Thread: The Glenn Beck Boycott Gaining Traction - FOX News Losing Money

Originally Posted by misterman

Once again:

Table F-2, Year 2000 (Clinton's last fiscal year budget), 3rd column (on-budget deficit or surplus):

0.9

That's a POSITIVE number. Ergo Clinton's surplus was real, even without including SS.

Historical Budget Data

If your point is that Clinton, with a republican controlled house and senate, maintained for two years an actual budget surplus I would readily agree. For 2 whole years. hell...if Clinton maintained a budget surplus the entire time I'd nominate him king. he didnt...but for two years...with a republican controlled congress passing spending bills...Clinton presided over an ANNUAL budget surplus. Mind you we still had trillions in debt...but for the year...there was a surplus.

This whole Bush sucks more than Clinton but less than Obama thing is part of the problem. We dont HAVE a king...therefore the budgets proposed really cant be laid at the foot of Obama...or Bush. BOTH PARTIES have had control of congress. BOTH PARTIES continually demonstrate wreckless and irresponsible spending. And WE...the people that actually WORK and pay taxes are stuck with the bill.

Originally Posted by VanceMack

If your point is that Clinton, with a republican controlled house and senate, maintained for two years an actual budget surplus I would readily agree.

So if the Congress had been Democratic you wouldn't agree?

Just agree, for God's sake. Don't hedge.

For 2 whole years. hell...if Clinton maintained a budget surplus the entire time I'd nominate him king. he didnt...but for two years...with a republican controlled congress passing spending bills...Clinton presided over an ANNUAL budget surplus. Mind you we still had trillions in debt...but for the year...there was a surplus.

Suddenly you've forgotten about the Republican Congress, which also didn't maintain a budget surplus for more than two years.

This whole Bush sucks more than Clinton but less than Obama thing is part of the problem. We dont HAVE a king...therefore the budgets proposed really cant be laid at the foot of Obama...or Bush. BOTH PARTIES have had control of congress. BOTH PARTIES continually demonstrate wreckless and irresponsible spending. And WE...the people that actually WORK and pay taxes are stuck with the bill.

Now you're being fair, and I agree 100%.

Originally Posted by VanceMack

If your point is that Clinton, with a republican controlled house and senate, maintained for two years an actual budget surplus I would readily agree. For 2 whole years. hell...if Clinton maintained a budget surplus the entire time I'd nominate him king. he didnt...but for two years...with a republican controlled congress passing spending bills...Clinton presided over an ANNUAL budget surplus. Mind you we still had trillions in debt...but for the year...there was a surplus.

This whole Bush sucks more than Clinton but less than Obama thing is part of the problem. We dont HAVE a king...therefore the budgets proposed really cant be laid at the foot of Obama...or Bush. BOTH PARTIES have had control of congress. BOTH PARTIES continually demonstrate wreckless and irresponsible spending. And WE...the people that actually WORK and pay taxes are stuck with the bill.

The key here is that Clinton took office with a 4.4 trillion dollar debt and left with the debt over 5.6 trillion dollars. What far too many ignore is the reality that SS was used to balance the budget. It was taken from the "trust fund" and replaced with an IOU. The govt. is predicting that SS is going broke yet the Presidents, all of them except for Reagan used SS funds to make the deficit look better than it was while adding trillions to the off budget debt.

I wonder if it bothers anyone here or the company's boycotting Fox News that, this very moment, I'm currently watching Glenn Beck. I love his show!

Originally Posted by Politics101

I wonder if it bothers anyone here or the company's boycotting Fox News that, this very moment, I'm currently watching Glenn Beck. I love his show!

thanks for getting this back on topic.

Originally Posted by Conservative

thanks for getting this back on topic.

If the Obama administration is at war with Glenn Beck, I think Barack is losing big-time. More than anything, Beck is probaby hated by the SEIU and Van Jones more than anyone else.

I really wish the White House would call his red phone, though! That would be Pay Per View worthy, in my opinion.

Originally Posted by Politics101

If the Obama administration is at war with Glenn Beck, I think Barack is losing big-time. More than anything, Beck is probaby hated by the SEIU and Van Jones more than anyone else.

I really wish the White House would call his red phone, though! That would be Pay Per View worthy, in my opinion.

The Obama Administration is too arrogant to call Beck or anyone else that disagrees with them. I don't think the majority in this country that voted for change expected the Obama Administration to change everything that they believe in.

This is the most radical leftwing Administration in U.S. history and the polls are starting to reflect that. Most that "hate" Glenn Beck never address the content of what Beck reports but they have no problem personally attacking him.

Oh cool!

upillar.com has an open auction (closes this Friday) for a signed copy of the one-and-only “We The People” mosaic from the Glenn Beck Studio.

I want it so bad. If only I could afford it...

The people I talk to that hate Glen Beck when asked if they watch usually state "I would never watch him" I always ask then how do you know u hate him?

Auction is up to over $11,000 now. I think it needs to go in a museum.