What you say above is pretty clear to you because it's pretty clear to me that you and the libs blame everything on Bush and refuse to accept any responsibility for anything. That's really clear to me.
Bill....read above my concerns about Romney. Throw in another war or two should he come in to office and you have a Bush repeat without the temporary economic gains.
When I hear "we need a moderate someone in the midde ground" I want to puke. Bush's biggest fault was he never said no to Congressional spending. He just wouldn't veto any bad bill. It was h is "moderation" that helped cause the problem. Then the Republicans ran another whimpy moderate in McCain, and he got steamrolled. The far left gets in and they immediately start crying for civility and compromise unless they control everything. At that point they start passing legislation that they don't even give the opposition time to read. Romney's a lot like Bush. He stood by when the idiots in Mass. wanted their health care bill. We'll never be rid of the can kickers. As they are in Greece we just don't have the will to stop the goodies that we can no longer afford. We need to seriously overhaul social security. We're long past the times of easy fixes. The gutless "leaders" of this country refused to do anything in the 70's, 80's and 90's. We need to protect our borders. We can't afford to educate our children without having to extend free education to the children of those who broke the law to get here. And then there are the people who get more back in tax refunds than they pay because they have children living outside the country. We're just fools.
:? you know Dave it amazes me how you never respond to Joco. 1) he has spent a life time studing History and Politics. 2) He started out as a long haired liberal 3) He studies both sides of any platform. with an open mind. something maybe you should try. He made comments to every one of your remarks and showed you the errors in them. I worked for one of the Banks and financial instutions that believed in preditory lending. I can tell you first hand that the heads of my lending instustions loved Barney Frank and Dodd and contributed heavily to their agenda's and vice versa. We lent money at high rates on mortgages that people didnt qualify for nor could they pay back. heads turned the other way. THIS was the collapse of the ecomony.... Dont blame Bush for that. it was the ability to lend these people money in the first place. I handled collections for this Bank for 15 years. and am well aware of the ins and outs of credit,ability to pay and not, The bank did what they were allowed to do. Grown ups accept responsiblity for thir mistakes do you see Obama doing this I dont. it is easy to blame someone else and after a time it just gets pathlethic.
Actually Gipper you have made many good points here. One wonders why if the GOP is the way to go and has all of the right ideas then why was Bush signing off on bills passed by a GOP controlled Congress his first six years in office if they were not good bills.?
Jo'Co: 1. I cannot absolve the leadership of a president who for 6 years also had a GOP controlled Congress. Bush was just a pawn in our near Depression....an innocent bystander? Really? 2. Drones equates to two large scale invasions and occupations? Really? 3. Agreed on #3....that and a voting populace easily misled and controlled 4. And some say corporate tax breaks are too great. Agreed some regulations may be too tight but willy nilly free enterprise leading to a Chinese type of environment is obviously not the way to go. I grew up in Jacksonville where the rivers in the late 60s were useless waterways of pollution. The same kind of thing was prevalent in Detroit in the 60s and 70s. Who wants that kind of environment?
Dave is always looking for a scapegoat. Move along folks, nothing to see here. But besides the "Blame Bush" strategy, the Dems are also playing the race card, aided by a more than willing media. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...uest_would_a_white_president_get_heckled.html
I'm not sure what the pollution levels in Jacksonville (bad thing...I agree) have to do with my opinion that it is counterproductive to have the highest corporate tax rates in the world (we do) and at the same time be considering higher tax rates and whining about "tax breaks"...it makes no sense and is all a smoke and mirrors sleight of hand to avoid facing the real problems.
In business you never look for a scapegoat.....you resolve the problem first while at the same time identifying where you went wrong so you don't repeat the same mistakes. Bush was CEO in charge when all of this went down and went down hard. Do I want to hire his crony for the same position? Hell no I don't.
I'll repost this since you totally ignored the first time through. Bush was not JUST behind Obama. He was light years behind. Bush spent and average of $410 billion per year over budget; shameful for sure for a man who calls himself a conservative. Obama exceeds his "budget" by $1.2 trillion per year.
What happens to those of us that have no faith in either party, 50% of all big donors contributors are giving to both parties in hope it lands them in a fair spot that helps them to continue. Apathy is not where I want to belong or linger very long but it seems to be the most intelligent position at the moment. Socialism is not my cup of tea but neither is servitude to the masters of not being able to relate to those of us who did not inherit a silver spoon vested in our anus... I find it incredible that both parties walk around in a daze at the generation aged 20-30 that has no allegiance to either party and does not trust their life to be better than their parents. This group has a keen sense of distrust in the dogma or rhetoric of politicians and what they promise. I weep for the future of our offspring because the correction of debt and government waste will come and not be pretty..
George....I have to admit that would be quite a sight to see a Democratic president cut back on a budget handed to him by a GOP president. Question.....some economists have said in the last 2-3 years that major cuts by our government could have deepened abd prolonged the recession.... so if you extract all of those billions from the economy what do you think would have happened?
Gipper pretty much nailed it a few posts back in this thread. I think we could start with a two term limit on all Congress people and a benefit package that is in line with what there constituents may or may not have. Then I would think an examination of all entitlement programs and those that do NOT do what they were designed to do would be eliminated. Entire departments should be analyzed as to their effectiveness and, if the overhead exceeds the benefit... eliminated. Power should be returned to the states. And on and on.
Good ideas all George. Saw something today that examined how our politicians are by and large some of the richest people in America as a group. How about limit the number of millionaires able to hold office? If that is the group that governs then how can they be in touch with what is really happening to the large majority of Americans.
I wouldn't have a problem with that. And look how many of them become millionaires while they hold office. On the surface that is very disturbing.
Stop with the "money envy" thing....please! The only issue is how to try and fix the economy. Three choices... 1. Do nothing (might actually be the best). 2. Stimulus...more money...print it...borrow it....give it away. 3. Austerity...cut spending. Eat the bad apple temporarily for a quicker fix. Myself...I vote for #3...#2 has not worked and the only economy surviving in Europe is Germany, who has utilized austerity. If I'm wrong, fine...but sitting around blaming everybody else and doing nothing is not going to work. Dave, I'm not sure how to say this without making it sound like an insult...I don't mean it that way...but haven't you fallen into that trap? You seem much more interested in finding scapegoats than discussing what the solutions should be. Do you really think that taking Bush's mistakes in overspending and tripling them is the answer? Do you think that the current administration has the slightest handle on the economy? I don't.
:idea: The idea that someone has money because they didn't earn it is ridiculous. Either they earned it or they risked it in investments to increase it. I saw a stat several years ago that more than 99% of all millionaires alive today earned their own money and didn't inherit it. That number includes people like Mitt Romney and George W. Bush who were also self-made millionaires. The elephant in the room isn't how much money someone has compared to someone else. It's government regulation and the destruction of personal freedoms which kill growth, jobs and wealth creation at every level of our society. Look at Bloomberg in New York. Now he's going to banish or regulate everything from soda pop to movie popcorn. Look at California. One of every three people in this state now work for the government. Either you're a maker or a taker. The political class is the new elite in a way that the rich never were, because they control the legal system, the media centers and the schools. Is any of this what we want for our country? To make every city like Chicago, New York or San Francisco? Wealth follows freedom and the jobs will return when regualtion is reduced...