• 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 announces his Candidacy for 2012.

Conservative said:
Are you ever going to respond to the actual post? How did President Bush create a 1.2 trillion dollar deficit from October 1, 2008 to January 20, 2009? Seems that all I get are intellectually dishonest statements from liberals.
Click to expand...
Speaking of dishonest, your question is a strawman anyway. No one said Bush created a $1.2 trillion dollar deficit between October 1, 2008 and January 20, 2009. The CBO released what they expected the deficit to be based on current economic conditions at that time, in conjunction with Bush's budget. Turns out, their projection wasn't that far off.
 
Last edited:
Sheik Yerbuti said:
Speaking of dishonest, your question is a strawman anyway. No one said Bush created a $1.2 trillion dollar deficit between October 1, 2008 and January 20, 2009. The CBO released what they expected the deficit to be based on current economic conditions at that time, in conjunction with Bush's budget. Turns out, their projection wasn't that far off.
Click to expand...

The total wasn't far off but the details you continue to ignore. How much deficit did Obama create in 2009 with his stimulus and war supplemental along with spending 350 billion of the TARP? Intellectual honesty? Let's see if you have any?
 
Conservative said:
The total wasn't far off but the details you continue to ignore.
Click to expand...
I did not ignore the details. Did you not read the details I provided you in post #897? Which of those details changed during the course of FY2009?

Conservative said:
How much deficit did Obama create in 2009 with his stimulus and war supplemental along with spending 350 billion of the TARP? Intellectual honesty? Let's see if you have any?
Click to expand...
Asked and answered.
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
I did not ignore the details. Did you not read the details I provided you in post #897? Which of those details changed during the course of FY2009?


Asked and answered.
Click to expand...

Stimulus, the amount that Obama spent of TARP, and the War supplemental, all Obama spending. there was indeed a deficit in 2009. Obama blames all of it on Bush and you buy the rhetoric.
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
I did not ignore the details. Did you not read the details I provided you in post #897? Which of those details changed during the course of FY2009?


Asked and answered.
Click to expand...

You live in a different universe. I am done with this argument. You are on ignore
 
Conservative said:
No, what I pointed out is the data for both, apparently you missed the data and ignored how the data was created. Both Reagan and Bush policies were pro growth, pro individual, pro entreprenuer whereas Obama's policies are pro nanny state which apparently you are more comfortable as you are used to having someone else take care of you, unions. You want badly to buy percentage change not realizing that percentage change is dependent on the base, the lower the base number the higher the negative percentages. If you drop a million people off the unemployment roles what will that do to the percentage change? Until one looks at actual numbers that actually affect people then one lacks credibility using percentage
Click to expand...
again, put an (R) in front of the name, and all is good...a (D)? obviously a failure with bad results..:roll:
 
randel said:
again, put an (R) in front of the name, and all is good...a (D)? obviously a failure with bad results..:roll:
Click to expand...

You don't seem to understand the difference between the free market capitalism, pro growth, pro private sector economic policy vs. the big govt, nanny state, govt. responsibility economy promoted by Obama. It has nothing to do with a R or a D after their name. Give me a reason to vote FOR Obama? The economic numbers and policy don't support your position.
 
Conservative said:
You don't seem to understand the difference between the free market capitalism, pro growth, pro private sector economic policy vs. the big govt, nanny state, govt. responsibility economy promoted by Obama. It has nothing to do with a R or a D after their name. Give me a reason to vote FOR Obama? The economic numbers and policy don't support your position.
Click to expand...
please put me on ignore, as i would hate to see you lose another argument today.:mrgreen: with you, it all comes down to what political affiliation a person has...why be dishonest about it? sheik whipped your ass up and down this thread, and when he did, and when you couldnt refute what he was saying, and when he called you on 'projections', you tucked tail and started whining 'you are going on ignore'...game, set, and match to sheik yerbuti.
 
randel said:
please put me on ignore, as i would hate to see you lose another argument today.:mrgreen: with you, it all comes down to what political affiliation a person has...why be dishonest about it? sheik whipped your ass up and down this thread, and when he did, and when you couldnt refute what he was saying, and when he called you on 'projections', you tucked tail and started whining 'you are going on ignore'...game, set, and match to sheik yerbuti.
Click to expand...

You have yet to prove that just like you haven't proven that I have been defeated in any debate. What I find interesting with you is that you are perfectly content to have someone else take care of you, i.e. unions and thus seem incapable of doing anything yourself which is why you need Obama a lot more than the country. I welcome any evidence that Sheik has whipped anyone's ass on this or any other thread. You want so badly to believe what you are told because that is the way you are used to it, a union boss tells you something i.e. that your union dues don't go for political campaigns and you buy it. I see you can offer nothing when asked for a reason to vote FOR Obama. That speaks volumes. For you it is political ideology and who is going to support the unions so they can take care of you. That is quite telling.
 
