The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

    In response to slomag's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to slomag's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to slomag's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    I would not be bringing Ted Nugent anywhere.   Correct about Romney but, Obama won Hispanics by large margins, under -25 by large margins, single women and more specifically single mothers by large margins, and he won the under $30k per year income group.  He won all the inner-city votes but not the suburb votes (exceptions being the ultra-liberal states, CA, MA, NY, etc).  If the poster checks the voter demographics the truth will prove that the "stupid voters" (user99`s words) voted for the currnet occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Av.

     

     

    (Insert airborne`s racist rant here)

     



    The Hispanic vote is overblown - if Romney had split the Hispanic vote he might have picked up Florida.  It wouldn't have made a difference in states that overwhelmingly blue or red like California and Texas, and there weren't enough Hispanics in states like Ohio and Wisconsin to make much of a difference.

     

    Maybe Republicans can take voters away in some of these demographic areas, but let's face it - their strongest demographic is literally dying.  They're never going to win the white house this way - if they split off from the tea party, each faction would at least be representing their (purported) beliefs, instead of this ridiculous hybrid that has guys like Mitt Romney pretending to give 2 sh1ts about varmint hunting and abortions.

     

     

     



    Sounds like you would rather have a bunch of illegal, taker, uneducated, lazy, dumb, fools, choosing your president?

     

     




     

    I'd say the 40 and younger crowd have a greater stake in the future of the country than the 70 and over crowd.

     

     



    I would too.  The problem is they are uninformed.  Not so much age 30-40 but, large percentages  of the 18-30 age group are getting their news from Comedy Central and Saturday Night Live.  You want them responsible for the future of America?  I don`t.  

     

     

     




     

    There are uninformed voters on both sides.  I don't see Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh as a step up from Jon Stewart and Seth Meyers.

     

     



    Interesting point.  You won`t find an entire voting block in polling data saying they "get their news" from Limbaugh or Hannity though.  They may be listening (or watching) for entertainment purposes or shock value but they are getting their news from reliable sources.  Remember, these were actual polls and exit polls taken for the under 30 crowd.  Over 60% of these very same people, as recently as Nov /2012, believed that Mrs Palin actually said "I can see Russia from my house".   That`s just sad (and a little scary).

     




    How many news sources do you trust that do not eventually lead to Rupert Murdoch?

     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from tacobreath. Show tacobreath's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    In response to airborne-rgr's comment:

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to airborne-rgr's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to airborne-rgr's comment:

     

    In response to airborne-rgr's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

     

    "....keep the focus on the facts..."

     

    Didn`t you post this?    Good, here`s the facts: (again)

    Jan 20, 2009            debt $9.7 trillion

    Jan 20, 2013            debt $16.8 trillion

     

    FACTS!

     

     

     




     

    Ummm, here's some facts from WSJ that you refuse to acknowledge.

     

    - In the 2009 fiscal year - the last of George W. Bush's presidency - federal spending rose by 17.9% from $2.98 trillion to $3.52 trillion. Check the official numbers at the Office of Management and Budget.

    - In fiscal 2010 - the first budget under Obama - spending fell 1.8% to $3.46 trillion.

    - In fiscal 2011, spending rose 4.3% to $3.60 trillion.

    - In fiscal 2012, spending is set to rise 0.7% to $3.63 trillion, according to the Congressional Budget Office's estimate of the budget that was agreed to last August.

    - Finally in fiscal 2013 - the final budget of Obama's term - spending is scheduled to fall 1.3% to $3.58 trillion. Read the CBO's latest budget outlook.

    Why do people think Obama has spent like a drunken sailor? It's in part because of a fundamental misunderstanding of the federal budget. What people forget (or never knew) is that the first year of every presidential term starts with a budget approved by the previous administration and Congress. The president only begins to shape the budget in his second year.

     


     

    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/obama-spending-binge-never-happened-2012-05-22?pagenumber=1

     

     




     

    Crickets....

     



    first year of every presidential term starts with a budget approved by the previous administration and Congress

     

    Ask you again as you seem to avoid this crucial FACT, Who had super majorities from Jan 2007?

     




     

    Hey spanky, why do you continually post Innauguration day when it has absolutely nothing to do with anything.

     

     

     



    Jan 1 2007 is the day the DEMOCRAT super majorities took over both houses after winning the Nov 2006 mid-terms.

     

    When the Q-Tip hits your brain stop pushing.

     




     

    Ummm, hey spanky, AGAIN what does Innauguration day have to do with that.

    Is it beyond your ability to answer an easy question about an arbitrary date you posted?

     



    It`s the day the Dems took over.  Read your own data (a chronic problem with you). CONGRESS along with the president provided Obama`s first fiscal budget.  That congress was all Dems.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from tacobreath. Show tacobreath's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    In response to airborne-rgr's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to airborne-rgr's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to airborne-rgr's comment:

     

    In response to airborne-rgr's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

     

    "....keep the focus on the facts..."

     

    Didn`t you post this?    Good, here`s the facts: (again)

    Jan 20, 2009            debt $9.7 trillion

    Jan 20, 2013            debt $16.8 trillion

     

    FACTS!

     

     

     




     

    Ummm, here's some facts from WSJ that you refuse to acknowledge.

     

    - In the 2009 fiscal year - the last of George W. Bush's presidency - federal spending rose by 17.9% from $2.98 trillion to $3.52 trillion. Check the official numbers at the Office of Management and Budget.

    - In fiscal 2010 - the first budget under Obama - spending fell 1.8% to $3.46 trillion.

    - In fiscal 2011, spending rose 4.3% to $3.60 trillion.

    - In fiscal 2012, spending is set to rise 0.7% to $3.63 trillion, according to the Congressional Budget Office's estimate of the budget that was agreed to last August.

    - Finally in fiscal 2013 - the final budget of Obama's term - spending is scheduled to fall 1.3% to $3.58 trillion. Read the CBO's latest budget outlook.

    Why do people think Obama has spent like a drunken sailor? It's in part because of a fundamental misunderstanding of the federal budget. What people forget (or never knew) is that the first year of every presidential term starts with a budget approved by the previous administration and Congress. The president only begins to shape the budget in his second year.

     


     

    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/obama-spending-binge-never-happened-2012-05-22?pagenumber=1

     

     




     

    Crickets....

     



    first year of every presidential term starts with a budget approved by the previous administration and Congress

     

    Ask you again as you seem to avoid this crucial FACT, Who had super majorities from Jan 2007?

     




     

    Hey spanky, why do you continually post Innauguration day when it has absolutely nothing to do with anything.

     

     

     



    Jan 1 2007 is the day the DEMOCRAT super majorities took over both houses after winning the Nov 2006 mid-terms.

     

    When the Q-Tip hits your brain stop pushing.

     




     

    So with the wingnut majority in the HoR, the chamber in which ALL fiscal bills originate, the responsibility is on the wingnuts for all the spending...right spanky?

     

    (QUOTE)

    Are we talking about Obama`s 1st term, more specifically his 1st 2 years,.............or are you moving the goal posts (yet) again?

     

     Read your own charts!

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from tacobreath. Show tacobreath's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    In response to slomag's comment:

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to slomag's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to slomag's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to slomag's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    I would not be bringing Ted Nugent anywhere.   Correct about Romney but, Obama won Hispanics by large margins, under -25 by large margins, single women and more specifically single mothers by large margins, and he won the under $30k per year income group.  He won all the inner-city votes but not the suburb votes (exceptions being the ultra-liberal states, CA, MA, NY, etc).  If the poster checks the voter demographics the truth will prove that the "stupid voters" (user99`s words) voted for the currnet occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Av.

     

     

    (Insert airborne`s racist rant here)

     



    The Hispanic vote is overblown - if Romney had split the Hispanic vote he might have picked up Florida.  It wouldn't have made a difference in states that overwhelmingly blue or red like California and Texas, and there weren't enough Hispanics in states like Ohio and Wisconsin to make much of a difference.

     

    Maybe Republicans can take voters away in some of these demographic areas, but let's face it - their strongest demographic is literally dying.  They're never going to win the white house this way - if they split off from the tea party, each faction would at least be representing their (purported) beliefs, instead of this ridiculous hybrid that has guys like Mitt Romney pretending to give 2 sh1ts about varmint hunting and abortions.

     

     

     



    Sounds like you would rather have a bunch of illegal, taker, uneducated, lazy, dumb, fools, choosing your president?

     

     




     

    I'd say the 40 and younger crowd have a greater stake in the future of the country than the 70 and over crowd.

     

     



    I would too.  The problem is they are uninformed.  Not so much age 30-40 but, large percentages  of the 18-30 age group are getting their news from Comedy Central and Saturday Night Live.  You want them responsible for the future of America?  I don`t.  

     

     

     




     

    There are uninformed voters on both sides.  I don't see Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh as a step up from Jon Stewart and Seth Meyers.

     

     



    Interesting point.  You won`t find an entire voting block in polling data saying they "get their news" from Limbaugh or Hannity though.  They may be listening (or watching) for entertainment purposes or shock value but they are getting their news from reliable sources.  Remember, these were actual polls and exit polls taken for the under 30 crowd.  Over 60% of these very same people, as recently as Nov /2012, believed that Mrs Palin actually said "I can see Russia from my house".   That`s just sad (and a little scary).

     

     




     

    How many news sources do you trust that do not eventually lead to Rupert Murdoch?

     




    Are you calling Comedy Central and SNL "news sources"?

    Geeeesh, I sure hope not.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from tacobreath. Show tacobreath's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    In response to airborne-rgr's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to airborne-rgr's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to airborne-rgr's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to airborne-rgr's comment:

     

    In response to airborne-rgr's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

     

    "....keep the focus on the facts..."

     

    Didn`t you post this?    Good, here`s the facts: (again)

    Jan 20, 2009            debt $9.7 trillion

    Jan 20, 2013            debt $16.8 trillion

     

    FACTS!

     

     

     




     

    Ummm, here's some facts from WSJ that you refuse to acknowledge.

     

    - In the 2009 fiscal year - the last of George W. Bush's presidency - federal spending rose by 17.9% from $2.98 trillion to $3.52 trillion. Check the official numbers at the Office of Management and Budget.

    - In fiscal 2010 - the first budget under Obama - spending fell 1.8% to $3.46 trillion.

    - In fiscal 2011, spending rose 4.3% to $3.60 trillion.

    - In fiscal 2012, spending is set to rise 0.7% to $3.63 trillion, according to the Congressional Budget Office's estimate of the budget that was agreed to last August.

    - Finally in fiscal 2013 - the final budget of Obama's term - spending is scheduled to fall 1.3% to $3.58 trillion. Read the CBO's latest budget outlook.

    Why do people think Obama has spent like a drunken sailor? It's in part because of a fundamental misunderstanding of the federal budget. What people forget (or never knew) is that the first year of every presidential term starts with a budget approved by the previous administration and Congress. The president only begins to shape the budget in his second year.

     


     

    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/obama-spending-binge-never-happened-2012-05-22?pagenumber=1

     

     




     

    Crickets....

     



    first year of every presidential term starts with a budget approved by the previous administration and Congress

     

    Ask you again as you seem to avoid this crucial FACT, Who had super majorities from Jan 2007?

     




     

    Hey spanky, why do you continually post Innauguration day when it has absolutely nothing to do with anything.

     

     

     



    Jan 1 2007 is the day the DEMOCRAT super majorities took over both houses after winning the Nov 2006 mid-terms.

     

    When the Q-Tip hits your brain stop pushing.

     




     

    Ummm, hey spanky, AGAIN what does Innauguration day have to do with that.

    Is it beyond your ability to answer an easy question about an arbitrary date you posted?

     

     



    It`s the day the Dems took over.  Read your own data (a chronic problem with you). CONGRESS along with the president provided Obama`s first fiscal budget.  That congress was all Dems.

     

     




     

    BWAAAAAAAAAAAAA HAAAAAAAAAAAAA HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

     

    So with the wingnut majority in the HoR since 2010, the chamber in which ALL fiscal bills originate, the responsibility is on the wingnuts for all the spending since then...right spanky?

    Or are you gonna run from that too?

    (QUOTE)




     

    So, not only moving goal posts, now you`re re-writng history?  Your chart has the Bush spending (you know "blame Bush" ) as the problem (in your little mind and chart).  I will ask you again, try and stay on topic, who had super majorities at the time the fiscal budget was handed over to Obama?

    Again, these are YOUR charts and this is YOUR data.  See:

    "first year of every presidential term starts with a budget approved by the previous administration and Congress. "

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from tacobreath. Show tacobreath's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    Hey Dooooooosh bag.................

    This is a FACT:

    "George Washington through George W. Bush (43 presidents) debt grows to $9.7 Trillion.  4 years of Obama debt grows by $7 Trillion.

