Cons.... what would you have had President Obama do differently...

Damocles said:
This was just a beginning, Jarod. You were given specifics, you just ignored them to pretend the thread when as you had "planned"...

The only uninformed person here, Jarod, isn't Topper or SM.
Click to expand...

If you call those specifics, you dont know what specifics are...

I countered all of those... silly!
 
Yurt said:
i came to the realization lately...and you're right...responding to you is a waste of time and is ironic that i do so...i understand you're tired of getting proven wrong and shown your hypocrisy and dishonesty....

anyone so obsessive with calling me yurtsie has serious sexual issues

:gives:
Click to expand...

LOL LOL LOL LOL

Wasting more time, eh Yurtsie!

You really have a hard time with self-realization. This is very entertaining; again, you have become a fine source of comedy...

:cof1:
 
Onceler said:
Which post did I ignore? I responded to you before.

Freak, the only reason this is getting any kind of Katrina comparison is because it's in the Gulf. If this was off California, you wouldn't hear a thing about it.

I'm surprised to hear you join the chorus of Beck disciples on this "logic"...
Click to expand...

Go back and read the post regarding the Arms from the Dutch.... they had to be requested by the Obama admin... they have not been allowed to be used in the US because they don't meet EPA requirements.... because apparently the EPA prefers all of the oil in the water vs. using a method that removes 95% of it.

You are quite wrong on the comparison. It would still be made if this same type of disaster was on either of the coasts as well. The response of the government has been weak at best.... despite Obama being in charge from day one.

Otherwise... WHY did they wait so long to request the arms?

Side note... I was referring to posts 102 and 106
 
Last edited:
Onceler said:
Which post did I ignore? I responded to you before.

Freak, the only reason this is getting any kind of Katrina comparison is because it's in the Gulf. If this was off California, you wouldn't hear a thing about it.

I'm surprised to hear you join the chorus of Beck disciples on this "logic"...
Click to expand...
If it was off the coast of anywhere in the US this comparison would still be happening, and rather valid.
 
Damocles said:
If it was off the coast of anywhere in the US this comparison would still be happening, and rather valid.
Click to expand...

I guess I must be king of the hacks, then. I just don't see the "rather valid."

People isolated in a flood & in danger calls for the kind of leadership Bush & his supporters always told us we could expect out of him.

The kind of criticisms being leveled at the current admin - and I'm not saying they are necessarily invalid - would compare more to criticizing Bush for not ensuring the levies would be able to withstand certain hurricanes, or faulting him for the slow recovery of the city, or the inability to clear water from the streets with more alacrity, or rebuild the levies more efficiently.

I'm sure you can find people criticizing Bush for those things, but I wouldn't call them valid criticisms, and I never made them. I did think that his lack of leadership when people needed it the most - when there was a basic need for rescue - was glaring, however.
 
Its hilarious that the libtards here mirror Obama in his pitiful response to this disaster: deflection, ignorance and incompetence.
 
what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Dems went all in with the faux outrage and made sure Katrina stuck to Bush. It's just as easy now for Obama to get stuck with BP. What shocks me is he polls that much worse than Bush. Timing couldn't have been worse for Obama, but he did plenty to fuck himself on this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top