Page 16 of 25 FirstFirst ... 6121314151617181920 ... LastLast
Results 226 to 240 of 365

Thread: Some are still in the dark on Obama

  1. #226 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    21,441
    Thanks
    73
    Thanked 1,982 Times in 1,405 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 287 Times in 274 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dixie View Post
    Well, what I hope that everyone learned from the Bush administration is, you can't replace them with a slick Democrat Marxist who really has nothing to offer but feel-good platitudes of Hope and Change. Because, when you do that, they end up spending twice as much in half the time, and don't solve any problems. Then, when it comes time for re-election, they run around pointing the finger at Bush, still... as if they have some magic solution they didn't try the first time or something.

    I mean really guys, what do you expect people to do here? You continue to point fingers of blame at Bush and Republicans, but you have had the White House and most of Congress for the past 6 years, and you've done nothing to fix ANY of the problems, instead, you've made things worse. Now, you want to bitch and complain about Bush and Republicans and ask people to continue electing you to power, but you have demonstrated you can't solve the problems, all you can do is bitch and moan about Bush. Sorry, but I think most Americans are looking for SOLUTIONS not a continuation of endless Bush-hate and Bush-blame.
    But it's Bush's fault...

  2. #227 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    24,050
    Thanks
    765
    Thanked 1,120 Times in 940 Posts
    Groans
    818
    Groaned 1,063 Times in 960 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Onceler View Post
    But it's Bush's fault...
    Well now, we seem to be running out of options of what to do about Bush, aren't we? We've replaced him with the most liberal president in history, we gave complete majorities in both houses of Congress to the people who had all the brilliant non-Bush ideas, we even tried a few years of 'bipartisan' Congress, where both parties had some power, but still... all we have is this nagging Bush problem. It seems like the only real option we haven't tried yet, is a full Republican congress and white house.... I think maybe we should try that, and see if we can't fix the Bush problem once and for all!!

  3. The Following User Groans At Dixie - In Memoriam For This Awful Post:

    The Dude (05-07-2012)

  4. #228 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    21,441
    Thanks
    73
    Thanked 1,982 Times in 1,405 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 287 Times in 274 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dixie View Post
    Well now, we seem to be running out of options of what to do about Bush, aren't we? We've replaced him with the most liberal president in history, we gave complete majorities in both houses of Congress to the people who had all the brilliant non-Bush ideas, we even tried a few years of 'bipartisan' Congress, where both parties had some power, but still... all we have is this nagging Bush problem. It seems like the only real option we haven't tried yet, is a full Republican congress and white house.... I think maybe we should try that, and see if we can't fix the Bush problem once and for all!!
    Well for starters, Republicans controlled Congress and the WH for most of the last decade.

    And second - haven't you been saying for years that Obama has been "just like Bush?" What's all this "most liberal President" stuff?

  5. #229 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    93,649
    Thanks
    9,766
    Thanked 33,614 Times in 21,477 Posts
    Groans
    290
    Groaned 5,632 Times in 5,140 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5

    Default

    Anyone here remember when Ann Coulter said that if Romney were the nominee President Obama gets reelected.
    4,487

    18 U.S. Code § 2071 - Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally
    44 U.S.C. 2202 - The United States shall reserve and retain complete ownership, possession, and control of Presidential records; and such records shall be administered in accordance with the provisions of this chapter.


    LOCK HIM UP!

  6. #230 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Mid-Atlantic State
    Posts
    26,917
    Thanks
    3,256
    Thanked 5,373 Times in 4,319 Posts
    Groans
    1,505
    Groaned 2,440 Times in 2,029 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Onceler View Post
    But it's Bush's fault...


    There you have it.....even though Democrats, since 1/2009, controlled the entire US government for awhile and the presidency
    and upper chamber the rest of the time, 4/2012........
    Bush is still in control of what happens in Washington DC and is running the nation from a undisclosed location.......:lmao:
    Put blame where it belongs
    ATF decided it could not regulate bump stocks during the Obama administration.
    It that time," the NRA wrote in a statement. "The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semiautomatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations."
    The ATF and Obama admin. ignored the NRA recommendations.


  7. The Following User Says Thank You to NOVA For This Post:

    Granule (04-26-2012)

  8. #231 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    24,050
    Thanks
    765
    Thanked 1,120 Times in 940 Posts
    Groans
    818
    Groaned 1,063 Times in 960 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Onceler View Post
    Well for starters, Republicans controlled Congress and the WH for most of the last decade.

    And second - haven't you been saying for years that Obama has been "just like Bush?" What's all this "most liberal President" stuff?
    For a very brief period, a few years ago, your first line was true. The 108th and 109th Congress' were majority Republican in both houses under a Republican president. This would mark the first time such a condition existed since Reconstruction. For nearly a century before the 108th, Democrats held either one or both houses of Congress, and/or the presidency. For many years, Democrats held majorities in both, AND the presidency. Your statement actually stopped being true with the 112th Congress.

    Now it was a cute little trick a few years ago when it was true for a hot second, but it's not cute or true anymore. Anyone with more than half a wit, can look up which party has DOMINATED congress over the past century, and it sure as hell ain't the Republican party.

    And second... I have never stated Obama was just like Bush. I did make the comment, when he was running for president, that his policies regarding the War on Terror, would be "just like Bush" and it turns out, I was somewhat wrong about that.... Obama actually EXPANDED and EXTENDED Bush's policies, BROADENED the Patriot Act, and never did close Gitmo...Bush always did what he said he was going to do, not the opposite... so Obama turned out to be nothing like Bush, although his policies re: the War on Terror, were equal to or greater than Bush.

  9. The Following User Groans At Dixie - In Memoriam For This Awful Post:

    The Dude (05-07-2012)

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to Dixie - In Memoriam For This Post:

    Granule (04-26-2012)

  11. #232 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Mid-Atlantic State
    Posts
    26,917
    Thanks
    3,256
    Thanked 5,373 Times in 4,319 Posts
    Groans
    1,505
    Groaned 2,440 Times in 2,029 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by apple0154 View Post
    No, I did not misspeak.

    OK, try to follow along. A person has no money. They go to the government for help. The government gives them money for food, rent, etc.

    Following so far?

    OK. By what logic and common sense would it make to ask for some of that money back in taxes?

    If people did have to pay taxes on welfare the government would give them less money to begin with. I don't understand how can such simple logic can pose a problem for you.

    So then you were wrong when you said, "Why does it make any difference from where a person gets money? Income is money coming in. All money should be taxed the same. "


    Seems it does matter where the money comes from.....

    You can't have it both ways.....
    Put blame where it belongs
    ATF decided it could not regulate bump stocks during the Obama administration.
    It that time," the NRA wrote in a statement. "The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semiautomatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations."
    The ATF and Obama admin. ignored the NRA recommendations.


  12. #233 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    I might be movin to Montana
    Posts
    24,947
    Thanks
    7,072
    Thanked 10,611 Times in 7,328 Posts
    Groans
    68
    Groaned 1,966 Times in 1,782 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dixie View Post
    For a very brief period, a few years ago, your first line was true. The 108th and 109th Congress' were majority Republican in both houses under a Republican president. This would mark the first time such a condition existed since Reconstruction. For nearly a century before the 108th, Democrats held either one or both houses of Congress, and/or the presidency. For many years, Democrats held majorities in both, AND the presidency. Your statement actually stopped being true with the 112th Congress.

    Now it was a cute little trick a few years ago when it was true for a hot second, but it's not cute or true anymore. Anyone with more than half a wit, can look up which party has DOMINATED congress over the past century, and it sure as hell ain't the Republican party.

    And second... I have never stated Obama was just like Bush. I did make the comment, when he was running for president, that his policies regarding the War on Terror, would be "just like Bush" and it turns out, I was somewhat wrong about that.... Obama actually EXPANDED and EXTENDED Bush's policies, BROADENED the Patriot Act, and never did close Gitmo...Bush always did what he said he was going to do, not the opposite... so Obama turned out to be nothing like Bush, although his policies re: the War on Terror, were equal to or greater than Bush.

    "For a very brief period..."

    If the very first words of the post are a lie...why should I continue reading?

    It was nearly a decade...but what matters the truth to Dixie if he can spend a paragraph or two ridiculing Liberals.
    What kind of country have we become?

    One in which federal prosecutors can take “evidence” before a “grand jury,”

    and that grand jury can “vote to indict” a former president for 91 alleged “crimes”?

  13. #234 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    24,050
    Thanks
    765
    Thanked 1,120 Times in 940 Posts
    Groans
    818
    Groaned 1,063 Times in 960 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ZappasGuitar View Post
    "For a very brief period..."

    If the very first words of the post are a lie...why should I continue reading?

    It was nearly a decade...but what matters the truth to Dixie if he can spend a paragraph or two ridiculing Liberals.
    Excuse me, Mr. Wizard, but we've had Presidents and Congresses for more than 200 years... I think a decade constitutes "a brief period" in that context. But even though the first words of the post were the truth, you should still not continue reading, because it will prompt you to respond, where you'll just end up looking more stupid and getting your ass PWNED again by me... so by all means, please stop reading!

  14. The Following User Groans At Dixie - In Memoriam For This Awful Post:

    The Dude (05-07-2012)

  15. #235 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    8,173
    Thanks
    3,704
    Thanked 2,354 Times in 1,809 Posts
    Groans
    799
    Groaned 5,133 Times in 4,488 Posts
    Blog Entries
    20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dixie View Post
    For a very brief period, a few years ago, your first line was true. The 108th and 109th Congress' were majority Republican in both houses under a Republican president. This would mark the first time such a condition existed since Reconstruction. For nearly a century before the 108th, Democrats held either one or both houses of Congress, and/or the presidency. For many years, Democrats held majorities in both, AND the presidency. Your statement actually stopped being true with the 112th Congress.

    Now it was a cute little trick a few years ago when it was true for a hot second, but it's not cute or true anymore. Anyone with more than half a wit, can look up which party has DOMINATED congress over the past century, and it sure as hell ain't the Republican party.

    And second... I have never stated Obama was just like Bush. I did make the comment, when he was running for president, that his policies regarding the War on Terror, would be "just like Bush" and it turns out, I was somewhat wrong about that.... Obama actually EXPANDED and EXTENDED Bush's policies, BROADENED the Patriot Act, and never did close Gitmo...Bush always did what he said he was going to do, not the opposite... so Obama turned out to be nothing like Bush, although his policies re: the War on Terror, were equal to or greater than Bush.
    BS. Pure BS.

    By most accounts, Bush was the worst president "ever".

  16. #236 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    73,380
    Thanks
    101,879
    Thanked 54,753 Times in 33,623 Posts
    Groans
    3,154
    Groaned 5,065 Times in 4,683 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by poet View Post
    BS. Pure BS.

    By most accounts, Bush was the worst president "ever".
    He is the worst I have seen in my life time.

  17. #237 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    93,649
    Thanks
    9,766
    Thanked 33,614 Times in 21,477 Posts
    Groans
    290
    Groaned 5,632 Times in 5,140 Posts
    Blog Entries
    5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dixie View Post
    For a very brief period, a few years ago, your first line was true. The 108th and 109th Congress' were majority Republican in both houses under a Republican president. This would mark the first time such a condition existed since Reconstruction. For nearly a century before the 108th, Democrats held either one or both houses of Congress, and/or the presidency. For many years, Democrats held majorities in both, AND the presidency. Your statement actually stopped being true with the 112th Congress.

    Now it was a cute little trick a few years ago when it was true for a hot second, but it's not cute or true anymore. Anyone with more than half a wit, can look up which party has DOMINATED congress over the past century, and it sure as hell ain't the Republican party.

    And second... I have never stated Obama was just like Bush. I did make the comment, when he was running for president, that his policies regarding the War on Terror, would be "just like Bush" and it turns out, I was somewhat wrong about that.... Obama actually EXPANDED and EXTENDED Bush's policies, BROADENED the Patriot Act, and never did close Gitmo...Bush always did what he said he was going to do, not the opposite... so Obama turned out to be nothing like Bush, although his policies re: the War on Terror, were equal to or greater than Bush.
    Like when he said we would not be involved in nation building or when he said he would cut spending?
    4,487

    18 U.S. Code § 2071 - Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally
    44 U.S.C. 2202 - The United States shall reserve and retain complete ownership, possession, and control of Presidential records; and such records shall be administered in accordance with the provisions of this chapter.


    LOCK HIM UP!

  18. #238 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    12,386
    Thanks
    877
    Thanked 1,882 Times in 1,475 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 237 Times in 228 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dixie View Post
    You're just addressing the welfare recipients, not the 48% who pay no income tax presently.

    And why shouldn't welfare recipients have to pay something in? You said all income is the same, and regardless of the situation, a welfare check is income. It's not a "loan" is it? They don't pay it back, do they? Seems to me, the logic and common sense are found in your statement, that all income is the same and should be taxed the same. I would think the people who are getting the most direct benefit from the dollars, would be the ones to want to contribute most. In fairness, shouldn't the ones who are benefiting the most, put something in the game? I'm glad you said you didn't misspeak, because I think that might have been one of the brightest things you've ever said here.
    With what are you having difficulty understanding? There is a minimum a person must receive or they qualify for financial assistance. Why would the government give money to such a person and then ask for part of it back? It wouldn't make any sense.

    The same idea applies to the 48% who are working. Everyone gets the same minimum deductions. Those who don't pay any income tax don't earn over the minimum deduction level. They have nothing to put in the game. If, as you claim, they are benefiting the most why doesn't everyone work for low wages?

    If low wages and welfare are such good deals why don't we see people quitting their jobs?

    Again, common sense and logic just glide right past you.
    "May your reality be as pleasant as mine."

  19. #239 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    11,073
    Thanks
    2,622
    Thanked 2,773 Times in 2,207 Posts
    Groans
    326
    Groaned 970 Times in 889 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ZappasGuitar View Post
    "For a very brief period..."

    If the very first words of the post are a lie...why should I continue reading?
    "If the very first words...."

    Why should I continue reading if you don't care enough to comment on his entire paragraph? Clearly, you misunderstood the gist of that message. Generally speaking, Liberals are always bigger liars than Conservatives, Zappa. It's important that you understand this.

  20. #240 | Top
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    12,386
    Thanks
    877
    Thanked 1,882 Times in 1,475 Posts
    Groans
    2
    Groaned 237 Times in 228 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dixie View Post
    Well, what I hope that everyone learned from the Bush administration is, you can't replace them with a slick Democrat Marxist who really has nothing to offer but feel-good platitudes of Hope and Change. Because, when you do that, they end up spending twice as much in half the time, and don't solve any problems. Then, when it comes time for re-election, they run around pointing the finger at Bush, still... as if they have some magic solution they didn't try the first time or something.

    I mean really guys, what do you expect people to do here? You continue to point fingers of blame at Bush and Republicans, but you have had the White House and most of Congress for the past 6 years, and you've done nothing to fix ANY of the problems, instead, you've made things worse. Now, you want to bitch and complain about Bush and Republicans and ask people to continue electing you to power, but you have demonstrated you can't solve the problems, all you can do is bitch and moan about Bush. Sorry, but I think most Americans are looking for SOLUTIONS not a continuation of endless Bush-hate and Bush-blame.
    Obama has offered solutions but we saw the Repubs constantly blocking him. Look at ObamaCare. While trying to please the Repubs and getting rid of a government option the Repubs still fight against the plan. Obama learned a lesson. Just go ahead with a plan and never mind if the Repubs are on board. That's the hope and change you'll see if Obama wins a majority.

    At least be honest about it. Have the Repubs endorsed any Obama plan? Has Obama had the opportunity to implement any specific plan without the Repubs ranting and raving and demandng so many changes? The Repubs demand a number of changes and then blame Obama when the plan doesn't work, a plan that has been altered due to the Repub's demands.

    If Obama wins a majority you'll see change. Change made possible without the interference of the Repubs. Then if the plans do not work, then one can blame Obama. Of course, if reality is any judge we know a proper medical plan will be wildly embraced by the citizens just as every other government medical plan has been embraced by the respective citizens, without exception. And, of course, the Repubs are acutely aware of that. They know if/when Obama gets a chance to implement a proper medical plan the idea of a "pay or suffer" medical nightmare scheme will never be tolerated by the citizens again.

    You want to see solutions? Let Obama make the necessary changes without Repub interference. Don't judge good plans that are deliberately hijacked by the Repubs and their greedy backers.

    Use some common sense and logic. There is not one country with a government medical plan where the citizens are trying to revert to a "pay or suffer" system. Not one country. Not one exception out of dozens. The lies spread by the Republicans regarding government health care have absolutely no basis in reality.
    "May your reality be as pleasant as mine."

Similar Threads

  1. Things are getting dark
    By evince in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 288
    Last Post: 05-08-2023, 02:16 PM
  2. As We Enter A New Dark Age.....
    By AnyOldIron in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 01-13-2016, 02:01 PM
  3. Never look into mirrors in the dark
    By BRUTALITOPS in forum Off Topic Forum
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 06-29-2011, 06:07 AM
  4. His Dark Materials
    By FUCK THE POLICE in forum Off Topic Forum
    Replies: 57
    Last Post: 07-22-2008, 01:47 AM
  5. We have seen an X-ray of a very dark soul.
    By Chapdog in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 05-25-2008, 03:59 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •