Did dot.com bust, 9/11,worst HURRICANE SEASONS happen and who's fault???

[KissMy]

GDP recovered big after the 2000 dot com bust. 3 very positive quarters of GDP growth after the dot com bust.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Okay, so if Bush was faced with repeated external, uncontrollable events causing losses of hundreds of billions in tax revenues,

why did he repeatedly cut taxes and exacerbate the revenue problem his administration already knew they had?

 

[NYcarbineer]

The bursting of the real estate bubble, the financial crisis, and the recession,

all leading into Obama's presidency,

were a far worse collection of disasters than what Bush faced.

Why hasn't the OP started 50 threads about that?

 

[healthmyths]

Now that was all Bush, all the time. The tax cuts never paid for themselves, nor were meant to. They were ideological rather than economic.

And Iraq was a clusterfuck by any definition. We were fed a steaming pile of bullshyte on Iraq, with the Bush administration trying to insinuate a connection between Iraq and 911. And straight up misrepresenting the 'WMD' claims.

It was a horrendously and pointless loss of lives, treasure and reputation. And will probably go down in history as one of the biggest blunders ever made by a US president.

No he didn't. He did try to draw parallels to what can happen, considering 9/11, the Cole bombing, the '93 tower attack, when rogue nations have a will to see harm come to the US. Something which the nation agreed with at the time, but due to politics of the worst kind, many soon forgot due to being fed lies, which they were successful with, to our nations detriment, at doing.

C'mon, guy.



The CIA has already acknowledged there's nothing indicating Iraq had anything to do with the 1993 bombing. Not training, not financing, nothing. But Cheney got to say "World Trade Center", "Attack", "Al-Qaida" and "Iraq" over and over on national television.

It stretches credulity to conclude that was all just a coincidence. Especially when Cheney has preceded these claims with this rhetorical gem:



911, Mohamed Atta, lead attacker, meeting with senior Iraqi intelligence......but we just don't know. And is not like Rumsfeld didn't join the bandwagon:



When there was zero evidence of any connection between Saddam and Al Qaeda. And the administration knew it. And its no coincidence that they just happened to cite '3000' deaths......the same number of deaths that were lost on 911. Citing the same organization that attacked us. And citing attacks on the United States.

The Bush administration was even lying to Congress:



Which is the *exact* claim they made against the Taliban in Afghanistan. Save in the case of Iraq, it was complete horseshyte.

And Bush is just the icing on the cake:



And again....

Evidence from intelligence sources, secret communications, and statements by people now in custody reveal that Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members
of al Qaeda. Secretly, and without fingerprints, he could provide one of his hidden weapons to terrorists, or help them develop their own.

President Bush, State of the Union 2003

Which was horseshyte. And in case there was any remaining doubts of the Bush administration repeated, obtuse, and intentional attempts to connect Iraq to Al Qaida to 911:

"The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September the 11, 2001 — and still goes on. . . . [T]he liberation of Iraq . . . removed an ally of al Qaeda.”

George Bush, May 2003

Its beyond obvious that the Bush administration was doing everything in their power to connect Iraq and 911 in the minds of the American people. Even while knowing that their claims were blithering nonsense.

Iraq lands fully on Bush. It was a colossal fuck up that he created from scratch. And he owns it.

And these 32 democrat quotes indicate even before GWB that Saddam was a threat!

"..deny Iraq the capacity to develop WMD".Bill Clinton,1998
"..most brutal dictators of Century", Biden,1998
"Iraq compliance with Resolution 687 becomes shell game"..Daschle 1998
"He will use those WMDs again,as he has ten times since 1983" ..Berger Clinton Ntl. Secur. Advr 1998
"posed by Iraq's refusal to end its WMD programs" Levin 1998
"Saddam has been engaged in development of WMDs which is a threat.."Pelosi 1998 WHERE'D SHE GET THIS INFORMATION BEFORE BUSH?
"Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building WMDS.."Albright 1999
"Saddam to refine delivery systems, that will threaten the US..."Graham 2001
"Saddam has ignored the mandate of the UN and is building WMDs and the means to deliver.." Levin 2002
"Iraq's search for WMDs ...will continue as long as Saddam's in power"..Gore 2002
"Saddam retains stockpiles of WMDS.."Byrd 2002
"..give President authority to use force..to disarm Saddam because an arsenal of WMDs..threat our security"..Kerry 2002
"..Unmistakable evidence Saddam developing nuclear weapons next 5 years.."Rockefeller 2002
"Violated over 11 years every UN resolution demanding disarming WMDs.."Waxman 2002
"He's given aid,comfort & sanctuary to al Qaeda members..and keep developing WMDs"..Hillary 2002
"Compelling evidence Saddam has WMDs production storage capacity.." Graham 2002
"Without a question, we need to disarm Saddam. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime .... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction .... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...."Kerry , Jan. 23. 2003.


