Why do you think it's taken over 2,000 years for Jesus to return?

[eflatminor]

eflatminor, first you deny what hangover says and then justify Ryan's budget.

Hungover referred to the "GOP platform", which is not Ryan's budget. One is a platform, the other a budget.

Further, I did not justify Ryan's budget, I simply pointed out the logical fallacies and unsupported conclusions drawn by thebrucebeat.

So, I'd agree with you, but you're wrong.

Why did you not just justify Ryan's budget to begin with?

Because I'm not a Republican and do not support Ryan's budget.

Wow, that's one massive fail there pal.

 

[Two Thumbs]

I gotta go with

do unto others...

That's a good rule to live by, the rest is nice, and to use tidbits to say that a religion is useless just shows ignorance and hate.

 

[thebrucebeat]

While I'm not a Republican, I do not believe that their platform calls to "destroy Social Security". Care to back that one up? Where exactly is that stated in the GOP platform?



EBT cards are up...way up. My but you're full of shit.



And we should take your word for this? Yea, pass.



Many would argue Obamacare is doing that all on its own.



That in their platform too?

My goodness you're a petty little man. So full of hate and spewing bullshit at every turn. You realize this means no one takes you seriously, right?

But you should take it seriously.
Paul Ryan has been the economic poster boy for the GOP and his plan supported the privatization of SS which would effectively end it.

Effectively end it how? Sorry, "Because I say so" doesn't cut.

Further, the returns produced by SS are ridiculously low. People would have been FAR better off putting their money into a diversified investment portfolio compared to SS. So tell us, exactly why is discussing the privatization of SS such a bad thing.

And that SS trust fund...how's it doing? Flush with cash or just more unfunded liabilities.

So far, you've not made ANY case much less a good one...



One, you'll have to prove that Paul Ryan's budget would make Medicare "so expensive" and two, you'll have to explain, using your own grown up words, why a private voucher program would be such a bad thing.

So far...fail.

The GOP has successfully cut funding this year for children's food programs providing breakfast for schoolchildren.

Care to point out where in the enumerated powers of the Constitution the federal government has the power to take resources from taxpayers in order to provide breakfast?

We spend more per student than just about any country in the world while producing consistently crappy results...but only if we spend just a bit more, right?

These aren't theoretical. These are the concentration of the party

Paul Ryan is not the GOP anymore than Alan Grayson is the Democrat party. He's one guy putting forth proposals that you have yet to address with even a modicum of logic or reason. Sorry, you don't get to make shit up.

The CBO backs up everything I said.
You said the opposite.
You are debunked.
Nothing is made up.
Ryan has been the spearhead of all GOP economic proposals. Grayson was never anything of the kind.
Methinks the lady doth protest too much.

 

[eflatminor]

But you should take it seriously.
Paul Ryan has been the economic poster boy for the GOP and his plan supported the privatization of SS which would effectively end it.

Effectively end it how? Sorry, "Because I say so" doesn't cut.

Further, the returns produced by SS are ridiculously low. People would have been FAR better off putting their money into a diversified investment portfolio compared to SS. So tell us, exactly why is discussing the privatization of SS such a bad thing.

And that SS trust fund...how's it doing? Flush with cash or just more unfunded liabilities.

So far, you've not made ANY case much less a good one...



One, you'll have to prove that Paul Ryan's budget would make Medicare "so expensive" and two, you'll have to explain, using your own grown up words, why a private voucher program would be such a bad thing.

So far...fail.



Care to point out where in the enumerated powers of the Constitution the federal government has the power to take resources from taxpayers in order to provide breakfast?

We spend more per student than just about any country in the world while producing consistently crappy results...but only if we spend just a bit more, right?

These aren't theoretical. These are the concentration of the party

Paul Ryan is not the GOP anymore than Alan Grayson is the Democrat party. He's one guy putting forth proposals that you have yet to address with even a modicum of logic or reason. Sorry, you don't get to make shit up.

The CBO backs up everything I said.

You really have no idea how the CBO works, do you? But hey, if you say so, we'll just go with that. I mean, who needs proof...

You said the opposite.

