President Obama - Definitely a new style of running the country

yeah and if there were Rep appointments to positions of bush , and they "forgot" to pay taxes... can you imagine the public outrage? O man people be marching in every town to oppose bush! Now that its dems that do it... thats okay..becuase Bo can do no wrong!

So it's Obama's fault that the republicans decided to hypocritcally refuse to back a bail out that would help support the economy even when they'd previously supported one that rewarded banks for failure? Also if punctuality is the worst you can come up with, then I'd suggest that he's doing a pretty good job. No doubt even if Obama did everything perfectly, and never made a single mistake, you'd still have the standard people here ranting about how terrible he's doing.

What? get off the Dems nuts man... maybe the rep learned the lesson the first go? hrmmm? maybe...

You have a very short memory.  The vote for the bank bail out in the Senate only had 10 out of 49 republicans and 46 out of 50 Dems.

While in the House only 20 out of 199 Republicans voted for passage and 203 Dems voted for it.

Where is that overwhelming support at?  It was not on the Republican side.  It may have been Bush's bill to fund failing banks, but it was the Dems who overwhelmingly supported it.

Info from the Washington Post's 110th Congress voting records at: http://projects.washingtonpost/congress/110

ive stated that Bush lost his rep lable soon after his second term started... but its us evil rep...you know

I guess Lee1776 said enough but let me add this. The Senate is havng trouble passing the bill, and it's not just because of the Republicans. Not that i would expect you to notice. The fact that you dismissed it in your comment suggest you are one of those who give passes to your own party.

Not sure what gave you the idea that the punctuality things was suppose to be my secret weapon of some sort but considering Bush was grilled for everything from fumbling words to talking funny, I say Obama's every move is game as far as I'm concerned. I said it once and I'll say it again. Sucks to have the shoe on the other foot doesn't it?

i guess bush figured he should show up on time (if he truly did; for all i know this is just one more thing you've pulled outta your ass) considering he spent more than 2 years outta 8 on vacation.

Talk about pulling something out of your ass.

Which doesn't seem to be much anymore, but I actually pulled this out of Foxnews.com ass.

Link

Does that look better for you? Figures you wouldn't look at the link.

LW,

I agree this is same old boss concept, but it's a tradition to pick on the new guys as if he was the first so. And that press secretary? He drives me nuts to.

I never said the democrats didn't support it. However the republicans (some of them) supported it as well. The democrats are mostly being consistent by supporting both (since the first one had far weaker reasons in favour of it, to me a consistent approach would either be to reject the first and support the second, or support both, or reject both). The republicans supported the first bail out in some cases (and let's not forget it was done under a republican president), and then refused to support the second one. To me that's playing politics, not having faith in your convictions. Also amusing how with many things done under Bush's term the republicans (and frequently Bush) are absolved of most blame, and instead it's the senate/house's fault. Then when Obama becomes president suddenly everything is his fault. Either being the president confers meaningful power (and hence responsibility+accountability) or it doesn't. You can't have one rule for Bush and a different one for Obama.

So did the Democrats, whats your point?

Funny, I recall several Democrats in the senate and around10 in Congress who refused to support this bill. Am I missing something here or is hypocrsy your second language?

Tell that to President Obama who said there would be n lobbyist in his admnistration and who chose to pick people who avoid paying taxes.

That would be because this is a Check and Balance Gov't and the Senate and Congress have just as much to blame as Bush does. Not that i would expect someone like you to grasp the concept of check and balances, you all think Bush ran the whole country all by himself.

So what you are saying is if this bailout fails, we can blame the whole thing on Obama and give Congress and the Senate a pass?

Not sure what you are talking about. We all know those in Congress (all but the Republicans and 10 Democrats or so) and those in the Senate in favor of this new bailout crap will be to blame but Obama will take the brunt of it because he is the one showing his face on tv screaming how the Republicans are not being bipartisan, all while ignoring the few Democrats in Congress and those in the Senate against the current bill.

But what can I expect from people who believe their party members could do no wrong and that any choices they make they are doing the right thing, even if it looks a lot like what the Republicans are doing.

