I'm not really sure what the dems take blame for the crisis. We still have the same Bush tax policy/budget.
Nope, NOT a chance!! You forget that money Bush sent ya, already??? You won't see that with obama!
NObama 2008!
No, we'd still have the economic meltdown because it was the Republicans that allowed the banks to leverage at a rate of 40 to 1 instead of the 12 to 1 that it had been. If you look at Canada which has a leverage rate of 20 to 1 you'll see that their economy isn't in near as bad of shape as ours due to the international economic meltdown.
There is nothing that the Dem's could have done or actually did do that would have impacted the economy to this extent. The time frame is simply too short.
Specifically, legislation like this would have needed to pass ~2006 to prevent the economic collapse:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd...
(Note the co-sponsors).
Doesn't matter which party would draft or pass it, it needed to get done and it didn't happen.
I don't think Bush's tax policies are bad, but his budget policies are horrid. Fiscal conservative he ain't.
Hard to say, but in a word Maybe.
Yes, we'd probably be drilling oil now (a good thing).
.
The Republicans had the reigns for 13 years and look at where they led us. The Dems have been sitting back waiting for Bush to leave because the want no part of his shameful regime. Stewart: If Bush Hadn't Been F*cking Things Up All This Time ::
Stewart: If Bush Hadn't Been F*cking Things Up All This Time --- Would We Still Love Democrats who choose not to support President Clinton, if elected
http://www.topix.com/forum/who/jon-stewart/TC3BOBO667544E36OHOME |
Republican spin.
The near 50/50 split means neither party has been in control - that's why Congress has been a failure.
no
and you mentioned the reason why
No - regardless of who controlled Congress, Bush would have still vetoed any bill that wasn't to his liking.
Nope, the financial crisis was gonna happen no matter what cause both parties were focused on fixing other things. Besides Dems don't have 60 votes in the Senate so they need GOP support.
No because the republican controlled congress didn't do anything either. That is what brought about the change in control. The whole congress should be fired and new people put in.
we have been failing for years now...
in a word, no.
Yes
Of course because you don't want to blame the Democrats for anything.
It was the Democrats who push for the sub-prime loans.
Remember that when you factor in your Blame Bush first.
we will never know
No. The problem is the Democrats only have a very slight majority in the House, and the Senate is basically tied, with Chaney being the tie breaker.
Having a slight Majority in congress only allows the democrats to control the floor, and the agenda. As well as head up all the comities. However, given that their lead is so slight, The republicans are effectively able to block any legislation they don't agree with. IF legislation does get through the house and the senate it still has to make it past president Bush's desk. He's been vetoing Democratic sponsored bills like they are going out of style.
They can't get anything done. It's partly their own fault for not compromising. But one could easily say the same of the other side. That's how a split house and senate (like the ones we have right now) work (or don't work).
Pfo:
That bill was defeated by a majority republican congress (2005). I'm glad you brought this up because it once again illustrates McCain's failure at leadership. He was unable to get his own party to agree with him. This bill could have been easily passed in '05 if McCain could have gotten his colleagues on board. He wouldn't even have needed any of his often trumped up ability to 'reach across the isle' (which in this case, aparently, he was also unable to do).
Mina:) :
Republican George Bush Sr. Singed the law that is currently banning drilling in protected areas. Not a democrat. You are blaming the democrats for not reversing a republican law.
We would be dead.
Or working in oil rigs.
yes, it's all their fault.
Well, we wouldn't have had the fuel crisis because congress keeps outlawing US oil in various ways- production, drilling, land-use rights, etc, etc, etc. I had a friend call the price of oil a few years back when he seemed like a lunatic, but he studies what goes on in congress and is very intuitive. I just get mad, because I feel that congress uses US(the people) like weapons to use against each other politically, and they really could care less who they hurt as long as they get the power. And both parties do it, so I'm not playing favorites here. Pretty sad state of affairs, really.
IT IS IRONIC THAT IT WAS MY REPUBLICAN FRIENDS THAT LOST THEIR JOBS AND HOMES ALMOST 4 YEARS AGO. THEY HAD TO FILE CHAPTER 13.
I AM A WIDOW AND VOTING DEMOCRAT
I LOST MY PLACE TO A FLOOD -DID NOT HAVE FLOOD INS -BUT DID NOT FILE ANY THING .
NOW WE ARE ALL VOTING FOR OBAMA AND DEMOCRAT THIS TIME.
No. Since the Dems have taken control of Congress we have been spending thirty percent more than in previous years. Also, we need McCain/Palin to take over the helm so that we can actually get rid of the corruption and unaccountable spending that goes on there.
Bush did not create the different natural disasors that dipped into Uncle Sam's pocketbook. FEMA was ripped off by illegal reports. One man that I know in Florida had a house falling down, so he put his son's name on the title. He has collected from FEMA 10's of thousands of dollars, using the system.
 Are hershey bars still made in the usa?
 If Obama wins, will he banish all talk radio, except for the liberal programs?
|
If the democrats hadn't taken control of congress in 2007, would America be prospering?