The President with the worst average unemployment rate since World War II is?

[RoshawnMarkwees]

If you make that claim, tell us how it does affect our economic policy. The US is one of the top oil producers in the world now. So who is controlling the economy?
Is, or is not, the stock market reaching record highs?
So who is controlling the economy?

Seems the repubs talk out of both sides of their mouths. If the president does do something about unemployment with the powers he has, he is meddling in the business world and needs to stay out of it, but now they want to shame him for doing nothing. His proposals were so shot down at every venue by the right wing. They are the job killers.
The right wing

The only thing hurting this economy -- and that includes unemployment -- is Obama energy policy.

You need to put down the Kool aid.
People have less and things cost more all because energy prices are higher than necessary thanks to obama energy policy. That is a recipe for contracted economy. Very simple and obvious.

 

[boilermaker55]

Don't try to insult me with your brand of bill o'reilly statements.
Disprove my statements rather than give billie boy statements.

The US is one of the top oil producers in the world now. So who is controlling the economy?
Is, or is not, the stock market reaching record highs?
So who is controlling the economy?

If you make that claim, tell us how it does affect our economic policy. The US is one of the top oil producers in the world now. So who is controlling the economy?
Is, or is not, the stock market reaching record highs?
So who is controlling the economy?

Seems the repubs talk out of both sides of their mouths. If the president does do something about unemployment with the powers he has, he is meddling in the business world and needs to stay out of it, but now they want to shame him for doing nothing. His proposals were so shot down at every venue by the right wing. They are the job killers.
The right wing

The only thing hurting this economy -- and that includes unemployment -- is Obama energy policy.

You need to put down the Kool aid.
People have less and things cost more all because energy prices are higher than necessary thanks to obama energy policy. That is a recipe for contracted economy. Very simple and obvious.

 

[kaz]

Who cares? Presidents don't decide who works or who doesn't.

I'm just curious. Why would you average in the first month or 3 months or 6 months of a president's term implying that he had anything to do with that unemployment rate?

Do you know how long into W's Presidency 9/11 happened?

 

[kaz]

The President with the greatest economic crash since the Great Depression is?

So you're pointing out that Obama's even worse than W? Interesting strategy for a leftist Democrat. Where are you headed with this?

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Don't try to insult me with your brand of bill o'reilly statements.
Disprove my statements rather than give billie boy statements.

The US is one of the top oil producers in the world now. So who is controlling the economy?
Is, or is not, the stock market reaching record highs?
So who is controlling the economy?

If you make that claim, tell us how it does affect our economic policy. The US is one of the top oil producers in the world now. So who is controlling the economy?
Is, or is not, the stock market reaching record highs?
So who is controlling the economy?

Seems the repubs talk out of both sides of their mouths. If the president does do something about unemployment with the powers he has, he is meddling in the business world and needs to stay out of it, but now they want to shame him for doing nothing. His proposals were so shot down at every venue by the right wing. They are the job killers.
The right wing

The only thing hurting this economy -- and that includes unemployment -- is Obama energy policy.

You need to put down the Kool aid.
People have less and things cost more all because energy prices are higher than necessary thanks to obama energy policy. That is a recipe for contracted economy. Very simple and obvious.

Why the O'Reilly bit?
I just explained reality and you keep harping on the irrelevant. US expansion in energy production in spite of obama squeeze-down on energy production is not a cure if the demand still outpaces the production.

 

[rightwinger]

Yes, Republican tax cuts are the reason 47% of Americans pay no federal income tax.

The ceasefire violations were never sufficient cause to invade Iraq.

Why hasn't Obama raised the federal income tax on the lower and middle class tax payers if the tax cut was such a bad thing?

The leading Democrats in the Senate apparently disagreed with your opinion on invading Iraq since they voted for it.

How did Democrats in the House vote?

You keep avoiding that more Democrats voted against the war than for it and that only seven Republicans had the balls to oppose the invasion

Enough Democrats voted for it, including Hillary Clinton, to enable the war. What about that is mysterious to you? Dems were for the war before they were against it.

Enough?

As in we lied to enough Democrats to get them to believe us?

Obama did not believe you

There were no lies. Democrats had access to the same intelligence Bush did. Facts just are not your friends, Nutjobber. Must be why you live in Fantasyland.

Bush and Cheney got the Iraq intelligence they demanded
They brushed aside anything that said Iraq was not a threat

The Lies that Led to the Iraq War and the Persistent Myth of Intelligence Failure Foreign Policy Journal

There was no such “intelligence failure”. On the contrary, there was an extremely successful disinformation campaign coordinated by the CIA in furtherance of the government’s policy of seeking regime change in Iraq. The language of the document itself reveals a persistent dishonesty. It speaks of “deepened suspicions” that Iraq “had ongoing WMD programs” and “suspicions that Iraq continued to hide WMD.” Needless to say, however, the Iraq war was not sold to the public on the grounds that government officials and intelligence agencies had “suspicions” that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction (WMD). It was sold to the public with declarations that it was a known fact that Iraq had ongoing programs and stockpiles of WMD. The tacit acknowledgment that the actual evidence only supported “suspicions” that this was so by itself is proof of that the narrative of an “intelligence failure” is a fiction.

Hussein Kamal actually told U.N. inspectors when he defected in 1995. The newly released document in fact points out, “He said that Saddam destroyed all WMD in secret” in 1991. Yet apart from that single buried admission, the document is full of statements implying that weapons programs continued.

 

[boilermaker55]

USA is one of the largest oil producing countries in the world.
And you make the "opinion" statement " you made and then you try to say I am irrelevant.
Nice try.
You agree it is producing more oil than ever, and you say what you say about controlling the economy.

Don't try to insult me with your brand of bill o'reilly statements.
Disprove my statements rather than give billie boy statements.

The US is one of the top oil producers in the world now. So who is controlling the economy?
Is, or is not, the stock market reaching record highs?
So who is controlling the economy?

If you make that claim, tell us how it does affect our economic policy. The US is one of the top oil producers in the world now. So who is controlling the economy?
Is, or is not, the stock market reaching record highs?
So who is controlling the economy?

Seems the repubs talk out of both sides of their mouths. If the president does do something about unemployment with the powers he has, he is meddling in the business world and needs to stay out of it, but now they want to shame him for doing nothing. His proposals were so shot down at every venue by the right wing. They are the job killers.
The right wing

The only thing hurting this economy -- and that includes unemployment -- is Obama energy policy.

You need to put down the Kool aid.
People have less and things cost more all because energy prices are higher than necessary thanks to obama energy policy. That is a recipe for contracted economy. Very simple and obvious.

Why the O'Reilly bit?
I just explained reality and you keep harping on the irrelevant.
The US is one of the top oil producers in the world now. So who is controlling the economy?
Is, or is not, the stock market reaching record highs?
So who is controlling the economy?
.

 

[kaz]

There were no lies. Democrats had access to the same intelligence Bush did. Facts just are not your friends, Nutjobber. Must be why you live in Fantasyland.

Bush and Cheney got the Iraq intelligence they demanded

They brushed aside anything that said Iraq was not a threat

Who said Iraq was a threat

- The UN
- The French
- The Russians
- The Germans
- The Democrats

Who said Iraq was not a threat

- ...

Crickets.

See big guy, this is what happens when you rewrite history. Invading Iraq was a bad idea. Stockpiles of WMDs were irrelevant. He repeatedly used them, so he had the capability to make them. You don't need stockpiles. If that was why you supported it at the time, then you should still support it.

I'm tired of taking the hit for everyone. Look what happened when the US didn't attack ISIS. The Jordanians and Egyptians did. We need to stop carrying everyone's water for them while they undercut us and stab us in the back.

but you have zero integrity. Your view shifts constantly based on the party in power and who it helps and harms. When you grow a pair, get back to me. In the meantime, you can just keep wearing a dress for the Democrats and bending over whenever they ask

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

USA is one of the largest oil producing countries in the world.
And you make the "opinion" statement " you made and then you try to say I am irrelevant.
Nice try.
You agree it is producing more oil than ever, and you say what you say about controlling the economy.

Don't try to insult me with your brand of bill o'reilly statements.
Disprove my statements rather than give billie boy statements.

The US is one of the top oil producers in the world now. So who is controlling the economy?
Is, or is not, the stock market reaching record highs?
So who is controlling the economy?

