The clown doesn't have a clue how to lead.....UPDATE 1-Obama attacks Bush policies in

[OrangeEmpire]

UPDATE 1-Obama attacks Bush policies in Bush's home state | Reuters

AUSTIN, Texas, Aug 9 (Reuters) - President Barack Obama attacked the economic policies of his Republican predecessor George W. Bush in Bush's home state on Monday as evidence of the way Republicans would operate if given power in Nov. 2 U.S. congressional elections.
At a fund-raising event for Democrats in Dallas, where Bush now lives, Obama said the former president's "disastrous" policies had driven the U.S. economy into the ground and turned budget surpluses into deficits.
Obama defended his repeated references to Bush's policies, saying they were necessary to remind Americans of the weak economy he inherited from Bush in January 2009.
"The policies that crashed the economy, that undercut the middle class, that mortgaged our future, do we really want to go back to that, or do we keep moving our country forward?" Obama said at another fund-raising event in Austin, referring to Bush's eight years as president.
In reminding voters about the policies of the unpopular Bush, Obama is trying to protect his fellow Democrats' majorities in Congress and limit anticipated Republican gains.
On Nov. 2, voters will choose all 435 members of the House of Representatives and 37 members of the 100-seat Senate.
Republicans say they doubt Obama's effort to cite Bush as a reason to vote against them in November will work because Americans are more concerned about getting or keeping a job.
"When we talk about this 'going back' thing, I notice that some Republicans say, 'Well, he just wants to bash the previous administration, he's looking backwards.' ... No, no, no. The reason we're focused on it is because the other side isn't offering anything new," Obama said in Austin.

Thoughts other than this clown being the best candidate the democrats could offer?

 

[OrangeYankee]

It's the only card they have left. You really think he wants to stand behind what they have accomplished so far?

 

[OrangeEmpire]

Absolutely not, that is why he does not talk about healthcare.

 

[TXA&M07]

Laura touched on this a little bit last night on her radio program in between her rants concerning the Vacation and his basketball habit.

I'd be willing to bet he received little resistance in Austin, but clearly the guy has began his campaign trail. I'd be happy if he stayed North of the Red River, and East of the Sabine.

 

[Heebs]

You can't stray from the party line.

 

[IPorange]

How long does this card remain good with Americans? He's had two years, and has been president 2/3's of it. He's spent trillions with a "T" dollars, to no real effect. I got to think this is going to wear thin very, very soon.

 

[OrangeEmpire]

Do you think A&M will be able to play defense this year?

You know, maybe give up less than 30 points a game and give up 5 yards a carry?

 

[TXA&M07]

Instituting the 3-4 with Deruyter as a coordinator. Im confident enough. Von Miller returned too so, we'll see.

 

[CSpindizzy]

How long does this card remain good with Americans? He's had two years, and has been president 2/3's of it. He's spent trillions with a "T" dollars, to no real effect. I got to think this is going to wear thin very, very soon.

This argument went away for a while. Poll numbers slipped. Time to dig into the bag of one liners and see if anything works. When you have nothing to go on, you dig up the crap that got you in office. At this point, they're desperate for anything.

 

[IPorange]

This argument went away for a while. Poll numbers slipped. Time to dig into the bag of one liners and see if anything works. When you have nothing to go on, you dig up the crap that got you in office. At this point, they're desperate for anything.

Yet the democrats have a fair chance at holding on to the House... How can that be, given the polls? It makes me wonder if we are going to see a "shocking" shift in Congress this election cycle, partly due to the media low-balling the current numbers.

 

[lumberjack4]

Here's my theory. Obama is trying to get people so sick of politics that they say "I'm tired of hearing about all this" and go back to ignoring everything he does.

 

[lawgator1]

How long does this card remain good with Americans? He's had two years, and has been president 2/3's of it. He's spent trillions with a "T" dollars, to no real effect. I got to think this is going to wear thin very, very soon.

