Budget Deficit. 9 trillion. How can you defend this?

[radamanthys]

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2009/08/21/us/politics/AP-US-Obama-Budget.html

9 Trillion dollars. The entire debt is 12 trillion. It's almost doubling the debt.

Why are we not working to fix this?

[Androidpk]

You worry too much. China will fix it.

[radamanthys]

You worry too much. China will fix it.

Some people say the glass is half full.
Others say half-empty.

I say it's evaporating. And the glass is too big.

[Warriorbird]

Exaggerated figures + it only becoming an issue when heavily astroturfed and a Democrat is President while the Republicans attempt to retake Congress.

Pelosi and Reid are screwing the pooch on an epic level... so quality plan. Nice one guys.

[radamanthys]

Exaggerated figures + it only becoming an issue when heavily astroturfed and a Democrat is President while the Republicans attempt to retake Congress.

Pelosi and Reid are screwing the pooch on an epic level... so quality plan. Nice one guys.

They're not exaggerated. And it's been an issue for a long time. I think the budget has been a talking point just about forever.

The whole 'astroturf' concept just sounds petty. Sorry, but it's partisan pettiness on the Bill O'Reilly level.

Screwed the pooch? The pooch has a size 47 poop chute by now.


So it's denial then? That's a real number and they're just out to get you? That's the excuse? That's why it's ok to ignore it?

[Warriorbird]

If I can eventually become aware of how fucked MoveOn is... you can eventually become aware of the forces playing you. I thought you were that intelligent.

We're going to waste money.

Should it be on A. The US. B. Iran + a bunch of contracting firms that don't even pay taxes (they did back when Reagan was President at least)

What's your choice? Oh, right... you don't like other people getting money.

You want the parents to take care of every special ed kid in America. See how that one plays in the real world.

http://www2.dailyprogress.com/cdp/news/local/local_govtpolitics/article/letters_sent_to_perriello_called_fakes._area_advoc ates_names_forged_by_d.c./43439/

[radamanthys]

If I can eventually become aware of how fucked MoveOn is... you can eventually become aware of the forces playing you. I thought you were that intelligent.

We're going to waste money.

Should it be on A. The US. B. Iran + a bunch of contracting firms that don't even pay taxes (they did back when Reagan was President at least)

What's your choice? Oh, right... you don't like other people getting money.

You want the parents to take care of every special ed kid in America. See how that one plays in the real world.

Nonono, I don't think the Federal government's providence is special ed. That's up to the states. And before that, the parents. Only if the parents can't afford it. NYS OMR-DD centers are actually pretty good neighbors. That was my argument. Big difference.

What forces are playing me? I'm curious.

We shouldn't be wasting money. Not with deficits and debts so insanely high. Not on Obamacare, not on blackwater, not on Luxury Jets, not on special ed, not on statues, not on helicopters, not on Ira*, not on 1000 days of Camp David excursions. One only should spend money if they have it. If we had a surplus and little debt, then I think we could argue where to spend the money- whether social programs and the like should be enacted. We don't.

You're right. I don't like people getting money when we don't have any. Not when it comes to mortgaging our future with unpayable coupons.

9 trillion. The current debt is 12 trillion. That's really really bad. Is idealistic altruism worth bankrupting our future, destroying our potential for prosperity, and eliminating any growth in enterprise?

If you think that government is always gonna waste money, then why advocate giving them more power? Why put everything into wasteful hands?

[radamanthys]

http://forum.gsplayers.com/images/reputation/reputation_neg.gif Budget Deficit. 9... (http://forum.gsplayers.com/showthread.php?p=988682#post988682) 08-21-2009 10:56 PM O'Reilly isn't partisan enough to be singled out you asshole.

Sorry if I'm not up on who democrats hate this week. Should I have said Rush?

[Kuyuk]

I'd like to see the breakdown of the 12 million and who we owe it to, and more importantly, WHY we owe them.


For example, How much money are we pumping into Iraq to rebuild it while we're at war with them?

If we owe 12 trillion to different countries for products, aid, taxes, etc that is one thing. But if we owe 12 trillion to different countries for "we're sorry we are at war with you," or other reasons, then why on earth would we repay it?

Other than being good people, of course :)

K.

[radamanthys]

I'd like to see the breakdown of the 12 million and who we owe it to, and more importantly, WHY we owe them.


For example, How much money are we pumping into Iraq to rebuild it while we're at war with them?

If we owe 12 trillion to different countries for products, aid, taxes, etc that is one thing. But if we owe 12 trillion to different countries for "we're sorry we are at war with you," or other reasons, then why on earth would we repay it?

Other than being good people, of course :)

K.

http://www.gpoaccess.gov/USbudget/fy10/pdf/budget/summary.pdf

Budget summary. It's a good read. Not much action, but plenty of exposition.

[Parkbandit]

WB only worries about spending when there is a Republican as President.

[Gan]

I bet Tsa'ah could defend it...

[Kuyuk]

From that pdf, corporations dont pay enough taxes.


K.

[Latrinsorm]

One only should spend money if they have it.Unless one is the government and there is an economic recession. Extravagant spending is what gets us out of recessions: it worked for FDR, it worked for Reagan, and it's working for Obama.

The better solution is to not get into great depressions in the first place, of course, but if there's anything history teaches us it's that people don't give a shit about history. I ask you: what's more hated than the damn yellow pie piece in Trivial Pursuit?

Finally, and I'm no economist, but according to the data you linked to the deficit is going to get back to around 3% of the GDP in a few years. Isn't that a more sensible measure than the raw figure?

[Parkbandit]

From that pdf, corporations dont pay enough taxes.


K.

Yea.. we only have the 2nd highest corporate tax on the planet.. we should strive to be #1!

[radamanthys]

Unless one is the government and there is an economic recession. Extravagant spending is what gets us out of recessions: it worked for FDR, it worked for Reagan, and it's working for Obama.

