Bush vs Obama: Who's Worse?

[TakeYouToTasker]

I hope you don't make your living in the actuarial or analytical professions.

If he ever did, it wasn't for long, because the company was quickly out of business.

 

Shall I eviscerate this post, or is it possible that you may catch it before I do so?

He doesn't see it. Please do.

[Tiberius]

I find it funny that people gripe about Obama and taxes - you gripers haven't taken the time to understand what is going on.

 

Reag

 

So how come our taxes are so high? Because in the last 40 years the tax breaks granted to high end individuals and corporations has exploded. This is Dem And GOP legislators giving breaks to hedge fund managers, the NFL, Boeing, GE, the oil industry, the solar industry......

 

http://thinkbynumber...are-statistics/ Government spends more on Corporate Welfare than Personal Welfare

Additional corporate welfare goes to Walmart etc in the form of the earned income tax credit. Our society has decided that people pretty much need $30,000+ per year to live adequately....if your employer doesn't pay - they US taxpayers make up the difference so you can actually live. So the guy working at Walmart cost us $20 per hour - Walmart pays the first 10 = we pay the next.

The less they pay - the more we pay....

Tax breaks in the tax code are more than receipts now....

THAT is what people should be talking about....but hey BO bowed once....or twice I guess

 

Interesting post, seems the ass wipes don't like it but haven't tried to point out where they emotionally feel you are wrong.

[TH3]

 

 

I hope you don't make your living in the actuarial or analytical professions.

 

Ummmm. These are simple facts. No liberal or conservative slant.

 

 

 

 

Shall I eviscerate this post, or is it possible that you may catch it before I do so?

 

 

Go ahead.

Edited June 11, 2014 by baskin

[Deranged Rhino]

If I was POTUS and they came to me and said "we'd like to set up a Twitter account for you" My answer would simply be "No". Nothing good could come of that.

That's probably because if you were president, you'd understand your role as a public servant with work to do.

Not defending how this administration uses Twitter, but instead picking on you two old coots. You're both in for a surprise if you don't think every president from here on out will have a twitter account, or the next-generation-equivalent. People are surgically wed to their screens these days, as a public servant you have to go to where the people are because their apathy sure as **** won't bring them to you.

 

As much as I despise social media, it can be an important tool if it's used correctly. Pandering and fear mongering are only two ways to use it, there are probably plenty of other, less destructive things that it can do.

[Tiberius]

I've always thought that if Iraq turned into some form of functioning democracy that Bush's historical standing would rise. But what's going on there now makes it more likely to keep him mired down in the depths of the worst Presidents ever, far, far below Obama, who, though not great, isn't a disaster like Bush

[Magox]

I've always thought that if Iraq turned into some form of functioning democracy that Bush's historical standing would rise. But what's going on there now makes it more likely to keep him mired down in the depths of the worst Presidents ever, far, far below Obama, who, though not great, isn't a disaster like Bush

 

I suppose it was Bush's fault that he didn't secure and renew the status of forces agreement?

 

Idiot

 

Go ahead.

 

Let's try it this way, two questions, two hints. Let's see if you are either willfully providing misleading information in order to advance a defense that is based off of a false premise, or simply that you're a numbskull.

 

1) Are you implying that Obama's policies have anything to do with this outcome?

 

2) Would you also say that because of the lower rate in health care spending that we've seen over the past couple years, that it has to do with the ACA OR...........................................?

[Hazed and Amuzed]

Wait, are you talking about Reagan, Clinton, GWB, or Obama?

 

Yes

[IDBillzFan]

I suppose it was Bush's fault that he didn't secure and renew the status of forces agreement?

 

Idiot

 

Gator is one of the last of the great Obama knob-gobblers. He's Debbie Wasserman-Shultz with a vagina. A committed statist. At this juncture, about all he has left is trying to lower the bar on other presidents in hopes he can somehow get it below the bar Obama has managed to lower in five short years.

