Devout Hillary Supporters[W:634]

[Slyfox696]

Even losing 2 million jobs the Bush performance in total for those three months was either better or equal to Obama's first term results and that is reality

Nonsense. Losing 2 million jobs in three months is not better than gaining 1.2 million jobs after a horrible recession. You are wrong.

Bush has 144 million, 143 million and 142 million employed November, December, and January, Obama's was 143 million at the end of his first term so with the exception of January the performance in November was better, the performance in December was equal, and the employment in January was worse.

No offense, but this comment is stupid. Using totals to ignore trends is dishonest, especially when discussing an economy which, contrary to your apparent belief, does not turn off and on like a light bulb.

The economy was spiraling down under Bush's last three months and making a slow, but steady, ascent during Obama's first term after the crater caused by the crash which started under Bush.

So, you are wrong. You have been proven wrong. Do you admit you were wrong when you said Bush's last three months were better than Obama's first term or his full presidency? Or are you denying facts, reality and truth, as provided by the BLS, so you can engage in blatant partisanship?

 

[Conservative]

Nonsense. Losing 2 million jobs in three months is not better than gaining 1.2 million jobs after a horrible recession. You are wrong.

No offense, but this comment is stupid. Using totals to ignore trends is dishonest, especially when discussing an economy which, contrary to your apparent belief, does not turn off and on like a light bulb.

The economy was spiraling down under Bush's last three months and making a slow, but steady, ascent during Obama's first term after the crater caused by the crash which started under Bush.

So, you are wrong. You have been proven wrong. Do you admit you were wrong when you said Bush's last three months were better than Obama's first term or his full presidency? Or are you denying facts, reality and truth, as provided by the BLS, so you can engage in blatant partisanship?

You hired Obama to get us out of the recession, he implemented an 842 BILLION dollar stimulus program for what was promoted as shovel ready jobs that took employment from 142 million to 139 million two years later. Were it not for that stimulus then you would be right but that stimulus happened and it failed. It was poorly created and poorly implemented or by liberals standards a true success because it bailed out states and unions that supported Obama. Civics is a great course, please consider

Name for me the legislation that the Democrat Congress proposed after taking control in January 2007 that Bush vetoed to turn the economy around? You blame Bush but ignore who truly benefited from the financial crisis, Obama and the Democrats.

 

[Slyfox696]

You hired Obama to get us out of the recession

Which has happened. So...what's the problem?

he implemented an 842 BILLION dollar stimulus program for what was promoted as shovel ready jobs that took employment from 142 million to 139 million two years later. Were it not for that stimulus then you would be right but that stimulus happened and it failed. It was poorly created and poorly implemented or by liberals standards a true success because it bailed out states and unions that supported Obama. Civics is a great course, please consider

Name for me the legislation that the Democrat Congress proposed after taking control in January 2007 that Bush vetoed to turn the economy around? You blame Bush but ignore who truly benefited from the financial crisis, Obama and the Democrats.

More red herrings. You're not smart enough to trick me. I've told you that before, I don't know why you still try.

I have asked you the following question several times: "Do you admit you were wrong when you said Bush's last three months were better than Obama's first term or his full presidency? Or are you denying facts, reality and truth, as provided by the BLS, so you can engage in blatant partisanship?"

At this point, given the fact you continue to refuse to acknowledge you were wrong AND continue to post meaningless blather to distract from the fact you are wrong, I have no choice but to believe you are denying facts, reality and truth, just to pursue your admitted blind partisanship.

If you ever want to discuss Hillary or Bush/Obama, I'll be happy to, but only if you're discuss it honestly. So let me know if you ever have any intention to objectively and honestly discuss these things, and I'll jump back in. Until then, I'll just settle for knowing that we both know you said something which is provably false and that we both know you know it's false, and that we both know you simply will not put aside your ego to admit you were wrong.

 

[Conservative]

Which has happened. So...what's the problem?

More red herrings. You're not smart enough to trick me. I've told you that before, I don't know why you still try.

I have asked you the following question several times: "Do you admit you were wrong when you said Bush's last three months were better than Obama's first term or his full presidency? Or are you denying facts, reality and truth, as provided by the BLS, so you can engage in blatant partisanship?"

