0
   

Bush Supporters' Aftermath Thread III

 
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Jan, 2007 01:15 pm
mm wrote: Tax revenues up
unemployment down
interest rates down

Over five million more Americans are now without health insurance since Bush took over the white house.
More Americans have fallen into poverty during Bush's tenure.
More students are dropping out of school since his underfunded NCLB.
College tuition have increased by double-digits while salaries have remained stagnant.
Unemployment is down only because those people who could not find jobs are no longer counted. Our country must create 200,000 jobs every month to maintain "full employment." Bush has created only 2.7 million jobs in six years (or about 37,000 jobs per month).
Tax revenues may be up, but so is the federeal deficit which endangers our economy for the long term.
Interest rates are down from what?
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Jan, 2007 01:20 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
Truman, Nixon, and Carter all had approval ratings lower than George W. Bush. Nixon still takes his hits but is given credit for foreign policy initiatives that were commendable. Truman is treated kindly by most historians and Carter is exalted as the model of presidential virtue and integrity by his fan club on the Left and this presumably overrides any negatives of his administration.


It's indeed not as bad as it could be:

http://i12.tinypic.com/2vmt3ed.jpg

http://i10.tinypic.com/2ynjofb.jpg http://i1.tinypic.com/4cwba4p.jpg
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Jan, 2007 01:24 pm
We no longer need to worry about Carter: he is long gone as our president and commander in chief. Bush, on the other hand, has two more years to destroy this country. YIKES!

CLUE: Trying to compare Bush to Carter or anybody else is no longer important.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Jan, 2007 01:31 pm
ci wrote...
My answers are in red.

Over five million more Americans are now without health insurance since Bush took over the white house.
Since when is that the Presidents problem?
Its not the govts job to insure private citizens,they can either buy their own or get it thru their employer.


More Americans have fallen into poverty during Bush's tenure.
According to who?
More students are dropping out of school since his underfunded NCLB.
College education is not a "right",its a priveledge.
If you want to go to college,the govt is NOT obligated to pay for it or finance it.

College tuition have increased by double-digits while salaries have remained stagnant.
See my previous answer.
Unemployment is down only because those people who could not find jobs are no longer counted. Our country must create 200,000 jobs every month to maintain "full employment." Bush has created only 2.7 million jobs in six years (or about 37,000 jobs per month).
I dont remember you saying that when the previous admin was touting unemployment numbers HIGHER then the current ones.
You were then claiming the economy was doing fine.

Tax revenues may be up, but so is the federeal deficit which endangers our economy for the long term.
Thats true,the deficit is up.
For that I blame BushI notice that you dont argue the fact that tax revenues have gone up to the govt.


Interest rates are down from what?

Interest rates for periods before January 1, 2007 are as follows:



Rate Period
7%
January 1, 2006 through December 31, 2006

5% July 1, 2003 through December 31, 2005
6% January 1, 2002 through June 30, 2003
8% January 1, 1999 through December 31, 2001
9% July 1, 1995 through December 31, 1998
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Jan, 2007 01:32 pm
CBS, NBC Polls
Bush reached an all-time low 28 percent approval rating in a CBS poll released today. Sixty-six percent of those surveyed in the CBS poll said they opposed Bush's sending 20,000 additional troops to Iraq, and 75 percent said the war there is going badly. Fifty percent said Congress shouldn't provide money for the 20,000 additional troops.
The CBS poll surveyed 1,168 adults nationwide by telephone from Jan. 18 to 21. The poll has a sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points.
Almost two-thirds of people in the U.S. don't support a troop increase in Iraq if Congress passes a resolution opposing it, and don't believe the war can succeed, according to an NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll. Investigators questioned 1,007 adults from Jan. 17 to Jan. 20, and the poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Jan, 2007 07:10 pm
http://media2.salemwebnetwork.com/Townhall/Car/b/20070124ST1AP-StateOfUnion.jpg
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Jan, 2007 09:52 pm
Thank Christ!!
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Thu 25 Jan, 2007 01:26 am
When Pres Bush was announced, and he walked into that chamber to give his SOTU speech, he looked so lost I almost felt sorry for him. Crying or Very sad
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Thu 25 Jan, 2007 01:29 am
Foxfyre wrote:
http://media2.salemwebnetwork.com/Townhall/Car/b/20070124ST1AP-StateOfUnion.jpg



