I expect she knows a great deal about banking. Don't care. WOOD.
Seems as if the people that “know a great deal about banking” tend to always side with the banks on any substantive matter
And rather that happen than a dipshit you claimed we "gutted" welfare in the 1990s despite the fact that welfare spending increased by $30B during the 90s. Or someone who thinks a budget with $700B in deficit spending is a sign of "austerity."
Federal spending as a % of GDP: 2009 - 24.3% 2010 - 23% 2011 - 23% 2012 - 21.8% 2013 - 20.5% 2014 - 20% 2015 - 20% 2016 - 20%
Number of welfare recipients in 2000 declined by 53% from 1996.
I know that yelling on this website is how you get your daily dopamine hit but you can log off now.
Stop hitting Bob with context and facts.
Work the balls Hondo, work the balls.
I thought the goal of welfare was to transition people back into the workforce making them productive members of society. Now we know that's an example of Welfare being "gutted."
Did we have an "austerity" budget under George W. Bush Hondo? Because there wasn't a single year of his presidency where the Federal Government spent more than 21% our GDP and every year but one was less than then numbers you're giving me now as "austerity." Hell in 2001 we spend 17.6% of our GDP and I don't recall anyone talking about austerity. Weird how you left out that "context" and those "facts."
Work the balls Hondo, work the balls.
Well given that spending went from 17.6% of GDP to 24.3% under Bush. No. I wouldn't call that austerity.
BTW. I'd also look up what that word means.
Bush was long gone from office when spending went to 24.3% of GDP Hondo and that number comes from the depth of the recession and includes both TARP and stimulus fraud spending.
I don't need to look up the meaning of austerity Hondo, you're the one who has your own person Kunt definition for words, not me.
Answer these questions.
Who pushed tarp? How much of the stimulus was spent by 2009 year end?
And Bush was in charge for almost 4 of the 9 months of 09.
Go fuck yourself, until you start answering questions I'm not responding to your requests Kunt.
Bush was long gone before spending rose to 24.3% of GDP. And Obama and the rest of the Rat controlled Congress voted for TARP.
Either way, spending above 20% of GDP happened in only just a few years since WWII. Claiming 21.8% of spending to GDP while running $800B plus budget deficits represents some kind of "austerity" budget is pure bullshit.
I expect she knows a great deal about banking. Don't care. WOOD.
Seems as if the people that “know a great deal about banking” tend to always side with the banks on any substantive matter
And rather that happen than a dipshit you claimed we "gutted" welfare in the 1990s despite the fact that welfare spending increased by $30B during the 90s. Or someone who thinks a budget with $700B in deficit spending is a sign of "austerity."
Federal spending as a % of GDP: 2009 - 24.3% 2010 - 23% 2011 - 23% 2012 - 21.8% 2013 - 20.5% 2014 - 20% 2015 - 20% 2016 - 20%
Number of welfare recipients in 2000 declined by 53% from 1996.
I know that yelling on this website is how you get your daily dopamine hit but you can log off now.
Stop hitting Bob with context and facts.
Work the balls Hondo, work the balls.
I thought the goal of welfare was to transition people back into the workforce making them productive members of society. Now we know that's an example of Welfare being "gutted."
Did we have an "austerity" budget under George W. Bush Hondo? Because there wasn't a single year of his presidency where the Federal Government spent more than 21% our GDP and every year but one was less than then numbers you're giving me now as "austerity." Hell in 2001 we spend 17.6% of our GDP and I don't recall anyone talking about austerity. Weird how you left out that "context" and those "facts."
Work the balls Hondo, work the balls.
Well given that spending went from 17.6% of GDP to 24.3% under Bush. No. I wouldn't call that austerity.
BTW. I'd also look up what that word means.
Bush was long gone from office when spending went to 24.3% of GDP Hondo and that number comes from the depth of the recession and includes both TARP and stimulus fraud spending.
I don't need to look up the meaning of austerity Hondo, you're the one who has your own person Kunt definition for words, not me.
Answer these questions.
Who pushed tarp? How much of the stimulus was spent by 2009 year end?
And Bush was in charge for almost 4 of the 9 months of 09.
Go fuck yourself, until you start answering questions I'm not responding to your requests Kunt.
Bush was long gone before spending rose to 24.3% of GDP. And Obama and the rest of the Rat controlled Congress voted for TARP.
Either way, spending above 20% of GDP happened in only just a few years since WWII. Claiming 21.8% of spending to GDP while running $800B plus budget deficits represents some kind of "austerity" budget is pure bullshit.
So you don't care to understand what happened. You just want to think Bush had nothing to do with it and it's all Obama fault.
I expect she knows a great deal about banking. Don't care. WOOD.
Seems as if the people that “know a great deal about banking” tend to always side with the banks on any substantive matter
And rather that happen than a dipshit you claimed we "gutted" welfare in the 1990s despite the fact that welfare spending increased by $30B during the 90s. Or someone who thinks a budget with $700B in deficit spending is a sign of "austerity."
Federal spending as a % of GDP: 2009 - 24.3% 2010 - 23% 2011 - 23% 2012 - 21.8% 2013 - 20.5% 2014 - 20% 2015 - 20% 2016 - 20%
Number of welfare recipients in 2000 declined by 53% from 1996.
I know that yelling on this website is how you get your daily dopamine hit but you can log off now.
Stop hitting Bob with context and facts.
Work the balls Hondo, work the balls.
I thought the goal of welfare was to transition people back into the workforce making them productive members of society. Now we know that's an example of Welfare being "gutted."
Did we have an "austerity" budget under George W. Bush Hondo? Because there wasn't a single year of his presidency where the Federal Government spent more than 21% our GDP and every year but one was less than then numbers you're giving me now as "austerity." Hell in 2001 we spend 17.6% of our GDP and I don't recall anyone talking about austerity. Weird how you left out that "context" and those "facts."
Work the balls Hondo, work the balls.
Well given that spending went from 17.6% of GDP to 24.3% under Bush. No. I wouldn't call that austerity.
BTW. I'd also look up what that word means.
Bush was long gone from office when spending went to 24.3% of GDP Hondo and that number comes from the depth of the recession and includes both TARP and stimulus fraud spending.
I don't need to look up the meaning of austerity Hondo, you're the one who has your own person Kunt definition for words, not me.
Answer these questions.
Who pushed tarp? How much of the stimulus was spent by 2009 year end?
