Bet you're sorry you voted for Obama now

[pattygreen 5]

We were "out of the hole" AND had a surplus under democrat Clinton. Let me think for a millisecond whose policies took that surplus and turned it into a deficit. Oh, I know, that would be republican bush. So, you see, when you don't give tax cuts to the rich and start two wars, it can be done.

And like I told you before, most of the spending we are doing now is for the wars, tax cuts and programs that bush enacted. Which one of them do you want to eliminate?:

1) tax cuts for the rich (results in reduced revenue)

2) medicare part D (one trillion over 10 years - unfunded)

3) two wars (nearly a trillion)

Keep in mind that stopping them now won't change the debt they have caused us so far, it would just stop the CONTINUED spending on them. You know, the spending you keep complaining about.

So, Bush spent 2 trillion dollars in his 8 years. 1 Trillion on a war that congress (dems) approved. (And the American people wanted at the time.) That is nothing compared to Obama's spending in JUST 1 year. And he claims that he is proposing a 3 year spending freeze (on domestic programs). What a JOKE!!!!!!!:Dancing_biggrin:

The payoff in budget savings would be tiny relative to the deficit: The estimated $250 billion in savings over 10 years would be less than 3 percent of the roughly $9 trillion in additional deficits the government will accumulate over that time.

[leroyspuds 0]

So, Bush spent 2 trillion dollars in his 8 years. 1 Trillion on a war that congress (dems) approved. (And the American people wanted at the time.)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Whoa, back up the truck! 1 trillion was spent on a war that Bush and Cheney justified with faulty intelligence. They lied to Congress and the American people. Not only did it cost us money, but it cost us the lives of American men and women who were fighting for Bush's folly. Anyone who opposed it, and many did (Obama for example), was considered unpatriotic. I can't think of anything more unpatriotic than unnecessarily spilling the blood of brave Americans. Did the money invested in that "war" benefit anyone? Did it make us safer? No, it was money flushed down the toilet. But rich corporations benefited from all those nice government contracts didn't they? That moron redneck Bush and his dog Cheney did serious damage to our economy and our reputation around the world. I'm sick of these rich bastards having their boot on the necks of the American people. :Dancing_biggrin:

[Cleo's Mom 257]

So, Bush spent 2 trillion dollars in his 8 years. 1 Trillion on a war that congress (dems) approved. (And the American people wanted at the time.) That is nothing compared to Obama's spending in JUST 1 year. And he claims that he is proposing a 3 year spending freeze (on domestic programs). What a JOKE!!!!!!!:ohmy:

The payoff in budget savings would be tiny relative to the deficit: The estimated $250 billion in savings over 10 years would be less than 3 percent of the roughly $9 trillion in additional deficits the government will accumulate over that time.

You still don't get it do you? :Dancing_biggrin: Just these three areas that came under bush need CONTINUED funding today and everyday. The funding didn't stop when Pres. Obama got elected.

Do you think that our deficit isn't rising because of funding the two wars? Do you think it's not rising to pay for medicare part D? Do you think it's not rising due to lost revenue because of the 2 tax cuts to the rich? And what kind of idiot president (bush!) enacts two tax cuts for the rich after starting two (unfunded) wars? Even the conservative economist didn't support this.

Plus, due to the fact that the republicans drove this economy into the ditch and Pres. Obama had to rescue it - we now have more people unemployed and eligible for federal aid. This aid eligibility didn't start under Pres. Obama - but since more people are eligible because of the economy Obama inherited from bush, that also adds to the spending.

Look at the amount the stimulus contributes to the total deficit. Then look at how much Pres. Obama's agenda contributes to the deficit. NOW - look at how much bush's policies contribute. What don't you get?

Edited June 4, 2010 by Cleo's Mom

[BJean 16]

patty just cannot see the big picture - the one where the president has to think about and balance all of the problems in this country. You know, the very thing that Bush did not do while he was in office. Bush and Cheney had an agenda when they rode into office. They carried it out and the entire country has suffered tremendously in the process.

There is no quick fix that's going to make everything right again. And the only way we can get things back on track - the track of fiscal responsibility - is to systematically go through the mess and make some choices. The choices that are being made may not bring the desired result, but they might just do the trick. No one person has all the answers - especially NOT the stupid greedy Republicans who got us here in the first place.

So for a right wing extremist to bellyache about spending NOW, after they are the ones who let the cows out of the barn, is utter folly and most Americans know it. The only ones who keep talking about how bad the government is and how awful the congress and president are for trying to fix our broken economy, the more stupid and selfish they look. And miss broken record there should for once stand back and look at the big picture of her great nation that has been brought to its' knees by the very people she likes to quote.

Go back to using your tea bag to make tea because all you're coming up with using the tea bagger nonsense is more selfish, single-minded clap trap.

[leroyspuds 0]

No matter what the figures bear out (very obvious from Cleo's chart) the right wing is trying to blame the deficit and the economy on Obama. Of course they are. They're pandering to the people who don't understand the facts so they can get re-elected and back into power. They're manipulating the people who don't understand the facts by making them fearful. They're stirring up anger among the people who don't understand the facts to divert attention from their own failed policies. Bush and his crowd brought our country to it's knees. That's an undeniable fact. It's all been dumped in Obama's and the Democrats' laps to fix. It's incredible that the eight years of damage done by George Bush and his crowd is being blamed on Obama. What cowards, what liars.

[BJean 16]

Yes and if they are able to convince enough pattys to go out and vote them back in office, then God help us!

[phil1336 0]

I`ve got a great idea. Since pattygreen is staying awake at night worrying herself to death over the Federal Debt and all of the Obama (spending policies), I`ve got a way to pay for most of it. First by stopping our Wars of Imperialism to make the Wealthy even more Wealthy without making us any safer, just shedding more young American blood and adding to the national deficit, lets cut the Defense Department budget in half, The Pentagon will cry but even they realize their budget is grossly bloated. Step two,start taxing all Churches and Houses of Worship! These institutions of spreading bigotry and fairy tales have had a free ride way too long. I don`t care what your religious stripe is....you wanna support your Pastor, Preacher, Priest, Rabbi, fine, but not on the Tax Payers dime. Tax payers are not asked to subsidize Disneyland and Disneyworld, why should us non-believers be forced to contribute to these entertainment centers that we don`t attend? The Tax Base of every village, town, and city is effected by having hundreds of billions of dollars omitted from the Tax Rolls because of this flaw. Fix it, and let the (believers) pay the full amount to "believe"!

[tdslf1 0]

I got a question.

The teabaggers are supposed to be an independant group that will vote for people who want to change from incumbants to fresh blood and reign in spending. Now if that is true, and there are some Dems that say that and want the spending to stop as well, why is it I don't see any teabaggers supporting a democrat?

[leroyspuds 0]

You've got my vote Phil!

[Cleo's Mom 257]

I got a question.

The teabaggers are supposed to be an independant group that will vote for people who want to change from incumbants to fresh blood and reign in spending. Now if that is true, and there are some Dems that say that and want the spending to stop as well, why is it I don't see any teabaggers supporting a democrat?

Because that's not what the tea party movement is about. It's an anti-Obama movement disguised as something else. Period. They want to advance their extreme right wing agenda which is pro-corporation, pro-their religion, pro-gun, anti-union, anti-environment, anti-gays, anti-abortion.

They say follow the money. Do you think the CEO of Massey mines (whose safety violations contributed to the deaths of all those miners) and who contributes to the tea party does so because he wants MORE corporate regulations?

Just follow the money of the teabaggers and you'll see the same old, same old, big money & big business well represented.

[BJean 16]

phil, you've got my vote.

And Cleo's I believe that you are entirely correct about who's funding the Tea Party "movement" which is less a real political grass roots movement than a corporate P.R. campaign.

They throw in the anti-gun control, anti-abortion, anti-government, pro-right wing extremist religious stuff to suck people in. Their true agenda is no federal regulations for corporations and continued subsidies for corporations.

And it works so well because of the emotional hook that it provides to the right wing conservatives that are already in such a frenzy because a black Democrat was elected to be our president.

The whole thing is lucicrous because the black Democrat has been shown to be totally willing to work with Republicans to get America back on its' feet.

[pattygreen 5]

So, Bush spent 2 trillion dollars in his 8 years. 1 Trillion on a war that congress (dems) approved. (And the American people wanted at the time.)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Whoa, back up the truck! 1 trillion was spent on a war that Bush and Cheney justified with faulty intelligence. They lied to Congress and the American people. Not only did it cost us money, but it cost us the lives of American men and women who were fighting for Bush's folly. Anyone who opposed it, and many did (Obama for example), was considered unpatriotic. I can't think of anything more unpatriotic than unnecessarily spilling the blood of brave Americans. Did the money invested in that "war" benefit anyone? Did it make us safer? No, it was money flushed down the toilet. But rich corporations benefited from all those nice government contracts didn't they? That moron redneck Bush and his dog Cheney did serious damage to our economy and our reputation around the world. I'm sick of these rich bastards having their boot on the necks of the American people. :thumbup:

If his inteligence was faulty, they fooled even the democrats at the time, not just Bush and Cheny.

[leroyspuds 0]

Didn't fool O B A M A

Anyway the Democrats were forced into giving approval to fund a potential war or be seen as unpatriotic. They didn't bargain on him going to war on such flimsy information and poor planning afterward. The president is responsible as commander and chief for making informed decisions and leading congress and the nation in the right direction -- not leading them off a cliff! Anyway he knew there were no wmd's before he got us in so deep. He had daddy issues.

[pattygreen 5]

You still don't get it do you? :thumbup: Just these three areas that came under bush need CONTINUED funding today and everyday. The funding didn't stop when Pres. Obama got elected.

And YOU just don't get it! All the programs that Obama is enacting now will need the funding for generations to come,as well. Since he already KNOWS that Bush's programs are going to require continued spending, you'd think he'd STOP! But, NO, he just keeps on SPENDING> And they will be still paying for his sprees when he's gone in 3 years!

[Cleo's Mom 257]

Didn't fool O B A M A

Anyway the Democrats were forced into giving approval to fund a potential war or be seen as unpatriotic. They didn't bargain on him going to war on such flimsy information and poor planning afterward. The president is responsible as commander and chief for making informed decisions and leading congress and the nation in the right direction -- not leading them off a cliff! Anyway he knew there were no wmd's before he got us in so deep. He had daddy issues.

And remember that those democrats in congress didn't see the same intelligence that bush did. I mean, come on, bush's own people (Richard Clarke, O'Neill) said going into Iraq was a goal from day one. All they needed was to convince the american people. And then 9/11 happened.....