Proving you wrong and watch you ignore facts and lie to yourself has always been humorous and a daily occasion:)

Well, mopping Subway sounds nice. Sadly, I'm confined to paying high taxes so low class buffoons like yourself can live the American dream of spending all day on a porn forum. :winkwink:

Yeah.... sure you are D. I'd bet your highest earnings topped out around $12k per year. :1orglaugh

How can an existence be delusional? We know you're not exactly intelligent BFT3K, but seriously? You just take two words you consider "big", and lump them together? I'll help you out buddy. Since I exist, it can't possibly be delusional because delusion implies something that isn't there. Oh dear, looks like I've confused you.:1orglaugh

Oh that would suck. Again, sadly not. But I'm assuming that was a way of you thanking me for making your existence meaningful (at least to you). I'll probably pay more in taxes this year so you can continue the American dream, brother!

ROFL! I see cracks in the Demon armor... you're starting to slip holmes. :1orglaugh

fuck em up BFT3!!! I'm tired of these backward inbred redneck Fox Fake News watching right wing racists running rampant on GFY

And here comes the delusion. Look Amputate I know you're "special" and I want to help you out. Just keep on doing what you're doing like the little engine that could, and I'll make sure you get the funding for it. :1orglaugh

You seem confused about your own facts... The two news articles you posted never said Obama created the two trillion in debt. They never said he printed more money, no article has ever shown proof that he printed 2 trillion dollars. Those articles never said that his stimulus was printed in full, or that any policy he setup/allowed/created increased our debt by 2 trillion dollars.

Is that the facts you're talking about or the ones you ignore?

Actually, the facts proved your article that Obama had spent only a few billiong (LOL), wrong. Please continue ignoring facts and then telling me I'm doing it. Too easy.:1orglaugh

You couldn't fund a lemonade stand. :1orglaugh :rasta

Demon, just one suit hanging in my closet is worth more than your entire education. :pimp

Sure thing amputate. The watch on my hand owns your entire net worth, but that's to be expected. I mean after all, you can't even be successful in your own career:):1orglaugh

LOL, you don't even know what my "career" is you lunkhead. :1orglaugh

We all know what your career is. It's most likely sitting on welfare (funded by me), and posting on this forum for the majority of the day. Occasionally you might feel spiffy and design a few galleries.:1orglaugh

Actually Minte posted it, I quoted it... here it is: http://www.investorsinsight.com/blog...onal-debt.aspx

It says and I quote "...To-date as of late May, according to the Congressional Budget Office, Obama has only spent $37 billion of the $787 billion stimulus package..."

Here is the new news articles you posted
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_1...76-503544.html
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/ni...towering-debt/

Neither of those articles say Obama increased the Debt, neither explain How he increased the Debt, both say under his watch the Debt increased - but not that 'HE' increased them.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_public_debt
The ratio of year to year debt increases has slowed down under Obama, the projection is lower and it reverses. The debt was going to increase no mater what but if anything Obama has slowed the rate of increase down. While I don't think that will truly ever happen - thinking Obama increased things - is a pure uneducated sheep mentality.

The Demon is still working on his career.

He is soliciting funds for his very own Argument Clinic...



https://youtube.com/watch?v=kQFKtI6gn9Y

Sheep mentality, you've described the Obama supporters perfectly. Here, educate yourself.

http://www.federabudget.com

Also, lol@your facts.

http://projects.propublica.org/table...nding-progress

classic right wing retard talking about how pissed he is that a tiny fraction of his tax dollars go to feeding the poor, while a HUGE portion goes to weapons systems contracts and the illegal wars trumped up by the criminals he helped elect. But don't worry people guys like Demon are going EXTINCT in the next 25 years or so... we are witnessing the last dying gasps of conservativism

Haven't your intelligent and delusions been made fun of enough already? I actually truly believe you make theDoc and BFT3K look smart when you post unrealistic/delusional ramblings. You haven't stated a single fact since you've been here, which is hilarious. Here, I'll replace your post with "liberalism" and it'll make as much sense as your original. :)

:1orglaugh

Hahaha, even by the above report Obama has only spent 46.77% of the 800 billion. That damn sure doesn't explain a 2 trillion dollar deficit increase in his first year in office. BTW, I said even if he spent it all and printed it all, it's still not 2 trillion in his first year.

Would you like to try again?

Weird, because you said Obama only spent 37 billion dollars. And here we have the typical TheDoc fashion of misdirection when his assertions get destroyed by actual facts.:1orglaugh

No I didn't say that... I quoted what an article said that was posted by someone else and I also said, if he spent it all - it wouldn't have made a difference.

At that, we're actually talking about the statement saying Obama increased the debt/deficit by 2 trillion dollars. If he spent 40 billion, 400 billion or all 800 billion, it's still does not matter how many ways you twist it, he did not spend 2 trillion dollars in the first year.

Talk about misdirection.

There's no misdirection here thedoc, the total debt went up by 2.6 trillion dollars on Obama's watch. Nobody said he literally sat there spending 2 trillion dollars. Cut out the strawman and we'll be good:)

The debt would have went up under anyones watch, me, you, anyone... nobody couldn't have stopped it from going up in the first year.

So the reality is, Obama's deficit is not as bad as Bush. Even if we give all 2 trillion to Obama simply because he was President, Bush still took it up over 5 trillion on his watch. And it wasn't Obama that 'directly' spent/increased or caused the 2 trillion dollar increase - so even saying it happened 'under his watch' is pure... word play.

I just don't get the blind hate for Obama - lots of shit to hate on, even a few things you truly might not agree with, like healthcare - but the blind hate, the blind accusations, the one sided direction of blame is, bat shit crazy talk.

Right but if people are going to blatantly criticize Bush for his economic stupidity, Obama gets the exact same criticism. At the same time, I would argue that an economic genius like Ron Paul or Peter Schiff would have actually reduced our debts and deficits through non keynesian means.



It's pretty damn close to Bush, if not the same. The problem is, he's only been in power for 2 years. But liberals blame entirely Bush while conservatives blame Obama when in reality, it's some form of both. But neither one knows dick about economics.

This is a delusional statement because the majority of political threads on here are created by bat shit crazy liberals who trash talk the right. That's not to say that there are more liberals here than conservatives, it's that the conservatives don't bother posting political shit on here. Then when some conservative threads are made, the liberals act shocked. There is no blind hate on Obama, that's just a justification the liberals need so they can feel that the president is doing a good job. There's no hate on Bush either. This "hate" argument is brought on by idiots incapable of any rational thought. If Obama was doing a good job, I would praise him and so would many conservatives. We prefer to see the country succeed rather than fail and then blame it on a liberal.

You really should lay down the crack pipe.

I would love to see the timeline in your head of what happened on wall street vs. his election. I mean seriously the economy was toast before he was in the Whitehouse, those jobs were gone the moment the credit market froze. BTW I wouldn't directly blame the economy on Bush either it is way more complex then that. In regards to the oil spill; do you think he should have thrown on a mask and fins and swam down with a wad of gum. The ONLY people in the world to equipped to deal with that oil spill were on it and it was simply not a problem that could be solved instantly.

I personally don't think he will get reelected, but I think he inherited a ton of problems on day one and only time will tell if his approach was good, bad or mediocre.

Awww what's the matter sweetheart? Another post that's above your intellectual pay grade? :1orglaugh

Indeed. That post was out there alright.... waaaaaaay the fuck out there. :1orglaugh

I know you're confused Demon, but truthfully... I've expended more than enough energy trying to reason with you and discuss things maturely here on this website. Frankly, I lost interest in it a long time ago, because like I said, speaking with you is like conversing with a block of cheese. Others may entertain your "points-of-view" (lol) but I'm just not going to invest anything more than my autopilot responses. Which is why our interactions together have reduced down to a nice, creamy mix of insult tennis and will likely remain that way for the duration of our existence together here. :rasta

Okay... Bush didn't actually have an economic plan, well not one that he even kinda stuck to at least. Obama does though, and he has stuck to most of it - worked or not, makes no difference.

