Hey Old Fart, is your love of RonPaul a

He can't say anything negative towards Obana though.

After all your posts last week, I'm surprised you would lie to us like that.

You are either a liar or a hypocrite.

(Well, I guess there is a chance that you are both)

so it was the Bush administration that "turned Wall St. loose"?

So did the Obama years, but you have no issue ignoring that. Weird.

It started with the Johnson years of underfunded social programs (thanks, Dems), compounded by the forced introduction of unions (thanks Dems) in the factories that made America uncompetitive in international manufacturing, destroying our manufacturing base and the export revenue with it. Compound that with the concept of deficit spending of Reagan (thanks Repubs), and selling out the country by Clinton (thanks Dems), then the electing of a business incompetent in GW Bush (thanks Repubs), along with war mongering for the benefit of private industry, then on into bank bailouts and exponential government growth by Obama (thanks Dems).

There ya' go. It isn't just one president's fault. You can trace the bullshit back to Johnson.

But, since we're talking about the current POTUS candidates, again I ask, WHY DO YOU IGNORE THE FAILINGS OF OBAMA?

I thought Obama Hoped to Change the way things were going though.....

How many of those bills did your "hero" Ron Paul support, genius?




Fuckin' hypocrite.

How did we get where? The answer is important if you are being honest or just another Democrat.
If here means federal debt then yes. The ball really got rolling in the Bush years and JTom is right, it was kicked into high gear when Obama took over.
If here means private sector economy then no, Bush had little to do with what caused the crash except maybe by omission. Obama had even less to do with it.
Government's culpability in the crash really boils down to the big push for home ownership which started sometime in the 70's I believe but was kicked into high gear during the 90's. It was also during the 90's that Glass Steagall was repealed.

"Go back to policies that got us into this mess" is a Democrat catch all phrase that you never here anybody pin them down on what it means.

You finally get it! YES!, You are the hypocrite.

"The" financial meltdown. Pal, there's a lot more to it than the Fed. There were times in this country between 1913 and now where the country wasn't in debt, yanno. Our "root cause" problem is a lack of revenue generation within our borders. It's not simply interest on our credit card....it's that we have to use our credit card because our country's salary is less than what it spends, and that's even not including interest paid to the Fed.


Now, let's get back to the subject. Romney doesn't have anything more to do with the Fed than Obama does. So let's shove that distraction back up your ass and address why you don't criticize ANY of Obama's failures, when you criticize EVERYTHING that Romney does.

So you're saying Obama will do a better job at fixing the issue with the Fed than Romney would, right?

Again, what will OBAMA do to stop this problem? I'm not talking about Romney. One more time, Oldfart. Ya' come back with Romney bashing or Bush talk (you do realize that Obama pumped billions into both domestic AND foreign banks, right?), and the proof is on the table that you're an Obama supporter.

"Corporate Amerika"

Fukin' liberals.......

Well, I can't PROVE Willard is better as POTUS, because he hasn't yet done the job.

But, I can prove that Obama sucks. He caters to big money, to the banks, to the Fed, to foreign intervention, to budget deficits, to big government, to debt that he doesn't even talk about as being an issue, to everything he's touched so far. He hasn't fixed shit.


Your speculation on what Romney will do is simply speculation. I don't doubt that he'll do about a shitty of a job as Obama will, but since my guy doesn't stand a chance in hell of getting elected, I'll vote for the guy who hasn't already proven incompetency as POTUS, and who actually showed signs of life as a private businessman. I'll also vote for the guy who isn't so ready to reward the losers in this country.

So, our conversation on this is done. You go ahead and vote for Obama, because that's your style. I'm gonna vote for Romney.

He's not asking everyone to hate President Obama, he's asking you to hold the President to the same standards you hold Romney.

The Times article says just what I said. Bush's complicity comes from omission. He didn't do what people think he should
have done. In hindsight of course. They barely discuss the fact that Congress would have nothing to do with these "things" Bush was supposed to do.

The second article lost all of it's credibility with the first 2 sentences: " As president of the United States, George W. Bush was the commander-in-chief of the country and its economy. For 8 years, America has struggled economically, with unemployment skyrocketing and the cost for necessities rising even higher."

The President is in charge of the economy? What fucking nonsense is that?
Skyrocketing unemployment? For most of his 8 years the unemployment rate was 5% or below.
You really need to check your sources before you post up political propaganda like that .

You can't say that "Willard" is a bad president because he's never been. You can however say Obama is a bad president and oldfart is a democrat that supports him. Both facts until you probe otherwise.