Performance Boats Forum banner

1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,729 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
If they are fiscally conservative, it would be the smart thing to do. A vote for Romney is a vote for the return to failed Bush era policies.:))ThumbsDwn Obama's policies have raised the debt only $1.41 trillion, while Bush's policies raised the debt $7 trillion. We as a nation can't afford any more GOP economic policy that has proven to be ruinous to our nation. If you want a fiscaly responsible America, pick Obama. if you want a bankrupt America, pick Romney. The choice is up to you.

Why CEOs and Other Fiscally Conservative Individuals Should Vote for Barack Obama
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
222 Posts
If they are fiscally conservative, it would be the smart thing to do. A vote for Romney is a vote for the return to failed Bush era policies.:))ThumbsDwn Obama's policies have raised the debt only $1.41 trillion, while Bush's policies raised the debt $7 trillion. We as a nation can't afford any more GOP economic policy that has proven to be ruinous to our nation. If you want a fiscaly responsible America, pick Obama. if you want a bankrupt America, pick Romney. The choice is up to you.

Why CEOs and Other Fiscally Conservative Individuals Should Vote for Barack Obama
By the President's own projections, he will increase the debt to $25 Trillion by 2022. Yep, that's the dipshit I want to vote for!
 

·
Temporarily Pacified!
Joined
·
5,554 Posts
Ram is a Bafoon!!!! Look at historical Data idiot!!!!!

2004 Bush tax cuts are all applied
2004 Federal Receipts $1880T Debt $412.7B
2005 $2153.6T $318.3B
2006 $2406.0T $248.2B
2007 Dems took over Congress, but still a Rep Budget
2007 $2568.0T $160.7B
2008 Barry Elected
2008 $2524.0T $458.6B
2009 $2105.0T $1,412.7T
2010 $2162.7T $1293.5T
2011 $2303.5T $1299.6T


Funny how actual historical facts proove you wrong and W and the right, right!!!!! Tax cuts applied and revenue increased, Debt decreased up untill the Dem congress was in place.....then it expoded under Obama.......how do you explain that? And don't give us crap about the housing and bank meltdown, that has nothing to do with tax cuts and fiscal spending......and history also prooves that as the Dems took office W warned congress to act atleast 17 times to fix the problem before the meltdown, the DEM Congress FAILED to act. Spin it how you will, history shows something else!!!!! IDIOT!

Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
499 Posts
Donzi, your using facts again...... It's the liberals cryptonite and only rattles their cage :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
499 Posts
I'd be very shocked if the Kenyan wins.... Americans are fed up with lies!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17 Posts
Here's a fact for you: Obama will be reelected. Better start coming to terms with that now.:)hand
That could happen...it's very disturbing trying to anticipate the possible ramification's of this election. One that disturbs me greatly is Benghazi if elected Obama will face that occurrence on very shaky ground's...i doubt the outcome will be good. With that said there is a very high probability that our next president will be Biden.....Do some soul searching..get beyond the democratic mantra and what that could mean for this country and the world.

Be careful what you wish for.

Strking commentary with truth that should shake anyone to the core.

