• 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 Says U.S. Long-Term Debt Load ‘Unsustainable’

LakeCharlesGuy said:
Although I agree with Obama on saying the current debt cannot be sustained in the long run, I disagree with the way he's handling the situation. I don't understand how it's smart to spend borrowed money in the way he does, but maybe I'm just not smart enough to understand.
Click to expand...

This may help.

[ame="http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7535755025025800195"]The Obama Deception[/ame]

Made by people who panned Bush for the same reasons.
 
celticlord said:
Gay marriage is one where I tend to split the baby: I want government to get the hell out of marriage regulation entirely.
Click to expand...

Actually we aren't to far from that IMO, I want marriage take out of the government hands and put into civil unions instead.

Leave marriage to ANY religious institution, but give civil unions for all to the state and federal.

celticlord said:
On abortion, I want to see two things: 1) overturn that legal abomination known as Roe v Wade. That stands as the most badly decided Supreme Court case since Dred Scott v Sanford, and it's an embarrassment to jurisprudence. 2) A resolution attaching personhood at conception, so that abortion is recognized as the willful termination of human life. Let the argument proceed from there as to whether the practice should be sustained or not. However, abortion is a show stopper only if the candidate wants to continue the practice country wide by sustaining Roe v Wade.
Click to expand...

From there I don't know about, I want abortion to go from federal to the states but not in that way. Either way I think we agree for it to go to the states.

celticlord said:
I'm pretty much in agreement with you about wars. They're a bloody business and should be fought sparingly--although I have a hard time figuring Bush was anything worse than premature on Iraq. It needed to be done, but he could have waited another year to do it.
Click to expand...

Well we disagree on the Bush, but we seem to agree on the war status.

Bush didn't need to go to war when he did and more information was needed to be confirmed.

So it seems liberals and conservatives can come to an agreement, so what the hell is the problem then on the candidates?

If liberals and conservatives can come to an agreement on most things, why not the candidates?
 
Keorythe said:
6 years with Republican majority,
Click to expand...

Well, that statement is wrong.

Six years with a GOP House, four years with a GOP Senate, but that Senate was infested with Specters and Snows and other alien life forms found under rocks in sewers.
 
akyron said:
You do understand the difference between millions, billions, and trillions right?

Your commentary makes no sense.

By definition the ones spending like crazy checked their conservative values at the door .
Click to expand...

During the 2000, 2002, 2004, 2006, & 2008 elections -- they all ran as conservatives.

Republican, that is the conservative party, right?
 
WillRockwell said:
Funny, you weren't telling the Republicans to
STOP SPENDING!
​
when they created this mess. Do you expect the financial crisis will just go away if we leave it alone? Eight years of Republican incompetence was enough, I don't think we'll listen to your advice any more, thank you.
Click to expand...
I certainly was and I know I was not alone. I hated TARP and spoke out against it repeatedly. I argued with my cousin over it for weeks, and he's a conservative. ANd just to clue you in to reality, Obama's cluelessness has surpassed Bush's and he has only been office for a little more than 100 days.

WillRockwell said:
I understand that the Republicans so damaged the economy that, by inauguration day, 4 trillion dollars had disappeared with more flowing out every day. As a Republican, I don't expect you to understand fiscal matters but don't worry, we'll fix the mess you made.
Click to expand...
But wait, you're a C E N T R I S T aren't you? If so, what do you mean by "we'll fix the mess"? Are you seriously implying that the Obama administration and Congress are being led by "centrists"? Nah, we already knew that you're not a centrist, isn't it time to stop the charade?

Maybe you should just ...

stfu.gif
 
WillRockwell said:
Funny, you weren't telling the Republicans to
STOP SPENDING!
​
when they created this mess. Do you expect the financial crisis will just go away if we leave it alone? Eight years of Republican incompetence was enough, I don't think we'll listen to your advice any more, thank you.
Click to expand...

Funny, you do enjoy being wrong.

1. I was telling Republicans to
STOP SPENDING!

I was telling Democrats to
STOP SPENDING!​

I'm the supreme fiscal conservative--I squeeze a nickel so tight the Indian rides the buffalo. I hate spending with a passion. I don't do it except when I have to, and I encourage everyone I know to do the same thing.

2. Yes, I do expect the financial crisis to just go away if we leave it alone. Economies are self-healing entities. If you bothered to study something other than Dear Leader's pompous platitudes, you would have learned that basic economic principle. Bankruptcy wipes out the losers and clears the field for new contestants--which is exactly what is needed now.

The deep wounds and festering sores occur when nimrods like the Anti-Republicans and their befuddled, benighted, babbling baboon Dear Leader decide they want to "fix" the economy. They don't dare let AIG fail because it's "too big". They don't dare let BofA and Citi fail because they're "too big". They're desperate not to let the UAW fail because it is "too big." "Too big to fail" means "too big to exist, period."

Let these corruptocrats at BofA, AIG, Citi, Goldman Sucks, go down the tubes. Let the vultures come in, pick up the pieces, and form new healthy banks and finance companies. Other than an overly inflated housing bubble, which impacts primarily these same corruptocrats, the economy of Main Street was doing ok. Healthy business will attract healthy finance, just like it has for centuries.
​
 
TheNextEra said:
No you were trying to say OBama is much worse. Given what he inherited compared to Bush, I don't think it is worse. I think is is the same. If Obama had inherited the same as Bush it would have been less.

you want it to be worse. Sorry I disagree.
Click to expand...

No, actually, I don't want it to be worse. It just is.

Like I said . . . in one year, Obama's deficit is more than AAAAAALLLLLL of Bush's deficits, COMBINED. AAAAALLLLLLLLLL.

If you deny that it IS worse, you're simply delusional.
 
hazlnut said:
During the 2000, 2002, 2004, 2006, & 2008 elections -- they all ran as conservatives.

Republican, that is the conservative party, right?
Click to expand...

What they say and what they do are entirely different things as we should all know by now. Why we fall for this 2 party idiocy is beyond me. Bush=Obama.


Saying you are conservative and acting like mmm something else does not make you a conservative.
 
Last edited:
TheNextEra said:
Irresponsible spending is irresponsible no matter the amount or person.

Bush did it getting us into Iraq and now Obama did it with the bailouts. Both are wrong.

However, in 2004 Republicans CHOSE irresponsible spending.

And I love the ole bile from the conservatives side that conservatism is good, liberals are bad routine. Get it through your thick skulls, no successful country ever happened with ALL liberal or ALL conservative values.
Click to expand...

Actually, the bailouts happened on Bushies watch too..

celticlord said:
You're being disingenuous.

Or have you forgotten that Dear Leader's spending is the problem of which he so fecklessly speaks?

Or do you wish to ignore the trillions upon trillions of debt his agenda calls for?

His budget agenda would conservatively add $9.3 trillion over ten years to the debt he calls unsustainable. At the rate his current administration is adding to the public debt, he will add that amount in a single term of office.

I do not attack Dear Leader for saying the debt is unsustainable. I attack Dear Leader for his unsustainable debt.
Click to expand...

Oh i see quoting the CBO again? What was there estimates based upon again? No, the CBO has never been wrong though..

Harshaw said:
Hardly. Obama's first-year deficit is more than all of the Bush deficits combined. Degree does indeed matter. It's completely unprecedented.

The Republicans were reckless. Obama's driving drunk.
Click to expand...

Obama spent 6trillion dollars in 4 months? somebody should stop that guy.

Keorythe said:
6 years with Republican majority, 2 years Democrat majority, 2 wars, 1 major natural disaster, and 1 Democrat housing law to get us into this kind of debt vs. 6 weeks to double the amount of spending and that doesn't count Bush taking the fall for Obama when he asked him if Obama wanted him to sign off on the second half of the TARP money in his last weeks.
Click to expand...

Democrat housing law to get us into this mess? LMAO you sir have bought the propaganda machine once again. 6 years republican majority got us how far again? One of the greatest economic disasters in recent American history. In fact no republican in recent history has been conservative in it's true form.


Keorythe said:
The 2007 - 2009 Democrats CHOSE to spend not only the extra TARP cash that Bush handed him without media emo-rage (the later bailouts far surpassed that) but to also initiate MASSIVE healthcare and energy spending plans as well as other pork projects during a recession. Lets not forget that Afghanistan is the "good" war which Obama has repeated campaigned in favor of continuing. Now he's stuck with it as Iraq (a victory) is winding down.
Click to expand...

Yes, we choose to pass massive health care and energy spending both which are vital to both our economic future and overall well being. The war in Iraq should have never been fought, that surely was not a "good war" as you call it. Afghanistan is where our focus should have been all along.

akyron said:
This may help.

The Obama Deception

Made by people who panned Bush for the same reasons.
Click to expand...

Ohhhh noes another conspriacy theory.
 
Harshaw said:
No, actually, I don't want it to be worse. It just is.

Like I said . . . in one year, Obama's deficit is more than AAAAAALLLLLL of Bush's deficits, COMBINED. AAAAALLLLLLLLLL.

If you deny that it IS worse, you're simply delusional.
Click to expand...

Incorrect, i assume you have data to back up this statement correct? Bush left office with a 1.7 TRILLION dollar annual deficit to add on to his already racked 6+ trillion dollars. Has Obama spent 7 trillion dollars already?
 
Harshaw said:
No, actually, I don't want it to be worse. It just is.

Like I said . . . in one year, Obama's deficit is more than AAAAAALLLLLL of Bush's deficits, COMBINED. AAAAALLLLLLLLLL.
Click to expand...

And how did you compute that number?

Congressional Budget Office - A Preliminary Analysis of the President's Budget and an Update of CBO's Budget and Economic Outlook

Bush's deficits for publicly held debt is $2 trillion, while debt held by public increased by $2.4 trillion. I'm pretty sure you just checked the Heritage site without making sure their computations were correct. And I'm pretty sure the CBO data is not inflation pegged. So Bush's deficits are actually significently more than that $2 trillion. Especially since the debt also increased on government held internal debt.

If you deny that it IS worse, you're simply delusional.
Click to expand...

The number is not worse. Last I checked, $1.8 trillion < $2 trillion (actually more, but I'm too lazy to inflation peg each deficit).

It is worse as a whole for the nation because Bush's debt accumulation was real bad. Now we're piling on even more.

So technically, you are wrong.
 
It's not a Rorschach test where you see what you want to see. Even that graph shows what I'm saying.
 
WillRockwell said:
Funny, you weren't telling the Republicans to
STOP SPENDING!
​
when they created this mess. Do you expect the financial crisis will just go away if we leave it alone? Eight years of Republican incompetence was enough, I don't think we'll listen to your advice any more, thank you.
Click to expand...
As usual, you dont want to address the issue at hgand, so you try to misdirect the conversation to someone/thing else.
 
:rofl One word "Duh".
 
TheNextEra said:
Irresponsible spending is irresponsible no matter the amount or person.

Bush did it getting us into Iraq and now Obama did it with the bailouts. Both are wrong.

However, in 2004 Republicans CHOSE irresponsible spending.
Click to expand...
All spending is a choice. Not a single dollar of spending is mandatory. The government could choose to spend $0 if it wanted to.
 
Goobieman said:
As usual, you dont want to address the issue at hgand, so you try to misdirect the conversation to someone/thing else.
Click to expand...

Yeah. Seems to me that Obama was supposed to usher in a New American Testament wherein the old ways of doing things would no longer apply. Why? He's the Secular Messiah, the Lightworker.

Now . . . he's hampered and handcuffed by the previous administration? He has no choice but to be doing what he's doing?

That doesn't sound very Messiah-like.
 
WillRockwell said:
I understand that the Republicans so damaged the economy...
Click to expand...
I would ask you to show this to be true, but I know you can't, so I wont bother.

If you're so right about things, why do you have to make stuff up?
 
Redress said:
I am puzzled about all this. President Obama says something the right disagrees with, and he is attacked for it. President Obama says something the right agree with, and he is attacked for it.
Click to expand...
The point here -- and this should be obvious -- is that The Obama said what He said as He pushes a budget that spends twice the available revenue -- whose deficit for just one year is 70% the total deficit under GWB.
 
celticlord said:
Obama Says U.S. Long-Term Debt Load ?Unsustainable? (Update1) - Bloomberg.com



Talk about cluelessness. If Dear Leader weren't spending so damn much, he wouldn't have to borrow so damn much.

Instead of all those Constitutional law courses he slept through at Harvard, he should have taken a basic class on how to balance a checkbook. Then he'd at least have some clue as to what the problem is.

If Dear Leader wants to solve the problem of deficit spending, here's a simple suggestion:

STOP SPENDING!
​
Click to expand...

haha, talk about a "no duh" moment. "This thing that we're doing, the one that's ruining our economy. Yeah, that's not sustainable." I really wish we didn't have a bunch of dumbasses in office.
 
Harshaw said:
Yeah. Seems to me that Obama was supposed to usher in a New American Testament wherein the old ways of doing things would no longer apply. Why? He's the Secular Messiah, the Lightworker.

Now . . . he's hampered and handcuffed by the previous administration? He has no choice but to be doing what he's doing?

That doesn't sound very Messiah-like.
Click to expand...
Apparently the "change" he was to bring is to take everything he han against and make it far, far worse.
 
Last edited:
Ikari said:
haha, talk about a "no duh" moment. "This thing that we're doing, the one that's ruining our economy. Yeah, that's not sustainable." I really wish we didn't have a bunch of dumbasses in office.
Click to expand...
Come next year, we have a chance to perhaps partially rectify that. Simply cast a vote for the non-incumbent candidate. ANYONE who is currently in the Congress needs to go. Vote against any and all incumbents, irrespective of party affiliation.
 
celticlord said:
Come next year, we have a chance to perhaps partially rectify that. Simply cast a vote for the non-incumbent candidate. ANYONE who is currently in the Congress needs to go. Vote against any and all incumbents, irrespective of party affiliation.
Click to expand...

Screw it. Let's just tar and feather the assholes. At least it should provide some form of entertainment.
 
Ikari said:
Screw it. Let's just tar and feather the assholes. At least it should provide some form of entertainment.
Click to expand...
No doubt. But we have to vote them out first or else there's going to be one hell of a clean up job in the Rotunda.
 
This guy is just an incredible idiot. Tell ya what, we're going to get a great big lotto prize so let's go spend all the money before we know how much! So Pelosi and Reid didn't know how much? What a bunch of fools, and we have to live with them in charge. Just frightening.
 
celticlord said:
Obama Says U.S. Long-Term Debt Load ?Unsustainable? (Update1) - Bloomberg.com



Talk about cluelessness. If Dear Leader weren't spending so damn much, he wouldn't have to borrow so damn much.

Instead of all those Constitutional law courses he slept through at Harvard, he should have taken a basic class on how to balance a checkbook. Then he'd at least have some clue as to what the problem is.

If Dear Leader wants to solve the problem of deficit spending, here's a simple suggestion:

STOP SPENDING!
​
Click to expand...

Don't blame me, I didn't vote for the morons. :cool:

By the way, where are all these millions of jobs we are supposed to be seeing? Let's see, Obama promised 5,000,000 NEW jobs and since he took office we have lost 2,000,000; that means that in order to meet his campaign promise we are now at 7,000,000 jobs needed.

I wonder how many jobs will be created next month? :roll:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom