If all else fails... still BLAME BUSH!!!

[Tiger Wench]

Asshole...

Facing the first real rough patch of his presidency, President Obama and his supporters are once again resorting to a tried-and-true tactic: attacking George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.
In his White House press conference last week, Mr. Obama referred to the Bush era at least nine times, three times lamenting that he "inherited" a $1.3 trillion debt that has set back his administration's efforts to fix the economy.

With the former president lying low in Dallas, largely focused on crafting his memoirs, Mr. Obama has increasingly attempted to exploit Mr. Bush when discussing the weak economy, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the difficulty closing the military prison at U.S. Naval Base Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

As he took power, Mr. Obama promised a "new era of responsibility" that would transcend partisan politics.

"For a guy who campaigned on taking responsibility and looking forward, he spends an awful lot of time pointing fingers and looking backward," said former Bush deputy press secretary Tony Fratto, who has begun defending the previous administration.

But Democrats think Mr. Obama would be remiss if he did not point out what he inherited.

"I'm not convinced that Obama and his supporters are bashing Bush as much as they are quite rightfully reminding people that our current economic mess and the wars were inherited from the Bush administration," said Democratic strategist Bud Jackson. "It's important to remind people of this because Republicans are now criticizing the Obama administration as if they had no role in how we got here."

Democratic Party strategist Liz Chadderdon said the strategy of blaming the previous team has been effective.

"I think Bush-bashing has been alive and well since '07 and, since it keeps working, why not use it?" she said. "Voters have short memories. The administration needs to remind people that things were way worse over the last four years than in the last six months."

Mixed feelings among voters about health care reform have shaken the president's approval ratings from the high poll numbers when he took office. Six months into his term, 30 percent of the nation's voters "strongly approve" of Mr. Obama's job performance, according to a survey released Monday by the Rasmussen polling organization.

The poll showed that 40 percent "strongly disapprove" of the president's performance, marking the first time the disparity has reached double digits.

Since taking office, Mr. Obama has implemented a $787 billion stimulus package that has failed to produce a quick economic turnaround and the U.S. economy has shed more than 2.5 million jobs.

Mr. Obama hardly ever refers to Mr. Bush by name. In fact, his Web site, whitehouse.gov, recently scrubbed the name of the former president out of a reference to Hurricane Katrina, which once read: "President Obama will keep the broken promises made by President Bush to rebuild New Orleans and the Gulf Coast."

Now, the "President Bush" is gone.

Although Mr. Obama's effort is subtle, his rhetoric is clear. On his first trip overseas, Mr. Obama referred to Mr. Bush's foreign policy and said the United States has "shown arrogance" and been "dismissive, even derisive." He said decisions of the past had "lowered our standing in the world."

"There are some mornings I read the news and feel like it's January 2009 -- there are so many stories making the front page about things that President Bush thought about and didn't do," said former White House press secretary Dana Perino. "I find it hard to believe that there aren't more interesting stories affecting Americans in the here and now that can garner that kind of space. But the obsession continues unabated."

Even when asserting his responsibility for addressing the nation's problems, Mr. Obama manages to highlight that he was left to deal with others' missteps.

At a town-hall meeting this month in Michigan -- the state with the nation's highest jobless rate -- Mr. Obama said that fixing the economy is "a job I gladly accept."

But he added, "I love these folks who helped get us in this mess. And then suddenly say, 'Oh, this is Obama's economy.'"  Guess what, asshole?  It IS your economy - you are the fucking President!!!

[Tarheel]

The ONE lied throughout that press conference, Tiger Wench, just like he lies every time he tells someone they'll be able to 'keep their current health care plan' even after the socialists pass their 'health care reform'.

Get used to the blame Bush rhetoric; we'll be hearing that from the American socialists for the next millennium.

[boartitz]

Just like the Bushies blamed Clinton for at least one term. We're in a world of shit, but we were there before Obama got elected.
As long as Congress is in session and a person is in the Oval Office, we be fucked.

[Tarheel]

Just like the Bushies blamed Clinton for at least one term. We're in a world of shit, but we were there before Obama got elected.
As long as Congress is in session and a person is in the Oval Office, we be fucked.

We weren't at 10+% unemployment with W or Clinton.  Write what you will in defense of the Dems but The ONE, his leftist staff, and his socialist congress are not making things any better.

But, I couldn't agree with you more with your last statement above; no matter what party they are in they all are conceited, arrogant, and ambitious for power over all of us (the people that they work for).

To quote from Kaos "Revolution is coming".

[boartitz]

Uh

[Tarheel]

Uh

Yes, I've seen that chart a lot.  Very misleading.  Newt Gingrich was Speaker of the House during most of Clinton's term...Clinton was largely not as responsible for the decreased deficit as much as it was the responsible budget cuts by the Republican Congress with Newt at the helm.  Of course the opposite was true when Reagan was President...the tax and spend Democrats in Congress headed by Tip O'Neil were largely responsible for the deficit spending then.  Now the Dems have all of Congress and the White House...I expect the deficit spending to do exactly what the chart is showing it's doing.

[Tarheel]

Uh

Oooh, here's one, The ONE's (and his Congressional buddies) deficit spending:

[Tarheel]

Uh

Scary. Thanks, Chairman Maobama.   And, here I thought that W's deficit was bad:

[boartitz]

Scary. Thanks, Chairman Maobama.   And, here I thought that W's deficit was bad:

That shows the mess that Bush left for his successor, no matter who it would have been. Thanks for the reinforcement.

[AUTiger1]

That shows the mess that Bush left for his successor, no matter who it would have been. Thanks for the reinforcement.

So Bush is the reason that Obama has tripled the debt? 

[jesus]

So Bush is the reason that Obama has tripled the debt? 

What the fuck color is the ice you're smoking?  You do know that the current budget the US is operating on began on 10/01/08 and ends on 09/30/09 and who signed that budget into law, don't ya? 

[AUTiger1]

What the fuck color is the ice you're smoking?  You do know that the current budget the US is operating on began on 10/01/08 and ends on 09/30/09 and who signed that budget into law, don't ya?  

I know exactly who signed off on that budget.  I also know who signed a off in March for a budget of $410 Billion to fund the government.  Didn't cut it one bit, as a matter of fact it increased, wow, who would have thunk it.  I also know who signed off on a Trillion dollar stimulus package and will cost close to 3.5 trillion when we calculate the interest b/c it was money spent that we didn't have and had to borrow it.  So yeah, I kinda blame the current admin on those.  

Side note*  I am not a defender of Bush for the most part.  Fiscally, he was liberal.  He didn't wield the veto stamp and stop unnecessary spending.  He went right a long with it an the government grew about 6 to 8%, depending on who you listen to, during his time in office.  I am not saying that he didn't have a hand in it, he did.  But to act like the spending that Obama has signed off on is Bush's fault is a reach and laughable at best.  If he were a man of his word, he would have told them to piss up a rope and never signed off on the stimulus package, the budget to fund the government, and he wouldn't be pushing cap and trade and healthcare, which the numbers have been shown, that it will cost us more money that we don't have.  But if you think that Obama is not a spend happy pres then by all means have some more Kool-aid.

[Tarheel]

That shows the mess that Bush left for his successor, no matter who it would have been. Thanks for the reinforcement.

Perhaps; but it's also the mess that was left by the Democrat Congress (elected in 2006 BTW...and the fact that Congress sets the budget and spending...not the President...he can only sign it or veto it) that set the budget that the evil Bush signed.  Of course for some no matter what facts and figures one can offer it will still always be ALL BUSH'S FAULT.

He IS to blame for not vetoing enough of the Dems spending.

[Tarheel]

That shows the mess that Bush left for his successor, no matter who it would have been. Thanks for the reinforcement.

Only reinforcing the budget deficit spending done while Democrats are on the watch.  They've been setting the budget since 2006.

[Tarheel]

What the eff color is the ice you're smoking?  You do know that the current budget the US is operating on began on 10/01/08 and ends on 09/30/09 and who signed that budget into law, don't ya? 

I believe that the Dems were in charge of Congress then...that they created the budget (deficit); Bush should have vetoed it; he is no more to blame than Pelosi and Reid (yes, they were in charge of Congress during said period).

[Tarheel]

I know exactly who signed off on that budget.  I also know who signed a off in March for a budget of $410 Billion to fund the government.  Didn't cut it one bit, as a matter of fact it increased, wow, who would have thunk it.  I also know who signed off on a Trillion dollar stimulus package and will cost close to 3.5 trillion when we calculate the interest b/c it was money spent that we didn't have and had to borrow it.  So yeah, I kinda blame the current admin on those.  

Side note*  I am not a defender of Bush for the most part.  Fiscally, he was liberal.  He didn't wield the veto stamp and stop unnecessary spending.  He went right a long with it an the government grew about 6 to 8%, depending on who you listen to, during his time in office.  I am not saying that he didn't have a hand in it, he did.  But to act like the spending that Obama has signed off on is Bush's fault is a reach and laughable at best.  If he were a man of his word, he would have told them to piss up a rope and never signed off on the stimulus package, the budget to fund the government, and he wouldn't be pushing cap and trade and healthcare, which the numbers have been shown, that it will cost us more money that we don't have.  But if you think that Obama is not a spend happy pres then by all means have some more Kool-aid.

Well said, AUT1.

[Tarheel]

That shows the mess that Bush left for his successor, no matter who it would have been. Thanks for the reinforcement.

Like I said earlier...we'll be hearing the Blame Bush rhetoric for the next millennium...it's a more convenient excuse than actually fixing the economic problems and far easier to implement.


Dems have Keynesian economics so far up their asses they don't know how to do anything but print and spend (and tax).  It has never worked.

[Kaos]

Like I said earlier...we'll be hearing the Blame Bush Tuberville rhetoric for the next millennium...it's a more convenient excuse than actually fixing the economic recruiting, offensive, coaching problems and far easier to implement.

That.