If you make that claim, tell us how it does affect our economic policy. The US is one of the top oil producers in the world now. So who is controlling the economy?
Is, or is not, the stock market reaching record highs?
So who is controlling the economy?

The only thing hurting this economy -- and that includes unemployment -- is Obama energy policy.

You need to put down the Kool aid.
People have less and things cost more all because energy prices are higher than necessary thanks to obama energy policy. That is a recipe for contracted economy. Very simple and obvious.

Why the O'Reilly bit?
I just explained reality and you keep harping on the irrelevant.
The US is one of the top oil producers in the world now. So who is controlling the economy?
Is, or is not, the stock market reaching record highs?
So who is controlling the economy?
.

My point is based in fact, not opinion. Producing the most and not enough are two completely separate things.

 

[boilermaker55]

Show the facts! Oil - production - Country Comparison
Rank Country Oil - production (bbl/day)
1 Saudi Arabia 10,520,000

2 Russia 10,270,000

3 United States 9,688,000

4 Iran 4,252,000

5 China 4,073,000

6 Canada 3,483,000

7 Mexico 2,983,000

8 United Arab Emirates 2,813,000

9 Iraq 2,642,000

10 Nigeria 2,458,000

15 Countries With The Biggest Oil Reserves - Business Insider

USA is one of the largest oil producing countries in the world.
And you make the "opinion" statement " you made and then you try to say I am irrelevant.
Nice try.
You agree it is producing more oil than ever, and you say what you say about controlling the economy.

Don't try to insult me with your brand of bill o'reilly statements.
Disprove my statements rather than give billie boy statements.

The US is one of the top oil producers in the world now. So who is controlling the economy?
Is, or is not, the stock market reaching record highs?
So who is controlling the economy?

If you make that claim, tell us how it does affect our economic policy. The US is one of the top oil producers in the world now. So who is controlling the economy?
Is, or is not, the stock market reaching record highs?
So who is controlling the economy?

You need to put down the Kool aid.
People have less and things cost more all because energy prices are higher than necessary thanks to obama energy policy. That is a recipe for contracted economy. Very simple and obvious.

Why the O'Reilly bit?
I just explained reality and you keep harping on the irrelevant.
The US is one of the top oil producers in the world now. So who is controlling the economy?
Is, or is not, the stock market reaching record highs?
So who is controlling the economy?
.

My point is based in fact, not opinion. Producing the most and not enough are two completely separate things.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

Show the facts!

USA is one of the largest oil producing countries in the world.
And you make the "opinion" statement " you made and then you try to say I am irrelevant.
Nice try.
You agree it is producing more oil than ever, and you say what you say about controlling the economy.

Don't try to insult me with your brand of bill o'reilly statements.
Disprove my statements rather than give billie boy statements.

The US is one of the top oil producers in the world now. So who is controlling the economy?
Is, or is not, the stock market reaching record highs?
So who is controlling the economy?

You need to put down the Kool aid.
People have less and things cost more all because energy prices are higher than necessary thanks to obama energy policy. That is a recipe for contracted economy. Very simple and obvious.

Why the O'Reilly bit?
I just explained reality and you keep harping on the irrelevant.
The US is one of the top oil producers in the world now. So who is controlling the economy?
Is, or is not, the stock market reaching record highs?
So who is controlling the economy?
.

My point is based in fact, not opinion. Producing the most and not enough are two completely separate things.

Look at the price of oil (and subsequently all consumer goods) in late 2008 before obama reimposed drilling and exploration restrictions and follow the price beyond that. Juxtapose that against stagnant and lower wages.

 

[boilermaker55]

You prove it, not me.
Here is my proof! 15 Countries With The Biggest Oil Reserves - Business Insider
Rank Country Oil - production (bbl/day)
1 Saudi Arabia 10,520,000

2 Russia 10,270,000

3 United States 9,688,000

4 Iran 4,252,000

5 China 4,073,000

6 Canada 3,483,000

7 Mexico 2,983,000

8 United Arab Emirates 2,813,000

9 Iraq 2,642,000

10 Nigeria 2,458,000

Oil - production - Country Comparison

Show the facts!

USA is one of the largest oil producing countries in the world.
And you make the "opinion" statement " you made and then you try to say I am irrelevant.
Nice try.
You agree it is producing more oil than ever, and you say what you say about controlling the economy.