No, I asked you to prove your assumptions. You didn't. Fail.

You are debunked.

Seems you need a dictionary...

Nothing is made up.

Once again, still looking for anything to back up what you've stated.

Ryan has been the spearhead of all GOP economic proposals.

Ah, again, because you say so? I suppose we'll just have to go with that too.

Go ahead and prove how the GOP platform is the same thing as one man's proposals.

Good luck.

Then you can explain why Ryan's ideas are wrongheaded. I'm not saying I agree with Ryan, but if I challenge someone's proposal, I like to state exactly why that is the case and you know, back it up with evidence, logic and reason....NONE of which we've seen from you.

Grayson was never anything of the kind.

Your hypocrisy is noted. YOU get to decide which individual's proposals represent an entire party. Got it.

Methinks the lady doth protest too much

Let's just add that to the long list of logical fallacies to which you've relied upon.

How sad for you.

 

[thebrucebeat]

Effectively end it how? Sorry, "Because I say so" doesn't cut.

Further, the returns produced by SS are ridiculously low. People would have been FAR better off putting their money into a diversified investment portfolio compared to SS. So tell us, exactly why is discussing the privatization of SS such a bad thing.

And that SS trust fund...how's it doing? Flush with cash or just more unfunded liabilities.

So far, you've not made ANY case much less a good one...



One, you'll have to prove that Paul Ryan's budget would make Medicare "so expensive" and two, you'll have to explain, using your own grown up words, why a private voucher program would be such a bad thing.

So far...fail.



Care to point out where in the enumerated powers of the Constitution the federal government has the power to take resources from taxpayers in order to provide breakfast?

We spend more per student than just about any country in the world while producing consistently crappy results...but only if we spend just a bit more, right?



Paul Ryan is not the GOP anymore than Alan Grayson is the Democrat party. He's one guy putting forth proposals that you have yet to address with even a modicum of logic or reason. Sorry, you don't get to make shit up.

The CBO backs up everything I said.

You really have no idea how the CBO works, do you? But hey, if you say so, we'll just go with that. I mean, who needs proof...



No, I asked you to prove your assumptions. You didn't. Fail.



Seems you need a dictionary...



Once again, still looking for anything to back up what you've stated.



Ah, again, because you say so? I suppose we'll just have to go with that too.

Go ahead and prove how the GOP platform is the same thing as one man's proposals.

Good luck.

Then you can explain why Ryan's ideas are wrongheaded. I'm not saying I agree with Ryan, but if I challenge someone's proposal, I like to state exactly why that is the case and you know, back it up with evidence, logic and reason....NONE of which we've seen from you.

Grayson was never anything of the kind.

Your hypocrisy is noted. YOU get to decide which individual's proposals represent an entire party. Got it.

Methinks the lady doth protest too much

Let's just add that to the long list of logical fallacies to which you've relied upon.

How sad for you.

You would equate the influence of one party's VP candidate with another party's defeated congressman?
Your credibility just circled down the toilet bowl.

 

[hangover]

If you vote republican, you are voting for the GOP platform. It's intentions are to destroy Social Security and Medicare, which will cause millions of the elderly to suffer, taking what they depend on to live.

While I'm not a Republican, I do not believe that their platform calls to "destroy Social Security". Care to back that one up? Where exactly is that stated in the GOP platform?

The GOP also has been destroying aid to the poor and food stamps,

EBT cards are up...way up. My but you're full of shit.



And we should take your word for this? Yea, pass.

The cons have voted over forty times to destroy health care in the past year.

Many would argue Obamacare is doing that all on its own.

They are determined to destroy Medicaid for the poor.

That in their platform too?

My goodness you're a petty little man. So full of hate and spewing bullshit at every turn. You realize this means no one takes you seriously, right?

So what about you isn't a con? I mean besides the ignorance of the GOP platform.
Deja Vu: A Look Back at Some of the Tirades Against Social Security and Medicare | BillMoyers.com

Eric Cantor Admits Republicans Want to Kill Social Security | Firedoglake

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/20/us/politics/house-passes-bill-cutting-40-billion-from-food-stamps.html?_r=0

 

[amrchaos]

I gotta go with

do unto others...

That's a good rule to live by, the rest is nice, and to use tidbits to say that a religion is useless just shows ignorance and hate.

The Cult of the Flying Spaghetti monster is a useless religion.

Damn, I'm ignorant and hateful!! Oh well, I guess I have no choice but to go and live with myself!!

 

[eflatminor]

The CBO backs up everything I said.

You really have no idea how the CBO works, do you? But hey, if you say so, we'll just go with that. I mean, who needs proof...



No, I asked you to prove your assumptions. You didn't. Fail.



Seems you need a dictionary...



Once again, still looking for anything to back up what you've stated.



Ah, again, because you say so? I suppose we'll just have to go with that too.

Go ahead and prove how the GOP platform is the same thing as one man's proposals.

Good luck.

Then you can explain why Ryan's ideas are wrongheaded. I'm not saying I agree with Ryan, but if I challenge someone's proposal, I like to state exactly why that is the case and you know, back it up with evidence, logic and reason....NONE of which we've seen from you.



Your hypocrisy is noted. YOU get to decide which individual's proposals represent an entire party. Got it.

Methinks the lady doth protest too much

Let's just add that to the long list of logical fallacies to which you've relied upon.

How sad for you.

You would equate the influence of one party's VP candidate with another party's defeated congressman?
Your credibility just circled down the toilet bowl.

So it's "influence" now, and not PLATFORM, as was the point.

Well, thanks for making my point!

Still waiting for that modicum of evidence, logic or reason to support your statements. So far, crickets. Telling...

 

[eflatminor]

If you vote republican, you are voting for the GOP platform. It's intentions are to destroy Social Security and Medicare, which will cause millions of the elderly to suffer, taking what they depend on to live.

While I'm not a Republican, I do not believe that their platform calls to "destroy Social Security". Care to back that one up? Where exactly is that stated in the GOP platform?



EBT cards are up...way up. My but you're full of shit.



And we should take your word for this? Yea, pass.



Many would argue Obamacare is doing that all on its own.

They are determined to destroy Medicaid for the poor.

That in their platform too?

My goodness you're a petty little man. So full of hate and spewing bullshit at every turn. You realize this means no one takes you seriously, right?

So what about you isn't a con? I mean besides the ignorance of the GOP platform.

The fact I'm not a conservative. The fact I am socially liberal. The fact I stand against all forms of cronyism and corporate handouts. The fact I think anyone should be free to marry anyone they like. The fact I stand against our extensive military interventionism. The fact I think no consensual activity between adults should be criminalized. I could go on, but I've already shown you to be ignorant with that little taste.

So what about you isn't a nanny state collectivist asshat.

Deja Vu: A Look Back at Some of the Tirades Against Social Security and Medicare | BillMoyers.com

So instead of pointing to, you know, the ACTUAL GOP PLATFORM, you link to something leftist Bill Moyers said.

Wow, just wow.

When you can back up your statements as being part of the actual GOP platform, you let us know. Until then, your overwhelming bias is evident for all to see.

Eric Cantor Admits Republicans Want to Kill Social Security | Firedoglake

So...NOT the GOP Platform, but something one Republican stated.

Wow are you stupid.

And besides, from your own damn link, Cantor says "So we’ve got to protect today’s seniors."

How is that killing Social Security?

Of course, these programs CANNOT exist as they currently do into the future, not without massive reforms. Anyone with a modicum of understanding as to how its funded in the face of an aging population understands this. But hey, don't let a quote taken out of context stop you from spewing unsubstantiated hate. It's what you do!

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/20/us/politics/house-passes-bill-cutting-40-billion-from-food-stamps.html?_r=0

From your link: "“This bill eliminates loopholes, ensures work requirements, and puts us on a fiscally responsible path,” said Representative Marlin Stutzman, Republican of Indiana"

Can't have that, can we???

ANOTHER massive fail from hungover

 

[amrchaos]

I think eflat is making a very simple and fine point here: Paul Ryan's budget was not part of the GOP platform during any election cycle.

