• 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: No Deal Without Tax Hikes

Status
Not open for further replies.
And the deficits in the 1980s and early 1990s would have been lower, had the Democrats not lied about providing spending cuts.

Bill Clinton benefited from the "peace dividend" created in the 80's but the fact is Clinton took a 4.4 trillion dollar debt and turned it into a 5.7 trillion dollar debt doing so with a Republican Congress most of his term.
 
Did you miss the meaning of the 2010 election? Did you miss that there are many new members who were not there during the Bush Administration. It looks like the GOP has finally learned. When with the Democrats learn?

They all share the same republican brain cell. The names have been changed, but it's the same bunch of theives they've always been
 
It did go back into reducing the deficit, but that won't show on a chart that only shows SPENDING.

Those repaid TARP funds should go under "revenue". So, if anyone can produce a chart or a series of charts that reflect a growth in revenue from March 2009 to present, perhaps we can figure out if TARP funds were actually repaid or not.

Conservative, there's something that's right up your alley. (And I'm being polite here; fact is you are known as the resident charts and stats guy here. Consider it a compliment for once. :D)
 
And the deficits in the 1980s and early 1990s would have been lower, had the Democrats not lied about providing spending cuts.

The deficits under the dem president went down. Under the repuke presidents, it went up
 
Bill Clinton benefited from the "peace dividend" created in the 80's but the fact is Clinton took a 4.4 trillion dollar debt and turned it into a 5.7 trillion dollar debt doing so with a Republican Congress most of his term.

So, it was the fault of the republican congress? I know this as you told me the democrat controlled congress excused Bush as everything was their fault. Right Mr. Pot?
 
Did you miss the meaning of the 2010 election? Did you miss that there are many new members who were not there during the Bush Administration. It looks like the GOP has finally learned. When with the Democrats learn?

Watch it, you are dealing with someone who runs to the Mods when challenged to get you thread banned. I want you to remain here doing a great job. Those people I ignore and will never communicate with again
 
Bill Clinton benefited from the "peace dividend" created in the 80's but the fact is Clinton took a 4.4 trillion dollar debt and turned it into a 5.7 trillion dollar debt doing so with a Republican Congress most of his term.

There was no peace divident. Military spending increased. And the increase in the debt was the slowest increase in the last several decades, and far slower than under the big spending republicans
 
Our current economic condition has 24 million Americans unemployed or underemployed paying very little in taxes and that is hurting economic growth. Democrat Steve Wynn said it best in an article I believe yesterday

Steve Wynn trashes Obama - Jul. 19, 2011

More liberals should pay attention to what is really happening

And hasn't President Obama said he's like to change the tax code to make it fair for everyone? I'd think such a measure would likely eliminate "free riders" all around no matter which side of the economic divide you're on.
 
So, it was the fault of the republican congress? I know this as you told me the democrat controlled congress excused Bush as everything was their fault. Right Mr. Pot?

Any debt is the responsibility of the Congress and the President. When will you admit to that reality.
 
And hasn't President Obama said he's like to change the tax code to make it fair for everyone? I'd think such a measure would likely eliminate "free riders" all around no matter which side of the economic divide you're on.

Obama has said a lot of things putting his supporters in an adoring daze. Where is the proposal? What did he do with total control of Congress including a filibuster proof Senate for a time.
 
Yes. Maybe you should read the Bible. Jesus clearly said the rich should sell all their possessions and give the proceeds to the poor.

By government mandate?
 
Any debt is the responsibility of the Congress and the President. When will you admit to that reality.

Debt is the responsibility of the President only insofar as he is required by law to submit a budget to Congress. He did that (on or about Feb 6, 2011) and look at where it got him? It's no 100% on Congress to resolve this budget issue w/the President mediating accordingly. He's doing his job; I wish Congress would do theirs.
 
Those repaid TARP funds should go under "revenue". So, if anyone can produce a chart or a series of charts that reflect a growth in revenue from March 2009 to present, perhaps we can figure out if TARP funds were actually repaid or not.

Conservative, there's something that's right up your alley. (And I'm being polite here; fact is you are known as the resident charts and stats guy here. Consider it a compliment for once. :D)

Thank you, but there is no evidence that the TARP repayment was ever put back into revenue and if it was that makes the Obama deficits worse
 
Any debt is the responsibility of the Congress and the President. When will you admit to that reality.

Second you do. So, say it for the record, Bush is repsonble for increasing the debt.
 
Debt is the responsibility of the President only insofar as he is required by law to submit a budget to Congress. He did that (on or about Feb 6, 2011) and look at where it got him? It's no 100% on Congress to resolve this budget issue w/the President mediating accordingly. He's doing his job; I wish Congress would do theirs.

It got him a vote of 0-97. Let's make no mistake in believing that anything voted down 0-97 was anything other than a dishonest effort.
 
Obama has said a lot of things putting his supporters in an adoring daze. Where is the proposal? What did he do with total control of Congress including a filibuster proof Senate for a time.

What can I say, Conserv...

You have Blue-Dog Democrats amongst Liberals as you have Tea Party hardline conservatives among Republicans. Speaker Boehner isn't President, but he's having no better luck convincing members of his party to act in the best interest of the country and work with him than Pres. Obama had with conservative Democrats early in his presidency. That's why you need someone who is able to force "compromise" when you can't get your way 100%.
 
What do I care what Cuomo is doing in New York or Rahm is doing in Chicago?

they illustrate the disposition of the political landscape

cuz if they're cutting billions in SACRAMENTO

with no new taxes

cuz if progressivism can't prosper in california...

well, it must get lonely

party on, pals, seeya at the polls
 
Debt is the responsibility of the President only insofar as he is required by law to submit a budget to Congress. He did that (on or about Feb 6, 2011) and look at where it got him? It's no 100% on Congress to resolve this budget issue w/the President mediating accordingly. He's doing his job; I wish Congress would do theirs.

The budget was due before October 1, 2010 for fiscal year 2010. The Obama Budget was defeated in the Senate by a 95-0 vote as it wasn't serious at all and he still isn't serious about cutting spending. where is his specific plan to cut spending? I don't know how anyone can say Obama is doing his job. His job is to lead and he has no leadership skills so maybe he doesn't know that what he is doing is dictating not leading. A leader would put out his own proposal for spending cuts. Let me know when Obama does that?
 
And they think it's the dems who are unwilling to compromise :roll:

And they aren't. But, they also lie about $3 cuts in spending for each $1 tax increase.
 
Did you miss the meaning of the 2010 election?

Not at all. we get the meaning of that election.

Get out and vote and don't let the wingnuts catch you resting on your fat behind.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom