Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Commander-in-fear?Follow

#77 Mar 04 2009 at 7:24 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
bluffratt wrote:
Now use that link to check the previous 6 months results then tell me the market hasn't shot down since Obama was elected.
That's not what you claimed.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#78 Mar 04 2009 at 7:27 AM Rating: Good
Vagina Dentata,
what a wonderful phrase
******
30,106 posts
I'd like to point out that some are saying Obama has inherited the worst economy in decades from a 2 term republican president but since he's been in office for a month, he's bad because the economy hasn't totally turned around.
Then I think we can all say conclusively that since 9/11 occurred on Bush's watch, he failed to keep us safe. He failed to maintain our liberties and given the financial meltdown in October, he failed domestically, keeping the economy stable.

Fail.
Fail.
Fail.

He failed as a baseball commissioner, as a businessman--I'll bet 10 to 1, he's just lousy in bed.
____________________________
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
#79REDACTED, Posted: Mar 04 2009 at 7:29 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Ash,
#80REDACTED, Posted: Mar 04 2009 at 7:34 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Anna,
#81 Mar 04 2009 at 7:36 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,007 posts
bluffratt wrote:
Anna,

Forget completely turning the economy around. Most would just settle for a slower decline. As it stands Obama's fiscal policies have terrified investors and caused the market to fall at a nearly unprecedented rate. Of course liberals are going to spend the remainder of the year blaming everything on W but that feeble excuse is only going to last so long. If things don't pick up by 2010 the Dems are going to be in serious trouble. And with the extreme partisan politics the Dems are engaging in it will be interesting to see how the GOP reacts when they're no longer the minority.



His policies haven't even hit the goddamned books yet. What is his physical presence in the White House supposed to have solved? Because that's all he's had time to accomplish so far.
#82REDACTED, Posted: Mar 04 2009 at 7:39 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Ash,
#83 Mar 04 2009 at 7:40 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,007 posts
bluffratt wrote:
Ash,

Quote:
His policies haven't even hit the goddamned books yet. What is his physical presence in the White House supposed to have solved? Because that's all he's had time to accomplish so far.


And things are going to get much worse when they do. Right now we're just watching the markets reaction to his plan. God help us when they actually go into effect. It's amazing you don't realize that businesses look at what the govn is doing, planning on doing, and make decisions on how to run their business accordingly.

Ok, so how about waiting until you see the effect before you start criticizing? It's like telling an author his book is **** when all he's written is "It was..."
#84 Mar 04 2009 at 7:41 AM Rating: Decent
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
bluffratt wrote:
God help us when they actually go into effect.
God helped us when W was pres right?
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#85 Mar 04 2009 at 7:44 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
bluffratt wrote:
Quote:
That's not what you claimed.
and the definition of "is" is...
Does the definition involve frantic backpedaling?
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#86 Mar 04 2009 at 7:44 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
*****
13,007 posts
If the last 8 years have succeeded in teaching me anything, it's that a significant portion of the population is actually insane. Varrus does nothing to help quell those fears.
#87 Mar 04 2009 at 7:45 AM Rating: Good
Vagina Dentata,
what a wonderful phrase
******
30,106 posts
bluffratt wrote:
Anna,

Forget completely turning the economy around. Most would just settle for a slower decline. As it stands Obama's fiscal policies have terrified investors and caused the market to fall at a nearly unprecedented rate. Of course liberals are going to spend the remainder of the year blaming everything on W but that feeble excuse is only going to last so long. If things don't pick up by 2010 the Dems are going to be in serious trouble. And with the extreme partisan politics the Dems are engaging in it will be interesting to see how the GOP reacts when they're no longer the minority.





Of course when we had a republican majority, the decline wasn't slowed either and Bush, et. al. had much more time to deal with it. As far as "extreme partisan politics," *****, please. The GOP has become so partisan with their terrorist accusations and ousting of RINOs, they are melting down as a national party. Blaming democrats aren't going to get you very far. Clean up your own house.

I bet you've been excited to have Obama in b/c you've been blaming Clinton for the current economic problems for so long, it has gotten old.

The correct answer is that all of this goes back to the fact that Reagan was a failed president and Reaganomics has led up to this ************
____________________________
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
#88 Mar 04 2009 at 7:46 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
AshOnMyTomatoes wrote:
It's like telling an author his book is sh*t when all he's written is "It was..."
It was a dark and stormy economy. Suddenly, a budget rang out!
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#89REDACTED, Posted: Mar 04 2009 at 7:47 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Ash,
#90REDACTED, Posted: Mar 04 2009 at 7:51 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Anna,
#91 Mar 04 2009 at 7:59 AM Rating: Good
Vagina Dentata,
what a wonderful phrase
******
30,106 posts
bluffratt wrote:
Anna,

So now this crisis is Reagans fault? LMAO. Boy you radical libs are really losing it. Reaganomics succeeded! Carter completely f*cked up the economy and only through Reagans business friendly policies was the economy able to come roaring back for W sr and slick willy to f*ck up.

And you're delusional if you think the GOP is more partisan than the Dems. If I recall even 11 Dems voted with the GOP against this horrendous bill. So in fact there has been a bi-partisan effort against this "stimulus bill".



Yeah, but Reagan's economic policies didn't affect the economy for at least a year and a half. The recession didn't end until late 1982-- all because of economic problems inherited from Ford and Carter administrations. By that measure, we should have voted Reagan out in February 1981, since the economy continued to decline. Right?

