Drudge Retort: Red Meat for Yellow Dogs
Wednesday, August 19, 2009

Can you feel the excitement ???
Got a tingle up your leg ????

Obama needs to show what kind of a man he is now.
He either splits with the hard left- as the polls, and hopefully, his common sense and concscious are telling him....

Or he caters to the liberal whackos and plummets below 50% approval rating.

Let's watch and see .

I am actually pulling for him. I want to see him come out of this with a new outlook on how to be an executive.

Come on Obama- you can do it. Do the right thing on healthcare- tear it down and start over without the public option.

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Subscriptions

Author Info

8roper

MORE STORIES

Special Features

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in the discussion of this weblog entry should note the site's moderation policy.

I thought this thread would be about my tax rate soon. Still could be true, though.

Obama will eventually back down and move more to the center instead of the extreme left. Now if he were to BITCH SLAP Nancy he would gain at least 10 points in the polls...

As a " GUN TOTING CHRISTIAN WHO CLINGS TO MY GUNS " I will never support Obama and his SOCIALISTIC AGENDA,
TOO bad the BIG HOUSE closed the website for confidential INFORMANTS I could turn myself in again for disagreeing with KING OBAMA


I thought this thread would be about my tax rate soon. Still could be true, though.

#1 | Posted by goatman

Me too.

Buffett Says Federal Debt Poses Risks to Economy, Dollar...


It is about your tax rate


Liberals seem to hold the idea that Conservatives did not care about the deficit until Obama was elected. Bush started this mess and OBAMA put it on STEROIDS. When the JOKER is finished spending money we won't have a POT to PISS in or a window to throw it out of...

he's going to have to tell a slew of people to stack beebees before the people who distrust his motives even come close to THINKING about listening to what comes out of his mouth. he certainly cannot kiss all the butts all the time - most people realize that - he should QUIT trying that.

The worst mistake Obama could make is to listen to the Astroturfers who claim that America doesn't want health care reform. The right-wingers who are complaining today about health care will be complaining tomorrow about his next initiative and complaining throughout his presidency. Nothing he does will make them happy. He should ignore that background noise and do what he was elected to do.

"Nothing he does will make them happy. "

You know that. I know that. Does he know that? If not, when will he figure it out?

I do not support the Heathcare bill, but as someone who voted for Obama, I agree and want to see the man lead instead of follow. Pelosi and Reid will destroy any good possible in the name of continuing the tit-for-tat politics of power. Use the Bully Pulpit already Obama!

People like to compare Obama to Kennedy, I don't see it, but fine, I will use that. Kennedy challenged Americans to live up to what it means to be American where Obama is trying to make us feel good about being Americans again. That is the wrong approach. LEAD and we will follow; ask us what we want and we will fall apart at the seams.

Nothing he does will make them happy. He should ignore that background noise and do what he was elected to do.

Agreed.

You can't fix stupid.

You can't win over an irrational person with irrational arguments.

Bottom line is he's got the votes and doesn't really need to bother trying to placate the obstructionists and madmen.

He needs to deliver on his campaign promises and in order to do that he has to stop playing their game and start playing his.

Spud to Obama:

The right thing?

Just do it.

Be Well.

"rational arguments" that shoulda been.

Need more coffee.

Be Well.

I am astonished by how badly liberals are divorced from reality. They don't have a child's understanding of balancing a budget.

$2 trillion deficit and rising
$2 trillion income and falling
$100 trillion in bonded and unbonded debts (think Ponzi)
Medicare $34 trillion in arrears (imagine Obamacare)
SS payments soon to exceed revenue

Washington is facing certain bankruptcy and you keep finding more ways to spend money. You're freaking insane!


The worst mistake Obama could make is to listen to the Astroturfers who claim that America doesn't want health care reform.

#7 | Posted by rcade

"teabaggers" "astroturfers"

the left is so bad at coming up with effective hate inspiring labels for the silent majority.

"astroturfers" ....Rcade in your statement , when you say "astroturfers" are you refering to the moderate democrats in Congress? If so, then I undestand what you mean.

For those who don't know what an astroturfer is, it's a person in a phony grass-roots campaign. A lot of the health care shout-down mob is coming from Republican operatives funded by clowns like disgraced health care CEO Richard Scott.

How about "brain-dead dukmbfucks"? You'd qualify.

8roper, of course.

So the Corosi and Soros crowds would qualify?


For those who don't know what an astroturfer is, it's a person in a phony grass-roots campaign. A lot of the health care shout-down mob is coming from Republican operatives funded by clowns like disgraced health care CEO Richard Scott.

#15 | Posted by rcade


BUT IT IS THE MODERATE DEMS CONGRESSMEN, who have jumped ship, that matter.
whether caused by American citizens' protests, or not.

You live in the USA - get comfortable with how democracy works.

It ain't a one way street.

the angry left stamping its feet over democracy in action is perhaps the only really satisfying thing that has happened in the period since the "unpleasantness" last Nov.

posts #16 and #17 ......

incoherency - you excel at it.

You live in the USA - get comfortable with how democracy works.

I'll remember you said that when the health care bill passes with moderate Democrat support.

Here's the trained journalist, Rogers. He certainly knows that if the Democrats establish a slippery-slope nationalization of healthcare, it will be because of hefty bribes to further corrupt the 'incorruptible' ... and not any real 'support.'

Meanwhile the administration is asking for a 'grant' to increase the military for any 'emergency' which might occur in some state or another ...

... send in the troops with equipment that can kill and destroy just as well as the regular armed forces can ...

The Democrats are out to protect you, if you will just put your hands on top of your heads and line up over there ...

... "Here's your cough medicine with codeine, back to duty with you, now ..."

How about "brain-dead dukmbfucks(sic)"? You'd qualify.

#16 | Posted by Big_League_Chew at 2009-08-19 12:37 PM | Reply | Flag: Self Retorting Retort

HAHAHAHA what a dumb piece of shit!!!

#15 | Posted by rcade - link please? i've been involved in the TPP for months now and we have NO BACKERS and are begging for money to cover meager costs such as signs and flags and speakers - if the conspeory your side has created were true, don't you think we'd have more money and be better organized? investigate for yourself. the people who will be taking buses to deecee on 9/12 are paying out of their own pockets and they have to get to a staging point first. good Lord - please use your head.

Link:

theplumline.whorunsgov.com

rcade - that doesn't mean we're "well funded" - there is NO money - it's not that difficult to have several hundred people on an email list and those people forward the emails. i've never heard of this person, nor have i or ANYBODY i know in the TPP being funded by any group or person - the article is nebulous in spots. and, most of us are fed up with the republican party and do not want to fall under that rock - as a matter of fact, there is a silent movement to re-register as independents in the next month. as for me, i've always been "decline to state".

You Pubs are in the pocket of big insurance. I bet you believe everything Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh and AKA Quitter Palin tell you too.

"Liberals seem to hold the idea that Conservatives did not care about the deficit until Obama was elected."

Maybe due to their silence, and the fact they re-elected the record-deficit guy.

This country has been spending money it does not have since we've gone off the gold standard, why stop now, Pubs will use any and all stops since they are in the back pocket of the insurance companies and big PHARMA, big oil and the big banks. Pub congressmen and senators are looking out for those who line there pockets and not those who they represent.

Just pissed cause a black man won. And he won big so you nuts are running around making so much noise.

conservatives for patient rights IS a site run by donations - there are no big backers from what i can see and they certainly aren't backing any event i've attended - it seems to be an information site only.

there is NO money -
#25 | Posted by nanc at 2009-08-19 01:51 PM | Reply | Flag

Just because you are not getting paid as an astroturfer then there must be no money in the process whatsoever.

Hey whatever you can believe to get you to sleep at night.

conservatives for patient rights IS a site run by donations

www.sourcewatch.org

Conservatives for Patients Rights is a front group organized in 2009 by Richard Scott to fight U.S. president Barack Obama's proposals for health reform. According to the Politico news site, Scott has raised $20 million to fight health care reform.[1]

Maggie Mahar at the Century Foundation's Health Beat blog reports that Scott previously started the for-profit hospital chain in 1987 that later became the $23 billion Columbia/HCA. He was ousted from this post in 1997 after an FBI investigation of Columbia/HCA that led to 14 felony convictions and $1.7 billion in criminal and civil fines for Medicare fraud.[8]

*Astroturf*

www.washingtonpost.com

Rick Scott, founder of a group called Conservatives for Patients' Rights. "Tell Congress to listen, too."

Scott, a multimillionaire investor and controversial former hospital chief executive, has become an unlikely and prominent leader of the opposition to health-care reform plans that Congress is expected to take up later this year. While disorganized Republicans and major health-care companies wait for President Obama and Democratic leaders to reveal the details of their plan before criticizing it, Scott is using $5 million of his own money and up to $15 million more from supporters to try to build resistance to any government-run program.

The campaign is being coordinated by CRC Public Relations, the group that masterminded the "Swift boat" attacks against 2004 Democratic presidential candidate John F. Kerry, and is inspired by the "Harry and Louise" ads that helped torpedo health-care reform during the Clinton administration

It's a good thing we aren't talking about schools huh? Can you hear the idiots on the Right if this was about education?

"Hell No! No Public Schools!!!"

"We Demand You Send Your Kids to Private Schools!!!"

"Public Education is the work of NAZIS!!!!"

"Defend Capitalism! No Public Option for Education!!!!!"

That is EXACTLY what the dumbfucks would be screaming. And the rest of us would be right here laughing at them.

I just don't get it, but I know they don't either. They are just still mad they lost. NOTHING more.

This country has been spending money it does not have since we've gone off the gold standard, why stop now, Pubs will use any and all stops since they are in the back pocket of the insurance companies and big PHARMA, big oil and the big banks. Pub congressmen and senators are looking out for those who line there pockets and not those who they represent.

#28 | Posted by JoeLabey at 2009-08-19 02:02 PM | Flag: Supports Democrats who took Single Payer off the table

#34 | Posted by Manypaths at 2009-08-19 02:51 PM | Reply | Flag: on furlough from the sanitarium, shows up immediately on DR



"Liberals seem to hold the idea that Conservatives did not care about the deficit until Obama was elected."


Maybe due to their silence, and the fact they re-elected the record-deficit guy.

#27 | Posted by Danforth at 2009-08-19 02:00 PM


Danforth that is HILARIOUS you actually believe OBAMA is the more frugal of the two when it comes to SPENDING MONEY, Please you have to be joking. In the land of reality where I live George Bush started the deficit disaster and OBAMA put it on STEROIDS. Obama's plans call for more deficit spending than all PREVIOUS PRESIDENTS PUT TOGETHER...

Come on Danforth you know who the " record-deficit guy " is...

Here is a clue BARRACK HUSSEIN OBAMA KING OF RECORD DEFICITS...



Just pissed cause a black man won. And he won big so you nuts are running around making so much noise.

#29 | Posted by JoeLabey


so.
Above we see the most pitiful embarassing display of running for the protection of the race card to date.

Obama tries to ram thru legislation to hijack peoples private health care and he gets bitch slapped by America.

The joelabias of the word will be crying "racism" from now until 2012 in the face of such reality bitch slaps.

keep em coming.

"Danforth that is HILARIOUS you actually believe OBAMA is the more frugal of the two when it comes to SPENDING MONEY"

Nope, and I never said that. I pointed out that when the last guy was breaking all-time records for spending and deficits, the righties were noticeably silent, and re-elected the guy. They had no way of knowing more spending was on the way, but when it happened, suddenly woke up to the dangers of debt.

"George Bush started the deficit disaster"

And then you voted for him again.

OH NOW THIS IS JUST RICH!

the HIGHEST approval rating that Obama is getting from all of the Real CLear POlitics polls is from .....

FROM.....


FOX NEWS POLL !!!!!!

it is Fox News poll at 53% that is single handedly keeping obama's above 51%


BWAH HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

that's like a double punch in the gut for all of you Obama lovers, now ain't it.

have some freedom fries!

SUCKERS!

#39 | Posted by Danforth

actually, not a bad backpeddle-spin with a quarter twist wriggle, Dan-o.

Props.



"George Bush started the deficit disaster"


And then you voted for him again.

#39 | Posted by Danforth

Oh come on and then YOU voted for OBAMA who did inherit a $1 trillion dollar deficit and NOW he has managed to make that deficit grow to $3 trillion with his misguided programs and policies. More deficits are coming if CAP AND TRADE and HEALTH SCARE ever happen...

Now lets review

GEORGE BUSH = 1 TRILLION
OBAMA = 3 TRILLION AND COUNTING...


Will you admit OBAMA has outspent BUSH by a 3 to 1 margin...

#42 | Posted by ATaxpayer

DAMN PESKY FACTS...

See you in 2016 sore losers!!!!

.

HA HA!


See you in 2016 sore losers!!!!

HA HA!

#44 | Posted by Manypaths

SEE YOU IN 2012 at the rate OBAMA is FUCKING the country over MICKEY MOUSE could beat him in 2012...


Well Danforth are you going to answer or just sit there until the PIGIONS START LANDING ON YOUR HEAD...


"George Bush started the deficit disaster"


And then you voted for him again.