     

    And it`s you changing the goal posts! You went through the REASON your hero P.O. S. president got handed the economy he did and YOUR charts show it was the DEMOCRAT-SUPER-MAJORITY Congress that gave it to him.

     

    YOUR DATA!   You stupid F vck!

     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from tacobreath. Show tacobreath's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    In response to airborne-rgr's comment:

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    Hey Dooooooosh bag.................

    This is a FACT:

    "George Washington through George W. Bush (43 presidents) debt grows to $9.7 Trillion.  4 years of Obama debt grows by $7 Trillion.

     

    And it`s you changing the goal posts! You went through the REASON your hero P.O. S. president got handed the economy he did and YOUR charts show it was the DEMOCRAT-SUPER-MAJORITY Congress that gave it to him.

     

    YOUR DATA!   You stupid F vck!

     




    Keep running with those goalpost ya fvcking COWARD!!!!!

     

    You're not worth wiping my a555 on.

     




    "You're not worth wiping my a555 on."

     

    You`d be combing your hair with the same stroke.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sistersledge. Show Sistersledge's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    The GOP problem is they have the likes Rubio as their new standard bearer and the Democrats have the likes of Elizabeth Warren fighting for the middleclass.

    Warren wins !

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from tacobreath. Show tacobreath's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    In response to Sistersledge's comment:

    The GOP problem is they have the likes Rubio as their new standard bearer and the Democrats have the likes of Elizabeth Warren fighting for the middleclass.

    Warren wins !




    Sis, she makes $350k per year for teaching 1 class per week and lied to get that job.

    "fighting for the middleclass"................really?

     

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from tacobreath. Show tacobreath's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    In response to airborne-rgr's comment:

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    Hey Dooooooosh bag.................

    This is a FACT:

    "George Washington through George W. Bush (43 presidents) debt grows to $9.7 Trillion.  4 years of Obama debt grows by $7 Trillion.

     

    And it`s you changing the goal posts! You went through the REASON your hero P.O. S. president got handed the economy he did and YOUR charts show it was the DEMOCRAT-SUPER-MAJORITY Congress that gave it to him.

     

    YOUR DATA!   You stupid F vck!

     




     

    You're nothing but an ignorant turd who is too dang obstinate to admit when you've had your a555 handed to you.

    You're entire spew of verbal diarhea has been "Obama...Obama...Obama"

    When you get slapped in the side of your empty pointy head with reality, you start spewing "Congress...Congress...Congress..."

    You don't have the balls to argue like a man. You change your 'position' more often than you change your underwear.

    So just shut up and slither away like the pieceofshit coward you are.




    It`s amazing to me (and everyone else here) how FREAKIN BLIND you are!  Everything you`ve said (above) is your EXACT M.O. and has been for all the years you`ve been here regardless of your alias.

    2000-2008 is "Bush`s fault", 2009-2013 is still "Bush`s fault", and you`re an insane ideologue FREAK-show.  You show a chart showing in no uncertain terms that CONGRESS hands over the FISCAL budget to the next president and that the DEMOCRATS had super majorities in Congress when it was handed over................yet in your crazy FREAK show mind it`s still "Bush`s fault"!

    "Obama.....Obama.....Obama".............EXACTLY!   He sux. He`s the worst president we`ve ever had.  The country is falling apart.  We`re in a recession (we`ve never left one), and you voted with the ignorant, uninformed, moron, 51%.  Because you are a dope!

    Do everyone here a favor, stop the Boones Farm and the crack pipe.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sistersledge. Show Sistersledge's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

    In response to Sistersledge's comment:

     

    The GOP problem is they have the likes Rubio as their new standard bearer and the Democrats have the likes of Elizabeth Warren fighting for the middleclass.

    Warren wins !

     




     

    Sis, she makes $350k per year for teaching 1 class per week and lied to get that job.

    "fighting for the middleclass"................really?

     




    I guess you have a problem with Warren . Thank God the majority of Massachusetts voters don't feel the same way about her that you do.

    BTW did Brown start that new gig on FOX yet ?

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from tacobreath. Show tacobreath's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    In response to Sistersledge's comment:

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to Sistersledge's comment:

     

    The GOP problem is they have the likes Rubio as their new standard bearer and the Democrats have the likes of Elizabeth Warren fighting for the middleclass.

    Warren wins !

     




     

    Sis, she makes $350k per year for teaching 1 class per week and lied to get that job.

    "fighting for the middleclass"................really?

     

     




    I guess you have a problem with Warren . Thank God the majority of Massachusetts voters don't feel the same way about her that you do.

     

    BTW did Brown start that new gig on FOX yet ?




    Don`t hold Mass up as smart voters.  They`re by far, the dumbest on earth and PROVE it in every election.  Brown voted 50% of the time with the Dems and the Mass dopes still had to have a 100% moonbat representative despite her complete incompetence, ignorance, and dishonesty.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Sistersledge. Show Sistersledge's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    tacobreath do you care to supply some proof to those accusations you made about Warren and the Massachusetts voters . If you can we can debate ... if you can't than they are just empty words and our discussion is finished. 

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from tacobreath. Show tacobreath's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    In response to Sistersledge's comment:

     

    tacobreath do you care to supply some proof to those accusations you made about Warren and the Massachusetts voters . If you can we can debate ... if you can't than they are just empty words and our discussion is finished. 

    (QUOTE)



    Were you asleep when it was/is PROVEN that she lied on her application to Harvard saying she was an American Indian? Do you not know that she teaches ONLY one class a semester for a salary of $350k per year?  Do you not know that Brown voted 50% of the time with the Dems? Do you not know that in 2010 when Obama took a midterm "shellacking" (his words) the only state to vote blindly for incompetent Dems was Massachusetts?

     

    C`mon sis? These are the facts.  Let`s debate?  Tell me why you could cast a vote for a inexperienced, lying, scum bag like Warren?

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

    In response to airborne-rgr's comment:

     

    In response to airborne-rgr's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

     

    "....keep the focus on the facts..."

     

    Didn`t you post this?    Good, here`s the facts: (again)

    Jan 20, 2009            debt $9.7 trillion

    Jan 20, 2013            debt $16.8 trillion

     

    FACTS!

     

     

     




     

    Ummm, here's some facts from WSJ that you refuse to acknowledge.