Edited, Mar 4th 2009 10:59am by Annabella
____________________________
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
#92 Mar 04 2009 at 8:00 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,007 posts
Baron von Annabella wrote:
bluffratt wrote:
Anna,

So now this crisis is Reagans fault? LMAO. Boy you radical libs are really losing it. Reaganomics succeeded! Carter completely f*cked up the economy and only through Reagans business friendly policies was the economy able to come roaring back for W sr and slick willy to f*ck up.

And you're delusional if you think the GOP is more partisan than the Dems. If I recall even 11 Dems voted with the GOP against this horrendous bill. So in fact there has been a bi-partisan effort against this "stimulus bill".



Yeah, but Reagan's economic policies didn't affect the economy for at least a year and a half. The recession didn't end until late 1982-- all because of economic problems inherited from Ford and Carter administrations. By that measure, we should have voted Reagan out in February 1981, since the economy continued to decline. Right?

Edited, Mar 4th 2009 10:59am by Annabella
Woops, a valid point. Time to talk about something else, varrus.
#93 Mar 04 2009 at 8:17 AM Rating: Excellent
Vagina Dentata,
what a wonderful phrase
******
30,106 posts
Quote:
Bush's policies turned that around as well. Impressively. Oddly, he never gets credit for that because once again, the only indicator the liberals look at is deficit. Let's ignore that right up until the last year and a half of his administration, the economy was booming. Oh no. Let's just look at the amount he borrowed while creating that boom, and then lets focus on a market crash at the end caused by factors that were utterly beyond his control.

I'd toss in the argument about how the economic collapse we're in was caused by liberal economic policies put in place before Bush took office and rabidly defended by Democrats (with some really nasty attacks), not just once, but twice during bush's terms when he and Republican members of congress attempted to fix the problems with the investment banking laws which would very likely have avoided this crisis. I happen to place the blame for what's going on squarely at the feet of the Democrats, so forgive me if I don't take your comment that seriously...
----------------------------


This is my favorite gbaji justification ever, btw, Not only could Bush not stop the economy--I mean, he doesn't have that much control, but that in fact, Clinton, who apparently could control the economy, actually did everything and is to blame. And now that Obama hasn't turned around the economy in a month means that we have to blame Obama for the collapse--Obama and Clinton, but not Bush.

Awesome.

Edited, Mar 4th 2009 11:18am by Annabella
____________________________
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
#94REDACTED, Posted: Mar 04 2009 at 8:24 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Anna,
#95 Mar 04 2009 at 8:28 AM Rating: Good
Vagina Dentata,
what a wonderful phrase
******
30,106 posts
bluffratt wrote:
Anna,

Remind me again who controlled congress at that time?



Maybe you should try using google.

Quote:

Oh and the market has known Obama was going to be president a good 6 months. This only a couple of months in office nonsense is nothing more than liberal apologists attempting to divert blame from Obamas policies. The market is reacting to Obamas policies.


What about the fact that the recession remained serious for the first year and half of Reagan's term?

Edited, Mar 4th 2009 11:29am by Annabella
____________________________
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
#96 Mar 04 2009 at 8:29 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,007 posts
bluffratt wrote:
Anna,

Remind me again who controlled congress at that time?

Oh and the market has known Obama was going to be president a good 6 months. This only a couple of months in office nonsense is nothing more than liberal apologists attempting to divert blame from Obamas policies. The market is reacting to Obamas policies.





Edited, Mar 4th 2009 11:27am by bluffratt
There aren't any policies yet.
#97 Mar 04 2009 at 8:31 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,007 posts
Baron von Annabella wrote:
What about the fact that the recession remained serious for the first year and half of Reagan's term?

Edited, Mar 4th 2009 11:29am by Annabella
Or the fact that our current economic climate has been sliding in this direction for well over a year?
#98 Mar 04 2009 at 8:34 AM Rating: Good
Vagina Dentata,
what a wonderful phrase
******
30,106 posts
AshOnMyTomatoes wrote:
Baron von Annabella wrote:
What about the fact that the recession remained serious for the first year and half of Reagan's term?

Edited, Mar 4th 2009 11:29am by Annabella
Or the fact that our current economic climate has been sliding in this direction for well over a year?


The fact that the republicans kept saying that Obama wouldn't win?

I think bluffrat is an 11 year old in real life.
____________________________
Turin wrote:
Seriously, what the f*ck nature?
#99REDACTED, Posted: Mar 04 2009 at 8:53 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Under W the economy was never in a recession; despite what liberal media and political pundits said. Do you even know the definition of the word recession?
#100 Mar 04 2009 at 8:53 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
bluffratt wrote:
Oh and the market has known Obama was going to be president a good 6 months. This only a couple of months in office nonsense is nothing more than liberal apologists attempting to divert blame from Obamas policies. The market is reacting to Obamas policies.
Dude, this is exactly the same thing I said about Bush and 9/11. Let's start a club!

You admit that 9/11 was all Bush's fault and I'll blame the market on Obama. Ok, you first!
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#101 Mar 04 2009 at 8:55 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,007 posts
bluffratt wrote:
Do you even know the definition of the word recession?

"A state the economy can be in only under a Democratic administration?"
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 253 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (253)