• 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!

Republicans block Obama jobs bill

Status
Not open for further replies.
Depends, how long are you going to blame Obama and ignore the 14.8 trillion dollars Bush spent?

HUH? Per BEA & UST the total debt in 2001 was 5.8t. At the end of '08 it was 10.0t...4.2t total ???? Where do you come up with the 14.8t number? Source please.
 
Depends, how long are you going to blame Obama and ignore the 14.8 trillion dollars Bush spent?

When you make dumb statements like that you have no credibility at all, 14.8TRILLION was spent by Bush? When and where? Proof?
 

Interesting article, did you read it? Where is the 14.8 trillion spent by the Bush Administration? I suggest you get better educated on actual data by going to the following sites, bea.gov for GDP Growth, bls.gov for unemployment and employment, and U.S. Treasury for budget items, spending including debt service.
 
Interesting article, did you read it? Where is the 14.8 trillion spent by the Bush Administration? I suggest you get better educated on actual data by going to the following sites, bea.gov for GDP Growth, bls.gov for unemployment and employment, and U.S. Treasury for budget items, spending including debt service.
When the bust finally arrived with a vengeance in 2007, the political timing couldn't have been worse. Mr. Bush tried to rally with one more fiscal "stimulus," but he repeated his 2001 mistake and agreed to another round of tax rebates. They did little good. The Administration might have prevented the worst of the panic had it sought some sort of TARP-like financing for the banking system months or a year earlier than it did last autumn. But neither the Treasury nor the FDIC seemed to appreciate how big the banking system's problems were. Their financial triage was well meaning but came too late and in a frenzy that invited mistakes.

I think you probably read the first half. I think he had the opportunity to fix the oncoming recession but instead decided to do what is popular. What is popular you might ask? Cutting taxes because no one, not even liberals, like paying taxes. So yes, in part, Bush is a major contributor to the current economic state. Not to mention the housing scam. I don't want to talk about that though because it disgust me.

BTW, a certain someone would be disappointed if I didn't post this:

http://www.debatepolitics.com/2012-us-presidential-election/109844-opposition-obama-grows-strongly-59.html#post1059891740
 
Last edited:
When the bust finally arrived with a vengeance in 2007, the political timing couldn't have been worse. Mr. Bush tried to rally with one more fiscal "stimulus," but he repeated his 2001 mistake and agreed to another round of tax rebates. They did little good. The Administration might have prevented the worst of the panic had it sought some sort of TARP-like financing for the banking system months or a year earlier than it did last autumn. But neither the Treasury nor the FDIC seemed to appreciate how big the banking system's problems were. Their financial triage was well meaning but came too late and in a frenzy that invited mistakes.

I think you probably read the first half. I think he had the opportunity to fix the oncoming recession but instead decided to do what is popular. What is popular you might ask? Cutting taxes because no one, not even liberals, like paying taxes. So yes, in part, Bush is a major contributor to the current economic state. Not to mention the housing scam. I don't want to talk about that though because it disgust me.

Your statement was that Bush spent 14.8 trillion dollars and you have yet to prove that. Further it has been claimed here that Bush didn't inherit a recession which of course the article refutes. Looks to me like you have selective reading skills.

Here is an interesting paragraph from that article

Democrats like to claim the 1990s were a golden age while the Bush years have been disastrous. But as the nearby chart shows, Mr. Bush inherited a recession. The dot-com bubble had burst in 2000, and the economy was sinking even before the shock of 9/11, the corporate scandals and Sarbanes-Oxley. Mr. Bush's original tax-cut proposal was designed in part as insurance against such a downturn.

You are right, most people don't like paying taxes and currently 47% don't pay any FIT. Doubt seriously that anyone voting in 2012 are going to worry about inflation adjusted GDP numbers, the Bush record, or concerns about how much Bush added to the debt. What is more important is what Obama has done the last three years and the results I have posted which continue to be ignored.

Let me know when you come up with the 14.8 trillion that you claimed?

Depends, how long are you going to blame Obama and ignore the 14.8 trillion dollars Bush spent?
 
You ignored him ignoring the damaged economy.

