Gallup: More people still blame Bush for poor economy than Obama

posted at 4:01 pm on June 14, 2012 by Allahpundit

I keep waiting for these numbers to start moving.

Annnnnny day now.

Quinnipiac’s polled this question repeatedly and their numbers are strikingly static too:

I’ve always assumed that the flatness of this data is due to people reserving judgment on O’s economic record for as long as they can. They like him personally and want to give him the benefit of the doubt so they’re waiting to see if he might yet still have a few bonanza jobs reports up his sleeve. But now I don’t know. The May jobs report was so awful and the prognosis for the rest of the year so grim that I figured we’d see some movement in this metric this time. Nope.

Either voters are willing to give him until the bitter end to show progress — the suspense is already mounting for the October jobs report — or the “who’s more blameworthy?” question doesn’t mean as much as I thought. Bruce McQuain at Q&O thinks it’s a big barrel of nothing, in fact, that voters don’t care whether Bush or Obama made more of this mess but whether Romney or Obama is best able to clean it up. Could be, but that’s not the sort of election that the GOP wants. They want a pure referendum on the economy’s performance during O’s term, not a choice between whether Mitt or The One is a better repairman. Remember, while independents are deeply skeptical of Obama’s economic plans, they’re not crazy about Romney’s either. And implicit in the judgment that the state of the economy is still the prior president’s fault fully three and a half years after he left office is the idea that he and the financial crisis left America in a hole so deep that it’s not fair to fault Obama for failing to dig us out of it. If a head coach leaves the team after it finishes 0-16 and his replacement manages to finish 4-12, does the replacement get hired for the next season? Yeah, possibly, because some fans will conclude that while his record was under .500, he inherited a disaster and showed just enough progress that it’s worth seeing if he can build on it. That, in a nutshell, is O’s argument for a second term. Team America still reeks economically but we’re playing slightly better, so why not let coach have another season to see what he can do? It’s not like Romney is Bill Parcells, a superstar free-agent coach with multiple rings. He’s more like … Dick Vermeil or something. (Analogies involving terrible football teams come naturally to a Jets fan.)


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Just think folks…these idiots get to vote for POTUS in November…JOY! (sarc) I am perplexed as to how ANYONE could blame Bush for this mess after the astounding amount of money Obama has spent.

neyney on June 14, 2012 at 5:16 PM

Consider the source. Gallup has an agenda.

Christian Conservative on June 14, 2012 at 4:41 PM

Gallup used to be the Gold Standard of public opinion polling.

But they were forever compromised by their association with CNN. Now they can’t get rid of the taint from that association.

Sorta like Seinfeld’s Smelly Car

Del Dolemonte on June 14, 2012 at 5:16 PM

…so there IS a King…and no Congress or Senate.

KOOLAID2 on June 14, 2012 at 5:18 PM

Heck, people don’t even remember that it was the hard-core GOP Pre-Tea Party Congresspeople who stood firm (with Bachmann one of the leaders, in the face of withering criticism from ALL sides) to stop TARP 1 (an insane 3 page joke of bill) from going through and forced Congress to write at least some safeguards and rules into the $750 billion giveaway. Those GOPers took a beating from everyone, with the MSM and all folks already blaming them “if the stock market sinks to 7500″ … The DOW sank to 6500 after TARP was finally passed, anyway.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on June 14, 2012 at 5:18 PM

What the Dems and the JVmedia are most afraid of is the possibility that these poll results have been given the “Wisconsin” treatment(ie., tell the pollster whatever is hypocritically correct, so they won’t throw you under the bus). The American people recognize the brutalization they will receive if it gets out that they don’t like or won’t vote for Obama. Hell they could have another union thug group go after them personally or show up at their house to terrorize their children, maybe a little “SWATting” will teach them not to open their mouths to say anything but the most positive things for the campaigner-in-chief, etc.,etc.

I think that what you’re seeing in these poll responses is the people simply covering their own assets before any of their “friends” on the left fire bomb them, metaphorically or actually.

God Bless America!

paratisi on June 14, 2012 at 5:21 PM

Bad sample, and more Bradley/Wilder. I believe that Wisconsin is a clue as to how much Bradley/Wilder is skewing some of the opinion polls.

slickwillie2001 on June 14, 2012 at 5:21 PM

% that blame Obama: 51%

% that blame Romney: 0%

Hide the chicken.

faraway on June 14, 2012 at 5:23 PM

Actually it doesn’t matter how many blame Bush. He isn’t running again and Romney hass been associated with him. Thanks to a smart campaign and GW’s ability to staay out of it. So the bigger question is how much do you blame Obama and do you think he has made it better or worse.

Deanna on June 14, 2012 at 5:29 PM

Republicans didn’t control Congress the last 2 years of Bush’s Presidency. The Democrats did.

Del Dolemonte on June 14, 2012 at 5:13 PM

We aren’t supposed to know that.

Wagthatdog on June 14, 2012 at 5:30 PM

Actually it doesn’t matter how many blame Bush. He isn’t running again and Romney hass hasn’t been associated with him. Thanks to a smart campaign and GW’s ability to stay out of it. So the bigger question is how much do you blame Obama and do you think he has made it better or worse.

Fixed it…Sorry about that.

Deanna on June 14, 2012 at 5:33 PM

Heck, people don’t even remember that it was the hard-core GOP Pre-Tea Party Congresspeople who stood firm (with Bachmann one of the leaders, in the face of withering criticism from ALL sides) to stop TARP 1 (an insane 3 page joke of bill) from going through and forced Congress to write at least some safeguards and rules into the $750 billion giveaway. Those GOPers took a beating from everyone, with the MSM and all folks already blaming them “if the stock market sinks to 7500″ … The DOW sank to 6500 after TARP was finally passed, anyway.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on June 14, 2012 at 5:18 PM

Those hard core people knew they did not have the votes to stop this..their votes were safe votes. The thing you are overlooking is that there is more than one TARP. The orginal TARP that Bush used was $300 billion. And that money has been paid back. He is not responsible for what Obama spent. That was a different set of circumstances..As for the stock market, imagine the reaction if Bush had come out and said that he felt that ideological purity was what mattered most and as such he would sit back and watch the show. The federal government which had helped create the situation would do nothing to stop the collapse. And if that meant people could not take care of their families….oh well.

No president under those circumstances was going to just sit back. That does not mean that there were no mistakes made of course. But I just do not think that the country or the GOP would be better off if Bush had refused to act.

Terrye on June 14, 2012 at 5:34 PM

Not only is this a poll of, “adults,” not voters, but Gallops methodology is a bit strange here. When they break down who blames Bush or Obama based on ideology, and when it comes to, “independents,” over half blame both Bush AND Obama.

Not sure if this is because of general disgust with politicians in general or people being fickle. I’m curious as to what the results would be if you asked voters the same question and questioners could blame only one or the other.

WolvenOne on June 14, 2012 at 5:35 PM

Republicans didn’t control Congress the last 2 years of Bush’s Presidency. The Democrats did.

Del Dolemonte on June 14, 2012 at 5:13 PM

We aren’t supposed to know that.

Wagthatdog on June 14, 2012 at 5:30 PM

It is true though…and when the Democrats took control of Congress our deficit was $168 billion a year..not a month and the unemployment rate was about 5%.

Terrye on June 14, 2012 at 5:36 PM

% that blame Obama: 51%

% that blame Romney: 0%

Hide the chicken.

faraway on June 14, 2012 at 5:23 PM

Yeah but can Romney slow jam the news?

redzap on June 14, 2012 at 5:37 PM

It doesn’t matter who made the mess. Obama said he could fix it.

HE

DIDN’T

stenwin77 on June 14, 2012 at 5:41 PM

Crosstabs? Especially as time goes by? Are they perhaps adjusting the sample? Also, If you look at middle class people in a state’s capital city, you will get a lot of unionized bureaucrats. If you’re asking Houstonians in 2009 and Austinites in 2012 this question, you can get people with similar incomes and so on, but the Austinites will be state employees and partisan Democrats, not more politically independent private sector employees.

I hated Sadistics(sic) and Research Design, but it was the course in college from which I learned about the most–mostly how to mess with sampling and other factors to get the desired results, and a healthy skepticism.

Sekhmet on June 14, 2012 at 5:42 PM

I’ve argued on many occassions that if the recession was Bush’s fault, some Liberal writer would have written a best selling book that detailed exactly how Bush wrecked the economy, and would call out every Republican cabinet member, Congressman, Senator, operative, crony, etc, that had a hand in creating this mess, and the MSM would’ve turned them all into household names, ala G. Gordon Liddy and H.L. Hunt.

But that book was never written, and it’s because the Democrats were not able to wave this book in people’s faces and quote chapte and verse from it during the 2010 midterm campaign, their cry of “do you really want to hand the keys to car back to the people who drove it in the ditch” rang hollow, and they got thumped.

The GOP is to blame for not spending the last 3+ years hammering away at the real cause of the recession, which we all know, so no point in me going over it. I don’t know how much these poll numbers mean about blaming Bush vs. Obama. All I know is that, true to form, the GOP wimped out and allowed the MSM narrative of “deregulation caused the recession” to go unchallenged.

ardenenoch on June 14, 2012 at 5:43 PM

The dumbing of America has progressed to level that is surprising. I guess you can’t expect anything else if you turn your public education over to a labor union.

volsense on June 14, 2012 at 5:44 PM

I remember that everyday, on every radio station, T.V. channel, newspaper, magazine, etc. there were constant hit pieces against George Bush.

I remember how when gas hit $2.25 the MSM was running Chicken Little hit pieces about how Bush wàs going to bring the country to it’s knees, etc.

I remember how the MSM was trying to take pictures of our troop coffins coming home from the wars, and how everyday there were reports of how many troops died that day.

I remember how everytime George Bush would take vacation or play a round of golf, the MSM would come out with the hit pieces about how many days “off” or how many rounds he had played.

So, don’t now come out with all the hit pieces trying to deflect the simmering anger from Baracka Hussein Obama, who has our gasoline at $4.00, has continued the wars he vowed to end – AND started new ones, has taken extreme liberties with his vacations, AND his family’s, and has played more golf than any President in history, and try to scapegoat George Bush. Again.

KMC1 on June 14, 2012 at 11:42 AM

This was my comment in the headlines.

KMC1 on June 14, 2012 at 5:47 PM

It doesn’t matter who made the mess. Obama said he could fix it.

HE

DIDN’T

stenwin77 on June 14, 2012 at 5:41 PM

Not his fault. Bushitler hid the decline from him. Plus he’s hip and a good singer and looks great with his shirt off in the shore break. Thanks for being a racist though.

/libtard

Kataklysmic on June 14, 2012 at 5:48 PM

Those hard core people knew they did not have the votes to stop this..their votes were safe votes. The thing you are overlooking is that there is more than one TARP. The orginal TARP that Bush used was $300 billion.

Wrong, wrong wrong. There was only one TARP and it was $750 billion. That was a number that Hank Paulson pulld right out of his azz. And the hard-core GOPers had the votes to stop it. THey stopped the first iteration, but took so much BS threats and pre-blame from people that a handful couldn’t stand it and flipped their vote on the second go-round. Like I said, people were laready blaming them for whatever they imagined was going to go wrong and tried to make it sound as if TARP would save everything. TARP didn’t do jack squat. The Fed accepted $2 trillion in worthless MBSs as “collateral” which was the real infusion of capital. TARP just ended up being a sluch fund, as the hard-core GOPers and many of us warned. It was NEVER used to buy toxic assets. Ever.

And that money has been paid back. He is not responsible for what Obama spent. That was a different set of circumstances.

Most of the $750 billion from TARP was paid back and Barky didn’t return it to the Treasury, but instead spent it. That is true. It’s also what Tim Geithner said he’d do the minute he got his tax-cheating azz in as Treasury Sec. Most of that deficit that Bush ran up from TARP was returned … but Congress didn’t try to stop anyone from using it as a slush fund and it got wasted so … it’s part of the debt and most people assess that part of our debt to Bush. The GOP hard-liners needed to hold out for more rigorous and well-defined legislation about TARP, but the pressure on them was beyond incredible and they just didn’t have it to go that much further all on their own. People like you were screaming bloody murder about “If we don’t pass this TARP we’ll all die!!!!”

.As for the stock market, imagine the reaction if Bush had come out and said that he felt that ideological purity was what mattered most and as such he would sit back and watch the show. The federal government which had helped create the situation would do nothing to stop the collapse. And if that meant people could not take care of their families….oh well.

That’s unmitigated bullsh!t and shows no understanding of what actually happened. Bush, for his culpability, was more than happy to go with the idiot dems on this and just release all sorts of free cash with no strings. He bears responsibility for that – him and the Dem Congress.

