Thread: Are we really better off?

Originally Posted by WickedTribe

Yes, the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act - sponsored by Sen. Phil Gramm (R, Texas), Rep. Jim Leach (R, Iowa), and Rep. Thomas J. Bliley, Jr. (R, Virginia). Damn democrats and their laws.

You left out a key part.

"The House passed its version of the Financial Services Act of 1999 on July 1, 1999, by a bipartisan vote of 343-86 (Republicans 205–16; Democrats 138–69;"

2/3s of your precious dems voted for the bill. Let me guess your next argument. They aren't really dems. lol Its really sad wicked.

Originally Posted by Fovezer

Which was negotiated after Obama won the election but before he was sworn in. If McCain had won, and he opposed the withdrawal, do you think we would have seen a deal? Honest question.



Not Mitt "It's not worth moving heaven and earth spending billions of dollars just trying to catch one person" Romney.

No it was negotiated before Bush left office. McCain probably would have opposed the withdrawal. However this isnt about what McCain would have done. Its about a blatantly false statement made by wicked in defense of his precious dems.

U.S.

Face it you both have your facts wrong on US withdrawal from Iraq.


You still believing what you see on tv Fov? Maybe thats why your still blind to Obamas bullshit.

Originally Posted by deathgodusmc

No it was negotiated before Bush left office. McCain probably would have opposed the withdrawal. However this isnt about what McCain would have done. Its about a blatantly false statement made by wicked in defense of his precious dems.

U.S.

Face it you both have your facts wrong on US withdrawal from Iraq.


You still believing what you see on tv Fov? Maybe thats why your still blind to Obamas bullshit.

Durr, that's what I said. It was signed after Obama was elected but before he was sworn in. That means Bush was still President. Damn, read your own link, too. It says December 14, 2008. My facts were correct. And what I asked, not in defense of Wicked who can defend himself, was a hypothetical question. Do you want to answer it or not? I didn't ask you to play dumb and say this isn't about McCain, because my question was clearly about Bush.

Originally Posted by CivilWars

Ah, so when Obama CAN'T get his stuff passed it is the Reps' fault, and when Clinton SIGNS stuff he knows is wrong, then it is the Reps' fault. These Reps must be the best politicians ever to get the Dems to do whatever they want whenever they want...

No, the first two years, it was mostly the right-wing Democrats that played hardball with Obama. With such massive minorities, I really didn't expect the Republicans to do anything other than try to obstruct at every chance. The last two years, the House Reps have been to busy wasting time passing pointless Obamacare repeals that have no chance of succeeding versus actually working with Obama and the Senate Republicans are busy filibustering every bill. They won't pass any bipartisan bills that have a chance to get to the President's desk.

Originally Posted by -Lazarus-

Still waiting for someone to tell me how we are actually better off with this President. So far we have:

"It could have been worse without Obama."

Still ignoring the take down of your deficit lie, I see. Par for the course so far.

Originally Posted by -Lazarus-

Still waiting for someone to tell me how we are actually better off with this President. So far we have:

"It could have been worse without Obama."

We aren't. We're in better shape as much as TSA helps protect us. They figure if they lie to us enough times we'll start to believe it. True for some people but they never we're the top of the food chain to begin with.

Originally Posted by deathgodusmc

Keep up it was your own words for christ sake. You said it was "negotiated after Obama won the election". Of which is incorrect. Maybe you should read the link. It was negotiated by us up to Oct. 16th. Then passed to Iraq for discussion and on november 16th approved by the Iraqi cabinet. So no your "facts" are not correct.

Fair enough. Negotiated was the wrong word. It wasn't finalized until December 14, 2008. But my question remains, do you think Bush would have still ultimately agreed to it had McCain won, knowing full well McCain opposed it? It's a yes or no question. Remember, Bush was the guy who kept saying deadlines help the terrorists win or some other bullshit like that.

Originally Posted by deathgodusmc

What a shock. Things didn't go my way so those guys aren't dems but right winged dems. ROFL

WTF? Reread your quote please and tell me if that makes any sense? How can I say they aren't DEMOCRATS when I call them right-wing DEMOCRATS. I still said they were Democrats, ones that were very conservative. The Democrats also aren't as ideologically pure as the Republicans. And I despise conservative Democrats just as much as Republicans, so you know.