It probably signals an expectation on his part that the economy and in particular the unemployment numbers will not markedly improve between now and November. So, rather than defend the current situation, he is going to point out that a return to Republican control of either or both houses means alikely return to their economic policies that, if not directly contributing to the current problems, at least played a role in making it worse.

Its all a matter of framing the debate as the Republicans favoring the wealthy at the expense of the lower classes, corporate greed caused this, and we'll have more of that if the Republicans win control.

Pretty much standard stuff, from either party.

 

[KB5252]

It probably signals an expectation on his part that the economy and in particular the unemployment numbers will not markedly improve between now and November. So, rather than defend the current situation, he is going to point out that a return to Republican control of either or both houses means alikely return to their economic policies that, if not directly contributing to the current problems, at least played a role in making it worse.

Its all a matter of framing the debate as the Republicans favoring the wealthy at the expense of the lower classes, corporate greed caused this, and we'll have more of that if the Republicans win control.

Pretty much standard stuff, from either party.

It is interesting, Obama has laid blame on the previous president openly more than any other president I can remember. In the past presidents have been reluctant to do this because it makes them look ineffective and unwilling to take responsibility.

There will come a time in the near future when laying blame at the feet of the previous administration no longer work. While he is actively campaigning for democrats many of those same candidates are staying at arms length from him publicly. There is a real sense among many citizens and those involved in politics that he is short on substance and his policies leave a lot to be desired by the average American.

Let us not also forget that the democrats were in control of the house before the crap hit the fan and they hold just as much of the responsibility as Bush or the previous house. people will be reminded often of the flat out denials of a coming crash by so many of the democrat super stars.

 

[CSpindizzy]

Yet the democrats have a fair chance at holding on to the House... How can that be, given the polls? It makes me wonder if we are going to see a "shocking" shift in Congress this election cycle, partly due to the media low-balling the current numbers.

A few factors:

1)When DeLay and others pushed reapportionment in the 90's many of the districts became ideologically purer. This was post '94. The number of swing districts shrunk. Not quite as many are in play as was then.
2)GOP failed to come up with some decent candidates in some districts we are now seeing as competitive late in the game. "Fillers" are making some stupid rookie mistakes that scare voters to sticking with devil they know
3)Money - much of the money went to Senate campaigns because the logic was the R's can win there. Only recently has money begun trickling back to those house seats

In what I've seen with the consultants is there is a reluctance to spread money out to some of the 'fringe possibility' districts. There are about 30-40 districts money and resources are going to - some of which are R's trying to hold the seats. If the R's can get the indies to come out with the trend remaining 2 to 1 for R's, then there is a chance. But efforts to get them out are underfunded.

It's a lot of time left in the game. Things can change. I personally think if there is ANY change it will be to the negative for D's. Economic news is only going to get worse. Food costs (especially with grain - see Russian fires news), gas costs, potentials for hurricanes, economic results, jobs (seasonal work trails off and more on the UE rolls) all spell bad media for Dems.

 

[volinbham]

Interesting that Obama and his cronies keep pointing to the Bush tax cuts as the policies that drove the car in the ditch. Those cuts may have grown the deficit but I've yet to see any explain how they caused the recession.

No surprise.

 

[lawgator1]

It is interesting, Obama has laid blame on the previous president openly more than any other president I can remember. In the past presidents have been reluctant to do this because it makes them look ineffective and unwilling to take responsibility.

I think the reason for that is that an overwhelming majority of the country pretty much abhors Bush and like Obama correctly blames he and his adminsitration's malfeasance for quite a bit.

 

[BeecherVol]

It probably signals an expectation on his part that the economy and in particular the unemployment numbers will not markedly improve between now and November. So, rather than defend the current situation, he is going to point out that a return to Republican control of either or both houses means alikely return to their economic policies that, if not directly contributing to the current problems, at least played a role in making it worse.

Its all a matter of framing the debate as the Republicans favoring the wealthy at the expense of the lower classes, corporate greed caused this, and we'll have more of that if the Republicans win control.

