Republicans would make deficit worse

[Jarhead]

LoL!!!

RepubliCON$...lets say you get your wildest dreams realized...you take everything.

Then what?

What will you guys do to fix things?

How soon will the economy improve?

Theres got to be a stopping point and that is by removing all democrats from congress then the work to repairing the damage can begin

What an interesting goal post and expectation you got there. Not one but two impossibilities allowing the RepubliCON$ a built-in excuse.

Firstly, there will never be a time when there will be only RepubliCON$ in Congress, so the standard you're setting up gives them a scapegoat by saying "Well we had some Dems in there that were stopping us from doing what we needed to do." Even if there was just 1.

Secondly, you got a built-in "we need more time" excuse there. Cause even in the pipe-dream or nightmare, rather, that its only RepubliCON$ in Congress, you can always say "well the Dems messed it up so bad, that we need more time for our policies to take effect."

I'd say it was genius if you weren't such a simpleton.

Was it intentional that you actualy used (albeit, reworded) the two excuses that we hear being used by President Obama and his administratin?

 

[Jarhead]

Yes, undergrad. Are you? That would be small world (well, with 50,000 students it wouldnt' be THAT small)

Syracuse Orangeman, 1980

Shoot...I knew that. But if you're a sports fan....I also remember a Syracuse punt returner just shredding the UT special teams and defense a couple times in the early to mid 1990's. Can't remember his name, but he was quite a talent.

I believe that may have been Marvin Harrison but I am not sure. I am a very big SU fan as I, too, was an athlete there and it never leaves your blood.
But after 30 seasons since graduation,the names and years all blend together.

 

[8537]

Syracuse Orangeman, 1980

Shoot...I knew that. But if you're a sports fan....I also remember a Syracuse punt returner just shredding the UT special teams and defense a couple times in the early to mid 1990's. Can't remember his name, but he was quite a talent.

I believe that may have been Marvin Harrison but I am not sure. I am a very big SU fan as I, too, was an athlete there and it never leaves your blood.
But after 30 seasons since graduation,the names and years all blend together.

Lord knows where these things reside in the deep recesses of my brain, but I just recalled that his name was Kadry(sp?) Ishmail. WR and punt returner with blinding speed.

Athlete at Syracuse? That's no chump athletic program. Jarhead must have some skills.

 

[DiveCon]

LoL!!!

RepubliCON$...lets say you get your wildest dreams realized...you take everything.

Then what?

What will you guys do to fix things?

How soon will the economy improve?

Theres got to be a stopping point and that is by removing all democrats from congress then the work to repairing the damage can begin

What an interesting goal post and expectation you got there. Not one but two impossibilities allowing the RepubliCON$ a built-in excuse.

Firstly, there will never be a time when there will be only RepubliCON$ in Congress, so the standard you're setting up gives them a scapegoat by saying "Well we had some Dems in there that were stopping us from doing what we needed to do." Even if there was just 1.

Secondly, you got a built-in "we need more time" excuse there. Cause even in the pipe-dream or nightmare, rather, that its only RepubliCON$ in Congress, you can always say "well the Dems messed it up so bad, that we need more time for our policies to take effect."

I'd say it was genius if you weren't such a simpleton.

gee, you mean the democrats using those very excuses now?

 

[Jarhead]

Shoot...I knew that. But if you're a sports fan....I also remember a Syracuse punt returner just shredding the UT special teams and defense a couple times in the early to mid 1990's. Can't remember his name, but he was quite a talent.

I believe that may have been Marvin Harrison but I am not sure. I am a very big SU fan as I, too, was an athlete there and it never leaves your blood.
But after 30 seasons since graduation,the names and years all blend together.

Lord knows where these things reside in the deep recesses of my brain, but I just recalled that his name was Kadry(sp?) Ishmail. WR and punt returner with blinding speed.

Athlete at Syracuse? That's no chump athletic program. Jarhead must have some skills.

Wow. I can not beleive you remembered him. Yes, very quick with his hips and lightening speed. If he got past the initial wall, he was gone. I believe it was Quadry...but not sure. I also seem to recall he had a brother play for the orangmen as well. Marvin Harrison followed up a few years after Ishmail.
As for my skills? My sport of choice was division 3 at Syracuse. Gymnastics. Not what one would call "a man's sport", but hey, I am now in my 50's and I have the physique of a 35 year old.

 

[Jarhead]

Theres got to be a stopping point and that is by removing all democrats from congress then the work to repairing the damage can begin

What an interesting goal post and expectation you got there. Not one but two impossibilities allowing the RepubliCON$ a built-in excuse.

Firstly, there will never be a time when there will be only RepubliCON$ in Congress, so the standard you're setting up gives them a scapegoat by saying "Well we had some Dems in there that were stopping us from doing what we needed to do." Even if there was just 1.

Secondly, you got a built-in "we need more time" excuse there. Cause even in the pipe-dream or nightmare, rather, that its only RepubliCON$ in Congress, you can always say "well the Dems messed it up so bad, that we need more time for our policies to take effect."

I'd say it was genius if you weren't such a simpleton.

gee, you mean the democrats using those very excuses now?

lol....my post about 3 or 4 below.

 

[Toro]

If the Republicans cut taxes and don't cut spending, then yes, the deficit will get worse. Its called "math."

 

[DiveCon]

If the Republicans cut taxes and don't cut spending, then yes, the deficit will get worse. Its called "math."

if they do that they wont be there long
they need to cut spending

 

[rdean]

Its a cruel ol world, but the republicans can't save the ship they created, as much as they lie about it. It's back to the question, why would you elect a republican to mess up the budget again and toss more debt on your grandchildren. And they party of "do Whatever It Takes" Boehner would sacrifice your families in order to help the rich get richer. Amazing!!

Estimates Say Fewer Jobs, Larger Deficits if Republicans Were in Charge

Nothing is more important to Republican politicians these days than jobs and the deficit—at least according to Republican politicians. As House Minority Leader John Boehner put it in a "major economic address" on Tuesday, President Obama is "doing everything possible to prevent jobs from being created" while refusing to do anything at all "about bringing down the deficits that threaten our economy." Elect Republicans in November, Boehner assured his audience, and we will put an end to this insanity.

According to the Congressional Budget Office, Obama's stimulus plan is projected to increase budget deficits over the next decade by $814 billion. But Republicans opposed the legislation refused to provide an alternative, and now insist that it's been a total failure. Republicans want to repeal it "lock, stock, and barrel," the reason, as Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell explained in July, is that "we all know that it's going to increase the deficit."

Obama wants to extend them for the 95 percent of taxpayers making less than $250,000 a year; Republicans want to extend them for everybody.

According to data compiled by The Washington Post, "the Democratic proposal would add about $3 trillion to the deficit during the next decade, while the GOP plan would cost $3.7 trillion." That brings the total Obama deficit to $3.784 trillion over 10 years, and its GOP counterpart to—drumroll, please—$4.155 trillion.

Estimates Say Fewer Jobs, Larger Deficits if Republicans Were in Charge - Newsweek

Hate to break it to you but Obama has ALREADY added 3 Trillion to the debt in less then 2 years with plans to add even more. HALF of every dollar spent this year was BORROWED with plans for the same next year.

It took 8 years under Bush to add 5.7 trillion and in less then 2 we have added 3 trillion under Obama.

Your figures are a lie.

Bush was handed a surplus and a healthy economy.

Obama was handed a sinking ship hemorrhaging jobs at 750,000 a month.

Can't you guys ever be honest, even a little?

 

[Oddball]

Bush was handed a surplus and a healthy economy.

.....

Can't you guys ever be honest, even a little?

No, he wasn't...Not only did he *ahem* inherit a mild recession, the mythical "balanced budget" and "surplus" were projected out to 2002, from 1998....They never existed in actual reality.

Speaking of dishonesty.

 

[Toro]

Bush was handed a surplus and a healthy economy.

.....

Can't you guys ever be honest, even a little?

No, he wasn't...Not only did he *ahem* inherit a mild recession, the mythical "balanced budget" and "surplus" were projected out to 2002, from 1998....They never existed in actual reality.

Speaking of dishonesty.

Link?

 

[8537]

Bush was handed a surplus and a healthy economy.

.....

Can't you guys ever be honest, even a little?

No, he wasn't...Not only did he *ahem* inherit a mild recession, the mythical "balanced budget" and "surplus" were projected out to 2002, from 1998....They never existed in actual reality.

Speaking of dishonesty.

On-budget surpluses existed in 1999 and 2000. Unified surpluses existed in 1998 and 2001. You can see this as a decline in debt held by the public.

The projections for 2002 and forward of course never came to fruition.

 

[edthecynic]

Shall I search the board and see how you reacted when poeple addressed Bush in an inappropriate way?

Or are you just what you come across as...an arrogant partisan hypocrtie who does nothing more than regurgitate left wing talking points.

Jar...don't cry to me.

The vitriol I see for Obama everyday on these boards completely DWARFS anything I could ever come up with.

Really?
Hmm...
I guess you were in your own little world for the 8 years prior to this administration.
As for "dont cry to you." I guess I should have added "selfish" in my take on you as well.

Just as you were in your own little world the 8 years prior to Bush. I mean, CON$ were accusing Clinton of murdering Vince Foster and a long list of others, including Ted Olsen's wife!!!! Bush got it easy compared to Clinton, but you crybabies do nothing but whine anyway. sheesh

 

[CrusaderFrank]

It's time to turn the page on the New Deal. It's done, we need to start closing it down

 

[edthecynic]

Bush was handed a surplus and a healthy economy.

.....

Can't you guys ever be honest, even a little?

No, he wasn't...Not only did he *ahem* inherit a mild recession, the mythical "balanced budget" and "surplus" were projected out to 2002, from 1998....They never existed in actual reality.

Speaking of ydishonest.

How exactly could Bush inherit a recession that hadn't begun yet???

I love how Bush isn't responsible for the recession that started 3 months into his first term but Obama owned the Bush Depression before he ever took office!!!!

November 6, 2008
RUSH: The Obama recession is in full swing, ladies and gentlemen.* Stocks are dying, which is a precursor of things to come.* This is an Obama recession.* Might turn into a depression.* He hasn't done anything yet but his ideas are killing the economy.* His ideas are killing Wall Street.*

January 15,2009
RUSH: * It's entirely fair to call this Obama's stock market because it's reacting to what Obama's plans are for the economy.* It's not reacting to Bush.* Bush isn't on anybody's mind here. *

 

[8537]

January 15,2009
RUSH: * It's entirely fair to call this Obama's stock market because it's reacting to what Obama's plans are for the economy.* It's not reacting to Bush.* Bush isn't on anybody's mind here. *

I don't listen to hillbilly heroiners, but I'm sure Rish is now giving Obama credit for the 40%ish increase in the stock market since Obama was elected, since it's his market and all...

Right? right?

 

[asterism]

Seems to me that the only objection the libs at Newsweak have with adding to the debt is when republicans do it.

Ho-hum.

That maybe so, however the point being, if republicans do take control we can expect the deficit to be higher. Will Becks raiders vote for more spending or less?

Less.

When was the last time the CBO was correct?

 

[asterism]

Hmm, really? A lie. I don't think the article is talking about the past, rather the future. Are you refuting those figures??

I am.

The CBO takes a static view of the economy and extrapolates expected government revenues from there. Their projections have been wrong every single time because the economy is not static, nor is government revenue.

 

[asterism]

"They're more suicidal than we are" is not a good campaign strategy for the Dems this year, because unlike the new Republicans, the old Democrats have a four-year track record.

A lot can be said about the last 4 years of spending however, and why it had to occur. I don't think people will vote against their better issues.

The generic Republican is beating the generic Democrat by 10% nationally, according to the latest polls.

That's historically unprecedented, period. Unless Obama performs a miracle in the next two months, the Democrats will lose the legislature.

Politically speaking, he missed an opportunity today. He should have declared victory and had Bush right there next to him. "I was wrong and you were right..." Then they both would have supported a new Keynesian public works plan (Bush is a Keynesian). I don't doubt that Bush would have accepted the opportunity to do a victory lap and it would have solidified Obama's 2012 reelection before the race even started. There's no love lost between the current RNC idiots and Bush, and Bush got this whole bailout thing started in the first place. He even consulted with the President Elect before enacting TARP.

I don't think we would be better off as a nation if that happened, but I'm curious as to why it didn't.

 

[Oddball]

Hmm, really? A lie. I don't think the article is talking about the past, rather the future. Are you refuting those figures??

I am.

The CBO takes a static view of the economy and extrapolates expected government revenues from there. Their projections have been wrong every single time because the economy is not static, nor is government revenue.

That and they mostly only deal with the numbers that they're given by the political flacks, who are trying to prove this or that about their silly spending policies.