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.
But you see, it's different. Bush had to cut taxes while waging two wars because that made sound fiscal sense. Doubling the debt was the patriotic thing to do during a "time of war." We can also see that cutting taxes for the top tier payed off handsomely by the end of Bush's second term; all one had to do is look at the job reports and our 401ks to see that.
On the other hand we have Obama: Spending tax payer money to stop our country from entering a period of deflation is Socialism. Allowing the Bush tax cuts to end after how much good they've done is pure insanity. He should have just let all the banks fail, letting the economy go down with it, while extending tax cuts for the wealthy for at least another 5 years. This way they could have created even more jobs for us and we could have simply grown our way out of this mess rebuilding the banking system from scratch. You know, pure capitalism.
You are blinded by partisanship. As a result, reason will never reach you, as you are only concerned with having a democrat in power, regardless of the consequences for the nation. When we are more concerned with party loyalty than actually improving the nation, we are lost.
1. The debt doubled during the Bush administration
2. Bush presided over a $5 trillion expansion of the national debt over 8 years
3. Bush had a liberal congress his last two years
4. Bush was a fiscal liberal
5. Obama has spent $3 trillion in eighteen months
6. Obama has added to the debt at a rate 4X greater than Bush
7. At $14.5 trillion in debt- we all are going to take a hit
8. Our "hit' will be
a. increased taxes
b. fewer entitlements
c. lower standard of living
d. inflation and or currency devaluation.
Debt is debt, whether that is "Bush" debt or "Obama" debt. Obama clearly is not the man to reign in spending and set the nation back to fiscal solvency. Let's put a congress and a president in power who will CUT SPENDING, regardless of party.
The troops have come home from Iraq... Read the link... Less than 50,000 troops are in Iraq for non combat operations... They are in National Guard mode...
Afghanistan is more complicated... Cheney-Bush and the Bin Laden family are controlling Afghanistan from Saudi Arabia...
What may I ask is National Guard mode? I think that you know very little about that organization. My foster daughter went to Afghanistan in January 2009 and that as a member of the Kansas National Guard. It seems that when they are in combat mode they are the best in the area of Afghanistan they are in. Nope, they don't fight, at all, but Rene sits in a hut and tells the troops fighting where the enemy is from electronic spying gear. I am pretty sure that you don't really know about what the Guard does these days.
BTW, Rene spent two solid years is Kuwait because under Bush they promised her she wouldn't have to go back to the Middle East but Obama sent them back. Ain't he some fine fellow?
As an Independent... The past 10 years have been a disaster... The right wing wealthy elitists are seething because they may lose everything that George Bush gave to them on a silver platter at the expense of the middle class...
You are as much of an "Independent" as I am a communist. Clearly your views are ALWAYS left wing partisan liberal views.
What may I ask is National Guard mode? I think that you know very little about that organization. My foster daughter went to Afghanistan in January 2009 and that as a member of the Kansas National Guard. It seems that when they are in combat mode they are the best in the area of Afghanistan they are in. Nope, they don't fight, at all, but Rene sits in a hut and tells the troops fighting where the enemy is from electronic spying gear. I am pretty sure that you don't really know about what the Guard does these days.
BTW, Rene spent two solid years is Kuwait because under Bush they promised her she wouldn't have to go back to the Middle East but Obama sent them back. Ain't he some fine fellow?
This is about Iraq... Afghanistan is a different story...
Under Obama's plan, American forces will no longer conduct combat operations but are instead to train Iraqi troops and help with counterterrorism operations — if asked for by the Iraqis.
Under the agreement between the U.S. and Iraq, all American troops must be out of Iraq by the end of next year. The troops now remaining in the country will mainly be responsible for training Iraqi security forces.
Under Obama's plan, American forces will no longer conduct combat operations but are instead to train Iraqi troops and help with counterterrorism operations — if asked for by the Iraqis.
Under the agreement between the U.S. and Iraq, all American troops must be out of Iraq by the end of next year. The troops now remaining in the country will mainly be responsible for training Iraqi security forces.
According to Obama's promise to the people who voted for him those troops were to be out of there by April or March of 2010. Believing any of his promises is pretty tough for me after all he failed to do anything about since he took office.
Under Obama's plan, American forces will no longer conduct combat operations but are instead to train Iraqi troops and help with counterterrorism operations — if asked for by the Iraqis.
Under the agreement between the U.S. and Iraq, all American troops must be out of Iraq by the end of next year. The troops now remaining in the country will mainly be responsible for training Iraqi security forces.
You just keep repeating to this to yourself over and over again, such that you actually believe this is true. Amazing.
1. There are 50,000 troops in Iraq
2. Soldiers are still dying in Iraq, regardless of what has been "declared"
3. We will have troops in Iraq for not only the next year, but the next 20 years.
4. Troops cost money, regardless of "combat" or "training" declarations
5. The combined cost for the Iraq and Afghan campaigns under Obama is HIGHER than it was under Bush.
6. Bush won the Iraq war through the surge that Obama opposed
7. Obama has escalated the war in Afghanistan, a war that can never be won.
It seems as though facts escape you, and you repeatedly cling to stating the same thing over and over again, which supports no point or contention. When we have 50,000 troops in a country, you do realize that supporting those troops costs the same amount of money, regardless of an arbitrary "combat" or "non-cobat" designation? Right? You do realize that we still have troops in Korea, Japan, Germany, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, even Cuba decades after the conflicts have ended? Right?
Do you really think that there will be no US troops in Iraq after a year? If so, you really need a nap.
You just keep repeating to this to yourself over and over again, such that you actually believe this is true. Amazing.
1. There are 50,000 troops in Iraq
2. Soldiers are still dying in Iraq, regardless of what has been "declared"
3. We will have troops in Iraq for not only the next year, but the next 20 years.
4. Troops cost money, regardless of "combat" or "training" declarations
5. The combined cost for the Iraq and Afghan campaigns under Obama is HIGHER than it was under Bush.
6. Bush won the Iraq war through the surge that Obama opposed
7. Obama has escalated the war in Afghanistan, a war that can never be won.
It seems as though facts escape you, and you repeatedly cling to stating the same thing over and over again, which supports no point or contention. When we have 50,000 troops in a country, you do realize that supporting those troops costs the same amount of money, regardless of an arbitrary "combat" or "non-cobat" designation? Right? You do realize that we still have troops in Korea, Japan, Germany, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, even Cuba decades after the conflicts have ended? Right?
Do you really think that there will be no US troops in Iraq after a year? If so, you really need a nap.
U.S. forces now need Iraqi permission to arrest or kill a suspected terrorist, and they need an Iraqi escort to drive through any city in the country.
These days, though, it's mostly Iraqis, not Americans, on the front lines. For example, at one checkpoint, Iraqi troops could be seen searching vehicles while American soldiers monitored their work via video feeds.
"There's not too much left that we have to do," one soldier said.
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.
