How else is the state supposed to pay for the 520 construction and the Seattle tunnel construction that all of the construction companies are getting rich from?
Muy Roads!!!
That was supposed to be paid for by other established means. Lack of accountability and transparency, irresponsible spending and no clue how to manage projects are the democrats fault, not the taxpayer. How bout we stop spending on pre-school and help fund bertha for one example, og countless others. Tolling was supposed to h e lp fund 520 ...where did that money go? It's fucking rediculous to impose crippling capital gains taxes. Sick of wasting tax money. New taxes will be wasted the same.
Yeah it's all democrats fault. Republicans don't spend money. Ever. Just listen to their campaign they'll tell you. And the one time they do cut, it fucks everything up. See Kansas and the huge budget deficit.
Statists are statists. Democrats happen to be the leader in the clubhouse right now, with the cult of righteous personality, led by a secular divine-right Leviathan.
Except the last balanced budget was under a democrat president and the largest deficit was under a Republican president. And the deficit has fallen faster under Obama than any other president. Ever.
Are you in support of a contraction of government then?
I'm in support of cutting waste and managing expenditures. I'm not in support of just cutting whole programs because groups disagree with the purpose (such as conservatives want all welfare programs gone and democrats wasn't too cut defense). I also think tax loopholes for the wealthy and corporations should be evaluated and some of them removed based on effectiveness.
So you think people in the government should evaluate if it is more "effective" to let people keep more of their money vs If the government took it from them? At least we know where you stand. Statist gonna statist.
Actually, that last paragraph is wrong. The best that Democrats can hope for is that Republicans, instead of choosing a Reaganite, nominate and elect a president from the Nixon-Bush wing of the party. Many of the biggest expansions in the size and scope of the federal government have taken place with such Republicans in the White House.
So the economy started over on day 1 of his presidency? Bush's last budget starte ended September 30, 2009. Obama's first budget starts October 1, 2009. Add in about $30 billion of stimulus spending too the October 1, 2009 debt. You are a fuck stick for even reading anything on CNS, let alone using it to support and argument.
I do give you props for trying to contribute something other than a Photoshop job.
How else is the state supposed to pay for the 520 construction and the Seattle tunnel construction that all of the construction companies are getting rich from?
Muy Roads!!!
That was supposed to be paid for by other established means. Lack of accountability and transparency, irresponsible spending and no clue how to manage projects are the democrats fault, not the taxpayer. How bout we stop spending on pre-school and help fund bertha for one example, og countless others. Tolling was supposed to h e lp fund 520 ...where did that money go? It's fucking rediculous to impose crippling capital gains taxes. Sick of wasting tax money. New taxes will be wasted the same.
Yeah it's all democrats fault. Republicans don't spend money. Ever. Just listen to their campaign they'll tell you. And the one time they do cut, it fucks everything up. See Kansas and the huge budget deficit.
Statists are statists. Democrats happen to be the leader in the clubhouse right now, with the cult of righteous personality, led by a secular divine-right Leviathan.
Except the last balanced budget was under a democrat president and the largest deficit was under a Republican president. And the deficit has fallen faster under Obama than any other president. Ever.
Are you in support of a contraction of government then?
I'm in support of cutting waste and managing expenditures. I'm not in support of just cutting whole programs because groups disagree with the purpose (such as conservatives want all welfare programs gone and democrats wasn't too cut defense). I also think tax loopholes for the wealthy and corporations should be evaluated and some of them removed based on effectiveness.
So you think people in the government should evaluate if it is more "effective" to let people keep more of their money vs If the government took it from them? At least we know where you stand. Statist gonna statist.
Lol Nice translation. What you just said is that you live on welfare and don't pay any taxes, get back a ton in earned income credit and still bitch that the government takes to much money from you.
The facts are the facts. Only a fucktard whines about the source. I could link those facts from any number of sources. 30 billion out of 7 trillion is meaningless. Obama was in favor of the stimulus.
Like I said, I just have to sit back and let you show your stupidity. It's working quite well
Your a partisan hack who loves Obama. When you started posting here you claimed your friend though you're a conservative.