The point behind Ryan's popularity has to do with him taking a bold step in recognizing that something has to be done about the financial problem surrounding Social Security. Before he even came out with his plan, there were few who was even willing to do more than simple cosmetics and jungling the accountant books when concerning the matter. Why not, you say? Because Social Security is a political third rail. Proof of that is Paul Ryan reputation and how he just got politically steamrolled by Democrats.


Again, Ryan's Health plan was not part of the Republican platform. Could it have become an agenda if Romney was elected, doubtfully as well. Ryan's plan had too many critics inside the party to gain support.


.

 

[hangover]

While I'm not a Republican, I do not believe that their platform calls to "destroy Social Security". Care to back that one up? Where exactly is that stated in the GOP platform?



EBT cards are up...way up. My but you're full of shit.



And we should take your word for this? Yea, pass.



Many would argue Obamacare is doing that all on its own.



That in their platform too?

My goodness you're a petty little man. So full of hate and spewing bullshit at every turn. You realize this means no one takes you seriously, right?

So what about you isn't a con? I mean besides the ignorance of the GOP platform.

The fact I'm not a conservative. The fact I am socially liberal. The fact I stand against all forms of cronyism and corporate handouts. The fact I think anyone should be free to marry anyone they like. The fact I stand against our extensive military interventionism. The fact I think no consensual activity between adults should be criminalized. I could go on, but I've already shown you to be ignorant with that little taste.

So what about you isn't a nanny state collectivist asshat.



So instead of pointing to, you know, the ACTUAL GOP PLATFORM, you link to something leftist Bill Moyers said.

Wow, just wow.

When you can back up your statements as being part of the actual GOP platform, you let us know. Until then, your overwhelming bias is evident for all to see.

Eric Cantor Admits Republicans Want to Kill Social Security | Firedoglake

So...NOT the GOP Platform, but something one Republican stated.

Wow are you stupid.

And besides, from your own damn link, Cantor says "So we’ve got to protect today’s seniors."

How is that killing Social Security?

Of course, these programs CANNOT exist as they currently do into the future, not without massive reforms. Anyone with a modicum of understanding as to how its funded in the face of an aging population understands this. But hey, don't let a quote taken out of context stop you from spewing unsubstantiated hate. It's what you do!

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/20/us/politics/house-passes-bill-cutting-40-billion-from-food-stamps.html?_r=0

From your link: "“This bill eliminates loopholes, ensures work requirements, and puts us on a fiscally responsible path,” said Representative Marlin Stutzman, Republican of Indiana"

Can't have that, can we???

ANOTHER massive fail from hungover

You dismiss the "fact" that the cons have been trying to destroy Social Security since it's inception, proves you live in denial, like cons do.

The fact that you try to defend republicans as fiscally responsible after the the last three con POTUS's have added $10 trillion to the national debt, show you refuse to deal with reality, like cons do.

The fact that Shrub Jr. destroyed the only balanced budget in U.S. history, in his first six months, proves how fiscally responsible cons really are.

The fact that you dismiss Cantor as just "one republican", even though he's one of the top leaders in the GOP, illustrates your con like deception.

And the fact that you ridicule Moyers as a leftist, exposes your right wingness.

And the fact that you use sophomoric insults like the cons do, leaves no doubt that you're an uneducated fukwit. There, now I' down to your level, so you can understand.

 

[eflatminor]

You dismiss the "fact" that the cons have been trying to destroy Social Security since it's inception, proves you live in denial, like cons do.

If it's such a "fact", then you ought to be able to point to that in their platform, as you previously suggested.

So far, all we've heard is "because you say so". Yea, well, that's not evidence.

The fact that you try to defend republicans as fiscally responsible after the the last three con POTUS's have added $10 trillion to the national debt, show you refuse to deal with reality, like cons do.

More lies from hungover. I never defended Republican spending because I find it indefensible. Of course, it pales compared to your current dear leader's fiscal irresponsibility.

Another fail.

The fact that Shrub Jr. destroyed the only balanced budget in U.S. history, in his first six months, proves how fiscally responsible cons really are.

Actually, the budget was balanced previously in American history. In fact, we even once paid off the debt. Do you even know the difference between deficit and debt?

But hey, if Bush ran up the deficit spending, what exactly has Obama done?

The fact that you dismiss Cantor as just "one republican", even though he's one of the top leaders in the GOP, illustrates your con like deception.

The fact that you equate one Republican's proposal with the entire GOP platform illustrates your profound ignorance.

And ANOTHER fail!

And the fact that you ridicule Moyers as a leftist, exposes your right wingness.

Riiiight...he's a limited government guy...

But the point was that you attempted to support your bullshit claim that the GOP platform is to destroy SS by pointing not the ACTUAL GOP PLATFORM, but to an article from a talking head. Now that's just pathetic.

Fail number...oh shit, I've lost count.

And the fact that you use sophomoric insults like the cons do, leaves no doubt that you're an uneducated fukwit. There, now I' down to your level, so you can understand

The irony is thick with this one.

You've been owned, your overwhelming biased exposed, and your profound ignorance laid bare. Deal with it.

 

[hadit]

Your first sentence opines: "you don't have to know his mind." You then proceed to instruct the readers as to the gods plans, aspirations and goals are.

It's really remarkable how religionists presume to speak on behalf of the gods.

Its called mentally ill delusions

Or it could simply mean you're wrong and people actually communicate with God.

Quite frankly, I'm glad He's waited this long. If He'd have shown up 50 years ago, I wouldn't be here to greet Him. As to why He's waited, only the Father knows the right time, so it follows logically that only He would know why.

 

[thebrucebeat]

You dismiss the "fact" that the cons have been trying to destroy Social Security since it's inception, proves you live in denial, like cons do.

If it's such a "fact", then you ought to be able to point to that in their platform, as you previously suggested.

So far, all we've heard is "because you say so". Yea, well, that's not evidence.

The fact that you try to defend republicans as fiscally responsible after the the last three con POTUS's have added $10 trillion to the national debt, show you refuse to deal with reality, like cons do.

More lies from hungover. I never defended Republican spending because I find it indefensible. Of course, it pales compared to your current dear leader's fiscal irresponsibility.

Another fail.



Actually, the budget was balanced previously in American history. In fact, we even once paid off the debt. Do you even know the difference between deficit and debt?

But hey, if Bush ran up the deficit spending, what exactly has Obama done?

The deficit has fallen every year of his presidency at a rate not seen since the post WWII era. Your agenda isn't keeping up with the facts.

The fact that you equate one Republican's proposal with the entire GOP platform illustrates your profound ignorance.

And ANOTHER fail!

And the fact that you ridicule Moyers as a leftist, exposes your right wingness.

Riiiight...he's a limited government guy...

But the point was that you attempted to support your bullshit claim that the GOP platform is to destroy SS by pointing not the ACTUAL GOP PLATFORM, but to an article from a talking head. Now that's just pathetic.

Fail number...oh shit, I've lost count.

And the fact that you use sophomoric insults like the cons do, leaves no doubt that you're an uneducated fukwit. There, now I' down to your level, so you can understand

The irony is thick with this one.

You've been owned, your overwhelming biased exposed, and your profound ignorance laid bare. Deal with it.

Your bias is clearly showing. So is your ignorance of what is happening with the deficit.
You're not a Republican?
Sure.
We believe you.

 

[eflatminor]

You dismiss the "fact" that the cons have been trying to destroy Social Security since it's inception, proves you live in denial, like cons do.

If it's such a "fact", then you ought to be able to point to that in their platform, as you previously suggested.

So far, all we've heard is "because you say so". Yea, well, that's not evidence.



More lies from hungover. I never defended Republican spending because I find it indefensible. Of course, it pales compared to your current dear leader's fiscal irresponsibility.

Another fail.



Actually, the budget was balanced previously in American history. In fact, we even once paid off the debt. Do you even know the difference between deficit and debt?

But hey, if Bush ran up the deficit spending, what exactly has Obama done?

The deficit has fallen every year of his presidency at a rate not seen since the post WWII era. Your agenda isn't keeping up with the facts.

The fact that you equate one Republican's proposal with the entire GOP platform illustrates your profound ignorance.

And ANOTHER fail!



Riiiight...he's a limited government guy...

But the point was that you attempted to support your bullshit claim that the GOP platform is to destroy SS by pointing not the ACTUAL GOP PLATFORM, but to an article from a talking head. Now that's just pathetic.

Fail number...oh shit, I've lost count.

And the fact that you use sophomoric insults like the cons do, leaves no doubt that you're an uneducated fukwit. There, now I' down to your level, so you can understand

The irony is thick with this one.

You've been owned, your overwhelming biased exposed, and your profound ignorance laid bare. Deal with it.

Your bias is clearly showing.

A bias for clear thinking and evidence based conclusions, sure.

So is your ignorance of what is happening with the deficit.

Yes, it's falling, but it's still at record levels. That's the point. Obama has piled on more debt than all previous administrations combined!!! That this year's deficit is less than last years doesn't mean it isn't still ASTRONOMICAL. There is every reason to believe we will hit $20 trillion of debt by the end of his term...and you want to claim victory?

Your ignorance is astounding...or you're just full of shit. Maybe both?

You're not a Republican?
Sure.
We believe you

Uh, you see that label right below my avatar that says "Classical Liberal"?

It's not as though I or anyone else gives a shit what you believe, but I am a registered libertarian.

Fail, once again.

 

[hangover]

You dismiss the "fact" that the cons have been trying to destroy Social Security since it's inception, proves you live in denial, like cons do.

If it's such a "fact", then you ought to be able to point to that in their platform, as you previously suggested.

So far, all we've heard is "because you say so". Yea, well, that's not evidence.

The fact that you try to defend republicans as fiscally responsible after the the last three con POTUS's have added $10 trillion to the national debt, show you refuse to deal with reality, like cons do.

More lies from hungover. I never defended Republican spending because I find it indefensible. Of course, it pales compared to your current dear leader's fiscal irresponsibility.

Another fail.



Actually, the budget was balanced previously in American history. In fact, we even once paid off the debt. Do you even know the difference between deficit and debt?

But hey, if Bush ran up the deficit spending, what exactly has Obama done?



The fact that you equate one Republican's proposal with the entire GOP platform illustrates your profound ignorance.

And ANOTHER fail!

And the fact that you ridicule Moyers as a leftist, exposes your right wingness.

Riiiight...he's a limited government guy...

But the point was that you attempted to support your bullshit claim that the GOP platform is to destroy SS by pointing not the ACTUAL GOP PLATFORM, but to an article from a talking head. Now that's just pathetic.

Fail number...oh shit, I've lost count.

And the fact that you use sophomoric insults like the cons do, leaves no doubt that you're an uneducated fukwit. There, now I' down to your level, so you can understand

The irony is thick with this one.

You've been owned, your overwhelming biased exposed, and your profound ignorance laid bare. Deal with it.

If it walks and talks like a con, it's a con. All of your posts have been a con.

 

[Indofred]

I'm curious to see the explanations of those that think they know the mind of God.

I do not claim to know the mind of God but, my wife takes 2,000 bloody years to get ready to go out, so maybe Jesus was really a woman.

 

[thebrucebeat]

If it's such a "fact", then you ought to be able to point to that in their platform, as you previously suggested.

So far, all we've heard is "because you say so". Yea, well, that's not evidence.



More lies from hungover. I never defended Republican spending because I find it indefensible. Of course, it pales compared to your current dear leader's fiscal irresponsibility.

Another fail.



Actually, the budget was balanced previously in American history. In fact, we even once paid off the debt. Do you even know the difference between deficit and debt?

But hey, if Bush ran up the deficit spending, what exactly has Obama done?

The deficit has fallen every year of his presidency at a rate not seen since the post WWII era. Your agenda isn't keeping up with the facts.

The fact that you equate one Republican's proposal with the entire GOP platform illustrates your profound ignorance.

And ANOTHER fail!



Riiiight...he's a limited government guy...

But the point was that you attempted to support your bullshit claim that the GOP platform is to destroy SS by pointing not the ACTUAL GOP PLATFORM, but to an article from a talking head. Now that's just pathetic.

Fail number...oh shit, I've lost count.



The irony is thick with this one.

You've been owned, your overwhelming biased exposed, and your profound ignorance laid bare. Deal with it.

Your bias is clearly showing.

A bias for clear thinking and evidence based conclusions, sure.

So is your ignorance of what is happening with the deficit.

Yes, it's falling, but it's still at record levels. That's the point. Obama has piled on more debt than all previous administrations combined!!! That this year's deficit is less than last years doesn't mean it isn't still ASTRONOMICAL. There is every reason to believe we will hit $20 trillion of debt by the end of his term...and you want to claim victory?

Your ignorance is astounding...or you're just full of shit. Maybe both?

You're not a Republican?
Sure.
We believe you

Uh, you see that label right below my avatar that says "Classical Liberal"?

It's not as though I or anyone else gives a shit what you believe, but I am a registered libertarian.

Fail, once again.

Not a fail in the least.
Under his administration the deficit is falling at the fastest rate in almost 70 years.
No matter your agenda, this is a very good thing.
Why you would want to recast that very good news as a disaster has to do with whatever your personal agenda is.
The deficit will not disappear until it gets lower first. Is this an advanced concept to you?
No one is claiming victory. We are pointing out good progress.
For some reason you need to believe that Obama is the reason the sky is falling.

 

[eflatminor]

You dismiss the "fact" that the cons have been trying to destroy Social Security since it's inception, proves you live in denial, like cons do.

If it's such a "fact", then you ought to be able to point to that in their platform, as you previously suggested.

So far, all we've heard is "because you say so". Yea, well, that's not evidence.



More lies from hungover. I never defended Republican spending because I find it indefensible. Of course, it pales compared to your current dear leader's fiscal irresponsibility.

Another fail.



Actually, the budget was balanced previously in American history. In fact, we even once paid off the debt. Do you even know the difference between deficit and debt?

But hey, if Bush ran up the deficit spending, what exactly has Obama done?



The fact that you equate one Republican's proposal with the entire GOP platform illustrates your profound ignorance.

And ANOTHER fail!



Riiiight...he's a limited government guy...

But the point was that you attempted to support your bullshit claim that the GOP platform is to destroy SS by pointing not the ACTUAL GOP PLATFORM, but to an article from a talking head. Now that's just pathetic.

Fail number...oh shit, I've lost count.

And the fact that you use sophomoric insults like the cons do, leaves no doubt that you're an uneducated fukwit. There, now I' down to your level, so you can understand

The irony is thick with this one.

You've been owned, your overwhelming biased exposed, and your profound ignorance laid bare. Deal with it.

If it walks and talks like a con, it's a con. All of your posts have been a con.

Ah yes, the ever so powerful "Because I say so" argument...

 

[eflatminor]

Your bias is clearly showing.

A bias for clear thinking and evidence based conclusions, sure.



Yes, it's falling, but it's still at record levels. That's the point. Obama has piled on more debt than all previous administrations combined!!! That this year's deficit is less than last years doesn't mean it isn't still ASTRONOMICAL. There is every reason to believe we will hit $20 trillion of debt by the end of his term...and you want to claim victory?

Your ignorance is astounding...or you're just full of shit. Maybe both?

You're not a Republican?
Sure.
We believe you

Uh, you see that label right below my avatar that says "Classical Liberal"?

It's not as though I or anyone else gives a shit what you believe, but I am a registered libertarian.

Fail, once again.

Not a fail in the least.
Under his administration the deficit is falling at the fastest rate in almost 70 years.

And yet, it's still at record levels!

It's as though you're saying "Hey honey, I may have maxed out 10 credit cards last year, but I only maxed out 9 this year...isn't that wonderful?"

Well, it isn't. However you want to spin it, the fact remains that more debt has accumulated under Obama than during any other administration...more than all previous administrations combined...and he isn't even done yet!

Am I glad it's falling? Sure, but I still disgusted with the OBSCENE level of spending, which, by the way, isn't all on Obama, but everyone one of the members of Congress as well.