Poll: Republicans more annoying when in power or out of power playing the victim card

[MrJayremmie]

Re: Poll: Republicans more annoying when in power or out of power playing the victim

OK, first off thank you for defending your position.

Now...

--You talk about recessions. You don't bring up the 28 consecutive quarters of growth, even after the body blow of 9/11. I'd like to see President Obama rack up the same kind of record.

I'd also like to see Obama as president starting in 2001 and see what he could have done. You'd can bet he wouldn't be in Iraq, which would have saved us hundreds of billions of money we borrowed. I actually do think that once this recession is over (and imo we are on our way out, as Germany, France and Hong Kong are already done with it) we will see sustained growth, and hopefully more regulation will prevent such things from happening again, at least as severe. But i'm pretty skeptical of that, so I did say "hope".

--President Bush's largest deficit was roughly 1/4 what President Obama is going to hit in his first year. http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/...l#cnnSTCOther1 Hell, in CNN's wildest dreams, which painted the Bush Administration in the worst light possible, they only spoke about a $482B deficit. http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/...cit/index.html Worse yet, President Obama's $1-$2T deficits are going to be structural, not unique. If he gets what he wants on health care, they're going to sprial upward further.

This is very deceptive because you have to keep in mind Bush inherited a surplus. So taking a surplus to hundred of billions in deficit is different then taking a deficit and expanding it. I'm also hesitant to say that a healthcare reform would further the deficit when you take into account the fact that our healthcare costs were continuing to go up. The fact that we spend more on healthcare then any other country in the world, yet have tens of millions uninsured is a problem.

Also, if Obama kept the exact same policies as Bush and didn't change a thing, the deficit would continue to grow either way. The thing Obama did differently was the stimulous package. I hate to talk about Obama "inheriting" a debt and a bad economy, but lets look at this rationally and realize what each president had at the time of inauguration.

--President Bush's policies brought us out of the recession he inherited from President Clinton. President Obama's policies have worsened the recession he inherited from President Bush.

Actually the economy is beginning to stabilize. The market has gone up significantly. The unemployment has slowed. And the comparison of severity of the two recessions is pretty lack, considering one was borderline depression.

--Like it or not, after getting hit by a terrorist attack on 9/11/2001, there wasn't another attack on US soil afterward. Do you think it's because the terrorists didn't try? Instead, they went after softer targets.

And that is awesome. I think the American people should be greatful to the Bush administration for that. The problem was what policies he put in place to keep us safe, as I believe it could have been done in different ways more in line with the constitution. But lets not act like the greatest attack on American soil didn't happen under his watch.

--You can disagree if the reasons for going to war were sound, but 52MM people are now free in Iraq and Afghanistan, freed from two of the most brutal dictatorships in the world.

I'm for Afghanistan. I'm against Iraq. It was none of our business as Sadaam posed no direct threat to America and had nothing to do with 9/11. We also strengthened Iran by taking him out. And we were NOT treated as liberators, like Bush/Cheney said we would be, lol. To go at it alone, and to engage in nation-building and occupation is simply silly. Going in with no exit strategy was pretty genius as well.

--Our unemployment rate is headed for double-digits. President Bush's worst unemployment rate in one month was 7.2%. http://www.swivel.com/data_sets/spreadsheet/1017326 That was his WORST. President Obama would throw a party in Grant Park if we got down to 7.2%.

Again, and are you saying if Bush was in office the unemployment rate would be lower than it is? Because I certainly don't think so. Unemployment is a huge problem, but the circumstances are far different as the unemployment was high going in to Obama's presidency, and was going up whether he liked it or not. Bush never had a recession like this, and it wasn't because of his policies.

--President Bush was not liked by Chirac and Schroeder, who undercut him at every turn. It seems the French and German people didn't like them either, since Sarkozy and Merkel replaced them, with both countries moving to the right. It seems as if Britain is going to follow in the footsteps of their continential neighbors. As for President Obama, it's easy to be liked--just apologize for your predecesor standing on principle. In other words, just prostrate yourself in front of people whose goals are counter to yours, and everyone will like you. Do I wish L*ker fans to like me? All I have to do is wear a K*be jersey and talk about how great he is and how much I hate the Blazers.

Search for "Bush Bully" on google. Search for "How the US and Great Britain became so Isolated" on YouTube. America's influence worldwide has become significantly less over the past 8 years. And it is silly to think that the European people voted their leaders out because their stance on Bush, as Bush's popularity throughout Europe was incredibly low. His hostile foreign policy was a joke. His "My way or the highway" approach failed miserably. War was not the last option as it should have been.

--President Bush was thought of as highly partisan, but it doesn't compare to President Obama. President Bush reached across the aisle and agreed on legislation with Ted Kennedy on an education bill. That was when the Democrats were in the minority in the Senate. Could you see President Obama working with Jim DeMint? Me either.

OK, lets look at both sides of the isle. You think the republicans are interested in working with Obama? Anything to further his popularity? LOL! There are e-mails going around the GOP about opposing legislation to break Obama... its all politics. To act like Obama hasn't tried to reach out is ridiculous. Each side needs to give a little here. Many on the left think the president has no balls for wanting to always reach a bi-partisan decision.

--You make me giggle when you complain about President Bush expanding the government as a defense of President Obama. Seriously, if you're going to criticize someone, you need to be consistent. I hated President Bush's expansion of the Federal Government, and I spoke up about it. If you hate growth in the Federal Government, President Obama's policies should enrage you.

I haven't been to big of a fan of how Obama has approached many things, but even he didn't reach Bush's level on expanding government and stripping our rights. And Bush was a "conservative"? Give me a break. At least people knew what we were getting with Obama for a most part as he is a democrat. Bush talked about less government and a humble foreign policy...

I backed Bush 100% after 9/11, as did most of the country. The world was behind him as well. Its bullshit where he was taking this country.

 

[maxiep]

Re: Poll: Republicans more annoying when in power or out of power playing the victim

OK, first off thank you for defending your position.

Now...



I'd also like to see Obama as president starting in 2001 and see what he could have done. You'd can bet he wouldn't be in Iraq, which would have saved us hundreds of billions of money we borrowed. I actually do think that once this recession is over (and imo we are on our way out, as Germany, France and Hong Kong are already done with it) we will see sustained growth, and hopefully more regulation will prevent such things from happening again, at least as severe. But i'm pretty skeptical of that, so I did say "hope".

We know with a great deal of certainty. President Bush inherited a recession, too. President Obama would have pursued a stimulus package and tried again for socialized health care. Massive deficits, high unemployment and the risk of inflation.

There are two kinds of recession results--V shaped and L shaped. This one seems more like the Japanese recovery, if and when it begins.

This is very deceptive because you have to keep in mind Bush inherited a surplus. So taking a surplus to hundred of billions in deficit is different then taking a deficit and expanding it. I'm also hesitant to say that a healthcare reform would further the deficit when you take into account the fact that our healthcare costs were continuing to go up. The fact that we spend more on healthcare then any other country in the world, yet have tens of millions uninsured is a problem.

It's not deceptive, it's simple math. The difference between President Clinton's surplus and President Bush's first year in office was $286B. The difference between President Bush's deficit and President Obama's first year in office appears as if it may be over $1.6T. How is something almost six times bigger at all "deceptive"?

As for health care, everyone gets treated. The problem is with freeriding on the insured, not health care. Get your facts straight. And based on Medicare, you can predict with certainty that cost overruns in healthcare would explode our already ridiculous deficit.

Also, if Obama kept the exact same policies as Bush and didn't change a thing, the deficit would continue to grow either way. The thing Obama did differently was the stimulous package. I hate to talk about Obama "inheriting" a debt and a bad economy, but lets look at this rationally and realize what each president had at the time of inauguration.

Let's look at it shall we? Let me take you back to January, 1981. President Reagan inherited a situation President Obama wouldn't have traded for a place on Mount Rushmore. Tax cuts, focusing on inflation and deregulation paved the way for 20 years of prosperity.

Actually the economy is beginning to stabilize. The market has gone up significantly. The unemployment has slowed. And the comparison of severity of the two recessions is pretty lack, considering one was borderline depression.

Stabilize? Really? You think July's numbers show an economy stabilizing? Look again. We hit a ledge in June and now we're over the cliff again. And this was a garden variety recession until President Obama's policies caused a deepening of it. There's a playbook on how to get out of a recession, and this strategy was the exact opposite.

And that is awesome. I think the American people should be greatful to the Bush administration for that. The problem was what policies he put in place to keep us safe, as I believe it could have been done in different ways more in line with the constitution. But lets not act like the greatest attack on American soil didn't happen under his watch.

What was not in line with the Constitution?

Do we blame FDR for Pearl Harbor? Do we blame President Kennedy for letting missles onto Cuban soil? It was an intelligence cockup to be sure, but he reacted well.

I'm for Afghanistan. I'm against Iraq. It was none of our business as Sadaam posed no direct threat to America and had nothing to do with 9/11.

20/20 hindsight is a luxury President Bush didn't have. Every single major intelligence agency on the planet believed Iraq had WMDs and were willing to give them to Al Qaeda.

We also strengthened Iran by taking him out.

Well, there was an election in Iran that seemingly put a "moderate" in power, basically rebutting the path Iran had been on. It seems the Iranians wanted the kind of openness their neighbors had in Iraq. Furthermore, it seems under President Obama, they're as emboldened as ever. We chose to intervene in Honduras, but not in Iran.

And we were NOT treated as liberators, like Bush/Cheney said we would be, lol. To go at it alone, and to engage in nation-building and occupation is simply silly. Going in with no exit strategy was pretty genius as well.

The Baathists fought an effective guerilla war along with Al Qaeda against us. And the people were cowed, as they had been for three decades. Today, Iraq is on the right path. Our exit strategy was always to set up some sort of representative government and hand power back to the Iraqis. In that sense, it was no different than what we did with the Germans or the Japanese. Also, we didn't go it alone, we had allies. Check your facts.

Again, and are you saying if Bush was in office the unemployment rate would be lower than it is? Because I certainly don't think so. Unemployment is a huge problem, but the circumstances are far different as the unemployment was high going in to Obama's presidency, and was going up whether he liked it or not. Bush never had a recession like this, and it wasn't because of his policies.

The private sector is the one that can most easily move the unemployment rate. Lower taxes and you increase consumer confidence and businesses plans for growth. Companies that are optimistic and growing hire. Remember when President Obama said if we didn't pass the "stimulus" bill immediately, the unemployment rate would go as high at 8%? Well, 8% looks pretty sweet right about now.

Search for "Bush Bully" on google. Search for "How the US and Great Britain became so Isolated" on YouTube. America's influence worldwide has become significantly less over the past 8 years. And it is silly to think that the European people voted their leaders out because their stance on Bush, as Bush's popularity throughout Europe was incredibly low. His hostile foreign policy was a joke. His "My way or the highway" approach failed miserably. War was not the last option as it should have been.

Yeah, I remember when I was in grad school. I based most of my research off of catchphrases I entered into google and YouTube. Perhaps that's why I'm ABD.

President Bush's goal wasn't to be popular; it was to be right. I lived in Europe during the Bush Administration, pre 9/11. He was ridiculed then. When I went back after 9/11, he was viewed as a "warmonger" among most of my friends. The bottom line is that we've done too good of a job in neutering Germany and the rest of continential Western Europe. They've seen so much war, they don't see the point of it any more. They'd rather surrender than fight. Ask them what's worth fighting and dying for, and their answer will more often than not be "nothing".

They've gone so far down the road of moral equivalence, they can't recognize right from wrong. If nothing can be criticized, everything has to be respected. Honor killings? Subjugating women? Genital mutilation? Meh, that's just their culture. It's no better or worse than ours.

Mostly, however, they're racist. I know, that's a shocking declaration. However, they don't give a shit about the living hell Iraqis lived under the Baathists, because many Europeans has a soft superiority about themselves. Ask Pakistanis in the UK what they think of "Paki bashing". Ask Turks in Germany what they think of their treatment in the Fatherland. They're a willing underclass.

The Germans and French circumvented the "Oil For Food" program to help Saddam stay in power. They buy plenty of oil from Iran. They live with terrorists and extremists all around them. Their goal is not to annoy them too much and hope they don't strike in Europe. Our strategy was different. Find them and kill them. We have a fundamental difference with much of Western Europe.

OK, lets look at both sides of the isle. You think the republicans are interested in working with Obama? Anything to further his popularity? LOL! There are e-mails going around the GOP about opposing legislation to break Obama... its all politics. To act like Obama hasn't tried to reach out is ridiculous. Each side needs to give a little here. Many on the left think the president has no balls for wanting to always reach a bi-partisan decision.

Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe and Arlen Specter are interested in working with President Obama. In fact, Sen. Spector liked the President so much he joined his party! The Republicans have begged to have a seat at the table with President Obama. However, the President's idea of compromise is "see things my way or else you're getting nothing."

I haven't been to big of a fan of how Obama has approached many things, but even he didn't reach Bush's level on expanding government and stripping our rights. And Bush was a "conservative"? Give me a break. At least people knew what we were getting with Obama for a most part as he is a democrat. Bush talked about less government and a humble foreign policy...

President Bush wasn't a small government conservative. He was a social conservative. There's a huge difference. I despised his profligate spending during his Administration, but right now President Obama makes him look like Andrew Jackson.

I backed Bush 100% after 9/11, as did most of the country. The world was behind him as well. Its bullshit where he was taking this country.

Where was he taking this country? It's throwaway lines like this one that makes me believe that people on the Left simply hated him so much they lost the ability to be rational.

 

[MrJayremmie]

Re: Poll: Republicans more annoying when in power or out of power playing the victim

Oh dear. I'm not going to answer this all, because I simply don't have the time, but let me see what I can do in the time I have.

We know with a great deal of certainty. President Bush inherited a recession, too. President Obama would have pursued a stimulus package and tried again for socialized health care. Massive deficits, high unemployment and the risk of inflation.

Not necessarily. How do we know that with a great deal of certainty? How do we know that Obama didn't pass a stimulus because of the fact that our country was on the verge of collapse? Again, the situations are incredibly different. He would have pushed for healthcare reform whether in a recession or not, and this country needs healthcare reform. Also, like I said, I believe that if Obama would have been president from 01-09, that our deficit would be lower. We would probably still have a deficit, but a very manageable deficit. Not going into Iraq would have definitely helped.

He also may have pushed for more financial regulation, which could have helped with this catastrophe.

As for health care, everyone gets treated. The problem is with freeriding on the insured, not health care. Get your facts straight. And based on Medicare, you can predict with certainty that cost overruns in healthcare would explode our already ridiculous deficit.

14,000 people a day are losing their health coverage. 18,000 die each year because they don't have healthcare coverage. And 750k bankruptcies per year in America are due to health care costs, thats over 2k per day. Give me a break.

This country needs healthcare reform considering how much we spend on it and the fact that almost 50 million Americans are uninsured. When the uninsured go to the ER, who pays for it? It doesn't have to be like any other countries healthcare system, but something has to be done.

Stabilize? Really? You think July's numbers show an economy stabilizing? Look again. We hit a ledge in June and now we're over the cliff again. And this was a garden variety recession until President Obama's policies caused a deepening of it. There's a playbook on how to get out of a recession, and this strategy was the exact opposite.

Maybe stabilize was a strong word, but we are beginning the recovery and the bottom has passed. The fed recently talked it, and many reports have been getting better.

There's a playbook on how to get out of a recession, and this strategy was the exact opposite.

Really? Are you saying that its unanimous that all economists were against the stimulus and said that the government spending to make up for the fall of consumer spending was the absolute opposite way to go? Because I sure heard many saying a stimulus was the correct way to go. I guess we will see over the next several months how the stimulus does what it is intended to do.

What was not in line with the Constitution?

The Patriot Act, Torture, etc, etc...

Do we blame FDR for Pearl Harbor? Do we blame President Kennedy for letting missles onto Cuban soil? It was an intelligence cockup to be sure, but he reacted well.

All I said was lets not act like the largest single attack on American soil didn't happen under Bush's watch. I don't blame him, but I also get very frustrated with all the warning signs.

20/20 hindsight is a luxury President Bush didn't have. Every single major intelligence agency on the planet believed Iraq had WMDs and were willing to give them to Al Qaeda.

Yes, because Iraq and Al-Qaeda were connected, right?

The Baathists fought an effective guerilla war along with Al Qaeda against us. And the people were cowed, as they had been for three decades. Today, Iraq is on the right path. Our exit strategy was always to set up some sort of representative government and hand power back to the Iraqis. In that sense, it was no different than what we did with the Germans or the Japanese. Also, we didn't go it alone, we had allies. Check your facts.

You are right, we are trying to do in Iraq what we did in Germany and Japan. And what a silly strategy it is. We don't have the money to do it, and we shouldn't be in nation building. If we were to go after Sadaam, then fine. But rebuilding the country is something I know many people did not want to happen.

And about the allies, the UN didn't sanction the war. NATO wouldn't go in with us. This was a "coalition of the willing" with pretty much our closest allies who wanted to stay on our good side, and whose population were EXTREMELY against it.

The private sector is the one that can most easily move the unemployment rate. Lower taxes and you increase consumer confidence and businesses plans for growth. Companies that are optimistic and growing hire. Remember when President Obama said if we didn't pass the "stimulus" bill immediately, the unemployment rate would go as high at 8%? Well, 8% looks pretty sweet right about now.

I am not denying this. They totally fucked up when they said that and it made them look like idiots. There was some serious deception going on to pass that stimulus and now they are using the line "Well, we found out the recession we inherited was much deeper than anyone could have ever imagined"... LOL! seriously, give me a break.

President Bush's goal wasn't to be popular; it was to be right. I lived in Europe during the Bush Administration, pre 9/11. He was ridiculed then. When I went back after 9/11, he was viewed as a "warmonger" among most of my friends. The bottom line is that we've done too good of a job in neutering Germany and the rest of continential Western Europe. They've seen so much war, they don't see the point of it any more. They'd rather surrender than fight. Ask them what's worth fighting and dying for, and their answer will more often than not be "nothing".

Well of course it wasn't to be popular, at least we better hope not. And he also failed on being "right", as most of the American people believed. I mean, I don't feel any more safe right now than I felt in 2000, and I feel much more of a target as an American. Anti-American hate is all over the world do to this president's foreign policy and the unflattering, uneducated approach that came across when he talked that made America look like a joke. It shouldn't be our job to be the world police, and running on a "humble foreign policy" and then acting like a complete prick to the point where many countries that were previously our allies turned away from us was super smooth.

No comment on European racism.

Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe and Arlen Specter are interested in working with President Obama. In fact, Sen. Spector liked the President so much he joined his party! The Republicans have begged to have a seat at the table with President Obama. However, the President's idea of compromise is "see things my way or else you're getting nothing."

I recently listened to an interview with Specter. He turned to democrat because he supported Obama, supported the stimulus, supported healthcare, and there is no way that the republican leadership would have forgiven him. Their goal is to break this presidents popularity, willfully reaching out to him from across the isle is a no-no.

Why don't the republicans come up with viable alternatives? Why do they have to simply just vote against everything rather than engage in healthy debate and look for compromises? "Oh, something in the stimulus worked? Cash for clunkers? I HATE IT NOW!!! WE MIGHT AS WELL HAVE CASH FOR CLUCKERS!!! WHY NOT?!?!!" (True words spoken by the 'pubs). Like I said, the president gets ripped by his own party for not doing whats right for the country (according to them) and pushing things through since many times they have the votes.

I just find it hilarious that republicans refuse to work with the other side on pretty much anything and then complain about the democrats lack of bi-partisanship.

Where was he taking this country? It's throwaway lines like this one that makes me believe that people on the Left simply hated him so much they lost the ability to be rational.

I don't hate Bush at all. I disliked him as a president but would have a beer with him as long as he didn't talk about politics. I strongly disliked Dick Cheney, who came across as a simply evil man in my eyes.

Bush was taking this country to unregulated greed, lesser freedoms, bigger government, more debt, too large of a military that is overfunded, hostile foreign policy, bullying the rest of the world, lying about things to fit his agenda, working on regime changes, being the world police, stretching our country to empire, and so on. The guy was a joke of a president.

 

[maxiep]

Re: Poll: Republicans more annoying when in power or out of power playing the victim

Oh dear. I'm not going to answer this all, because I simply don't have the time, but let me see what I can do in the time I have.



Not necessarily. How do we know that with a great deal of certainty? How do we know that Obama didn't pass a stimulus because of the fact that our country was on the verge of collapse? Again, the situations are incredibly different. He would have pushed for healthcare reform whether in a recession or not, and this country needs healthcare reform. Also, like I said, I believe that if Obama would have been president from 01-09, that our deficit would be lower. We would probably still have a deficit, but a very manageable deficit. Not going into Iraq would have definitely helped.

He also may have pushed for more financial regulation, which could have helped with this catastrophe.

His prescription to a recession is well documented.

14,000 people a day are losing their health coverage. 18,000 die each year because they don't have healthcare coverage. And 750k bankruptcies per year in America are due to health care costs, thats over 2k per day. Give me a break.

This country needs healthcare reform considering how much we spend on it and the fact that almost 50 million Americans are uninsured. When the uninsured go to the ER, who pays for it? It doesn't have to be like any other countries healthcare system, but something has to be done.

You're talking health insurance. That's different from health care. We spend more on it because we demand better service and higher quality. I wasn't aware that the 12-14MM illegal aliens were "Americans". When you boil the numbers down after those who are illegal, who don't think they need health insurance because they're young and healthy and who make enough money but put other priorities above buying health insurance, the number shrinks to 10-15MM. You don't undergo a radical overhaul of the best healthcare system in the world for .3%-.5% of your population.

Maybe stabilize was a strong word, but we are beginning the recovery and the bottom has passed. The fed recently talked it, and many reports have been getting better.

The worst is not behind us. We have yet to see the effect of commercial RE foreclosures, the bailout of Ginnie Mae, and the full consequence of derivative securities, not to mention the growth killing measures of cap and trade and socialized healthcare. You don't think nurses are going to lose their jobs to reduce costs? Our ratio of nurse to patient is 1:6; in countries with socialized medicine it's 1:12-1:15. Finally, what happens to our economy when inflation comes along? This recession is going to be a double dip.

Really? Are you saying that its unanimous that all economists were against the stimulus and said that the government spending to make up for the fall of consumer spending was the absolute opposite way to go? Because I sure heard many saying a stimulus was the correct way to go. I guess we will see over the next several months how the stimulus does what it is intended to do.

I'm saying a few things. First, the majority of economists out there were strongly against this spending package, because it didn't have much to do with stimulus. I'm interested, which economists did you hear that were strongly in favor of this spending package? Since you heard "many", I'm sure you'll be able to name two or three.

Second, there is never a majority with economists. All I know is that a dead weight loss like we've never seen before has been created, and that will be a drag on us all. And the crushing debt load will crowd out private investment and raise interest rates.

Third, what no one in Government understands is that there's a difference between creating work and creating a job. If you create work, it won't stimulate the economy. People will save their money to get through the part where the work ends. Job creation is something that happens in the private sector. Those are the only jobs that create a positive return to the economy.

The Patriot Act, Torture, etc, etc...

I wasn't aware The Patriot Act was deemed unconstitutional. In fact, I'm sure President Obama has extended many of the parts of the PA he criticized as a candidate.

Second, you and I likely have different definition of torture. And if you choose not to adhere to the Geneva Convention, you shouldn't expect to be covered under it when you're captured.

All I said was lets not act like the largest single attack on American soil didn't happen under Bush's watch. I don't blame him, but I also get very frustrated with all the warning signs.

Boy, it sure sounds like you're blaming him. Do you blame Clinton for refusing UBL at least twice because he couldn't construct a legal case against him?

Yes, because Iraq and Al-Qaeda were connected, right?

The saying, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" originated in that part of the world. Do you think the Baathists and the Palestinians would be allies without the Israelis?

You are right, we are trying to do in Iraq what we did in Germany and Japan. And what a silly strategy it is. We don't have the money to do it, and we shouldn't be in nation building. If we were to go after Sadaam, then fine. But rebuilding the country is something I know many people did not want to happen.

You broke it, you bought it. When you topple a regime, it's the obligation of the conquerer to impose peace. As for the strategy being "silly", exactly how many wars have Germany and Japan started since WWII?

And about the allies, the UN didn't sanction the war. NATO wouldn't go in with us. This was a "coalition of the willing" with pretty much our closest allies who wanted to stay on our good side, and whose population were EXTREMELY against it.

What's the difference between the "coalition of the willing" and any other coalition, other than they weren't obligated by a treaty to enter into a conflict?

I am not denying this. They totally fucked up when they said that and it made them look like idiots. There was some serious deception going on to pass that stimulus and now they are using the line "Well, we found out the recession we inherited was much deeper than anyone could have ever imagined"... LOL! seriously, give me a break.

Well of course it wasn't to be popular, at least we better hope not. And he also failed on being "right", as most of the American people believed. I mean, I don't feel any more safe right now than I felt in 2000, and I feel much more of a target as an American. Anti-American hate is all over the world do to this president's foreign policy and the unflattering, uneducated approach that came across when he talked that made America look like a joke. It shouldn't be our job to be the world police, and running on a "humble foreign policy" and then acting like a complete prick to the point where many countries that were previously our allies turned away from us was super smooth.

You don't think our fight against Islamic Extremism is "right"? We'll agree to disagree.

I've lived abroad after 9/11 and traveled plenty, and I feel perfectly safe. And if you knew anything, people may rail against our government, but they love Americans as people.

Clearly, you were embarrassed by President Bush. See, you fall into the peer pressure trap. Gosh, Obama is so cool! He's so hip! Europe will like us again! You can aspire to eat at the cool kids' table; I'll eat at the table where people think for themselves.

As for our job as "world police", it's the price you pay for being the only superpower left.

No comment on European racism.

Of course not. It's inconceivable to you that those high-minded folks from Europe could ever be racist. Why the continent is a big Bennetton ad!

I recently listened to an interview with Specter. He turned to democrat because he supported Obama, supported the stimulus, supported healthcare, and there is no way that the republican leadership would have forgiven him. Their goal is to break this presidents popularity, willfully reaching out to him from across the isle is a no-no.

LOL. Specter wants to be reelected and he knew he wouldn't win his primary. Did you believe Albert Speer at Nurnburg too?

As for the Republicans, thankfully the Democrats would never stoop to the level of opposing a President just to oppose them. The Democratic Party is on the rise. You don't think a Republican wouldn't want to work with President Obama and try to ride his coattails? The Republican Leadership doesn't have that kind of power over its members.

Why don't the republicans come up with viable alternatives? Why do they have to simply just vote against everything rather than engage in healthy debate and look for compromises? "Oh, something in the stimulus worked? Cash for clunkers? I HATE IT NOW!!! WE MIGHT AS WELL HAVE CASH FOR CLUCKERS!!! WHY NOT?!?!!" (True words spoken by the 'pubs). Like I said, the president gets ripped by his own party for not doing whats right for the country (according to them) and pushing things through since many times they have the votes.

Could it be that they don't want the government to be involved at all? How do you make a negative proposal? You create laws that say where the government isn't involved? Isn't that what the Constitution and the Bill of Rights outlines? Government has specific duties, everything else is none of its business.

I just find it hilarious that republicans refuse to work with the other side on pretty much anything and then complain about the democrats lack of bi-partisanship.

Check the voting records. Republicans vote with Democrats all the time. And like I said, when the President believes compromise means getting everything and giving nothing, than what's the compromise?

I don't hate Bush at all. I disliked him as a president but would have a beer with him as long as he didn't talk about politics. I strongly disliked Dick Cheney, who came across as a simply evil man in my eyes.

Bush was taking this country to unregulated greed, lesser freedoms, bigger government, more debt, too large of a military that is overfunded, hostile foreign policy, bullying the rest of the world, lying about things to fit his agenda, working on regime changes, being the world police, stretching our country to empire, and so on. The guy was a joke of a president.

How is "unregulated greed" leading to "lesser freedoms"? And I'd be interested in the list of areas where President Bush lied. The guy had a lot of faults as President, but he seemed pretty comfortable with telling you exactly where he stood. The rest of that paragraph is just a set of bumper stickers that I can't take seriously.

 

[Denny Crane]

Re: Poll: Republicans more annoying when in power or out of power playing the victim

http://www.gallup.com/poll/122333/Political-Ideology-Conservative-Label-Prevails-South.aspx#2

 

[Idog1976]

Re: Poll: Republicans more annoying when in power or out of power playing the victim

http://www.gallup.com/poll/122333/Political-Ideology-Conservative-Label-Prevails-South.aspx#2

It's a gallup poll. They only call landlines...landlines that have people willing to spend the time to do a political poll. Gallup always tilts Conservative. I take polls especially Gallup polls with a salt lick sized grain of salt.

If this poll accurately reflects the US then why didn't McCain win in a landslide? In fact the opposite occurred. I find it hard to believe the population turned hard right so quickly after turning hard left. Next year are the midterms. It wouldn't surprise me to see a significant change in the House or Senate but I doubt it will be what amounts to a 30 or 40 point swing (Going from Democrats +15% to Republicans +15%) in the polls. More like a small majority in both in the House and Senate for the Republicans. It will be an interesting few years that's for sure regardless of the election results.

 

[Denny Crane]

Re: Poll: Republicans more annoying when in power or out of power playing the victim

It's a gallup poll. They only call landlines...landlines that have people willing to spend the time to do a political poll. Gallup always tilts Conservative. I take polls especially Gallup polls with a salt lick sized grain of salt.

If this poll accurately reflects the US then why didn't McCain win in a landslide? In fact the opposite occurred. I find it hard to believe the population turned hard right so quickly after turning hard left. Next year are the midterms. It wouldn't surprise me to see a significant change in the House or Senate but I doubt it will be what amounts to a 30 or 40 point swing (Going from Democrats +15% to Republicans +15%) in the polls. More like a small majority in both in the House and Senate for the Republicans. It will be an interesting few years that's for sure regardless of the election results.

There are conservative democrats and liberal republicans.

There's been a large majority of republicans in the house from 1994-2006, and Clinton the only democrat president since 1981 (until Obama).

I wouldn't confuse "throw the bums out" with "radical switch to the left."

I think the conservative leanings of the populace explains the reaction to Obama's left (of the populace) policies.

 

[cloudydays]

Re: Poll: Republicans more annoying when in power or out of power playing the victim

These "What Would Obama Do if he were President in 2001?" questions are ridiculous.

I'd rather discuss what Brandon would do if he were on the Drexler teams on the 90s or if Drexler was on this years' team.

 

[Minstrel]

Re: Poll: Republicans more annoying when in power or out of power playing the victim

These "What Would Obama Do if he were President in 2001?" questions are ridiculous.

I'd rather discuss what Brandon would do if he were on the Drexler teams on the 90s or if Drexler was on this years' team.

What if Brandon were President in 2001?

 

[cloudydays]

Re: Poll: Republicans more annoying when in power or out of power playing the victim

What if Brandon were President in 2001?

Probably go out on the offensive against the terrorists and not spend much on defense.

 

[Minstrel]

Re: Poll: Republicans more annoying when in power or out of power playing the victim

Probably go out on the offensive against the terrorists and not spend much on defense.

And sneaky offense. Very subtle on the attack.

 

[cloudydays]

Re: Poll: Republicans more annoying when in power or out of power playing the victim

And sneaky offense. Very subtle on the attack.

haha exactly. While he wouldn't declare war on Iraq, he would have sent Black Ops teams in to take out Saddam.

 

[Eastoff]

Re: Poll: Republicans more annoying when in power or out of power playing the victim

haha exactly. While he wouldn't declare war on Iraq, he would have sent Black Ops teams in to take out Saddam.

And then when they got Bin Laden, he would rip open his shirt and pull his tie off and chest bump his staff.

 

[Tyler_Hansbrough]

Re: Poll: Republicans more annoying when in power or out of power playing the victim

Who cares? Politics are fucking stupid.