#39 | Posted by Danforth


Oh come on and then YOU voted for OBAMA who did inherit a $1 trillion dollar deficit and NOW he has managed to make that deficit grow to $3 trillion with his misguided programs and policies. More deficits are coming if CAP AND TRADE and HEALTH SCARE ever happen...


Now lets review


GEORGE BUSH = 1 TRILLION
OBAMA = 3 TRILLION AND COUNTING...


Will you admit OBAMA has outspent BUSH by a 3 to 1 margin...


#42 | Posted by ATaxpayer

HASTA LAREDOOOO...

See you in 2016 sore losers!!!!

HA HA!

Wayback machine:


See you in 1984 sore losers!!!!

HA HA!
See you in 2016 sore losers!!!!

#44 | Posted by Manypaths at 1977-08-19 04:16 PM |

"the rate OBAMA is FUCKING the country over MICKEY MOUSE could beat him in 2012..."

Well they better nominate Mickey, rather than Sarah! or Jindi the Hindi.

Now lets review

GEORGE BUSH = 1 TRILLION
OBAMA = 3 TRILLION AND COUNTING...

Will you admit OBAMA has outspent BUSH by a 3 to 1 margin...

#46 | Posted by ATaxpayer at 2009-08-19 04:27 PM

3 trillion? Not defending Obama but last I read it was at 2.

ballpark...

"Oh come on and then YOU voted for OBAMA who did inherit a $1 trillion dollar deficit and NOW he has managed to make that deficit grow to $3 trillion"

Which has absolutely nothing to do with explaining your silence during the $1 Trillion deficit (which is ludicrous, as the $Trillion-plus Iraq war was "off-budget"). Even now, you've got no answer, and have to keep deflecting to something you had no idea of at the time.

Obviously, deficits only matter to you when the President has a (D) after his name.

And tell us...how much of that deficit is interest payment on debts piled up by Republican Presidents?

SEE YOU IN 2012 at the rate OBAMA is FUCKING the country over MICKEY MOUSE could beat him in 2012...



#45 | Posted by ATaxpayer

The GOP can't recruit Mickey Mouse.

Face it, you guys don't even have a candidate.

HA HA

Face it, you guys don't even have a candidate.

Did the dems have one four years ago? They did? What was her name again?

LOL

#53 | Posted by Manypaths at 2009-08-19 05:59 PM | Reply | Flag: Still hasn't figured out that a lot can happen in three years.

#9 | POSTED BY KANREI
"Obama is trying to make us feel good about being Americans again. That is the wrong approach. LEAD and we will follow; ask us what we want and we will fall apart at the seams."


Very well said.

For those who don't know what an astroturfer is, it's a person in a phony grass-roots campaign. A lot of the health care shout-down mob is coming from Republican operatives funded by clowns like disgraced health care CEO Richard Scott.

Yes, we know EXACTLY what astroturfing is.

It is the SEIU showing up to shout down, intimidate, or even assault Obamacare protesters.
www.washingtonexaminer.com

Or ACORN busing in people to shout down health care protesters and stack the town halls.
beltwayblips.dailyradar.com

It is also Craig's List ads offering to pay people $11 - $16/hour to go to town halls in favor of health care.

On the other hand... you have, what? The website of a person you don't like that has asked people to go. No pay. No evidence that a single person has gone because of that website.

As a matter of fact, I never heard about that guys website until it was mentioned by the lefties well after protests at the town halls had already hit the news cycle.

You also fail to counter the fact that quite a few of the protesters I have seen are not just Republicans, but Democrats and Independents as well. Unlike Acorn, SEIU, etc.

Yes, I think we know EXACTLY what astroturf is. We also know what psychological projection is. It is obvious the Democrats are guilty of both.

BTW... here is an example of one of the Craig's List ads:

**TALENTED LEADERS needed to work for health care reform $11-16/hour** (Downtown)
newyork.craigslist.org

Which has absolutely nothing to do with explaining your silence during the $1 Trillion deficit (which is ludicrous, as the $Trillion-plus Iraq war was "off-budget").

Which has absolutely nothing to do with what is going on now. You, sir, are a pettifogger.

"Which has absolutely nothing to do with what is going on now. You, sir, are a pettifogger."

Read the posts leading up to that one. They concerned folks who never made a peep during the Bush record deficits, now awakening to the dangers of debt for the first time. You sir, are an idiot.

They concerned folks who never made a peep during the Bush record deficits, now awakening to the dangers of debt for the first time.
Posted by Danforth

You sir, failed 3rd Grade math if you can't figure out the last 7-1/2 months.

"You sir, failed 3rd Grade math if you can't figure out the last 7-1/2 months.

And you failed 1st grade English if you think that was the topic.

Have you actually read the prior posts, or are you content with digging that hole deeper and deeper?

They concerned folks who never made a peep during the Bush record deficits

Irrelevant to what Obama is doing. It is only relevant if you feel that one bad deed justifies another.

You on the other hand castigate Bush for HIS deficits, but excuse Obama for deficits that are 3 times larger in 1/16th the amount of time.

"Irrelevant to what Obama is doing."

But the subject of the posts, nonetheless. Are you really that fucking stupid? You and the rest of the idiots had no idea Obama would break GWB's deficit records, and were virtually silent during his Presidency. That's been the subject of the back-and-forths, you and your dumbshit cohorts notwithstanding.

"You on the other hand castigate Bush for HIS deficits, but excuse Obama for deficits that are 3 times larger in 1/16th the amount of time."

Your math sucks as bad as your comprehension skills. First, I've never excused Obama's deficits. Second, it was idiots like you, who viewed the Iraq debacle as "off budget", that led you to that erroneous conclusion. And third, I'll bet you blame the interest for Dubya's debt on Obama.

But the subject of the posts, nonetheless. Are you really that fucking stupid?

No, but evidently you are. You seem to ignore the idea of "limits" and that perhaps the people that excused Bush for growing the deficit to $1 trillion over 8 years might have reached theirs at $3 trillion in 7 months.

To put that in perspective, if I went out and spent $500 on a credit card over a period of 8 months, I would still be justified in being upset if my wife then went out and spent $1500 in 15 days.

First, I've never excused Obama's deficits.

That is EXACTLY what you are doing now.

Second, it was idiots like you, who viewed the Iraq debacle as "off budget", that led you to that erroneous conclusion.

What erroneous conclusion? The deficit in 2008 was $455 billion, but the national debt (do you know the difference?) increased by $1 trillion*. That means that the reported deficit was half the actual deficit. The real number was $1 trillion. That means you are full of shit about the "off budget" bit and the $1 trillion number actually takes into account this "off budget" amount.

* www.fms.treas.gov

And third, I'll bet you blame the interest for Dubya's debt on Obama.

No... we are talking about defict, not national debt.

"You seem to ignore the idea of "limits""

Too fuckin' funny. The largest deficits since the dawn of time weren't enough for you, and you only met your "limit" recently. Riiiiiiiiight.

"...and that perhaps the people that excused Bush for growing the deficit to $1 trillion over 8 years might have reached theirs at $3 trillion in 7 months."

I'll type this slowly, so you can understand:

Back in 2005, how big a deficit did you know Obama would accrue?

THAT was the topic, not some dumbass deflection you and the rest of the apologists are insisting upon. Without knowing the future, you were dead silent about deficits, until the President had a (D) after his name. That qualifies you as a hack. OTOH, I've been decrying deficits regardless of the WH occupant, present company INCLUDED.

"No... we are talking about defict (sic), not national debt."

What a moron. The interest on Bush's debts are included in Obama's deficits.

Too fuckin' funny. The largest deficits since the dawn of time weren't enough for you, and you only met your "limit" recently. Riiiiiiiiight.

Yes, too fucking funny. "The largest deficits since the dawn of time weren't enough for you", and you think it should be ok to EXCEED them. Despite the fact that you complained about a lesser amount when there was an (R) after the President's name.

Back in 2005, how big a deficit did you know Obama would accrue?

Let me say THIS slow so you can understand: It isn't 2005, it is 2009. The deficit isn't $1 trillion, it is $3 trillion. You just can't help but try the Bush deflection as if somehow that just makes it ok.

THAT was the topic

No... that is just the topic you WANT, never mind the fact that it is a deflection to ignore your own hypocrisy for castigating Bush, then excusing Obama for doing worse.

The interest on Bush's debts are included in Obama's deficits.

And only account for a small amount of the deficit Which still exceeds in just 7 months what took Bush 8 years to work up to.

The fact is, what Obama is doing is yet another political gimmick: Grow the deficit as large as you can this year so that he can try and blame it all on Bush.

"and you think it should be ok to EXCEED them."

I never claimed that, and your pretense merely shows your stupidity. The subject isn't and has never been Obama's too-large deficits, it was the fact you jagoffs never made a peep when the largest deficits since the dawn of time to that point were being amassed. Only now, that the President has a (D) after his name, are you finally interested. Instead, you're pretending you were all silent during Dubya's debts because you knew there would be larger ones. Excuse me while I convulse from derisory laughter.