From what I know of Keynesian economics, it means someone that corrects problems in business, gov spending, tax breaks, things along those lines. If you look forward at what Obama has planned, you'll see this in action.


Obama could have killed the bailout bill when he came into office... he didn't have to let it go through, I agree. I do blame Bush for the mess we are in and I can't blame Obama for the mess we're in and I don't expect him to turn it around in two years when no other President in history has ever done that without some extreme injections by the Gov.

Would I have liked him to do a few things differently? Without question....


I'm not liberal, Other than maybe towards people/society, but not with the eco or gov.

It's not that GFY has more left or right, it's most people can't talk politics on either side. I've talked with MANY people that have said they wish they could get into these threads but they just don't stay up with the range of politics/eco stuff enough to truly inject and backup what they say.

Liberals or the left aren't out saying Obama is doing a good job (I'm sure some are), What they're saying is he isn't destroying the Country, that his policies aren't killing us and to wait and see if he says he will do what he said. No doubt in my mind if he blows this, the liberal/left/dem is going to rip his ass apart during the election, assuming the GOP gets someone half ass decent in the chair.

I will say this... with so much b.s. going on - I think he has done a great job stopping the drops. I think it was smart he went through with the org military plan and then changed our mission/target. As well, I think the tax cuts and any tax benefit at this time needs to be corrected/removed. As he stated, correct the holes, the leaks, etc and then we can come back and cut the budget and taxes.

Either he's barking up the conservative tree or he's hiking his leg to take a piss on it... time will only tell. If he doesn't live up to what he said he would do or at least try it, I'll join the hate wagon and bitch like everyone else! But at this time, he's been doing exactly what he said he would.

He won't even run.

I forgive your incompetence Amputate. It's been clear that you lack any ability to debate logically, or think rationally and because you're insecure, you start lying to yourself. That's alright because most insecure, unintelligent people do the same thing so I can't fault you for that. I MORE than enjoy our exchanges because it really shows me that either I'm ridiculously smart (True), or that you're ridiculously incompetent (also true). Anyways, it's been a blast. I will no doubt look forward to you continuously creating new threads and either being ignored, or mocked. :1orglaugh

Wow... so you gauge your intelligence level based on GFY post comparisons? Is it any wonder you have the cranial capacity of a gnat? :1orglaugh

He probably wont even run, he is posturing himself for an exit.

Even if he did, he has no chance, those people wont come out in droves again because their lives under his rule has worsened.

Uh having no plan and having a failed plan are in the same category. And throwing money at the problem Keynesian style isn't a plan, it's a prayer.

Keynesian economics are based on fundamental flaws and they haven't worked in the past. The only way they could conceivably work is if we were running surpluses. The LAST thing a logical economist would do would involve "stimulating" the economy through quantitative easing while we're running astronomical deficits.




Bullshit, because Clinton started the mess in the first place, just in case you're trying to blame one party in particular. Obama is underqualified for his position and we're beginning to see that now. Liberals love the position they're in because if Obama succeeds, they can praise him but if he fails, they can blame Bush. Those double standards are illogical and therefore don't work. Obama has failed not because of Bush, but because of his flawed fundamentals and those of the morons he's hired.


Well, there are very few people here that can be objective.

But his economic policies ARE destroying the companies. The massive money printing/quantitative easing has been a complete failure. The cash for everything programs have been a failure. Neither Bush nor Obama understand their economical failures, which is why they continued to make the same mistakes.

Stopping what drops? Unemployment fluctuates weekly and monthly. His policies have become such a failure that the CBO and the FED have to reduce their "predictions" so as to not send the American public into a saving frenzy.

I don't hate the guy, I just think that he's a great speaker and an incompetent leader. At least Clinton was both a great speaker and a great leader.

1. Gauging an intelligence implies this is the only standard of measurement that I'm using, which I haven't even implied. Good try at reading comprehension.:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

2. If I was gauging my intelligence by this forum and have stated that I'm smarter than you, and it looks like you've conceded that point, why would by "cranial capacity" be that of a gnat? And if it was, a gnat still beats a single celled organism.:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

That was buried by the Devil to test your faith in Jeebuz, right? :1orglaugh

The problem is not the people but the options :)

Having experienced first-hand how corrupt and idiotic Washington really is, perhaps Obama won't even bother running for a second term. Maybe it'll be Hillary vs Sarah.

As long as corporate and special interests trump those of the American people, we are fucked regardless.

Funny how so many big money Americans have recently invested in properties in other countries - including the Bush family. I guess no one wants to stay on a sinking ship.

damnnn what did i cause here!!!!!!!!!!!!

If we had to be in a surplus, then Ron Paul couldn't have changed much either, without changing everything.

Stimulating the eco has worked before... for sure in various sectors of the Eco, just like this current one has done. No, it wasn't a perfect solution - but it isn't like it was a total failure either.


Clinton did not leave us in a mess... he left us with a surplus though. Obama hasn't enough time to fail for the Liberals to blame him, probably why most don't blame him. I have heard left/liberal/dems Blame him for the mess we're already in though, even on GFY.


What economic policies and how are they destroying companies? Anything going up or down in my Companies, is not any part Obama's fault. He didn't really print trillions of dollars, I hope you understand that.

Yes, some of his ideas failed... but not all of them. Nobody will ever get it all right.


Unemployment is the very last thing to improve and it was in a mad drop, along with the eco, dollar value, the stock market, and housing when he came into office. All of which have stopped dropping. All of which naturally fluctuates even in a good market.

Precisely.

What exactly are the options that the Republicans will offer up?

Huckabee?

Mitt Mitt Nitwit?

Palin?

Some loon from the tea party?

Who?

No one will "come out in droves" to vote in another Republitard either.

IF Obama runs for a second term he will likely win, but there certainly is a chance he won't even bother to run again at all.

I'm sure it is not a very satisfying job - especially when you are not able to break through all of the partisan gridlock and special interest corruption.

Time will tell, as they say...

Unless the Republicans put up Sarah Failin we could have on our hands an "I will vote for anyone but Obama" election. Much like what we are about to see this November and saw in 08 the "anyone but a republican" election.

No, I'm saying if Ron Paul ran the country after Bush, I think he would have succeeded because he has sound economic ideals.

It may have worked in various sectors but a massive expansion of the money supply doesn't work for this country. How I miss the Gold Standard.




He didn't leave us in a mess but he unintentionally started the financial crisis.




I meant countries, sorry. He definitely printed a good deal of money, although trillions may be an exaggeration.

What are you talking about? In real value, the stock market has been plummeting since 2000, anytime the market rises these days, it's due to low volume trading, there is no mad drop in unemployment because stats fluctuate up and down and Obama tried to use census workers as "employed", and housing is at record lows.

Obama shouldn't have ran for President. He should have let Hillary. Whoever became President inherited a bad economy and international problem. This problem would have at least taken 2 terms to get this fixed. He wanted to be the savor or be held to god like powers.

I can't remember one thing he said that actually worked out and he's trying to buy a 2nd term saying it will take time. Please, you Socialist. Where's the Hope. I guess he meant "Hope" for him to win Presidency.

Let me see, big deficit, corporation bail out, infinity money for war, and citizen of Americans get screwed. Yeah, that is the reason I live for.

He's outta here.

That would be a site to see.......

clinton vs Palin :helpme

The problem is this: it is not a "tiny fraction." If you add up all the left wing social programs, the corruption, welfare fraud, union costs, it is a HUGE portion of your tax dollars.

National Defense is a core governmental function --"feeding people" is not. Feeding the poor is best left to individuals, churches and private charities.

When the government does it, the fraud and waste go through the roof and it kills the economy.

its the economy stupid

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh