The Hall Of The Mountain Kings Tennessee United States
Member #73,902
April 28, 2009
15,378 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by Boney526 on Jul 31, 2011
This was a response to Rdgrns first post, about spending/Obama/Reid.
Agreed on most points.
But I'd lump John Boener in there, too, and the rest of the Republican Leadership.
As an economic-conservative and libertarian minded individual, I'm only registering (lol yeah, haven't sent in the form yet since I turned 18 there's been 2010 elections, and I feel bad for missing that) as a Republican is because of the Tea Party and to vote in Primaries.
I feel way worse for saying this, but I may even change my affiliation to Democrat (not that I think I'd ever vote Democrat) just to vote in their primaries assuming Obama gets defeated because I would try to get a sane non-spending crazy guy in office. IDK about whether their's an R or D next to their name, just that the R makes it more likely they can do simple arithmetic. We can't spend more that we take in, sure, but do you really think the mainstream Republican party is any better with that than the Ds?
Bush only set the course for Obama. Obama may be worse, but this unprecedented level of spending wouldn't have ran it's course the way it did without Bush. Expansions of Medicaid, DOE, etc. Easily makes a conservative weary of the Repubilcan party.
I would never support most of the domestic policies of the Bush Administration unless they were vis-a-vis the disaster that would have accompanied the alternatives - Gore or Kerry. Either one would have been almost as big a nightmare as Obama is proving to be. But I'm no fan of Bush and don't consider him a conservative anymore than McCain.
That primary crossover voting you mention is why TN has such wimpy Republican Representatives and Senators. The dems always crossover and vote for the wimpiest Republican primary candidate they can because they know that their dem candidate is gonna lose in the election. Dems love wimpy, fruity men as their leaders, so this is their way of assuring they get them no matter who wins the general election.
And you're right about the R's being no better than the D's in Congress. They always seem to want to keep the D's happy and compromise their principles more often than not to do so. The Tea Party group of freshmen is the only group that is standing up for doing what is right and sticking to their principles. We need to get rid of all the weasels in government but unfortunately there are a lot of gullible, lazy or stupid people who support them.
United States
Member #75,356
June 1, 2009
5,345 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by joker17 on Jul 31, 2011
I did some research on the net and found that Clinton paved the way for a surplus If everything was to stay the way it did, but the Nazi wannabe Bush tore it to pieces when he came into office.
Clinton didn't actually leave a surplus. It was a -prospective- surplus, meaning that the way we were going, if everything stayed the same, we'd have a balanced budget and a surplus in another year or so.
As soon as Bush came into office he couldn't wait to undo all of Clinton's work. He started by giving a big tax cut to rich people--the tax cut was in things like capital gains and inheritance tax, paid only by people above a certain economic level. He insisted that we could have a surplus and still give a tax break. Like EVERY Republican since Reagan, Bush ran as a strict budget hawk, but once in office he behaved as if deficits simply didn't matter. He was the first president in our history to insist on tax cuts during an expensive war. He doubled our entire pre-existing national debt (which was considered at emergency levels when he came to office!)
Yes, Clinton's plan didn't eliminate the pre-existing debt, it only balanced the budget at the time. More work would be required to pay down the debt. But at least it was in the right direction. Reagan and both Bushes grew the debt as if it just didn't matter. I find it just ASTONISHINGLY hypocritical for Republicans to criticize Obama's deficits.
Michigan United States
Member #81,738
October 28, 2009
128,225 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by rdgrnr on Jul 31, 2011
I would never support most of the domestic policies of the Bush Administration unless they were vis-a-vis the disaster that would have accompanied the alternatives - Gore or Kerry. Either one would have been almost as big a nightmare as Obama is proving to be. But I'm no fan of Bush and don't consider him a conservative anymore than McCain.
That primary crossover voting you mention is why TN has such wimpy Republican Representatives and Senators. The dems always crossover and vote for the wimpiest Republican primary candidate they can because they know that their dem candidate is gonna lose in the election. Dems love wimpy, fruity men as their leaders, so this is their way of assuring they get them no matter who wins the general election.
And you're right about the R's being no better than the D's in Congress. They always seem to want to keep the D's happy and compromise their principles more often than not to do so. The Tea Party group of freshmen is the only group that is standing up for doing what is right and sticking to their principles. We need to get rid of all the weasels in government but unfortunately there are a lot of gullible, lazy or stupid people who support them.
