I'd love to see the links that shows ACORN swung the election for President Obama.LOL!! My argument is my opinion, and I can start pulling out links to back it up if need be. I'm sure they have all been posted here over... and over... and over... why re-post? We are reaching a point where people SHOULD have read all the articles by now, and opinions have already been formed. Not much new to post on a holiday weekend, but I'm sure it will heat up again tomorrow. I'm putting MY focus on which of the many candidates to vote for in the primary. Already know who I am NOT voting for. I've seen enough Obama, and do not expect miracles in the next year.
:mrgreen:
(PS-- I do not rely on FOX for all my news. If I did I would be as uninformed as people that rely on MSNBC or CNN for their news.)
:2wave:
Dick Morris and Byron York? Give us a ****ing break.Here are some links to actually shed some truth on your sorry, sheltered self:
These are the true deficits: Bush $800B, Obama $1.4T - TheHill.com
Obama's trillions dwarf Bush's 'dangerous' spending | Byron York | Politics | Washington Examiner
Real talk, real facts.
I'd love to see the links that shows ACORN swung the election for President Obama.
Dick Morris and Byron York? Give us a ****ing break.
There are no links to it because libs are very sneaky and are not stupid enough to leave any evidence but we ALL know the real truth. I don't drink Obama kool ade.
Aint think you'd be very receptive to facts....and common sense logic.....well I tried.
Rightwingers just *know* that ACORN swung the election for BO. Just like they "know" he was born in Kenya
How dare pbrauer not trust that aficionado of whores, Dick Morris? :lol:
Cries the Conservative who voted for Bush after he failed to protect us on 9.11 and after he led us into Iraq over WMD which weren't there. Those were the results you rewarded Bush with by giving him 4 more years ... which he used to completely wreck our economy.You see, in your world the smile and rhetoric trumps results, history, and actual performance.
Sure, just like FDR was elected to fix the problems he inherited. That took time too.Didn't we elect Obama to fix those problems??????
Sure, just like FDR was elected to fix the problems he inherited. That took time too.
Reagan had an unemployment rate of 11%.The Bureau of Labor Statistics is the keeper of the unemployment data and begins in 1948 so since that is the agency of record, name for me one Republican President who had unemployment at 14.7 million using BLS data.
The Great Depression was over before we entered WWII. GDP for 1941 was 17.1%. The unemployment rate for 1942 was 4.7%.indeed it did. in fact, it wasn't until we were done with FDR that we fully recovered. In fact, it wasn't until post-WWII when we dramatically slashed government spending that we fully recovered.
Yeah, I can't imagine where we got the idea from that we won in Iraq?? :roll:Interesting how you bought the media portrayal of "Mission Accomplished" as if it meant we won in Iraq.
Really?He then failed by giving the enemy a withdrawal date.
Cries the Conservative who voted for Bush after he failed to protect us on 9.11 and after he led us into Iraq over WMD which weren't there. Those were the results you rewarded Bush with by giving him 4 more years ... which he used to completely wreck our economy.
Hey, notice something here ... ?Here are the dates of the other recessions
Last Four Recessions and their Durations
12/07 - 6/09 18 months
3/01 - 11/01 8 months
7/90 - 3/91 8 months
7/81 - 11/82 16 months
Clinton warned the nation there would likely be an attack inside the U.S. and Conservatives accused him of saying that just to divert attention away from the Monica Lewinsky scandal. Republicans don't care about America ... they only care about their party.Even though Clinton warned Bush about terrorism and Osama Bin Laden, Bush was busy pushing the missile defense system 911.
Sure ... December, 2009 ... 16.1 million. Seems to me the trend since then is that we're gaining jobs.Go to the following site and find for me any month when unemployment was higher than 14.7 million
Clinton warned the nation there would likely be an attack inside the U.S. and Conservatives accused him of saying that just to divert attention away from the Monica Lewinsky scandal. Republicans don't care about America ... they only care about their party.
The Phyllis Schlafly Report
[...]
Second, by putting U.S. troops in Kosovo, Clinton is provoking terrorist attacks by Islamic radicals connected to Saudi renegade Osama bin Laden, who has declared a worldwide war on Americans. Fanatics bent on jihad against the "Great Satan" United States could hardly ask for a more tempting target than Americans deployed close to terrorist bases in northern Albania.
Even more dangerous, entering the Kosovo war may provoke terrorist retaliation within the United States. It's not only our U.S. troops who will be put in mortal danger. Bin Laden has stated unequivocally that all Americans, including "those who pay taxes," are targets. At a recent Senate hearing, CIA Director George Tenet warned against the danger of a stepped-up terrorist campaign, saying, "There is not the slightest doubt that Osama bin Laden, his worldwide allies, and his sympathizers are planning further attacks against us."
Clinton's reckless meddling in Kosovo, Bosnia, Macedonia, Sudan, and Iraq exposes Americans to retaliation from terrorists regardless of whether he achieves any phony "peace" or actually sends in troops.
Clinton predicted on January 22 that it is "highly likely" that a terrorist group will attack on American soil within the next few years. He is using this risk as the excuse to create a Domestic Terrorism Team headed by a military "commander in chief," with a $2.8 billion budget. We should not underestimate the deceit and deviousness of Clinton's plans to use aggressive presidential actions to wipe out public memory of his impeachment trial.
Clinton has already issued a Presidential Decision Directive to authorize military intervention against terrorism on our own soil. Secretary of Defense William Cohen said in an Army Times interview that "Terrorism is escalating to the point that Americans soon may have to choose between civil liberties and more intrusive means of protection."
Deputy Secretary of Defense John Hamre has been floating the idea of designating a unit of U.S. troops as a Homelands Defense Command to take charge in case of a terrorist attack on U.S. soil. Hamre argues that the military's role should be formalized under a four-star general, and he has even speculated about creating a bi-national command with Canada called the "Atlantic Command."
The far-reaching nature of the plans being discussed within the Clinton Administration is indicated in the Autumn 1997 Parameters, the scholarly publication of the Army War College. The article predicts that "the growing prospect of terrorism in our own country . . . will almost inevitably trigger an intervention by the military." The article casually adds, "legal niceties or strict construction of prohibited conduct will be a minor concern."
That's old news. Realclearpolitics.com tracks multiple polls and the average of the latest polls indicates that as of now, no Republican running for president beats Obama...
Also notice how she claimed that sending U.S. troops into Kosovo would provoke a response by terrorists? How come Conservatives didn't voice that same concern when Bush sent U.S. troops into Iraq?Very interesting.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?