Fox News, the GOP, and the loss of a generation

[Saunders]

He's better in the sense that getting hit by a train is preferable to drowning.

[carlfense]

He's better in the sense that getting hit by a train is preferable to drowning.

I doubt that you think that they are equal. Who do you think is going to leave the country in a better place?

[StPaulHusker]

 

He's better in the sense that getting hit by a train is preferable to drowning.

I doubt that you think that they are equal. Who do you think is going to leave the country in a better place?

 

Well, W left it pretty bad. Not sure Obama had anywhere to go but up.

[Saunders]

 

He's better in the sense that getting hit by a train is preferable to drowning.

I doubt that you think that they are equal. Who do you think is going to leave the country in a better place?

 

A quick death is better than a slow tortuous one.

[Junior]

He's better in the sense that getting hit by a train is preferable to drowning.

 

 

Care to explain how Obama is getting us "hit by a train"? I'm genuinely curious.

[Saunders]

 

He's better in the sense that getting hit by a train is preferable to drowning.

 

 

Care to explain how Obama is getting us "hit by a train"? I'm genuinely curious.

 

I'm on my phone and don't feel like typing a bunch. Think of it as a lesser of 2 evils.

[Junior]

I understand t

 

 

 

He's better in the sense that getting hit by a train is preferable to drowning.

 

 

Care to explain how Obama is getting us "hit by a train"? I'm genuinely curious.

 

I'm on my phone and don't feel like typing a bunch. Think of it as a lesser of 2 evils.

 

 

I understand the analogy. I'm curious as to why you think Obama is killing us faster than W. What policies, or what scandals are there that would rate him as being nearly as bad as W?

[Saunders]

I understand t

 

 

 

He's better in the sense that getting hit by a train is preferable to drowning.

 

 

Care to explain how Obama is getting us "hit by a train"? I'm genuinely curious.

 

I'm on my phone and don't feel like typing a bunch. Think of it as a lesser of 2 evils.

 

 

I understand the analogy. I'm curious as to why you think Obama is killing us faster than W. What policies, or what scandals are there that would rate him as being nearly as bad as W?

I think you're reading into it my comments too deeply. Both suck, one just sucks less. That's it.

[carlfense]

Surprising times in the P&R forum.

[TGHusker]

Gore was a stuffed shirt, and however right he may be on Climate Change, I did not see him as a leader. Not that Bush 2.0 was much better, but he was better than Gore.

 

Looking back on it, with a "if I knew then what I know now," I definitely would not have voted for W. But at the time, Gore being the willing accomplice to the shenanigans of the Clinton Era, having no policies that convinced me that he would reverse Clinton's (as it turns out) disastrous dismantling of our spy network in the post Cold War era, I could not see him as a step forward. I thought he got the nomination solely because he was the Veep, and I didn't think that qualified him to be president. I still don't think that - although I do think W. turned out to be one of the worst presidents in American history.

Knapp I agree. I would not have voted for Gore either. Sometimes a no vote is better than voting between 2 disagreeable. Hind sight is 20/20. If GWB would have kept his no nation building position (sounds like GHWB - read my libs, no new taxes) and had acted more conservative in spending restraints (didn't use a veto his 1st term that I recall and very little overall ) he may have turned out ok. Our response to 9/11 didn't need to be nation building and a patriot act that has fueled NSA activity and 1st amendment rights issues, etc. In the modern era, GWB, Carter, and Obama will go down as worse IMHO. Only history/time will ultimately tell which one gets the bottom ring - I suspect GWB.

[tschu]

I'm honestly surprised that W vs. Gore was so close. W was the more electable guy given the Clinton backlash and the climate of that time in retrospect. How could we know what would actually be in store with him? W was the better candidate; Gore would have been the better president, but yes, hindsight is 20/20.

[Hammerhead]

 

Gore was a stuffed shirt, and however right he may be on Climate Change, I did not see him as a leader. Not that Bush 2.0 was much better, but he was better than Gore.

 

Looking back on it, with a "if I knew then what I know now," I definitely would not have voted for W. But at the time, Gore being the willing accomplice to the shenanigans of the Clinton Era, having no policies that convinced me that he would reverse Clinton's (as it turns out) disastrous dismantling of our spy network in the post Cold War era, I could not see him as a step forward. I thought he got the nomination solely because he was the Veep, and I didn't think that qualified him to be president. I still don't think that - although I do think W. turned out to be one of the worst presidents in American history.

Knapp I agree. I would not have voted for Gore either. Sometimes a no vote is better than voting between 2 disagreeable. Hind sight is 20/20. If GWB would have kept his no nation building position (sounds like GHWB - read my libs, no new taxes) and had acted more conservative in spending restraints (didn't use a veto his 1st term that I recall and very little overall ) he may have turned out ok. Our response to 9/11 didn't need to be nation building and a patriot act that has fueled NSA activity and 1st amendment rights issues, etc. In the modern era, GWB, Carter, and Obama will go down as worse IMHO. Only history/time will ultimately tell which one gets the bottom ring - I suspect GWB.

 

 

The worst part of criticizing the current presidency is that anytime anyone does it, so many of Obama's supporters are quick to counter with the "Oh yeah well Dubya did this and that and blahblahblah" argument, like if you don't support Obama, GWB must have been your idol. It's a shame that so many people see politics in such a black-and-white manner, but that's what the two-party system has given us, sadly.

[carlfense]

 

 

Gore was a stuffed shirt, and however right he may be on Climate Change, I did not see him as a leader. Not that Bush 2.0 was much better, but he was better than Gore.

 

Looking back on it, with a "if I knew then what I know now," I definitely would not have voted for W. But at the time, Gore being the willing accomplice to the shenanigans of the Clinton Era, having no policies that convinced me that he would reverse Clinton's (as it turns out) disastrous dismantling of our spy network in the post Cold War era, I could not see him as a step forward. I thought he got the nomination solely because he was the Veep, and I didn't think that qualified him to be president. I still don't think that - although I do think W. turned out to be one of the worst presidents in American history.

Knapp I agree. I would not have voted for Gore either. Sometimes a no vote is better than voting between 2 disagreeable. Hind sight is 20/20. If GWB would have kept his no nation building position (sounds like GHWB - read my libs, no new taxes) and had acted more conservative in spending restraints (didn't use a veto his 1st term that I recall and very little overall ) he may have turned out ok. Our response to 9/11 didn't need to be nation building and a patriot act that has fueled NSA activity and 1st amendment rights issues, etc. In the modern era, GWB, Carter, and Obama will go down as worse IMHO. Only history/time will ultimately tell which one gets the bottom ring - I suspect GWB.

 

 

The worst part of criticizing the current presidency is that anytime anyone does it, so many of Obama's supporters are quick to counter with the "Oh yeah well Dubya did this and that and blahblahblah" argument, like if you don't support Obama, GWB must have been your idol. It's a shame that so many people see politics in such a black-and-white manner, but that's what the two-party system has given us, sadly.

 

Counterargument, this meme:

[tschu]

Jeb is gearing up his presidential run, if you read the signs. We could have another!

 

I don't think Jeb is nearly as stupid as W is though. But obviously still would like to avoid that scenario.

[AR Husker Fan]

Wow!! I have said numerous times that GB II wasn't the best president in history, but seriously are there people that are serious when saying Obama is better?

Well...another good job surge in September meant that more net jobs have been created under Obama in six and a half years than in the combined 12 years of the Bush presidents (5.1 million to 3.9 million) and more than Japan, Europe and the world's other advanced economies combined. Those nations, which followed the Republican strategy of cutting public services to fight recession, are slipping into recession again.

 

Unemployment, 10 percent when Bush left, is now 5.9 percent. The Dow Jones closed under 8,000 on Bush's last day on its free-fall to 6,479 six weeks later, but it now ranges between 16,000 and 17,000. The S&P index has nearly tripled since then. Rich Americans, bleeding from Obama's "class warfare," have never enjoyed so much prosperity (they have the lowest effective tax rate in 50 years) in spite of the president's attempts to push more of the national wealth downward through the minimum wage, higher taxes on investors and subsidized health insurance for the poor and the middle class.

 

Health care spending has been the driver of forecasts of fiscal doom, but no one takes notice that health care inflation has leveled off since 2009. Medicare was on its way to bankrupting the country, according to the forecasts every year, but after the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act took effect in 2010, the Congressional Budget Office and the Medicare trustees each year have reduced their projections of future spending. Owing to reforms in Obamacare and the Budget Control Act of 2011, the CBO's forecast this summer of Medicare spending in 2019 was reduced by another $95 billion.

 

Remember those warnings — actually they're still issuing them in most political races — that Obamacare would cost millions of jobs, send the country into recession and send budget deficits soaring?

 

In fact, job growth picked up smartly when the big features of the law went into effect 10 months ago. And the federal deficit fell to $483 billion in the fiscal year that just ended, less than a third of its $1.5 trillion peak in George W. Bush's last budget year.

 

So, yeah...Obama is quantifiably and demonstrably better. Much better.