All you are is a lying sack like the president you support
Actually, that last paragraph is wrong. The best that Democrats can hope for is that Republicans, instead of choosing a Reaganite, nominate and elect a president from the Nixon-Bush wing of the party. Many of the biggest expansions in the size and scope of the federal government have taken place with such Republicans in the White House.
Obamacare is the ticking time bomb of entitlements. It has to be repealed. That's why the republicans are gaining seats back. There is a reason Obama delayed so much of its implementation like the lies that have already been revealed.
Big surprise - those signing up are getting "free" healthcare at the expense of your former rates and doctor that you can't keep. It will only get worse and more expensive.
When Bush had republican control of the congress he spent like a drunken sailor. Obama spent like a boat load of drunken sailors. When Clinton had Newt to keep him in check we actually had a pretty good deal going.
The facts are the facts. Only a fucktard whines about the source. I could link those facts from any number of sources. 30 billion out of 7 trillion is meaningless. Obama was in favor of the stimulus.
Like I said, I just have to sit back and let you show your stupidity. It's working quite well
Your a partisan hack who loves Obama. When you started posting here you claimed your friend though you're a conservative.
All you are is a lying sack like the president you support
Water is wet and Honda gurgles
"30 billion out of 7 trillion is meaningless. Obama was in favor of the stimulus."
You don't read well do you? Cause yes my point was $30 billion out of $7 trillion is meaningless, that's pretty much exactly what I said.
If you actually understood how the government works you'd understand this. I'll type slowly so you can maybe understand. You see, the president submits the budget to congress in March. So Bush's last budget was sent to Congress in March of 2008 that was for the period of October 1, 2008 to September 30, 2009. Obama's first budget was submitted in March of 2009 for the period beginning October 1, 2009. You can't count the spending through September 30, 2009 against Obama. Except, like I said that you didn't read, he passed the stimulus bill in March of 2009, which we spent about $30 billion by September 30, 2009. So take the debt on October 1, 2009 and add $30 billion for the stimulus.
Again you can't read. I said conservatives call me a left wing liberal. Left wing liberals call me moderate or conservative. Do you understand that? Or should I type that slower next time too?
Actually, that last paragraph is wrong. The best that Democrats can hope for is that Republicans, instead of choosing a Reaganite, nominate and elect a president from the Nixon-Bush wing of the party. Many of the biggest expansions in the size and scope of the federal government have taken place with such Republicans in the White House.
Obamacare is the ticking time bomb of entitlements. It has to be repealed. That's why the republicans are gaining seats back. There is a reason Obama delayed so much of its implementation like the lies that have already been revealed.
Big surprise - those signing up are getting "free" healthcare at the expense of your former rates and doctor that you can't keep. It will only get worse and more expensive.
When Bush had republican control of the congress he spent like a drunken sailor. Obama spent like a boat load of drunken sailors. When Clinton had Newt to keep him in check we actually had a pretty good deal going.
Except spending as a percent of GDP increased drastically under Bush and decreased significantly under Obama. How is that "spending like a boat load of drunken sailors?" If you look at facts, spending has actually been under control under Obama.
Actually, that last paragraph is wrong. The best that Democrats can hope for is that Republicans, instead of choosing a Reaganite, nominate and elect a president from the Nixon-Bush wing of the party. Many of the biggest expansions in the size and scope of the federal government have taken place with such Republicans in the White House.
Obamacare is the ticking time bomb of entitlements. It has to be repealed. That's why the republicans are gaining seats back. There is a reason Obama delayed so much of its implementation like the lies that have already been revealed.
Big surprise - those signing up are getting "free" healthcare at the expense of your former rates and doctor that you can't keep. It will only get worse and more expensive.
When Bush had republican control of the congress he spent like a drunken sailor. Obama spent like a boat load of drunken sailors. When Clinton had Newt to keep him in check we actually had a pretty good deal going.
Except spending as a percent of GDP increased drastically under Bush and decreased significantly under Obama. How is that "spending like a boat load of drunken sailors?" If you look at facts, spending has actually been under control under Obama.
Reading for comprehension might help you.
The debt has increased exponentially under Obama
Stop with the bullshit. No one believes you. Liars figure and figures lie. Fuck off
The facts are the facts. Only a fucktard whines about the source. I could link those facts from any number of sources. 30 billion out of 7 trillion is meaningless. Obama was in favor of the stimulus.
Like I said, I just have to sit back and let you show your stupidity. It's working quite well
Your a partisan hack who loves Obama. When you started posting here you claimed your friend though you're a conservative.
All you are is a lying sack like the president you support
Water is wet and Honda gurgles
"30 billion out of 7 trillion is meaningless. Obama was in favor of the stimulus."
You don't read well do you? Cause yes my point was $30 billion out of $7 trillion is meaningless, that's pretty much exactly what I said.
If you actually understood how the government works you'd understand this. I'll type slowly so you can maybe understand. You see, the president submits the budget to congress in March. So Bush's last budget was sent to Congress in March of 2008 that was for the period of October 1, 2008 to September 30, 2009. Obama's first budget was submitted in March of 2009 for the period beginning October 1, 2009. You can't count the spending through September 30, 2009 against Obama. Except, like I said that you didn't read, he passed the stimulus bill in March of 2009, which we spent about $30 billion by September 30, 2009. So take the debt on October 1, 2009 and add $30 billion for the stimulus.
Again you can't read. I said conservatives call me a left wing liberal. Left wing liberals call me moderate or conservative. Do you understand that? Or should I type that slower next time too?
Just look at facts. 1994 to 2001 is Clinton. 2002 to 2009 is Bush. 2010 and up is Obama. You notice the explosion in spending under Bush? And it's basically unchanged under Obama? Also notice the other side of the equation no conservative talks about. Revenues. Look what happens in 2009. Revenue tanked because the recession, which started 13 months before Obama took office.
Also look at the far right column. Spending as a prevent if GDP. Notice it went down most of Clinton and Obama's terms and up most of Bush's term.
Now look at revenue as a percent of GDP, notice how it goes up most of Clinton's and Obama's term and down most of Bush's.
It's not about Obama or Bush or republican or democrat. It's about facts. And the last 35 years (including Reagan), we have been much more fiscally responsible under democrats as president than Republicans.
Actually, that last paragraph is wrong. The best that Democrats can hope for is that Republicans, instead of choosing a Reaganite, nominate and elect a president from the Nixon-Bush wing of the party. Many of the biggest expansions in the size and scope of the federal government have taken place with such Republicans in the White House.
Obamacare is the ticking time bomb of entitlements. It has to be repealed. That's why the republicans are gaining seats back. There is a reason Obama delayed so much of its implementation like the lies that have already been revealed.
Big surprise - those signing up are getting "free" healthcare at the expense of your former rates and doctor that you can't keep. It will only get worse and more expensive.
When Bush had republican control of the congress he spent like a drunken sailor. Obama spent like a boat load of drunken sailors. When Clinton had Newt to keep him in check we actually had a pretty good deal going.
Except spending as a percent of GDP increased drastically under Bush and decreased significantly under Obama. How is that "spending like a boat load of drunken sailors?" If you look at facts, spending has actually been under control under Obama.
Reading for comprehension might help you.
The debt has increased exponentially under Obama
Stop with the bullshit. No one believes you. Liars figure and figures lie. Fuck off
Except look at facts. See the link I posted. Your head is just stuck in the sand. It's OK to pull out it, the air is nice above the sans.
Since the congress controls the purse the facts would be who is in control of the congress. Notice that you ignore the fact that Obama has increased the debt more than any other president. If you can't even admit that glaring fact then there is little point in further discussion with such an obvious partisan hack. You aren't fooling anyone.
None of us are claiming that Bush wasn't a big spender. We're pointing out that Obama is a bigger spender and his biggest time bomb of all hasn't kicked in yet. Hard not to notice you're ignoring Obamacare. Why don't you find a graph that says it isn't what it is and get back to us.
There are Obamaites like you all over the web peddling this crap. If you were honest and just tried to defend him on what he has actually done it would be one thing,. Instead its the usual bullshit. I hope you don't think you're original.
The explosion under Bush was the one time stimulus that Obama claims saved the country. The fact that it is unchanged under Obama proves my point, not yours. That's why Obama has raised the debt more than every president combined.
The facts are the facts. Only a fucktard whines about the source. I could link those facts from any number of sources. 30 billion out of 7 trillion is meaningless. Obama was in favor of the stimulus.
Like I said, I just have to sit back and let you show your stupidity. It's working quite well
Your a partisan hack who loves Obama. When you started posting here you claimed your friend though you're a conservative.
All you are is a lying sack like the president you support
Water is wet and Honda gurgles
"30 billion out of 7 trillion is meaningless. Obama was in favor of the stimulus."
You don't read well do you? Cause yes my point was $30 billion out of $7 trillion is meaningless, that's pretty much exactly what I said.
If you actually understood how the government works you'd understand this. I'll type slowly so you can maybe understand. You see, the president submits the budget to congress in March. So Bush's last budget was sent to Congress in March of 2008 that was for the period of October 1, 2008 to September 30, 2009. Obama's first budget was submitted in March of 2009 for the period beginning October 1, 2009. You can't count the spending through September 30, 2009 against Obama. Except, like I said that you didn't read, he passed the stimulus bill in March of 2009, which we spent about $30 billion by September 30, 2009. So take the debt on October 1, 2009 and add $30 billion for the stimulus.
Again you can't read. I said conservatives call me a left wing liberal. Left wing liberals call me moderate or conservative. Do you understand that? Or should I type that slower next time too?
I call you a liar. Do you understand that?
You want to know how to take care of that bitterness race? See the first step is too pull your pants down. The second step is to grab your douche bag and wipe the sand out your vag.
The facts are the facts. Only a fucktard whines about the source. I could link those facts from any number of sources. 30 billion out of 7 trillion is meaningless. Obama was in favor of the stimulus.
Like I said, I just have to sit back and let you show your stupidity. It's working quite well
Your a partisan hack who loves Obama. When you started posting here you claimed your friend though you're a conservative.
All you are is a lying sack like the president you support
Water is wet and Honda gurgles
"30 billion out of 7 trillion is meaningless. Obama was in favor of the stimulus."
You don't read well do you? Cause yes my point was $30 billion out of $7 trillion is meaningless, that's pretty much exactly what I said.
If you actually understood how the government works you'd understand this. I'll type slowly so you can maybe understand. You see, the president submits the budget to congress in March. So Bush's last budget was sent to Congress in March of 2008 that was for the period of October 1, 2008 to September 30, 2009. Obama's first budget was submitted in March of 2009 for the period beginning October 1, 2009. You can't count the spending through September 30, 2009 against Obama. Except, like I said that you didn't read, he passed the stimulus bill in March of 2009, which we spent about $30 billion by September 30, 2009. So take the debt on October 1, 2009 and add $30 billion for the stimulus.
Again you can't read. I said conservatives call me a left wing liberal. Left wing liberals call me moderate or conservative. Do you understand that? Or should I type that slower next time too?
I call you a liar. Do you understand that?
You want to know how to take care of that bitterness race? See the first step is too pull your pants down. The second step is to grab your douche bag and wipe the sand out your vag.
The facts are the facts. Only a fucktard whines about the source. I could link those facts from any number of sources. 30 billion out of 7 trillion is meaningless. Obama was in favor of the stimulus.
Like I said, I just have to sit back and let you show your stupidity. It's working quite well
Your a partisan hack who loves Obama. When you started posting here you claimed your friend though you're a conservative.
All you are is a lying sack like the president you support
Water is wet and Honda gurgles
"30 billion out of 7 trillion is meaningless. Obama was in favor of the stimulus."
You don't read well do you? Cause yes my point was $30 billion out of $7 trillion is meaningless, that's pretty much exactly what I said.
If you actually understood how the government works you'd understand this. I'll type slowly so you can maybe understand. You see, the president submits the budget to congress in March. So Bush's last budget was sent to Congress in March of 2008 that was for the period of October 1, 2008 to September 30, 2009. Obama's first budget was submitted in March of 2009 for the period beginning October 1, 2009. You can't count the spending through September 30, 2009 against Obama. Except, like I said that you didn't read, he passed the stimulus bill in March of 2009, which we spent about $30 billion by September 30, 2009. So take the debt on October 1, 2009 and add $30 billion for the stimulus.