Conservative said:
You have yet to prove that just like you haven't proven that I have been defeated in any debate. What I find interesting with you is that you are perfectly content to have someone else take care of you, i.e. unions and thus seem incapable of doing anything yourself which is why you need Obama a lot more than the country. I welcome any evidence that Sheik has whipped anyone's ass on this or any other thread. You want so badly to believe what you are told because that is the way you are used to it, a union boss tells you something i.e. that your union dues don't go for political campaigns and you buy it. I see you can offer nothing when asked for a reason to vote FOR Obama. That speaks volumes. For you it is political ideology and who is going to support the unions so they can take care of you. That is quite telling.
Click to expand...
:lamo sheik beat you like a rented mule, obviously did some serious damage, as you don't remember the beating...as for the rest...blah blah blah union, blah blah blah...yeah, just put me on ignore, i don't like to pile on when someone is down :)
 
randel said:
:lamo sheik beat you like a rented mule, obviously did some serious damage, as you don't remember the beating...as for the rest...blah blah blah union, blah blah blah...yeah, just put me on ignore, i don't like to pile on when someone is down :)
Click to expand...

Rah! Rah! Rah! Wonder how you look in a cheerleader outfit? Wonder if your unions put you down as a deduction. Did they give you permission to post on a message board? What does any of that have to do with the thread topic and how is distorting Bush's number relevant to the Obama results? Still waiting for an explanation as to why anyone should vote for Obama? He isn't Bush doesn't appear to be a good campaign tactic.
 
Conservative said:
Rah! Rah! Rah! Wonder how you look in a cheerleader outfit? Wonder if your unions put you down as a deduction. Did they give you permission to post on a message board? What does any of that have to do with the thread topic and how is distorting Bush's number relevant to the Obama results? Still waiting for an explanation as to why anyone should vote for Obama? He isn't Bush doesn't appear to be a good campaign tactic.
Click to expand...
cheerleading? nah, just telling you what is obvious to most folks...anyhoo, put me on ignore, you don't want to lose any more arguments today, wouldnt be good for your ego. just lookin' out for ya;)
 
Conservative said:
You don't seem to understand the difference between the free market capitalism, pro growth, pro private sector economic policy vs. the big govt, nanny state, govt. responsibility economy promoted by Obama.
Click to expand...
Pro-growth like we had under Bush? 6 million more unemployed than when he began 8 years earlier? Pro-growth like the unemployment rate going from 4.2% when he was sworn in and 7.8% when he crawled out? Or perhaps you mean like the GDP going from 11.2K to 13.2K, or 2.2% average per year, worst GDP growth for a president since Herbert Hoover? Maybe you mean pro-growth like we experienced with the Dow, which went from 10,588 to 8,280 (22% drop), NASDAQ from 2,770 to 1,521 (45% drop).

That's what you call, pro-growth. Oh wait, here's where the pro-growth was, I found it ... National debt went from $5.7T to $10.6T (86% growth).
 
Last edited:
tmdsu11040620110406095449.jpg
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
Pro-growth like we had under Bush? 6 million more unemployed than when he began 8 years earlier? Pro-growth like the unemployment rate going from 4.2% when he was sworn in and 7.8% when he crawled out? Or perhaps you mean like the GDP going from 11.2K to 13.2K, or 2.2% average per year, worst GDP growth for a president since Herbert Hoover? Maybe you mean pro-growth like we experienced with the Dow, which went from 10,588 to 8,280 (22% drop), NASDAQ from 2,770 to 1,521 (45% drop).

That's what you call, pro-growth. Oh wait, here's where the pro-growth was, I found it ... National debt went from $5.7T to $10.6T (86% growth).
Click to expand...

Ouch. That is not going to go over well.
 
Red Crow said:
:2usflag:Donald Trump for President!!!:2usflag::2dancing:
Click to expand...
Hey, did ya see Trump today make an ass of himself when he fell for the, "Obama's Grandmother said he was born in Kenya," nonsense?

First Trump posts his wrong birth certificate, now he reveals he's a full-blown birfer ... what's next? He's gonna pick Sarah Palin as his running mate?? :lamo
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
Hey, did ya see Trump today make an ass of himself when he fell for the, "Obama's Grandmother said he was born in Kenya," nonsense?

First Trump posts his wrong birth certificate, now he reveals he's a full-blown birfer ... what's next? He's gonna pick Sarah Palin as his running mate?? :lamo
Click to expand...

Schhhhhh! Let the Republicans think he can win.
 
pbrauer said:
Schhhhhh! Let the Republicans think he can win.
Click to expand...

With the Obama results anyone seems to be capable of winning. the problem is the Obama supporters continue to be brainwashed and feint over the rhetoric. Results don't seem to matter to a liberal.
 
Conservative said:
Rah! Rah! Rah! Wonder how you look in a cheerleader outfit? Wonder if your unions put you down as a deduction. Did they give you permission to post on a message board? What does any of that have to do with the thread topic and how is distorting Bush's number relevant to the Obama results? Still waiting for an explanation as to why anyone should vote for Obama? He isn't Bush doesn't appear to be a good campaign tactic.
Click to expand...
President Obama will not nominate corporatist (fascist) judges to SCOTUS.
 
pbrauer said:
President Obama will not nominate corporatist (fascist) judges to SCOTUS.
Click to expand...

Right, anyone that interpets the Constitution different than the leftwing is facist? Brilliant argument. Roberts and Alito represent the views of the majority in this country and that is the way it works.
 
pbrauer said:
Trump placed second in a poll yesterday, could be promising.
Click to expand...

With the Obama results, in a three candidate race Obama could finish third. Results warrant that kind of a finish although there are still a lot of brainwashed individuals. This country cannot afford four more years of Obama.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom