What is ?really? going on with the Republicans

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: senseamp
California is glorious success of Republican obstructionism, something they are eager to take nationwide.

No shit. Thank goodness there's no 2/3 vote requirement in the US Congress, or we'd never get jack shit done. Multiple GOP senators who voted for TARP under Bush, suddenly didn't support the same GD thing under Obama. They're like a dead body under the front wheel of progress. They'll spend $500B propping up the banks (allegedly), but suddenly are afraid to spend once Obama's at the helm.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: JSt0rm01

Originally posted by: Genx87
Hence the reason I said " in 24 months". I understand right now deflation is an issue. However when our economy turns around that wont be a problem. With the amount of money the govt is injecting right into the economy inflation will come back.

So how do we deal with deflation now?

How do we deal with inflation? Use the fed to regulate the money supply.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: JSt0rm01

Originally posted by: Genx87
Hence the reason I said " in 24 months". I understand right now deflation is an issue. However when our economy turns around that wont be a problem. With the amount of money the govt is injecting right into the economy inflation will come back.

So how do we deal with deflation now?

How do we deal with inflation? Use the fed to regulate the money supply.

How do you suggest the fed regulates the money supply to counter deflation? The interest rates they are offering are already effectively zero. As far as I've read nearly every economist thinks that using the fed is a far more effective way to stimulate the economy than any legislation, but in this case the fed has simply run out of ways to do this, hence stimulus packages.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: sportage
In the end I doubt one republican votes for the Obama stim package.
Why? The fear of what I call ?the Clinton Factor? or Clinton syndrome?.
Remember, Clinton came into office and stirred things up his way.
He proved the traditional republican way of doing things, the Reagan-nomics trickle down theory, was not so successful. During the 8 years of Clinton, and no one in their right mind can deny this any longer, under Clinton the country and the people did very well.
Maybe we had it too easy, thinking a good president and policy was a given.
Certainly in 2000 many American?s thought this way. We felt anyone, any party, any president could keep us in the black, and in the right. Later we learned, the hard way, this was not necessarily so.

So now, after 8 years of failed policy, comes along president Obama.
Elected by a healthy majority, with republicans taking a sever beating.

The republicans are now facing the cold reality, ?The Clinton factor?.
That is? If Obama?s stim package, which is actually the Obama policy of government, if this stim package works, then the republican ideology will suffer the fatal hard blow.
Fearing success from the Obama admin policy change, Republicans will have little to believe in come future elections.
After a very successful Clinton presidency, a failed Bush presidency, followed by a successful Obama presidency, republicans will feel doom at their doorstep.

So why will the republicans fight anything Obama does, suggests, attempts, so aggressively?
Why will right wing talk radio high gear their attack on this new admin, day after day.
Simply because republicans now see clearly they can not afford to take another hit from a successful democratic administration. Their wounds are too deep.

After voting billions to bail out wall street, do you really think republicans give a rats ?A? about spending billions on helping out main street?
After tossing billions at the Bush war, do you think they really care about tossing billions to help average American?s?
I think not.
Their fear is not the money. It?s the success.

During Watergate the key word was ?follow the money?.
Now the key word is ?follow their fear?.
Remember this in the coming weeks, months, and years as you watch republicans
continue to stir up their typical ideology rhetoric.
Concerned only with scoring points, and concerned not in helping American workers.
They have everything to lose, that is, if they let Obama succeed.
Look through their right wing rhetoric, and ask what is their real goal here.
Their fear of the Clinton syndrome. an Obama administration?s success.

And what happens in 24 months when this stimulus shows up late to the party and only adds inflation? Thus forcing the fed to raise interest rates to slow it and putting the brakes on the economy? Instead of a strong recovery we head back into a slagging economy.

Clinton had a Republican congress to contend with and an emerging industry(internet) to fuel our public coffers. Obama has neither.

At this point, low borrowing rates do not matter. If nobody is willing to borrow, because they want to pay down existing debt, and nobody is willing to lend to those who want to actually consume (and can), then rates can be 0% and it won't matter.