And Bush was in charge for almost 4 of the 9 months of 09.
Go fuck yourself, until you start answering questions I'm not responding to your requests Kunt.
Bush was long gone before spending rose to 24.3% of GDP. And Obama and the rest of the Rat controlled Congress voted for TARP.
Either way, spending above 20% of GDP happened in only just a few years since WWII. Claiming 21.8% of spending to GDP while running $800B plus budget deficits represents some kind of "austerity" budget is pure bullshit.
So you don't care to understand what happened. You just want to think Bush had nothing to do with it and it's all Obama fault.
Educate yourself man. Seriously.
I not only care about what happened I actually know what happened, and I know that you of all people aren't going to provide me with any information that will add to my knowledge on that topic.
I never claimed Bush had nothing to do with it or that it was all Obama's fault but a strawman ass fucker has got to do what a strawman ass fucker does.
The only topic you could "educate" me on Hondo is how to be a lying cocksucking piece of shit and frankly I have no interest in that.
I expect she knows a great deal about banking. Don't care. WOOD.
Seems as if the people that “know a great deal about banking” tend to always side with the banks on any substantive matter
And rather that happen than a dipshit you claimed we "gutted" welfare in the 1990s despite the fact that welfare spending increased by $30B during the 90s. Or someone who thinks a budget with $700B in deficit spending is a sign of "austerity."
Federal spending as a % of GDP: 2009 - 24.3% 2010 - 23% 2011 - 23% 2012 - 21.8% 2013 - 20.5% 2014 - 20% 2015 - 20% 2016 - 20%
Number of welfare recipients in 2000 declined by 53% from 1996.
I know that yelling on this website is how you get your daily dopamine hit but you can log off now.
Stop hitting Bob with context and facts.
Work the balls Hondo, work the balls.
I thought the goal of welfare was to transition people back into the workforce making them productive members of society. Now we know that's an example of Welfare being "gutted."
Did we have an "austerity" budget under George W. Bush Hondo? Because there wasn't a single year of his presidency where the Federal Government spent more than 21% our GDP and every year but one was less than then numbers you're giving me now as "austerity." Hell in 2001 we spend 17.6% of our GDP and I don't recall anyone talking about austerity. Weird how you left out that "context" and those "facts."
Work the balls Hondo, work the balls.
Well given that spending went from 17.6% of GDP to 24.3% under Bush. No. I wouldn't call that austerity.
BTW. I'd also look up what that word means.
Bush was long gone from office when spending went to 24.3% of GDP Hondo and that number comes from the depth of the recession and includes both TARP and stimulus fraud spending.
I don't need to look up the meaning of austerity Hondo, you're the one who has your own person Kunt definition for words, not me.
Answer these questions.
Who pushed tarp? How much of the stimulus was spent by 2009 year end?
And Bush was in charge for almost 4 of the 9 months of 09.
Go fuck yourself, until you start answering questions I'm not responding to your requests Kunt.
Bush was long gone before spending rose to 24.3% of GDP. And Obama and the rest of the Rat controlled Congress voted for TARP.
Either way, spending above 20% of GDP happened in only just a few years since WWII. Claiming 21.8% of spending to GDP while running $800B plus budget deficits represents some kind of "austerity" budget is pure bullshit.
So you don't care to understand what happened. You just want to think Bush had nothing to do with it and it's all Obama fault.
Educate yourself man. Seriously.
I not only care about what happened I actually know what happened, and I know that you of all people aren't going to provide me with any information that will add to my knowledge on that topic.
I never claimed Bush had nothing to do with it or that it was all Obama's fault but a strawman ass fucker has got to do what a strawman ass fucker does.
The only topic you could "educate" me on Hondo is how to be a lying cocksucking piece of shit and frankly I have no interest in that.
Read your comments, that's exactly how they come across.
Research how much of the stimulus was spent in FY 09. Yes 10 was on Obama, stimulus, shitty economy, Medicare part D, etc. But 09 had very little to do with Obama.
The only other time in our history that spending as a percentage of our GDP was ever higher than it reached under Obama was during WWII. Since WWII there have only been 14 years where the Federal Government spent a greater percentage of our GDP than Obama did in his lowest year of spending.
For 57 years after WWII according to Hondo and idiotic friend, the United States operated under an "austerity" budget.
Vietnam, Great Society, Medicare and NASA were all financed under an "austerity" budget according to these dipshits.
I expect she knows a great deal about banking. Don't care. WOOD.
Seems as if the people that “know a great deal about banking” tend to always side with the banks on any substantive matter
And rather that happen than a dipshit you claimed we "gutted" welfare in the 1990s despite the fact that welfare spending increased by $30B during the 90s. Or someone who thinks a budget with $700B in deficit spending is a sign of "austerity."
Federal spending as a % of GDP: 2009 - 24.3% 2010 - 23% 2011 - 23% 2012 - 21.8% 2013 - 20.5% 2014 - 20% 2015 - 20% 2016 - 20%
Number of welfare recipients in 2000 declined by 53% from 1996.
I know that yelling on this website is how you get your daily dopamine hit but you can log off now.
Stop hitting Bob with context and facts.
Work the balls Hondo, work the balls.
I thought the goal of welfare was to transition people back into the workforce making them productive members of society. Now we know that's an example of Welfare being "gutted."
Did we have an "austerity" budget under George W. Bush Hondo? Because there wasn't a single year of his presidency where the Federal Government spent more than 21% our GDP and every year but one was less than then numbers you're giving me now as "austerity." Hell in 2001 we spend 17.6% of our GDP and I don't recall anyone talking about austerity. Weird how you left out that "context" and those "facts."
Work the balls Hondo, work the balls.
Well given that spending went from 17.6% of GDP to 24.3% under Bush. No. I wouldn't call that austerity.
BTW. I'd also look up what that word means.
Bush was long gone from office when spending went to 24.3% of GDP Hondo and that number comes from the depth of the recession and includes both TARP and stimulus fraud spending.
I don't need to look up the meaning of austerity Hondo, you're the one who has your own person Kunt definition for words, not me.
Answer these questions.
Who pushed tarp? How much of the stimulus was spent by 2009 year end?
And Bush was in charge for almost 4 of the 9 months of 09.
Go fuck yourself, until you start answering questions I'm not responding to your requests Kunt.
Bush was long gone before spending rose to 24.3% of GDP. And Obama and the rest of the Rat controlled Congress voted for TARP.
