Ch, Ch, Ch Changes

[once a runner]

Ooooh, I said "neocon", now that's some harsh rhetoric. That's gotta be on par with calling someone a liberal or "lib". I really thought you had thicker skin to be able to take such a vile name. Now that I know it bothers you, I will refrain from doing so. Somehow I think the name calling on the democrats will continue. Perhaps I should start keeping score. I think democrats have been called far more names than republicans on this board.

I realize you are not a big Bush fan, but you have not shown the same level outrage at Bush's spending than you have Obama's plans to spend. How many posts have been started just ripping what Obama plans, yet Bush's policies get either ignored and sometimes even lauded even though he has done a terrible job in the spending department. My guess is that if GW had a "D" behind his name, you guys would have ripped him a new butthole every day. I can only imagine what would be said if it was a democrat who doubled the national debt in a mere 8 years.

Monday morning quarterbacking? What do you call criticism before a play is even run? Thursday afternoon quarterbacking? Obama hasn't done anything yet and he's incurring the wrath of the right. I prefer to give the guy a chance. And as I've said many times, if he does a poor job, I won't vote for him again.

[southpaw]

OAR

1. Bush was criticized as well before taking office. How soon we forget that the was accused of "stealing" the election.

2. I believe it when I see it the you would actually vote for a repub. in '12.

[once a runner]

Southpaw,

1. There is always a fringe on both sides who will never support the other side. Bush had detractors when he took office, but let's not forget that after 9/11 he had an approval rating of around 90%! He had the support of the American people and still found a way to screw it up to near record lows.

2. Who ever said anything about voting for a republican? I just said that I would not vote for Obama if he does a poor job. It seems kind of odd to rehire a guy who is obviously doing a poor job, don't you think so?

[southpaw]

Ya that vote for Ralph Nader really makes a difference doesn't it. You and I both know that Bush wasn't incessantly criticized by the MSM up until 9/11. Not just "fringe" elements. He did do a poor job his last four years but let's not forget his first term was pretty good but playing a good first half wasn't near good enough.

Obama is still in the pregame mode and hasn't been real impressive. He already had to bench one starter and some of others in the starting lineup are of pretty poor quality.

[southpaw]

Southpaw,

1. There is always a fringe on both sides who will never support the other side. Bush had detractors when he took office, but let's not forget that after 9/11 he had an approval rating of around 90%! He had the support of the American people and still found a way to screw it up to near record lows.

2. Who ever said anything about voting for a republican? I just said that I would not vote for Obama if he does a poor job. It seems kind of odd to rehire a guy who is obviously doing a poor job, don't you think so?

Did you cast your vote to reelect Fast Eddie Rendell?

[southpaw]

Hope and Change on Wall Street!

Both Inauguration day and Election Day saw the stock market tank. Coincidence? Whenever all the lemmings are "feeling" so good about the "hope" in Barry's "change" the money people cringe. The reality in the real world is that the markets have no faith in Barry or his hope and change no matter what the lemmings are doing in DC.