Who do you support for U.S. Senate in...
Bored

Jefferson, GA

#6893 Apr 13, 2013
domino wrote:
<quoted text>
Pardon me but you havent ask anything that hasnt been beat to death previously. Just read back. Its ongoing & has been answered many times. The economy wasnt nearly as bad under Bush as it is under Obama and unemloyment is much higher as is welfare.
And you have beat what Obama "inherited" to death. Hes in his 5th year. Time for him to take responsibility.

Chickenbutt likes and admires Obama because he can fool most of the liberals, and because he has a teflon coating. Chickenbutt is envious, he wants the same teflon but all he has been able to get is goo on his feathers.

He likes to think he has the authority to set the parameters of an argument and everyone else abide by them. He reminds me of a Lemming, running to jump off the cliff with Obama.


Bored

Jefferson, GA

#6894 Apr 13, 2013
A libtard DOJ uses the Commerce Clause to prosecute a pair of scissors crime.

"Amish prosecuted because scissors 'crossed state lines'"

Under this analogy, libtards will be using the Commerce clause to prosecute any and all local crimes in order to have federal control over all local authorities.


ChicknButt

Douglasville, GA

#6895 Apr 13, 2013
Good Morning Bored.

Post 6880 tells us everything we need to know about you.
Bored

Jefferson, GA

#6896 Apr 13, 2013
Goofy Obamanomics.

Fiscal Policy: Shorn of its accounting gimmicks, the president's budget isn't a "balanced" plan to get the debt crisis under control. It's a monument to fiscal irresponsibility.

With much fanfare and a lot of media hype, President Obama unveiled his latest budget plan two months late. An IBD review of Obama's budget finds that, among other things, it:

Boosts spending and deficits over the next two years. Obama's own budget numbers show that he wants to hike spending over the next two years by $247 billion compared with the "baseline," which even after his proposed new tax hikes would mean $157 billion in additional red ink.

Obama claims he'll get tough on spending and deficits later, but every budget expert knows boosting spending today only makes it harder to cut later.

Vastly exaggerates spending cuts. The press has widely reported that Obama's budget would cut spending a total of $1.2 trillion over the next decade. But Obama's own budget shows that he actually cuts spending a mere $186 billion.(The relevant tables can be found at http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files... on Pages 187-190.)

Obama inflates his claimed savings by first canceling the automatic sequester spending cuts he previously signed into law, then reclaiming them as new savings, and by adding in cuts in interest payments on the debt.

Relies almost entirely on tax hikes. Obama's budget shows his plan would increase revenues by $1.14 trillion over the next decade. That means his budget proposes $6 in new taxes for every $1 in spending cuts.

Cuts the deficit less than claimed. "My budget will reduce our deficits by nearly another $2 trillion," Obama said Wednesday. But his budget shows total deficit reduction over the next decade would be just $1.4 trillion. Plus, deficits start rising again after 2018.

Creates a new entitlement without a reliable means to pay for it. Obama claims he can finance a new $76 billion "preschool for all" program by raising tobacco taxes again. But after an initial spike, tobacco tax revenues will start trending downward year after year as more people quit smoking, while the costs of this new program will keep climbing.

The last time Obama hiked tobacco taxes to pay for an expansion of Medicaid revenues came in $2.2 billion less than expected.

Boosts taxes on the middle class. Obama proposes to change the government's "consumer price index" in a way that will lower the official inflation rate. He's selling it as a way to cut Social Security annual "cost of living" adjustments, which are based on the CPI.

But because his "chained CPI" would also apply to annual tax bracket adjustments, it will end up hiking taxes by $124 billion mainly on the middle class over the next decade through bracket creep, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

In his remarks Wednesday after releasing his 65-day-overdue budget, Obama claimed: "The numbers work. There's not a lot of smoke and mirrors in here."

Fact is, if it weren't for smoke and mirrors, Obama would have no budget plan at all.
Bored

Jefferson, GA

#6897 Apr 13, 2013
ChicknButt wrote:
Good Morning Bored.
Post 6880 tells us everything we need to know about you.
Get a job.
Farrell Landon Democrat

Washington, DC

#6898 Apr 13, 2013
Bored wrote:
<quoted text>
Get a job.
Anybody know how to get upgraded section 8? I need a nicer house and more money cause my car is 4 years old and i want a newer one.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#6899 Apr 13, 2013
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>
This is a DRAMATIC change of subject from where we currently are.
You're a smart person. Can you acknowledge that Bush tanked the economy before he left office, that there was rampant job losses during his last year, and that he raised the deficit significantly?
Yes or no? Did those things happen?
Oh, since when can this thread only follow one topic at a time - and actually it is right on point, which I think is your real problem with the information. The state of NY has come to the realization that they can either raise taxes on the job producers and thus lose businesses or they can encourage businesses to come to their states by lowering taxes and thereby encourage job growth. That is what builds an economy.

Did Bush spend too much money in office - yep, was he to blame for the housing crisis which precipitated the downturn - nope - that you can blame on "feel good" Democrat policies that reflected Barney Frank's statement that "Everyone should get to own their own home." Would that be wonderful, yes - is it realistic, not by a long shot. In 2002, the Bush administration was warning that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were not being regulated sufficiently and could have a ripple effect on the economy. Barney Frank - House Financial Services ranking member states - "these two entities - Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac- are not facing any kind of financial crisis....The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure is on these companies, the less we will see in affordable housing." Well, we all know what happened.

TARP 1 was a mistake - it probably would have been better to let those financial institutions fail. That was Bush's mistake. TARP 2, where Obama doubled down, was also a mistake and really more of a joke - somehow those shovel ready jobs , as Obama acknowledged "weren't so shovel ready." And now we have the same people who shoved Obamacare down our throats acknowledging that "oops, it's costing more than we thought it would [big surprise], now we need another bill to bring in more money to pay for it."

So, no, Bush was not the fiscal conservative Republicans wanted, but he was certainly better than the man in office now who is following in the same steps as FDR when he inherited a troubled economy. FDR's policies exacerbated the problems and prolonged the Depression by years. Obama's policies are doing the same thing.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#6900 Apr 13, 2013
Oh my wrote:
<quoted text>
Too funny, as if the PIOUS would have let that slip by.
Simple fact, Obama is among the wealthy and he has consistently advocated for raising the taxes of the wealthy.
Oh, no problem there. When they released their tax returns all they had to do was state they chose not to take their deductions - you know - lead by example and put their money where their mouths are. And you're right, he is wealthy. He followed the Democrat play book - get elected, get rich. He certainly hasn't done anything in the private sector to earn any money.
Bored

Jefferson, GA

#6901 Apr 13, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, since when can this thread only follow one topic at a time - and actually it is right on point, which I think is your real problem with the information. The state of NY has come to the realization that they can either raise taxes on the job producers and thus lose businesses or they can encourage businesses to come to their states by lowering taxes and thereby encourage job growth. That is what builds an economy.
Did Bush spend too much money in office - yep, was he to blame for the housing crisis which precipitated the downturn - nope - that you can blame on "feel good" Democrat policies that reflected Barney Frank's statement that "Everyone should get to own their own home." Would that be wonderful, yes - is it realistic, not by a long shot. In 2002, the Bush administration was warning that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were not being regulated sufficiently and could have a ripple effect on the economy. Barney Frank - House Financial Services ranking member states - "these two entities - Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac- are not facing any kind of financial crisis....The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure is on these companies, the less we will see in affordable housing." Well, we all know what happened.
TARP 1 was a mistake - it probably would have been better to let those financial institutions fail. That was Bush's mistake. TARP 2, where Obama doubled down, was also a mistake and really more of a joke - somehow those shovel ready jobs , as Obama acknowledged "weren't so shovel ready." And now we have the same people who shoved Obamacare down our throats acknowledging that "oops, it's costing more than we thought it would [big surprise], now we need another bill to bring in more money to pay for it."
So, no, Bush was not the fiscal conservative Republicans wanted, but he was certainly better than the man in office now who is following in the same steps as FDR when he inherited a troubled economy. FDR's policies exacerbated the problems and prolonged the Depression by years. Obama's policies are doing the same thing.
And those libtards want to do the same thing again with easy lending home practices for those who otherwise pay their bills under normal lending practices.

Obama has not totally crashed America's economy yet so he's trying another trick out of the playbook of Franks.
Bored

Jefferson, GA

#6902 Apr 13, 2013
Farrell Landon Democrat wrote:
<quoted text>
Anybody know how to get upgraded section 8? I need a nicer house and more money cause my car is 4 years old and i want a newer one.
The Chicken wants to help you.
ChicknButt

Norcross, GA

#6903 Apr 13, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, since when can this thread only follow one topic at a time - and actually it is right on point, which I think is your real problem with the information. The state of NY has come to the realization that they can either raise taxes on the job producers and thus lose businesses or they can..........snipped for brevity)......
So to paraphrase your answers in short:

Did Bush tank the economy?-"He gets a free pass - the economy tanked on his watch but it was the Democrats fault"

Did Bush have rampant job losses? "Let's not really go there."

Did Bush significantly add to the deficit? "Bush was not the fiscal conservative Republicans wanted,(but I'm going to spin this around and complain about Obama)"

While I think that you're working really hard to awkwardly spin things, I do appreciate that you (sort of) acknowledge that there was at least an 'economic ripple' of sorts that happened while your man was in office. The rest of the Republicans here just quote Reagan when the questions come up - "I have no recollection of those events."

I do appreciate that you at least try to go a step beyond "Libtards" and "Obama sucks" and "jelly on nipples" and such.
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, we all know what happened.
Bored doesn't. Just try to read post 6880 without busting out laughing.

