<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/P5yxFtTwDcc&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/P5yxFtTwDcc&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object> Buckle Up, grab hold of the "Oh Snap!" handle, and pray your air bags are working!
Do you care to respond in the threads you abandoned or would you just like me to ignore this one altogether?
This is an excellent example of why people continue to say that lying has become part of the conservative agenda. Lying liars and the liars that perpetrate the lies. http://rationallythinkingoutloud.wordpress.com/2009/06/12/whose-deficit-is-it/
from the above link-- For years, budget analysts complained that former president George W. Bush tried to make his deficits look smaller by excluding cost estimates for the war in Iraq and domestic disasters, minimizing the cost of payments to Medicare doctors and assuming that millions more families would pay the costly alternative minimum tax. Obama has banned those techniques, the senior official said.
Here's some more back story for you Brother. Probably deserves it's own thread This is a major indictment of the Bush administration -- Pelosi: Bush Admin Barred Officials From Warning Congress Of Financial Crisis Nearly two years after the Wall Street meltdown drove the U.S. economy to the brink of collapse, and forced the U.S. government to prop up major financial institutions with hundreds of billions of dollars, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi now claims that the Bush Administration prohibited its own top officials who were handling the emerging crisis from briefing Congress until a complete financial collapse was only hours away. In little-noticed statements to reporters over the last few weeks, Pelosi has alleged that the Bush administration knew well in advance of its intervention that the financial crisis would hit, and that Congress would need to authorize a historic and unpopular bailout - but that top officials, including then-Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, told her that they had been barred from briefing Congress about true extent of the crisis.
oh BTW Poll: Americans Becoming More Optimistic About Economy A new CBS/New York Times poll finds that Americans have become more optimistic about the economy now than at any time during the recession.
I thought this post, http://bbs.clutchcity.net/showpost.php?p=5260351&postcount=121, summarized my stance on most of the issues we discussed. Also, I agree with a fair share of the counter arguments you made and not so much with some of the others. There were some that I felt we just have to agree to disagree on. However, I will skim through and see if there were any large issues I feel that I have not already addressed in some of my other posts. The only reason I did not was because I thought you were done discussing issues with me because of the post I referenced above. I don't have as much free time as I have had before with work ramping up and biking 30 miles a day--not to mention 3 little ones. Also, my “CFO” has no problem with my time spent in GARM; however, she is not exactly thrilled about the time I spent in D&D. Of course, I will still try to jump in and respectfully stir up this liberal hornets’ nest with my conservative perspective as much as I can.
When are you liberals going to realize that Congress passes all spending policies? The only real power the President has is on War issues. And even that, Congress approved the discussion to go to war. Any analysis you do, must be based on who was the majority in Congress at the time a spending initiatives were implemented. Was it bipartisan? Or was it passed like HCR? Only once this is determined, can we discuss if it was Republicans or Democrats that spend like a liberal. The video I posted noted who was in power in Congress when spending was increased or decreased. For example, when Clinton decreased the debt, it was the Republicans that were the majority in Congress. Also, in the last 2-3 years of Bush, it was the Democrats that were in power in Congress. They were in power during the collapse of the current economy starting in 2007. http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/62793 No Democrat-Controlled Congress Has Balanced Federal Budget in 40 Years; No Republican President Has Balanced Federal Budget in 50 Years Monday, March 15, 2010 By Terence P. Jeffrey, Editor-in-Chief http://media.cnsnews.com/resources/62052.jpg (CNSNews.com) - Many leading Democrats in Washington these days like to point to the fact that the federal budget was balanced for part of the time that President Bill Clinton was in office. What they do not mention is that those balanced budgets occurred only when Republicans controlled both houses of Congress. In fact, according to the historical data published by the Office of Management and Budget in the Obama White House, no Congress in which the Democrats controlled both the House and Senate has balanced the federal budget since fiscal 1969--more than 40 years ago. WHO BALANCED THE BUDGET? The chart below lists the fiscal years since 1960 (see link for whole chart), the president who was in office when that fiscal year began, the political party that controlled Congress when that fiscal year began, whether the federal budget was balanced in that fiscal year, and the amount of the federal surplus or deficit in that fiscal year. The figures for federal deficits and surpluses come from the “Historical Tables—Budget of the U.S. Government, Fiscal 2011,” published by the Office of Management and Budget in the Obama White House. ---------Control of Congress ---- Budget Balanced? -------Deficit/Surplus President William J. Clinton (Left office Jan. 20, 2001) 1994-----------Democrat---------------No------------------(-$203.2 billion) 1995-----------Democrat---------------No------------------(-$163.9 billion) 1996-----------Republican---------------No------------------(-$107.4 billion) 1997-----------Republican---------------No------------------(-$21.9 billion) 1998-----------Republican ----------YES------------------ (+$69.2 billion) 1999-----------Republican ---------YES------------------ (+$125.6 billion) 2000-----------Republican ----------YES------------------ (+$236.2 billion 2001-----------Republican ----------YES------------------ (+$128.2 billion) President George W. Bush (Left office Jan. 20, 2009) 2002-----------Split--------------------No------------------(-$157.8 billion) 2003-----------Split--------------------No------------------(-$377.6 billion) 2004-----------Republican--------------No------------------(-$412.7 billion) 2005-----------Republican--------------No------------------(-$318.3 billion) 2006-----------Republican--------------No------------------(-$248.2 billion) 2007-----------Democrat---------------No------------------(-$160.7 billion) 2008-----------Democrat ---------------No------------------(-$458.6 billion ) 2009-----------Democrat---------------No------------------(-$1.41 trillion ) President Barack Obama(Left office Jan. 20, 2012 ) 2010-----------Democrat---------------No------------------(-$1.55 trillion ) However, don’t let these facts get in the way of your Progressive Propaganda Campaign!
You could make a song out of this: "Spin it to the left! Oh oh oh yeeaaaah, spin it to the right! Awwwww yeaaah!" Anyway, you have to spend money to recover from economic disaster. You have to spend money to improve existing programs. Can't afford a colonoscopy? Well, it'll be a lot more expensive if you get colon cancer, so you better go get your test even if it puts you in debt right now.
You know, I guess when you conservatives stop running around at tea parties with signs like the following: and ...maybe we can change the subject and talk about Congress. But as long as you conservatives want to make it all about Obama, us liberals can't help but respond.
Oh my god dude. The President introduces the budget has veto power over the budget and signs the budget into law. That's one of the hilarious things about that video you posted. The guy who made the video is quick to point out which party held power in Congress starting with Reagan except the Congress was mostly Democratic LONG before Reagan ever showed up and LONG before Republican Presidents destroyed the National Debt. Since the 1930's in fact until the 1980's, the US Congress had a Democratic majority most of the time and in that time five of the eight Presidents were Democrats. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_divisions_of_United_States_Congresses Look at the Democratic Congress running up the debt all those years. It's AMAZING. Another excellent example of how conservatives omit and include information based on how it benefits their position.
First of all, I trust what Nancy Pelosi says almost as much as I trust what this guys says: "When [then-Senator Obama] accepted the nomination in Colorado, the [Bush] Administration had kept from the public the idea that, in a matter of weeks, the financial community would be in crisis, and we would need to pass the TARP legislation." So Bush kept this from Congress for a whole two weeks? Wow! You mean that this whole disaster could have been avoided if we had known about it two weeks earlier? I have some sage advice for Nancy, "Stop listening with your mouth and pay attention to what being discussed when Congress is in session." If you are really interested in the truth, here is the timeline of how things really went down: <object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/cMnSp4qEXNM&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/cMnSp4qEXNM&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object> This crisis came about because the Democrats refused to support the Republicans proposal for of a regulatory committee to oversee Freddie and Fannie. Barney Franks is the really kingpin for our financial collapse No, if's, ands or buts' about it!
Most of your initial responses to my threads were not worthy of a response. However, you have recently made more mature, although still misguided , responses --so I will respond accordingly. Here is one response to you post: :grin: http://bbs.clutchcity.net/showpost.php?p=5282343&postcount=18 So, now I responded to 2 of your posts.
well at least you responded And to compare an honest, hardworking member of congress to an enemy of America is par for the course for you freaks.