Guest viewing limit reached
  • You have reached the maximum number of guest views allowed
  • Please register below to remove this limitation

Obama-3, Bush-0...

JudoJosh

JudoJosh

Pro Virili Parte
So Im watching CNN and Giuliani is on and says we have been attacked 3 times already under Obama and havent had any attacks under Bush.. WTF!?!?!? So since then naturally every station has this single approach of all saying we have been attacked more now then under Bush. I thought these were news reporters, but no they just echo whatever talking point is that day.

Let me try and recap here to try and get a better understanding of this...

Under Obama we had:
Little rock arkansas shooting
the Fort hood shooting
the recent underwear bombing attempt

Under bush we had..
the DC sniper
the shoe bomber
the solider who blew himself and other fellow soliders up in kuwait in 03 I think
the anthrax attacks
the shoting at the LA airport
the guy who drove a SUV into a crowd of people praising the bombers of 9/11 in 06
Oh and of course 9/11!!!

Now let me be fair. Bill O'riley did bring up and ask, "what about the shoe bomber", but it was dismissed and didnt count as an attack under Bush because it wasnt sucessful and it didnt happen over our soil it was in the air and was stopped by airline passengers... That sounds totally different then the underwear bomber. Of course the shoe bomber one doesnt count.

News is such a joke now-a-days





NOTE: This is not intended to be a Bush VS Obama thread such showing the stupidity of the news and how they report to the american people as if we are idiots. I mean this is their job to research facts and report back those facts to us. Not hear a talking point and all run with it without any real reasoning but to just talk. I dont know why I even watch TV anymore, its a little insulting
 
Care for news reports = 0. This is because of this very reason

I care about people and helping them though
 
I figured out why Giulliani's math was off:

Maybe during the Bush years he was watching certain media outlets(cnn,nbc,cbs,abc) who more often than not, describe the above mentioned incidents as committed by "Lone, sexually frustrated nuts"etc. (Thanks Chris-thrill up my leg- Mattews, Keith Olberman, Katie Couric, Harry Smith) and rightly so, didnt count those as "attacks on America".

Then he switched to FOX when Obama came in
 
Well, this was all explained on the Colbert Report. I'll see if I can find the video. You'll laugh hard.
 
CopyCat said:
Well, this was all explained on the Colbert Report. I'll see if I can find the video. You'll laugh hard.
Click to expand...

Lol.. I would love to see his spin on it. Please post when you find it
 
JudoJosh said:
Lol.. I would love to see his spin on it. Please post when you find it
Click to expand...

been looking for it, it was some what of a recent episode and the premise was explaining why Obama had X number of terror acts and bush did not, lowest score wins and Bush had -1 and Obama 3 I think. The way they spun what counts and doesn't count, why, how etc was like staring at an M. C. Escher drawing or following Abbott and Costello's Who's on First...lol

I'll keep looking.
 
I just don't get the whole exploding garments angle. Exploding shoes, exploding underwear. It's like Versace went nuts or something. What are they gonna do next, eat a ton of bean burritos before boarding and try to light the farts?
 
"...deported to Yemen, whereupon he began importing cabbage and bratwurst in record amounts, at once revitalizing the world economy and leading to the new TSA guideline that requires all travelers to eat five pounds of Velveta at least four hours before flying."
 
i wish "reporters" would change their job description to "opinionators". i think modern "reporters" cast a black eye on the profession.
 
Jayhawkk said:
It was Daily Show with the commentary

Invalid Link Removed
Click to expand...

If you were referring to my post, no.. it was definitely The Colbert Report, not the Daily Show, but it'll work..haha.
 
pcproffy said:
Then I'm sure you will admit everything with the economy up to today is the fault of the Bush administration.
Click to expand...

I never denied Bush was the major contributor to the economy, only to be exastrabated two fold by the stupid ass stimulus passed by Bush, then the follow up abomination TARP.

I am guessing you are someone who worships at the feet of liberal ideology, and subsequently their figure head?
 
forget obama. everyone blames bush, but he played the cards he got delt. obama has promised us (as Americans, not republicans or democrats) alot of things, but him and his cronies have yet to fix this nations economic situation. instead they try to put in stupid ass health care bills thats gonna break the country even more. and forget the news, they are biased (not just fox, stupid ass c span and cnn are too dont even argue)

and as for the tally of everything bad thats happened under both presidents.. they couldnt personally do **** about it. people think the president runs the whole damn country. 9/11 was not bushs fault, it was our nations security. and the forth hood shooting wasnt obamas fault. people are so gullible by what liberal news preaches...
 
pcproffy said:
Then I'm sure you will admit everything with the economy up to today is the fault of the Bush administration.
Click to expand...

Bush and Clinton, but especially Bush for his 'saving' us from the last recession. What we're seeing now is the ultimate unwinding of the imbalances that occurred during the Clinton years which Bush, like the moronic ******* that he is, and Greenspan, like the arrogant ******* he is, decided to give us a 'soft landing' from. Which is economic jargon for pushing the same policies that caused the problem even further to generate even more false prosperity to delay and/or cover up the ****storm that would inevitably arrive, though hopefully not in their administrations. There is no way to slow down and/or stop a bubble, it either pops or keeps going, period.
 
CDB said:
Bush and Clinton, but especially Bush for his 'saving' us from the last recession. What we're seeing now is the ultimate unwinding of the imbalances that occurred during the Clinton years which Bush, like the moronic ******* that he is, and Greenspan, like the arrogant ******* he is, decided to give us a 'soft landing' from. Which is economic jargon for pushing the same policies that caused the problem even further to generate even more false prosperity to delay and/or cover up the ****storm that would inevitably arrive, though hopefully not in their administrations. There is no way to slow down and/or stop a bubble, it either pops or keeps going, period.
Click to expand...

Agreed. The concept started as far back as Carter, and Clinton gave the CRA new legs, and even when the problem was being seen in the Bush Era, instead of repealing the ****ty CRA, and tackling the heart of the banking problems, the dumb ass just threw money at it. Now Obama is taking that same path, but throwing more and more and more and more money at it... eventually we will have to stop throwing money at it, then we will be left with a dollar that is equivelent to a peso and a recession that is dragged along for years to come.
 
DAdams91982 said:
Agreed. The concept started as far back as Carter, and Clinton gave the CRA new legs, and even when the problem was being seen in the Bush Era, instead of repealing the ****ty CRA, and tackling the heart of the banking problems, the dumb ass just threw money at it. Now Obama is taking that same path, but throwing more and more and more and more money at it... eventually we will have to stop throwing money at it, then we will be left with a dollar that is equivelent to a peso and a recession that is dragged along for years to come.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. This is a case of piss poor leadership going back decades. It is not the blame soley on Obama/Bush etc... however, they did diddley pooh to tackle the issue and face the trouble head on

they all suck
 
AE14 said:
Absolutely. This is a case of piss poor leadership going back decades. It is not the blame soley on Obama/Bush etc... however, they did diddley pooh to tackle the issue and face the trouble head on

they all suck
Click to expand...

We haven't seen a true fiscal conservative in a very long time.
 
DAdams91982 said:
We haven't seen a true fiscal conservative in a very long time.
Click to expand...

Sure we have, during the primaries. Ron Paul this last time around. Except fiscal conservatives, true fiscal conservatives, tend to know that war is very expensive, destructive, and that the only 'prosperity' it brings is to the people who survive, and then only of the Broken Window Fallacy type. Due to the fact that true fiscal conservatives do not want to try and maintain a trillion military bases in every country possible and then bomb the **** out of the rest of the world, they tend to not get the mainstream Republican vote.
 
obama and bush are the same thing, obama is really bush's 3rd term.

everybody needs to stop what these aholes are saying, and watch what they are doing. what they say is all psychological stuff on society so pay no attention to that.
 
CDB said:
Sure we have, during the primaries. Ron Paul this last time around. Except fiscal conservatives, true fiscal conservatives, tend to know that war is very expensive, destructive, and that the only 'prosperity' it brings is to the people who survive, and then only of the Broken Window Fallacy type. Due to the fact that true fiscal conservatives do not want to try and maintain a trillion military bases in every country possible and then bomb the **** out of the rest of the world, they tend to not get the mainstream Republican vote.
Click to expand...

I meant in the white house.
 
I think it's still rather welcoming to have people actually paying attention to the president's speeches, where as with Bush everything would just instantly be forwarded to Saturday Night Live skit writers.
 
noot said:
I think it's still rather welcoming to have people actually paying attention to the president's speeches, where as with Bush everything would just instantly be forwarded to Saturday Night Live skit writers.
Click to expand...

Thats only because of liberal media bias.
 
noot said:
I think it's still rather welcoming to have people actually paying attention to the president's speeches, where as with Bush everything would just instantly be forwarded to Saturday Night Live skit writers.
Click to expand...

Sure, people do not tumble over in laughter at every mispoken phrase or term as they did with Bush, but I would not go as far as to say that Obama is "welcoming".

Obama is not the same tongue tied politician that Bush is. Fancy words mean nothing if they do not deliver what is promised. Obama look the public in the eyes and makes promises he can't possibly fulfill makes blatant lies as to how his actions/lack of actions has definitely created a positive outcome. There is nothing refreshing or welcomng about politics in the bush era or the obama era...:squint:
 
Mrs. Gimpy! said:
would you please care to elaborate? :poke:
Click to expand...

face (space added) book.com/photo.php?pid=825592&id=1534662477&op=1&view=all&subj=82766788824&aid=-1&oid=82766788824

I'm just saying that he needed a teleprompter while talking to a group of 3rd graders. Watch the most recent SOTUA, even his speech writers were struggling to stick the agenda after the dems lost Massachusetts.

Don't misunderstand me, Obama's a very charismatic speaker...as long as he has a teleprompter telling him what to say. As far as policy, Obama is George Bush on meth. Each expanded/or are expanding the federal government to an unprecedented size and each contributed to the expansion of the federal defecit/national debt to an unsustainable level.

Whether you agree with his policies or not, Reagan was the last fiscal conservative. And, Kennedy was the last real leader who took the office of president (and we see where it got him). All presidents after have had corporate sponsors: Carter (we just won't talk about Carter (see FTC and UN), Regan: (see deregulation of FCC), Clinton: (W is for Whitewater and weakening of national security), Bush (hello? Anyone heard of Halliburton?), Obama (See "Unions, SEIU, UAW, top 10 contributors to Democratic National Committee)

Answer: Less government, not more. (see: 10th amendment)
 
Gizmacho said:
face (space added)


Gizmacho said:
Don't misunderstand me, Obama's a very charismatic speaker...as long as he has a teleprompter telling him what to say. As far as policy, Obama is George Bush on meth.
Click to expand...
agreed. I love how in Obama's state of the union address he states that our economical situation is improving because of his efforts : " ...Talk to the small business in Phoenix that will triple ...its workforce because of the Recovery Act...Talk to the window manufacturer... [who] add[ed] two more work shifts just because of the business it created...There are stories like this all across America.

..".But I realize that for every success story, there are other stories, of men and women who wake up with the anguish of not knowing where their next paycheck will come from;"


I hate how the speech made it seem as if those who are suffering are in the minority compared to those who are experiencing the financial orgasm of their lives. ugh... disgusting how politicians skew things to their benefit. :banghead: sorry for the rant :(
Gizmacho said:
Answer: Less government, not more. (see: 10th amendment)
Click to expand...

you are officially my best friend. the concept of less government was what our country was founded on. Sad to see that the sacrifices of our founding fathers is no longer appreciated by many.
Click to expand...
 
Mrs. Gimpy! said:
agreed. I love how in Obama's state of the union address he states that our economical situation is improving because of his efforts : " ...Talk to the small business in Phoenix that will triple ...its workforce because of the Recovery Act...Talk to the window manufacturer... [who] add[ed] two more work shifts just because of the business it created...There are stories like this all across America.

..".But I realize that for every success story, there are other stories, of men and women who wake up with the anguish of not knowing where their next paycheck will come from;"


I hate how the speech made it seem as if those who are suffering are in the minority compared to those who are experiencing the financial orgasm of their lives. ugh... disgusting how politicians skew things to their benefit. :banghead: sorry for the rant :(


you are officially my best friend. the concept of less government was what our country was founded on. Sad to see that the sacrifices of our founding fathers is no longer appreciated by many.
Click to expand...

You're right. I couldn't stand to watch the entire speech, for what I saw was an inexperienced leader in disbelief that the American people who were fawning over him only one year ago are now not only questioning his policies but blocking them by leveling the playing field in congress. In my opinion he spoke like a spoiled child, sarcastic, petulant, arrogant and condescending... amazed that Americans are no longer buying his magic beans, and angry that he doesn't have a professor to turn this giant "D" into an "A" this time.

In Tuesday's speech, I couldn't stand it when he said, "responsible families don't balance their budgets the way the federal government does. You don't go buying a new boat when you can barely pay your mortgage. You don't blow your cash in Vegas when you're saving for college...etc." Really Mr. President? I still can't believe he would say something like that. Please, lecture me on fiscal responsibility (see US Debt Clock dot org).



I'd like a financial orgasm. :aargh4:
 
noot said:
I think it's still rather welcoming to have people actually paying attention to the president's speeches, where as with Bush everything would just instantly be forwarded to Saturday Night Live skit writers.
Click to expand...

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vje2FtM_itw&feature=related"]YouTube- Big Bird calls bullcrap on Michelle Obama and her husband the president![/ame]


:rofl:
 
Gizmacho said:
face (space added) book.com/photo.php?pid=825592&id=1534662477&op=1&view=all&subj=82766788824&aid=-1&oid=82766788824

I'm just saying that he needed a teleprompter while talking to a group of 3rd graders. Watch the most recent SOTUA, even his speech writers were struggling to stick the agenda after the dems lost Massachusetts.

Don't misunderstand me, Obama's a very charismatic speaker...as long as he has a teleprompter telling him what to say. As far as policy, Obama is George Bush on meth. Each expanded/or are expanding the federal government to an unprecedented size and each contributed to the expansion of the federal defecit/national debt to an unsustainable level.

Whether you agree with his policies or not, Reagan was the last fiscal conservative. And, Kennedy was the last real leader who took the office of president (and we see where it got him). All presidents after have had corporate sponsors: Carter (we just won't talk about Carter (see FTC and UN), Regan: (see deregulation of FCC), Clinton: (W is for Whitewater and weakening of national security), Bush (hello? Anyone heard of Halliburton?), Obama (See "Unions, SEIU, UAW, top 10 contributors to Democratic National Committee)

Answer: Less government, not more. (see: 10th amendment)
Click to expand...

i did see the speech to the 3rd graders and he had 2 teleprompters setup.. that is really bad.. but you know he had to make sure he touched on the major issues like if cuties coverage will be apart of the health care reform
 
JudoJosh said:
i did see the speech to the 3rd graders and he had 2 teleprompters setup.. that is really bad.. but you know he had to make sure he touched on the major issues like if cuties coverage will be apart of the health care reform
Click to expand...

Lol, he's lost without his speech writers. Check out, "obama lost without teleprompter" on youtube. I wish I could post links already, only 11 posts to go!

On another, more serious note... I remember G.W.'s press conference after 9/11. He spoke an hour after it happened after he dispatched the Navy to New York in a show of support. They were still looping the crashes on CNN. He called it how it was, America was attacked in an act of terror and many Americans were killed.

In contrast, it took B.O. three days to issue a statement on the Christmas Bomber, even though it took him only 50 minutes to give the terrorist the rights and protections afforded by the American legal system. The same benefits he has given Khalid Shaikh Mohammed (self-admitted mastermind of 9/11)

Bush: 1 Obama: 0

And by the way Barack, if you're reading this, stop bowing down to Saudi kings and Japanese emperors, because it is a sign of abject subservience and you're humiliating the American people.
 
word, he is just a piece of crap who runs everything for the bankers, not the american people,

teleprompters for school children, i saw that, thats ridiculous.

he moved me when i first saw him, i wish i knew he was using those stupid things.

go by what he does, not what he says, and thats for any president. he was elected by the bildebergers to win the hearts and minds of the american people so they can finish their global agenda. its all an act.

does anybody know where you can take your votes back? because the hope and change i was looking for isnt there and i want my vote back.....george bush's 3rd term is what we have.

<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/eAaQNACwaLw&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/eAaQNACwaLw&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>
 
I just don't care who the president is. We still hate gay people, religion is still valued above science, abortion is everyone's decision besides the women, and apparently we still have one of the ****ies health care in the world.

I think we need a whole government overhaul and then we can worry about who we pick as the president. Until then, it will just be the same thing over and over again and the only change we get is a pretty face telling us that everything is okay.
 
Gizmacho said:
Lol, he's lost without his speech writers. Check out, "obama lost without teleprompter" on youtube. I wish I could post links already, only 11 posts to go!

On another, more serious note... I remember G.W.'s press conference after 9/11. He spoke an hour after it happened after he dispatched the Navy to New York in a show of support. They were still looping the crashes on CNN. He called it how it was, America was attacked in an act of terror and many Americans were killed.

In contrast, it took B.O. three days to issue a statement on the Christmas Bomber, even though it took him only 50 minutes to give the terrorist the rights and protections afforded by the American legal system. The same benefits he has given Khalid Shaikh Mohammed (self-admitted mastermind of 9/11)

Bush: 1 Obama: 0

And by the way Barack, if you're reading this, stop bowing down to Saudi kings and Japanese emperors, because it is a sign of abject subservience and you're humiliating the American people.
Click to expand...

As opposed to the week it took Bush to respond to the shoe bomber? He even stayed on holiday when it happened FFS. As for the whole bowing thing you obviously get the majority of your information on politics courtesy of Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly and Fox News if you believe such a non event was even news worthy in the first place.

Your insinuation in the above is what? That Obama is a snivelling terrorist sympathiser and is afraid of Saudi oil sheik's and Japanese Emperors? Assuming that the answer to this question is yes, I suggest you take the time to remove the big red nose and big floppy shoes you're wearing, turn off Fox News and do some actual research and investigation into politics.

Anyone, and I mean anyone, who tries to assert that GW Bush is a better orator prompted or not than Barack Obama is one of two things; 1 - a rabidly one eyed republican with no regard for truth or factual integrity or 2 - high as a kite... Or both. I'd be 2000% confident that clips of Bush douching a speech will outnumber clips of Obama douching a speech by a rate of 10 - 1.

If I was going to give anyone advice on US politics I'd suggest reading and watching as much information from both sides of the fence and making up your own mind. Don't just parrot what news outlets say like it's your own opinion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top