What I love is that at the moment bipartisan means that Republicans cave to whatever the Democrats want to do instead of what it should mean as the Democrats and Republicans actually working together to come to a consensus.

Hey, now that they have control of all 3 houses, they seem to think they should be feared. That somehow hey control everyone. I say let them have their fun. The average voter getstired of new things pretty  quickly and things will "change" again in 4 to 8 years.

hardly.  this is a link >>>> click me <<<<<<< one of many publishing these numbers:

as of 1/16/09, bush had spent a total of 487 full or partial days at camp david & another 490 full or partial days playin cowboy at his crawford property (if it were really a ranch, its owner wouldn't be afraid of horses) during the 8 years he served as president. 

remembering your difficulty with arithmetic, lemme help out by tellin you the sum of those two numbers is 977 vacation days.  that total doesn't even include trips to kennebunkport, me.

next we use something called multiplication to determine how many days there are in 8 years and discover the answer is 2920.

clearly i was incorrect in my claim bush spent 1/4 of his terms vacationing.   

in fact, he spent a taste over 1/3 of that time fuckin the dog.

LOL

SOME REP supported it??? WHAT? at best those were moderate conservatives AT BEST. Belive me there was not a whole heck of alot of support from teh Rep on that... first bail out... but you know once the numbers are shown to back up that a majority of REP didnt support it and in fact it was almost sweeping support from the Dems... the tone changed to... : well well some supported it!"

Bo nut riders crack me up. In fact I know of another one who thinks that more taxes are a great thing so we can expand even more gov and socailism is a good thing...

Now since  I only saw bits of the time Bush spent at his ranch/ or Camp David on TV, Some of those periods of time I noticed he had VIPs and foreign leaders there. So I am going to step out on a limb and say he was possibly doing some work there from time to time. Of course you seem to know exactly what went on at these locations (perhaps you held the dog for him ), so who am I to tell you different right?

So lets be fair now, equal time for conservatives and liberals.

Care to analyze your current love interest's (BO) time at work over his four years in the Senate? Oh that's right he spent two years campaigning while drawing a Senators pay check, does that fall under "Hope" or "Change"? Now as you point out my arithmetic is not so good, I give Obama 1/2 the time spent doing his job. Now I didn't take into account the times that House was not in session, and the senators go home. Using your "Bush" logic, that equals vacation time. So using your superior liberal brain power (shouldn't be much of a strain) why don't you tell everyone how little BO did any real work? Come on you can do it, I have trust in you o'wise one. 

"snickers" dont throw out numbers like that!

Yes you are. Most (possibly even all - I cant be bothered to check all the minute details) democrats that supported the first bail out supported the second. None of the republicans that supported the first bail out supported the second. Given that the second had more (economic) justification than the first, that means that when it comes to hypocracy the republicans are the worst offenders in this case. I wouldn't expect you to see that though, since you seem blind to anything other than criticism of Obama.

Dude, wake up and smell the coffee already. The bill did not pass with a Democrat controlled  Congress and Senate right off the back. If anything you shoulb be less concerned with what Republican is a hypocrit and more concerned with your own traders. Heh heh.

Did you ever stop to think of the other possible explanation?  You know the one where those that voted for the bailout realized the err of their ways with how that bill hasn't done anything that it promised to do.  How does learning from past mistakes make them hypocrits?

LW ive tried explainign this to the BO goons that warship him, and I use the peso as an example...but that is to complicated for most of em to understand...after all its free money and move governement invasions into our lives and they could care less as long as there is "more for them"

Ed why do people still insist on blaming the rep for the last bail out? Has it not been proven that for a matter of fact that there was very little Rep support for it and yet the Dems overwhelmingly voted for it? O thats right...because Bush okayed it that must mean its a Rep thing...even though bush pretty much threw away his rep lable in his second term

I think it just comes down to standard politics, the previous President was a Republican and he spend most of his tenure with a Republican congress so everything must be their fault.  Personally I blame party politics for the entire mess, and that includes both parties.  Congress stopped being a check on the executive branch, even after the Dems took controll in 2006.  When you refuse to do your job and play party line politics all sorts of things go wrong, it's time for congress to step up and start representing the people again.  I know that isn't likely to happen but that is what needs to happen.