Only 22 percent of Americans — and only 33 percent of Republicans — think that Sarah Palin has the ability to be an effective president, according to a new CBS News survey. But since she announced her plans to resign as Alaska governor, contributions to Sarah PAC, her political action committee, reportedly have surged. Meanwhile, perhaps in an effort to be taken more seriously on policy issues, Palin had a commentary in Tuesday’s Washington Post arguing that the cap-and-trade bill before Congress is “an enormous threat to our economy” that “would undermine our recovery over the short term and would inflict permanent damage.”
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Chas on Open thread 11/24
- donndublin on Open thread 11/24
- BlueJay on Huckabee felt costs of campaign
- BlueJay on Huckabee felt costs of campaign
- ANTI on Open thread 11/24
- DavidB on Open thread 11/24
- okobserver on Open thread 11/24
- ANTI on Open thread 11/24
- ANTI on Open thread 11/24
- DavidB on Open thread 11/24
163 Comments
But all that Clean Coal technology makes Cap & Trade moot.
Doesn’t it?
It’s a sign of how far the GOP has veered to the right, Palin’s and the party’s public statements about cap and trade. Cap and trade was a GOP idea, one propagated by the University of Chicago’s Ron Coase and, if memory serves, supported by none other than Phil Gramm as an alternative to the alternative of government by fiat nee the Clean Air Act as enforced by the EPA.
But that was back in the day when the GOP was famously rational in its approach to federal government, largely because it was still defending itself against the damage done by Richard Nixon.
All you can do is shake your head at where Big Oil and its think tanks have taken the GOP since. Sarah Palin has merely chosen the biggest of these wacky populist waves — cap and trade, originally a GOP idea, is a market solution that can’t be trusted to markets — to ride ashore.
Looks like Sarah Palin has found her wings, on the highly lucrative national speakers tour. No more dealing with the nuts and bolts of state budgets, crafting proposed state legislation, dealing with argumentative state legislators.
She didn’t do any of that anyway, from what I read JWink.
“JWink” observes –
“…Sarah Palin has found her wings….”
I do so hope the Moose-Dresser becomes the consensus choice of the Repubic Party.
What do you do in a financial crisis?
“Quit your job!”
How do you assure your daughter won’t get pregnant?
“Let her boyfriend sleep over!”
Are labor unions a mortal threat to the free market?
“You betcha! Except for my husband’s union job.”
Ms. Palin, who are the leaders of the various factions of the Knesset?
(blinking like a caribou in the headlights)
“In what way, Charley?”
Oh, I so want her to succeed in her quest to lead the CONs.
She is the perfect representative of the movement.
(wink)
obama surging in spending our money, our kids money, our grandkids money,,,,, but not in polls
beber…………based on what you read…..where?
monk..you have seen a caribou in the headlights….i thought you preferred to watch Marines dress
It is generally true those people who accuse others of doing something, are usually the ones doing the exact same thing.
Perhaps this a revelation from some hidden closet?
What’s a matter ‘Phillip’? She got ya scared!!!
“Palin surging in fundraising but not polls”
Perfect example of the 80/20 rule.
cap and trade, originally a GOP idea, is a market solution
-Pedant
Pedant really blew it in the last sentence. Cap and Trade is NOT a market solution. It is an attempt by the government to artificially create demand for alternative technology by drastically elevating the costs for carbon energy.
Government of course is the sole source seller of carbon credits and reaps all the profits.
#
Monkeyhawk
Posted July 15, 2009 at 8:28 am | Permalink
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
“wichhick” –
Seems you’re the one obsessing about watching a Marine futz with his garters and stockings.
It happened once to me, years ago. I mentioned it once, more than a month ago.
But you repeatedly spl**ge WE Blog about it, typing with one hand.
Not my problem.
But “RFL” –
With all that “Clean Coal” technology, the whole issue of Cap & Trade is moot, isn’t it?
Another Palin thread. You people just can’t get over the hottie can you?
Monkeyhawk
Posted July 15, 2009 at 8:29 am | Permalink
But you repeatedly spl**ge WE Blog about it, typing with one hand.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
That may explain wichhick’s unusual writing style.
If George W. Bush had given Gordon Brown a set of inexpensive and incorrectly formatted DVDs, when Gordon Brown had given him a thoughtful and historically significant gift, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had given the Queen of England an iPod containing videos of his speeches, would you have thought this embarrassingly narcissistic and tacky?
If George W. Bush had bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had visited Austria and made reference to the non-existent “Austrian language,” would you have brushed it off as a minor slip?
If George W. Bush had filled his cabinet and circle of advisers with people who cannot seem to keep current on their income taxes, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had been so Spanish illiterate as to refer to “Cinco de Cuatro” in front of the Mexican ambassador when it was the fourth of May (Cuatro de Mayo), and continued to flub it when he tried again, would you have winced in embarrassment?
If George W. Bush had mis-spelled the word advice would you have hammered him for it for years like Dan Quayle and potatoe as “proof” of what a dunce he is?
If George W. Bush had burned 9,000 gallons of jet fuel to go plant a single tree on “Earth Day”, would you have concluded he’s a hypocrite?
If George W. Bush’s administration had okayed Air Force One 20 flying low over millions of people followed by a jet fighter in downtown Manhattan causing widespread panic, would you have wondered whether they actually “get” what happened on 9-11?
If George W. Bush had been the first President to need a teleprompter installed to be able to get through a press conference, would you have laughed and said this is more proof of how inept he is on his own and is really controlled by smarter men behind the scenes?
If George W. Bush had failed to send relief aid to flood victims throughout the Midwest with more people killed or made homeless than in New Orleans , would you want it made into a major ongoing political issue with claims of racism and incompetence?
If George W. Bush had ordered the firing of the CEO of a major corporation, even though he had no constitutional authority to do so, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had proposed to double the national debt, which had taken more than two centuries to accumulate, in one year, would you have approved?
If George W.. Bush had then proposed to double the debt again within 10 years, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had reduced your retirement plan’s holdings of GM stock by 90% and given the unions a majority stake in GM, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had spent thousands of dollars to take Laura Bush to a play in NYC, would you have approved?
So, tell me again, what is it about Obama that makes him so brilliant and impressive? Can’t think of anything? Don’t worry. He’s done all this in 6 months — so you’ll have three years and six months to come up with an answer. Naïve, misinformed voters with no common sense did this to themselves and the rest of us. Ignorance is wide spread. Americans better start waking up and realizing that being cool does not qualify one to be President.
I don’t care what you think of Palin, she’d be infinitely more qualified and doing a better job than the buffoon Obama has been and is.
Oh, and for those that have nothing to do but be petty, there should be quotation marks on all but the last sentence.
I got the perfect bumper sticker.
Palin 2012!
you BETCHA we’re that nucking futs!
Not fair, in Wingnuttia, where the Wingnuts are king, Sarah would be polling atleast 60%!
It’s glaringly apparent that Sarah did not author that piece. The sentence structure is nothing like classic Palin.
