The best in arts & entertainment, news, pop culture, and your mom since 2002.

[Total: 70    Average: 2.9/5]
246 Comments - View/Add
Hits: 28663
Rating: 2.9
Category:
Date: 07/16/11 02:20 PM

246 Responses to A Graph Of America`s Current Finances [Pic]

  1. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33085 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 2:20 pm
    Link: A Graph Of America`s Current Finances - Remember when Obama promised to NOT increase the deficit? I do.
  2. Profile photo of diylobotomy
    diylobotomy Male 18-29
    1832 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 2:26 pm
    Remember when politicians kept their promises? Me neither.
  3. Profile photo of xCYBERDYNEx
    xCYBERDYNEx Male 18-29
    4903 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 2:27 pm
    Well I see 5Cats is getting his jabs in today
  4. Profile photo of ruthless1990
    ruthless1990 Female 18-29
    3001 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 2:28 pm
    omg, i nearly passed out from not caring
  5. Profile photo of osirisascend
    osirisascend Male 40-49
    3045 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 2:39 pm
    @5Cats: We get it... you hate Obama.

    Why do you even care?
  6. Profile photo of TurkeyInButt
    TurkeyInButt Male 18-29
    101 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 2:46 pm
    @ruthless yeah you are in Europe why would you care? Why even waste time commenting that crap? Nobody cares what you think about America`s problems Eurotrash
  7. Profile photo of RyanF701
    RyanF701 Male 18-29
    2486 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 2:47 pm
    Hey 5Cats.. I have some advice for you.

    This is an entertainment website, what you are posting is not entertainment. You probably think you`re on some soapbox and everything you post negatively about Obama is just smashing apart his life and career.

    Truth is, he doesn`t care, he doesn`t know you exist. We don`t care, we wish we didn`t know you exist. Stop posting stupid poo, you`re making yourself look like an idiot.
  8. Profile photo of mctagub
    mctagub Male 40-49
    1 post
    July 16, 2011 at 2:50 pm
    Obama isn`t responsible for the first of the big red lines. Bush years need to be shifted by one year. FY2009 starts in September 2008 and was submitted by his administration. Ditto for the last year of Clinton.
  9. Profile photo of IrishJesus
    IrishJesus Male 18-29
    483 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 2:51 pm
    Obama didn`t dig this grave single handed. The housing bubble burst when he first started off, which wasn`t his fault. I may not agree with all his financial policies, but this hole we`re in started with Clinton, and arguably before.
  10. Profile photo of randomxnp
    randomxnp Male 30-39
    1293 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 2:53 pm
    Ruthless1990

    You should care.

    The world`s largest economy is in a country whose government is broke. It cannot possibly service its debts without serious improvements in both fiscal management and management of the economy (or better yet stepping aside from trying to manage it). That will have a negative impact on every one of us in the developed world.
  11. Profile photo of ragebot
    ragebot Male 18-29
    32 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 2:54 pm
    Remember when administrative decisions had instantaneous affect on the economy? Neither do I. Bush`s inept and neglectful handling of the US economy was so severe that we`re still dealing with it. I also don`t recall Obama starting the longest US war to date, costing the country trillions in dollars. Your lack of long-term memory is both alarming and disturbing.
  12. Profile photo of fiveanthems
    fiveanthems Male 18-29
    49 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 2:56 pm
    5cats: Obama included the debt due to war to the deficit, and also had to increase spending to curb the massive recession we were left in. Is he without fault? No. Could you have done any better? No.
  13. Profile photo of Nocato
    Nocato Male 18-29
    65 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 3:00 pm
    F*ck them all, there were noone, but buttheads till Bill Clinton - a lot of deficit, 4 of his years - no deficit, even some surplus, then there was a moron/junkie for eight years - predictable deficit and now - a man without any political/economical experience, chosen only out of USA`s political correctness. Figures. (By the way, wasn`t Clinton the only Democrat during the above-mensioned time?)
  14. Profile photo of Fatninja01
    Fatninja01 Male 30-39
    25420 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 3:01 pm
    eeeeeeeeek
  15. Profile photo of Zeegrr60
    Zeegrr60 Male 40-49
    2106 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 3:02 pm
    Bush`s 12 trillion dollar wars are at fault for our economy.
  16. Profile photo of clancy54
    clancy54 Male 18-29
    83 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 3:04 pm
    @ IrishJesus

    Clinton had the United States in its best financial situation ever. History will look at Clinton as one of the best financial managers of the country.
  17. Profile photo of viperjason
    viperjason Male 18-29
    68 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 3:09 pm
    @fiveanthems
    "Could you have done any better? No."
    Actually, as long as 5Cats didnt like to fellate bankers he would have done better.
  18. Profile photo of basketkase
    basketkase Male 18-29
    1183 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 3:09 pm
    clancy your like 13 finish middle school first please
  19. Profile photo of SephirothA83
    SephirothA83 Male 18-29
    955 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 3:16 pm
    woot, I got one, this is a fun game.
  20. Profile photo of IrishJesus
    IrishJesus Male 18-29
    483 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 3:18 pm
    clancy54: It`s true he made our financial situation LOOK better, but the way he did it is what happened to the economy. Have you heard of the housing bubble? People who couldn`t afford houses or loans for them suddenly could get loans for them when Clinton passed legislation that allowed it. The housing market boomed and the economy took off. Problem was, when it came time to actually pay off all of those loans, those people that should never have gotten loans for houses couldn`t pay up. Basically, the country thought it was wealthier than it was, and now we have a surplus of empty houses no one can afford.
  21. Profile photo of spanerbulb
    spanerbulb Male 30-39
    1244 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 3:25 pm
    Isn`t this the economic downturn that affected the entire world and couldn`t be stopped? Man, some people will really scrape the barrel just because they have a black president, bet it`s the same people that believe in creationism.
  22. Profile photo of WeePee
    WeePee Male 18-29
    612 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 3:40 pm
    @spaner
    it has absolutely nothing to do with a black president. its about having a bad president that refuses to actually work with the house/senate.
  23. Profile photo of DuckBoy87
    DuckBoy87 Male 18-29
    3275 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 3:44 pm
    Clancy54, Clinton`s reign was part of the lingering effects of Reaganomics left by Ronald Reagan and continued over by George H.W. Bush. That, and I believe the legislation branch started off controlled by the G.O.P. at the beginning of Clinton`s reign, though I`ll admit I could be wrong on that and that I`m a it tired to actually look it up.

    But the point is, Clinton did nothing for the economy, and probably for the country, except get laid in the oval office.
  24. Profile photo of DuckBoy87
    DuckBoy87 Male 18-29
    3275 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 3:46 pm
    WeePee, you can`t deny that the past election was primarily driven by race and sex.

    Overwhelming first time black voters came out to vote for Obama.
  25. Profile photo of Intaresting
    Intaresting Male 18-29
    812 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 4:16 pm
    Remember the time when US wasn`t plunged into a futile war? I sure don`t.
  26. Profile photo of jwhalerfan
    jwhalerfan Male 30-39
    220 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 4:17 pm
    Instead of defending Obama by deflecting and pointing fingers, please explain the things he has done to NOT inflate the deficit... or anything he has done, period.

    There are over 100,000 people out of work in Florida with Space Program cut, let`s ask them...
    (by the way, cutting the space program and paying China and Russia for seats on their flights is a wash...)
  27. Profile photo of drworm2002
    drworm2002 Male 30-39
    662 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 4:24 pm
    I love stupid people in their 20`s that have no idea what they`re talking about. Clinton is the reason for how well we did in the 90`s. To give Reagan credit is beyond stupid. And that graph is wrong. What you don`t see is that the first two years of Obama`s presidency is Bush`s fault.
  28. Profile photo of davymid
    davymid Male 30-39
    12140 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 4:28 pm
    *Sigh*

    I retain my 100% batting rate at guessing which submissions were by 5Cats, from reading the description alone.
  29. Profile photo of jtrebowski
    jtrebowski Male 40-49
    3359 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 4:31 pm
    Duckboy said: "Clinton`s reign was part of the lingering effects of Reaganomics left by Ronald Reagan and continued over by George H.W. Bush."

    What do all three of those president have in common? They all raised taxes.
  30. Profile photo of madest
    madest Male 40-49
    7378 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 4:31 pm
    Yeah this is the republican plan to win back the White House. Ignore the fact that GWB was a moron who ruined the world`s economy. Blame our financial situation on Obama. Actively block any legislation that could possibly help the country and hope that people are stupid enough to buy it.

    Their actions are going to sweep them all out of office. Not Obama`s.
  31. Profile photo of BetterBob
    BetterBob Male 18-29
    168 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 4:33 pm
    that`s a racist graph. It`s just showing the facts because obama is black.
  32. Profile photo of jtrebowski
    jtrebowski Male 40-49
    3359 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 4:36 pm
    jwhalerfan said: "There are over 100,000 people out of work in Florida with Space Program cut, let`s ask them..."

    *sigh*
    What does Obama have to do with that?
  33. Profile photo of piperfawn
    piperfawn Male 30-39
    4916 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 4:39 pm
    5Cats a new IAB generation is born, will you be able to afford it?
  34. Profile photo of almightybob1
    almightybob1 Male 18-29
    4290 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 4:51 pm
    Yes, because I`m sure the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, which kicked in around September 2008, had nothing to do with this and/or was Obama`s fault.
  35. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 4:53 pm
    He didn`t completely lie, after all he did say he would give us change. What we are getting left with is pocket change, So in his twisted logic he didn`t lie to the American people.

    Now he`s threatened to take away Veteran`s and Social Security checks, if he doesn`t get his way, daring lawmakers to "Don`t call my bluff".

    Obviously he`s never played poker before because you never tell your opponent when you are bluffing.
  36. Profile photo of TopperHey
    TopperHey Male 18-29
    1930 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 4:54 pm
    And that`s just yearly deficit, not cumulative debt.

    Sorry chaps, but America`s little overspend after it`s not-being-negatively-affected-by-WWII -edness is coming to a close. Either everyone manages to spread their sh-t more evenly over Europe and China in due course, or America gets written of as a bad debt and this little financial cough recently gets overshadowed as being of f*ck-all interest to anyone a thousand years from now. The same way that barely anyone remembers the AD62 earthquake that knackered Pompeii.
  37. Profile photo of Squrlz4Sale
    Squrlz4Sale Male 40-49
    6230 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 4:54 pm
    What happened to 5Cats`s other post today, the Obama video?
  38. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 4:55 pm
    madest: If the democrat plan to retain the WH is to keep blaming GW Bush, then the republicans have already won the WH back for 2012.
  39. Profile photo of slut_etta
    slut_etta Female 50-59
    3876 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 4:55 pm
    if the government wasn`t run by morons who practiced deficit spending, we wouldn`t be in such a mess. try running a household using the deficit spending model; you`ll be living under a bridge in no time!
  40. Profile photo of freddyferret
    freddyferret Male 40-49
    11741 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 4:57 pm
    Yes he did it all by himself. It wasn`t Congress or anyone else doing it. Just Obama. He has that power.

  41. Profile photo of josebrwn
    josebrwn Male 40-49
    12 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 4:57 pm
    Remember when Bush inherited the Clinton budget surplus? I do.
  42. Profile photo of cuthere2
    cuthere2 Male 30-39
    317 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 5:06 pm
    To those claiming there was a Clinton SURPLUS are deluded, and buying into the media lies. It was "fuzzy math" that has for 10 years now been proven wrong over, and over, and over. Anyone who claims CLinton had a surplus is clearly either ignorant of basic math, or failed to research even the most basic facts.
  43. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 5:06 pm
    almightybob1: I guess you have a myopic view of history, Obama as a community organizer,for ACORN, and then senator supported and voted for continuing the 100% mortgage lending practices that caused the housing crisis in the first place. Then he hired people involved in supporting the scandal, like Tim Geithner, Rahm Emanuel, and others for his cabinet team.

    Not one of those bankers that profited from that mortgage housing collapse been persecuted for fraud, in fact Geithner made sure those involved were paid their bonuses out of the bailout money.

    Obama is a bigger crook than Nixon ever thought of being.
  44. Profile photo of cuthere2
    cuthere2 Male 30-39
    317 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 5:08 pm
    Show me the surplus in the officialstats please:

    Fiscal
    Year Year
    Ending National Debt Deficit
    FY1993 09/30/1993 $4.411488 trillion
    FY1994 09/30/1994 $4.692749 trillion $281.26 billion
    FY1995 09/29/1995 $4.973982 trillion $281.23 billion
    FY1996 09/30/1996 $5.224810 trillion $250.83 billion
    FY1997 09/30/1997 $5.413146 trillion $188.34 billion
    FY1998 09/30/1998 $5.526193 trillion $113.05 billion
    FY1999 09/30/1999 $5.656270 trillion $130.08 billion
    FY2000 09/29/2000 $5.674178 trillion $17.91 billion
    FY2001 09/28/2001 $5.807463 trillion $133.29 billion
  45. Profile photo of DShephard
    DShephard Male 18-29
    1595 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 5:11 pm
    Uh, yeah, we were kind of ATTACKED in 2001, causing a LOT of expenses that we are still not recovered from thanks to you know who.
  46. Profile photo of kineo
    kineo Male 30-39
    68 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 5:12 pm
    Look at the track we were on until Bush got his hands on the country lol.
  47. Profile photo of whyme73
    whyme73 Male 18-29
    469 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 5:13 pm
    Remember when presidents didn`t lie? Neither do I.
  48. Profile photo of MildCorma
    MildCorma Male 18-29
    496 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 5:14 pm
    Well this is wrong, as according to the actual statistics from the government GWB had left the country with a 1.7 trillion dollar debt in 2008, not the 400 billion claimed on this picture (which is cute, but ultimately incorrect and the image surfaced first on 4chan)
  49. Profile photo of xCYBERDYNEx
    xCYBERDYNEx Male 18-29
    4903 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 5:14 pm
    And RyanF701 has won this debate
  50. Profile photo of mrgreen999
    mrgreen999 Male 18-29
    6 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 5:28 pm
    The first red bar should actually be a blue bar since the budget is done a year in advance
  51. Profile photo of cuthere2
    cuthere2 Male 30-39
    317 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 5:32 pm
    More facts for those pushing the LIE that Clinton had a surplus:

    In no year did the national debt go down nor did Clinton leave President Bush with a surplus that Bush subsequently turned into a deficit. Yes, the deficit was almost eliminated in FY2000 (ending in September 2000 with a deficit of "only" $17.9 billion), but it never reached zero-let alone a positive surplus number. And Clinton`s last budget proposal for FY2001, which ended in September 2001, generated a $133.29 billion deficit. The growing deficits started in the year of the last Clinton budget, not in the first year of the Bush administration.

    Continued:
  52. Profile photo of cuthere2
    cuthere2 Male 30-39
    317 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 5:33 pm
    Continued:

    President Bush took office in January 2001 and his first budget took effect October 1, 2001 for the year ending September 30, 2002 (FY2002). So the $133.29 billion deficit in the year ending September 2001 was Clinton`s. Bush supported a tax refund where taxpayers received checks in 2001. However the total amount refunded to taxpayers was only $38 billion . So even if we assume that $38 billion of the FY2001 deficit was due to Bush`s tax refunds which were not part of Clinton`s last budget, that still means that Clinton`s last budget produced a deficit of 133.29 - 38 = $95.29 billion.

    Clinton did not achieve a surplus and he didn`t leave President Bush with a surplus.

    Source:
  53. Profile photo of cuthere2
    cuthere2 Male 30-39
    317 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 5:40 pm
    Another thing the Liberals are ignoring on here whist claiming that Clinton created some rosy, ideal economy.... Is that during his presidency started a recession! Yep check out the U.S. Dept. of Commerce, the 3rd quarter of 2000. The economy began to falter in March 2000, and officially hit a recession in late 2000 during Clintons final months in office.

    But don`t let the facts get in the way of covering for the Democrats!
  54. Profile photo of Baalthazaq
    Baalthazaq Male 18-29
    4548 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 6:13 pm
    Crakr:
    "mortgage lending practices that caused the housing crisis in the first place"

    Except that you couldn`t properly pinpoint what those practices were and consistently mislead, as on every topic, with blaming tertiary participants as main contributors.

    Cuthere:


    Sure, claim it is "fuzzy math" if you want but it`s still the measure normally used. Changing the measure used only when it comes to your convenience is also, fuzzy math.

    Like... say... oh I don`t know, the original graph. Have you complained about that yet? Have you vented your outrage at this graph`s fuzzy math? It uses the same math you`re arguing against after all.
  55. Profile photo of Baalthazaq
    Baalthazaq Male 18-29
    4548 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 6:18 pm
    So to summarize:
    "If you blame this term on Bush, you`re crazy. That`s history. That was 3 YEARS ago!"
    "So... Bush had no impact?"
    "No, that was Clinton."

    Gotcha.

    Maybe the answer is tax cuts. After all we`ve only been running that little experiment for 10 years, it adds billions to the national debt, and is by all accounts a complete failure in every respect, there are fewer jobs even discounting the 2008 recession.

    Considering this seems to be the only Republican plan, quite frankly, you don`t have much to go on.
  56. Profile photo of cuthere2
    cuthere2 Male 30-39
    317 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 6:18 pm
    Baal, so the extent of your argument is "the other side does it too?" So that`s what you resort to when you have nothing left. Pretty weak reply, please try again.

    My point still stands regardless of how you wish to redirect the argument and create your man of straw.
  57. Profile photo of Baalthazaq
    Baalthazaq Male 18-29
    4548 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 6:34 pm
    Cuthere; It`s not a strawman, I`m stating openly:

    You`re the one using fuzzy math by picking and choosing.

    I`m not stating "you do it too", I`m stating "You do it".

    You`re picking and choosing the most convenient figures.

    If you want to measure the deficit there are two ways of doing it.

    One: Clinton Had a Surplus, Barack doubled the deficit.
    Two: Clinton did not have a Surplus, Barack added 10% to the deficit.

    If you`re in the camp where you`re claiming the most convenient half of each mathematical choice for your side, you`re using two different measures to make your argument.

    THAT is fuzzy math. It is inconsistent.

    Unless you want to argue that you`re not actually talking about the figures first brought up. In which case it`s a simple strawman you`re using.
  58. Profile photo of Viralshade
    Viralshade Male 18-29
    45 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 6:41 pm
    You guys do realize, that a huge part of the federal budget is Congress. You cant talk about the budget, from either political party, without taking into account which party had control of congress at that time.
  59. Profile photo of Viralshade
    Viralshade Male 18-29
    45 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 6:42 pm
    Oh, and Aussieguy29, remember that the US is the only reason no one has come to take over your awful little desert island.
  60. Profile photo of Baalthazaq
    Baalthazaq Male 18-29
    4548 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 6:46 pm
    P.S. I use method 1. Which is the most inconvenient for both Democrats and Republicans. I also think it`s the fairest measure.

    Method 2, whilst valid, doesn`t give a realistic measure of what`s going on.

    Just like say Republicans suddenly talking about "U6 unemployment" being "real unemployment". We have not used the the U6 number to represent unemployment in normal reporting, ever.

    All of a sudden, we get Republicans talking about it. Why? It sounds worse.

    Have a look at this. Only one year has the U6 measure. Why? Because for the last century, except now, we`ve been consistent.
  61. Profile photo of cuthere2
    cuthere2 Male 30-39
    317 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 6:49 pm
    Really Hal? Looks like your logic is breaking down there bud as not bring up anentirely different conversation is not "using math."

    Sorry, once again you`ll have to do better. You`re attempting to deflect the facts here by derailing the conversation.

    It seems you use this tactic a lot. I suppose that`s what you must resort to when you have nothing better.

    Once again, you fail to address the core fact of my statement which is: The claimed surplus and economic prosperity CLAIMED by the liberals in this thread is nothing more than smoke and mirrors and intellectual dishonesty.

    Your whine that I did not address "the other side" is irrellevant, as it was not the point I was making and has nothing to do with the core fact.
  62. Profile photo of cuthere2
    cuthere2 Male 30-39
    317 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 6:49 pm
    Typo, was supposed to say Baal.
  63. Profile photo of aussieguy29
    aussieguy29 Male 18-29
    420 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 6:49 pm
    Wow America. Four years of surplus in the last 30 years. No wonder your economy is so f`ed.

    If I may make a comparison...
    Australia - 13 years of surplus in last 30 years
    New Zealand - 15 years of surplus in last 22 years
  64. Profile photo of cuthere2
    cuthere2 Male 30-39
    317 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 6:51 pm
    Viralshade: Great point. Those who blame Bushprefer to ignore who was in Congress/The House when pointing fingers.

    As I`ve said many times before, both sides share responsiblity.
  65. Profile photo of Baalthazaq
    Baalthazaq Male 18-29
    4548 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 7:01 pm
    Cuthere.
    "Once again, you fail to address the core fact of my statement"




    Did the long post confuse you? I`ll simplify it: You use fuzzy math.
    Looky graph. It pretty. It valid.

    If you want to address the second post as if I *only* posted it go ahead, but don`t whine about how I haven`t addressed you.

    I have.
  66. Profile photo of Ruffiana
    Ruffiana Male 30-39
    506 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 7:13 pm
    Every administration has run a defecit since the 1940s and the debt has steadily increased since that time.

    Blaming the current President for the debt is pure dellusion. Blaming this administraion alone for the current defecit is political posturing. It`s partially due to increased spending, partially due to ever increasing requirements of pre-existing social programs, partially due to being muddled in 2 oversea wars, and also due to a global economic collapse. More costs and less revenue.