"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." Ex-President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." Ex-President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998
"..most brutal dictators of Century", Biden,1998

 

[Freewill]

No he didn't. He did try to draw parallels to what can happen, considering 9/11, the Cole bombing, the '93 tower attack, when rogue nations have a will to see harm come to the US. Something which the nation agreed with at the time, but due to politics of the worst kind, many soon forgot due to being fed lies, which they were successful with, to our nations detriment, at doing.

C'mon, guy.



The CIA has already acknowledged there's nothing indicating Iraq had anything to do with the 1993 bombing. Not training, not financing, nothing. But Cheney got to say "World Trade Center", "Attack", "Al-Qaida" and "Iraq" over and over on national television.

It stretches credulity to conclude that was all just a coincidence. Especially when Cheney has preceded these claims with this rhetorical gem:



911, Mohamed Atta, lead attacker, meeting with senior Iraqi intelligence......but we just don't know. And is not like Rumsfeld didn't join the bandwagon:



When there was zero evidence of any connection between Saddam and Al Qaeda. And the administration knew it. And its no coincidence that they just happened to cite '3000' deaths......the same number of deaths that were lost on 911. Citing the same organization that attacked us. And citing attacks on the United States.

The Bush administration was even lying to Congress:



Which is the *exact* claim they made against the Taliban in Afghanistan. Save in the case of Iraq, it was complete horseshyte.

And Bush is just the icing on the cake:



And again....



Which was horseshyte. And in case there was any remaining doubts of the Bush administration repeated, obtuse, and intentional attempts to connect Iraq to Al Qaida to 911:

"The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September the 11, 2001 — and still goes on. . . . [T]he liberation of Iraq . . . removed an ally of al Qaeda.”

George Bush, May 2003

Its beyond obvious that the Bush administration was doing everything in their power to connect Iraq and 911 in the minds of the American people. Even while knowing that their claims were blithering nonsense.

Iraq lands fully on Bush. It was a colossal fuck up that he created from scratch. And he owns it.

And these 32 democrat quotes indicate even before GWB that Saddam was a threat!

"..deny Iraq the capacity to develop WMD".Bill Clinton,1998
"..most brutal dictators of Century", Biden,1998
"Iraq compliance with Resolution 687 becomes shell game"..Daschle 1998
"He will use those WMDs again,as he has ten times since 1983" ..Berger Clinton Ntl. Secur. Advr 1998
"posed by Iraq's refusal to end its WMD programs" Levin 1998
"Saddam has been engaged in development of WMDs which is a threat.."Pelosi 1998 WHERE'D SHE GET THIS INFORMATION BEFORE BUSH?
"Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building WMDS.."Albright 1999
"Saddam to refine delivery systems, that will threaten the US..."Graham 2001
"Saddam has ignored the mandate of the UN and is building WMDs and the means to deliver.." Levin 2002
"Iraq's search for WMDs ...will continue as long as Saddam's in power"..Gore 2002
"Saddam retains stockpiles of WMDS.."Byrd 2002
"..give President authority to use force..to disarm Saddam because an arsenal of WMDs..threat our security"..Kerry 2002
"..Unmistakable evidence Saddam developing nuclear weapons next 5 years.."Rockefeller 2002
"Violated over 11 years every UN resolution demanding disarming WMDs.."Waxman 2002
"He's given aid,comfort & sanctuary to al Qaeda members..and keep developing WMDs"..Hillary 2002
"Compelling evidence Saddam has WMDs production storage capacity.." Graham 2002
"Without a question, we need to disarm Saddam. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime .... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction .... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...."Kerry , Jan. 23. 2003.


"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." Ex-President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." Ex-President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998
"..most brutal dictators of Century", Biden,1998

Did not we just read that Obama's buddies in ISIS just captured 88 pounds of uranium? Yes, I remember reading about it but it must not be true, Saddam had no such thing, well according to you know who.

 

[healthmyths]

Okay, so if Bush was faced with repeated external, uncontrollable events causing losses of hundreds of billions in tax revenues,

why did he repeatedly cut taxes and exacerbate the revenue problem his administration already knew they had?