Again you can't read. I said conservatives call me a left wing liberal. Left wing liberals call me moderate or conservative. Do you understand that? Or should I type that slower next time too?
I call you a liar. Do you understand that?
You want to know how to take care of that bitterness race? See the first step is too pull your pants down. The second step is to grab your douche bag and wipe the sand out your vag.
I'm not bitter
Nope not at all. ;-)
Ok let's try this. You say "Obama spent $7 trillion". Why don't you point to the bills, executive orders, etc. of his that add up to $7 trillion. Should be relatively easy to find.
The facts are the facts. Only a fucktard whines about the source. I could link those facts from any number of sources. 30 billion out of 7 trillion is meaningless. Obama was in favor of the stimulus.
Like I said, I just have to sit back and let you show your stupidity. It's working quite well
Your a partisan hack who loves Obama. When you started posting here you claimed your friend though you're a conservative.
All you are is a lying sack like the president you support
Water is wet and Honda gurgles
"30 billion out of 7 trillion is meaningless. Obama was in favor of the stimulus."
You don't read well do you? Cause yes my point was $30 billion out of $7 trillion is meaningless, that's pretty much exactly what I said.
If you actually understood how the government works you'd understand this. I'll type slowly so you can maybe understand. You see, the president submits the budget to congress in March. So Bush's last budget was sent to Congress in March of 2008 that was for the period of October 1, 2008 to September 30, 2009. Obama's first budget was submitted in March of 2009 for the period beginning October 1, 2009. You can't count the spending through September 30, 2009 against Obama. Except, like I said that you didn't read, he passed the stimulus bill in March of 2009, which we spent about $30 billion by September 30, 2009. So take the debt on October 1, 2009 and add $30 billion for the stimulus.
Again you can't read. I said conservatives call me a left wing liberal. Left wing liberals call me moderate or conservative. Do you understand that? Or should I type that slower next time too?
I call you a liar. Do you understand that?
You want to know how to take care of that bitterness race? See the first step is too pull your pants down. The second step is to grab your douche bag and wipe the sand out your vag.
I'm not bitter
Nope not at all. ;-)
Ok let's try this. You say "Obama spent $7 trillion". Why don't you point to the bills, executive orders, etc. of his that add up to $7 trillion. Should be relatively easy to find.
The facts are the facts. Only a fucktard whines about the source. I could link those facts from any number of sources. 30 billion out of 7 trillion is meaningless. Obama was in favor of the stimulus.
Like I said, I just have to sit back and let you show your stupidity. It's working quite well
Your a partisan hack who loves Obama. When you started posting here you claimed your friend though you're a conservative.
All you are is a lying sack like the president you support
Water is wet and Honda gurgles
"30 billion out of 7 trillion is meaningless. Obama was in favor of the stimulus."
You don't read well do you? Cause yes my point was $30 billion out of $7 trillion is meaningless, that's pretty much exactly what I said.
If you actually understood how the government works you'd understand this. I'll type slowly so you can maybe understand. You see, the president submits the budget to congress in March. So Bush's last budget was sent to Congress in March of 2008 that was for the period of October 1, 2008 to September 30, 2009. Obama's first budget was submitted in March of 2009 for the period beginning October 1, 2009. You can't count the spending through September 30, 2009 against Obama. Except, like I said that you didn't read, he passed the stimulus bill in March of 2009, which we spent about $30 billion by September 30, 2009. So take the debt on October 1, 2009 and add $30 billion for the stimulus.
Again you can't read. I said conservatives call me a left wing liberal. Left wing liberals call me moderate or conservative. Do you understand that? Or should I type that slower next time too?
I call you a liar. Do you understand that?
You want to know how to take care of that bitterness race? See the first step is too pull your pants down. The second step is to grab your douche bag and wipe the sand out your vag.
I'm not bitter
Nope not at all. ;-)
Ok let's try this. You say "Obama spent $7 trillion". Why don't you point to the bills, executive orders, etc. of his that add up to $7 trillion. Should be relatively easy to find.
Already did. I told you, if you can't even admit the obvious there's no point. I'm going around in circles with you. What has been posted is clear to anyone with half a brain.
Comments
I do give you props for trying to contribute something other than a Photoshop job.
Like I said, I just have to sit back and let you show your stupidity. It's working quite well
Your a partisan hack who loves Obama. When you started posting here you claimed your friend though you're a conservative.
All you are is a lying sack like the president you support
Water is wet and Honda gurgles
Big surprise - those signing up are getting "free" healthcare at the expense of your former rates and doctor that you can't keep. It will only get worse and more expensive.
When Bush had republican control of the congress he spent like a drunken sailor. Obama spent like a boat load of drunken sailors. When Clinton had Newt to keep him in check we actually had a pretty good deal going.
You don't read well do you? Cause yes my point was $30 billion out of $7 trillion is meaningless, that's pretty much exactly what I said.
If you actually understood how the government works you'd understand this. I'll type slowly so you can maybe understand. You see, the president submits the budget to congress in March. So Bush's last budget was sent to Congress in March of 2008 that was for the period of October 1, 2008 to September 30, 2009. Obama's first budget was submitted in March of 2009 for the period beginning October 1, 2009. You can't count the spending through September 30, 2009 against Obama. Except, like I said that you didn't read, he passed the stimulus bill in March of 2009, which we spent about $30 billion by September 30, 2009. So take the debt on October 1, 2009 and add $30 billion for the stimulus.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_budget_process
Educate yourself.
Again you can't read. I said conservatives call me a left wing liberal. Left wing liberals call me moderate or conservative. Do you understand that? Or should I type that slower next time too?
Big surprise - those signing up are getting "free" healthcare at the expense of your former rates and doctor that you can't keep. It will only get worse and more expensive.
When Bush had republican control of the congress he spent like a drunken sailor. Obama spent like a boat load of drunken sailors. When Clinton had Newt to keep him in check we actually had a pretty good deal going.
Except spending as a percent of GDP increased drastically under Bush and decreased significantly under Obama. How is that "spending like a boat load of drunken sailors?" If you look at facts, spending has actually been under control under Obama.
Reading for comprehension might help you.
Reading for comprehension might help you.
The debt has increased exponentially under Obama
Stop with the bullshit. No one believes you. Liars figure and figures lie. Fuck off
Just look at facts. 1994 to 2001 is Clinton. 2002 to 2009 is Bush. 2010 and up is Obama. You notice the explosion in spending under Bush? And it's basically unchanged under Obama? Also notice the other side of the equation no conservative talks about. Revenues. Look what happens in 2009. Revenue tanked because the recession, which started 13 months before Obama took office.
Also look at the far right column. Spending as a prevent if GDP. Notice it went down most of Clinton and Obama's terms and up most of Bush's term.
Now look at revenue as a percent of GDP, notice how it goes up most of Clinton's and Obama's term and down most of Bush's.
It's not about Obama or Bush or republican or democrat. It's about facts. And the last 35 years (including Reagan), we have been much more fiscally responsible under democrats as president than Republicans.
Stop with the bullshit. No one believes you. Liars figure and figures lie. Fuck off
Except look at facts. See the link I posted. Your head is just stuck in the sand. It's OK to pull out it, the air is nice above the sans.
None of us are claiming that Bush wasn't a big spender. We're pointing out that Obama is a bigger spender and his biggest time bomb of all hasn't kicked in yet. Hard not to notice you're ignoring Obamacare. Why don't you find a graph that says it isn't what it is and get back to us.
There are Obamaites like you all over the web peddling this crap. If you were honest and just tried to defend him on what he has actually done it would be one thing,. Instead its the usual bullshit. I hope you don't think you're original.
The explosion under Bush was the one time stimulus that Obama claims saved the country. The fact that it is unchanged under Obama proves my point, not yours. That's why Obama has raised the debt more than every president combined.
Admit it or fuck off
Ok let's try this. You say "Obama spent $7 trillion". Why don't you point to the bills, executive orders, etc. of his that add up to $7 trillion. Should be relatively easy to find.