The better solution is to not get into great depressions in the first place, of course, but if there's anything history teaches us it's that people don't give a shit about history. I ask you: what's more hated than the damn yellow pie piece in Trivial Pursuit?

Finally, and I'm no economist, but according to the data you linked to the deficit is going to get back to around 3% of the GDP in a few years. Isn't that a more sensible measure than the raw figure?

At the time of this writing, only three of the appropriations bills for 2009 had been enacted; therefore, references to 2009 spending in the text and tables reflect approximate estimates of final likely appropriations action that set total discretionary funding at the level assumed to conform to the total level for appropriations in the Concurrent resolution on the Budget for 2009. Adjustments are also made to include the costs of the just-enacted American recovery and reinvestment Act of 2009.

This doesn't include Obama's healthcare plans. I think the budget came out in March.

This budget doesn't include any new spending. It'll get worse before it'll get better.

Debt doesn't disappear. Interest doesn't, either.

There's no proof that the Obama stimulus accomplished what it was meant to. The only observable stimulus I've seen was Cash for Clunkers, and who knows when the dealers will be paid?


Kuyuk, the solution to deficits isn't just soaking people more, it's lowering spending. If you were under a crippling amount of debt, would you bother your boss daily for a raise, or would you cancel HBO?

[Warriorbird]

WB only worries about spending when there is a Republican as President.

You totally care when Republicans are! My point was towards who's framing the issue more than any individual's ideals.

I've just reached the point where I've concluded both are going to waste money. Let me know when you get there.

[radamanthys]

You totally care when Republicans are! My point was towards who's framing the issue more than any individual's ideals.

I've just reached the point where I've concluded both are going to waste money. Let me know when you get there.

People said the same about racism. Hell, look what Wiberforce had to go through in Britain to get rid of slavery! It can be done. People's minds can be changed. It takes time and energy.

Don't resign. Stand up for it. It's important!

[Warriorbird]

Well... here's the thing. How exactly do you get around Congress? The upshot of the current 'spending is evil' campaign will likely be the Republicans booting the Democrats from control of Congress.

This will result in gridlock... and nothing being done.

Now I think Obama has a 50/50 shot on term two. He can win by then claiming, "The evil Republicans took control and stopped my CHANGE!"

Now if you get your happy result of a Republican Congress and a Republican president again?

What'll happen? More spending. You don't want to admit it... but that's how Congress works.

Obama's got you all astir now.... but what happened the last time a Republican Congress took control? They outspent the previous Democrats.

Until some magic solution to this problem emerges we're going to go through periods of gridlock followed by periods of epic spending. The general trend will be a rise.

[Skeeter]

I do think China buying up all our debt can't be good in the long run.

[Warriorbird]

I agree. As we're in this gridlock/spend cycle... China and India are winning the resource/economics war... the one we should actually be paying attention to.

[radamanthys]

I agree. As we're in this gridlock/spend cycle... China and India are winning the resource/economics war... the one we should actually be paying attention to.

Exactly!

As we move manufacturing offshore, we lose competitive advantage. We lose the efficiency that comes with experience curves, and we lose the benefits of economies of scale.

Asian markets are expanding faster than a 15 year old with a bottle of viagra at a whorehouse.

Unfortunately, under this world system, prosperity lies in beating everyone else. In order to get rich, other people can't. I'd rather America be rich than China. It's not ethnocentrism, it's enlightened self-interest.


Well... here's the thing. How exactly do you get around Congress? The upshot of the current 'spending is evil' campaign will likely be the Republicans booting the Democrats from control of Congress.

This will result in gridlock... and nothing being done.

Now I think Obama has a 50/50 shot on term two. He can win by then claiming, "The evil Republicans took control and stopped my CHANGE!"

Now if you get your happy result of a Republican Congress and a Republican president again?

What'll happen? More spending. You don't want to admit it... but that's how Congress works.

Obama's got you all astir now.... but what happened the last time a Republican Congress took control? They outspent the previous Democrats.

Until some magic solution to this problem emerges we're going to go through periods of gridlock followed by periods of epic spending. The general trend will be a rise.

I was in High School when Bush came into power. I couldn't vote.

I'm more than admitting that that's how congress works! I'm saying that something needs to change. We control who sits in congress. You and me. Dems aren't doing it. Many Republicans aren't either (though there's at least one). Lets get people in power who will say, "hey, let's pay off this debt!"

I don't want another Bush Republican, either. That was bad news, as well.


We're the magic solution. Our vote. Getting people riled up. Enacting change. It can be done. It should be done. Shit, it sorta was done (to the wrong ends, though). I'd go so far to say that it has to be done, in order to prosper. I just want a decent future- to be able to live here, and have the chance to live well.

We just have to convince people to live for themselves. Perhaps you're right that it'd be impossible to do that, but I don't think so. That mentality isn't too firmly entrenched... yet.

[Methais]

They should take that $12 trillion and make the world's largest cake.

One of you number crunchers should go to the grocery store, price cake supplies, adjust the price for bulk purchase and figure out exactly how big a $12 trillion cake would be.

This thread will be happy after.

[Warriorbird]

Sadly...

http://imvu.regnarts.com/news/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/01072008-the-cake-is-a-lie.jpg

I'd love to see the numbers too.

[radamanthys]

They should take that $12 trillion and make the world's largest cake.

One of you number crunchers should go to the grocery store, price cake supplies, adjust the price for bulk purchase and figure out exactly how big a $12 trillion cake would be.

This thread will be happy after.

30lbs of white flour would cost 60 bucks. So a cake worth 12 trillion would weigh well over 6 billion pounds.

[Methais]

30lbs of white flour would cost 60 bucks. So a cake worth 12 trillion would weigh well over 6 billion pounds.

But what about the frosting and other ingredients? :cake:

[radamanthys]

But what about the frosting and other ingredients? :cake:

Fine, then!

Spreadsheet time. Give me a couple minutes to do the calculations.

Edit: This is taking a long time.

Edit: It's really big, whatever it is.

[Latrinsorm]

This doesn't include Obama's healthcare plans. I think the budget came out in March.

This budget doesn't include any new spending. It'll get worse before it'll get better.

Debt doesn't disappear. Interest doesn't, either.

There's no proof that the Obama stimulus accomplished what it was meant to. The only observable stimulus I've seen was Cash for Clunkers, and who knows when the dealers will be paid?I'm willing to agree to all those points for the sake of argument: do they matter? (Of course they matter insofar as numbers are not imaginary, but stick with me here.) The government can't sit on its hands a la Harding and Carter. It has never worked, it will never work.

I guess what I'm saying is take an ultra-macro-scale view. So much of economics is psychology and sociology rather than calculus and arithmetic, things that make no sense for the latter ($X trillion, TRILLION ffs!) can sometimes make perfect sense for the former.

.

As for the cake: I will begin by assuming the cake is a perfect sphere...

[kookiegod]

On the other hand, being a conservative Republican (for the sake of transparency), I think the economy IS turning the corner and some of what Obama is spending on has to be a reason for it.

I've made 13 percent this year on my investments, recovered nearly $300,000. I'm still down from the losses last year, but who isn't. Even my 401k grew in the last quarter by $5000.

The stock market is ticking up, passed 9500 for the first time since November 2008 today, keep this up we'll be back at 10000 before the end of the summer. 14000 is a bit away for sure, but if we keep making incremental gains I'll be happy.

Bernake thinks we've turned the corner, if we can really get banks lending again (heck, I'm doing a private lending agreement with some friends @ 10 percent I might add cause they aren't) and if the price of oil doesn't go up too much (this needs to stablize) I think we're doing ok.

Yes , the deficit scares me for inflationary fear, and yes, Obamacare REALLY scares me, but I think some of what he's doing is working.

~Paul

[Geshron]

http://forum.gsplayers.com/images/reputation/reputation_neg.gif Budget Deficit. 9... (http://forum.gsplayers.com/showthread.php?p=988682#post988682) 08-21-2009 10:56 PM O'Reilly isn't partisan enough to be singled out you asshole.

Sorry if I'm not up on who democrats hate this week. Should I have said Rush?

Most Partisan human being ever, you are a fucking dipshit if you think otherwise.

[Methais]

As for the cake: I will begin by assuming the cake is a perfect sphere...

It will be shaped like a proper cake.

Like this:
http://www.virtuousgeek.org/recipes/perfect_chocolate_cake.jpg

Or this:
http://img.timeinc.net/recipes/i/recipes/sl/02/11/chocolate-cake-sl-366569-l.jpg

And it will be in a big pool of chocolate sauce like this:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8a/Chocolate_cake_-_be_Ehud_Kenan.jpg/800px-Chocolate_cake_-_be_Ehud_Kenan.jpg

And it will make you want to do this:
http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a162/DoyleHargraves/FatSlobEatingPie.jpg

[Valthissa]

30lbs of white flour would cost 60 bucks. So a cake worth 12 trillion would weigh well over 6 billion pounds.

at 2$/lb it would take 6 trillion pounds, right?

For comparison some of the heaviest man made objects are Hoover Dam and the Great Pyramid, both of which come in around 13 billion pounds.

C/Valth

[Parkbandit]

You totally care when Republicans are! My point was towards who's framing the issue more than any individual's ideals.

I've just reached the point where I've concluded both are going to waste money. Let me know when you get there.

Once again WB, look back at my political posts throughout the Bush Administration. I've always have stated that one of my biggest issues with his administration was that he spent like he was a lunatic Liberal. He was never a conservative.. just a Progressive-Lite.

So my stance has always been consistent.. where yours has fluctuated with who is in office at the time. Unlike you, I don't allow a political party determine my own personal values.

[Hulkein]

Most Partisan human being ever, you are a fucking dipshit if you think otherwise.

There is no possible way O'Reilly is more partisan than Hannity or Rush.

[Kuyuk]

http://zfacts.com/metaPage/lib/Stoft-2004-debt-presidents.gif


graph is from 2005 sources.

[Parkbandit]

On the other hand, being a conservative Republican (for the sake of transparency), I think the economy IS turning the corner and some of what Obama is spending on has to be a reason for it.

I've made 13 percent this year on my investments, recovered nearly $300,000. I'm still down from the losses last year, but who isn't. Even my 401k grew in the last quarter by $5000.

The stock market is ticking up, passed 9500 for the first time since November 2008 today, keep this up we'll be back at 10000 before the end of the summer. 14000 is a bit away for sure, but if we keep making incremental gains I'll be happy.

Bernake thinks we've turned the corner, if we can really get banks lending again (heck, I'm doing a private lending agreement with some friends @ 10 percent I might add cause they aren't) and if the price of oil doesn't go up too much (this needs to stablize) I think we're doing ok.

Yes , the deficit scares me for inflationary fear, and yes, Obamacare REALLY scares me, but I think some of what he's doing is working.

~Paul

The economy is turning around DESPITE what Obama is doing. Had Bush and Obama let the free market weed out the shitty companies instead of bailing them out, we would be in a better place than we are today.. AND 2 TRILLION dollars less in debt.

Think about it.. 800 billion Bush pissed away.. credit is still tight. Obama, not wanting to be outdone, spent another 800 BILLION on liberal pet projects.. and most of that money isn't even in the economy yet.

Growing government isn't the answer to an economic crisis.

[Parkbandit]

Most Partisan human being ever, you are a fucking dipshit if you think otherwise.

http://venturebeat.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/hyperbole.png

You are an idiot.

[Hulkein]

http://venturebeat.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/hyperbole.png

You are an idiot.

That's probably a better response for that dope than even bothering pointing out other guys who are "more partisan." Still, there is no way O'Reilly takes that award.

[Parkbandit]

That's probably a better response for that dope than even bothering pointing out other guys who are "more partisan." Still, there is no way O'Reilly takes that award.

Obviously Geshron is about 6 months behind on his moveon.org reading. He should be focusing his hate on Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh and Glen Beck. Hating on Bill was so last year.

[TheEschaton]

The better solution is to not get into great depressions in the first place, of course, but if there's anything history teaches us it's that people don't give a shit about history. I ask you: what's more hated than the damn yellow pie piece in Trivial Pursuit?


The pink questions in the original Genus edition Trivial Pursuit, DUH.

The Arts and Entertainment from that edition are all from about 1930s-1950s. Probably cause the edition was made in the 70s. But it's the only authentic edition, imo.

[Gan]

I reviled the pink questions in the original version of TP.

[Methais]

Most Partisan human being ever, you are a fucking dipshit if you think otherwise.

http://exiledonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/oreillymad3.jpg

[Latrinsorm]

Re: Mr. O'Reilly, he at least seems to get the humor of his position at times. In a way I think this is evidence that he actually is one of the most partisan people. People like Beck etc. are nutjobs, it's not clear they're coherent enough to tie their own shoes. O'Reilly seems more like an actual person, exaggerated though he may be.

[kookiegod]

The economy is turning around DESPITE what Obama is doing. Had Bush and Obama let the free market weed out the shitty companies instead of bailing them out, we would be in a better place than we are today.. AND 2 TRILLION dollars less in debt.

Think about it.. 800 billion Bush pissed away.. credit is still tight. Obama, not wanting to be outdone, spent another 800 BILLION on liberal pet projects.. and most of that money isn't even in the economy yet.

Growing government isn't the answer to an economic crisis.

Not gonna disagree at all PB...

I only gave him credit for a few things. As I said, my conservative credentials are in order.

I'm gonna slightly disagree, while letting GM fail was probably the right thing to do, I was more worried about the 100k jobs down the supply chain.

I'm just glad whatever is working, is working. America is too great to stay down long.

~Paul

[Parkbandit]

I'm gonna slightly disagree, while letting GM fail was probably the right thing to do, I was more worried about the 100k jobs down the supply chain.

I'm just glad whatever is working, is working. America is too great to stay down long.

~Paul

If GM didn't get the bailout, what would they have done.. gone through bankruptcy and shed tons of legacy and union weight.

Since GM was bailed out.. it's given most of it's value to the unions THEN went through bankruptcy, only keeping much of the shit that sank it.

GM is in a worst position today than it would have been if it went through bankruptcy on it's own.

I wouldn't keep any GM stock if it was given to me with a pretty bowtie wrapped around it.

[Ravenstorm]

I thought deficits didn't matter? Didn't Saint Reagan prove that to the Republican's satisfaction? When did it suddenly become an issue? Oh, right. When we got a black Democratic president.

Mind you, I'm not defending Obama. I've got tons of problems with him and how he's going about things. I'm beginning to think I should have voted for Hillary. But the hypocrisy is enough to make one choke. (And I don't necessarily mean the hypocrisy of those here. If you want to claim you always cared about deficits, I'll take you at your word but they were never a Republican concern for 20+ years.)

[Keller]

Yea.. we only have the 2nd highest corporate tax on the planet.. we should strive to be #1!

I'd be happy to reduce the corporate tax rate and close international loopholes.

Corporations would pay MORE taxes, and people like you couldn't make retarded claims.

[Hulkein]

When did it suddenly become an issue? Oh, right. When we got a black Democratic president.

Fail.

[Parkbandit]

I thought deficits didn't matter? Didn't Saint Reagan prove that to the Republican's satisfaction? When did it suddenly become an issue? Oh, right. When we got a black Democratic president.

Mind you, I'm not defending Obama. I've got tons of problems with him and how he's going about things. I'm beginning to think I should have voted for Hillary. But the hypocrisy is enough to make one choke. (And I don't necessarily mean the hypocrisy of those here. If you want to claim you always cared about deficits, I'll take you at your word but they were never a Republican concern for 20+ years.)

That must be the case.. we're all racists because we dislike deficit spending.

Grats on having the dumbest post of the day.

[Parkbandit]

I'd be happy to reduce the corporate tax rate and close international loopholes.

Corporations would pay MORE taxes, and people like you couldn't make retarded claims.

Close away imo.. I'm all for closing loopholes in the tax code. Hell, throw out our current tax code and simplify it. Better yet, enact a Fair Tax system and I'll be happy.

[radamanthys]

Close away imo.. I'm all for closing loopholes in the tax code. Hell, throw out our current tax code and simplify it. Better yet, enact a Fair Tax system and I'll be happy.

We'd have to repeal the 16th first. We have a better chance of building an efficient cold fusion power plant on mars.

[kookiegod]

If GM didn't get the bailout, what would they have done.. gone through bankruptcy and shed tons of legacy and union weight.

Since GM was bailed out.. it's given most of it's value to the unions THEN went through bankruptcy, only keeping much of the shit that sank it.

GM is in a worst position today than it would have been if it went through bankruptcy on it's own.

I wouldn't keep any GM stock if it was given to me with a pretty bowtie wrapped around it.

PB, dun get me wrong, but two issues here...

Legacy issues - i.e. the people who worked for 20-30 years at GM and earned those pensions and medical benefits. Really cannot do revisionist history and simply say, 'my bad, we're just taking them away now'. Can you revise the terms? Have them pay part of the costs, cut down the benefits, sure, but you really can't take it all away.

I guess if the company went under they'd lose it anyways, but as I said, I worry about the supply chain, the small shop with 50 guys who make brake pads, the catering company who runs the commissary, etc. That's a lot of jobs at risk.

Unions? Whole other ball of wax. ALL unions have run their course, from the UAW to the Major League Players Association. Tired of em. They were useful once when owners ran kids into the ground using meat saws and were cutting off their hands after 16 hour shifts and such, but with such improvements in the law, OSHA, USDA, and whatever hundreds of regulatory agencies out there, let alone discrimination and sexual harrassment laws, is just unneeded.

The UAW should be thankfull their folks still have jobs and say, ok, we're gonna take a 50 percent pay cut for the next 3 years, and when things are back to good, we'll go back to normal pay (no backpay!).

That would be a good start...

~Paul

[kookiegod]

Close away imo.. I'm all for closing loopholes in the tax code. Hell, throw out our current tax code and simplify it. Better yet, enact a Fair Tax system and I'll be happy.

God, I'm all for a flat tax. Huckabee had that one right.

Pay for what you use.

Everyone pays, no loopholes, no deductions, no tax returns, no tax code, make it simple. You buy something, you pay tax. Period.

~Paul

[Ravenstorm]

That must be the case.. we're all racists because we dislike deficit spending.

Wow, clever way of avoiding the question.

And I'm sorry you don't like to admit it but there is a very vocal percentage of people who wouldn't have half the problem with Obama they do if he wasn't black. That doesn't include you, general you, unless you want it to. I'm not forcing anyone to put that shoe on for a fitting.

[Methais]

And I'm sorry you don't like to admit it but there is a very vocal percentage of people who wouldn't have half the problem with Obama they do if he wasn't black.

Like who? Care to name some?

[Parkbandit]

Wow, clever way of avoiding the question.

And I'm sorry you don't like to admit it but there is a very vocal percentage of people who wouldn't have half the problem with Obama they do if he wasn't black. That doesn't include you, general you, unless you want it to. I'm not forcing anyone to put that shoe on for a fitting.

Remember when you used to make intelligent posts in the political area?

Yea, neither do I.

To equate anyone having an issue with Obama's spending spree to OMG U R A RACIST is a retarded stretch that is typical ploy used by liberals to marginalize any discussion.

You forget that Obama was actually elected by a pretty large margin.. must be those racists forgot he was black for that one day.

[Ravenstorm]

To equate anyone having an issue with Obama's spending spree to OMG U R A RACIST is a retarded stretch that is typical ploy used by liberals to marginalize any discussion.

Which isn't even close to what I said. But hey, a conservative just shouting down opposition without addressing the issue? Gee, where'd I read about that recently.

Tell you what, never mind. Go back to... whatever it is you think you're doing here.

[Parkbandit]

Which isn't even close to what I said. But hey, a conservative just shouting down opposition without addressing the issue? Gee, where'd I read about that recently.

Tell you what, never mind. Go back to... whatever it is you think you're doing here.

Actually, it's exactly what you said.


I thought deficits didn't matter? Didn't Saint Reagan prove that to the Republican's satisfaction? When did it suddenly become an issue? Oh, right. When we got a black Democratic president.


Go ahead and explain what you meant by that. I read it as if you didn't have problems with deficit spending under Reagan, and do now, it's because you are a racist.

Tell you what, continue posting your stupidity.. I need the entertainment.

[Ravenstorm]

Actually, it's exactly what you said.


Here's also what I said:


And I'm sorry you don't like to admit it but there is a very vocal percentage of people who wouldn't have half the problem with Obama they do if he wasn't black. That doesn't include you, general you, unless you want it to. I'm not forcing anyone to put that shoe on for a fitting.

So if you want to include yourself under the racist category, go right ahead. I have no doubt at all that a sizable minority of the Republican base are bigots who are only as enraged as they because he's also black. Would anyone be calling for the death of Michelle Obama and her children if they and he were white? Hell no. But go ahead and lump yourself in with them if it gets you off.

If you want to actually address the issue, please explain why Saint Reagan is no longer right that "deficits don't matter". No, wait. Ad hominem attacks and posting images is so much easier. What a waste of time you are.

[Parkbandit]

Here's also what I said:

So if you want to include yourself under the racist category, go right ahead. I have no doubt at all that a sizable minority of the Republican base are bigots who are only as enraged as they because he's also black. Would anyone be calling for the death of Michelle Obama and her children if they and he were white? Hell no. But go ahead and lump yourself in with them if it gets you off.

If you want to actually address the issue, please explain why Saint Reagan is no longer right that "deficits don't matter". No, wait. Ad hominem attacks and posting images is so much easier. What a waste of time you are.

You are the queen of Ad Hominem attacks.. didn't you just call most people who disagree with Obama's deficit spending racists? Oh wait, NOW you are "only" saying a "sizable minority" are. Riiight. Nice backtrack. You have "no doubt"... thanks for that fantastic source.

And there are threats on every President. If memory serves, wasn't there a movie made of the assassination of George W Bush? I guess you never had a problem with that though, did you.

Unlike yourself though.. my stance on deficit spending has remained consistent. I don't give two shits what letter is behind the current President's name.

Here's the thing about Reagan though.. even though he spent like a crazy ass Liberal, he also did:

*On 8 of the 10 key economic variables examined, the American economy performed better during the Reagan years than during the pre- and post-Reagan years.

*Real median family income grew by $4,000 during the Reagan period after experiencing no growth in the pre-Reagan years; it experienced a loss of almost $1,500 in the post-Reagan years.

*Interest rates, inflation, and unemployment fell faster under Reagan than they did immediately before or after his presidency.

*The only economic variable that was worse in the Reagan period than in both the pre- and post-Reagan years was the savings rate, which fell rapidly in the 1980s.

