World Events
Topic: Bush sucks; worst president in history...

#	Author	Message
261	DouglasDubh Sat 5/24/2008 6:27p	<I laid out the facts.> You laid out some facts, and ignored others. Just as your last post did. <Nope, still right, and you can't show otherwise.> Nope, still wrong, and you can't show otherwise.
262	Dabob2 Sun 5/25/2008 3:10p	<<I laid out the facts.>> <You laid out some facts, and ignored others. Just as your last post did.> Wrong again. I ignored nothing. I addressed all your points, which is why I always copy your posts verbatim and in full. You often don't, and often do ignore points you can't answer, but that's your MO, not mine. <<Nope, still right, and you can't show otherwise.>> <Nope, still wrong, and you can't show otherwise.> How many times are you going to do this, Mr. Python? I've shown facts, you haven't. As usual. I know it's a hard thing for a true believer to hear, but Clinton did do a better job on the deficits that the Republicans who immediately preceded him or followed him. You'd like to chalk all that up to the GOP Congress of the 90's (which - shock! - had some of the same leadership in the 00's when the deficit went through the roof), while giving the Dem. Congress of the 80's all the blame for the then-record deficits and none to St. Reagan or Bush I. Whereas I say that both the presidents in question and the congresses in question should share the blame and/or credit for the fiscal situation they're both responsible for. Which do you think the average person would recognize as more plausible? Your black and white, all or nothing view, or mine?
263	DouglasDubh Mon 5/26/2008 9:04a	<Your black and white, all or nothing view, or mine?> I'd think they'd see you're distorting my position in order to make yours seem more reasonable. I never claimed that the Democrats were solely to blame for greater federal spending than Presidents Reagan or Bush, only that they were more responsible. I say it because it's true.
264	Dabob2 Mon 5/26/2008 12:41p	Well, no it's not, when the lion's share of the deficits were presented to those congresses and the most they did was tinker around the edges. You just can't get around that inconvenient little fact.
265	DouglasDubh Mon 5/26/2008 4:13p	It's you that can't get around a fact - that the Democrats raised federal spending.
266	Dabob2 Mon 5/26/2008 8:45p	No, I've admitted that they raised it slightly above the whopping rate that Reagan raised it.
267	DouglasDubh Mon 5/26/2008 11:59p	Ignoring the fact that President Reagan raised it to meet their demands. How much is "slightly"? How much is "whopping"?
268	Dabob2 Tue 5/27/2008 7:45a	<Ignoring the fact that President Reagan raised it to meet their demands.> I'm sure that's a comforting thought for you, but it bears no resemblance to reality. If it WERE true, that would make Reagan a pretty weak president. The Democrats didn't have nearly the majority to override a veto in the house, and didn't even regain the majority in the senate till 1987. Yet he still submitted budgets based on what those brutes in Congress wanted? Please. >How much is "whopping"?> Enough so that the budgets Reagan SUBMITTED to Congress had far larger deficits than those seen under Carter, Ford, or indeed anyone before him. <How much is "slightly"? > The couple of percentage points they altered the submitted budgets with the whopping deficits.
269	X-san Tue 5/27/2008 8:03a	And for his next trick, ladies and gentlemen, Dabob will shoot fish in a barrel! *applause* Any takers on whether or not Douglas can even attempt to reply to "Yet he still submitted budgets based on what those brutes in Congress wanted?" in a meaningful way? I'll bet $50 he can't come up with anything better than "no, he didn't", or "that's not true", or "I won't reply to distortions" etc...
270	Kar2oonMan Tue 5/27/2008 8:47a	Reagan aside, how does any of that explain how spending went crazy with THIS president, while the GOP controlled the house and senate? This nonsense that the GOP is in favor of "smaller" government is a lie. The truth is neither party is interested in smaller government, and they're not really all that concerned about deficit spending. Why should they be? We voters don't hold them accountable for anything, and supporters of this president will explain away anything and everything and dig back through the 80's looking for something to pin on the Democrats rather than face the disaster this president and the neocons have been.

All times are Pacific Time (US)

Note: Information on the discussion boards is sometimes based on rumors or incorrect information and should not be assumed true. Messages do not necessarily reflect the opinion of LaughingPlace.com or its editors.

More messages:	1-10	11-20	21-30	31-40	41-50
	51-60	61-70	71-80	81-90	91-100
	101-110	111-120	121-130	131-140	141-150
	151-160	161-170	171-180	181-190	191-200
	201-210	211-220	221-230	231-240	241-250
	251-260	261-270	271-280	281-290	291-300
	301-310	311-320	321-330	331-340	341-350
	351-360	361-365

< Previous Topic

Next Topic >

You must be a registered user to post messages.
Click here to register.
After registration you will automatically be brought back to this topic

Jeff Lange DVDs at
The LaughingPlace Store
The LaughingPlace Store carries all of Jeff Lange's theme park DVDs featuring the best of Walt Disney World and Disneyland past and present.

What's on
The Latest
LP Guide to Bolt updated
Bolt Across America Cross-Country Journey Culminates at Red Carpet Premiere of "Bolt" 16 week tour visits 32 cities, raising awareness for the movie and for the ASPCA
Beauty and the Beast to be released in 3D in 2010
Disney's New Five-Picture Deal With IMAX to Begin With 'A Christmas Carol'
Buffalo International Film Festival presents a film benefit celebrating Mickey's 80th birthday December 13th
Disney's Hawai'i Project Begins with Ground Blessing
The Lion King to perform as part of 2008 Royal Variety Performance and BBC Radio 2's Friday Night is Music Night
Walt Disney Imagineering Earns Four Thea Awards
Travel Industry Honors Walt Disney Parks and Resorts Chairman Jay Rasulo
The Walt Disney Company Grants $1.5 Million to Reforest Fire-Ravaged Areas in Southern California

Click here for The Latest