• 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!

Democrats threaten violence on Michigan House floor

And you appointed yourself the person responsible for getting the rest of the thread up on the herd eh?Typical winger trait.:2wave:


:failpail: No, as usual the liberal progressive totally misses the point of a post, to completely make up a strawman to knock down...In the words of the immortal W.C. Fields...."Go away boy, you bother me".....:lamo
 
I don't claim a cause and effect relationship. I merely wonder whether or not it can be summarily dismissed as mere coincidence. :mrgreen:

I don't think it can either be summarily dismissed nor held up as a cause. We need to examine several issues: Do the foreign workers have to belong to a union? How are the GM cars designed? How competent is the management of that entity? This is a very complex issue, it seems to me.
 
You realize no matter how many times you make the statement it still remains a lie according to the bank account of the United States. Please show me the budget surplus in the Treasury Data

Debt to the Penny (Daily History Search Application)

why do you continue to perpetuate the lie. Please educate yourself on the budget of the United States and what makes up the deficit?



Tax Reduction Act of 1997 was in the Clinton second term. Google it and learn something



Continuing to relive the past only allows you to divert from the present and the disaster called Obama. You probably weren't very old during the Clinton years but that doesn't prevent you today from actually doing some research. You might want to start by googling the Contract with America



Lying under oath is a felony



LOL, teabaggers? We saw leadership when Obama had total control of the Congress but then again the leftwing sites you read won't show you how poor that leadership was. BEA.gov, BLS.gov, and the U.S. Treasury will.

Its laughable that you think that the Tax Reduction Act was a “significant, second term bill“ When unemployment went from 7.3, to 5.3, during CLINTONS FIRST TERM then it only dropped a little over 1%, before the wrecking crew took office (bush two sticks).So tell me why,if the Tax Reduction Act was such a panacea, didn’t it lower the unemployment rate at least as much as the Clinton’s first term.?:shock:

One would think that it woulda given George two sticks a jump on his presidency. Instead, two sticks went from the 4.2% unemployment,that Clinton left, to 5.3%, after his first term.

SOOoo...tell me how the “Tax Reduction Act”,and the republican controlled congress of his second term helped the Clinton boom along?

While your in an explaining mood, also explain to me how Clinton’s raising taxes,during his first term hurt the economy?The rest of your post is rightwing nonsense,not worthy of a response.:peace
 
Its laughable that you think that the Tax Reduction Act was a “significant, second term bill“ When unemployment went from 7.3, to 5.3, during CLINTONS FIRST TERM then it only dropped a little over 1%, before the wrecking crew took office (bush two sticks).So tell me why,if the Tax Reduction Act was such a panacea, didn’t it lower the unemployment rate at least as much as the Clinton’s first term.?:shock:

One would think that it woulda given George two sticks a jump on his presidency. Instead, two sticks went from the 4.2% unemployment,that Clinton left, to 5.3%, after his first term.

SOOoo...tell me how the “Tax Reduction Act”,and the republican controlled congress of his second term helped the Clinton boom along?

While your in an explaining mood, also explain to me how Clinton’s raising taxes,during his first term hurt the economy?The rest of your post is rightwing nonsense,not worthy of a response.:peace

Are you ready to admit that there was no surplus under Clinton? Further I fully understand why you want to divert to Clinton but this is 2012 not 1997. People keeping more of their own money stimulates our consumer economy and grows govt. revenue
 
Are you ready to admit that there was no surplus under Clinton? Further I fully understand why you want to divert to Clinton but this is 2012 not 1997. People keeping more of their own money stimulates our consumer economy and grows govt. revenue

FederalDeficit(1).jpg


Bbbutt...What about yer “Tax Reduction Act”?What about the measly 1% drop in unemployment after it was implemented compared to before it was implemented?

Are you ready to pick up your fail pail and proudly follow your compadres into oblivion?:2wave:
 
FederalDeficit(1).jpg


Bbbutt...What about yer “Tax Reduction Act”?What about the measly 1% drop in unemployment after it was implemented compared to before it was implemented?

Are you ready to pick up your fail pail and proudly follow your compadres into oblivion?:2wave:

Noticed you posted data up to 2006 when the deficit was 412.7 billion dollars. When has Obama had a deficit under a trillion? Tax reduction act of 1997 obviously hasn't been researched by you therefore I will not do the work for you. Suggest you at least try to be non partisan for a change

You are the one claiming a budget surplus under Clinton and as reported the Treasury doesn't show that. It was a projected surplus based upon assumptions given the CBO by the Congress. DO you know the difference between a projection and actual numbers?

Don't know what it is about liberalism that creates this kind of loyalty but if there was a surplus the debt wouldn't have grown like it did
 
Noticed you posted data up to 2006 when the deficit was 412.7 billion dollars. When has Obama had a deficit under a trillion? Tax reduction act of 1997 obviously hasn't been researched by you therefore I will not do the work for you. Suggest you at least try to be non partisan for a change

You are the one claiming a budget surplus under Clinton and as reported the Treasury doesn't show that. It was a projected surplus based upon assumptions given the CBO by the Congress. DO you know the difference between a projection and actual numbers?

Don't know what it is about liberalism that creates this kind of loyalty but if there was a surplus the debt wouldn't have grown like it did


very telling.:(

Your search - the last republican president with a budget surplus - did not match any shopping results.

Suggestions:

Make sure all words are spelled correctly.
Try different keywords.
Try more general keywords.
Try fewer keywords.

the last democratic president with a budget surplus


https://www.google.com/search?sourc...533617cf8985b78&bpcl=39967673&biw=930&bih=593
 
Last edited:
very telling.:(

Your search - the last republican president with a budget surplus - did not match any shopping results.

Suggestions:

Make sure all words are spelled correctly.
Try different keywords.
Try more general keywords.
Try fewer keywords.

the last democratic president with a budget surplus


https://www.google.com/search?sourc...533617cf8985b78&bpcl=39967673&biw=930&bih=593

This is getting ridiculous, if you think we had a surplus then please contact the Treasury Dept. and tell them about it and demand a refund on the debt service that was charged to Clinton and the taxpayers. This is almost like your school telling you that your bank account is wrong and that there is more money in there than you thought. try spending it? The bank, thus the U.S. Treasury has the accurate numbers.
 
You are the one claiming a budget surplus under Clinton and as reported the Treasury doesn't show that. It was a projected surplus based upon assumptions given the CBO by the Congress. DO you know the difference between a projection and actual numbers?


Uhmm dude that chart comes from a report generated in January 2010. So it is not a projection but rather a matter of historical record.
 
This is getting ridiculous, if you think we had a surplus then please contact the Treasury Dept. and tell them about it and demand a refund on the debt service that was charged to Clinton and the taxpayers. This is almost like your school telling you that your bank account is wrong and that there is more money in there than you thought. try spending it? The bank, thus the U.S. Treasury has the accurate numbers.

do you think it is as ridiculous as you implying that the Tax Reduction Act was a “significant, second term bill“ that contributed to Clintons balanced budget?After it was shown to you that the unemployment rate went down by two percentage points during Clinton's first term (WITH AN INCREASE IN TAXES) and only went down one percentage point, with the "Tax Reduction Act"in place. Ohhh-by the way, your lame attempt at diversion to Obama. NOTED.:peace
 
Uhmm dude that chart comes from a report generated in January 2010. So it is not a projection but rather a matter of historical record.

CBO doesn't provide historical record, the Treasury Dept. does. Why don't you and all the others here who believe there was a surplus demand the Treasury refund the debt service on the non existent deficits that were created the years of those surpluses/.
 
do you think it is as ridiculous as you implying that the Tax Reduction Act was a “significant, second term bill“ that contributed to Clintons balanced budget?After it was shown to you that the unemployment rate went down by two percentage points during Clinton's first term (WITH AN INCREASE IN TAXES) and only went down one percentage point, with the "Tax Reduction Act"in place. Ohhh-by the way, your lame attempt at diversion to Obama. NOTED.:peace

when you get out of schools, start paying taxes which reduce your take home pay you will realize what a tax reduction does to your take home pay. Let me know when that happens.
 
