To our liberal friends

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

So I did a search for the origins of this list since Joseph conveniently left out any link...

That list has been floating around on the internetz for awhile now. It was started even before Obama's first 100 days and apparently someone keeps building on the list.

I found these comments on Slate where some schmuck posted them there. The responses are golden.

......

Tom Fritz comments:

"If George W. Bush had made a joke at the expense of the Special Olympics, would you have approved?"

No, but Bush wouldn't have apologized even before the naysayers started up, either.

"If George W. Bush had given Tony Blair a set of inexpensive and useless (to Tony Blair's UK video formatting) DVDs, when Tony Blair had given him a thoughtful and historically significant gift, would you have approved?"

I don't think I would have cared. BTW, digital is digital, everywhere in the world.

"If George W. Bush had given the Queen of England an iPod containing videos of his speeches, would you have approved?"

Probably not, But at least Obama appeared with the Queen in public and entered through the front door, in front of a cheering crowd, something Bush NEVER did.

"If George W. Bush had bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia, would you have approved?"

You didn't mind when Bush kissed him.

"If George W. Bush had visited Austria and made reference to the non-existent "Austrian language," would you have brushed it off as a minor slip?"

I don't know anything about this. BTW, the language of Austria is German.

"If George W. Bush had filled his cabinet and circle of advisers with people who cannot seem to keep current on their income taxes, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had ordered the firing of the CEO of a major corporation, even though he had no constitutional authority to do so, would you have approved?"

No, but his cabinet picks had much bigger problems than that.

"If George W. Bush had proposed to double the national debt, which had taken more than two centuries to accumulate, in one year, would you have approved?"

That's precisely what he did.

"If George W. Bush had then proposed to double the debt again within 10 years, would you have approved?"

That's what he did.

"So, tell me again, what is it about Obama that makes him so brilliant and impressive?

Can't think of anything? Don't worry. He's done all this in 100 days -- so you'll have slightly more than three years and eight months to come up with an answer."

We'll be ready for you in the next two election cycles!!!

"Those willing to forfeit liberty for security, will have neither."

Benjamin Franklin

Now that's a pretty odd quote for someone who advocates torture for poltical reasons.

You've been advocating forfieting your liberty to the Federal government for eight years now.

I guess you're not satisfied with the false sense of security!

.....

by Adrasteia

Dude, you must have slept through the Bush administration.

.....

by Fierrey persuit

He wasn't sleeping,he was jacking off!

http://www.slate.com/discuss/forums/thread/2789126.aspx

[zqt3344 21]

MISSION ACCOMPLISHED! YOU THE MAN GW!

The US budget for Iraq in FY 2007 came to $4,988/Iraqi. This is triple Iraq's per-person GDP. It's like spending $121,000 per person ($484,000 per family of 4) in the US

Here are some statistics on what the Iraq war (taken from think tanks such as the Brookings Institute and from the media) has cost the U.S. as of 1/21/09 due to Bush’s folly of inserting us in the middle of a civil and religious war:

4,231 U.S. soldiers killed; 30% of them younger than 22 years old

30,984 U.S. soldiers injured, with 20% of them having serious brain or spinal injuries

30% of U.S. soldiers develop serious mental health problems within 3-4 months of returning home and suicide rates in the U.S. Army hitting an all-time high in 2008

$800 billion through mid-2009 in U.S. taxpayer money

$390,000 per year to deploy just ONE U.S. soldier

142,000 – 148,000 (depending on whose statistics you use) troops in Iraq currently

513,000 U.S. troops deployed since 2003; 197,000 of those more than once and 53,000 more than 3 times

According to February, 2007 Congressional hearings (and that was two years ago so the number is probably much higher now) an estimated $10 billion wasted and mismanaged in Iraq

Now add to those staggering numbers the impact on the Iraqi people:

An estimated more than one MILLION Iraqi citizens killed as of August, 2007 (according to the Opinion Business Research survey);

the official documented number around 100,000

2.25 million Iraqis displaced inside Iraq and 2.25 million Iraqis who are now refugees in Syria or Jordan as of May 2007;

an additional 840,000 people displaced since May 2007 – a total of well over 5 MILLION Iraqis displaced

A note: Syria has refused to allow the 1.5 million who came there to work so many of the refugees have been forced to send their daughters – even as young as 5 or 6 – to clubs to dance to get money unofficially, becoming the family breadwinners. The girls make usually $20 to 30 per day in the clubs and the fathers of these girls act as pimps for work outside the club. These girls and their families are casualties of the U.S. War on Iraq.

Bush used the fear that the Iraq War would disintegrate into chaos to get re-elected in 2004. The cost to the American people of having four more years of Bush as president has been immense. He used fear again to continue to justify the now $12 billion per month the U.S. spends to keep our troops there. This is triple the burn rate of what we spent in the early years of the war. .

Ovomit has not done JACK $HIT! AND you know it, he will not get re-elected just watch and see. He is a one time charlie and fading fast!

So I did a search for the origins of this list since Joseph conveniently left out any link...