No president under those circumstances was going to just sit back. That does not mean that there were no mistakes made of course. But I just do not think that the country or the GOP would be better off if Bush had refused to act.

Terrye on June 14, 2012 at 5:34 PM

Well, you’re just wrong. These years that have passed should have shown you that. Like I said, we’re still not out of this. TARP and the Fed’s monetary expansion just bought time, not a solution. Very, very expensive time that we don’t have the money or monetary tools to buy any more of, should another such event befall us.

You know, people who know how these things go remember that the Asian currency crisis was not a one-off event. It was one year and then the next year. Two instances of the same. These things are not fixed with free cash in one fell swoop. We might have done it, had we grown out of the problem in the meantime, but America chose the anti-growth candidate when growth was the most important thing on Earth. Now, $5 trillion more in debt later … with the Fed’s balance sheet #3 trillion larger … no growth as far as the eye can see, but huge debts stretching far past the horizon … That’s where we are.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on June 14, 2012 at 5:54 PM

Republicans didn’t control Congress the last 2 years of Bush’s Presidency. The Democrats did.

Del Dolemonte on June 14, 2012 at 5:13 PM

We aren’t supposed to know that.

Wagthatdog on June 14, 2012 at 5:30 PM

During Bush’s first 6 years, government spending increased by nearly 40% while taxes fell significantly, setting the country up for a hard landing when the financial crisis arrived.

Didn’t you learn this from Glenn?

bayam on June 14, 2012 at 6:06 PM

I went to the gallup site and read through what they did.

There is a major flaw in their question. The never asked WHAT the economic problems are. Since they only released question 15 in their report, we have no idea what direction they were leading the respondants in when they asked that individual question.

This is a perfect example of why I constantly state that EVERY poll is USELESS propaganda!

Freddy on June 14, 2012 at 6:06 PM

Since we alljknow the media bias and know how – sorry but it’s true-dumb the average voter is -there is one main reason why this is so, IMO because the RNC failed to take it to the Dems hard in perpetuity for their mandatory mortgage and banks giveaways and it took down the world.

Don L on June 14, 2012 at 6:13 PM

KMC1 on June 14, 2012 at 5:47 PM

Remember how after every single President George W. Bush drone strike in Iraq or Afghanistan the liberal networks would have footage showing collateral damage, claimed civilian deaths, wedding parties, people smoking, etc, etc?

Why no longer any interest in what our bombs hit?

slickwillie2001 on June 14, 2012 at 6:22 PM

Republicans didn’t control Congress the last 2 years of Bush’s Presidency. The Democrats did.

Del Dolemonte on June 14, 2012 at 5:13 PM

We aren’t supposed to know that.

Wagthatdog on June 14, 2012 at 5:30 PM

During Bush’s first 6 years

bayam on June 14, 2012 at 6:06 PM

Sad Alinsky attempt to hijack the thread duly noted.

A+

Del Dolemonte on June 14, 2012 at 6:22 PM

Allahpundit,

The economy hasn’t had an uptick in the last four years to really reset the clock on who owns the economy. After 8 years “Bush made it horrible” (electorate’s thinking, not mine), and it has been horrible ever since. Obama has failed to repair it as he said he definitely would.

It’s not about who is the better repairman. Obama is the failed repairman in the electorate’s eyes, who used a hacksaw (Obamacare) when he should have used other tools to rebuild the machine. Moreover, he oversold and under-delivered. Romney has some new tools and new ideas and deserves a shot.

The football analogy is fine. But Obama has had more than one season. The “fans” are more and more ready for a change b/c they don’t expect the team to get any better with this coach.

-Otis

FreeManOtis on June 14, 2012 at 6:24 PM

This means Romney can blame Obama for the economy during the first three years of his coming Mitt presidency.

Sounds fair.

profitsbeard on June 14, 2012 at 6:26 PM

Not only is this a poll of, “adults,” not voters, but Gallops methodology is a bit strange here. When they break down who blames Bush or Obama based on ideology, and when it comes to, “independents,” over half blame both Bush AND Obama.

WolvenOne on June 14, 2012 at 5:35 PM

What I find curious is the timing of this “poll”. It just happened to come out on the same day as O’bongbowl’s big speech about the…economy.

Yep, Gallup has forever been tainted by their association with CNN. George Gallup Senior is no doubt spinning in his grave.

Del Dolemonte on June 14, 2012 at 6:28 PM

Sad Alinsky attempt to hijack the thread duly noted.

A+

Del Dolemonte on June 14, 2012 at 6:22 PM

Well you can’t really blame the National Socialist Left for wanting to deflect from the unmitigated disaster that is the Downgrade regime.

Chip on June 14, 2012 at 6:33 PM

And I guarantee you if you asked the dumbass sheeple specifically which of Bush’s policies ruined the economy, they’d give you a blank stare and drool like idiots.

That’s why I don’t really think it matters all that much in the long run who wins the election. The country will be indistinguishable from Idiocracy within two decades.

Walter Sobchak on June 14, 2012 at 6:38 PM

People are stupid.

Yakko77 on June 14, 2012 at 6:39 PM

During Bush’s first 6 years, government spending increased by nearly 40% while taxes fell significantly, setting the country up for a hard landing when the financial crisis arrived.

Didn’t you learn this from Glenn?

bayam on June 14, 2012 at 6:06 PM

Source? For all we know you’re including the 2007 budget done by dems, and the 2007 crash in tax revenue as things started to crash.

How was spending as a % of GDP? How is it that with even the $80 Billion a year on the wars the first big deficit was $200 Billion in the 2007 budget? If spending went up as much as you say and taxes went down “significantly”, how did we manage to have very small deficits until the first year “pay go” democrats took control of both houses?

PastorJon on June 14, 2012 at 6:42 PM

Republicans didn’t control Congress the last 2 years of Bush’s Presidency. The Democrats did.

Del Dolemonte on June 14, 2012 at 5:13 PM

We aren’t supposed to know that.

Wagthatdog on June 14, 2012 at 5:30 PM

When they polled in 2008 before the election, a majority of VOTERS didn’t know which party controlled the Senate or the House. We’re a country of “whatever feels right” voters who, fortunately, I believe, end up balancing each other out while the informed ones swing the election.

Bush went to Congress 23 times, beginning right after he was elected, to stop the Fannie/Freddie market for high risk mortgage paper but nothing ever made it out of committee thanks to people like Maxine “The fine work of Harold Raines” Waters. The media was too busy castrating him over Iraq to leave him with any room to bring the impending doom to the people.

And who would have heard him? You ONLY had Peter Schiff telling people what was coming. Every panel of economists, every person on the evening news, said the housing bubble was the new norm, not to worry. So if Bush had tried to use his bully pulpit people would have either listened to the idiots spouting that glory days are ahead or been angry at him for talking down their new “bank” for buying cars and flat screen TVs.

Bush is responsible for the prescription drug add-on to Medicare and being a wimp with his bully pulpit, but he’s not responsible for the bubble, or the crash that followed. That’s the fault of Clinton, Raines, Lindsey Graham and Congress.

But how do you tell an American Idol, reality show addicted, public school educated populace something this complicated? How do you explain to them what happened?

You can’t, but you can repeat one simple line over and over again “Government regulations that encouraged and coerced banks to make bad loans caused this recession. Obama has made it worse.”

PastorJon on June 14, 2012 at 6:58 PM

Obama could have spurred recovery with basic steps:

1) Get rid of the bad debt marketplaces at Fannie and Freddie. Poor people couldn’t get loans any more anyways.

2) Put the banking/investing curtain back up at financial institutions. Make them be separate again.

3) Hold off on Obamacare until the economy was zooming again.

4) Take a regulatory posture that shouts stability, not his current one of “what’s next from this administration?”

5) Put forth a budget that was at 2007 baseline and make the Senate and House (when Dems controlled both) get us back to sanity, instead of rolling the stimulus into the baseline and letting the Senate get away with continuing resolutiosn for 3 years.

This president hasn’t written one significant piece of legislation in 3 years. Obamacare and Dodd-Frank came out of the Apollo Foundation and other liberal “think” tanks. He basically just told the communist movement in this country, “Just write it and my allies in Congress will force it through.”

That’s not leadership, it’s being a puppet.

PastorJon on June 14, 2012 at 7:06 PM

bayam on June 14, 2012 at 6:06 PM

Wipe your chin and take your knee pads off . You’re an embarrassment.

So when does Obama own the economy ?

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2011/08/obama-has-his-own-economic-hockey-stick-graph/obama-hockey-stick/

ES scumbag.

CW on June 14, 2012 at 7:19 PM

What makes this a Hockey Stick is not only the fact that spending goes up in 2009, it’s that spending stays at those elevated levels.

In 2008, the CBO projection for Non-Defense spending in 2016 was 16.3% of GDP.

In 2011, after the crises and President Obama’s policy changes, the CBO projection of Non-Defense spending in 2016, when they predicts the economy has fully recovered, is 20.0% of GDP.

http://super-economy.blogspot.com/2011/08/obama-hockey-stick.html

CW on June 14, 2012 at 7:23 PM

I’ve had nearly this identical conversation with three D friends:

D: George Bush wrecked the economy President Obama inherited. It’s his fault things are so bad now.

R: What did Bush do that wrecked the economy?

D: He deregulated everything so Wall Street ran amok.

R: Give me an example.

D: (silence). . . well, I do know his economic policies were terrible. He inherited surpluses and ran up deficits by cutting taxes for the rich, fighting two wars, and enacting a prescription drug benefit.

R: No question, the prescription drug benefit added to the deficit. We agree on that. But you do know that President Obama didn’t try to repeal that, but made it bigger, don’t you?

D: Well, yeah. . .

R: And as for the tax cuts, you know that Bush also inherited a recession and that taxes were at an all-time high when he took office, right?

D: What are you talking about?

R: Bush inherited a recession too. Except that no one remembers it now because we got out of it so quickly, and he didn’t spend his whole presidency blaming it on President Clinton. Let me ask you something: if Bush is responsible for the bad things that happened in the following Administration, why isn’t Clinton responsible for the bad things that you say happened in the Bush administration?

D: (Confused look).

R: Did Clinton policies create the 2000-1 recession in the same way that Bush is responsible for today’s lousy economy?

D: Look at the deficits Bush ran up! Clinton left him with a surplus.

R: Actually, he didn’t. It was a PROJECTED surplus, and the projection turned out to be wrong. And you do know that the deficits now are several times bigger, don’t you, and that D’s are arguing that running bigger deficits is GOOD for the economy? Why do you think Bush’s smaller deficits ruined the economy, but today’s bigger ones are great?

D: (Confused, glazed look. . . snaps to attention). Well, Bush was an inarticulate idiot!

Chuckles3 on June 14, 2012 at 9:01 PM

WHY would Allahpundit be “waiting for these numbers to change”?

HE did more to CREATE them than CHRIS MATTHEWS or MSNBC!!!

I came here DAY AFTER DAY in 2007 and 2008 to find A SINGLE MESSAGE, Time After Time:

DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DO YA HAAAATE mmmMBOOOOOOOOOOOOSH?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

williamg on June 14, 2012 at 10:53 PM

Remember how after every single President George W. Bush drone strike in Iraq or Afghanistan the liberal networks would have footage showing collateral damage, claimed civilian deaths, wedding parties, people smoking, etc, etc?

Why no longer any interest in what our bombs hit?

slickwillie2001 on June 14, 2012 at 6:22 PM

Exactly.

KMC1 on June 15, 2012 at 12:17 AM

I’m am just sick and tired of the very worn-out “Bush’s Fault” LIE!!! Buycks-Robeson v Citibank was the very origination of sub-prime, with Citi setting aside the first-ever $1Billion for subprime loans (Truth is, Citi just got tired of all the bussed-over ACORN folks being STUPID, Loud, and generally Obnoxious in ALL of Citi’s Chicago locations.) Since ALL the other majors didn’t want the same ACORN MORONS in all of their facilities, the majors also set aside hundreds of $Millions for subprime. The lead attorney on Buycks-Robeson v Citibank??? Barack Hussein Obama. Yes ,the J@ck@ss-In-Chief actually started this mess!?! Oh yeah, ACORN paid for the lawsuit’s legal fees as well. Consider also that Paul Robeson, the actor, was a card-carrying Commie. Now then, as payback for the Chicago vote in ’96, Slick Willie signed an executive order allowing Fannie and Freddie to suck up ANY old kind of horsecrap mortgage!!! So if the J@ck@ss-In-Chief’s looking for someone to blame, B. Hussein just needs to look in the mirror. And yes, so does the “first black president.” Barack Hussein Obama and William Jefferson Clinton were the AUTHORS of this present catastrophy.

Colatteral Damage on June 15, 2012 at 5:42 PM

Comment pages: 1 2