Lucky...

And you would say the opposite if another D candiate won. Grass greener, meet Rush. Tell me, what do you think any other president would do with a: - Failed banking system - Mortgage mess worst ever - Unemp driving 3.4% the year before he took office - GDP 4 of 5 Q's negative, current Q -6.4% - 2 big wars in process, entered under false pretense, a total mess VN in the making - Deficit at record levels - Debt at record levels NOT MAKE WORSE LIKE THIS DUMB ASS IS Again, what would you do, not what wouldn't you do. I understand if you don't have an answer, it is a tough question.

- Other countries do and manage it I didn't say that other people do it, I wrote: "Other countries do and manage it." Meaning other countries impose a universal HC of some sort and manage it w/o BKing themselves. If that's hard to understand I can *try* to breakit down more. No, we can't afford to spend 8 times, so we will transition to 6 times, then to 4 times and hopefully less until we stop hammering the budget and still maintain the strongest military in the world. Quit acting like you don't get it, simple military reduction.

is that a PA? Oh... you're saying he's a yank as in yankee... I thought you meant he was a ... well anyway. Is it hard to figure out that he meant Yankee?

You refuse to answer any points you intiated: He inherited a recovering economy, recovering from that fascist pig's overspending and tax cuts. Why was it recovering? GHWB cut spending, military and otherwise, and raised taxes. Clinton did more of the same, cut spending, cut the military and raised taxes. It was still a mess, unemp at 7% is not great, way better than what Obama inherited; 8% and flying upward, it had risen 3.4% from Feb 08 to Feb 09. But Clinton inherited what was a stable but struggling economy thx to GHWB's actions. So Clinton didn't start cutting the military before Jan 95? The 1993 Omnibus spending bill didn't bring taxes up to 40% from 31%? Receipts didn't start rolling in before Jan 95? Unemp didn't drop from Jan 93 to Jan 95? The debt/deficit wasn't underway of repair before Jan 95? Yea, you oughtta sit down on those issues, you won't like the result of the research. Clinton's fingers were all over it, if not, tell us about him shuitting down the economy to get the turds in congress to act right. That's what I thought. Come on, address them or go design an acft that looks like a trailer. You must have been the engineer on teh Shorts 360

So after all this: He inherited a recovering economy, recovering from that fascist pig's overspending and tax cuts. Why was it recovering? GHWB cut spending, military and otherwise, and raised taxes. Clinton did more of the same, cut spending, cut the military and raised taxes. It was still a mess, unemp at 7% is not great, way better than what Obama inherited; 8% and flying upward, it had risen 3.4% from Feb 08 to Feb 09. But Clinton inherited what was a stable but struggling economy thx to GHWB's actions. So Clinton didn't start cutting the military before Jan 95? The 1993 Omnibus spending bill didn't bring taxes up to 40% from 31%? Receipts didn't start rolling in before Jan 95? Unemp didn't drop from Jan 93 to Jan 95? The debt/deficit wasn't underway of repair before Jan 95? Yea, you oughtta sit down on those issues, you won't like the result of the research. Clinton's fingers were all over it, if not, tell us about him shuitting down the economy to get the turds in congress to act right. That's what I thought. That's all ya got? Ok, you're done then. Constitutional or not, Clinton shut it down to get his way and even after all the changes made from 93 to 95, he still DEMANDED more and got them via shutdown. It was his economy from Jan 93 to Jan 01; I have never heard of anyone trying to assign the credit otherwise other than you and Mike.

And you would say the opposite if another D candiate won. Grass greener, meet Rush. Tell me, what do you think any other president would do with a: - Failed banking system - Mortgage mess worst ever - Unemp driving 3.4% the year before he took office - GDP 4 of 5 Q's negative, current Q -6.4% - 2 big wars in process, entered under false pretense, a total mess VN in the making - Deficit at record levels - Debt at record levels And so on..... and you can chide anyone in that position? Bizzare.

I'm going to have to bookmark that, just so I can pull it up in 7 years. Don Yea, cause he will get the other one in 2016!

I'll say it here, this is a vague overview, but to move the top brkt to 50-60% is the most healthy, history has simply proven this since WWI.

Sure we do. Pull all of our money away from Iraq. Reduce the pork to the military-industrial complex by about 30% (pretty modest). Stop wasting money prosecuting marijuana. That pays for it. Better those savings be used to reduce the deficit and taxes first. Right, we can only walk OR chew gum; not both simultaneously. Clinton took unemp from 7% to

So as it boils down, the only area you differ from the crowd is on abortion. I'll explain why. This was very Republican in 86 and I can't say they really want real immigration reform, as the R's love teh cheap labor so they can avoid union issues and worker's rights. That's vague that I don't see it as left or right. So you're pro-NAFTA, that's a RW perspective, not sure what your argument is there. See, you've made the assumprion that Clinton was uber liberal when in fact he was very moderate like GHWB. - The Marriage defense act - Welfare reform / workfare / limits on welfare - NAFTA - Pardoning Symington Just a few off the top of my head; Clinton is not a liberal standard of leftiness by which you should measure yourself. So you're not pro-life, that is one area where you don't march to the RW beat, I wonder how you would eminate that in certain groups? Either way, it's one, don't kid yourself that it's more.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_health_overhaul_requiring_insurance Not really a big surprise, fromthe party that gave us mandatory seat belts and mandatory auto insurance.

After your clown, who pushed for his whole 1st term to rewrite the 1938 FLSA with the Overtime Bill/Law to make some people ineligible for OT pay, I think we have to do a lot of unfucking before we're even, so don't worry too much.

Actually, the G.W. Bush who occupied the Oval Office was a far cry from the one to be found at the Governor's Mansion in Austin. Once it became clear that he had gone around the bend, the consensus of people who assumed it was a bluff was WTF? Blue skies, Winsor Oh, was GWB a great governor? Hardly. I don't know his record well, but I think his presidency was a continuation of his governorship. The key part of your observation with which I find fault is where you say "I think." "5% of the population think, 5% think they think, and 90% would rather die than think." Taylor Caldwell Alwasy count on a conservative to either ad hominem or get touchy feely,never address the issue. If you were more liberal in your approach you would contrast the failure president GWB from the, in your claim, success governor. I don't expect that will happen, or should I say I don't think that will happen. Dude, you are awful touchy waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa It's not about that, it's about the approach to issues; the RW goes after the person or defers to emotions - LW dissects the issues. See, if you subscribe to the RW, no thinking is required, just follow the prescribed rules.

Actually, the G.W. Bush who occupied the Oval Office was a far cry from the one to be found at the Governor's Mansion in Austin. Once it became clear that he had gone around the bend, the consensus of people who assumed it was a bluff was WTF? Blue skies, Winsor Oh, was GWB a great governor? Hardly. I don't know his record well, but I think his presidency was a continuation of his governorship. The key part of your observation with which I find fault is where you say "I think." "5% of the population think, 5% think they think, and 90% would rather die than think." Taylor Caldwell Alwasy count on a conservative to either ad hominem or get touchy feely,never address the issue. If you were more liberal in your approach you would contrast the failure president GWB from the, in your claim, success governor. I don't expect that will happen, or should I say I don't think that will happen.

Sure we do. Pull all of our money away from Iraq. Reduce the pork to the military-industrial complex by about 30% (pretty modest). Stop wasting money prosecuting marijuana. That pays for it. Better those savings be used to reduce the deficit and taxes first. Right, we can only walk OR chew gum; not both simultaneously. Clinton took unemp from 7% to

Actually, the G.W. Bush who occupied the Oval Office was a far cry from the one to be found at the Governor's Mansion in Austin. Once it became clear that he had gone around the bend, the consensus of people who assumed it was a bluff was WTF? Blue skies, Winsor Oh, was GWB a great governor? Hardly. I don't know his record well, but I think his presidency was a continuation of his governorship.

No, I didn't miss the point. Don't care to comment? Here's a vid of tea baggers, look at the last question and answer at the end of the vid and it will bring it all home. Not saying that clown represents all conservatives, but it generalizes how they work. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nunTTyfCr8Y&NR=1

Cause that is what he is getting paid to do Better nudge my employers then, cause I aint gettin' no check yet. Perhaps go wave down the helicopter outside and tell them I need my check.

Because Captain 1976 posted the pic of the infant with thumbs down, made me think of GWB's vetoed child HC Bill and Obama's passed one 2 weeks after he took office. - Other countries do and manage it - We have no way to fund a military that is 8 times more expensive as that of #2, also matches the world in spending, however we find a way to pay for it.

And Scalia, with his nose up Thomas' ass, will parrot him and go along. Roberts will go along just cause and you'll lose 6-3. waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa Yet another example of a Lucky post where if he doesnt agree something is wrong Your head is going to explode one of these days What are you talking about, I'm winning 63 in that scenario? I'm winning, why would I have a problem?

Now that we're done worrying about where I'm from, care to address the issue? The point I was making I think you missed, it's the process that each ideology uses; libs examine issues, conservatives blindly support feelings that are preset. Just read this thread, the conservative approach is to get the emotion boiling and then to say, 'Now, do we really want to pass issue x?' Libs will take issue X and dissect it for it's merits rather than already know what they are going to do based upon a precept.

Pah ... that's a pretty lop-sided swing you'd have going there... Bush and his mob of morons had the upper hand for waty too long. Yea, 20 of 28 years and these were the worst debt years in all the world likely, while these same suspects are screaming about too much spending. What gets me is why do you foreigners even care what our government does? I am not concerned about your country's government. Exception, how do they treat our missionaries? See, it's about who I and not the issue; case in point. BTW, read the bio, it's all for fun, nothing real in it: I'm a born American living in America - back to the issue.

Pah ... that's a pretty lop-sided swing you'd have going there... Bush and his mob of morons had the upper hand for waty too long. Yea, 20 of 28 years and these were the worst debt years in all the world likely, while these same suspects are screaming about too much spending.