To our liberal friends

[nowhereman 1]

It says a lot that someone would put silly gaffes ahead of a war that has bankrupted the country and destroyed millions of lives.

Some perspective is clearly lacking.

Still waiting on an answer.

The answer is Obama has made mistakes & he hasn't accomplished anything significant to this point, but he is still in the first year of his tenure. On the flip side Bush was a decent President (I'd give him a C) during his first term but absolutely awful during his second term (clearly an F). Basically Obama gets an Incomplete to this point and Bush was overall a D.

If you want to talk about hypocrites then look at everyone who gave Bush a pass but now bashes Obama for every single thing he does or says.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

It says a lot that someone would put silly gaffes ahead of a war that has bankrupted the country and destroyed millions of lives.

Some perspective is clearly lacking.

Still waiting on an answer.

The answer is that you spend more time thinking about Obama than I do, and less time on the quality of your criticisms.

[Joseph & Ana 0]

The question was, what has Obama done that makes him so brilliant and impressive?

Well, from a fiscal and budget perspective, he won't be nearly as brilliant and impressive as the Gipper who managed to triple the national debt during just two terms - and that without any wars going on. He'll probably be almost as brilliant and impressive as W on that front who actually managed to swing the positive trend the national debt was on (so positive that the debt clock was turned off before he took office only to be switched on again right quick thereafter) and put it on a trajectory to more than double it over the course of a decade and actually doubling it during his two terms in office.

So, Joe, I'll give you that, the GOP still remains the most brilliant and impressive political force when it comes to recklessly racking up the national debt. Nobody will come even close.

Uh actually Obama has done worse.

It says a lot that someone would put silly gaffes ahead of a war that has bankrupted the country and destroyed millions of lives.

Some perspective is clearly lacking.

Still waiting on an answer.

The answer is that you spend more time thinking about Obama than I do, and less time on the quality of your criticisms.

So still no answer?

It says a lot that someone would put silly gaffes ahead of a war that has bankrupted the country and destroyed millions of lives.

Some perspective is clearly lacking.

Still waiting on an answer.

The answer is Obama has made mistakes & he hasn't accomplished anything significant to this point, but he is still in the first year of his tenure. On the flip side Bush was a decent President (I'd give him a C) during his first term but absolutely awful during his second term (clearly an F). Basically Obama gets an Incomplete to this point and Bush was overall a D.

If you want to talk about hypocrites then look at everyone who gave Bush a pass but now bashes Obama for every single thing he does or says.

Actually, Obama has done a lot of the same things Bush did and was bashed for. But the difference is that Obama will always get a pass.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Nope Joe, no obligation to play silly games with a guy who would put "incorrectly formatted dvds" over a fantastically expensive and destructive war.

There's just no reasoning with that kind of "special".

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

The question was, what has Obama done that makes him so brilliant and impressive?

Well, from a fiscal and budget perspective, he won't be nearly as brilliant and impressive as the Gipper who managed to triple the national debt during just two terms - and that without any wars going on. He'll probably be almost as brilliant and impressive as W on that front who actually managed to swing the positive trend the national debt was on (so positive that the debt clock was turned off before he took office only to be switched on again right quick thereafter) and put it on a trajectory to more than double it over the course of a decade and actually doubling it during his two terms in office.

So, Joe, I'll give you that, the GOP still remains the most brilliant and impressive political force when it comes to recklessly racking up the national debt. Nobody will come even close.

Uh actually Obama has done worse.

Obama has already tripled or at least more than doubled the national debt? Is that what your crystal ball is telling you? Seeing that he's been in office not quite 10 months yet and seeing that his first FY just started a couple of weeks ago, I'd say the jury on how he is doing on the fiscal front is still out. Well, except for those - like yourself - that want to judge before any evidence can be presented.

[Ban Hammer 13,337]

It says a lot that someone would put silly gaffes ahead of a war that has bankrupted the country and destroyed millions of lives.

Some perspective is clearly lacking.

Still waiting on an answer.

you'll be waiting a long time. it's easier to attack the message or messenger for some.

[Joseph & Ana 0]

The question was, what has Obama done that makes him so brilliant and impressive?

Well, from a fiscal and budget perspective, he won't be nearly as brilliant and impressive as the Gipper who managed to triple the national debt during just two terms - and that without any wars going on. He'll probably be almost as brilliant and impressive as W on that front who actually managed to swing the positive trend the national debt was on (so positive that the debt clock was turned off before he took office only to be switched on again right quick thereafter) and put it on a trajectory to more than double it over the course of a decade and actually doubling it during his two terms in office.

So, Joe, I'll give you that, the GOP still remains the most brilliant and impressive political force when it comes to recklessly racking up the national debt. Nobody will come even close.

Uh actually Obama has done worse.

Obama has already tripled or at least more than doubled the national debt? Is that what your crystal ball is telling you? Seeing that he's been in office not quite 10 months yet and seeing that his first FY just started a couple of weeks ago, I'd say the jury on how he is doing on the fiscal front is still out. Well, except for those - like yourself - that want to judge before any evidence can be presented.

Small minds...

So you're saying that the deficit going to 1 and half trillion is ok because the national debt is already 11 trillion. So technically he didn't triple the national debt... Your logic is idiotic.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Clearly some would rather open up old arguments

The question was, what has Obama done that makes him so brilliant and impressive?

Well, from a fiscal and budget perspective, he won't be nearly as brilliant and impressive as the Gipper who managed to triple the national debt during just two terms - and that without any wars going on. He'll probably be almost as brilliant and impressive as W on that front who actually managed to swing the positive trend the national debt was on (so positive that the debt clock was turned off before he took office only to be switched on again right quick thereafter) and put it on a trajectory to more than double it over the course of a decade and actually doubling it during his two terms in office.

So, Joe, I'll give you that, the GOP still remains the most brilliant and impressive political force when it comes to recklessly racking up the national debt. Nobody will come even close.

Uh actually Obama has done worse.

Obama has already tripled or at least more than doubled the national debt? Is that what your crystal ball is telling you? Seeing that he's been in office not quite 10 months yet and seeing that his first FY just started a couple of weeks ago, I'd say the jury on how he is doing on the fiscal front is still out. Well, except for those - like yourself - that want to judge before any evidence can be presented.

Small minds...

So you're saying that the deficit going to 1 and half trillion is ok because the national debt is already 11 trillion. So technically he didn't triple the national debt... Your logic is idiotic.

I don't believe McCain would have done anything differently.

[nowhereman 1]

I don't believe McCain would have done anything differently.

Agree 100%. If McCain was elected you would have the Democrats fighting him every step of the way (just like the GOP with Obama) and Palin would be saying stupid stuff just like Biden. There is so much animosity between the parties right now that it's almost impossible to get anything done. In fact Obama even has significant resistance from his own party (i.e. the liberals) because for the most part he is promoting a centrist agenda.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I don't believe McCain would have done anything differently.

Agree 100%. If McCain was elected you would have the Democrats fighting him every step of the way (just like the GOP with Obama) and Palin would be saying stupid stuff just like Biden. There is so much animosity between the parties right now that it's almost impossible to get anything done. In fact Obama even has significant resistance from his own party (i.e. the liberals) because for the most part he is promoting a centrist agenda.

That's as I understand it too - hence the protests last week in San Francisco.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

The question was, what has Obama done that makes him so brilliant and impressive?

Well, from a fiscal and budget perspective, he won't be nearly as brilliant and impressive as the Gipper who managed to triple the national debt during just two terms - and that without any wars going on. He'll probably be almost as brilliant and impressive as W on that front who actually managed to swing the positive trend the national debt was on (so positive that the debt clock was turned off before he took office only to be switched on again right quick thereafter) and put it on a trajectory to more than double it over the course of a decade and actually doubling it during his two terms in office.

So, Joe, I'll give you that, the GOP still remains the most brilliant and impressive political force when it comes to recklessly racking up the national debt. Nobody will come even close.

Uh actually Obama has done worse.

Obama has already tripled or at least more than doubled the national debt? Is that what your crystal ball is telling you? Seeing that he's been in office not quite 10 months yet and seeing that his first FY just started a couple of weeks ago, I'd say the jury on how he is doing on the fiscal front is still out. Well, except for those - like yourself - that want to judge before any evidence can be presented.

Small minds...

So you're saying that the deficit going to 1 and half trillion is ok because the national debt is already 11 trillion. So technically he didn't triple the national debt... Your logic is idiotic.

Ah yes, nothing but silly rants left when your "case" falls flat. Small minds indeed if can't even master simple math which, quite obviously, you can't.

The fact of the matter is that the national debt was less than a trillion dollars when the Gipper took office and that he left with the national debt being just under 3 trillion. 1 * 3 = 3 - i.e. the Gipper tripled the debt in 8 years. The debt was 5 trillion when W took office and 10 trillion when he left. 5 * 2 = 10 - i.e. W doubled the debt in 8 years.

Those are the numbers. Refute them if you can but the mere fact that they are inconvenient for you and blow a big, fat hole into your ridiculous argument doesn't make them invalid.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The house of cards that it is trickle-down economics

[one...two...tree 2,762]

They won't answer the questions because they know they are hypocrits.

Joseph - your list is full of it and you know it. Cite your sources and then lets break down each claim on that list. I noticed you didn't include the link, but even the original author of that list better have footnotes to each claim along with the sources if you want someone like me to even bother to argue with you about it. You'd never make it very far as a trial lawyer if this is how you'd argue your case - on hearsay. Fail.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

They won't answer the questions because they know they are hypocrits.

Joseph - your list is full of it and you know it. Cite your sources and then lets break down each claim on that list. I noticed you didn't include the link, but even the original author of that list better have footnotes to each claim along with the sources if you want someone like me to even bother to argue with you about it. You'd never make it very far as a trial lawyer if this is how you'd argue your case - on hearsay. Fail.

Why?

Its hardly an expert or searching analysis as much as a compilation of tabloidy blog headlines that have emerged over the first year.

Edited October 20, 2009 by Gene Hunt

[spookyturtle 9,465]

Joe, maybe you should consider moving to Australia?