PDA

View Full Version : Not Bush's Fault HUH? BULL!



Gayle in MD
06-16-2010, 08:03 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- <span style='font-size: 26pt'>The hemorrhaging of American jobs accelerated at a record pace at the end of 2008, bringing the year's total job losses to 2.6 million or the highest level in more than six decades.</span>
<span style='font-size: 20pt'>A sobering U.S. Labor Department jobs report Friday showed the economy lost 524,000 jobs in December and 1.9 million in the year's final four months, after the credit crisis began in September.</span>
The unemployment rate rose to 7.2% last month from 6.7% in November - its highest rate since January 1993.

The steep annual drop in jobs marked the highest yearly job-loss total since 1945, the year in which World War II ended.

"We're seeing a <span style='font-size: 26pt'>complete unraveling of the labor market and are on track for getting beyond 10% unemployment," </span>said Lawrence Mishel, president of the Economic Policy Institute.
<span style='font-size: 20pt'>
The total number of unemployed Americans rose by 632,000 to 11.1 million.

November, in which 584,000 jobs were lost, and December marked the first time in the 70-year history of the report in which the economy lost more than 500,000 jobs in consecutive months.</span><span style='font-size: 20pt'>
"We have a bigger economy now, but even on a proportional basis, the last months have been the worst since [1945]," said Kurt Karl, head of economic research at Swiss Re. "It's just an enormous acceleration of job losses."</span>
<span style='font-size: 20pt'>
By comparison, the 2.6 million jobs lost in 2008 nationwide were equal to the number of jobs found in states such as Wisconsin, Missouri or Maryland.</span><span style='font-size: 20pt'>
Under-employment at a record high
A growing number of workers seeking full-time jobs were able to find only part-time work. Those working part-time jobs - because they couldn't find full-time work, or their hours had been cut - jumped by 715,000 people to 8 million, the highest since such records were first kept in 1955.</span><span style='font-size: 20pt'>
The so-called under-employment rate, which counts those part-time workers as well as those without jobs who have become discouraged and stopped looking for work, rose to a record 13.5% from 12.6%.</span> Calculations for that measure began in January 1994.

<span style='font-size: 20pt'>"The existing unemployment figures are greatly understated," said billionaire steel tycoon Wilbur Ross in a recent interview with CNNMoney.com. "They count as employed someone who used to have a high-paid manufacturing job, and now is working at a Wal-Mart or a Wendy's."</span>
<span style='font-size: 20pt'>In another discouraging sign, the average hourly work week fell last month to 33.3 hours - the lowest level in history - </span>from 33.5 hours. Even with a modest 5-cent gain in the average hourly salary, the average weekly paycheck fell by $2 to $611.39.

Job losses widespread
Job losses were spread across a wide variety of industries. Manufacturing lost 149,000 jobs, the leisure and hospitality industries cut 22,000 jobs, and the mining industry shed 1,000 positions.

Even in the midst of the holiday shopping season, retailers still slashed payrolls by 66,600 workers last month.

Professional and business services jobs, a category seen by some economists as a proxy for overall economic activity, dropped by 113,000. And financial services jobs fell by 14,000.

Only two of ten industry categories were hiring last month. Government hiring, which has stayed relatively strong throughout the downturn, added another 7,000 jobs in December. Education and health services also grew payrolls by 45,000 employees.

Construction employment shrank further by 101,000 jobs, and the rate of construction unemployment soared to 15.3% - by far the highest of any group.

"Today's jobs report ... is conclusive evidence that it is time to put people back to work building America," said Terry O'Sullivan, general president of the Laborers' International Union of North America. "Now it's time for Congress to move to create jobs with the same urgency as they did on the $700 billion Wall Street bailout."

Call for stimulus
<span style='font-size: 20pt'>President-elect Barack Obama has begun his push for a massive stimulus plan, aimed at creating or saving 3 million jobs over the next two years. </span>Lawmakers have called for rapid action to address the extraordinary stresses facing the labor market, including spending hundreds of billions of dollars on new infrastructure projects.

"This morning, we received a stark reminder about how urgent action is needed," said Obama at a Friday press conference. "Clearly the situation is dire, it is deteriorating and demands urgent and immediate action. For the sake of our economy and our people, this is the moment to act, and act without delay."

