the swiftboating of Obama

[JK2000]

So is holding the Executive branch. You know, 24 out of the last 32 years.

 

But keep using the same tactics and wondering why they don't work. Welcome to liberalism's reality.

 

During 24 of those years our national debt increased while during 8 it decreased, can you guess which party was in power during the increases?

 

http://www.lafn.org/politics/gvdc/Natl_Debt_Chart.html

[Alaska Darin]

During 24 of those years our national debt increased while during 8 it decreased, can you guess which party was in power during the increases?

Nice job on attempting to reduce something like the Budget of the United States of America to something as small as which party holds the White House. Welcome to why partisan politics has such a firm hold on this country.

 

Perhaps we should look and see who controlled Congress during the majority of those 8 years? Would that be just as valid? Or will you actually get this point?

 

Our education system really is a disaster.

[JK2000]

Nice job on attempting to reduce something like the Budget of the United States of America to something as small as which party holds the White House. Welcome to why partisan politics has such a firm hold on this country.

 

Our education system really is a disaster.

 

Look at the graph, the numbers don't lie. Do you think it's a coincidence that national debt skyrocketed under Reagan, GHWB, and GWB while it fell during Clinton?

[/dev/null]

Look at the graph, the numbers don't lie. Do you think it's a coincidence that national debt skyrocketed under Reagan, GHWB, and GWB while it fell during Clinton?

 

Do you think it's a coincidence that the national debt dropped after Republicans took control of Congress in 1994?

[JK2000]

Do you think it's a coincidence that the national debt dropped after Republicans took control of Congress in 1994?

 

Clinton was already reducing the debt the two years prior to Republicans winning the house in 1994 and then as soon as he was gone it started going up again.

 

"Bill Clinton steadily reduced the debt increase while he was in office, thanks largely to the 1993 Debt Reduction Act* that was OPPOSED BY EVERY SINGLE REPUBLICAN IN CONGRESS, led by Newt Gingrich! The Republicans claimed that the Debt Reduction Act would result in HIGHER deficits and also result in an economic recession during President Clinton's term. Obviously, with hindsight they were completely wrong. Republicans don't seem to be very good at math, or economics."

[finknottle]

But at least the Obama ad is talking about an issue like the economy while McCain is playing bizarre ads starring Britney and Paris, whose dad by the way is a heavy McCain contributer. All the republiscum have come out now, Corsi, Floyd, etc. we're just waiting on O'Neil.

 

For some of us, the gravitas of a candidate matters. Contrary to how Obama's media handlers portrayed it, there were a great many Democrats who opposed Obama for reasons other than being white trash racists or feminists with hurt feelings. It had everything to do with electing somebody whose chief qualifications seemed to be being tall, handsome, and articulate; with the added bonuses of being (suspiciously) lock step with the party base and an african-american to boot. The dream candidate... but where was his track record? How was he going to deliver on all the things he was promising, like transcending politics, uniting the country, and so forth.

 

He may have policies on his web-site, but he is not a policy candidate. That was Hillary. His policies - whether on Health Care or Georgia - show up a week after everybody elses does, and looks like theirs but a little better triangulated. He comes off as the smooth-talking student that gets away with copying everybody elses assignment and handing it in late. Obama has no gravitas. One doesn't identify him with any strong beliefs, policies, or history, just lofty phrases. How can we tell what kind of president he will be under pressure?

 

For me, the ads you find bizarre are completely on the mark. Obama is not a politician who has been tested in the crucibles of life and politics. He is the American Idol candidate: coming out of nowhere, and smiling his way through chanting crowds to the nomination. And like American Idol - and Britney and Paris - he has managed to do it without ever revealing any lasting talent or character.

[Alaska Darin]

Clinton was already reducing the debt the two years prior to Republicans winning the house in 1994 and then as soon as he was gone it started going up again.

 

"Bill Clinton steadily reduced the debt increase while he was in office, thanks largely to the 1993 Debt Reduction Act* that was OPPOSED BY EVERY SINGLE REPUBLICAN IN CONGRESS, led by Newt Gingrich! The Republicans claimed that the Debt Reduction Act would result in HIGHER deficits and also result in an economic recession during President Clinton's term. Obviously, with hindsight they were completely wrong. Republicans don't seem to be very good at math, or economics."

You are an absolute partisan idiot.

 

My mother could have been President of the United States during the 1990s. Every single economic star lined up while the books were being cooked.

 

But you go ahead and pretend it had something to do with who held the Executive and the passage of "The Debt Reduction Act". Then ignore the fact that the bubble of all that bull sh-- has burst these 8 years later and all that crap came tumbling down - as it was going to do no matter who was in office and what got passed. And that's not me giving a pass the current Administration, whose staggaring lack of competence is trumped only by the terminally stupid electorate (of which you're obviously a part of).

[JK2000]

You are an absolute partisan idiot.

 

My mother could have been President of the United States during the 1990s. Every single economic star lined up while the books were being cooked.

 

But you go ahead and pretend it had something to do with who held the Executive and the passage of "The Debt Reduction Act". Then ignore the fact that the bubble of all that bull sh-- has burst these 8 years later and all that crap came tumbling down - as it was going to do no matter who was in office and what got passed. And that's not me giving a pass the current Administration, whose staggaring lack of competence is trumped only by the terminally stupid electorate (of which you're obviously a part of).

 

Oh right, the president's economic policies have zero effect on economic growth and the national debt. Keep dreaming.

[Alaska Darin]

Oh right, the president's economic policies have zero effect on economic growth and the national debt. Keep dreaming.

Once again, STOP TAKING WORDS OFF MY KEYBOARD THAT DON'T EXIST.

 

That's the problem with you partisans. It's an "all or nothing" proposition.

 

Keep ignoring reality. You masters count on it.

[JK2000]

Once again, STOP TAKING WORDS OFF MY KEYBOARD THAT DON'T EXIST.

 

That's the problem with you partisans. It's an "all or nothing" proposition.

 

Keep ignoring reality. You masters count on it.

 

How else should I have interpreted "my mother could have been President"?

[Alaska Darin]

How else should I have interpreted "my mother could have been President"?

Because she could have. You give the lion's share of credit to the Executive for a single policy that had minimal (if any) short term effect on the economy. That's not anywhere near reality, not that I'd expect you to have a modicum of understanding on the subject. I mean, why break what's obviously a long streak?

[JK2000]

Because she could have. You give the lion's share of credit to the Executive for a single policy that had minimal (if any) short term effect on the economy. That's not anywhere near reality, not that I'd expect you to have a modicum of understanding on the subject. I mean, why break what's obviously a long streak?

 

Oh I forgot, "Clinton Bad".

[Alaska Darin]

Oh I forgot, "Clinton Bad".

Yep. So is his successor. And quite probably whichever of the 2 buffoons that "wins" in November.

 

And it's all thanks to dudes like you.

[JK2000]

Yep. So is his successor. And quite probably whichever of the 2 buffoons that "wins" in November.

 

And it's all thanks to dudes like you.

 

Another ZERO POINT ZERO...........

[Bishop Hedd]

For some of us, the gravitas of a candidate matters. Contrary to how Obama's media handlers portrayed it, there were a great many Democrats who opposed Obama for reasons other than being white trash racists or feminists with hurt feelings. It had everything to do with electing somebody whose chief qualifications seemed to be being tall, handsome, and articulate; with the added bonuses of being (suspiciously) lock step with the party base and an african-american to boot. The dream candidate... but where was his track record? How was he going to deliver on all the things he was promising, like transcending politics, uniting the country, and so forth.

 

He may have policies on his web-site, but he is not a policy candidate. That was Hillary. His policies - whether on Health Care or Georgia - show up a week after everybody elses does, and looks like theirs but a little better triangulated. He comes off as the smooth-talking student that gets away with copying everybody elses assignment and handing it in late. Obama has no gravitas. One doesn't identify him with any strong beliefs, policies, or history, just lofty phrases. How can we tell what kind of president he will be under pressure?

 

For me, the ads you find bizarre are completely on the mark. Obama is not a politician who has been tested in the crucibles of life and politics. He is the American Idol candidate: coming out of nowhere, and smiling his way through chanting crowds to the nomination. And like American Idol - and Britney and Paris - he has managed to do it without ever revealing any lasting talent or character.

 

I'm not talking about democratic feelings about Obama, I'm referring to the legendary slime machine of the right fringe now in full force appearently. It can all be summed up fairly will in this cartoon: http://www.salon.com/comics/tomo/2008/08/12/tomo/

 

 

 

All the things you mentioned about Obama are the same things said of Bush back in 2000...and how did he fare (supreme court decisions aside) in the elections?

 

You don't think interspersing shots of Obama speaking with Chuck Heston as Moses are just slightly surreal, to say nothing of daffy?

[Adam]

Clinton was already reducing the debt the two years prior to Republicans winning the house in 1994 and then as soon as he was gone it started going up again.

 

"Bill Clinton steadily reduced the debt increase while he was in office, thanks largely to the 1993 Debt Reduction Act* that was OPPOSED BY EVERY SINGLE REPUBLICAN IN CONGRESS, led by Newt Gingrich! The Republicans claimed that the Debt Reduction Act would result in HIGHER deficits and also result in an economic recession during President Clinton's term. Obviously, with hindsight they were completely wrong. Republicans don't seem to be very good at math, or economics."

Didn't Clinton also borrow a lot out of the social security fund as well- and isn't social security pretty much in shambles right now?

[finknottle]

All the things you mentioned about Obama are the same things said of Bush back in 2000...and how did he fare (supreme court decisions aside) in the elections?

 

You don't think interspersing shots of Obama speaking with Chuck Heston as Moses are just slightly surreal, to say nothing of daffy?

 

These ads are what many people were thinking all along.

 

I would have approved of an ad mocking Bush on those grounds too - I thought he brought nothing to the table but a folksy manner and a famous dad. My point is that many people are sick of our American Idol approach to politics, wherein smiling, looking good, and speaking in noncontroversial generalities is rewarded over substance and a track record which - by their very nature - will alienate some of the voters.

 

As for the Moses angle, I don't understand why you see it as daffy. You have to be living under a rock not to see the cult-like adoration that has accompanied his campaign, particularly among the media, and the transcendant trappings his campaign has chosen to wrap itself in (we are the Change we've been waiting for, the seas are lifting, and all that). Why is satirizing that such a stretch?

 

Is there something wrong with voters being troubled by what they see as a charismatic political movement?

[/dev/null]

Didn't Clinton also borrow a lot out of the social security fund as well- and isn't social security pretty much in shambles right now?

 

Shhhh, don't tell anyone

[Alaska Darin]

Didn't Clinton also borrow a lot out of the social security fund as well- and isn't social security pretty much in shambles right now?

Borrowing implies that the President intended on paying the money back.

[Adam]

Borrowing implies that the President intended on paying the money back.

Gotta love our last two presidents. Great people, both of them. there should be a play- there really should