Obama spending binge never happened

[edthecynic]

I concede that point. But the funding of the stimulus was still multiyear, supporting the facts laid out in the OP's analysis. It also doesn't break out how much of the bill was loans. Did you tell Cecilie she's a liar with her number? Of course not, you're a partisan hack who follows Reagan's 11th commandment.

You're still a fucking cyberstalking moron.

Obama established a higher baseline with the Stimulus and he's hiding behind it, juggling the numbers so it doesn't appear like he's increasing spending any faster. Baseline (budgeting) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


The funding of the Stimulus started after Bush. No Republican had anything to do with it. The Stimulus ran out quickly and then Obama asked for another $140 billion stimulus.

The genesis of baseline budget projections can be found in the Congressional Budget Act of 1974. That act required the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to prepare projections of federal spending for the upcoming fiscal year based on a continuation of the existing level of governmental services. It also required the newly established Congressional Budget Office to prepare five-year projections of budget authority, outlays, revenues, and the surplus or deficit. OMB published its initial current-services budget projections in November 1974, and CBO's five-year projections first appeared in January 1976. Today's baseline budget projections are very much like those prepared more than two decades ago, although they now span 10 years instead of five.

The Budget Act was silent on whether to adjust estimates of discretionary appropriations for anticipated changes in inflation. Until 1980, OMB's projections excluded inflation adjustments for discretionary programs. CBO's projections, however, assumed that appropriations would keep pace with inflation, although CBO has also published projections without these so-called discretionary inflation adjustments.

Obama has stopped from going over the debt limit sooner than projected by using Quantitative Easing of the debt. Monetizing the debt by printing money. We're on our 3rd QE so far.......and last week Obama quietly asked for another Stimulus, then the talk has already started about raising the debt even more.

QE1, QE2, and QE3

The expression "QE2" became a "ubiquitous nickname" in 2010, usually used to refer to a second round of quantitative easing by central banks.[56] In retrospect, the round of quantitative easing preceding QE2 may be called "QE1". Similarly, "QE3" refers to proposals for an additional round of quantitative easing following QE2.[57]

Effectiveness

According to the IMF, the quantitative easing policies undertaken by the central banks of the major developed countries since the beginning of the late-2000s financial crisis have contributed to the reduction in systemic risks following the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers. The IMF states that the policies also contributed to the improvements in market confidence and the bottoming out of the recession in the G-7 economies in the second half of 2009.[58]

Economist Martin Feldstein argues that QE2 led to a rise in the stock-market in the second half of 2010, which in turn contributed to increasing consumption and the strong performance of the US economy in late-2010.[59]

In November 2010, a group of conservative Republican economists and political activists released an open letter to Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke questioning the efficacy of the Fed's QE program. The Fed responded that their actions reflected the economic environment of high unemployment and low inflation.[60]


Risks

Quantitative easing may cause higher inflation than desired if the amount of easing required is overestimated, and too much money is created.[16] On the other hand, it can fail if banks remain reluctant to lend money to small business and households in order to spur demand. Quantitative easing can effectively ease the process of deleveraging as it lowers yields. But in the context of a global economy, lower interest rates may contribute to asset bubbles in other economies.

Obama has been able to keep from worsening the economy by printing more money, but then again he has increased inflation which doesn't get wide media coverage because food and energy nolonger are included in figuring inflation....which is total insanity. What other factors effect the value of your incomes more than groceries, gas, and energy? This is what drives the economy yet it's conveniently excluded.

Obama was trying to be slick when he took office. He signed a discretionary spending bill or Stimulus during fiscal year 09' hoping to get away with establishing a higher baseline of spending and thus attempted to transfer blame onto Bush. Bush didn't even sign the 09' budget because it contained massive earmarks, and even Obama wouldn't sign it heh....heh.......because he knew they could blame him for it. So this chode Knut ignores all of this and sent out this bogus report and you're running with it (as predicted).

The Devil is in the details and you're not interested in the details. This is why these hosers put out these hoaxes is because Obama Fluffers are out there swallowing it and it takes weeks, months, or even years to prove it was a total fabrication.



Links
Baseline (budgeting) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Quantitative easing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Baseline spending jumps by $4.4 trillion | United Liberty | Free Market - Individual Liberty - Limited Government

As I have shown so many times before, when caught in their lies CON$ervcoFascists simply lie some more!

There was no QE3, as every worthless lying CON$ervoFascist knows!
And there was only 107.1 billion of the stimulus spent in 2009 and Nutting credited it to Obama not Bush, so big spender Bush set the 2009 baseline.

But keep lying, it shows just how desperate CON$ are and how effective Nutting's truth has been.

 

[mudwhistle]

I concede that point. But the funding of the stimulus was still multiyear, supporting the facts laid out in the OP's analysis. It also doesn't break out how much of the bill was loans. Did you tell Cecilie she's a liar with her number? Of course not, you're a partisan hack who follows Reagan's 11th commandment.

You're still a fucking cyberstalking moron.

Obama established a higher baseline with the Stimulus and he's hiding behind it, juggling the numbers so it doesn't appear like he's increasing spending any faster. Baseline (budgeting) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


The funding of the Stimulus started after Bush. No Republican had anything to do with it. The Stimulus ran out quickly and then Obama asked for another $140 billion stimulus.




Obama has stopped from going over the debt limit sooner than projected by using Quantitative Easing of the debt. Monetizing the debt by printing money. We're on our 3rd QE so far.......and last week Obama quietly asked for another Stimulus, then the talk has already started about raising the debt even more.

QE1, QE2, and QE3

The expression "QE2" became a "ubiquitous nickname" in 2010, usually used to refer to a second round of quantitative easing by central banks.[56] In retrospect, the round of quantitative easing preceding QE2 may be called "QE1". Similarly, "QE3" refers to proposals for an additional round of quantitative easing following QE2.[57]

Effectiveness

According to the IMF, the quantitative easing policies undertaken by the central banks of the major developed countries since the beginning of the late-2000s financial crisis have contributed to the reduction in systemic risks following the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers. The IMF states that the policies also contributed to the improvements in market confidence and the bottoming out of the recession in the G-7 economies in the second half of 2009.[58]

Economist Martin Feldstein argues that QE2 led to a rise in the stock-market in the second half of 2010, which in turn contributed to increasing consumption and the strong performance of the US economy in late-2010.[59]

In November 2010, a group of conservative Republican economists and political activists released an open letter to Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke questioning the efficacy of the Fed's QE program. The Fed responded that their actions reflected the economic environment of high unemployment and low inflation.[60]


Risks

Quantitative easing may cause higher inflation than desired if the amount of easing required is overestimated, and too much money is created.[16] On the other hand, it can fail if banks remain reluctant to lend money to small business and households in order to spur demand. Quantitative easing can effectively ease the process of deleveraging as it lowers yields. But in the context of a global economy, lower interest rates may contribute to asset bubbles in other economies.

Obama has been able to keep from worsening the economy by printing more money, but then again he has increased inflation which doesn't get wide media coverage because food and energy nolonger are included in figuring inflation....which is total insanity. What other factors effect the value of your incomes more than groceries, gas, and energy? This is what drives the economy yet it's conveniently excluded.

Obama was trying to be slick when he took office. He signed a discretionary spending bill or Stimulus during fiscal year 09' hoping to get away with establishing a higher baseline of spending and thus attempted to transfer blame onto Bush. Bush didn't even sign the 09' budget because it contained massive earmarks, and even Obama wouldn't sign it heh....heh.......because he knew they could blame him for it. So this chode Knut ignores all of this and sent out this bogus report and you're running with it (as predicted).

The Devil is in the details and you're not interested in the details. This is why these hosers put out these hoaxes is because Obama Fluffers are out there swallowing it and it takes weeks, months, or even years to prove it was a total fabrication.



Links
Baseline (budgeting) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Quantitative easing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Baseline spending jumps by $4.4 trillion | United Liberty | Free Market - Individual Liberty - Limited Government

As I have shown so many times before, when caught in their lies CON$ervcoFascists simply lie some more!

There was no QE3, as every worthless lying CON$ervoFascist knows!
And there was only 107.1 billion of the stimulus spent in 2009 and Nutting credited it to Obama not Bush, so big spender Bush set the 2009 baseline.

But keep lying, it shows just how desperate CON$ are and how effective Nutting's truth has been.

So you're saying that Bernake didn't propose QE3??

As my post stated, we're at the proposal phase, not the actual implementation.

