U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-10-2010, 05:31 PM
 
Location: USA - midwest
5,945 posts, read 4,733,213 times
Reputation: 2606

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Gringo View Post
Several years ago, the country was plenty angry with President Bush. The issues were that he started the war in Iraq on false premises, approved torture, and the economy was sliding into a deep recession.

Now, there's plenty of anger aimed at President Obama. The issues are that he hasn't mended the economy yet, he bailed out the auto industry, and he wants all Americans to have better access to health care. In addition, there's anger from Glen Beck because Obama wants America's food supply to be safer. Also, the First Lady is catching flack for advocating better health for our kids by fighting childhood obesity.

I see a difference in these angers.

You?
Yeah, I get it.

People should be outraged over the stunts that Bush pulled.

The overheated rhetoric from the right about Obama is just phony outrage, fed by BS from Limbaugh, Beck, Palin, Fox and Co.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-10-2010, 05:36 PM
 
Location: west central Georgia
1,482 posts, read 941,375 times
Reputation: 525
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Gringo View Post
Several years ago, the country was plenty angry with President Bush. The issues were that he started the war in Iraq on false premises, approved torture, and the economy was sliding into a deep recession.

Now, there's plenty of anger aimed at President Obama. The issues are that he hasn't mended the economy yet, he bailed out the auto industry, and he wants all Americans to have better access to health care. In addition, there's anger from Glen Beck because Obama wants America's food supply to be safer. Also, the First Lady is catching flack for advocating better health for our kids by fighting childhood obesity.

I see a difference in these angers.

You?
What is the difference that you see in these angers?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-10-2010, 06:20 PM
 
5,915 posts, read 4,034,812 times
Reputation: 1396
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Gringo View Post
he wants all Americans to have better access to health care.
To achieve that he couldn't come up with anything better than nationalizing 1/6 of the economy. Nothing to be angry about, right?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-10-2010, 06:45 PM
 
69,372 posts, read 53,850,424 times
Reputation: 9358
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Gringo View Post
Several years ago, the country was plenty angry with President Bush. The issues were that he started the war in Iraq on false premises, approved torture, and the economy was sliding into a deep recession.

Now, there's plenty of anger aimed at President Obama. The issues are that he hasn't mended the economy yet, he bailed out the auto industry, and he wants all Americans to have better access to health care. In addition, there's anger from Glen Beck because Obama wants America's food supply to be safer. Also, the First Lady is catching flack for advocating better health for our kids by fighting childhood obesity.

I see a difference in these angers.

You?
Yeah, I see the difference..
Bush ended a recession and then couldnt do anything about it in 2007 due to Democratic Congress not putting bills forward.

I also note you give Obama credit for saving the auto industry, when it was Bush, and then you have the nerve to talk about him making health care "better" while increasing the costs.. And then the bs about Obama wanting our food supply to be safer, well heck, I want all americans to be millionaires.. Does that mean that If Congress proposed giving everyone $1M that it shouldnt be criticized?

FAIL..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2010, 07:22 AM
 
Location: New Mexico
8,388 posts, read 8,126,961 times
Reputation: 4070
Why, yes...

There IS a very real difference in the anger aimed at Bush vs Obama. What I notice is that the rabid right attempts to deflect any faults of the Bush years (Iraq, recession) while at the same time trying to characterize any progress of the Obama years as something negative.

Hyperpartisanship in the extreme. But warmly embraced by the GOP.

Which is precisely why I'm no longer a Republican.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2010, 07:36 AM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
61,224 posts, read 31,024,807 times
Reputation: 13038
When we can all quit being so immature and childish, and actually sit down and discuss the direction and the effects of the ideas, will we then actually come to a conclusion on what works and what does not work.


Just because someone paid you a lot of money to get you re-elected, doesn't automatically make your "paid for ideas", make any sense. It is clear some of this bogus crap that is brought out, is just to satisfy the big money that was placed into campaign funds.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2010, 07:41 AM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
61,224 posts, read 31,024,807 times
Reputation: 13038
Quote:
Originally Posted by skoro View Post
Why, yes...

There IS a very real difference in the anger aimed at Bush vs Obama. What I notice is that the rabid right attempts to deflect any faults of the Bush years (Iraq, recession) while at the same time trying to characterize any progress of the Obama years as something negative.

Hyperpartisanship in the extreme. But warmly embraced by the GOP.

Which is precisely why I'm no longer a Republican.



Yet Bush, never went against the will of the people.
Bush was on the bandwagon, right along with the majority. Progressive Bush, couldn't say no to the will of the people.

12 people protesting outside Crawford, does not amount to 3-400,000 people in the Washington Mall 8/28.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2010, 07:53 AM
 
Location: New Mexico
8,388 posts, read 8,126,961 times
Reputation: 4070
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post
Yet Bush, never went against the will of the people.
Bush was on the bandwagon, right along with the majority. Progressive Bush, couldn't say no to the will of the people.

12 people protesting outside Crawford, does not amount to 3-400,000 people in the Washington Mall 8/28.

A very "interesting" spin. And one that confirms my point.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2010, 08:17 AM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
61,224 posts, read 31,024,807 times
Reputation: 13038
Quote:
Originally Posted by skoro View Post
A very "interesting" spin. And one that confirms my point.

Spin?

Bush, and the USA Congress, along with a very big majority of people, went to war.
With Saddam running his mouth and documented evidence there was and he has used WMD.
The majority of Americans didn't take the treats lightly, as I wouldn't if you threatened me.
The majority of people didn't want war criminals held or tried on US soil.
Come to find out, the majority of people are glad for Tarp after being against it during it's passage.

What else did he do?

Oh, ya he did something with Medicare/Medicaid, I don't think the majority was against that.
No child left behind, which is a wreck and cost billions in waste, and has not done anything to help. It has actually made our kids as individuals dumber, to help the collective be even. I don't think the majority were against that at the time.


What else?

Remember the Far left, only represent 20% of the population and we are talking majority, here. Not what the far left socialist ideological agenda.

Bush did things that went against the far far right, too... but there are only 35% of those freaky Constitutional Patriots represented in the population.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2010, 08:39 AM
 
11,961 posts, read 12,484,119 times
Reputation: 2772
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post
Yet Bush, never went against the will of the people.
100,000 people yelling no war Iraq in 2002 don't have a will? Tricking congress with outright lies and a million dollar paid witness? The patriot act is the will of the people?

Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post
Bush was on the bandwagon, right along with the majority.
It was the will of a think tank, not the will of the people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top