Bored

Commerce, GA

#6841 Apr 12, 2013
This is the lie libtards believe.

Barack Obama says::
""Over the last four years, the deficit has gone up, but 90 percent of that is as a consequence of" President George W. Bush’s policies and the recession.""
LogicalChickn

Douglasville, GA

#6842 Apr 12, 2013
Bored wrote:
<quoted text>
Obama claimed it was a "fiscally responsible blueprint for middle-class jobs and growth." But many Republicans quickly assailed the plan for not cutting deficits deeply or quickly enough. We’ll sort through some of the spin."
Let's do that. Let's sort through some of the spin.

If Republicans want the deficit reduced more quickly they should allow closing loopholes and raising tax rates for the wealthy. They should immediately support cutting corporate welfare. The revenue generated from increased taxes and savings from corporate handouts could go directly towards the deficit. You wouldn't find a SINGLE Democrat anywhere who would be opposed to this.

Are the Republicans doing these things? No. In fact, they vehemently oppose doing these things. So their actions really aren't backing up their words, are they?

Hows that for cutting through some spin? It's pretty easy.
LogicalChickn

Douglasville, GA

#6843 Apr 12, 2013
Bored wrote:
This is the lie libtards believe.
Barack Obama says::
""Over the last four years, the deficit has gone up, but 90 percent of that is as a consequence of" President George W. Bush’s policies and the recession.""
How much of the deficit was caused by REPUBLICAN President George W. Bush destroying the economy of the United States of America?

How much of the deficit was caused by REPUBLICAN President George W. Bush's policies enacted during his administration?

How much of the deficit was caused by REPUBLICAN President George W. Bush's unfunded wars?

The answers are out there. I'd like for a right-winger to look them up and share them with us.

What actions and policies has Obama taken that WERE NOT RELATED TO THE REPUBLICAN ECONOMIC DESTRUCTION that added to the deficit? How much did those add up to?

This isn't an unsolvable mystery. It's just simple math and accounting. The numbers exist and can be found with a quick Google search.

Republicans don't want to do it because it would expose their flawed assertions. They would have to look blame right in the eye and take personal responsibility for the devastation they caused.

Synergy? Are you up for this? How about you Big Dave? Maybe Glorya? Maybe one of you other Fox News Watching Zombies?

No spin - just straight answers to those questions.
Bored

Commerce, GA

#6844 Apr 12, 2013
LogicalChickn wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's do that. Let's sort through some of the spin.
If Republicans want the deficit reduced more quickly they should allow closing loopholes and raising tax rates for the wealthy. They should immediately support cutting corporate welfare. The revenue generated from increased taxes and savings from corporate handouts could go directly towards the deficit. You wouldn't find a SINGLE Democrat anywhere who would be opposed to this.
Are the Republicans doing these things? No. In fact, they vehemently oppose doing these things. So their actions really aren't backing up their words, are they?
Hows that for cutting through some spin? It's pretty easy.

Everyone knows chickens can live quite a while with their heads cut off.
You are a good example.
No way is hades would libtards not spend more than received, something about their genes.
You are correct, not a SINGLE democrat is opposed to raising taxes. They want your money, my money, and the dead mans money.

And a good thang the repubs oppose tax increases, everytime they give in to the demos the libtards put us further into debt.

The repubs are the ones who forced the sequester, or have you forgotten that?
Obama is now laying claim to those savings in his budget saying he will reduce the deficit by $2 trillion over ten years.
Without that sequester, Obama will only reduce the deficit $600 billion over 10 years, What a laugh, spend trillions and save billions.
Yep, that's the libtard way of economics, spend everything and let the next generation or 3 fix the problem.


LogicalChickn

Douglasville, GA

#6845 Apr 12, 2013
Bored wrote:
<quoted text>
Everyone knows chickens can live quite a while with their heads cut off.
You are a good example.
No way is hades would libtards not spend more than received, something about their genes.
You are correct, not a SINGLE democrat is opposed to raising taxes. They want your money, my money, and the dead mans money.
And a good thang the repubs oppose tax increases, everytime they give in to the demos the libtards put us further into debt.
Are you saying something? I don't hear anything. Certainly no suggestions, no facts. You're just mumbling and moving your lips and spewing useless little driblets of hate like Fox News and Rush taught you to do. Nothing of substance came out of your mouth. You're just wasting everyone's time.
Bored wrote:
<quoted text>

The repubs are the ones who forced the sequester, or have you forgotten that?
Obama is now laying claim to those savings in his budget saying he will reduce the deficit by $2 trillion over ten years.
Without that sequester, Obama will only reduce the deficit $600 billion over 10 years, What a laugh, spend trillions and save billions.
Yep, that's the libtard way of economics, spend everything and let the next generation or 3 fix the problem.
I just hear some blame. No workable suggestions, no actual facts. Just mouthing stuff again. I think I heard a bit of deflection.
Bored wrote:
<quoted text>

Yep, that's the libtard way of economics, spend everything and let the next generation or 3 fix the problem.
Well this is a workable plan you're putting forth, isn't it? NOT! No plan at all.

Again - Cutting tax loopholes on the wealthy, cutting corporate welfare, cutting defense, and applying the savings directly to the deficit is something that would actually make the deficit go down, unlike your non-stop blame and mumblings.

Republicans want the deficit to go down. Let's do something about it. Let's do those items? What's the objection? Don't you WANT to see the deficit go down?

Bored - how about you take a stab at answering those questions I asked about how the deficit got the way it is? The answers are in the CBO and OBM documents. Easily found. Just give us the straight answers about how the deficit got to be the way it is based on the official numbers. Care to take a try at it?

You won't like the answers.
Bored

Commerce, GA

#6846 Apr 12, 2013
LogicalChickn wrote:
<quoted text>
How much of the deficit was caused by REPUBLICAN President George W. Bush destroying the economy of the United States of America?
How much of the deficit was caused by REPUBLICAN President George W. Bush's policies enacted during his administration?
How much of the deficit was caused by REPUBLICAN President George W. Bush's unfunded wars?
The answers are out there. I'd like for a right-winger to look them up and share them with us.
What actions and policies has Obama taken that WERE NOT RELATED TO THE REPUBLICAN ECONOMIC DESTRUCTION that added to the deficit? How much did those add up to?
This isn't an unsolvable mystery. It's just simple math and accounting. The numbers exist and can be found with a quick Google search.
Republicans don't want to do it because it would expose their flawed assertions. They would have to look blame right in the eye and take personal responsibility for the devastation they caused.
Synergy? Are you up for this? How about you Big Dave? Maybe Glorya? Maybe one of you other Fox News Watching Zombies?
No spin - just straight answers to those questions.
Since it's so easy, you do it.
Let us know when you accomplish something.
LogicalChickn

Douglasville, GA

#6847 Apr 12, 2013
If those easy questions are just too hard for you, you can always take the easy questions. No extra points for that though. Here they are:

1. Did spending go up doing the Bush Years? Yes or No?

2. Did unemployment rise during the Bush Years? Yes or No?

3. Did the economy collapse during the Bush Years? Yes or No?

4. How did Romney intend to reduce the deficit while cutting the wealthiest peoples taxes while at the same time adding 2 Trillion to Defense Spending? How does this math work?

5. How ...., specifically,......does the CURRENT Republican plan (that you obviously support) intend to reduce the deficit and improve the economy? Do you even know what that actual plan is? I bet you don't.
Bored

Commerce, GA

#6848 Apr 12, 2013
LogicalChickn wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you saying something? I don't hear anything. Certainly no suggestions, no facts. You're just mumbling and moving your lips and spewing useless little driblets of hate like Fox News and Rush taught you to do. Nothing of substance came out of your mouth. You're just wasting everyone's time.
<quoted text>
I just hear some blame. No workable suggestions, no actual facts. Just mouthing stuff again. I think I heard a bit of deflection.
<quoted text>
Well this is a workable plan you're putting forth, isn't it? NOT! No plan at all.
Again - Cutting tax loopholes on the wealthy, cutting corporate welfare, cutting defense, and applying the savings directly to the deficit is something that would actually make the deficit go down, unlike your non-stop blame and mumblings.
Republicans want the deficit to go down. Let's do something about it. Let's do those items? What's the objection? Don't you WANT to see the deficit go down?
Bored - how about you take a stab at answering those questions I asked about how the deficit got the way it is? The answers are in the CBO and OBM documents. Easily found. Just give us the straight answers about how the deficit got to be the way it is based on the official numbers. Care to take a try at it?
You won't like the answers.
Like your post don't lay blame?
What a dufus.

You want to know about about the deficits, look it up. I already know. And ain't no way in hell it is 90% Bush, and 10% Obama like Obama said it was.
But I know you believe him, heck you would believe him if he said it was bush's fault 100%.


LogicalChickn

Douglasville, GA

#6849 Apr 12, 2013
Bored wrote:
<quoted text>
Since it's so easy, you do it.
Let us know when you accomplish something.
No. You're missing the point.

YOU do it. You're complaining about the deficit. Show us that you understand the official numbers and how they got there.

Personally, I think you're afraid to look at the data before the Republican spin-meisters get a hold of it. I think you're afraid to analyze that data on your own without Fox telling you what to think. But you can easily prove me wrong. I hope you do.
LogicalChickn

Douglasville, GA

#6850 Apr 12, 2013
Bored wrote:
<quoted text>
Like your post don't lay blame?
What a dufus.
You want to know about about the deficits, look it up. I already know. And ain't no way in hell it is 90% Bush, and 10% Obama like Obama said it was.
But I know you believe him, heck you would believe him if he said it was bush's fault 100%.
Still not showing that you know anything at all. You're really starting to look like a bunch of hot air.

Show us you can do something besides spew out hot air and repeat what the right-wing media have told you.
LogicalChickn

Douglasville, GA

#6851 Apr 12, 2013
Bored wrote:
<quoted text>
heck you would believe him if he said it was bush's fault 100%.
It doesn't matter what I BELIEVE or what President of the United States of America Barack Obama SAYS in this particular instance.

Believes and Says have nothing to do with it. We're talking facts. They can be looked up and they are what they are.

Why don't you look them up and we can save all this BS talk that you're doing? You don't KNOW like you say you do. And you know it.
Bored

Commerce, GA

#6852 Apr 12, 2013
LogicalChickn wrote:
<quoted text>
No. You're missing the point.
YOU do it. You're complaining about the deficit. Show us that you understand the official numbers and how they got there.
Personally, I think you're afraid to look at the data before the Republican spin-meisters get a hold of it. I think you're afraid to analyze that data on your own without Fox telling you what to think. But you can easily prove me wrong. I hope you do.
2013 is the only year where Obama has projected a deficit below a Trillion dollars where as Bush had only one year with a deficit of over 1 trillion.

President Barack Obama: First Term =$5.073 trillion deficit.

FY 2013 -$901 billion.
FY 2012 -$1.327 trillion.
FY 2011 -$1.299 trillion.
FY 2010 -$1.546 ($1.293 trillion plus $253 billion from the Obama Stimulus Act that was attached to the FY 2009 budget).


President George W. Bush: First Term =$1.267 trillion. Second Term =$2.027 trillion. Total =$3.294.

FY 2009 -$1.16 trillion.($1.416 trillion minus $253 billion from Obama's Stimulus Act)
FY 2008 -$458 billion.
FY 2007 -$161 billion.
FY 2006 -$248 billion.
FY 2005 -$318 billion.
FY 2004 -$413 billion.
FY 2003 -$378 billion.
FY 2002 -$158 billion.
LogicalChickn

Douglasville, GA

#6853 Apr 12, 2013
Why are Republicans so damn afraid of actually acknowledging a real fact?
Bored

Commerce, GA

#6854 Apr 12, 2013
LogicalChickn wrote:
<quoted text>
Still not showing that you know anything at all. You're really starting to look like a bunch of hot air.
Show us you can do something besides spew out hot air and repeat what the right-wing media have told you.
And now you show the real azzhole you are.
Just another clucking chicken.
OMTE

Moultrie, GA

#6855 Apr 12, 2013
Synergy wrote:
<quoted text>
Folks...here you have Darrell and his other brother, Darrell. rotfl
That wasn't nice. Do you really want to provoke me?
domino

Macon, GA

#6856 Apr 12, 2013
LogicalChickn wrote:
<quoted text>
It doesn't matter what I BELIEVE or what President of the United States of America Barack Obama SAYS in this particular instance.
Believes and Says have nothing to do with it. We're talking facts. They can be looked up and they are what they are.
Why don't you look them up and we can save all this BS talk that you're doing? You don't KNOW like you say you do. And you know it.
No one here has seen any proof positive from you either. Just a lot of left wing propaganda. All you have is what your master(Nobama) tells you. You have no facts to back up anything. Just because msn, cnn or all your other left wing media says it, that doesn't make it true.
OMTE