So, who is the true author, they should be given credit.
Sarah’s got her own PAC, Blumenthalls here she comes!
Please, please God, let Sarah Palin be the GOP candidate for president in 2012.
Not meaning to sound “petty” here Boxlock, but please, practice your cutting and pasting elsewhere.
iphil,
You are sounding petty….why, probably because you are petty.
Answer the questions butt/hole then comment on my post.
#
Boxlock20
Posted July 15, 2009 at 9:52 am | Permalink
If George W. Bush had given Gordon Brown a set of inexpensive and incorrectly formatted DVDs, when Gordon Brown had given him a thoughtful and historically significant gift, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had given the Queen of England an iPod containing videos of his speeches, would you have thought this embarrassingly narcissistic and tacky?
If George W. Bush had bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had visited Austria and made reference to the non-existent “Austrian language,” would you have brushed it off as a minor slip?
If George W. Bush had filled his cabinet and circle of advisers with people who cannot seem to keep current on their income taxes, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had been so Spanish illiterate as to refer to “Cinco de Cuatro” in front of the Mexican ambassador when it was the fourth of May (Cuatro de Mayo), and continued to flub it when he tried again, would you have winced in embarrassment?
If George W. Bush had mis-spelled the word advice would you have hammered him for it for years like Dan Quayle and potatoe as “proof” of what a dunce he is?
If George W. Bush had burned 9,000 gallons of jet fuel to go plant a single tree on “Earth Day”, would you have concluded he’s a hypocrite?
If George W. Bush’s administration had okayed Air Force One 20 flying low over millions of people followed by a jet fighter in downtown Manhattan causing widespread panic, would you have wondered whether they actually “get” what happened on 9-11?
If George W. Bush had been the first President to need a teleprompter installed to be able to get through a press conference, would you have laughed and said this is more proof of how inept he is on his own and is really controlled by smarter men behind the scenes?
If George W. Bush had failed to send relief aid to flood victims throughout the Midwest with more people killed or made homeless than in New Orleans , would you want it made into a major ongoing political issue with claims of racism and incompetence?
If George W. Bush had ordered the firing of the CEO of a major corporation, even though he had no constitutional authority to do so, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had proposed to double the national debt, which had taken more than two centuries to accumulate, in one year, would you have approved?
If George W.. Bush had then proposed to double the debt again within 10 years, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had reduced your retirement plan’s holdings of GM stock by 90% and given the unions a majority stake in GM, would you have approved?
If George W. Bush had spent thousands of dollars to take Laura Bush to a play in NYC, would you have approved?
So, tell me again, what is it about Obama that makes him so brilliant and impressive? Can’t think of anything? Don’t worry. He’s done all this in 6 months — so you’ll have three years and six months to come up with an answer. Naïve, misinformed voters with no common sense did this to themselves and the rest of us. Ignorance is wide spread. Americans better start waking up and realizing that being cool does not qualify one to be President.
I don’t care what you think of Palin, she’d be infinitely more qualified and doing a better job than the buffoon Obama has been and is.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Sure, but even President Obama knows that Thomas Jefferson wasn’t President from 1777 to 1781.
Oh my…
Mike (I think he’s getting fat again) Huckabee just snarked the Moose-Dresser!
Says she’s in it for the bucks. (Dollars, not caribou.)
The Huckster was the Kansas Repubic Party’s choice for president in 2008.
(I imagine now WE Blog’s Paliin-istas curling up into the fetal position.)
Two candidates.
Each of them born twice.
What will Kansas CONs do?
What will they do?
“Daniel” notes –
“…even President Obama knows that Thomas Jefferson wasn’t President from 1777 to 1781.”
Damned elitist!
He11 I sent Sarah a big fat check. Could care less about her politic’s.
But anyone who gets liberals panties in such a wad is worth every penny for the entertainment value alone.
It also keeps the lib media distracted.
Send her a check folks.
“It also keeps the lib media distracted.”
Palin is strictly comic relief.
“If George W. Bush had been the first President to need a teleprompter installed to be able to get through a press conference,”
Obama uses a teleprompter for speeches, rather than index cards, like every president has for the last thirty-five years.
“If George W. Bush had proposed to double the national debt, which had taken more than two centuries to accumulate, in one year, would you have approved?”
Where did you learn math, Box? The National debt was $5.4 trillion when Bush took office, $11 trillion when he left office, more than double. The deficit this year (due to the Bush Depression) will be $1.84 trillion – how is that doubling the debt in just one year?
But the Queen was here for the centenial right?
“Sure, but even President Obama knows that Thomas Jefferson wasn’t President from 1777 to 1781.”—Dumbass, eh, Daniel
And so do I. That was someone else’s comment that I copied and pasted in a discussion about something entirely unrelated to term dates.
I don’t correct others posts, only dimwits like yourself make something out of.
You see I don’t feel the need to go around changeing what other’s say like you must, it show shallowness.
“If George W. Bush had spent thousands of dollars to take Laura Bush to a play in NYC, would you have approved?”
How many times did George the Dumber fly on AF – 1 to Crawford for a vacation, taking Laura and Barney with him?
#
Monkeyhawk
Posted July 15, 2009 at 6:13 am | Permalink
But all that Clean Coal technology makes Cap & Trade moot.
Doesn’t it?
———-
Cap and trade is moot, but only as it would affect global warming. With regard to our wallets, look out.
“If George W. Bush had bowed to the King of Saudi Arabia, would you have approved?”
George KISSED the King of Saudi Arabia and held hands with him – did you approve?
(Reports say no tongue was involved.)
“If George W. Bush had ordered the firing of the CEO of a major corporation, even though he had no constitutional authority to do so, would you have approved?”
You want a Federal bailout of your company, Ricky, well then, you have to go.
Easy. No resignation, no bailout.
Ah, making the Libs look like talking anuses isn’t hard, just put up a Palin thread.
“If George W. Bush had reduced your retirement plan’s holdings of GM stock by 90% and given the unions a majority stake in GM, would you have approved?”
The UAW was the single largest creditor owed by GM – of course they had a choice – take a share of GMC or lose the the debt owed to them by GM.
The other creditors also had a stock for debt offer – they refused.
“If George W. Bush had given the Queen of England an iPod containing videos of his speeches, would you have thought this embarrassingly narcissistic and tacky?”
He gave the Queen an iPod – it was not pre-loaded – provide a link that PROVES that assertion if you disagree.
“If George W. Bush had failed to send relief aid to flood victims throughout the Midwest with more people killed or made homeless than in New Orleans , would you want it made into a major ongoing political issue with claims of racism and incompetence?”
Completely false – Obama did send relief efforts to the flooded areas and declared them Federal disaster areas.
“If George W. Bush had filled his cabinet and circle of advisers with people who cannot seem to keep current on their income taxes, would you have approved?”
Two – Geithner and Sebelius. That hardly qualifies as “filled” and “circle of advisers”
Which advisers, by the way.
Daschle withdrew his nomination – which other are you referring to?
Both Geithner and Sebelius had legitimate IRS questions. Geithner overseas income and Sebelius had a reasonable error. Kathleen Sebelius came forward and paid her tax error, as did Geithner.
When you get to a higher income level, tax errors are common – it’s not like doing a 1040 EZ form.
WS actually I don’t need Palin for comedy relief. After all we have you and Bluejay and Monkey. Who could ask for anything more?
As for your canned answers. Did you get those from the Globe – and then when called on your statements say ‘prove it’. You can’t prove a falsehood. Why don’t you prove what did or didn’t happen.
As for the dollars spent by Bush – The mysterious NY flight over the Statue of Liberty, The date night in New York, The private shopping trip to Paris for Michelle, her mommy and the kids,… These are the trips we know about for the Obama family. Since the economy is tanking and thousands are losing jobs daily this seems like a totally narcisstic person at work.
And all the left has to talk about is Palin. Go figure.
“Palin surging in fundraising but not polls”
Bluejay sighs….
Ah the sound of con money being wasted. TAX the fools higher and let us make better use of the money.
“As for the dollars spent by Bush”
Bush: took office with a $258 billion surplus – then raised the National Debt from $5.4 trillion to $11 trillion in eight years.
“And all the left has to talk about is Palin.”
Dang, you Righties just don’t get it – we WANT, we PRAY, we BEG you all to nominate Palin in 2012!
PLEASE!!!!!
Put Sarah on the ticket – polls show that only 22% consider her qualified to be president – and only 33% of Republicans.
PLEASE!!!!!
Run, Sarah, run!
“The private shopping trip to Paris for Michelle, her mommy and the kids,… ”
Let’s see – Barack was flying to Paris on official US business – how much more did it cost for him to have his family fly with him on AF-1?
Here ya go cons. Indulge your inner… whatever.
http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&q=sarah+palin+doll&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=sF1eStSjMozeMaPbta4C&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&ct=title&resnum=4
“Did you get those from the Globe – and then when called on your statements say ‘prove it’.”
Not sure who the Globe is, but I rarely if ever visit sites other than the Eagle, ESPN, MSNBC and ABC. Since no one has “called” me on anything, I fail to understand what the Hell you are talking about.
I would say, however, that the “Blog Rules According to Regular” require the original poster to provide a link to back up his assertions.
Since I was not the original poster, it would be up to Box to provide proof.
I seem to always get mentioned in “okobserver’s” whiny posts.
She never cites anything specific, choosing instead to dodge generic questions I pose to WE Blog CONs.
(The others don’t answer either.)
But it’s become amusing to see CONs attack me for stuff that makes them cranky but have nothing to do with my posting to this forum.
It’s not as if I expect them to get anything right. Attribution to a relevant poster is the last thing I expect from WE Blog CONs.
Perhaps I should work harder to post more relevant and “substantive” comments to satisfy “okobersever’s” animus toward me. Like commenting on Michelle Obama’s ass.
Here MonkeyHock, take one of these Depends to dry your moist eyes – Only used it once.
“The date night in New York”
I realize that the Right’s hatred of anything Obama knows no bounds, but the man is the PRESIDENT of the United States and deserves protection. There are no lack of wingers that would, if they could, do him or his family harm. You all know that, yet you decry his date to NYC, while giving a pass to GWB’s frequent flights to Crawford to “work” his ranch.
The man is the leader of the free world, the most targeted man on the planet – would you expect him and his wife to take a commercial flight to NYC and take a cab to the theater?
Really?
“Regular” exposes –
“Here MonkeyHock, take one of these Depends to dry your moist eyes – Only used it once.”
Give your sister a break.
Don’t ask her to change it ’til there’s a #2.
Any minute now….
WSClark
Posted July 15, 2009 at 5:54 pm | Permalink
“The private shopping trip to Paris for Michelle, her mommy and the kids,… ”
Let’s see – Barack was flying to Paris on official US business – how much more did it cost for him to have his family fly with him on AF-1?
—————
“With school over for the summer, First Lady Michelle Obama, her mother Marian Robinson, and daughters Malia, 10, and Sasha, 7, both making their first-ever trip across the Atlantic, flew to meet President Barack Obama on Friday for a weekend of sightseeing and shopping in the City of Light.”
————-
Gee WS for a know it all type of person you are woefully lacking in knowledge about the Paris shopping trip. Freedom of info requests have been unsuccessful in finding what this trip cost the taxpayers. Wonder why?
No actually WS I don’t care if he takes his wife out I just feel duty bound to moan and groan about every minute he spends out of the White House because I was taught by the dims for the last 8 years that this is what the party out of the WH does. What the matter — didin’t I learn my lesson right?
“With school over for the summer, First Lady Michelle Obama, her mother Marian Robinson, and daughters Malia, 10, and Sasha, 7, both making their first-ever trip across the Atlantic, flew to meet President Barack Obama on Friday for a weekend of sightseeing and shopping in the City of Light.”
One, no attribution.
Two, where does it say that the TAXPAYERS paid for the trip.
Three, how did they fly (since AF – 1 was already in France?) Did they charter a jet, – AF – 2, fly commercial?
But Okie, you ignored the point about Bush and his frequent trips to Crawford to clear brush with Laura.
Monkey I realize you have a azz fixation – first that mysterious marine in the dressing room and now Michelle Obama’s. When you have something substantive to post let me know.
Maybe one of your deeply searching questions?.?…
Bush isn’t the prez anymore in case you missed the election. You moaned about him for 8 years. I doubt if you missed a day of pointing out his shortcomings. Obama is now in charge.
Which part of ‘they flew to meet him’ can’t you grasp. As for what they flew on. A clue – planes come and then they go all of the time. I would say this meant an extra trip for AF1 wouldn’t you?
Bush only went to Crawford, so he could get a six pack of Pearl,Shiner or Lonestar beer.
but ws what did the UAW get vs. what the others were offered(take it or leave it)……………and you don’t think it was a payoff for past and future votes………naive you are
ws don’t talk about guys and tongue……you will get monkey……….well…… aroused
geitner paid his only after confronted and knowingly did not pay when due………….and paid no interest or penalties
Turbo Tax Tim (Geitner)
lets see barack was flying to paris to apoligize for America…..strange official business
“I would say this meant an extra trip for AF1 wouldn’t you?”
No, I would not ASSUME.
I have yet to see an attribution for your assertion.
Try link, KS/Okie – Regular demands attribution – it is the “Blog Rule” at least when it comes to LIBERALS.
monkey you could not provide relative or substantive answers……your std moa
“but ws what did the UAW get vs. what the others were offered(take it or leave it)”
You tell us – with attribution.
“geitner paid his only after confronted and knowingly did not pay when due………….and paid no interest or penalties”
Facts needs attribution.
“lets see barack was flying to paris to apoligize for America”
Actually, as the President of the United States, he was representing us at the D-Day ceremonies.
http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20283745,00.html
Read it and weep WS. Your hero has feet of clay. Now lets hear about Bush some more. I’m waiting. As I said earlier you really are funnier than anyone else I know and so predictable.
Two trips to Paris. The facts are there. Millions unemployed AF1 is taken to Paris TWICE so that Michelle and mommy can take the girls shopping.
so ws what about the UAW vs the other creditors?
ws AF-1 vs. commercial. vs. general aviation (oops can’t do that)………would it not have been more efficient and less costly to fly with him to began with and pay the extra motel bill
ws .it was reported nationally on mulitiple sources that the UAW got 70 to 80%……the other investors were offered 10cents on the dollar…..take it or leave it
ws..but my point all along was if obama was doing his job he would have seen the billions given to GM would not save them from bankruptcy…..and those billions never would have happened……….they only happened to fill the uaw coffers for future votes…..then 60days later file bankruptcy…….naive you are
Sarah Palin on working together
Last year: “Our opponent … is someone who sees America, it seems, as being so imperfect, imperfect enough, that he’s palling around with terrorists who would target their own country.”
Last week: “You can choose to engage in things that tear down, or build up. I choose to work very hard on a path for fruitfulness and productivity.”
Sarah Palin on intestinal fortitude
Last year: “What’s the difference between a hockey mom and a pit bull? Lipstick.”
Last week: “I’ve determined it’s best to transfer the authority of governor to Lieutenant Governor Parnell.”
Sarah Palin on WTF? LOL!
Last year: “As Putin rears his head and comes into the air space of the United States of America, where – where do they go? It’s Alaska. It’s just right over the border.”
Last week: “I think on a national level your Department of Law there in the White House would look at some of the things that we’ve been charged with and automatically throw them out.”
******
Sarah Palin is like Rocky Balboa . . . if Rocky had lay down and quit instead of fighting Apollo Creed.
“Read it and weep WS.”
Where does it say in the quoted article that Michelle and family flew AF – 1?
“so ws what about the UAW vs the other creditors?”
Link?
“ws .it was reported nationally on mulitiple sources that the UAW got 70 to 80%……the other investors were offered 10cents on the dollar…..take it or leave it”
Link?
Hick–
Presidents and their families CAN’T fly commercial for security reasons.
Bush and his family never did either.
In fact, people in Bush’s circle were told to quit flying commercial about three months before 9-11.
Things that make you go hmmmmm . . .
capn’…….wow i didn’t think my post would be so difficult to comprehend .but what can we expect from you……
capn’n………try again and read real slow………
Links, Hick? Links, Okie?
#
wichhick
Posted July 15, 2009 at 6:42 pm | Permalink
ws .it was reported nationally on mulitiple sources that the UAW got 70 to 80%……the other investors were offered 10cents on the dollar…..take it or leave it
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Since this was reported nationally by multiple sources it should be very easy for you to provide a link backing up this assertion.
Right?
Capn you and WS are two of a kind. But wait maybe you have had Michelle Obama to your house and CF came also.
WS actually she wouldn’t have been on AF1 since that designation is only used for the plane the prez is on. She however would have been on one of the four planes reserved for the prez and his ‘people’.
What is your dim point exactly. Hitting the juice awfully early tonight aren’t you? You are having a real problem with comprehension tonight.
#
WSClark
Posted July 15, 2009 at 5:12 pm | Permalink
Where did you learn math, Box? The National debt was $5.4 trillion when Bush took office, $11 trillion when he left office, more than double. The deficit this year (due to the Bush Depression) will be $1.84 trillion – how is that doubling the debt in just one year?
=-===-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Don’t be so hard on Boxlock20. You see, Boxlock20 is a highly principled copy/paster who doesn’t “…feel the need to go around changeing [sic] what other’s [sic] say” because, in his view, such actions would be “shallow” and the province of “dimwits.”
Boxlock20 is so principled that he thinks it better to disseminate demonstrably false information than to be accurate and risk being labeled “shallow” by anonymous posters on a blog.
And for now WS I have played your little source?? as long as it was convenient for me. What you ask is common knowledge and anyone with a brain would know it. So common you are but it appears not knowledgeable.
Have a good night!
okobserver
Posted July 15, 2009 at 6:19 pm | Permalink
No actually WS I don’t care if he takes his wife out I just feel duty bound to moan and groan about every minute
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Well, you’re certainly doing a bang-up job of that. :)
Economic growth. U.S. output has expanded faster than in most advanced economies since 2000. The IMF reports that real U.S. gross domestic product (GDP) grew at an average annual rate of 2.2% over the period 2001-2008 (including its forecast for the current year). President Bush will leave to his successor an economy 19% larger than the one he inherited from President Clinton.
Household consumption. The ICP study found that the average per-capita consumption of the U.S. population (citizens and illegal immigrants combined) was second only to Luxembourg’s, out of 146 countries covered in 2005. The U.S. average was $32,045. This was well above the levels in the UK ($25,155), Canada ($23,526), France ($23,027) and Germany ($21,742). China stood at $1,751.
Health services. The U.S. spends easily the highest amount per capita ($6,657 in 2005) on health, more than double that in Britain. But because of private funding (55% of the total) the burden on the U.S. taxpayer (9.1% of GDP) is kept to similar levels as France and Germany. The U.S. Census Bureau reports that 84.7% of the U.S. population was covered by health insurance in 2007, an increase of 3.6 million people over 2006. The uninsured can receive treatment in hospitals at the expense of private insurance holders. While life expectancy is influenced by lifestyles and not just access to health services, the World Bank nevertheless reports that average life expectancy in the U.S. rose to 78 years in 2006 (the same as Germany’s), from 77 in 2000.
- Income and wealth distribution. The latest World Bank estimates show that the richest 20% of U.S. households had a 45.8% share of total income in 2000, similar to the levels in the U.K. (44.0%) and Israel (44.9%). In 65 other countries the richest quintile had a larger share than in the U.S….
- Employment. The U.S. employment rate, measured by the percentage of people of working age (16-65 years) in jobs, has remained high by international standards. The latest OECD figures show a rate of 71.7% in 2006. This was more than five percentage points above the average for the euro area. The U.S. unemployment rate averaged 4.7% from 2001-2007. This compares with a 5.2% average rate during President Clinton’s term of office, and is well below the euro zone average of 8.3% since 2000.
The evidence shows that much of the Democratic Party’s criticism of President Bush’s economic record is wide of the mark. True, the economic slowdown now affecting most advanced countries will likely result in rising unemployment over the coming months. But thanks to sensible policies pursued by the Bush administration (not always with adequate support from a Democratic-controlled Congress), the U.S. economy is sufficiently flexible to keep unemployment below the 7.7% peak reached in the last postrecession year of 1992.
The main risk is that, if elected, Barack Obama will pursue a “social justice” strategy. This would encompass higher taxes on entrepreneurs, savers and investors, more direct government intervention in the economy, and protectionist policies (including revoking existing trade agreements) aimed at safeguarding the jobs of his union backers in “old” industries and public services. If so, the pain is likely to be more widespread and prolonged.
Retrieved from “http://www.dkosopedia.com/wiki/Economy_Under_George_W_Bush”
This is the world Bush left Obama. Compare it to where we are now. In almost all categories Bush improved on the economic picture he was left from Clinton.
Facts don’t lie – people do.
Daniel I have learned from the best! Are you part of that party?
#
okobserver
Posted July 15, 2009 at 7:25 pm | Permalink
Daniel I have learned from the best! Are you part of that party?
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Which party is that?
“WS actually she wouldn’t have been on AF1 since that designation is only used for the plane the prez is on. She however would have been on one of the four planes reserved for the prez and his ‘people’.”
So, KS/Okie, how did she fly to Paris? What PROOF do you have? Just an assumption?
Figures.
“What you ask is common knowledge and anyone with a brain would know it”
“Common knowledge” says that Barack Obama is a Muslim born in Kenya – but we all know that is false.
So WTF are you talking about?
“You are having a real problem with comprehension tonight.”
Where in the link you provided does it STATE how Michelle and her children arrived in Paris?
What part of “comprehension” am I missing?
You provided the link to “prove” your point, so where is the “proof” KS/Okie?
wichhick must be at work.
KS/Okie is about to change her nic again.
WS ok I will admit she flew in on her broomstick.
Idiot.
WS do you have a substantive comment on the numbers I posted about what Bush did while in office. Very impressive I will have to say. I can see why you can’t comment. Too hurtful I am sure.
“WS do you have a substantive comment on the numbers I posted about what Bush did while in office”
Bush inherited a $257 billion surplus – after eight years he took the National Debt from $5.4 trillion to $11 trillion.
What else is there left to say?
Oh, when did Reagan, Bush I or Bush II EVER propose a balanced Federal budget?
Never?????????????????????????
“Very impressive I will have to say.”
If you fuel the economy with $5.6 trillion in borrowed money – yeah – that is impressive.
Just imagine what Bush could have done if he had FOUR MORE YEARS.
Or not.
“(not always with adequate support from a Democratic-controlled Congress)”
I heard a rumor the the Republicans controlled both Houses of Congress from 1995 until 2007, with a brief period when the Democrats held the Senate 50-50 when Jeffords defected from the GOP.
So, what Democratic controlled Congress?
I heard a rumor the the Republicans controlled both Houses of Congress from 1995 until 2007
And life was good, interest rates were low, only 4 percent unemployment, stocks were boiling to greatness.
#
okobserver
Posted July 15, 2009 at 8:25 pm | Permalink
WS do you have a substantive comment on the numbers I posted about what Bush did while in office. Very impressive I will have to say. I can see why you can’t comment. Too hurtful I am sure.
=-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
I never figured you for a Daily Kos fan.
My problem with the link you provided is that nothing in the link is sourced. Compare your link to a wikipedia link. I find wikipedia to be a decent source for looking up objective material. For instance, if I want basic information about the Civil Rights Act of 1964 I can look it up and find basic information about when the legislation was proposed, what the vote counts in the House and Senate were, when the legislation was signed, etc… The nice thing about wikipedia is that ‘facts’ are generally well-sourced, although you should take anything you read with a grain of salt.
When your link states as fact that “President Bush will leave to his successor an economy 19% larger than the one he inherited from President Clinton.” there should be a link to proof of that ‘fact.’ Also, how current is that information? The language used, ’successor’ instead of ‘President Obama,’ leads me to wonder how current is the information that ‘fact’ is based on. Does that ‘fact’ take into account the economic contraction that occurred in the fall of 2008?
Not bashing you, just saying that just because you can find letters, words, sentences, and paragraphs on the internet that are assembled in a way that jibes with your views, doesn’t mean that they are factual.
“And life was good, interest rates were low, only 4 percent unemployment, stocks were boiling to greatness.”
Welfare “reform” was getting passed so that James could be assured HIS welfare would keep him uselessly alive while others got cut off…
Clark is one of those people that if you see someone commit a crime, instead of agreeing the crime was wrong, or seeing the criminal prosecuted, or providing facts, he screams:
“Yeah but so-in-so was a criminal too!”
” could be assured HIS welfare would keep him uselessly alive while others got cut off…”
Bluejay, for the millionth time, Regular is being compensated for his services rendered.
That is different from going down to the unemployment office or Social Services and requesting public assistance.
But I understand your childish need to put down a nonlib poster. It’s important for your sense of well-being.
But it’s hardly factual.
“Clark is one of those people that if you see someone commit a crime, instead of agreeing the crime was wrong, or seeing the criminal prosecuted, or providing facts, he screams:”
Since you don’t actually know me, have never met me and wouldn’t know me from Adam if you saw me on the street, how the Hell would you have any idea how I would react if I saw a crime being committed?
Or are you just making up skit again?
Pssst.
BJ cannot grasp the concept of EARNING anything.
Clark, it’s a logical conclusion based on your means of defending THE ONE.
WS and Daniel,
My math is fine, you see there is a difference between the ‘deficit’ and the ‘dept’.
Of course you are both too both stupid and ignorant to know anything about that.
And the post I copied to the blog was on one particular subject under discussion, the error in the dates of Jefferson’s term had nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with the subject, so why bring it up, except for those of you too petty and ignorant to understand and stay current with the discussion.
Boxlock20
Posted July 15, 2009 at 8:58 pm | Permalink
WS and Daniel,
My math is fine, you see there is a difference between the ‘deficit’ and the ‘dept’.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
The deficit and the what?
“If George W. Bush had proposed to double the national debt, which had taken more than two centuries to accumulate, in one year, would you have approved?” – posted by Box.
Show us the math, Box, how did Barack propose to DOUBLE the National Debt in one year?
Boxlock20,
This is copied from your copy/paste extravaganza:
“If George W. Bush had proposed to double the national debt, which had taken more than two centuries to accumulate, in one year, would you have approved?”
————————————
As Clark noted, the National Debt when Bush left office was in the ballpark of 11 Trillion. Unless you can make the case that the National Debt will be more than 22 Trillion come next January, I’m going to have to conclude that you are the one who doesn’t understand the difference between the yearly deficit and the National debt.
The deficit is the annual shortfall between income and spending while the debt is the cumulative amount of all the previous deficits.
Again, here you go disseminating false information.
“Clark, it’s a logical conclusion based on your means of defending THE ONE.”
Curious. I answer AmWay’s post and Jim Johnson answers.
But I am still waiting to see where I would SCREAM if I saw a crime being committed.
Clark I cannot help you improve your IQ. I’m afraid it just be something you will have to live with.
I would have thought JJ’s post would have been simple enough for your comprehension.
But it appears I have to make things as simple as possible for you – but no simpler.
Not sure I can dumb it down that far.
Do you dimwits ever look anything up for yourselves?
Obama’s Doubling of National Debt in Pictures
http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/27/obamas-doubling-of-national-debt-in-pictures/
I chose one that included pictures because you are both too ignorant to read and comprehend without them, and I question even then will you be able too.
cont.
If George W. Bush,If George W. Bush,If George W. Bush,If George W. Bush,If George W. Bush,If George W. Bush,If George W. Bush,If George W. Bush,If George W. Bush,If George W. Bush,If George W. Bush,If George W. Bush,If George W. Bush,If George W. Bush,If George W. Bush,If George W. Bush,If George W. Bush,If George W. Bush,If George W. Bush,If George W. Bush,If George W. Bush,If George W. Bush,If George W. Bush,If George W. Bush,If George W. Bush,If George W. Bush,If George W. Bush,If George W. Bush,If George W. Bush,If George W. Bush,If George W. Bush,If George W. Bush,If George W. Bush,If George W. Bush,If George W. Bush,If George W. Bush,If George W. Bush,If George W. Bush,If George W. Bush,
cont.
Obama On Course To Double National Debt
http://www.investorsinsight.com/blogs/forecasts_trends/archive/2009/06/16/obama-on-course-to-double-national-debt.aspx
cont.
“I chose one that included pictures ”
Hey Box! Did you see anything out there done in crayon??? LoL
cont.
Democrats on track to double national debt by 2010
http://www.examiner.com/x-268-Right-Side-Politics-Examiner~y2009m2d27-Democrats-on-track-to-double-national-debt-by-2010
cont.
cont.
Obama wants to half national debt in four years?
Well that sounds all warm and fuzzy until you realize that with all the spending bills and bail outs, additional social programs, etc… that Obama has or is going to put in place in the next year, that he is going to DOUBLE the national debt. So even if he does cut it in half….it will only be getting it back to where it was when Bush left office. Is that change?
http://www.mylot.com/w/discussions/1919353.aspx
#
American_Way
Posted July 15, 2009 at 9:19 pm | Permalink
“I chose one that included pictures ”
Hey Box! Did you see anything out there done in crayon??? LoL
===-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Help out you buddy Boxlock20 and tell him what the National Debt was on January 20, 2009. I’ve seen you post it before. Wasn’t it about 11 Trillion?
Two of the Blogs resident idiots show up with false “facts” wild assumptions and character assassinations and they wonder why the traffic on the WEBlog has dropped dramatically.
You boys must be SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO proud of your maturity and rationale.
………………… another two to add to the ignore list.
No facts, just tiny little CON talking points without substantiation.
In other words, posters to be ignored.
cont.
THE OBAMA BUDGET: SPENDING, TAXES, AND DOUBLING THE NATIONAL DEBT
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=17749
And I could go on and on.
Say, what do you dimwits eat and drink along with that ‘CROW’ you are always having to eat to make it go down.
You two, as well as a few other dimlibs around here, present the only situation I know where the more of you that get together the futher the collective I.Q. falls.
Make that THREE idiots to be ignored.
My bad.
Yes Daniel I have posted them many times. For many time periods including presidents of all parties.
But it gets old. You have to plug in a beginning date and ending date. If you want a particular prez, you need his dates in office. But the site will show the debt increase for any given period in time.
Any monkey can do it.
USTreasury.gov
“just tiny little CON talking points without substantiation”
ROTFLMAO! Like anything different is being posted by dims? Too funny.
WS and Daniel, and anyone else for that matter, just argue the figures I brought after it became obvious you dimwit Dimlibs couldn’t look them up for themselves.
There are plenty more as well, I just became bored playing with you.
You both can best save face at this point by running with your tails between your legs to hide in bed until tomorrow when we can do the same to you.
Boxlock20,
Of the three ’sources’ you’ve posted the numbers match up on NONE of them. One uses numbers that go back 2 years before President Obama was even elected and NONE of them provide evidence that the National debt will be doubled in one year. Two of them project a doubling of the National debt over TEN years.
Your copy/paste extravaganza, and you by extension, made the claim that the National debt would be doubled in ONE year.
Nice try. LOL!
You should really read your copy/post extravaganzas from start to finish before you post them. I suppose you’ll come back now and claim that the part about Obama doubling the National debt really wasn’t part of larger point you were trying to make and that you’re not the kind of guy to go around changing what other people have written because you’re not a shallow dimwit.
Right? LOL!
Daniel obviously I gave you more credit than you deserved. The ‘facts’ in the post I put in are provable by looking at GAO sites. They weren’t cut out of whole cloth as you and you old pal WS like to do.
You have really made yourself look incredibly stupid in your post so I will just leave you to wallow in it alone. Some people just cant be helped.
Sorry but I think you are terminally stupid. Maybe when they come up with the monkeyman through the new genetics you can have a brain implant.
Oh wait that would mean you would think half like you and half like MH. Sorry that wouldn’t be an improvement for either of you.
Can’t trust Clark any way, that bastage taunted me with Brats on 4th of July, only to take them away. I bet he’s still cackling about that. :(
#
American_Way
Posted July 15, 2009 at 9:33 pm | Permalink
Yes Daniel I have posted them many times. For many time periods including presidents of all parties.
USTreasury.gov
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Thanks, hey can you grab me a banana while you’re up?
Yup Daniel is an idiot too.
I notice something with you more and more okie. It doesn’t matter the poster or the argument. You more and more try to claim to have the intellectual high ground. I could look just today and find a dozen examples. It was always a part of your posts, but so much more so lately.
That’s a sign of intellectual insecurity. You are up against arguments you can’t win simply by declaring yourself the winner and SO you automatically declare every opponent stupid or unable to keep up with you.
The phenomenon is known as projection.
#
okobserver
Posted July 15, 2009 at 9:37 pm | Permalink
Daniel obviously I gave you more credit than you deserved. The ‘facts’ in the post I put in are provable by looking at GAO sites. They weren’t cut out of whole cloth as you and you old pal WS like to do.
You have really made yourself look incredibly stupid in your post so I will just leave you to wallow in it alone. Some people just cant be helped.
Sorry but I think you are terminally stupid. Maybe when they come up with the monkeyman through the new genetics you can have a brain implant.
Oh wait that would mean you would think half like you and half like MH. Sorry that wouldn’t be an improvement for either of you.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Then why not post a link to the GAO figures? When you make an assertion it’s incumbent upon you to provide proof, not me.
“One uses numbers that go back 2 years before President Obama was even elected and NONE of them provide evidence that the National debt will be doubled in one year. Two of them project a doubling of the National debt over TEN years.”
In his first year in office, not even that, his proposed budget will double the debt over ten years. Remember he said he was going to reduce it, like he said he would reduce unemployment, and other lies.
Refute those figures I referenced, and linked to, with credible data instead of just your mouth.
You said, “When you make an assertion it’s incumbent upon you to provide proof, not me”, then you do it.
“In his first year in office, not even that, his proposed budget will double the debt over ten years”
You said, Obama was going to double the National Debt in just his first year – put up or STFU.
“If George W. Bush had proposed to double the national debt, which had taken more than two centuries to accumulate, in one year, would you have approved?”
The above post by Boxlock.
Yeah or nay, Box, are you a liar or are you just stupid?
#
WSClark
Posted July 15, 2009 at 10:19 pm | Permalink
Yeah or nay, Box, are you a liar or are you just stupid?
-=-===-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=
Why can’t he be both?
His proposed budget in one year, stupid, will double the national dept. His budget isn’t just for one year, it is a multi-year budget, and it will double the debt in some say five, some say ten years, some say as few as four years the way he’s going.
The post was correct in that his budget, for this year alone, projected out, will double the national debt.
Don’t be so stupid.
Boxlock20
Posted July 15, 2009 at 10:30 pm | Permalink
His proposed budget in one year, stupid, will double the national dept.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
That’s not what you claimed in your copy/paste extravaganza. (Try not to hurt yourself moving those goal posts.)
Here, read it again.
——————————–
“If George W. Bush had proposed to double the national debt, which had taken more than two centuries to accumulate, in one year, would you have approved?”
Ha ha ha!
Neither of you have brought any credible data to disprove what I said, only semantic arguments of what a one year budget is.
Just as Bush’s budget mistake of Medicare Drug Benefits will play out over years worsening the debt, Obama’s one year budget will double it projected out over it’s course.
You guys are really incapable of understanding how that works apparently. I shouldn’t be so short tempered with you but I actually gave you more credit than what you are deserving of….you both need help or treatment, but then….that’s the lot of DimLibs.
I can’t help you if you don’t understand the national budget process. His one year budget, this one alone, will double the national debt. His budget for this year alone, without any increases, will double the dept. We are committed to that budget once passed because it is then law. They don’t rewrite budgets, obliterating ones already passed every year, those budgets go forward, they are committed to, the money is considered spent.
His one year budget will double the national debt, and he said he would reduce it.
#
Boxlock20
Posted July 15, 2009 at 10:36 pm | Permalink
Neither of you have brought any credible data to disprove what I said, only semantic arguments of what a one year budget is.
Just as Bush’s budget mistake of Medicare Drug Benefits will play out over years worsening the debt, Obama’s one year budget will double it projected out over it’s course.
You guys are really incapable of understanding how that works apparently. I shouldn’t be so short tempered with you but I actually gave you more credit than what you are deserving of….you both need help or treatment, but then….that’s the lot of DimLibs.
==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Give it up, man!
So, if what you’re saying is true, why is this:
“If George W. Bush had proposed to double the national debt, which had taken more than two centuries to accumulate, in one year, would you have approved?”
followed immediately by this:
“If George W.. Bush had then proposed to double the debt again within 10 years, would you have approved?” [emphasis added]
Hmmmmmm?
As was said, in one year’s budget Obama will double the national debt.
Now continue to show your complete ignorance with this.
Bluejay I will argue my point with you all day long but I will not be pulled into the kind of game Daniel and WS are trying to play tonight. I posted credible numbers that if they doubted it would have been simple to disprove. They choose not to do that but only to keep saying ‘prove your numbers’.
This isn’t adult dialoguing and if someone tries this continually then I can only think they are deficient in the brain department.
When they dialogue with a semblance of reasonabness then I will treat them as adults.
Please refute with fact, not your mouth, how his one year budget will not double the debt.
Ha ha ha!!!
Boxlock20
Posted July 15, 2009 at 10:46 pm | Permalink
His one year budget will double the national debt, and he said he would reduce it.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
So, you’re now saying that President Obama said he would reduce the national debt? Meaning that the national debt, by the end of his term, would be less than it was on January 19, 2009?
Bee Ess.
I’m even less convinced now than I was before that you even understand the difference between the deficit and the debt
Boxlock20,
So, when did President Obama say that he was going to reduce the debt. I’m sure you can provide a link.
Right?
Here dummy try this, simply Google ‘obama’s one year budget doubling the debt’.
Oh heck, that’s too tough for you so here, just click on this link if you know how to do that.
http://www.google.com/search?q=obama%27s+one+year+budget+doubling+the+debt&sourceid=navclient-ff&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1B3GGGL_en___US230
Read a few of them and then refute, with fact, and not dimwitted semantics.
They will confirm that Obama’s single, one year, budget will double the national debt when completed.
Argue with them, I have lost interest in dueling with fools.
“So, when did President Obama say that he was going to reduce the debt. I’m sure you can provide a link.
Right?” the dimwit that seems to never learn
Here are but two:
Mastering Houdini Economics
Will he get out of this economic crisis!?
Among Obama’s campaign promises was his assurance that he would reduce the national debt substantially during his time in office.
http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:OYMzlz8kZRoJ:uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Pre-Presidential_Accomplishments_of_Barack_Obama+did+Obama+claim+to+reduce+the+national+debt&cd=8&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
cont.
cont.
Mr. Boskin is a professor of economics at Stanford University and a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution.
“Mr. Obama’s characterizations of his budget unfortunately fall into this pattern. He claims to reduce the deficit by half, to shave $2 trillion off the debt (the cumulative deficit over his 10-year budget horizon)”
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123871911466984927.html
Daniel,
Night night dummy, I hope your brain has enough going to keep you breathing through the night.
I THINK I AM COMING TO A POINT OF BELIEVING IN THE THEORY OF PARALLEL UNIVERSES…. I MEAN, JUST LOOK AT THE POSTS HERE… CONS POSTS ARE DEAD CERTAIN THEY ARE RIGHT… OTHERS ARE JUST AS CERTAIN THEY ARE WRONG… CONS ARE SO SURE OF THE ACCURACY OF THEIR POSTS… BUT OTHERS REFUTE THEM WITH OTHER EQUALLY ACCURATE POSTS/LINKS….
HAS TO BE PARALLEL UNIVERSES — CROSSING WIRES ON THE INTERNET… AMAZING HOW SOME OF THOSE SCI-FI WRITERS WERE RIGHT ON TARGET!!
/SARCASM OFF
#
Boxlock20
Posted July 15, 2009 at 11:14 pm | Permalink
“So, when did President Obama say that he was going to reduce the debt. I’m sure you can provide a link.
Right?” the dimwit that seems to never learn
Here are but two:
Mastering Houdini Economics
Will he get out of this economic crisis!?
Among Obama’s campaign promises was his assurance that he would reduce the national debt substantially during his time in office.
http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:OYMzlz8kZRoJ:uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Pre-Presidential_Accomplishments_of_Barack_Obama+did+Obama+claim+to+reduce+the+national+debt&cd=8&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
cont.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Uncyclopedia? From their main page:
“Welcome to Uncyclopedia,
the content-free encyclopedia that anyone can edit.”
——————
Boxlock20, I’m fairly certain that this is a parody site. Either you aren’t even trying or you have a sense of humor that I hadn’t noticed, heretofore.
HERE’S A LINK TO THE 10 YEAR BUDGET PLAN…
http://www.jameslogancourier.org/index.php?itemid=4945
AND YET ANOTHER >>>>
Introduction
It took the United States of America 233 years (1776-2009) to amass a national debt of $11 trillion. Yet President Barack Obama’s record large 2009 budget deficit estimated at $1.85 trillion and his own spending plans for the next 10 years (2010-2019) show that our national debt will likely double over the next 10 years.
http://www.investorsinsight.com/blogs/forecasts_trends/archive/2009/06/16/obama-on-course-to-double-national-debt.aspx
AND YET ANOTHER >>>>
McConnell: Obama Budget Will ‘Double Debt in 5 Years’
March 15, 2009 10:33 AM
PrintRSSE-mailShare this story with friendsFacebookRedditTwitterStumbleUponMore
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said the Republican Party doesn’t intend to offer a comprehensive alternative budget in the Senate. Instead, McConnell said, the GOP will offer numerous amendments to the administration’s budget plan.
“First let’s take a look at the budget the president is offering,” McConnell said on “This Week” Sunday, “that’s his responsibility. The majority has a responsibility to lay out their plan, George, for the next few years and they’ve done it. It will double the national debt in five years and triple the national debt in ten years.”
http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2009/03/mcconnell-obama.html
#
Boxlock20
Posted July 15, 2009 at 11:18 pm | Permalink
cont.
Mr. Boskin is a professor of economics at Stanford University and a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution.
“Mr. Obama’s characterizations of his budget unfortunately fall into this pattern. He claims to reduce the deficit by half, to shave $2 trillion off the debt (the cumulative deficit over his 10-year budget horizon)”
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123871911466984927.html
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Once again, you display your inability to differentiate between the deficit and the debt. You can cry about ’semantics’ all you want but if you don’t understand fundamental definitions of terms that are central to the argument, it’s impossible to engage in any discourse.
You make ridiculous claims and then when called on it, you offer evidence of a modified claim which, while true, does not support your initial claim.
ONE MORE……
WASHINGTON—The national debt held by the public would double over the next decade if President Barack Obama’s budget is enacted into law, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projected Friday.
The U.S. government would run budget deficits approaching $1 trillion every year for a decade under Obama’s budget, the CBO said.
Deficits and debt that big are unsustainable over the long term, economists agree. They’d threaten to send inflation spiraling upward, threaten the nation’s creditworthiness and the value of the dollar—China’s prime minister publicly voiced concern about the safety of U.S. debt last week—and force up interest rates, as investors come to see the United States as a risky, debt-ridden economy.
http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/obamas_budget_on_track_to_double_national_debt_in_next_10_years/
PLEASE NOTE…. NONE OF THESE LINKS IS FROM THE UNCYCLOPEDIA, OFFERED UP BY NONE OTHER THAN THE GREAT WIZARD OF PHONY LINKS, THE ONE, THE ONLY, BOXLOCK20!!!
NOTHING IN ANY OF THE LINKS I POST HERE ABOUT ANY KIND OF NATIONAL DEBT DOUBLING IN ONE YEAR…. ALL OF THESE ARE 5 YEARS AT MINIMUM…. TO THE REST, WHO SAY 10 YEARS!!!
BOXLOCK WILL CLAIM IT IS JUST LEFTIST PROPAGANDA…. BUT WE KNOW HE JUST LIES TO SUIT HIS EVERY NEED….
GOOD NIGHT ALL!!!
Chas,
Links don’t work. I’ve seen this scenario play out before. It’s like Déjà vu all over again.
Here is how it usually goes:
——————————–
Boxlock20: Today is Saturday.
Rational Person: No, it’s not.
Boxlock20: Yes, it is.
Rational Person: No, today is Thursday.
Boxlock20: No, today is July 16th.
Rational Person: Ok, but it’s not Saturday.
Boxlock20: Yes, it is July 16th.
Boxlock20: Look, here are 3 links proving that today is July 16th.
Rational Person: But you said that today is Saturday.
Boxlock20: Oh, I’m tired of these semantics! Bring some facts to prove that today is not July 16th, dimwit.
Rational Person: *eye roll*
Dumasses, the Obama budget for one year, his first alone, would eventually double the national debt.
Yes that budget extends over a period of an approximately 5 to 10 years but it is that ONE YEAR BUDGET that DOUBLES the DEBT.
That is all that was meant by doubling the dept in one year, one years budget WOULD in fact double the debt.
Dumbasses = Dumasses, they are all the same here.
I still find it quite interesting that the best argument the dimlibs can come up with is over the semantics of doubling the debt in one budget year (which is what I’m talking about and is happening) vs 5/10 years and not the significance damage that will have on this country and our children and grandchildren.
that’s ‘doubling the debt in one budget year’s budget’.
Simply stated;
Why are Daniel and Chas to simple and unable to recognize that Obama’s one year budget will double the national dept, even if it plays out over 5 to 10 years it is still one years budget.
#
Boxlock20
Posted July 16, 2009 at 9:40 am | Permalink
Simply stated;
Why are Daniel and Chas to simple and unable to recognize that Obama’s one year budget will double the national dept, even if it plays out over 5 to 10 years it is still one years budget.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Boxlock20: Today is Saturday.
Rational Person: No, it’s not.
Boxlock20: Yes, it is.
Rational Person: No, today is Thursday.
Boxlock20: No, today is July 16th.
Rational Person: Ok, but it’s not Saturday.
Boxlock20: Yes, it is July 16th.
Boxlock20: Look, here are 3 links proving that today is July 16th.
Rational Person: But you said that today is Saturday.
Boxlock20: Oh, I’m tired of these semantics! Bring some facts to prove that today is not July 16th, dimwit.
Rational Person: *eye roll*
See to stupid to understand that is is a single years budget that will double the debt.
What’d I tell ya, ha.
“See to stupid to understand that is is a single years budget that will double the debt.”
Dang! Obama’s first budget begins October 1, 2009 and extends to September, 2010. The DEFICIT during that fiscal year is projected to be $1.8 trillion.
The current national DEBT is over $11 trillion. Double that debt would be $22 trillion, not $12.8 trillion.
Federal budget are PROJECTED beyond the coming fiscal year – they are not voted on in total, only in specific appropriations, like the Medicare RX drug bill.
Here dimwit, argue with some of these folks who claim what I have.
http://www.google.com/search?q=obama%27s+budget+doubling+the+national+debt&sourceid=navclient-ff&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGGL,GGGL:2006-10,GGGL:en
WS,
Didn’t your Dad ever warn you about urinating into a strong wind? Ha!
Hey Boxlock20, what day is it?
What day is it?
It’s a day, like yesterday, that I rubbed your face in it with FACTS and REFERENCES and not just the mouth you seem to think is enough.
I don’t see you refuting any of the articles I bring to the discussion. Here they are again:
http://www.google.com/search?q=obama%27s+budget+doubling+the+national+debt&sourceid=navclient-ff&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGGL,GGGL:2006-10,GGGL:en
Is that because you are unable to realize that a single years budget effects several years? If Obama’s budget is passed it will double the national debt, just that one single years budget will double it. Yes it will do so over the years it is in effect, but none the less the truth is that one years budget will in fact double the debt. That is where the statement of doubling the debt in one year comes from, because it is put in place in just one year and will double the debt over it’s course.
I know, it’s just too hard for you, isn’t it?