"Let me say THIS slow so you can understand: It isn't 2005, it is 2009. The deficit isn't $1 trillion, it is $3 trillion. "

And that wasn't the topic, until you deflection-maniacs tried to move the goalposts. The salient question was, and is: if deficits are so bad, where were you during the prior 8 years?

"No... that is just the topic you WANT"

Nice try for yet another deflection, but that was the initial point of my first post on this thread. Ever since then, those silent have been pretending they were waiting to speak up until "limits" had been met. YOU have been changing the subject, merely to avoid the inconvenient facts. That exposes you, once again, as a partisan HACK.

"The fact is, what Obama is doing is yet another political gimmick: Grow the deficit as large as you can this year so that he can try and blame it all on Bush."

Obama is responsible for his own deficits, minus the interest on the debts his predecessors amassed, the vast majority from Republican Presidents. This, however, is about idiots who never raised a hand until the guy in office was from a different party than them.

I never claimed that

Not in those exact words, but the disingenuous of your actual words means the same thing. Basically, castigating those that didn't complain about a lesser amount as if they couldn't possibly be rightfully upset over a much higher amount.

Only now, that the President has a (D) after his name, are you finally interested.

Again, you prove my point. You assume the outrage is now only over party affiliation. If Obama was simply looking at a $1 trillion deficit the same as Bush, you would have a point. However that isn't the case. Obama's deficit is 3 times greater. The fact that you would ignore that little fact and instead focus on party affiliation as necessary cause of the outrage simply points out the hackery in your argument.

The salient question was...

To which we answer, where are you NOW when it is much higher under Obama? You see, hypocrisy works both ways, except since Obama has exceeded Bush in this matter, the newfound outrage by some on the right can easily be explained as justified by the even higher amount. You, however, just remain a hypocrite that wants to limit the discussion to what you feel comfortable with.

Nice try for yet another deflection, but that was the initial point of my first post on this thread.

Your first post on this thread was in ANSWER to someone else that was making THE SAME POINT I AM.... so the deflection is all yours.

"Basically, castigating those that didn't complain about a lesser amount as if they couldn't possibly be rightfully upset over a much higher amount."

Good God, are you always this obstinately ignorant? My initial question was, if deficits are so bad, where were you for the last eight years? Your answer is well, the next guy spent more. Your answer has nothing to do with the question, but is instead a bullshit deflection. And you have to pretend I endorse Obama's deficits, to boot.

"To which we answer, where are you NOW when it is much higher under Obama? "

I'm against them, and have been from the start, something you've yet to acknowledge.

The rest of your post is all based on your false premises. What a disingenuous, idiotic hack. You can't defend your silence, so you have to pretend I endorse Obama's overspending. You lose.

My initial question was, if deficits are so bad, where were you for the last eight years?

Actually, that "question" was a statement that was in ANSWER to Ataxpayer that commented on the fact that "Bush started this mess and OBAMA put it on STEROIDS" (#4 post). You even quoted this in your first post.

Now you just want to keep people from pointing this out and try to pretend it was you that brought it up in the first place. Hack

The rest of your post is all based on your false premises... You can't defend your silence...

You mean like that false premise right there. I didn't like the big spending by Bush. Especially in 2008. I also thought the bailouts were a REALLY bad idea for more than one reason.

How about this for disingenuous:

You claim you don't like Obama's spending. If that were really true why and the hell would you bash the people that agree with you? So you think they should have spoken up before, big deal. The fact that they are supposedly agreeing with you now should be a welcome change even if they are late to the party. Instead you want to score a cheap political point, that in reality has no point since Obama's spending just in the first half of the first year of his Presidency is set to outstrip Bush's last year of an 8 year Presidency by a country mile.

For someone that says they don't endorse Obama's spending, you are sure looking like one right now.

That, my friend, is the epitome of disingenuous.

8roper

HOW DARE YOU

you know good and well that any poll showing bad shit for the messiah will be just thrown off as manufactored or something like that....

wont be long though will it...

so without scrolling down through posts so far

HOW many times have bush numbers been mentioned already...as if that makes a difference in this issue??

"The deficit in 2008 was $455 billion, but the national debt (do you know the difference?) increased by $1 trillion*. That means that the reported deficit was half the actual deficit. The real number was $1 trillion. That means you are full of shit about the "off budget" bit and the $1 trillion number actually takes into account this "off budget" amount."

Econ flunkee.
Where is the trillion dollars Bernanke shoved into the system a few days before the bailout? And where is the near trillion-dollar bailout? Your numbers don't add up at all.

"The fact that they are supposedly agreeing with you now should be a welcome change even if they are late to the party."

Then you have to admit Obama has been good for the country. Just look at how much the average intelligence of rightwingers has risen.

"For someone that says they don't endorse Obama's spending, you are sure looking like one right now."

You really know how to lose a debate, don't you? You can't find a single post where I've endorsed Obama's overspending, but because I point out Republicans are johnny-come-latelys regarding debt, your only conclusion is I support Obama's spendthrift ways.

"Instead you want to score a cheap political point"

Not cheap at all. It's a fact: when Dubya was racking up the largest deficits since the dawn of time, Republicans were silent. Iraq war, tax cuts for the wealthiest, not a peep. It wasn't until the bank bailout (and the $trillion pumped in a few days before the bailout passed), there was even a whisper. Now that the President has a (D) after his name, rightwingers are screaming. And their excuse? They've finally met their "limits". Idiotic.

Bush actually had a chance -- maybe the last -- to right the economy and prepare for the tsunamis of Medicare and Social Security. Instead, we got a 60% income tax rate cut for the richest, and a war of choice. And Bush's hand-picked SEC slept for 8 years. Forgive me if I believe this "limits" bullshit is partisan. My bet is if McCain had been elected, and felt the need for a stimulus, the right would be, once again, silent.

AFKA -surprisingly - zero mentions of Ws pol numbers.

The deflection today here is Obama's bad poll numbers are becuase of astroturfers and Oh yeah W has been mentioned as having started this whole ballooning deficit mess, even though Obammy immediately tripled the whole bush defecit.

Now lets review


GEORGE BUSH = 1 TRILLION
OBAMA = 3 TRILLION AND COUNTING...


Will you admit OBAMA has outspent BUSH by a 3 to 1 margin...


#42 | Posted by ATaxpayer at 2009-08-19 03:55 PM

DANFORTH IT WAS FUNNY AS HELL TO WATCH YOU WEARING YOUR BUTT FOR A HAT AND CLING VIGOROUSLY TO YOUR TALKING POINTS IN THE FACE OF A SIMPLE MATH EQUATION MOST 1ST GRADERS COULD MASTER...

DEAD BALLS ACURATE RESPONSES:

**********

You on the other hand castigate Bush for HIS deficits, but excuse Obama for deficits that are 3 times larger in 1/16th the amount of time.

#63 | Posted by moomanfl

To put that in perspective, if I went out and spent $500 on a credit card over a period of 8 months, I would still be justified in being upset if my wife then went out and spent $1500 in 15 days.


You sir, failed 3rd Grade math if you can't figure out the last 7-1/2 months.

#61 | Posted by wisgod at 2009-08-19 11:50 PM

*****

LOL LOL LOL...


"DEAD BALLS ACURATE RESPONSES:"

Ya gotta love the self-retorting retort.

"IN THE FACE OF A SIMPLE MATH EQUATION MOST 1ST GRADERS COULD MASTER..."

My statements regarded the fact the largest deficits since the dawn of time weren't enough for rightwingers to reach their "limits". A trillion dollar war didn't do it. Tax cuts for the wealthiest didn't do it. A trillion pumped into the system a few days before the near-trillion dollar bailout got a blip. And now you're relying on two lies to try to prove your point: Obama's deficit is NOT $3 trillion, and Bush's, when you add it all up, was much MORE than $1 trillion.

That, and the fact you can't find a single post where I've ever praised Obama's overspending. Instead, you all pretend you were silent during the Bush debacle was because...wait for it...you knew bigger deficits were coming. You lose.

"Obammy immediately tripled the whole bush defecit(sic)."

Another math flunk-out.

Ya gotta love the self-retorting retort.

#77 | Posted by Danforth

This is as close as we will ever see to an actual answer from Danforth to the original question...


GEORGE BUSH = 1 TRILLION
OBAMA = 3 TRILLION AND COUNTING...

Will you admit OBAMA has outspent BUSH by a 3 to 1 margin...

#42 | Posted by ATaxpayer at 2009-08-19 03:55 PM


DAMN PESKY FACTS

"Obama's deficits are 3 times larger in 1/16th the amount of time." that statement said it all, oh well everyone has an opinion...







You Pubs are in the pocket of big insurance. I bet you believe everything Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh and AKA Quitter Palin tell you too.

#26 | Posted by JoeLabey

As opposed to MSNBC or CNN?

JoeLabey, one more leftist Lib whose been double dipped in the stupid-pond.

