- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: The Right Didn’t Mind When Bush Paid a Ransom to Terrorists
Posted on 6/12/14 at 7:55 am to mmcgrath
Posted on 6/12/14 at 7:55 am to mmcgrath
Clinton doubled down on Carter,s CRA and with the impetus from Dodd/Frank it resulted in the financial collapse of 08. These things don,t happen overnight. Bush warned congress for years that forcing sub prime loans would result in economic chaos. Dodd/Frank made fun of his warnings and assured the nation that all was fine as late as 07.
Perhaps Bush should have bypassed congress with executive orders?????
Perhaps Bush should have bypassed congress with executive orders?????
2
Posted on 6/12/14 at 7:57 am to ChineseBandit58
quote:
Clinton doubled down on Carter,s CRA and with the impetus from Dodd/Frank it resulted in the financial collapse of 08. These things don,t happen overnight. Bush warned congress for years that forcing sub prime loans would result in economic chaos. Dodd/Frank made fun of his warnings and assured the nation that all was fine as late as 07.
Perhaps Bush should have bypassed congress with executive orders?????
Boom.
The lion's share of the blame goes to the Dems, but the GOP is to blame also because they had majorities in both houses of Congress until 2006 and were too scared of the "racist" moniker to do make the changes necessary.
Posted on 6/12/14 at 7:59 am to Big Scrub TX
I fail to see how paying 300k in ransom is equivalent to releasing 5 high caliber terrorists.
I'd be fine with paying 300k to get Bergdahl back
I'd be fine with paying 300k to get Bergdahl back
Posted on 6/12/14 at 8:12 am to HailHailtoMichigan!
Bush will still be getting blamed when he's 90.
Posted on 6/12/14 at 8:40 am to udtiger
quote:
Boom.
The lion's share of the blame goes to the Dems, but the GOP is to blame also because they had majorities in both houses of Congress until 2006 and were too scared of the "racist" moniker to do make the changes necessary.
The GOP would have been gleefully savaged by the media and race pimps.
Posted on 6/12/14 at 8:46 am to Big Scrub TX
quote:
The hilarious thing is that illegal Mexican immigration has plunged while Obama has been president.
well this is false
Posted on 6/12/14 at 8:55 am to deltaland
quote:
I fail to see how paying 300k in ransom is equivalent to releasing 5 high caliber terrorists.
I'd be fine with paying 300k to get Bergdahl back
I'm wondering why it took so long for someone to post this. The two scenarios aren't even comparable.
Also, when will we get past all these childish "well they did it too!" bullshite excuses that everyone seems to love? Who gives a shite if someone else did something stupid? I'm not a Republican and I couldn't care for Bush, so how is this argument in any way pertinent to me? It's not, it's just a way for each side to show how much they equally suck. The argument holds no merit whatsoever for logical thinking people who aren't blinded by party affiliation.
This post was edited on 6/12/14 at 8:57 am
Posted on 6/12/14 at 8:57 am to deltaland
quote:
I'd be fine with paying 300k to get Bergdahl back
Some of the rumors are, it may have actually cost much more than that money-wise, in addition to the 5 Taliban dudes.
But, yeah this is an AWESOME gotcha.
Posted on 6/12/14 at 9:04 am to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:and the OP isn't? We aren't debating truth here, and I am only aware of one solid "opportunity" that Clinton had which would have been a coin flip and involved 100's of innocent people.
Well, for one, it's true. Clinton could have killed him numerous times and two, Bush never once got in front of a microphone and whined like a girl about how he inherited a terrorist problem.
And Bush rarely got in front of a microphone on anything during his Presidency. It was a part of their strategy. I don't even remember him making more than a single last minute speech about Iraq before we invaded. It was all Cheney, Condi, and Powell.
Posted on 6/12/14 at 9:06 am to ChineseBandit58
quote:Did he even make a speech about it, warning of the dangers? As was mentioned above, he didn't have to bypass anyone unless you are saying his own party opposed him. Not that I believe that sub-prime loans were to to blame for the entire world suffering from an economic collapse. It was money handlers playing games with cool formulas.
Clinton doubled down on Carter,s CRA and with the impetus from Dodd/Frank it resulted in the financial collapse of 08. These things don,t happen overnight. Bush warned congress for years that forcing sub prime loans would result in economic chaos. Dodd/Frank made fun of his warnings and assured the nation that all was fine as late as 07.
Perhaps Bush should have bypassed congress with executive orders?????
Posted on 6/12/14 at 9:34 am to mmcgrath
For some reason I remember a speech about the dangers of predatory lending that was government sponsored. I also then remember it being discussed on MSNBC as the feral cries of a mad man who will stop it nothing to suppress the poor in America.
Posted on 6/12/14 at 9:35 am to mmcgrath
For some reason I remember a speech about the dangers of predatory lending that was government sponsored. I also then remember it being discussed on MSNBC as the feral cries of a mad man who will stop it nothing to suppress the poor in America.
Posted on 6/12/14 at 9:36 am to rintintin
From 2000-2008, all you heard from the left was "Bush lied!!! Bush lied!!!" It was incessant.
Since 2008, their mantra has been "Well, ALL politicians lie."
Give me a fricking break.
Since 2008, their mantra has been "Well, ALL politicians lie."
Give me a fricking break.
Posted on 6/12/14 at 9:37 am to mmcgrath
quote:
Did he even make a speech about it, warning of the dangers?
Yes.
You appear to suffer from selective memory.
Posted on 6/12/14 at 10:19 am to Big Scrub TX
Amazing how Bush haters return to him repeatedy to ok Obama decisions. 
Posted on 6/12/14 at 10:43 am to Vegas Bengal
quote:
There are 10 "Obama is the worst" threads to every one "Bush did it too" threads
Well yeah, this board is kind of heavily skewed to the right. I mean, is there some golden ratio we need to make this better? 4:3 or 1:1 perhaps? The decisions of a sitting president are always going to receive more scrutiny because they're topical and current discussions.
quote:
And if someone is going to make the statement "Obama is the worst (fill in the blank), he has to expect comparisons
Well let us compare 300k vs releasing the 5 highest value/risk Gitmo detainees.
Oh wait there is really no comparison there. If Obama had paid 300k for Bergdahl, traitor or not, no one would have really cared. But circumventing Congress to make a terrible deal for a possible deserter? Yeah that's a pretty shitty deal.
Posted on 6/12/14 at 11:02 am to Vegas Bengal
quote:
he's intent on destroying America
I don't know if it's intentional or not, but destroying America he is.
Posted on 6/12/14 at 1:26 pm to deltaland
quote:
I fail to see how paying 300k in ransom is equivalent to releasing 5 high caliber terrorists. I'd be fine with paying 300k to get Bergdahl back
I agree with one other distinction. I don't think the couple that Bush paid ransom for were criminals. Bergdahl is.
Page 4 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News