I guess he showed them that, if he can get elected as President, anybody can.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Thu 25 Jan, 2007 01:33 am
That was funny, Foxfyre. Smile
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Thu 25 Jan, 2007 08:40 am
This one from today's Chicago Tribune isn't as funny (thanks for the laugh, Foxfyre!)



http://i13.tinypic.com/2wci3w4.jpg
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Thu 25 Jan, 2007 09:07 am
I am woman, hear me bore
By Ann Coulter
Wednesday, January 24, 2007

It's nice to have a president who is not so sleazy that not a single Supreme Court justice shows up for his State of the Union address (Bill Clinton, January 1999, when eight justices stayed away to protest Clinton's disregard for the law and David Souter skipped the speech to watch "Sex and the City").

Speaking of which, the horny hick's wife finally ended the breathless anticipation by announcing that she is running for president. I studied tapes of Hillary feigning surprise at hearing about Monica to help me look surprised upon learning that she's running.

As long as we have revived the practice of celebrating multicultural milestones (briefly suspended when Condoleezza Rice became the first black female to be secretary of state), let us pause to note that Mrs. Clinton, if elected, would be the first woman to become president after her husband had sex with an intern in the Oval Office.

According to the famed "polls" -- or, as I call them, "surveys of uninformed people who think it's possible to get the answer wrong" -- Hillary is the current front-runner for the Democrats. Other than the massive case of narcolepsy her name inspires, this would cause me not the slightest distress -- except for the fact that the Republicans' current front-runners are John McCain and Rudy Giuliani.

Fortunately, polls at this stage are nothing but name recognition contests, so please stop asking me to comment on them. "Arsenic" and "proctologist" have sky-high name recognition going for them, too.

In January, two years before the 2000 presidential election, the leading Republican candidate in New Hampshire was ... Liddy Dole (WMUR-TV/CNN poll, Jan. 12, 1999). In the end, Liddy Dole's most successful run turned out to be a mad dash from her husband Bob after he accidentally popped two Viagras.

At this stage before the 1992 presidential election, the three leading Democratic candidates were, in order: Mario Cuomo, Jesse Jackson and Lloyd Bentsen (Public Opinion Online, Feb. 21, 1991).

Only three months before the 1988 election, William Schneider cheerfully reported in The National Journal that Michael Dukakis beat George Herbert Walker Bush in 22 of 25 polls taken since April of that year. Bush did considerably better in the poll taken on Election Day.

The average poll respondent reads the above information and immediately responds that the administrations of presidents Cuomo, Dole and Dukakis were going in "the wrong direction."

Still and all, Mrs. Clinton is probably the real front-runner based on: (1) the multiple millions of dollars she has raised, and (2) the fact that her leading Democratic opponent is named "Barack Hussein Obama." Or, as he's known at CNN, "Osama." Or, as he's known on the Clinton campaign, "The Soft Bigotry of Low Expectations."

Mrs. Clinton's acolytes are floating the idea of Hillary as another Margaret Thatcher to get past the question, "Can a woman be elected president?" This is based on the many, many things Hillary Clinton and Margaret Thatcher have in common, such as the lack of a Y chromosome and ... hmmm, you know, I think that's it.

Girl-power feminists who got where they are by marrying men with money or power -- Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, Arianna Huffington and John Kerry -- love to complain about how hard it is for a woman to be taken seriously.

It has nothing to do with their being women. It has to do with their cheap paths to power. Kevin Federline isn't taken seriously either.