Good points Ridge, trust me any RINO who ran on the Tea Party ticket I believe, will be quickly weeded out, we've had enough.
Michigan United States
Member #81,738
October 28, 2009
128,225 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by joker17 on Jul 31, 2011
I did some research on the net and found that Clinton paved the way for a surplus If everything was to stay the way it did, but the Nazi wannabe Bush tore it to pieces when he came into office.
Clinton didn't actually leave a surplus. It was a -prospective- surplus, meaning that the way we were going, if everything stayed the same, we'd have a balanced budget and a surplus in another year or so.
As soon as Bush came into office he couldn't wait to undo all of Clinton's work. He started by giving a big tax cut to rich people--the tax cut was in things like capital gains and inheritance tax, paid only by people above a certain economic level. He insisted that we could have a surplus and still give a tax break. Like EVERY Republican since Reagan, Bush ran as a strict budget hawk, but once in office he behaved as if deficits simply didn't matter. He was the first president in our history to insist on tax cuts during an expensive war. He doubled our entire pre-existing national debt (which was considered at emergency levels when he came to office!)
Yes, Clinton's plan didn't eliminate the pre-existing debt, it only balanced the budget at the time. More work would be required to pay down the debt. But at least it was in the right direction. Reagan and both Bushes grew the debt as if it just didn't matter. I find it just ASTONISHINGLY hypocritical for Republicans to criticize Obama's deficits.
now is the time to say we have had enough, the current situation we are in is at a breaking point, I think Gasmeterguy said, if we raise the debt limit, we all might as well jump off a cliff.
COLUMBUS,GA. United States
Member #4,924
June 3, 2004
6,719 Posts
Offline
joker, if they dug deep enough, they would find the 9 trillion, the Fed doesn't talk about, they know where it went. Sully, you may right about jumping off a cliff, but not yet. We haven't hit bottom, yet! The first step in paying down the debt, should be to stop sending money to countries that don't give a <snip> about us.
This post has been automatically changed by the Lottery Post computer system to remove inappropriate content and/or spam.
United States
Member #868
November 19, 2002
513 Posts
Offline
Thank you for the truth..What is more disgusting that some would rather accept lies over the truth even when you present the truth to them...Even in the Old Testament of the Bible , God required all to pay them taxes including the "Rich"...
It is shameful disgrace that the "Rich" get off scott free while the weight is carried on the backs of the non rich people...weighing us down...
Once again thank you for the truth..Truth crushed to the ground will rise again.. President Obama and Senator Harry Reid will prevail in spite of the haters..
The Hall Of The Mountain Kings Tennessee United States
Member #73,902
April 28, 2009
15,378 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by joker17 on Jul 31, 2011
I did some research on the net and found that Clinton paved the way for a surplus If everything was to stay the way it did, but the Nazi wannabe Bush tore it to pieces when he came into office.
Clinton didn't actually leave a surplus. It was a -prospective- surplus, meaning that the way we were going, if everything stayed the same, we'd have a balanced budget and a surplus in another year or so.
As soon as Bush came into office he couldn't wait to undo all of Clinton's work. He started by giving a big tax cut to rich people--the tax cut was in things like capital gains and inheritance tax, paid only by people above a certain economic level. He insisted that we could have a surplus and still give a tax break. Like EVERY Republican since Reagan, Bush ran as a strict budget hawk, but once in office he behaved as if deficits simply didn't matter. He was the first president in our history to insist on tax cuts during an expensive war. He doubled our entire pre-existing national debt (which was considered at emergency levels when he came to office!)
Yes, Clinton's plan didn't eliminate the pre-existing debt, it only balanced the budget at the time. More work would be required to pay down the debt. But at least it was in the right direction. Reagan and both Bushes grew the debt as if it just didn't matter. I find it just ASTONISHINGLY hypocritical for Republicans to criticize Obama's deficits.
"I did some research on the net and found that Clinton paved the way for a surplus"
Yeah well, I got a news flash for ya Sparky. You can find anything you want to say and have it said anyway you want it said on the web as long as it's of a liberal bent. Because liberals are the most unmitigated prolific liars ever known. It's in their blood; it's necessary for their agenda; it's an integral part of their gameplan; it's in their genetic makeup. Liberalism could not exist without lies, no one with half a brain would accept it. It has to be hard being a liberal politician knowing you have to keep lying all the time.
