When our NEXT president screws up I'm going to....

[Borillar]

I well aware of the wars and debt and unemployment Bush left. I'm also aware that Bush lost control and Obama gained it. I'm also aware virtually NOTHING has changed in any of those categories. I'm also aware that you too apparently have bush derangement syndrome.

yeah, holding Obama responsible for Bush's bad economy and Republican obstructionism is all well and good. Holding Bush responsible for his mess = BDS.

You may call "Holding bush responsible for his mess = BDS" if you wish, but I call it a way to avoid acknowledging the truth. This will be a hard thought for you to understand but the damage bush did to this nation DID NOT occur in one year. bush had to work at crashing this country over several years. The mess that he created WILL NOT be cleaned up in one or even two terms. This is expecially true when the people who helped bush create a mess are doing everything in their power to preserve the mess they created.
Perhaps if your party were more concerned about doing what was best for the people of this country rather than what was best for their party the mess would get cleaned up faster. Of course that would call for the republicans putting country over party and I believe they are incapable of such an act.

Perhaps I should have used a sarcasm smiley. I am in agreement with you, not defending Republicans.

 

[ron4342]

I well aware of the wars and debt and unemployment Bush left. I'm also aware that Bush lost control and Obama gained it. I'm also aware virtually NOTHING has changed in any of those categories. I'm also aware that you too apparently have bush derangement syndrome.

Hummmm.... "... virtually NOTHING has changed in any of those catagories."
Hummmm ... If I am not mistaken we are out of Iraq and in 2014 we will be out of Afghanistan. That looks like change to me! Hummmm... The losing of 750,000 jobs per month has stopped and over the last couple of years we have been slowly gaining jobs back. That also looks like change to me! Oh, and that depression that was predicted, IT NEVER HAPPENED!!!!! I would call that change. What about you? A person with IDS (Ignorance Derangement Syndrome) should probably NOT accuse other people of problems or syndromes when they can't prove their statements false.

We got out of Iraq because of Bush's time line so who was president at the time is irrelevant. The economy hit bottom and the blood loss slowed in some industries and stopped in others. Again irrelevant to political influence. The lack of growth however after the bottom was hit is astounding. Unless you're a banker or investor not much has changed as I stated. The growth is anemic. But I suppose that is somehow Bush's fault for some odd reason

Hummmmm..... You keep saying nothing has changed. IF that is the case doesn't it mean that the Obama presidency is just a continuation of the bush presidency. And since you were obviously a fan of the bush presidency, how come you are not a fan of the Obama presidency. If there is no change between the bush presidency and the obama presidency and if you supported bush, shouldn't you be supporting Obama?

 

[percysunshine]

Perhaps I should have used a sarcasm smiley. I am in agreement with you, not defending Republicans.

Ha! Can't fool us. You voted for Romney.

 

[ron4342]

yeah, holding Obama responsible for Bush's bad economy and Republican obstructionism is all well and good. Holding Bush responsible for his mess = BDS.

You may call "Holding bush responsible for his mess = BDS" if you wish, but I call it a way to avoid acknowledging the truth. This will be a hard thought for you to understand but the damage bush did to this nation DID NOT occur in one year. bush had to work at crashing this country over several years. The mess that he created WILL NOT be cleaned up in one or even two terms. This is expecially true when the people who helped bush create a mess are doing everything in their power to preserve the mess they created.
Perhaps if your party were more concerned about doing what was best for the people of this country rather than what was best for their party the mess would get cleaned up faster. Of course that would call for the republicans putting country over party and I believe they are incapable of such an act.

Perhaps I should have used a sarcasm smiley. I am in agreement with you, not defending Republicans.

I am sorry if I misread your intention. In my defense it is because I have always had this irrational fear of noogie's. Your picture struck immediate fear in me and I was unable to control my response. I will try to do better in the future.

 

[blackhawk]

Blame Obama and only Obama. Republican or Democrat, doesn't matter. I'm going to use the same lame ass play book the left has been using for 5 damn years. Doesn't matter what the screw up is I'm just gonna offer the typical liberal response, "It's the previous guys fault"

Look at the US that Clinton turned over to bush (There were NO wars, the US had a surplus on the books, and the economy was doing well). Now look at the US bush turned over to Obama (Two wars being paid for by borrowed money, a huge jump in the national debt, the US losing 750,000 jobs per month, and virtually ever economist predicting a major depression). Only a complete fool and imbecile would be stupid enough to be able to ignore the mess bush left Obama.