It is as easy to imagine Americans voting for someone like Margaret Thatcher or Condoleezza Rice for president as it is difficult to imagine them voting for someone like Hillary. (Or Kevin Federline.) Hillary isn't piggybacking on Thatcher because she's a woman, she's piggybacking on Thatcher because Thatcher made it on her own, which Hillary did not.

But the most urgent question surrounding Hillary's candidacy is: How will the Democrats out-macho us if Hillary is their presidential nominee? Unlike their last presidential nominee, she doesn't even have any fake Purple Hearts.

Sen. Jim Webb, who managed to give the rebuttal to President Bush's State of the Union address Tuesday night without challenging the president to a fistfight (well done, Jim!), won his election last November by portraying himself as one of the new gun-totin' Democrats.

He once opposed women in the military by calling the idea "a horny woman's dream." But -- as some of us warned you -- it appears that Webb has already been fitted for his tutu by Rahm Emanuel.

Webb began his rebuttal by complaining that we don't have national health care and aren't spending enough on "education" (teachers unions). In other words, he talked about national issues that only are national issues because of this country's rash experiment with women's suffrage. I guess we should all be relieved that at least Webb's response did not involve putting a young boy's penis into a man's mouth, as characters in his novels are wont to do.

He then palavered on about the vast military experience of his entire family in order to better denounce the war in Iraq. As long as Democrats keep insisting that only warriors can discuss war, how about telling the chick to butt out?
0 Replies
 
kelticwizard
 
  1  
Reply Thu 25 Jan, 2007 10:31 am
Add me to the list of people who found Foxfyre's cartoon hilarious. Very Happy
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Thu 25 Jan, 2007 10:33 am
Republicans show their small and mean-spiritedness side. One can almost hear Rove saying: "What, they want more gruel!"

Raising America

After 10 years stuck making $5.15 an hour, millions of Americans are ready for a raise. But some senators are not quite ready to give it to them. Yesterday, 47 Democrats, five Republicans, and two independents joined together as a bipartisan majority to push for a vote on a raising the minimum wage to $7.25 an hour. Eighty-three percent of the American public supports this increase. But unfortunately, the Senate fell six short of the votes needed to end debate and move on. It will now take up a bill pairing a minimum wage increase with tax breaks for small businesses, at the insistence of a small group of conservative senators. In the past 10 years, Congress has given small businesses $36 billion in tax breaks. It has given itself $31,600 in cost-of-living raises. Working Americans deserve their long overdue raise. Send a message to your senator voicing your support for a clean bill to increase the minimum wage.
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Thu 25 Jan, 2007 10:41 am
I may have missed it. Did Bush say that Barbara and Jenna would lead the surge of civilians into Iraq?
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Jan, 2007 02:03 am
Is it fair to say that Mr Bush is now reviled by most of the electorate and rejected by most of his party?

What took them so long?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Jan, 2007 12:53 pm
McT, Godo question. However, we must remember that "they" are the ones that created this monster by supporting him without question for the past six years. The only wake up call they've had is the last election, but there seems to be some still cheerleading Bush on.

It's good to see that the majority of Ameridcans now see that Bush is a tyrant. He doesn't listen to the American People or congress.
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Jan, 2007 02:44 am
Looks like all the remaining Bush supporters have slunk back whence they came.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Jan, 2007 05:52 am
McGentrix wrote-

Quote:
Thatcher made it on her own, which Hillary did not.


I'm not sure that's correct. Denis Thatcher was a rich guy and Margaret Roberts was a greengrocer's daughter who lived above the shop.

As I understand it Bill Clinton and Hilary met when they were students and I didn't think he came from a rich background.

If I'm right the reverse of what you said is true.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Jan, 2007 06:39 am
Thursday Jan 25 2006
President Bush rode Air Force 1 for the entire 85 mile trip between Washington DC and Wilmington Delaware to deliver a speech on "Energy Conservation"
You cant make this **** up.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 01/10/2025 at 03:54:57