And you ignored the Treasury Data as there was nothing in that article claiming that Bush spent 14.8 trillion dollars and infact that article actually cites some excellent Bush results. Interesting that we are almost 3 years after Bush has left office, have terrible economic results, and many are still blaming Bush. Even the Obama Administration officials state that this is the Obama economy and the results are all his including the 4.2 trillion added to the debt, 2.6 million net job losses, 25 Plus million unemployed and under Employed Americans, and rising misery index. Those are the numbers that will be on the ballot in 2012, not foolish claims like the one you made and cannot back up
 
You ignored him ignoring the damaged economy.

Here are the Obama economic results, please explain to me where the damaged economy is that you want to blame Bush for the results today?

http://www.bea.gov/iTable/iTable.cfm?ReqID=9&step=1

Line 2009 2010 2011
I II III IV I II III IV I II
1 Gross domestic product

2009 -6.7 -0.7 1.7 3.8
2010 3.9 3.8 2.5 2.3
2011 0.4 1.3
 
Last edited:
Note to liberals: Even though Bush may have sucked, it's apparent BO sucks more.
 
Whoa whoa! Don't overload us with your evidence there.

Since when does evidence ever matter to an Obama supporter? 2.6 million fewer people employed today than when he took office, 25 million plus unemployed/under employed, rising misery index, 4.2 trillion added to the debt, record budgets, failed stimulus, wasted money on green energy jobs. I could go on but what's the use,liberals don't pay any attention to facts.
 
Since when does evidence ever matter to an Obama supporter? 2.6 million fewer people employed today than when he took office, 25 million plus unemployed/under employed, rising misery index, 4.2 trillion added to the debt, record budgets, failed stimulus, wasted money on green energy jobs. I could go on but what's the use,liberals don't pay any attention to facts.
not paying attention to facts....sounds like these 'liberals' took a page from your playbook...just sayin'
 
not paying attention to facts....sounds like these 'liberals' took a page from your playbook...just sayin'

How about offering some for a change?

Like these

Obama economic results in 2011,
.4% GDP and 1.3% GDP growth in 2011(bea.gov)
25+ million unemployed or under employed Americans in 2011(bls.gov)
2.6 million fewer jobs(bls.gov)
4.2 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years(U.S. Treasury Site)
Downgrade of the U.S. credit rating(S&P)
Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.97 (The United States Misery Index By Year)
38-41% JAR and well over 50-55% disapproval ratings(Gallup)
 
How about offering some for a change?

Like these

Obama economic results in 2011,
.4% GDP and 1.3% GDP growth in 2011(bea.gov)
25+ million unemployed or under employed Americans in 2011(bls.gov)
2.6 million fewer jobs(bls.gov)
4.2 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years(U.S. Treasury Site)
Downgrade of the U.S. credit rating(S&P)
Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.97 (The United States Misery Index By Year)
38-41% JAR and well over 50-55% disapproval ratings(Gallup)
i've no need to smack you around today, seems that rob and several others have been beating on you pretty regular the last few days.....you really shouldnt accuse people of not paying attention to facts when you don't do it yourself, just sayin'
 
How about offering some for a change?

Like these

Obama economic results in 2011,
.4% GDP and 1.3% GDP growth in 2011(bea.gov)
25+ million unemployed or under employed Americans in 2011(bls.gov)
2.6 million fewer jobs(bls.gov)
4.2 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years(U.S. Treasury Site)
Downgrade of the U.S. credit rating(S&P)
Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.97 (The United States Misery Index By Year)
38-41% JAR and well over 50-55% disapproval ratings(Gallup)

Now conservative:

http://www.debatepolitics.com/2012-...n-obama-grows-strongly-59.html#post1059891740

1) cut
2) paste
3) get debunked
4) spiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiinnnnnnnn
5) make personal insult
 
Since when does evidence ever matter to an Obama supporter? 2.6 million fewer people employed today than when he took office, 25 million plus unemployed/under employed, rising misery index, 4.2 trillion added to the debt, record budgets, failed stimulus, wasted money on green energy jobs. I could go on but what's the use,liberals don't pay any attention to facts.

Since when is telling the truth "your strong suit?" You still haven't apologized for lying about Reagan "doubling" revenues from FIT which I disproved.
 
Yes I have heard the claim by those on the far right who think our forefathers were socialists for instituting and maintaing social security for most of the last century.

why do you try to praise FDR and his administration as "forefathers"

is that an attempt to make his unconstitutional nonsense appear more palatable?
 
Since when is telling the truth "your strong suit?" You still haven't apologized for lying about Reagan "doubling" revenues from FIT which I disproved.

This isn't the Reagan Thread and Yes, I did apologize for saying that increasing Revenue from 345 billion to 565 billions after that 25% three year tax cut wasn't doubling the revenue but then again you haven't explained how that happened nor how 17 million jobs were created? But none of that has anything to do with this thread topic and the numbers that I posted. One of your fellow libs claimed they were going to prove those numbers wrong and never did it, so how about you trying. I have pulled up a chair, have a good pizza and a case of beer, have the wife sitting here, am in for the evening and thus plent of time to wait. You will probably do what liberals always do, run from facts when challenged.
 
This isn't the Reagan Thread and Yes, I did apologize for saying that increasing Revenue from 345 billion to 565 billions after that 25% three year tax cut wasn't doubling the revenue but then again you haven't explained how that happened nor how 17 million jobs were created? But none of that has anything to do with this thread topic and the numbers that I posted. One of your fellow libs claimed they were going to prove those numbers wrong and never did it, so how about you trying. I have pulled up a chair, have a good pizza and a case of beer, have the wife sitting here, am in for the evening and thus plent of time to wait. You will probably do what liberals always do, run from facts when challenged.

I never said it didn't happen because of the tax cuts, I just challenged your elementary math failure. It does have relevance, however, as habitual lying and manipulation of numbers can carry over thread-to-thread.
 
This isn't the Reagan Thread and Yes, I did apologize for saying that increasing Revenue from 345 billion to 565 billions after that 25% three year tax cut wasn't doubling the revenue but then again you haven't explained how that happened nor how 17 million jobs were created? But none of that has anything to do with this thread topic and the numbers that I posted. One of your fellow libs claimed they were going to prove those numbers wrong and never did it, so how about you trying. I have pulled up a chair, have a good pizza and a case of beer, have the wife sitting here, am in for the evening and thus plent of time to wait. You will probably do what liberals always do, run from facts when challenged.

Speaking of ignoring facts.

Now conservative:

http://www.debatepolitics.com/2012-...n-obama-grows-strongly-59.html#post1059891740

1) cut
2) paste
3) get debunked
4) spiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiinnnnnnnn
5) make personal insult
 
I never said it didn't happen because of the tax cuts, I just challenged your elementary math failure. It does have relevance, however, as habitual lying and manipulation of numbers can carry over thread-to-thread.

Then you should love the opportunity to prove that I am "lying" again. Go for it

Obama economic results in 2011,
.4% GDP and 1.3% GDP growth in 2011(bea.gov)
25+ million unemployed or under employed Americans in 2011(bls.gov)
2.6 million fewer jobs(bls.gov)
4.2 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years(U.S. Treasury Site)
Downgrade of the U.S. credit rating(S&P)
Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.97 (The United States Misery Index By Year)
38-41% JAR and well over 50-55% disapproval ratings(Gallup)
 
Speaking of ignoring facts.

So what it a lie when you claimed that Bush spent 14.8 trillion dollars? You really don't understand debt and deficit at all nor have even a basic economics understand. better stop when way behind
 
Then you should love the opportunity to prove that I am "lying" again. Go for it

Obama economic results in 2011,
.4% GDP and 1.3% GDP growth in 2011(bea.gov)
25+ million unemployed or under employed Americans in 2011(bls.gov)
2.6 million fewer jobs(bls.gov)
4.2 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years(U.S. Treasury Site)
Downgrade of the U.S. credit rating(S&P)
Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.97 (The United States Misery Index By Year)
38-41% JAR and well over 50-55% disapproval ratings(Gallup)

Quote Originally Posted by Jryan View Post
Now conservative:
http://www.debatepolitics.com/2012-...n-obama-grows-strongly-59.html#post1059891740

1) cut
2) paste
3) get debunked
4) spiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiinnnnnnnn
5) make personal insult
 
This isn't the Reagan Thread and Yes, I did apologize for saying that increasing Revenue from 345 billion to 565 billions .

I can think of three times off hand that you have been busted on that. Yet you persist on continuing that fallacious claim.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom