Originally posted by poet1b
I pointed out that idiots voted for President Obama.
So what is your point. Yeah, idiots do vote, but that is not a reflection on Obama. Strawman nonsense that has nothing to do with my point.
You didn't specifically mention anything, except that government should protect people's rights. I pointed out that laws against pollution are
legitimate, and serve the purpose of protecting people's rights.
Most of the pro-business laws were put into place before Democrats took over office.
Congress only passes laws, it is the exec admin that is suppose to enforce those laws, and that is what the GW admin refused to do. That was the
Yeah, there is a huge difference between the way Clinton ran the exec admin and the way GW ran things, and between the way Obama runs things.
GW selectively ignored those laws he had no desire to enforce, and so business fraud ran amuck, and illegals entered our country at will.
Clinton did a great deal to work towards ending fraudulent business practices and going after those who hire illegals. Obama is doing the same,
although he could do a much better job of going after illegal immigrants.
You made a comment about those who voted for President Bush, and I made a counter point that the same can be said about those who voted for President
I then provided a video showing an example and you whine that I have blown my credibility, and claim my video was talking about the administration.
My point? That idiots voted for President Obama, and that you took it out of context because you refused to read what I said.
You inferred the video was about the Presidents administration and it wasn't.
My point is you can't debate.
The straw men that I accuse you of putting up are valid.
You decided to not address what I said and put up a distraction that wasn't related to what I said.
Any attempt to change gears and ignore what an opponent says is at the very least poor debating skills and a straw man.
You come across as not caring about actually having a discussion, all you want to do is point out I'm wrong.
You couldn't point out that I was wrong though so you pointed to another issue, or at least an aspect of a broader issue that wasn't being
discussed(at least in my post).
I didn't specifically mention anything?
Lets see I pointed out that it's not actually the President's job to fix the economy .
I pointed out that the President was originally a Head of State with similar duties to the Sec of State.
I pointed out that each President and each party has taken more powers that weren't originally theirs.
I pointed out that an economy is cyclic, and that efforts to actually regulate the economy make matters worse.
I pointed out the actual role of the Government.
I pointed out that both sides are messing up, and that anyone who believes otherwise is willingly blind.
I went on to point out that Democrats passed the regulations that the Presidents Bush signed into office and that it was therefore both the Democrats
and the Republicans fault.
You side stepped this and said that it's all really the Bush dynasty fault.
No, they can't sign something if it isn't first passed, that makes it both parties fault.
I will take it one step further, economic cycles are more than 10 years long, some say they are 25 some say 30 but at the very least they are more
than 10 years long.
The regulations that put us in this mess were singed into office by President Clinton, they were passed by a Republican Congress.
Again both parties faults.
President Bush the second was dealing with regulations passed before he took office.
In fact most Presidents these days deal largely with regulations their predecessor passed.
Now in the 1990's we were reaching the peak of an upswing and than we began to fall.
That was not President Clinton's, or Bush's fault.
It's called the economy, the economy is cyclic as I pointed out before.
The economy was going to fall no matter what.
What made it worse were regulations passed by both parties, and signed into law by both parties.
As for the pro-business laws, the are passed equally by both sides.
It just depends on which part of business benefits, the Dems friends or the Reps friends.
The housing mess that was a Dem mess to buy votes from the public.
It was a Rep mess for not stopping it, again both at fault.
President Obama is also ignoring certain laws, it happens it's called Presidential discretion.
Presidents Bush, Clinton and Bush again did the same thing.
You are right President Clinton did great thing, but he also screwed up.
A few things are clear, both sides screw up.
You are willingly blind to the fact that both sides screw up.
Lastly you don't know how to debate; you throw up distractions and pretend points aren't raised, and you don't read and digest entire posts.
I'm close to done with conversing since you actually ignore the debate just to rail blindly against one side.