The bursting of an $8 trillion housing bubble.

 

and what better way to counter that than create an unsustainable government spending bubble

The Dems have no problem ignoring the recession Bill Clinton left Bush and 9-11 when they talk about the Repubs wasting the "BIGGEST SURPLUS EVER"...

The Dems have no problem ignoring the recession Bill Clinton left Bush and 9-11 when they talk about the Repubs wasting the "BIGGEST SURPLUS EVER"...

 

who was left in a better situation...

 

GWB after Clinton

or

Obama after GWB

 

enough said.

who was left in a better situation...

 

GWB after Clinton

or

Obama after GWB

 

enough said.

 

You are right. Leaving the country completely vulnerable to attack is way worse.

You are right. Leaving the country completely vulnerable to attack is way worse.

 

you mean the Detroit Underwear Bomber?

you mean the Detroit Underwear Bomber?

 

i believe the correct term is 'Detroit Diaper Bomber'

i believe the correct term is 'Detroit Diaper Bomber'

Because it made all the Republicans soil their diapers in fear?

really? so, uh, haven't seen the deficit numbers since the Dems took over eh?

 

i mean, i can understand turning on the GOP over spending, but then voting Dem because you think they will lower spending? not a good plan.

um, what? I never said the Dems would lower spending. I think you'd have to be delusional to think that EITHER party takes fiscal responsibility very seriously right now. What I'm saying is, since both parties are just going to spend away anyway, that makes me look at other issues for my decision-making.

 

The problem, spending-wise, isn't one party or the other anymore - its what BODY we're discussing. Its Congress, its rules, the way it functions, etc. Obama AND Bush have tried various things to control it, to little or no avail. Its about Congress.

 

You are right. Leaving the country completely vulnerable to attack is way worse.

You're not seriously saying that Bush, or Obama, or Clinton, are responsible for 9/11, are you?

 

You're not seriously saying that Bush, or Obama, or Clinton, are responsible for 9/11, are you?

 

Why not? If people can make up rules for economics, I can make up rules for terrorism.

You're not seriously saying that Bush, or Obama, or Clinton, are responsible for 9/11, are you?

2 of those 3 at least have to share some blame.

 

So that I'm not banned from this thread, I won't name explicitly which ones they are, so that this thread's usual posters can assume I'm blaming the latter 2 on that list.

 

Am I unusually snarky this morning?

2 of those 3 at least have to share some blame.

 

So that I'm not banned from this thread, I won't name explicitly which ones they are, so that this thread's usual posters can assume I'm blaming the latter 2 on that list.

 

Am I unusually snarky this morning?

Some small part? Sure. In the grand scheme of things though, not really.

 

Some small part? Sure. In the grand scheme of things though, not really.

Bah, I don't buy that and I think I've said this before. The Clintons seriously screwed up by not doing anything in response to Africa, the Millennium plots, or the Cole other than lobbing a few missiles and hitting the wrong targets, and their lack of action was probably in no small part related to Clinton's inability to keep his zipper up. The Clintons also seriously screwed up in allowing the CIA and FBI to spend 8 years each doing their own thing, and by focusing on creating the illusion of security at airports rather than real security in order to avoid pissing off the airlines. The Bushes seriously screwed up by not really caring 1 bit about terrorism or the Bin Laden group until 9/11 and thinking that the most important issue for this country was missile defense. They wouldn't have had the time to do the serious reform that still hasn't happened at the agencies or to launch a serious rollback campaign, but there was more than enough intel out there mid-2001 to disrupt that plot if there had been a focus on it at the top.

Bah, I don't buy that and I think I've said this before. The Clintons seriously screwed up by not doing anything in response to Africa, the Millennium plots, or the Cole other than lobbing a few missiles and hitting the wrong targets, and their lack of action was probably in no small part related to Clinton's inability to keep his zipper up. The Clintons also seriously screwed up in allowing the CIA and FBI to spend 8 years each doing their own thing, and by focusing on creating the illusion of security at airports rather than real security in order to avoid pissing off the airlines. The Bushes seriously screwed up by not really caring 1 bit about terrorism or the Bin Laden group until 9/11 and thinking that the most important issue for this country was missile defense. They wouldn't have had the time to do the serious reform that still hasn't happened at the agencies or to launch a serious rollback campaign, but there was more than enough intel out there mid-2001 to disrupt that plot if there had been a focus on it at the top.

I think, at worst, Clinton and Bush have a very small part of the blame. Lots and lots and lots of other things lead up to that, many of which were beyond their control.

 

I think, at worst, Clinton and Bush have a very small part of the blame. Lots and lots and lots of other things lead up to that, many of which were beyond their control.

Depends on whether you believe Harry Truman's sign or not.

um, what? I never said the Dems would lower spending. I think you'd have to be delusional to think that EITHER party takes fiscal responsibility very seriously right now. What I'm saying is, since both parties are just going to spend away anyway, that makes me look at other issues for my decision-making.

 

The problem, spending-wise, isn't one party or the other anymore - its what BODY we're discussing. Its Congress, its rules, the way it functions, etc. Obama AND Bush have tried various things to control it, to little or no avail. Its about Congress.

 

agree

http://www.rollcall.com/news/43349-1.html?...a:&st=email

 

 

Another R gain, eventually, but maybe only temporarily.

http://www.rollcall.com/news/43349-1.html?...a:&st=email

 

 

Another R gain, eventually, but maybe only temporarily.

 

Stay classy.

http://www.rollcall.com/news/43349-1.html?...a:&st=email

 

 

Another R gain, eventually, but maybe only temporarily.

 

political suicide for a republican governor in a democratic state, to appoint a republican interim if something happens.

 

he'll be Robert Byrd/Tim Johnson/Ed Kennedy'd.

political suicide for a republican governor in a democratic state, to appoint a republican interim if something happens.

 

he'll be Robert Byrd/Tim Johnson/Ed Kennedy'd.

 

 

Lmao. Like the way Lautenberg was put back in office.

Stay classy.

 

 

Thank You! Will do.

Lmao. Like the way Lautenberg was put back in office.

Winning an election?

 

(Yes, I know there were some minor hijinks to get him on the ballot).

Winning an election?

 

(Yes, I know there were some minor hijinks to get him on the ballot).

 

No hijinks. Just New Jersey Democratic politics.

No hijinks. Just New Jersey Democratic politics.

 

Take out the Democratic and you've got it right.

 

New Jersey politics is plain out dirty, party be damned.

This must be that diplomacy we heard so much about...

 

http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/brad-wilm...past-trash-bags

 

NBC: Obama Made Dalai Lama Sneak Out of White House Past Trash Bags

 

Uniquely among Friday’s broadcast network evening newscasts, NBC Nightly News anchor Brian Williams gave his viewers a glimpse into the undignified exit endured by the Dalai Lama, who was made to walk past a number of trash bags as President Obama sought to keep the Chinese government from noticing the meeting. A photograph of the Tibetan spiritual leader walking past the bags was shown as Williams read the piece.

 

Below is a transcript of the news item from the Friday, February 19, NBC Nightly News, as read by Brian Williams:

 

How do you ask the Dalai Lama to leave the White House if you’re trying to keep his visit from becoming too public? Well, judging from the trash bags that he had to walk around, the Obama White House had him exit through a door seldom used by anybody but household staff. It’s where the West Wing meets the main residence. China, however, did notice the visit and called in the U.S. ambassador to China today to protest.

 

 

Read more: http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/brad-wilm...s#ixzz0g7C19GJR