Alan Simpson Calls GOP Refusal To Raise Revenue ‘Absolute Bullshit’

[JakeStarkey]

BenNatuf, you really can't read and understand the chart? Or are you just kidding?

 

[edthecynic]

hey dumbass, the wars are still off budget and off budget items count in the final deficit numbers.

I love it when you stupid assed liberals think you know something.

Historical Tables | The White House

Benny, you are the poster child for neocon willful ignorance and partisan hackery. Observe and learn:

Did the Bush administration include the cost of the war in its 2005 budget?No. Instead, it plans to ask for funding in the form of supplemental appropriations from Congress in early 2005. This has led some critics to charge that the Bush administration is trying to hide the cost of the war from American voters. “We must give the troops what they need to be successful under increasingly risky conditions. And the president must tell the hard truth to the American people about how much longer our troops will remain in Iraq and how much more it will cost,” House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi said May 5. The Bush administration says it can’t estimate the costs because it does not know how many soldiers it will keep in Iraq and under what conditions they will serve. One solution: the Bush administration could have budgeted $30 billion to $50 billion— assuming the war would cost at least that much. “It was a policy decision” [not to], Holtz-Eakin says.

IRAQ: The war's price tag - Council on Foreign Relations


Finally, we should point out that the procedure used by the administration to fund the Iraq war was chosen deliberately in order to deflect close attention. The administration has requested nearly all the money for the war in the form of “emergency” funding, which is not subject to standard budget caps or vigorous scrutiny. Emergency funding is intended for genuine crises, such as Hurricane Katrina, where the utmost speed is required to get the money to the field. The continued use of this emergency procedure—five years after the war began—is budgetary sleight of hand that makes a mockery of a democratic budget process.

The $3 Trillion War | Politics | Vanity Fair


The president’s defense budget does seem to get high marks across the political spectrum for its transparency in accounting for the true cost of the war; President Bush was often criticized for tucking war expenses into various line items that were hard to add up consistently. As Bob Work, a vice president at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, put it, “People can say this budget is wrong, but it is very upfront.”

The Economic Cost of War in Iraq and Afghanistan - NYTimes.com

and you are the poster child for idiots who can't read a chart. The chart dumbass has the total deficit, the on budget deficit and the off budget SURPLUS. the total deficit including both ON budget and OFF budget items in 2007 was 161B. The wars are still paid for with off budget supplemental appropriations not as part of the defence budget... Obama lied to you... again.

The chart dumbass is not a chart of projections based on the proposed budget it is a chart of ACTUAL deficit numbers. No matter how your left wing hero's try to spin it those are the numbers and they are ALL of the numbers including spending for the wars and katrina.

Also dumbfuck, if you bother to look at the chart you'll notice that OFF Budget spending (which you seem to dislike) has incresed about 20% under Obama from an average of less than 430M under Bush to more than 530M under Obama while reciepts have stayed the same.

Your chart shows "off budget" spending but NOT off budget supplemental appropriations.

Here is the actual national debt for the years you posted earlier. Subtract one year from the next and you get the real deficit for that year including the off budget SUPPLEMENTAL spending. As you can see the deficit for the year you chose in the above post, 2007, was $500 billion, not the $161 billion you claim.

Government - Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 2000 - 2010
Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 2000 - 2010
Includes legal tender notes, gold and silver certificates, etc.
The first fiscal year for the U.S. Government started Jan. 1, 1789. Congress changed the beginning of the fiscal year from Jan. 1 to Jul. 1 in 1842, and finally from Jul. 1 to Oct. 1 in 1977 where it remains today.
To find more historical information, visit The Public Debt Historical Information archives.
Date - Dollar Amount
09/30/2010 - $13,561,623,030,891.79
09/30/2009 - $11,909,829,003,511.75
09/30/2008 - $10,024,724,896,912.49
09/30/2007 - $9,007,653,372,262.48
09/30/2006 - $8,506,973,899,215.23
09/30/2005 - $7,932,709,661,723.50
09/30/2004 - $7,379,052,696,330.32
09/30/2003 - $6,783,231,062,743.62
09/30/2002 - $6,228,235,965,597.16
09/30/2001 - $5,807,463,412,200.06
09/30/2000 - $5,674,178,209,886.86

 

[bigrebnc1775]

BenNatuf, you really can't read and understand the chart? Or are you just kidding?

Are you kidding? You have a hard time identifing what you are. The rest already know, the only one that doesn't know is you. So tell us Turd how can you read a chart when you can't read what you are?

 

[bripat9643]

What makes you think that a continuation of reaganomics is going to save the day?

Let me get this straight: you want even more spending and higher taxes?

 

[Steelplate]

Hitler didn't have to nationalize anything the people were so in love with him they free submitted all they had in the name of the motherland. Kind of reminds me of people like you in love wiuth der leader Obamush.

Do you have a picture Obamush on the ceiling above your bed?

That in itself is a lie. The "people" were not all that much in love with Hitler. They feared him and respected that he brought needed jobs to Germany. But Starkey is right. He never "Nationalized" anything. The people of industry were behind him and he had a significant sized base of loyalists. The power brokers and his loyalists forced their will on the rest of a desperate population.

You guys really don't read, do you?

Have you ever seen those video's with Hitler and the large crowds? If the Germans didn't love hitler so much why did they allow him to murder all those German Jews? And in those days a few Americans one being Joe Kennedy Really like hitler.

Big crowds on grainy video? This is what you have? Hey... Glenn Beck and mama Grizzly had their horde at the "restoring honor" rally, didn't they? I saw big crowds too. I know.... we don't want to talk about that though.

I think we've shown enough that should make an intelligent person at least question the motives behind the extremist Right. But, even intelligent people... caught up in the fervor of Nationalism and anger...especially when desperate times occur, tend to leave intelligence at the door.

Like I said... I don't expect you to believe me... you guys are true believers... you are shiites...extremists. I just ask you to pay attention to what's going on around you.

 

[JakeStarkey]

What makes you think that a continuation of reaganomics is going to save the day?

Let me get this straight: you want even more spending and higher taxes?

Non sequitur all the time for you.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Dems 2011: More Taxes, Higher Spending, Bigger Deficits and It's Bushs Fault...Reagan Too

 

[editec]

What would the budget look like if the billionaires haven't enjoyed all these holidays from taxes for the last couple decades?

 

[saveliberty]

What would the budget look like if the billionaires haven't enjoyed all these holidays from taxes for the last couple decades?

Probably a lot like Spain's.

 

[JakeStarkey]

What would the budget look like if the billionaires haven't enjoyed all these holidays from taxes for the last couple decades?

Probably a lot like Spain's.

None, pure unadulterated nonsense.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

That in itself is a lie. The "people" were not all that much in love with Hitler. They feared him and respected that he brought needed jobs to Germany. But Starkey is right. He never "Nationalized" anything. The people of industry were behind him and he had a significant sized base of loyalists. The power brokers and his loyalists forced their will on the rest of a desperate population.

You guys really don't read, do you?

Have you ever seen those video's with Hitler and the large crowds? If the Germans didn't love hitler so much why did they allow him to murder all those German Jews? And in those days a few Americans one being Joe Kennedy Really like hitler.

Big crowds on grainy video? This is what you have? Hey... Glenn Beck and mama Grizzly had their horde at the "restoring honor" rally, didn't they? I saw big crowds too. I know.... we don't want to talk about that though.

I think we've shown enough that should make an intelligent person at least question the motives behind the extremist Right. But, even intelligent people... caught up in the fervor of Nationalism and anger...especially when desperate times occur, tend to leave intelligence at the door.

Like I said... I don't expect you to believe me... you guys are true believers... you are shiites...extremists. I just ask you to pay attention to what's going on around you.

Not only those old video's , but have you ever talked with GERMANS who lived then? I have back in the 80's when I was their, most Germans was in love in hitler.

I think we've shown enough that should make an intelligent person at least question the motives behind the extremist Right. But, even intelligent people... caught up in the fervor of Nationalism and anger...especially when desperate times occur, tend to leave intelligence at the door.

You are a idiot. You question people who are open yet support a president who has lie from day one. Stupid asshat.

 

[JakeStarkey]

littledeb continues the asshat. One, the great majority of Germans in the eighties were not Hitler supporters (Lie #1), and litledeb pretends that she tells the truth (like #2). littledeb and her friends are Righty Extremist Fascists. Stupid goofs.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

What makes you think that a continuation of reaganomics is going to save the day?

heh

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Of course we want to raise revenue, that's why we want to reduce taxes and repeal ObamaCare in favor of the Whoole Foods Suggestions

 

[BenNatuf]

BenNatuf, you really can't read and understand the chart? Or are you just kidding?

I read it just fine, evidently the words

Total................On Budget.................Off Budget


confuse the fuck out of you liberal fucking morons though.

 

[BenNatuf]

Benny, you are the poster child for neocon willful ignorance and partisan hackery. Observe and learn:

Did the Bush administration include the cost of the war in its 2005 budget?No. Instead, it plans to ask for funding in the form of supplemental appropriations from Congress in early 2005. This has led some critics to charge that the Bush administration is trying to hide the cost of the war from American voters. “We must give the troops what they need to be successful under increasingly risky conditions. And the president must tell the hard truth to the American people about how much longer our troops will remain in Iraq and how much more it will cost,” House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi said May 5. The Bush administration says it can’t estimate the costs because it does not know how many soldiers it will keep in Iraq and under what conditions they will serve. One solution: the Bush administration could have budgeted $30 billion to $50 billion— assuming the war would cost at least that much. “It was a policy decision” [not to], Holtz-Eakin says.

IRAQ: The war's price tag - Council on Foreign Relations


Finally, we should point out that the procedure used by the administration to fund the Iraq war was chosen deliberately in order to deflect close attention. The administration has requested nearly all the money for the war in the form of “emergency” funding, which is not subject to standard budget caps or vigorous scrutiny. Emergency funding is intended for genuine crises, such as Hurricane Katrina, where the utmost speed is required to get the money to the field. The continued use of this emergency procedure—five years after the war began—is budgetary sleight of hand that makes a mockery of a democratic budget process.

The $3 Trillion War | Politics | Vanity Fair


The president’s defense budget does seem to get high marks across the political spectrum for its transparency in accounting for the true cost of the war; President Bush was often criticized for tucking war expenses into various line items that were hard to add up consistently. As Bob Work, a vice president at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, put it, “People can say this budget is wrong, but it is very upfront.”

The Economic Cost of War in Iraq and Afghanistan - NYTimes.com

and you are the poster child for idiots who can't read a chart. The chart dumbass has the total deficit, the on budget deficit and the off budget SURPLUS. the total deficit including both ON budget and OFF budget items in 2007 was 161B. The wars are still paid for with off budget supplemental appropriations not as part of the defence budget... Obama lied to you... again.

The chart dumbass is not a chart of projections based on the proposed budget it is a chart of ACTUAL deficit numbers. No matter how your left wing hero's try to spin it those are the numbers and they are ALL of the numbers including spending for the wars and katrina.

Also dumbfuck, if you bother to look at the chart you'll notice that OFF Budget spending (which you seem to dislike) has incresed about 20% under Obama from an average of less than 430M under Bush to more than 530M under Obama while reciepts have stayed the same.

Your chart shows "off budget" spending but NOT off budget supplemental appropriations.

Here is the actual national debt for the years you posted earlier. Subtract one year from the next and you get the real deficit for that year including the off budget SUPPLEMENTAL spending. As you can see the deficit for the year you chose in the above post, 2007, was $500 billion, not the $161 billion you claim.

Government - Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 2000 - 2010
Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 2000 - 2010
Includes legal tender notes, gold and silver certificates, etc.
The first fiscal year for the U.S. Government started Jan. 1, 1789. Congress changed the beginning of the fiscal year from Jan. 1 to Jul. 1 in 1842, and finally from Jul. 1 to Oct. 1 in 1977 where it remains today.
To find more historical information, visit The Public Debt Historical Information archives.
Date - Dollar Amount
09/30/2010 - $13,561,623,030,891.79
09/30/2009 - $11,909,829,003,511.75
09/30/2008 - $10,024,724,896,912.49
09/30/2007 - $9,007,653,372,262.48
09/30/2006 - $8,506,973,899,215.23
09/30/2005 - $7,932,709,661,723.50
09/30/2004 - $7,379,052,696,330.32
09/30/2003 - $6,783,231,062,743.62
09/30/2002 - $6,228,235,965,597.16
09/30/2001 - $5,807,463,412,200.06
09/30/2000 - $5,674,178,209,886.86

What kind of fucking moron are you? Off budget include ALL off budget spending including supplemental appropriations. You guys and you ignorant assed denial is just plain stupid. You are aware that treasuries outstanding that have matured are still fucking owed aren't you, the money to redeem them is budgetted. You cannot look at the total debt to figure out what the deficit was, to figure the deficit you look at outlays vs reciepts. And the total fucking deficit for 2007 including ALL on and off budget items was 161B. The other 340B has NOTHING whatever to do with outlays or reciepts in 2007. it could be money owed to the government from 2006 that was not paid in 2007, it could be unredeemed trasuries still on the books, it could be a combination of both, neither of which has a damned thing to do with 2007. What it is NOT is any "hidden" spending on any supplemental appropriation, those are INCLUDED in the final deficit number. No matter how much you want to believe otherwize. My god you fucking liberals are stupid.

 

[JakeStarkey]

BenNatuf, you really can't read and understand the chart? Or are you just kidding?

I read it just fine, evidently the words

Total................On Budget.................Off Budget

confuse the fuck out of you liberal fucking morons though.

You use Righty Extremist Fascist code talk to try to force sensible Republicans, like me, out of the GOP. Two words, roadie: fuck on. Two more: I'm staying. Two final: you lose.

 

[dblack]

You use Righty Extremist Fascist code talk to try to force sensible Republicans, like me, out of the GOP. Two words, roadie: fuck on. Two more: I'm staying. Two final: you lose.

The more people remain deluded by the left/right, Republican/Democtate, Coke/Pepsi nonsense - well, we all lose. Wake up.

 

[JakeStarkey]

dblack, that is libertarian code talk. Libertarians are not necessarily fascists, but that does not excuse them for having such a philosophy.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

You use Righty Extremist Fascist code talk to try to force sensible Republicans, like me, out of the GOP. Two words, roadie: fuck on. Two more: I'm staying. Two final: you lose.

The more people remain deluded by the left/right, Republican/Democtate, Coke/Pepsi nonsense - well, we all lose. Wake up.

Thing is jokey is nothing conservative. he's a true blue progressive liberal.