• 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!

Obama announces his Candidacy for 2012.

rocket88 said:
It goes with what seems to be the prevailing Conservative view (meaning all Conservatives, not "Conservative"). If Obama does it, it's bad (Romney-care, breathing in and out).

I think "Conservative" should be forced to change his name to "Republican." There is a distinct difference. For example, I know many actual Conservatives who think Bush was terrible. Wouldn't hear that from "Conservative."
Click to expand...

Wrong, Romneycare is a state initiated program not a national one and that is where issues like this belong. As for being a Republican, I vote Republican because they beat the alternative but Bush was too liberal for me but less liberal than Gore or Kerry.
 
Conservative said:
Doesn't look like you paid a lot of attention to the entire thread as I have repeated stated that GW Bush had help in creating the recession we had in 2008 just like Obama had a lot of help from the Democrat Congress to generate the disasterous results he has generated since being President. The Democrat President had a Democrat Congress to help him implement his agenda and the results aren't very good. Bush had a Democrat Congress that was more interested in regaining the WH than it was helping Bush prevent a recession thus we got a recession with a Democrat Congress and less employment and higher debt with a Democrat President and Democrat Congress.
Click to expand...

Like I said, according to you, if it happened when a Republican was President, the economy is the controlled by Congress. If it happened when a Democrat was President, the economy is controlled by the President. I've seen you post like this for quite some time. It's hypocrisy, Conservative, and hackish hypocrisy at that.
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
What you believe and what is real are two entirely different things.

For example, while you complain about the percentage of debt of GDP being too high (a valid complaint) ... you supported the man who saw that increase 52% and refuse to support the man who saw it increase, amidst the Great Recession, just 9%.
Click to expand...

the deficit for february alone was greater than what's-his-name's for all of 2007

U.S. sets $223B deficit record - Washington Times

Deficit for Fiscal 2007 Slides - Real Time Economics - WSJ
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
Doesn't matter what Frank wanted, until 2007, he was in the minority party. Republicans were in charge until then and did not pass any legislation which might have prevented the collapse. I blame Republicans for that; just as I blame Democrats for not passing any legislation after they took over in 2007. But by then, most of the damage had already occurred. By 2006, the housing bubble was already declining, on its way to complete collapse.
Click to expand...

Yet with overwhelming Democrat numbers and even a filibuster proof Senate Obama generated these kind of results, less employment and greater debt plus we now have $4 gasoline and it is going higher. Oh, by the way did you get your ticket to NYC for the 9/11 trial of terrorists? Didn't Obama claim to the world he was closing GITMO and had a Democrat Congress to do that? Oh, well, liberals have a selective memory when it comes to promises and results.
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
For doing a better with job with unemployment than every Republican president since Hoover.
Click to expand...

LOL!

125,000 per month doesn't even keep up with population
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Like I said, according to you, if it happened when a Republican was President, the economy is the controlled by Congress. If it happened when a Democrat was President, the economy is controlled by the President. I've seen you post like this for quite some time. It's hypocrisy, Conservative, and hackish hypocrisy at that.
Click to expand...

Unlke many here I understand civics and that isn't what I stated and you are being dishonest in your statement. All spending is indeed controlled by Congress and the President can do very little without Congressional support, that IMO is why we went into recession in 2008 as Democrats were more concerned about regaining the WH than doing their job. Sounds like a little baiting to me and disengenuous at that. You are showing your true colors.
 
Conservative said:
You sure have a lot of time invested in Bush hatred
Click to expand...
What's not to hate? He left a memorial where the Twin Towers once proudly stood; he took us to war over WMD that weren't there; unemployment nearly doubled on his watch; the stock market lost about a third of its value; he led the economy to a near complete meltdown; we had to spend $700 billion just to prevent that meltdown from leading us into another Great Depression. He left a city to drown for a week after Hurricane Katrina.
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
What's not to hate? He left a memorial where the Twin Towers once proudly stood; he took us to war over WMD that weren't there; unemployment nearly doubled on his watch; the stock market lost about a third of its value; he led the economy to a near complete meltdown; we had to spend $700 billion just to prevent that meltdown from leading us into another Great Depression. He left a city to drown for a week after Hurricane Katrina.
Click to expand...

You really need to take a civics course to see how govt. works, then you need to ask yourself how Barack Obama with overwhelming control of Congress generated such miserable results? I would have thought that liberalism on full display and total control would really have our economy humming by now and yet the American people don't seem to be giving Obama a lot of credit as the polls show. Wonder who really has the disconnect, you or the majority?
 
Objective Voice said:
If you read ANY of the Republican health reform bill proposals, you'd know that many of the Republican ideas were incorporated in the PPACA.
Click to expand...

obamacare was CRAMMED with ONE republican vote in either congress, joseph cao, the vietnamese seminarian from new orleans who lost his job on tsunami tuesday

if States really wanted to do away with the so-called "nanny state", they'd toughen their welfare program requirements
Click to expand...

have you seen what cuomo and moonbeam are doing?
 
