billay Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 Whether or not there is pork these bills are simply spending we can not afford. You realize that in one month Obama has put us in more debt than the war in Iraq has cost us in 6 years. The Iraqi war, when all is said and done, will have cost 3 trillion dollars. Mr. Obama has a looooong way to go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaP'N GRuNGe Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 (edited) Like the taxes of Obama's cabinet? Has he got a Secretary of Commerce yet? Maybe the third time will be a charm. We can't trust the guy to vet his own cabinet, he comes from a state where politics are corrupt (hell everyone in the state is dirty except Obama), and we are supposed to trust him with what is the biggest group of spending bills ever passed in our history. I hope any short term help this gives us is worth the long term agony it is going to force on the tax payer. Granted less than 1/2 the people that voted for Obama actually pay taxes. He's announcing his pick for Commerce Secretary this morning. He vetted Richardson, he didn't think the issue that eventually led to him stepping down was that big of an issue. Greg pushed for the job and then quit. You can't blame Obama for that. If the economy continued to shrink without intervention to help stabilize it, one could argue that the long term pain for the taxpayer could be even worse. Edited February 25, 2009 by CaP'N GRuNGe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimC Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 What's the name of the bill again? Something tells me the liberals are missing the fact that the WHOLE ENTIRE piece of legislation was one big, fat piece of pork. And not the kind of pork you want to put BBQ sauce on. The nasty grisly kind that you could chew for 20 minutes and not grind up. But hey, in this day and age, taking a cash advance on your credit card to have more cash to spend makes sense to some people too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 The Iraqi war, when all is said and done, will have cost 3 trillion dollars. Mr. Obama has a looooong way to go. Every estimate I've found has it right around 600 Billion right now. If you hold the Obamassiah to his word and he get the troops out by August of 2010, how can it cost that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billay Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 Every estimate I've found has it right around 600 Billion right now. If you hold the Obamassiah to his word and he get the troops out by August of 2010, how can it cost that? 3 Trillion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 3 Trillion $599 Billion according to this. $638 Billion according to this. Both are a long way from $3 Trillion. Maybe if they showed us some of the guesstimates they used in figuring it it would make sense, though I doubt it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmarc117 Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 We don't have a trillion-dollar debt because we haven't taxed enough, we have a trillion-dollar debt because we spend too much. - Ronald Reagan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cre8tiff Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 (edited) We don't have a trillion-dollar debt because we haven't taxed enough, we have a trillion-dollar debt because we spend too much. - Ronald Reagan Hmm, interesting words, given the rise in the debt that happened on his watch. Edited February 25, 2009 by cre8tiff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 Hmm, interesting words, given the rise in the debt that happened on his watch. Exactly. The right's greatest God presided over a monumental increase in debt, same as the recently departed incumbent did. And yet it's still the right wing mantra that it's the Dems who spend the most. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 Shipping pallet loads of cash overseas is not the same thing as recycling the money through our own economy. well you could spin that and say most of the money for the iraq war goes to american companies (defense contractors) to create jobs and to pay soldiers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimC Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 It ain't cheap to kill commies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 Exactly. The right's greatest God presided over a monumental increase in debt, same as the recently departed incumbent did. And yet it's still the right wing mantra that it's the Dems who spend the most. He greatly increase military spending which helped to end the Cold War, and also gave us enough equipment on hand that Clinton could cut military spending to the bone to get a surplus. It is the right wing's mantra that the Dems spend too much on programs that should not be funded by the federal government, and bitch and moan about any spending on one of the few things the government was set up for, Defense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikesVikes Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 Money will be spent if it's "for the good of National security." I need some money. What for? Defense. How much? That's no concern of yours. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westvirginia Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 Something tells me the liberals are missing the fact that the WHOLE ENTIRE piece of legislation was one big, fat piece of pork. And not the kind of pork you want to put BBQ sauce on. The nasty grisly kind that you could chew for 20 minutes and not grind up. But hey, in this day and age, taking a cash advance on your credit card to have more cash to spend makes sense to some people too. Don't go injecting rational thought into this little "D vs. R" whizzing contest, Tim. It'll spoil their fun! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmarc117 Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 Money will be spent if it's "for the good of National security." I need some money. What for? Defense. How much? That's no concern of yours. just keep the canadians out up there!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Cid Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 He greatly increase military spending which helped to end the Cold War, and also gave us enough equipment on hand that Clinton could cut military spending to the bone to get a surplus. It is the right wing's mantra that the Dems spend too much on programs that should not be funded by the federal government, and bitch and moan about any spending on one of the few things the government was set up for, Defense. When are y'all going to wise up to the fact that the only difference between the Dems and the Reps fiscally is the amount they want to grow the gov't by and where they want to spend it? Not one of those f'ers on the Hill want to shrink gov't spending in any meaningful way. So y'all just keep kicking each other trying to figure out who's more red or more blue. The fact is, everyone is brown. The same color brown as this kettle of schit we're all in and we're all responsible for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimC Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 just keep the canadians out up there!!! Canadian banks are currently the most stable in the world. Even Obama can't contain their smugness. It's every man for themselves. Avenge Randall!! Who's on our side? 50,000 screaming Inuits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikesVikes Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 just keep the canadians out up there!!! Like Jim Finks and Bud Grant? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westvirginia Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 When are y'all going to wise up to the fact that the only difference between the Dems and the Reps fiscally is the amount they want to grow the gov't by and where they want to spend it? Not one of those f'ers on the Hill want to shrink gov't spending in any meaningful way. So y'all just keep kicking each other trying to figure out who's more red or more blue. The fact is, everyone is brown. The same color brown as this kettle of schit we're all in and we're all responsible for. cue shrubwhacked to tell us that yes, the emperor DOES have clothes. "That's not his schlong, that a belt!"... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 cue shrubwhacked to tell us that yes, the emperor DOES have clothes. "That's not his schlong, that a belt!"... Simply simple. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimC Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 Don't go injecting rational thought into this little "D vs. R" whizzing contest, Tim. It'll spoil their fun! You do have to give the Democrats credit for having that ugly trained seal jump up and down behind Obama and slap it's fins together begging for fish everytime Obama told a lie or misrepresented something. It was a neat trick, but we couldn't figure out why. It must've been to keep the kids entertained? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 You do have to give the Democrats credit for having that ugly trained seal jump up and down behind Obama and slap it's fins together begging for fish everytime Obama told a lie or misrepresented something. It was a neat trick, but we couldn't figure out why. It must've been to keep the kids entertained? The thought of her rack 25 years ago? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Neutron Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 not enough enemy/ hate speach for Yah?? What are you nuts? He openly lied and that's where he lost me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 What are you nuts? He openly lied and that's where he lost me. Lied about what? Earmarks? Earlier in this thread, a Republican being interviewed failed to name even one. Can you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dmarc117 Posted February 25, 2009 Share Posted February 25, 2009 this just in!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.