Either way, spending above 20% of GDP happened in only just a few years since WWII. Claiming 21.8% of spending to GDP while running $800B plus budget deficits represents some kind of "austerity" budget is pure bullshit.
So you don't care to understand what happened. You just want to think Bush had nothing to do with it and it's all Obama fault.
Educate yourself man. Seriously.
I not only care about what happened I actually know what happened, and I know that you of all people aren't going to provide me with any information that will add to my knowledge on that topic.
I never claimed Bush had nothing to do with it or that it was all Obama's fault but a strawman ass fucker has got to do what a strawman ass fucker does.
The only topic you could "educate" me on Hondo is how to be a lying cocksucking piece of shit and frankly I have no interest in that.
Read your comments, that's exactly how they come across.
Research how much of the stimulus was spent in FY 09. Yes 10 was on Obama, stimulus, shitty economy, Medicare part D, etc. But 09 had very little to do with Obama.
That's just facts.
Yes, if you're a liar and moron I'm sure that's how they come across. I never said that it was all Obama's fault or that Bush had nothing to do with it. You come across as exactly like what you are Hondo, a strawman ass fucking moron who can't address what people here actually say.
I expect she knows a great deal about banking. Don't care. WOOD.
Seems as if the people that “know a great deal about banking” tend to always side with the banks on any substantive matter
And rather that happen than a dipshit you claimed we "gutted" welfare in the 1990s despite the fact that welfare spending increased by $30B during the 90s. Or someone who thinks a budget with $700B in deficit spending is a sign of "austerity."
Federal spending as a % of GDP: 2009 - 24.3% 2010 - 23% 2011 - 23% 2012 - 21.8% 2013 - 20.5% 2014 - 20% 2015 - 20% 2016 - 20%
Number of welfare recipients in 2000 declined by 53% from 1996.
I know that yelling on this website is how you get your daily dopamine hit but you can log off now.
Stop hitting Bob with context and facts.
Work the balls Hondo, work the balls.
I thought the goal of welfare was to transition people back into the workforce making them productive members of society. Now we know that's an example of Welfare being "gutted."
Did we have an "austerity" budget under George W. Bush Hondo? Because there wasn't a single year of his presidency where the Federal Government spent more than 21% our GDP and every year but one was less than then numbers you're giving me now as "austerity." Hell in 2001 we spend 17.6% of our GDP and I don't recall anyone talking about austerity. Weird how you left out that "context" and those "facts."
Work the balls Hondo, work the balls.
Well given that spending went from 17.6% of GDP to 24.3% under Bush. No. I wouldn't call that austerity.
BTW. I'd also look up what that word means.
Bush was long gone from office when spending went to 24.3% of GDP Hondo and that number comes from the depth of the recession and includes both TARP and stimulus fraud spending.
I don't need to look up the meaning of austerity Hondo, you're the one who has your own person Kunt definition for words, not me.
Answer these questions.
Who pushed tarp? How much of the stimulus was spent by 2009 year end?
And Bush was in charge for almost 4 of the 9 months of 09.
Go fuck yourself, until you start answering questions I'm not responding to your requests Kunt.
Bush was long gone before spending rose to 24.3% of GDP. And Obama and the rest of the Rat controlled Congress voted for TARP.
Either way, spending above 20% of GDP happened in only just a few years since WWII. Claiming 21.8% of spending to GDP while running $800B plus budget deficits represents some kind of "austerity" budget is pure bullshit.
So you don't care to understand what happened. You just want to think Bush had nothing to do with it and it's all Obama fault.
Educate yourself man. Seriously.
I not only care about what happened I actually know what happened, and I know that you of all people aren't going to provide me with any information that will add to my knowledge on that topic.
I never claimed Bush had nothing to do with it or that it was all Obama's fault but a strawman ass fucker has got to do what a strawman ass fucker does.
The only topic you could "educate" me on Hondo is how to be a lying cocksucking piece of shit and frankly I have no interest in that.
Read your comments, that's exactly how they come across.
Research how much of the stimulus was spent in FY 09. Yes 10 was on Obama, stimulus, shitty economy, Medicare part D, etc. But 09 had very little to do with Obama.
That's just facts.
Yes, if you're a liar and moron I'm sure that's how they come across. I never said that it was all Obama's fault or that Bush had nothing to do with it. You come across as exactly like what you are Hondo, a strawman ass fucking moron who can't address what people here actually say.
No, you just said, "Bush was long gone before spending rose to 24.3% of GDP" in FY 2009. That would be the budget approved in calendar year 2008, of course. You're at least as honest as Daddy is, blob.
I expect she knows a great deal about banking. Don't care. WOOD.
Seems as if the people that “know a great deal about banking” tend to always side with the banks on any substantive matter
And rather that happen than a dipshit you claimed we "gutted" welfare in the 1990s despite the fact that welfare spending increased by $30B during the 90s. Or someone who thinks a budget with $700B in deficit spending is a sign of "austerity."
Federal spending as a % of GDP: 2009 - 24.3% 2010 - 23% 2011 - 23% 2012 - 21.8% 2013 - 20.5% 2014 - 20% 2015 - 20% 2016 - 20%
Number of welfare recipients in 2000 declined by 53% from 1996.
I know that yelling on this website is how you get your daily dopamine hit but you can log off now.
Stop hitting Bob with context and facts.
Work the balls Hondo, work the balls.
I thought the goal of welfare was to transition people back into the workforce making them productive members of society. Now we know that's an example of Welfare being "gutted."
Did we have an "austerity" budget under George W. Bush Hondo? Because there wasn't a single year of his presidency where the Federal Government spent more than 21% our GDP and every year but one was less than then numbers you're giving me now as "austerity." Hell in 2001 we spend 17.6% of our GDP and I don't recall anyone talking about austerity. Weird how you left out that "context" and those "facts."
Work the balls Hondo, work the balls.
Well given that spending went from 17.6% of GDP to 24.3% under Bush. No. I wouldn't call that austerity.
BTW. I'd also look up what that word means.
Bush was long gone from office when spending went to 24.3% of GDP Hondo and that number comes from the depth of the recession and includes both TARP and stimulus fraud spending.
I don't need to look up the meaning of austerity Hondo, you're the one who has your own person Kunt definition for words, not me.
Answer these questions.
Who pushed tarp? How much of the stimulus was spent by 2009 year end?
And Bush was in charge for almost 4 of the 9 months of 09.
Go fuck yourself, until you start answering questions I'm not responding to your requests Kunt.
Bush was long gone before spending rose to 24.3% of GDP. And Obama and the rest of the Rat controlled Congress voted for TARP.
Either way, spending above 20% of GDP happened in only just a few years since WWII. Claiming 21.8% of spending to GDP while running $800B plus budget deficits represents some kind of "austerity" budget is pure bullshit.
So you don't care to understand what happened. You just want to think Bush had nothing to do with it and it's all Obama fault.
Educate yourself man. Seriously.
I not only care about what happened I actually know what happened, and I know that you of all people aren't going to provide me with any information that will add to my knowledge on that topic.
I never claimed Bush had nothing to do with it or that it was all Obama's fault but a strawman ass fucker has got to do what a strawman ass fucker does.
The only topic you could "educate" me on Hondo is how to be a lying cocksucking piece of shit and frankly I have no interest in that.
Read your comments, that's exactly how they come across.
Research how much of the stimulus was spent in FY 09. Yes 10 was on Obama, stimulus, shitty economy, Medicare part D, etc. But 09 had very little to do with Obama.
That's just facts.
Yes, if you're a liar and moron I'm sure that's how they come across. I never said that it was all Obama's fault or that Bush had nothing to do with it. You come across as exactly like what you are Hondo, a strawman ass fucking moron who can't address what people here actually say.
Why won't you research how much of the stimulus was spent in the FY 09 fiscal year?
I expect she knows a great deal about banking. Don't care. WOOD.
Seems as if the people that “know a great deal about banking” tend to always side with the banks on any substantive matter
And rather that happen than a dipshit you claimed we "gutted" welfare in the 1990s despite the fact that welfare spending increased by $30B during the 90s. Or someone who thinks a budget with $700B in deficit spending is a sign of "austerity."
Federal spending as a % of GDP: 2009 - 24.3% 2010 - 23% 2011 - 23% 2012 - 21.8% 2013 - 20.5% 2014 - 20% 2015 - 20% 2016 - 20%
Number of welfare recipients in 2000 declined by 53% from 1996.
I know that yelling on this website is how you get your daily dopamine hit but you can log off now.
Stop hitting Bob with context and facts.
Work the balls Hondo, work the balls.
I thought the goal of welfare was to transition people back into the workforce making them productive members of society. Now we know that's an example of Welfare being "gutted."
Did we have an "austerity" budget under George W. Bush Hondo? Because there wasn't a single year of his presidency where the Federal Government spent more than 21% our GDP and every year but one was less than then numbers you're giving me now as "austerity." Hell in 2001 we spend 17.6% of our GDP and I don't recall anyone talking about austerity. Weird how you left out that "context" and those "facts."
Work the balls Hondo, work the balls.
Well given that spending went from 17.6% of GDP to 24.3% under Bush. No. I wouldn't call that austerity.
BTW. I'd also look up what that word means.
Bush was long gone from office when spending went to 24.3% of GDP Hondo and that number comes from the depth of the recession and includes both TARP and stimulus fraud spending.
I don't need to look up the meaning of austerity Hondo, you're the one who has your own person Kunt definition for words, not me.
Answer these questions.
Who pushed tarp? How much of the stimulus was spent by 2009 year end?
And Bush was in charge for almost 4 of the 9 months of 09.
Go fuck yourself, until you start answering questions I'm not responding to your requests Kunt.
Bush was long gone before spending rose to 24.3% of GDP. And Obama and the rest of the Rat controlled Congress voted for TARP.
Either way, spending above 20% of GDP happened in only just a few years since WWII. Claiming 21.8% of spending to GDP while running $800B plus budget deficits represents some kind of "austerity" budget is pure bullshit.
So you don't care to understand what happened. You just want to think Bush had nothing to do with it and it's all Obama fault.
Educate yourself man. Seriously.
I not only care about what happened I actually know what happened, and I know that you of all people aren't going to provide me with any information that will add to my knowledge on that topic.
I never claimed Bush had nothing to do with it or that it was all Obama's fault but a strawman ass fucker has got to do what a strawman ass fucker does.
The only topic you could "educate" me on Hondo is how to be a lying cocksucking piece of shit and frankly I have no interest in that.
Read your comments, that's exactly how they come across.
Research how much of the stimulus was spent in FY 09. Yes 10 was on Obama, stimulus, shitty economy, Medicare part D, etc. But 09 had very little to do with Obama.
That's just facts.
Yes, if you're a liar and moron I'm sure that's how they come across. I never said that it was all Obama's fault or that Bush had nothing to do with it. You come across as exactly like what you are Hondo, a strawman ass fucking moron who can't address what people here actually say.
No, you just said, "Bush was long gone before spending rose to 24.3% of GDP" in FY 2009. That would be the budget approved in calendar year 2008, of course. You're at least as honest as Daddy is, blob.
Approved in Calendar year 2008 and passed by both the Rat held Congress and the Rat held Senate. Obama's stimulus package that was passed by the Rat held House and Rat held Senate also added to that 2009 budget.
I'm not denying that Bush signed the budget but Obama and his party's finger prints are also all over that spending. It's not as if Obama opposed any of that spending, and he was more than happy to take credit for TARP and the Stimulus Fraud when he could use them to claim that's how he saved us from economic ruin.
I expect she knows a great deal about banking. Don't care. WOOD.
Seems as if the people that “know a great deal about banking” tend to always side with the banks on any substantive matter
And rather that happen than a dipshit you claimed we "gutted" welfare in the 1990s despite the fact that welfare spending increased by $30B during the 90s. Or someone who thinks a budget with $700B in deficit spending is a sign of "austerity."
Federal spending as a % of GDP: 2009 - 24.3% 2010 - 23% 2011 - 23% 2012 - 21.8% 2013 - 20.5% 2014 - 20% 2015 - 20% 2016 - 20%
Number of welfare recipients in 2000 declined by 53% from 1996.
I know that yelling on this website is how you get your daily dopamine hit but you can log off now.
Stop hitting Bob with context and facts.
Work the balls Hondo, work the balls.
I thought the goal of welfare was to transition people back into the workforce making them productive members of society. Now we know that's an example of Welfare being "gutted."
Did we have an "austerity" budget under George W. Bush Hondo? Because there wasn't a single year of his presidency where the Federal Government spent more than 21% our GDP and every year but one was less than then numbers you're giving me now as "austerity." Hell in 2001 we spend 17.6% of our GDP and I don't recall anyone talking about austerity. Weird how you left out that "context" and those "facts."
Work the balls Hondo, work the balls.
Well given that spending went from 17.6% of GDP to 24.3% under Bush. No. I wouldn't call that austerity.
BTW. I'd also look up what that word means.
Bush was long gone from office when spending went to 24.3% of GDP Hondo and that number comes from the depth of the recession and includes both TARP and stimulus fraud spending.
I don't need to look up the meaning of austerity Hondo, you're the one who has your own person Kunt definition for words, not me.
Answer these questions.
Who pushed tarp? How much of the stimulus was spent by 2009 year end?
And Bush was in charge for almost 4 of the 9 months of 09.
Go fuck yourself, until you start answering questions I'm not responding to your requests Kunt.
Bush was long gone before spending rose to 24.3% of GDP. And Obama and the rest of the Rat controlled Congress voted for TARP.
Either way, spending above 20% of GDP happened in only just a few years since WWII. Claiming 21.8% of spending to GDP while running $800B plus budget deficits represents some kind of "austerity" budget is pure bullshit.
So you don't care to understand what happened. You just want to think Bush had nothing to do with it and it's all Obama fault.
Educate yourself man. Seriously.
I not only care about what happened I actually know what happened, and I know that you of all people aren't going to provide me with any information that will add to my knowledge on that topic.
I never claimed Bush had nothing to do with it or that it was all Obama's fault but a strawman ass fucker has got to do what a strawman ass fucker does.
The only topic you could "educate" me on Hondo is how to be a lying cocksucking piece of shit and frankly I have no interest in that.
Read your comments, that's exactly how they come across.
Research how much of the stimulus was spent in FY 09. Yes 10 was on Obama, stimulus, shitty economy, Medicare part D, etc. But 09 had very little to do with Obama.
That's just facts.
Yes, if you're a liar and moron I'm sure that's how they come across. I never said that it was all Obama's fault or that Bush had nothing to do with it. You come across as exactly like what you are Hondo, a strawman ass fucking moron who can't address what people here actually say.
Why won't you research how much of the stimulus was spent in the FY 09 fiscal year?
Why are you saying you like sucking dick Hondo? Why have you done nothing to address your bullshit about Obama's budget being an "austerity" budget? Why have you done nothing to support your bullshit about Welfare being "gutted" simply because people left it as they found jobs?
I don't know how much of it was spent in 2009 but I know that part of it was budgeted to 2009 and added to the budget deficit. There isn't a piece of spending in that 2009 budget that Obama voted against and all of it was passed by a Rat held Congress.
I expect she knows a great deal about banking. Don't care. WOOD.
Seems as if the people that “know a great deal about banking” tend to always side with the banks on any substantive matter
And rather that happen than a dipshit you claimed we "gutted" welfare in the 1990s despite the fact that welfare spending increased by $30B during the 90s. Or someone who thinks a budget with $700B in deficit spending is a sign of "austerity."
Federal spending as a % of GDP: 2009 - 24.3% 2010 - 23% 2011 - 23% 2012 - 21.8% 2013 - 20.5% 2014 - 20% 2015 - 20% 2016 - 20%
Number of welfare recipients in 2000 declined by 53% from 1996.
I know that yelling on this website is how you get your daily dopamine hit but you can log off now.
Stop hitting Bob with context and facts.
Work the balls Hondo, work the balls.
I thought the goal of welfare was to transition people back into the workforce making them productive members of society. Now we know that's an example of Welfare being "gutted."
Did we have an "austerity" budget under George W. Bush Hondo? Because there wasn't a single year of his presidency where the Federal Government spent more than 21% our GDP and every year but one was less than then numbers you're giving me now as "austerity." Hell in 2001 we spend 17.6% of our GDP and I don't recall anyone talking about austerity. Weird how you left out that "context" and those "facts."
Work the balls Hondo, work the balls.
Well given that spending went from 17.6% of GDP to 24.3% under Bush. No. I wouldn't call that austerity.
BTW. I'd also look up what that word means.
Bush was long gone from office when spending went to 24.3% of GDP Hondo and that number comes from the depth of the recession and includes both TARP and stimulus fraud spending.
I don't need to look up the meaning of austerity Hondo, you're the one who has your own person Kunt definition for words, not me.
Answer these questions.
Who pushed tarp? How much of the stimulus was spent by 2009 year end?
And Bush was in charge for almost 4 of the 9 months of 09.
Go fuck yourself, until you start answering questions I'm not responding to your requests Kunt.
Bush was long gone before spending rose to 24.3% of GDP. And Obama and the rest of the Rat controlled Congress voted for TARP.
Either way, spending above 20% of GDP happened in only just a few years since WWII. Claiming 21.8% of spending to GDP while running $800B plus budget deficits represents some kind of "austerity" budget is pure bullshit.
So you don't care to understand what happened. You just want to think Bush had nothing to do with it and it's all Obama fault.
Educate yourself man. Seriously.
I not only care about what happened I actually know what happened, and I know that you of all people aren't going to provide me with any information that will add to my knowledge on that topic.
I never claimed Bush had nothing to do with it or that it was all Obama's fault but a strawman ass fucker has got to do what a strawman ass fucker does.
The only topic you could "educate" me on Hondo is how to be a lying cocksucking piece of shit and frankly I have no interest in that.
Read your comments, that's exactly how they come across.
Research how much of the stimulus was spent in FY 09. Yes 10 was on Obama, stimulus, shitty economy, Medicare part D, etc. But 09 had very little to do with Obama.
That's just facts.
Yes, if you're a liar and moron I'm sure that's how they come across. I never said that it was all Obama's fault or that Bush had nothing to do with it. You come across as exactly like what you are Hondo, a strawman ass fucking moron who can't address what people here actually say.
No, you just said, "Bush was long gone before spending rose to 24.3% of GDP" in FY 2009. That would be the budget approved in calendar year 2008, of course. You're at least as honest as Daddy is, blob.
Approved in Calendar year 2008 and passed by both the Rat held Congress and the Rat held Senate. Obama's stimulus package that was passed by the Rat held House and Rat held Senate also added to that 2009 budget.
I'm not denying that Bush signed the budget but Obama and his party's finger prints are also all over that spending. It's not as if Obama opposed any of that spending, and he was more than happy to take credit for TARP and the Stimulus Fraud when he could use them to claim that's how he saved us from economic ruin.
And so blob shifts from Bush was "long gone" all the way to "but Obama didn't oppose any of Bush's proposed spending". 'Cuz blob's about the honesty.
I expect she knows a great deal about banking. Don't care. WOOD.
Seems as if the people that “know a great deal about banking” tend to always side with the banks on any substantive matter
And rather that happen than a dipshit you claimed we "gutted" welfare in the 1990s despite the fact that welfare spending increased by $30B during the 90s. Or someone who thinks a budget with $700B in deficit spending is a sign of "austerity."
Federal spending as a % of GDP: 2009 - 24.3% 2010 - 23% 2011 - 23% 2012 - 21.8% 2013 - 20.5% 2014 - 20% 2015 - 20% 2016 - 20%
Number of welfare recipients in 2000 declined by 53% from 1996.
I know that yelling on this website is how you get your daily dopamine hit but you can log off now.
Stop hitting Bob with context and facts.
Work the balls Hondo, work the balls.
I thought the goal of welfare was to transition people back into the workforce making them productive members of society. Now we know that's an example of Welfare being "gutted."
Did we have an "austerity" budget under George W. Bush Hondo? Because there wasn't a single year of his presidency where the Federal Government spent more than 21% our GDP and every year but one was less than then numbers you're giving me now as "austerity." Hell in 2001 we spend 17.6% of our GDP and I don't recall anyone talking about austerity. Weird how you left out that "context" and those "facts."
Work the balls Hondo, work the balls.
Well given that spending went from 17.6% of GDP to 24.3% under Bush. No. I wouldn't call that austerity.
BTW. I'd also look up what that word means.
Bush was long gone from office when spending went to 24.3% of GDP Hondo and that number comes from the depth of the recession and includes both TARP and stimulus fraud spending.
I don't need to look up the meaning of austerity Hondo, you're the one who has your own person Kunt definition for words, not me.
Answer these questions.
Who pushed tarp? How much of the stimulus was spent by 2009 year end?
And Bush was in charge for almost 4 of the 9 months of 09.
Go fuck yourself, until you start answering questions I'm not responding to your requests Kunt.
Bush was long gone before spending rose to 24.3% of GDP. And Obama and the rest of the Rat controlled Congress voted for TARP.
Either way, spending above 20% of GDP happened in only just a few years since WWII. Claiming 21.8% of spending to GDP while running $800B plus budget deficits represents some kind of "austerity" budget is pure bullshit.
So you don't care to understand what happened. You just want to think Bush had nothing to do with it and it's all Obama fault.
Educate yourself man. Seriously.
I not only care about what happened I actually know what happened, and I know that you of all people aren't going to provide me with any information that will add to my knowledge on that topic.
I never claimed Bush had nothing to do with it or that it was all Obama's fault but a strawman ass fucker has got to do what a strawman ass fucker does.
The only topic you could "educate" me on Hondo is how to be a lying cocksucking piece of shit and frankly I have no interest in that.
Read your comments, that's exactly how they come across.
Research how much of the stimulus was spent in FY 09. Yes 10 was on Obama, stimulus, shitty economy, Medicare part D, etc. But 09 had very little to do with Obama.
That's just facts.
Yes, if you're a liar and moron I'm sure that's how they come across. I never said that it was all Obama's fault or that Bush had nothing to do with it. You come across as exactly like what you are Hondo, a strawman ass fucking moron who can't address what people here actually say.
Why won't you research how much of the stimulus was spent in the FY 09 fiscal year?
Why are you saying you like sucking dick Hondo? Why have you done nothing to address your bullshit about Obama's budget being an "austerity" budget? Why have you done nothing to support your bullshit about Welfare being "gutted" simply because people left it as they found jobs?
I don't know how much of it was spent in 2009 but I know that part of it was budgeted to 2009 and added to the budget deficit. There isn't a piece of spending in that 2009 budget that Obama voted against and all of it was passed by a Rat held Congress.
I didn't say welfare was gutted. Someone else used Clinton's words "end welfare as we know it" in quotes as sarcasm that you of course took literally. I've been laughing at you about that for few days now.
Did Obama vote for unfunded Medicare part D?
Seriously, look up how much Obama put his fingers on in 09. He does have a part but it's less than $100 billion.
Why are you afraid to educate yourself even if the answer goes against your preconceived notions?
No, just the guy who's ass your were tonguing claiming he'd provided "context and facts" said it. Are you backtracking on that now Hondo? I didn't respond to "end welfare as we know it" Kunt. I specifically responded to the claim that we "gutted" Welfare so laugh at that you strawman ass fucking Kunt.
Obama voted for TARP you lying piece of crap and he voted in favor of the 2009 Budget. He had his fingers on a lot more than $100B. What a lying worthless piece of shit you are Hondo.
I love it when this lying fucking moron talks to me about educating myself while he blatantly lies and misrepresents the facts.
I expect she knows a great deal about banking. Don't care. WOOD.
Seems as if the people that “know a great deal about banking” tend to always side with the banks on any substantive matter
And rather that happen than a dipshit you claimed we "gutted" welfare in the 1990s despite the fact that welfare spending increased by $30B during the 90s. Or someone who thinks a budget with $700B in deficit spending is a sign of "austerity."
Federal spending as a % of GDP: 2009 - 24.3% 2010 - 23% 2011 - 23% 2012 - 21.8% 2013 - 20.5% 2014 - 20% 2015 - 20% 2016 - 20%
Number of welfare recipients in 2000 declined by 53% from 1996.
I know that yelling on this website is how you get your daily dopamine hit but you can log off now.
Stop hitting Bob with context and facts.
Work the balls Hondo, work the balls.
I thought the goal of welfare was to transition people back into the workforce making them productive members of society. Now we know that's an example of Welfare being "gutted."
Did we have an "austerity" budget under George W. Bush Hondo? Because there wasn't a single year of his presidency where the Federal Government spent more than 21% our GDP and every year but one was less than then numbers you're giving me now as "austerity." Hell in 2001 we spend 17.6% of our GDP and I don't recall anyone talking about austerity. Weird how you left out that "context" and those "facts."
Work the balls Hondo, work the balls.
Well given that spending went from 17.6% of GDP to 24.3% under Bush. No. I wouldn't call that austerity.
BTW. I'd also look up what that word means.
Bush was long gone from office when spending went to 24.3% of GDP Hondo and that number comes from the depth of the recession and includes both TARP and stimulus fraud spending.
I don't need to look up the meaning of austerity Hondo, you're the one who has your own person Kunt definition for words, not me.
Answer these questions.
Who pushed tarp? How much of the stimulus was spent by 2009 year end?
And Bush was in charge for almost 4 of the 9 months of 09.
Go fuck yourself, until you start answering questions I'm not responding to your requests Kunt.
Bush was long gone before spending rose to 24.3% of GDP. And Obama and the rest of the Rat controlled Congress voted for TARP.
Either way, spending above 20% of GDP happened in only just a few years since WWII. Claiming 21.8% of spending to GDP while running $800B plus budget deficits represents some kind of "austerity" budget is pure bullshit.
So you don't care to understand what happened. You just want to think Bush had nothing to do with it and it's all Obama fault.
Educate yourself man. Seriously.
I not only care about what happened I actually know what happened, and I know that you of all people aren't going to provide me with any information that will add to my knowledge on that topic.
I never claimed Bush had nothing to do with it or that it was all Obama's fault but a strawman ass fucker has got to do what a strawman ass fucker does.
The only topic you could "educate" me on Hondo is how to be a lying cocksucking piece of shit and frankly I have no interest in that.
Read your comments, that's exactly how they come across.
Research how much of the stimulus was spent in FY 09. Yes 10 was on Obama, stimulus, shitty economy, Medicare part D, etc. But 09 had very little to do with Obama.
That's just facts.
Yes, if you're a liar and moron I'm sure that's how they come across. I never said that it was all Obama's fault or that Bush had nothing to do with it. You come across as exactly like what you are Hondo, a strawman ass fucking moron who can't address what people here actually say.
No, you just said, "Bush was long gone before spending rose to 24.3% of GDP" in FY 2009. That would be the budget approved in calendar year 2008, of course. You're at least as honest as Daddy is, blob.
Approved in Calendar year 2008 and passed by both the Rat held Congress and the Rat held Senate. Obama's stimulus package that was passed by the Rat held House and Rat held Senate also added to that 2009 budget.
I'm not denying that Bush signed the budget but Obama and his party's finger prints are also all over that spending. It's not as if Obama opposed any of that spending, and he was more than happy to take credit for TARP and the Stimulus Fraud when he could use them to claim that's how he saved us from economic ruin.
And so blob shifts from Bush was "long gone" all the way to "but Obama didn't oppose any of Bush's proposed spending". 'Cuz blob's about the honesty.
No, I haven't "shifted" from anything. That was always my position. Spending as a percentage of GDP reached its peak when Obama was in office and Bush was long gone. All of this spending stemmed from budgets and programs that Obama and his party supported and some of it stemmed from spending solely supported by Obama and his party. Cash for Clunkers wasn't a Bush program. The stimulus fraud wasn't a Bush program. Sorry if those facts make your Kunt hurt O'Keefed.
No, just the guy who's ass your were tonguing claiming he'd provided "context and facts" said it. Are you backtracking on that now Hondo? I didn't respond to "end welfare as we know it" Kunt. I specifically responded to the claim that we "gutted" Welfare so laugh at that you strawman ass fucking Kunt.
Obama voted for TARP you lying piece of crap and he voted in favor of the 2009 Budget. He had his fingers on a lot more than $100B. What a lying worthless piece of shit you are Hondo.
I love it when this lying fucking moron talks to me about educating myself while he blatantly lies and misrepresents the facts.
Where did I say Obama didn't vote for tarp? You are going senile old man.
I expect she knows a great deal about banking. Don't care. WOOD.
Seems as if the people that “know a great deal about banking” tend to always side with the banks on any substantive matter
And rather that happen than a dipshit you claimed we "gutted" welfare in the 1990s despite the fact that welfare spending increased by $30B during the 90s. Or someone who thinks a budget with $700B in deficit spending is a sign of "austerity."
Federal spending as a % of GDP: 2009 - 24.3% 2010 - 23% 2011 - 23% 2012 - 21.8% 2013 - 20.5% 2014 - 20% 2015 - 20% 2016 - 20%
Number of welfare recipients in 2000 declined by 53% from 1996.
I know that yelling on this website is how you get your daily dopamine hit but you can log off now.
Stop hitting Bob with context and facts.
Work the balls Hondo, work the balls.
I thought the goal of welfare was to transition people back into the workforce making them productive members of society. Now we know that's an example of Welfare being "gutted."
Did we have an "austerity" budget under George W. Bush Hondo? Because there wasn't a single year of his presidency where the Federal Government spent more than 21% our GDP and every year but one was less than then numbers you're giving me now as "austerity." Hell in 2001 we spend 17.6% of our GDP and I don't recall anyone talking about austerity. Weird how you left out that "context" and those "facts."
Work the balls Hondo, work the balls.
Well given that spending went from 17.6% of GDP to 24.3% under Bush. No. I wouldn't call that austerity.
BTW. I'd also look up what that word means.
Bush was long gone from office when spending went to 24.3% of GDP Hondo and that number comes from the depth of the recession and includes both TARP and stimulus fraud spending.
I don't need to look up the meaning of austerity Hondo, you're the one who has your own person Kunt definition for words, not me.
Answer these questions.
Who pushed tarp? How much of the stimulus was spent by 2009 year end?
And Bush was in charge for almost 4 of the 9 months of 09.
Go fuck yourself, until you start answering questions I'm not responding to your requests Kunt.
Bush was long gone before spending rose to 24.3% of GDP. And Obama and the rest of the Rat controlled Congress voted for TARP.
Either way, spending above 20% of GDP happened in only just a few years since WWII. Claiming 21.8% of spending to GDP while running $800B plus budget deficits represents some kind of "austerity" budget is pure bullshit.
So you don't care to understand what happened. You just want to think Bush had nothing to do with it and it's all Obama fault.
Educate yourself man. Seriously.
I not only care about what happened I actually know what happened, and I know that you of all people aren't going to provide me with any information that will add to my knowledge on that topic.
I never claimed Bush had nothing to do with it or that it was all Obama's fault but a strawman ass fucker has got to do what a strawman ass fucker does.
The only topic you could "educate" me on Hondo is how to be a lying cocksucking piece of shit and frankly I have no interest in that.
Read your comments, that's exactly how they come across.
Research how much of the stimulus was spent in FY 09. Yes 10 was on Obama, stimulus, shitty economy, Medicare part D, etc. But 09 had very little to do with Obama.
That's just facts.
Yes, if you're a liar and moron I'm sure that's how they come across. I never said that it was all Obama's fault or that Bush had nothing to do with it. You come across as exactly like what you are Hondo, a strawman ass fucking moron who can't address what people here actually say.
No, you just said, "Bush was long gone before spending rose to 24.3% of GDP" in FY 2009. That would be the budget approved in calendar year 2008, of course. You're at least as honest as Daddy is, blob.
Approved in Calendar year 2008 and passed by both the Rat held Congress and the Rat held Senate. Obama's stimulus package that was passed by the Rat held House and Rat held Senate also added to that 2009 budget.
I'm not denying that Bush signed the budget but Obama and his party's finger prints are also all over that spending. It's not as if Obama opposed any of that spending, and he was more than happy to take credit for TARP and the Stimulus Fraud when he could use them to claim that's how he saved us from economic ruin.
And so blob shifts from Bush was "long gone" all the way to "but Obama didn't oppose any of Bush's proposed spending". 'Cuz blob's about the honesty.
No, I haven't "shifted" from anything. That was always my position. Spending as a percentage of GDP reached its peak when Obama was in office and Bush was long gone. All of this spending stemmed from budgets and programs that Obama and his party supported and some of it stemmed from spending solely supported by Obama and his party. Cash for Clunkers wasn't a Bush program. The stimulus fraud wasn't a Bush program. Sorry if those facts make your Kunt hurt O'Keefed.
Republicans pushed tarp and voted for the stimulus. Now you are solely blaming Obama. El oh El.
It's ok to place blame on conversing m conservatives too.
And you ignoring Medicare part D didn't go unnoticed.
No, just the guy who's ass your were tonguing claiming he'd provided "context and facts" said it. Are you backtracking on that now Hondo? I didn't respond to "end welfare as we know it" Kunt. I specifically responded to the claim that we "gutted" Welfare so laugh at that you strawman ass fucking Kunt.
Obama voted for TARP you lying piece of crap and he voted in favor of the 2009 Budget. He had his fingers on a lot more than $100B. What a lying worthless piece of shit you are Hondo.
I love it when this lying fucking moron talks to me about educating myself while he blatantly lies and misrepresents the facts.
Where did I say Obama didn't vote for tarp? You are going senile old man.
Look up the stimulus. Seriously.
When you claimed that his fingers were only on less than a $100 Billion of the 2009 Spending
You're lying like you always do Kunt. Obama voted for TARP, he voted for the 2009 Budget, He signed the Stimulus fraud and spent money from that program in 2009. Cash for clunkers was an Obama program.
He had his fingers on a lot more than $100B in spending. What spending in 2009 did Obama oppose Hondo?
Can you admit you lied your ass off when you claimed that Obama only had his finger prints on less than $100B in spending in 2009. There wasn't single Republican in the House that voted for the stimulus fraud and in the Senate I believe it got 3 Republican votes. Bush did push TARP and more Rats voted in favor of it in both the House and the Senate than did Republicans.
Hey Hondo lets talk about Medicare Part D. I opposed it. It also received Rat votes in support of it. As I recall, the Rats opposed it because they favored an even more expensive plan. It passed long before Obama was elected to the Senate.
So while Medicare part D was part of 2009 Budget, if the Rats would have gotten there way spending on that program would have been even greater.
Comments
Bush was long gone before spending rose to 24.3% of GDP. And Obama and the rest of the Rat controlled Congress voted for TARP.
Either way, spending above 20% of GDP happened in only just a few years since WWII. Claiming 21.8% of spending to GDP while running $800B plus budget deficits represents some kind of "austerity" budget is pure bullshit.
Educate yourself man. Seriously.
I never claimed Bush had nothing to do with it or that it was all Obama's fault but a strawman ass fucker has got to do what a strawman ass fucker does.
The only topic you could "educate" me on Hondo is how to be a lying cocksucking piece of shit and frankly I have no interest in that.
Research how much of the stimulus was spent in FY 09. Yes 10 was on Obama, stimulus, shitty economy, Medicare part D, etc. But 09 had very little to do with Obama.
That's just facts.
For 57 years after WWII according to Hondo and idiotic friend, the United States operated under an "austerity" budget.
Vietnam, Great Society, Medicare and NASA were all financed under an "austerity" budget according to these dipshits.
I'm not denying that Bush signed the budget but Obama and his party's finger prints are also all over that spending. It's not as if Obama opposed any of that spending, and he was more than happy to take credit for TARP and the Stimulus Fraud when he could use them to claim that's how he saved us from economic ruin.
I don't know how much of it was spent in 2009 but I know that part of it was budgeted to 2009 and added to the budget deficit. There isn't a piece of spending in that 2009 budget that Obama voted against and all of it was passed by a Rat held Congress.
Did Obama vote for unfunded Medicare part D?
Seriously, look up how much Obama put his fingers on in 09. He does have a part but it's less than $100 billion.
Why are you afraid to educate yourself even if the answer goes against your preconceived notions?
No, just the guy who's ass your were tonguing claiming he'd provided "context and facts" said it. Are you backtracking on that now Hondo? I didn't respond to "end welfare as we know it" Kunt. I specifically responded to the claim that we "gutted" Welfare so laugh at that you strawman ass fucking Kunt.
Obama voted for TARP you lying piece of crap and he voted in favor of the 2009 Budget. He had his fingers on a lot more than $100B. What a lying worthless piece of shit you are Hondo.
I love it when this lying fucking moron talks to me about educating myself while he blatantly lies and misrepresents the facts.
Look up the stimulus. Seriously.
It's ok to place blame on conversing m conservatives too.
And you ignoring Medicare part D didn't go unnoticed.
You're lying like you always do Kunt. Obama voted for TARP, he voted for the 2009 Budget, He signed the Stimulus fraud and spent money from that program in 2009. Cash for clunkers was an Obama program.
He had his fingers on a lot more than $100B in spending. What spending in 2009 did Obama oppose Hondo?
So while Medicare part D was part of 2009 Budget, if the Rats would have gotten there way spending on that program would have been even greater.
Funny how you left out that "context" Hondo.