     

    - In the 2009 fiscal year - the last of George W. Bush's presidency - federal spending rose by 17.9% from $2.98 trillion to $3.52 trillion. Check the official numbers at the Office of Management and Budget.

    - In fiscal 2010 - the first budget under Obama - spending fell 1.8% to $3.46 trillion.

    - In fiscal 2011, spending rose 4.3% to $3.60 trillion.

    - In fiscal 2012, spending is set to rise 0.7% to $3.63 trillion, according to the Congressional Budget Office's estimate of the budget that was agreed to last August.

    - Finally in fiscal 2013 - the final budget of Obama's term - spending is scheduled to fall 1.3% to $3.58 trillion. Read the CBO's latest budget outlook.

    Why do people think Obama has spent like a drunken sailor? It's in part because of a fundamental misunderstanding of the federal budget. What people forget (or never knew) is that the first year of every presidential term starts with a budget approved by the previous administration and Congress. The president only begins to shape the budget in his second year.

     


     

    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/obama-spending-binge-never-happened-2012-05-22?pagenumber=1

     

     




     

    Crickets....

     



    first year of every presidential term starts with a budget approved by the previous administration and Congress

     

    Ask you again as you seem to avoid this crucial FACT, Who had super majorities from Jan 2007?




    The supermajority claim is ridiculous.  If you count all Dems and independents who caucus with Dems it should have added up to 60 votes.  The reality was...

    1) You have to count Lieberman in this talley - a man who campaigned for the Republican Presidential nominee.

    2) You have to count Al Franken in this talley - a man who was not sworn in until July, 2009 due to a contested election.

    3) You have to count Robert Byrd in this talley - a man who lost half his votes to illness, and died in June, 2010 (seat vacant for remainder of session)

    4) You have to count Ted Kennedy in this talley - a many who was also often too sick to vote, and who died in August, 2009.  His seat was won by a Republican.

    So the supermajority actually lasted one month - from July, 2009 to August 2009, and then again from September, 2009 - January 2010 (when Brown won the special election). The reality of getting all 60 votes on an issue never materialized.  Not a single bill was passed with only "supermajority" votes.  Go back and check - every piece of legislation passed in Obama's first two years had at least one Republican casting an aye.

     

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from tacobreath. Show tacobreath's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    In response to slomag's comment:

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to airborne-rgr's comment:

     

    In response to airborne-rgr's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

     

    "....keep the focus on the facts..."

     

    Didn`t you post this?    Good, here`s the facts: (again)

    Jan 20, 2009            debt $9.7 trillion

    Jan 20, 2013            debt $16.8 trillion

     

    FACTS!

     

     

     




     

    Ummm, here's some facts from WSJ that you refuse to acknowledge.

     

    - In the 2009 fiscal year - the last of George W. Bush's presidency - federal spending rose by 17.9% from $2.98 trillion to $3.52 trillion. Check the official numbers at the Office of Management and Budget.

    - In fiscal 2010 - the first budget under Obama - spending fell 1.8% to $3.46 trillion.

    - In fiscal 2011, spending rose 4.3% to $3.60 trillion.

    - In fiscal 2012, spending is set to rise 0.7% to $3.63 trillion, according to the Congressional Budget Office's estimate of the budget that was agreed to last August.

    - Finally in fiscal 2013 - the final budget of Obama's term - spending is scheduled to fall 1.3% to $3.58 trillion. Read the CBO's latest budget outlook.

    Why do people think Obama has spent like a drunken sailor? It's in part because of a fundamental misunderstanding of the federal budget. What people forget (or never knew) is that the first year of every presidential term starts with a budget approved by the previous administration and Congress. The president only begins to shape the budget in his second year.

     


     

    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/obama-spending-binge-never-happened-2012-05-22?pagenumber=1

     

     




     

    Crickets....

     



    first year of every presidential term starts with a budget approved by the previous administration and Congress

     

    Ask you again as you seem to avoid this crucial FACT, Who had super majorities from Jan 2007?

     




     

    The supermajority claim is ridiculous.  If you count all Dems and independents who caucus with Dems it should have added up to 60 votes.  The reality was...

    1) You have to count Lieberman in this talley - a man who campaigned for the Republican Presidential nominee.

    2) You have to count Al Franken in this talley - a man who was not sworn in until July, 2009 due to a contested election.

    3) You have to count Robert Byrd in this talley - a man who lost half his votes to illness, and died in June, 2010 (seat vacant for remainder of session)

    4) You have to count Ted Kennedy in this talley - a many who was also often too sick to vote, and who died in August, 2009.  His seat was won by a Republican.

    So the supermajority actually lasted one month - from July, 2009 to August 2009, and then again from September, 2009 - January 2010 (when Brown won the special election). The reality of getting all 60 votes on an issue never materialized.  Not a single bill was passed with only "supermajority" votes.  Go back and check - every piece of legislation passed in Obama's first two years had at least one Republican casting an aye.

     



    Correct.  Good points.  What I`m saying and have been saying all along is, W was a lousy president, a spender.  You would be hard-pressed to find one conservative here at BDC that would disagree.  We can admit that W was a problem.  BUT, (and as Pee-Wee Herman always said, "everyone has a big BUT"), after 4 years of Obama`s incompetence, he owns this mess.  It is no longer "Bush`s fault".  The fiscal budget handed over was handed over by a Rep president and a Dem congress. The first 2 years of Obama`s tenure he owned all 3 branches and his big accomplishment was a $1.8 Trillion HC debacle.  It`s time to "man up" and take responsibility.

    We should all try and learn these simple words.........."Obama`s fault". 

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

    In response to slomag's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to airborne-rgr's comment:

     

    In response to airborne-rgr's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

     

    "....keep the focus on the facts..."

     

    Didn`t you post this?    Good, here`s the facts: (again)

    Jan 20, 2009            debt $9.7 trillion

    Jan 20, 2013            debt $16.8 trillion

     

    FACTS!

     

     

     




     

    Ummm, here's some facts from WSJ that you refuse to acknowledge.

     

    - In the 2009 fiscal year - the last of George W. Bush's presidency - federal spending rose by 17.9% from $2.98 trillion to $3.52 trillion. Check the official numbers at the Office of Management and Budget.

    - In fiscal 2010 - the first budget under Obama - spending fell 1.8% to $3.46 trillion.

    - In fiscal 2011, spending rose 4.3% to $3.60 trillion.

    - In fiscal 2012, spending is set to rise 0.7% to $3.63 trillion, according to the Congressional Budget Office's estimate of the budget that was agreed to last August.

    - Finally in fiscal 2013 - the final budget of Obama's term - spending is scheduled to fall 1.3% to $3.58 trillion. Read the CBO's latest budget outlook.

    Why do people think Obama has spent like a drunken sailor? It's in part because of a fundamental misunderstanding of the federal budget. What people forget (or never knew) is that the first year of every presidential term starts with a budget approved by the previous administration and Congress. The president only begins to shape the budget in his second year.

     


     

    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/obama-spending-binge-never-happened-2012-05-22?pagenumber=1

     

     




     

    Crickets....

     



    first year of every presidential term starts with a budget approved by the previous administration and Congress

     

    Ask you again as you seem to avoid this crucial FACT, Who had super majorities from Jan 2007?

     




     

    The supermajority claim is ridiculous.  If you count all Dems and independents who caucus with Dems it should have added up to 60 votes.  The reality was...

    1) You have to count Lieberman in this talley - a man who campaigned for the Republican Presidential nominee.

    2) You have to count Al Franken in this talley - a man who was not sworn in until July, 2009 due to a contested election.

    3) You have to count Robert Byrd in this talley - a man who lost half his votes to illness, and died in June, 2010 (seat vacant for remainder of session)

    4) You have to count Ted Kennedy in this talley - a many who was also often too sick to vote, and who died in August, 2009.  His seat was won by a Republican.

    So the supermajority actually lasted one month - from July, 2009 to August 2009, and then again from September, 2009 - January 2010 (when Brown won the special election). The reality of getting all 60 votes on an issue never materialized.  Not a single bill was passed with only "supermajority" votes.  Go back and check - every piece of legislation passed in Obama's first two years had at least one Republican casting an aye.

     

     



    Correct.  Good points.  What I`m saying and have been saying all along is, W was a lousy president, a spender.  You would be hard-pressed to find one conservative here at BDC that would disagree.  We can admit that W was a problem.  BUT, (and as Pee-Wee Herman always said, "everyone has a big BUT"), after 4 years of Obama`s incompetence, he owns this mess.  It is no longer "Bush`s fault".  The fiscal budget handed over was handed over by a Rep president and a Dem congress. The first 2 years of Obama`s tenure he owned all 3 branches and his big accomplishment was a $1.8 Trillion HC debacle.  It`s time to "man up" and take responsibility.

     

    We should all try and learn these simple words.........."Obama`s fault". 




    I disagree - we'll never know exactly what Obama wanted, because he has always been dealing within the confines of political reality.  Having a majority in the Senate used to mean something, but it doesn't anymore.  Republicans will fillibuster anything - they are fillibustering a member of their own party for Sec of Defense, during a time of war.  They fillibustered bills with overwhelming bi-partisan support in the House.

    Obama's doing his best, but he doesn't own anything.  Bush got exactly what he asked for with Iraq, the Patriot act, no child left behind, Homeland Security, Bush Tax Cuts, Medicare Part D, Partial Birth Abortion, Trade agreements in South American and Asia, even TARP.

    The only thing Obama really owns is foreign policy.  If that's not OK with you, you guys have to start getting out of the way.  If he's as much a mess as you say he is, his policies will hurt the country, the American people will see it, and give the Republicans a second look.  As it stands now, it just looks like the GOP is playing keep-away with the constitution, and it may have sold some people in 2010, but everybody seems to be sick of the game by now.

     

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from tacobreath. Show tacobreath's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    In response to slomag's comment:

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to slomag's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to airborne-rgr's comment:

     

    In response to airborne-rgr's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

     

    "....keep the focus on the facts..."

     

    Didn`t you post this?    Good, here`s the facts: (again)

    Jan 20, 2009            debt $9.7 trillion

    Jan 20, 2013            debt $16.8 trillion

     

    FACTS!

     

     

     




     

    Ummm, here's some facts from WSJ that you refuse to acknowledge.

     

    - In the 2009 fiscal year - the last of George W. Bush's presidency - federal spending rose by 17.9% from $2.98 trillion to $3.52 trillion. Check the official numbers at the Office of Management and Budget.

    - In fiscal 2010 - the first budget under Obama - spending fell 1.8% to $3.46 trillion.

    - In fiscal 2011, spending rose 4.3% to $3.60 trillion.

    - In fiscal 2012, spending is set to rise 0.7% to $3.63 trillion, according to the Congressional Budget Office's estimate of the budget that was agreed to last August.

    - Finally in fiscal 2013 - the final budget of Obama's term - spending is scheduled to fall 1.3% to $3.58 trillion. Read the CBO's latest budget outlook.

    Why do people think Obama has spent like a drunken sailor? It's in part because of a fundamental misunderstanding of the federal budget. What people forget (or never knew) is that the first year of every presidential term starts with a budget approved by the previous administration and Congress. The president only begins to shape the budget in his second year.

     


     

    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/obama-spending-binge-never-happened-2012-05-22?pagenumber=1

     

     




     

    Crickets....

     



    first year of every presidential term starts with a budget approved by the previous administration and Congress

     

    Ask you again as you seem to avoid this crucial FACT, Who had super majorities from Jan 2007?

     




     

    The supermajority claim is ridiculous.  If you count all Dems and independents who caucus with Dems it should have added up to 60 votes.  The reality was...

    1) You have to count Lieberman in this talley - a man who campaigned for the Republican Presidential nominee.

    2) You have to count Al Franken in this talley - a man who was not sworn in until July, 2009 due to a contested election.

    3) You have to count Robert Byrd in this talley - a man who lost half his votes to illness, and died in June, 2010 (seat vacant for remainder of session)

    4) You have to count Ted Kennedy in this talley - a many who was also often too sick to vote, and who died in August, 2009.  His seat was won by a Republican.

    So the supermajority actually lasted one month - from July, 2009 to August 2009, and then again from September, 2009 - January 2010 (when Brown won the special election). The reality of getting all 60 votes on an issue never materialized.  Not a single bill was passed with only "supermajority" votes.  Go back and check - every piece of legislation passed in Obama's first two years had at least one Republican casting an aye.

     

     



    Correct.  Good points.  What I`m saying and have been saying all along is, W was a lousy president, a spender.  You would be hard-pressed to find one conservative here at BDC that would disagree.  We can admit that W was a problem.  BUT, (and as Pee-Wee Herman always said, "everyone has a big BUT"), after 4 years of Obama`s incompetence, he owns this mess.  It is no longer "Bush`s fault".  The fiscal budget handed over was handed over by a Rep president and a Dem congress. The first 2 years of Obama`s tenure he owned all 3 branches and his big accomplishment was a $1.8 Trillion HC debacle.  It`s time to "man up" and take responsibility.

     

    We should all try and learn these simple words.........."Obama`s fault". 

     




     

    I disagree - we'll never know exactly what Obama wanted, because he has always been dealing within the confines of political reality.  Having a majority in the Senate used to mean something, but it doesn't anymore.  Republicans will fillibuster anything - they are fillibustering a member of their own party for Sec of Defense, during a time of war.  They fillibustered bills with overwhelming bi-partisan support in the House.

    Obama's doing his best, but he doesn't own anything.  Bush got exactly what he asked for with Iraq, the Patriot act, no child left behind, Homeland Security, Bush Tax Cuts, Medicare Part D, Partial Birth Abortion, Trade agreements in South American and Asia, even TARP.

    The only thing Obama really owns is foreign policy.  If that's not OK with you, you guys have to start getting out of the way.  If he's as much a mess as you say he is, his policies will hurt the country, the American people will see it, and give the Republicans a second look.  As it stands now, it just looks like the GOP is playing keep-away with the constitution, and it may have sold some people in 2010, but everybody seems to be sick of the game by now.

     



    "If he's as much a mess as you say he is, his policies will hurt the country"

    Gas up 100%

    Unemployment up to 14.4% (real numbers)

    Food stamps up tp 57 million

    Government assistance up to 101 million

    HC costs up 25%

    Houses worth nothing

    N Korea with nukes and Iran seconds away

     

    Could his "policies" hurt the country any freakin more?  Geeeeeesh.

    Just admit it.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

    In response to slomag's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to slomag's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to airborne-rgr's comment:

     

    In response to airborne-rgr's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

     

    "....keep the focus on the facts..."

     

    Didn`t you post this?    Good, here`s the facts: (again)

    Jan 20, 2009            debt $9.7 trillion

    Jan 20, 2013            debt $16.8 trillion

     

    FACTS!

     

     

     




     

    Ummm, here's some facts from WSJ that you refuse to acknowledge.

     

    - In the 2009 fiscal year - the last of George W. Bush's presidency - federal spending rose by 17.9% from $2.98 trillion to $3.52 trillion. Check the official numbers at the Office of Management and Budget.

    - In fiscal 2010 - the first budget under Obama - spending fell 1.8% to $3.46 trillion.

    - In fiscal 2011, spending rose 4.3% to $3.60 trillion.

    - In fiscal 2012, spending is set to rise 0.7% to $3.63 trillion, according to the Congressional Budget Office's estimate of the budget that was agreed to last August.

    - Finally in fiscal 2013 - the final budget of Obama's term - spending is scheduled to fall 1.3% to $3.58 trillion. Read the CBO's latest budget outlook.

    Why do people think Obama has spent like a drunken sailor? It's in part because of a fundamental misunderstanding of the federal budget. What people forget (or never knew) is that the first year of every presidential term starts with a budget approved by the previous administration and Congress. The president only begins to shape the budget in his second year.

     


     

    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/obama-spending-binge-never-happened-2012-05-22?pagenumber=1

     

     




     

    Crickets....

     



    first year of every presidential term starts with a budget approved by the previous administration and Congress

     

    Ask you again as you seem to avoid this crucial FACT, Who had super majorities from Jan 2007?

     




     

    The supermajority claim is ridiculous.  If you count all Dems and independents who caucus with Dems it should have added up to 60 votes.  The reality was...

    1) You have to count Lieberman in this talley - a man who campaigned for the Republican Presidential nominee.

    2) You have to count Al Franken in this talley - a man who was not sworn in until July, 2009 due to a contested election.

    3) You have to count Robert Byrd in this talley - a man who lost half his votes to illness, and died in June, 2010 (seat vacant for remainder of session)

    4) You have to count Ted Kennedy in this talley - a many who was also often too sick to vote, and who died in August, 2009.  His seat was won by a Republican.

    So the supermajority actually lasted one month - from July, 2009 to August 2009, and then again from September, 2009 - January 2010 (when Brown won the special election). The reality of getting all 60 votes on an issue never materialized.  Not a single bill was passed with only "supermajority" votes.  Go back and check - every piece of legislation passed in Obama's first two years had at least one Republican casting an aye.

     

     



    Correct.  Good points.  What I`m saying and have been saying all along is, W was a lousy president, a spender.  You would be hard-pressed to find one conservative here at BDC that would disagree.  We can admit that W was a problem.  BUT, (and as Pee-Wee Herman always said, "everyone has a big BUT"), after 4 years of Obama`s incompetence, he owns this mess.  It is no longer "Bush`s fault".  The fiscal budget handed over was handed over by a Rep president and a Dem congress. The first 2 years of Obama`s tenure he owned all 3 branches and his big accomplishment was a $1.8 Trillion HC debacle.  It`s time to "man up" and take responsibility.

     

    We should all try and learn these simple words.........."Obama`s fault". 

     




     

    I disagree - we'll never know exactly what Obama wanted, because he has always been dealing within the confines of political reality.  Having a majority in the Senate used to mean something, but it doesn't anymore.  Republicans will fillibuster anything - they are fillibustering a member of their own party for Sec of Defense, during a time of war.  They fillibustered bills with overwhelming bi-partisan support in the House.

    Obama's doing his best, but he doesn't own anything.  Bush got exactly what he asked for with Iraq, the Patriot act, no child left behind, Homeland Security, Bush Tax Cuts, Medicare Part D, Partial Birth Abortion, Trade agreements in South American and Asia, even TARP.

    The only thing Obama really owns is foreign policy.  If that's not OK with you, you guys have to start getting out of the way.  If he's as much a mess as you say he is, his policies will hurt the country, the American people will see it, and give the Republicans a second look.  As it stands now, it just looks like the GOP is playing keep-away with the constitution, and it may have sold some people in 2010, but everybody seems to be sick of the game by now.

     

     



    "If he's as much a mess as you say he is, his policies will hurt the country"

     

    Gas up 100%

    Unemployment up to 14.4% (real numbers)

    Food stamps up tp 57 million

    Government assistance up to 101 million

    HC costs up 25%

    Houses worth nothing

    N Korea with nukes and Iran seconds away

     

    Could his "policies" hurt the country any freakin more?  Geeeeeesh.

    Just admit it.



    Let's take your arguments one at a time, and see who admits what.

    Gas prices up 100% - you can point to two prices on a timeline that support this idea, but you know in your heart it's BS.  Average gas prices of Bush's 2nd term = $2.98.  Average gas price of Obama's first term = $3.04.

    That's really all you should need to know to admit you're twisting the truth to support your ideology.  If we're agreed, we can move on to your next fiction.

     

     

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from tacobreath. Show tacobreath's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    In response to slomag's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to slomag's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to slomag's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to airborne-rgr's comment:

     

    In response to airborne-rgr's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

     

    "....keep the focus on the facts..."

     

    Didn`t you post this?    Good, here`s the facts: (again)

    Jan 20, 2009            debt $9.7 trillion

    Jan 20, 2013            debt $16.8 trillion

     

    FACTS!

     

     

     




     

    Ummm, here's some facts from WSJ that you refuse to acknowledge.

     

    - In the 2009 fiscal year - the last of George W. Bush's presidency - federal spending rose by 17.9% from $2.98 trillion to $3.52 trillion. Check the official numbers at the Office of Management and Budget.

    - In fiscal 2010 - the first budget under Obama - spending fell 1.8% to $3.46 trillion.

    - In fiscal 2011, spending rose 4.3% to $3.60 trillion.

    - In fiscal 2012, spending is set to rise 0.7% to $3.63 trillion, according to the Congressional Budget Office's estimate of the budget that was agreed to last August.

    - Finally in fiscal 2013 - the final budget of Obama's term - spending is scheduled to fall 1.3% to $3.58 trillion. Read the CBO's latest budget outlook.

    Why do people think Obama has spent like a drunken sailor? It's in part because of a fundamental misunderstanding of the federal budget. What people forget (or never knew) is that the first year of every presidential term starts with a budget approved by the previous administration and Congress. The president only begins to shape the budget in his second year.

     


     

    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/obama-spending-binge-never-happened-2012-05-22?pagenumber=1

     

     




     

    Crickets....

     



    first year of every presidential term starts with a budget approved by the previous administration and Congress

     

    Ask you again as you seem to avoid this crucial FACT, Who had super majorities from Jan 2007?

     




     

    The supermajority claim is ridiculous.  If you count all Dems and independents who caucus with Dems it should have added up to 60 votes.  The reality was...

    1) You have to count Lieberman in this talley - a man who campaigned for the Republican Presidential nominee.

    2) You have to count Al Franken in this talley - a man who was not sworn in until July, 2009 due to a contested election.

    3) You have to count Robert Byrd in this talley - a man who lost half his votes to illness, and died in June, 2010 (seat vacant for remainder of session)

    4) You have to count Ted Kennedy in this talley - a many who was also often too sick to vote, and who died in August, 2009.  His seat was won by a Republican.

    So the supermajority actually lasted one month - from July, 2009 to August 2009, and then again from September, 2009 - January 2010 (when Brown won the special election). The reality of getting all 60 votes on an issue never materialized.  Not a single bill was passed with only "supermajority" votes.  Go back and check - every piece of legislation passed in Obama's first two years had at least one Republican casting an aye.

     

     



    Correct.  Good points.  What I`m saying and have been saying all along is, W was a lousy president, a spender.  You would be hard-pressed to find one conservative here at BDC that would disagree.  We can admit that W was a problem.  BUT, (and as Pee-Wee Herman always said, "everyone has a big BUT"), after 4 years of Obama`s incompetence, he owns this mess.  It is no longer "Bush`s fault".  The fiscal budget handed over was handed over by a Rep president and a Dem congress. The first 2 years of Obama`s tenure he owned all 3 branches and his big accomplishment was a $1.8 Trillion HC debacle.  It`s time to "man up" and take responsibility.

     

    We should all try and learn these simple words.........."Obama`s fault". 

     




     

    I disagree - we'll never know exactly what Obama wanted, because he has always been dealing within the confines of political reality.  Having a majority in the Senate used to mean something, but it doesn't anymore.  Republicans will fillibuster anything - they are fillibustering a member of their own party for Sec of Defense, during a time of war.  They fillibustered bills with overwhelming bi-partisan support in the House.

    Obama's doing his best, but he doesn't own anything.  Bush got exactly what he asked for with Iraq, the Patriot act, no child left behind, Homeland Security, Bush Tax Cuts, Medicare Part D, Partial Birth Abortion, Trade agreements in South American and Asia, even TARP.

    The only thing Obama really owns is foreign policy.  If that's not OK with you, you guys have to start getting out of the way.  If he's as much a mess as you say he is, his policies will hurt the country, the American people will see it, and give the Republicans a second look.  As it stands now, it just looks like the GOP is playing keep-away with the constitution, and it may have sold some people in 2010, but everybody seems to be sick of the game by now.

     

     



    "If he's as much a mess as you say he is, his policies will hurt the country"

     

    Gas up 100%

    Unemployment up to 14.4% (real numbers)

    Food stamps up tp 57 million

    Government assistance up to 101 million

    HC costs up 25%

    Houses worth nothing

    N Korea with nukes and Iran seconds away

     

    Could his "policies" hurt the country any freakin more?  Geeeeeesh.

    Just admit it.

     



     

    Let's take your arguments one at a time, and see who admits what.

    Gas prices up 100% - you can point to two prices on a timeline that support this idea, but you know in your heart it's BS.  Average gas prices of Bush's 2nd term = $2.98.  Average gas price of Obama's first term = $3.04.

    That's really all you should need to know to admit you're twisting the truth to support your ideology.  If we're agreed, we can move on to your next fiction.

     

     

    (QUOTE) 



    3.79 TODAY!   Stop lying!  You`re not a liar, you`re a good person.......geeeesh!

     

    Jan 20th, 2009 (Obama Inaugaration) gas=$1.82.   Stop!

    Everything is worse!   Are you living in the real world?

     If you think ANYTHING I`ve posted is "fiction", then we`re not "moving on" to anything because you`re delusional.  I`m very close to a senator from a NE state.  His exact words......"if anyone you`re discussing politics with suggests that anything is better since Obama took office, walk away, they`re being dishonest"

    In Obama`s defense, the DOW is back to where it was for some of W`s tenure.  Housing isn`t as awful as it was.  It`s bouncing along the bottom with no where to go but up.  Everything else is worse.  Obama had majorities for his 1st 2 years.  He chose to focus on Obamacare insted of the economy.  

    Obama`s fault.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: The GOP Problem...in a Nutshell ( literally and figuratively)

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

    In response to slomag's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to slomag's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to slomag's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to airborne-rgr's comment:

     

    In response to airborne-rgr's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

     

    "....keep the focus on the facts..."

     

    Didn`t you post this?    Good, here`s the facts: (again)

    Jan 20, 2009            debt $9.7 trillion

    Jan 20, 2013            debt $16.8 trillion

     

    FACTS!

     

     

     




     

    Ummm, here's some facts from WSJ that you refuse to acknowledge.

     

    - In the 2009 fiscal year - the last of George W. Bush's presidency - federal spending rose by 17.9% from $2.98 trillion to $3.52 trillion. Check the official numbers at the Office of Management and Budget.

    - In fiscal 2010 - the first budget under Obama - spending fell 1.8% to $3.46 trillion.

    - In fiscal 2011, spending rose 4.3% to $3.60 trillion.

    - In fiscal 2012, spending is set to rise 0.7% to $3.63 trillion, according to the Congressional Budget Office's estimate of the budget that was agreed to last August.

    - Finally in fiscal 2013 - the final budget of Obama's term - spending is scheduled to fall 1.3% to $3.58 trillion. Read the CBO's latest budget outlook.

    Why do people think Obama has spent like a drunken sailor? It's in part because of a fundamental misunderstanding of the federal budget. What people forget (or never knew) is that the first year of every presidential term starts with a budget approved by the previous administration and Congress. The president only begins to shape the budget in his second year.

     


     

    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/obama-spending-binge-never-happened-2012-05-22?pagenumber=1

     

     




     

    Crickets....

     



    first year of every presidential term starts with a budget approved by the previous administration and Congress

     

    Ask you again as you seem to avoid this crucial FACT, Who had super majorities from Jan 2007?

     




     

    The supermajority claim is ridiculous.  If you count all Dems and independents who caucus with Dems it should have added up to 60 votes.  The reality was...

    1) You have to count Lieberman in this talley - a man who campaigned for the Republican Presidential nominee.

    2) You have to count Al Franken in this talley - a man who was not sworn in until July, 2009 due to a contested election.

    3) You have to count Robert Byrd in this talley - a man who lost half his votes to illness, and died in June, 2010 (seat vacant for remainder of session)

    4) You have to count Ted Kennedy in this talley - a many who was also often too sick to vote, and who died in August, 2009.  His seat was won by a Republican.

    So the supermajority actually lasted one month - from July, 2009 to August 2009, and then again from September, 2009 - January 2010 (when Brown won the special election). The reality of getting all 60 votes on an issue never materialized.  Not a single bill was passed with only "supermajority" votes.  Go back and check - every piece of legislation passed in Obama's first two years had at least one Republican casting an aye.

     

     



    Correct.  Good points.  What I`m saying and have been saying all along is, W was a lousy president, a spender.  You would be hard-pressed to find one conservative here at BDC that would disagree.  We can admit that W was a problem.  BUT, (and as Pee-Wee Herman always said, "everyone has a big BUT"), after 4 years of Obama`s incompetence, he owns this mess.  It is no longer "Bush`s fault".  The fiscal budget handed over was handed over by a Rep president and a Dem congress. The first 2 years of Obama`s tenure he owned all 3 branches and his big accomplishment was a $1.8 Trillion HC debacle.  It`s time to "man up" and take responsibility.

     

    We should all try and learn these simple words.........."Obama`s fault". 

     




     

    I disagree - we'll never know exactly what Obama wanted, because he has always been dealing within the confines of political reality.  Having a majority in the Senate used to mean something, but it doesn't anymore.  Republicans will fillibuster anything - they are fillibustering a member of their own party for Sec of Defense, during a time of war.  They fillibustered bills with overwhelming bi-partisan support in the House.

    Obama's doing his best, but he doesn't own anything.  Bush got exactly what he asked for with Iraq, the Patriot act, no child left behind, Homeland Security, Bush Tax Cuts, Medicare Part D, Partial Birth Abortion, Trade agreements in South American and Asia, even TARP.

    The only thing Obama really owns is foreign policy.  If that's not OK with you, you guys have to start getting out of the way.  If he's as much a mess as you say he is, his policies will hurt the country, the American people will see it, and give the Republicans a second look.  As it stands now, it just looks like the GOP is playing keep-away with the constitution, and it may have sold some people in 2010, but everybody seems to be sick of the game by now.

     

     



    "If he's as much a mess as you say he is, his policies will hurt the country"

     

    Gas up 100%

    Unemployment up to 14.4% (real numbers)

    Food stamps up tp 57 million

    Government assistance up to 101 million

    HC costs up 25%

    Houses worth nothing

    N Korea with nukes and Iran seconds away

     

    Could his "policies" hurt the country any freakin more?  Geeeeeesh.

    Just admit it.

     



     

    Let's take your arguments one at a time, and see who admits what.

    Gas prices up 100% - you can point to two prices on a timeline that support this idea, but you know in your heart it's BS.  Average gas prices of Bush's 2nd term = $2.98.  Average gas price of Obama's first term = $3.04.

    That's really all you should need to know to admit you're twisting the truth to support your ideology.  If we're agreed, we can move on to your next fiction.

     

     

    (QUOTE) 



    3.79 TODAY!   Stop lying!  You`re not a liar, you`re a good person.......geeeesh!

     

    Jan 20th, 2009 (Obama Inaugaration) gas=$1.82.   Stop!

    Everything is worse!   Are you living in the real world?

     If you think ANYTHING I`ve posted is "fiction", then we`re not "moving on" to anything because you`re delusional.  I`m very close to a senator from a NE state.  His exact words......"if anyone you`re discussing politics with suggests that anything is better since Obama took office, walk away, they`re being dishonest"

    In Obama`s defense, the DOW is back to where it was for some of W`s tenure.  Housing isn`t as awful as it was.  It`s bouncing along the bottom with no where to go but up.  Everything else is worse.  Obama had majorities for his 1st 2 years.  He chose to focus on Obamacare insted of the economy.  

    Obama`s fault.



    Let's stick with gas for now...

    mmm

    Is January 2009 the only date you are willing to use?  Is that honesty?  The DOW closed at 8212.49 on January 15, 2009.  Why do you say that gas prices doubled under Obama, but the DOW is "back to where it was for some of W's tenure"?  An honest person would see the two are directly related - how do you justify having it both ways?

     

     

Share