The biggest problem at this point is staunching the flood of job losses, getting the banks to clean up, sorting out the CDS mess, and getting things back in order. I think those are all moves Obama is taking.

What in this stimulus package is going to create 3 million or more jobs we have lost? The amount of money we as a nation are spending on 3 million jobs seems futile and ridiculous. The cost of this package if it magically created 3 million jobs equals enough to buy a home in cash for each job created.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: senseamp
California is glorious success of Republican obstructionism, something they are eager to take nationwide.

No shit. Thank goodness there's no 2/3 vote requirement in the US Congress, or we'd never get jack shit done. Multiple GOP senators who voted for TARP under Bush, suddenly didn't support the same GD thing under Obama. They're like a dead body under the front wheel of progress. They'll spend $500B propping up the banks (allegedly), but suddenly are afraid to spend once Obama's at the helm.

Except it's was supposed to be an entirely different thing and it still took much arm twisting to actually get the tarp passed. So don't even try to claim they are similar - they aren't even close. One was suppsed to be a specific(targeted) bill to free up credit. This one is just a massive spending bill that BHO, Pelosireid, and the apologists are trying blast through claiming "stimulus".

 

[Pocatello]

Under the Republican Administration, borrow and spend recklessly. Under the Democratic Administration, same thing. The American people also borrow and spend recklessly. Why buy stuffs when you don't have the money for them? Do you think you can afford to buy a $200,000 house with a $20,000/year salary? Oh no, it's not my fault I can't pay the rent, it's the big bad bank that loans me the money. For years, we have sent our money overseas to support our appetite for shiny stuffs, while our manufacturing base is shipped overseas. We have shifted the balance of power by sending trillions of dollars overseas, we become poorer while China becomes richer. All the Asian countries take pride in their manufacturing industries, while we export them. Unless the American people change the way they do things, it doesn't matter who's in control of the government.

 

[dawp]

Originally posted by: Xellos2099
You guys talk about California problem. How about CA refusal to build new power plant? How about waste millions of dollar buying electricity from Canada because of all those tree hugger. How about forest fire every year because of there is simply too much conceration of tree at one area.

Most major fires are caused by fire being supressed for 50+ years. When fire does break out, the accumulation of debris over those years cause the trouble, it burns hotter and faster. If fire was allowed to run naturely, it wouldn't be so bad. fire is a part of nature.

 

[miniMUNCH]

OP... you don't understand macroeconomics... that much is clear.

But yes, obviously, rep's do not want Obama to be successful and are and will try to derail some of his intiatives

 

[Siddhartha]

Originally posted by: sportage
In the end I doubt one republican votes for the Obama stim package.
Why? The fear of what I call ?the Clinton Factor? or Clinton syndrome?.
Remember, Clinton came into office and stirred things up his way.
He proved the traditional republican way of doing things, the Reagan-nomics trickle down theory, was not so successful. During the 8 years of Clinton, and no one in their right mind can deny this any longer, under Clinton the country and the people did very well.
Maybe we had it too easy, thinking a good president and policy was a given.
Certainly in 2000 many American?s thought this way. We felt anyone, any party, any president could keep us in the black, and in the right. Later we learned, the hard way, this was not necessarily so.

So now, after 8 years of failed policy, comes along president Obama.
Elected by a healthy majority, with republicans taking a sever beating.

The republicans are now facing the cold reality, ?The Clinton factor?.
That is? If Obama?s stim package, which is actually the Obama policy of government, if this stim package works, then the republican ideology will suffer the fatal hard blow.
Fearing success from the Obama admin policy change, Republicans will have little to believe in come future elections.
After a very successful Clinton presidency, a failed Bush presidency, followed by a successful Obama presidency, republicans will feel doom at their doorstep.

So why will the republicans fight anything Obama does, suggests, attempts, so aggressively?
Why will right wing talk radio high gear their attack on this new admin, day after day.
Simply because republicans now see clearly they can not afford to take another hit from a successful democratic administration. Their wounds are too deep.

After voting billions to bail out wall street, do you really think republicans give a rats ?A? about spending billions on helping out main street?
After tossing billions at the Bush war, do you think they really care about tossing billions to help average American?s?
I think not.
Their fear is not the money. It?s the success.

During Watergate the key word was ?follow the money?.
Now the key word is ?follow their fear?.
Remember this in the coming weeks, months, and years as you watch republicans
continue to stir up their typical ideology rhetoric.
Concerned only with scoring points, and concerned not in helping American workers.
They have everything to lose, that is, if they let Obama succeed.
Look through their right wing rhetoric, and ask what is their real goal here.
Their fear of the Clinton syndrome. an Obama administration?s success.

The Republicans are hoping that Mr Obama and the Democrats badly crash and burn. They want to be the party of Herbert Hoover. Which does not have anything to do with helping people except for what trickle down policies, cutting taxes, reducing government oversight of businesses, etc can provide. Mr Hoover's policiies did not work well in the late 1920's so all the Republicans can do is obstruct, divert, attack, and hope for the worst

The state of the economy has not allowed them to effectively wage the cultural wars but this is on their agenda too.

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Oh look! Yet another wingnut hoping that America fails under Obama.

:roll:

"Country First" eh Bozack?

As someone said recently, you can't just listen to Rush and expect to get things done.

:laugh:

Oh look, another BHO knob slobberer on this board...big surprise.

So let me get this straight, last eight years dissent, protest, disagreement, claming and hoping for absolute disaster and failure were ok and "amercian" in the eyes of the left, whereas now with the messiah in office it is unamerican to disagree and hope for the worst with his presidency?...please, seems bitter sweet to me if anything.

And FWIW I never listen to Rush...but keep those talking points going, you're guy will need them if he keeps it up with the bad decisions, maybe he can appoint a few more tax cheats and frauds...change we can count on.

 

[retrospooty]

Originally posted by: bozack

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Oh look! Yet another wingnut hoping that America fails under Obama.

:roll:

"Country First" eh Bozack?

As someone said recently, you can't just listen to Rush and expect to get things done.

:laugh:

Oh look, another BHO knob slobberer on this board...big surprise.

So let me get this straight, last eight years dissent, protest, disagreement, claming and hoping for absolute disaster and failure were ok and "amercian" in the eyes of the left, whereas now with the messiah in office it is unamerican to disagree and hope for the worst with his presidency?...please, seems bitter sweet to me if anything.

And FWIW I never listen to Rush...but keep those talking points going, you're guy will need them if he keeps it up with the bad decisions, maybe he can appoint a few more tax cheats and frauds...change we can count on.

Bozack, you think that 8 years of GWB was good for the country... This means your opinion is totally irrelevant, because you are too stupid. you should only be posting in the "off topic" forum. Technology and politics are obviously way above your skillset.

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: bozack

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Oh look! Yet another wingnut hoping that America fails under Obama.

:roll:

"Country First" eh Bozack?

As someone said recently, you can't just listen to Rush and expect to get things done.

:laugh:

Oh look, another BHO knob slobberer on this board...big surprise.

So let me get this straight, last eight years dissent, protest, disagreement, claming and hoping for absolute disaster and failure were ok and "amercian" in the eyes of the left, whereas now with the messiah in office it is unamerican to disagree and hope for the worst with his presidency?...please, seems bitter sweet to me if anything.

And FWIW I never listen to Rush...but keep those talking points going, you're guy will need them if he keeps it up with the bad decisions, maybe he can appoint a few more tax cheats and frauds...change we can count on.

Whatever you say, dude, but at least you admit you're all about the revenge. The first step is always admitting you have a problem, right? It's also great to hear that you won't bother waiting to examine the actual results from Obama's Administration in order to determine whether they're failing or not, instead you'll just assume from the start like a partisan douchebag.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: retrospooty

Originally posted by: bozack

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Oh look! Yet another wingnut hoping that America fails under Obama.

:roll:

"Country First" eh Bozack?

As someone said recently, you can't just listen to Rush and expect to get things done.

:laugh:

Oh look, another BHO knob slobberer on this board...big surprise.

So let me get this straight, last eight years dissent, protest, disagreement, claming and hoping for absolute disaster and failure were ok and "amercian" in the eyes of the left, whereas now with the messiah in office it is unamerican to disagree and hope for the worst with his presidency?...please, seems bitter sweet to me if anything.

And FWIW I never listen to Rush...but keep those talking points going, you're guy will need them if he keeps it up with the bad decisions, maybe he can appoint a few more tax cheats and frauds...change we can count on.

Bozack, you think that 8 years of GWB was good for the country... This means your opinion is totally irrelevant, because you are too stupid. you should only be posting in the "off topic" forum. Technology and politics are obviously way above your skillset.

Right... because only opinions that you agree with are relevant and anyone who doesn't buy into your apologist crap is "stupid".

Seems the libs are drunk on their new found power already...

 

[retrospooty]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: retrospooty

Originally posted by: bozack

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Oh look! Yet another wingnut hoping that America fails under Obama.

:roll:

"Country First" eh Bozack?

As someone said recently, you can't just listen to Rush and expect to get things done.

:laugh:

Oh look, another BHO knob slobberer on this board...big surprise.

So let me get this straight, last eight years dissent, protest, disagreement, claming and hoping for absolute disaster and failure were ok and "amercian" in the eyes of the left, whereas now with the messiah in office it is unamerican to disagree and hope for the worst with his presidency?...please, seems bitter sweet to me if anything.

And FWIW I never listen to Rush...but keep those talking points going, you're guy will need them if he keeps it up with the bad decisions, maybe he can appoint a few more tax cheats and frauds...change we can count on.

Bozack, you think that 8 years of GWB was good for the country... This means your opinion is totally irrelevant, because you are too stupid. you should only be posting in the "off topic" forum. Technology and politics are obviously way above your skillset.

Right... because only opinions that you agree with are relevant and anyone who doesn't buy into your apologist crap is "stupid".

Seems the libs are drunk on their new found power already...

No, but nice job you have done, totally twisting my words around... Let me spell it out clearly.

If you disagree with my opinion, and/or have totally different political views that I do does not mean you are stupid. If you actually think 8 years of GWB as pres. was good for the country, then yes, by all means, you are stupid. Bozack actually said that it, in THIS thread. Now if either of you want to comment on that, feel free, but do NOT claim that I think anyone that disagrees with me is stupid, because I never said anything like that.

 

[0marTheZealot]

Originally posted by: bozack

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Oh look! Yet another wingnut hoping that America fails under Obama.

:roll:

"Country First" eh Bozack?

As someone said recently, you can't just listen to Rush and expect to get things done.

:laugh:

Oh look, another BHO knob slobberer on this board...big surprise.

So let me get this straight, last eight years dissent, protest, disagreement, claming and hoping for absolute disaster and failure were ok and "amercian" in the eyes of the left, whereas now with the messiah in office it is unamerican to disagree and hope for the worst with his presidency?...please, seems bitter sweet to me if anything.

And FWIW I never listen to Rush...but keep those talking points going, you're guy will need them if he keeps it up with the bad decisions, maybe he can appoint a few more tax cheats and frauds...change we can count on.

The difference between the two camps is striking.

Most people heree protested GWB's policies because they were ill-conceived, ill-advised policies, not because they were GWB's policies. Any president doing the things that GWB did would have been protested, Republican or Democrat.

However, what the Republicans are doing is the opposite, they are hoping and aiding failure to gain political clout. I'm sure the Dems did this as well with GWB, but they weren't as brazen and they also had no power during the first 6 years to do the same, because GWB & Co. simply ignored them. Obama is extending a hand out to kill this gridlocking behavior but the Republicans are simply too stubborn to even consider changing their minds.

That's what I see is the biggest difference between the two camps.

 

[her209]

2010 is just around the corner.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: retrospooty

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: retrospooty

Originally posted by: bozack

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Oh look! Yet another wingnut hoping that America fails under Obama.

:roll:

"Country First" eh Bozack?

As someone said recently, you can't just listen to Rush and expect to get things done.

:laugh:

Oh look, another BHO knob slobberer on this board...big surprise.

So let me get this straight, last eight years dissent, protest, disagreement, claming and hoping for absolute disaster and failure were ok and "amercian" in the eyes of the left, whereas now with the messiah in office it is unamerican to disagree and hope for the worst with his presidency?...please, seems bitter sweet to me if anything.

And FWIW I never listen to Rush...but keep those talking points going, you're guy will need them if he keeps it up with the bad decisions, maybe he can appoint a few more tax cheats and frauds...change we can count on.

Bozack, you think that 8 years of GWB was good for the country... This means your opinion is totally irrelevant, because you are too stupid. you should only be posting in the "off topic" forum. Technology and politics are obviously way above your skillset.

Right... because only opinions that you agree with are relevant and anyone who doesn't buy into your apologist crap is "stupid".

Seems the libs are drunk on their new found power already...

No, but nice job you have done, totally twisting my words around... Let me spell it out clearly.

If you disagree with my opinion, and/or have totally different political views that I do does not mean you are stupid. If you actually think 8 years of GWB as pres. was good for the country, then yes, by all means, you are stupid. Bozack actually said that it, in THIS thread. Now if either of you want to comment on that, feel free, but do NOT claim that I think anyone that disagrees with me is stupid, because I never said anything like that.

I know exactly what you said which is exactly how you re-explained it. Thus, since YOU don't hold the same opinion you claim he is "stupid" and irrelevant. Now I've gone through this thread and none of the posts I read by bozack had "8 years of GWB as pres. was good for the country" - seems those were YOUR words.

So again, it looks like you are nothing but another elitist lib who likes dissent only when you agree with it and it's only "patriotic" when you agree with it. Just more evidence you libs have gotten yourself drunk on power in record time. It took the R's quite a few years to get drunk on power after their '94 take over - hopefully we can have another '94 style take over and have it last longer due to the critters learning their lesson. Seems the libs didn't learn from the R failure after the take over and look to be going full speed towards failure.

 

[mooseracing]

P

Originally posted by: Pocatello
Under the Republican Administration, borrow and spend recklessly. Under the Democratic Administration, same thing. The American people also borrow and spend recklessly. Why buy stuffs when you don't have the money for them? Do you think you can afford to buy a $200,000 house with a $20,000/year salary? Oh no, it's not my fault I can't pay the rent, it's the big bad bank that loans me the money. For years, we have sent our money overseas to support our appetite for shiny stuffs, while our manufacturing base is shipped overseas. We have shifted the balance of power by sending trillions of dollars overseas, we become poorer while China becomes richer. All the Asian countries take pride in their manufacturing industries, while we export them. Unless the American people change the way they do things, it doesn't matter who's in control of the government.

ahh finally someone I can agree with in P&N.

I think the factory problem lies more in all the strict requirements for saftey, emissions, etc we have here compared to there, kind of like the comparo of cars emissions when they come to the States and then the mpg drops off.

Also I see all these bailouts as worthless and just delaying the problem while putting us in a bigger whole.

Why not work on keeping the jobs we have instead of creating a few new ones while thousand disapear?

Why not increase import taxes so you would want to buy US because it is cheaper?

I think a scenario like that will eventually happen (if we have any jobs left), the dollar will just keep getting printed and printed, be worth nothing, and we will only be able to buy American since everything else will cost to much.


But I suppose I should just buy a new car and hope I get bailed out, instead of driving a 25yr old truck, quit paying my student loans, quit paying credit card debt, and quit on rent. Get on welfare and live off of the government.

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Whatever you say, dude, but at least you admit you're all about the revenge. The first step is always admitting you have a problem, right? It's also great to hear that you won't bother waiting to examine the actual results from Obama's Administration in order to determine whether they're failing or not, instead you'll just assume from the start like a partisan douchebag.

Hmm, so let me get this straight, are you trying to claim some kind of objectivity deal?? please...like you said at least I admit I am about the revenge (if one can even call it that, like it really matters enough to me...)...and why should anyone with fundimental differences in opinion both socio and economic wait to examine anything, BHO has already made it crystal clear where he stands on many issues and what direction his admin wants to take, heck if I were a govt or a union laborer or if I was on welfare I would be all for this admin, but I am not and thus I don't see anything in the next four years working out in my favor...and afterall that is really all I care about when it comes to fiscal matters, I made out pretty well in the past 8 years..given that why would I want change especially if it means that change is at my expense?...but who knows, maybe you're right and I won't be impacted at all...then again I doubt it as my CC rate is already on the rise even though I pay all my bills on time and keep a low balance, I have to subsidize the degenerates who cost these companies...my view of the new admin is the same, I am going to be paying for those who made bad decisions or lived beyond their means...and I love being a douchebag, its fun so long as it gets your panties in a bunch which apparenty it does.

Originally posted by: retrospooty
Bozack, you think that 8 years of GWB was good for the country... This means your opinion is totally irrelevant, because you are too stupid. you should only be posting in the "off topic" forum. Technology and politics are obviously way above your skillset.

Retro, this is quite possibly the only time I will even grace you with a response...

In the short amount of time I have even bothered to notice your posts (the past two days, before that you didn't even register) it is apparent that your as much of a partisan hack as the rest of the regulars here, myself included...so stop with the high and mighty tude, it is tiresome.

And if I bothered posting as you do I would seriously consider refraining from commenting on anyone's "skillset".

Originally posted by: 0marTheZealot
The difference between the two camps is striking.

Most people heree protested GWB's policies because they were ill-conceived, ill-advised policies, not because they were GWB's policies. Any president doing the things that GWB did would have been protested, Republican or Democrat.

However, what the Republicans are doing is the opposite, they are hoping and aiding failure to gain political clout. I'm sure the Dems did this as well with GWB, but they weren't as brazen and they also had no power during the first 6 years to do the same, because GWB & Co. simply ignored them. Obama is extending a hand out to kill this gridlocking behavior but the Republicans are simply too stubborn to even consider changing their minds.

That's what I see is the biggest difference between the two camps.

Sorry Omar but this is crap, Bush was protested out of the gate because of the hanging chad/gore fiasco...from that point on he was doomed for failure....the only ray of hope for the party if one can call it that was the aftermath of 9/11 when he was able to "unite" America (well not really but it seemed like that for a little) and then when the dems regretted their decisions regarding the war on terror they launched a huge slam campaign against Bush & Co...

I am very confident that had a dem been in charge and made the same calls Bush did they wouldn't have gotten the same negative media spin which turned off many voters..period.

And as far as Obama extending a hand out....I really have yet to see it, especially with the stimulus bill which didn't include any republican input, and then the "we won" or "you shouldn't be listening to Rush" digs on his part really don't help the situation....but those are ok because he is progressive.


And CAD is on the money, 8 years of Bush and Co wasn't the best thing for the country for sure, but it was ok enough for me....I doubt Obama really has the benefit of middle to upper middle class white guys in mind as we are certainly not his "base".

 

[JSt0rm]

Originally posted by: bozack
a partisan hack as the rest of the regulars here, myself included...

Thanks for clearing that up

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: JSt0rm01

Originally posted by: bozack
a partisan hack as the rest of the regulars here, myself included...

Thanks for clearing that up

Jstorm was there ever a doubt? I mean really ...I had to state the obvious...and here people are saying I am "stupid".

Everyone who contributes to this board regularly is highly partisan, I have yet to find/see a vocal moderate persona expressed on here.

 

[retrospooty]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

I know exactly what you said which is exactly how you re-explained it. Thus, since YOU don't hold the same opinion you claim he is "stupid" and irrelevant. Now I've gone through this thread and none of the posts I read by bozack had "8 years of GWB as pres. was good for the country" - seems those were YOUR words.

So again, it looks like you are nothing but another elitist lib who likes dissent only when you agree with it and it's only "patriotic" when you agree with it. Just more evidence you libs have gotten yourself drunk on power in record time. It took the R's quite a few years to get drunk on power after their '94 take over - hopefully we can have another '94 style take over and have it last longer due to the critters learning their lesson. Seems the libs didn't learn from the R failure after the take over and look to be going full speed towards failure.

You might want to work on your reading comprehension - this is exactly what was said.

Originally posted by: Bozack

"The one good thing about Clinton is that he pushed the nation so far away from "progressive" politics that we got eight years of a republican in charge"

What what republican in charge for 8 years after Clinton do you think was meant by that statement? And more importantly, if you disagree with me and you think that GWB in office for 8 years was good for the country, then please, enlighten me as to how.

 

[retrospooty]

Originally posted by: bozack

Retro, this is quite possibly the only time I will even grace you with a response...

In the short amount of time I have even bothered to notice your posts (the past two days, before that you didn't even register) it is apparent that your as much of a partisan hack as the rest of the regulars here, myself included...so stop with the high and mighty tude, it is tiresome.

And if I bothered posting as you do I would seriously consider refraining from commenting on anyone's "skillset".

Wow... talk about high and mighty. thanks for "gracing" me by your response.

Anyhow, I stand by my comment. Anyone that thinks GWB in office for 8 years was good for the country, I feel is stupid. Surely you must have a reason for thinking that - please, enlighten me as to how. Grace me with just one more response /rolls eyes

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: senseamp
California is glorious success of Republican obstructionism, something they are eager to take nationwide.

No shit. Thank goodness there's no 2/3 vote requirement in the US Congress, or we'd never get jack shit done. Multiple GOP senators who voted for TARP under Bush, suddenly didn't support the same GD thing under Obama. They're like a dead body under the front wheel of progress. They'll spend $500B propping up the banks (allegedly), but suddenly are afraid to spend once Obama's at the helm.

Except it's was supposed to be an entirely different thing and it still took much arm twisting to actually get the tarp passed. So don't even try to claim they are similar - they aren't even close. One was suppsed to be a specific(targeted) bill to free up credit. This one is just a massive spending bill that BHO, Pelosireid, and the apologists are trying blast through claiming "stimulus".

How many times have we had stimulus packages in the past 8 years? At least twice that I can recall. All those US$Billions sent out to taxpayers. How much did that cost? $300Billion? More? Face it Cad, the GOP was all for spending when it suited them (or the Bush Administration), but suddenly now they're fiscally responsible? Puh-lease.

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: retrospooty
Wow... talk about high and mighty. thanks for "gracing" me by your response.

Anyhow, I stand by my comment. Anyone that thinks GWB in office for 8 years was good for the country, I feel is stupid. Surely you must have a reason for thinking that - please, enlighten me as to how. Grace me with just one more response /rolls eyes

Given that you asked I will respond this last time....

1. I never specified GWB, rather I just said a repblican regime

2. I really never said was better for the country but rather said was better for "me"...I am not one of those ritcheous individuals that quotes Star Trek 2 and lives by it, I care about my wallet and the well being of my family.

Under Clinton I paid more for taxes and made less money, under Bush 2 I paid less in taxes and there were far more job opportunities for me at higher pay rates,

Plus from a social standpoint I am more in line with the republicans and for the most part totally disagree with progressives/liberal democrats (though as with everything there are exceptions)...I don't care about UHC as I have always worked for companies that provide this, and I know many who aren't here in MA but make enough to be mandated to buy it only to feel punished by this law as they can barely afford to make it as it is, with the coverage cost they are forced into a lower standard of living, one would hope they don't use us as the model when it goes nation wide.

Given that Robin Hood rode into office on his bright white horse this past November I am most certain that the next four years at least will mean a return to Clinton syle fees and taxes to help prop up those who contribute nothing or very little to society and at the expense of those such as myself who make just enough to get themselves into trouble, but not enough to be considered financially secure.

So in short, my primary concern is "me me me me" and thus the reason why I would usually take any Republican admin over a democratic/progressive one....and as an example of where I have made exceptions, I voted for Clinton's buddy Deval Patrick in the race for the governor last time around here in MA...biggest mistake I could have made as he is an absolute disaster and joke.