*The productivity rate was higher in the pre-Reagan years but much lower in the post-Reagan years.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reaganomics

You should stick with posting under your ClydeR login ID.. at least we can all laugh with your stupidity.. it's better than laughing at your stupidity on Ravenstorm.

[radamanthys]

Here's also what I said:



So if you want to include yourself under the racist category, go right ahead. I have no doubt at all that a sizable minority of the Republican base are bigots who are only as enraged as they because he's also black. Would anyone be calling for the death of Michelle Obama and her children if they and he were white? Hell no. But go ahead and lump yourself in with them if it gets you off.

If you want to actually address the issue, please explain why Saint Reagan is no longer right that "deficits don't matter". No, wait. Ad hominem attacks and posting images is so much easier. What a waste of time you are.

I had a feeling you considered the Republican party racist by default. This proves it. It's petty and untrue. What does 'sizeable minority' even mean? 49%? There's a bevy of racists wandering around the country pissed off because there's a black guy in office, so they whine about the economy... right...

It would be like me saying, "You didn't vote for McCain because he's white. You're a racist because you hated bush- if Bush was black you (oh, not you, but the proverbial you) would have loved him."

It's petty, accusatory, and it doesn't make sense.

Neither does the accusation of ad hominem attack to you in this thread. You started it. You whipped out the race card with a veiled accusation to an entire party platform of systematic racism. You're the one, not PB. You are what you think PB is.

It's impossible to take you seriously any further after a post like that. The rest of your participation in this thread will be comprised of ad hominem attacks against you because of your initial comment. You're not gonna be taken seriously, nobody with a differing opinion will listen to your argument, and you'll continue to fuck up a thread that was generally civil before your involvement. Kudos.

I can't respect you after something like that. Shoo.

[Warriorbird]

even though he spent like a crazy ass Liberal

Classic. I'd been mostly bored with this thread, reading the alternate version over at the other Simu game's unofficial forum to stave off boredom.

To explain further... it makes an excellent counterpoint (not necessarily one that I agree to) to Rad's initial post.

[Parkbandit]

Classic. I'd been mostly bored with this thread, reading the alternate version over at the other Simu game's unofficial forum to stave off boredom.

Fantastic! Make sure you keep us updated!!

[Methais]

Would anyone be calling for the death of Michelle Obama and her children if they and he were white? Hell no. But go ahead and lump yourself in with them if it gets you off.

Who was calling for the death of Michelle Obama and her children?

Don't forget to answer my last question too.

[Parkbandit]

Who was calling for the death of Michelle Obama and her children?

Don't forget to answer my last question too.

Pretty sure I could find a blog where someone is... just like I could find a blog about someone wanting to kill Bush, Cheney, Rove, Limbaugh, Beck, O'Reilly, etc....

Difference is, Ravenstorm takes that one nutjob and uses that to then say "OMG, ALL REPUBLICANS WANT OBAMA DEAD!!" like an idiot. When called out for that, he'll change it to a "sizable minority of all Republicans want Obama to die".

[Ravenstorm]

Who was calling for the death of Michelle Obama and her children?

Don't forget to answer my last question too.

One of the many town hall whackos. He was holding a sign calling for Obama's death and "Michelle and her stupid kids". Death threats against presidents aren't uncommon, no but their children? If you want to assume it's coincidence because they're black, go ahead.

You can also google the various 'go back to Kenya' remarks. You won't find a single 'go back to Panama' directed to McCain. And do you need reminding of all the election idiots calling him a terrorist, a Muslim, etc? This is the base the GOP is embracing and riling up. Are they the entire Republican voters? No. But the ones who aren't should be ashamed and embarassed much like the Democrats ostracize the Lyndon Larouche whackos.

[Parkbandit]

One of the many town hall whackos. He was holding a sign calling for Obama's death and "Michelle and her stupid kids". Death threats against presidents aren't uncommon, no but their children? If you want to assume it's coincidence because they're black, go ahead.

So ONE deranged guy holds up a sign, and you paint an entire political party. Awesome.



You can also google the various 'go back to Kenya' remarks. You won't find a single 'go back to Panama' directed to McCain.

There's a difference between a Presidential candidate and a President. FYI: McCain never made it to President. If you want a valid comparison, google up death threats against George W Bush. Might also want to look at the movie and books that were made about his fantasy assassination.

http://www.lulu.com/items/volume_54/826000/826391/12/preview/320_826391.jpg

I guess that wouldn't work for you though.. since it doesn't support your nonsense. :(


And do you need reminding of all the election idiots calling him a terrorist, a Muslim, etc? This is the base the GOP is embracing and riling up. Are they the entire Republican voters? No. But the ones who aren't should be ashamed and embarassed much like the Democrats ostracize the Lyndon Larouche whackos.

No, but by your words, they are a "sizable minority" which still makes me laugh... especially since that was your fall back position.

[Hulkein]

Ravenstorm is redefining epic fail in this thread.

[Tsa`ah]

Ravenstorm is redefining epic fail in this thread.

That's highly debatable.

[Parkbandit]

That's highly debatable.

I agree. Tsa'ah hasn't has an opportunity to post his typical stupidity yet.

Way to be premature, Hulkein.

[Atlanteax]

http://zfacts.com/metaPage/lib/Stoft-2004-debt-presidents.gif
graph is from 2005 sources.

So if there's a 2009 or 2010 edition, Obama's will be 2x the size of Reagan's in that, with just one term?

[radamanthys]

So if there's a 2009 or 2010 edition, Obama's will be 2x the size of Reagan's in that, with just one term?

http://perotcharts.com/images/deficit/budgetdeficit15-640.png

I think this may be the third time I've posted this particular graph. Based off CBO reporting.

[Daniel]

So ONE deranged guy holds up a sign, and you paint an entire political party. Awesome.



.

Or you know, an entire birthers movement.

Whichever.

[radamanthys]

Or you know, an entire birthers movement.

