• 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!

National Debt Up $3 Trillion on Obama's Watch

Goobieman said:
It's YOUR standard -- don't get all sniffly over me for using it against you.
:cry:
Click to expand...

I have already explained why you are doing it dishonestly :shrug:
 
Whovian said:
Pissing contest - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia :ninja:
Click to expand...

Yeah, I have a habit of getting bogged down by dishonest people as I love leaving the last word. Its a character flaw of mine :(

I guess this would be me

images
 
Last edited:
megaprogman said:
Yeah, I have a habit of getting bogged down by dishonest people...
Click to expand...
Now, this is just sour grapes. You set a standard and I'm using it.
Don't like it? Perhaps you should exhibit a little honesty and reconsider that standard.
 
Goobieman said:
Now, this is just sour grapes. You set a standard and I'm using it.
Don't like it? Perhaps you should exhibit a little honesty and reconsider that standard.
Click to expand...

Ok, than this would give me license to take what you say out of context and with deliberate misunderstanding and apply it back to you? I am willing to bet you would think such a thing would be dishonest.
 
megaprogman said:
I have already explained why you are doing it dishonestly :shrug:
Click to expand...
Hardly. Your standard must necessarly applies everywhere, not just where you want it to - else you're just trying to conveniently pick and choose when a subjective argument is valid and when its not.
THAT is dishonest.
 
megaprogman said:
Ok, than this would give me license to take what you say out of context...
Click to expand...
I didnlt take anything you said out of context, and you know it.
Its YOUR standard. Live with it or discard it.
 
Goobieman said:
Hardly. Your standard must necessarly applies everywhere, not just where you want it to - else you're just trying to conveniently pick and choose when a subjective argument is valid and when its not.
THAT is dishonest.
Click to expand...

That is not true and you know it. In fact the idea behind that is pretty idiotic. Different types of situations require different types of thinking to understand them.
 
Last edited:
megaprogman said:
Thats not true and you know it. All situations are not the same and they require different types of thinking to understand them.
Click to expand...
Oh. So, sometimes, criticisms based on subjective standards are not valid?
Like... when?
 
The federal budget was last in balance from 1998 to 2001.

Obama's debt. "The Debt increased $4.9 trillion during President Bush's two terms. The Administration has projected the National Debt will soar in Mr. Obama's fourth year in office to nearly $16.5-trillion in 2012. That's more than 100 percent of the value of the nation's economy and $5.9-trillion above what it was his first day on the job."

Bush came into office owing what? Bush inherited a great economy.

Obama came into office with the government owing what?

reality bites.
 
Goobieman said:
Oh. So, sometimes, criticisms based on subjective standards are not valid?
Like... when?
Click to expand...

That's not true either. It is a mix of opinion, the data in which we draw the opinion from, and the context surrounding which informs us of the constraints of the situation. That's three different types of thinking right there. However, IN THIS SITUATION, the opinion, I believe, should be weighted most heavily.
 
Ajay said:
Bush came into office owing what? Bush inherited a great economy.
Click to expand...
The economy was in recession when GWB took office, which continued for 6-9 more months.
 
megaprogman said:
I bit of it yes, but I really wouldn't call it blame as almost all of the spending was necessary. To me, blame implies that he did something wrong (really the biggest blame I have for him, is he hasn't done enough)
Click to expand...

Necessary ??

Was the rebuilding of New York City and care for the people there after 9/11 unnecessary ??

Was the rebuilding of the nation's economy after 9/11 unnecessary ??

Was defeating the terrorists that attacked us on 9/11and the nation that harbored them unnecessary ??

Was the formation of the Dept. of Homeland Security to protect us from another attack unnecessary ??

Was rebuilding New Orleans after Katrina unnecessary ??

Which ones would you have eliminated ?
 
Goobieman said:
The economy was in recession when GWB took office, which continued for 6-9 more months.
Click to expand...