The mistakes and screw ups of one President do not justify or excuse the mistakes and screw ups of another Bush and Bush alone is responsible for the decisions he made during his administration and the results of them the good and the bad just as Obama is responsible for the decisions he makes and the results of them. When we start letting any President off the hook for his decisions by allowing him to blame the person before them unchallenged we are basically giving them free reign to do as they please free of consequences that will never be a good thing for the country people always seem to like this when it's being done by the President they support seeming to forget sooner or later there will be a President they don't support doing the same thing.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Hummmm.... "... virtually NOTHING has changed in any of those catagories."
Hummmm ... If I am not mistaken we are out of Iraq and in 2014 we will be out of Afghanistan. That looks like change to me! Hummmm... The losing of 750,000 jobs per month has stopped and over the last couple of years we have been slowly gaining jobs back. That also looks like change to me! Oh, and that depression that was predicted, IT NEVER HAPPENED!!!!! I would call that change. What about you? A person with IDS (Ignorance Derangement Syndrome) should probably NOT accuse other people of problems or syndromes when they can't prove their statements false.

We got out of Iraq because of Bush's time line so who was president at the time is irrelevant. The economy hit bottom and the blood loss slowed in some industries and stopped in others. Again irrelevant to political influence. The lack of growth however after the bottom was hit is astounding. Unless you're a banker or investor not much has changed as I stated. The growth is anemic. But I suppose that is somehow Bush's fault for some odd reason

Hummmmm..... You keep saying nothing has changed. IF that is the case doesn't it mean that the Obama presidency is just a continuation of the bush presidency. And since you were obviously a fan of the bush presidency, how come you are not a fan of the Obama presidency. If there is no change between the bush presidency and the obama presidency and if you supported bush, shouldn't you be supporting Obama?

Maybe you should learn or ask what I think of bush rather than making assumptions.

Bush was not much better than Obama when it came to liberal issues and spending.

 

[ron4342]

Blame Obama and only Obama. Republican or Democrat, doesn't matter. I'm going to use the same lame ass play book the left has been using for 5 damn years. Doesn't matter what the screw up is I'm just gonna offer the typical liberal response, "It's the previous guys fault"

Look at the US that Clinton turned over to bush (There were NO wars, the US had a surplus on the books, and the economy was doing well). Now look at the US bush turned over to Obama (Two wars being paid for by borrowed money, a huge jump in the national debt, the US losing 750,000 jobs per month, and virtually ever economist predicting a major depression). Only a complete fool and imbecile would be stupid enough to be able to ignore the mess bush left Obama.

The mistakes and screw ups of one President do not justify or excuse the mistakes and screw ups of another Bush and Bush alone is responsible for the decisions he made during his administration and the results of them the good and the bad just as Obama is responsible for the decisions he makes and the results of them. When we start letting any President off the hook for his decisions by allowing him to blame the person before them unchallenged we are basically giving them free reign to do as they please free of consequences that will never be a good thing for the country people always seem to like this when it's being done by the President they support seeming to forget sooner or later there will be a President they don't support doing the same thing.

blackhawk, your argument has merit. However, consider this, if a president really fucks up and turns over a country that has gigantic problems to the next president, the incoming president is forced to try to clean up the mess he was given. Now if the people who made the mess work to help the new president clean up the mess it is well and good and he should take responsibility for the results of the clean up. But what if those who helped to make the mess are doing everything in their power to make sure the mess is not cleaned up. What if obstructionism and the use of filibusters (over 400 the last legislative session) tie the hands of the president. Who is then responsible for the mess remaining. If the presidents hands are tied, how can he be expected to solve problems he never made? And how can he be blamed for events and results he has no control over?
(Oh, and by the way, don't even mention ACA. bush had nothing to do with that BUT I am sure you will agree that the republicans have done absolutely everything in their power to make ACA a failure.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Look at the US that Clinton turned over to bush (There were NO wars, the US had a surplus on the books, and the economy was doing well). Now look at the US bush turned over to Obama (Two wars being paid for by borrowed money, a huge jump in the national debt, the US losing 750,000 jobs per month, and virtually ever economist predicting a major depression). Only a complete fool and imbecile would be stupid enough to be able to ignore the mess bush left Obama.

The mistakes and screw ups of one President do not justify or excuse the mistakes and screw ups of another Bush and Bush alone is responsible for the decisions he made during his administration and the results of them the good and the bad just as Obama is responsible for the decisions he makes and the results of them. When we start letting any President off the hook for his decisions by allowing him to blame the person before them unchallenged we are basically giving them free reign to do as they please free of consequences that will never be a good thing for the country people always seem to like this when it's being done by the President they support seeming to forget sooner or later there will be a President they don't support doing the same thing.

blackhawk, your argument has merit. However, consider this, if a president really fucks up and turns over a country that has gigantic problems to the next president, the incoming president is forced to try to clean up the mess he was given. Now if the people who made the mess work to help the new president clean up the mess it is well and good and he should take responsibility for the results of the clean up. But what if those who helped to make the mess are doing everything in their power to make sure the mess is not cleaned up. What if obstructionism and the use of filibusters (over 400 the last legislative session) tie the hands of the president. Who is then responsible for the mess remaining. If the presidents hands are tied, how can he be expected to solve problems he never made? And how can he be blamed for events and results he has no control over?
(Oh, and by the way, don't even mention ACA. bush had nothing to do with that BUT I am sure you will agree that the republicans have done absolutely everything in their power to make ACA a failure.