    The media starts hyping up the defecit and debt like it`s a new 3 year old crisis and everyone and their dog suddenly becomes dratin financial wizards with political science doctorates who know exactly what`s wrong and how to fix it. Most of which are dogma being spewed out of the mouths of talking heads on TV.
  67. Profile photo of RotBottom
    RotBottom Male 18-29
    100 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 7:31 pm
    A significant amount of documentation exists to illustrate the reason why the deficit, in reports, appears to vastly increase under Obama. However, in real assets and actual deficit, it has changed in a statistically similar way as all past administrations.

    The stark reality here is that the Bush administration (and many others before theirs, but never to the same extent) hid the actual deficit with tactics ranging from simply not disclosing spending due to "National Security" factors to delaying when spending would actually hit records so that a significant part of their spending (like the $700B cash bailout of banks) would not hit the accounts until after the administration change.

    A simplistic overview of some of the relevant facts of this can be read here
  • Profile photo of lytle_lytle
    lytle_lytle Male 18-29
    208 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 7:35 pm
    1 kudos to Clinton, proves all a preZ needs to fix the budget is a good BJ. Bush, Yeah he started screwing it up, but hell, Obama cant blame bush for his crazy spending.
  • Profile photo of RotBottom
    RotBottom Male 18-29
    100 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 7:35 pm
    Also, the link in my previous post refutes *all* of the supposed and claimed lack of surplus under Clinton. Using the appropriate math any conclusion can be arrived at. The simple fact of the matter is, under the same accounting methods that Papa Bush and those before him used, Clinton left office with a budgetary surplus.

    Under the incredibly modified accounting practices of Bush Jr`s presidency, the deficit was being presented as nearly a full $1T less than it actually was, and TARP spending of $700B was simply not reported until 2010.
  • Profile photo of Klamz
    Klamz Male 18-29
    689 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 7:44 pm
    It gets better when society collapses because the government can`t take care of them, the good news is with the trillions were spending on the military one of the main reasons were in a deficit each year once everything starts to collapse where already primed for a military dictatorship under the guise of democracy trying to put down civil unrest.

    I suggest you live in a boat offshore for a rapid escape.
  • Profile photo of DrProfessor
    DrProfessor Male 18-29
    3894 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 8:02 pm
    Agreed with Ruffiana and RotBottom.

    So many people who criticize our current administration do so without actually being informed on the matter. The past 4 years haven`t been perfect, mind you, but we`ve made it through a very rough patch in the *global* economy`s history with some pretty minimal damage, considering.

    The amount that Obama has spent isn`t nearly as drastic as it has been claimed (see RotBottom`s posts for a fine explanation), but it can`t be denied that he believes in using the government`s spending power to jump-start the economy.

    You know what? It WORKED. We`ve seen unemployment decline in the last few years. We`re starting to get back on our feet.

    I feel like most of the population believes that it is within the president`s power to fix the economy immediately. It doesn`t work like that. The economy takes time to recover.
  • Profile photo of AtheistAlien
    AtheistAlien Male 30-39
    809 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 8:10 pm
    all the problem with the budget were caused by Bush. You can try all you want to make it look like Obama did it, but it`s wrong and everyone knows it.
  • Profile photo of RotBottom
    RotBottom Male 18-29
    100 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 8:12 pm
    klamz has it absodratinglutely right. Go hit up copblock.org or the many people who videotape our "authorities" violating the law and already acting as though we live inside a police state.
    Oh, wait, we do.
  • Profile photo of Squrlz4Sale
    Squrlz4Sale Male 40-49
    6230 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 8:19 pm
    A chart showing THE SOURCES of these deficits is worth a thousand words.
  • Profile photo of Squrlz4Sale
    Squrlz4Sale Male 40-49
    6230 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 8:34 pm
    Cuthere2, if you`re still online, I would enjoy discussing the Clinton budget surplus with you. Are you game?
  • Profile photo of pixiechick81
    pixiechick81 Female 30-39
    838 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 9:02 pm
    We should pay attention to the fact this is talking about the DEFICIT and not the DEBT
  • Profile photo of collegebound
    collegebound Male 18-29
    3745 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 9:07 pm
    oh look! a graph!

    lets all not give a twat drat!!
  • Profile photo of RotBottom
    RotBottom Male 18-29
    100 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 9:08 pm
    Squrlz -

    The Clinton budget surpluses were absolutely valid.
    There clearly was a budget, using any form of accounting in acceptable use before and after the "Clinton era", methods that I personally find detestable and under which occurs the very real theft of citizens` money that occurs. As rational humans who know the Fed has paid $100 for hammers and $600 for toilet seats. This occurs simply because it can in a bureaucracy and is a consequence of one.

    These budget surpluses were heavily derived from the incidental boom of technology, which occurred under economic policies which encouraged job creation and new business development.

    During the Clinton era, anyone can posit that the silicon valley boom was more Clinton`s luck than anything, and they`d be right. They`d also be the types to posit that Bush just happened to be President during 9/11.

    So encouraging business practices, including some that transferred wealth from the ma
  • Profile photo of xbx214
    xbx214 Male 18-29
    958 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 9:13 pm
    This poo is fake, drat the republicans!
  • Profile photo of RotBottom
    RotBottom Male 18-29
    100 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 9:17 pm
    Clinton Surplus #2
    Further, as computerization became incredibly cheap early into the Clinton administration, both Federal and State agencies through all levels and branches of government were encouraged to computerize as much as was possible, and in this argument consider thoroughly that the Clinton administration was engaged with the pending "Y2K bug" in early 1996, passing a law in 1998. Though laughable now, at the time it was a complete unknown with a significant divide among even the the most authoritative of computer experts.

    So the specific encouragement of technology and the growth of the computer industries indicates clearly that the Clinton administration wasn`t entirely without influence and it was complete chance of timing.

    Also, during the Clinton administration, there wasn`t open transfer of wealth from the many to the few, as there was in coming years. $600 toilet seats don`t really compare with the Bush43 prison and military industrial
  • Profile photo of RotBottom
    RotBottom Male 18-29
    100 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 9:19 pm
    When the drat is 1000 chars not 1000 chars?
  • Profile photo of Fleaman1797
    Fleaman1797 Male 18-29
    718 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 9:22 pm
    More proof Obama should be in the Ghetto and not the WHITE HOUSE!
  • Profile photo of rebetikas
    rebetikas Male 30-39
    213 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 9:23 pm
    Answers to debt are not more debt (though the Chinese would say I`m wrong).

    I`m curious though to see what would actually happen should the US default on a repayment, might start getting people in government respecting money again.
  • Profile photo of davymid
    davymid Male 30-39
    12140 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 9:43 pm
    Oh, and Aussieguy29, remember that the US is the only reason no one has come to take over your awful little desert island.
    The US is the only reason no-one has yet invaded the "awful little desert island" called Australia yet?

    Wow Viralshade, how delightfully, charmingly parochial of you. Bless.
  • Profile photo of 614188
    614188 Male 18-29
    220 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 10:04 pm
    we want clinton back
  • Profile photo of Squrlz4Sale
    Squrlz4Sale Male 40-49
    6230 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 10:06 pm
    @RotBottom: Not entirely sure where you`re coming from; I never suggested the Clinton budget surplus wasn`t a surplus. Who are you trying to convince?

    That said, you`re focusing on an incidental (the tech boom of the 90s) and ignoring the single largest factor behind the surplus: the tax increases on the wealthy that Clinton pushed through in his first year in office.
  • Profile photo of username3415
    username3415 Male 18-29
    362 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 10:07 pm
    is this correct?
  • Profile photo of LazyMe484
    LazyMe484 Male 18-29
    10441 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 10:18 pm
    A chart showing THE SOURCES of these deficits is worth a thousand words.
    Ahh, that looks much more... reasonable. Anyway, why didn`t Obama push to end those tax cuts sooner?
  • Profile photo of TKD_Master
    TKD_Master Male 18-29
    4794 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 10:45 pm
    "we want clinton back "

    Yes please.
  • Profile photo of ChrisP12
    ChrisP12 Male 40-49
    186 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 10:45 pm
    Our debt is the totality of deficits and the interest we pay on servicing that debt. That has never gone down in, eh well...uh,I don`t know when.
  • Profile photo of Mornaf
    Mornaf Male 18-29
    820 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 11:30 pm
    Oh, and Aussieguy29, remember that the US is the only reason no one has come to take over your awful little desert island.

    The US is the only reason no-one has yet invaded the "awful little desert island" called Australia yet?

    Wow Viralshade, how delightfully, charmingly parochial of you. Bless.

    Wait..., I thought the reason nobody invaded Australia, is because Australia is the land where everything will kill you.

    Oh wait...,
  • Profile photo of EricWRN
    EricWRN Male 30-39
    590 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 11:38 pm
    haha, "a chart showing THE SOURCES of these deficits"!!! Are people REALLY still trying to convince themselves that it`s not Obamas fault? He`s SPENT more money than Bush!!! It`s OBAMAS FAULT. He hasn`t cut ANY of Bush`s programs, he`s INCREASED war spending and INCREASED spending on everything else as well!!! STOP fooling yourselves into thinking it`s not Obamas fault you drating sheep!
  • Profile photo of davymid
    davymid Male 30-39
    12140 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 11:45 pm
    vv Word, Eric. Word.

    Say, found any of those pesky WMDs in Iraq yet? War ain`t cheap. Not by a long shot.
  • Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    July 16, 2011 at 11:57 pm
    davy: I shown you evidence of Saddam`s hidden WMDs a long time ago, Of course you just dismissed that evidence, but it was still found buried and hidden away for possible future use.

    I guess you felt a diversion was necessary to point blame away from Obama, which is a common tactic these days, anytime someone actually zeroes in on Obama.
  • Profile photo of EricWRN
    EricWRN Male 30-39
    590 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 12:01 am
    yes, they`ve found plenty of WMDs in Iraq, just not in the quantities that Bush thought/ promised (but I`m guessing you wouldn`t know since your clearly just another obama-scapegoating kool-aid drinking sheep).... What the drat does that even have to do with Obama spending money? I hate George Bush and I don`t think we should have gone to Iraq and I don`t think we should be there now... that has nothing to do with this graph or the fact that Obama has already outspent Bush INCLUDING THE WARS
  • Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 12:04 am
    Just some of Saddam`s WMDs







    So please stop with the false rhetoric Davy.
  • Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 12:11 am
    EricWRN: I`m guessing you wouldn`t know since your clearly just another obama-scapegoating kool-aid drinking sheep

    Yeah, Right.

    I never said Bush was perfect, mistakes were made but at least he apologized for them.

    Obama won`t admit he`s made any mistakes and believes that he knows better than anyone else, including some of his own generals, aides, and cabinet members. He`s arrogant and throws fits when he doesn`t get his way, Sorry but that`s not how a real leader should act, that`s how teenagers act.
  • Profile photo of Batmanners
    Batmanners Male 18-29
    4006 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 12:12 am
    No, you guys defending Bush are morons.

    Obama took over a budget that was plummeting to its death, and handed the sh*t sandwich to Obama, as the recession was beginning (don`t know if you remember, but the Bush administration was in denial of the recession).

    Obama took care of getting the country out f recession, and he has. He promised to give nationwide medicare, and he has. He has done so many things that have gone unnoticed, and people still don`t like him.

    America needs to realize the incredible amounts of work Obama has put in, and the good it has done for the nation.

    Bush did absolutely nothing in his 8 years, except go to war with Afghanistan and Iraq.
  • Profile photo of Batmanners
    Batmanners Male 18-29
    4006 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 12:13 am
    When did Bush apologize or hone up to anything?
  • Profile photo of Batmanners
    Batmanners Male 18-29
    4006 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 12:15 am
    What the f*ck has Obama done so far?
  • Profile photo of davymid
    davymid Male 30-39
    12140 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 12:16 am
    davy: I shown you evidence of Saddam`s hidden WMDs a long time ago, Of course you just dismissed that evidence, but it was still found buried and hidden away for possible future use.
    Must have missed the memo on that. Here`s me thinking all this time that GWB junior was just flexing his dick-muscles to impress his dad.

    Pretty sure that "WMDs Discovered in Iraq: US Invasion Justified!" would have made world news. Except it didn`t, because it didn`t happen.

    Crackrjak, I don`t even need to respond to these kinds of posts. With everything you write, you dig yourself deeper into people thinking you`re a twat. No help from me.
  • Profile photo of EricWRN
    EricWRN Male 30-39
    590 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 12:19 am
    Wait, what? Got us out of a recession? We`re still headed towards a depression with unemployment that`s lasted a record period of time.

    And yeah, Obama did take over a pooty budget.. .AND HE QUADRUPLED IT. HOW IS THAT ACCEPTABLE???? WHY ARE YOU SHEEP MAKING EXCUSES FOR OBAMA?!!!

    Don`t you morons know when you`ve been sold a lie?! I don`t give a damn if Obama is the best looking, slickest talking, most benevolent president we`ve ever had - he IS spending us into oblivion. Why do you idiots deny that? This graph is about Obama`s spending... it`s not about the war, it`s not about Bush... it`s about the PREPOSTEROUS amount of money Obama has continued to spend.
  • Profile photo of EricWRN
    EricWRN Male 30-39
    590 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 12:22 am
    davymid: it is funny how the media never cared about the poo we did find in Iraq.... it`s not surprising but it is a little weird - although it`s obvious that people only hear what they want to, because even when obama-scapegoating morons like you are presented with facts you simply regress to some stupid "blame george bush" meme and pretend that Obama isn`t bankrupting the US at a record rate (although you are from Europe so i`m not even sure why you care...)
  • Profile photo of davymid
    davymid Male 30-39
    12140 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 12:33 am
    Going assh*le now. It doesn`t really matter.

    The US is f*cked, the US Dollar is going to be superceded by the Chinese Dong, or the Euro, or whatever. Doesn`t matter. Point is, America is f*cked. The writing was on the wall when GWB launched a retaliation attack on a country that had f*ck all to do with it.

    And yet, the conservative right will still find a way to blame the libutards for the world going f*cked up.

    In the words of I-A-B, Welcome your new overlords.
  • Profile photo of EricWRN
    EricWRN Male 30-39
    590 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 12:36 am
    um, i`m not a conservative, i said i hate george bush, and frankly, I think europeans just like Obama so much because he stepped on the gas pedal to our demise and now it`s like a race to see who can self destruct faster: the US or Europe... although if you think the US is in worse shape than Europe you`re again nothing more than a fact-denying, kool-aid drinking idiot
  • Profile photo of EricWRN
    EricWRN Male 30-39
    590 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 12:36 am
    and um, davymid: still not sure what ANYTHING you`ve said actually has to do with the post above...
  • Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 12:42 am
    Davy: [quote">Pretty sure that "WMDs Discovered in Iraq: US Invasion Justified!" would have made world news.[/quote">

    It did make world news, but few media outlets decided to pick it up, Why ? because no nukes were found. WMDs are not exclusively nuclear weapons, but I guess non-nuclear weapons just weren`t enough evidence to just justify the Iraq war, in liberal eyes, no matter how many people it freed, no matter the democratic elections, no matter that a bastard dictator and his evil sons were eliminated. Even finding his huge stockpile of yellow cake uranium wasn`t enough, Link, to get much news coverage.
  • Profile photo of tedgp
    tedgp Male 30-39
    3287 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 1:41 am
    Remember when George Bush destroyed your economy and put you in record debt simply because he wanted to go to war? I do.
  • Profile photo of Batmanners
    Batmanners Male 18-29
    4006 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 1:48 am
    The weapons found weren`t WMD`s, and the weapons that were found were known about.

    Even so, what matters isn`t that the US went to war against a country that could`ve had WMDs... It`s that they themselves refuse to get rid of their own... douchebags.
  • Profile photo of 8BitHero
    8BitHero Male 18-29
    5414 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 2:03 am
    I`m pretty it`s because Obama is cleaning up the mess which is why it`s still bad?
  • Profile photo of skypirate
    skypirate Male 18-29
    2422 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 2:19 am
    ...

    where in the first set of brackets you type `quote` the `...` is the copied text. in the in second set of brackets you type `quote` after the the forward slash.

    no picking on you but i tired of seeing it done wrong
  • Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 2:42 am
    skypirate: I typed it correctly.

    The problem exists here on IAB, If you add a link or image as well a quote, the quote command gets messed up. I don`t know why, Ask one of the mods or Fancy for the answer.
  • Profile photo of paddy215
    paddy215 Male 18-29
    1677 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 2:46 am
    Bush drats up economy, Obama hasn`t a baldoes how to clean it up, retards blame one or the other with no real evidence. Politics will never improve until people stop treating parties like sports teams.
  • Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 2:50 am
    Batmanners: I`m guessing that you`ve never heard of the nuclear arms reduction treaty or the similar treaties regarding the disposal of chemical and biological weapons by both the US and Russia. Link 1 Link 2

    I`ll forgive your ignorance this time, Next time do some research before you stick your foot in your mouth.
  • Profile photo of paddy215
    paddy215 Male 18-29
    1677 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 2:56 am
    Anyone who thinks the US found evidence to justify the Iraq war dhould be put down.
  • Profile photo of tommy2X4
    tommy2X4 Male 50-59
    3447 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 3:04 am
    I don`t believe this propaganda. The government is just a puppet for the rich. The two party system works together to keep the poor poor. In capitalism, when one gets rich, one gets poor. Period!
    Wake up!
  • Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 3:06 am
    tedgp: I`m afraid you`ve been told a rather biased and terribly liberal view of recent history.

    The economy was doing fine until 9/11 happened, It took us awhile to recover from those blows. In 2005 housing auditors warned of the impending collapse in the housing market, the then democrat party dominated congress ignored the pleas for reform. Because they were ignored the housing market crashed in 2008 and instead of letting the banks fail that caused the problem, The congress and Obama rewarded the banks with bailouts.

    Btw, The banks that got the best deals in the bail out were top campaign contributors to Obama during his election campaign, Some of which Are listed below with the amounts they gave to his campaign.

    Goldman Sachs - $994,795
    Citigroup Inc - $701,290
    JPMorgan Chase - $695,132
    UBS AG - $543,219
    Morgan Stanley - $514,881
  • Profile photo of November_Rai
    November_Rai Male 30-39
    319 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 3:11 am
    Oh look, Clinton balanced the budget. But he was such a terrible president...
  • Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 3:21 am
    tommy2X4: I see you`ve been indoctrinated into believing socialism is a panacea, the cure to the evils of capitalism, am I right ?

    You totally believe in `class conflict` as defined by Karl Marx in his book "The Communist Manifesto". I`m sorry to tell you this but there will always rich and poor because greed can not be exorcised from the human condition, the only difference is under what economic system that disparity will exist under, one with freedoms or those without.

    The only system by which masses of people have risen from the crushing poverty, that you complain about, is where there is capitalism and free trade.
  • Profile photo of tedgp
    tedgp Male 30-39
    3287 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 3:29 am
    @CrackrJak

    Lets see. During the last 10 years, Bush and the republicans took you from a surplus into a deficit.

    The democrats tried to help by allowing the republicans to raise taxes slightly and do what they NEEDED to do to lessen the impact of the defecit towards Americans.

    Enter Obama after bush. He inherited one of the biggest sefecits since the Depression. The republicans constantly refuse to do what is needed to get the AMerican Economy back on track. They then try to tell the media and put out propeganda saying it`s all obama`s fault. ( Remember, this is the same political group that said Obama was from the middle East or wherever, then when proved wrong, said he didnt have a valid birth Certificate).

    Not much the current Governement can do when theyre stalled at every turn by a political party intent on destroying the country simply because they hate the opposing party/president.

    Now i know youre going to make some smartass comeb
  • Profile photo of tedgp
    tedgp Male 30-39
    3287 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 3:29 am
    *comeback, but shut up, take the time to research and you will see that its not lies, it is actually what has happened, and is still happeneing right now.
  • Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 3:59 am
    tedgp: The US hasn`t had a true `Surplus` of funds since before the civil war, If you`ve heard otherwise then you`ve been told a half-truth (which is a lie spun to sound true).

    Bush was only president for 8 years, NOT 10, Obama has been president for over 2-1/2 years now, He owns this economic mess we are in because he`s signed the bills that increased spending by over $4 trillion dollars, That`s four times what GW Bush signed in spending bills.

    Remember, this is the same political group that said Obama was from the middle East or wherever, then when proved wrong, said he didnt have a valid birth Certificate

    I guess it would surprise you to know that it was a Hillary Clinton campaign supporter, Phil J. Berg, that initiated the first search for Obama`s birth certificate, he has never been a republican.

    It is you sir that is severely misinformed, I suggest that you are the one needing to do some fact checking.
  • Profile photo of almightybob1
    almightybob1 Male 18-29
    4290 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 4:09 am
    Squrlz4Sale posted a good graph, worth embedding:


  • Profile photo of tedgp
    tedgp Male 30-39
    3287 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 4:18 am
    Define "true surplus" because every single economic analyst disagrees with you. As for your 2nd statement You must go around blind, believing whatever propaganda is thrown about. The republicans who have the final decision currently on any tax rise etc, WILL NOT LET OBAMA DO ANYTHING to get the economy back on track. That is why the deficit is piling higher and higher. Add to that that when bush left, most economic analysts were in full agreement that the economy was about to collapse, and guess what, it did. Leading to an almost world wide recessions.

    I suggest you lay off FOX News and go buy a tinfoil hat, because it`s obvious who have almost no knowledge of what is happening in front of you, and when called out, you start to try and sound "intelligent" ( and i use that word loosely), in a vain attempt hoping people will stop replying so you gain the last word.

    Unfortunatley for you, a LOT of people happen to know a hell of a lot more tha
  • Profile photo of tedgp
    tedgp Male 30-39
    3287 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 4:19 am
    *Know a lot more than what you have seen from a r andom news reporter on tv
  • Profile photo of tedgp
    tedgp Male 30-39
    3287 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 4:24 am
    As for the hilary Supporter, I suggest you read up a little more on him ;)


    Also, i will say it again. When it was proven that the republicans were wrong about Obama beign from africa or whatever, they tried to change it to other things. The media caught hold, tried to pass what the republicans were saying off as fact, and the public believed it.

    This isnt fantasy or wishful thinking. This ACTUALLY happened. You can try and defend your comments as much as you want crackr. The Facts laid out in history speak for themselves. It`s just that you choose to ignore them and try to convince people that YOU are right, and everything that happened was a conspiracy against republicans.

    Both political parties in the US are a mess. However, no matter how you choose to defend one side or the other, the fact remains that it WAS the republicans that caused the current deficit, and theyre still intent on destroying the economy just because they have something again
  • Profile photo of Sakamura
    Sakamura Male 30-39
    237 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 4:52 am
    Ahhh nothing like a good troll in the morning to awaken you. Strange if I look at the historical perspectives at the said bureau, I don`t see the same numbers ... Oh well ...

    And nothing like a good political debate in the morning with people who got hooked bait and sinker against said troll...

    <3 you IAB. *eats popcorn* *tries to recover from hangover*
  • Profile photo of Tekinette
    Tekinette Male 30-39
    273 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 5:08 am
    Yeah let`s blame Obama for the great recession, the huge defence increased spendings and the bush tax cuts that represents about 56% of the debt... The Obama stimulus is about 6% of the debt and the Medicare Part D about 2%...

    Let`s not blame the previous president that turned a surplus federal spending into a debt while at the same time having a collapse in revenues and a rise in unemployment which simply doubled under Bush...
  • Profile photo of apbadogs
    apbadogs Male 40-49
    25 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 6:00 am
    November_Rai
    Oh look, Clinton balanced the budget. But he was such a terrible president
    ****
    You do know who controlled Congress when that happened, right?
  • Profile photo of apbadogs
    apbadogs Male 40-49
    25 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 6:03 am
    Couple things to point out to some posters here:
    1. They are now the Obama Tax Cuts. He re-upped them, he owns them.
    2. With the stroke of Obama`s "stimulus" pen he spent (wasted) almost as much as the combined cost of the 2 wars.
  • Profile photo of Squidbush
    Squidbush Male 40-49
    791 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 6:07 am
    "Ahhh nothing like a good troll in the morning to awaken you. Strange if I look at the historical perspectives at the said bureau, I don`t see the same numbers ... Oh well ..."

    Funny. 5 minutes on the same website and I see exactly the same numbers. You didn`t look very well.
  • Profile photo of tedgp
    tedgp Male 30-39
    3287 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 6:17 am
    apbadogs
    Male, 40-49, Eastern US
    7 Posts Sunday, July 17, 2011 6:03:00 AM
    Couple things to point out to some posters here:
    1. They are now the Obama Tax Cuts. He re-upped them, he owns them.
    2. With the stroke of Obama`s "stimulus" pen he spent (wasted) almost as much as the combined cost of the 2 wars.

    ---------------

    Please tell me you were home schooled....
  • Profile photo of monsterzero
    monsterzero Male 40-49
    356 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 6:27 am
    @tegp:
    You obviosly don`t "*Know a lot more than what you have seen from a random news reporter on tv". If you did you would know about the Glass-Steagal act that was instilled by president Roosevelt to protect the country from another depression. You would also know that this act was waived by president Clinton and president Bush tried to reinstate the act four times to save the economy but all his attempts were blocked by the democratic majority in congress. As for the rumors about Obama being from Kenya and not having a birth certificate, they were started not by republicans but by Hillary Clintons supporters when she ran against him in the democratic primaries. Now that the shoe is on the other foot and the republican majority in congress is blocking Obamas feeble and useless attempts to make himself look good before an election, people like you (who apparently don`t even live in the United States)get their panties in a bunch.
  • Profile photo of tedgp
    tedgp Male 30-39
    3287 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 6:36 am
    @monsterzero. You do realize that whatever happens to your economy has a HUGE knock on effect around the world right?

    I hope you have a vague idea at least.
  • Profile photo of monsterzero
    monsterzero Male 40-49
    356 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 7:11 am
    If your so concerned with how our economy affects the rest of the world then I suggest you stop drinking the Kool-Aid of political propaganda and do some studying on how our government actually works. I would suggest beginning with the United States treasury department.
  • Profile photo of tedgp
    tedgp Male 30-39
    3287 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 7:33 am
    I do understand how governements work. I also understand how economies and the mishandling of economies work.

    You and crackr have yet to put forth any legit argument based in fact towards the points i, and others on this forum have made. Instead, you try to "read between the lines" and argue about somethign that wasnt really said, in a vain attempt to try and look knowledgeable.

    But it`s ok. People like yourself and crackr are part of the reason why economies fail.
  • Profile photo of madest
    madest Male 40-49
    7378 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 7:44 am
    Thank you CJ, Nobody but you understood what WMD`s were. How could we survive without your Einstein like knowledge.
    PS: There were no WMD`s found in Iraq no matter your protestations to the contrary.
  • Profile photo of xCYBERDYNEx
    xCYBERDYNEx Male 18-29
    4903 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 7:53 am
    Im still bored, this is an entertainment site, Keep the f*cking politics out!
  • Profile photo of EntrE
    EntrE Male 18-29
    535 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 7:54 am
    well you gotta keep the recession in the back of your head. it probably would have been a lot worse if he didn`t do anything about it. also wow, look how well bill clinton did!
  • Profile photo of cuthere2
    cuthere2 Male 30-39
    317 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 8:09 am
    More claims of a Clinton surplus. Do liberals even bother fact-checking before believing the hype? Seriously, it takes 5 minutes to see it`s all smoke and mirrors. So sad.
  • Profile photo of LazyMe484
    LazyMe484 Male 18-29
    10441 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 8:15 am
    ... there is just too much BS on this thread (can you tell where it`s coming from?), I`ll stick to one thing:

    Just some of Saddam`s WMDs
    Those don`t look like WMDs

    Yellowcake uranium is not a weapon.
  • Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33085 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 8:30 am
    Yay! 141 comments to read!
    It`s easy to predict who will say what, but you never know, hope springs eternal & all that!

    Main point: Obama PROMISED over and over to NOT raise the deficit. He promised to match ALL increases in spending with cuts elsewhere. He blasted Bush again and again for "wreckless over-spending".

    AND he had big majorities in both the House & Senate.

    Worst. President. Ever!
  • Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33085 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 8:39 am
    the bush tax cuts that represents about 56% of the debt... The Obama stimulus is about 6% of the debt and the Medicare Part D about 2%...
    Oh dead, can`t even get off the front page without @Tekinette making the FUNNIEST post ever! lolz! Do you mean "deficit" 1.4 trillion, or "debt" 14.3 trillion. Either way, tax cuts are just that, they allow people to KEEP THEIR OWN MONEY and spend it, thus driving the economy, m-kay?

    @Almightybob1, that graphic is the 2nd biggest pile of bull I`ve seen today! (@Tekinette`s post being the biggest, eh?) Heaven forbid people should be allowed to keep their own money!

    Gha! can`t even begin to point out all the idiocy of @tedgp`s ranting...
  • Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33085 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 8:39 am
    * Oh "dear" el oops!
  • Profile photo of madest
    madest Male 40-49
    7378 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 8:45 am
    Your opinion would mean something 5Cats, If you weren`t Canadian.
  • Profile photo of NNoamfer
    NNoamfer Male 18-29
    1216 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 8:46 am
    Oh look, bush started the debt problem in your country! Who knows; maybe this wouldn`t happen if there wasn`t debt in the first place. Can you president?
  • Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33085 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 8:49 am
    @5Cats: We get it... you hate Obama.
    Not really @osirisacend - I hate his politics, policies and personality. Oh wait! I do hate him, lolz! Why care? Because he`s destroying the USA and thus Canada too.

    Hey 5Cats.. I have some advice for you.
    Hey @RyanF701 - I have some news for you: I do not post anything! I suggest, the Mods post it. If I suggested 100 kitten pictures in a row, none would be posted, m-kay? The IAB mods agree that LEARNING SOMETHING about the MOST important news in the USA just MIGHT relieve your boredom.

    Could you have done any better? No. - @fiveanthems
    Actually, as long as 5Cats didnt like to fellate bankers he would have done better. - @viperjason

    Lolz! I`ll TRY to read and be quite now...
  • Profile photo of Squrlz4Sale
    Squrlz4Sale Male 40-49
    6230 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 9:06 am
    The level of acrimony and disinformation is so high in this thread, I hesitate to step into it. That said, I feel compelled to respond regarding the Clinton budget surpluses.

    Yes, the Clinton budget surpluses were real. How do I (and the CBO) define a surplus? More money coming in than going out. How do I (and the CBO) define a deficit? More money going out than coming in. During the latter years of Clinton`s presidency, the U.S. government was collecting more money than it was paying out. That`s an undeniable fact.

    (continued next post)
  • Profile photo of Squrlz4Sale
    Squrlz4Sale Male 40-49
    6230 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 9:07 am
    (continued)

    So why is it the case that if you Google "Clinton surplus myth" you get about 100 returns directing you to conservative websites and blogs, all declaring the surplus never existed? Because some of the money being taken in was earmarked for the Social Security program: it was money collected to deliver on a future promise of payments and thus, to some minds, should never have been counted in the surplus.

    The conservative position on this is inconsistent. If conservatives want to say that there was no surplus during the Clinton years, that implies they believe the Social Security funds are sacrosanct. Yet these same conservatives want to see large cuts in Social Security now in order to reduce the deficit. That`s having it both ways: either the Social Security money is separate from the budget or it’s not.
  • Profile photo of monsterzero
    monsterzero Male 40-49
    356 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 9:22 am
    @tedgp:
    If you knew how the government of the United States worked then you would know the only power the president has is the power of veto and to nominate a supreme court justice. The president and congress can talk about the economy all they want but the treasury department calls all the shots.You would not be blind to the fact that putting the blame on a president is nothing but political propaganda and therefore would keep your mouth shut. I have not seen you make any legitimate points to this discussion except for the "I know you are, but what am I?" shoolyard attitude. But it`s O.K. people like you are the reason idiots gain power.
  • Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33085 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 9:26 am
    GWB launched a retaliation attack on a country that had f*ck all to do with it.
    Nooo @davymid, The UN re-invaded Iraq because of years of violation of the cease-fire agreement, m-kay? I`ve utterly proven this already BUT you`re a kool-aid gulping libtard and see what the MSM tells you and nothing more. Ditto for @Batmanners. Double Ditto for @Paddy215.

    Also: Saddam had two years to smuggle the WMDs out of Iraq into Syria, which Israel blew to tiny, radioactive pieces a few years ago.

    The republicans constantly refuse to do what is needed to get the AMerican Economy back on track.
    Hey @tedgp! How did the minority Repubs do THAT exactly? Since the Dems had a lock on both houses from 2008 - 2010, eh? The rest of your posts make even less sense. Be quiet boy, adults are speaking!
  • Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33085 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 9:32 am
    Which Obama video got removed?

    China Debt

    WTF Win The Future?

    The first one is just plain FUNNY! The second one should be watched by ALL the Obama defenders, m-kay?
  • Profile photo of SaintsFan
    SaintsFan Male 30-39
    256 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 9:47 am
    Hello? America? HI! This is China, Russia, Australia and the rest of the gang. We want our ******* money back now. You don`t have it? No problem. My kids will beat up your kids for it."
  • Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 10:11 am
    tedgp: The so called "News" you are getting is quite literally an ocean away from the truth.

    The republicans did not initiate the `birther issue`, Hillary Clinton did and she brought the question up in the 2008 democrat primary debates.
    Phil J. Berg has since been lambasted and falsely accused by Obama supporters for his actions.

    This over $4 trillion dollars in spending is all on Obama, and the democrat held congress of 2008-2010, he signed those bills into law and that is FACT, no matter how your European media outlets have tried to spin it in his favor.
  • Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 10:22 am
    madest: Denying the evidence of your own eyes now I see. I don`t think you would believe Saddam had WMDs even if the US military were to line them up in a parade right in front of you.

    You are so committed to your liberal ideology, that nothing gets through your thick skull, even when I show you overwhelming evidence.

    Keep on with your liberal delusions and you`ll eventually end up like Keith Olbermann did, naked in a bathtub crying, during the Monica Lewinsky scandal, refusing to go to work. But even that event didn`t change him, and no evidence I produce to show you will either.
  • Profile photo of -Firestorm-
    -Firestorm- Male 18-29
    48 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 10:52 am
    yeah i`m a liberal and a democrat but i didn`t want obama as president...i still feel he hasn`t done much but hang out with the celebs
  • Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10742 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 11:01 am
    Saddam had WMDs even if the US military were to line them up in a parade right in front of you.


    Oh yes several hundred chemical munitions which were so heavily degraded it was practically impossible to launch them from a remote location. What a threat that was it even justified sending in an entire corps as opposed to a highly trained Spec Ops strike team.

    Saddam had two years to smuggle the WMDs out of Iraq into Syria, which Israel blew to tiny, radioactive pieces a few years ago.


    Uh no reactors != WMDs.
  • Profile photo of davymid
    davymid Male 30-39
    12140 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 11:04 am
    Politics will never improve until people stop treating parties like sports teams.
    Most sensible comment in the whole thread.

    Nooo @davymid, The UN re-invaded Iraq because of years of violation of the cease-fire agreement, m-kay? I`ve utterly proven this already BUT you`re a kool-aid gulping libtard and see what the MSM tells you and nothing more.
    The UN didn`t invade Iraq, America and it`s coalition did, against vast overwhelming international will. And your country, Canada, was not part of that farcical invasion for a very good reason, and I applaud them for it. But yeah, you`re right, I`m just a kool-aid gulping libtard that watches too much MSM. I`ll decline to insult you in return.
  • Profile photo of zombieland
    zombieland Male 18-29
    418 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 11:09 am
    Any way yea figger, that president`s a ........... im not allowed to say the next word, but i think u get my point, obama isnt fit to run nap time let alone a country
  • Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10742 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 11:14 am
    heavily degraded it was practically impossible to launch them from a remote location.

    Okay THAT`s an overstatement but I WILL point out that these munitions were, in fact, produced BEFORE the Gulf War. The rhetoric during the build up was "there was a massive clandestine WMD program", when in fact there were just a 5h17load of WMDs. That latter part IS the rhetoric now.
  • Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10742 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 11:16 am
    By WMDs of course I mean nothing biological or nuclear.
  • Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 11:20 am
    Cajun: Much more than just degraded old chemical weapons were found, I`m guessing you didn`t read the link about the 550 metric tons of yellow cake uranium.

  • Profile photo of jamie76
    jamie76 Male 30-39
    2345 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 11:21 am
    yea of course that deficit was already heading that way under bush and his policies had NO impact whatsoever on the deficit after he left office...

    really people are you that stupid??? the deficit jumped due to the BAILOUT that BUSH et al created.

    it was their bailout not Obama`s...Bush`s. Say it again, BUSH. thank you, you may now return to being stupid.
  • Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10742 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 11:22 am
    550 metric tons of yellow cake uranium

    For the last TIME!

    YELLOWCAKE != WMD
  • Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10742 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 11:22 am
    Another thing to point out:

    ALSO produced before Gulf War.

    See a pattern here?
  • Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 11:41 am
    Cajun: YELLOWCAKE != WMD

    Shhhh, now calm down and breathe for a minute.

    Now what is uranium used for ? Come on you can admit it, you know what it`s used for.

    Two things, Making nuclear power rods for nuclear power plants, which Saddam had none, and for enrichment to make nuclear weapons.

    Since it`s clear he had no nuke power plants it`s pretty certain what he was going to use it for and what it was meant to create, and that`s bombs.
  • Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10742 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 11:51 am
    Since it`s clear he had no nuke power plants it`s pretty certain what he was going to use it for and what it was meant to create, and that`s bombs.

    You`re generalizing. Lack of exonerating evidence doesn`t prove anything.
  • Profile photo of November_Rai
    November_Rai Male 30-39
    319 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 11:54 am
    apbadogs I actually didn`t know who controlled congress at the time, and I don`t care. I was ECSTATIC when we had a balanced budget. THRILLED!

    I`m what you call a `bad-poster`, and I`ll admit it. I don`t pay attention to much of what was said before me, and I usually don`t check back to see if someone has responded to me. I just say my two cents and move on. And this thread is so crazy I don`t know what I`m doing here. Mods must have fun with ones like this.
  • Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 12:06 pm
    Cajun: I think you meant to use another word than `exonerating`, otherwise your sentence doesn`t make sense.
  • Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10742 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 12:15 pm
    I think you meant to use another word than `exonerating`, otherwise your sentence doesn`t make sense.

    Like you said yellowcake has multiple purposes, just because you can`t find a nuclear power plant (exonerating) does not mean there were any nuclear weapons produced.
  • Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 12:22 pm
    Cajun: "Eliminate all other factors, and the one which remains must be the truth." - Sherlock Holmes

    Since there were no nuclear power plants, and 550 metric tons of yellow cake is much more than would ever needed for scientific research, then the only factor left is that it was meant to be used to make bombs.

    Pretty simple logic really.
  • Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10742 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 12:27 pm
    Sorry Crakr "all other factors" weren`t eliminated.

    If we go by your logic anyone with a bong could convicted on smoking MJ when it was just a collector`s item.

    Even Sherlock Holmes knew he had to PROVE his case before any conviction was made.

    No nuclear warhead, no WMDs. Period.
  • Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10742 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 12:29 pm
    The assertion that yellowcake was going to be used to make WMDs based on Saddam`s character alone is a HIGHLY circumstantial assertion.
  • Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 12:36 pm
    Cajun: If we go by your logic anyone with a bong could convicted on smoking MJ when it was just a collector`s item.

    There are laws against owning them, It`s called drug paraphernalia and carries a sentence and fine not unlike the charge of possession of marijuana itself.

    You`re denying the logic of it because you hate GW Bush, not because you actually think Saddam was innocent that`s called relativism.
  • Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10742 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 12:40 pm
    You`re denying the logic of it because you hate GW Bush

    Ad Hominem
  • Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 12:44 pm
    Cajun: Ad Hominem

    Now you`re just deflecting.
  • Profile photo of Squrlz4Sale
    Squrlz4Sale Male 40-49
    6230 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 12:49 pm
    @CrakrJak: Are you suggesting that the U.S. should wage war against any country that *might* be planning to do something wrong? I`m not being facetious here; it`s just the only way I`m able to interpret your train of thought regarding Iraq.
  • Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10742 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 12:51 pm
    @Crakr

    What is THAT supposed to mean?
    You`re trying to discredit me based on my stance, among with other logical fallacies `dude`.
  • Profile photo of almightybob1
    almightybob1 Male 18-29
    4290 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 12:55 pm
    Your opinion would mean something 5Cats, If you weren`t Canadian.
    I`d like to think us foreigners should still be able to chip in on these issues madest. Especially when it`s to do with the economy, since all of our financial infrastructure is inextricably linked worldwide now.

    @Almightybob1, that graphic is the 2nd biggest pile of bull I`ve seen today! (@Tekinette`s post being the biggest, eh?) Heaven forbid people should be allowed to keep their own money!
    Which part of the graph do you disagree with? The calculated and projected figures on the cost of the wars and the cost of lost tax money? Because they`re fairly simple accounting calculations, nothing really debatable.

    Or the implication that, although nobody really likes having to pay taxes, a tax cut is actually not always a good idea?
  • Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 1:01 pm
    Squrlz4Sale: I never made that claim, The answer is No.

    Saddam Hussein was a special case, for many reasons other than him wanting to make WMDs to destroy America and Israel with. Had he squired nukes he would`ve used them, He was a menace to not only his own countrymen but his neighbors as well. Saddam was funding terrorists and paying the families of suicide bombers. The world is much better off now that he is gone.

    There are other despots in the world, but they are either supported by other countries that we don`t want to war with or have the potential of being overthrown by opposition within their own country.
  • Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 1:03 pm
    Cajun: If the shoe fits.
  • Profile photo of almightybob1
    almightybob1 Male 18-29
    4290 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 1:04 pm
    @Almightybob1, that graphic is the 2nd biggest pile of bull I`ve seen today! (@Tekinette`s post being the biggest, eh?) Heaven forbid people should be allowed to keep their own money!
    The UN did not invade and did not give its backing to the Coalition invasion. In fact the UN Secretary General at the time, Kofi Annan, said in 2004 that the Iraq war was illegal.
  • Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10742 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 1:09 pm
    If the shoe fits.

    A very big IF mind you.
  • Profile photo of almightybob1
    almightybob1 Male 18-29
    4290 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 1:13 pm
    Whoops, copy-paste fail. That last post was of course in response to this:

    Nooo @davymid, The UN re-invaded Iraq because of years of violation of the cease-fire agreement, m-kay?
  • Profile photo of Squrlz4Sale
    Squrlz4Sale Male 40-49
    6230 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 1:14 pm
    @CrakrJak: Thanks; I see where you`re coming from. Not sure that I agree, but at least I understand your position.
  • Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10742 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 1:15 pm
    Saddam was funding terrorists and paying the families of suicide bombers.

    Interesting you should mention that because 50% Hamas funding actually came from Saudi Arabia at the time. Hezbollah in particular recieved a boatload of munitions from Iran. So was Iraq a supporter of West Bank terrorism, perhaps, but certainly not the biggest one.
  • Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33085 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 1:57 pm
    @Jamie76: You mean the first bailout, which the Dems wrote and Bush signed, or the SECOND bailout which the Dems wrote and Obama signed? There were two, dude.

