• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama Hammers Congress: Do Your Job

No no, Obama went to a retreat this weekend...the poor man works so very much.

Red Crow said:
Congress is going to work while Obama is going out to raise money for his campaign. He doesn't want to get involved because if something bad happens as a result of these negotiations he won't be blamed for anything, this is good leadership!!
Click to expand...
 
donc said:
And you posted four dead President that you say “cut spending to reduce the debt “. My link showed two live Presidents who did it as well.
Click to expand...

which two were those?
 
cpwill said:
which two were those?
Click to expand...

US_Federal_Debt_as_Percent_of_GDP_by_President.jpg


Carter and Clinton both reduced debt as Percent of GDP.
 
donc said:
Carter and Clinton both reduced debt as Percent of GDP.
Click to expand...
The debt went up inder both.
Both increased spendng.
And so, your graph does not meet the challenge put to you.

(and note that, according to your graph and your standard, Ike and Nixon did a better job)
 
donc said:
US_Federal_Debt_as_Percent_of_GDP_by_President.jpg


Carter and Clinton both reduced debt as Percent of GDP.
Click to expand...

0bama record, 14.7 officially unemployed with 15.8% total unemployment, Declining labor force, 4 trillion added to the debt, double digit misery index, 1.8% GDP growth, record budgets, no leadership skills at all, 29 fund raisers, 76 rounds of golf. Yes, that is leadership and a record to be proud of.
 
PzKfW IVe said:
The debt went up inder both.
Both increased spendng.
And so, your graph does not meet the challenge put to you.

(and note that, according to your graph and your standard, Ike and Nixon did a better job)
Click to expand...

I know its hard but try and keep up with the post that I was responding to.:2wave:
 
RStringfield said:
What happened donc (sounds like donkey)? Thought you were going to give me some pointers on how to read graphs.
Click to expand...

do you have anything other than insults to add to the thread?
 
Ikari said:
Well about time someone told Congress to do their job. They won't. They're just a partisan **** hole doing what's best for their party's power and not what's best for America. But whatever. Bunch of terrorists. Hehehe.

But in reality, I do give Obama props for this. He's completely right. Congress is decimating America for partisan, political gains and its sick. They need to do their god damned job. Otherwise WE need to be finding some mother****ers who will. Now I still hate Obama since he's still perpetuating our forever war and not really working to free America from the choke hold of government. But at least he strapped on a pair and told Congress to get up off their fat, lazy, designer suit wearing asses and get to work. Bunch of privileged assholes up on that hill.
Click to expand...

Obama is the last person who has a right to tell congress to do its job. What he means when he says that is “do MY job; I’m busy with more important things”.

mrz103009dAPR20091030024032.jpg
 
donc said:
US_Federal_Debt_as_Percent_of_GDP_by_President.jpg


Carter and Clinton both reduced debt as Percent of GDP.
Click to expand...

no, you said they cut spending to reduce the debt. Spending increased under both those Presidents - and much of the "growth" we saw under Clinton turned out to be fueled by the Tech Bubble.
 
it did. but by marking it as "increases" they are measuring the deficits.

mind you, it's partially bunk - because as per the Constitution of the United States of America, all spending originates in the House of Representatives.

which means, if you want to track whose been spending:

chart.jpg


now. I'll be the first to agree that Republicans Lost Their Way. But the story isn't quite what he's trying to tell with that graph.
 
cpwill said:
no, you said they cut spending to reduce the debt. Spending increased under both those Presidents - and much of the "growth" we saw under Clinton turned out to be fueled by the Tech Bubble.
Click to expand...

The only honest way of measuring spending in today’s dollars is percent of GDP,the graph is right on. Using that as a guideline Clinton, Carter, managed to reduce debt as a percent of GDP.

When Carter came into office, in 1977, debt/GDP ratio was35.8%. Four years later, when he left, it was 32.5%, down -3.3%.

Clinton's first term (1993) numbers were 66.1%, at the end of first term (65.4%) down -0.7%.

Second term numbers = 1993,start= 65.4%. Final = 56.4%, down… -9.0%

(Clinton turned out to be fueled by the Tech Bubble)
Click to expand...

You might want to check what years the Tech Bubble was running.:2wave:
 
MrVicchio said:
That's a bright idea, let the President over step his Constitutional boundaries to "deal with" an Emergency...
Click to expand...

Sounds like a high crime or misdemeanor to me. The Democrats a just furious because the American people mandates some sense back into Congress by tossing 63 of them to the curb last November. If they keep it up they might lose all 21 they have up in the Senate Nov 2012.

In 1993 the cumulative national debt was $4.822 trillion dollars. In 2001 the cumulative national debt was $4.022 trillion dollars. With all that computer and dot com boom in the late 1990's the cumulative national debt only went down $800 Billion or what Obama spent on the stimulus.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/story/Government-Debt-Graphic/39255812/1?loc=interstitialskip
 
Last edited:
donc said:
The only honest way of measuring spending in today’s dollars is percent of GDP,the graph is right on. Using that as a guideline Clinton, Carter, managed to reduce debt as a percent of GDP.

When Carter came into office, in 1977, debt/GDP ratio was35.8%. Four years later, when he left, it was 32.5%, down -3.3%.

Clinton's first term (1993) numbers were 66.1%, at the end of first term (65.4%) down -0.7%.

Second term numbers = 1993,start= 65.4%. Final = 56.4%, down… -9.0%



You might want to check what years the Tech Bubble was running.:2wave:
Click to expand...

A bubble that burst and led to the recession that began in March 2001, a recession compounded by 9/11. Seems you ignore that President's aren't Kings, Clinton had a GOP Congress that passed much of the Contract with America whereas Obama has a Democrat Congress and has 14.7 million unemployed Americans and added 4 trillion to the debt in less than 3 years. Interesting how you want to focus on the past and ignore the present.
 
donc said:
I know its hard but try and keep up with the post that I was responding to.:2wave:
Click to expand...
Translation:
You understand that the veracity of post was destroyed and you have no way to defend your point.
 
QUOTE PzKfW

Translation:
Click to expand...

Translation. Your drive by was too fast for this ole man.:roll:


You understand that the veracity of post was destroyed and you have no way to defend your point.
Click to expand...


Enlighten me how my “post was destroyed “.If it looks good perhaps you and I can resurrect this seldom used forum of DP.:2wave:


Battle Grounds and Disputations
 
Congress should do their job by further seeking legal action against Obama's military campaign in Libya. Obama is essentially just saying "do as you're told."
 
digsbe said:
Congress should do their job by further seeking legal action against Obama's military campaign in Libya. Obama is essentially just saying "do as you're told."
Click to expand...

Not for nothing Digbs, but that post really does warrant a whole new thread, as it has nothing to do with the subject at hand. I get that you despise the man.
 
BDBoop said:
Not for nothing Digbs, but that post really does warrant a whole new thread, as it has nothing to do with the subject at hand. I get that you despise the man.
Click to expand...

I'm just pointing out his hypocrisy. I don't despise him as a person, but I am disgusted by his arrogance and conduct as the president.
 
digsbe said:
I'm just pointing out his hypocrisy. I don't despise him as a person, but I am disgusted by his arrogance and conduct as the president.
Click to expand...

And see, I'm SO not. And I don't see what you see. At all. It's very strange.
 
BDBoop said:
And see, I'm SO not. And I don't see what you see. At all. It's very strange.
Click to expand...

I guess it's a matter of perspective. I won't derail the thread but if you're curious we can discuss things via PM.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom