Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: OzmO on July 05, 2015, 08:25:59 AM
-
After 7 years of Obama.... taking into account the state of the nation now versus the state of the nation when we took over are we better or worse and why?
-
After 7 years of Obama.... taking into account the state of the nation now versus the state of the nation when we took over are we better or worse and why?
hey oz. long time no see!
No, America is not better off. I know the stats, data, polls, and other info says we've improved over 7 years. But in my gut, I have to say we are 100,000,000 times worse off. I can't explain it, just feel it in me bones.
-
After 7 years of Obama.... taking into account the state of the nation now versus the state of the nation when we took over are we better or worse and why?
I cancelled my 3rd trip to the US because it has fallen into a communist utopia led by an islamist dictator.
I am also terrified about the death camps, they must be everywhere by now.
-
I cancelled my 3rd trip to the US because it has fallen into a communist utopia led by an islamist dictator.
I am also terrified about the death camps, they must be everywhere by now.
I was going to book a hotel room for July 4th, but saw the reprogramming camps would be up already.
Lo and behold, I had to watch the fireworks from my confederate-flag painted trunk, not from the Motel 6. Camp fail.
he who hesitates, masturbates. Wise words.
-
No.
-
After 7 years of Obama.... taking into account the state of the nation now versus the state of the nation when we took over are we better or worse and why?
No.
typical Bum
absolutely zero explanation on how he thinks we're worse off today than the day Obama took office
Does anyone actually remember how god awful things were when Obama took office
-
typical Bum
absolutely zero explanation on how he thinks we're worse off today than the day Obama took office
Does anyone actually remember how god awful things were when Obama took office
::)
;D
-
typical Bum
absolutely zero explanation on how he thinks we're worse off today than the day Obama took office
Does anyone actually remember how god awful things were when Obama took office
America is much worse off. Obama is the most divisive President ever. However he is a perfect tool for the elite. They want a person that can help distract the public with racial bullshit issues so they can focus on bigger items that can slip under the radar. Divide and conquer.
If things are so great and everyone has jobs, why did these blacks have to riot in Baltimore and attack whites? Because the media and government steered them in that direction. They are very malleable and can be riled up easily.
(http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2015/04/28/us/28FIRSTDRAFT-baltimore/28FIRSTDRAFT-baltimore-tmagArticle.jpg)
-
America is much worse off. Obama is the most divisive President ever. However he is a perfect tool for the elite. They want a person that can help distract the public with racial bullshit issues so they can focus on bigger items that can slip under the radar. Divide and conquer.
If things are so great and everyone has jobs, why did these blacks have to riot in Baltimore and attack whites? Because the media and government steered them in that direction. They are very malleable and can be riled up easily.
(http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2015/04/28/us/28FIRSTDRAFT-baltimore/28FIRSTDRAFT-baltimore-tmagArticle.jpg)
CHECKMATE ATHEISTS!
If things are so good, why are their homeless? why is their crime? no things are no better.
This riot based on a white cop shooting a black man in a city (1 of the thousands) cause a riot for several days, nothing like this has ever happened, we are in end times.
-
typical Bum
absolutely zero explanation on how he thinks we're worse off today than the day Obama took office
Does anyone actually remember how god awful things were when Obama took office
Yes. But for the right wing dimwits it was the height of a personal and national Utopia. LaLa Land being the nation apparently.
If you don't think so, please feel free to hop in your little time machine and travel back to a time when America was in better shape.
-
Your president creates those facts....you know like it will take between 1-3 years to defeat Isis...oh wait its a generational thing...but cause he says it instead of Bush its ok. The country is worse by a magnitude of ten.
-
Your president creates those facts....you know like it will take between 1-3 years to defeat Isis...oh wait its a generational thing...but cause he says it instead of Bush its ok. The country is worse by a magnitude of ten.
you were in a great recession, LOLOLOL.
things must have been awesome, i miss the 11% unemployment days.
