The GOP Change Machine

[pBills]

Actually, the original motion picture is still going and it has now morphed from what was an uplifting story into a comedy/horror flick.

 

 

That's what happens when the GOP gets into office.

[OCinBuffalo]

My favorite is Senator John Kyle of Arizona holding up the START Treaty so that he can squeeze more money out of the deal. What a jackwagon!

 

I've always said that the worst thing that could have happened to the South was that they could have won the Civil War. The same holds true for the crybaby GOP, the worst thing for them is winning. They cry very well, but governing is by far their weak point*

 

*This was a partisan post and there will be no appologies for that

This isn't even close to being historically accurate. This isn't even distortion. This is flat out BS.

 

Did you just wake up from a 4 year coma? Who has been winning, and therefore, governing for the last 4 years prior to the election this month? Republicans?

 

Get a grip. Over the last 60 years, CLEARLY, the far-left has the "winning" problem. LBJ, Jimmy Cater, the first 2 years of Clinton, and now the first 2 years of Obama all have something in common: bad results and massive amounts of mess that takes years to clean up, and often requires extreme measures.

[Gene Frenkle]

This isn't even close to being historically accurate. This isn't even distortion. This is flat out BS.

 

Did you just wake up from a 4 year coma? Who has been winning, and therefore, governing for the last 4 years prior to the election this month? Republicans?

 

Get a grip. Over the last 60 years, CLEARLY, the far-left has the "winning" problem. LBJ, Jimmy Cater, the first 2 years of Clinton, and now the first 2 years of Obama all have something in common: bad results and massive amounts of mess that takes years to clean up, and often requires extreme measures.

Nice "first two years of Clinton" blast, retard. Way to continue to be a partisan tool!

[OCinBuffalo]

Nice "first two years of Clinton" blast, retard. Way to continue to be a partisan tool!

So are you saying that the first 2 years of Clinton was no different than the last 6? Are you trying to tell us that he didn't get up and say "The era of big government is over?" Are you trying to say that Clinton and Gingrich weren't racing each other to see who cold cut spending fastest after the Republicans took the house?

 

It is historically accurate to stay that Clinton:

you know, the guy that passed welfare reform?

the guy who hired Republican Dick Morris to create the triangulation strategy, which is basically doing Republican ideas before they do, so that they can't argue with you?

yeah, that guy?

was a centrist President for the last 6 years he was in office....and look how well that worked.

 

In contrast, look at the results we get when the far-left agenda is followed = crap.

We got decent results with far-right economic policy, or did you forget about the Reagan Revolution, and/or the fact that the Bush tax cuts prevented the recession everybody said would come right after 9/11?

 

As I said, the above is historically accurate. Opinion is not history.

[Gene Frenkle]

So are you saying that the first 2 years of Clinton was no different than the last 6? Are you trying to tell us that he didn't get up and say "The era of big government is over?" Are you trying to say that Clinton and Gingrich weren't racing each other to see who cold cut spending fastest after the Republicans took the house?

 

It is historically accurate to stay that Clinton:

you know, the guy that passed welfare reform?

the guy who hired Republican Dick Morris to create the triangulation strategy, which is basically doing Republican ideas before they do, so that they can't argue with you?

yeah, that guy?

was a centrist President for the last 6 years he was in office....and look how well that worked.

 

In contrast, look at the results we get when the far-left agenda is followed = crap.

We got decent results with far-right economic policy, or did you forget about the Reagan Revolution, and/or the fact that the Bush tax cuts prevented the recession everybody said would come right after 9/11?

 

As I said, the above is historically accurate. Opinion is not history.

You're a clown. A partisan stooge.

[OCinBuffalo]

You're a clown. A partisan stooge.

You're unable to argue with me, because you simply don't have the ability. Calling me names simply underscored that fact.

[Gene Frenkle]

You're unable to argue with me, because you simply don't have the ability. Calling me names simply underscored that fact.

I'm unable to argue with you because I fall asleep halfway through each of your rants that I bother to read.

[OCinBuffalo]

I'm unable to argue with you because I fall asleep halfway through each of your rants that I bother to read.

No, you make excuses for your inability to argue with me, like this.

 

Would you rather I post 3 points you can't argue with, rather than 10? Want me to hit you with one thing at a time? Then, you will then cry about the volume of my posts, but you still won't be able to argue with them.

 

Edit: Back on point, and still waiting for you to defend your position that the first 2 years of Clinton were the same as the last 6.

Edited November 24, 2010 by OCinBuffalo

[....lybob]

So are you saying that the first 2 years of Clinton was no different than the last 6? Are you trying to tell us that he didn't get up and say "The era of big government is over?" Are you trying to say that Clinton and Gingrich weren't racing each other to see who cold cut spending fastest after the Republicans took the house?

 

It is historically accurate to stay that Clinton:

you know, the guy that passed welfare reform?

the guy who hired Republican Dick Morris to create the triangulation strategy, which is basically doing Republican ideas before they do, so that they can't argue with you?

yeah, that guy?

was a centrist President for the last 6 years he was in office....and look how well that worked.

 

In contrast, look at the results we get when the far-left agenda is followed = crap.

We got decent results with far-right economic policy, or did you forget about the Reagan Revolution, and/or the fact that the Bush tax cuts prevented the recession everybody said would come right after 9/11?

 

As I said, the above is historically accurate. Opinion is not history.

 

I also don't get where you are coming from, Clinton ran as a moderate "NEW" democrat from the get go- after a dem congress in his first two years he had Republican the next six, is that what you are trying to get at?

 

this is a timeline of Clinton's legislation why don't you show us where he changed himself after two years.

[OCinBuffalo]

I also don't get where you are coming from, Clinton ran as a moderate "NEW" democrat from the get go- after a dem congress in his first two years he had Republican the next six, is that what you are trying to get at?

 

this is a timeline of Clinton's legislation why don't you show us where he changed himself after two years.

Again, historically inaccurate. Clinton RAN as a center-left Democrat. However, he attempted to GOVERN as a liberal the first two years.

 

It appears you have your causes and effects mixed up. The Republican Congress elected in 1994 was the effect of the governing from the far-left cause. If Clinton hadn't pulled a bait and switch, I doubt the Democrats would have been rolled in 94. It's hardly like Clinton "decided" to move to the center. He had that decision made for him = move to the center or GTFO.

 

And please, spare us from linking websites and docs that are written by the political office of the White House, and then archived by non-partisan people who have no control over the content. Did you even read the rest of that site? The concept that "issuing waivers" = the complete downsizing of Welfare, is laughable. It's trying to cover the fact that Clinton completely abandoned the leftists to secure his re-election. This was forced on Clinton and that he(read: Dick Morris) was smart enough to beat the Republicans to the punch, doesn't change a thing.

 

The REAL history is clear as a bell. You can keep your rewritten spin version created by government political employees.

Edited November 24, 2010 by OCinBuffalo

[....lybob]

Again, historically inaccurate. Clinton RAN as a center-left Democrat. However, he attempted to GOVERN as a liberal the first two years.

 

It appears you have your causes and effects mixed up. The Republican Congress elected in 1994 was the effect of the governing from the far-left cause. If Clinton hadn't pulled a bait and switch, I doubt the Democrats would have been rolled in 94. It's hardly like Clinton "decided" to move to the center. He had that decision made for him = move to the center or GTFO.

 

And please, spare us from linking websites and docs that are written by the political office of the White House, and then archived by non-partisan people who have no control over the content. Did you even read the rest of that site? The concept that "issuing waivers" = the complete downsizing of Welfare, is laughable. It's trying to cover the fact that Clinton completely abandoned the leftists to secure his re-election. This was forced on Clinton and that he(read: Dick Morris) was smart enough to beat the Republicans to the punch, doesn't change a thing.

 

The REAL history is clear as a bell. You can keep your rewritten spin version created by government political employees.

 

Are you the quantum leap guy- I ask because you seem to be from an alternative timeline- well maybe you're not as cool as the quantum leap guy- how about the fat windbag from sliders

[OCinBuffalo]

Are you the quantum leap guy- I ask because you seem to be from an alternative timeline- well maybe you're not as cool as the quantum leap guy- how about the fat windbag from sliders

Yes, you are denying the fact that Clinton purposely hired a Republican strategist to save him from being booted in 1996....but I am the one who's the quantum leap guy?

 

Pathetic. No amount of goofing changes your terrible argument, and your lack of anything to support it.

[Magox]

Let's be real here, Clinton DID attempt to govern more from the left initially until the midterm route of 94. For Christ's sake, he hired Dick !@#$ing Morris.

[....lybob]

Let's be real here, Clinton DID attempt to govern more from the left initially until the midterm route of 94. For Christ's sake, he hired Dick !@#$ing Morris.

Clinton had worked with Morris before and tried to hire Morris for the 1992 campaign - Morris refused because depending on which version you believe (there was an incident where Bill tackled him and was going to punch him until Hillary intervened) or ( Morris didn't think Bill had much of a chance and didn't want to be associated with a losing campaign).

Clinton ran as a centrist and was a pragmatist, he had both right and left leaning legislation from day one of his administration and going right to the end. As to whether you perceived him moving left to right that is your perception, and just like your perception that Obama is a socialist it bears no resemblance to reality.

[Magox]

Clinton had worked with Morris before and tried to hire Morris for the 1992 campaign - Morris refused because depending on which version you believe (there was an incident where Bill tackled him and was going to punch him until Hillary intervened) or ( Morris didn't think Bill had much of a chance and didn't want to be associated with a losing campaign).

Clinton ran as a centrist and was a pragmatist, he had both right and left leaning legislation from day one of his administration and going right to the end. As to whether you perceived him moving left to right that is your perception, and just like your perception that Obama is a socialist it bears no resemblance to reality.

You suffer from the same disease as the rest of your wingnut base does, which is the disease of Delusion

Edited November 24, 2010 by Magox

[OCinBuffalo]

You suffer from the same disease as the rest of your wingnut base does, which is the disease of Delusion

As I have been saying. This is either the stupidity of refusing to see the world as it is, or, the ignorance of simply not knowing any better, or, as you say, wishful thinking to the point of delusion.

[Gene Frenkle]

No, you make excuses for your inability to argue with me, like this.

 

Would you rather I post 3 points you can't argue with, rather than 10? Want me to hit you with one thing at a time? Then, you will then cry about the volume of my posts, but you still won't be able to argue with them.

 

Edit: Back on point, and still waiting for you to defend your position that the first 2 years of Clinton were the same as the last 6.

It's much more fun watching you get your panties in a wad. Don't hold your breath.

[OCinBuffalo]

It's much more fun watching you get your panties in a wad. Don't hold your breath.

Which only serves to once again prove my point: you simply don't have the ability to argue with me.