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.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,330 posts, read 54,411,082 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by nononsenseguy
What has capsized our economy is Barack Hussein Obama and the Democrats in Congress. But former Democrat administrations gave them a good running start, starting with Jimmy Carter and the CRA, which was then expanded under Clinton. That is what is responsible for the Banking/Mortgage scandal, along with the mismanagement of Fannie Mae (under Democrat "leadership").
Thank goodness 20 years of Reagan/Bush/Bush did sooooooooooooooooooo much to solve our economic woes, eh?
What has capsized our economy is Barack Hussein Obama and the Democrats in Congress. But former Democrat administrations gave them a good running start, starting with Jimmy Carter and the CRA, which was then expanded under Clinton. That is what is responsible for the Banking/Mortgage scandal, along with the mismanagement of Fannie Mae (under Democrat "leadership").
Defending ourselves against our enemies is a legitimate function of the military, and the Federal Government, and that is a purpose that is spelled out in the Constitution ("...to provide for the common defense...").
Spending money on all the other programs the Federal Government spends money on, is not something that the Constitution has given the Federal Government the authority to do.
Ever read the Constitution? Perhaps you should.
[/color]
What makes you think this? According to what source, was that our "real intent"? No one ever said that, though a lot of people have made that accusation. Where's the proof? Do you know something the rest of us do not?
[/color]
Hardly.
'Defending ourselves against our enemies'? When Saddam used the weapons we sold him against Iran, we applauded him. 'The Constitution'? I know it well, and I also know that Bush-Cheney did all they could to undermine it. Cheney was studying his 'meat chart' of the best oil fields in Iraq, and pushing Clinton for an attack on Iraq, long before 9-11.
Which situation did Obama invent to justify invading a sovereign state?
I'm all eyes, ready to read and I'm holding my breath.
Read my statement. I never said Obama invented a situation. I stated that he has continued with Bush's policies. Do you deny that Obama failed to pull troops out as promised during his campaign and instead chose to spend more money to fund the wars?
As usual I will attempt answering utterly stupid questions. Right off the bat your obtuse beliefs are blatanly obvious...what the hell did Iraq have to so with 9/11???
Why aren't you getting the oil? OMG! The guys making the profits do not care who gets the oil as long as they make the profits. Ask Cheney about his backroom deals...I was not in attendance.
Cheney's Oil Law For Iraq Is Neocolonial Theft
As stated, the purpose of these wars was not to grab the oil, as a thing in itself. However, as anyone familiar with the appetites of the Bush-Cheney crowd knows, they are not averse to making a few billion bucks in the course of overthrowing regimes and occupying countries. And, controlling the flow of oil, is also a means of containing resource-dependant countries like China.
The recently drafted Iraqi Oil Law is a case in point. If one were to write an unbiased executive summary of the law, it would have to contain the following points: The purpose of the legislation is to open Iraq's vast, undeveloped oil fields to exploitation by international oil companies (read: the friends of Cheney and Bush) in a modern version of early twentienth-century colonial ventures for oil. In order to exercise control over the oil, U.S. military forces will be forced to extend their tour of duty, and set up the biggest embassy in the world, thus dashing hopes for Iraqi sovereignty.
If current Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki is unwilling or unable to force through the legislation, he can be replaced by Cheney favorite Iyad Allawi, a man closely associated with the process leading to the law. As a postscript to such a summary, one must note the shameful fact that there has been, to date, only one U.S. Congressman, Dennis Kucinich, who has unmasked the outrageous aims of the law, and started a fight around it. Cheney's Oil Law For Iraq Is Neocolonial Theft
If Bush and Cheney truly wanted to control the oil in Iraq, then why didn't they install a puppet dictator, why the push for a domocraticly elected government?
Thank goodness 20 years of Reagan/Bush/Bush did sooooooooooooooooooo much to solve our economic woes, eh?
Don't know why you are lumping Reagan and both Bushes together. They were three different presidents.
Anyway, they certainly did better than the recent Democrats.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,330 posts, read 54,411,082 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fleet
Don't know why you are lumping Reagan and both Bushes together. They were three different presidents.
Anyway, they certainly did better than the recent Democrats.
They did better? HOW? Selling weapons to an enemy? Raising taxes when they claimed they wouldn't? Starting unnecessary wars of choice? This is better HOW? Or are you still just upset about the BJ thingie?
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.
