Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
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 01-07-2010, 12:10 PM
 
Location: Colorado
6,804 posts, read 9,350,606 times
Reputation: 8825

Advertisements

I disapprove of Obama and I disapproved of Bush too. I don't think I'm the only one. Disapproving of Obama (or belonging to a tea party group) doesn't automatically mean that one is/was a Bush supporter.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-07-2010, 12:36 PM
 
Location: Oklahoma City
757 posts, read 802,887 times
Reputation: 238
Obama is including the cost of the 2 wars Bush started in his budget. Bush never did. Bush funded his "wars" though supplementals. Fuzzy math or lies you decide.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jadex View Post
Hey remember when Obama said Bushs debt was bad? Guess Obama debt is good even if its more then Bushs that he complained about
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2010, 12:41 PM
 
23,838 posts, read 23,121,445 times
Reputation: 9409
Quote:
Originally Posted by okccowboy View Post
W expanded the Federal Government more than any President before him. Bush also doubled the Federal debt. The cumulative debt of the United States under Bush in the last 8 completed fiscal years was approximately $4.3 trillion, or about 43% of the total national debt of ~$10.0 trillion as of September 2008. Where were the tea partiers then? I guess if Obama were a white Republican there would be no tea parties.
There was a Tea Party. It was called the National Tea Party For Revenge And Retaliation for September 11, 2001. And the whole nation was a participant.

War is not cheap. And sometimes its necessary.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2010, 12:44 PM
 
125 posts, read 282,141 times
Reputation: 122
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC View Post
There was a Tea Party. It was called the National Tea Party For Revenge And Retaliation for September 11, 2001. And the whole nation was a participant.

War is not cheap. And sometimes its necessary.
so you're saying the Iraq war was necessary?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2010, 12:52 PM
 
Location: New Jersey
4,085 posts, read 8,787,372 times
Reputation: 2691
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC View Post
There was a Tea Party. It was called the National Tea Party For Revenge And Retaliation for September 11, 2001. And the whole nation was a participant.

War is not cheap. And sometimes its necessary.
Yes, but it help when you fight the person who attacked you instead of using the attack to go after someone that you hate who wasn't involved.

If Bob is always attacking me and one day puts me in the hospital, I'm not going to go after Steve who has never attacked me, no matter how much I don't like Steve. I'm going to go after Bob, if my goal is to protect myself.

But that's not what Bush did, he went after Iraq and let Bin Laden go free. Bush LIED to all of us in the NY/NJ metro area when he told us that he'd "smoke him out" (Bin Laden) and get him "dead or alive". He told those lies and then within a few months admitted he didn't care where Bin Laden was, didn't worry about him, and instead wanted to go after Iraq, and he made up lies about fictitious WMD to try to justify it. He's a lying jerk and the people who continued to support him once his lies were obvious are equally lying jerks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2010, 12:58 PM
 
Location: Oklahoma City
757 posts, read 802,887 times
Reputation: 238
Iraq did not attack the US on 9/11.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC View Post
There was a Tea Party. It was called the National Tea Party For Revenge And Retaliation for September 11, 2001. And the whole nation was a participant.

War is not cheap. And sometimes its necessary.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2010, 01:02 PM
 
23,838 posts, read 23,121,445 times
Reputation: 9409
Quote:
Originally Posted by okccowboy View Post
Iraq did not attack the US on 9/11.
Niether did Afghanistan.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2010, 01:03 PM
 
6,022 posts, read 7,828,690 times
Reputation: 746
Quote:
Where were the tea parties when Bush 43 expanded the Federal Government?
At home cheering
Afraid
Didn't want to be called Traitors, Un-American
Wanted to wait until a liberal democrat was in office
Listening to Hannity tell them to give the president time.
Being told to not backlash against their own, just let it ride out
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2010, 01:05 PM
 
23,838 posts, read 23,121,445 times
Reputation: 9409
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmantra View Post
so you're saying the Iraq war was necessary?
I believe if you pull out a world map, and find Iraq, and then look at its relative juxtaposition to world affairs, I believe you will recognize why the United States wanted a presence in Iraq. Do I believe that Saddam was an imminent threat? Not necessarily. But I do believe that stratgically, when you look at the geographic location of Iraq, and its proximity to our stated enemies, it makes perfect sense to be there. We will always have an ally in Iraq in a strategic part of the world because of GWB.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-07-2010, 01:08 PM
 
6,022 posts, read 7,828,690 times
Reputation: 746
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC View Post
Niether did Afghanistan.
exactly so how do you declare a war on terrorist?
also U support iraq but there were no Iraqis attacking America. the iraqi government did not declare war on the US and u supported it why.

Do you oppose the afghan-war and why and no i do not suport the war
war on terror is the stupidest thing an American president can do. war on terror is a human lifetime event

i kinda wish palin will become 2012 so she herself can see that you cannot defeat terror cells in the middle east. russia knew that as well. people all over those parts of asia will help their muslim brethen
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

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:44 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top