[Tiberius]

I suppose it was Bush's fault that he didn't secure and renew the status of forces agreement?

 

Idiot

 

You mean kept our sitting ducks, I mean troops, in Iraq?

 

Speaking of agreements, I thought you agreed to boycott me

 

Gator is one of the last of the great Obama knob-gobblers. He's Debbie Wasserman-Shultz with a vagina. A committed statist. At this juncture, about all he has left is trying to lower the bar on other presidents in hopes he can somehow get it below the bar Obama has managed to lower in five short years.

 

Ya, let's turn the discussion away from the epic failure Bush and towards me. You are trash

[Magox]

You mean kept our sitting ducks, I mean troops, in Iraq?

 

Speaking of agreements, I thought you agreed to boycott me

 

 

Let me get this straight, you blamed Bush for the chaos that is occurring in Iraq that is happening under Obama's watch, then when confronted of the fact that the president was unable to renew the status of forces agreement which helps prevent this sort of chaos, you then respond that he was correct to not help prevent this sectarian war.

 

 

That's fine, if you don't want to have troops at all in Iraq, I can go along with this line of thought, but to blame an ex president who most certainly would have renewed the agreement which most likely would have prevented this level of strife is beyond moronic.

 

Oh, and I never agreed to anything with you, you have me confused with someone else.

Edited June 12, 2014 by Magox

[IDBillzFan]

Ya, let's turn the discussion away from the epic failure Bush and towards me. You are trash

 

Now, now...we understand how difficult it is to defend Obama at this point. We know you can barely wake up without tripping over yet another piece to the Obama incompetence puzzle.

 

But cheer up. He can still save his legacy. If he can get another million people to quit looking for work, he'll get unemployment down to the mid 5%!!!

[Tiberius]

Mission Accomplished!

 

 

IRBIL, Iraq — Iraq was on the brink of disintegration Thursday as al-Qaeda-inspired fighters swept through northern Iraq toward Baghdad and Kurdish soldiers seized the city of Kirkuk without a fight.

Lawmakers gathered at the Iraqi parliament to discuss the declaration of a state of emergency, a day after Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki assured Iraqis that the insurgents’ gains were temporary and would soon be reversed by the Iraqi army.

But after the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) captured fresh territory and set its sights on Baghdad, Iraq seemed to be fast slipping out of government control.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/iraq-disintegrating-as-insurgents-advance-kurds-seize-kirkuk/2014/06/12/22e79e2b-f793-4120-8161-36f17c287e5f_story.html?hpid=z1

 

 

 

 

 

LONDON, June 12 (Reuters) - Brent crude oil climbed towards $112 a barrel on Thursday on worries that escalating violence in Iraq could disrupt oil supplies from the major OPEC exporter.

The Brent futures contract - an international benchmark sensitive to geopolitical turmoil - rose $1.90 to $111.85 a barrel by 1320 GMT, paring earlier gains that saw it rise more than $2 to its highest since early March.

U.S. oil gained $1.66 to $106.06 a barrel, also shedding earlier gains that saw it hit a year high.

An initially muted market response to news that Sunni rebels had overrun Iraq's second-largest city and moved in on its largest refinery at Baiji has given way to growing alarm as the al Qaeda splinter group appeared to make rapid advances toward the Shi'ite-led government in Baghdad.

"I would entirely ascribe this move to the insurrection in the north of Iraq ... The fear is that it will cause a threat to Iraqi oil exports," Christopher Bellew, a trader at Jefferies Bache, said.

"If this conflict knocked out Iraq as an exporter, that would have significant impact on prices."

 

 

http://in.reuters.com/article/2014/06/12/markets-oil-idINL4N0OT1B020140612

[IDBillzFan]

Mission Accomplished!

 

It takes a special breed of incompetence to screw up Iraq. And make no mistake...Barack Obama is a special kind of incompetence.

 

Now if you want to vent about " George Bush's war," be my guest. But George Bush isn't president anymore. Barack Obama is because he wanted the job and the responsibilities that come with the American presidency. Up to now, burying those responsibilities in the sand has never been in the job description.

 

Mosul's fall matters for what it reveals about a terrorism whose threat Mr. Obama claims he has minimized. For starters, the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) isn't a bunch of bug-eyed "Mad Max" guys running around firing Kalashnikovs. ISIS is now a trained and organized army.

 

The seizures of Mosul and Tikrit this week revealed high-level operational skills. ISIS is using vehicles and equipment seized from Iraqi military bases. Normally an army on the move would slow down to establish protective garrisons in towns it takes, but ISIS is doing the opposite, by replenishing itself with fighters from liberated prisons

 

.FOREWARD!!!

[DC Tom]

It takes a special breed of incompetence to screw up Iraq. And make no mistake...Barack Obama is a special kind of incompetence.

 

 

 

.FOREWARD!!!

 

This is going to get REAL interesting when an ISIS-run fundamentalist Iraq bumps up against the Shi'ite-Persian Iran.

 

Headline on CNN:

 

ISIS: The first terror group to build an Islamic State?

 

Wasn't the Taliban just in the news last week?

[B-Man]

Wasn't the Taliban just in the news last week?

 

I'm not sure.

 

 

But I do remember our President saying, in 2012, that they were..........."On the Run"

 

 

.

 

 

 

.

Edited June 12, 2014 by B-Man

[Magox]

I'm not sure.

 

 

But I do remember our President saying, in 2012, that they were..........."On the Run"

 

 

.

 

 

 

.

 

They said a lot of things during the 2012 campaign. Many of them in which have turned out to not be true. Who knew? His opponent foresaw many of these very same issues that happen to be the president's failures.

[TH3]

I suppose it was Bush's fault that he didn't secure and renew the status of forces agreement?

 

Idiot

 

 

 

Let's try it this way, two questions, two hints. Let's see if you are either willfully providing misleading information in order to advance a defense that is based off of a false premise, or simply that you're a numbskull.

 

1) Are you implying that Obama's policies have anything to do with this outcome?

 

2) Would you also say that because of the lower rate in health care spending that we've seen over the past couple years, that it has to do with the ACA OR...........................................?

 

Dude if you have a point make it....I didn't imply anything about Obama or say anything about the ACA

[Chef Jim]

Dude if you have a point make it....I didn't imply anything about Obama or say anything about the ACA

 

Well I'm not going to get into what Magox is talking about but there is one word in your Obama 2nd numbers that make them worthless.

[Magox]

Dude if you have a point make it....I didn't imply anything about Obama or say anything about the ACA

Ok, so what you're saying is that you are numbskull.

 

First off, you did imply something, which was that he was responsible for the stats that you provided, or else you wouldn't have posted them. Secondly, for the very same reason that the Tax revenue as a percentage of GDP is what it is today is the same reason that health care spending increases have slown down is because of the...........................

 

 

Drum roll .........

 

 

 

Depressed economy.

 

So if you want him to take credit for it, then you can as long as you also acknowledge that he would be responsible for the depressed economy.

Edited June 12, 2014 by Magox

[Tiberius]

Let me get this straight, you blamed Bush for the chaos that is occurring in Iraq that is happening under Obama's watch, then when confronted of the fact that the president was unable to renew the status of forces agreement which helps prevent this sort of chaos, you then respond that he was correct to not help prevent this sectarian war.

 

 

That's fine, if you don't want to have troops at all in Iraq, I can go along with this line of thought, but to blame an ex president who most certainly would have renewed the agreement which most likely would have prevented this level of strife is beyond moronic.

 

Oh, and I never agreed to anything with you, you have me confused with someone else.

Bush's invasion opened this can of worms to begin with. Why is that so hard for you guys to understand? I think its because you are really, really stupid, but whatever.

 

And BTW, if Iraq turned around into a great democracy--who knows, maybe someday--Bush would deserve a lot of the credit

 

Obama > Bush