Christie is effusive in his praise for Obama [W:56] (2 Viewers)

[winston53660]

I see, so when a source that you don't agree with posts actual data which are facts that makes those facts inaccurate? Tell me which economic source do you find viable and willingly accept? My facts come from bls.gov, bea.gov, U.S. Treasury, and the U.S. Census all of which showed that Bush didn't have 22.7 million unemployed/under employed/discouraged workers, 2.0% GDP growth, 5.6 trillion added to the debt, 47 million on food stamps.

Not sure what grade you are in but please try at least to take a civics course to find out how our govt. works. Seems that Bush was solely responsible for the recession and today Bush is responsible for the terrible recovery. Is that what it is like in the liberal universe

Originally Posted by winston53660
Huh?

There are 261,000 fewer employees on payrolls today than when Obama took office. But at the same point of the Bush administration, the jobs deficit stood at 856,000 jobs, according to current estimates of the same period.

Obama's jobs record: Better than Bush's - Sep. 18, 2012

He was certainly on his way to achieving that

 

[winston53660]

As stated, Bush didn't have 5.6 trillion added to the debt, 22.7 million unemployed/under employed/discouraged workers, 2.0% GDP growth, and 47 million on food stamps. That is the Obama record that you want to ignore.

Here is the Bush record on employment

Years: 1980 to 2011

Hmm interesting.

 

[Conservative]

Originally Posted by winston53660
Huh?

There are 261,000 fewer employees on payrolls today than when Obama took office. But at the same point of the Bush administration, the jobs deficit stood at 856,000 jobs, according to current estimates of the same period.

Obama's jobs record: Better than Bush's - Sep. 18, 2012

He was certainly on his way to achieving that

I posted the Bush results when he ran for re-election in 2004 and there were 2 million more people employed then than when Bush took office, now you can spin until hell freezes over but that doesn't change reality. Bush had a lot of help creating the recession of 2007-2009 and apparently also generated the results that we have today. It is those results that will be on the ballot.

I voted early and voted FOR Romney

 

[Conservative]

Hmm interesting.

Interesting? You wanted the Bush numbers so I gave them to you from the BLS chart. Want Obama's numbers as well? Didn't think so because they aren't favorable.

 

[Verax]

I see, so when a source that you don't agree with posts actual data which are facts that makes those facts inaccurate? Tell me which economic source do you find viable and willingly accept? My facts come from bls.gov, bea.gov, U.S. Treasury, and the U.S. Census all of which showed that Bush didn't have 22.7 million unemployed/under employed/discouraged workers, 2.0% GDP growth, 5.6 trillion added to the debt, 47 million on food stamps.

Not sure what grade you are in but please try at least to take a civics course to find out how our govt. works. Seems that Bush was solely responsible for the recession and today Bush is responsible for the terrible recovery. Is that what it is like in the liberal universe

I'm not going to continue wasting my time with this. It seems you would find a way to argue the sky is green if it suited your agenda. Long story short, Bush's presidency ended in an almost complete meltdown of the world economies, are you denying this? Are you seriously going to argue the collapse under Bush versus the poor recovery under Obama? You're really going to trot out numbers and pretend the Bush economy was good? We've been through this whole game before, I'm not going to do this again with you.

Remember how you declared Obama had ONE day to fix everything Bush did and everything after that was 100% Obama's fault? The "Bush results" as you like to call them, carried over into quite a bit of Obama's presidency, tainting it. I don't think Obama has done the best job but to say Bush was better? Give me a break man. This is bizarre nonsense.

 

[Conservative]

Verax;1061091557]I'm not going to continue wasting my time with this. It seems you would find a way to argue the sky is green if it suited your agenda. Long story short, Bush's presidency ended in an almost complete meltdown of the world economies, are you denying this? Are you seriously going to argue the collapse under Bush versus the poor recovery under Obama? You're really going to trot out numbers and pretend the Bush economy was good? We've been through this whole game before, I'm not going to do this again with you.

So what you are saying is because Bush left the country in recession Obama shouldn't be held accountable for the results four years later? You try that when you get your first job. Go to your employer with Obama type results and tell him that you deserve four more years? In the private sector you wouldn't last two years let alone for with the Obama results. I suggest a civics course as an elective for you.

Remember how you declared Obama had ONE day to fix everything Bush did and everything after that was 100% Obama's fault? The "Bush results" as you like to call them, carried over into quite a bit of Obama's presidency, tainting it. I don't think Obama has done the best job but to say Bush was better? Give me a break man. This is bizarre nonsense.

Leadership is about taking responsibility and playing the cards you are dealt not placing blame and diverting from your responsibility. Bush isn't on the ballot and Bush didn't have the results in 2004 when he was up for re-election that Obama has today and what I find quite telling is how bad you believe Bush was but will vote for Obama with worse results. That speaks volumes to the brainwashing the media has done. Check out the sites I gave you and tell me which results from Obama are better than Bush's even at the end of his term?

 

[Gonzo Rodeo]

Cory Booker was critical of Obama's attack campaign on Bain, and a week later (no doubt after some serious ball-busting) changed his tune and supported Obama. Former President Bill Clinton was critical of Obama's attack campaign on Bain, and a week later (again, no doubt after some serious ball busting) changed his tune and supported Obama.

I wonder if Christie will get his balls busted and change his tune of praise for Obama?

No. No, I don't. That's not going to happen. Now ask yourself, "Why?"

 

[winston53660]

Interesting? You wanted the Bush numbers so I gave them to you from the BLS chart. Want Obama's numbers as well? Didn't think so because they aren't favorable.

you posted 1980 to 2011. You don't even know how reference your BS.

 

[Boo Radley]

Proving once again that the right can like and respect the man, give credit where it's due, and still not agree with his policies. The left should take a lesson.

Both parties are capable and have done so. Bush himself got praise early on. It wasn't until he lost hsi mind with Iraq that he lost people like myself.

 

[cpgrad08]

Good part on Christe and good part on Obama on doing their job regardless of politics

 

[Conservative]

you posted 1980 to 2011. You don't even know how reference your BS.

So prove what I posted wrong

Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey
Original Data Value

Series Id: LNS12000000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Employment Level
Labor force status: Employed
Type of data: Number in thousands
Age: 16 years and over
Years: 2000-2004

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2000 136559 136598 136701 137270 136630 136940 136531 136662 136893 137088 137322 137614
2001 137778 137612 137783 137299 137092 136873 137071 136241 136846 136392 136238 136047
2002 135701 136438 136177 136126 136539 136415 136413 136705 137302 137008 136521 136426
2003 137417 137482 137434 137633 137544 137790 137474 137549 137609 137984 138424 138411
2004 138472 138542 138453 138680 138852 139174 139556 139573 139487 139732 140231 140125

 

[Boo Radley]

So prove what I posted wrong

You're still misreading.

 

[winston53660]

So prove what I posted wrong

Why don't you take a look at private sector. Or is that a data point you want to ignore?

 

[Conservative]

Why don't you take a look at private sector. Or is that a data point you want to ignore?

So you think Obama controls state and local govt. hiring as well as private sector employment? He truly is the Messiah, isn't he?

 

[winston53660]

So you think Obama controls state and local govt. hiring as well as private sector employment? He truly is the Messiah, isn't he?

Yeah what ever:roll:

 

[Conservative]

You're still misreading.

Employment is the key to taxpayers and the employment when Bush was running for re-election in 2004 was two million higher than when he took office. Compare that to Obama including the amout of debt added to generate those numbers.

I doubt that any of the actual numbers will ever make a difference to someone who is in need of Obamanomics and the Govt. central economy Obama is promoting.

 

[Boo Radley]

Employment is the key to taxpayers and the employment when Bush was running for re-election in 2004 was two million higher than when he took office. Compare that to Obama including the amout of debt added to generate those numbers.

I doubt that any of the actual numbers will ever make a difference to someone who is in need of Obamanomics and the Govt. central economy Obama is promoting.

And there are no other factors other than the president? Again, you misread data, thinking it means something it doesn't.

 

[Conservative]

And there are no other factors other than the president? Again, you misread data, thinking it means something it doesn't.

Have you been reading the posts here? Seems Bush is solely responsible for the terrible economic results Obama inherited and obviously is still responsible four years later for the terrible results of this Administration. How do you reconcile the attitude here by Obama supporters?

 

[Verax]

So what you are saying is because Bush left the country in recession Obama shouldn't be held accountable for the results four years later? You try that when you get your first job. Go to your employer with Obama type results and tell him that you deserve four more years? In the private sector you wouldn't last two years let alone for with the Obama results. I suggest a civics course as an elective for you.



Leadership is about taking responsibility and playing the cards you are dealt not placing blame and diverting from your responsibility. Bush isn't on the ballot and Bush didn't have the results in 2004 when he was up for re-election that Obama has today and what I find quite telling is how bad you believe Bush was but will vote for Obama with worse results. That speaks volumes to the brainwashing the media has done. Check out the sites I gave you and tell me which results from Obama are better than Bush's even at the end of his term?

All you do is spin and pretend on your high horse, it is pathetic. Yes Obama should be held accountable for his performance. However that is not the argument, you claimed Bush's "good economy" vs. Obama's "bad economy", that is the most hysterical spin I could ever imagine but you decided to run with it.

More high horse crap about Obama not being a leader, blah, blah. You always go for the propaganda junk to try and make an argument out of nothing. You make the besides the point remark about Bush not being on the ballot but you're the one that brought it up. You reiterate Obama's weak recovery is worse than Bush's worldwide meltdown... nobody can take you seriously when you say things like this. Then you fall back to your numbers in which you pin Bush's results on Obama from day one.

You should delete your account and never wade into politics again. You are wrong about almost everything almost all of the time.

 

[Boo Radley]

Have you been reading the posts here? Seems Bush is solely responsible for the terrible economic results Obama inherited and obviously is still responsible four years later for the terrible results of this Administration. How do you reconcile the attitude here by Obama supporters?

I present my own arguments. However, if like you, I were to blame presidents, something I reject, I would be forced to blame bush with the lion's share of the problem. For me, that's the problem with your position. If you really thought about it, you'd either agree with me or accept their proposition.

 

[Verax]

Have you been reading the posts here? Seems Bush is solely responsible for the terrible economic results Obama inherited and obviously is still responsible four years later for the terrible results of this Administration. How do you reconcile the attitude here by Obama supporters?

Quit crying like a teenager spouting off hyperbole victimhood garbage. Bush is responsible for the meltdown, Obama is responsible for the recovery. Simple as that. End of story. Except YOU can't stop trying to pin the meltdown on Obama to make him look worse. Its pathetic, stop it, stop now, don't do it again, stop it, stop, sir, stop, please, stop.

 

[Conservative]

All you do is spin and pretend on your high horse, it is pathetic. Yes Obama should be held accountable for his performance. However that is not the argument, you claimed Bush's "good economy" vs. Obama's "bad economy", that is the most hysterical spin I could ever imagine but you decided to run with it.

More high horse crap about Obama not being a leader, blah, blah. You always go for the propaganda junk to try and make an argument out of nothing. You make the besides the point remark about Bush not being on the ballot but you're the one that brought it up. You reiterate Obama's weak recovery is worse than Bush's worldwide meltdown... nobody can take you seriously when you say things like this. Then you fall back to your numbers in which you pin Bush's results on Obama from day one.

You should delete your account and never wade into politics again. You are wrong about almost everything almost all of the time.

I posted the data and the sources, you make your own decision. Bush isn't on the ballot on Tuesday, Obama is as are the Obama results.

Obviously you need Obama and it is apparent that we as a society need school vouchers based upon what I am reading from your posts as the education system has failed you.

 

[disneydude]

Yet my posting of the facts are right on

Good Bush economy attacked, bad Obama economy ignored by media | Fox News

LOL....not that anyone is surprized...but now we see where you get it from.

 

[Conservative]

I present my own arguments. However, if like you, I were to blame presidents, something I reject, I would be forced to blame bush with the lion's share of the problem. For me, that's the problem with your position. If you really thought about it, you'd either agree with me or accept their proposition.

I accept and have always accepted the responsibilities of leadership. I took over areas of the country that were disasters and not once did I blame someone else for what I inherited especially four years later. My position as always been one of accepting personal responsibility and never delegating it. You and others seem to not understand the concept. How anyone can talk today about an inherited economy four years ago is beyond comprehension just like I cannot comprehend how anyone could vote for Obama based upon his results today. If this is the kind of economy that you support then this country really is in trouble. I am glad I live in TX

 

[Verax]

I posted the data and the sources, you make your own decision. Bush isn't on the ballot on Tuesday, Obama is as are the Obama results.

Obviously you need Obama and it is apparent that we as a society need school vouchers based upon what I am reading from your posts as the education system has failed you.

That's right, pretend, ignore reality, you've been destroyed on every point yet to carry on with the same garbage. I hope you're getting paid because if not you got some serious issues.