Sure they he did. It had nothing to do with the massive war debt that Bush raked up. Osama Bin Laden won his war to bring down America after all.
Kill the stock market! more more! And please more government programs! maybe TWICE daily! who knew? Obama-Geithner actually WANT the market lower.
Caution: Be wary of anyone that quotes themselves on ET, let alone in two posts on the same page. They are usually crying out for attention, kind of like the "2 year old that is whining for a candy bar from his Momma".
Don't know why the libs are trying to claim this calamity on Bush. It plays right into their hands. Which party gets the votes when the economy is in the toilet? Who do the unemployed vote for? Poll public housing, who's the overwhelming favorite party? Go to any government handout office and ask how many voted for Obama and see a real landslide, not some 53-47% split. Democrats want as many people on government life support as possible, and they do not want anybody to find a way off. They don't want people to build wealth in the markets, they want everybody to be poor. That's how they get votes. That's why they leap at the chance to punish success and reward failure. Successful people don't need much government. Obama even said during the campaign that he didn't care if raising taxes brought in less revenue - it was all about "fairness". They cheered every new low in the S&P, glad for the opportunity to expand government and make a majority of the US population depend on them for their daily bread. Don't believe me? Imagine if the economy tanked so bad that 50% of voters were on welfare. Which party would win big? The one promising to cut welfare, or the one promising to get even with the rich?
TGREGG.... Don't know why the libs are trying to claim this calamity on Bush. It plays right into their hands. Which party gets the votes when the economy is in the toilet? Who do the unemployed vote for? Poll public housing, who's the overwhelming favorite party? Go to any government handout office and ask how many voted for Obama and see a real landslide, not some 53-47% split. Democrats want as many people on government life support as possible, and they do not want anybody to find a way off. They don't want people to build wealth in the markets, they want everybody to be poor. That's how they get votes. That's why they leap at the chance to punish success and reward failure. Successful people don't need much government. Obama even said during the campaign that he didn't care if raising taxes brought in less revenue - it was all about "fairness". They cheered every new low in the S&P, glad for the opportunity to expand government and make a majority of the US population depend on them for their daily bread. Don't believe me? Imagine if the economy tanked so bad that 50% of voters were on welfare. Which party would win big? The one promising to cut welfare, or the one promising to get even with the rich? ..................................................................................... Chavez and Venezuela....