Page 18 of 18 FirstFirst ... 8161718
Results 171 to 172 of 172

Thread: Obama: I didn't draw the red line on Syria, world did [W:162]

  1. #171
    Pragmatic Idealist
    upsideguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Rocky Mtn. High
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    10,095

    Re: Now he's lying about the Red Line...

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Nice sarcasm, but the problem is the Treasury Dept., BLS.gov, and BEA.gov. support my statements and refute yours. Seems to me that you have a bad case of BDS, Bush Derangement Syndrome, and because you have made the statements over and over again you believe what you stated is correct.

    It really is sad, what exactly did Bush do to you and your family that creates this hatred and here we are five years after leaving office you still have to promote those liberal lies to divert from the Obama record?

    Debt to the Penny (Daily History Search Application)

    Debt when Obama took office was 10.6 trillion dollars and it is now approaching 17 trillion. Obama signed the Bush budget in March 2009 after adding to it. The Bush projected deficit was not a trillion dollars and the continuing resolutions from Oct. 2008 to January 21, 2009 did not create the 1.2 trillion dollar deficit for fiscal year 2009. Further the Treasury Dept. does not show a Clinton surplus that you and others claim existed.

    I wouldn't have expected someone who claims to be in business to be so poorly informed about either economic policies or actual results.
    Yawn.... Yet, I have to hand it to you, you have made DP posting very efficient: 4 original works posted 40,000 times.

    That said, the Treasury Dept, BLS and BEA numbers are facts, which taken out of context, as you continually do, mean nothing. You are more than happy to tell us that change in the federal debt between Jan 20, 2009 and today... we can all look it up. Attributing that change to Obama, however, has no basis as you never explain what he has done to make that debt happen. While arguments deal with causation, yours deals with circumstance. Citing the change in debt and declaring it Obama's fault is about as meaningful analysis as going to the Doctor with a list a symptoms validate your symptom; or calling a structural engineer into analyze a collapsed building and having him declare it a mess or attributing to the night watchman, because the night watchman was the only one in the building.... its NON analysis; its meaningless.

    So, I will give you another shot. I have told you that Bush started with essentially a balanced budget and delivered $1.1T running deficits (which he did; my cite posted numerous times, happy to post again, if you need). I then explained how those deficits were racked up: 1) tax cuts which cut income tax revenue, which racked up $2T of the debt and $200B of annual deficit; 2) wars and related occupations which cost $1.5T to $4.0T depending on how you look at it and 3) an unfunded expansion of Medicare (Part D), which added about $50B annually to the deficit. This was all compounded by a recession that took $400B out tax revenues and added $100B in unemployment (each, of which, have evaporated during the Obama administration).... That was my argument of how GW Bush screwed up the economy. BTW, I have supported, numerous times each of these assertions and can do so again, if necessary.

    Now, you have thrown out the rather absurd proposition that Bush did not screw up the economy; Obama did. May I present that post where you make this absurd statement:

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    I would have thought that in 5 years you would have overcome the ignorance you continue to display. Bush didn't screw up the economy, that would be Obama. The economy was healing when Obama took office and today the results speak for themselves. the partisanship is coming from you, not me. I post facts and support those facts with logic and common sense. I don't understand how someone who claims to run a business can be so blind to what Obama is doing to that business.

    I have no party line, I am a conservative and nothing Obama or the Democrats have done is conservative. I don't belong to the Republican Party, never have, and grew up a Democrat, registered Democrat for decades, voted for more democrats than you probably voted for Republicans. The difference between me and you is that I understand the economy and the private sector better than either you or Obama. You cannot tell me how Bush screwed up the economy because the war certainly didn't do that. Obama has no redeeming qualities but screwed up from day one, too bad you cannot see that.

    Results do not speak for themselves.... you have to link the facts to the "crime" and show us how Obama is responsible for the results.... Now, here is your chance to come up with robo post #5.... prove that point. Tell us all, exactly how Obama screwed up the economy. And, since your assertion was a complex one that says Bush DID NOT screw up the economy, your proof must include substantiation that Bush delivered Obama a sound economy. I don't know why I am wasting my time with this post as I don't believe you are capable of such a proof.... the good Dr. Conservative will once again tell us the symptoms and be totally unable to identify the disease nor explain how it got out of control..... But, give it a try.
    Last edited by upsideguy; 09-11-13 at 02:24 AM.

  2. #172
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,264

    Re: Now he's lying about the Red Line...

    =upsideguy;1062301338]Yawn.... Yet, I have to hand it to you, you have made DP posting very efficient: 4 original works posted 40,000 times.
    Sometimes you have to be repetitive when you are dealing with people with very short attention span and lack of any ability to do any research.


    That said, the Treasury Dept, BLS and BEA numbers are facts, which taken out of context, as you continually do, mean nothing. You are more than happy to tell us that change in the federal debt between Jan 20, 2009 and today... we can all look it up. Attributing that change to Obama, however, has no basis as you never explain what he has done to make that debt happen. While arguments deal with causation, yours deals with circumstance. Citing the change in debt and declaring it Obama's fault is about as meaningful analysis as going to the Doctor with a list a symptoms validate your symptom; or calling a structural engineer into analyze a collapsed building and having him declare it a mess or attributing to the night watchman, because the night watchman was the only one in the building.... its NON analysis; its meaningless.
    Yes, I keep hearing that the data is taken out of context yet not once have you or anyone else put it in "context" and it does seem the data was "in context" when it was used during the Clinton term to tout his "superior" performance. I wonder if this is the way you run your business?

    Leadership is about taking responsibility something you have to do in the business world but Obama never does. What Obama did was spend more money than Bush as the Treasury Dept shows and implemented economic policies that haven't put millions of Americans back to work so they are paying taxes. There are two sides to the debt, revenue and expenses. Unemployed people don't pay much in taxes and spending more increases expenses. I would have thought someone in business would understand that. Now please put the Obama results into context and feel free to explain why we have so many unemployed/under employed/discouraged workers, so many on food stamps, so many dependent on the taxpayers and so many discouraged and dropping out of the labor force. I love context so please offer it.

    So, I will give you another shot. I have told you that Bush started with essentially a balanced budget and delivered $1.1T running deficits (which he did; my cite posted numerous times, happy to post again, if you need). I then explained how those deficits were racked up: 1) tax cuts which cut income tax revenue, which racked up $2T of the debt and $200B of annual deficit; 2) wars and related occupations which cost $1.5T to $4.0T depending on how you look at it and 3) an unfunded expansion of Medicare (Part D), which added about $50B annually to the deficit. This was all compounded by a recession that took $400B out tax revenues and added $100B in unemployment (each, of which, have evaporated during the Obama administration).... That was my argument of how GW Bush screwed up the economy. BTW, I have supported, numerous times each of these assertions and can do so again, if necessary.
    Yes, you did, yet you ignored that the country was going into recession and then we had 9/11. Apparently those facts escaped you and of course you ignored context. Then of course there is the context that you are assigning to Bush a deficit for a budget that was never approved by Congress but was signed by Obama in March 2009. I guess that is context that doesn't matter to you. You claim that income taxes cut revenue and yet we set record tax revenue under the Bush term, wonder how that is out of context? How do you know we cut tax revenue since you never post data showing that, actual data, not projected data. I love the unfunded Medicare Part D program that Democrats wanted to double in expenses. Guess that is out of context as well?

    I do love how that liberal proclaimed dumb cowboy from TX destroyed the economy all by himself with a Congress totally controlled by Democrats. That is quite an accomplishment, don't you think?


    Now, you have thrown out the rather absurd proposition that Bush did not screw up the economy; Obama did. May I present that post where you make this absurd statement:
    I stand by that statement because I understand leadership and our our Congress works, apparently you don't




    Results do not speak for themselves.... you have to link the facts to the "crime" and show us how Obama is responsible for the results.... Now, here is your chance to come up with robo post #5.... prove that point. Tell us all, exactly how Obama screwed up the economy. And, since your assertion was a complex one that says Bush DID NOT screw up the economy, your proof must include substantiation that Bush delivered Obama a sound economy. I don't know why I am wasting my time with this post as I don't believe you are capable of such a proof.... the good Dr. Conservative will once again tell us the symptoms and be totally unable to identify the disease nor explain how it got out of control..... But, give it a try.
    Results don't matter in the liberal world when there is a liberal President, now that is my opinion based upon observations here. It does seem that liberals don't understand leadership nor are willing to do any research. It is very easy to post why Obama is responsible because Obama's economic policy went into effect almost day one, that was a Stimulus plan which stimulated spending to the states and debt, not stimulating the private sector of the economy. Obama had total control of the Congress and did nothing to grow the economy other than spend money. When he saw the stimulus not working he then proposed Obamacare and got it passed. Yes, that is really setting priorities and of course is ignored by supporters like you.

    Obama claimed he had the solutions to the economy and today we aren't better off than we were before the recession began. We are down 2 million workers today when recession began. You simply don't seem to understand the role of leadership, the responsibilities of leadership, and the lack of executive experience of this "leader" We have a private sector economy that you don't seem to understand. Leaders are responsible for the hand they are dealt. Obama was responsible for the economy that he inherited just like Bush was because he was in the Democrat controlled Congress. Maybe it should be you that needs to take a leadership class, an economics class, but more importantly a civics class so you understand who controls the purse strings and who controls the legislative agenda.

    you seem to live in a liberal dream world but certainly don't understand responsibilities of leadership. If you generated the Obama results almost 5 years after taking office, you would have lost your business or been fired. I assure you that no one is motivated by the wealth redistribution rhetoric and policies of this President except supporters like you

Page 18 of 18 FirstFirst ... 8161718

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •