Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Fury on February 22, 2013, 11:49:56 AM
-
Obama pledges to veto effort to undo automatic spending cuts
President Obama is promising to veto any effort to undo the automatic spending cuts that are set to take effect now that the congressional supercommittee has announced its failure to strike a deal to cut $1.2 trillion from the deficit over the next 10 years.
"Already some in Congress are trying to undo these automatic spending cuts. My message to them is simple: No," Mr. Obama said from the White House briefing room Monday evening. "I will veto any effort to get rid of those automatic spending cuts to domestic and defense spending."
"There will be no easy off ramps on this one.," he added. (watch at left)
The president's statement came about an hour after the chairs of the bipartisan supercommittee, Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., and Rep. Jeb Hensarling, R-Texas., officially announced that they would be unable to reach a deal, citing an inability to bridge "significant differences."
"After months of hard work and intense deliberations, we have come to the conclusion today that it will not be possible to make any bipartisan agreement available to the public before the committee's deadline," said Hensarling and Murray in a joint statement.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57329146-503544/obama-pledges-to-veto-effort-to-undo-automatic-spending-cuts/
-
no shit
why would he cave in and undo the spending cuts the Republicans negotiated for and said they wanted
why would he let them off the hook
-
no shit
why would he cave in and undo the spending cuts the Republicans negotiated for and said they wanted
why would he let them off the hook
He is the one melting down w the fear tactics while on the golf course w oil executives and tiger woods.
Time to pay the piper O-TWINK!
-
He is the one melting down w the fear tactics while on the golf course w oil executives and tiger woods.
Time to pay the piper O-TWINK!
Anytime you say Obama/Libs are melting down it means that no one is melting down or Repubs are melting down
You, of course, are in a permanent 24/7 meltdown
You're allegedly a lawyer. Is it common practice for you to negotiate a settlement or agreement and then immediately nullify it and give the other side whatever they want ?
-
no shit
why would he cave in and undo the spending cuts the Republicans negotiated for and said they wanted
why would he let them off the hook
Lol so he said he wouldn't sign it without it bc he didn't want to let the reps off the hook for something they sai they wanted and now he is saying he doesn't want it?
Does that make sense in your feable mind?
-
Lol so he said he wouldn't sign it without it bc he didn't want to let the reps off the hook for something they sai they wanted and now he is saying he doesn't want it?
Does that make sense in your feable mind?
if he doesn't want it then he would veto it
obviously what he wants it what was negotiated to begin with but that the Repubs are now backing off on (like the lying sacks of shit we've known them to be for years now)
Repubs want sequestration even less then Dems or Obama but Repubs are fine harming the country on the (very stupid) gambit that it will help their party
That shit just doesn't work any more
The public is too smart (not you and 333 of course) to fall for that crap again
-
Lol so he said he wouldn't sign it without it bc he didn't want to let the reps off the hook for something they sai they wanted and now he is saying he doesn't want it?
Does that make sense in your feable mind?
the fucking sequester is a product of the gop forcing near default you twit. Combined with massive GOP support in the house, in fact it was only GOP support in the house.
-
the fucking sequester is a product of the gop forcing near default you twit. Combined with massive GOP support in the house, in fact it was only GOP support in the house.
Maybe if O-TWINK was not spending us out of house and home we would not have to revisit this issue every few months?
-
How can Repubs stop being the Stupid Party when most of the members are fucking morons
If you're a fucking moron you can't just stop and suddenly become smart or even just have normal intelligence
This thread is proof of that
-
Maybe if O-TWINK was not spending us out of house and home we would not have to revisit this issue every few months?
Dude, you are out to lunch. The biggest source of said spending the the bush wars, which were passed via the budget of 2008 before Obama took office, massively increasing Obama's said spending.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-cesca/repeat-after-me-obama-cut_b_1955561.html
Obama has actually cut the defecit significantly and is nothing like you portray. He spends far less then bush, way way less.
-
Maybe if O-TWINK was not spending us out of house and home we would not have to revisit this issue every few months?
here you go sweety
http://www.factcheck.org/2012/06/obamas-spending-inferno-or-not/
"All of the yearly changes under Obama are well below the 7 percent average annual increase under Bush prior to fiscal 2009. And in that year — for which we assign most of the increase to Bush — the rise amounted to a staggering 17.9 percent."
so what happened here is that bush spent like he was drunk, much higher then obama.
yet no debt issues? no showdowns? how many times did bush raise the ceiling? you hypocrite.
-
here you go sweety
http://www.factcheck.org/2012/06/obamas-spending-inferno-or-not/
"All of the yearly changes under Obama are well below the 7 percent average annual increase under Bush prior to fiscal 2009. And in that year — for which we assign most of the increase to Bush — the rise amounted to a staggering 17.9 percent."
so what happened here is that bush spent like he was drunk, much higher then obama.
yet no debt issues? no showdowns? how many times did bush raise the ceiling? you hypocrite.
So he kept spending at bush levels? And if he ended the iraq war - where are the savings as the deficit is still over a trillion a year?
-
-
if he doesn't want it then he would veto it
obviously what he wants it what was negotiated to begin with but that the Repubs are now backing off on (like the lying sacks of shit we've known them to be for years now)
Repubs want sequestration even less then Dems or Obama but Repubs are fine harming the country on the (very stupid) gambit that it will help their party
That shit just doesn't work any more
The public is too smart (not you and 333 of course) to fall for that crap again
Are you HIGH? Obama signed it into law over a year ago. He CANNOT veto it now.
-
So he kept spending at bush levels? And if he ended the iraq war - where are the savings as the deficit is still over a trillion a year?
slightly lower actually. However, revenues were at an all time low accounting for the issues with the deficit. Not all the issues, spending needs to be cut but revenues are far to low. Tax loopholes and havens need to be removed, I can't think of one reason why not.
Bush had one year that was close to triple any of Obama's also.
Obama has cut into the debt and CBO projections indicate it to b3 500billion by the end of 2013.
He is not a spending mad man, he actual is a conservative on fiscal issues as far as I can tell with left leanings socially.
-
the fucking sequester is a product of the gop forcing near default you twit. Combined with massive GOP support in the house, in fact it was only GOP support in the house.
if it was only a GOP idea and only had GOP support why did obama threaten to veto any bill without it?
doesnt make any sense
-
slightly lower actually. However, revenues were at an all time low accounting for the issues with the deficit. Not all the issues, spending needs to be cut but revenues are far to low. Tax loopholes and havens need to be removed, I can't think of one reason why not.
Bush had one year that was close to triple any of Obama's also.
Obama has cut into the debt and CBO projections indicate it to b3 500billion by the end of 2013.
He is not a spending mad man, he actual is a conservative on fiscal issues as far as I can tell with left leanings socially.
As usual, your 8 year old reading comprehension has gotten in your way.
Did you even read your own link moron?
Obama ADDED to 2009 spending and it's INCREASED every year since.
From your own link tard:
"Since fiscal 2009, however, it cannot be denied that spending has increased only modestly."
And claiming that he didn't increase as much as Bush increased as a percentage is a non-sense argument. Bush was a big spender. Obama is a big spender - and Barry isn't even fighting a war in Iraq.
-
if it was only a GOP idea and only had GOP support why did obama threaten to veto any bill without it?
doesnt make any sense
it is something that frankly I think was a good idea, it should have forced the super committee to get their shit together.
It's obama and the gop's issue as I have stated. It's not Obama's sequester as everyone is stating. This wouldn't have happened without the debt issues.
-
it is something that frankly I think was a good idea, it should have forced the super committee to get their shit together.
It's obama and the gop's issue as I have stated. It's not Obama's sequester as everyone is stating. This wouldn't have happened without the debt issues.
no no no brain child up until now you have ranted and raved about how the sequester was the fault of the GOP...
so youre backing off that stance now?
-
As usual, your 8 year old reading comprehension has gotten in your way.
Did you even read your own link moron?
Obama ADDED to 2009 spending and it's INCREASED every year since.
From your own link tard:
"Since fiscal 2009, however, it cannot be denied that spending has increased only modestly."
And claiming that he didn't increase as much as Bush increased as a percentage is a non-sense argument. Bush was a big spender. Obama is a big spender - and Barry isn't even fighting a war in Iraq.
"Since fiscal 2009, however, it cannot be denied that spending has increased only modestly. Total federal outlays actually went down 1.7 percent in fiscal 2010, for example, then rose a little more than 4 percent in the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30. Spending was projected by CBO to rise less than 1 percent in fiscal 2012. In fact, CBO reported on May 7 in its most recent monthly budget report that spending for the first seven months of the current fiscal year was 3.4 percent below the same period a year ago. That was mostly due to differences in timing of certain payments, but even adjusting for those, CBO figured spending is 0.8 percent lower so far this year."
read the total paragraph. My point for posting this which was lost on you, no wonder, was that 33 claimed the debt ceiling wouldn't have been needed if Obama wasn't spending the US out of house and home. He is not, he has spent similar to Bush's average years and this year appears to be significantly down.
-
no no no brain child up until now you have ranted and raved about how the sequester was the fault of the GOP...
so youre backing off that stance now?
the sequester is the fault of the GOP, yes. The idea of the sequester and responsibility for it occuring now is both parties.
This issue wouldn't have occurred had the GOP not pushed the US to the brink. However, Obama supported it and so did the house.
I tend to think the issue is more complex then "Obama's sequester" or vice versa.
I have said in numerous threads this is truly a GOP created issue as the cause of it was the debt issue. Obama however by signing it into law requires blame. I think it was a good idea however.
-
the sequester is the fault of the GOP, yes. The idea of the sequester and responsibility for it occuring now is both parties.
This issue wouldn't have occurred had the GOP not pushed the US to the brink. However, Obama supported it and so did the house.
I tend to think the issue is more complex then "Obama's sequester" or vice versa.
I have said in numerous threads this is truly a GOP created issue as the cause of it was the debt issue. Obama however by signing it into law requires blame. I think it was a good idea however.
LMFAO both parties pushed the country to the brink nit wit...the dems couldnt agree on spending cuts in order to compromise, thus the sequester....
youre the typical party hack, even worse b/c youre not part of the party...youre not even a citizen of this country
-
the sequester is the fault of the GOP, yes. The idea of the sequester and responsibility for it occuring now is both parties.
This issue wouldn't have occurred had the GOP not pushed the US to the brink. However, Obama supported it and so did the house.
I tend to think the issue is more complex then "Obama's sequester" or vice versa.
I have said in numerous threads this is truly a GOP created issue as the cause of it was the debt issue. Obama however by signing it into law requires blame. I think it was a good idea however.
Let's not forgot that Boehner gloated that he got 98% of what he wanted and at that time he never said a peep about the sequester as something he didn't want or had a problem with
-
"Since fiscal 2009, however, it cannot be denied that spending has increased only modestly. Total federal outlays actually went down 1.7 percent in fiscal 2010, for example, then rose a little more than 4 percent in the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30. Spending was projected by CBO to rise less than 1 percent in fiscal 2012. In fact, CBO reported on May 7 in its most recent monthly budget report that spending for the first seven months of the current fiscal year was 3.4 percent below the same period a year ago. That was mostly due to differences in timing of certain payments, but even adjusting for those, CBO figured spending is 0.8 percent lower so far this year."
read the total paragraph. My point for posting this which was lost on you, no wonder, was that 33 claimed the debt ceiling wouldn't have been needed if Obama wasn't spending the US out of house and home. He is not, he has spent similar to Bush's average years and this year appears to be significantly down.
No, you need to read. Spending is UP. This year remains to be seen...but I think the sequester may drop it if it goes into effect.
The point going well over your head is that Bush was a BIG spender. If Obama is ANYWHERE even near Bush...he too is a big spender.
Just because Bush drove it up (and yes, way faster than Obama) doesn't mean Obama shouldn't make meaningful cuts. I know that's subjective, but at least 10% I think everyone could agree is meaningful
-
Let's not forgot that Boehner gloated that he got 98% of what he wanted and at that time he never said a peep about the sequester as something he didn't want or had a problem with
Why would he? Or Obama for that matter? The whole point of the sequester was to make it so bad that neither side wanted it and would be willing to come to an agreement.
-
Let's not forgot that Boehner gloated that he got 98% of what he wanted and at that time he never said a peep about the sequester as something he didn't want or had a problem with
well we know obama was certainly for it, i mean nobody would threaten a veto they didnt want whole heartedly
-
well we know obama was certainly for it, i mean nobody would threaten a veto they didnt want whole heartedly
Obama rolled the dice and is losing. tough shit on him.
-
Obama rolled the dice and is losing. tough shit on him.
actually Repubs were the one that rolled the dice and lost
they made this deal thinking the would win back the White House and would never have to deal with spending cuts that they didn't want
-
actually Repubs were the one that rolled the dice and lost
they made this deal thinking the would win back the White House and would never have to deal with spending cuts that they didn't want
I like seeing O-TWINK meltdown in public - its a funny site to see. Like a baby wo the binky
-
actually Repubs were the one that rolled the dice and lost
they made this deal thinking the would win back the White House and would never have to deal with spending cuts that they didn't want
really the GOP made the deal obama proposed b/c they thought it would help them win back the white house?
DO YOU HEAR YOURSELF????
-
well we know obama was certainly for it, i mean nobody would threaten a veto they didnt want whole heartedly
Neither party really wanted these specific "sequestered" cuts
Keep in mind these cuts were supposed to do into effect on Jan 1 - that was the so called fiscal cliff
Congress can still act NOW and pass a set or more nuanced and specific cuts (including tweeks of the revenue side of the equation) and this problem is solved
We know they won't do that because Repubs still believe that somehow by harming the country they will help their party
They are wrong about that just like they've been wrong about everything for the last 4 years but the STUPID PARTY is too stupid to understand this
-
I like seeing O-TWINK meltdown in public - its a funny site to see. Like a baby wo the binky
you must be referring to one of you daily hallucinations because it never happened in reality
-
Neither party really wanted these specific "sequestered" cuts
Keep in mind these cuts were supposed to do into effect on Jan 1 - that was the so called fiscal cliff
Congress can still act NOW and pass a set or more nuanced and specific cuts (including tweeks of the revenue side of the equation) and this problem is solved
We know they won't do that because Repubs still believe that somehow by harming the country they will help their party
They are wrong about that just like they've been wrong about everything for the last 4 years but the STUPID PARTY is too stupid to understand this
what harm do you feel the reps are for?
-
really the GOP made the deal obama proposed b/c they thought it would help them win back the white house?
DO YOU HEAR YOURSELF????
Good God you dense
they made the deal thinking they would never have to go through with it because their guy would be in the White Hosue and they probably expected to win back the Senate too
-
what harm do you feel the reps are for?
?
-
Good God you dense
they made the deal thinking they would never have to go through with it because their guy would be in the White Hosue and they probably expected to win back the Senate too
so again the reps agreed to a plan obama came up with b/c they thought it would help them get the white house back?
ARE YOU FUCKING SERIOUS?
-
Good God you dense
they made the deal thinking they would never have to go through with it because their guy would be in the White Hosue and they probably expected to win back the Senate too
And now O-TWINK has the law h signed to deal with - its on him.
-
Good God you dense
they made the deal thinking they would never have to go through with it because their guy would be in the White Hosue and they probably expected to win back the Senate too
No, both sides made the deal thinking neither side wanted the cuts and it would force a compromise.
-
No, both sides made the deal thinking neither side wanted the cuts and it would force a compromise.
I agree that neither side wanted these specific set of cuts but I also think that Repubs were fully confident that Obama was not going to around in 2013 and they probably expected to win back the Senate too
-
so again the reps agreed to a plan obama came up with b/c they thought it would help them get the white house back?
ARE YOU FUCKING SERIOUS?
WHY THE FUCK ARE YOU SO STUPID
did I say the Repubs made this deal because they thought it (this deal) would help them get the white house back
Jesus it's an utter waste of time trying to have a conversation with you
-
WHY THE FUCK ARE YOU SO STUPID
did I say the Repubs made this deal because they thought it (this deal) would help them get the white house back
Jesus it's an utter waste of time trying to have a conversation with you
you act like obama has no role in this fiasco.
-
you act like obama has no role in this fiasco.
dude - I'm not going to even waste my time on you
Tony is using up all my patience for "dumb" today
-
Nobody wants furloughed employees.
The last time it happened, the employees were eventually paid for that time....meaning it was essentially a free vacation.
Both sides need to hammer out something...and soon.
-
This thread reminds me of a conversation I had recently with a friend who's company just filed for Chapter 11. After the company wide meeting informing everyone the company was bankrupt, all people could talk about was whether or not they would be getting their parking spot they had been waiting to get, or if they were going to get donuts on Fridays still.
You all are arguing over the most nonsensical shit. Wake the fuck up and realize that both of these so called parties do not give a single fuck about us and that the government will do what's in it's own best interest. You are wasting so much time and energy arguing over things that, in the greater sense of it all, matter about as much as a grain of dust floating through the universe.
How anyone could be so obtuse is mind boggling.
-
I think we need these cuts and way more. We are broke,
-
WHY THE FUCK ARE YOU SO STUPID
did I say the Repubs made this deal because they thought it (this deal) would help them get the white house back
Jesus it's an utter waste of time trying to have a conversation with you
ahhh I see, so obama suggested and agreed to it thinking he would be president and have to deal with it?
-
ahhh I see, so obama suggested and agreed to it thinking he would be president and have to deal with it?
thinking it would compel the Repubs to deal so as to avoid the cuts they truly don't want
it also allowed him to avoid having to deal with the debt ceiling during the election
According to the Office of Management and Budget, "bipartisan majorities in both the House and Senate voted for the threat of sequestration as a mechanism to force Congress to act on further deficit reduction. The specter of harmful across-the-board cuts to defense and non-defense programs was intended to drive both sides to compromise. The sequestration itself was never intended to be implemented."
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-34227_162-57570678/sequestration-q-a/
-
thinking it would compel the Repubs to deal so as to avoid the cuts they truly don't want
it also allowed him to avoid having to deal with the debt ceiling during the election
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-34227_162-57570678/sequestration-q-a/
I want the govt to shut down
-
thinking it would compel the Repubs to deal so as to avoid the cuts they truly don't want
it also allowed him to avoid having to deal with the debt ceiling during the election
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-34227_162-57570678/sequestration-q-a/
why wouldnt anybody want the cuts?
do you really think there arent non value adding employees that cant be cut?
do you really think there arent places outside of employees that cant be cut?
-
LMFAO both parties pushed the country to the brink nit wit...the dems couldnt agree on spending cuts in order to compromise, thus the sequester....
youre the typical party hack, even worse b/c youre not part of the party...youre not even a citizen of this country
both parties did not push fuck all to the brink, it was the GOP who forced the debt ceiling issue. That's not even debatable.
Your country directly influences mine, greatly in fact. I follow both canadian and american politics.
-
No, you need to read. Spending is UP. This year remains to be seen...but I think the sequester may drop it if it goes into effect.
The point going well over your head is that Bush was a BIG spender. If Obama is ANYWHERE even near Bush...he too is a big spender.
Just because Bush drove it up (and yes, way faster than Obama) doesn't mean Obama shouldn't make meaningful cuts. I know that's subjective, but at least 10% I think everyone could agree is meaningful
What can be attributed to Obama, is virtually identical to bush, expect for the fiscal year of 08 which was triple the norm.
Regardless the point was that Obama, is nothing that hasn't been seen before and the debt issue was a bit of a farce.
I would agree spending needs to be cut, namely defense.
-
How can Repubs stop being the Stupid Party when most of the members are fucking morons
If you're a fucking moron you can't just stop and suddenly become smart or even just have normal intelligence
This thread is proof of that
+1
-
both parties did not push fuck all to the brink, it was the GOP who forced the debt ceiling issue. That's not even debatable.
Your country directly influences mine, greatly in fact. I follow both canadian and american politics.
really so the dems share no blame at all for not agreeing to much much needed spending cuts in return for raising the debt limit?
they share no blame at all for not compromising?
-
really so the dems share no blame at all for not agreeing to much much needed spending cuts in return for raising the debt limit?
they share no blame at all for not compromising?
How about obama end his drone wars to save $$$$
-
really so the dems share no blame at all for not agreeing to much much needed spending cuts in return for raising the debt limit?
they share no blame at all for not compromising?
the debt ceiling is about bills owed, money already spent, why would risking the health of a nation on debt owed be a bargaining chip? sure debate and compromise it but not at the expense of the debt ceiling which is money they all agreed to spend. It does nothing but put people at risk and is not the time nor place to do it, as history has shown.
-
the debt ceiling is about bills owed, money already spent, why would risking the health of a nation on debt owed be a bargaining chip? sure debate and compromise it but not at the expense of the debt ceiling which is money they all agreed to spend. It does nothing but put people at risk and is not the time nor place to do it, as history has shown.
THERE IS NEVER A TIME AND PLACE!!!!
democrats continually kick the CAN DOWN THE FUCKING ROAD. If they were willing to compromise they would have done so prior to the debt ceiling when ppl were yelling for spending cuts and avoided the entire situation.
Face it they didnt want to compromise, b/c of that they put themselves in a postion where they had to compromise.
You live in a bubble much like most party hacks, again which is even worse as your arent a part of the party your a hack for!!!
-
THERE IS NEVER A TIME AND PLACE!!!!
democrats continually kick the CAN DOWN THE FUCKING ROAD. If they were willing to compromise they would have done so prior to the debt ceiling when ppl were yelling for spending cuts and avoided the entire situation.
Face it they didnt want to compromise, b/c of that they put themselves in a postion where they had to compromise.
You live in a bubble much like most party hacks, again which is even worse as your arent a part of the party your a hack for!!!
Complete strawman. jesus.
-
if it was only a GOP idea and only had GOP support why did obama threaten to veto any bill without it?
doesnt make any sense
And how does an only-GOP idea make it THROUGH THE DEMOCRAT-RUN Senate?
-
No, you need to read. Spending is UP. This year remains to be seen...but I think the sequester may drop it if it goes into effect.
The point going well over your head is that Bush was a BIG spender. If Obama is ANYWHERE even near Bush...he too is a big spender.
Anywhere near Bush? Obama makes Bush look like Scrooge!!!
-
Anywhere near Bush? Obama makes Bush look like Scrooge!!!
Source or gtfo
-
Source or gtfo
http://www.skymachines.com/US-National-Debt-Per-Capita-Percent-of-GDP-and-by-Presidental-Term.htm
10 trillion in debt when Obama took office (2009); 16 trillion NOW.
6 trillion when Bush took office (2001); 10 trillion when he left office (2009)
In other words, Bush: 4 trillion in 8 years, Obama: 6 trillion in 4 years.
-
http://www.skymachines.com/US-National-Debt-Per-Capita-Percent-of-GDP-and-by-Presidental-Term.htm
10 trillion in debt when Obama took office (2009); 16 trillion NOW.
6 trillion when Bush took office (2001); 10 trillion when he left office (2009)
In other words, Bush: 4 trillion in 8 years, Obama: 6 trillion in 4 years.
From the chart it looks like Obama's first 2 years it's growth was higher but now declining. Agree?
-
Complete strawman. jesus.
Strawman?
LMFAO youre a grade A moron, the democrats first didnt want spending cuts, then obama said he would veto any bill without a sequester and through all of this you blame the GOP solely...
hahahah it would be funny watching you moronic hacks bend over backwards to defend your politicians if it wasnt so sad...and again they arent even your politicians ::)
-
Strawman?
LMFAO youre a grade A moron, the democrats first didnt want spending cuts, then obama said he would veto any bill without a sequester and through all of this you blame the GOP solely...
hahahah it would be funny watching you moronic hacks bend over backwards to defend your politicians if it wasnt so sad...and again they arent even your politicians ::)
My guess is that the Dems (especially Obama) were counting on the GOP caving, mainly because the military gets sodomized the most by these "cuts". Of course, the Republicans still have time to bend over for Obama within the next six days.
-
My guess is that the Dems (especially Obama) were counting on the GOP caving, mainly because the military gets sodomized the most by these "cuts". Of course, the Republicans still have time to bend over for Obama within the next six days.
absolutely
-
Strawman?
LMFAO youre a grade A moron, the democrats first didnt want spending cuts, then obama said he would veto any bill without a sequester and through all of this you blame the GOP solely...
hahahah it would be funny watching you moronic hacks bend over backwards to defend your politicians if it wasnt so sad...and again they arent even your politicians ::)
I don't blame it on the GOP solely, there literally is no point in conversing with you. You can't follow along nor do you display a modicum of comprehension.
-
http://www.skymachines.com/US-National-Debt-Per-Capita-Percent-of-GDP-and-by-Presidental-Term.htm
10 trillion in debt when Obama took office (2009); 16 trillion NOW.
6 trillion when Bush took office (2001); 10 trillion when he left office (2009)
In other words, Bush: 4 trillion in 8 years, Obama: 6 trillion in 4 years.
ah no. read my link, you link seems to miss the point that Obama, was saddled with Bush's money spent on wars.
Typical liar.
-
ah no. read my link, you link seems to miss the point that Obama, was saddled with Bush's money spent on wars.
Typical liar.
Bush forced him to spend a trillion o. The stim bill and obamacare too right?
-
I don't blame it on the GOP solely, there literally is no point in conversing with you. You can't follow along nor do you display a modicum of comprehension.
actually you blamed the GOP solely for it until it was pointed out to you that obama was the one that suggested it. Then you blamed the GOP solely for creating the situation that caused obama to suggest it....
and now youre trying to back off that stance too?
LMFAO how old are you kid?