Chris Matthews Finds new Axis of Evil: West Point, Colorado Springs, and Annapolis

[tigercpa]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sTbJcixsLq8&feature=player_embedded

Didn't Matthews make out that Maj. Hassan, the Ft. Hood murderer, was some sort of victim?

Makes sense that he would believe West Point was the enemy.

[HellYeahHokie]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sTbJcixsLq8&feature=player_embedded

Didn't Matthews make out that Maj. Hassan, the Ft. Hood murderer, was some sort of victim?

Makes sense that he would believe West Point was the enemy.

He wasn't saying West Point is the enemy, he was making the point that the people at West Point don't like the President, which is probably a fair assessment. I've spoken to very few military people who have positive feelings about Obama. So the cold reception he received was like he was speaking to an enemy camp.

It's called an analogy for heaven's sake.

[Jim]

Der Spiegle also wrote a scathing article on this meeting. Did Obama ever once mention the word "victory". So he is going to send in 30,000 (original request was 80,000) and then withdraw them just in time for his 2012 presidential re-elaction run. What is theri purpose? what is the purpose of providing the enemy with a withdrawl date? They'll just sit on their hands and bide their time working on their eventual "infrastrutcure" once the US forces leave. He understaffs then tips off the bad guys.

And HYH, those Cadets may not like him, the Holy Messiah, but Chris Matthew's comments are absolutely outrageous - analogy or not. Der Spiegle was also there prior to Dear Leader's Holy Decending to the plane of the mere mortal. The Cadets were instructed to show encouragement with His commentary.

HYH, do you feel He was speaking in an "enemy camp"? Afterall, Chris does have his hand on the pulse of America, right?!

A total poliitcal bullshit prime time flop - as usual.

[tigercpa]

He wasn't saying West Point is the enemy, he was making the point that the people at West Point don't like the President, which is probably a fair assessment. I've spoken to very few military people who have positive feelings about Obama. So the cold reception he received was like he was speaking to an enemy camp.

It's called an analogy for heaven's sake.

In the same clip, Matthews refers to West Pointers as “rabble.”

Those cadets aren’t stupid. They know whose side Obama is on. And it isn’t on the side of America.

[tigercpa]

Der Spiegle also wrote a scathing article on this meeting. Did Obama ever once mention the word "victory". So he is going to send in 30,000 (original request was 80,000) and then withdraw them just in time for his 2012 presidential re-elaction run. What is theri purpose? what is the purpose of providing the enemy with a withdrawl date? They'll just sit on their hands and bide their time working on their eventual "infrastrutcure" once the US forces leave. He understaffs then tips off the bad guys.

And HYH, those Cadets may not like him, the Holy Messiah, but Chris Matthew's comments are absolutely outrageous - analogy or not. Der Spiegle was also there prior to Dear Leader's Holy Decending to the plane of the mere mortal. The Cadets were instructed to show encouragement with His commentary.

HYH, do you feel He was speaking in an "enemy camp"? Afterall, Chris does have his hand on the pulse of America, right?!

A total poliitcal bullshit prime time flop - as usual.

Chrissy Tingle only feels the pulse of one thing....

[Jim]

He is from San Francisco isn't he? Must be used to that. And the hand - probably his right hand!

[Jim]

Yes Tiger, the new Axis-ofEvil. Why ... listen now ... I can hear the jackboots and Horst Wessel's anthem.

[tigercpa]

He is from San Francisco isn't he? Must be used to that. And the hand - probably his right hand!

Crissy is a typical Massachusetts loyalist traitor and enemy of America...

This is all a political board-game to him where the goal is to advance Liberalism.

These Cadets are seeing the first 10 years of their careers being mapped out during Obama’s speech. This is serious business.

[HellYeahHokie]

Those cadets aren’t stupid. They know whose side Obama is on. And it isn’t on the side of America.

Well that response right there is proof enough that Chris Matthew's was right.

[Jim]

So HYH, who is the "real enemy" and why?

[HellYeahHokie]

HYH, do you feel He was speaking in an "enemy camp"? Afterall, Chris does have his hand on the pulse of America, right?!.

Do I think West Point cadets are the enemy? Of course I don't. But neither does Obama. Do I think the Cadets of West Point reacted to Obama in a way that might be similar to a leader talking to an enemy camp? I certainly do. Which doesn't mean I believe the Cadets are the enemy, but I believe many (if not most) of the Cadets see Obama as the enemy. I'm sure they listen to the same reactionary right-wing propaganda as you do.

[HellYeahHokie]

So HYH, who is the "real enemy" and why?

ignorance.

[Bucs90]

Do I think West Point cadets are the enemy? Of course I don't. But neither does Obama. Do I think the Cadets of West Point reacted to Obama in a way that might be similar to a leader talking to an enemy camp? I certainly do. Which doesn't mean I believe the Cadets are the enemy, but I believe many (if not most) of the Cadets see Obama as the enemy. I'm sure they listen to the same reactionary right-wing propaganda as you do.

No, to be fair, we can only say Chris Matthews believes they are the enemy, b/c he said it. The enemy of the USA? No. I think he meant the enemy of Obama's agenda.

The expression of the faces of the cadets and military brass told the whole story. They know Obama is selling them out. New motto of our military? "Don't get killed before 07-2011." Fine way to fight a war wouldn't you say?

[Bucs90]

ignorance.

That is basically Obama's war plan.

[Jim]

ignorance.

Can you enlighten us then? Do you actually think Matthew's is a good journalist? His style and content and his exclusion, along with almost all major media, of an indepth analysis and presenting all sides on an issue? Interested in why the major pro-Obama administration media ignores so much of accurate and noteworthy news along with the reasons for those positions in opposition to his policies? Other than calling those who do not support his agenda names what do they actually contribute in a constructive manner?

Had the Bush administration been doing exactly what the Obama administration has been doing over these past ten months would you be totally supportive? The $800 billion confiscated to pay off and bankroll his friends and cronies while presenting the citezenry, you know, you and I, with the bill but with absolutely no say in how this hijacked money is actually dealed out?

Do you agree with SEIU tactics, ACORN's tactics and Pelosi/Reid/Frank trinity that tells people who question their actions as uninformed, ignorant, intolerant and basically to just to shut the hell up? If you protested would you agree that you're nothing more than a racist, jackboot stomping nazi? Would people who peacefully hand out a "Dont Tread on Me" flag be deserving of having their asses kicked by right-thinking patriots?

Is there such a thing as the loyal opposition when a liberal or socialist progressive is running the show? It woudl appear that aside from the numerous names to include "Tea Bagging" which refers to a rather funky homosexual practice involving testicles, what constructive commentary do they offer.

Do you feel that your great-grandchildren will still be paying off a bill that is mathematically impossible to pay. In time the interest on our insane borrowing will surpass what wealth this nation can produce in any given fiscal year. At this time it would take all Fortune 500 companies 145 years to pay our current debt off even if they gave 100% of theri profits to the effort. And in ten years that balance they'd theoretically be paying is going to double. Oh, our real debt is somethijng like $106 trillion. Since I'm a moron in your view I suggest you endulge me and watch Glen Beck one evening. He has a board that is electronically updated in real time. He explains all of the really insane numbers. Verify my comment about $106 trillion by watching. He'll mention it as he does regularly.

So, having said all that, this whole thing becomes asymptotic and a mental exercise in relativistic physics or maybe even pure, unadulterated science fiction.

So, to disagree with the path we're taking and to challenge/chide/argue against those who provide the propaganda and cover for this administration and public consumption are just - "ignorant". This, single discriptive word from a highly educated man like yourself?

WTF.

[Spice1]

Crissy is a typical Massachusetts loyalist traitor and enemy of America...



You mean like John & John Q. Adams, Paul Revere, Joseph Warren, John Hancock, etc....?

[Jim]

Actually all of those person you mentioned from colonial times were constructvie in theri asseertions and aspirations. Freedom from a King who taxed his "American" subjects, whose tropps could break into and required to be serviced by any resident in the colonies. Who forced their views on you and shot you if you disagreed.

I think those folks are a lot different than Chris who, if anything, is a very willing enabler and court clown for the administration. I think Chris is more like a Joseph Goebbles than one of our founding fathers. It wouldn't surprise me that if he ever heard someone say he was like a Goebbles, he'd probably get a tingly feeling, giggle and blush and want ot see Der Fuhrer.

[HellYeahHokie]

No, to be fair, we can only say Chris Matthews believes they are the enemy, b/c he said it. The enemy of the USA? No. I think he meant the enemy of Obama's agenda.

Exactly. So why say Chris Matthew's said anything offensive? (not you, the other 2 guys)

[HellYeahHokie]

Can you enlighten us then? Do you actually think Matthew's is a good journalist? His style and content and his exclusion, along with almost all major media, of an indepth analysis and presenting all sides on an issue? Interested in why the major pro-Obama administration media ignores so much of accurate and noteworthy news along with the reasons for those positions in opposition to his policies? Other than calling those who do not support his agenda names what do they actually contribute in a constructive manner?

Had the Bush administration been doing exactly what the Obama administration has been doing over these past ten months would you be totally supportive? The $800 billion confiscated to pay off and bankroll his friends and cronies while presenting the citezenry, you know, you and I, with the bill but with absolutely no say in how this hijacked money is actually dealed out?

Do you agree with SEIU tactics, ACORN's tactics and Pelosi/Reid/Frank trinity that tells people who question their actions as uninformed, ignorant, intolerant and basically to just to shut the hell up? If you protested would you agree that you're nothing more than a racist, jackboot stomping nazi? Would people who peacefully hand out a "Dont Tread on Me" flag be deserving of having their asses kicked by right-thinking patriots?

Is there such a thing as the loyal opposition when a liberal or socialist progressive is running the show? It woudl appear that aside from the numerous names to include "Tea Bagging" which refers to a rather funky homosexual practice involving testicles, what constructive commentary do they offer.

Do you feel that your great-grandchildren will still be paying off a bill that is mathematically impossible to pay. In time the interest on our insane borrowing will surpass what wealth this nation can produce in any given fiscal year. At this time it would take all Fortune 500 companies 145 years to pay our current debt off even if they gave 100% of theri profits to the effort. And in ten years that balance they'd theoretically be paying is going to double. Oh, our real debt is somethijng like $106 trillion. Since I'm a moron in your view I suggest you endulge me and watch Glen Beck one evening. He has a board that is electronically updated in real time. He explains all of the really insane numbers. Verify my comment about $106 trillion by watching. He'll mention it as he does regularly.

So, having said all that, this whole thing becomes asymptotic and a mental exercise in relativistic physics or maybe even pure, unadulterated science fiction.

So, to disagree with the path we're taking and to challenge/chide/argue against those who provide the propaganda and cover for this administration and public consumption are just - "ignorant". This, single discriptive word from a highly educated man like yourself?

WTF.

I made no political qualifications on ignorance. Ignorance on the right is just as bad as ignorance on the left. Much of the discourse I see on both sides promotes ignorance rather than enlightenment. I find that a greater enemy than any foreigner.

[Jim]

Try this one. Some restrictions on our military when these new guys deploy to Afghanistan.

(1) You can not pull any surprise visits at night.
(2) You have to notify villages/towns befroe coming in for a raid or whatever.
(3) You can't fire on the enemy unless you can see that he is ready to fire on you.
(4) You can not engage the enemy when civilians are present.
(5) You can not apprehend the enemy unless he is actually caught in the act of planting an IED. If he has already planted it and you see him in the vicinity and heading eth other way (because you're now there) you can't stop them.

So, this sounds like a winning srategy no? I wonder if the Cadets knew this is what Obama has in store for them?

Can you win a war, or even a battle, with these restrictions?

Put the troops in to show his commitment to bringing downthe Taliban etc. but let them know beforehand what they'll have ot do to actually avoid losing their lives (while our young men and women lose theirs with the above game rules). Then appeases the left with withdrawl in time for elections. Do you think the "surge" he is going to employ now is to scim some of those "iffy" voters away from the opposition.

Yes, the lives of our militay forces are just numbers to him and lightly regarded. If it was otherwise he'd not tsend thm into battle with both hands tied behind their backs.

[Jim]

How about this ...

A few months ago in Paris, France, Howard Dean (DNC Chairman) was promoting the idea that the democrats were operating in perpetual campaign mode. They are.

Also, that $800 billion or so that they confiscated with teh fist stimulus package ... howmuch has actually been spent? About one fourth. So why the rush, rush, rush on its passage?

Consider this ...

Dean also said that the democrats only campaigned once in four years. They went dormant, so to speak, during the other three. So, to run a perpetual campaign for democrats requires money and lots of it. Do you think that stimulus money is going to be parceled out as is necessary to ensure the democrats have enough capital to run campaigns and grease some palms with pet projects etc?

Think about it. Why $800 billion when three fourths of it is still just sitting there? Why? The necessary "friends" were propped up (Goldman Sachs, AIG and others) while non-agreeable players of competition (Lehman Brothers) was cast aside and consequently went belly up. Unions, auto industry, certain banks. And now with the healthcare scam costing so much anotehr $1.2 trillion (actually $6 trillion).

Cloward and Piven said the way to conquer this country and capitalism is to spend it into oblivion. Their words and with many of the current administration, to include the president, is full support of their ideaology.

Do the math. They certainly are.

[Bucs90]

Exactly. So why say Chris Matthew's said anything offensive? (not you, the other 2 guys)

I don't think it was Matthews himself being offensive, it was the truth of his words and what that means to our country that were....disturbing, not offensive.

I think Matthews had a bit more of a lighthearted context when he said it. I heard it and it was almost like bar-room demeanor between buddies, but he accidentally made a crucial observation. Obama and our military are NOT on the same page philosophically.

To put it into perspective, had Obama never become a politician, with his worldview and philosophies, would West Point have hired him as a professor? Not a chance in hell. That sums up what Matthews was saying, and I found it a disturbing truth, not offensive.

[Bucs90]

Try this one. Some restrictions on our military when these new guys deploy to Afghanistan.

(1) You can not pull any surprise visits at night.
(2) You have to notify villages/towns befroe coming in for a raid or whatever.
(3) You can't fire on the enemy unless you can see that he is ready to fire on you.
(4) You can not engage the enemy when civilians are present.
(5) You can not apprehend the enemy unless he is actually caught in the act of planting an IED. If he has already planted it and you see him in the vicinity and heading eth other way (because you're now there) you can't stop them.


Jim those restrictions are more harsh that the ones put on street cops in America. Thats sad.

[Bucs90]

. Much of the discourse I see on both sides promotes ignorance rather than enlightenment. I find that a greater enemy than any foreigner.

What is it with "enlightenment" these days? Enlightenment to what? Surrendering to enemies? Crumbling in the face of a violent threat? Eliminating financial competition and the possibility of social inequality?

We don't need to be enlightened on anything. We need to look BACKWARDS at the values and morals that made us the strongest nation on Earth and get back to them. Just what do we need to be "enlightened" to and who knows what path the enlightened should be led down????? Just get us all back to basic conservative values, and our country will be better off.

[HellYeahHokie]

I always find it interesting when people treat the concept of becoming more enlightened, or less ignorant, as a negative trait.

[Bucs90]

I always find it interesting when people treat the concept of becoming more enlightened, or less ignorant, as a negative trait.

But you didn't do anything to "enlighten" us. Why are tried and true conservative values not good enough? They are proven to work. Enlightenment must mean that what one has been doing, the traditional way of doing things, is subpar. That it is not acceptable, inferior, etc.

In my humble opinion, any person that thinks an "enlightened" liberal view of society is IGNORANT because they just don't know or won't accept that traditional conservative values and morals are by far the best path for personal and community success. To feel otherwise, to me, is ignorant. Maybe the 360-degree fully "enlightened" individual eventually comes back around to realize and embrace this. So HYH, man, you're halfway there!

[ZOOMBAG]

I always find it interesting when people treat the concept of becoming more enlightened, or less ignorant, as a negative trait.

If "enlightenment" includes the buying the concepts of the label giver then I'll take a pass. In your case, "enlightenment" would mean one drinks regularly from the global warming/climate change kool-aide when with every passing year that whole concept is clearly becoming more and more of sham and a joke....

[Bucs90]

If "enlightenment" includes the buying the concepts of the label giver then I'll take a pass. In your case, "enlightenment" would mean one drinks regularly from the global warming/climate change kool-aide when with every passing year that whole concept is clearly becoming more and more of sham and a joke....

Yeah, Zoom, countless libs have tried to "enlighten" me on some concepts such as:

Global Warming- proven to be a hoax finally
Open Borders- Although no other country on Earth accepts it
Welfare- Yeah, we see how that has helped
No War- Well, when the other guy is set on war, it's hard to avoid it
Universal Healthcare- Like Medicaid, Medicare, and Massachusetts....broke

And a whole host of other topics I must be too dense, ignorant and stubborn to accept as "Enlightened" concepts. I'm sure somewhere out there is a brilliant college professor with absolutely no real life experience who can enlighten me on the ways of the world.

[HellYeahHokie]

I never put a political tag on enlightenment. One can become enlightened about conservative or liberal ideas.

However, the defensiveness or negative reaction over the word enlightened is an interesting trait.

[Bucs90]

I never put a political tag on enlightenment. One can become enlightened about conservative or liberal ideas.

However, the defensiveness or negative reaction over the word enlightened is an interesting trait.

True, you never have, but "enlightened" is the choice verb for snotty, supposedly intellectual liberals who would love nothng more than to preach to the world how evil most Americans and their way of life is. When the far left has the knee jerk reaction to label all who disagree with "ignorant" and use "enlightenment" as the verb to describe the cleansing of ignorance, well, it becomes a hot point.

This isn't directed at you, HYH, but it's tough for a lot of people to hear college professor types preach about "enlightenment" of society, when most of them have never done one day's worth of dirty work in their lives, and honestly have no clue how the real world outside their static environment of a classroom and campus truly works. Same goes for moron cable news hosts and moron politicians, both of whom also like to speak of enlightenment of some ignorant conservatives in America.

[ZOOMBAG]

I never put a political tag on enlightenment. One can become enlightened about conservative or liberal ideas.

However, the defensiveness or negative reaction over the word enlightened is an interesting trait.

Modern history and culture pretty much throws terms like "enlightenment", "progressiveness", "openness" squarely in the liberal camp. "Enlightenment" also has a coercive connotation attached to it, meaning one does not claim another is "enlightened" until they share one's own view of a subject.

[Bucs90]

I personally use more simple terms. A person who does not believe in traditional conservative values is simply a "dumbass".

[Jim]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/03/gop-lawmaker-bemoans-lack-congressional-hearing-fort-hood-shooting/?test=latestnews

What is sad is that this doesn't surprise me. Even Fox News (TV) is wrapped up in this as I watch their programming regularly.

[Bucs90]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/12/03/gop-lawmaker-bemoans-lack-congressional-hearing-fort-hood-shooting/?test=latestnews

What is sad is that this doesn't surprise me. Even Fox News (TV) is wrapped up in this as I watch their programming regularly.

The story of the year thus far, IMO, is going to be how the White House, under Obama Inc, in conjunction with General Electric/NBC (who own the Real Houswives series as well as massive investments in "green" global warming nonsense) have manufactured one massive distraction from the global warming hoax and fraud being revealed.

Really? 2 no-names, one of whom is set to be on GE/NBC's Real Housewives, make it past 4-5 Secret Service agents to crash a party? Come on. Lets be real. This was a manufactured incident, which has served it's purpose: Create one massive distraction to take up the air time to avoid any more talk about ClimateGate.

[Jim]

I feel that you're probably right. Its a diversion. BTW, they were no shows at their hearing. Please correct me if I'm wrong on this but if I "skipped out" wouldn't there be a warrant issued to "obtain" me?

But aside from these socialites' convenient entrance into the Grand Ball ("let the people eat cake" party) and Climategate, what do you think of the lack of pursuing, without any delay, the Ft. Hood incident? I mean doesn't this constitute a threat to "national security".

[Bucs90]

I feel that you're probably right. Its a diversion. BTW, they were no shows at their hearing. Please correct me if I'm wrong on this but if I "skipped out" wouldn't there be a warrant issued to "obtain" me?

But aside from these socialites' convenient entrance into the Grand Ball ("let the people eat cake" party) and Climategate, what do you think of the lack of pursuing, without any delay, the Ft. Hood incident? I mean doesn't this constitute a threat to "national security".

Of course it does. And I have no inside knowledge, but they are pursuing it hard, just not publicly. Remember, the Obama campaign was brilliant. Image was and is everything. EVERY president in history has manufactured distractions for the media, and Obama is no different.

He doesn't want Ft Hood out b/c it was a terror attack on our soil. 1st since 9-11. He wants that to go away.

He doesn't want the climate hoax being talked about. Hes invested deep. Thankfully, so is NBC/GE, and they helped him out with their Real Housewives party crash incident. There is a reason the Social Coordinator of the White House is not being allowed to testify, either. She knew about it. She had the guest list. They weren't "on it" , but were on it. So, Secret Service was informed, allowed it, but not on guest list. Easy harmless distraction. And, the best part, it's so odd, and so harmless, that liberals who read this post will say "What an idiot he's so full of sh**". Game, set, match.....Obama wins. His distraction has MSNBC and Fox talking about the party crash....not the 20 year hoax of Global Warming that has been exposed.

[Jim]

I agree.

[MasterBevo]

I think the entire viewing public was "enlightened" when Chrissy slipped up and verbalized what everyone "in the know" believes.... that Obama has FEW, if any friends in the US military.... and, even fewer at West Point.

They despise him, and everything he stands for.... Making that speech there WAS going into "enemy territory"... and that, is a very VERY sad state of affairs.

[ZOOMBAG]

I think the entire viewing public was "enlightened" when Chrissy slipped up and verbalized what everyone "in the know" believes.... that Obama has FEW, if any friends in the US military.... and, even fewer at West Point.

They despise him, and everything he stands for.... Making that speech there WAS going into "enemy territory"... and that, is a very VERY sad state of affairs.

One term President.

[Bucs90]

Obama is behaving like he is still in a college professor roundtable coffee chat. I don't think he and his staff view themselves as presidential, but rather professors who stole power. Really. I don't think he or his people actually desired the Office of The President of the United States, as they've always viewed that seat with disdain. BUT, they wanted the power to do some stuff that only could be done by gaining that presidential power. Now, they realize its not as easy as they all said it would be in the teachers lounge at Harvard.

[Hail to the Victors Valiant]

Obama Admin definitely stole power, which irks me and many people. I wish people focused more on developing solutions and relaying them to Obama's Admin. Instead, most people focus on why they think something will not work and we really do not need these people unless they want to enlist in the armed services and defend our nation.

Some people expouse theories of tax cuts being the solution to recovery, but many conveniently forget that while Reagan created a bustling economy, he implemented tax cuts and increased ease in lending and borrowing as well. Bush 43 implemented tax cuts except for some corporate tax cuts and if not for allowing large banks to run wild and people to borrow freely, the economy would have shrunk 5 years earlier than it did.

One thing I have always believed is that the best way to teach others is to lead by example and develop lasting solutions to problems that everyone can identify. The Obama Admin and the American people should follow this credo now and forever so that we can remain the best country on Planet Earth.

[ZOOMBAG]

Obama Admin definitely stole power, which irks me and many people. I wish people focused more on developing solutions and relaying them to Obama's Admin. Instead, most people focus on why they think something will not work and we really do not need these people unless they want to enlist in the armed services and defend our nation.

Some people expouse theories of tax cuts being the solution to recovery, but many conveniently forget that while Reagan created a bustling economy, he implemented tax cuts and increased ease in lending and borrowing as well. Bush 43 implemented tax cuts except for some corporate tax cuts and if not for allowing large banks to run wild and people to borrow freely, the economy would have shrunk 5 years earlier than it did.

One thing I have always believed is that the best way to teach others is to lead by example and develop lasting solutions to problems that everyone can identify. The Obama Admin and the American people should follow this credo now and forever so that we can remain the best country on Planet Earth.

Obama's downfall has been that he's never stopped campaigning and has yet to start being President. His chosen method of executing his agenda is to "Let Nancy and Harry do it", and I'll sign what comes out. His administration has yet to submit ANY actual legislative bills themselves! You cannot govern from the executive branch that way. Reagon's administration actually WROTE the bills and submitted them, then did an end-run around Congress and took them directly to the people, who in turn pressured Congress to enact them. Obama acts just the opposite which is why he will fail as a President. He is entrusting his agenda to a body that suffers less than a 20% approval rating.

[MasterBevo]

Bush 43 implemented tax cuts except for some corporate tax cuts and if not for allowing large banks to run wild and people to borrow freely, the economy would have shrunk 5 years.

Are you trying to say that Bush's tax cuts for everyone would actually have cause the economy to contract??? If not for the easing of lending requirements?

Man.. you are one of the most confused and conflicted people I have ever come across.

Our economy was tanking when Bush 43 came into office.. then, 9/11 sent us further into a tailspin. Bush's tax cuts (along with dramatic action by Greenspan) turned things around in a hurry... from 2003 until 2007, we had a very robust economy.

What happened after that, was the predictable result of poor policy choices going back through SEVERAL administrations.. plenty enough blame for BOTH parties...

[Bucs90]

Obama's downfall has been that he's never stopped campaigning and has yet to start being President. His chosen method of executing his agenda is to "Let Nancy and Harry do it", and I'll sign what comes out. His administration has yet to submit ANY actual legislative bills themselves! You cannot govern from the executive branch that way. Reagon's administration actually WROTE the bills and submitted them, then did an end-run around Congress and took them directly to the people, who in turn pressured Congress to enact them. Obama acts just the opposite which is why he will fail as a President. He is entrusting his agenda to a body that suffers less than a 20% approval rating.

Zoom, that is because he desperately wants the far left liberal agenda passed- he just doesn't want to appear totally responsible for it. He can deflect blame if Pelosi, Reid and Holder appear to be the source of the agenda, not him.