At this point, given the fact you continue to refuse to acknowledge you were wrong AND continue to post meaningless blather to distract from the fact you are wrong, I have no choice but to believe you are denying facts, reality and truth, just to pursue your admitted blind partisanship.

If you ever want to discuss Hillary or Bush/Obama, I'll be happy to, but only if you're discuss it honestly. So let me know if you ever have any intention to objectively and honestly discuss these things, and I'll jump back in. Until then, I'll just settle for knowing that we both know you said something which is provably false and that we both know you know it's false, and that we both know you simply will not put aside your ego to admit you were wrong.

Here is what happened,

Bush GDP growth 4.5 trillion dollars Obama 3.2 trillion
Bush debt 4.9 trillion, Obama 8.6 trillion
Bush Labor Participation rate 66%, Obama 63%
Bush won the war in Iraq, Obama lost the peace
Bush listened to his military advisors, Obama ignored them
Bush average discouraged workers 450,000 Obama 900,000
Obama highest number of people on food stamps in modern history
Bush empowered the states, Obama empowers the federal govt.

ACA increases premiums and still has over 10% uninsured

I could go on but won't. You are focused on three months and ignored the Democrat influence on the causes of the recession and who benefited.

I have always admitted when I am wrong but regarding Obama policy results I am not. You focus on jobs lost ignoring population growth as well as employment numbers including part time for economic reasons.

Not exactly sure what you are looking for but until you take a basic civics class, learn to read ALL the numbers in BLS, BEA, and Treasury, you are going to allow the media and leftwing to destroy your credibility.

 

[Conservative]

Nonsense. Losing 2 million jobs in three months is not better than gaining 1.2 million jobs after a horrible recession. You are wrong.

No offense, but this comment is stupid. Using totals to ignore trends is dishonest, especially when discussing an economy which, contrary to your apparent belief, does not turn off and on like a light bulb.

The economy was spiraling down under Bush's last three months and making a slow, but steady, ascent during Obama's first term after the crater caused by the crash which started under Bush.

So, you are wrong. You have been proven wrong. Do you admit you were wrong when you said Bush's last three months were better than Obama's first term or his full presidency? Or are you denying facts, reality and truth, as provided by the BLS, so you can engage in blatant partisanship?

Here is a pretty good tribute to the Obama Presidency and four more years with Hillary in the WH. Is there any wonder that the military isn't supporting Hillary or even Obama at this point? Military Times poll!!

https://www.youtube.com/embed/Nh8kaXXv35c?rel=0

 

[Slyfox696]

Here is a pretty good tribute to the Obama Presidency and four more years with Hillary in the WH. Is there any wonder that the military isn't supporting Hillary or even Obama at this point? Military Times poll!!

My conditions haven't changed. I'll remind you again:

If you ever want to discuss Hillary or Bush/Obama, I'll be happy to, but only if you'll discuss it honestly. So let me know if you ever have any intention to objectively and honestly discuss these things, and I'll jump back in. Until then, I'll just settle for knowing that we both know you said something which is provably false and that we both know you know it's false, and that we both know you simply will not put aside your ego to admit you were wrong.

 

[Moot]

You hired Obama to get us out of the recession, he implemented an 842 BILLION dollar stimulus program for what was promoted as shovel ready jobs that took employment from 142 million to 139 million two years later. Were it not for that stimulus then you would be right but that stimulus happened and it failed. It was poorly created and poorly implemented or by liberals standards a true success because it bailed out states and unions that supported Obama. Civics is a great course, please consider

Name for me the legislation that the Democrat Congress proposed after taking control in January 2007 that Bush vetoed to turn the economy around? You blame Bush but ignore who truly benefited from the financial crisis, Obama and the Democrats.

No...we didn't elect Obama to get us out of recession because no one knew we were in one at that time. What Bush did just before he left office was to blow up the economy and leave the mess for his predecessor to clean up. I don't think Obama planned on Bush's mess consuming his presidency....and neither did the public.

 

[Conservative]

My conditions haven't changed. I'll remind you again:

I will not be dealing with anyone who is civics challenged and has no understanding of how to read economic data. Have a good day. Come back with you learn that Bush alone didn't cause the recession and that everyone of Bush's numbers are better than Obama's except for the employment number which are distorted by the high number of part time employees for economic reasons. Take those out and we are no better than when the recession started in 2007 with 10 million more people living in this country

 

[Slyfox696]

I will not be dealing with anyone who is civics challenged

You quoted me...again. Your consistent accusation of being "civics challenged", when you don't even understand the difference between job losses and unemployment (along with many other things you erroneously claim) is hilarious.

Again, if you want to debate, just meet my conditions. Otherwise, go sell your nonsense to someone else for a while.

 

[Conservative]

No...we didn't elect Obama to get us out of recession because no one knew we were in one at that time. What Bush did just before he left office was to blow up the economy and leave the mess for his predecessor to clean up. I don't think Obama planned on Bush's mess consuming his presidency....and neither did the public.

That is what I keep hearing from civics challenged individuals who have yet to offer the legislation that the DEMOCRAT controlled Congress presented to Bush to prevent a recession that he vetoed. it is absolutely stunning how poorly informed many are and how they buy the media spin. Most civics educated people understand that the Congress controls the legislative process and purse strings plus most people understand who benefited, Republicans or Democrats from the financial crisis. You see, rather than do their work and prevent a recession to put a Democrat in the WH they preferred blaming Bush knowing people like you would buy the rhetoric

 

[Conservative]

You quoted me...again. Your consistent accusation of being "civics challenged", when you don't even understand the difference between job losses and unemployment (along with many other things you erroneously claim) is hilarious.

Again, if you want to debate, just meet my conditions. Otherwise, go sell your nonsense to someone else for a while.

I know the difference between employment and unemployment which apparently you don't. Care to tell me what Obama numbers are better than Bush's

If I wanted to deal with nonsense I would indeed follow you to whatever site you are on

 

[Slyfox696]

I know the difference between employment and unemployment which apparently you don't. Care to tell me what Obama numbers are better than Bush's

If I wanted to deal with nonsense I would indeed follow you to whatever site you are on

As I said:

I have asked you the following question several times: "Do you admit you were wrong when you said Bush's last three months were better than Obama's first term or his full presidency? Or are you denying facts, reality and truth, as provided by the BLS, so you can engage in blatant partisanship?"

At this point, given the fact you continue to refuse to acknowledge you were wrong AND continue to post meaningless blather to distract from the fact you are wrong, I have no choice but to believe you are denying facts, reality and truth, just to pursue your admitted blind partisanship.

If you ever want to discuss Hillary or Bush/Obama, I'll be happy to, but only if you're discuss it honestly. So let me know if you ever have any intention to objectively and honestly discuss these things, and I'll jump back in. Until then, I'll just settle for knowing that we both know you said something which is provably false and that we both know you know it's false, and that we both know you simply will not put aside your ego to admit you were wrong.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

That is what I keep hearing from civics challenged individuals who have yet to offer the legislation that the DEMOCRAT controlled Congress presented to Bush to prevent a recession that he vetoed. it is absolutely stunning how poorly informed many are and how they buy the media spin. Most civics educated people understand that the Congress controls the legislative process and purse strings plus most people understand who benefited, Republicans or Democrats from the financial crisis. You see, rather than do their work and prevent a recession to put a Democrat in the WH they preferred blaming Bush knowing people like you would buy the rhetoric

Wow, a whole lotta stupid in the above post, since the GOP controlled both Houses during the bubble years, it would be quite the trick for their legislation to reach the Shrub's desk, ole civics master.

 

[Conservative]

As I said:

That question has been answered over and over again and still you don't get it. Yes, the last three months of Bush were better than Obama's first term as I posted the employment numbers to show.

I am still waiting for exactly how Bush destroyed the economy all by himself with a Democrat controlled Congress that controlled the legislative process and purse strings. Ask your civics teacher to explain that to us all

 

[Conservative]

Wow, a whole lotta stupid in the above post, since the GOP controlled both Houses during the bubble years, it would be quite the trick for their legislation to reach the Shrub's desk, ole civics master.

Bill Clinton was President when the bubble was created and Democrats controlled the Congress when the bubble burst. Waiting for the Democrat legislation that Bush vetoed that would have prevented the recession as well as who benefited from the financial crisis, Democrats or Republicans?