Pretty much standard stuff, from either party.

So basically he has no other leg to stand on other than the "Bush's Fault".

At some point he has to have something to point to. Other than, the last guy made a bigger mess than we thought so its gonna take more $ and more time to get out of it.

 

[BeecherVol]

Hope and Change!

 

[KB5252]

I think the reason for that is that an overwhelming majority of the country pretty much abhors Bush and like Obama correctly blames he and his adminsitration's malfeasance for quite a bit.

I would agree save one small issue, the only real issue Obama seems to be pounding the drum on is the Bush tax cuts. He regularly equates these cuts with the economic downturn which is faulty reasoning at best. He knows he and his party are no better on the issues that started the chain of events that led to the disaster we're in today.

There are any number of issues that Obama could take Bush to task on that are relevant to the situation we find ourselves in today and the tax cuts are not among them. The reason he focuses there instead of elsewhere is that he is every bit as guilty of those things as Bush was so he picks the class warfare argument. Disagree with the Bush tax cuts or not you must call a spade a spade and class warfare is exactly what Obama is engaged in here.

 

[gsvol]

Government motors is spending $500 million building a new plant in Mexico and figures no one will notice the six illegals pushing it across the border.

 

[lawgator1]

I would agree save one small issue, the only real issue Obama seems to be pounding the drum on is the Bush tax cuts. He regularly equates these cuts with the economic downturn which is faulty reasoning at best. He knows he and his party are no better on the issues that started the chain of events that led to the disaster we're in today.

There are any number of issues that Obama could take Bush to task on that are relevant to the situation we find ourselves in today and the tax cuts are not among them. The reason he focuses there instead of elsewhere is that he is every bit as guilty of those things as Bush was so he picks the class warfare argument. Disagree with the Bush tax cuts or not you must call a spade a spade and class warfare is exactly what Obama is engaged in here.

I don't see how the Republicans can on the one hand run on budget deficits and then on the other successfully defend the Bush tax cuts, especially since the Dems can so easily argue that the cuts are going to those who have been getting the big Wall Street bonuses.

 

[Oldvol75]

He's the Alfred E. Newman of politics, "What? Me worry?" Come to think of it, he does resemble Alfred E. Newman!

 

[KB5252]

I don't see how the Republicans can on the one hand run on budget deficits and then on the other successfully defend the Bush tax cuts, especially since the Dems can so easily argue that the cuts are going to those who have been getting the big Wall Street bonuses.

Please explain what you mean by "running on"? Are you trying to imply the deficits were a result of the tax cuts?

Do you mean the same segment of the population that pays the lion's share of taxes to begin with? See here we go with the class warfare again, is it ingrained in the democrat psyche?

How much of ones income should one be expected to pay? Is 40 or 50% too much, is 0 to 5% too little? See where I'm going here?

 

[CSpindizzy]

I don't see how the Republicans can on the one hand run on budget deficits and then on the other successfully defend the Bush tax cuts, especially since the Dems can so easily argue that the cuts are going to those who have been getting the big Wall Street bonuses.

Considering every bracket benefited from this and things like child tax credits were thrown in there, I'm sure Republicans can easily argue that quite a few Americans including none who even pay taxes benefited from them.

 

[MG1968]

I don't see how the Republicans can on the one hand run on budget deficits and then on the other successfully defend the Bush tax cuts, especially since the Dems can so easily argue that the cuts are going to those who have been getting the big Wall Street bonuses.

and the GOP can now argue that democrats like Chris Dodd wrote those bonuses into recently passed legislation. They can also point to the GM/Chrysler bailout, bank takeovers, and the Financial reform bill as a blurring of the line between government and business.

They can point to Fannie and Freddie, which democrats claimed, and still claim, were perfectly fine and had nothing to do with the financial crisis.

the GOP can also point to 50+ months of positive, private sector job growth as a result of the Bush tax cuts.