One More Dreary Jobs Report

[wbcoleman]

It's also not hard to tell that the hole we're still in was dug by Dubya's Republicans, going from Clinton surplus to an abyss. Yeah--we know.

All Bush's fault!!!!!! hahahahahahahaha......   :woot:  :prop:   :woot:

I got it! Dubya is as pure as the driven snow because he didn't do a damn thing--not even get us into Iraq.  I'll buy that cuz that was President Cheney's doing. Dubya was just the do-nothing veep. I know. :wuv:

See, Dubya is as IRRELEVANT as the driven snow on a 106 degree day.

Then so is Obama, for the same reasons. What Dubya couldn't do as President are the same things Obama can't do as President.  :cheers:

O is POTUS, Dubya is history.

[clistensprechen]

O is POTUS, Dubya is history.

And America wasn't born just yesterday.

[wbcoleman]

O is POTUS, Dubya is history.

And America wasn't born just yesterday.

You know, I was just reading a piece in The Guardian opining that David Cameron intends to run against Gordon Brown in 2015.  How do you suppose that will work?

[clistensprechen]

It's worth getting a bucket of popcorn for.  :popcorn:

[wbcoleman]

It's worth getting a bucket of popcorn for.  :popcorn:

It'll work every bit as well as Obama running in 2012 against George Bush.  In other words:   :giveup:

[clistensprechen]

It's worth getting a bucket of popcorn for.  :popcorn:

It'll work every bit as well as Obama running in 2012 against George Bush.  In other words:   :giveup:

Wishful thinking on your part.  :duck:

[Don Houston]

It's also not hard to tell that the hole we're still in was dug by Dubya's Republicans, going from Clinton surplus to an abyss. Yeah--we know.

What I still do not understand, is everyone blames Bush, when the Markets started going south in 2007.  Why is it that the Democrats refuse to accept any blame for that

[clistensprechen]

It's also not hard to tell that the hole we're still in was dug by Dubya's Republicans, going from Clinton surplus to an abyss. Yeah--we know.

What I still do not understand, is everyone blames Bush, when the Markets started going south in 2007.  Why is it that the Democrats refuse to accept any blame for that

Because Dubya wasn't a Democrat. Still isn't.

[Don Houston]

But DEMOCRATS controlled the House and Senate.  That is the legislative branch, no?

[clistensprechen]

But DEMOCRATS controlled the House and Senate.  That is the legislative branch, no?

Where the dickens do you get your information? Faux News? Ever hear of Blue Dogs, perchance? O_O

[wbcoleman]

But DEMOCRATS controlled the House and Senate.  That is the legislative branch, no?

Where the dickens do you get your information? Faux News? Ever hear of Blue Dogs, perchance? O_O

Blue Dogs aren't Republicans, didn't you hear?

Anyway, if you think O can successfully run against George Bushin 2012, you're dreaming.

[Ted S]

It's also not hard to tell that the hole we're still in was dug by Dubya's Republicans, going from Clinton surplus to an abyss. Yeah--we know.

What I still do not understand, is everyone blames Bush, when the Markets started going south in 2007.  Why is it that the Democrats refuse to accept any blame for that

Because Dubya wasn't a Democrat. Still isn't.

He wasn't a democrat by name but some of his actions certainly were more democrat than republican.

Didn't Dubya sign the largest expansion of entitlements in a generation, Medicare Part D, into law?  That's not a conservative position in anyone's book.  Didn't Bush sign Sarbanes-Oxley into law? That massive collection of stifling regulations isn't conservative.

[wbcoleman]

It's also not hard to tell that the hole we're still in was dug by Dubya's Republicans, going from Clinton surplus to an abyss. Yeah--we know.

What I still do not understand, is everyone blames Bush, when the Markets started going south in 2007.  Why is it that the Democrats refuse to accept any blame for that

Because Dubya wasn't a Democrat. Still isn't.

He wasn't a democrat by name but some of his actions certainly were more democrat than republican.

Didn't Dubya sign the largest expansion of entitlements in a generation, Medicare Part D, into law?  That's not a conservative position in anyone's book.  Didn't Bush sign Sarbanes-Oxley into law? That massive collection of stifling regulations isn't conservative.

"COMPASSIONATE CONSERVATISM"!!!   :woot:

[Don Houston]

But DEMOCRATS controlled the House and Senate.  That is the legislative branch, no?

Where the dickens do you get your information? Faux News? Ever hear of Blue Dogs, perchance? O_O

The Democrats took control of the House in 2007.  It was also the year Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) became speaker of the house, meaning that the Democrats were the major party in the House.  They may not have had a super majority, but they still held control of the house and Senate

[Ted S]

"COMPASSIONATE CONSERVATISM"!!!   :woot:

I cringed the first time I heard that term and I still cringe every time I hear it.

I like the idea of conservatives being compassionate as long as they are acting as an individual and using their own resources.  It's when they use the strong arm of the federal government for their compassion that I cry foul.  The federal government is here to protect our liberty and provide some basic societal infrastructure. Individuals, operating independently or voluntarily with other like minded people is the best mechanism for showing compassion.  States can also be the instrument of benevolence if the citizens want that kind of thing but really, charity is best when the provider is close to the consumer and the provider has some skin-in-the-game.