 

[Gimmesometruth]

Bill Clinton was President when the bubble was created

No he wasn't, and we already went over this bit of BS too many times, besides, yer moving your goalpost again.....while repeating a demand on the Shrub I just countered. Every post of yours is a combo of Groundhog Day and Back To The Future.

 

[Moot]

That is what I keep hearing from civics challenged individuals who have yet to offer the legislation that the DEMOCRAT controlled Congress presented to Bush to prevent a recession that he vetoed. it is absolutely stunning how poorly informed many are and how they buy the media spin. Most civics educated people understand that the Congress controls the legislative process and purse strings plus most people understand who benefited, Republicans or Democrats from the financial crisis. You see, rather than do their work and prevent a recession to put a Democrat in the WH they preferred blaming Bush knowing people like you would buy the rhetoric

"...to prevent a recession that he vetoed?" I'm sorry, but I don't understand your English. But please allow me to "offer legislation presented by Democrat controlled congress to prevent recession"....

January 2008: Start of the Great Recession

January 28, 2008: President Bush delivered the 2008 State of the Union Address

February 3, 2008: Democrat congress passes the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008...

The Economic Stimulus Act of 2008 (Pub.L. 110–185, 122 Stat. 613, enacted February 13, 2008) was an Act of Congress providing for several kinds of economic stimuli intended to boost the United States economy in 2008 and to avert a recession, or ameliorate economic conditions. The stimulus package was passed by the U.S. House of Representatives on January 29, 2008, and in a slightly different version by the U.S. Senate on February 7, 2008. The Senate version was then approved in the House the same day.[1] It was signed into law on February 13, 2008 by President Bush with the support of both Democratic and Republican lawmakers...."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_Stimulus_Act_of_2008​

July 2008: Three months before the election...in response to the Bush housing crisis, the Democrat congress passed the:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Housing_and_Economic_Recovery_Act_of_2008​

September 15, 2008: The precipitation of global financial crisis intensifies a recession that began in January.

October 3, 2008: One month before the election, Treasury Secretary, Henry Paulson threatened a total economic collapse if congress didn't pass an emergency bank bailout bill:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_Economic_Stabilization_Act_of_2008​

November 4, 2008: General elections - Democrats increased their congressional majorities and Senator Barack Obama was elected President.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/110th_United_States_Congress​

Let me know when you need another civics lesson, Con. LOL

 

[Conservative]

No he wasn't, and we already went over this bit of BS too many times, besides, yer moving your goalpost again.....while repeating a demand on the Shrub I just countered. Every post of yours is a combo of Groundhog Day and Back To The Future.

Yes, we have gone over it and the reality went right over your head. The bubble began in the 90's with extremely low interest rates forcing people into real estate and it burst in 08

 

[Conservative]

"...to prevent a recession that he vetoed?" I'm sorry, but I don't understand your English. But please allow me to "offer legislation presented by Democrat controlled congress to prevent recession"....

January 2008: Start of the Great Recession

January 28, 2008: President Bush delivered the 2008 State of the Union Address

February 3, 2008: Democrat congress passes the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008...

The Economic Stimulus Act of 2008 (Pub.L. 110–185, 122 Stat. 613, enacted February 13, 2008) was an Act of Congress providing for several kinds of economic stimuli intended to boost the United States economy in 2008 and to avert a recession, or ameliorate economic conditions. The stimulus package was passed by the U.S. House of Representatives on January 29, 2008, and in a slightly different version by the U.S. Senate on February 7, 2008. The Senate version was then approved in the House the same day.[1] It was signed into law on February 13, 2008 by President Bush with the support of both Democratic and Republican lawmakers...."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_Stimulus_Act_of_2008​

July 2008: Three months before the election...in response to the Bush housing crisis, the Democrat congress passed the:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Housing_and_Economic_Recovery_Act_of_2008​

September 15, 2008: The precipitation of global financial crisis intensifies a recession that began in January.

October 3, 2008: One month before the election, Treasury Secretary, Henry Paulson threatened a total economic collapse if congress didn't pass an emergency bank bailout bill:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_Economic_Stabilization_Act_of_2008​

November 4, 2008: General elections - Democrats increased their congressional majorities and Senator Barack Obama was elected President.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/110th_United_States_Congress​

Let me know when you need another civics lesson, Con. LOL

I asked what legislation did Bush VETO that caused the recession. TARP was signed by Bush, those acts were signed by Bush, You call it the Bush housing crisis yet ignore the reality that started in the 90's. Guess nothing is ever going to change the mind of an ideologue including actual facts.

