The Republican Chaos Strategy: Obstruct and Blame!! Rely on dumb People.

[akphidelt]

 

[akphidelt]

Republican sick obstructionism. Obstruct and blame!!

 

[akphidelt]

 

[scottcarter]

funny how people see things differently. To me, that chart only proves Obama is not a leader and who is someone who rather blames and bitches about the past rather than get the job done.

Obama's slogan for his entire presidency should have been "BLAME" rather than Change and Forward.



OH and BTW ...

 

[akphidelt]

funny how people see things differently. To me, that chart only proves Obama is not a leader and who is someone who rather blames and bitches about the past rather than get the job done.

Obama's slogan for his entire presidency should have been "BLAME" rather than Change and Forward.

Or it shows how sick Republican obstructionism has become. Any honest person can tell the level of obstructionism by degenerate Repubs is unprecedented! Obstruct and blame. Borderline treason happening.

 

[GasMan]

funny how people see things differently. To me, that chart only proves Obama is not a leader and who is someone who rather blames and bitches about the past rather than get the job done.

Obama's slogan for his entire presidency should have been "BLAME" rather than Change and Forward.



OH and BTW ...

WHAT? HOW can that BE???

OBAMa has not been allowed to spend the money he needs to be successful, has he??

I am so confused, AKphi is smarter than everyone, he says Obama hasn't been allowed to spend enough, yet he has spent more than everyone else, at any time, in our history?

Somebody please help me.

Is Akphi a full of shit lying jock riding liberal wing nut, or are these statistics posted by scottcarter a lie somebody made up to obstruct and blame?

Thanks guys,
I am new at this shit and trying to find my way around.

 

[scottcarter]

Or it shows how sick Republican obstructionism has become. Any honest person can tell the level of obstructionism by degenerate Repubs is unprecedented! Obstruct and blame. Borderline treason happening.

or? and? if? can't you at least admit that both sides are acting like babies? Calling the GOP degenerates while completing ignoring the Dems obstruction is just silly. Too bad its nearly impossible to have an honest debate with someone who's so far left.

I know you will make a comment about how uneducated I am blah blah blah but it really does always come down to one man ultimately. That's Obama. He is the leader. So called leader. The leader of the free world! The most powerful man in the world. The guy that can't get both parties to work together for the good common goal of the people. Funny if it wasn't so sad.

 

[akphidelt]

funny how people see things differently. To me, that chart only proves Obama is not a leader and who is someone who rather blames and bitches about the past rather than get the job done.

Obama's slogan for his entire presidency should have been "BLAME" rather than Change and Forward.



OH and BTW ...

All he did was double the debt? Damn, Reagan almost increased the debt 3 times more than all the previous Presidents before him. Bush spent more than all the previous presidents before him also. You guys really can't understand relativity. It's hilarious.

 

[akphidelt]

 

[akphidelt]

or? and? if? can't you at least admit that both sides are acting like babies? Calling the GOP degenerates while completing ignoring the Dems obstruction is just silly. Too bad its nearly impossible to have an honest debate with someone who's so far left.

I know you will make a comment about how uneducated I am blah blah blah but it really does always come down to one man ultimately. That's Obama. He is the leader. So called leader. The leader of the free world! The most powerful man in the world. The guy that can't get both parties to work together for the good common goal of the people. Funny if it wasn't so sad.

The data shows that the obstructionism is coming from one group and one group only. Unprecedented level of obstructionism forcing Obama to do things no other President has had to do in the past century and then blaming him for the result. It's pretty sick if you think about it.

 

[akphidelt]

WHAT? HOW can that BE???

OBAMa has not been allowed to spend the money he needs to be successful, has he??

I am so confused, AKphi is smarter than everyone, he says Obama hasn't been allowed to spend enough, yet he has spent more than everyone else, at any time, in our history?

Somebody please help me.

Is Akphi a full of shit lying jock riding liberal wing nut, or are these statistics posted by scottcarter a lie somebody made up to obstruct and blame?

Thanks guys,
I am new at this shit and trying to find my way around.

You don't understand simple math. It's hilarious. Remember, you think it's harder to spend money now because the values are larger, lmao!! That's retarded.

 

[JDeuce]

All he did was double the debt? Damn, Reagan almost increased the debt 3 times more than all the previous Presidents before him. Bush spent more than all the previous presidents before him also. You guys really can't understand relativity. It's hilarious.

I've asked you this before and you couldn't answer. I'll ask again, even though you still don't know.

Tell everyone where spending originates in Congress. Then tell us whether the spending during the Reagan years was entirely up to him, or any sitting president.

Aren't you supposed to be going to the Redskins game tonight? Or is spending 23.5 hours per day on this site more important to you? Or better yet, are you going to sit with your laptop in your lap at the stadium during the game to get the best of both worlds? Watch out, though...it may not be easy getting that bottle of Canadian Club whiskey past security...

 

[akphidelt]

Obstruct and blame!

 

[akphidelt]

I've asked you this before and you couldn't answer. I'll ask again, even though you still don't know.

Tell everyone where spending originates in Congress. Then tell us whether the spending during the Reagan years was entirely up to him, or any sitting president.

Aren't you supposed to be going to the Redskins game tonight? Or is spending 23.5 hours per day on this site more important to you? Or better yet, are you going to sit with your laptop in your lap at the stadium during the game to get the best of both worlds? Watch out, though...it may not be easy getting that bottle of Canadian Club whiskey past security...

Nope, ended up not going. But I guess, if it was the Democrat Congress making those decisions, you should attribute the economic growth during Reagan's tenure to the Democrat's. But you are a racist piece of shit, so you will lie anyways.

 

[JDeuce]

Nope, ended up not going. But I guess, if it was the Democrat Congress making those decisions, you should attribute the economic growth during Reagan's tenure to the Democrat's. But you are a racist piece of shit, so you will lie anyways.

So you admit it's disingenuous to suggest Reagan was responsible for all the spending which occurred under his presidency? Thanks for making my point, Cochise.

And it wasn't a "democratic Congress" under Reagan, you fucking moron. Dims had control of the House while R's had control of the Senate (Until the end of Reagan's second term). Thankfully, the Senate blocked several atrocious bills House dimocraps attempted to pass during that time. Now, when did most of the Reagan years spending occur...early in his two terms or later? You are now embarrassing yourself by being incapable of even discussing elementary-level civics.

Reagan took office in 1981 (saddled with a dimocrap house)...a recession hit later that same year. Dimocraps gained a majority in the House and Senate in the late 80s...a recession hit in 1990. On the other hand, R's had a majority in the House and Senate under Slick Willie. Are you willing to credit the mid-90s economic boom to their policies (like the Contract with America)? Going even farther down the party control timeline, dims had control of both the House and Senate from 2007-2011. Do we even need to discuss the Great Depression?

Funny, every time you've seen a dimocrap majority in both the house and senate, bad economic times seem to follow shortly after.

 

[akphidelt]

Austerity at its finest. Obstruct and blame!!

 

[scottcarter]

So you admit it's disingenuous to suggest Reagan was responsible for all the spending which occurred under his presidency? Thanks for making my point, Cochise.

And it wasn't a "democratic Congress" under Reagan, you fucking moron. Dims had control of the House while R's had control of the Senate (Until the end of Reagan's second term). Thankfully, the Senate blocked several atrocious bills House dimocraps attempted to pass during that time. Now, when did most of the Reagan years spending occur...early in his two terms or later? You are now embarrassing yourself by being incapable of even discussing elementary-level civics.

Reagan took office in 1981 (saddled with a dimocrap house)...a recession hit later that same year. Dimocraps gained a majority in the House and Senate in the late 80s...a recession hit in 1990. On the other hand, R's had a majority in the House and Senate under Slick Willie. Are you willing to credit the mid-90s economic boom to their policies (like the Contract with America)? Going even farther down the party control timeline, dims had control of both the House and Senate from 2007-2011. Do we even need to discuss the Great Depression?

Funny, every time you've seen a dimocrap majority in both the house and senate, bad economic times seem to follow shortly after.

:aktion033

 

[Dave007inVegas]

So you admit it's disingenuous to suggest Reagan was responsible for all the spending which occurred under his presidency? Thanks for making my point, Cochise.

And it wasn't a "democratic Congress" under Reagan, you fucking moron. Dims had control of the House while R's had control of the Senate (Until the end of Reagan's second term). Thankfully, the Senate blocked several atrocious bills House dimocraps attempted to pass during that time. Now, when did most of the Reagan years spending occur...early in his two terms or later? You are now embarrassing yourself by being incapable of even discussing elementary-level civics.

Reagan took office in 1981 (saddled with a dimocrap house)...a recession hit later that same year. Dimocraps gained a majority in the House and Senate in the late 80s...a recession hit in 1990. On the other hand, R's had a majority in the House and Senate under Slick Willie. Are you willing to credit the mid-90s economic boom to their policies (like the Contract with America)? Going even farther down the party control timeline, dims had control of both the House and Senate from 2007-2011. Do we even need to discuss the Great Depression?

Funny, every time you've seen a dimocrap majority in both the house and senate, bad economic times seem to follow shortly after.

:Carcajada:

 

[akphidelt]

So you admit it's disingenuous to suggest Reagan was responsible for all the spending which occurred under his presidency? Thanks for making my point, Cochise.

And it wasn't a "democratic Congress" under Reagan, you fucking moron. Dims had control of the House while R's had control of the Senate (Until the end of Reagan's second term). Thankfully, the Senate blocked several atrocious bills House dimocraps attempted to pass during that time. Now, when did most of the Reagan years spending occur...early in his two terms or later? You are now embarrassing yourself by being incapable of even discussing elementary-level civics.

Reagan took office in 1981 (saddled with a dimocrap house)...a recession hit later that same year. Dimocraps gained a majority in the House and Senate in the late 80s...a recession hit in 1990. On the other hand, R's had a majority in the House and Senate under Slick Willie. Are you willing to credit the mid-90s economic boom to their policies (like the Contract with America)? Going even farther down the party control timeline, dims had control of both the House and Senate from 2007-2011. Do we even need to discuss the Great Depression?

Funny, every time you've seen a dimocrap majority in both the house and senate, bad economic times seem to follow shortly after.

Never said Reagan was responsible for the spending. Just said spending was much higher under Reagan. Spending is spending. And right now we are increasing spending less than anytime in the past 6 decades regardless of who is in control of Congress.

 

[akphidelt]

There's just honestly no way around it or any way to explain why the last 50 years we have increased government expenditures by over an average of 5% per year until Obama came in to office. It's Republican obstructionism at its finest. Obstruct and blame!!