Rick Perry's college transcript! (Canadian, Clint: live in, vs., bill)

[cityconvo]

Originally Posted by EDS_

Did you honestly think he would close Gitmo and withdraw troops in 16 months, cut the deficit by 50% while trying to socialize medical care? Those and a number of other Obama promises were simply never going to happen. They fall into the pre-electcion bed time stories for leftists column.

No. And most practical people were not concerned with 16 months. What we wanted was consistent measurable progress to those ends. Do you really think pre-election bed time stories are exclusive to the left?

[mikeh19468]

Originally Posted by cityconvo

No. And most practical people were not concerned with 16 months. What we wanted was consistent measurable progress to those ends. Do you really think pre-election bed time stories are exclusive to the left?

No, they're not exclusive to the left, but then when you run with themes of Hope and Change, I think it's reasonable to expect that you're not just another typical politician (that's what his campaign was pushing). That's why so many independents are having buyers remorse, liberals are wondering what's going on, and Republicans are saying I told you so...

[EDS_]

Originally Posted by cityconvo

No. And most practical people were not concerned with 16 months. What we wanted was consistent measurable progress to those ends. Do you really think pre-election bed time stories are exclusive to the left?

Not exclusive to the left. But the number and scope of pre-claims by Obama set him apart from any prez-candidate.

[Metro Matt]

Originally Posted by EDS_

Did you honestly think he would close Gitmo and withdraw troops in 16 months, cut the deficit by 50% while trying to socialize medical care? Those and a number of other Obama promises were simply never going to happen. They fall into the pre-electcion bed time stories for leftists column.

Closing GITMO in 16 months would have meant no Bin Laden capture from intelligence gained there. It was all a lie to the American people because he knew GITMO's value.

Obama can partially thank Bush for GITMO & capturing Bin Laden.

Funny how the Liberals were so against it calling it inhumane how they water boarded terrorists & bashed Bush so badly when the very person who knew Bin Laden's where abouts was a prisoner there.

Bush deserves half the credit for Bin Laden's capture IMO.

[dgz]

Originally Posted by mikeh19468

No, they're not exclusive to the left, but then when you run with themes of Hope and Change, I think it's reasonable to expect that you're not just another typical politician (that's what his campaign was pushing). That's why so many independents are having buyers remorse, liberals are wondering what's going on, and Republicans are saying I told you so...

I think it was good for him to run with those themes. He was elected on those themes and most people would not expect change to happen over night. I think one disappointment is that he keeps trying to please the Republicans who have lost their moderate conservative base and are totally led by the Tea Party extremists.

With Obama, I'm disappointed that he is not doing more. Obama is not as effective as many of us had hoped.

With Bush, I'm angry with the destruction that he has caused in this country and the giant deficits he has brought upon us by these stupid useless wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. His tax advantages for the top 1% that doesn't need them doesn't help us either. Some of Bush's actions in office were criminal; others were unethical. I think he should be put on trial. Some could argue that Bush could be more effective than Obama, but there are mobsters who are more effective than police commissioners too. And yet if you had to pick one to run for mayor, most of us would choose the police commissioner.

[EDS_]

Originally Posted by dgz

I think it was good for him to run with those themes. He was elected on those themes and most people would not expect change to happen over night. I think one disappointment is that he keeps trying to please the Republicans who have lost their moderate conservative base and are totally led by the Tea Party extremists.

With Obama, I'm disappointed that he is not doing more. Obama is not as effective as many of us had hoped.

With Bush, I'm angry with the destruction that he has caused in this country and the giant deficits he has brought upon us by these stupid useless wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. His tax advantages for the top 1% that doesn't need them doesn't help us either. Some of Bush's actions in office were criminal; others were unethical. I think he should be put on trial. Some could argue that Bush could be more effective than Obama, but there are mobsters who are more effective than police commissioners too. And yet if you had to pick one to run for mayor, most of us would choose the police commissioner.

Wow!
You might want to compare year over year Bush era deficts to Obama's and then report back. I predict you won't.

You do realize that Bush moved millions and millions of lower middle class folks into net-zero federal tax payers?

If Bush commited criminal acts where are the indictments? Obama promised them - oh wait!

The fact of the matter is Obama offered up a bunch of emotional nonsense that many on the left love. Rational people including a lot of democrats knew better.

While you are looking up stats what was average unemployment under Bush, Obama? You will not like the answer at all.

[skids929]

Originally Posted by EDS_

Wow!
You might want to compare year over year Bush era deficts to Obama's and then report back. I predict you won't.

You do realize that Bush moved millions and millions of lower middle class folks into net-zero federal tax payers?

If Bush commited criminal acts where are the indictments? Obama promised them - oh wait!

The fact of the matter is Obama offered up a bunch of emotional nonsense that many on the left love. Rational people including a lot of democrats knew better.

While you are looking up stats what was average unemployment under Bush, Obama? You will not like the answer at all.

Nice!


I would think someone would have mentioned he bought curtains at Needless Markup and sent the bill to the taxpayers. That should lower his credibility more than a lowsy transcript. Doesn't sound like a "fiscal" conservative to me.

[dgz]

Originally Posted by EDS_

Wow!
You might want to compare year over year Bush era deficts to Obama's and then report back. I predict you won't.

You do realize that Bush moved millions and millions of lower middle class folks into net-zero federal tax payers?

If Bush commited criminal acts where are the indictments? Obama promised them - oh wait!

The fact of the matter is Obama offered up a bunch of emotional nonsense that many on the left love. Rational people including a lot of democrats knew better.

While you are looking up stats what was average unemployment under Bush, Obama? You will not like the answer at all.

This is the cost of the Bush policies:

The Chart That Should Accompany All Discussions of the Debt Ceiling - James Fallows - Politics - The Atlantic

Bush took this country down and when Obama got into office, it continued downward. It is difficult for anyone to stop something that has acquired 8 years' momentum.

The reason that many people voted for Obama was not some emotional thing. People wanted change. There is widespread discontent with the way things are currently done and the people who vote in the next election will be voting for change as well. This disappointment with Obama for some of us is that there hasn't been enough change. Most of his policies, with the exception of his efforts in his first year, seem to be far to the right. I think Obama ran for the wrong Party. And there is nothing emotional about voting for change. I'm not sure why you're attaching emotion with the desire for change--unless change creates *emotion* for you. A lot of Republicans seem to be terrified of it.

And regarding criminals... There are plenty of criminals who do not get the indicted. A lot of reasonable people would think that lying to your country so you can take them into a war, a war that results in getting thousands of your soldiers killed and for no good reason, is criminal. Additionally, is making torture an acceptable practice in your country a criminal act? I don't know but I think it should be. We arrest serial killers for torturing people. Why shouldn't presidents be held accountable too?

[dgz]

Originally Posted by EDS_

Wow!
You might want to compare year over year Bush era deficts to Obama's and then report back. I predict you won't.

You do realize that Bush moved millions and millions of lower middle class folks into net-zero federal tax payers?

If Bush commited criminal acts where are the indictments? Obama promised them - oh wait!

The fact of the matter is Obama offered up a bunch of emotional nonsense that many on the left love. Rational people including a lot of democrats knew better.

While you are looking up stats what was average unemployment under Bush, Obama? You will not like the answer at all.

This is the cost of the Bush policies:

The Chart That Should Accompany All Discussions of the Debt Ceiling - James Fallows - Politics - The Atlantic

Bush took this country down and when Obama got into office, it continued downward. It is difficult for anyone to stop something that has acquired 8 years' momentum.

The reason that many people voted for Obama was not some emotional thing. People wanted change. There is widespread discontent with the way things are currently done and the people who vote in the next election will be voting for change as well. This disappointment with Obama for some of us is that there hasn't been enough change. Most of his policies, with the exception of his efforts in his first year, seem to be far to the right. So much so, I think Obama ran on the wrong Party ticket. Also, I'm not sure why you're attaching emotion with the desire for change.

And regarding criminals... There are plenty of criminals who do not get indicted. A lot of reasonable people would think that lying to your country so you can take them into a war, a war that results in getting thousands of your soldiers killed and for no good reason, is criminal. It doesn't matter if you're convicted or not. Plenty of South American dictators have done terrible things and never had a trial. Additionally, the use of torture is criminal. We arrest serial killers for torturing people. Then, you have a president that makes this acceptable? Oh, that's right, if you're getting some benefit from the torture, it's OK? We didn't think it was OK when the Nazis were doing it. But now it's ok because Bush's lack of values is acceptable?

[mikeh19468]

Originally Posted by dgz

This is the cost of the Bush policies:

The Chart That Should Accompany All Discussions of the Debt Ceiling - James Fallows - Politics - The Atlantic

Bush took this country down and when Obama got into office, it continued downward. It is difficult for anyone to stop something that has acquired 8 years' momentum.

The reason that many people voted for Obama was not some emotional thing. People wanted change. There is widespread discontent with the way things are currently done and the people who vote in the next election will be voting for change as well. This disappointment with Obama for some of us is that there hasn't been enough change. Most of his policies, with the exception of his efforts in his first year, seem to be far to the right. So much so, I think Obama ran on the wrong Party ticket. Also, I'm not sure why you're attaching emotion with the desire for change.

And regarding criminals... There are plenty of criminals who do not get indicted. A lot of reasonable people would think that lying to your country so you can take them into a war, a war that results in getting thousands of your soldiers killed and for no good reason, is criminal. It doesn't matter if you're convicted or not. Plenty of South American dictators have done terrible things and never had a trial. Additionally, the use of torture is criminal. We arrest serial killers for torturing people. Then, you have a president that makes this acceptable? Oh, that's right, if you're getting some benefit from the torture, it's OK? We didn't think it was OK when the Nazis were doing it. But now it's ok because Bush's lack of values is acceptable?

Before laying all the blame for the direction the country is going in, keep in mind that executive is only 1 branch. Dems have been blaming the Tea Party and the Republicans for the economic turmoil of the last few months due to obstructionism. And they only control the House. The Dems had both houses from 2006 on, and also had the Senate during the first two years of Bush's first term. They are far from blameless for much of what's going on with the economy right now...