<span style='font-size: 20pt'>Many economists have said job losses will continue to accelerate without government intervention.</span><span style='font-size: 20pt'>"The country is losing half a million jobs in a month, and if the government doesn't act quickly, there's no reason that wouldn't intensify," said Mark Zandi, chief economist of Moody's Economy.com before a Democratic Steering and Policy Committee forum Wednesday.</span>
Infrastructure experts agree, saying unemployed construction workers are eager to get back to work.

"Putting money into highways won't by itself end the recession, but it will put a lot of skilled workers back on job," said Ken Simonson, chief economist for The Associated General Contractors of America.

December's job losses were expected to be deep, as employers looked to slash payrolls to free up balance sheets for the new year. <span style='font-size: 20pt'>But large-scale cutbacks may continue throughout the first half of 2009, economists say, as the nation's economy continues on its slow path to recovery.</span>
<span style='font-size: 20pt'>"I think this [level of job loss] is going to continue at least through March," said Tig Gilliam, chief executive of Adecco Group North America, a unit of the world's largest employment firm. "The many clients I've spoken with are not expecting an economic bounce-back soon. They're making the painful and difficult decisions to adjust their capacity for the reduced demand for their goods and services."</span>
Gilliam and Karl both expect about another 1 million jobs to be lost in January and February before the declines begin to shrink to about a 200,000 level in June. Both said stimulus will help, but they doubt infrastructure jobs will have as quick of a boost as lawmakers hope.

"Infrastructure projects won't have an effect until late in the year," said Karl. "Tax cuts may have a more immediate impact, but as we saw with the last stimulus package, they may have no economic impact at all."

<span style='font-size: 17pt'>In another sign that more losses will come soon, </span>temporary employment, including workers employed by temp agencies, fell by another 80,600 jobs last month. Employers often cut temporary workers before they begin cutting permanent staff.

<span style='font-size: 20pt'>The economy has lost more than 2.5 million jobs in the current recession, which began in December 2007, far surpassing the previous two recessions, and just below the 2.7 million jobs lost in the 1981-1982 recession, which had the deepest unemployment in the 70-year history of the report. </span>

<span style='font-size: 20pt'>First Published: January 9, 2009: 8:34 AM ET</span>
Stimulus may spur jobs - abroad

Small companies, giant job losses

Same job, less pay
</div></div>

Barack Obama did not take office until Jan. 20th, 2009!

http://money.cnn.com/2009/01/09/news/economy/jobs_december/

Deeman3
06-16-2010, 08:08 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">[/size]
The unemployment rate rose to 7.2% last month from 6.7% in November - its highest rate since January 1993.

<span style="color: #FF0000"> Looks pretty good compared to to today's 9.7% rate, right?</span>
</div></div>

Barack Obama did not take office until Jan. 20th, 2009!

http://money.cnn.com/2009/01/09/news/economy/jobs_december/ [/quote]

pooltchr
06-16-2010, 08:12 AM
Your link is from January '09. It doesn't even begin to address the job losses that have followed since Obama took office. It doesn't address the complete failure of the so-called stimulus bill to address job losses. (Remember, stimulus was supposed to cap unemployment at no more than 8%?) When was the last time unemployment was below 8%???????

Nothing new here, just more But Bush!!!

Try again.

Steve

Gayle in MD
06-16-2010, 08:15 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Deeman3</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">[/size]
The unemployment rate rose to 7.2% last month from 6.7% in November - its highest rate since January 1993.

<span style="color: #FF0000"> Looks pretty good compared to to today's 9.7% rate, right?</span>
</div></div>

Barack Obama did not take office until Jan. 20th, 2009!

http://money.cnn.com/2009/01/09/news/economy/jobs_december/ </div></div> [/quote]

The predictions were that we could well end up in a Depression, likely to last a decade.

BUSH'S OWN WORDS!

Get real!

Things are far better than they could have been right now, and far better than predicted, and there is no doubt, who set this country head long into it's nose dive!

This is still Bush's deep recession, which we are trying to climb out of.

Sev
06-16-2010, 08:25 AM
By the looks of it climbing isnt the operative term.

May housing starts plummeted 10%. Another government induced bubble has burst.

Gayle in MD
06-16-2010, 08:42 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Deeman3</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">[/size]
The unemployment rate rose to 7.2% last month from 6.7% in November - its highest rate since January 1993.

