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.
I"ll take your word on the jobs part; I don't feel like researching it.
However, Obama came in wanting to work in a bipartisan spirit. The "pubs, especially the Tea Party element, did not want that. The elections of 2010 just reinforced that negative attitude.
HOW can you possibly lay the lack of cooperation on Obama?
"However, Obama came in wanting to work in a bipartisan spirit."
I am almost at a lost for words.
A question for you. who said at the FIRST meeting with Obama and the leaders of Congress after Obama won, " We won, get used to it"?
If you call that "wanting to work in a bipartisan spirit.", There is no hope for you.
Again it is all about "we stopped Bush because our policies are correct because we are progressives and we are always right but you conservatives must bend over for the president because your policies are incorrect and you trying to stop him is wrong and hurting our country and likely racist".
You don't even see the hypocrisy.
When the unemployment rate goes up, or the jobs report is bad, the RWs on this board are gleeful. They don't care how much suffering there is, if they can make Obama look bad.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quick Enough
"However, Obama came in wanting to work in a bipartisan spirit."
I am almost at a lost for words.
A question for you. who said at the FIRST meeting with Obama and the leaders of Congress after Obama won, " We won, get used to it"?
If you call that "wanting to work in a bipartisan spirit.", There is no hope for you.
From the earliest days of the Obama administration:
In case you cant read: "Bush, NO NEW NET PRIVATE SECTOR JOB CREATION"
George Bush...worse than Jimmy Carter. Hell, Carter created more jobs per year than Ronnie Raygun
Bush's administration was book-ended by severe recessions. The 2001 recession was considered mild by most standards but was actually pretty severe if you were in the tech sector, but fortunately most sectors didn't feel the pinch then unlike in 2008 when everybody was affected. If you count only 2003-2007, Bush's numbers will look far better.
Why do Conservatives spend so much time looking backwards? Even if he were alive, Reagan would not be eligible to run again for President. It is pointless to wish for such a thing out loud. It might be possible in a few years to clone a new Reagan from DNA. Anyone know what the eligibility statutes are regarding clones of former sitting presidents? Anyone know if there is a cocktail dress out there in America with the DNA of the greatest leader this country has ever known on it? Don't be shy. Your country needs you. It will still take decades to grow the clone out to maturity. Less if techniques like artificial memory implantation and accelerated development protocols are invented. Science fiction in other words. So... in the meantime we have a dilemma. Who should we choose to lead America back from the brink. Mitt Romney's campaign has been invigorated by the DNA of the young Paul Ryan... seems fair to compare...
Carter: one term Democrat... didn't leave the U.S. that badly off... Reagan: two term Republican... took the hand-off from the one term Democrat and grew unemployment out to ~10.2%. Quite a feat since the population then was much lower than it is now, but there you have it. Romney (if he wins) would inherit an America considerably improved than what it was when Obama received it. It's not hard to lead when everyone wants to follow you. Obama has led the most fractious constituency since... ever. That takes leadership.
H (if you get from this that I don't think plenty of people in this thread know what the @#%@# they are talking about you would be right)
Why do Conservatives spend so much time looking backwards? Even if he were alive, Reagan would not be eligible to run again for President. It is pointless to wish for such a thing out loud. It might be possible in a few years to clone a new Reagan from DNA. Anyone know what the eligibility statutes are regarding clones of former sitting presidents? Anyone know if there is a cocktail dress out there in America with the DNA of the greatest leader this country has ever known on it? Don't be shy. Your country needs you. It will still take decades to grow the clone out to maturity. Less if techniques like artificial memory implantation and accelerated development protocols are invented. Science fiction in other words. So... in the meantime we have a dilemma. Who should we choose to lead America back from the brink. Mitt Romney's campaign has been invigorated by the DNA of the young Paul Ryan... seems fair to compare...
Carter: one term Democrat... didn't leave the U.S. that badly off... Reagan: two term Republican... took the hand-off from the one term Democrat and grew unemployment out to ~10.2%. Quite a feat since the population then was much lower than it is now, but there you have it. Romney (if he wins) would inherit an America considerably improved than what it was when Obama received it. It's not hard to lead when everyone wants to follow you. Obama has led the most fractious constituency since... ever. That takes leadership.
H (if you get from this that I don't think plenty of people in this thread know what the @#%@# they are talking about you would be right)
If you are looking for someone who has no idea what they are talking about, go look in the mirror. You'll find one immediately...
Funny how good economic policies allows you to keep your job with a very high approval rating.
I know of a president who could learn a thing or two from Ronald Reagan...
Carter set the stage by deregulating a lot of industries, trucking, airlines, trains, telephone, and beer off the top of my head. Reagan reaped the rewards. Volcker raised interest rates which stopped the run away inflation.
When the unemployment rate goes up, or the jobs report is bad, the RWs on this board are gleeful. They don't care how much suffering there is, if they can make Obama look bad.
From the earliest days of the Obama administration:
I don't know who said the quote in your post. You tell me, and post a link, as well.
You're mad because you perceive RWers to be gleeful when unemployment goes up. So what? How does that matter in the scheme of things? Them being overjoyed somehow has some effect on the economy?
Get mad at congress for manipulating the free market. Get mad because Congress said it was a good idea to make mortgage loans to people with a bad credit history, a below average ability to make those payments and little to no down payment. Get mad at the people who think the very same ones who ruined the economy can somehow make it better.
If you are looking for someone who has no idea what they are talking about, go look in the mirror. You'll find one immediately...
Hah! Just admit that what I wrote was above your reading level. If you ask nicely I'll DM you the 6th grade reading level version.
H
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.