A) repeated uncontrolled events occurred AFTER the tax cuts were planned which were in response to the Recession that started when the GDP went down in
1999 4.8%
2000 4.1%
2001 1.0%

B) The recessions are solved by having MORE money for businesses to hire/expand production.
FACTS regarding revenue ... AFTER the tax cuts REVENUES Increased an average of 9.78% per year!!!
Government Revenue Details: Federal State Local for 2008 - Charts
Income difference % increase
taxes prior yr decrease
2000 $1,211
2001 $1,145 -$66 -5.47% 9/11 remember Wall street closed, no flights 3 days.. billions lost in property
2002 $1,006 -$139 -12.14% recovery
2003 $926 -$81 -8.04%
2004 $998 $73 7.87% tax cuts actually start here... and what was the increase in revenues???
2005 $1,206 $207 20.76% increase in revenues???
2006 $1,398 $192 15.95% increase in revenues???
2007 $1,534 $136 9.72% increase in revenues???
2008 $1,450 -$84 -5.45% economic collapse $500 billion pulled 9/18/08 in 2 hours..

NOTE revenues went up even after Recession/9/11 worst weather!!!

OH and today I showed how the Bush Bailout HAS actually created a profit for the government!
The State of the Bailout Bailout Scorecard | Eye on the Bailout | ProPublica
The Bush Bailout originally $700B the actual amount went out: $611 billion!

OUTFLOWS: $611B This includes money that has actually been spent, invested, or loaned.
40.1% or $245B of total went to Banks and other Financial Institutions
30.7% or $187B went to Fannie and Freddie
13.0% or $79.7B went to Auto Companies
11.1% or $67.8B went to AIG
5% or $31B went to Toxic Asset Purchases and Other

How much has been paid back:
INFLOWS: $653 billion Money returned and paid to Treasury as interest, dividends, fees or to repurchase their stock warrants.
Refunded or didn't USE $388B
Revenues $265B
Profit $41.7B (6.8% of outflows)
Do you comprehend this??? The Bush Bailout that was for $611B BUT
paid back $653B a profit UNHEARD OF to the Government of $41.7B or 6.8%

Do you BUSH bashers comprehend this????
THE BIG BAD BUSH BANK BAILOUT was less then $611B and paid back $653B for a profit!!!

 

[BlindBoo]

C'mon, guy.



The CIA has already acknowledged there's nothing indicating Iraq had anything to do with the 1993 bombing. Not training, not financing, nothing. But Cheney got to say "World Trade Center", "Attack", "Al-Qaida" and "Iraq" over and over on national television.

It stretches credulity to conclude that was all just a coincidence. Especially when Cheney has preceded these claims with this rhetorical gem:



911, Mohamed Atta, lead attacker, meeting with senior Iraqi intelligence......but we just don't know. And is not like Rumsfeld didn't join the bandwagon:



When there was zero evidence of any connection between Saddam and Al Qaeda. And the administration knew it. And its no coincidence that they just happened to cite '3000' deaths......the same number of deaths that were lost on 911. Citing the same organization that attacked us. And citing attacks on the United States.

The Bush administration was even lying to Congress:



Which is the *exact* claim they made against the Taliban in Afghanistan. Save in the case of Iraq, it was complete horseshyte.

And Bush is just the icing on the cake:



And again....



Which was horseshyte. And in case there was any remaining doubts of the Bush administration repeated, obtuse, and intentional attempts to connect Iraq to Al Qaida to 911:



Its beyond obvious that the Bush administration was doing everything in their power to connect Iraq and 911 in the minds of the American people. Even while knowing that their claims were blithering nonsense.

Iraq lands fully on Bush. It was a colossal fuck up that he created from scratch. And he owns it.

And these 32 democrat quotes indicate even before GWB that Saddam was a threat!

"..deny Iraq the capacity to develop WMD".Bill Clinton,1998
"..most brutal dictators of Century", Biden,1998
"Iraq compliance with Resolution 687 becomes shell game"..Daschle 1998
"He will use those WMDs again,as he has ten times since 1983" ..Berger Clinton Ntl. Secur. Advr 1998
"posed by Iraq's refusal to end its WMD programs" Levin 1998
"Saddam has been engaged in development of WMDs which is a threat.."Pelosi 1998 WHERE'D SHE GET THIS INFORMATION BEFORE BUSH?
"Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building WMDS.."Albright 1999
"Saddam to refine delivery systems, that will threaten the US..."Graham 2001
"Saddam has ignored the mandate of the UN and is building WMDs and the means to deliver.." Levin 2002
"Iraq's search for WMDs ...will continue as long as Saddam's in power"..Gore 2002
"Saddam retains stockpiles of WMDS.."Byrd 2002
"..give President authority to use force..to disarm Saddam because an arsenal of WMDs..threat our security"..Kerry 2002
"..Unmistakable evidence Saddam developing nuclear weapons next 5 years.."Rockefeller 2002
"Violated over 11 years every UN resolution demanding disarming WMDs.."Waxman 2002
"He's given aid,comfort & sanctuary to al Qaeda members..and keep developing WMDs"..Hillary 2002
"Compelling evidence Saddam has WMDs production storage capacity.." Graham 2002
"Without a question, we need to disarm Saddam. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime .... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction .... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...."Kerry , Jan. 23. 2003.


"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." Ex-President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." Ex-President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998
"..most brutal dictators of Century", Biden,1998

Did not we just read that Obama's buddies in ISIS just captured 88 pounds of uranium? Yes, I remember reading about it but it must not be true, Saddam had no such thing, well according to you know who.

Deplete Uranium can be found all over Iraq.

UPDATE 4-Seized nuclear material in Iraq low grade - UN agency | Reuters

 

[TooTall]

Recessions for your pea brain aren't like a water faucet.

Except of course, the Dec 2007 Bush Depression which the Right says happened the instant the Dems took office in 2007 without passing a single bill. The 2007 Bush Depression was the Dem Congress' fault not Bush's, but the 2001 Bush Recession was Clinton's fault NOT the GOP Congress' fault.

The GDP growth rate in 2007 was 4.42%. I have not heard that the recession started 'the instant the Dems took office." Perhaps you have a quote. The Democrats did start passing bills in 2007 and look what happened in 2008.

US GDP Growth Rate Per Year. Annual percentage
Dec 31, 2008 -0.98%
Dec 31, 2007 4.42%
Dec 31, 2006 5.12%
Dec 31, 2005 6.52%
Dec 31, 2004 6.31%
Dec 31, 2003 6.42%
Dec 31, 2002 3.77%
Dec 31, 2001 2.17%

 

[NYcarbineer]

Okay, so if Bush was faced with repeated external, uncontrollable events causing losses of hundreds of billions in tax revenues,

why did he repeatedly cut taxes and exacerbate the revenue problem his administration already knew they had?

A) repeated uncontrolled events occurred AFTER the tax cuts were planned which were in response to the Recession that started when the GDP went down in
1999 4.8%
2000 4.1%
2001 1.0%

B) The recessions are solved by having MORE money for businesses to hire/expand production.
FACTS regarding revenue ... AFTER the tax cuts REVENUES Increased an average of 9.78% per year!!!
Government Revenue Details: Federal State Local for 2008 - Charts
Income difference % increase
taxes prior yr decrease
2000 $1,211
2001 $1,145 -$66 -5.47% 9/11 remember Wall street closed, no flights 3 days.. billions lost in property
2002 $1,006 -$139 -12.14% recovery
2003 $926 -$81 -8.04%
2004 $998 $73 7.87% tax cuts actually start here... and what was the increase in revenues???
2005 $1,206 $207 20.76% increase in revenues???
2006 $1,398 $192 15.95% increase in revenues???
2007 $1,534 $136 9.72% increase in revenues???
2008 $1,450 -$84 -5.45% economic collapse $500 billion pulled 9/18/08 in 2 hours..

NOTE revenues went up even after Recession/9/11 worst weather!!!

OH and today I showed how the Bush Bailout HAS actually created a profit for the government!
The State of the Bailout Bailout Scorecard | Eye on the Bailout | ProPublica
The Bush Bailout originally $700B the actual amount went out: $611 billion!

OUTFLOWS: $611B This includes money that has actually been spent, invested, or loaned.
40.1% or $245B of total went to Banks and other Financial Institutions
30.7% or $187B went to Fannie and Freddie
13.0% or $79.7B went to Auto Companies
11.1% or $67.8B went to AIG
5% or $31B went to Toxic Asset Purchases and Other

How much has been paid back:
INFLOWS: $653 billion Money returned and paid to Treasury as interest, dividends, fees or to repurchase their stock warrants.
Refunded or didn't USE $388B
Revenues $265B
Profit $41.7B (6.8% of outflows)
Do you comprehend this??? The Bush Bailout that was for $611B BUT
paid back $653B a profit UNHEARD OF to the Government of $41.7B or 6.8%

Do you BUSH bashers comprehend this????
THE BIG BAD BUSH BANK BAILOUT was less then $611B and paid back $653B for a profit!!!