"GEORGE BUSH = 1 TRILLION"

Bullshit. The prior deficit, the "off-budget" Iraq war, and the bailout add up to much, much more.

"OBAMA = 3 TRILLION AND COUNTING..."

Link?

"Will you admit OBAMA has outspent BUSH by a 3 to 1 margin..."

No, your math is all wrong.

"DAMN PESKY FACTS"

More like damn pesky lies.

"Obama's deficits are 3 times larger in 1/16th the amount of time." that statement said it all, oh well everyone has an opinion..."

Again, a lie. Link or stink.

blog.heritage.org


Again, a lie. Link or stink.

#82 | Posted by Danforth at 2009-08-20 02:46 PM


President Barack Obama has repeatedly claimed that his budget would cut the deficit by half by the end of his term. But as Heritage analyst Brian Riedl has pointed out, given that Obama has already helped quadruple the deficit with his stimulus package, pledging to halve it by 2013 is hardly ambitious.

DANFORTH here you go and the really GOOD NEWS is OBAMA CLAIMS the deficit will be cut in half by 2013 WOW ...

LOL LOL LOL...

#83

Translation: I looked, and discovered I was wrong, so I'm going to deflect some more.

Find proof to back up your bullshit, or retract. And in the meantime, please explain how a half-trillion dollar deficit, plus the Iraq war, plus the bailout, plus the trillion dollars pumped into the economy a few days before the bailout passed, all adds up to only $1 Trillion.


DANFORTH You asked for a link and I provided a link to prove you are full of CRAP, just ADMIT YOU ARE WRONG ALREADY...

"Please explain how a half-trillion dollar deficit, plus the Iraq war, plus the bailout, plus the trillion dollars pumped into the economy a few days before the bailout passed, all adds up to only $1 Trillion."

#84 | Posted by Danforth at 2009-08-20 03:20 PM


UPDATE: Many Obama defenders in the comments are claiming that the numbers above do not include spending on Iraq and Afghanistan during the Bush years. They most certainly do. While Bush did fund the wars through emergency supplementals (not the regular budget process), that spending did not simply vanish. It is included in the numbers above. Also, some Obama defenders are claiming the graphic above represents biased Heritage Foundation numbers. While we stand behind the numbers we put out 100%, the numbers, and the graphic itself, above are from the Washington Post. We originally left out the link to WaPo. It has been now been added.


WELL I BROUGHT THE HORSE TO WATER AND DISCOVERED HE IS FULL OF KOOL AID ...

"You asked for a link and I provided a link"

Your own link proved you wrong. Where is the $3 trillion dollar deficit? Where is the 3 times the spending?

All your own link "proved" is you're a liar or an ignoramus.

blog.heritage.org


But as Heritage analyst Brian Riedl has pointed out, given that Obama has already QUADRUPLED the deficit with his stimulus package, pledging to halve it by 2013 is hardly ambitious.


DANFORTH try reading the words beside the graph it will help to explain the RATIO, in particular please note the word QUADRUPLED I only claimed 3X. AS for the GRAPH itself it is from the Washington Post, that should make you FEEL ALL WARM AND FUZZY...





All your own link "proved" is you're a liar or an ignoramus.

TRANSLATION: DAMN PESKY FACTS AGAIN....

HASTA LAREDOOO

"DAMN PESKY FACTS AGAIN...

You still haven't proven any of your assertions.

"given that Obama has already QUADRUPLED the deficit with his stimulus package"

You're counting spending slated for upcoming years in this one, and comparing one year of Bush to multiple years of Obama. You haven't shown me where the bailout or the trillion-dollar pump a few days prior is in Bush's deficit, nor have you shown me a $3 trillion deficit in any year from Obama. You lose, again.

With a name like TAXPAYER you would think he would have some sort of grasp of economics but it is clear that he doesn't. He has no idea what he is fucking talking about.

People wouldn't know how stupid you were if you lost your keyboard there Sparky.

have you shown me a $3 trillion deficit in any year from Obama. You lose, again.

#90 | Posted by Danforth

GET WELL...

SOMEONE PLEASE HELP DANFORTH...

Hasta Laredooo...

No wonder he LOLs all the time. He's just a clueless simpleton.

TAXPAYER = proving ignorance is bliss, one keystroke at a time.

He needs to deliver on his campaign promises

#10 | Posted by dethspud

Don't hold your breath, he's a politician.

Comments are closed for this entry.

Drudge Retort

Home | News | Comments | User Blogs | Nooner | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | Copyright 2009 World Readable