Conservative said:
Unlke many here I understand civics and that isn't what I stated and you are being dishonest in your statement. All spending is indeed controlled by Congress and the President can do very little without Congressional support, that IMO is why we went into recession in 2008 as Democrats were more concerned about regaining the WH than doing their job. Sounds like a little baiting to me and disengenuous at that. You are showing your true colors.
Click to expand...

OK, well if that's the case, then we should all disregard anything you say about Obama negatively affecting the economy. Thank you for the clarification.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Anyone other than me notice that when discussing the economic problems before 2008, Conservative faults the Democratic Congress, and when discussing the economic problems after 2008, Conservative faults the Democratic President. To me, there seems to be a rather hackish consistency in his argument... one reason why I pay no attention to what his argument actually is. Just thought I'd point this out.
Click to expand...
I doubt that escaped anyone's notice. Just like they credit Bush for the Dow reaching 14,000 while Democrats ran Congress, but blame Democrats for the market crashing following that milestone.
 
rocket88 said:
It's not a big change, but it is better.
Click to expand...

better than what?

Obama could gain full employment (which no President has done), walk on water and bring about world peace and it wouldn't be enough for you.
Click to expand...

perhaps, but in doing so one would be awful lonely

the american people, in contrast, would want to come up with some kinda nobel of their own to reward him with

on tsunami tuesday why did the president's party lose more house seats than anyone since 1938, the most state reps and legislatures in history, 10 gubs, 6 senators...
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
I doubt that escaped anyone's notice. Just like they credit Bush for the Dow reaching 14,000 while Democrats ran Congress, but blame Democrats for the market crashing following that milestone.
Click to expand...

I'm coming up with a list of comments or positions that demonstrate that one presents as a partisan hack. This will be one of them.

Point is, you can't have it both ways. Either blame Bush and Obama or blame neither. Does the President control the economy, or does Congress?
 
Conservative said:
You really need to take a civics course to see how govt. works, then you need to ask yourself how Barack Obama with overwhelming control of Congress generated such miserable results? I would have thought that liberalism on full display and total control would really have our economy humming by now and yet the American people don't seem to be giving Obama a lot of credit as the polls show. Wonder who really has the disconnect, you or the majority?
Click to expand...

It's sad to see you attempt to pass yourself off as somebody who knows something about government. Anybody who dares to disagree with your 100 percent Republican party position is the accused of not knowing government or civics. I taught the course for 33 years but that does not stop you from telling me the same thing too many times in the past even though it's just a difference of opinion and perspective.

You should really stop it or lose the last remaining shreds of credibility you may have with even your fellow True Believers.
 
Conservative said:
I gave you the date and location of the CBO report that generated those numbers. You have a problem with the numbers? take it up with the CBO
Click to expand...
And I thank you for providing that CBO article because it proved you were lying. Nowhere in that article did the number, $228,000, appear. That number, despite your claim to the contrary, did not come from the CBO.

Conservative said:
You have a problem with the numbers? take it up with the CBO
Click to expand...
Why would I have a problem with you saying Obama saved or created 3.5 million jobs? That more than accomplished his "key goal" of creating or saving 3 million jobs by the end of last year.
 
The Prof said:
better than what?
Click to expand...

Better than the month before. I didn't say wonderful, but it was an improvement.


on tsunami tuesday why did the president's party lose more house seats than anyone since 1938, the most state reps and legislatures in history, 10 gubs, 6 senators...
Click to expand...

Same reason the opposite happened two years before. Punishing the party in power. It's certainly not because of any inherent greatness in either party.
 
Last edited:
CaptainCourtesy said:
I'm coming up with a list of comments or positions that demonstrate that one presents as a partisan hack. This will be one of them.

Point is, you can't have it both ways. Either blame Bush and Obama or blame neither. Does the President control the economy, or does Congress?
Click to expand...

Thank you for the non partisan statement however IMO and according to basic civics they both control and affect the economy. The President can recommend spending and policy but it has to be approved by Congress just like Congress can approve legislation that the President can veto. Congress can override that veto but a President cannot overturn a Congressional veto.
 
rocket88 said:
Better than the month before. I didn't say wonderful, but it was an improvement.




Same reason the opposite happened two years ago. Punishing the party in power. It's certainly not because of any inherent greatness in either party.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't you expect that with overwhelming numbers in Congress that the liberal policies would have generated greater results than what we currently have?
 
Objective Voice said:
As my wife is fond of saying for each presidential election cycle where the economy falters, "It's the economy, stupid!" And seeing that progress is being made in that area...
Click to expand...

what's changed since november?
 
rocket88 said:
And Qadafi is less evil than Hitler. Not exactly something to be proud of.
Click to expand...

My choice was Bush vs Gore and Bush vs. Kerry, I chose Bush both times and chose wisely. IMO the alternative would have been much worse.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom