Peter Ferrara has never written an interesting thing in his life. He is a paid hack of the corporate right-wing. Hence his deep history with the extremist and reliably dishonest "Club for Growth" and his hired-gun role in defending the work of Jack Abramoff. They don't come much mroe sleazy than Peter Ferrara.
What roots and traditions does Obama have in Florida? How did you feel about footing the bill for Bush's surprise visits to Baghdad? That's even further than Hawaii you know, and he went that far just to create image-enhancing photo-ops. Like the one with the plastic turkey.
I'm actually focused here on the vapid nature of this thread and so many of your posts within it. Facts be damned, you just want something bad to say about Obama and will invent it out of whole cloth if you have to. Pretty sorry story there. One that unfortunately applies to the greater part of the right-wing in general.
You might as well have gone to Clint Eastwood as Peter Ferrrara. Claiming anything he has produced to be "interesting" or "historical" is simply a farce. Obviously, you are not familiar with his long career as a paid liar, character assassin, and excuse-making distortionist. As noted, they don't come much sleazier than Peter Ferrara.
Funny how much difficulty you all have countering such posts, isn't it. Where are the facts that would put all those "lies" and all that "propaganda" to rest? They don't appear. Because they don't exist. Once the arsenal of "prerecorded messages" from right-wing central has been exhausted, it's all over. Then it's down to sloppy attempts at personal attack such as the above. Pretty pathetic.
Since it's less wasteful than any president you ever voted for, you're not really in a position to complain.
Since he's spending less time on Air Force One than presidents you voted for, it's completely within reason to highlight your hypocrisy on the matter. In fact, compared to some other Republican presidents, Obama's Air Force One expenses are a bargain.
I said nothing negative about it. You sound paranoid.
You don't have to. Perhaps you can't credit him? Who knows, you seem reluctant to answer such a simple question.
Sorry, but now you're spouting bull****. That article didn't specify what Reagan did to turn the economy around. All it said about that period was that unemployment fell and GDP rose. It did not say what Reagan did to cause that to happen.
I'm not expecting you to. Actually, if you would answer the question (and answer it honestly), I am here to educate you.
I know the history. What I'm wondering is, if you know it, why you're so scared to say what Reagan did that turned the economy around?
One reason and one reason only ... because Obama's a Democrat.
