Drowning in debt: Obama's spending and borrowing leaves U.S. gasping for air

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: blanghorst

Originally posted by: sandorski

Obama's "Fiscal Policy" is a result of Bush's stupidity. You'll probably think that's another useless post, but that's because you can't grasp simple Reality.

The short term fiscal policy is a result of Bush, correct. However, how long are you going to keep that act up? It is amazing to me how you guys pick and choose who inherits what problems. For example, when we discuss Carter in this forum, we hear the "But...But...Ford....but..but....Nixon" chants, as if Carter were an innocent bystander. When the discussion turns to Reagan, you guys imply he inherited those problems from Ford or Nixon, ignoring Carter's role. And today, the "Bu....Bu....Bush" chants are all we hear. Sure, I will grant it is too early to pin everything on Obama, but the CBO estimates are very scary and you can't pin all of that on Bush no matter how much you want it to be true.

It's simple really: He who caused it, is to Blame.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: blanghorst

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: sandorski
No, what's your point? We all know the Debt is getting bigger. Some of us understand why and the necessity of it. Others just see it getting bigger and run around screaming about it.

So in other words, you have nothing else to add?

Or perhaps it's just that you're in over your head? :laugh:

And as usual, you have nothing to add, either (except trolling). It's funny, between your posting style (no substance, quick one-liners that you think are brilliant, etc) and your avatars, sometimes I forget you're two separate people .

LOL, you are one to talk about not having anything to add. It seems that you're a bit of a one-trick pony.

Better a one-trick pony than a lame pony. Remember, the lame ones get a bullet between the eyes .

So see my sig (CBO) for my "one trick." Right now, it's plenty more than you've had to offer. And sorry, "Bu bu bu bu Buuuuuuuuuuush" just doesn't cut it when we're talking about the consequences of Obama's fiscal policy. So take your Ritalin, get your ADD under control, and try to wrap your head around it :lips:

edit - Oh wait, I just remembered who you are: you're the guy who demands facts and figures, and then when presented with them, you either run for the hills or you start one-liner personal attacks. Never mind then... I didn't realize I was wasting my time with you. No need to look at the graph (or the OP, for that matter).

I think it is time to ignore him. As you say, he demands facts and when you give him the facts, he ignores them or uses his new line -- "I think independently." Because, after all, nobodyknow's "independent thought" is a lot more valuable and inciteful than the PhDs from Stanford, MIT, Harvard, etc. who consult and work with the CBO. I mean, who are we to believe folks like this and this, with such questionable credentials. :roll: Or how dare we quote the research of other "questionable" organizations such as Gallup, PriceWaterhouseCoopers, CNN, etc.

Seriously, I wonder if perhaps he is an alternate account for Dave.

Yup, runaway.

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

Originally posted by: SickBeast
I was told recently that in California they pay MORE tax than we do here in Canada, yet they don't have universal health care.
IMO the US needs a third and maybe even a fourth political party. Both the Democrats and the Republicans have proven themselves to be incompetent. I'm willing to give Obama some more time before judging him too harshly, but I'm not impressed with his handling of the economic crisis thus far, and I'm not entirely convinced that his impending arrival didn't play a role in it.

What we need is LESS GOVERNMENT and lower taxes. It blows my mind how little they can accomplish with half of our collective monies.

let me get this straight....
Your canadian? You have no say in this ......
I didn`t know canadians could mvote for POTUS>>..hmmm

I don't need to be an American to critique your president. If anything, I'm more objective that you are as an outsider, plus my mind hasn't been poisoned by your messed up media.

Objective? Aren't you the same dummy who went to Cuba on holiday and thought it was a utopia?

So does Jude Law apparently. I would give creedence to your opinion but I'm sure you're not allowed to go to Cuba. You sure look hypocritical for pointing out Cuba's flaws (lack of freedom) when you don't even have the freedom to visit the place yourself. :roll:

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: blanghorst

Originally posted by: sandorski

Obama's "Fiscal Policy" is a result of Bush's stupidity. You'll probably think that's another useless post, but that's because you can't grasp simple Reality.

The short term fiscal policy is a result of Bush, correct. However, how long are you going to keep that act up? It is amazing to me how you guys pick and choose who inherits what problems. For example, when we discuss Carter in this forum, we hear the "But...But...Ford....but..but....Nixon" chants, as if Carter were an innocent bystander. When the discussion turns to Reagan, you guys imply he inherited those problems from Ford or Nixon, ignoring Carter's role. And today, the "Bu....Bu....Bush" chants are all we hear. Sure, I will grant it is too early to pin everything on Obama, but the CBO estimates are very scary and you can't pin all of that on Bush no matter how much you want it to be true.