Whichever.

How about 9/11 deniers? The ones who say bush did it? Do they represent liberals everywhere?

[Daniel]

How about 9/11 deniers? The ones who say bush did it? Do they represent liberals everywhere?

Care to throw up a few figures to suggest they represent even a sliver of the democratic party?

[radamanthys]

Care to throw up a few figures to suggest they represent even a sliver of the democratic party?

http://www.scrippsnews.com/911poll

first google link

[Parkbandit]

Care to throw up a few figures to suggest they represent even a sliver of the democratic party?

Democrats in America are evenly divided on the question of whether George W. Bush knew about the 9/11 terrorist attacks in advance. Thirty-five percent (35%) of Democrats believe he did know, 39% say he did not know, and 26% are not sure. Republicans reject that view and, by a 7-to-1 margin, ...

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/bush_administration/22_believe_bush_knew_about_9_11_attacks_in_advance

So... 35% said Bush knew about the 9-11 attacks.. and 26% weren't sure. Seems to me that 61% of Democrats might represent a tad more than "even a sliver of the democratic party"

[Parkbandit]

Or you know, an entire birthers movement.

Whichever.

I don't even know what your point here is to be honest... since one deranged guy holding up a sign that wants to see the entire Obama family dead has nothing to do with someone not believing that Obama was born in Hawaii.

[Latrinsorm]

Saying he knew about it isn't the same as saying he "did it".

[Daniel]

http://www.scrippsnews.com/911poll

first google link

1. not democrats, in fact casual link proposed has to do with anger over the Iraq war which at this time was at 77%, so unless you think democrats consist of 77% of the population then not so much.
2. loaded question, did they actively do something or did they kinda sorta let it happen? See next response


Democrats in America are evenly divided on the question of whether George W. Bush knew about the 9/11 terrorist attacks in advance. Thirty-five percent (35%) of Democrats believe he did know, 39% say he did not know, and 26% are not sure. Republicans reject that view and, by a 7-to-1 margin, ...

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/bush_administration/22_believe_bush_knew_about_9_11_attacks_in_advance

So... 35% said Bush knew about the 9-11 attacks.. and 26% weren't sure. Seems to me that 61% of Democrats might represent a tad more than "even a sliver of the democratic party"

It's been established that intel existed pointing to the attacks. It was even acknowledged when Bush created ODNI. Not the same thing as beliving they actually did it.


I don't even know what your point here is to be honest... since one deranged guy holding up a sign that wants to see the entire Obama family dead has nothing to do with someone not believing that Obama was born in Hawaii.

The point is that there are plenty of people who are being stupid, not just one looney with a sign.

[Parkbandit]

Saying he knew about it isn't the same as saying he "did it".

Actually, since the #1 job of the President is to safeguard the USA, I would say it is.

If Bush actually knew that planes would be flown into the WTC on 9-11-01 and did nothing about it would make him culpable.

[Parkbandit]

The point is that there are plenty of people who are being stupid, not just one looney with a sign.

Do you have any polling data that show a "sizable minority" of Republicans want Obama and his family dead?

We weren't talking about people being stupid.. we were talking about Ravenstorm using one incident of one idiot with one sign, and painting an entire political party as racist because of it.

[Keller]

Do you have any polling data that show a "sizable minority" of Republicans want Obama and his family dead?

We weren't talking about people being stupid.. we were talking about Ravenstorm using one incident of one idiot with one sign, and painting an entire political party as racist because of it.

I'm sorry to interrupt your dinner hour, sir, but I have an important question: Would you like to see the President and his family dead?


Come on.

Be serious, now.

[radamanthys]

I'm sorry to interrupt your dinner hour, sir, but I have an important question: Would you like to see the President and his family dead?


Come on.

Be serious, now.

I don't want them dead! I called shotgun on the older daughter!

[radamanthys]

http://forum.gsplayers.com/images/reputation/reputation_neg.gif Budget Deficit. 9... (http://forum.gsplayers.com/showthread.php?p=989859#post989859) 08-24-2009 09:21 PM Classy!

I'd say. That's part of the allure.

[Tsa`ah]

Actually, since the #1 job of the President is to safeguard the USA, I would say it is.

If Bush actually knew that planes would be flown into the WTC on 9-11-01 and did nothing about it would make him culpable.

Knowing and doing nothing is not the same as having intelligence suggesting it will happen and not really doing anything about it.

Unfortunately for us, being inept isn't actually criminal.

[CrystalTears]

Knowing and doing nothing is not the same as having intelligence suggesting it will happen and not really doing anything about it.

Unfortunately for us, being inept isn't actually criminal.
I believe several presidents prior to Bush received attack threats and didn't do anything about it. What are they supposed to, respond to all threats as though they were real? Who is to know which are just bluffs and which aren't? How much presidential time do you want them to spend on threats that might come to fruition?

[Tsa`ah]

I believe several presidents prior to Bush received attack threats and didn't do anything about it. What are they supposed to, respond to all threats as though they were real? Who is to know which are just bluffs and which aren't? How much presidential time do you want them to spend on threats that might come to fruition?

Went right over your head didn't it.

[Gan]

MY GOD WHO PASSED OUT THE BOX OF TIN FOIL HATS!!!

[CrystalTears]

Went right over your head didn't it.
So what was your point? Intelligence has mentioned threats in the past and they were dismissed. Or maybe something was done and we don't know to what extent. Unless you're sitting in the presidential seat, we're taking guesses based on nothing.

[Tsa`ah]

So what was your point? Intelligence has mentioned threats in the past and they were dismissed. Or maybe something was done and we don't know to what extent. Unless you're sitting in the presidential seat, we're taking guesses based on nothing.

And still over your head.

I made no inference to fault outside of Dubya being inept. The statement was in response to PB saying if he "knew" and did nothing.

