And at what point do you acknowledge that if he is saying it over and over and the media is ignoring it, it's not because he is not "doing his job," but rather because he is being attacked and ignored by a hostile media over which he had no control?
Obviously you are one who ignored all the facts of the election in order to blame President Bush for "having O," but it's an argument that cannot hold water, and will disappear as the negative emotions about George W. Bush fade away into a much deserved oblivion.
When all we have left are the facts, the blaming of President Bush for the election of Barack Obama is going to seem as weak and silly as it does to many of us already.
I’m really tired of your nonsensical rants.
Nobody here has any idea why you expend so much time and energy defending Bush’s indefensible passive acceptance of socialism, and the misrepresentation of material facts, but to argue that because the constitution lacks a specific instruction for each and every logical duty that he ignored, that he was thus justified in doing so, is to ignore the purpose of the constitution.
It is clear to most here that Bush’s dismantling of the Republican party, and disregard of basic principles of republican government are a major factor is the election results, both Presidential, and congressional.
You fail to note that President Reagan also had the same hostile media to deal with, but did not settle for losing a single debate. Bush wanted to lose the debate; it cannot ever be denied again.
Save your replies for those that limit themselves to your adolescent analytical level.
I was debating his argument, disagreeing with his comments, and it led to a series of insults of me personally that had no bearing on anything I had said.
I guess this is expected and accepted around here, but I just want the facts out there before I leave this thread in an effort to avoid any further mindless insults....