It's simple really: He who caused it, is to Blame.

I'm sorry, maybe you didn't see the question: However, how long are you going to keep that act up? So if Obama screws it up worse or doesn't fix it, you are still going to blame Bush? Nice logic there. Not like Obama was elected to fix the issues or anything. :roll:

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: blanghorst

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: jbourne77

Originally posted by: sandorski
No, what's your point? We all know the Debt is getting bigger. Some of us understand why and the necessity of it. Others just see it getting bigger and run around screaming about it.

So in other words, you have nothing else to add?

Or perhaps it's just that you're in over your head? :laugh:

And as usual, you have nothing to add, either (except trolling). It's funny, between your posting style (no substance, quick one-liners that you think are brilliant, etc) and your avatars, sometimes I forget you're two separate people .

LOL, you are one to talk about not having anything to add. It seems that you're a bit of a one-trick pony.

Better a one-trick pony than a lame pony. Remember, the lame ones get a bullet between the eyes .

So see my sig (CBO) for my "one trick." Right now, it's plenty more than you've had to offer. And sorry, "Bu bu bu bu Buuuuuuuuuuush" just doesn't cut it when we're talking about the consequences of Obama's fiscal policy. So take your Ritalin, get your ADD under control, and try to wrap your head around it :lips:

edit - Oh wait, I just remembered who you are: you're the guy who demands facts and figures, and then when presented with them, you either run for the hills or you start one-liner personal attacks. Never mind then... I didn't realize I was wasting my time with you. No need to look at the graph (or the OP, for that matter).

I think it is time to ignore him. As you say, he demands facts and when you give him the facts, he ignores them or uses his new line -- "I think independently." Because, after all, nobodyknow's "independent thought" is a lot more valuable and inciteful than the PhDs from Stanford, MIT, Harvard, etc. who consult and work with the CBO. I mean, who are we to believe folks like this and this, with such questionable credentials. :roll: Or how dare we quote the research of other "questionable" organizations such as Gallup, PriceWaterhouseCoopers, CNN, etc.

Seriously, I wonder if perhaps he is an alternate account for Dave.

Yup, runaway.

I am not running away from anything. Read the post again and try to keep up here. If you want to disagree with those sources, spell out your position and arguments along with links to sources which are as credible as mine.

However, do NOT ask me for facts and once presented to you from reputable sources, try to divert the topic, resort to name calling, or run away claiming "victory." Because as you can see from the links above, you aren't "winning" anything over me but you are claiming to have achieved "victory" over some very smart people, any one of whom would rip you guys to shreds in a debate over public policy.

 

[Mursilis]

Originally posted by: SickBeast
So does Jude Law apparently. I would give creedence to your opinion but I'm sure you're not allowed to go to Cuba. You sure look hypocritical for pointing out Cuba's flaws (lack of freedom) when you don't even have the freedom to visit the place yourself. :roll:

Plenty of Americans have gone to Cuba - it merely involves some creative flight-booking. One of the elite private high schools in DC (Sidwell Friends?) even sent a class there on a field trip a few years back, and it was reported in the Wash. Post. The State Department's ban is widely disregarded and unenforced. And I wasn't pointing out Cuba's flaws; I was merely making reference to your hilarious blindness regarding them.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: blanghorst

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: blanghorst

Originally posted by: sandorski

Obama's "Fiscal Policy" is a result of Bush's stupidity. You'll probably think that's another useless post, but that's because you can't grasp simple Reality.

The short term fiscal policy is a result of Bush, correct. However, how long are you going to keep that act up? It is amazing to me how you guys pick and choose who inherits what problems. For example, when we discuss Carter in this forum, we hear the "But...But...Ford....but..but....Nixon" chants, as if Carter were an innocent bystander. When the discussion turns to Reagan, you guys imply he inherited those problems from Ford or Nixon, ignoring Carter's role. And today, the "Bu....Bu....Bush" chants are all we hear. Sure, I will grant it is too early to pin everything on Obama, but the CBO estimates are very scary and you can't pin all of that on Bush no matter how much you want it to be true.

It's simple really: He who caused it, is to Blame.

I'm sorry, maybe you didn't see the question: However, how long are you going to keep that act up?

What act? Carter inherited an Economy that went into the dumps in 1973. Part Oil Embargo, part Cost of the Vietnam War, part other things.

