Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Let's see...54 days during 2000 was NBD because the country was doing well economically. How's that for an answer ?
The country wasn't broke and in debt for trillions.
HappyTexan !!! ... Great Post !
It truly appears that the feeble minded "Simpletons" forgot once again about the economic conditions during that time span when GWB was POTUS ! OPPPPPPS !
OH MY ..... Em musta juss foogot bout da tillions n det dat we be ah facin rite naowl ! OPPPPPPPS ! Dey foogot ahgin ! Duh !
No burdell. Regardless of which party is wearing the big P today I'd feel the same way. This is not the time to spend needlessly.
You thowing out the "well your boy did it so can we" is deflection.
The Queen canceled her Christmas Party citing bad economic times.
We are in bad economic times. A little restraint on the spending would go a long way seeing that 10% of the population are without jobs and every extension is a begging job in Congress.
You can't go crying balance the budget and stop spending and then go off and charge $200K/hour to jet around the world. Walk the talk else it's meaningless.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,389,283 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinman01
No better question is why don't the party hardliners hold their own accountable?
This is how the politicians beat we the people. They count on a free pass from those in their own party.
I swear hardliners are like obsessed fans.
No burdell that isn't pointed at you personally. It just seems that hardliners never accept that their own party is flawed and are even less willing to admit it.
They're both flawed, I haven't said otherwise.
It's the hypocrisy that ticks me off. Like hearing an adulterer like Newt Gingrich preach 'family values'. Like this whining about Presidential travel when they all do it, those from both sides of the aisle.
So, WHERE was the outrage when GWB spent 54 days abroad in his first two years as POTUS?
Just another example of typical self-Righteous hypocrisy.
Bush would go to his ranch, the security was already established, so we do not need to send out dozens of security personnel and equipment to make it safe. The secret service could stay at the ranch and not have to reserve entire hotels. Secure phone lines and video conference and satellite equip were installed, and meals could be prepared and eaten right on the ranch, so no extra expenses were needed to make some local restaurant safe and secure either.
But you fools on the left wail and moan over the relative inexpensive trips Bush took to the ranch, and ignore the outrageous expenses 0bama incurs by traveling all over the planet, rarely if ever visiting the same place twice, and staying in the most expensive hotels, and sometimes only doing it to go on shopping sprees around Europe or to take in Broadway plays.
BTW, by beef is not with how many vacation days 0bama takes, I have no idea how stressful his life is, I just object to him traveling around like a king, and spending money like it's water.
So, WHERE was the outrage when GWB spent 54 days abroad in his first two years as POTUS?
Just another example of typical self-Righteous hypocrisy.
Yet another liberal who tries to justify anything Obama does by pointing at Bush. IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT BUSH DID. If what Obama is doing is bad, it doesn't matter if someone else did the same thing or worse, it doesn't justify what he's doing. The country is massively in debt, getting further in debt every minute thanks to Obama, and you still point to Bush. Get over it, no matter how badly Bush may have done Obama is worse any way you spin it.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,389,283 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan
No burdell. Regardless of which party is wearing the big P today I'd feel the same way. This is not the time to spend needlessly.
You thowing out the "well your boy did it so can we" is deflection.
The Queen canceled her Christmas Party citing bad economic times.
We are in bad economic times. A little restraint on the spending would go a long way seeing that 10% of the population are without jobs and every extension is a begging job in Congress.
You can't go crying balance the budget and stop spending and then go off and charge $200K/hour to jet around the world. Walk the talk else it's meaningless.
"This is not the time to spend needlessly."
Who's been appointed to judge just what expenditures are needed and which are not?
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,389,283 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haakon
Yet another liberal who tries to justify anything Obama does by pointing at Bush. IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT BUSH DID. If what Obama is doing is bad, it doesn't matter if someone else did the same thing or worse, it doesn't justify what he's doing. The country is massively in debt, getting further in debt every minute thanks to Obama, and you still point to Bush. Get over it, no matter how badly Bush may have done Obama is worse any way you spin it.
And yet another load of NeoConfused spin.
Wah, wah, wah, It's OK when our guy does but it's just horribly wrong when your guy does it.
I'll stick with it being typical self-Righteous hypocrisy
BTW, the POTUS travels, and he doesn't fly coach, that's the way it is, get over it.
Who's been appointed to judge just what expenditures are needed and which are not?
I don't know but it's obvious Presidential travel and First lady travel is not on that list of "not necessary".
Papa Doc and Baby Doc lived lavishly didn't they while their people starved.
Mugbe spent over $1 million on his birthday party while his people starved.
Sure those comparisons are extreme but they are valid comparisons.
Heads of countries live in a different world, a world where they don't worry about spending.
I have the utmost respect for the Queen and what she did. Queen Elizabeth cancels palace Christmas Party - CNN
"The queen is acutely aware of the difficult economic circumstances facing the country and, given the current economic climate, it was thought that it was appropriate for the royal household to show restraint," the spokesman said.
Let's see...54 days during 2000 was NBD because the country was doing well economically. How's that for an answer ?
The country wasn't broke and in debt for trillions.
They wont ever understand.
Most liberals have no way of knowing right from wrong.
Obama has set a record for spending and what to they do go right back to Bush again.
No President under any economic times we are experience right now should be spending money like he is.
Not morally right and not a good sound decision.
Then again, he does not care that he is presiding over a second recession under the dems watch in the last 4 years.
It is simply wrong for him to being high off the hog during a recession while people are losing their homes in record numbers, food banks are empty and record homeless.
He is a total embarrassment and shows he is an elitist who uses our tax money to spend on himself.
Selfish and wrong.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Great Post !
