• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Borders to Shut Down

Apparently you totally missed the part where I said "But all that aside I didn't approve of that either." Why is that? What? Do you want a two paragraph post of calling Bush out everytime someone blasts Obama? Seriously...start holding Obama accountable for HIS crap and stop trying to shift the blame to Bush. Bush is not the one in charge. He is not the CiC. He is not the one sitting in the White House. He is not the one that passed the bailout crap that we had in 2009. He is not the President of the United States anymore and hasn't been for 2 years plus. Get over Bush.

See what I mean? Not only do you make excuses for the former administration here, but you still have no knowledge not only of who signed the bailouts into law, but who is ultimately responsible for them. TARP was signed into law on October 3, 2008. Who was President at that time? True, Obama may support them, but your failure to acknowledge the former President only goes to further prove my original observation correct. Your post - like it or not - was clearly ultrapartisan.

Last I looked Bush's signature was not on the bailout plan that was passed in 2009. You know...when the current president was in office? You know...the president that ran on the campaign trail that he was not Bush? You know...the President that ran on the slogan of "change"?

Lol, are you talking about the stimulus plan? Okay, what companies were bailed out in the ARRA?

I will ask you again. What is the point in blasting Bush when he is no longer in a position to do anything? Just to make you feel good? Sorry, I'm not here to make you feel good. What Bush did is in the past. As I said before I didn't like it then but there is no reason that I should continue to beat a dead horse.


Why should I have mentioned Bush first? Is he the President today? Is he the one that passed the latest bailout plan? No? Then why should I bring up Bush?

BTW, all you had to do from the very begining is ask me about my standing on Bush's bailout plan from the very begining instead of calling me ultrapartisan and and supposedly joking about me and the other person being birthers and crap. But instead you automatically went on the offensive accusing me of crap that is just not true. Even 1Perry attempted to show you the truth but you basically ignored him saying "nuh uh!". I have learned something. That you just can't let Bush go and realize that Obama is the one in charge and calling the shots and is the one responsible for the latest bailouts.

Why would I ask you that? You came into this thread, dropped a comment that was clearly ultrapartisan, and when I labelled it as such, we landed here. Regardless, you asked in post #30 "what's the difference between those and GM", regarding the bankruptcies I listed. Well, I suppose the difference is that Gee Dubya bailed one out, and not the others. Yes, I realize that you were trying to point the finger at Obama here, which tells me that you didn't know that Bush - not Obama - is the one responsible for the bailout program. You've struggle with this all thread. Perhaps it's time to do a little actual reading first : American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
I'm going to ask this for the last time.

Why should I be blasting Bush when he is not in charge? His time is done. It does not matter that he was the one that started it all anymore. Obama continued it.

I no longer care about Bush. His time is done. Ended. I understood bashing him for the first year of Obama's Presidency (after all, Bush was an idiot). But we are already past Obamas second year and well into his third. When are you going to start blaming Obama for HIS policies?
 
I'm going to ask this for the last time.

Why should I be blasting Bush when he is not in charge? His time is done. It does not matter that he was the one that started it all anymore. Obama continued it.

I no longer care about Bush. His time is done. Ended. I understood bashing him for the first year of Obama's Presidency (after all, Bush was an idiot). But we are already past Obamas second year and well into his third. When are you going to start blaming Obama for HIS policies?

So, no response then? That's fine. If anything, you've learned which Presidential administration is behind the bailouts, the difference between TARP and ARRA (and which President was responsible for which one), and hopefully why your original post was labelled ultrapartisan. This will ensure that we can avoid any future ultrapartisan comments when it comes to debate on this issue, and go forward from there.

Regarding my view on Obama and his policies, there are a number of them I disagree with in the social arena, but I have no general objection to the Stimulus Plan overall - some specifics, but that's the subject of another thread.
 
See what I mean? Not only do you make excuses for the former administration here, but you still have no knowledge not only of who signed the bailouts into law, but who is ultimately responsible for them. TARP was signed into law on October 3, 2008. Who was President at that time? True, Obama may support them, but your failure to acknowledge the former President only goes to further prove my original observation correct. Your post - like it or not - was clearly ultrapartisan.

TARP was an open ended bail out. It was Obama who decided where and who got most of the money. Bush should be tarred and feathered for signing it. I was never going to vote for McCain but his jumping in to help saved it, sealed it. Obama argued that we must do it and he is the one who implemented most of it. He is the one who put the (mods I'm sorry, it's hard to not get in the gutter when I speak of this guy) Geithner in charge. Geithner is nothing more than a Wall Street whore. You won't see Kal'Stang or I defending what Bush did but you simply refuse to put any blame on Obama. That is our problem and why the economy still sucks. You.
 
TARP was an open ended bail out. It was Obama who decided where and who got most of the money. Bush should be tarred and feathered for signing it. I was never going to vote for McCain but his jumping in to help saved it, sealed it. Obama argued that we must do it and he is the one who implemented most of it. He is the one who put the (mods I'm sorry, it's hard to not get in the gutter when I speak of this guy) Geithner in charge. Geithner is nothing more than a Wall Street whore. You won't see Kal'Stang or I defending what Bush did but you simply refuse to put any blame on Obama. That is our problem and why the economy still sucks. You.

Actually I find plenty of fault with Obama, but not on this issue.
 
Actually I find plenty of fault with Obama, but not on this issue.

Well it certainly has nothing to do with Bush either. Kal'Stangs was a sarcastic jab. It's what happens when you take the government places it does not belong.
 
Well it certainly has nothing to do with Bush either. Kal'Stangs was a sarcastic jab.

I don't find fault with Bush, either. And you are right - Kal'Stang's was a sarcastic jab, one that was clearly ultrapartisan. He was better off simply admitting it, as subsequent arguments only served to further illustrate this.
 
We in Denver are blessed to have one of the world's largest independent bookstores, The Tattered Cover. A Denver institution since 1970.

Tattered Cover - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The one thing I really miss being in Atlanta is the local independent Book store, Schuler's. I remember when they where just one store, and it was not that big. Now they have 5 locations and all are huge and never ail to have 50 + people shopping in them.

Schuler Books & Music
 
I don't find fault with Bush, either. And you are right - Kal'Stang's was a sarcastic jab, one that was clearly ultrapartisan. He was better off simply admitting it, as subsequent arguments only served to further illustrate this.

I tend to portray an ultrapartisan arguement with those who only argue one side all the time. I've not been here a long time but I've been here long enough to know that Kal'Stang's arguements are all over the place.
 
Bummer that Borders, and Waldenbooks [and other subsidiaries of Borders] is shutting down - there is a Waldenbooks near me, one of the new places within 3 minutes driving time to stock up on comic books, manga [translated to english of course], and everything somebody would need for a long campaign of D&D minus the soft drinks and chips. :p
 
Back
Top Bottom