Obama inherited the worst Recession since the Great Depression.

What's there to discuss? A new President doesn't get a Clean Slate, Reset Economy, or anything else whereupon everything they do from Day 1 is 100% responsible for what happens next.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Originally posted by: sandorski

What act? Carter inherited an Economy that went into the dumps in 1973. Part Oil Embargo, part Cost of the Vietnam War, part other things.

Carter was not successful at fixing the problems, which he was elected to do. I agree that you don't point the finger on day 1 and say "It is your fault Jimmy!," but he had a full term to fix these issues and failed. By that time, it was HIS problem. Many on this forum like to pretend Carter was an innocent bystander and the problems Reagan encountered were the problems of Ford and/or Nixon, which is a load of crap.

Obama inherited the worst Recession since the Great Depression.

What's there to discuss? A new President doesn't get a Clean Slate, Reset Economy, or anything else whereupon everything they do from Day 1 is 100% responsible for what happens next.

As I previously mentioned in my post, I do agree with this view. However, if the situations were reversed and Bush was a Democrat and Obama was a Republican, would you be saying the same thing?

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: blanghorst

Originally posted by: sandorski

What act? Carter inherited an Economy that went into the dumps in 1973. Part Oil Embargo, part Cost of the Vietnam War, part other things.

Carter was not successful at fixing the problems, which he was elected to do. I agree that you don't point the finger on day 1 and say "It is your fault Jimmy!," but he had a full term to fix these issues and failed. By that time, it was HIS problem. Many on this forum like to pretend Carter was an innocent bystander and the problems Reagan encountered were the problems of Ford and/or Nixon, which is a load of crap.

Obama inherited the worst Recession since the Great Depression.

What's there to discuss? A new President doesn't get a Clean Slate, Reset Economy, or anything else whereupon everything they do from Day 1 is 100% responsible for what happens next.

As I previously mentioned in my post, I do agree with this view. However, if the situations were reversed and Bush was a Democrat and Obama was a Republican, would you be saying the same thing?

Given the same situation, Yes.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: blanghorst

Originally posted by: sandorski

What act? Carter inherited an Economy that went into the dumps in 1973. Part Oil Embargo, part Cost of the Vietnam War, part other things.

Carter was not successful at fixing the problems, which he was elected to do. I agree that you don't point the finger on day 1 and say "It is your fault Jimmy!," but he had a full term to fix these issues and failed. By that time, it was HIS problem. Many on this forum like to pretend Carter was an innocent bystander and the problems Reagan encountered were the problems of Ford and/or Nixon, which is a load of crap.

Obama inherited the worst Recession since the Great Depression.

What's there to discuss? A new President doesn't get a Clean Slate, Reset Economy, or anything else whereupon everything they do from Day 1 is 100% responsible for what happens next.

As I previously mentioned in my post, I do agree with this view. However, if the situations were reversed and Bush was a Democrat and Obama was a Republican, would you be saying the same thing?

Given the same situation, Yes.

Somehow I doubt that and more than likely, you would find some reason to play "pin the blame tail on the Republican," but I will take you for your word.

 

[SickBeast]

Originally posted by: Mursilis

Originally posted by: SickBeast
So does Jude Law apparently. I would give creedence to your opinion but I'm sure you're not allowed to go to Cuba. You sure look hypocritical for pointing out Cuba's flaws (lack of freedom) when you don't even have the freedom to visit the place yourself. :roll:

Plenty of Americans have gone to Cuba - it merely involves some creative flight-booking. One of the elite private high schools in DC (Sidwell Friends?) even sent a class there on a field trip a few years back, and it was reported in the Wash. Post. The State Department's ban is widely disregarded and unenforced. And I wasn't pointing out Cuba's flaws; I was merely making reference to your hilarious blindness regarding them.

So tell me what's so wrong with Cuba then? From a tourist's perspective, absolutely nothing is the answer, aside from perhaps the bland food which is at least organically grown.

Cubans lack freedom and they don't have as much money as people in America. Money isn't everything. If all you care about is GDP per capita I suggest you move to Singapore or something.

Why are you derailing this thread again?

 

[Jadow]

scares the hell out of me. Wish they'd passed that balanced budged amendment in the 90's. Back then the repubs were against it... ugh

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: Jadow
scares the hell out of me. Wish they'd passed that balanced budged amendment in the 90's. Back then the repubs were against it... ugh

Uh you got it backwards. GOP was pushing for balanced amendment.