Homosexual behaviour is typical of extreme lefty social welfare loonies. Likewise, going to hell because of the gay extreme lefty social welfare loonie sins.
See? It all makes sense!
See? It all makes sense!
Jon Stewart rips Obama a new one on debt deal
- Thread starter DarthTom
- Start date
You're on the internet. Real life rules need not apply.
You'd be wrong there.
On this day in 2008, the national debt was 10.096 Trillion.
Today, it sits at 14.568 trillion.
That's "only" an increase of 4.272 trillion and Obama didn't have much to do with the 2009 budget.
http://www.usdebtclock.org/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms
We have a 14.568 trillion in debt, but only 2.201 trilion in Revenue????????
Shiiiiiiit.
We've added 4+ trillion in debt largely due to a massive recession which torpedoed revenues. Recessions seem like they show up all at once, but they actually take years to gestate. Plus the "showed up all at once" moment was right before the election anyway so Bush wasn't even out of office yet when it hit. Not sure how you could've missed that unless you're not an American. Then I suppose it'd be understandable to be that unaware of America's situation.
So is knowing how much our debt has grown when you're trying to cite it while making a point.
@ Ultramann's comment, (although others have answered before me): Funny, I thought we added 9 plus trillion in debt since obama took office. Not sure how that is Bush's fault."
^ A good part of that increase (not so sure if 9 trillion is an accurate number) is because Obama chose to start being more honest with our books regarding the budget. Including expenses in the budget that -although we are (and were) paying for them- were off budget because the numbers were "kept in a separate book".
Funding for the war during the Bush years was "off the books", paid for with emergency and supplemental spending requests and NOT included as part of the annual budget proper. I knew this was a huge lie when I heard at budget time every year that "we can't possibly estimate how much we are going to need to spend in Iraq in the next 12 months", so the amount was not included in the formal budget, BUT - about a month later- the Pentagon would submit requests for hundreds of billions of dollars to fund the war.
Obama should be commended for forcing us to look at what the budget really is- and not being blamed for the debts that other politicians were keeping hidden from the average American.
^ A good part of that increase (not so sure if 9 trillion is an accurate number) is because Obama chose to start being more honest with our books regarding the budget. Including expenses in the budget that -although we are (and were) paying for them- were off budget because the numbers were "kept in a separate book".
Funding for the war during the Bush years was "off the books", paid for with emergency and supplemental spending requests and NOT included as part of the annual budget proper. I knew this was a huge lie when I heard at budget time every year that "we can't possibly estimate how much we are going to need to spend in Iraq in the next 12 months", so the amount was not included in the formal budget, BUT - about a month later- the Pentagon would submit requests for hundreds of billions of dollars to fund the war.
Obama should be commended for forcing us to look at what the budget really is- and not being blamed for the debts that other politicians were keeping hidden from the average American.
We have a 14.568 trillion in debt, but only 2.201 trilion in Revenue????????
Shiiiiiiit.
Debt != deficit. Our deficit runs around $1.3T a year, at least as of 2010, since federal outlays are about $3.5T and receipts are $2.2T. We're basically 1/3 short on revenue.
We have a 14.568 trillion in debt, but only 2.201 trilion in Revenue????????
Shiiiiiiit.
Strictly speaking, the relevant ratio is revenue to expenses, which includes debt payments, but not the entire debt at once.
We have a 14.568 trillion in debt, but only 2.201 trilion in Revenue????????
Shiiiiiiit.
Debt != deficit. Our deficit runs around $1.3T a year, at least as of 2010, since federal outlays are about $3.5T and receipts are $2.2T. We're basically 1/3 short on revenue.
We have a 14.568 trillion in debt, but only 2.201 trilion in Revenue????????
Shiiiiiiit.
Strictly speaking, the relevant ratio is revenue to expenses, which includes debt payments, but not the entire debt at once.
Thanks for the clarifying this for me. I'm Accountant for God's sake.
I didn't look at closely.
Anyone can use just about whatever language they want here, so lighten up Francis.
Sane people already know the Republicans (George Bush in particular) are to blame for the current financial crisis, but for those that need proof, may I suggest you Google "Everything that happened in the world between 2000-2009".
Last edited:
Have you ever noticed that when you provide an Obama-basher with ACTUAL FACTS, they tend to disappear from the conversation? I've seen it numerous times on numerous boards.
I guess once they've exhausted their official list of Teabagger Talking Points, they can't think of anything else to say.
I guess once they've exhausted their official list of Teabagger Talking Points, they can't think of anything else to say.
Reality has a well-known liberal bias.
Tea Party usually go away when their points can't the compete with the facts. But when it comes to Obama-bashers who happens to be a liberal/progressive, they usually don't care about that.
Oh, I don't know. I am a supporter of Obama, and even I can see the point of many of his "bashers" on the liberal/left. For one, Obama ran his election on a progressive platform of "change". Yet, he hasn't provided much but continue the policies set forth by GWB.
Regarding his leadership during the debt crisis, I personally think he made a big mistake in being far too compromising. I hate to be a conspiracy theorist, but it feels like Obama is a closet Republican. He's clearly right/center, especially in his economic views - which is why my mind boggles when people call him a socialist/communist.
As much as I despise Bush Jr., at least he would have approached the debt "crisis" the way I wish Obama would have. He would have stuck to his guns and insisted on getting most of what he wants. He would not have insisted on being a negotiator or on giving the other side 99% of what they want.
Right now, progressives need that sort of leader. Not one who will let the Republicans steamroll him at every turn.
While I understand this frustration, I think we are losing sight of how this government was set up to work. We have an election, then expect the President to act like a dictator. He can't pass laws by himself. He has to be able to convince a greater part of the 535 other elected representatives to see things his way. Unfortunately, too many in Congress adopted the "my way or the highway" approach, and not just the Tea Partiers, either. They got to stake out their positions and point fingers when it all went to hell.
Let's not forget that Boehner couldn't get his own cats to march in a parade and support the bill he put up.
The House Dems didn't come up with a workable plan.
The Tea Party straight up said la-la-la, we can't hear you . . .
And while there was precedent for NOT coming up with a solution and letting the chips fall where they may (Clinton v. Gingrich), that only resulted in a government shutdown and didn't carry the risk of tanking the world market. Nobody would have had Obama's back if he'd played chicken with the TP and lost, not even progressives.
POTUS doesn't have the luxury of only representing his party, unlike the 535 brats in Congress. I'm not saying he's blameless, or handled this "crisis" perfectly, but I do give him props for consistently being the adult in the room.
A quick google search reveals that at least one credit agency has given the USA a negative rating which means that it's credit rating will be downgraded from AAA within two years if internal finacial issues are not resovled. i.e it will be more expensive for the USA to borrow money.
On this side of the pond in the UK, we have had cutbacks and tax rises. Whilst I'm not keen on paying more tax it's what is needed. When you see the mess the Eurozone countries are in.
The global economy is still in a fragile state after the banking crisis a few years back. In the UK it was the final nail in the coffin of the New Labour government, so the current Conservative-Liberal coalition government has to deal with the fallout of it. As no one likes too pay more tax and suffer cutbacks in services. At the end of the day it's quite simple you can't spend what you don't have, and sooner or later if you try you'll max out your credit cards.
On this side of the pond in the UK, we have had cutbacks and tax rises. Whilst I'm not keen on paying more tax it's what is needed. When you see the mess the Eurozone countries are in.
The global economy is still in a fragile state after the banking crisis a few years back. In the UK it was the final nail in the coffin of the New Labour government, so the current Conservative-Liberal coalition government has to deal with the fallout of it. As no one likes too pay more tax and suffer cutbacks in services. At the end of the day it's quite simple you can't spend what you don't have, and sooner or later if you try you'll max out your credit cards.
