Obama artificial economics exposed by job losses?

[Taichiliberal]

I asked you who controlled the Senate, not who the Speaker of the House was.

No, you said who controlled the HOUSE. That could mean the House of Congressional Representatives. The Senate is usually referred to as the Senate, but not always.

In any event, it does not change what I stated. Gingrich was able to lead a walkout that paralyzed the country for a short period. The Dems HAVE NOT had total control of both Houses for some time. What I wrote remains solid.

 

[Cancel5]

No, you said who controlled the HOUSE. That could mean the House of Congressional Representatives. The Senate is usually referred to as the Senate, but not always.

In any event, it does not change what I stated. Gingrich was able to lead a walkout that paralyzed the country for a short period. The Dems HAVE NOT had total control of both Houses for some time. What I wrote remains solid.

They were talking the other night about getting rid of the Senate! I think that is a grand idea!

 

[Taichiliberal]

They were talking the other night about getting rid of the Senate! I think that is a grand idea!

Hmmm, that would mean a serious restructuring of our gov't system that would shake the very foundation of the Constitution. I would prefer term limits with campaign fund reforms...as you've have Senators and Congressmen who have had a lifetime on the public dime....entrenched ideology coupled with the ever present need to get re-elected. That's a lot of power in some instances.

 

[Cancel5]

Hmmm, that would mean a serious restructuring of our gov't system that would shake the very foundation of the Constitution. I would prefer term limits with campaign fund reforms...as you've have Senators and Congressmen who have had a lifetime on the public dime....entrenched ideology coupled with the ever present need to get re-elected. That's a lot of power in some instances.

I know, abut just think of all the good legislation that gets stuck there and dies, it was just a happy thought of the moment!

 

[DamnYankee]

No, you said who controlled the HOUSE. That could mean the House of Congressional Representatives. The Senate is usually referred to as the Senate, but not always.

In any event, it does not change what I stated. Gingrich was able to lead a walkout that paralyzed the country for a short period. The Dems HAVE NOT had total control of both Houses for some time. What I wrote remains solid.

My post 37: "Who controlled the House during those 30 years?

Since you can't admit a simple mistake like that, you have no integrity to blame Gingrich for the Democrat's forcing banks to lend to folks with bad credit.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
No, you said who controlled the HOUSE. That could mean the House of Congressional Representatives. The Senate is usually referred to as the Senate, but not always.

In any event, it does not change what I stated. Gingrich was able to lead a walkout that paralyzed the country for a short period. The Dems HAVE NOT had total control of both Houses for some time. What I wrote remains solid.

My post 37: "Who controlled the House during those 30 years?

Since you can't admit a simple mistake like that, you have no integrity to blame Gingrich for the Democrat's forcing banks to lend to folks with bad credit.

I made no mistake, as there is NOTHING false about what I state above... YOU act like bratty child who can't have his way...so you just keep repeating something and pretend there was no response, explanation, clarification or elaboration from the person you're debating.

I answered you, and you have no real response, so you fall back on a tried and failed neocon parrot tactic or insipid stubborness and repetition.

Bottom line: your statement about 30 years control by Dems was factually and logically proved wrong time and again. You ran out of dodges, so now you just repeat yourself and lie about my responses. As always, the chronological record of the post is your undoing. YOU JUST CAN'T BE ADULT ENOUGH TO ADMIT YOU'RE WRONG. Now, just do what you always do when I defeat you....repeat yourself, make false accusations and declarations, and have the last (albeit false) word on the matter. See ya.

 

[Sammy Jankis]

I made no mistake, as there is NOTHING false about what I state above... YOU act like bratty child who can't have his way...so you just keep repeating something and pretend there was no response, explanation, clarification or elaboration from the person you're debating.

I answered you, and you have no real response, so you fall back on a tried and failed neocon parrot tactic or insipid stubborness and repetition.

Bottom line: your statement about 30 years control by Dems was factually and logically proved wrong time and again. You ran out of dodges, so now you just repeat yourself and lie about my responses. As always, the chronological record of the post is your undoing. YOU JUST CAN'T BE ADULT ENOUGH TO ADMIT YOU'RE WRONG. Now, just do what you always do when I defeat you....repeat yourself, make false accusations and declarations, and have the last (albeit false) word on the matter. See ya.

Just admit your mistake and back away from the keyboard.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
I made no mistake, as there is NOTHING false about what I state above... YOU act like bratty child who can't have his way...so you just keep repeating something and pretend there was no response, explanation, clarification or elaboration from the person you're debating.

I answered you, and you have no real response, so you fall back on a tried and failed neocon parrot tactic or insipid stubborness and repetition.

Bottom line: your statement about 30 years control by Dems was factually and logically proved wrong time and again. You ran out of dodges, so now you just repeat yourself and lie about my responses. As always, the chronological record of the post is your undoing. YOU JUST CAN'T BE ADULT ENOUGH TO ADMIT YOU'RE WRONG. Now, just do what you always do when I defeat you....repeat yourself, make false accusations and declarations, and have the last (albeit false) word on the matter. See ya.

Just admit your mistake and back away from the keyboard.

Well, all you have to do is logically and factually prove that what I stated was wrong. If you can't, repeating your opinion and accusations is just a waste of time, and not worth responding to.

 

[DamnYankee]

Just admit your mistake and back away from the keyboard.

As I predicted in post 28, he will not.

 

[DamnYankee]

I made no mistake, as there is NOTHING false about what I state above... YOU act like bratty child who can't have his way...so you just keep repeating something and pretend there was no response, explanation, clarification or elaboration from the person you're debating.

I answered you, and you have no real response, so you fall back on a tried and failed neocon parrot tactic or insipid stubborness and repetition.

Bottom line: your statement about 30 years control by Dems was factually and logically proved wrong time and again. You ran out of dodges, so now you just repeat yourself and lie about my responses. As always, the chronological record of the post is your undoing. YOU JUST CAN'T BE ADULT ENOUGH TO ADMIT YOU'RE WRONG. Now, just do what you always do when I defeat you....repeat yourself, make false accusations and declarations, and have the last (albeit false) word on the matter. See ya.

Let's distill this back down to the basic argument:
1. You seem to think that Reaganomics (reducing taxes and regulations) caused the current "Great Recession", and you maintain that Bush 41, Clinton '(somewhat) and Bush 43 were true to Reaganomics.
2. I maintain that Carter era policies of loaning money to deadbeats, culminating with Bwarney Frank's demolition of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac was the main cause. I also assert that Bush 41 and Clinton raised taxes, which is against the principles of Reaganomics.

Is this a fair summation?