    @CrakrJak: Are you suggesting that the U.S. should wage war against any country that *might* be planning to do something wrong?
    @Squrlz4Sale: Like invade Libya for example? Without Congressional permission as required by the US Constitution? Like that? lolz! (hint: Obama`s doing that right this minute, eh?)

    @mastaroshi: banhammer please?

    @almightybob1: are the numbers compounded weekly at creditcard rates? That graph says the tax cuts are bigger than the cost of 2 wars! Bullcrap. Also: money in people`s pockets = more spending = more tax revenue. It`s called Reaganomics and it powered the US economy back to life after Carter`s 20% inflation almost destroyed it.
  • Profile photo of Squrlz4Sale
    Squrlz4Sale Male 40-49
    6230 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 2:03 pm
    @5Cats: You`re meowing up the wrong tree if you think you need to tell me Obama`s war policies are misguided.
  • Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10742 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 2:10 pm
    It`s called Reaganomics

    What are you referring to?

    Reagan raised taxes twice after cutting them once. He also cut defense spending and blocked an effort by HIS OWN PARTY to cut social security.
  • Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33085 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 2:11 pm
    Kofi Annan (through his son) was getting millions in kickbacks from Saddam, (oil for food, lmao!)of course he`d say anything to keep the money comming!

    The UN Passed a resolution allowing willing nations to use force to enforce the Cease-fire. THUS the USA and others had permission from the UN to re-invade. Simple. What Koffi has to say about it is opinion, nothing more.

    Saddam funded terrorists. He had torture prisons, seperate ones for men, women AND children! There were 3-4 mass graves numbering nearly 100K each of the victems.

    Meanwhile Obama`s attacking a nation for "threatening to harm it`s own citizens" while the "peace movement" sits silently and does nothing. Nice!

    Meanwhile another nation DOES actually harm it`s own citiznes, for months now, and Obama does nothing! Really Nice!
  • Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33085 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 2:17 pm
    UN Resolution 1441

    Sry @Squrlz, but really, read that. The UN said it was OK, @Cajun, @davy et al are blowing smoke.

    "Iraq`s breaches related NOT ONLY to weapons of mass destruction (WMD), but also the KNOWN construction of prohibited types of missiles, the purchase and import of prohibited armaments, and the continuing refusal of Iraq to compensate Kuwait" - from Wiki. Emphesis added.

    @Cajun I listened to the MSM bash Reagan for YEARS and after his policies were proven right? They were silent. Again don`t forget that the Congress was taken by Dems in his second term and THEY (Congress I mean) hiked the taxes. Of course he signed it, but I recall several "vetos" along the way.
  • Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10742 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 2:29 pm
    ahem:

    [quote">The President vowed to protect entitlement programs (such as Medicare and Social Security) while cutting the outlays for social programs by targeting "waste, fraud and abuse." [/quote">

    [quote">Although inflation dropped from 13.5% in 1980 to 5.1% in 1982, a severe recession set in, with unemployment exceeding 10% in October, 1982 for the first time in forty years. The administration modified its economic policy after two years by proposing selected tax increases and budget cuts to control rising deficits and higher interest rates.[/quote">

    2 years later meaning:
    Dems controlled Houses
    GOP controlled Senate

    There was also the Highway Revenue act of 1982

    Article
  • Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10742 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 2:33 pm
    Regardless Reagan could`ve still said `NO`.
  • Profile photo of Squrlz4Sale
    Squrlz4Sale Male 40-49
    6230 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 2:44 pm
    @5Cats: From "Ronald Reagan Myth Doesn`t Square with Reality" by Brian Montopoli:

    Meanwhile, following that initial tax cut, Reagan actually ended up raising taxes - eleven times. That`s according to former Republican Sen. Alan Simpson, a longtime Reagan friend who co-chaired President Obama`s fiscal commission that last year offered a deficit reduction proposal.

    "Ronald Reagan was never afraid to raise taxes," historian Douglas Brinkley, who edited Reagan`s diaries, told NPR. "He knew that it was necessary at times. And so there`s a false mythology out there about Reagan as this conservative president who came in and just cut taxes and trimmed federal spending in a dramatic way. It didn`t happen that way. It`s false."
  • Profile photo of almightybob1
    almightybob1 Male 18-29
    4290 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 3:32 pm
    @almightybob1: are the numbers compounded weekly at creditcard rates?
    I don`t know, but I doubt it. Why would it be? That would be a very unusual way of measuring it. It would probably be compounded annually at the rate of inflation.

    @mastaroshi: banhammer please?
    Huh, not sure how I missed that. Thanks, on it.

    The UN Passed a resolution allowing willing nations to use force to enforce the Cease-fire. THUS the USA and others had permission from the UN to re-invade. Simple.
    That`s not what it says, and not what was proposed when the resolution was passed. Considering you linked to the Wikipedia article, I`m surprised you missed the quotes from the US and UK ambassadors in the "Security Council votes" section, where they both said

    If there is a further Iraqi breach of its disarmament obligations, the matter will return to the Council for discussion as required in paragraph 12.
  • Profile photo of u_jesse_u
    u_jesse_u Male 18-29
    170 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 3:48 pm
    This is useless this does not represent the national debt (the current political issue) this is -US Federal Budget Deficit- which is the difference in the total amount spent by congress and the revenue received by the IRS. The only thing that this graph suggests is that The current administration is collecting less taxes than the previous administrations which is exactly what the GOP wants so why is everyone bitching?
  • Profile photo of ledzeppeloyd
    ledzeppeloyd Male 18-29
    2385 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 3:50 pm
    cant we all just agree that we are fu cked?
  • Profile photo of crackyhoss
    crackyhoss Male 18-29
    254 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 4:57 pm
    you realize that the bush years don`t include the wars in afghanistan and iraq, at ALL? not to mention the financial meltdown of `08 that his lack of regulation brought on. drating morons.
  • Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 6:05 pm
    almightybob1: Kofi Annan`s son was involved in the `oil for food` scandal that was revealed after the invasion. Of course Kofi himself didn`t want the invasion, he knew how bogus the `oil for food` deal for Iraq was and didn`t want it revealed.
  • Profile photo of gothmo
    gothmo Female 18-29
    1324 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 7:00 pm
    Remember when the other presidents promised to do other things but rarely ever followed through, at least successfully?

    I do.

    Get over it, it could be worse.
  • Profile photo of Squrlz4Sale
    Squrlz4Sale Male 40-49
    6230 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 7:06 pm
    I think the solution here is obvious: NYAN CAT 2012. (Not sure who to put in the VP spot, though. Hmmmmm. How about Shark Girl?)
  • Profile photo of drips
    drips Male 30-39
    904 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 7:27 pm
    This graph looks fair and balanced.
  • Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33085 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 7:43 pm
    Wise Choice for VP there @Squirlz - get the female vote AND the weirdo vote too! (lolz!)

    "It could be worse, it could be raining!"
    *cue sfx*

    @drips: this graph looks truthful and accurate. "fair" and "balance" have zero to do with it. Yeesh!
  • Profile photo of misiz_sjmxo
    misiz_sjmxo Female 18-29
    77 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 8:23 pm
    Maybe it`s because he has to fix all Bush`s mistakes. Bush`s very, very expensive mistakes.
  • Profile photo of sosueme1966
    sosueme1966 Male 40-49
    439 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 8:29 pm
    Who`s the greatest President of our generation? Read the graph.
  • Profile photo of securitywyrm
    securitywyrm Male 18-29
    89 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 8:38 pm
    "Okay so, I get a bonus based on the cash available to my company. I`m going to take out several billion dollars worth of loans that will be due in five years."
    "What happens when the loans come due?"
    "Not my concern, since I`m being forced into retirement in four years. Gonna suck for the next guy though."
  • Profile photo of swiftkeys
    swiftkeys Male 18-29
    500 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 9:18 pm
    shoulda stuck with clinton.
  • Profile photo of abrxax
    abrxax Male 18-29
    74 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 9:35 pm
    I blame Bush.
  • Profile photo of monsterzero
    monsterzero Male 40-49
    356 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 9:55 pm
    I guess it`s time to collect the billions of dollars the U.S. lent other countries from the 50`s to the 90s that was never paid back.
    It seems we are wonderful when we dole out cash but suddenly become the evil empire when it`s time to pay it back.
  • Profile photo of sl4d3
    sl4d3 Male 18-29
    32 posts
    July 17, 2011 at 10:22 pm
    Rich people are money black holes. If they don`t let go of their money, they`ll hoard it to themselves. Easy fix is to forcibly take their money through taxes.
  • Profile photo of deckem_17
    deckem_17 Male 18-29
    17 posts
    July 18, 2011 at 12:00 am
    People seem to not like the rich...with good reason.

    But something tells me that they don`t want to give away their money so easily (like in taxes).

    The poor can`t provide enough tax to fix this....

    I have a fun solution! Why not tax the Church (I say church, but really mean all religious institutes)? I`m pretty sure the property tax alone could bring the US out of this debt in a few years. Besides, if religious institutions want to dictate laws and policy, maybe they should pay their admission price (taxes) like everyone else.
  • Profile photo of dragosal
    dragosal Male 18-29
    1630 posts
    July 18, 2011 at 12:01 am
    it`s possible that these numbers are somewhat accurate. although its almost certainly caused by the changes bush made on his way out.
  • Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10742 posts
    July 18, 2011 at 1:41 am
    @sl4d3


    That`s a horrible misconception the left has about the "rich".
  • Profile photo of almightybob1
    almightybob1 Male 18-29
    4290 posts
    July 18, 2011 at 2:43 am
    CJ: Kofi Annan`s son was involved in the `oil for food` scandal that was revealed after the invasion. Of course Kofi himself didn`t want the invasion, he knew how bogus the `oil for food` deal for Iraq was and didn`t want it revealed.

    5Cats: Kofi Annan (through his son) was getting millions in kickbacks from Saddam, (oil for food, lmao!)of course he`d say anything to keep the money comming!

    Yes, but this comment was a year after the invasion, when it was already too late to stop it, and easily checked. Plenty of other legal minds, such as the UK Attorney General, advised that the invasion breached international law.

    And as I said, specific assurances were given at the time that resolution 1441 would not and could not be used to justify invasion - see next post.
  • Profile photo of almightybob1
    almightybob1 Male 18-29
    4290 posts
    July 18, 2011 at 2:45 am
    US Ambassador: This resolution contains no "hidden triggers" and no "automaticity" with respect to the use of force. If there is a further Iraqi breach, reported to the Council by UNMOVIC, the IAEA or a Member State, the matter will return to the Council for discussions as required in paragraph 12.

