Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Was driving to the booze store when I heard a guy on Hannity defend Obama as a great president, because he has spent the last three years undoing all the problems Bush caused. With that being said, I have three questions:

1)Which Bush policies contributed to the horrible economy.
2)What has Obama done to counter said egregious Bush policies, especially in light of him having a super majority when elected.
3)How does the Democratic owned House and Senate from 2006 to 2010 play into all these decisions.

By the way, my role on this board has always been partisan political hack because I just don't have the time to become informed on all the political nuances, so I am asking for some real input.

Let me be the first to say: Obama never had a supermajority.

There. I just cut the legs off analjelly's attempt to derail the thread.

AZGrizFan wrote:Let me be the first to say: Obama never had a supermajority.

There. I just cut the legs off analjelly's attempt to derail the thread.

Okay, oh-so-very-close-to-super-majority.

Anywho, controlled all three parts of government.

By the way, not trying to be snooty with you AZ. Still gonna slap the shit out of you when we make it back to AZ.

Written in the seriousness you claim you want:

It wasn't Bush's fault, It isn't Obama's fault. It's politics.

The answer is "none of the above."

The current economic malaise all started right with this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramm%E2%8 ... Bliley_Act which was signed into law by Clinton.

AZGrizFan wrote:Let me be the first to say: Obama never had a supermajority.

There. I just cut the legs off analjelly's attempt to derail the thread.

Au contraire.

July 7th 09' to Aug 25th 09' 58 Donk Senators plus 2 Independent who caucused with the donks.

Sept 25th 09' to Feb 4 10' 58 Donk Senators plus 2 Independent who caucused with the donks.

That's almost 6 months of Supermajority where 60 Senators were caucusing with the donks.

For the other 1.5 years of the 111th Congress he had near Supermajority.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/111th_Unit ... s_Congress" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Love how this thread died within six posts.

Guess we do know it all!

If this country can elect Bush twice, I see no reason it won't elect Obama twice. Who's fault is it that Obama is following Bush's footsteps with nearly identical policy.

Gil Dobie wrote:If this country can elect Bush twice, I see no reason it won't elect Obama twice. Who's fault is it that Obama is following Bush's footsteps with nearly identical policy.

This and bluebells post.

1)Which Bush policies contributed to the horrible economy.
2)What has Obama done to counter said egregious Bush policies, especially in light of him having a super majority when elected.
3)How does the Democratic owned House and Senate from 2006 to 2010 play into all these decisions.

The foundations were layed during the Reagan years with ideas that greed is good, government and therefore regulation is always bad, and deficits don't matter - especially if it means high end tax cuts and putting a nail in the soviet coffin.

Taxes on the rich and corporations have remained relatively low ever since, through both Democratic and Republican administrations. Regulation of the financial services sector has diminished while it's percentage of GDP has dramatically increased. Manufacturing however, what truly creates wealth, has declined.

We are now a country that moves money around, basically only manufactures things that explode, and over-consumes.

I blame everyone.