That list has been floating around on the internetz for awhile now. It was started even before Obama's first 100 days and apparently someone keeps building on the list.

I found these comments on Slate where some schmuck posted them there. The responses are golden.

......

Tom Fritz comments:

"If George W. Bush had made a joke at the expense of the Special Olympics, would you have approved?"

No, but Bush wouldn't have apologized even before the naysayers started up, either.

"If George W. Bush had given Tony Blair a set of inexpensive and useless (to Tony Blair's UK video formatting) DVDs, when Tony Blair had given him a thoughtful and historically significant gift, would you have approved?"

I don't think I would have cared. BTW, digital is digital, everywhere in the world.

"If George W. Bush had given the Queen of England an iPod containing videos of his speeches, would you have approved?"

Probably not, But at least Obama appeared with the Queen in public and entered through the front door, in front of a cheering crowd, something Bush NEVER did.

"If George W. Bush had bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia, would you have approved?"

You didn't mind when Bush kissed him.

"If George W. Bush had visited Austria and made reference to the non-existent "Austrian language," would you have brushed it off as a minor slip?"

I don't know anything about this. BTW, the language of Austria is German.

"If George W. Bush had filled his cabinet and circle of advisers with people who cannot seem to keep current on their income taxes, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had ordered the firing of the CEO of a major corporation, even though he had no constitutional authority to do so, would you have approved?"

No, but his cabinet picks had much bigger problems than that.

"If George W. Bush had proposed to double the national debt, which had taken more than two centuries to accumulate, in one year, would you have approved?"

That's precisely what he did.

"If George W. Bush had then proposed to double the debt again within 10 years, would you have approved?"

That's what he did.

"So, tell me again, what is it about Obama that makes him so brilliant and impressive?

Can't think of anything? Don't worry. He's done all this in 100 days -- so you'll have slightly more than three years and eight months to come up with an answer."

We'll be ready for you in the next two election cycles!!!

"Those willing to forfeit liberty for security, will have neither."

Benjamin Franklin

Now that's a pretty odd quote for someone who advocates torture for poltical reasons.

You've been advocating forfieting your liberty to the Federal government for eight years now.

I guess you're not satisfied with the false sense of security!

.....

by Adrasteia

Dude, you must have slept through the Bush administration.

.....

by Fierrey persuit

He wasn't sleeping,he was jacking off!

http://www.slate.com/discuss/forums/thread/2789126.aspx

[almaty 19]

lol..zgt..you are funny....

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

lol..zgt..you are funny....

He's the class clown.

[almaty 19]

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

Dubyaspeak:

This is a historic moment in history, as far as I'm concerned.

Afghanistan is the most daring and ambition mission in the history of NATO.

I think when the history of this period is written, people will realize a lot of the decisions that were made on Wall Street took place over a decade or so, before I arrived in President, during I arrived in President.

WASHINGTON POST: Why do you think bin Laden has not been caught?

DUBYA: Because he's hiding.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Dubyaspeak:

This is a historic moment in history, as far as I'm concerned.

Afghanistan is the most daring and ambition mission in the history of NATO.

I think when the history of this period is written, people will realize a lot of the decisions that were made on Wall Street took place over a decade or so, before I arrived in President, during I arrived in President.

WASHINGTON POST: Why do you think bin Laden has not been caught?

DUBYA: Because he's hiding.

"One of the very difficult parts of the decision I made on the financial crisis was to use hardworking people's money to help prevent there to be a crisis."—Washington, D.C., Jan. 12, 2009

"I'm telling you there's an enemy that would like to attack America, Americans, again. There just is. That's the reality of the world. And I wish him all the very best."—Washington, D.C., Jan. 12, 2009

"I've been in the Bible every day since I've been the president."—Washington, D.C., Nov. 12, 2008

"This thaw—took a while to thaw, it's going to take a while to unthaw."—Alexandria, La., Oct. 20, 2008

"And so, in my State of the—my State of the Union—or state—my speech to the nation, whatever you want to call it, speech to the nation—I asked Americans to give 4,000 years—4,000 hours over the next—the rest of your life—of service to America. That's what I asked—4,000 hours." —Bridgeport, Conn., April 9, 2002

"It would be a mistake for the United States Senate to allow any kind of human cloning to come out of that chamber."—Washington, D.C., April 10, 2002

"It was us vs. them, and it was clear who them was. Today, we are not so sure who the they are, but we know they're there."—Iowa Western Community College, Jan 21, 2000

Bush: "First of all, Cinco de Mayo is not the independence day. That's dieciséis de Septiembre, and ..."

Matthews: "What's that in English?"

Bush: "Fifteenth of September." (Dieciséis de Septiembre = Sept. 16)

"They misunderestimated me."—Bentonville, Ark., Nov. 6, 2000

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

What's really funny is that those weren't isolated quotes - they were prolific and there is a whole industry built up around publishing books, calendars and merchandise on Bushisms.

[Joseph & Ana 0]

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.

Nor do I.. Whats the point? Taking the direction off Obama?

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.

Its not centrist to take over everything, and Obama has said plenty of gaffes without help from Biden.

[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.

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.

Nonsense. Your argument is that the debt is so big now that its impossible for Obama to double or triple it because that would mean it will have to go to 20 trillion. So therefore he's off the hook for 1.5 trillion so far, and as Harry Reid just admitted coming up to 3 trillion after the healthcare BS is implemented.

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.

Haha its funny how in order to win an argument with a liberal (based on their terms) you have to cite all sources for each claim (which liberals do not) and when you do cite the sources, they are attacked. You people are so braindead it isn't funny.

[Joseph & Ana 0]

So I did a search for the origins of this list since Joseph conveniently left out any link...

That list has been floating around on the internetz for awhile now. It was started even before Obama's first 100 days and apparently someone keeps building on the list.

I found these comments on Slate where some schmuck posted them there. The responses are golden.

......

Tom Fritz comments:

"If George W. Bush had made a joke at the expense of the Special Olympics, would you have approved?"

No, but Bush wouldn't have apologized even before the naysayers started up, either.

"If George W. Bush had given Tony Blair a set of inexpensive and useless (to Tony Blair's UK video formatting) DVDs, when Tony Blair had given him a thoughtful and historically significant gift, would you have approved?"

I don't think I would have cared. BTW, digital is digital, everywhere in the world.

"If George W. Bush had given the Queen of England an iPod containing videos of his speeches, would you have approved?"

Probably not, But at least Obama appeared with the Queen in public and entered through the front door, in front of a cheering crowd, something Bush NEVER did.

"If George W. Bush had bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia, would you have approved?"

You didn't mind when Bush kissed him.

"If George W. Bush had visited Austria and made reference to the non-existent "Austrian language," would you have brushed it off as a minor slip?"

I don't know anything about this. BTW, the language of Austria is German.

"If George W. Bush had filled his cabinet and circle of advisers with people who cannot seem to keep current on their income taxes, would you have approved?

If George W. Bush had ordered the firing of the CEO of a major corporation, even though he had no constitutional authority to do so, would you have approved?"

No, but his cabinet picks had much bigger problems than that.

"If George W. Bush had proposed to double the national debt, which had taken more than two centuries to accumulate, in one year, would you have approved?"

That's precisely what he did.

"If George W. Bush had then proposed to double the debt again within 10 years, would you have approved?"

That's what he did.

"So, tell me again, what is it about Obama that makes him so brilliant and impressive?

Can't think of anything? Don't worry. He's done all this in 100 days -- so you'll have slightly more than three years and eight months to come up with an answer."

We'll be ready for you in the next two election cycles!!!

"Those willing to forfeit liberty for security, will have neither."

Benjamin Franklin

Now that's a pretty odd quote for someone who advocates torture for poltical reasons.

You've been advocating forfieting your liberty to the Federal government for eight years now.

I guess you're not satisfied with the false sense of security!

.....

by Adrasteia

Dude, you must have slept through the Bush administration.

.....

by Fierrey persuit

He wasn't sleeping,he was jacking off!

http://www.slate.com/discuss/forums/thread/2789126.aspx

Where's your sources and footnotes for each claim?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Nor do I.. Whats the point? Taking the direction off Obama?

If, as has been claimed on here innumerable times there is no major areas of difference between the two parties in their approach to the big issues, then what is the point of complaining about it in such a way as to suggest that people should come to the defence of either side?

I'm not a Democrat, I didn't vote for Obama nor do I have no particular emotional investment in him, nor feel any need to defend him.

I do however find serious fault in your arguments - such as you presented in the OP which amount to a litany of hyperbole and lies.

There are certainly legitimate criticisms of Obama, yet a discussion of those isn't possible with the likes of you, Joe. Sorry to disappoint.

Edited October 20, 2009 by Gene Hunt

[Joseph & Ana 0]

What's really funny is that those weren't isolated quotes - they were prolific and there is a whole industry built up around publishing books, calendars and merchandise on Bushisms.

As there will be for Obamaisms..

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

What's really funny is that those weren't isolated quotes - they were prolific and there is a whole industry built up around publishing books, calendars and merchandise on Bushisms.

As there will be for Obamaisms..

I guess we'll see.

[Joseph & Ana 0]

Nor do I.. Whats the point? Taking the direction off Obama?

If, as has been claimed on here innumerable times there is no major areas of difference between the two parties in their approach to the big issues, then what is the point of complaining about it in such a way as to suggest that people should come to the defence of either side?

I'm not a Democrat, I didn't vote for Obama nor do I have no particular emotional investment in him, nor feel any need to defend him.

I do however find serious fault in your arguments - such as you presented in the OP which amount to a litany of hyperbole and lies.

There are certainly legitimate criticisms of Obama, yet a discussion of those isn't possible with the likes of you, Joe. Sorry to disappoint.

There is plenty of GWB to criticize as well - however my posts have more to do with the hypocrisy of those in power now than it is with those that were in power. I know you understand that, but you want to make it all about criticizing republicans.