Still, where was the fear and paranoia? If big gov't under Obama is just as bad and drives paranoia/fear....then it's the same with Bush. Right?
Because there is no balance with Mr. Obama. The Legislature is controlled by the same party that is in the White House. The last time Republicans had control of both the Legislature and the White House was for 2 years under President Reagan. The liberals screamed that his budget over ten years would cost the nation one trillion dollars and that was too much for any nation to take. Our grandchildren would be paying it off. Well, in reality we had almost 20 years of prosperous growth. The liberals took power back and wrote some laws and we went into a fiscal tailspin. It is not paranoia when you have seen this before and going down this road again you see the signs of disaster. The disturbing thing is that we are asked to report people that disagree with what our government is doing. Yet Senator Clinton screamed that it was our duty to do this when Mr. Bush was in office. Suddenly it is wrong to do it now. All President Bush asked of us was to report people that seemed suspicious in regards to terrorism to help safeguard the nation during a time of war. While President Obama is asking us to turn in people because that disagree with him. That smacks of the old Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, and a host of other bad groups. It is not paranoia, or fear mongering, it is pointing out that what our elected leader is doing is wrong. Had one of the front groups done this I would not care but it is the full power and weight of the government that is asking for this information. What will they do with it? We don't know because they never said. Why does our current government worry about people saying what they think and believe? When Mr. Bush was in office the loony left (as opposed to the left) screamed that our president was a fascist, a Nazi, a rebirth of Hitler and that was free speech and okay. Now it is almost treason to disagree. AJ, that does not worry you? Your elected leader wants to collect names of people that disagree with what he is doing.
I don't know where you're getting at my agreeing with massive presidential powers. I'm assuming it's because you commonly and erroneously are throwing me into one big pot so to speak.
Look carefully, I never said YOU, did not even use the work you. I was pointing out what has been said when Mr. Bush was in office and the difference when Mr. Obama is doing the same thing.
As for Obama being an evil socialist...if Obama is a socialist, what was Bush? Or are these ruinous economic practices not acceptable only if the administration practicing them is not Republican, otherwise they're okay?
If that is what you believe then you have misread me and many here on JU.
Bush warned us about it? Yet why did he push for budgets that were big?
The DHS was demanded by the democrat lawmakers. The large budgets happened because we are fighting a war that will last at least 50 years, longer with the current president in charge. Oh, one other thing, according to the constitution the Congress writes the budget and the President can only veto or sign it. The President sends his budget to the Congress they write it into a law and the President has only two choices. If the President had a line item veto then you can blame the big budgets on him. Yes, if Mr. Bush were a conservative he would have vetoed the big budgets and shut down the government until he got one that was smaller but he did not for political reasons. He shares the blame.
and then ask yourself this: Where were these people while the previous administration grew the size of government, built the largest federal government in history, ran up a ridiculously high deficit and wrecked the national economy?
Right where they are now, only back then we were in a war and wanted to win that first. With the current administration we see no movement to win the war, the money is going to things that are not in the constitution for the government to spend, and instead of a trillion and a half dollars we are looking at 12 to 16 trillion dollars in spending and every week we hear they want to spend more money we don't have. Mr. Ford loaned Chrysler two billion dollars, and it was paid back. Mr. Obama took over GM and Chrysler. The difference is that now the federal government owns a private industry. That is not in the constitution.
The economy was wrecked when the Congress passed a law ordering the banks to loan money to people that could not pay it back. This inflated home prices because everyone could buy a home so price did not matter. When the bubble burst the banks were promised by the Congress that it would back the bad loans with the full faith and credit of the U.S. Govenment. When the banks said it is time to keep your word the Congress said the banks were greedy and mismanaged. Instead of backing the hundreds of billions of bad loans they chose to spend two trillion dollars to save the economy. That did not work so they want to spend another 10 trillion dollars to save the economy. Still the banks are hurt, the economy is wrecked, and people are being foreclosed upon. Nothing was fixed and it only got worse.