As I quote from my post......."QE3" refers to proposals for an additional round of quantitative easing following QE2.[57]"

I said we were on QE3......so it is a cuXXXXhair from being implemented.

So......what do you have to say now????

 

[edthecynic]

Obama established a higher baseline with the Stimulus and he's hiding behind it, juggling the numbers so it doesn't appear like he's increasing spending any faster. Baseline (budgeting) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


The funding of the Stimulus started after Bush. No Republican had anything to do with it. The Stimulus ran out quickly and then Obama asked for another $140 billion stimulus.




Obama has stopped from going over the debt limit sooner than projected by using Quantitative Easing of the debt. Monetizing the debt by printing money. We're on our 3rd QE so far.......and last week Obama quietly asked for another Stimulus, then the talk has already started about raising the debt even more.


Obama has been able to keep from worsening the economy by printing more money, but then again he has increased inflation which doesn't get wide media coverage because food and energy nolonger are included in figuring inflation....which is total insanity. What other factors effect the value of your incomes more than groceries, gas, and energy? This is what drives the economy yet it's conveniently excluded.

Obama was trying to be slick when he took office. He signed a discretionary spending bill or Stimulus during fiscal year 09' hoping to get away with establishing a higher baseline of spending and thus attempted to transfer blame onto Bush. Bush didn't even sign the 09' budget because it contained massive earmarks, and even Obama wouldn't sign it heh....heh.......because he knew they could blame him for it. So this chode Knut ignores all of this and sent out this bogus report and you're running with it (as predicted).

The Devil is in the details and you're not interested in the details. This is why these hosers put out these hoaxes is because Obama Fluffers are out there swallowing it and it takes weeks, months, or even years to prove it was a total fabrication.



Links
Baseline (budgeting) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Quantitative easing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Baseline spending jumps by $4.4 trillion | United Liberty | Free Market - Individual Liberty - Limited Government

As I have shown so many times before, when caught in their lies CON$ervcoFascists simply lie some more!

There was no QE3, as every worthless lying CON$ervoFascist knows!
And there was only 107.1 billion of the stimulus spent in 2009 and Nutting credited it to Obama not Bush, so big spender Bush set the 2009 baseline.

But keep lying, it shows just how desperate CON$ are and how effective Nutting's truth has been.

So you're saying that Bernake didn't propose QE3??

As my post stated, we're at the proposal phase, not the actual implementation.

As I quote from my post......."QE3" refers to proposals for an additional round of quantitative easing following QE2.[57]"

I said we were on QE3......so it is a XXXXhair from being implemented.

So......what do you have to say now????

As I quote from YOUR post

"We're on our 3rd QE so far."

CON$ervoFascist lying scum have been claiming QE3 has already begun for a year now, so that's the BIGGEST "XXXXhair" in the universe!

QE3 Has Already Started | ZeroHedge

QE3 Has Already Started
Submitted by madhedgefundtrader on 05/31/2011 11:00 -0400

Ben Bernanke Ben Bernanke Bond Exchange Traded Fund Fail None Quantitative Easing Real estate Recession Ron Paul TARP Too Big To Fail Unemployment


Most analysts have missed the fact that QE3 has already started in earnest. Of course, it would have been easy to miss. Ben Bernanke has not made any grand pronouncements. He hasn’t done some public thinking out loud, as he did among friends at Jackson Hole, Wyoming last August. It is not even called “QE3”. Think of it as a “stealth QE3”. But make no mistake. A new variety of quantitative easing has already begun in a big way, and is generating its desired effect.

 

[mudwhistle]

As I have shown so many times before, when caught in their lies CON$ervcoFascists simply lie some more!

There was no QE3, as every worthless lying CON$ervoFascist knows!
And there was only 107.1 billion of the stimulus spent in 2009 and Nutting credited it to Obama not Bush, so big spender Bush set the 2009 baseline.

But keep lying, it shows just how desperate CON$ are and how effective Nutting's truth has been.

So you're saying that Bernake didn't propose QE3??

As my post stated, we're at the proposal phase, not the actual implementation.

As I quote from my post......."QE3" refers to proposals for an additional round of quantitative easing following QE2.[57]"

I said we were on QE3......so it is a XXXXhair from being implemented.

So......what do you have to say now????

As I quote from YOUR post

"We're on our 3rd QE so far."

CON$ervoFascist lying scum have been claiming QE3 has already begun for a year now, so that's the BIGGEST "XXXXX-hair" in the universe!

QE3 Has Already Started | ZeroHedge

QE3 Has Already Started
Submitted by madhedgefundtrader on 05/31/2011 11:00 -0400

Ben Bernanke Ben Bernanke Bond Exchange Traded Fund Fail None Quantitative Easing Real estate Recession Ron Paul TARP Too Big To Fail Unemployment


Most analysts have missed the fact that QE3 has already started in earnest. Of course, it would have been easy to miss. Ben Bernanke has not made any grand pronouncements. He hasn’t done some public thinking out loud, as he did among friends at Jackson Hole, Wyoming last August. It is not even called “QE3”. Think of it as a “stealth QE3”. But make no mistake. A new variety of quantitative easing has already begun in a big way, and is generating its desired effect.

So who are you calling a liar, me or the author of your link???

I'm not sure here........

Once again.....I linked that it was in the proposal phase. If the link you provided is true then it's actually been implemented but in a clandestine manner.......

This doesn't support your claim that I was lying.

 

[edthecynic]

So you're saying that Bernake didn't propose QE3??

As my post stated, we're at the proposal phase, not the actual implementation.

As I quote from my post......."QE3" refers to proposals for an additional round of quantitative easing following QE2.[57]"

I said we were on QE3......so it is a XXXX-hair from being implemented.

So......what do you have to say now????

What I love most about CON$ervoFascist lying scum is they make PERFECT contrarian indicators. Whatever they say you can be PERFECTLY confident the opposite is true.

When the Fed says there will be NO QE2, CON$ say that QE2 has already begun!!!

Fed’s Lockhart Sees Continued Accommodative Policy but No QE3 - Real Time Economics - WSJ

May 21, 2012, 8:59 AM
Fed’s Lockhart Sees Continued Accommodative Policy but No QE3

The challenge policymakers face is judging the appropriateness of a tool for particular circumstances, Lockhart said. He reiterated that he doesn’t see the need right now for the Fed to embark on balance-sheet-expanding bond purchases most in the market refer to as a stimulus policy called QE3.

Still, the option can’t be taken off the table, he said.

While another round of quantitative easing would work under the right circumstances, “I don’t believe such circumstances prevail at this time,” Lockhart said.

 

[mudwhistle]

So you're saying that Bernake didn't propose QE3??

As my post stated, we're at the proposal phase, not the actual implementation.

As I quote from my post......."QE3" refers to proposals for an additional round of quantitative easing following QE2.[57]"

I said we were on QE3......so it is a XXXXhair from being implemented.

So......what do you have to say now????

What I love most about CON$ervoFascist lying scum is they make PERFECT contrarian indicators. Whatever they say you can be PERFECTLY confident the opposite is true.

When the Fed says there will be NO QE2, CON$ say that QE2 has already begun!!!

Fed’s Lockhart Sees Continued Accommodative Policy but No QE3 - Real Time Economics - WSJ

May 21, 2012, 8:59 AM
Fed’s Lockhart Sees Continued Accommodative Policy but No QE3

The challenge policymakers face is judging the appropriateness of a tool for particular circumstances, Lockhart said. He reiterated that he doesn’t see the need right now for the Fed to embark on balance-sheet-expanding bond purchases most in the market refer to as a stimulus policy called QE3.

Still, the option can’t be taken off the table, he said.

While another round of quantitative easing would work under the right circumstances, “I don’t believe such circumstances prevail at this time,” Lockhart said.

Bernanke suggested QE3 way back in 2011. You provided evidence that he started it but called it something else. I said we are on QE3. My link said it was in the proposal phase.

I still fail to see where the lie is.

You're desperately grasping at straws.......and I'm laughing my ass off at how silly you look.

 

[mudwhistle]

I'm whipping your ass and now you're reporting me to the mods?






What a chicken-shit.

We are allowed to use chicken-shit now, aren't we??

 

[Meister]

I'm whipping your ass and now you're reporting me to the mods.






What a chicken-shit.

We are allowed to use chicken-shit now, aren't we??

No...he didn't report you to the mods. I was reading the thread and found it being used used, Mud. It was ME, not Ed....any questions, PM me.

 

[mudwhistle]

I'm whipping your ass and now you're reporting me to the mods.






What a chicken-shit.

We are allowed to use chicken-shit now, aren't we??

No...he didn't report you to the mods. I was reading the thread and found it being used used, Mud. It was ME, not Ed....any questions, PM me.

I have. Thanks for bringing it out in the open.......

 

[edthecynic]

What I love most about CON$ervoFascist lying scum is they make PERFECT contrarian indicators. Whatever they say you can be PERFECTLY confident the opposite is true.

I'm whipping your ass and now you're reporting me to the mods.






What a chicken-shit.

We are allowed to use chicken-shit now, aren't we??

Thank you for proving me correct in the above post yet again!

 

[Synthaholic]

But what creates those deficits?

CON$ervoFascism!

Obama is just a Black Reagan!!!

'I don't worry about the deficit. It's big enough to take care of itself.'
Ronald Reagan

"Reagan proved deficits don't matter."
Dick Cheney

Edith? Yer an IDIOT.​

T The Retard shows off his retardation.

 

[mudwhistle]

What I love most about CON$ervoFascist lying scum is they make PERFECT contrarian indicators. Whatever they say you can be PERFECTLY confident the opposite is true.

I'm whipping your ass and now you're reporting me to the mods.






What a chicken-shit.

We are allowed to use chicken-shit now, aren't we??

Thank you for proving me correct in the above post yet again!

Actually it only becomes a lie when you know you're lying.

Try learning the difference.

 

[Synthaholic]

Oh, really? You saw the over $800 billion stimulus mentioned and attributed to Bush in that article, did you? WHERE? Do you really think anyone is stupid enough to believe that Rex Nutjob is attributing ALL of Obama's spending to Obama because he - very grudgingly - admits that he has to attribute $140 billion to Obama, no matter how much he'd LIKE to blame it on Bush? Even YOU are not that damned stupid, and God knows it's a near miss, so all that leaves is that you're a lying sack of shit.

So one more time: Your article is a pile of ignorant, lying pig swill, your OP is a pile of ignorant, lying pig swill, YOU are a pile of ignorant, lying pig swill, and your President is going down in November, because his only hope for supporters is among morons like you, and unfortunately, the very stupidity that makes you his eager ass-kissers also makes you incapable of effectively lying him out of HIS responsibility for HIS spending binge.

Please, PLEASE keep enthusiastically trumpeting your pathetic lies about how "Obama is fiscally conservative; no, REALLY", because I want to watch your pathetic world crumble around you as you realize how helpless and useless you are to save your Messiah. I figure the wave of drawer-shitting fools like you running to the psychiatrists and suicide hotlines after Obama loses should give the economy a real shot in the arm.

You lost, dumbass. You've failed your master. Wallow in your meaninglessness.

Hey moron, you are aware that most of the $800 million in stimulus was used for tax breaks, not spending. Wow, you're an idiot.

NO asswipe. It was USED to shore up GOVERNMENT and UNIONS.

Retard says what? Got proof?

 

[edthecynic]

What I love most about CON$ervoFascist lying scum is they make PERFECT contrarian indicators. Whatever they say you can be PERFECTLY confident the opposite is true.

I'm whipping your ass and now you're reporting me to the mods.






What a chicken-shit.

We are allowed to use chicken-shit now, aren't we??

Thank you for proving me correct in the above post yet again!

Actually it only becomes a lie when you know you're lying.

Try learning the difference.

Ahhhh, the St Ronnie rationalization for lying!

A lie is always a lie, if you are too stupid to know you are telling a lie that merely makes you a stupid liar rather than a premeditated lier, but you are a liar nonetheless.

REAGAN (11/13/86): We did not, repeat, did not trade weapons or anything else for hostages, nor will we.

REAGAN (3/4/87): A few months ago, I told the American people I did not trade arms for hostages. My heart and my best intentions still tell me that's true. But the facts and the evidence tell me it is not.

 

[mudwhistle]

Thank you for proving me correct in the above post yet again!

Actually it only becomes a lie when you know you're lying.

Try learning the difference.

Ahhhh, the St Ronnie rationalization for lying!

A lie is always a lie, if you are too stupid to know you are telling a lie that merely makes you a stupid liar rather than a premeditated lier, but you are a liar nonetheless.

REAGAN (11/13/86): We did not, repeat, did not trade weapons or anything else for hostages, nor will we.

REAGAN (3/4/87): A few months ago, I told the American people I did not trade arms for hostages. My heart and my best intentions still tell me that's true. But the facts and the evidence tell me it is not.

You've been posting misleading information for about an hour trying desperately to derail several solid and indisputable facts in my posts......and it hasn't worked. Now you want to pull this, and trust me.....it isn't working. You go back in history to try to prove that some Republican lied way back in the 80s and that's supposed to make me a liar by association. Epic fail.

I'm not gonna explain the difference between a lie and a lack of understanding because I know you know the difference.

 

[edthecynic]

What I love most about CON$ervoFascist lying scum is they make PERFECT contrarian indicators. Whatever they say you can be PERFECTLY confident the opposite is true.

You've been posting misleading information for about an hour trying desperately to derail several solid and indisputable facts in my posts......

Thank you yet again!

 

[mudwhistle]

What I love most about CON$ervoFascist lying scum is they make PERFECT contrarian indicators. Whatever they say you can be PERFECTLY confident the opposite is true.

You've been posting misleading information for about an hour trying desperately to derail several solid and indisputable facts in my posts......

Thank you yet again!

You're a legend in your own mind.

Remember.....even a retard thinks he's clever.


If you feel like getting your ass whipped some more please come back anytime.

 

[mudwhistle]

The only asset somebody like you has is you don't really care about the truth. You'll dance around it all day.

However most cons do care about truth. That's part of the reason they're cons.

It's clear to see why you would support a serial fabricator like Obama.....extremely clear.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Hey moron, you are aware that most of the $800 million in stimulus was used for tax breaks, not spending. Wow, you're an idiot.

The Obama administration disagrees with your assessment of the Stimulus Spending... Dickless Fuck

Recovery.gov - Tracking the Money
Tax Breaks $297.8 billion
Contracts, grants, loans $233.4 billion
Entitlements $225.6 billion

Now, Let's do the math for Dickless, since he can't even count to 21 naked (no dick, remember?)

233.4 plus 225.6 equals 459 billion

Now, try to keep up, Dickless...

TAX BREAKS were $297.8 billion... Th REST totaled $459 billion.

Now, I know how difficult basic math is for you, so I'll just tell you...

$459 billion

IS MORE THAN

$297.8 billion

SO... and this is the tricky part... the TAX BREAKS in the Stimulus was NOT 'most' of the Stimulus spending.

The combination of Contracts, Grants, Loans & Entitlements was MOST of the Stimulus spending.

Now.. call your saviors administration liars. I dare you.

Fucking moron.

____________________________________________________________

This complete PWNAGE of Dickless Fuck, courtesy of CONSERVATIVE.

I concede that point. But the funding of the stimulus was still multiyear, supporting the facts laid out in the OP's analysis. It also doesn't break out how much of the bill was loans. Did you tell Cecilie she's a liar with her number? Of course not, you're a partisan hack who follows Reagan's 11th commandment.

You're still a fucking cyberstalking moron.

"Multiyear" - whether true or not - has FUCK-ALL to do with the OP's analysis, since the OP's analysis tried to say that the stimulus was BUSH SPENDING, not Obama. Nothing about making it "multiyear" is going to make that true. OBAMA signed that stimulus bill, not Bush, so OBAMA spent that money, whether he spent it "multiyear" or not. Ditto for how much of it was "tax cuts", or "loans", or whatever the fuck you want to call it. I don't care if he spent it by sending every family in the nation a personally-signed check. Point is, HE SPENT IT, and you and Rex Nutjob tried to claim he didn't.

Thank you for these increasingly lame attempts to divert attention from your screw-up, but I'll just stay right here on-point, rather than following your little tangents.

You lied, you got caught, you got your lying ass kicked. End of story.

 

[edthecynic]

What I love most about CON$ervoFascist lying scum is they make PERFECT contrarian indicators. Whatever they say you can be PERFECTLY confident the opposite is true.

The only asset somebody like you has is you don't really care about the truth. You'll dance around it all day.

However most cons do care about truth. That's part of the reason they're cons.

It's clear to see why you would support a serial fabricator like Obama.....extremely clear.

I owe you yet another thank you.
Thank you.