Let me know what kind of response you get from the bank of the United States when you ask them for a refund of debt service paid on a non existent increase in the debt?

This has to one of the most non-sensical misdirections you have ever attempted:lamo
 
This has to one of the most non-sensical misdirections you have ever attempted:lamo

Totally understand coming from you, overpaying taxes to fund the debt service on a non existent deficit which added to that debt service is non-sensical to you? Interesting since it is only money, right?
 
when you get out of schools, start paying taxes which reduce your take home pay you will realize what a tax reduction does to your take home pay. Let me know when that happens.

Dude...when you get time,move your curser,over to the left under my aviator,two spots left of the gold star, between the 5k post and the five year award, then float your curser over the thing that looks like an old fashon telephone and try to figure out who yours talking to.:lamo
 
Dude...when you get time,move your curser,over to the left under my aviator,two spots left of the gold star, between the 5k post and the five year award, then float your curser over the thing that looks like an old fashon telephone and try to figure out who yours talking to.:lamo

I already know who I am talking to but to say it here would lead to an infraction. Now please show me the surplus in the bank account of the United States. Thanks in advance.
 
I already know who I am talking to but to say it here would lead to an infraction. Now please show me the surplus in the bank account of the United States. Thanks in advance.

Still grasping for that(Clinton surplus) life preserver, in your vain attempt to save face eh?CLUE-it didn't work.sorry.:2wave:
 
Still grasping for that(Clinton surplus) life preserver, in your vain attempt to save face eh?CLUE-it didn't work.sorry.:2wave:

You are the one claiming the surplus, not me. I use Treasury data which is just like using my own bank data.

Show me the total budget surplus that Clinton had using U.S. bank account information. You seem to be like far too many, someone who doesn't understand what makes up the total deficit and Debt regardless of giving you the link to explain it to you.

Total Debt or Surplus=Public Debt + Intergovernment Holdings.
 
You are the one claiming the surplus, not me. I use Treasury data which is just like using my own bank data.

Show me the total budget surplus that Clinton had using U.S. bank account information. You seem to be like far too many, someone who doesn't understand what makes up the total deficit and Debt regardless of giving you the link to explain it to you.

Total Debt or Surplus=Public Debt + Intergovernment Holdings.

There is no convincing you,You swallowed too much look-aid. you wont even take the CBO data as proof. On the other hand, you try to shift the topic from what we were discussing,WHICH WAS ,your assertion, that somehow, that the Tax Reduction Act was a“significant, second term bill“ which I showed was wrong, for all readers of this thread to see.Which at the moment is just you and I.:(
 
There is no convincing you,You swallowed too much look-aid. you wont even take the CBO data as proof. On the other hand, you try to shift the topic from what we were discussing,WHICH WAS ,your assertion, that somehow, that the Tax Reduction Act was a“significant, second term bill“ which I showed was wrong, for all readers of this thread to see.Which at the moment is just you and I.:(

Do you have a bank account? Is that proof enough for you? Why would the bank account of the United States not be proof? Talk about drinking the Kool-aid?
 
Do you have a bank account? Is that proof enough for you? Why would the bank account of the United States not be proof? Talk about drinking the Kool-aid?

Are you equating a private bank account with an entity that can print money?:shock:
 
They do not threaten violence, they predict violence which is something
completely different from threatening violence.

Oh BS. All those attempts by a cowardly lying liberal mass to demonize the Tea Party and all along the violent are the fringe liberals, even their politicians who DID threaten violence.

There will be blood wasn't a warning, it was a promise and a liberal plan of attack.

From Occupy to Michigan thugs it always ends in violence with you guys.

And then you try to lie your way out of it.
 
Are you equating a private bank account with an entity that can print money?:shock:

The Federal Reserve prints money, the bank account of the U.S. collects money and pays bills. That isn't what the CBO does. You ought to know better.
 
Back
Top Bottom