Alan Baker wrote in
:
In article ,
RD Sandman wrote:
Alan Baker wrote in
:
In article ,
RD Sandman wrote:
Alan Baker wrote in news:alangbaker-
:
In article ,
RD Sandman wrote:
Alan Baker wrote in
:
In article ,
"Oglethorpe" wrote:
"dave" wrote in message
...
On 7/24/2011 7:34 AM, JohnJohnsn wrote:
On Jul 23, 8:48 am,
wrote:
ISN'T IT OBVIOUS to all but you brainless racists among
us that the "Boehner Plan" is aimed squarely at making
Obama the first president to preside over a U.S.
DEFAULT?
The Obama administration spent more in less than 3 years
than the Bush administration did in eight years. There would
be no need to raise the debt ceiling were it not for that.
Yeah.
If you take over the controls of an aircraft that someone has
put
into
a steep dive, you can't just yank the controls back to level
it off, either.
How many more years do you think that excuse will fly?
Before I answer: do you really think that is is just an excuse
that has no validity?
Do you mean the aircraft metaphor or the comment about Obama and
your implication?
I mean do you really think that the fact that the U.S. economy was
in a steep decline when Obama took office and it cannot be reversed
just by flicking a switch: do you think that that is valid or not?
Yes, I believe that the decline actually started at the end of the
Clinton administration with the dot.com industry going bust and the
regulations being eased on the housing and financial markets and the
Democrats' dream of new home ownership. Clinton wanted 8 million new
home owners. Bush continued that dream with a desire for 5.5 million
on his watch. Oversight went in the toilet, we had 9/11, two wars,
an unfunded mandate on Medicare Part D, etc.
We also had a Democratically controlled House and Senate since the
2006 elections and lack of oversight on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac,
Obama campaigning that Afghanistan was the "right" war and a
continuation of the many of the same policies that existed under
Bush. The economy was in the toilet, jobs were going away and Obama
was concentrating on passing his historic healthcare bill (insurance
reform) rather than to focus on the other two problems.
Yes, I believe those things. I also believe that, sometime, Obama
needs to stand up and be counted rather than to continue to blame
things on Bush.
Wow. Talk about reality distortion fields....
Yep, too many folks on both sides have them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jobs_cr...esidential_ter
ms
What did you want me to look at on that cite? The 1.1 million created
under Bush or the 1.81 lost under Obama? That is what those + and -
signs mean, don't ya' know.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms
How about
:
07/25/2011 14,535,921,315,199
09/30/2010 13,561,623,030,891.79
09/30/2009 11,909,829,003,511.75
09/30/2008 10,024,724,896,912.49
09/30/2007 9,007,653,372,262.48
09/30/2006 8,506,973,899,215.23
09/30/2005 7,932,709,661,723.50
09/30/2004 7,379,052,696,330.32
09/30/2003 6,783,231,062,743.62
09/30/2002 6,228,235,965,597.16
09/30/2001 5,807,463,412,200.06
09/30/2000 5,674,178,209,886.86
We could use the 2000 fiscal year end and start Bush with $5.7T and
ending with $10.1T. Now Obama is at $14.5T after only 2.5 years. Let's
see that is Bush at $4.4T in 8 years and Obama at $4.4T in less than 3.
Got it. Thanks.
--
RD (The Sandman)
Thought for the day.......
Handle every stressful situation like a dog would.
If you can't eat it or hump it....**** on it and walk away.