Moultrie, GA

#6857 Apr 12, 2013
OMTE wrote:
<quoted text>
Heavy drug use will do that ya.
Please do not use my handle. I don't like it and I will find you.
FactChickn

Douglasville, GA

#6858 Apr 12, 2013
Bored wrote:
<quoted text>
2013 is the only year where Obama has projected a deficit below a Trillion dollars where as Bush had only one year with a deficit of over 1 trillion.
President Barack Obama: First Term =$5.073 trillion deficit.
FY 2013 -$901 billion.
FY 2012 -$1.327 trillion.
FY 2011 -$1.299 trillion.
FY 2010 -$1.546 ($1.293 trillion plus $253 billion from the Obama Stimulus Act that was attached to the FY 2009 budget).
President George W. Bush: First Term =$1.267 trillion. Second Term =$2.027 trillion. Total =$3.294.
FY 2009 -$1.16 trillion.($1.416 trillion minus $253 billion from Obama's Stimulus Act)
FY 2008 -$458 billion.
FY 2007 -$161 billion.
FY 2006 -$248 billion.
FY 2005 -$318 billion.
FY 2004 -$413 billion.
FY 2003 -$378 billion.
FY 2002 -$158 billion.
You're showing how much the deficit grew during each quarter.

That's NOT what I asked. Not even anything close to it.

I asked WHAT made the deficit grow, and by how much for each cause.

You know that's what I asked. You're avoiding the truth.

I'm not trying to be an a-hole. I'm trying to establish and get some acknowledgement of some real facts that are very useful if we're going to discuss anything at all.

Otherwise all this "Libtards Suck" "Obama Sucks" "Giving all my money away" comments I keep hearing here are the intellectual equivalent of saying: "Nanny-nanny-Boo-Boo you doo-doo-head". It's an exercise in immaturity and pointlessness.

So how about we go to the official government accounting agencies and seeing why the deficit has gotten to it's current state.?

Care to do that? Or do you just like calling people "Doo-Doo Head"?
FactChickn

Douglasville, GA

#6859 Apr 12, 2013
Bored wrote:
<quoted text>
And now you show the real azzhole you are.
Just another clucking chicken.
Sorry. I see you already answered my question.

You DO prefer calling people names over actually knowing anything.

What a waste of time. Why do you bother?
FactChickn

Douglasville, GA

#6860 Apr 12, 2013
domino wrote:
<quoted text>
No one here has seen any proof positive from you either. Just a lot of left wing propaganda. All you have is what your master(Nobama) tells you. You have no facts to back up anything. Just because msn, cnn or all your other left wing media says it, that doesn't make it true.
Ah turn it around - avoid the questions - put some accusations my way rather than actually answer the question.

How utterly pointless.

Would you care to answer ANY of the questions I asked? What's the point of talking here if NO FACT AT ALL will ever be agreed on? Do you get what I'm saying?

Let's establish what is true, just some very basic things, rather than continuing with our regularly scheduled programming of name calling and deflection.

Wouldn't a change of pace be nice? Maybe you would care to help establish the most simple and basic truths. Want to take a stab at it? Here you go:

1. Did spending go up doing the Bush Years? Yes or No?

2. Did unemployment rise during the Bush Years? Yes or No?

3. Did the economy collapse during the Bush Years? Yes or No?

4. How did Romney intend to reduce the deficit while cutting the wealthiest peoples taxes while at the same time adding 2 Trillion to Defense Spending? How does this math work?

5. How ...., specifically,......does the CURRENT Republican plan intend to reduce the deficit and improve the economy?

Those questions are NOT trick questions, or complex. They're about as basic as we can get if we're going to talk national politics at a level above 1st-graders.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Blairsville Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Ban Flights Now 5 hr Opie 41
Isn't politics ineresting 5 hr ACOG 15
Obama: "If Michelle Nunn Wins, That Means Democ... 7 hr XYZ 2
Bicycles 13 hr Republican 8
End of Days 16 hr Barter 3
florida 17 hr Granny 32
tanyard aprtments (Jan '11) Tue Robin 39

Blairsville News Video

Blairsville Dating
Find my Match

Blairsville Jobs

Blairsville People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Blairsville News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Blairsville

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]