The Obama Presidential Library?

Yeah, then the poor rube got da ole panties bunched up stomping her feet demanding that I answer this very second. Quite comical. She is quite the drama queen.

:rofl2: You didn't have an answer, and hence the little meltdown on display here.

Let's see: drama queen, rube, panties bunched up, feet stomping - yes, I think you effectively projected every one of your attributes, too bad it fails miserably. Per usual. :D
 
:rofl2: You didn't have an answer, and hence the little meltdown on display here.

Let's see: drama queen, rube, panties bunched up, feet stomping - yes, I think you effectively projected every one of your attributes, too bad it fails miserably. Per usual. :D

Actually the answer is relatively simple as both Reagan and Clinton have provided recent examples of such leadership. But you kept throwing your little tantrum demanding that I answer immediately, so I mocked you for it. Now you are trying unsuccessfully to spin away from your embarrassment.
 
Actually the answer is relatively simple as both Reagan and Clinton have provided recent examples of such leadership. But you kept throwing your little tantrum demanding that I answer immediately, so I mocked you for it. Now you are trying unsuccessfully to spin away from your embarrassment.

Another failed projection. You have no answer. Duly noted. Next...
 
Actually the answer is relatively simple as both Reagan and Clinton have provided recent examples of such leadership. But you kept throwing your little tantrum demanding that I answer immediately, so I mocked you for it. Now you are trying unsuccessfully to spin away from your embarrassment.

Reagan and Clinton did not have this Congress, compromise was not a dirty word back then.
 
Another failed projection. You have no answer. Duly noted. Next...

So you are ignorant of the fact that both Reagan and Clinton worked with Congress controlled by the opposition? Obama says 'do what I want' and if Reps don't then he says 'they won't work with me'. Reagan and Clinton worked with their opponents. Butted heads? absolutely, but they worked with them and hammered out real compromises. Obama refuses. Obama can't even get his own party to pass a budget in the Senate. Failure at its finest.
 
Reagan and Clinton did not have this Congress, compromise was not a dirty word back then.

Rana, he doesn't have an answer. And really, there's no shame in saying, 'I don't know what Obama needs to do, but what Obama is doing is clearly not working'. Superdumbfuck can't bear the notion of simply admitting he DOESN'T KNOW, and he's going to great lengths and considerable high-drama spectacle to avoid making a simple statement: 'I don't know'.

His pride is more important to him than his credibility. Pity the fool.
 
So you are ignorant of the fact that both Reagan and Clinton worked with Congress controlled by the opposition? Obama says 'do what I want' and if Reps don't then he says 'they won't work with me'. Reagan and Clinton worked with their opponents. Butted heads? absolutely, but they worked with them and hammered out real compromises. Obama refuses. Obama can't even get his own party to pass a budget in the Senate. Failure at its finest.

More gas from you in the (failed) attempt to hide that you have no answer as to HOW Obama could effectively lead.
 
Reagan and Clinton did not have this Congress, compromise was not a dirty word back then.

LMAO... you clearly have forgotten how Gingrich tried to bring down Clinton. You also have forgotten how Reagan and Tip butted heads consistently. The only difference is that this Congress was caught on tape stating the goal of every opposition... get the 'other' party out of the WH. Pretending otherwise is simply ridiculous.

Pelosi's House and Reids Senate were every bit as hostile towards Bush. Even with Super majorities, the Dems still pretend they don't have enough power to get things done. In reality, they are simply inept leaders. The Dems could have the WH, 80 Senators and the entire House and they would still blame Reps for not getting things done.
 
More gas from you in the (failed) attempt to hide that you have no answer as to HOW Obama could effectively lead.

That is quite comical lil drama queen rube. you have added nothing to this conversation other than the amusement of watching you spaz all over the thread.
 
LMAO... you clearly have forgotten how Gingrich tried to bring down Clinton. You also have forgotten how Reagan and Tip butted heads consistently. The only difference is that this Congress was caught on tape stating the goal of every opposition... get the 'other' party out of the WH. Pretending otherwise isM simply ridiculous.

Pelosi's House and Reids Senate were every bit as hostile towards Bush. Even with Super majorities, the Dems still pretend they don't have enough power to get things done. In reality, they are simply inept leaders. The Dems could have the WH, 80 Senators and the entire House and they would still blame Reps for not getting things done.