So thanks for the answer, Democrats benefited from the financial crisis and they knew people like you would continue to blame Bush. That violates the very principle of basic civics

 

[Moot]

I asked what legislation did Bush VETO that caused the recession. TARP was signed by Bush, those acts were signed by Bush, You call it the Bush housing crisis yet ignore the reality that started in the 90's. Guess nothing is ever going to change the mind of an ideologue including actual facts.

So thanks for the answer, Democrats benefited from the financial crisis and they knew people like you would continue to blame Bush. That violates the very principle of basic civics

Bush didn't veto anything because he had a republican majority rubber stamp congress the first six years of his presidency. So if the housing crisis started in the 90s like you claim...then what legislation did the rubber stamp congress pass to stop the banking and housing crisis?

 

[Conservative]

Bush didn't veto anything because he had a republican majority rubber stamp congress the first six years of his presidency. So if the housing crisis started in the 90s like you claim...then what legislation did the rubber stamp congress pass to stop the banking and housing crisis?

Really? So Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschale was a Republican? It is amazing what the Democrat controlled Congress did to stop the problem from occurring in the first place, It was Clinton with the sub prime loans, it was Clinton who signed Glass-Steagall, it was Barney Frank and Chris Dodd that said Freddie and Fannie were fine. you have a very selective, partisan memory. Who benefited from the financial crisis? Did you ever take a civics class?

 

[Moot]

Really? So Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschale was a Republican? It is amazing what the Democrat controlled Congress did to stop the problem from occurring in the first place, It was Clinton with the sub prime loans, it was Clinton who signed Glass-Steagall, it was Barney Frank and Chris Dodd that said Freddie and Fannie were fine. you have a very selective, partisan memory. Who benefited from the financial crisis? Did you ever take a civics class?

The democrats only had control of the senate during the first two years of Bush presidency...whereas republicans had control over the lower house and the "purse strings" for six years. So were you unaware that the lower house controls the purse strings when you said "most civics educated people understand that congress controls the purse strings?"

The people who benefitted from the financial crisis were the top 15%. So which party wants to investigate and regulate the banks and raise taxes on the top 15% to prevent another recession? Because that's the party you should vote for if you care about preventing another recession.

 

[Conservative]

The democrats only had control of the senate during the first two years of Bush presidency...whereas republicans had control over the lower house and the "purse strings" for six years. So were you unaware that the lower house controls the purse strings when you said "most civics educated people understand that congress controls the purse strings?"

The people who benefitted from the financial crisis were the top 15%. So which party wants to investigate and regulate the banks and raise taxes on the top 15% to prevent another recession? Because that's the party you should vote for if you care about preventing another recession.

So let's see what the Democrats did with total control of the Congress AND the WH from 2009-2011. hmmm

142 million employed to 138 million
debt 10.6 trillion to 16.4 trillion
Unemployment 12 million to 15 million

So you want to talk about rubber stamping??

So how are the top 15% doing with the current stock market?

 

[Moot]

So let's see what the Democrats did with total control of the Congress AND the WH from 2009-2011. hmmm

142 million employed to 138 million
debt 10.6 trillion to 16.4 trillion
Unemployment 12 million to 15 million

So you want to talk about rubber stamping??

So how are the top 15% doing with the current stock market?

*POOF* It's like Bush and the recession never happened in your magical thinking little world. And we were just talking about "when the recession started" not more than a couple of posts ago, too.

Btw...what did Republicans do to prevent the recession when they had control over all three branches of government for four years (2002 - 2006)???

 

[Conservative]

*POOF* It's like Bush and the recession never happened in your magical thinking little world. And we were just talking about "when the recession started" not more than a couple of posts ago, too.

Btw...what did Republicans do to prevent the recession when they had control over all three branches of government for four years (2002 - 2006)???

It is like the Obama stimulus for shovel ready jobs never happened nor did his trillion dollar deficits for three years in a row. Please take a civics class to understand how the govt. works