But copy and paste to your heart's content from all the lying liberal sources out there you want.
Michigan United States
Member #81,738
October 28, 2009
128,225 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by Jammboogie on Jul 31, 2011
Thank you for the truth..What is more disgusting that some would rather accept lies over the truth even when you present the truth to them...Even in the Old Testament of the Bible , God required all to pay them taxes including the "Rich"...
It is shameful disgrace that the "Rich" get off scott free while the weight is carried on the backs of the non rich people...weighing us down...
Once again thank you for the truth..Truth crushed to the ground will rise again.. President Obama and Senator Harry Reid will prevail in spite of the haters..
Really? when Bush left office there were roughly 2 million americans on welfare, there are now 51 million americans on welfare. Do you really think the rich people did that? Do you think they want to support people in such a way.
at one point in the 90's that fastest growing business model, were women and minorities.
United States
Member #75,356
June 1, 2009
5,345 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by rdgrnr on Jul 31, 2011
"I did some research on the net and found that Clinton paved the way for a surplus"
Yeah well, I got a news flash for ya Sparky. You can find anything you want to say and have it said anyway you want it said on the web as long as it's of a liberal bent. Because liberals are the most unmitigated prolific liars ever known. It's in their blood; it's necessary for their agenda; it's an integral part of their gameplan; it's in their genetic makeup. Liberalism could not exist without lies, no one with half a brain would accept it. It has to be hard being a liberal politician knowing you have to keep lying all the time.
But copy and paste to your heart's content from all the lying liberal sources out there you want.
The truth remains unchanged.
" I find it just ASTONISHINGLY hypocritical..."
Yeah, that's cuz you're easily astonished.
And gullible.
Because liberals are the most unmitigated prolific liars ever known. It's in their blood; it's necessary for their agenda; it's an integral part of their gameplan; it's in their genetic
You're right Ridge. Republicans have never lied about anything.
United States
Member #75,356
June 1, 2009
5,345 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by sully16 on Jul 31, 2011
Really? when Bush left office there were roughly 2 million americans on welfare, there are now 51 million americans on welfare. Do you really think the rich people did that? Do you think they want to support people in such a way.
at one point in the 90's that fastest growing business model, were women and minorities.
What happened?
There are 51 million on welfare probably because they can't feed their families thanks to rich greedy, wheeling and dealing upper crust who aren't happy with a mansion and a yacht, they want two of each, so they gambled our money away in the housing market fiasco and lost. Now everything's Obama's fault....
The Hall Of The Mountain Kings Tennessee United States
Member #73,902
April 28, 2009
15,378 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by Jammboogie on Jul 31, 2011
Thank you for the truth..What is more disgusting that some would rather accept lies over the truth even when you present the truth to them...Even in the Old Testament of the Bible , God required all to pay them taxes including the "Rich"...
It is shameful disgrace that the "Rich" get off scott free while the weight is carried on the backs of the non rich people...weighing us down...
Once again thank you for the truth..Truth crushed to the ground will rise again.. President Obama and Senator Harry Reid will prevail in spite of the haters..
Ah, jeeeze.
I don't think a moron like you is worth the effort to straighten out.
"God required all to pay them taxes including the "Rich"..."
It is shameful disgrace that the "Rich" get off scott free while the weight is carried on the backs of the non rich people...weighing us down...
Who the hell do you think pays the overwhelming majority of the taxes in this country, you imbecile?
I swear I'm losing my patience for idiots.
It figures that this moron would think joker is telling the truth.
Michigan United States
Member #81,738
October 28, 2009
128,225 Posts
Offline
Quote: Originally posted by joker17 on Jul 31, 2011
There are 51 million on welfare probably because they can't feed their families thanks to rich greedy, wheeling and dealing upper crust who aren't happy with a mansion and a yacht, they want two of each, so they gambled our money away in the housing market fiasco and lost. Now everything's Obama's fault....
Joker, Fannie and Freddie are run by the Government , they are directly responsible for HUD and the sub-prime lending. They are responsible for the housing crash.