-
...You're fucking from Canada....nobody asked you
-
...You're fucking from Canada....nobody asked you
Geography of where the message is coming from doesn't change the nature of the message itself.
Since you can't refute his (factual) claim, you try to discredit his post simply because he is in Canada?
-
...You're fucking from Canada....nobody asked you
:D
-
you were in a great recession, LOLOLOL.
things must have been awesome, i miss the 11% unemployment days.
It's all bullshit funny money...
http://www.usdebtclock.org/ (http://www.usdebtclock.org/)
-
...You're fucking from Canada....nobody asked you
And you got shit for brains...nobody asked you
-
We're pretty much the same. Some things are better, some things are worst.
Legislatively, Obama hasn't been able to accomplish much, and it hasn't been the end. So the last thing we need are a bunch of candidates chomping at the bit to pass even more laws.
-
work...as you have been nowhere and done nothing...perhaps you should fuck off as well. You're another one...parrots political tp's with wave top alacrity while having ZERO fucking idea what he's talking about.
As for dipshits 11% unemployment.....really, I think it was worse and stayed worse under Obama as he did nothing to fix it with real jobs. People just quit...only get worse when the shitbags pour over the border and take more jobs.
-
work...as you have been nowhere and done nothing...perhaps you should fuck off as well. You're another one...parrots political tp's with wave top alacrity while having ZERO fucking idea what he's talking about.
As for dipshits 11% unemployment.....really, I think it was worse and stayed worse under Obama as he did nothing to fix it with real jobs. People just quit...only get worse when the shitbags pour over the border and take more jobs.
You should have stayed in the military, there being an ignorant simpleton who just does what he is told, is actually a good thing.
;) Relax Mods im just breaking balls.
-
It's all bullshit funny money...
http://www.usdebtclock.org/ (http://www.usdebtclock.org/)
it's not, the difference between the debt and deficit shows how it is not.
-
work...as you have been nowhere and done nothing...perhaps you should fuck off as well. You're another one...parrots political tp's with wave top alacrity while having ZERO fucking idea what he's talking about.
As for dipshits 11% unemployment.....really, I think it was worse and stayed worse under Obama as he did nothing to fix it with real jobs. People just quit...only get worse when the shitbags pour over the border and take more jobs.
He lowered it twice as fast as Romney said he would.
didn't know there were "real jobs", automation will continue to lessen available jobs, there is not much one can do.
-
He lowered it twice as fast as Romney said he would.
didn't know there were "real jobs", automation will continue to lessen available jobs, there is not much one can do.
Pesky little facts....
-
CHECKMATE ATHEISTS!
If things are so good, why are their homeless? why is their crime? no things are no better.
This riot based on a white cop shooting a black man in a city (1 of the thousands) cause a riot for several days, nothing like this has ever happened, we are in end times.
;D
-
Some of the replies to this thread are pretty funny.
Hadn't the housing market just took a dump in 2008 and didn't we have double digit UE?
I remember houses in Sacramento that went for 400K in 2007 going for 100K in 2009.
But things aren't better according to our resident conservative curmudgeons.
At least make a case that the blame doesn't fall on OB but instead on a repub controlled congress or something.
But to say things aren't better now than 2008? ::)
-
Some of the replies to this thread are pretty funny.
Hadn't the housing market just took a dump in 2008 and didn't we have double digit UE?
I remember houses in Sacramento that went for 400K in 2007 going for 100K in 2009.
But things aren't better according to our resident conservative curmudgeons.
At least make a case that the blame doesn't fall on OB but instead on a repub controlled congress or something.
But to say things aren't better now than 2008? ::)
Obama Derangement Syndrome causes many dimwits to grasp onto their delusions. Not matter how stupid they are in light of facts.
-
Obama Derangement Syndrome causes many dimwits to grasp onto their delusions. Not matter how stupid they are in light of facts.
I think a good debate or discussion would be how much of an impact did OB have on our current state we are in now. But to say things were better off in 2008? seriously?
-
I think a good debate or discussion would be how much of an impact did OB have on our current state we are in now. But to say things were better off in 2008? seriously?
Yes, things were better in 2008. The Anti-Christ had not yet fully entrenched himself in the White House and started his demonic agenda that led to the downfall of America. In 2008, the hopes and tears of those who though the birther issue would be enough to remove him were still fresh and salty.
-
I think a good debate or discussion would be how much of an impact did OB have on our current state we are in now. But to say things were better off in 2008? seriously?
A number of things are dramatically worse, including the national debt, race relations, national security, employment/unemployment/labor participation, etc.
-
Bernie Sanders Says Conservatives Are Right About Unemployment!
Posted on July 8, 2015
Yes, you read that headline correctly. If you’re still reading this, congratulations. You win the internet.
(http://louderwithcrowder.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/BernieSandersUnemployment-Link-1024x535.jpg)
Conservatives have been saying for years that the real unemployment is way higher than 5.5 or 5.3 percent. Why? Well, a few reasons, the biggest being that more people have simply dropped out of the workforce. It’s not that unemployment is down, it’s that fewer people are even attempting to look for work at all. You can’t fail at something you never even attempt.
Everybody ignored the conservatives and tried to pretend they didn’t exist…
Well, that becomes a little harder, when Bernie Sanders comes out saying the exact same thing. Yes, that Bernie Sanders. Unemployment is way higher than the government pretends. It’s pretty damning.
The “real” unemployment is 10.8%. We need to put millions of unemployed workers back to work. pic.twitter.com/ETPTSm9UXi
— Bernie Sanders (@SenSanders) June 11, 2015
The crazy thing here, is that Bernie Sanders is loopy enough to think that he may have just discovered this. Still no word on him discovering a comb.
All this does is prove that we were right and people are listening. Even if they pretend they’re not. Also, the left is completely out of original ideas. They’ve now resorted to taking ours and are re-treadding them for the next election.
Still, thanks Bernie for proving Conservatives right about unemployment. You’re a real pal. Now go find a damn comb.
http://louderwithcrowder.com/bernie-sanders-says-conservatives-are-right-about-unemployment/#ixzz3fn1PEh2u
-
Bernie Sanders Says Conservatives Are Right About Unemployment!
Posted on July 8, 2015
Yes, you read that headline correctly. If you’re still reading this, congratulations. You win the internet.
(http://louderwithcrowder.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/BernieSandersUnemployment-Link-1024x535.jpg)
Conservatives have been saying for years that the real unemployment is way higher than 5.5 or 5.3 percent. Why? Well, a few reasons, the biggest being that more people have simply dropped out of the workforce. It’s not that unemployment is down, it’s that fewer people are even attempting to look for work at all. You can’t fail at something you never even attempt.
Everybody ignored the conservatives and tried to pretend they didn’t exist…
Well, that becomes a little harder, when Bernie Sanders comes out saying the exact same thing. Yes, that Bernie Sanders. Unemployment is way higher than the government pretends. It’s pretty damning.
The “real” unemployment is 10.8%. We need to put millions of unemployed workers back to work. pic.twitter.com/ETPTSm9UXi
— Bernie Sanders (@SenSanders) June 11, 2015
The crazy thing here, is that Bernie Sanders is loopy enough to think that he may have just discovered this. Still no word on him discovering a comb.
All this does is prove that we were right and people are listening. Even if they pretend they’re not. Also, the left is completely out of original ideas. They’ve now resorted to taking ours and are re-treadding them for the next election.
Still, thanks Bernie for proving Conservatives right about unemployment. You’re a real pal. Now go find a damn comb.
http://louderwithcrowder.com/bernie-sanders-says-conservatives-are-right-about-unemployment/#ixzz3fn1PEh2u
For years huh? UE has been 5% for years? Recent years?
When UE was 5% under Bush were they saying that then too?
-
A number of things are dramatically worse, including the national debt, race relations, national security, employment/unemployment/labor participation, etc.
Has national Debt been worse under every president since Carter?
Was there ever a president who lowered it from what it was when he got was elected?
Kind of a weak argument.
Don't know that our national security is worse. We are better at it since 9/11, the largest terrorist attack on US soil which was under BUSH.
-
For years huh? UE has been 5% for years? Recent years?
When UE was 5% under Bush were they saying that then too?
I don't know. Regardless, doesn't change the fact that our current unemployment numbers are a farce.
-
Has national Debt been worse under every president since Carter?
Was there ever a president who lowered it from what it was when he got was elected?
Kind of a weak argument.
Don't know that our national security is worse. We are better at it since 9/11, the largest terrorist attack on US soil which was under BUSH.
What difference does it make if it has gone up under other presidents? The question you asked is whether we are better off today than 2008. The fact our national debt skyrocketed since 2008 is pretty clear evidence that our country as a whole is not economically better off today than 2008. And remember, this president was supposed to be different. He called Bush unpatriotic for adding $4 trillion to our national debt. Obama has added $8 trillion. By Obama's own definition he is an "irresponsible," "unpatriotic" failure.
I think our national security is worse because of the instability in the Middle East. ISIS is running through Iraq because of Obama. Egypt, Libya, Syria, etc. are a mess. That is a problem for us, because the growth of Radical Islam overseas has direct implications at here at home.
-
I don't know about you, but I want to go back to the good old days before the disaster of Obama came along. You know, the days when the housing industry collapsed; Wall Street and the banking industry collapsed; the airline industry collapsed; the insurance industry collapsed; the auto industry collapsed, and a free Osama bin Laden. You know, the days when the insurgency was in its "last throes" and Rumsfeld was christened as then best defense secretary the country had ever been blessed with.
-
I don't know. Regardless, doesn't change the fact that our current unemployment numbers are a farce.
Then they have always been a farce.
So the "farce" they were under BUSH @5% is the same "farce" they are under OB at 5% and the same farce they were at 8-10% under Bush is the same "farce" they were under OB @8-10%
All thing being equal as shown. Another weak argument.
-
What difference does it make if it has gone up under other presidents? The question you asked is whether we are better off today than 2008. The fact our national debt skyrocketed since 2008 is pretty clear evidence that our country as a whole is not economically better off today than 2008. And remember, this president was supposed to be different. He called Bush unpatriotic for adding $4 trillion to our national debt. Obama has added $8 trillion. By Obama's own definition he is an "irresponsible," "unpatriotic" failure.
I think our national security is worse because of the instability in the Middle East. ISIS is running through Iraq because of Obama. Egypt, Libya, Syria, etc. are a mess. That is a problem for us, because the growth of Radical Islam overseas has direct implications at here at home.
All presidents make campaign promises and do not deliver them. They all say they will be different. So did BUSH. Our Debt is still sky rocketing and will continue to do so under any president, no matter who we elect. People don't go OMG my life s fucked because of our national debt. (only conservative cry babies who are running out of things to cry about) They go my life is fucked because i can't find a job, gas is too high, inflation, etc. That's why that's a weak argument.
The ME was unstable when BUSH left. That place was far more stable when Sadam was in power. Whose brilliant idea was it to remove him? But regardless, national security has little to do with what's going on in the ME. ISIS is no different than other terrorist groups before 9/11 which found a way under the last president who was conservative, to attack the USA on USA soil. Bush established great national security directives and OB hasn't changed them much.
-
I don't know about you, but I want to go back to the good old days before the disaster of Obama came along. You know, the days when the housing industry collapsed; Wall Street and the banking industry collapsed; the airline industry collapsed; the insurance industry collapsed; the auto industry collapsed, and a free Osama bin Laden. You know, the days when the insurgency was in its "last throes" and Rumsfeld was christened as then best defense secretary the country had ever been blessed with.
Things are much worse now. Conservative cry babies have less to cry about so now they have to try and make shit up to cry about. things are terrible for them.
-
it's nice not seeing 911's on our President's watch.
