” And of course you like to talk about the Obama stimulus but you don’t want to talk about Bush stimulus.
Gaffer accused him of nit picking and you accuse me of being Robert Gibbs. My response is the same, its just a matter of being accurate.”
I see. So your definition of accuracy is what exactly?
You know my talking points? You know that I go somewhere, FR perhaps, and get talking points fed to me without examination? Or you are calling me an RNC operative?
You characterize me as “liking to talk about the Obama stimulus”. Really? Can you identify my voluminous posts regarding that topic? Or perhaps you know me in real life and you have heard me discuss this ad nauseum?
Or could it be you assume and project when it fits your narrative?
Your impotent little reply doesn’t even directly address what I said, you simply used it as a tool to characterize me as some sort of ideologue.
I suppose, back to my original post, you are attempt to support my primary assertion.
I was responding to your phrase "financial bailout" and the 3 componants of that were the loans, tarp and stimulus.
And over the last 4 plus years, the right both collectively and individually has talked about all three. And when they have talked about stimulus they never want to even acknowledge that there was a Bush Stimulus.
And beyond that, the rightwing attempts to hang it(economic meltdown) around Obama's neck were never successful.
Thru that period, large majorities of those polled blamed Bush and the GOP.
Now if that strategy of trying hang it around Obama's neck never worked thru 09-12, and Obama got re-elected, why would the GOP collectively, or freepers collectively , or individual freepers such as you or others on this thread continue trying to hang the economic bailout, gasoline prices, job losses, etc around Obama's neck.
Do you think that maybe by 2016 it will be a an effective political strategy to use against Hillary?