View Poll Results: How convincing is the ignore Bush strategy?

Voters
19. You may not vote on this poll
  • Very Convincing

    1 5.26%
  • Somewhat Convincing

    1 5.26%
  • Neither

    2 10.53%
  • Somewhat Unconvincing

    1 5.26%
  • Very Unconvincing

    14 73.68%
Page 11 of 17 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 161

Thread: How convincing is the ignore Bush strategy?

  1. #101
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: How convincing is the ignore Bush strategy?

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    The difference here is Bush's deficits where with a good economy.
    How soon we forget the recession that the liberals claimed Bush caused once he took office.

    Obama, with a bad economy, is going to run up a deficit, that is the nature of things.
    This is absolutely false. Every dollar that is spent is voluntarily spent.
    Deficits are choice. You run them because you choose to run them.

    Now, if Obama keeps running up deficits with no effort to reign them in as the economy improves, then we will have a very legitimate complaint...
    The Obama has done in 2 years what it took GWB 8 to do - and -no one- sees it changing.
    The complaint is legitimate NOW.

    ...and I will be leading the people making it.
    Then, rather than make excuses for The Obama you need to get busy and sound that bugle.

  2. #102
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: How convincing is the ignore Bush strategy?

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Did you notice the world changed the last 60 years....
    Please, explain in specific terms how that makes any difference at all, especially as held by relevant US and international law.
    Last edited by Goobieman; 08-02-10 at 06:07 PM.

  3. #103
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: How convincing is the ignore Bush strategy?

    Quote Originally Posted by Catz Part Deux View Post
    These are special cases, reserved for various leaders or others accused of committing specific war crims.

    Normal POWs held for the duration of the war are not subject to trial, do not get a lawyer and have no right to habeus corpus.

  4. #104
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:47 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,316
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: How convincing is the ignore Bush strategy?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    How soon we forget the recession that the liberals claimed Bush caused once he took office.
    And that recession lasted how long during Bush's term? Sorry, but pointing out that The Bush(see what I did there?) is less than perfect is not particularly controversial.

    This is absolutely false. Every dollar that is spent is voluntarily spent.
    Deficits are choice. You run them because you choose to run them.
    Really? Obama came into office with a deficit of 1.2 trillion, if he did nothing new. So you are saying Obama could have cut the budget by 1.2 trillion the first year in office? And what impact would that have had on the economy?

    The Obama has done in 2 years what it took GWB 8 to do - and -no one- sees it changing.
    The complaint is legitimate NOW.
    So first you excuse The Bush's deficits, then bitch about Obama's, even though most of Obama's actually are The Bush's. There is a word for that. Hint: it begins with hypocrisy.

    Then, rather than make excuses for The Obama you need to get busy and sound that bugle.
    I guess the phrase "as the economy improves" went over your head.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  5. #105
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:47 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,316
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: How convincing is the ignore Bush strategy?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    Please, explain in specific terms how that makes any difference at all, especially as held by relevant US and international law.
    Geneva Conventions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia--Hey look, there is just one example of international law changing since WW2. I bet you can think of others too.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  6. #106
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: How convincing is the ignore Bush strategy?

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    And that recession lasted how long during Bush's term? Sorry, but pointing out that The Bush(see what I did there?) is less than perfect is not particularly controversial.
    Doesnt change the fact that you deliberately mis-represnted the economy under GWB in order to make an excuse for The Obama. In fact, if we listen to people like John Kerry, and evryone that parroted his position - like, I'd guess, you - even as far along as 2004, the economy was still crappy.

    In fact, until The Obama took office, there were few, if any, liberlas that thought the economy was EVER good under GWB. But, I guess that's what partisanship does for you.

    Really? Obama came into office with a deficit of 1.2 trillion, if he did nothing new.
    You better check your numbers, or exaplin exactly how you reached this number.

    So you are saying Obama could have cut the budget by 1.2 trillion the first year in office?
    Yep. Without question.

    And what impact would that have had on the economy?
    Less than the long-0term effects of Him running up the deficit 400% faster than GWB did.

    So first you excuse The Bush's deficits....
    Fail. I excused nothing. YOU, on the other hand, complain about the 1, but find excuses for the 4.

    then bitch about Obama's, even though most of Obama's actually are The Bush's.
    This is abolsutely false. GWB didnt force The Obama to do a thing -- The Obama -chose- to run up every dollar of those deficits.

    There is a word for that. Hint: it begins with hypocrisy.
    yes... and it is properly prefaced with the word 'liberal'.

    I guess the phrase "as the economy improves" went over your head.
    Oh... so now your tack is that the economy hasnlt gotten better, so its OK to run those huge deficits.
    That leads to the obvious question: When do you start complaining about The Obama's perfomance on the economy, especially given the TRILLIONS of dollars he added to the debt in an attempt to save it.

    It hard to see how you'd argue that He has been anything but a abject failure in that regard, but you'll find a way.

  7. #107
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: How convincing is the ignore Bush strategy?

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Geneva Conventions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia--Hey look, there is just one example of international law changing since WW2. I bet you can think of others too.
    Yeah? Did you actually READ anything in that link? Really? I'll bet not.

    Here's how I collect:
    Show me where any of that negates my argument - that POWs do not have a right to a lawyer, habeus corpus or a trial, and can be held w/o any such things for the duration.

  8. #108
    Sage
    Caine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    10-05-17 @ 01:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    23,336

    Re: How convincing is the ignore Bush strategy?

    Quote Originally Posted by megaprogman View Post
    In various threads, whenever the mistakes of Bush are brought up, some people always seem to want to bury the past and act like it never happened so they can blame everything on Obama instead.

    So, in your opinion, how effective is this strategy?
    Its extremely effective.
    What would be more effective is that every time a democrat brings up Blame Bush syndrome that someone calls them out on it for the foolish attempt of clinging to the problem that got them blindly elected in the first place.
    "I condemn the ideology of White Supremacy and Nazism. They are thugs, criminals, and repugnant, and are against what I believe to be "The American Way" "
    Thus my obligatory condemnation of White supremacy will now be in every post, lest I be accused of supporting it because I didn't mention it specifically every time I post.

  9. #109
    Sage
    VanceMack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,677

    Re: How convincing is the ignore Bush strategy?

    Quote Originally Posted by Catz Part Deux View Post
    Except of course...we are not AT war. The war against Afghanistan ended in 2002. The war against Iraq ended in 2003. We are currently engaged in joint mil-ops with the governments of those states combating terrorists. They would most edequately be described as 'criminals', except under who's rules and laws?

  10. #110
    Educator Helvidius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Good ol' US of A
    Last Seen
    02-01-17 @ 12:41 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    735

    Re: How convincing is the ignore Bush strategy?

    Quote Originally Posted by The Uncola View Post
    Quite franky, the only people they are fooling, is each other. Obama is far from perfect, but the plate full of crapola he has been left, is a direct result of the failure of not just Bush the Jr, but of the entire "conservative" philosophy.
    Bush was not a conersvative. I do not know why you compare the two. He was a neoconservative. Very different.
    Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

Page 11 of 17 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •