aren't scads of dems who aren't in the pockets of BigPharm, and equally adept at giving them their own sweetheart deals?not the same bill, but certainly the democrats wanted a pill bill, just NOT this one that catered to pharma and is bankrupting us.Ironic, since the repubs stole Medicare D from the democrats, isn't it?
Poison Pill - Barbara T. Dreyfuss
read it if you will...one reason i could never be a republican.....
and yes, i know the democrats have had their scummy times too...but i doubt anyone could outdo the republican sleaziness recorded in the article.
Don't be naïve.
You do realize that you are using the New York Post as a source? The New York Post is also a propanda tool for the DNC, same as with the New York Times.Those old videos prove squat. Since nobody (NOBODY) was aware of the little securities packaging that was being done by the lending banks, with no SEC oversight, posting what lawmakers said before it all came crashing down is moot.
What are you smoking? Those old video's as you call them prove plenty. that there was a problem and the Republicans tried to address but listen to what the democrats had to say abnout it. I would imagine that if the Republicans would have had a super majority we would not have been in this mess.The democrats could have fillabustered because the Republicans did not have a 60 majority to stop a fillabuster.
no the republicans did not try to fix a thing....they were lobbied with big cash by freddie mac so they BACKED OFF of it....they were no better.
GOP LOBBY TIED TO KILLING OVERHAUL BILL - NYPOST.com
Problem is they haven't been in a position to wreck havoc for over 4 years and said havoc didn't take place until 07. [check the dates on the banking and housing crisis]
So....who's to blame for our economy??? Congress. The President doesn't set banking regulations....Congress does. Who spends money from the Treasury....Congress. Who's to blame for all of the hell that broke loose in 08'?
Those who've been in charge since Jan 07'
Democraps in Congress.
Sure, since 2007. Nobody with half a brain buys that, genius.
USATODAY.com - Bush seeks to increase minority homeownership
In a bid to boost minority homeownership, President Bush will ask Congress for authority to eliminate the down-payment requirement for Federal Housing Administration loans.
You can find his speeches on that in many places. Feel free to search for yourself. Although the house of cards came crashing down on Democrats' watch, it took many years building to the crescendo, my friend. These events didn't happen as a result of only one year of Democratic control. You continue to be easy to dumb down:
The Financial Crisis Timeline
your bucket has a hole in it.........................or two
[youtube]cMnSp4qEXNM[/youtube]
[youtube]_MGT_cSi7Rs[/youtube]
the craps are covering up for ACORN which got the cheap or free loans and have been for years
Are you also aware that the Republicans tried to regulate Freddy Mac and Fanny Mae in 2003,2005,2006? But they did not have enough power to stop any Democratic fillabuster.You are one of the few maybe you haven't noticed though that there is a lot of blame being pushed off on the Republicans.
How about Freddy Mac and Fanny Mae failures?
Oh sorry, I have noticed it.
I simply don't agree that it should be entirely pushed off on Republicans nor do I believe that Republicans are entirely without fault.
It is that way in most issues as far as I can tell.
Now, please don't ask me where I find fault with the Republicans in this case, because that is a big issue and quite frankly I'm not sure I can lay my fingers on a good answer to it. Although, I have little doubt that some blame can be placed with the Republicans in regards to the issue.
Immie
