ANOTHER GOLDEN oportunity for liberals to RUN and HIDE from reality about Obama Admin

[Midnight Marauder]

Why is it supposed to get better in 2012? HOPE once Obama is gone?

No.

Those are projections, estimates from Obama himself and the CBO based on numbers the WH is giving. They show generational massive deficits for the foreseeable future.

Maybe the pseudo-messiah KNOWS he won't make another term, is just making up that it will improve until he gets kicked out.

If that were the case, the non-partisan CBO would catch it, and their projections would reflect it.

 

[jillian]

No.

Those are projections, estimates from Obama himself and the CBO based on numbers the WH is giving. They show generational massive deficits for the foreseeable future.

Which would exist based on the last admins policies in any event.

Someone had to clean up the mess. I can't say I agree with the way they're doing it, as I don't think they did enough or focused it where they should have, necessarily. But the mess that was left for him didn't leave a lot of options.

 

[JenT]

Empathy? Empathy for WHAT? All the people that sat on their you know what and wouldn't work?

Obama's EMPATHY of taking all the money from those that would have TAKEN RISKS and provided jobs, he has penalized THOSE people and pouring all their money into welfare and health care, where everyone is paying our tax money at $500 a pop for runny noses. One woman was reported as even calling an ambulance to take her to the hospital for a headache because she didn't want to wait in line (ambulance patients get immediate help)

This entitlement attitude is what's killing our economy, people don't care if they get laid off because they'll just go on government rolls and be paid for doing nothing.

Then the STUPID LIBS LIKE PELOSI have been pushing abortion down our throats so long that we have no new generations to support the elderly, baby boomers are going to be blamed for costing too much and will be denied services by the time I get there, because my life or health won't be worthy enough.

Empathy isn't Entitlement, always or necessarily. Calm down fair-weathered partisan, your mind is not objective regarding these issues. Partisanship clouds judgement, it's like an ailment. I trust neither ******* side, especially those who cannot recognize that they obviously hack on one side over and over and basically, 75% of the time on meaningless issues.

A quick search on you and you're amongst those who makes the fly-by meaningless, gradeschool partisan comments like how good or bad Obama can throw.

Are you a star athlete? I bet I'd ******* run you off of any court of field there is and still not use it as an immature ******* dig, as if you're objective

Racquetball. Used to be sponsored. Try it, Superman.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

The surpluses "under Clinton" were with a Republican Congress, and WITH Paygo, Gramm-Rudman, and line-item veto which were all taken away or rendered toothless before Boooosh was ever elected.

Nice try though. Just face the one and only truth Nancy Pelosi has ever uttered, "Elections have consequences."

Yes yes, and the defecit under Bush w/6-years under Republican congress was Clinton's fault, and Obama's 8 months in office is also comparable to what one has done over a 6-year span. partisanship is for koo-koo's.

No one's blaming Clinton for the deficits that followed. That's kookism right there. The FACT is, Clinton enjoyed the most power any President has ever had, and the COURTS took it away from him and all future Presidents.

Keep deflecting, you cannot assail the facts, or the accuracy of the chart. You cannot dazzle with brilliance, so you are trying to baffle with bullshit.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

No.

Those are projections, estimates from Obama himself and the CBO based on numbers the WH is giving. They show generational massive deficits for the foreseeable future.

Which would exist based on the last admins policies in any event.

That's debatable. Not that there wouldn't BE deficits, just how HUGE they would be.

Someone had to clean up the mess.

The same ones who MADE it, the same Congress!

 

[jillian]

Empathy? Empathy for WHAT? All the people that sat on their you know what and wouldn't work?

Obama's EMPATHY of taking all the money from those that would have TAKEN RISKS and provided jobs, he has penalized THOSE people and pouring all their money into welfare and health care, where everyone is paying our tax money at $500 a pop for runny noses. One woman was reported as even calling an ambulance to take her to the hospital for a headache because she didn't want to wait in line (ambulance patients get immediate help)

This entitlement attitude is what's killing our economy, people don't care if they get laid off because they'll just go on government rolls and be paid for doing nothing.

Then the STUPID LIBS LIKE PELOSI have been pushing abortion down our throats so long that we have no new generations to support the elderly, baby boomers are going to be blamed for costing too much and will be denied services by the time I get there, because my life or health won't be worthy enough.

Empathy isn't Entitlement, always or necessarily. Calm down fair-weathered partisan, your mind is not objective regarding these issues. Partisanship clouds judgement, it's like an ailment. I trust neither ******* side, especially those who cannot recognize that they obviously hack on one side over and over and basically, 75% of the time on meaningless issues.

A quick search on you and you're amongst those who makes the fly-by meaningless, gradeschool partisan comments like how good or bad Obama can throw.

Are you a star athlete? I bet I'd ******* run you off of any court of field there is and still not use it as an immature ******* dig, as if you're objective

Racquetball. Used to be sponsored. Try it, Superman.

That's nice... you're still a psycho....

 

[G.T.]

Racquetball. Used to be sponsored. Try it, Superman.

A: it's a corny sport but yea, I'd probably beat you.
B:sponsorship is not hard to come-by in low-fans sports like that, **** I have a friend who's a sponsored runner by Saucony and I'm faster than him in meets, but am only a hobbyist.

 

[G.T.]

No one's blaming Clinton for the deficits that followed. That's kookism right there. The FACT is, Clinton enjoyed the most power any President has ever had, and the COURTS took it away from him and all future Presidents.

Keep deflecting, you cannot assail the facts, or the accuracy of the chart. You cannot dazzle with brilliance, so you are trying to baffle with bullshit.

Clinton enjoyed the most power but the Republican Congress was responsible for his surplus. Obama is responsible for his deficit, but a quick search at Hannity shows you with (zero) threads bashing Bush's economy or 6-year Republican congress.

It's you who cannot baffle with bullshit.

You provided a chart, whoop-tee-doo, and my response was to look at a chart of the Clinton yrs. which is not to say Dems are great, but to say this is all bullshit and the same guys have been running shit for years while they have morons on messageboards passing the buck of blame and keeping busy while both sides employ the same policies.

 

[JenT]

Racquetball. Used to be sponsored. Try it, Superman.

A: it's a corny sport but yea, I'd probably beat you.
B:sponsorship is not hard to come-by in low-fans sports like that, **** I have a friend who's a sponsored runner by Saucony and I'm faster than him in meets, but am only a hobbyist.

If you call it corny, you clearly have no love of it, which means no idea how the ball bounces. I used to wipe the floor with college men like you and never break a sweat. But whatever, just funny you would zero in on my comment about how Obama throws a ball. He DOES throw like a girl but who cares, it's his determination to drive this country into the ground, and all the Middle East banks that are buying up our debt with the requirement that we honor their restrictions while Obamasama is making his bows.

Those agreements are going to come back and bite us.

 

[Liability]

WOW.

The last time I checked in my little thread, nobody had replied at all. Now at least there is the semblence of some discussion.

And as I noted in another post (unrelated topic), there may be a rational lib or two willing to step up to the plate and discuss an issue with reason and objectivity! It is gratifying to see a lib or two at least willing to discuss this one.

Of course, I have to be VERY careful in deciding who is or isn't a "lib." I made some erroneous assumptions along those lines in my first and second day here and got properly smacked upside my head for it. But a couple of people who seem like they might qualify as libs did jump in here. If they are libs, then I say "good for you" to them.

If they aren't libs, then hell. There's stil time.

Come on libs. Tell us. Is the CBO wrong? Is Obamenomics going to magically somehow work? If so, how?

 

[G.T.]

WOW.

The last time I checked in my little thread, nobody had replied at all. Now at least there is the semblence of some discussion.

And as I noted in another post (unrelated topic), there may be a rational lib or two willing to step up to the plate and discuss an issue with reason and objectivity! It is gratifying to see a lib or two at least willing to discuss this one.

Of course, I have to be VERY careful in deciding who is or isn't a "lib." I made some erroneous assumptions along those lines in my first and second day here and got properly smacked upside my head for it. But a couple of people who seem like they might qualify as libs did jump in here. If they are libs, then I say "good for you" to them.

If they aren't libs, then hell. There's stil time.

Come on libs. Tell us. Is the CBO wrong? Is Obamenomics going to magically somehow work? If so, how?

lol. If you want to know me, by chance, I'm anti-partisan anything. I despise the fact of "choosing" a side and have a chip on my shoulder not to do so. I am slightly but I get me some females, ya dig?

 

[Liability]

WOW.

The last time I checked in my little thread, nobody had replied at all. Now at least there is the semblence of some discussion.

And as I noted in another post (unrelated topic), there may be a rational lib or two willing to step up to the plate and discuss an issue with reason and objectivity! It is gratifying to see a lib or two at least willing to discuss this one.

Of course, I have to be VERY careful in deciding who is or isn't a "lib." I made some erroneous assumptions along those lines in my first and second day here and got properly smacked upside my head for it. But a couple of people who seem like they might qualify as libs did jump in here. If they are libs, then I say "good for you" to them.

If they aren't libs, then hell. There's stil time.

Come on libs. Tell us. Is the CBO wrong? Is Obamenomics going to magically somehow work? If so, how?

lol. If you want to know me, by chance, I'm anti-partisan anything. I despise the fact of "choosing" a side and have a chip on my shoulder not to do so. I am slightly but I get me some females, ya dig?

I did not have you pegged as either a lib or a conservative (or as anything in between).

You seem to run a bit hot and cold, but generally (so far) you seem reasonable.

In any event, your comments might yet get a lib or two (more?) here willing to discuss what the CBO has to say about this massive deficit spending machination from the Obama Administration and the liberal Democrat Parody dominated Congress.

 

[Toro]

Look how the deficit was going DOWN until the Dems got majority control of Congress, vs. what we're seeing today. Handy chart:

This is worrisome.

A trillion dollar this year does not worry me. A trillion dollar deficit each year for the next five years worries the hell out of me.

I'll be in the Caymans by that time.

 

[Toro]

No one's blaming Clinton for the deficits that followed. That's kookism right there. The FACT is, Clinton enjoyed the most power any President has ever had, and the COURTS took it away from him and all future Presidents.

Keep deflecting, you cannot assail the facts, or the accuracy of the chart. You cannot dazzle with brilliance, so you are trying to baffle with bullshit.

Clinton enjoyed the most power but the Republican Congress was responsible for his surplus. Obama is responsible for his deficit, but a quick search at Hannity shows you with (zero) threads bashing Bush's economy or 6-year Republican congress.

It's you who cannot baffle with bullshit.

You provided a chart, whoop-tee-doo, and my response was to look at a chart of the Clinton yrs. which is not to say Dems are great, but to say this is all bullshit and the same guys have been running shit for years while they have morons on messageboards passing the buck of blame and keeping busy while both sides employ the same policies.

Its amusing to see the Bush-apologists scream about the deficit when Bush and the incompetent GOP ran deficits during expansion, and they hid much of the cost of the Iraq war off the books.

However, that graph has GOT to be fixed. Much of it is because of Obama and the Democrats. They MUST fix it, or we are fucked.

 

[mal]

The current group of democrats don't care how much money they spend or what the consequences of spending that money might be. At the present spending rate we are soon going to be just like the state of California - bankrupt. What then, Batman?

+1...



peace...

 

[JenT]

The current group of democrats don't care how much money they spend or what the consequences of spending that money might be. At the present spending rate we are soon going to be just like the state of California - bankrupt. What then, Batman?

+1...



peace...

What then?

I just read in the paper that we in California are getting $25 million in federal grants for things like "habitat conservation"

We are BANKRUPT but we're sucking up the rest of the country's money to make sure that some kind of freaking snail that nobody has ever heard of, is comfy.

The world has gone freaking nuts.

 

[Liability]

No one's blaming Clinton for the deficits that followed. That's kookism right there. The FACT is, Clinton enjoyed the most power any President has ever had, and the COURTS took it away from him and all future Presidents.

Keep deflecting, you cannot assail the facts, or the accuracy of the chart. You cannot dazzle with brilliance, so you are trying to baffle with bullshit.

Clinton enjoyed the most power but the Republican Congress was responsible for his surplus. Obama is responsible for his deficit, but a quick search at Hannity shows you with (zero) threads bashing Bush's economy or 6-year Republican congress.

It's you who cannot baffle with bullshit.

You provided a chart, whoop-tee-doo, and my response was to look at a chart of the Clinton yrs. which is not to say Dems are great, but to say this is all bullshit and the same guys have been running shit for years while they have morons on messageboards passing the buck of blame and keeping busy while both sides employ the same policies.

Its amusing to see the Bush-apologists scream about the deficit when Bush and the incompetent GOP ran deficits during expansion, and they hid much of the cost of the Iraq war off the books.

However, that graph has GOT to be fixed. Much of it is because of Obama and the Democrats. They MUST fix it, or we are fucked.

What Bush apologists? Like many conservatives, I am pissed at President Bush for his loose spending and his lack of testicular fortitude in vetoing all the exceesive money spent by the libtarded Democrat Parody controlled Congress -- especially that first scam at the end of his tenure involving TARP.

The point is that nobody is excusing what he did. It's just kind of pointless NOW, him being no longer the one in the Oval Office and all.

That guy who IS in the Oval Office, now? Why, gee. That would be President Obama. Try to focus.

 

[mal]

What then?

I just read in the paper that we in California are getting $25 million in federal grants for things like "habitat conservation"

We are BANKRUPT but we're sucking up the rest of the country's money to make sure that some kind of freaking snail that nobody has ever heard of, is comfy.

The world has gone freaking nuts.

Cali Needs a Revolution...



peace...

 

[wimpy77]

Clinton enjoyed the most power but the Republican Congress was responsible for his surplus. Obama is responsible for his deficit, but a quick search at Hannity shows you with (zero) threads bashing Bush's economy or 6-year Republican congress.

It's you who cannot baffle with bullshit.

You provided a chart, whoop-tee-doo, and my response was to look at a chart of the Clinton yrs. which is not to say Dems are great, but to say this is all bullshit and the same guys have been running shit for years while they have morons on messageboards passing the buck of blame and keeping busy while both sides employ the same policies.

Its amusing to see the Bush-apologists scream about the deficit when Bush and the incompetent GOP ran deficits during expansion, and they hid much of the cost of the Iraq war off the books.

However, that graph has GOT to be fixed. Much of it is because of Obama and the Democrats. They MUST fix it, or we are fucked.

What Bush apologists? Like many conservatives, I am pissed at President Bush for his loose spending and his lack of testicular fortitude in vetoing all the exceesive money spent by the libtarded Democrat Parody controlled Congress -- especially that first scam at the end of his tenure involving TARP.

The point is that nobody is excusing what he did. It's just kind of pointless NOW, him being no longer the one in the Oval Office and all.

That guy who IS in the Oval Office, now? Why, gee. That would be President Obama. Try to focus.

you're right in general about bush, but you forget to mention that most of his open ending spending was done with a republican majority. most conversatives are now admitting that bush was not a conservative.

 

[Epsilon Delta]

Well, to be honest I haven't taken "Macroeconomic Theory" yet, but I can tell you something very amusing: I was listening to a rousing speech by the President of Costa Rica after the opening of a new clinic in the Naranjo region of the country; and his [very short and diminished version of the plan] is that we would SPEND on Education SPEND on technology SPEND on health care SPEND on all sorts of things; the message is that the government was SPENDING lots of money; and I inevitably contrasted that to the reporting on FOX and the opinions on this board and it is astounding how different people across borders really are: here that was met with rousing applaus; people LOVE that the government is spending tons of money it is seen as helpful and useful that the government [which is seen as an agent of the people who elected them] spends to boost economic and social indicatos. Meanwhile in the US this is met with alarm; though that is understandable because the debt is so high. I was just amused by the large disparities which I simply cannot account for or explain. I don't know who is seeing things wrong or if either side is; but at least the people here trust that higher spending will boost aggregate demand and counteract the the contractionary effects of the recession. In America, I would suppose things are much harder to sell.