|
|
Post by harpman1 on Oct 21, 2008 15:14:18 GMT -5
Nice point Gaff; in America, the period in question is known as the Great Depression.
In the rest of the world, it is simply known as the Depression.
FDR's policies made it Great.
I'm pretty much done explaining truth vs. fiction to leftists.
It's like they're on drugs or something.
Recall as well, that (according to the polls & even Election Day exit polls) Jean Francois Kerry won the election in 2004.
Until the votes were counted.
Hopefully John "The Hero of Haditha" Murtha's racist redneck constituents can prevent our Muslim-in-waiting from being dragged across the finish line by the MSM.
Regardless, buy ammo.
Lots.
And, yes; I had a great vacation.
Thank you.
Swell to be back.
|
|
|
|
Post by saunterelle on Oct 21, 2008 17:10:56 GMT -5
I will field this. Redistribution of wealth punishes those who work hard to get ahead, plain and simple. And working hard to get ahead is supposed to be rewarded in this country, not punished by taking their money away. Redistribution of wealth is purely a liberal/progressive ideal, not conservative and not certainly not American. That, by caveat, makes progressives and far left liberals totally un-American. I am very comfortable that this nation has not been attacked in over 2500 days. Under Clinton this country was attacked several times and more then once on our own soil. If Obama is only half as tough as Clinton, I believe he is even less then half as tough, then we are in trouble. We will be less secure. I have heard Democrat pundits say were are currently less secure under Bush policies, but that is untrue. We may be less liked because we are way tougher, but we are more secure for the same reasons. This will not be the case under Obama, even Biden has acknowledged that. Bush himself is grudgingly resorting to socialism (taking over banks) because it is necessary! So give some thanks and shut your trap about those you don't agree with being un-American. Aren't you a Ron Paul fan? |
|
|
|
Post by maxsawdust on Oct 21, 2008 17:47:36 GMT -5
THAT is your response?
OMG public schooling I presume?
|
|
|
|
Post by saunterelle on Oct 21, 2008 17:51:28 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by maxsawdust on Oct 21, 2008 18:43:13 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by The New Guy on Oct 21, 2008 20:33:20 GMT -5
Were businesses struggling?/quote] as i recall S & L's were dropping like flies throughout the 80's and YES during the 90's under clinton. why? let's look back to our old buddy jimmy catah and his inflation days in the late 70's. then let's take a look at the democratic congress and their........OMG  DEREGULATION!!! .....which was the genesis for the whole debacle. remember how much the S & L debacle cost the american taxpayer??? how quickly our memories fade. this isn't the first time we've been down this road...... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savings_and_Loan_crisis |
|
|
|
Post by jgaffney on Oct 29, 2008 13:02:57 GMT -5
RealClearpolitics has a good recap of the Great Depression and how it compares to Obama's economic proposals: So, is Obama betting on a new war to bail out his economy? |
|
|
|
Post by bolverk on Oct 29, 2008 13:33:42 GMT -5
My point is that both Presidents lied. Clinton outright lied about sex while Bush misled us to take our country to war. Which is worse? Surefire, he doesn't need a cheerleader. That is not an accurate depiction of what happened. Clinton was convicted of lying about what happened in the hotel with Paula Jones, that was a sexual harassment case. If I recall, several Republicans were forced from office for exactly the same thing. His trial had nothing to do with Monica Lewinsky. Also, it is a mischaracterization that Bush lied to take us to war, that is simply not the truth. In fact, it is a simpletons way of addressing what actually did happen. |
|
|
|
Post by The Big Dog on Apr 29, 2012 13:37:49 GMT -5
Re-visiting a thread from the archive.
So here we are four years gone by. Unemployment is higher than it was when Barack took office, and it's starting to trend higher. We've borrowed and spent more money in four years than Bush did in eight. And no matter how deeply the economy has tanked (and it's tanking again right now if you care to read the tea leaves) it's still the fault of Bush.
The Republicans are poised to nominate yet another Rockefeller Republican, and it's still quite likely that there are enough voters out there stupid enough, or dead enough, to give Barack a second term.
So tell me, after reading through this thread.... are you better off than you were four years ago?
And was I right, after all?
|
|
|
|
Post by Mink on Jun 10, 2012 0:15:13 GMT -5
No, you were not right (so to speak) Big Dog (hee-hee  |
|
DEREGULATION!!! 
