Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 53

Thread: Bush sex scandal

  1. #21
    Senior Member Kwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    0


    Yes | No

    Default

    As he said, most of the people who are investing in the stock market aren't using disposable income, but their retirement funds or money they should be saving. And they can't stand a huge loss in income from a crash, as they can't recoup the money they have invested.

  2. #22
    Senior Member Merauk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    4


    Yes | No

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Phleg
    It's pretty hard for a president to fuck over the economy considering that it's Congress that controls the budget, spending, taxes, etc.
    Quote Originally Posted by Phleg
    However, he didn't even have a chance to fuck up the economy before it started going down. Hell, it was already going into a recession when Clinton was in office. And if you look now, a couple years after Bush's inauguration, the economy's picking itself back up.
    So if I understand correctly:

    1.) If the economy is bad and a Republican is in office then it is because the Congress controls the economy.
    2.) If the economy is bad and a Democrat is in office then it is because the President controls the economy.
    3.) If the economy is good and a Democrat is in office (with a Republican predecessor) then it is because fiscal adjustments take several years and he is reaping the wind of his Republican predecessors policies.
    4.) If the economy is bad and a Republican is in office (with a Democratic predecessor) then it is because fiscal adjustments take several years and he is inheriting the poor policy decisions of his Democratic predecessor.

  3. #23


    Yes | No

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Merauk
    So if I understand correctly:

    1.) If the economy is bad and a Republican is in office then it is because the Congress controls the economy.
    2.) If the economy is bad and a Democrat is in office then it is because the President controls the economy.
    3.) If the economy is good and a Democrat is in office (with a Republican predecessor) then it is because fiscal adjustments take several years and he is reaping the wind of his Republican predecessors policies.
    4.) If the economy is bad and a Republican is in office (with a Democratic predecessor) then it is because fiscal adjustments take several years and he is inheriting the poor policy decisions of his Democratic predecessor.

    See my post about how republicans invented "delayed economy"

    Every time a republican is in office the economy plunges, even when a republican is in office 2 terms in a row (ie, Ronald) the economy still stays low...(5 trillion in debt his first term, 8 trillion in debt his second, economy crashed in 85 under his command, slight up after but maintained lows until bush in 88, who promised no new taxes to cover for Reagen, but in the end taxed the shit out of everything. It wasn't until Clinton that the economy picked up, even up till his 8th year in office republicans were trying to say it was because of Bush that the economy was doing so well...Then Bush jr. takes over and within a year the economy is at a record low, and planes are crashing into our buildings.
    Sithray <Juggernauts>
    No Fear
    No Conscience

    A day in the life

  4. #24
    Registered Member Kitska's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    0


    Yes | No

    Default

    Sithgay for presidente!
    Used to be high-elf, then i got tan and shrunk.
    Used to be Phantasmist.
    If you don't know... seek help :P.
    maybe.

  5. #25
    Registered Member Mesmer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    0


    Yes | No

    Default

    Bush is the worst president I have seen in my lifetime.

    He has us bogged down in Iraq. He lied about the reason for going to Iraq. He didnt plan for "post" war occupation at all. Some soldiers are having to buy their own bullet proof vests for fucks sake. The pentagon has completely fucked up how the soldiers in iraq are compensated for their service. Some are not getting paid on time, some not getting paid at all, some getting overpayments which are then deducted out of their accounts automatically. Soldiers in Iraq are having to worry about whether their houses will be taken and their families out on the streets. In 2 company's. 94 % of soldiers stated that they had experienced a problem with their paychecks. He has slashed benefits for Veterans across the board all the while claiming that the very people who serve this country and risk their lives deserve our unwaivering support (which they do).

    Bush ran as a moderate conservative, but he has been so far to the right that many moderate republicans are pissed. Bush has yet to implement any policy change that even remotely grants benefits to those who he works for - U.S. Citizens.

    Bush appointed John Ashcroft. Most of the attorneys I have spoken with, many of whom have been practicing for over 30 years, agree that he is a horrible attorney general because he obviously allows his own political and moral views to influence his decisions. He spent $8000 on curtains to cover the breasts of a statue. He has encouraged the enforcement of the Patriot Bill against non-Terrorist criminals such as drug dealers and organized crime when there is a perfectly acceptable statute for prosecuting such folks called RICO. He has attempted to drastically reduce the amount of discretion that Federal Judges have in sentencing criminals, trying to force the judges to hand down stricter penalties. Its no surprise that the companies that build and sometimes run these private prisons contributed lots-o-cash to his campaign.

    Bush appointed Donald Rumsfeld. See pentagon problems mentioned above.

    I could go on and on, although I will give bush credit for one thing: He didnt plant evidence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, yet.

    Bush is an unmitigated disaster, and I have not even talked about the economy because I dont have anymore time to contribute to this post.
    "The most important thing is for us to find Osama bin Laden. It is our Number One Priority and we will not rest until we find him."
    George W. Bush, September 13, 2001.


    "I don't know where he is. I have no idea and I really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."
    George W. Bush, March 13, 2002.

  6. #26
    Registered Member Boanerges's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    0


    Yes | No

    Default

    Then Bush jr. takes over and within a year the economy is at a record low, and planes are crashing into our buildings.
    And this is Bush's fault... how?
    Boanerges Thundercry
    Archon of Prexus

  7. #27


    Yes | No

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Boanerges
    And this is Bush's fault... how?
    Hello! He is the most powerful man in the country, that's how. The "buck stops here" with him. He can try and divert blame all he wants, but it all comes down to him. If he is allowing people in his administration to make bad descisions, it is still his fault. No matter how you try to say it's not his fault, ultimately, it is. That is the price you pay to be the president.

    Now I am not saying republicans are blind sheep, but republicans are blind sheep.
    Sithray <Juggernauts>
    No Fear
    No Conscience

    A day in the life

  8. #28
    Registered Member Stabu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    0


    Yes | No

    Default

    Yeah, Clinton tossing a couple of missles at Osama everytime he killed a few American's really helped us out, in regards to planes crashing.

    Whats that? You say Clinton had an opportunity to take Osama out but refused to give the order. No way

  9. #29


    Yes | No

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stabu
    Yeah, Clinton tossing a couple of missles at Osama everytime he killed a few American's really helped us out, in regards to planes crashing.

    Whats that? You say Clinton had an opportunity to take Osama out but refused to give the order. No way
    Bullshit! His "opportunity" was for the Saudi gov to get Osama for him in exchange for Terrorism sanctions against Sudan to be lifted....

    How the fuck were the Saudi's going to hand over Bin Laden exactly? They couldn't, and Clinton knew that. They never had him in custody, only said that if the sanctions were lifted, they would extradite him, yet he wasn't even in SA, but in Afghanastan.

    Maybe if you actually knew 2 shits about the gov' and what goes on in it, you wouldn't sound so lost...

    [edit]read: republicans are blind sheep[/edit]
    Sithray <Juggernauts>
    No Fear
    No Conscience

    A day in the life

  10. #30
    Senior Member Merauk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    4


    Yes | No

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sithray
    The "buck stops here" with him. He can try and divert blame all e wants, but it all comes down to him. If he is allowing people in his administration to make bad descisions, it is still his fault. No matter how you try to say it's not his fault, ultimately, it is. That is the price you pay to be the president.
    I think this is the thing which I find to be the problem with politicians today. After the Bay of Pigs, Kennedy addressed the American Association of Newspaper Editors and went through the reasoning for the invasion. This was followed up with a press conference the following day in which I think one of the most poignant answers ever was given by a President. There is nothing I despise more then a man not big enough to own up to his mistakes, far to many politicians fall into that category today. It is disappointing that in todayís age of information technology we actually get less press conferences with elected officials and the ones we do see are sugar coated spin sessions. Anyone know how many press conferences Bush has given since Iraq, aside from his recent meeting with Sir David Frost I canít think of any press conference or interview he has given (I honestly donít know the count on this so if somebody knows I would be curious as to the answer).

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Vanocur
    QUESTION: Sir, since last Saturday, a certain foreign policy situation has given rise to many conflicting stories. But during that time, reporters in Washington have noticed that there has been a clamming up of information from formerly useful sources. To my knowledge the State Department and the White House has not attempted to take a representative group of reporters and say "these are the facts as we know them." And this morning we are not permitted to ask any further questions abut this foreign policy situation. In view of the fact we are taking a propaganda lambasting around the world, why is it not useful, sir, for us to explore with you the real facts behind this, or our motivations?
    Quote Originally Posted by JFK
    THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think in answer to your question that we have to make a judgment as to how much we can usefully say that would aid the interest of the United States. One of the problems of a free society, a problem not met by a dictatorship, is this problem of information. A good deal has been printed in the paper. I wouldn't be surprised if those of you who are members of the press would be receiving a lot of background briefings in the next day or two by interested people or interested agencies.

    There's an old saying that victory has a hundred fathers and defeat is an orphan, and I wouldn't be surprised if information is poured into you in regard to all the recent activities.

    Now, I think we see some of the problems, to move from this particular case, in the problem of Space, where the Soviet Union -- no reports were made in regard to any experiments that they carried out. "Our man in space" -- I saw in a national magazine about some student said the Americans talk a good deal about their man in space. The Soviet Union says nothing and yet it wins. Well, that is one of the problems of a democracy competing and carrying on a struggle for survival against a dictatorship.

    But I will say to you, Mr. Vanocur, that I have said as much as I feel can be usefully said, by me, in regard to the events of the past few days. Further statements, detailed discussions, are not to conceal responsibility because I am the responsible officer of the government, and that is quite obvious, but merely because I do not believe that such a discussion would benefit us during the present difficult situation. I think you will be informed and some of the information, based on what I have seen, will not be accurate.
    If you have never taken time to read about Kennedy I recommend looking at some of his speeches. I cannot think of a greater orator in the 20th century, nor can I think about a person who better defined what I like about America ( We choose to go to the moon. We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard). Sure you can say the press went soft on him over his social life and medical/drug issues. Read some his press conferences though they hit him fairly on the issues that mattered (as above) and he gave well thought out and candid response to those answers.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
◮ Top