I hold everyone accountable including posters on here who can't back up their contentions.

 

Are you saying I should not have voted for President Bush in 2004 because he failed to live up to all of his campaign promises?

 

"Failed leader" is obviously subjective.

 

I give him full credit for the attacking the healthcare issue.

I give him full credit for bringing troops home.

I give him full credit for avoiding a catastrophe in Detroit.

I give him full credit for no attacks on US soil.

I give him full credit for making the call on Bin laden.

I give him full credit for 4M private sector jobs in 29 months.

 

To say he hasn't had accomplishments is pure partisan hackery.

 

Thank you for finally answering.

 

Healthcare-no Republican support. A tax which he lied about, sold out other Democrats to push it through and it went through the Supreme Court, because they said it was a tax.

 

Troops home? When and where? Does Libya count?

 

detroit-your opinion.

 

no attacks on US soil-okay. Stupid argument (and was by Bush too)-so if there is one tonight is it his fault?

 

Bin Laden-agree

 

4.5 million jobs created. 5 million jobs lost per CNN. net loss.

 

He has to bring in others from the other side to succeed. He hasn't done that in any way shape or form. Bush did. Clinton did. Reagan did. He divided things from the get go, because he thinks he has the right to. He will be stopped in his tracks in November and then his health care fiasco will be quickly dismantled piece by piece.

From the article:

 

" President Bush’s tax cuts and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq explain virtually the entire deficit over the next ten years"

 

hmmmm.

 

I thought we were talking about debt. That quote deals with deficit.

So I was correct that none of it is Obama's fault, yet? But in 2019 we can hold him accountable.

 

Again, your failure to keep up is noted. No one said ANYTHING about the President not sharing in the blame game.

The stimulus was a half hearted effort. I'd argue it should have been much bigger and we'd be a whole lot farther along in this recovery.

Specifics. What exactly did the stimulus stimulate? Does anyone have a link that breaks down the specifics of where the stimulus money went? I always hear how the stimulus was a good thing and that it got the economy where we are today but noone ever gives specifics. What good things did it do?

Can I speak to it? Yes. It didn't happen.

 

Would I have believed it? What would I have based it on?

 

Are we really trying to say this particular POTUS is bad because he didn't live upto all of his campaign promises? If that's the case would we not have a new POTUS every 4 years?

If we did maybe politicians would stop making empty promises just to get elected.

Thank you for finally answering.

 

Healthcare-no Republican support. A tax which he lied about, sold out other Democrats to push it through and it went through the Supreme Court, because they said it was a tax.

 

Troops home? When and where? Does Libya count?

 

detroit-your opinion.

 

no attacks on US soil-okay. Stupid argument (and was by Bush too)-so if there is one tonight is it his fault?

 

Bin Laden-agree

 

4.5 million jobs created. 5 million jobs lost per CNN. net loss.

 

He has to bring in others from the other side to succeed. He hasn't done that in any way shape or form. Bush did. Clinton did. Reagan did. He divided things from the get go, because he thinks he has the right to. He will be stopped in his tracks in November and then his health care fiasco will be quickly dismantled piece by piece.

 

You asked. I answered. You disagree. Now what?

I thought we were talking about debt. That quote deals with deficit.

 

I thought it was interesting, as were other statements in the article. I urge people to read the entire thing and review the citations.

Who do you attribute the debt to?

 

First you asked the question

 

Let me take a stab at this one, George Bush? the Tsunami? Katrina? Rising gas price? Carbon emissions? BP oil spill?

 

Trust me we know this administration had nothing to do with the debt.

 

I gave you multiple answers. Clyde, we know it's not Obama's doing. Relax.

 

Then I gave you the correct answer. Except that I didn't blame the president from 32 years ago.

 

Classic MC response. Make a big generalization and then run and hide when someone challenges him.

 

Then you make a condensending remark even though I got the question correct.

 

The problem is that you (seem to) assume that debt held today is NOT a product of previous decisions. That defies economic logic.

 

CBPP says that Bush tax cuts and two wars represent 50% of the debt we will owe in 2019. HALF! You can't look at it in a linear fashion ie President Bush left here and President Obama started here. The only way that would be true is IF on Jan 20, 2008 all of the spending and revenue that was created prior to that date was wiped out and we started over.

 

Off the Charts Blog | Center on Budget and Policy Priorities | What

 

So in other words I contend you guys are not using fact and economic logic to support your beliefs.

 

Then you concur that I got the question correct.

 

I would suggest you study up a bit more on President Reagan and the issue of debt and deficit spending.

 

Then you blame Reagan.

 

Come on. Quit throwing out barbs and shots. I've given you what seems to be fair responses and you have not responded.

 

Then you get upset at someone else for throwing barbs even though you have thrown a few yourself.

 

Again, I've pointed out the failure of your logic and all that's resulted is "failed leader" and "over his head."

 

Do you believe that the Bush tax cuts and two unfunded wars are having a negative impact today?

 

Then you blame Bush again, confirming I got the question correct.

 

At some point you need to start contributing to the conversation. So far you're struggling.

 

The throw a barb at me because I knew you were going to blame Bush. The Reagan thing did surprise me.

First you asked the question

 

 

 

 

 

Then I gave you the correct answer. Except that I didn't blame the president from 32 years ago.

 

 

 

Then you make a condensending remark even though I got the question correct.

 

 

 

Then you concur that I got the question correct.

 

 

 

Then you blame Reagan.

 

 

 

Then you get upset at someone else for throwing barbs even though you have thrown a few yourself.

 

 

 

Then you blame Bush again, confirming I got the question correct.

 

 

 

The throw a barb at me because I knew you were going to blame Bush. The Reagan thing did surprise me.

 

You've lent nothing to this discussion other than generics. Somehow pointing out economic reality gets labeled as "blaming Bush." Call it what you will. I simply pointed out that you cannot look at a $$ today and said it is 100% attributable to the current POTUS. That seems easy to follow and doesn't seem to fall into "blame." President Bush did what he thought was best. It had some positives BUT it also had some negatives. All decisions have consequences .

 

I never once "blamed" Reagan. I DID point out that he seemed to kickstart deficit spending . There were positives re: economy during his tenure but deficit spending was an issue. Again, no "blame." Just stating the fact.

 

If you want to contribute to the debate bring some facts or at least some opinions that aren't tinged with partisanship. It makes the debate better. Too many of your responses are sophomorish.

Again, your failure to keep up is noted. No one said ANYTHING about the President not sharing in the blame game.

 

Clyde, their you go again with that condensending tone. I know, I know we can blame Obama in 7 years for 1/2 of our problems. Relax I told you earlier, we realize it's not his fault. Now we have the internet link to prove it.

Clyde, their you go again with that condensending tone. I know, I know we can blame Obama in 7 years for 1/2 of our problems. Relax I told you earlier, we realize it's not his fault. Now we have the internet link to prove it.

 

I have zero patience for people who add nothing to the discussion. If that's condescending then....

I hold everyone accountable including posters on here who can't back up their contentions.

 

Are you saying I should not have voted for President Bush in 2004 because he failed to live up to all of his campaign promises?

 

"Failed leader" is obviously subjective.

 

I give him full credit for the attacking the healthcare issue.

I give him full credit for bringing troops home.

I give him full credit for avoiding a catastrophe in Detroit.

I give him full credit for no attacks on US soil.

I give him full credit for making the call on Bin laden.

I give him full credit for 4M private sector jobs in 29 months.

 

To say he hasn't had accomplishments is pure partisan hackery.

 

I can't agrue with that, even if I hate the way he went about it and hate the bill itself.

This one is two fold, he was way late of his promise on Iraq, and did he really bring them home or just shift them to Afghanistan.

I don't.

I agree

Depends on how you look at it. While I'm happy he is gone how would we feel if another country did the same to us.

What policies of his lead to 4M new private sector jobs?

I can't agrue with that, even if I hate the way he went about it and hate the bill itself.

This one is two fold, he was way late of his promise on Iraq, and did he really bring them home or just shift them to Afghanistan.

I don't.

I agree

Depends on how you look at it. While I'm happy he is gone how would we feel if another country did the same to us.

What policies of his lead to 4M new private sector jobs?

 

I'm far from a policy expert so I cannot answer your last question completely. However, it would seem fair for me to reverse it and say what policies have been enacted to cause the job losses? Can we actually attribute a policy to either side?

Specifics. What exactly did the stimulus stimulate? Does anyone have a link that breaks down the specifics of where the stimulus money went? I always hear how the stimulus was a good thing and that it got the economy where we are today but noone ever gives specifics. What good things did it do?

 

State/Territory Totals, as Reported by Recipients

 

Breakdown of Funding

I have zero patience for people who add nothing to the discussion. If that's condescending then....

 

Clyde, it'll be ok. Here's an internet link just for you.