some funnies
- Thread starter hedgehog
- Start date
Wow look at that. 4 out of the top five guys are Republican big spenders and if u take of the republican tax cuts and wars from Obama watch which are Bush deficits, the Republicans would sweep it four for four. Imagine that but what the media portrays u would think it was the democrats who can't balance budgets.
That's stupid Sponge, take social security, medicare and medicaid away and there is no budget problem, Obama has raised that bullshit line already, he only wants to get more idiots to repeat that nonsense.
Liberal PUPPET.
Keep up the good work, Little Eichmann.
:lol:
Liberal PUPPET.
Keep up the good work, Little Eichmann.
:lol:
- Feb 26, 2001
- 13,593
- 164
- 63
I thought about bringing that up to skul but knew he wouldn't be able to understand it. That chart is something he shouldn't be posting. :mj07: :mj07:
maybe someday we can stop blaming BUsh as soon as these asshole finally give him some blame :shrug:
Wow! Could you post anything more anti-Republican!!! :mj07: :mj07: :mj07: :mj07:
You can't see the fucking forest for the trees, just like the retard high-fiving you for posting it!!! :mj07: :mj07: :mj07:
- Feb 26, 2001
- 13,593
- 164
- 63
I can't believe how fucking stupid you are. Go back and read all the comments and actually try to process them.
Obama is 8.3 and the rest are at or below 4, how am I stupid by posting this, you people are in denial about this farce that is President
- Feb 26, 2001
- 13,593
- 164
- 63
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/G6c1HWWspGo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
i doubt this will help you but i will try anyway
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/...-spending-stimulus-budget-historic-trends.php
A dominant theme of the national political discourse has been the crushing spending spree the U.S. has ostensibly embarked on during the Obama presidency. That argument, ignited by Republicans and picked up by many elite opinion makers, has infused the national dialogue and shaped the public debate in nearly every major budget battle of the last thee years.
But the numbers tell a different story.
The fact that the national debt has risen from $10.6 trillion to $15.6 trillion under Obama?s watch makes for easy partisan attacks. But the vast bulk of the increase was caused by a combination of revenue losses due to the 2008-09 economic downturn as well as Bush-era tax cuts and automatic increases in safety-net spending that were already written into law.
Obama?s policies, including the much-criticized stimulus package, have caused the slowest increase in federal spending of any president in almost 60 years, according to data compiled by the financial news service MarketWatch.
December 17, 2010 4:19 PM
- Printhttp://www.madjacksports.com/forum/
- Text http://www.madjacksports.com/forum/http://www.madjacksports.com/forum/
- comments
134 - <?xml:namespace prefix = fb ns = "http://ogp.me/ns/fb#" /><fb:like class="fb_XFBML fb_edge_widget_with_comment fb_iframe_widget" font="arial" action="like" layout="button_count" ref="fbrecT" href="http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20026069-503544.html" width="86"><IFRAME style="BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; WIDTH: 90px; HEIGHT: 21px; BORDER-TOP: medium none; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none" id=f30e457c43d528 class=fb_ltr title="Like this content on Facebook." src="http://www.facebook.com/plugins/like.php?action=like&api_key=79439656165&channel_url=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic.ak.facebook.com%2Fconnect%2Fxd_arbiter.php%3Fversion%3D9%23cb%3Df2a759087b4d8bc%26origin%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.cbsnews.com%252Ff2787a6312c29f4%26domain%3Dwww.cbsnews.com%26relation%3Dparent.parent&extended_social_context=false&font=arial&href=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cbsnews.com%2F8301-503544_162-20026069-503544.html&layout=button_count&locale=en_US&node_type=link&ref=fbrecT&sdk=joey&show_faces=false&width=90" frameBorder=0 allowTransparency name=f274943bb37ab18 scrolling=no></IFRAME></fb:like>
- <IFRAME style="WIDTH: 110px; HEIGHT: 20px" class="twitter-share-button twitter-count-horizontal" title="Twitter Tweet Button" src="http://platform.twitter.com/widgets/tweet_button.1340179658.html#_=1341415334574&count=horizontal&counturl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cbsnews.com%2F8301-503544_162-20026069-503544.html&id=twitter-widget-0&lang=en&original_referer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cbsnews.com%2F8301-503544_162-20026069-503544.html&size=m&text=Obama%20Signs%20Bill%20To%20Extend%20Bush%20Tax%20Cuts%20-%20Political%20Hotsheet&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cbsnews.com%2F8301-503544_162-20026069-503544.html%3Ftag%3Dsocsh&via=CBSNews" frameBorder=0 allowTransparency scrolling=no></IFRAME>
- <IFRAME style="POSITION: static; BORDER-BOTTOM-STYLE: none; MARGIN: 0px; BORDER-LEFT-STYLE: none; WIDTH: 90px; BORDER-TOP-STYLE: none; HEIGHT: 20px; VISIBILITY: visible; BORDER-RIGHT-STYLE: none; TOP: 0px; LEFT: 0px" id=I0_1341415334736 title=+1 tabIndex=0 marginHeight=0 src="https://plusone.google.com/_/+1/fastbutton?bsv=pr&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cbsnews.com%2F8301-503544_162-20026069-503544.html&size=medium&count=true&origin=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cbsnews.com&hl=en-US&jsh=m%3B%2F_%2Fapps-static%2F_%2Fjs%2Fgapi%2F__features__%2Frt%3Dj%2Fver%3DwDGOjzLOE8E.en.%2Fsv%3D1%2Fam%3D!0Tt3uNrLr0Coc6egjA%2Fd%3D1%2Frs%3DAItRSTNbO3Cy1IaVqa8IbrJOT_Rf3eZN5w#_methods=onPlusOne%2C_ready%2C_close%2C_open%2C_resizeMe%2C_renderstart%2Conload&id=I0_1341415334736&parent=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cbsnews.com" frameBorder=0 width="100%" allowTransparency name=I0_1341415334736 marginWidth=0 scrolling=no></IFRAME>
- inShare0<SCRIPT type=IN/Share+init data-onsuccess="LinkedIn.trackShareEvent" data-counter="right" data-url="http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20026069-503544.html"></SCRIPT>
- More
<!-- body start -->
(Credit: AP)
Updated 4:56 p.m. Eastern Time
In a display of compromise rarely seen during his time in office, President Obama has signed into law a $858 billion tax cut bill despite the misgivings of members of both parties.
"We are here with some good news for the American people this holiday season," Mr. Obama said.
The bill, which was largely worked out earlier this month between the White House and Congressional Republicans, extends the Bush-era tax cuts for all Americans for two years, extends unemployment benefits for 13 months and includes a one-year Social Security tax cut, among other measures.
The measure is not paid for, and costs more than Mr. Obama's controversial stimulus package that was harshly criticized by Republicans for exacerbating America's deficit and debt problem.
The president acknowledged that the bill's cost and the coming effort to address the deficit, stating, "In some ways this was easier than some of the tougher choices we're going to have to make next year."
Mr. Obama said the bill would create jobs and boost the still-struggling U.S. economy. He called it a "substantial victory for middle class families" who would otherwise have seen a tax increase.
"In fact, not only will middle class Americans avoid a tax increase, but tens of millions of Americans will start the new year off right by opening their first paycheck to see that it's larger than the one they get right now," he said.
The president also noted the bill included tax breaks for millions of college students and their families and extensions of the earned income tax credit and $1,000-per-child tax credit. It also includes extensions of tax incentives for businesses to invest and expand and lower taxes on capitol gains and dividends.
The 2 percent Social Security tax reduction would mean a savings of about $1,000 for a worker making $50,000 per year.
Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell was one of five Republicans present at the bill signing ceremony, along with 19 Democrats. It was Mr. Obama's 29th public bill-signing ceremony -- but the first at which McConnell was in attendance.
<!--pagebreak-->
(Credit: CBS)
The tax cut package angered liberals in the president's party due to the extension of the Bush-era tax cuts for the roughly two percent of highest-earning Americans, which comes at a cost of $120 billion over two years. They were also incensed at the level at which the estate tax was set in the measure, which exempts estates under $10 million for couples and taxes subsequent income at 35 percent.
But the bill passed overwhelmingly in the Senate and also got through the House, where angry Democrats eventually accepted what came to be seen as inevitable. Still, many complained that the bill was an expensive giveaway to the richest Americans at a time when America could not afford it. Some fiscally conservative Republicans also expressed concerns about the cost of bill, though most GOP lawmakers supported it.
Had Congress not acted to address the expiring Bush-era tax cuts, all Americans would have seen a tax increase on January 1st. (The average tax increase per family, the White House said, would have been $3,000.) Mr. Obama, who had long opposed extending the Bush tax cuts for America's highest-earners, has argued he had no choice but to agree to GOP demands to do so in order to avoid a tax increase on the middle class.
In his remarks Friday, however, he cast the agreement as evidence that both parties can work together.
"Now, candidly speaking, there are some elements of this legislation that I don't like," he said. "There are some elements that members of my party don't like. There are some elements that Republicans here today don't like. That's the nature of compromise. Yielding on something each of us cares about to move forward on what all of us care about."
The president said the bill ultimately reflected "a good deal for the American people."
"The final product proves when we can put aside the partisanship and political gains, we can get a lot done," he said. "If we can keep doing it, if we can keep that spirit I'm hopeful that we won't just reinvigorate this economy and restore the American dream, I'm also hopeful that we might refresh the American people's faith in the capability of their leaders to govern in challenging times."
Polls show a majority of voters blame Bush for the ailing economy. And while Bush is not on the ballot this year, some Democrats privately acknowledge that the Bush blame factor is a key reason why Obama has a narrow lead over Romney.
Freshman Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-S.C.) who rode the wave of anti-incumbency fervor into the House in 2010, said Romney should firmly separate himself from Bush?s economic policies.:mj07:
?Many of us, myself included, got into politics because we were appalled at the Bush record on spending,? Mulvaney said in an interview with The Hill.:mj07:
Mulvaney, who ousted veteran Democratic lawmaker John Spratt, said his party made mistakes on spending in the early 2000?s, and should be the ?first ones to admit it ? and to do better next time.?
Other Republican lawmakers, including those in leadership positions, admit that the GOP lost its way during Bush's tenure when government spending spiked.:SIB
According to a recent Gallup poll, 68 percent of respondents said Bush is responsible for a ?great deal or a moderate amount? of current economic woes, while only 52 percent blamed Obama. Gallup has tracked ?blame assessment? since six months after Obama took office; when 80 percent blamed Bush, and 32 percent blamed Obama. Since mid-2010 however, the numbers settled into the current range.:142smilie
2008, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) had a tough time distinguishing himself from Bush, despite his independent streak and bitter 2000 primary against Obama's predecessor.
Obama has invoked McCain on many occasions this year to drive home his point that Romney is an extreme candidate. Obama has noted that McCain and he have similar positions on climate change, immigration and campaign finance reform.
A Republican strategist close to Romney?s campaign told The Hill earlier this year that the likely strategy would be to avoid discussing Bush?s two terms in office, even when asked directly about him.:142smilie
?When questions are asked about Bush, it?ll be a combination of being respectful of Bush but then pivoting to his own agenda and the contrasts with the current president,? said the strategist. ?It?s not going to benefit Romney to get into a long, protracted discussion about the successes and failures of President George W. Bush?s presidency.?
..............................................................
the truth fawking hurts
Willard.
I love George W but I wouldnt walk across the street to kiss his ass.
Freshman Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-S.C.) who rode the wave of anti-incumbency fervor into the House in 2010, said Romney should firmly separate himself from Bush?s economic policies.:mj07:
?Many of us, myself included, got into politics because we were appalled at the Bush record on spending,? Mulvaney said in an interview with The Hill.:mj07:
Mulvaney, who ousted veteran Democratic lawmaker John Spratt, said his party made mistakes on spending in the early 2000?s, and should be the ?first ones to admit it ? and to do better next time.?
Other Republican lawmakers, including those in leadership positions, admit that the GOP lost its way during Bush's tenure when government spending spiked.:SIB
According to a recent Gallup poll, 68 percent of respondents said Bush is responsible for a ?great deal or a moderate amount? of current economic woes, while only 52 percent blamed Obama. Gallup has tracked ?blame assessment? since six months after Obama took office; when 80 percent blamed Bush, and 32 percent blamed Obama. Since mid-2010 however, the numbers settled into the current range.:142smilie
2008, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) had a tough time distinguishing himself from Bush, despite his independent streak and bitter 2000 primary against Obama's predecessor.
Obama has invoked McCain on many occasions this year to drive home his point that Romney is an extreme candidate. Obama has noted that McCain and he have similar positions on climate change, immigration and campaign finance reform.
A Republican strategist close to Romney?s campaign told The Hill earlier this year that the likely strategy would be to avoid discussing Bush?s two terms in office, even when asked directly about him.:142smilie
?When questions are asked about Bush, it?ll be a combination of being respectful of Bush but then pivoting to his own agenda and the contrasts with the current president,? said the strategist. ?It?s not going to benefit Romney to get into a long, protracted discussion about the successes and failures of President George W. Bush?s presidency.?
..............................................................
the truth fawking hurts
Willard.
I love George W but I wouldnt walk across the street to kiss his ass.