Domino doesn't. She doesn't even adjudge that we were in serious poop there for awhile. It never happened. See post 6883

Farrell Landon does acknowledge serious poop, but he's talking about his gas problems.
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
TARP 1 was a mistake - it probably would have been better to let those financial institutions fail.
It's pretty easy to Monday Morning Quarterback that one. But the people that actually had to make the decision had to keep in mind what stakes were being gambled at the time. Now, after it's all said and done, we don't get to know what that "alternate universe" might have been like if we let those companies fail. It might have been ugly beyond imagination, it might have led to a better world. At the time the decision was made to err on the side of doing something rather than err on the side of doing nothing. It is probably the same choice you would have made if you were the one "making the call" at the time with 315 million American lives at stake.
----------
(Need a good laugh? Read post 6883 on page 324 of this thread.)
Bored

Jefferson, GA

#6904 Apr 13, 2013
""Bored doesn't. Just try to read post 6880 without busting out laughing.""

And you have yet to post anything to I was wrong. No links, no response except to act the clown.

Put up your data to show I am wrong, you know you can't. You know I'm right but your leader won't allow you to even try.

You just get ornery because we won't let you set your libtard parameters for debate.

It's so easy to debate a libtard because all his info is wrong.
Bored

Jefferson, GA

#6905 Apr 13, 2013
""Did Bush have rampant job losses? "Let's not really go there."""

Good thing, all the data shows you are wrong again swammi.

“Liberals are closet raaacists!”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#6906 Apr 13, 2013
Columbus Native wrote:
<quoted text>Just as I thought, no solutions or answers about your sorry azz romney pick just Troll, Man go take a bath!
TROLL
formerresident

Decatur, GA

#6907 Apr 13, 2013
This is how it works. I was so naive. We give huge tax breaks to set up in a city, then those companies make/buy products in other countries, then when the tax incentives are done, they leave and find a new place to set up to get a tax break.
Those at the top, know how to hide the funds, so just a few get them, then they cut back hours and wages, and tell the employees, sorry but we aren't making any money. Then those living on almost nothing, are blamed for not having a job, and racking up the debt and relying on government support.
Then if they are too big to fail( love that line!) we bail them out, when the money is spent they fly in their corporate jets, to ask for more.
And we get the American taxpayer to worry about those earning 175.00 a week in the government welfare system, while we give shelters of millions a year to the top. We don't concern ourselves with the top tier, because they are too big to fail.
ChicknButt

Norcross, GA

#6908 Apr 13, 2013
Bored wrote:
""Did Bush have rampant job losses? "Let's not really go there."""
Good thing, all the data shows you are wrong again swammi.
http://money.cnn.com/2009/01/09/news/economy/...

Don't like that link? Here's another:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Job_losses_cause...

Still no good? There's thousands of them. Here's another:

http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0000000001...

I can do this all day. Swammi.

“Liberals are closet raaacists!”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#6909 Apr 13, 2013
einstein wrote:
<quoted text>
Your SSI check lost in the mail again and can't sell enough cans to pay your power bill??? Amazing to me how people on the public dole always find a way to put down others doing the same with only a different name. All those damn Dems who support your way would be sick to see you wasting our money. Get off SSI and get a JOB.
Another TROLL
Informed Opinion

Fort Myers, FL

#6910 Apr 13, 2013
formerresident wrote:
This is how it works. I was so naive. We give huge tax breaks to set up in a city, then those companies make/buy products in other countries, then when the tax incentives are done, they leave and find a new place to set up to get a tax break.
Those at the top, know how to hide the funds, so just a few get them, then they cut back hours and wages, and tell the employees, sorry but we aren't making any money. Then those living on almost nothing, are blamed for not having a job, and racking up the debt and relying on government support.
Then if they are too big to fail( love that line!) we bail them out, when the money is spent they fly in their corporate jets, to ask for more.
And we get the American taxpayer to worry about those earning 175.00 a week in the government welfare system, while we give shelters of millions a year to the top. We don't concern ourselves with the top tier, because they are too big to fail.
Great post.

You have nailed it.
Informed Opinion

Fort Myers, FL

#6911 Apr 13, 2013
Synergy wrote:
<quoted text>TROLL
Great.

We are back to Right Winger calling names instead of trying to defend their lunacy.

Let's join in :

"You're so stupid you sold your car for gas money".

I win !!!
einstein

Rome, Italy

#6912 Apr 13, 2013
Bored wrote:
Obama sucks and so do Chickens.
Doesn't take a genius to tell that you get ALL your information from FNC and Rush! They are getting rich telling gullible folks like you just what they want to hear. Doesn't have to be true anymore, they don't claim to be unbiased or accurate, just entertaining and profitable. "Obama sucks"!?!?!? Good lord is that the best you can do? Of course it is and anyone who even tries to make you do more never gets anything but more of the same, what a joke you are.

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.

Ludowici Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Party Friendly Female Cuddler Needed Jun 14 CuddleBuddy48male 1
Hard shit (Feb '16) Jun 14 HinesvilleCuddler 3
Need to make some friends!:) (Oct '13) Jun 14 HinesvilleCuddler 2
Cuddle Buddy Jun 14 HinesvilleCuddler 2
Sex dares (May '12) Jun 14 HinesvilleCuddler 4
Where's it at Hinesville? Jun 8 Pat 1
Literally free cash 🤯 Jun 7 Anonymous 3

Ludowici Jobs

Personal Finance

Ludowici Mortgages