Dear Obama

BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

oops.... wrong link

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25884806/

Sometimes I wonder if Bush is deliberately trying to sabotage and in-coming Democratic presidency and congress majority.

BBB

No need to wonder any longer - the Democrats are self destructing from within.
Bush and the Republicans have their own problems, but they are not trying to sabotage the Dems - they don't need to.

revel wrote:

I don't get where you come from when say democrats are self destructing from within.

For one thing, the dems are attempting to raise the federal tax on gas. Not a wise move.

The chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, Rep. James Oberstar, and the chairman of the highway subcommittee, Rep. Peter DeFazio, presented fellow lawmakers with a list of how many jobs and how much money each state would lose. It ranged from $30 million and 1,000 jobs in Vermont to $664 million and 23,000 jobs in California.

"Because the trust fund is already looking at a looming shortfall, it would have moved project cancellations into the construction season," DeFazio, D-Ore., said in an interview. He said it was "highly unlikely" that oil companies would have passed savings along to consumers.

Just three years ago, that trust fund enjoyed a surplus of $10 billion. Even without a tax freeze, the fund is projected to finish 2009 with a deficit of $3 billion. That that could grow as Americans drive less and buy less gas because of higher pump prices.

The consequence is that only about $27 billion in federal money will be available next year to states and local governments for new infrastructure investment even though the current highway act calls for spending $41 billion a year. For many, the solution is to raise rather than suspend or cut federal fuel taxes, which haven't changed since 1993.

The Transportation Construction Coalition, a group of industry companies and unions, said that if Congress does not do something about the shortfall, states will lose about one-third of their road and bridge money in the budget year starting Oct. 1. That would put 485,000 more jobs at risk.

Again back to that deficit problem.

H2O_MAN wrote:

BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

oops.... wrong link

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25884806/

Sometimes I wonder if Bush is deliberately trying to sabotage and in-coming Democratic presidency and congress majority.

BBB

No need to wonder any longer - the Democrats are self destructing from within.
Bush and the Republicans have their own problems, but they are not trying to sabotage the Dems - they don't need to.

Thanks for the vote of confidence, Bill. If Drew Dad was restricting his observation to the quoted comment from H2O, however, I think he's right.

I did say the Dems were self-destructing...and they were at the time, per my opinion. I mean, they couldn't beat the most unpopular president in modern history...twice... They appear to have gotten a second wind, though. :wink:

DewDad, a fellow idiot has decided joined you.

I usually look at it like this: If they do win an election, by the time the next cycle comes around, they've pissed off enough people to get the opposition in for 8 years.

Now, however, I'm not sure that's as appealing...

Pah.

Dude. You're **** is weak. Seriously.

Lash wrote:

H2O_MAN wrote:

BumbleBeeBoogie wrote:

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

oops.... wrong link

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25884806/

Sometimes I wonder if Bush is deliberately trying to sabotage and in-coming Democratic presidency and congress majority.

BBB

No need to wonder any longer - the Democrats are self destructing from within.
Bush and the Republicans have their own problems, but they are not trying to sabotage the Dems - they don't need to.

Thanks for the vote of confidence, Bill. If Drew Dad was restricting his observation to the quoted comment from H2O, however, I think he's right.

I did say the Dems were self-destructing...and they were at the time, per my opinion. I mean, they couldn't beat the most unpopular president in modern history...twice... They appear to have gotten a second wind, though. :wink:

There is a not so minor difference here: 4 years ago, you were right.


I believe John Kerry was on a very short list of Democrats who couldn't defeat Bush.

DrewDad wrote:

Dude. You're **** is weak. Seriously.

I know you have had those words spoken to you all your life and what's up
with the lame ass "dude speak"? Isn't it time you grow a pair and grow up?

Smell you later!

Have your mom wash that stuff of you fat face and run along ...

Enjoy your miserable life.