Is there a problem in this country that Obama won't fix via more spending?

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: Rio Rebel
Here's a post by profjohn just yesterday in a different thread:

Explain to me how the budget got balanced in the 1990s AFTER Republicans took over control of congress.

Democrats controlled congress for 40 years and couldn't balanced the budget, it took Republicans only 4 to balance the budget... hmmmmm

So which is it? Does Congress control balancing the budget, or does the President? You can't have it both ways.

Based on recent history it takes both parts wanting to balance the budget.

Reagan/Bush and Democrats no balanced budget.
Clinton and Democrats no balanced budget.
Clinton and Republicans balanced budget.
Bush and Republicans no balanced budget.
Bush and Democrats no balanced budget.

Of the two candidates running now McCain is the only one talking about a balanced budget.

 

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Of the two candidates running now McCain is the only one talking about a balanced budget.

McCain will talk about ending world hunger and curing AIDS by 2013 if it gets him elected.

 

[Rio Rebel]

How can McCain possibly balance the budget while staying in Iraq?

The last republican elected also "talked about" balancing the budget. He also talked about no nation building, non-partisanship, and compassionate conservatism.

 

[cliftonite]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: RichardE
The problem with that being? It is going to take 1-3 years no matter who becomes the POTUS to start work on a solution to this crap. It is better than the slash all social program because we want results today that you are pushing for.

I'm glad you were able to do some research though Good job PJ Now what is wrong with that answer?

The problem is that Obama is not talking about balancing the budget in 1-3 years. He is talking about a 'path' to a balanced budget. He never says when that path will reach its destination.

Now for some historical perspective.
The 1994 budget deficit was $200 billion.
It took us three whole years to go from $200 billion in the hole to a balanced budget.
1995 $163 billion
1996 $107 billion
1997 $21 billion

So why isn't Obama suggesting that we can re-balance the budget in 3 years? Or even 4 years?
Why is he instead talking about a 'path' to a balanced budget, but never saying when we will achieve that goal.

We will be paying for the mistakes of the last 8 years for a while. How can he swoop and balance a budget when we have been spending ridiculous amounts of money for so long.

 

[sprok]

Originally posted by: JSt0rm01

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
So why isn't Obama suggesting that we can re-balance the budget in 3 years? Or even 4 years?
Why is he instead talking about a 'path' to a balanced budget, but never saying when we will achieve that goal.

Because your boss fucked shit up so bad that its going to take TIME to fix it. Don't you understand that bush has fucked up so bad that it boggles the mind? Can you concede this?

Why don't we stop talking about bush and focus on obama :roll:

As evidenced by the tax and spend credo of liberal lefties, BHO recently threw in his support for the new GI bill that would increase benefits substantially. Their proposed method of paying this? Additional taxes for individuals/couples making $500,000/$1,000,000+. Only McCain had the fiscal cojones to stand up against such obvious injustice to American tax payers.

This has certainly added street cred to his conviction on reducing federal spending. For that, I salute him.

 

[RichardE]

Originally posted by: sprok

Originally posted by: JSt0rm01

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
So why isn't Obama suggesting that we can re-balance the budget in 3 years? Or even 4 years?
Why is he instead talking about a 'path' to a balanced budget, but never saying when we will achieve that goal.

Because your boss fucked shit up so bad that its going to take TIME to fix it. Don't you understand that bush has fucked up so bad that it boggles the mind? Can you concede this?

Why don't we stop talking about bush and focus on obama :roll:

As evidenced by the tax and spend credo of liberal lefties, BHO recently threw in his support for the new GI bill that would increase benefits substantially. Their proposed method of paying this? Additional taxes for individuals/couples making $500,000/$1,000,000+. Only McCain had the fiscal cojones to stand up against such obvious injustice to American tax payers.

This has certainly added street cred to his conviction on reducing federal spending. For that, I salute him.

Look, another ignorant fool. Join the group on the right please.

PJ, going to answer my question? You wanted to have a discussion on him, so come for it. Just because the discussion doesn't turn out the way you want is no reason to avoid it, grow a pair.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: cliftonite
We will be paying for the mistakes of the last 8 years for a while. How can he swoop and balance a budget when we have been spending ridiculous amounts of money for so long.

We are spending less now than during the 80s and yet we still balanced the budget in only 4 years...

 

[JSt0rm]

Has PJ ever admitted to being wrong about something on these forums?

 

[RichardE]

Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
Has PJ ever admitted to being wrong about something on these forums?

He tends to avoid facts that do not conform to his view of life. It's one of the main issues with current politics, people who see it all in black or white, them or us and have no concept of the reasons behind things, nor the ability to look at the other side and see why they might have some good ideas.

 

[cliftonite]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: cliftonite
We will be paying for the mistakes of the last 8 years for a while. How can he swoop and balance a budget when we have been spending ridiculous amounts of money for so long.

We are spending less now than during the 80s and yet we still balanced the budget in only 4 years...

And you wont give Obama 4 years to see if he can balance the budget?

 

[cliftonite]

Originally posted by: sprok

Originally posted by: JSt0rm01

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
So why isn't Obama suggesting that we can re-balance the budget in 3 years? Or even 4 years?
Why is he instead talking about a 'path' to a balanced budget, but never saying when we will achieve that goal.

Because your boss fucked shit up so bad that its going to take TIME to fix it. Don't you understand that bush has fucked up so bad that it boggles the mind? Can you concede this?

Why don't we stop talking about bush and focus on obama :roll:

As evidenced by the tax and spend credo of liberal lefties, BHO recently threw in his support for the new GI bill that would increase benefits substantially. Their proposed method of paying this? Additional taxes for individuals/couples making $500,000/$1,000,000+. Only McCain had the fiscal cojones to stand up against such obvious injustice to American tax payers.

This has certainly added street cred to his conviction on reducing federal spending. For that, I salute him.

Injustice? The troops that are fighting the war dont deserver better benefits?

 

[Moonbeam]

In eight years Bush has ruined America. I wouldn't put too much credit in the opinions of people who voted for him. They are left handed traitors whose best knowledge and advise are nothing but wrong. A fool is somebody who continues down the same path or maintains the same set of beliefs thinking that somehow what's been a disaster will turn out will in the end. Bush supporters don't need arguments, they need a doctor.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: cliftonite

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: cliftonite
We will be paying for the mistakes of the last 8 years for a while. How can he swoop and balance a budget when we have been spending ridiculous amounts of money for so long.

We are spending less now than during the 80s and yet we still balanced the budget in only 4 years...

And you wont give Obama 4 years to see if he can balance the budget?

The problem is that Obama does not talk about balancing the budget in four years.

All Obama is talking about is more spending. If Obama was talking about balancing the budget by the end of his first term then you might have a point.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: RichardE
PJ, going to answer my question? You wanted to have a discussion on him, so come for it. Just because the discussion doesn't turn out the way you want is no reason to avoid it, grow a pair.

Please enlighten me on the difference between today and the 90s.

The war is irrelevant because it is already including in our spending. In fact if Obama follows through on his promise to end the war that alone would save $100 billion a year. Yet even after making that promise Obama doesn't provide a way to balance the budget.

 

[ProfJohn]

Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
Has PJ ever admitted to being wrong about something on these forums?

I was wrong in thinking that you guys would actually talk about Obama and his spending

BTW have you ever provided anything substantial to the argument?

 

[RichardE]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: RichardE
PJ, going to answer my question? You wanted to have a discussion on him, so come for it. Just because the discussion doesn't turn out the way you want is no reason to avoid it, grow a pair.

Please enlighten me on the difference between today and the 90s.

The war is irrelevant because it is already including in our spending. In fact if Obama follows through on his promise to end the war that alone would save $100 billion a year. Yet even after making that promise Obama doesn't provide a way to balance the budget.

You need to take some course, get a little education going in politics, economy, or maybe read a few books. It should be embarrassing to the republican party at the ignorance some people such as yourself display when comparing different time periods as a measurement stick, as well as just overall ignorance at anything outside there scope of what "life should be".

I already provided you with statics that would cover his spending promises you showed, which you wanted before you actually did the research yourself. I'm not going to give you a huge outline of the differences in spending priorities, political environment as well as economics of two very very different decades. If you can't do that yourself with minimal effort you are truly a lost cause. Not a cause as a "republican" but as a informed participator in politics.

 

[JSt0rm]

Originally posted by: sprok

Why don't we stop talking about bush and focus on obama :roll:

As evidenced by the tax and spend credo of liberal lefties, BHO recently threw in his support for the new GI bill that would increase benefits substantially. Their proposed method of paying this? Additional taxes for individuals/couples making $500,000/$1,000,000+. Only McCain had the fiscal cojones to stand up against such obvious injustice to American tax payers.

This has certainly added street cred to his conviction on reducing federal spending. For that, I salute him.

are you fucking kidding me? Of all the things you could of picked that obama is going to spend money on you pick the troops? some guy loses his fucking leg so that you can make 500,000 to 1 million dollars and you don't want to give him a little more? unreal. You guys are so getting pwned this season. You dump our troops into this bs war and then don't want to support them when they come home. You deserve nothing.

 

[JSt0rm]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
Has PJ ever admitted to being wrong about something on these forums?

I was wrong in thinking that you guys would actually talk about Obama and his spending

BTW have you ever provided anything substantial to the argument?

there is no argument - just the village idiot who found a soap box.

 

[fskimospy]

By the way quick question, half the time Obama is attacked by right wingers for not having a plan on anything, that he's just running on 'hope'. The other half of the time he is attacked for his plans being too expensive or whatever. So which is it? Does he not have a plan, or do you not like his plan? This alternating between the two is getting old... you can't have both, and it just shows that you're justifying your dislike of him by whatever argument is most convenient at the moment.

 

[Rio Rebel]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
By the way quick question, half the time Obama is attacked by right wingers for not having a plan on anything, that he's just running on 'hope'. The other half of the time he is attacked for his plans being too expensive or whatever. So which is it? Does he not have a plan, or do you not like his plan? This alternating between the two is getting old... you can't have both, and it just shows that you're justifying your dislike of him by whatever argument is most convenient at the moment.

and he's not black enough...then he's too black.
and he's muslim...then he's got poor judgment for attending a Christian church for 20 years with Rev. Wright as the pastor.

Seems like with Obama, folks don't feel the need to be consistent at all - just however we can justify not liking him, that's good enough.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: sprok

Originally posted by: JSt0rm01

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
So why isn't Obama suggesting that we can re-balance the budget in 3 years? Or even 4 years?
Why is he instead talking about a 'path' to a balanced budget, but never saying when we will achieve that goal.

Because your boss fucked shit up so bad that its going to take TIME to fix it. Don't you understand that bush has fucked up so bad that it boggles the mind? Can you concede this?

Why don't we stop talking about bush and focus on obama :roll:

As evidenced by the tax and spend credo of liberal lefties, BHO recently threw in his support for the new GI bill that would increase benefits substantially. Their proposed method of paying this? Additional taxes for individuals/couples making $500,000/$1,000,000+. Only McCain had the fiscal cojones to stand up against such obvious injustice to American tax payers.

This has certainly added street cred to his conviction on reducing federal spending. For that, I salute him.

I'm more concerned about the morality of a politician that would vote for a war and against the restoration of the VA benefits for the veterans of that war. Benefits which McCain himself received in his time.

So that's not cojones, that's just plain immoral, and yet another reason why veterans of all kinds hate McCain.

Or is my sarcasm meter broke?

 

[sprok]

Originally posted by: Vic

I'm more concerned about the morality of a politician that would vote for a war and against the restoration of the VA benefits for the veterans of that war. Benefits which McCain himself received in his time.

So that's not cojones, that's just plain immoral, and yet another reason why veterans of all kinds hate McCain.

Or is my sarcasm meter broke?

I broke plenty of sarcasm meters with that post.

 

[JSt0rm]

Originally posted by: sprok

I broke plenty of sarcasm meters with that post.

lol.

 

[Engineer]

If Obama wants to spend, he is just imitating the last 7 years of government that we currently have....with one big exception. At least he wants to add taxes to the "upper classes" to pay for it instead of balooning our debt and creating a weak dollar and financial turmoil in the US (i.e. inflation gone wild) by the consequences of borrow and spend.

To think McCain will balance anything....buwhwhahahahaha. Not going to happen.

Call him tax and spend if you wish, but he will most likely be far more responsible in controlling government debt that BushCo.....which did nothing but run of the ole credit card bill.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Originally posted by: senseamp
If Obama is so much for all these proposals, he's a US Senator now, why doesn't he propose them now? Even if Bush vetoes them, he can put some specifics on the table and we can have a real discussion of their merits, or lack there of.

pssst... someone proposed all of Obama's plans for him and Obama voted against them.

And if Obama somehow ends up being a poor President (which I doubt, but let's assume), we will have only the Republicans and 8 years of GW Bush to blame for it.

Are you fuckin kidding me?

ROFL