3 Year Results of Hope and Change

What an absolutely idiotic thread. I may post a list of the accomplishments, but I really doubt the OPer cares. When you call the President of the United States "president skid mark" you are showing your true colors.

You have posted information concerning the UE rate, the price of gas at the pump, the price of electricity, the poverty rate, food stamp%, and some other various economic statistics. These are the only metrics and issues you are looking at? Were these the only issues discussed and debated during the election of 2008?

Not only are you completely ignorant of the causes of most of these statistics, but you are also ignorant of the overall trends in these over a great period of time than President Obama has been in the WH. The fact that you are quoting the price of gaseoline in January 09 to where it is today is such an indication of how clueless you are in this issue, or how much you are trying to disort the facts.
 
Im going to laugh my *** off when I pull all these threads up in 9 months.

President Obama will win the 2012 election....and he will win quite easily.

Today's GOP party is akin to Charlie Brown....nothing but a bunch of fuckups who repeatedly fumble on the 5 yard line.

No way in hell the GOP shouldnt have captured both the House and Senate in 2010, but they nominated some horrible candidates and ultimately all they won was the House.

They will do the same thing in 2012....and if by the Grace of God Newt wins the GOP nomination......they will probably lose seats in the House and Senate.
 
he is s **** stain on society. no getting around that. but if you want to go into the policies that got us into this mess that is fine too. Both parties have spent way too much. both parties buy votes to stay in power. Recall skid mark told us all that he was going to change the policies that got us into this mess. he was going to go through that budget "line by line" to eliminate the waste, and consolidate redudant agencies and eliminate those that are no longer needed. he was going to balance the budget by the end of his first term. uh....instead he will have added over 6 TRILLION to the debt in 4 years, and has failed to even submit a competent budget in over 700 days now. He owns all of that. The unprecedented spending, the failure to submit a good faith budget, the failure to even try to control spending and rid us of the policies he decried on the campaign trail. now you morons support him keeping the bush policies he railed against, but not only did he keep them, he doubled down. what kind of dumbass does this. what kind of dumbass continues to support the escalation of the olicies they so hated previously? my goodness. idiocracy. it has arrived in full force.
 
Both Bush and Obama sucked. Bush was screwed by an economy based on bubbles that began to pop toward the end of his 2nd term. Obama was screwed by an economy that was collapsing when he took over.

The bottom line, though, is that both of them have spent way, WAY too much money and, as a result, we're going to have to pay the price at some point in the near future. I think I would be less upset at both of them if we had a bad economy without the trillions of debt.
 
Fair enough. I guess the difference to me is one was reacting (overreacting in hindsight?) to one of the biggest national security threats in our history. The other was handing out giant political favors.
 
I know Shiner and I agree with what you are saying. My issue with Bush is more toward the initial TARP spending. I know arguments can be made that it possibly did help lessen the blow of the recession. However, this was the first major step in spending that is going to kill this country at some point. I can't complain about Obama's spending when Bush initiated the action.
 
It really is hard to understand this "Bush vs Obama" debate. We are (hopefully recovering) from a massive recession. There was absolutely no way to declining revenues.

Economists can debate whether the tax cuts and/or stimulus from either President hurt or helped, but it is not realistic to think that Bush could have averted this recession or that we would somehow be fiscally sound and all happily employed if McCain or another imaginary Republican were President.

To put all this on Obama is simply naive.
 
we are saying bush started it, oabama campaigned against bush doing it, told he would stop it, and made it worse instead. he is either too stupid to know what he has done, or he doesn't give a **** that he is fvcking up our financial viability. Either way, he put the bush doctrine on steroids after campaigning against it. Why you bootlickers won't hold him accountable and vote his dumbass out of office is beyond me. we simply cannot continue on this path no matter what happens to the tax rates, and recovery. it isn't sustainable, and he has proven he doesn't care or even know how to fix it. he wasn't sent to washington as POTUS to continue doing what Bush was doing only bigger and worse. He wasn't sent there to hand out trillions of taxpayer money to unions and auto makers with ****** business plans, and old men with a railroad. He was sent to end all of that. He was "different" going to "usher in a new era in washington". Yeah. He ushered in a new error all right. That he still has morons supporting his bush on steroids doctrine is tragic.
 
I35 and Tex007:

No doubt we need fiscal sanity restored, and I personally think that will have to come from a combination of tax increases and spending reductions. Hopefully the economy will be in a position to absorb this soon.

However, my point is that the increasingly large deficits can be blamed more on the massive recession than on any combination of Bush or Obama policies.

As far as the policies that contributed to the easy money bubbles and subsequent pain, well that's a different post, but I'd personally look more to Reagan and Clinton (especially Clinton) than Bush.

Obama is blameless for the worst of the recession, but no doubt reasonable minds can differ whether he has mitigated or exacerbated the situation since his inauguration.
 
I 35, that's another outright lie.

Why do you insist on posting made-up facts, figures, and statistics on a regular basis?
 
My bad, that is one of the estimated total cost and some estimate it being a lot more than that. But 3.5 billion is not the end of it I promise you. What's amazing is the Keystone pipeline will cost the tax payers nothing. He says no to that but wants to put of 3.5 Billion of our money for the high speed train. Both are not environmental friendly and both would disrupt the land.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

NEW: Pro Sports Forums

Cowboys, Texans, Rangers, Astros, Mavs, Rockets, etc. Pro Longhorns. The Chiefs and that Swift gal. This is the place.

Pro Sports Forums

Recent Threads

Back
Top