<span style="color: #FF0000"> Looks pretty good compared to to today's 9.7% rate, right?</span>
</div></div>

Barack Obama did not take office until Jan. 20th, 2009!

http://money.cnn.com/2009/01/09/news/economy/jobs_december/ </div></div> [/quote]


[quote]As government data revealed that 651,000 more jobs disappeared in February, a sense took hold that growing joblessness may reflect a wrenching restructuring of the American economy.

Fears of a million layoffs a month in corporate America (14)Tweet this (5)Heather Stewart and Ruth Sunderland The Observer, Sunday 7 December 2008 Article historyAs many as a million American jobs could be lost every month by next spring as businesses struggle to raise capital in financial markets consumed by fear, according to a new analysis.

<span style='font-size: 20pt'>November was the worst month in the US labour market since the oil crisis of 1974, as more than 500,000 US workers were laid off, according to official figures released on Friday.</span>
<span style='font-size: 20pt'>But Graham Turner, of consultancy GFC Economics, says the rising cost of corporate debt is now flashing a red warning signal that far worse is to come over the next few months and job losses are heading for levels last seen in the 1930s Great Depression.</span>

Corporate bond yields have rocketed since the credit crisis began as investors flee risky assets in search of safe havens such as US Treasuries. That effectively means many firms are being forced to pay eye-watering interest rates to borrow funds.

Turner says when the gap between the yield on high-risk company bonds and US Treasuries widens sharply, unemployment tends to shoot up - and current credit conditions are pointing to a doubling in the pace of layoffs, to more than a million workers a month, by spring.

'The correlation is holding up all too well,' he said. 'It's very disconcerting.' He added that the pace of layoffs already happening in the US 'is indicative of panic'. During the 1970s oil crisis the panic was relatively short-lived, he says. 'But the worry now is that this will just roll on and on.'

On Friday alone, embattled car firm General Motors, fund manager Legg Mason, and motor parts supplier Gentex announced plans to shed staff.

November's jobs figures were so much worse than analysts had expected that the Dow Jones share index actually rallied by 259 points, more than 3 per cent, as investors bet that Washington would have to launch a major new rescue package for the economy even before President-elect Barack Obama takes over the White House in January.

The scale of the layoffs in the US, which pushed unemployment to 6.7 per cent, could also point towards a further deterioration in conditions in the UK: David Blanchflower, an independent member of the Bank of England's Monetary Policy Committee and labour market specialist, warned recently: 'What happens in the US tends to be repeated six to nine months later in Britain'.

David Frost, director-general of the British Chambers of Commerce, believes Britain's companies are gearing up for large-scale layoffs.

'There will be a huge raft of redundancies. I am sensing that talking to firms. The worry is that next year the job losses will be just horrendous. All sectors are taking the hit. In the middle of the year it was construction and estate agencies. Now it is services, the automotive industry, retailers. Firms are waiting for Christmas and if they can't see any improvement they will cut their payrolls.'

Woolworths administrators made 450 of its office staff redundant on Friday, but the future of the 25,000 staff who work in its stores remains uncertain.





As government data revealed that 651,000 more jobs disappeared in February, a sense took hold that growing joblessness may reflect a wrenching restructuring of the American economy.


Interactive Graphic: The Rise in Unemployment
Back Story With The Times's David Leonhardt


Times Topics: UnemploymentThe unemployment rate surged to 8.1 percent, from 7.6 percent in January, its highest level in a quarter-century. In key industries ó manufacturing, financial services and retail ó layoffs have accelerated so quickly in recent months as to suggest that many companies are abandoning whole areas of business.

<span style='font-size: 20pt'>ďThese jobs arenít coming back,Ē said John E. Silvia, chief economist at Wachovia in Charlotte, N.C. ďA lot of production either isnít going to happen at all, or itís going to happen somewhere other than the United States. There are going to be fewer stores, fewer factories, fewer financial services operations. Firms are making strategic decisions that they donít want to be in their businesses.Ē</span>
This dynamic has proved true in past recessions as well, with fading industries pushed to the brink during downturns before others emerged to create jobs when economic growth inevitably resumed. But with job losses so enormous over such a short period of time, some economists argue that the latest crisis challenges the traditional American response to hard times.
<span style='font-size: 20pt'>
For decades, the government has reacted to downturns by handing out temporary unemployment insurance checks, relying upon the resumption of economic growth to restore the jobs lost. This time, the government needs to place a greater emphasis on retraining workers for other careers, these economists say.</span>
<span style='font-size: 20pt'>The grim scorecard of contraction in the American workplace released by the Labor Department on Friday largely destroyed what hopes remained for an economic recovery in the first half of this year, and it added to a growing sense that 2009 is probably a lost cause. </span>
Most economists now assume American fortunes

LWW
06-16-2010, 08:44 AM
That was just precious.

The economy would be in true recovery if we had Bush era UE numbers.

LWW

eg8r
06-16-2010, 09:02 AM
Yeah, she is losing it. Even Obama has made it worse than he predicted.

eg8r

Deeman3
06-16-2010, 12:41 PM
[quote=Gayle in MD

This is still Bush's deep recession, which we are trying to climb out of. [/quote]

<span style="color: #FF0000"> Only those so far left they arein danger of falling off the California Coast are still blaming Bush for this. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

The left wanted a far left guy to cure our ills and even the "not-so-far" left, the moderates and guys on Comedy Central now are understanding why more spending is not working, except for a few government slugs. Bacjk when they wewre giving Bush hell, they were funny newscasters with a vien of truth, what are they now? /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

Even you questioned his experience level before he knocked Hillary out and, I have to admit, you were right on. If we need someone to give an accademic lecture or debate, he is our guy. We need a leader to take responsibility beyond blaming Bush for an organization he "reformed" over the last 20 months. Now he is saying the corruption and inepitude is "worse than we first thought!" The same thing he said about jobs, the economy, health care and so forth.

He is using rendition in all time high numbers, has maintained the wiretapping, kept Giutmo open, is killing rathere than capturing opponents (not bad in my view), reversed himself on Miranda and is moving more right of Bush on policy every day. Goos for him, but don't claim otherwise. He is punishing whistleblowers while allowing select leaks from his white house.

I know why you don't act like you miss bush, you have him in office already. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif If he would just drop the outrageous spending he would be fine for most of us. Sorta coll having a smoker for prez! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

</span>

hondo
06-16-2010, 12:59 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That was just precious.

The economy would be in true recovery if we had Bush era UE numbers.

LWW </div></div>

I needs me Bush, my Precioussss! Gollum!

Gayle in MD
06-16-2010, 01:45 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Deeman3</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif[/img]

<span style="color: #000066"> Only those so thoroughly brain washed by the Bush and the RW media pundits, who ONLY watch and listen to nutcases like Rush, are not blaming Bush for leaving the country in a no good optioins set of circumstances, resulting ffrom his incompetnece and failed policies. </span>

The left wanted a far left guy to cure our ills and even the "not-so-far" left, the moderates and guys on Comedy Central now are understanding why more spending is not working, except for a few government slugs.

<span style="color: #000066">LOL, it's fine to use the comedy guys when they support your misinformation, I see.
They still all agree that the righties are nuts, and that Bush left nothing but disaster. </span>


Bacjk when they wewre giving Bush hell, they were funny newscasters with a vien of truth, what are they now? /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

<span style="color: #000066"> Comedians </span>

Even you questioned his experience level before he knocked Hillary out and, I have to admit, you were right on.

<span style="color: #000066"> He's been experienced enough to accomplish more than Bush, Reagan, Bush one, Even Clinton didn't pass HC reform. </span>


If we need someone to give an accademic lecture or debate, he is our guy.

<span style="color: #000066"> Yep because none of the right are smart enough to follow what he's telling them. </span>


We need a leader to take responsibility beyond blaming Bush for an organization he "reformed" over the last 20 months.

<span style="color: #000066"> He took office In Jan. 2009, and the well blew in April, 2010, that's15 months where I come from, but I forget how much trouble the right has with math, they still can't calculate how much better off Clinton left the country economically, compared to any Republican in recent history. One of you guys even said debts don't matter, while Republicans were in the middle of their spendfest. </span>


Now he is saying the corruption and inepitude is "worse than we first thought!" The same thing he said about jobs, the economy, health care and so forth.

<span style="color: #000066"> I suppose you haven't seen all the good economic reports out today, oh, but then, you'd all just deny those, too. Even bushy's little Barbara, applauds the Health Care passage. </span>

He is using rendition in all time high numbers,

<span style="color: #000066">No, that's not true. </span>


has maintained the wiretapping,

<span style="color: #000066">Again, not true, he does not spy on Americans, or the press. </span>


kept Giutmo open,

<span style="color: #000066"> Another lie, didn't keep it open, is still working on closing it, fighting the Republicans, the same way he has had to fight them for everything he's accomplished, some of which presidents since roosevelt, and a whole list of Republican Presidents couldn't accomplish, like Health care reform. I'd say his record show MORE Executive accomplishments than any previous president, most historians agree. </span>


is killing rathere than capturing opponents (not bad in my view),

<span style="color: #000066"> You can't have it both ways, Deeman, although I realize that you boomers don't understand that. You're accusing more renditions, and more killing than capturing, make up your mind. </span>


reversed himself on Miranda and is moving more right of Bush on policy every day.

<span style="color: #000066"> LMAO! Yeah, right, like Bush and Cheney would have stopped those deep wells in the Gulf, would have pushed for health care reform, would have come down on banks and insurance and BP? BWA HA HA HA....who do you think you're kidding. </span> /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

Goos for him, but don't claim otherwise.

<span style="color: #000066"> Goos? You must be thinking of Larry Craig or Linse Graham? Oh, and you left off the "e"...
</span> /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif


He is punishing whistleblowers

<span style="color: #000066"> That too, is a big lie. </span>



while allowing select leaks from his white house.

<span style="color: #000066">LOL, all presidents leak what they choose, only Bush outs covert CIA agents, while doing so, and false intelligence, that Bush knew was fake. </span>

I know why you don't act like you miss bush, you have him in office already. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif If he would just drop the outrageous spending he would be fine for most of us. Sorta coll having a smoker for prez! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

</span>

<span style="color: #000066"> You know everything about Obama, huh? Living in his underwear? Riding around in it, and know his every move? Gee, you've really grown in the last year and a few months, before that, nothing penetrated your brain, even when there was undeniable proof. </span>

<span style="color: #000066">There are so many lies and exaggerations in this response of yours, addressing all of them would be tiring.

Gitmo became a problem because we learned that some released by Bush turned right around and trained the underwear bomber.

Also, the justice department hasn't completed investigations to determine who many in Gitmo are actually innocent, and have no ties at all to terrorists, or terrorism.

Then there are the torture charges, which greatly complicate opportunities to get convictions. IOW, another Bush result with no good options situation, one of many.

G.</span>

Deeman3
06-16-2010, 03:11 PM
I can't make out the dark blue enough to read all of it but I am sure we disagree! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

pooltchr
06-16-2010, 03:18 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

<span style="color: #000066"> [b]He took office In Jan. 2009, and the well blew in April, 2010, that's15 months where I come from,

G.</span> </div></div>

Well, that is almost twice as long as GW had been in office when 9/11 happened, but you thought that was plenty of time for him to have stopped the terrorists. Why is 15 months not long enough to have changed the things you seem to believe have been problems since Obama was elected...steps that would have averted the oil spill in the gulf.

OK, I'll even give you that one. Why did it take 57 days to put someone in charge of planning the clean up?????????????


Steve

wolfdancer
06-16-2010, 04:49 PM
lets see now...according to your post...Obama should have had plenty of time to make sure that steps were taken to avert oil spills..... /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/confused.gif /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/confused.gif /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/confused.gif
It's a safe guess that those wells have been there since the days of GWB, but you think it to be Obama's fault.......
go to the head of the class....

pooltchr
06-16-2010, 05:16 PM
I never suggested that it was Bush who created the problem, but since you guys seem to think so, why didn't Obama go ahead and fix the problem.

Oh, I forgot, the person he named to head MMS had to be fired this month because of all the corruption in the agency. That's why we now have a new one.

Steve

wolfdancer
06-16-2010, 06:06 PM
At least he was gotten rid of.....that's a positive step. So you believe that the MMS began to be corrupted after Obama took office?

pooltchr
06-16-2010, 06:44 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">At least he was gotten rid of.....that's a positive step. So you believe that the MMS began to be corrupted after Obama took office? </div></div>

I believe that Obama named a new head for the department, and it was politics as usual. Nothing changed. The corruption continues, just under a leader with a (D) after their name. Probably a political favor being returned. Obama is just another Chicago sytle hack politician. He is also showing the world how incompetent he is as a leader.

Is that the kind of change you were expecting with your vote???

Steve

Qtec
06-17-2010, 01:30 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">He is using rendition in all time high numbers, has maintained the wiretapping, kept Giutmo open, is killing rathere than capturing opponents (not bad in my view), reversed himself on Miranda and is moving more right of Bush on policy every day. Goos for him, but don't claim otherwise. He is punishing whistleblowers while allowing select leaks from his white house. </div></div>

I agree and this is why those who supported him are not pleased.

OTOH, you can't blame him for the state of the economy or the debt.
Also, how can he be a Socialist 'who wants to spread the wealth' when he is 'more right of Bush'. ???

Just to refresh your memory, whose fault was 9/11?

What does the Right Wing say?

Throughout the Bush reign, everything was blamed on Clinton.
When Obama became President, for the RW its like Bush never existed. Under Clinton the USA had a profit and he was paying off the Nat Debt [ the thing that all the Teabaggers are crazy about ] not adding to it.

Bush handed Obama a housing crisis, a credit crisis, a banking crisis, foreclosure crisis, two wars etc etc etc ...need I go on?

The country is in dire straights and what does the GOP do?
<span style='font-size: 14pt'>They oppose..........EVERYTHING!</span>
Instead of pulling behind the POTUS, they bring Govt to a virtual halt and then try to blame Obama for everything going wrong.

Just like Deepwater, Bush left the country 'gushing' and Obama is still trying to plug the hole.

Q

Gayle in MD
06-17-2010, 05:10 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Deeman3</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I can't make out the dark blue enough to read all of it but I am sure we disagree! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif </div></div>

Ha ha ha, that's convenient. Whenever your accusations are blown away, you go blind. Typical of a rightie. LOL...

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

Gayle in MD
06-17-2010, 05:24 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">lets see now...according to your post...Obama should have had plenty of time to make sure that steps were taken to avert oil spills..... /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/confused.gif /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/confused.gif /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/confused.gif
It's a safe guess that those wells have been there since the days of GWB, but you think it to be Obama's fault......,
go to the head of the class.... </div></div>

Notice how the pervasive failed Republican policies are left out of the discussion.

Government bad, until they need this president to go out there and fight for their plight, then they're screaming for goverrnment to step in and do something.

Obama made their safety the first consideration when he started with the stimulus, maintaining their police, teachers firemen, do they stop to think what they'd be dealing with, had he said F. the states, as Bush did so many times?

The Republicans made it clear they wanted Obama to fail within weeks of his win. They've prevented as much progress as they could, and fed a dangerous radical terrorist group, right here in our country.

Not one oil man expert had a solution to plug the well. Not one, from anywhere, but does that penetrated their vitriol? WTF did they want him to do?

Republicans destroyed the country, now they want a miracle!

Idiots!

This President just secured twenty billion dollars to supply immediate aid to those affected in the GULF. MEantime, what have any of those fat ass REpublican Governors done down ther b ut walk around with their guts hanging over their belts, and bitch!

Bacnmann is now out there defending BP! Boehner, dooing the same! Sgteele, what a F-ing idiot!

No wonder most people trust Democratics to lead us out of BUSHWHACKED LAND, more then Republicans. No wonder that more people now are supporting the Health Care Bill than ever before.

Republican have a rude awakening in store.

Thank heavens there were no oil pawns running this country when BP F-ed it up.

Any compsrison to 9/11, is a total idiotic joke! Bush was being warned for eight damned months, and did not one single damned thing, NOTHING!

The right should never mention the word, partisan.

G.

Sev
06-17-2010, 06:54 AM
Sooooo Ahhhh. Just where exactly has there been any positive progress since Obama came into office?

All I see coming are higher taxes and one huge credit card run.
If they get there way with the VAT tax and Cap & Trade the entire country is going to get boned harder rougher than any idea a masochist could possibly come up with.

Gayle in MD
06-17-2010, 02:57 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">the entire country is going to get boned harder rougher than any idea a masochist could possibly come up with. </div></div>

That already happened, 2001 through Jan, 2009.

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smirk.gif

pooltchr
06-17-2010, 05:16 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">the entire country is going to get boned harder rougher than any idea a masochist could possibly come up with. </div></div>

That already happened, 2001 through Jan, 2009.

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smirk.gif </div></div>

You ain't seen nothing yet!!!!!

Steve

Sev
06-17-2010, 05:25 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">the entire country is going to get boned harder rougher than any idea a masochist could possibly come up with. </div></div>

That already happened, 2001 through Jan, 2009.

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smirk.gif </div></div>

That was kiddy porn compared to what is coming. Pardon my pun.