    UK Ambassador: We heard loud and clear during the negotiations the concerns about "automaticity" and "hidden triggers" -- the concern that on a decision so crucial we should not rush into military action; that on a decision so crucial any Iraqi violations should be discussed by the Council. Let me be equally clear in response... There is no "automaticity" in this resolution. If there is a further Iraqi breach of its disarmament obligations, the matter will return to the Council for discussion as required in paragraph 12.
  • Profile photo of MrLill
    MrLill Male 18-29
    371 posts
    July 18, 2011 at 2:53 am
    I don`t care what anyone says Bill Clinton was a great president
  • Profile photo of squoggle
    squoggle Female 18-29
    158 posts
    July 18, 2011 at 2:54 am
    Tax more!
  • Profile photo of Batmanners
    Batmanners Male 18-29
    4006 posts
    July 18, 2011 at 2:54 am
    @Crackrjak

    Does the US have nuclear weapons? Yes? My argument stands.

    Even when they claim to have gotten rid of every nuclear weapon, I will still think they have some. I don`t think the US has been playing the nice card long enough to be able to get rid of its nukes and feel safe. Ergo, my argument stands. (Basically the US is the main boss at the end of Reservoir Dogs if it gets rid of its nukes)
  • Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10742 posts
    July 18, 2011 at 3:31 am
    Furthermore @CrakrJak

    The Iraqis prior to the Gulf War DID actually build a research reactor which which was approved by our own govt but was blown up by the Israelis not long thereafter. Note I said "research" as in "not in any way involved in WMD production".
  • Profile photo of Vimto
    Vimto Male 40-49
    2853 posts
    July 18, 2011 at 5:13 am
    HEADLINE: Obama not as good at hiding true figures as Bush.
  • Profile photo of monsterzero
    monsterzero Male 40-49
    356 posts
    July 18, 2011 at 6:03 am
    To everyone arguing that WMDs did not exist:
    Most of you were 10yrs old so I doubt you were watching CNN covering the convoys of trucks leaving Iraq and going into Syria weeks before the invasion.
    CNN basically let the world know the exact date it would happen and announced exactly what we would be looking for.
    The scumbag Julian Assange, who most of you seem to hail as a hero, has already released the documents that prove Iraq moved everything into Syria.
    As for the 18-29yr old Bush haters who were more interested in Zordon giving the power rangers their new mission while these world events were happening, you should get your facts straight before you say anything, you tend to sound like programmed robots just repeating a recording.
    Just to let you know, I had plenty of work during all 8yrs of the Bush administration. Now,not so much. It`s hard to provide services when everyone is on welfare.
  • Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    July 18, 2011 at 6:12 am
    Batmanners: So what you mean is that you would hate the US no matter what, Nice to now. Btw, You do know that Canada is part of NATO and heavily participated in anti-soviet bloc exercises right ?

    You do also know that there are Canadian forces in Afghanistan ? and that they helped topple Saddam Hussein with the US right ?

    So, little brother to the north, I suggest that if you are going to curse the USA that you are cursing your own country as well.
  • Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    July 18, 2011 at 6:18 am
    Cajun: Yeah sure, Just as the Iranians built `only` a research reactor then imported piece-by-piece parts to build bigger reactors and cyclotrons, supposedly for peaceful purposes.

    If you believe Iran too only wants peaceful nuke technology, then I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.

    Gotta love how you are so willing to give Saddam Hussein, a mass murdering genocidal bastard, a pass and still vilify GW Bush as being worse than him.
  • Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10742 posts
    July 18, 2011 at 6:21 am
    Gotta love how you are so willing to give Saddam Hussein, a mass murdering genocidal bastard

    I`m not saying he wasn`t, but to say he had yellowcake uraniam to make nuclear warheads based on his character alone is again, a HIGHLY circumstantial assertion.
  • Profile photo of Deepeyes
    Deepeyes Male 18-29
    151 posts
    July 18, 2011 at 6:21 am
    Clinnnnnntoooonnnnnn
  • Profile photo of Student_Law
    Student_Law Male 30-39
    1010 posts
    July 18, 2011 at 6:23 am
    Clinton did good yes but it was Reagan who installed Greenspan, and Clinton who kept him. But who can really blame them? Back then, "The Maestro" was worshiped like a god and criticizing him would be suicide.

    Not Clinton nor Bush did anything to stop Wall Street turning into a casino.

    Bush just cut taxes and started pouring money into Iraq, and let jobs flag to China. GWB poured a lot of water into the boat, but he did not make the hole.

    We need to go away from investment bankings. Europe too. It used to be illegal for banks to speculate with people savings and debts. There was a very important reason for that. Banks should stick to lending.

    First of all the US must get it`s export going again. Used to be half the stuff we had here in EU was made in the US. And go back to capitalism. As of today, it`s anarchy. If not, increasing spending to keep the economy going, will be like peeing your pants to keep warm.
  • Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10742 posts
    July 18, 2011 at 6:26 am
    As for nuclear weapons in Iran that`s in rampant speculation right now. It would be troubling if they did though.
  • Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10742 posts
    July 18, 2011 at 6:28 am
    I`m saying there was no justification for sending in entire corps risking THOUSANDS of civilian lives at all.
  • Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    July 18, 2011 at 6:49 am
    Cajun: As opposed to risking TENS OF THOUSANDS of civilian lives, both in Israel and here in the US, if Saddam had got nukes and attempted to use them or give them to terrorists to use.

    It`s the same risk we are running with Iran with Ahmadinutjob as their president.
  • Profile photo of AntPharm
    AntPharm Male 18-29
    950 posts
    July 18, 2011 at 6:50 am
    we`re doomed.
  • Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10742 posts
    July 18, 2011 at 7:04 am
    [quote"> if Saddam had got nukes and attempted to use them or give them to terrorists to use[/quote">


    A very big IF as this non-liberal article will point out.
  • Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10742 posts
    July 18, 2011 at 7:06 am
    ...and IF it did happen we could send in soldiers like DEVGRU (Seal Team 6 if you prefer) to smuggle said weapon out of Iraq.
  • Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    July 18, 2011 at 7:49 am
    Cajun: We can no longer afford to be complacent when it comes to those countries that threaten us and our friends. Nor would we `smuggle` any weapon like that out of a country, we`d attempt to destroy it by other means, rather than risking our very best of the best.

    A good example of that was the Stuxnet virus/worm that destroyed most of Iran`s cyclotrons recently.
  • Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10742 posts
    July 18, 2011 at 8:17 am
    Nor would we `smuggle` any weapon like that out of a country, we`d attempt to destroy it by other means, rather than risking our very best of the best.

    That`s they`re there for Crakr, minimum (almost none) civilian casualties minimum cost. Destroy a nuclear weapon sans mushroom cloud? DEVGRU operatives DO have training in nuclear engineering.

    A good example of that was the Stuxnet virus/worm that destroyed most of Iran`s cyclotrons recently.

    There were no fatalities from that incident.
  • Profile photo of SumRandom1
    SumRandom1 Male 18-29
    794 posts
    July 18, 2011 at 8:52 am
    fyi, it takes policies couple of years to show their true effect, clinton success was not only clinton success but also the prez before him, bush`s BS is still affecting obama today, and the policies implimented under obama will not be seen until 2 years from now, plus its not one man that runs the country, that is why we have congress one man does not run the country and he can neither change its outcome, plus promises stay promises people say $hit to get elected, bush did not make everything come true when he was president either and taxes will need to be raised if we want out of this slump thats the unfortunate truth, now the republicans wont do it since they want to have their person in office next couple of years and the rest of the country will suffer for it for years to come
  • Profile photo of EthanCoker
    EthanCoker Male 18-29
    52 posts
    July 18, 2011 at 10:47 am
    fyi, what appears as success was mostly just market bloating and was doomed to fail, and had almost nothing to do with Bush. And we are actually still facing repercussions of decisions made before this chart even starts.
  • Profile photo of ATL1EN
    ATL1EN Male 18-29
    622 posts
    July 18, 2011 at 10:55 am
    One Big Ass Mistake America OBAMA--- NO dratING poo. YOU NIGS ARE STUPID FOR ELECTING HIM. MOST peopel who voted for obama were black and have never reg to vote ever in their life and just voted b/c he was black. GOOD dratING JOB
  • Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10742 posts
    July 18, 2011 at 11:04 am
    @ATL13N
  • Profile photo of almightybob1
    almightybob1 Male 18-29
    4290 posts
    July 18, 2011 at 12:00 pm
    ATL1EN: Abbreviating racial slurs is not any less racist than just typing the whole thing out.
    This ban is not permanent only because you`ve been around for 350-odd posts without showing signs of racism before, so I can only assume this is a completely unacceptable moment of stupidity that you will doubtless rectify when you come back.
  • Profile photo of MichaelBored
    MichaelBored Male 40-49
    206 posts
    July 18, 2011 at 12:17 pm
    OK....this is a rather obvious point, but the president that was responsible for the the FY09 budget was Bush, not Obama, and that the FY10 budget deficit was indeed smaller than FY09.

  • Profile photo of BeObscure
    BeObscure Male 40-49
    1 post
    July 18, 2011 at 2:54 pm
    Anyone here that is complaining about the "Obama Budget" ever read the constitution, or take civics in school? The debt is all in the hands of congress. The president has NO ability to spend money that is not budgeted by the congress. The only thing the president can do is veto a bill with spending if it. There could not be those numbers without a two year extension of unpaid tax cuts, unpaid for medicare prescription drug programs (with no negotiating), two wars, and a military action. The congress can always say no money for X, so anything that lasts for more then current funds allow for is in the congresses hands. The congress has authorized and demanded in bills that the government do things for years in advance, then now they are going refuse to pay for what they authorized, demanded. BTW authorized often really is demanded as in it is a law that we must buy something 4 years from now.

    So how about we call this the US Congress for the last 10 years budget fias
  • Profile photo of muffalletta
    muffalletta Male 18-29
    543 posts
    July 18, 2011 at 4:34 pm
    hey obscure....doesn`t the pres have the power to bring our troops home? Isn`t that the reason for the big spending?
  • Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    July 19, 2011 at 12:03 pm
    MichaelBored: Obama signed the 2009 budget into law and here is Video to prove it.

    Obama promised that he would not sign a budget with `earmarks` in to, but reneged on that promise. If Obama`s campaign tactic is to continue to blame GW Bush then he will loose in 2012.
  • Profile photo of Fwoggie2
    Fwoggie2 Male 30-39
    1803 posts
    July 19, 2011 at 1:11 pm
    How the hell do you stack up that sorta deficit so fast...
  • Profile photo of photomstr
    photomstr Male 50-59
    766 posts
    July 19, 2011 at 10:38 pm
    lots of new pockets lined at our expense,
    war does that
  • Profile photo of QualityJay
    QualityJay Male 18-29
    303 posts
    July 22, 2011 at 11:13 am
    Well they just need to increase the debt ceiling so we can see those red bars go even lower. Evil conservatives wont let us borrow more money. It`s not like there will be any repercussions from borrowing so much, might as well print another 100 billion.
  • Leave a Reply