And to add, Wars shouldn't be permanent spending. Anything I've heard from the Dems is as that money decreases they want to put it towards other spending, not use it to pay off the debt and deficit.
So what have you heard FROM DEMS? Not from Fox News but actually from Dems?
Also, the Obama apologists recognize that our economy was bad when Obama took over. Yet, instead of making jobs and the economy his main focus, he made pushing his social ideology his main focus by things like Obamacare and Gays in the Military. Things which are mistakes to do while the economy is hurting and while we're at war. He hasn't even made a true effort to reduce the debt.
He has taken steps to end both wars and to turn around our economy. Regardless of whether you agree with what he has done regarding those issues, to say he hasn't focused on them is blind or ignorant. The president's job is massive, he has to be able to get a lot of things done in a short amount of time. The job is that much harder when the opposition doesn't want to work with him. Personally between ending 2 senseless wars, turning around our economy, and pushing a liberal agenda that will take our country into the future instead of back to the darkages I hope he finds the time to address our outragious marijuana prohibition laws. If not, I'm pushing for Barr in 2016!!!
Yet we still have the same problems with the UN that we had with the league of nations - inaction.
Do you want Iran or N.Korea getting nuclear weapons? I don't.
Are sanctions going to prevent it? No.
But instead of doing something they debate.
Then they give the Palestinans a place at the table even though they don't have any land? How's that work? They HAD land until they decided to help the Jordanians invade Israel in 1967 then they lost it. Should have kept their noses out of it.
______________________
There really isn't much you can do when you're dealing with irrational people who are leading a country and have WMD's. Any outward military aggression toward them could possibly lead to use of these weapons by these lunatics. Continued pressure by use of sanctions will hopefully cause enough internal discomfort for the people in Korea and Iran to turn on there own leaders. Look at what happened to Kadafi and what's now happening in Syria. Stay patient things will change over there for the better. Remember the old saying, " fools rush in where angels fear to tread. "
As for N.Korea, I say we allow China to invade them. N.Korea has the 3rd largest standing army in the world. Fortunately they're on a penensula. Go south and we all go back to 1950. Go north and it's suicide as you're invading China with a population of 1 billion people. That gives China an army of about 300M if they wanted it. That's the entire population of the US, in laymans terms. Just tell China they can have N.Korea, just stop at the border. We can trust China with nukes, we can't trust N.Korea.
As for Iran....if they screw around long enough, Israel will take care of them like they did Iraq. I love that scrappy little nation. They're the little nation that could. Who else could beat 3 countries in a war they didn't start in 6 days?
Either you are wrong and not all medical school graduates believe this or there are a lot of people lying with no real motive for it.
Or they've just been indoctrinated that this is something acceptable to tell women when the doctors feel they should get the abortion, which doesn't honor the woman's choice. You confront them with the truth that getting the abortion means they will be killing their child, well that means they are going to realistically make "their" choice (well there's still coercion from birthfathers pressuring them to get an abortion which the supposed "pro-choice" groups haven't done anything to stop). These are definately human lives being killed though.
Neither preseident started entitlement spending so I see that as a moot point. We are talking about the money that these 2 presidents have spent themselves and why. As out of hand as entitlement spending might be it's not anywhere near as out of hand as spending on 2 wars that we have no business being inregardless of which one uses more money.
No we definately had business being in Afghanistan. We were attacked and the Taliban played a big part in abetting that attack. Considering what happened during the 9-11 attacks, inaction would have destroyed all confidence in the economy. A lot of the spending was in domestic homeland security after the attacks as Bush inherited a national security mess. He chose bigger government to be the solution for that and that resulted in a lot of spending as well. Democrats tend to like that. Iraq is easy to criticize after the fact, but looking back at the time of it, the Democrats voted for it based on the same info the Republicans voted for it on.
Again, people claim Obama inherited a financial mess, yet he didn't focus on the economy. If the Democrats were so great on the economy like they claim, Obama would have focused on jobs and the economy on day 1 (when it was needed). Instead he focused on using the majority in both houses to push social ideology.
So, as I said, we attacked the country over terrorism. If all that we wanted to do was get them to stop harboring terrorists, all we had to do was stop providing them aid. We didn't have to attack them. In the meantime, we lose many American soldiers lives, many innocent civilians lives, and we will not only still give them aid but will rebuild their country. Epic fail!!!!
Oh yeah, that always works. You forgot the part of sending a sternly written letter. The Taliban wouldn't have taken those actions seriously. After the previous 8 years they always counted on inaction to be the policy. Just like it was the only way to get rid of Hitler, the Afghan war was the only way to get rid of Bin Ladin.
It doesn't mean they weren't lied to, it means they were lied to by Clinton too if what you say is true. Everyone was lied to and I tried to tell everyone I knew that as soon as they started talking about going into Iraq for weapons. You can call it a conspiracy but I never believed that Bush believed Iraq had WMDs. Here we are 10 years later and Iran actually does have WMDs and we don't have the resourses to deal with it. Another epic fail!!!
No one was lied to, until the Dems lied by claiming they were lied to in order to get them to vote for it. The real truth probably lies in that Saddam was duping the world, b/c he wanted Iran to believe he had the WMDs. We had the resources to deal with Iran. It's called stay out of Israel's way and let them take care of it. Yet Israel gets hampered and treated like their the bad guy, while the UN just lets Iran and N Korea do whatever they need to do to get WMDs. No corruption in that UN at all - lol
So what have you heard FROM DEMS? Not from Fox News but actually from Dems?
Show me where any Dems say as those funds decrease, the $$ should go soley towards paying off the debt and deficit rather than new spending. BTW, I actually see more MSNBC than Fox, thanks to the breakroom nazi at work. However all the people who cry "Fox News, Fox news, It hit me on the head" can never point to anything they actually lie about.
He has taken steps to end both wars and to turn around our economy. Regardless of whether you agree with what he has done regarding those issues, to say he hasn't focused on them is blind or ignorant. The president's job is massive, he has to be able to get a lot of things done in a short amount of time. The job is that much harder when the opposition doesn't want to work with him. Personally between ending 2 senseless wars, turning around our economy, and pushing a liberal agenda that will take our country into the future instead of back to the darkages I hope he finds the time to address our outragious marijuana prohibition laws. If not, I'm pushing for Barr in 2016!!!
Playing class warfare and just claiming the other side is obstructionist isn't doing anything to fix the economy and he had 2 years of total Democratic power to pass a long term budget. He didn't need the Republicans for that.
Check out Article 24 of the Iraq Status of Forces Agreement from 2,008. A 2,011 withdrawl of troops was a goal of the Bush Administration.
Or they've just been indoctrinated that this is something acceptable to tell women when the doctors feel they should get the abortion, which doesn't honor the woman's choice. You confront them with the truth that getting the abortion means they will be killing their child, well that means they are going to realistically make "their" choice (well there's still coercion from birthfathers pressuring them to get an abortion which the supposed "pro-choice" groups haven't done anything to stop). These are definately human lives being killed though.
Medically trained or not, there are people who don't believe that aborting a fetus is killing a human being. It really doesn't matter what I say or even more importantly what they believe, you are going to think that they are simply lying. Again, you're not lying if you believe it. Your truth isn't everyone else's truth.
No we definately had business being in Afghanistan.
We had no business sending thousands of troops to Afghanistan if what we were truly trying to do is stop terrorism/kill one guy. We didn't go there saying we wanted to topple the government or install democracy. We went in saying we were hunting for bin Laden.
Iraq is easy to criticize after the fact, but looking back at the time of it, the Democrats voted for it based on the same info the Republicans voted for it on.
So both sides of the isle were duped. No doubt about it.
Again, people claim Obama inherited a financial mess, yet he didn't focus on the economy. If the Democrats were so great on the economy like they claim, Obama would have focused on jobs and the economy on day 1 (when it was needed). Instead he focused on using the majority in both houses to push social ideology.
And when Republicans are in office the GDP goes down and unemployment goes up so they DO focus on the economy and still fail. I want my president focused on ALL presidential issues and I wouldn't think he was doing his job if all that he foceused on was the economy. There's more to running a country that trying to fix problems with the economy. and I get the feeling that if he solely focused on the economy and completely turned it around the right would be saying "OK, he fixed the economy but what else has he done?"
Oh yeah, that always works. You forgot the part of sending a sternly written letter. The Taliban wouldn't have taken those actions seriously. After the previous 8 years they always counted on inaction to be the policy. Just like it was the only way to get rid of Hitler, the Afghan war was the only way to get rid of Bin Ladin.
Last time I checked bin Laden had never been the dictator of Afghanistan so it's a weak comparison at best. The Taliban was not Nazi Germany. I didn't say anything about not taking action, I said send in special forces, take out the person, don't attack a country.
No one was lied to, until the Dems lied by claiming they were lied to in order to get them to vote for it. The real truth probably lies in that Saddam was duping the world, b/c he wanted Iran to believe he had the WMDs. We had the resources to deal with Iran. It's called stay out of Israel's way and let them take care of it. Yet Israel gets hampered and treated like their the bad guy, while the UN just lets Iran and N Korea do whatever they need to do to get WMDs. No corruption in that UN at all - lol
Our intelligence said that they knew Iraq had WMDs. If they sent us to war based on Saddam trying to dupe Iran then our intelligence and the itelligence of our last president is more questionable that I had previously thought. I'd prefer that they lied than to truly be that fargin stupid!!!
And, yes, we need to stay out of it and let Isreal clean up the area. At the end of the day though no matter what why and how if Isreal goes to war we will likley get sucked in.
ATTN. CBS-SPORTS, YOU GUYS PROBABLY HAVE TAMPA'S ADDRESS. GET A MEDICAL CREW OVER THERE, NOW!
SOMETHINGS GONE WRONG!
Nothing is wrong. I don't like wasting an hour of primetime TV watching the president when I can get the shorter version on the internet the next day, which I have done. I've read about the speech, I've read a fact check article and I've read about that tool Rubio's rebuttle. I don't spend that much time mulling over politics. As it turned out though I should have watched the president because it had to be better than watching Michigan get embarrassed!!!!
Show me where any Dems say as those funds decrease, the $$ should go soley towards paying off the debt and deficit rather than new spending. BTW, I actually see more MSNBC than Fox, thanks to the breakroom nazi at work. However all the people who cry "Fox News, Fox news, It hit me on the head" can never point to anything they actually lie about.
They probably see you as the Nazi at work. Just sayin!! I don't have to show you anything about what the plan with that money is. You made the statement, the burden of proof is on you.
Playing class warfare and just claiming the other side is obstructionist isn't doing anything to fix the economy and he had 2 years of total Democratic power to pass a long term budget. He didn't need the Republicans for that.
From my perspective the Reps have ignited the class warfare. The Dems are just pointing it out. With every move, every statement, every law introduced the REps show their hand as the party of business, the party of the rich. You can say the Dems do the same thing with the middle class and poor but it's hypoctrical to try to pin it all on the Dems. And the Reps have been obstructionists. Everything the president proposes, even if it's reintroducing Republican ideas like Romneycare, it's met with disdain and vitriol. What is that but obstruction? And as far as the first 2 years, he spent it getting Obamacare passed which would have never passed if the Reps took over the House or Senate. We've seen that he was right about that.
Check out Article 24 of the Iraq Status of Forces Agreement from 2,008. A 2,011 withdrawl of troops was a goal of the Bush Administration.
the goal still had to be implemented. also, it shouldn't have taken 5 years of that senseless war to get a withdrawal plan. After 7 years at war in Afghanastan Bush still had no plan to bring those troops home. Obama has.