SF, it still wasn't at the level it is at today, that is the reason the moderates are leaving Congress, I am not pretending anything, I see it for what it is.
 
That is quite comical lil drama queen rube. you have added nothing to this conversation other than the amusement of watching you spaz all over the thread.

You really ought to quit while you're behind. You couldn't answer the question and admitting that you didn't have one was inconceivable to your fragile little ego.

Tell you what - you're off the hook. No need to answer. Everyone reading knows you don't have an answer, anyway. And, in my view, watching you twist and squirm as you awkwardly try (and fail) to project your failure elsewhere, I can only imagine how humiliated you must be. You've suffered enough. ;)
 
That is quite comical lil drama queen rube. you have added nothing to this conversation other than the amusement of watching you spaz all over the thread.

SF, it was you who lost control and used profanity, sorry, buddy, but I always know when someone pushes your hot buttons.
 
SF, it still wasn't at the level it is at today, that is the reason the moderates are leaving Congress, I am not pretending anything, I see it for what it is.

No, the moderates are leaving Congress because the states have created safe districts where one party or the other cannot lose. That is what allows the extremists to win. I will agree the partisanship is worse than it was under Clinton or Reagan, but in no way is Obama showing leadership with regards to the economy. Bottom line... he cannot even get his own party to put forth a budget in the Senate. Total lack of leadership.
 
SF, it was you who lost control and used profanity, sorry, buddy, but I always know when someone pushes your hot buttons.

apparently you do not. It is merely your incorrect assumption (this is becoming a habit for you) that a swear word means the same to you as it does to me. If I type the word fuck or moron or retard, it doesn't mean I am angry or that someone has pushed a 'hot button'. You simply presume that because you personally would not swear unless upset. I use them far more casually than you. Go back and look at the responses from her. not 15 minutes had passed before the 'crickets' comment. Then when I happened to return to the thread, the foot stomping began demanding that I answer that question NOW!.... LMAO...

Do try to stop making assumptions, it is not working out to well for you lately.
 
You really ought to quit while you're behind. You couldn't answer the question and admitting that you didn't have one was inconceivable to your fragile little ego.

Tell you what - you're off the hook. No need to answer. Everyone reading knows you don't have an answer, anyway. And, in my view, watching you twist and squirm as you awkwardly try (and fail) to project your failure elsewhere, I can only imagine how humiliated you must be. You've suffered enough. ;)

thanks for once again demonstrating that you have nothing of value to offer this board. Simply ranting on in your fantasy world.

Next time rube... if you wait more than 13 minutes, you might get a response. We do not all sit here 24/7 and when we are here, many of us are on multiple threads at once. Try to keep that in mind prior to your next fit.
 
apparently you do not. It is merely your incorrect assumption (this is becoming a habit for you) that a swear word means the same to you as it does to me. If I type the word fuck or moron or retard, it doesn't mean I am angry or that someone has pushed a 'hot button'. You simply presume that because you personally would not swear unless upset. I use them far more casually than you. Go back and look at the responses from her. not 15 minutes had passed before the 'crickets' comment. Then when I happened to return to the thread, the foot stomping began demanding that I answer that question NOW!.... LMAO...

Do try to stop making assumptions, it is not working out to well for you lately.

Cite the post where I am stomping my feet. This oughta be good.... :rofl2:




You're not too bright are ya, drama queen? I gave you a chance to let it go but you just can't. That's some fierce pride you got there. It eats your credibility for breakfast, every day. :D
 
apparently you do not. It is merely your incorrect assumption (this is becoming a habit for you) that a swear word means the same to you as it does to me. If I type the word fuck or moron or retard, it doesn't mean I am angry or that someone has pushed a 'hot button'. You simply presume that because you personally would not swear unless upset. I use them far more casually than you. Go back and look at the responses from her. not 15 minutes had passed before the 'crickets' comment. Then when I happened to return to the thread, the foot stomping began demanding that I answer that question NOW!.... LMAO...

Do try to stop making assumptions, it is not working out to well for you lately.

If it were that casual, as you claim, you would use them in most posts, but you don't, only when you appear to be frustrated. Sorry, my perception.
 
Back
Top