The GOP has had nothing to do with the success or failure of the ACA. Democrats own it 100%

 

[blackhawk]

Look at the US that Clinton turned over to bush (There were NO wars, the US had a surplus on the books, and the economy was doing well). Now look at the US bush turned over to Obama (Two wars being paid for by borrowed money, a huge jump in the national debt, the US losing 750,000 jobs per month, and virtually ever economist predicting a major depression). Only a complete fool and imbecile would be stupid enough to be able to ignore the mess bush left Obama.

The mistakes and screw ups of one President do not justify or excuse the mistakes and screw ups of another Bush and Bush alone is responsible for the decisions he made during his administration and the results of them the good and the bad just as Obama is responsible for the decisions he makes and the results of them. When we start letting any President off the hook for his decisions by allowing him to blame the person before them unchallenged we are basically giving them free reign to do as they please free of consequences that will never be a good thing for the country people always seem to like this when it's being done by the President they support seeming to forget sooner or later there will be a President they don't support doing the same thing.

blackhawk, your argument has merit. However, consider this, if a president really fucks up and turns over a country that has gigantic problems to the next president, the incoming president is forced to try to clean up the mess he was given. Now if the people who made the mess work to help the new president clean up the mess it is well and good and he should take responsibility for the results of the clean up. But what if those who helped to make the mess are doing everything in their power to make sure the mess is not cleaned up. What if obstructionism and the use of filibusters (over 400 the last legislative session) tie the hands of the president. Who is then responsible for the mess remaining. If the presidents hands are tied, how can he be expected to solve problems he never made? And how can he be blamed for events and results he has no control over?
(Oh, and by the way, don't even mention ACA. bush had nothing to do with that BUT I am sure you will agree that the republicans have done absolutely everything in their power to make ACA a failure.

Obama has followed most of the Bush policies despite being a Republican Bush was a big government big spending President so is Obama the failed big spending policies of Bush don't make Obama's right both parties will oppose what they once supported and vice versa depending on who is in power. What have Republicans done to make ACA fail? Remember that was passed by a Democrat President and a Democrat controlled Congress without any Republican votes it was upheld by what many on the left see as a conservative leaning Supreme Court despite many calls by Republicans to repeal, defund, or delay ACA that never happened it never came close the Presidents chosen people headed up getting ACA ready for launch they had three years to do this it launched on the date it was supposed to and the results have been less than impressive. While I understand the desire to want to pass the blame for this onto the Republicans you can't not this time no matter what the final verdict is on ACA good or bad the Democrats own this one if it does what it was advertised to do they get the credit if not they get the blame.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Blame Obama and only Obama. Republican or Democrat, doesn't matter. I'm going to use the same lame ass play book the left has been using for 5 damn years. Doesn't matter what the screw up is I'm just gonna offer the typical liberal response, "It's the previous guys fault"

Personally, I will just marvel that him accidently nuking New York still made him look better than Obama.

 

[The T]

Blame Obama and only Obama. Republican or Democrat, doesn't matter. I'm going to use the same lame ass play book the left has been using for 5 damn years. Doesn't matter what the screw up is I'm just gonna offer the typical liberal response, "It's the previous guys fault"

While they do what the other guy did...hmmm...

To be human is one thing...accepted...to be honorable is quite another. (And don't we insist holders of office to be such)?

 

[Politico]

Might as well. That's anyone here ever does is talk and bitch and name call and argue. It's why nothing ever changes.

 

[jknowgood]

Blame Obama and only Obama. Republican or Democrat, doesn't matter. I'm going to use the same lame ass play book the left has been using for 5 damn years. Doesn't matter what the screw up is I'm just gonna offer the typical liberal response, "It's the previous guys fault"

Look at the US that Clinton turned over to bush (There were NO wars, the US had a surplus on the books, and the economy was doing well). Now look at the US bush turned over to Obama (Two wars being paid for by borrowed money, a huge jump in the national debt, the US losing 750,000 jobs per month, and virtually ever economist predicting a major depression). Only a complete fool and imbecile would be stupid enough to be able to ignore the mess bush left Obama.

Clinton also handed bush 911 you idiot. Also a reccession.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Might as well. The reason all the bad things happened during the Bush years was because Clinton got a blowjob.

Clinton was a dirt bag personally but he was an effective president. Bush's fuck ups had nothing to do with anything but Bush.

fuck Clinton and his unconstitutional assault weapons ban

 

[ron4342]

The mistakes and screw ups of one President do not justify or excuse the mistakes and screw ups of another Bush and Bush alone is responsible for the decisions he made during his administration and the results of them the good and the bad just as Obama is responsible for the decisions he makes and the results of them. When we start letting any President off the hook for his decisions by allowing him to blame the person before them unchallenged we are basically giving them free reign to do as they please free of consequences that will never be a good thing for the country people always seem to like this when it's being done by the President they support seeming to forget sooner or later there will be a President they don't support doing the same thing.

blackhawk, your argument has merit. However, consider this, if a president really fucks up and turns over a country that has gigantic problems to the next president, the incoming president is forced to try to clean up the mess he was given. Now if the people who made the mess work to help the new president clean up the mess it is well and good and he should take responsibility for the results of the clean up. But what if those who helped to make the mess are doing everything in their power to make sure the mess is not cleaned up. What if obstructionism and the use of filibusters (over 400 the last legislative session) tie the hands of the president. Who is then responsible for the mess remaining. If the presidents hands are tied, how can he be expected to solve problems he never made? And how can he be blamed for events and results he has no control over?
(Oh, and by the way, don't even mention ACA. bush had nothing to do with that BUT I am sure you will agree that the republicans have done absolutely everything in their power to make ACA a failure.

The GOP has had nothing to do with the success or failure of the ACA. Democrats own it 100%

You do realize when you make comments like this your stupidity is highlighted. For example, you do realize that 197 amendments were added to ACA. Of the 197 amendments, 36 were Democratic and 161 were from republicans. So much for owning it "100%." Further, can you deny that republicans have done everything in their power to try to ensure the failure of ACA. Doesn't voting to repeal it 41 times offer you a bit of a clue about the republicans attempt to make ACA fail? You do understand that or are you senile to the point you cannot understand what is occurring?

 

[ron4342]

Blame Obama and only Obama. Republican or Democrat, doesn't matter. I'm going to use the same lame ass play book the left has been using for 5 damn years. Doesn't matter what the screw up is I'm just gonna offer the typical liberal response, "It's the previous guys fault"

Look at the US that Clinton turned over to bush (There were NO wars, the US had a surplus on the books, and the economy was doing well). Now look at the US bush turned over to Obama (Two wars being paid for by borrowed money, a huge jump in the national debt, the US losing 750,000 jobs per month, and virtually ever economist predicting a major depression). Only a complete fool and imbecile would be stupid enough to be able to ignore the mess bush left Obama.

Clinton also handed bush 911 you idiot. Also a reccession.

Hummmm.... "Clinton handed bush 9/11." Hummmm....
You do realize that bush took office on 1/20/2001. That means he was in office the rest of January (10 days). He was also in office all of February (28 days), March (31 days), April (30 days), May (31 days), June (30 days), July (31 days), August (31 days), and 10 more days in Sept. In other words bush was in office a total of over 210 days prior to 9/11. Exactly how many days warning do you think he should have had?

 

[ron4342]

Might as well. The reason all the bad things happened during the Bush years was because Clinton got a blowjob.

Clinton was a dirt bag personally but he was an effective president. Bush's fuck ups had nothing to do with anything but Bush.

1. fuck Clinton and his unconstitutional assault weapons ban

1. Why do you need assault weapons? Are you planning to kill kids in a school or in a movie theatre? Go fuck yourself.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Clinton was a dirt bag personally but he was an effective president. Bush's fuck ups had nothing to do with anything but Bush.

1. fuck Clinton and his unconstitutional assault weapons ban

1. Why do you need assault weapons? Are you planning to kill kids in a school or in a movie theatre? Go fuck yourself.

Reason why
The second amendment to hard for you to comprehend?
Miller vs U.S. 1939
10 USC § 311
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.
When seconds count the police are minutes if not hours away.

 

[FJO]

Blame Obama and only Obama. Republican or Democrat, doesn't matter. I'm going to use the same lame ass play book the left has been using for 5 damn years. Doesn't matter what the screw up is I'm just gonna offer the typical liberal response, "It's the previous guys fault"

No, you won't. You are old and growing senile, just as was Reagan. You will remember nothing but that you are hungry.

If that is how you feel a person who is older than you, I sincerely hope that you never get to grow old.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Jake, you're so ignorant. How old do you think I am?

Your writing on the Board leads one to think that you are over eighty five and slipping.