Revenues fell (year to year) in FY's 2001, 2002, 2003, 2008, and 2009.

 

[healthmyths]

Okay, so if Bush was faced with repeated external, uncontrollable events causing losses of hundreds of billions in tax revenues,

why did he repeatedly cut taxes and exacerbate the revenue problem his administration already knew they had?

A) repeated uncontrolled events occurred AFTER the tax cuts were planned which were in response to the Recession that started when the GDP went down in
1999 4.8%
2000 4.1%
2001 1.0%

B) The recessions are solved by having MORE money for businesses to hire/expand production.
FACTS regarding revenue ... AFTER the tax cuts REVENUES Increased an average of 9.78% per year!!!
Government Revenue Details: Federal State Local for 2008 - Charts
Income difference % increase
taxes prior yr decrease
2000 $1,211
2001 $1,145 -$66 -5.47% 9/11 remember Wall street closed, no flights 3 days.. billions lost in property
2002 $1,006 -$139 -12.14% recovery
2003 $926 -$81 -8.04%
2004 $998 $73 7.87% tax cuts actually start here... and what was the increase in revenues???
2005 $1,206 $207 20.76% increase in revenues???
2006 $1,398 $192 15.95% increase in revenues???
2007 $1,534 $136 9.72% increase in revenues???
2008 $1,450 -$84 -5.45% economic collapse $500 billion pulled 9/18/08 in 2 hours..

NOTE revenues went up even after Recession/9/11 worst weather!!!

OH and today I showed how the Bush Bailout HAS actually created a profit for the government!
The State of the Bailout Bailout Scorecard | Eye on the Bailout | ProPublica
The Bush Bailout originally $700B the actual amount went out: $611 billion!

OUTFLOWS: $611B This includes money that has actually been spent, invested, or loaned.
40.1% or $245B of total went to Banks and other Financial Institutions
30.7% or $187B went to Fannie and Freddie
13.0% or $79.7B went to Auto Companies
11.1% or $67.8B went to AIG
5% or $31B went to Toxic Asset Purchases and Other

How much has been paid back:
INFLOWS: $653 billion Money returned and paid to Treasury as interest, dividends, fees or to repurchase their stock warrants.
Refunded or didn't USE $388B
Revenues $265B
Profit $41.7B (6.8% of outflows)
Do you comprehend this??? The Bush Bailout that was for $611B BUT
paid back $653B a profit UNHEARD OF to the Government of $41.7B or 6.8%

Do you BUSH bashers comprehend this????
THE BIG BAD BUSH BANK BAILOUT was less then $611B and paid back $653B for a profit!!!

Revenues fell (year to year) in FY's 2001, 2002, 2003, 2008, and 2009.

And what happened in 2001 Recession, 2002 Dot.com/9/11 all created LOWER tax revenue duh!!!
2003 yea duh... tax revenues increased though AFTER the tax cuts went into affect!
2003, 2004,2005,2006,2007 UP! UP UP!
FACTS:
2000 $1,211 revenues...
2001 $1,145 -$66 -5.47% 9/11 remember Wall street closed, no flights 3 days.. billions lost in property
2002 $1,006 -$139 -12.14% recovery
2003 $926 -$81 -8.04%
2004 $998 $73 7.87% tax cuts actually start here... and what was the increase in revenues???
2005 $1,206 $207 20.76% increase in revenues???
2006 $1,398 $192 15.95% increase in revenues???
2007 $1,534 $136 9.72% increase in revenues???
2008 $1,450 -$84 -5.45% economic collapse $500 billion pulled 9/18/08 in 2 hours..
Government Revenue Details: Federal State Local for 2008 - Charts
FACTS hard to refute!

 

[NYcarbineer]

A) repeated uncontrolled events occurred AFTER the tax cuts were planned which were in response to the Recession that started when the GDP went down in
1999 4.8%
2000 4.1%
2001 1.0%

B) The recessions are solved by having MORE money for businesses to hire/expand production.
FACTS regarding revenue ... AFTER the tax cuts REVENUES Increased an average of 9.78% per year!!!
Government Revenue Details: Federal State Local for 2008 - Charts
Income difference % increase
taxes prior yr decrease
2000 $1,211
2001 $1,145 -$66 -5.47% 9/11 remember Wall street closed, no flights 3 days.. billions lost in property
2002 $1,006 -$139 -12.14% recovery
2003 $926 -$81 -8.04%
2004 $998 $73 7.87% tax cuts actually start here... and what was the increase in revenues???
2005 $1,206 $207 20.76% increase in revenues???
2006 $1,398 $192 15.95% increase in revenues???
2007 $1,534 $136 9.72% increase in revenues???
2008 $1,450 -$84 -5.45% economic collapse $500 billion pulled 9/18/08 in 2 hours..

NOTE revenues went up even after Recession/9/11 worst weather!!!

OH and today I showed how the Bush Bailout HAS actually created a profit for the government!
The State of the Bailout Bailout Scorecard | Eye on the Bailout | ProPublica
The Bush Bailout originally $700B the actual amount went out: $611 billion!

OUTFLOWS: $611B This includes money that has actually been spent, invested, or loaned.
40.1% or $245B of total went to Banks and other Financial Institutions
30.7% or $187B went to Fannie and Freddie
13.0% or $79.7B went to Auto Companies
11.1% or $67.8B went to AIG
5% or $31B went to Toxic Asset Purchases and Other

How much has been paid back:
INFLOWS: $653 billion Money returned and paid to Treasury as interest, dividends, fees or to repurchase their stock warrants.
Refunded or didn't USE $388B
Revenues $265B
Profit $41.7B (6.8% of outflows)
Do you comprehend this??? The Bush Bailout that was for $611B BUT
paid back $653B a profit UNHEARD OF to the Government of $41.7B or 6.8%

Do you BUSH bashers comprehend this????
THE BIG BAD BUSH BANK BAILOUT was less then $611B and paid back $653B for a profit!!!

Revenues fell (year to year) in FY's 2001, 2002, 2003, 2008, and 2009.

And what happened in 2001 Recession, 2002 Dot.com/9/11 all created LOWER tax revenue duh!!!
2003 yea duh... tax revenues increased though AFTER the tax cuts went into affect!
2003, 2004,2005,2006,2007 UP! UP UP!
FACTS:
2000 $1,211 revenues...
2001 $1,145 -$66 -5.47% 9/11 remember Wall street closed, no flights 3 days.. billions lost in property
2002 $1,006 -$139 -12.14% recovery
2003 $926 -$81 -8.04%
2004 $998 $73 7.87% tax cuts actually start here... and what was the increase in revenues???
2005 $1,206 $207 20.76% increase in revenues???
2006 $1,398 $192 15.95% increase in revenues???
2007 $1,534 $136 9.72% increase in revenues???
2008 $1,450 -$84 -5.45% economic collapse $500 billion pulled 9/18/08 in 2 hours..
Government Revenue Details: Federal State Local for 2008 - Charts
FACTS hard to refute!

Revenues barely increased, not enough to eliminate the deficit.

 

[NYcarbineer]

One billion dollars+ natural disasters:

Billion Dollar U.S. Weather Disasters, 1980?2013 | Infoplease.com

As you can see, the Obama presidency has been hammered as well, if not more, than Bush was.

 

[healthmyths]

One billion dollars+ natural disasters:

Billion Dollar U.S. Weather Disasters, 1980?2013 | Infoplease.com

As you can see, the Obama presidency has been hammered as well, if not more, than Bush was.

That is true. There have been let's see ONE!
Cost of Hurricane Sandy?
(The total was projected by Eqecat, a catastrophic risk management consulting firm, which indicated that the damage caused by the storm was between $30-$50 billion.)
How Much Will Hurricane Sandy Cost Insurance Companies?

Now Let's look at the top ten costliest catastrophes in US History!!
SOURCE: Kiplinger - Interstitial
10. Hurricane Rita 2005
8. Hurricane Ivan 2004
7. Hurricane Charley 2004
6. Hurricane Wilma 2005
5. Hurricane Ike 2008
3. 9/11 Terrorist attacks 2001
1. Hurricane Katrina 2005...
That combined COST nearly ) $1 trillion in written off losses due to the WORST Hurricane SEASONS in history![/U][/B]
The worst Katrina,made landfall in Louisiana as a Category 3 in 2005. It took 1,836 lives and caused $81.2 billion in damages.
Hurricane Katrina ALONE! Year 2005: Hurricanes Katrina and Rita
On August 25, 2005, Hurricane Katrina hit the Gulf Coast of the U.S. as a strong Category 3 or low Category 4 storm. It quickly became the biggest natural disaster in U.S. history, almost destroying New Orleans due to severe flooding.
Hurricane Rita quickly followed Katrina only to make matters worse. Between the two, more than $200 billion in damage was done. 400,000 jobs were lost and 275,000 homes were destroyed.
Many of the jobs and homes were never to be recovered. Hundreds of thousands of people were displaced and over 1,000's were killed and more are missing.
The effect on oil and gasoline prices was long-lasting.

YEA poor Obama has really faced a lot more then Bush!
Let's see Sandy damages $70 billion Sandy caused two deaths.

YUP poor Obama how can anyone compare his catastrophes say like what Bush faced!

6 of the worst hurricane catastrophes in history... 1,000s of deaths! Trillions of dollars in damages, 275,000 homes in Katrina alone destroyed!
Number 3 on the list of most catastrophic and far far WORSE THEN Pearl Harbor..
Counting the value of 3,000 lives lost as well as property damage and lost production of goods and services, losses already exceed $100 billion.
Including the loss in stock market wealth -- the market's own estimate arising from expectations of lower corporate profits and higher discount rates for economic volatility -- the price tag approaches $2 trillion.
The Cost of September 11

YEA POOR Obama!!!

 

[healthmyths]

Revenues fell (year to year) in FY's 2001, 2002, 2003, 2008, and 2009.

And what happened in 2001 Recession, 2002 Dot.com/9/11 all created LOWER tax revenue duh!!!
2003 yea duh... tax revenues increased though AFTER the tax cuts went into affect!
2003, 2004,2005,2006,2007 UP! UP UP!
FACTS:
2000 $1,211 revenues...
2001 $1,145 -$66 -5.47% 9/11 remember Wall street closed, no flights 3 days.. billions lost in property
2002 $1,006 -$139 -12.14% recovery
2003 $926 -$81 -8.04%
2004 $998 $73 7.87% tax cuts actually start here... and what was the increase in revenues???
2005 $1,206 $207 20.76% increase in revenues???
2006 $1,398 $192 15.95% increase in revenues???
2007 $1,534 $136 9.72% increase in revenues???
2008 $1,450 -$84 -5.45% economic collapse $500 billion pulled 9/18/08 in 2 hours..
Government Revenue Details: Federal State Local for 2008 - Charts
FACTS hard to refute!

Revenues barely increased, not enough to eliminate the deficit.

Oh man that's why you guys elected the Messiah!
See Obama like these women told us has a STASH! He can write a check from the White House!
I mean if Jesus could take 5 loaves and two fish feed 5,000 how much more powerful is Obama!
I mean Obama could eliminate the deficit right??

From his stash!
And I know from your comments YOU believe as these women do... Obama has a stash... just not spending it!!!
ROGULSKI: Why are you here?
WOMAN #1: To get some money.
ROGULSKI: What kind of money?
BWOMAN #1: Obama money.
ROGULSKI: Where's it coming from?
WOMAN #1: Obama.
ROROGULSKI: And where did Obama get it?
WOMAN #1: I don't know, his stash. I don't know. (laughter) I don't know where he got it from, but he givin' it to us,
WOMAN #2: And we love him.
WOMAN #1: We love him. That's why we voted for him!
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOZ-Etb0k0Q]Obama Money - Where Did it Come From? - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Kosh]

And the whole time you assholes were denying that that weather was unusual. So which is it, we are seeing very unusual weather since 2000, or there really isn't anything unusual happening? You can't have it both ways just because you want to defend the abysmal record of President Bush.

Not only is this a far left Obama drone but part of the AGW cult religion.

To bad your programming is still on a very slow and old hard drive..

Then again this is the same poster that cheers for the terrorists and supports Obama no matter how worse than Bush he is..

 

[Kosh]

One billion dollars+ natural disasters:

Billion Dollar U.S. Weather Disasters, 1980?2013 | Infoplease.com

As you can see, the Obama presidency has been hammered as well, if not more, than Bush was.

That is true. There have been let's see ONE!
Cost of Hurricane Sandy?
(The total was projected by Eqecat, a catastrophic risk management consulting firm, which indicated that the damage caused by the storm was between $30-$50 billion.)
How Much Will Hurricane Sandy Cost Insurance Companies?

Now Let's look at the top ten costliest catastrophes in US History!!
SOURCE: Kiplinger - Interstitial
10. Hurricane Rita 2005
8. Hurricane Ivan 2004
7. Hurricane Charley 2004
6. Hurricane Wilma 2005
5. Hurricane Ike 2008
3. 9/11 Terrorist attacks 2001
1. Hurricane Katrina 2005...
That combined COST nearly ) $1 trillion in written off losses due to the WORST Hurricane SEASONS in history![/U][/B]
The worst Katrina,made landfall in Louisiana as a Category 3 in 2005. It took 1,836 lives and caused $81.2 billion in damages.
Hurricane Katrina ALONE! Year 2005: Hurricanes Katrina and Rita
On August 25, 2005, Hurricane Katrina hit the Gulf Coast of the U.S. as a strong Category 3 or low Category 4 storm. It quickly became the biggest natural disaster in U.S. history, almost destroying New Orleans due to severe flooding.
Hurricane Rita quickly followed Katrina only to make matters worse. Between the two, more than $200 billion in damage was done. 400,000 jobs were lost and 275,000 homes were destroyed.
Many of the jobs and homes were never to be recovered. Hundreds of thousands of people were displaced and over 1,000's were killed and more are missing.
The effect on oil and gasoline prices was long-lasting.

YEA poor Obama has really faced a lot more then Bush!
Let's see Sandy damages $70 billion Sandy caused two deaths.

YUP poor Obama how can anyone compare his catastrophes say like what Bush faced!

6 of the worst hurricane catastrophes in history... 1,000s of deaths! Trillions of dollars in damages, 275,000 homes in Katrina alone destroyed!
Number 3 on the list of most catastrophic and far far WORSE THEN Pearl Harbor..
Counting the value of 3,000 lives lost as well as property damage and lost production of goods and services, losses already exceed $100 billion.
Including the loss in stock market wealth -- the market's own estimate arising from expectations of lower corporate profits and higher discount rates for economic volatility -- the price tag approaches $2 trillion.
The Cost of September 11

YEA POOR Obama!!!

What made Katrina so bad was the worst hit area was under (D) control and they dropped the ball on so many levels in that state.

Had the (D)'s in that state done their jobs properly things would have been a lot different..

Yet the far left here will give those criminals a pass so they can blame: Boooooosssshhh!

 

[KissMy]

Commodity price inflation from increasing deficit spending far outpaced any GDP increase. GDP only grew in terms of dollars, not product. Stagnant pay, massive job loss & soaring price, exploding size of government is what Bush created.

Bush cost us 18 million jobs, tripled prices, stagnate wages unless you were a government employee, their wages soared. Standard of living declined due to high prices, deregulation theft of savings investment, outsourcing, immigration & stagnant wages.

 

[Kosh]

Commodity price inflation from increasing deficit spending far outpaced any GDP increase. GDP only grew in terms of dollars, not product. Stagnant pay, massive job loss & soaring price, exploding size of government is what Bush created.

Bush cost us 18 million jobs, tripled prices, stagnate wages unless you were a government employee, their wages soared. Standard of living declined due to high prices, deregulation theft of savings investment, outsourcing, immigration & stagnant wages.

And the far left propaganda and talking points comes gushing out...

But then again judging by the far left on this board, one might think that Bush was still president..

 

[TruthSeeker56]

So where are all of the big hurricanes that were predicted by the global warming crowd after Katrina? Robert Kennedy, Jr.? Haven't heard SHIT from your mouth since your prediction of "multiple hurricanes every year" didn't pan out.

No matter how hard The Weather Channel pimps the whole global warming/climate change myth, they can't invent hurricanes. I'm sure Jim Cantore and the other climate change salesmen must be losing sleep over the lack of hurricanes in the past several years.

Hey dumb fuck, you have never heard me predicting multiple hurricanes every year. What you have heard is that the warming and climate changes it results in will create weather that has wider and wilder swings with an overall warming. Exactly what we have been seeing.

Not it is not what we are seeing when the data is looked at honestly not by sound bites by the MSM every time there is a storm.

Why it seems that severe weather is ?getting worse? when the data shows otherwise ? a historical perspective | Watts Up With That?

PLEASE don't confuse the left wingnuts with FACTS!

These two-legged TURDS hate it when you confuse and befuddle them with FACTS.

The playground bullies can call the rest of names, and drop all the F-bombs they want. All it does is verify how dishonest and ignorant they really are.

Thanks for the FACTS. Let the bottom feeders digest them.

 

[TruthSeeker56]

One billion dollars+ natural disasters:

Billion Dollar U.S. Weather Disasters, 1980?2013 | Infoplease.com

As you can see, the Obama presidency has been hammered as well, if not more, than Bush was.

Either NYcarbineer has a broken Sponge Bob calculator, or he is just a LIAR. Which is it?

Do some simple addition, and Bush had a helluva lot more natural disasters to deal with than Obama did.

Unless of course you count Obama himself as a NATURAL DISASTER. Then Obama wins.