Obama's Spending Spree

[heckofajobbrownie]

We talked about this a while ago, about how most of Obama's contributions to the deficit and the debt aren't from his "wild spending" but because of the effects of the recession. Well, here's a look at his spending in graph form. You'll see that most of it is automatic spending, not anything he approved, driven by the recession and the aging population.

 

Now, please, disregard this evidence and continue believing all that stuff about Obama's "wild spending" that you already want to believe in the first place.

[calfoxwc]

One little bitty graph from a special interest bigtime Dem ...a major part of the time...

 

Having Sullivan being your big authority to defend Obamao? LOL? Really?

 

Here, no, it isn't all Obamao's fault.

 

But he has kicked the debt over the cliff, and must be stopped.

 

For some REAL information - go here:

 

http://www.heritage.org/budgetchartbook/PDF/All-Budget-chart-book-2010.pdf

[Mr. T]

What is so funny about that graph is when the Democrats took control of Congress in 2007 the $pending went through the roof.

 

What Obama inherited was from his $pending liberal party.

 

You cannot blame this on "W". Obammy has been the president for almost 2 1/2 years now and he still likes to rob and give it away.

[heckofajobbrownie]

Eh. Maybe John will understand it.

[calfoxwc]

Understanding isn't the point. The graph is cherry picked, to present a major, complex conclusion, with a singular bit of information, designed to accomplish

 

the very thing you are trying to do.

 

Sullivan is a weirdo. Try a respectable source for once.

[Westside Steve]

 

Heck if blaming Bush gives you a boner go ahead.

He caused it all, OK?

 

Now it's time to move on to the fact that drastic (in US political terms) measures are called for.

 

YOu're a little like the "there ain't no climate change" guys.

Except for a few Democrat shills economists the world over see our debt as a real crisis.

 

No matter how evil Bush was todays solution needs to be more than class warfare.

 

Pull the trigger on Simpson Bowles.

And now in 2011 STFU about the cost of war. (not you personally but the Dems) We're all tired of it.

 

WSS

[heckofajobbrownie]

Bush didn't cause it all either. That's not what this is about.

 

Also, you did it again. (Dismiss the point. Cartoon, cartoon. Then change the subject to something else, and say Democrats are the problem.)

[heckofajobbrownie]

My point: Despite what the political rhetoric coming from the right is, the majority of the "spending" under Obama has been either automatic spending that kicked in because of the recession, health care spending that any president would be on the hook for, or spending to minimize the effects of the recession. It's not spending on new programs. His spending on new programs is only typical. Here's a graph that helps illustrate that point.

 

Your point: You want to blame it all on Bush because it gives you a hard-on! Democratic shills may not know it, but the debt is a crisis! (Insert class warfare talking point here.) And shut the xxxx up about the cost of the war. Don't mention it. We're all tired of it.

 

Honestly. This is how you ruin everything.

[Westside Steve]

My point: Despite what the political rhetoric coming from the right is, the majority of the "spending" under Obama has been either automatic spending that kicked in because of the recession, health care spending that any president would be on the hook for, or spending to minimize the effects of the recession. It's not spending on new programs. His spending on new programs is only typical. Here's a graph that helps illustrate that point.

 

Your point: You want to blame it all on Bush because it gives you a hard-on! Democratic shills may not know it, but the debt is a crisis! (Insert class warfare talking point here.) And shut the xxxx up about the cost of the war. Don't mention it. We're all tired of it.

 

Honestly. This is how you ruin everything.

 

Ruin?

As I recall your party "the left" has claimed now cfor years that the "recession" was caused by "the failed economic policies of the Bush administration."

When asked directly after a few times you agreed.

 

My point is that no matter who caused the problem it needs real action.

And I don't think this post in defense of Obama means much.

Though I see repealing the tax cuts would have a negative effect, I also thing Republicans have strapped themselves to the mast, for good or ill.

Simpson Bowles hardly seems like a right wing plot.

WSS

[heckofajobbrownie]

I did not say the recession was caused by "the failed economic policies of the bush administration." You're pulling that out of your ass.

 

In fact, we had a long conversation about what caused the economic collapse, remember? And that wasn't even close to the case I made. Not even close.

 

A little honesty would be nice.

 

And once again, I'm aware of what your point was. It's not the point of this thread. It had nothing to do with the thread's point. You changed the subject.

 

At this point I feel like I'm posting so John can read it and take from it what he will. Which isn't a great reason to post since John can read just fine by himself.

[Westside Steve]

I did not say the recession was caused by "the failed economic policies of the bush administration." You're pulling that out of your ass.

 

In fact, we had a long conversation about what caused the economic collapse, remember? And that wasn't even close to the case I made. Not even close.

 

A little honesty would be nice.

 

And once again, I'm aware of what your point was. It's not the point of this thread. It had nothing to do with the thread's point. You changed the subject.

 

At this point I feel like I'm posting so John can read it and take from it what he will. Which isn't a great reason to post since John can read just fine by himself.

 

You're lying.

That's exactly what Obama said.

And you backed it up.

WSS

[heckofajobbrownie]

I would not and have never said that the recession was caused by Bush administration policies. I'm sure I made the point that I didn't care much for Bush administration policies, and that the Bush administration deserves some blame for the recession, but that's entirely different than saying the recession was caused by Bush administration policies. The recession was caused by a variety of factors, and many of them had nothing to do with the government. I know you don't make distinctions, but that's a pretty easy one to make.

 

If you can present me with evidence of me claiming what you suggest, feel free. There's a nice search engine up there. Go nuts.

 

Otherwise, you're calling someone a liar while being wrong about the thing you're suggesting is a lie, which makes you look pretty stupid.

 

Will I get a retraction when you can't prove this? Of course not. That would require shame.

[calfoxwc]

No, you are a liar, Heck. You have made statements about me often, that you have to know are not true.

 

Liar, no wonder you rhetorically lick ObaMao the Chief Liar's toes... @@

[Westside Steve]

"I did not say the recession was caused by "the failed economic policies of the bush administration." You're pulling that out of your ass.

 

A little honesty would be nice"

 

Yeah that's a lot different from "You're lying."

Anyway I'm sure it's too much pain in the ass to read every post from the last 3 years but I recall it fairly well.

I was making fun of Obama (and everyone from the left) who parroted the phrase "the failed economic policies of the Bush [or the past administration's] administration and you swung into a typical defensive essay.

 

I'm sure I'd have remembered you launching a defense of Bush OR agreeing your guys were full of shit.

 

No idea if anyone actually reads our crap or remembers.

 

WSS

[heckofajobbrownie]

You don't even know what words mean. You accuse me of saying X, then I say I never said that, and then you call me a liar. I say I never said X, and ask you to prove it. You can't, because I never said X, so you accuse me of saying Y.

 

Your original claim: As I recall your party "the left" has claimed now cfor years that the "recession" was caused by "the failed economic policies of the Bush administration." When asked directly after a few times you agreed.

 

Me: I never said Bush administration's policies caused the recession. Not once.

 

Your new claim: I was making fun of Obama (and everyone from the left) who parroted the phrase "the failed economic policies of the Bush [or the past administration's] administration and you swung into a typical defensive essay.

 

 

You're pathetic.

[calfoxwc]

Good God, man. Of course you said "X".

 

Here's an exact quote from you:

 

"You accuse me of saying X"

 

so, you TYPED "X", therefore, in terms of entering a post, you "SAID" "X".

 

It's right there. What the freakin is your progressive lightweight problem, Mr. Quibblies ?

[VaporTrail]

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

 

 

This is cal's forte

[Westside Steve]

 

 

You're pathetic.

 

 

I'm crushed.

So then the actual liars (or fools) are those who blame Bush and his policies for the economic woes.

And you have vociferously opposed them all along.

 

Is that true?

WSS

[calfoxwc]

Yet again, Vapor proves to be working on becoming a major liberal weinie force:

 

he has no sense of humor...

[heckofajobbrownie]

I'm crushed.

So then the actual liars (or fools) are those who blame Bush and his policies for the economic woes.

And you have vociferously opposed them all along.

 

Is that true?

WSS

 

Ha. "Never mind the fact that I'm full of shit. Let's change the subject to how you're full of shit because you didn't oppose anyone who ever blamed Bush's policies for the economic woes!" (Still not what you said I claimed.) So, so pathetic.

 

Let's see if we can change the subject back to the part where you understand that you called someone a liar and were wrong, and take responsibility for being wrong.

 

Come on, Steve. You can do it.

[VaporTrail]

Yet again, Vapor proves to be working on becoming a major liberal weinie force:

 

he has no sense of humor...

 

Aww, c'mon! I made myself chuckle!

[Westside Steve]

Ha. "Never mind the fact that I'm full of shit. Let's change the subject to how you're full of shit because you didn't oppose anyone who ever blamed Bush's policies for the economic woes!" (Still not what you said I claimed.) So, so pathetic.

 

Let's see if we can change the subject back to the part where you understand that you called someone a liar and were wrong, and take responsibility for being wrong.

 

Come on, Steve. You can do it.

 

Nope. That was just an aside.

You attacked me for giving your boy shit for blaming Bush.

 

So now you say you guys were [lying] wrong.

OK.

WSS

[heckofajobbrownie]

Nope. That was just an aside.

You attacked me for giving your boy shit for blaming Bush.

 

So now you say you guys were [lying] wrong.

OK.

WSS

 

Clearly, you are too stupid to talk to. This is as dumb as you've ever gotten. Honestly.

 

So you can falsely accuse me of being a liar as long as it's "an aside?" Am I hearing you correctly?

 

Steve, this should be very simple for someone who isn't a windbag and an asshole, or at least thinks it's important to try not to be. You claimed I said "Bush administration economic policies caused the recession." I never said that. You can't prove that I said that. Because I didn't. That's why I "attacked" you (for now, we'll set aside the ridiculous notion that the person responding to being called a liar is the one who is doing the attacking). I didn't "attack" you for "giving your boy shit for blaming Bush." It's perfectly fine to blame Bush for his economic policies. It's pretty common, actually.

 

Now you're saying that Obama and I were both "blaming Bush", and now I'm saying we didn't that means I'm lying again, or that we're wrong. Because you're obviously too dense to be able to understand the difference between not liking Bush economic policies, or disagreeing with Bush economic policies, and stating that Bush economic policies caused the recession.

 

Look, I understand you don't like me. I understand that you don't like it when I think little of your ability to have an adult discussion. But this kind of stuff is truly idiotic. It's objectively dumb by any real standard. It's also objectively dishonest. The fact that you can't see it means one of two things: that you don't care about being honest or accurate, or that you're too obstinate and stupid to know the difference.

[Westside Steve]

[q

Clearly, you are too stupid to talk to.

 

Please Heck, I have a weak heart.

 

 

Steve, this should be very simple for someone who isn't a windbag and an asshole,

 

Apparant;y not.

 

Look "the failed economic policies of the Bush (or previous) administration" [as the reason for the bad economy] was the mantra (probably a DNC buzz sentence to be repeated like "risky scheme") throughout the campaign and basically still is.

I made fun of your boy for saying that and you attacked me in one of a thousand defense essays.

I wish the ssearch engine was worthwhile but I remember the dialogue.

 

Masybe you misspoke or have now changed your opinion.

 

 

Look, I understand you don't like me.

 

Thaty's not true at all Heck, and I'd actually feel bad if I thought you meant it as anything but a debate device.

Seriously, though your screen persona is kind of a self aggrandizing partisan pompous ass, I'd love to have a beer with you.

 

WSS

[heckofajobbrownie]

And yet you still can't distinguish between the two statements. It's astounding.

 

You said I claimed something very specific about Bush administration policies causing the recession that I didn't, and called me a liar for denying it. And rather than take it back when you can't make your case like a grown up would do, you instead claim we were talking about a bland political statement from the campaign. Or about Bush economic policies in general.

 

And you can't even cite me a single example of that conversation.

 

It's my fault, Steve. I keep imagining that we're going to have a debate about politics, or about policy, when you don't have political opinions or policy opinions. You only have personal opinions.

[Westside Steve]

And yet you still can't distinguish between the two statements. It's astounding.

 

You said I claimed something very specific about Bush administration policies causing the recession that I didn't, and called me a liar for denying it. And rather than take it back when you can't make your case like a grown up would do, you instead claim we were talking about a bland political statement from the campaign. Or about Bush economic policies in general.

 

And you can't even cite me a single example of that conversation.

 

It's my fault, Steve. I keep imagining that we're going to have a debate about politics, or about policy, when you don't have political opinions or policy opinions. You only have personal opinions.

 

 

Obama and the dems said Bush created the financial mess.

I laughed at 'em.

You defended them.

 

Deny it if you will.

 

Are we done with this?

WSS

[heckofajobbrownie]

Well, we could be if you seemed to have any ability to admit you were wrong. Or to present evidence like a normal person would. You'd find quotes from articles. You'd find quotes from me. Instead, you just keep repeating your mindless assertions and seem to imagine that one day they'll stop making you look ridiculous.

 

Like I've now stated a half dozen times, Democrats and the president did lay a lot of blame on the Bush administration's policies for lots of economic problems we currently have. I'm sure I have as well. There's nothing wrong with making these statements. This also has nothing to do with why you called me a liar.

 

You called me a liar because you said that I claimed that Bush administration policies "caused the recession." Now, I know didn't say that. Because I don't believe that. So you're already wrong. And since you can't back that up, you should admit you're wrong to call someone a liar who wasn't lying. Because that's what people who aren't assholes would do, and without having to be prodded to do it.

 

I'll try one last time:

 

Obama and the dems said Bush created the financial mess.

I laughed at 'em.

You defended them.

 

Deny it if you will.

 

I'm sure I happily mentioned that the Bush administration played a role in the economic problems we face, and especially the budget problems we face. Because they did. Obviously. I don't have to "deny" this because it's what I believe. So, you don't have me cornered here. And I can't for the life of me imagine why you think you do.

 

So, unless you can show me where "Obama and the dems said Bush created the financial mess" and that I defended that assertion, you have no case. If Obama and the Democrats said that, and we talked about it here, and I defended the idea that the Bush administration "caused the recession" you should be able to find it in 5 minutes.

 

You've had 5 days. You've got nothing but your bullshit.

 

Put up or shut up.

[calfoxwc]

Heck translation:

 

"I will never admit any dem had any role in creating this financial mess, and I won't admit

 

that Obamao is a failure, a coward, and a marxist pantywaist. I also won't admit that the Bush admin

 

put all the pieces in place to effectively fight the war on terror, and eventually, capture obl....

 

and I won't admit that Holder is a racist, and I won't admit that Steve keeps twisting me and my dumb defense of

 

all liberals...like a pretzel....

 

and I won't admit that I would love to give Dennis Kuchinich great big smoochies"

[Westside Steve]

Bush didn't cause it all either.

Sounds to me you're saying you think Bush did cause it, just not ALL of it.

 

 

Because you are. And did. And your defense is the idea that the search engine can't pinpoint a thread two years old.

Even while admitting it now.

And I'm the contrarian?

 

WSS

[heckofajobbrownie]

Ugh. This is my last post on this. I might as well jerk off. At least I'd get something out of that.

 

I am not admitting what you accused me of lying about. Words have meaning. It's not my fault that you don't know what they are.

 

Yes, Steve, Virginia, the Bush administration played a role. There isn't a single person on the planet who knows anything about it that doesn't think the government played a role in the financial collapse. The government is intricately involved in the economy in a variety of ways, and in charge of regulating and policing markets and Wall Street and all the rest. By definition, the government has to have played a role. You can't be anything other than a total hack to ignore the role government played in the financial collapse.

 

The government also played a huge role in preventing a depression.

 

Even still, all I really remember hanging on the Bush administration is the majority of the budget problem. That's the only conversation I remember. When we had a conversation about the financial collapse, and you were contending that it happened because we gave poor people housing loans through the CRA, and I was saying it wasn't really that at all, and that it was far more complicated, and mostly involved Wall Street and leverage issues.

 

These are the only conversations I remember.

 

Honestly, you're mad because someone dared suggest that the Bush administration played a role in the financial collapse and ensuing recession? That seems to be what you're upset about. But that's so obviously true that everyone acknowledges that, even President Bush. And you think you've somehow nailed me because I'm admitting to thinking that? It's equal parts hysterical and mind-numbingly dumb.

 

What's more, what you don't seem to understand is that your explanation for the financial collapse is all about government programs that existed under the Bush administration, and then those government programs led to the collapse of the financial sector and a massive recession. That's your explanation. Government programs did it.

 

That's not my explanation. And then you're bugging me about blaming the Bush administration? You're blaming the Bush administration for the financial collapse. You're blaming the government. You just don't know it.