Guliani is backtracking
https://www.yahoo.com/news/giuliani-clarifies-obama-doesn-t-love-america-150640320.html
“My blunt language suggesting that the president doesn’t love America notwithstanding, I didn’t intend to question President Obama’s motives or the content of his heart,” Giuliani writes in an op-ed published by the Wall Street Journal Sunday night. “My intended focus really was the effect his words and his actions have on the morale of the country, and how that effect may damage his performance.”
Comments
-
The guy is a total POS.....but a helluva job trying to make himself relevant again....I'll give him that.
-
Obama ever apologize for questioning Bush's patriotism? I'm sure you'll be on the case.
No clue on what Obama loves, but I know one thing you love...and it involves Obama and a set of kneepads...
-
Got a link for that?HoustonHusky said:Obama ever apologize for questioning Bush's patriotism? I'm sure you'll be on the case.
No clue on what Obama loves, but I know one thing you love...and it involves Obama and a set of kneepads... -
Both these guys are fags
-
Sure...get your kneepads out and start explaining when you are done sucking.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DyLmru6no4U
(also note that Obama has added $7.5 trillion to the debt in 6 years...so if Bush is "unpatriotic" for adding $4 trillion in 8 years what does that make Obama himself.)
And now for the kneepads... -
Wow really? Yes what he said was exactly like what Guliani said. BTW, bush added way more than $4 trillion, but you knew that.
-
*Gurgle* *Gurgle* *Slurp*
-
Oh I didn't know your two dad's were there.HoustonHusky said:*Gurgle* *Gurgle* *Slurp*
-
The 'I know you are but what am I response'. More brilliant commentary from the mental midget.
Keep using your kneepads...you really need them with your obsession with Obama...and you dig up the debt numbers yet? You'll have to start gurgling a different tune to try and explain that one away... -
So now Bush is really in charge when Obama's president, but can't mention Clinton about things like the rise of AQ (and those costs) for Bush. And the Economy and revenues are fixed no matter what the policy or person in charge is. Rihht... Etc....etc....keep *gurgling*.
Simple fact...debt went up $4.9 trillion under Bush in 8 years, and has gone up almost $8 trillion under Obama in 6. He's in charge now...he doesn't like a policy he's had more than enough time to change it (hell...he's ignored Congress for most things).
Keep trying to *gurgle* away.
-
Did you read the article? It clearly stopped Bush's debt at 2009.HoustonHusky said:So now Bush is really in charge when Obama's president, but can't mention Clinton about things like the rise of AQ (and those costs) for Bush. And the Economy and revenues are fixed no matter what the policy or person in charge is. Rihht... Etc....etc....keep *gurgling*.
Simple fact...debt went up $4.9 trillion under Bush in 8 years, and has gone up almost $8 trillion under Obama in 6. He's in charge now...he doesn't like a policy he's had more than enough time to change it (hell...he's ignored Congress for most things).
Keep trying to *gurgle* away.
You are so blindly in love with Republicans that you can't see facts right in front of your face. -
The article? All the numbers are "analysis" from cbpp....a Liberal 501c org.
And you eat it up as "news". Lemming.
-
Just like you eat up O'Reilly and fox news as news.HoustonHusky said:The article? All the numbers are "analysis" from cbpp....a Liberal 501c org.
And you eat it up as "news". Lemming.
Ok. Let's go here. You said Obama " spent " $8 trillion. Show new your source on his actions that led him to spending that much. -
I think "cbpp is your source?" would have done the job.HoustonHusky said:The article? All the numbers are "analysis" from cbpp....a Liberal 501c org.
And you eat it up as "news". Lemming. -
Rudy is right
-
The internet provides facts for any debate now. There are articles that provide facts the earth is 5,000 years old and dinosaurs never existed.
Any argument you want to make can be backed up by the internet. Just google it. -
There even a website that says Houston husky doesn't actually blindly believe all conservative talking points. Crazy, I know.
-
But Guiliani took out the mob!1!
-
Ok...where to start. I guess I'll start with our resident short-bus passenger:
1) Never watch O'Reilly...can't stand the guy. Only thing I can tolerate on Fox New is Special Report, and I've probably watched it twice in the last 6 months. But thank you for at least admitting to being a lemming and therefore assuming others must be as well.
2) Back to the straw man argument...'give me one policy that's resulted in the debt going up $8 TRILLION dollars in the last 6 years, and if you can't then somehow, someway the Fracking President of the United States isn't responsible for anything'. *Gurgle*. Its amazing... And i still can't figure out where you are confused...its common knowledge (i.e. you can look up any website that maintain debt numbers to find them) that the debt went up $4.9 trillion under Bush over 8 years, and has gone up $8 trillion and counting for Obama over the last 6 years. Are you still disagreeing with reality, or trying to *gurgle* the truth away? You know the President has signed every spending bill each year that has gone through Congress, right? Maybe you don't...its a running guess as to what you might and might not know.
3) I know it may be hard to understand for someone like yourself, but just because you can't think on your own it doesn't mean others can't. There was plenty to rip on Bush when he was President...and I did on some if you ever read the old Unleashed boards (the drug plan was stupid with the budget the way it was, along with mailing checks to people to try and boost the economy...both FS ideas). Yet it is amazing how flexible you are in bending over and taking any and all things Obama. It would be comical if it wasn't so pitiful...
-
1) O'Reilly is the same as your news source.
2) yes those are facts the debt went up that much. But let's look at why. Part of it is from additional tax cuts and the stimulus package, we are about a trillion in spending there. The rest is from the wars (which is partially him for extending them for so long), reduced revenues from the recession, and increased welfare from the recession. The recession started a full year before he was elected. I dont stroke Obama, I just dont make up shit and pretend all of the $8 trillion is on Obama. That's just FS.
3) yes and those things you rip Bush on, carried over to Obama. So you remember losing 800k jobs a month? The TARP bailout? Or just expect Obama to fix that on day 1.
The funny part is watching videos of the same news sources blasting Obama got the debt and recession in 2009 and then blaming the recession in 2001 on Clinton. Even tho it started well into Bush's term. That's my point. You parrot right wing talking points. -
1) *gurgle*.. *slurp*...*gurgle*. I think we've already shown you have no clue how to understand even the most basic of news sources including govt data (O'Reilly is now = to govt data...you should tell him and make his ego even bigger)...
2) So you (finally) agree its reality, but now its just not 'fair'. How liberal of you. He's the President...he can cancel/expand/add programs as he sees fit as he has in working with Congress (go look at the tab for Obamacare with the "taxes" that pay for it now being pushed out/repealed/etc...funny how your 501c fails to mention that...and its only going to climb). In addition, the economy should be booming as was beaten through your weak talking points in a previous thread. It hasn't because of his policies, so govt revenues haven't grown like they should. *Gurgle* and *slurp* away as you keep apologizing for it and explaining it away...
3) Really? We are still sending one-time checks out to people? Effin moron. And Obama quadrupled down on the medicare drug benefit with that ACA, but its great for Obama and bad for Bush. And yes, its been 6 YEARS, yet we are still running half a trillion $ deficits a year. Lemming.
Its truly is amazing you keep hitting reply... -
8 years into Bush and we ran a $1.5 trillion deficit. What's your point? Even Romney said 2020 was the best case for a balanced budget.HoustonHusky said:1) *gurgle*.. *slurp*...*gurgle*. I think we've already shown you have no clue how to understand even the most basic of news sources including govt data (O'Reilly is now = to govt data...you should tell him and make his ego even bigger)...
2) So you (finally) agree its reality, but now its just not 'fair'. How liberal of you. He's the President...he can cancel/expand/add programs as he sees fit as he has in working with Congress (go look at the tab for Obamacare with the "taxes" that pay for it now being pushed out/repealed/etc...funny how your 501c fails to mention that...and its only going to climb). In addition, the economy should be booming as was beaten through your weak talking points in a previous thread. It hasn't because of his policies, so govt revenues haven't grown like they should. *Gurgle* and *slurp* away as you keep apologizing for it and explaining it away...
3) Really? We are still sending one-time checks out to people? Effin moron. And Obama quadrupled down on the medicare drug benefit with that ACA, but its great for Obama and bad for Bush. And yes, its been 6 YEARS, yet we are still running half a trillion $ deficits a year. Lemming.
Its truly is amazing you keep hitting reply...
It would be nice if you skipped backed into reality. -
-
Through a bail-out...i.e. a one-time spending event. Obama institutionalized the spending. And Bush spent way too much...I'm not arguing he didn't. His debt is just half of what Obama's spent.
I've seen walls more enlightened then you. Keep *Gurgling*. -
Houston is killing you Honda.
-
Interesting. Didn't know this was a contest. But he is much better at distorting facts then me, yes.Doogles said:Houston is killing you Honda.
-
And Bush sending checks directly to people didn't institutionalize spending? At least Obama made people work for their money.HoustonHusky said:Through a bail-out...i.e. a one-time spending event. Obama institutionalized the spending. And Bush spent way too much...I'm not arguing he didn't. His debt is just half of what Obama's spent.
I've seen walls more enlightened then you. Keep *Gurgling*. -
I think the committee has seen enough
-
Every time I think we've hit rock bottom on your intelligence you prove it goes even lower with a gem like this...2001400ex said:
And Bush sending checks directly to people didn't institutionalize spending? At least Obama made people work for their money.HoustonHusky said:Through a bail-out...i.e. a one-time spending event. Obama institutionalized the spending. And Bush spent way too much...I'm not arguing he didn't. His debt is just half of what Obama's spent.
I've seen walls more enlightened then you. Keep *Gurgling*.
Do you have a clue what you are talking about? The Economic Stimulus Act of 2008 was a one-time "tax rebate" that in essence was the IRS mailing a check out to everybody ONLY ONE TIME. Institutionalizing means growing government bureaucracy and permanent programs (i.e. years and years of spending). And I'm glad you think all the folks with Obama-phones are "working" for their free money.
God I hope you aren't a UW grad...
