A
Anonymous
Guest
Seems like most Americans are smarter than some give them credit for- the majority (even half the Republicans) know and admit who brought on the Bush Bust and are not forgetting it...
Help Support Ranchers.net:
Seems like most Americans are smarter than some give them credit for- the majority (even half the Republicans) know and admit who brought on the Bush Bust and are not forgetting it...
Big Muddy rancher
Well-known member
I wouldn't give them credit for being that smart. :roll:
They have been brainwashed the last 4 years into believing that line.
Bush might have been president but he had a bubble growing under him from the Clinton years ie Dodd/Frank, Freddie and Fannie and he had democrats to deal with in the Senate and Congress,
He had 9,11 which might have been avoided if Clinton had done his job and even the Democrats believed in WMD's.
They have been brainwashed the last 4 years into believing that line.
Bush might have been president but he had a bubble growing under him from the Clinton years ie Dodd/Frank, Freddie and Fannie and he had democrats to deal with in the Senate and Congress,
He had 9,11 which might have been avoided if Clinton had done his job and even the Democrats believed in WMD's.
A
Anonymous
Guest
Big Muddy rancher said:
So your're saying over 2/3 of Americans are wrong- and you are right :???: :roll:
And these folks (including half the Republicans) have been brainwashed- while you haven't been with your cult mentality... :???: :shock: :roll:
It couldn't have anything to do with an unnecessary war, 6 years of having a Republican rubber stamp Congress, a Repub Congress throwing out many banking laws put in place in the 30's to prevent just such a bust (which Clinton signed onto), and GW cutting out numerous rules (including the checking for aliens legal status and/or ID) giving everyone shortcuts to house loans, while dropping all remaining oversight on the Wall Street Banking and Lending Institutions......
Nope to those that actually looked into the issue- and not followed one or the other cultist preaching- while there is blame to go around on both sides- Bush was asleep at the wheel- and it will always be the Bush Bust...
Big Muddy rancher
Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
No doubt Bush has to carry a share of the blame but I think his biggest fault was trying to hard to please everybody.
Strange be we had to show passports under Bush's presidency and never before that I remember. :?
A
Anonymous
Guest
Big Muddy rancher said:
Yep- he made it difficult for folks living on the border to go back and forth- even if they had lived there for 50 years--BUT he waived the rule requiring lending institutions/brokers and federal lending oversight employees check for adequate ID and proof of being legal aliens before lending huge amounts for overpriced houses...
And the brokers who were making percentage commissions (and trying to become millionaires before they were 40) were happy as a pig in sh*t to dole out the money to whoever came in...And since the banking rules had been changed so that the lender could sell off the loan- and didn't have to keep any skin in the game- the lending companies were happy to hand out to all that came forward....
farmguy
Active member
First of all let me say that I am a Viet Nam veteran and long-time Republican and have been a delegate to many of our state conventions. But the pragmatic, socially conservative party I had known seems to have changed or I have. When I first read these figures I was skeptical.
President Obama declared: "America's finances were in great shape by the year 2000. We went from deficit to surplus. America was actually on track to becoming completely debt-free, and we were prepared for the retirement of the Baby Boomers."
Is that an accurate picture of how things stood at the turn of the century? Actually, yes. In 2000, we had a budget surplus of $230 billion, and both President Clinton and President Bush expressed confidence that the U.S. national debt could be paid off in full by 2010.
Of course, the budget gap widened quickly from there, starting with the $1.5 trillion Bush tax cuts of 2001, and continuing right up to the $787 billion Obama stimulus bill of 2009. Plenty of other budget-busting developments also played a role, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the economic downturn and attendant hit to tax revenue.
Come November I may vote holding my nose or closing my eyes. Thanks Farmguy
President Obama declared: "America's finances were in great shape by the year 2000. We went from deficit to surplus. America was actually on track to becoming completely debt-free, and we were prepared for the retirement of the Baby Boomers."
Is that an accurate picture of how things stood at the turn of the century? Actually, yes. In 2000, we had a budget surplus of $230 billion, and both President Clinton and President Bush expressed confidence that the U.S. national debt could be paid off in full by 2010.
Of course, the budget gap widened quickly from there, starting with the $1.5 trillion Bush tax cuts of 2001, and continuing right up to the $787 billion Obama stimulus bill of 2009. Plenty of other budget-busting developments also played a role, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the economic downturn and attendant hit to tax revenue.
Come November I may vote holding my nose or closing my eyes. Thanks Farmguy
Steve
Well-known member
did the liberals vote for Obama to blame Bush or actually lead and solve some of the problems?
given two years with a overwhelming majority in both houses, you would think he could have done something.... other then find out who he wanted to blame for his incompetencies..
given two years with a overwhelming majority in both houses, you would think he could have done something.... other then find out who he wanted to blame for his incompetencies..
Steve
Well-known member
the 'temporary" tax cuts ,..extended several times under Obama were in response to a downturn in the Clinton economy.. without them some claim we would have had a recession...
the war was a result of failed policy (Clinton) in dealing with known terrorists and a rogue regime that lost a war and would not comply with it's own UN ceasefire agreement..
Bush had several choices,..solve it,.. or blame Clinton.... he worked to solve the problems,...
the fact is ... both parties spent and both parties extended the tax cuts...
but the real problems started after the Democrats took control of the houses in the last two years of Bush's term...
the solution seems to be to vote TEA Party and hope that they can cause enough headaches in DC to slow the spending...
Larrry
Well-known member
Why is it so hard to see for the left that lack of taxes was not the problem.
It's the SPENDING
It's the SPENDING
Trinity man
Well-known member
Bush might have push it over the top some, but he had two major hurricanes, world trade center attack, and Freddie and Fannie problem that the Democratic started years ago to pay for. OT it was the Democratic that started this problem. In 1999, Fannie Mae came under pressure from the Clinton administration to expand mortgage loans to low and moderate income borrowers by increasing the ratios of their loan portfolios in distressed inner city areas designated in the CRA of 1977.[18] Additionally, institutions in the primary mortgage market pressed Fannie Mae to ease credit requirements on the mortgages it was willing to purchase, enabling them to make loans to subprime borrowers at interest rates higher than conventional loans. Now when you are giving money to people that don't have money to pay back how is it going to work if you was in charge?
Faster horses
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2005
- Messages
- 30,239
- Reaction score
- 1,422
Trinity man said:
And that is pure fact.
Thanks for the post, Trinity Man.
Larrry
Well-known member
So you are taking polls as Gospel(excuse me leftwingernuts if the word gospel offends you).
So where does that put the lefties since 2/3 of the people don't like obamacare
So where does that put the lefties since 2/3 of the people don't like obamacare