Camille Paglia on Why She's Not Voting for President Obama - YouTube
 

·
Living in a cage of fear
Joined
·
16,464 Posts
A very valid point, gunner.
You may notice that I often say O will not do 4 more years.
Not that he will not win.
There are too many everyday joes out there that are on the edge.
It doesn't take a nut case these days. People are on their last nerve
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,020 Posts
If they are fiscally conservative, it would be the smart thing to do. A vote for Romney is a vote for the return to failed Bush era policies.:))ThumbsDwn Obama's policies have raised the debt only $1.41 trillion, while Bush's policies raised the debt $7 trillion. ]
Wow, what a piece of debris. Reminds me of the type of nonsense we see when China or the PLO writes a letter to the editor in the NYT.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,020 Posts
I did read the article. It contained a dozen different canards of yours that have been refuted here. As a whole it was a nonsensical waste of time.
I also read CBO predictions, which are occasionally useful. The claim that repealing Obamacare will INCREASE the deficit is patent nonsense. As is the claim that Romney has a $5T tax cut.
As I've explained, I'm no apologist for W Bush. His numbers are what they are.
O's numbers reflect continous stimulus, and the Rs cowardice in not stopping him the last 2 yrs.
I don't think you can blame Bush for the $ that O spent on his cronies the last 4 yrs. O said he would end the wars, so I don't think you can blame Bush for the $ spent on the wars the last 3 yrs. O extended the Bush tax cuts twice and might do it again, so you can't blame Bush for that (using lib premise that this "cost" $).
Let's try a little math. Let's say the Bush wars cost $2T that wasn't "paid for." The interest on that is about $50 billion a year. O can properly blame Bush for this expense. O spends about $3.5 T a yr., so that means O has responsibility for $3.45T/yr.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
499 Posts
SB, how could those numbers be right, they don't make Obama look like the obvious choice Nov 6.. I'd better re-read it a few times.... Can't possibly be right.... :)hammers
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
339 Posts
Here's a fact for you: Obama will be reelected. Better start coming to terms with that now.:)hand
Is this the best comeback youve got. Faced with facts you fall back on your heels and weakly state" Here's a fact for you: Obama will be reelected." For a self described intelectual, you should be able to argue fact with fact, not this ridiculous diatribe.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,729 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
I did read the article. It contained a dozen different canards of yours that have been refuted here. As a whole it was a nonsensical waste of time.
I also read CBO predictions, which are occasionally useful. The claim that repealing Obamacare will INCREASE the deficit is patent nonsense. As is the claim that Romney has a $5T tax cut.
As I've explained, I'm no apologist for W Bush. His numbers are what they are.
O's numbers reflect continous stimulus, and the Rs cowardice in not stopping him the last 2 yrs.
I don't think you can blame Bush for the $ that O spent on his cronies the last 4 yrs. O said he would end the wars, so I don't think you can blame Bush for the $ spent on the wars the last 3 yrs. O extended the Bush tax cuts twice and might do it again, so you can't blame Bush for that (using lib premise that this "cost" $).
Let's try a little math. Let's say the Bush wars cost $2T that wasn't "paid for." The interest on that is about $50 billion a year. O can properly blame Bush for this expense. O spends about $3.5 T a yr., so that means O has responsibility for $3.45T/yr.
Can you blame Obama for policies that Bush put in place that Obama can't change? Bush's tax cuts are an example, and before you say Obama approved the extension, he had little other choice as the GOP was holding the economy hostage. Bush put those tax cuts in place, which was a horribly stupid thing to do. After Obama gets reelected, I doubt he extends the tax cuts, and I doubt Congress will even present him with an extension to sign. In fact, I bet Obama uses the expired tax cuts as motivation to get the GOP to work with the dems to reach an agreement that will revamp the tax system and reduce the debt (and it will include tax increases). Without a little motivation, those GOP dumbfucks would be OK with continuing to kick the can down the road. Hell, the GOP wants the debt to run out of control because then they will have an excuse to dismantle Roosevelt's New Deal and Johnson's Great Society social programs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
339 Posts
Hell, the GOP wants the debt to run out of control because then they will have an excuse to dismantle Roosevelt's New Deal and Johnson's Great Society social programs.
An interesting thought. Do you truly believe the "New Deal" and "Great Society" were intended to create the generational class of entitlement we see today?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,020 Posts
Can you blame Obama for policies that Bush put in place that Obama can't change?

Hmm, Dems had the WH and control of Congress for a couple yrs. So, yes.
Btw, you freely blame Bush for costs from Medicare, SS, etc. put in place yrs. before. I'm wondering if O can take the blame for 7th and 8th yrs he is in office or will that still be Bush's fault?


Bush's tax cuts are an example, and before you say Obama approved the extension, he had little other choice as the GOP was holding the economy hostage.

O obviously believed a tax increase would hurt the economy, and rightly so. Talk about inconvenient truths.



. After Obama gets reelected, I doubt he extends the tax cuts, and I doubt Congress will even present him with an extension to sign.

Count on it being presented.

In fact, I bet Obama uses the expired tax cuts as motivation to get the GOP to work with the dems to reach an agreement that will revamp the tax system and reduce the debt (and it will include tax increases).

There is nobody running for office with a revamp platform, so I doubt there will be a mandate for it. Whether there is a mandate for a tax increase on the "rich" is an interesting question.


Hell, the GOP wants the debt to run out of control because then they will have an excuse to dismantle Roosevelt's New Deal and Johnson's Great Society social programs.
There is nobody running with a dismantle platform either. Holding the growth in programs flat or very low would be considered radical.


SB, how could those numbers be right, they don't make Obama look like the obvious choice Nov 6.. I'd better re-read it a few times.... Can't possibly be right.... :)hammers
:D


An interesting thought. Do you truly believe the "New Deal" and "Great Society" were intended to create the generational class of entitlement we see today?
Social Security was a "little something" for the old people to keep them from starving. All the programs have been perverted beyond imagination and increased exponentially.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
339 Posts
There is nobody running with a dismantle platform either. Holding the growth in programs flat or very low would be considered radical.




:D




Social Security was a "little something" for the old people to keep them from starving. All the programs have been perverted beyond imagination and increased exponentially.
Agree, just waiting on Rams response. These programs had good intent, but were poorly thought out and are purely socialistic in nature, they could not, should not survive as proven by our current financial state. They need a major overhaul based on incentives not handouts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
656 Posts
Is this the best comeback youve got. Faced with facts you fall back on your heels and weakly state" Here's a fact for you: Obama will be reelected." For a self described intelectual, you should be able to argue fact with fact, not this ridiculous diatribe.


Just sit tight. ram will be Along shortly and say your gay, call you a fag, tell you to go to broke back mtn, and I am sure he will come up with more gay shit. :))ThumbsDwn:))ThumbsDwn
 

·
Living in a cage of fear
Joined
·
16,464 Posts
Just sit tight. ram will be Along shortly and say your gay, call you a fag, tell you to go to broke back mtn, and I am sure he will come up with more gay shit. :))ThumbsDwn:))ThumbsDwn
Ram wishes he could work up on his so called broke back mountain. We all make at least a quarter million a year. Of course, he would never be able to do it. Besides the fact that could never do the actual work, his pro union stance, anti-industry leanings coupled with the uncomfortable atmosphere his underlying gay tendencies would bring to the workplace makes it an impossibility.
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top