If you want to run with "past presidents" and "past intelligence" .... there are only two cases since WWII in US history where a foreign entity has attacked us on our door step. We really can rehash all of the details of intelligence that are very public.

[Daniel]

So what was your point? Intelligence has mentioned threats in the past and they were dismissed. Or maybe something was done and we don't know to what extent. Unless you're sitting in the presidential seat, we're taking guesses based on nothing.

...lol


The point being discussed is whether or not a majority of democrats believed outlandish shit about Bush. The point was made about 9\11 denier to which PB tried to equate with people who thought Bush knew something prior to 9/11.

[CrystalTears]

Meh. You're still putting blame on Bush when other presidents could have done something to prevent it. I don't believe that the attack was soley on Bush's shoulders and I don't think he could have done anything to stop it. :shrug:

[Daniel]

Meh. You're still putting blame on Bush when other presidents could have done something to prevent it. I don't believe that the attack was soley on Bush's shoulders and I don't think he could have done anything to stop it. :shrug:

I'm not blaming anyone for anyone in this thread. Jesus christ you all are sensitive.

[CrystalTears]

I was just making a point that the difference between knowing and not doing anything and intelligence telling you and not doing anything is there yet slight, yet you guys chose to jump me for who I am rather than what I'm saying, so I give up. Hell I'm pretty sure some of you guys have mentioned that intelligence can't be trusted for correct information yet you blame Bush for it. But whatever. You guys are the sensitive ones taking what PB said so defensively.

[Tsa`ah]

I was just making a point that the difference between knowing and not doing anything and intelligence telling you and not doing anything is there yet slight,

Which had nothing to do with the conversation. But if you want to go there ... when your counter terrorism coordinator (Clarke)and then your CIA director (Tenet) tell you something is going to go down ... intelligence indicates something big and you ignore it but the only defense you can offer is "We put in the same effort Clinton did" ... then something is fucking wrong.

Don't downplay the intel and don't suggest that a little over 3,000 people would have died anyway because you don't think anything could have been done to stop it. Taking no action is taking no action ... which is why I said being inept isn't a crime.

But as I said ... that's not what we were discussing.


yet you guys chose to jump me for who I am rather than what I'm saying, so I give up. Hell I'm pretty sure some of you guys have mentioned that intelligence can't be trusted for correct information yet you blame Bush for it. But whatever. You guys are the sensitive ones taking what PB said so defensively.

This coming from you, of all people, who has done more than her fair share of trolling and tossing around bullshit snipes at the poster and adding exactly jack shit to the topic being discussed. Get the fuck over yourself.

[CrystalTears]

This coming from you, of all people, who has done more than her fair share of trolling and tossing around bullshit snipes at the poster and adding exactly jack shit to the topic being discussed. Get the fuck over yourself.Takes one to know one, I suppose.

[Tsa`ah]

Oh ya ... you so got me.

[Parkbandit]

...lol


The point being discussed is whether or not a majority of democrats believed outlandish shit about Bush. The point was made about 9\11 denier to which PB tried to equate with people who thought Bush knew something prior to 9/11.


Actually, the point was that you didn't think that the 9-11ers was representative of Democrats... not even a sliver.

I think you've been corrected sufficiently. If you do it again though, I'll have to get out the rolled up newspaper.

[Parkbandit]

This coming from you, of all people, who has done more than her fair share of trolling and tossing around bullshit snipes at the poster and adding exactly jack shit to the topic being discussed. Get the fuck over yourself.

CODE RED HYPOCRITE ALERT!!!

PS - Please don't "hump my leg" or "hang from my nuts" in response to this.

[Daniel]

I was just making a point that the difference between knowing and not doing anything and intelligence telling you and not doing anything is there yet slight, yet you guys chose to jump me for who I am rather than what I'm saying, so I give up. Hell I'm pretty sure some of you guys have mentioned that intelligence can't be trusted for correct information yet you blame Bush for it. But whatever. You guys are the sensitive ones taking what PB said so defensively.

It's a good thing that was NOT WHAT THE FUCK WE WERE TALKING ABOUT.

[Daniel]

Actually, the point was that you didn't think that the 9-11ers was representative of Democrats... not even a sliver.

I think you've been corrected sufficiently. If you do it again though, I'll have to get out the rolled up newspaper.

rriiiight

[CrystalTears]

It's a good thing that was NOT WHAT THE FUCK WE WERE TALKING ABOUT.
It was a tangent mentioned IN THIS THREAD that I wanted to elaborate on. FUCKING GET OVER YOURSELF.

You can continue to talk about how great Obama is at spending our money. And when I say great, I mean how fucking much of it.

[Daniel]

It was a tangent mentioned IN THIS THREAD that I wanted to elaborate on. FUCKING GET OVER YOURSELF.

You can continue to talk about how great Obama is at spending our money. And when I say great, I mean how fucking much of it.

Except we're not the ones who brought it up and yet you're trying to slam us for it. So, please get the fuck over yourself.

[Hulkein]

Those poll numbers are pretty embarrassing to Democrats. Much more embarrassing than anything going on now re: Republican's IMO.

[Warriorbird]

Uhm... the poll numbers that read a lot like the election numbers?

Since when did you get to say what was embarassing to Democrats?

[Hulkein]

WUT

[CrystalTears]

:rofl:

[Parkbandit]

Uhm... the poll numbers that read a lot like the election numbers?

Since when did you get to say what was embarassing to Democrats?

How about we're embarrassed for you.. since you don't have enough common sense to be embarrassed (or enough sense to know how to spell embarrassed)

[Warriorbird]

Oooh. A spelling troll! Step it up! It'll go well with the concern trolling.

[Tsa`ah]

Those poll numbers are pretty embarrassing to Democrats. Much more embarrassing than anything going on now re: Republican's IMO.

Really? How so?