-
Then they have always been a farce.
So the "farce" they were under BUSH @5% is the same "farce" they are under OB at 5% and the same farce they were at 8-10% under Bush is the same "farce" they were under OB @8-10%
All thing being equal as shown. Another weak argument.
What's weak is using moral equivalency to try and justify Obama's poor performance.
-
it's nice not seeing 911's on our President's watch.
Bush did the job well here, after 9/11.
-
What's weak is using moral equivalency to try and justify Obama's poor performance.
No.
-
All presidents make campaign promises and do not deliver them. They all say they will be different. So did BUSH. Our Debt is still sky rocketing and will continue to do so under any president, no matter who we elect. People don't go OMG my life s fucked because of our national debt. (only conservative cry babies who are running out of things to cry about) They go my life is fucked because i can't find a job, gas is too high, inflation, etc. That's why that's a weak argument.
The ME was unstable when BUSH left. That place was far more stable when Sadam was in power. Whose brilliant idea was it to remove him? But regardless, national security has little to do with what's going on in the ME. ISIS is no different than other terrorist groups before 9/11 which found a way under the last president who was conservative, to attack the USA on USA soil. Bush established great national security directives and OB hasn't changed them much.
Your question is weak. If you wanted to ask "are you, as an individual, better off today than 2008," then that's what you should ask. If you are asking if the country as a whole is better off (which is what your threat title asks), then of course the skyrocketing national debt is a major factor.
Wrong. Iraq was stable when Bush left. It's a mess because Obama sabotaged the SOFA and pulled all our troops out. Without that, ISIS would not be controlling large portions of Iraq.
National security is directly related to what happens in the ME. The attacks on 9/11 were planned in the ME. The growth of Radical Islam in the ME will unquestionably eventually result in more attacks on our soil. That's why our intelligence people were so concerned about the July 4 weekend.
-
I don't know about you, but I want to go back to the good old days before the disaster of Obama came along. You know, the days when the housing industry collapsed; Wall Street and the banking industry collapsed; the airline industry collapsed; the insurance industry collapsed; the auto industry collapsed, and a free Osama bin Laden. You know, the days when the insurgency was in its "last throes" and Rumsfeld was christened as then best defense secretary the country had ever been blessed with.
Apparently you're forgetting that we have a black, muslim/atheist, marxist, communist, dictator who hates america as POTUS
when you look at it through that lense we're worse off
-
Your question is weak. If you wanted to ask "are you, as an individual, better off today than 2008," then that's what you should ask. If you are asking if the country as a whole is better off (which is what your threat title asks), then of course the skyrocketing national debt is a major factor.
Wrong. Iraq was stable when Bush left. It's a mess because Obama sabotaged the SOFA and pulled all our troops out. Without that, ISIS would not be controlling large portions of Iraq.
National security is directly related to what happens in the ME. The attacks on 9/11 were planned in the ME. The growth of Radical Islam in the ME will unquestionably eventually result in more attacks on our soil. That's why our intelligence people were so concerned about the July 4 weekend.
America is defined by its citizens, not by the national debt. When someone asks is America better off they ask themselves are they better off or are the people better off. Not if our debt is in order, unless of course you got nothing else to point out to fit into your hate OB agenda.
So if we can't control the ME our National security is weak? Then by your logic our national security has always been weak. Our intelligence people will always be concerned, that's there job, which was made easier and more productive since 9/11, because of Bush.
-
America is defined by its citizens, not by the national debt. When someone asks is America better off they ask themselves are they better off or are the people better off. Not if our debt is in order, unless of course you got nothing else to point out to fit into your hate OB agenda.
So if we can't control the ME our National security is weak? Then by your logic our national security has always been weak. Our intelligence people will always be concerned, that's there job, which was made easier and more productive since 9/11, because of Bush.
It's unreasonable to use anecdotes to measure the overall financial health of the country. When someone is engaging in a reasonable analysis, the national debt, unemployment rate, and labor participation rate are very important factors, unless of course you are acting like an Obamabot.
I didn't say our national security is weak.
-
Some people will argue ANYTHING - no matter how lame - just to complain about Obama.
-
It's unreasonable to use anecdotes to measure the overall financial health of the country.
Such as "look at our national debt clock?"
When someone is engaging in a reasonable analysis, the national debt, unemployment rate, and labor participation rate are very important factors, unless of course you are acting like an Obamabot. I didn't say our national security is weak.
A reasonable analysis includes all comparisons. not one sided ones like "under OB....."
-
Such as "look at our national debt clock?"
A reasonable analysis includes all comparisons. not one sided ones like "under OB....."
Are you suggesting there is a difference from reasonable analysis and biased selectivity?
-
Bush did the job well here, after 9/11.
OJ was a great husband, aside from that one time.
-
OJ was a great husband, aside from that one time.
I'm still convinced it was Kato.
-
Such as "look at our national debt clock?"
A reasonable analysis includes all comparisons. not one sided ones like "under OB....."
Comparing our national debt to the financial condition of a single American is unreasonable.
What you talkin bout Willis? You asked the question whether America is better "under OB." When given specific facts showing what a lousy job he has done, you started talking about past presidents.
If you are truly being reasonable, you look at all indicators. If you are being an Obamabot, you start using moral equivalency to talk about past presidents (which has nothing to do with your original question).
-
I do always find it funny that libs love to blame Bush for what he left Obama but none of them ever blame Clinton for what he left Bush. I mean Al Qaida was flying fucking planes into buildings less then 8 months after Bush was inaugurated. Did they all of a sudden get mad at us in January of 2001?
I'm starting to think there is some bias on this board.
-
Comparing our national debt to the financial condition of a single American is unreasonable.
What you talkin bout Willis? You asked the question whether America is better "under OB." When given specific facts showing what a lousy job he has done, you started talking about past presidents.
If you are truly being reasonable, you look at all indicators. If you are being an Obamabot, you start using moral equivalency to talk about past presidents (which has nothing to do with your original question).
This was the question:
After 7 years of Obama.... taking into account the state of the nation now versus the state of the nation when we took over are we better or worse and why?
The question itself brings Bush into it. So any nonsense about moral equivalency ends before the question.
-
i am.
-
I do always find it funny that libs love to blame Bush for what he left Obama but none of them ever blame Clinton for what he left Bush. I mean Al Qaida was flying fucking planes into buildings less then 8 months after Bush was inaugurated. Did they all of a sudden get mad at us in January of 2001?
I'm starting to think there is some bias on this board.
Almost a fair point, but perhaps you should read Richard Clarke's book "Against All Enemies: Inside America's War on Terror." Clarke worked under Reagan, Bush, Clinton, and Bush. When Bush/Cheney took over, Clarke tried for (eight) months to hold a number of meetings on terrorism because he saw it as a serious threat that the administration needed to pay attention to. They repeatedly and consistently gave him the brush off because they simply were not interested in terrorism. They did not think it was important and refused to listen to his increasingly dire overtures. Even when Condi read the memo "Bin Ladin determined to strike in the United States" they all dismissed it is not a high priority. After ignoring him for 8 months 9/11 blew up in their face and immediately the Bush team were suddenly interested in, and experts on, terrorism. ::)
Stung by their obvious failures, the Bush/Cheney team turned to their familiar playbook of avoiding responsibility and attacking anyone who called them out: Richard Clarke, Joe Wilson, even their own Treasury Secretary, Paul O'Neill, once he refused to play along. As he left the administration, he was quoted as saying, "I'm too old to start lying now..."
Even as the poorly planned and totally unnecessary was was falling apart, they doubled down on endorsing Rumsfeld for years even as his own generals called for his termination! Paul Wolfowitz literally lost $8 billion dollars in U.S. cash that was sent over to Iraq and dismissed it as "we didn't have Western-style accounting standards over there..." Perhaps you'd be interested in another well respected book "Fiasco: The American Military Adventure in Iraq, 2003 to 2005." I could go on and on....
Were you around and paying attention during all this... or do you think it was just all liberal bias? :'(
-
Are you suggesting there is a difference from reasonable analysis and biased selectivity?
maybe so... :)
-
This was the question:
After 7 years of Obama.... taking into account the state of the nation now versus the state of the nation when we took over are we better or worse and why?
The question itself brings Bush into it. So any nonsense about moral equivalency ends before the question.
You didn't ask to compare the Obama presidency to the Bush presidency. You asked to compare the state of the country in 2009 versus today. That has nothing to do with how well Bush (or the country) did from 2001 to 2008.
Deflecting negative indicators under the Obama administration by pointing to Bush is classic moral equivalency.
-
You didn't ask to compare the Obama presidency to the Bush presidency. You asked to compare the state of the country in 2009 versus today. That has nothing to do with how well Bush (or the country) did from 2001 to 2008.
Deflecting negative indicators under the Obama administration by pointing to Bush is classic moral equivalency.
::)
You know very well what i was asking for.
There are Obamabots and anti-Obamabots i guess lol
-
::)
You know very well what i was asking for.
There are Obamabots and anti-Obamabots i guess lol
Yes I do: "Is America better off?" I gave you my answer and reasons why.
The Obama hatred stuff is partisan nonsense. I don't hate him. I think he is a dishonest, incompetent, lousy leader, but I don't hate him.
-
Yes I do: "Is America better off?" I gave you my answer and reasons why.
The Obama hatred stuff is partisan nonsense. I don't hate him. I think he is a dishonest, incompetent, lousy leader, but I don't hate him.
sure you did :)
-
sure you did :)
I sure did. Although I doubt it mattered, because you were really asking a rhetorical question. Based on your responses, you already had your mind made up when you posted the thread.
-
I sure did. Although I doubt it mattered, because you were really asking a rhetorical question. Based on your responses, you already had your mind made up when you posted the thread.
Not at all actually.
I was hoping or some good debate and discussion using relevant facts. Not an Anti-Obamabot response that included: weak arguments such like "the national debt clock" or "what my question meant"
And you did answer the question, with a "no", but when it came to to you supporting your points you did your normal dodgy dodge 2-step.
(http://www.smh.com.au/content/dam/images/1/3/7/a/v/1/image.related.articleLeadwide.620x349.137aoj.png/1423724003172.jpg)
-
Not at all actually.
I was hoping or some good debate and discussion using relevant facts. Not an Anti-Obamabot response that included: weak arguments such like "the national debt clock" or "what my question meant"
And you did answer the question, with a "no", but when it came to to you supporting your points you did your normal dodgy dodge 2-step.
(http://www.smh.com.au/content/dam/images/1/3/7/a/v/1/image.related.articleLeadwide.620x349.137aoj.png/1423724003172.jpg)
Well that was a whole lot of typing without actually saying a whole lot. lol
But puh-leaze. You were not looking for discussion.
-
Well that was a whole lot of typing without actually saying a whole lot. lol
But puh-leaze. You were not looking for discussion.
Just commenting on what you wrote. Not my fault it lacks substance.
-
Just commenting on what you wrote. Not my fault it lacks substance.
I agree your responses lacked substance. We should stop here, since we're on the same page. :D
-
I agree your responses lacked substance. We should stop here, since we're on the same page. :D
oh yeah, that's a good one, just say the same thing back at me. You dodgy dodger. :)
-
The country : 2008 > 2015?
Umm.... ok. ::)
-
The country : 2008 > 2015?
Umm.... ok. ::)
Yeah....
2008< 2015?
Umm....ok. ::)
(Just trying out some of the dodgy dodgy 2 step)
-
Yeah....
2008< 2015?
Umm....ok. ::)
(Just trying out some of the dodgy dodgy 2 step)
You just keep ignoring facts and reality buddy. They don't mean shit cause I hate Obama and that's all there is to it.