Don't try to insult me with your brand of bill o'reilly statements.
Disprove my statements rather than give billie boy statements.

The US is one of the top oil producers in the world now. So who is controlling the economy?
Is, or is not, the stock market reaching record highs?
So who is controlling the economy?

Why the O'Reilly bit?
I just explained reality and you keep harping on the irrelevant.
The US is one of the top oil producers in the world now. So who is controlling the economy?
Is, or is not, the stock market reaching record highs?
So who is controlling the economy?
.

My point is based in fact, not opinion. Producing the most and not enough are two completely separate things.

Look at the price of oil (and subsequently all consumer goods) in late 2008 before obama reimposed drilling and exploration restrictions and follow the price beyond that. Juxtapose that against stagnant and lower wages.

 

[regent]

And to this day the GOP will advocate tax cuts for the wealthy. W began two wars then gave a tax break for the wealthy. He should have just taken a drink instead.....

The attack on 9-11 started one war and the material breach of the cease fire by Iraq started the other one. Bush had the votes from Congress for both wars.
Bush gave tax cuts to EVERY taxpayer and that included the high income earners.

Yes, Republican tax cuts are the reason 47% of Americans pay no federal income tax.

The ceasefire violations were never sufficient cause to invade Iraq.

Why hasn't Obama raised the federal income tax on the lower and middle class tax payers if the tax cut was such a bad thing?

The leading Democrats in the Senate apparently disagreed with your opinion on invading Iraq since they voted for it.

How did Democrats in the House vote?

You keep avoiding that more Democrats voted against the war than for it and that only seven Republicans had the balls to oppose the invasion

Enough Democrats voted for it, including Hillary Clinton, to enable the war. What about that is mysterious to you? Dems were for the war before they were against it.

The authorization reads: "The president is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he (Bush) determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to...."
It does not say Bush's gotta or were gonna be pissed and impeach Bush if he don't. It just says as "he (Bush) determines." The Congress dumped that decision into Bush's lap, simple politics, and Bush was hot to trot.

 

[rightwinger]

There were no lies. Democrats had access to the same intelligence Bush did. Facts just are not your friends, Nutjobber. Must be why you live in Fantasyland.

Bush and Cheney got the Iraq intelligence they demanded

They brushed aside anything that said Iraq was not a threat

Who said Iraq was a threat

- The UN
- The French
- The Russians
- The Germans
- The Democrats

Who said Iraq was not a threat

- ...

Crickets.

See big guy, this is what happens when you rewrite history. Invading Iraq was a bad idea. Stockpiles of WMDs were irrelevant. He repeatedly used them, so he had the capability to make them. You don't need stockpiles. If that was why you supported it at the time, then you should still support it.

I'm tired of taking the hit for everyone. Look what happened when the US didn't attack ISIS. The Jordanians and Egyptians did. We need to stop carrying everyone's water for them while they undercut us and stab us in the back.

but you have zero integrity. Your view shifts constantly based on the party in power and who it helps and harms. When you grow a pair, get back to me. In the meantime, you can just keep wearing a dress for the Democrats and bending over whenever they ask

Did the UN say Bush should invade?
Did the French? Germans? Majority of Democrats? Obama?

No

All advised Bush to wait for more proof. Bush invaded before proof that Iraq was not a threat came out

 

[kaz]

Did the UN say Bush should invade?
Did the French? Germans? Majority of Democrats? Obama?

No

All advised Bush to wait for more proof. Bush invaded before proof that Iraq was not a threat came out

You're moving the goal posts big guy. This is the point I refuted:

They brushed aside anything that said Iraq was not a threat

 

[NYcarbineer]

Show the facts!

USA is one of the largest oil producing countries in the world.
And you make the "opinion" statement " you made and then you try to say I am irrelevant.
Nice try.
You agree it is producing more oil than ever, and you say what you say about controlling the economy.

Don't try to insult me with your brand of bill o'reilly statements.
Disprove my statements rather than give billie boy statements.

The US is one of the top oil producers in the world now. So who is controlling the economy?
Is, or is not, the stock market reaching record highs?
So who is controlling the economy?