Recession with a balanced budget? How much was the national debt when Bush took office? You were talking about and comparing the national debt, weren't you?
 
megaprogman said:
That's not true either.
Click to expand...
Oh. So, criticiems based on subjective standards -are- always valid.
Except, of course, they carry no more weight than stating you dont like liver.
How then have I done anything to take you out of context?
 
Last edited:
Ajay said:
Recession with a balanced budget?
Click to expand...
You said that GWB inherited a great ecomomy.
Unless you were offering sarcasm, your statement is demonstrably incorrect.
 
"On the day President Bush took office, the national debt stood at $5.727 trillion. The latest number from the Treasury Department shows the national debt now stands at more than $9.849 trillion. That's a 71.9 percent increase on Mr. Bush's watch."- September 29, 2008
Click to expand...
Then there was the Bush bailout. How much did that add? To the debt totals?
 
Gill said:
Necessary ??

Was the rebuilding of New York City and care for the people there after 9/11 unnecessary ??
Click to expand...

New Orleans is still largely in ruins, but overall, I don't think it was necessary beyond cleaning up any unsafe areas

Gill said:
Was the rebuilding of the nation's economy after 9/11 unnecessary ??
Click to expand...

Of course, and I supported some of the stimulus that Bush did, even though I think he did it in an ineffective manner

Gill said:
Was defeating the terrorists that attacked us on 9/11and the nation that harbored them unnecessary ??
Click to expand...

Afghanistan was, Iraq was not

Gill said:
Was the formation of the Dept. of Homeland Security to protect us from another attack unnecessary ??
Click to expand...

Yes

Gill said:
Was rebuilding New Orleans after Katrina unnecessary ??
Click to expand...

New Orleans is still largely in ruins

Gill said:
Which ones would you have eliminated ?
Click to expand...

Iraq, homeland security, a lot of the silly measures that cost lots of money but do nothing for our safety (like giving awesome equipment to redneck police departments), the medicare prescription thing, no child left behind (even though that was largely unfunded), some other stuff.
 
Ajay said:
Then there was the Bush bailout. How much did that add? To the debt totals?
Click to expand...
How much of it was spent before Jan 21 2009?
 
Goobieman said:
Oh. So, criticiems based on subjective standards -are- always valid.
Except, of course, they carry no more weight than stating you dont like liver.
How then have I done anything to take you out of context?
Click to expand...

You are giving me a false choice here. Its not a binary thing. You are trying to apply absolutes to something that is not absolute.
 
Last edited:
Goobieman said:
You said that GWB inherited a great ecomomy.
Unless you were offering sarcasm, your statement is demonstrably incorrect.
Click to expand...

Maybe I misspoke. I think the economy was doing great. I didn't buy into the 'new' economy of the Dot Com bs. Compare news stories on the economy in 2000 with news stories on the economy in 2008.
 
megaprogman said:
New Orleans is still largely in ruins, but overall, I don't think it was necessary beyond cleaning up any unsafe areas
Click to expand...
You also don't like liver. So what?

Of course, and I supported some of the stimulus that Bush did, even though I think he did it in an ineffective manner
Click to expand...
You also don't like liver. So what?

Afghanistan was, Iraq was not
Click to expand...
You also don't like liver. So what?

Yes[the formation of the Dept. of Homeland Security to protect us from another attack was unnecessary]
Click to expand...
You also don't like liver. So what?

New Orleans is still largely in ruins
Click to expand...
You also don't like liver. So what?

Iraq, homeland security, a lot of the silly measures that cost lots of money but do nothing for our safety...
Click to expand...
You also don't like liver. So what?

the medicare prescription thing, no child left behind (even though that was largely unfunded), some other stuff.
Click to expand...
You also don't like liver. So what?
 
Goobieman said:
How much of it was spent before Jan 21 2009?
Click to expand...
"On the day President Bush took office, the national debt stood at $5.727 trillion. The latest number from the Treasury Department shows the national debt now stands at more than $9.849 trillion. That's a 71.9 percent increase on Mr. Bush's watch."- September 29, 2008
Click to expand...
Then there was the Bush bailout. How much did that add? To the debt totals?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom