PDA

View Full Version : LatestCNN PollMajorityBlameBush & Repubs 4 Economy



Gayle in MD
10-01-2011, 08:19 AM
52% Blame Bush and the Repubicans for our bad economy.

32% blame President Obama and the Dems.


G.

cushioncrawler
10-01-2011, 03:20 PM
There will be growth in the spring.
http://i1035.photobucket.com/albums/a432/cushioncrawler/Garden/Dec4014.jpg

eg8r
10-01-2011, 10:52 PM
So Obama's numbers are getting worse. Funny how things change once reality sets in. Obama is a complete failure.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
10-03-2011, 07:27 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So Obama's numbers are getting worse. Funny how things change once reality sets in. Obama is a complete failure.

eg8r </div></div>

Yeah, right. He only killed bin Laden, successfully accomplishing what Bush couldn't or wouldn't do in seven years of Texas styled bravado of "Wanted, Dead of alive"....and laughable "Mision Accomplished" claims, whe nothing had been accomlished, but a total fiasco in the Middle East.

Protected the suffering unemployed, from living in Repiglican created Hooverville's across this country, suffering through a diverted Bush Depression.

Managed to pass a Bill that eight presidents could get accomplished, and promoted the first humane afforts, the prevent a health care policy in which only the wealthy could afford to go to the doctor.

Diverted a global collapse resulting from Repiglicans sending the message to the world, that America is a country that borrows money, and thenn refuses to make their payments on colossal Bush Debts, while trying to get free of the two F-ed up wars, that Bush left this country mired in, neither of which had been properly prosecuted, and one of them totally unjustifiable, given Bush created false intelligence, to scare the people into cowering down to his irrational policies, fear mongering as he went.

This president has accomplished a number of successes, that the right tried to block, and he is still proving himself, a far more successful president, on the foreign policy level.

No more DODT!

NO MORE BEING DROPPED BY THE CORRUPT INSURANCE INDUSTRY, USING FALSE 'PRE-EXSITING CONDITION' BS, IN ORDER TO DROP PEOPLE WHO HAVE PAID FOR PROTECTION.

NO MORE PRETENDING THAT KILLING BIN LADEN WASN'T POSSIBLE, LIKE BUSH DID, FOR HIS BIN LADEN BUSINESS PARTNERS.

We know it kills you, after eight years of a president who failed on every level, but there is no way in this world, that Bush could light a candle, to this President's many successes, all in the face of unprecedented obstructionism by the Grand Oil Party.

G.

eg8r
10-03-2011, 08:11 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Yeah, right. He only killed bin Laden, successfully accomplishing what Bush couldn't or wouldn't do in seven years of Texas styled bravado of "Wanted, Dead of alive"....and laughable "Mision Accomplished" claims, whe nothing had been accomlished, but a total fiasco in the Middle East.
</div></div>Sorry but you really need to keep on subject. You were talking about how many people blame Obama and the Dems for the economy. When Obama took control that number was extremely low. Now that he has done nothing for a couple years Americans are taking notice and more are blaming Obama for the current state of the economy while less are blaming Bush for the current state of the economy.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
10-03-2011, 08:52 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Yeah, right. He only killed bin Laden, successfully accomplishing what Bush couldn't or wouldn't do in seven years of Texas styled bravado of "Wanted, Dead of alive"....and laughable "Mision Accomplished" claims, whe nothing had been accomlished, but a total fiasco in the Middle East.
</div></div>Sorry but you really need to keep on subject. You were talking about how many people blame Obama and the Dems for the economy. When Obama took control that number was extremely low. Now that he has done nothing for a couple years Americans are taking notice and more are blaming Obama for the current state of the economy while less are blaming Bush for the current state of the economy.

eg8r </div></div>

By a twenty percent margin, this poll shows that most Americans ztill blame Bush and the Republicans, for the economy, not President Obama and the Democratics.

Deny it all you want, that's what it shows.

G.

eg8r
10-03-2011, 12:05 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">By a twenty percent margin, this poll shows that most Americans ztill blame Bush and the Republicans, for the economy, not President Obama and the Democratics.
</div></div>The problem is I accept that part but I am not ignorant enough to stop there like you are. I decided to look at the other data you provided which shows us that more and more people, as time ticks on, are giving Obama his deserved credit for the poor economy. When you remove your head from your rear and quick being partisan about everything maybe you will wake up.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
10-04-2011, 09:08 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">52% Blame Bush and the Repubicans for our bad economy.

32% blame President Obama and the Dems.


G.
</div></div>

As well they should....


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The insinuation that Fannie and Freddie were primary movers of the housing market excesses of 2004–2006 lacks even superficial merit. This is because since 2003 both Fannie and Freddie have had limited asset growth, and Fannie's assets actually fell significantly after 2003.

Moreover, the roots of the crisis lie in the sub-prime, Alt-A, and jumbo mortgage markets. That is where "no doc" and "zero down" mortgages proliferated, where loan originations exploded in volume, where losses started, and where the bulk of losses have been so far. Yet, Fannie and Freddie are prevented from financing such mortgage products by their charters.

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>These facts should make clear that Fannie and Freddie did not cause the crisis. Instead, it was driven by loose and negligent lending by banks and Wall Street. That behaviour was due to lack of regulatory oversight, combined with a failed incentive system that rewards management and mortgage brokers for pushing loans rather than prudent lending.

Such loan pushing was even promoted by conservative animus to Fannie and Freddie, as Wall Street was encouraged to muscle in on the former's business. That is why the Bush administration sought regulatory limits on Fannie and Freddie's asset holdings. However, unlike Fannie and Freddie, Wall Street has no legal restrictions on loan quality and opted for gorging on sub-prime.

The bubble's origins lie in failed macroeconomic policy that prompted the Fed to push interest rates too low for too long, combined with loose lending by banks and Wall Street. This inflicted a huge negative "pecuniary externality" on Fannie and Freddie, driving up house prices in the normally sound mortgage markets they serve. Consequently, they too have been battered by the bubble's implosion.</span> </div></div>

http://populareconomicsweekly.blogspot.com/2011/07/dont-blame-fannie-and-freddie.html

Sid_Vicious
10-04-2011, 10:35 PM
Anyone not admitting that it was Bush's fault, needs an analrectalectomy. All humor aside, Bush was terrible. His 8 years in office was a blight on the United States Of America. The continuance of educated people here to defend Bush even today, is a blight too. You Bush lovers are not to smart folks...sid

Qtec
10-05-2011, 12:26 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">You were talking about how many people blame Obama and the Dems for the economy. When Obama took control that number was extremely low. </div></div>

No kidding! I would have said the number was zero. How can you blame him for the economy <span style='font-size: 14pt'>before</span> he is President?

Q

Qtec
10-05-2011, 12:45 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So Obama's numbers are getting worse. Funny how things change once reality sets in. Obama is a complete failure.

eg8r </div></div>

Obama is losing support because he gives in too much to the GOP. His biggest mistake was to believe the GOP and the banks would work with him to solve the county's economic problems.

Its time he sees them for what they are, the enemy.

Q



Q

eg8r
10-05-2011, 07:25 AM
Obama is losing support because he is a failure. You can try and come up with as many excuses as you want but the reality is that the people are seeing him for what he really is.

eg8r

eg8r
10-05-2011, 07:27 AM
Why are you arguiing the obvious? In this day and age it is ridiculous to state zero because it is hard to prove however it would be much easier to prove there were some nutcases already blaming Obama.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
10-05-2011, 07:47 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So Obama's numbers are getting worse. Funny how things change once reality sets in. Obama is a complete failure.

eg8r </div></div>

Obama is losing support because he gives in too much to the GOP. His biggest mistake was to believe the GOP and the banks would work with him to solve the county's economic problems.

Its time he sees them for what they are, the enemy.

Q



Q </div></div>

Luckily, my friend, hundreds of thousands all over this country, are demonstrating to show their disgust for the Bush/Repiglican colossal giveaway with no strings attached, to the Wall Street crooks, predatory lenders, ratings agencies, financial institutions- banks, the wealthy crooked CEO's, basically, as Bush himself told us, those who were "Basically, my base," who have robbed all of the rfest of us of our futures...and our health.

Yes, Bush's Base, the thieving Wall St. PIGS, brought this country to it's knees...and America knows it all too well. Dick Cheney's deceitful effort to blame it all on Middle Class Consumers, and the CRA, and Fannie and Freddie, has failed.

BRAVO! The Middle Class, the blue collar workers, the members of unions across this country, have launched their protests against the typical Repiglican protectionism of the greedy, corrupt CEO pigs, who have been enjoying Repiglican methods of turning our country into a fascist nation, paying off the wealthy for their contributions, by stealing from all of the rest,with the help of the Bush (Father and son) Supreme Court fascists, annd the Bush Tax Cuts...

We are watching what is known as a sea change, and it's high time, I must say.

G.


I think that now, change IS on it's way, at last, and hopefully it won't be destroyed by propagandists like FUX NOISE, pigs like the Koch Brothers, (Iran's Buddies,) or the fascist un-American obstructionists of the Grand Oil Party.

Things are looking up!

G.

Gayle in MD
10-05-2011, 07:47 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sid_Vicious</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Anyone not admitting that it was Bush's fault, needs an analrectalectomy. All humor aside, Bush was terrible. His 8 years in office was a blight on the United States Of America. The continuance of educated people here to defend Bush even today, is a blight too. You Bush lovers are not to smart folks...sid </div></div>

Tap, Tap, Tap!

cushioncrawler
10-05-2011, 04:39 PM
The usofa iz full of idiots.
Religious idiots.
Selfish idiots.
Krappynomicysts.
The idiot majority will keep the selfish religious idiot rulers in idiot power.
mac.

cushioncrawler
10-05-2011, 04:46 PM
Idiot
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
An idiot, dolt, or dullard is a mentally deficient person, or someone who acts in a self-defeating or significantly <span style='font-size: 14pt'>counterproductive way</span>. Archaically the word mome has also been used. The synonymous terms moron, imbecile, and cretin have all gained specialized meanings in modern times. An idiot is said to be idiotic, and to suffer from idiocy. A dunce is an idiot who is specifically incapable of learning. An idiot differs from a fool (who is unwise) and an ignoramus (who is uneducated/an ignorant), neither of which refers to someone with low intelligence.

Etymology
Idiot as a word derived from the Greek ἰδιώτης, idiōtēs ("person lacking professional skill", "a private citizen", "individual"), from ἴδιος, idios ("private", "one's own").[1] In Latin the word idiota ("ordinary person, layman") preceded the Late Latin meaning "uneducated or ignorant person."[2] Its modern meaning and form dates back to Middle English around the year 1300, from the Old French idiote ("uneducated or ignorant person"). The related word idiocy dates to 1487 and may have been analogously modeled on the words prophet[3] and prophecy.[4][5] The word has cognates in many other languages.

An idiot in Athenian democracy was someone who was characterized by self-centeredness and concerned almost exclusively with private—as opposed to public—affairs.[6] Idiocy was the natural state of ignorance into which all persons were born and its opposite, citizenship, was effected through formalized education.[6] In Athenian democracy, idiots were born and citizens were made through education (although citizenship was also largely hereditary). Idiot" originally referred to "layman, person lacking professional skill", "person so mentally deficient as to be incapable of ordinary reasoning". Declining to take part in public life, such as democratic government of the polis (city state), was considered dishonorable. <span style='font-size: 14pt'> "Idiots" were seen as having bad judgment in public and political matters</span>. Over time, the term "idiot" shifted away from its original connotation of <span style='font-size: 14pt'>selfishness </span>and came to refer to individuals with overall bad judgment–individuals who are "stupid". According to the Bauer-Danker Lexicon, the noun ίδιωτής in ancient Greek meant "civilian" (ref Josephus Bell 2 178), "private citizen" (ref sb 3924 9 25), "private soldier as opposed to officer," (Polybius 1.69), "relatively unskilled, not clever," (Herodotus 2,81 and 7 199).[7] The military connotation in Bauer's definition stems from the fact that ancient Greek armies in the time of total war mobilized all male citizens (to the age of 50) to fight, and many of these citizens tended to fight poorly and ignorantly.

In modern English usage, the terms "idiot" and "idiocy" describe an extreme folly or stupidity, and its symptoms (foolish or stupid utterance or deed). In psychology, it is a historical term for the state or condition now called profound mental retardation.[8]

Disability
In 19th and early 20th century medicine and psychology, an "idiot" was a person with a very severe mental retardation. In the early 1900s, Dr. Henry H. Goddard proposed a classification system for mental retardation based on the Binet-Simon concept of mental age. Individuals with the lowest mental age level (less than three years) were identified as idiots; imbeciles had a mental age of three to seven years, and morons had a mental age of seven to ten years.[9] IQ, or intelligence quotient, is determined by dividing a person's mental age, as determined by standardized tests, by their actual age. The term "idiot" was used to refer to people having an IQ below 30.[10][11]

In current medical classification, these people are now said to have profound mental retardation.[8]

United States law
Until 2007, the California Penal Code Section 26 stated that "Idiots" were one of six types of people who are not capable of committing crimes. In 2007 the code was amended to read "persons who are mentally incapacitated."[12] In 2008, Iowa voters passed a measure replacing "idiot, or insane person" in the State's constitution with "person adjudged mentally incompetent."[13]

In several states, "idiots" do not have the right to vote:

The constitution of the state of Arkansas was amended in the general election of 2008 to, among other things, repeal a provision (Article 3, Section 5) which had until its repeal prohibited "idiots or insane persons" from voting.[18]

In literature
A few authors have used "idiot" characters in novels, plays and poetry. Often these characters are used to highlight or indicate something else (allegory). Examples of such usage are William Faulkner's The Sound and the Fury and William Wordsworth's The Idiot Boy. Idiot characters in literature are often confused with or subsumed within mad or lunatic characters. The most common imbrication between these two categories of mental impairment occurs in the polemic surrounding Edmund from William Shakespeare's King Lear. In Fyodor Dostoevsky's novel The Idiot, the idiocy of the main character, Prince Lev Nikolaievich Myshkin, is attributed more to his honesty, trustfulness, kindness, and humility, than to a lack of intellectual ability. Nietzsche claimed, in his The Antichrist, that <span style='font-size: 14pt'>Jesus was an idiot</span>. This resulted from his description of Jesus as having an aversion toward the material world.[19