- Joined
- Mar 2, 2013
- Messages
- 24,826
- Reaction score
- 8,345
- Location
- Northern New Jersey
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
This is the reactionary fiction that the GOP peddles. Democrats/liberals/progressives want to use gubmint to solve problems, like ending the Great Depression, winning the Second World War, and doing something about the unjust and dysfunctional consequences of the enslavement and persecution of millions of African-Americans. We don't want gubmint to be any larger than it needs to be, we don't want to spend money unwisely, and, as I've repeatedly noted in this community, we eliminate deficits and the resulting debt created by so-called conservatives, not the other way around.
You're going to have to back that up with something, anything. Otherwise, it's just ignorant.I'd say it was founded out of ignorance and bigotry.
Which goes to show that he never has been serious over reducing the deficit.
Do you realize that the money given to GM was a loan? That TARP was a loan.
you guys are all about limited government and personal liberty
Again, Congress cut his requests by one percent, while he spent five percent less than was authorized. I can't account for what that "shows" you.
>>Now as I recall the GOP took Congress in Jan 2015 and their first budget was 2016.
Republicans have held a majority in the House since 2011.
>>When will you stop carrying water for Obama. He isn't worth it
I see the facts for what they are. Yer perception is grossly distorted.
They were of course recorded in the budget as expenditures and revenues. You've simply created another baseless talking point that has has no relation to reality.
>>He did things he had no business doing like bailing out state expense items like teachers
Yes, Democrats care about education and are willing to fund it.
>>He gave tax cuts with strings which was nothing more than another giveaway with no benefits.
More of the mindless blather you endlessly barf up.
>>He failed to create the shovel ready jobs projected
Five million jobs added through the ARRA, according to the CBO. Not projected, actual. You simply can't face facts.
>>you ignored that Obama increased military spending to fund the Afghanistan surge, recycled TARP, took over GM/Chrysler, Bailed out AIG
Nothing was "ignored." The spending levels I posted are easily confirmed. Who are you lying to, yerself, the community, or both?
>>According to people like you Obummer prevented a worldwide depression which is liberal talking points, how exactly did he do that and with what legislation?
I keep answering that over and over — all of it.
>>It was TARP that supposedly saved the banks
I've always credited Dubya for taking on that responsibility.
>>you buy the leftwing spin and rhetoric. The question is why?
The answer is very simple — you view it as spin and rhetoric, when it's simply the truth. Seems like you can't handle the truth.
Yes, we are. We just don't like some of the limitations the Right wants placed on it, like no effort to end the poverty that has resulted from centuries of racial and ethnic brutality and discrimination, no effort to invest in public sector education, research, and infrastructure, no effort to create an effective and efficient healthcare system available to all Americans, etc. And we oppose violations of personal liberty like unjust restrictions on reproductive freedom, a racially biased criminal justice system, and economic discrimination based on race, gender, and sexual orientation.
>>The tea Party was born out of opposition to too much spending and taxes. You're going to have to back that up with something, anything. Otherwise, it's just ignorant.
Oh, there's definitely ignorance involved:
View attachment 67196542
View attachment 67196543
View attachment 67196544
It's not difficult to find this information. I've discussed it repeatedly in this forum. You just don't like the facts:
- President Bush signed the massive spending bill under which the government was operating when Obama took office. That was Sept. 30, 2008. As The Associated Press noted, it combined "a record Pentagon budget with aid for automakers and natural disaster victims, and increased health care funding for veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan."
- Bush also signed, on Oct. 3, 2008, a bank bailout bill that authorized another $700 billion to avert a looming financial collapse (though not all of that would end up being spent in fiscal 2009, and Obama later signed a measure reducing total authorized bailout spending to $475 billion).
- On Jan. 7, 2009 — two weeks before Obama took office — the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office issued its regular budget outlook, stating: "CBO projects that the deficit this year will total $1.2 trillion."
- CBO attributed the rapid rise in spending to the bank bailout and the federal takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — plus rising costs for unemployment insurance and other factors driven by the collapsing economy (which shed 818,000 jobs in January alone).
- Another factor beyond Obama’s control was an automatic 5.8 percent cost of living increase announced in October 2008 and given to Social Security beneficiaries in January 2009. It was the largest since 1982. Social Security spending alone rose $66 billion in fiscal 2009, and Medicare spending, driven by rising medical costs, rose $39 billion.
But it’s also true that Obama signed a number of appropriations bills, plus other legislation and executive orders, that raised spending for the remainder of fiscal 2009 even above the path set by Bush. By our calculations, Obama can be fairly assigned responsibility for a maximum of $203 billion in additional spending for that year.
It can be argued that the total should be lower. Economist Daniel J. Mitchell of the libertarian CATO Institute — who once served on the Republican staff of the Senate Finance Committee — has put the figure at $140 billion. — "Obama’s Spending: 'Inferno' or Not?," FactCheck.org, Jun 4, 2012
>>what Obama did with his responsibility as President to reduce it?
Obummer cut $225 billion from TARP, as noted above, but more importantly he signed the ARRA, which helped lead us out of the morass the GOP placed us in by, as CBO calculates, adding five million jobs to the economy. Now if we can avoid sending more asses to Washington, …
This is the reactionary fiction that the GOP peddles. Democrats/liberals/progressives want to use gubmint to solve problems, like ending the Great Depression, winning the Second World War, and doing something about the unjust and dysfunctional consequences of the enslavement and persecution of millions of African-Americans. We don't want gubmint to be any larger than it needs to be, we don't want to spend money unwisely, and, as I've repeatedly noted in this community, we eliminate deficits and the resulting debt created by so-called conservatives, not the other way around.
View attachment 67196532
>>The tea Party was born out of opposition to too much spending and taxes.
I'd say it was founded out of ignorance and bigotry.
signs democrats used against Bush including comparing him to Hitler.
There are millions of people today who haven't felt the Obama recovery
It's a big country with a very large and complex economy. Which party wants to help those who are still hurting from the effects of the GOP SSE Great Recession?
And who is responsible for that debt? I'm working while I post, so I keep getting delayed and then timed out, causing images to be dumped by the server. Here's one I tried to post in 222:
View attachment 67196558
>>the largest items items that shouldn't even be on budget, SS and Medicare
They're public expenditures.
>>who signed the 2009 budget. I gave you the details, they are accurate but you don't want accuracy you want partisan bs.
I posted the facts. You posted drivel, just as Fenton has.
>>If you want to blame Bush for leaving Obama a 1.4 trillion dollar deficit you have to prove it by posting expenditures and revenues
The facts have been posted and are easily found/confirmed online. I can't help it if you simply refuse to accept them.
>>when you include TARP as an expense you have to show the revenue that paid back those loans and how they got applied to the deficit.
I've done that through links that go through the weedy details. You now have a new and equally irrelevant item to point to in yer ongoing confusion — the accounting process related to TARP expenditures. I expect you will return to it with some frequency.
>> I grew up a strong Democrat
In recent years, GOP policies have included:
I can only suggest that you consider returning to yer political roots.
- massive and completely unproductive tax cuts for wealthy households that led to very large revenue shortfalls and highly dysfunctional wealth inequality, a repeat of the Reagan folly
- an unnecessary and disastrous invasion of Iraq in 2003, one that greatly weakened our position in Afghanistan, and
- an irresponsible deregulation of the financial sector that led to the housing bubble and collapse, causing the Great Recession and its corrosive effects on our fiscal position
When you use debt as a percentage of GDP you ignore the amount and the cost of debt service on that debt.
snipped
What on earth is the point? You're exponentially better than I at explaining this stuff, but what is the point if you're just yelling it at a wall of talking points?
What on earth is the point?
post 205 is fact
It is with great sadness that I must report that Conservative Debt Concerns has been quite ill for most of the year and bedridden the last few months. A decision was made yesterday to pull the plug. I will update you as information comes in.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?