I recall Bush on a train with the press

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

Personal attacks? Who is personally attacking you? She asked for facts to back up your statement and when you couldn't give those facts you got defensive. No one is trying to run you out or get you kicked off of the board so simmer down. Share your opinion freely....that is all good. However, you can't come on a board and voice your opinion and then get upset when someone asks for facts. Her request that you state it is your opinion and not fact was not a personal attack. It was a request so that others will know....this is this person's opinion but they have no facts to back this up. There was no reason to get upset about her request.

Seriously....calm down....take a Xanax....it's all good. You don't like Palin....fine. There are a lot of other people who don't like her either. However, I do and so do a lot of other people. We are just going to have to agree to disagree on this one.

defending Bush no matter what. There are a lot of things that I don't agree with Bush on as well. I think both parties need a good cleaning out. I'm not a Cheney fan either but I do get what he is saying. If they want to let out part of those memos....let them all out so we know what happened and what we got in return that may or may not have benefited. How are we to know for sure if only half of this is opened up and looked at. You have pubs lying and dems lying alike. If the dems want the pubs to go down.....then the dems involved should go down with the ship as well. I'm tired of the double standards and the finger pointing.

However, I still say this is all best left alone until after our troops are home. It does no good for anyone to have us fighting amongst ourselves at home and releasing information that could endanger our troops even more than they are.

I also don't really think that our tactics as far as treatment of prisoners should be out there for all to see because, like I said before, what is the point of anything if terrorists know they are going to be treated well with no threat to their life. They would have no reason to spill the beans. They would just have to be patient until they got out.

I'm not here defending the GOP and Bush and Cheney. However, I personally see nothing wrong with waterboarding in an attempt to save lives.

Obviously this is something that you and I are going to have to agree to disagree on. As per my research and understanding, terrorists are not covered under the Geneva Convention and therefore Bush didn't order anything unlawful in that instance. But seriously....this is something that should be investigated after our troops are home and safe. I don't think Bush is worth putting our troops at higher risk.

any promises to the gay and lesbian community. He himself is against same sex marriage.

As for this healthcare BS.....when it comes to pass and it isn't as great as he professed it to be and we are getting taxed out of the ying yang to pay for it....I'm sure many will be ready to get rid of Obama and any fellow cronies on the dem party. So don't count your chickens before they hatch.

As for the promises he has broken. Gitmo is still open. We are still in Iraq and now in Afgan. He promises he wouldn't raise taxes on 95% of Americans which is a downright lie especially if he is going to pay for this healthcare plan of his. He said lobbyists wouldn't have a place in his administration and yet he appointed some. Obama is nothing but a liar. The reason a lot of people still love Obama is because the mainstream media continues to portray Obama as doing no wrong. If some of these people would actually pay attention to what is going on and actually do a little research as well as lay off the kool-aid.....I'm sure more people would not be satisfied with Barry.

Why is it you are the only ones who are "free" to display your anger on your board?

If you take a look at the posts on this board, the only time they get nasty is when a troll from your board comes here and begins spewing your hatred and rage.

Whenever a liberal raises an issue concerning a Bush administration policy or decision, I seldom see an intelligent thoughtful response come from most of you. Instead you attack the poster on a personal level when that poster never personally attacked YOU. They complained about Bush. Are you BUSH??

Time and time again, most of you come back with "all liberals" insults and rarely, if ever, address the question or issue that was raised.

If you can begin to understand that it isn't YOU PERSONALLY that we are referring to, maybe then we can begin to have an intelligent conversation on this board.

If you are a conservative, I respect your right to your opinions, and I'd like to learn more about them. I can't do that if all you do is throw insults, which you are "free" to do on your board, but if we are angered or insulted by them, we are not likewise "free" to express that.

I had hoped that these new boards would eliminate the personal favorites that seemed to exist on the other board. Looks like that isn't the case.

And as far as approaching the administrator about fairness, if I can't do that, then I truly don't belong in a forum like this one. I belong in one that doesn't play favorites, where intelligent discourse can occur, where personal insults and attacks are prohibited for everyone, not just for some.

If I didn't lose count, that's #8 since he was elected. Do I have to listen to 4 years of this? Or is this just about chosing his cabinet and if so, did he fill all the spots yet?

I can read. I don't need to see him except when he takes questions from reporters.

FYI, I never listened to GW's press conferences either. I can't stand canned speeches.

The press might finally be wising up to a fact that's even more important (to their bosses) than playing suck-face with BO - namely, that even Americans who voted for this President are starting to really, really dislike his policies. The last issue of Newsweek to feature an Obama (was it number 19?) barely sold enough copies to pay for the printing, and it's more or less a rule in the news business (and it IS a business) that "if they don't sell, they smell". Obama is starting to sell less, and smell worse. Lots worse.

If the most recent news conference with BO is any indication, the honeymoon might just be over...and BO didn't like it one bit. In fact, he got downright surly - and he is really one UGLY man when he gets surly. Tsk - such a thin veneer.

conference. Jesse Jackson, Jr. is "candidate #5" and he thinks Blagojevich should step aside and resign and let the Lt. Gov. take over. He states JJ, Jr. is qualified for the position.

He states JJ, Jr. is not guity of anything. He is not worried about any consequences of this except the media frenzy that is being created by this. If the meeting between the Gov. and JJ, Jr. was taped, they have no concern over it.

He (JJ, Jr.) will be speaking with the investigators on Friday or Monday. He will be holding a press conference in 15-16 minutes.

Born in IRAN. Worked for Richard Daley, was her mentor? She is co-chair of the Obama-Biden transistion team. She hired Michele in 1991.

She will not give any info on whom he may choose for his team. "Everything is a possibility." She is not ruling out anything. "Obama is selecting the best team for the job."

What are his flaws? "That's what is nice about being his friend. I can talk about his strengths, not his flaws."

Amazing. Maybe some in the press actually are beginning to wise up to Obama. Read it here:

WASHINGTON (AP) - "That wasn't me," President Barack Obama said on his 100th day in office, disclaiming responsibility for the huge budget deficit waiting for him on Day One.

It actually was him - and the other Democrats controlling Congress the previous two years - who shaped a budget so out of balance.

And as a presidential candidate and president-elect, he backed the twilight Bush-era stimulus plan that made the deficit deeper, all before he took over and promoted spending plans that have made it much deeper still.

Obama met citizens at an Arnold, Mo., high school Wednesday in advance of his prime-time news conference. Both forums were a platform to review his progress at the 100-day mark and look ahead.

(AP) President Barack Obama speaks at a town hall meeting at Fox Senior High School in Arnold, Mo.,...
Full Image

At various times, he brought an air of certainty to ambitions that are far from cast in stone.

His assertion that his proposed budget "will cut the deficit in half by the end of my first term" is an eyeball-roller among many economists, given the uncharted terrain of trillion-dollar deficits and economic calamity that the government is negotiating.

He promised vast savings from increased spending on preventive health care in the face of doubts that such an effort, however laudable it might be for public welfare, can pay for itself, let alone yield huge savings.

A look at some of his claims Wednesday:

OBAMA: "Number one, we inherited a $1.3 trillion deficit.... That wasn't me. Number two, there is almost uniform consensus among economists that in the middle of the biggest crisis, financial crisis, since the Great Depression, we had to take extraordinary steps. So you've got a lot of Republican economists who agree that we had to do a stimulus package and we had to do something about the banks. Those are one-time charges, and they're big, and they'll make our deficits go up over the next two years." - in Missouri.

(AP) President Barack Obama speaks during a town hall meeting Wednesday, April 29, 2009, at Fox Senior...
Full Image

THE FACTS:

Congress controls the purse strings, not the president, and it was under Democratic control for Obama's last two years as Illinois senator. Obama supported the emergency bailout package in President George W. Bush's final months - a package Democratic leaders wanted to make bigger.

To be sure, Obama opposed the Iraq war, a drain on federal coffers for six years before he became president. But with one major exception, he voted in support of Iraq war spending.

The economy has worsened under Obama, though from forces surely in play before he became president, and he can credibly claim to have inherited a grim situation.

Still, his response to the crisis goes well beyond "one-time charges."

He's persuaded Congress to expand children's health insurance, education spending, health information technology and more. He's moving ahead on a variety of big-ticket items on health care, the environment, energy and transportation that, if achieved, will be more enduring than bank bailouts and aid for homeowners.

The nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget estimated his policy proposals would add a net $428 billion to the deficit over four years, even accounting for his spending reduction goals. Now, the deficit is nearly quadrupling to $1.75 trillion.

---

OBAMA: "I think one basic principle that we know is that the more we do on the (disease) prevention side, the more we can obtain serious savings down the road. ... If we're making those investments, we will save huge amounts of money in the long term." - in Missouri.

THE FACTS: It sounds believable that preventing illness should be cheaper than treating it, and indeed that's the case with steps like preventing smoking and improving diets and exercise. But during the 2008 campaign, when Obama and other presidential candidates were touting a focus on preventive care, the New England Journal of Medicine cautioned that "sweeping statements about the cost-saving potential of prevention, however, are overreaching." It said that "although some preventive measures do save money, the vast majority reviewed in the health economics literature do not."

And a study released in December by the Congressional Budget Office found that increasing preventive care "could improve people's health but would probably generate either modest reductions in the overall costs of health care or increases in such spending within a 10-year budgetary time frame."

---

OBAMA: "You could cut (Social Security) benefits. You could raise the tax on everybody so everybody's payroll tax goes up a little bit. Or you can do what I think is probably the best solution, which is you can raise the cap on the payroll tax." - in Missouri.

THE FACTS: Obama's proposal would reduce the Social Security trust fund's deficit by less than half, according to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center.

That means he would still have to cut benefits, raise the payroll tax rate, raise the retirement age or some combination to deal with the program's long-term imbalance.

Workers currently pay 6.2 percent and their employers pay an equal rate - for a total of 12.4 percent - on annual wages of up to $106,800, after which no more payroll tax is collected.

Obama wants workers making more than $250,000 to pay payroll tax on their income over that amount. That would still protect workers making under $250,000 from an additional burden. But it would raise much less money than removing the cap completely.

---

Associated Press writers Kevin Freking and Jim Kuhnhenn contributed to this report.