Billy Burpelson wrote:

Billy Burpelson wrote:

obamao.[RUDENESS and vulgarity wrote:

ObaMa0 Destroyed 45% of World's Wealth.
45%? The whole WORLD? In only seven lousy WEEKS???? (For
someone who thinks O is so incompetent, you sure give him a lot
of credit!)

And predecessor Bush gets a free pass for the last eight
YEARS????

(Especially since the Bush loving, Republican Wall Street
Journal says this mess started on Bush's watch).

BWAHAHAHAhaha.... donkey brain, you're a riot! :-)
B.O. Jr. wrote:

Everything started to crash and burn in 2007 when Pelosi and Reid
took over the Congress.

Well, first of all, 2007 WAS on Bush's watch, totally refuting
donkey brain's contention that Obama did it in 7 -weeks- (which you
will recall was the original thread).

B.O. Jr. wrote:

Let's go back to elementary civics. Congress spends the money, makes
the laws and performs oversight. Obumma authorized the spending to
double the debt in just seven weeks.

So, are you saying that authorizing "the spending to double the [U.S.]
debt in just seven weeks" is the same as *destroying* 45% of the
*WORLD'S* wealth as stated by the OP? Quite a leap, don't you think?

Pelosi and Reid notwithstanding, what happened to Bush's veto
power? Why didn't Bush "just say no"?

B.O. Jr. wrote:

That was his [Bush's] problem.

Exactly my point. Bush could have nipped it in the bud and he didn't.

Do you know what a tagline is?

On my news reader, most 'tag lines' are presented in a different font
and/or a lighter density, making it very clear that it is a tag line.

Your so-called tag line was the same size, font and
density as your regular text, thus rendering it virtually
indistinguishable from being interpreted as part of your regular post.
Are you a neophyte to Usenet, not knowing how to properly encode your
tag line so that it is *clearly* understood as such?