Actually you are wrong. The defecit pretty much matches what obama was left with when he was elected.

Why didn’t you care about defecits when Bush turned a surplus into a defecit with tax breaks to the rich and two wars paid for supplementally?

Actually you are wrong. The defecit pretty much matches what obama was left with when he was elected.

Why didn’t you care about defecits when Bush turned a surplus into a defecit with tax breaks to the rich and two wars paid for supplementally?
Posted by Jack Schite 2010-02-01 10:09:48

Starting off the week with a couple of strong lies, Jack. You must have eaten your Wheaties this morning.

The deficit is three times higher than what Obama was left with. In his first year in office, Obama built a bigger deficit than Bush did in his first six years in office – and the last two years of Bush were with a Dem Congress.

Moreover, Bush’s worst year as a deficit spender was his last, and that was a result of the first Stimulus package and the auto bailouts – both programs that Obama was fully consulted on (Bush even brought him into the White House to discuss them) and which Obama fully supported.

Obama didn’t have to line up one massive spending increase after another. You can’t blame that on Bush.

And, as for the claim I didn’t care, you obviously have never heard of the Porkbuster movement. I was bloody screaming my head off about the Bush deficits. I was bloody infuriated about the ‘emergency spending bills’ and the fastest growth in domestic spending in history. I was irrate about the Medicade prescription drug benefit, and appalled when Bush partnered with Ted Kennedy over ‘No Child Left Behind’. You were just too busy yelling ‘No war for oil’ or some other nonsense to hear me, and besides which the DNC backed all of those things EXCEPT that they didn’t think that Bush was spending ENOUGH.

Nor for that matter is your memory very good as to what was posted on RightWingNews for the last eight years. The Right, including the administrator of this website, have been continually protesting deficit spending the whole time I’ve been here.

Line up over there Jack, the revolution is coming.

This is a fantasy budget, and essentially gives China a seat in the US Congress because close to 50% of it is going to be borrowed money.

It’s time for the government to admit the bailouts and stimulus have been costly failures, and cancel any remaining parts of them. The Federal payroll needs to shrink, entitlements need to be cut, and all earmarks immediately stopped.

Obama’s budget is a cop out and an embarassment, and will be rejected by the increasing number of Americans fed up with the rampant growth of government that want it to do less. From a President who just emphasized fiscal responsibility in his own SOTU, it’s a sorry joke.

Obama has quadrupled the deficit in one year after taking office. That takes some serious talent folks.

Only problem, Jack, is that the deficit was only a bit over $400 billion during Bush’s last year. Part of the reason it went up in 2009 was the TARP garbage, which both parties, including Obama, signed on to. The rest is all Obama and the Democrats.

And, let’s not forget that Democrats controlled Congress since 2007, effectively controlling the purse strings. You bought it, you own it, Jack! So, stop lying.

Nor for that matter is your memory very good as to what was posted on RightWingNews for the last eight years. The Right, including the administrator of this website, have been continually protesting deficit spending the whole time I’ve been here.

Line up over there Jack, the revolution is coming.

Posted by celebrim
2010-02-01 10:29:29

Sure, you have been protesting so much that you voted those big spenders out of office right? Oh wait, no you re-elected them for another term, sure you care, what bullshit.

Sure, you have been protesting so much that you voted those big spenders out of office right?Posted by whats_up 2010-02-01 11:34:00

Actually, that’s exactly what happened in the Democrat take-over of Congress, crthns.

But you already know that and are bitching just to be a bitch!

what bullshit.
Posted by whats_up
2010-02-01 11:34:00

Are we talking about David Duke voting for Bush again?

“Sure, you have been protesting so much that you voted those big spenders out of office right?”

Well, I tried.

The biggest problem in the Aughts, was that if you were a fiscal conservative, your choice was between someone like George W. Bush and someone that was complaining that GWB wasn’t spending enough.

I mean, it’s all well and good to say, “GWB was a prolifigate spender who should have never held office.”, because I agree.

The problem gets to be when I say to you, “Well, what’s my alternative?” Because, if your answer isn’t something like ‘Ron Paul’ or ‘the Constitution Party’, then you really aren’t producing an alternative. GWB was criticized from the Left for spending too much, but mostly that was an anti-war complaint. GWB’s far and away largest spending increases can on domestic government spending, and the Left criticized him primarily for not spending enough. The DNC’s consistant platform on GOP spending for the last 20 years has been that the GOP doesn’t spend enough on big entitlement programs to ‘help’ the poor/children/working man/middle class. Every program GWB backed, the Democrats opposed because they said it didn’t go far enough. Moreover, when GWB in 2005 tried to institute Mortagage reform to reduce the size of the coming real estate/banking melt down, it was the DNC that blocked his attempts at reform on the grounds that the risk was worth it compared to the amount of good that would be done spending money we didn’t have. By 2007, Bush was basically a lame duck fighting a Congress controlled by the Dems.

So, yeah, GWB was a terrible choice. But by every objective standard, when it came to fiscal restraint his competitors were far worse. Kerry? One of the worst spenders in Congress. Edwards? Proposed spending increases that dwarf even what Obama is doing. Gore? Called for the same spending increases the DNC would support all during the Bush years.

I haven’t had the luxury of voting between ‘good’ and ‘bad’. I’ve had to pick between ‘bad’ and ‘worse’. Gore, Kerry, and Edwards have been trainwrecks since losing their elections that only justify that as bad as GWB was, they would have been far worse. This single handedly explains why the approval ratings of Obama and the DNC have dropped faster in the past year than Nixon’s did in the wake of the Watergate scandal. People voted Obama to give the other side a try, figuring, ‘What the heck, how could it be worse than what we’ve already had?’ Well, after spending more money in one year than Bush spent in six, and doing more to destroy the future of the Republic, sadly we now all can see just exactly what could manage to be worse than Bush. We’ve gone from going bankrupt by 2040, to going bankrupt THIS DECADE. We stand now on the brink not of a recession, as we did in 2008, but on the brink of an economic holocaust that would make the Great Depression of the 1930′s seem like a small matter. The US dollar is now on the brink of a third world style collapse, and Obama has now released a budget for the next year that involves more than 50% borrowed money.

You think I’m kidding about a revolution? We’ll be lucky now to get out of this without a civil war. I’ve gone well past the point where I think its funny to laugh at Obama. This is a national disaster. This is a tragedy. I had hoped for his success; I lacked the imagination to concieve just how inept he actually is. It’s staggering failure worthy of a Shakespearean play, save that McBeth and Richard III were at least compotent villains. Obama is proving to be the ultimate empty suit, lacking even the intelligence and Charisma I had hoped and believed he had.

You think I’m kidding about a revolution? We’ll be lucky now to get out of this without a civil war.

As I see it, we only have a very slim chance to avoid a collapse similar to what took place in Zimbabwe: monetary collapse, then hyper-inflation, followed by riots and civil war. Republicans would have to take the overwhelming majority of seats in the House, with Conservatives taking a plurality of them, and Conservatives would have to take most of the seats up for grabs in the Senate. On top of that, we’d have to elect a fiscal conservative President next year, while retaining (or increasing) the hold on both Houses of Congress. Did I say it was slim? I meant slim-to-none. So I’ve been building up my supplies of preserved food and ammo, just in case.

OBAMA: LYING UPDATE

After a year of broken promises he gets a “pass” on we now have the brazen lie about his new budget. Mainly, its always about how its never the fault of his administration or his socialist political party that controls the money…pleeeease.
Since the Obama new budget puts US 1.6 trillion in debt he is blaming Bush…Obama voted for ALL spending bills since 2005…Obama’s socialist party has run congress since Jan. 2007…3 complete years (not one)!
Just keep lying…12% raise in HIS budget HE signed last December was not mentioned either. Gee, I wonder why?
Okay boss, give me a 12% raise then freeze 12% of my salary. Sweet deal if you can get away with it like Obama does.
The bottom line is 4x the debt and 2x the jobless in a year. DO THE MATH.
Did I mention this budget drops the Bush tax cuts (aka raises taxes)?
The next phase of crybaby J. Carter Obama is alarm at HIS debt then lay a ton of taxes down on US.
This will prolong HIS recession. Like he cares.
http://conservablogs.com/theconservativecrawfish

Did I mention this budget drops the Bush tax cuts (aka raises taxes)?

Only consevatives would fall for the line that you can get out of debt by bringing in LESS money, unreal.

Only consevatives would fall for the line that you can get out of debt by bringing in LESS money, unreal.
Posted by whats_up 2010-02-01 16:56:36

Except every time we have lowered taxes since Kennedy did it, revenues to the Treasury have INCREASED.

Oops, another lie from crthns.

So, you are admitting, whats_up, that Obama lied when he said that 95% of Americans would not see their taxes go up? He said, at at least one point, that he would keep those cuts for people making under $250K a year. Sounds like a lie to me!

Perhaps the federal government could reduce their expenditures, just like real people do.

One thing I noticed is that you lefties whined quite a bit about those tax cuts, but, you didn’t refuse to take them yourselves. Why is that? You could have rejected the extra money, that you earned, and sent it to the IRS. Are you OK with sending hundreds, to thousands, of extra dollars, that you earn, to the IRS? Why don’t you start a movement among progressives to send all that money to the IRS?

Only consevatives would fall for the line that you can get out of debt by bringing in LESS money, unreal.

It’s economics, something else you Libs obviously don’t understand.

http://www.investopedia.com/articles/08/laffer-curve.asp

“Only consevatives would fall for the line that you can get out of debt by bringing in LESS money, unreal.”

Which is greater, 20% of 100 or 25% of 75?

You liberals always want to take a bigger slice of a smaller pie when any schoolchild could tell you taking a smaller slice of a bigger pie is a better deal for everybody involved.

Only consevatives would fall for the line that you can get out of debt by bringing in LESS money, unreal.

Posted by whats_up
2010-02-01 16:56:36

Only a dumbass like you fails to notice the record tax revenues under Bush.

Since being gay doesn’t make you stupid whats_up, were you just born a moron?

One thing I noticed is that you lefties whined quite a bit about those tax cuts, but, you didn’t refuse to take them yourselves. Why is that? You could have rejected the extra money, that you earned, and sent it to the IRS.

We’ve been telling that to whats_up (crthns) for years. People like him love tax cuts providing its for them but not for other people. Anybody who makes that excuse is saying that they’re incapable of accepting a tax hike without a government order. Talk about passing the buck.