Why the O'Reilly bit?
I just explained reality and you keep harping on the irrelevant.
The US is one of the top oil producers in the world now. So who is controlling the economy?
Is, or is not, the stock market reaching record highs?
So who is controlling the economy?
.

My point is based in fact, not opinion. Producing the most and not enough are two completely separate things.

Look at the price of oil (and subsequently all consumer goods) in late 2008 before obama reimposed drilling and exploration restrictions and follow the price beyond that. Juxtapose that against stagnant and lower wages.

Juxtapose that with the 2.49 gas I bought yesterday, Captain Juxtaposer.

 

[rightwinger]

Did the UN say Bush should invade?
Did the French? Germans? Majority of Democrats? Obama?

No

All advised Bush to wait for more proof. Bush invaded before proof that Iraq was not a threat came out

You're moving the goal posts big guy. This is the point I refuted:

They brushed aside anything that said Iraq was not a threat

I provided a link that proved that they did

The Lies that Led to the Iraq War and the Persistent Myth of Intelligence Failure Foreign Policy Journal

 

[The Rabbi]

The attack on 9-11 started one war and the material breach of the cease fire by Iraq started the other one. Bush had the votes from Congress for both wars.
Bush gave tax cuts to EVERY taxpayer and that included the high income earners.

Yes, Republican tax cuts are the reason 47% of Americans pay no federal income tax.

The ceasefire violations were never sufficient cause to invade Iraq.

Why hasn't Obama raised the federal income tax on the lower and middle class tax payers if the tax cut was such a bad thing?

The leading Democrats in the Senate apparently disagreed with your opinion on invading Iraq since they voted for it.

How did Democrats in the House vote?

You keep avoiding that more Democrats voted against the war than for it and that only seven Republicans had the balls to oppose the invasion

Enough Democrats voted for it, including Hillary Clinton, to enable the war. What about that is mysterious to you? Dems were for the war before they were against it.

The authorization reads: "The president is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he (Bush) determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to...."
It does not say Bush's gotta or were gonna be pissed and impeach Bush if he don't. It just says as "he (Bush) determines." The Congress dumped that decision into Bush's lap, simple politics, and Bush was hot to trot.

Thats a fail. Everyone knew they were voting for war.

 

[The Rabbi]

There were no lies. Democrats had access to the same intelligence Bush did. Facts just are not your friends, Nutjobber. Must be why you live in Fantasyland.

Bush and Cheney got the Iraq intelligence they demanded

They brushed aside anything that said Iraq was not a threat

Who said Iraq was a threat

- The UN
- The French
- The Russians
- The Germans
- The Democrats

Who said Iraq was not a threat

- ...

Crickets.

See big guy, this is what happens when you rewrite history. Invading Iraq was a bad idea. Stockpiles of WMDs were irrelevant. He repeatedly used them, so he had the capability to make them. You don't need stockpiles. If that was why you supported it at the time, then you should still support it.

I'm tired of taking the hit for everyone. Look what happened when the US didn't attack ISIS. The Jordanians and Egyptians did. We need to stop carrying everyone's water for them while they undercut us and stab us in the back.

but you have zero integrity. Your view shifts constantly based on the party in power and who it helps and harms. When you grow a pair, get back to me. In the meantime, you can just keep wearing a dress for the Democrats and bending over whenever they ask

Did the UN say Bush should invade?
Did the French? Germans? Majority of Democrats? Obama?

No

All advised Bush to wait for more proof. Bush invaded before proof that Iraq was not a threat came out

Aleady a failed point Bush had waited over 18 months during which time Saddam had expelled the inspectors at least once. Saddam continued to cover up, delay, and lie.
Compare that to Ghaddafi's handing over his nuclear arsenal and you see what full and fair accounting looks like Too bad Obozo bumbled Libya as well and got our ambassador killed.

 

[The Rabbi]

Did the UN say Bush should invade?
Did the French? Germans? Majority of Democrats? Obama?

No

All advised Bush to wait for more proof. Bush invaded before proof that Iraq was not a threat came out

You're moving the goal posts big guy. This is the point I refuted:

They brushed aside anything that said Iraq was not a threat

I provided a link that proved that they did

The Lies that Led to the Iraq War and the Persistent Myth of Intelligence Failure Foreign Policy Journal

Not responsive.