DC Protests Draw 2 Million

[Vast LWC]

In fact, lets talk about what makes up the 1.8 Trillion dollar deficit.

1/4 of the current budget is made up of INTEREST ON PRE-EXISTING DEBT. That would of course be the 10 Trillion dollars worth of debt incurred by Reagan, Bush and Bush II.

Another 1/4 of the Debt is spent on DEFENSE.

And another 1/3 is spent on Medicare and Social Security.

The remaining tiny portion is spent on EVERYTHING ELSE.

Federal Budget Spending and the National Debt

So, what would you like Mr Obama to cut?

Defense, Social Security, or Medicare?

Because he ceratinly can't stop paying the interest on the debt that you people built up, now can he?

 

[Si modo]

Some were. Many were against the war because of spending. Do you dispute this?

I dispute that they were marching in protests. Yes.

I was at two anti-war protests. I was at the 9/12 protest.

Yup...no one was against the war because of spending.

 

[Ame®icano]

In fact, lets talk about what makes up the 1.8 Trillion dollar deficit.

1/4 of the current budget is made up of INTEREST ON PRE-EXISTING DEBT. That would of course be the 10 Trillion dollars worth of debt incurred by Reagan, Bush and Bush II.

Another 1/4 of the Debt is spent on DEFENSE.

And another 1/3 is spent on Medicare and Social Security.

The remaining tiny portion is spent on EVERYTHING ELSE.

Federal Budget Spending and the National Debt

So, what would you like Mr Obama to cut?

Defense, Social Security, or Medicare?

Because he ceratinly can't stop paying the interest on the debt that you people built up, now can he?

 

[Titanic Sailor]

YouTube - 9/12 Protest Washington DC Time Lapse Footage 0800 - 1130

 

[Vast LWC]

*sigh* And, the city was paralyzed because there were road closures before Inauguration day; because there were more road closures during Inauguration day than on Saturday; it was paralyzed because pedestrians were so restricted as to where they could be at any given time; because pedestrian traffic was very restricted; because some Metro stations were closed; it is SOP to call in extra police and emergency services during an Inauguration; and because there were a lot of persons there.

All due to the fact that there were 2 million extra people in the city.

The 30-mile radius claim is nothing I experienced at all. Hell, traffic was fine even in Arlington that afternoon.

Incomplete analysis.

Traffic was certainly hellish where I and my friends were. OK, perhaps a 10-15 mile radius. The point still stands.

 

[bodecea]

See, there are these concepts called sets. They can intesect or not. We have two sets of persons in this problem - those who sympathize with the spending protesters on 9/12 and those who were against the war. Believing that there is no intersection or even an insignificant intersection is nonsense.

I still would like to see links to those tea bagger type protests during the Reagan and Bush(s) adminstrations.

I'm really wondering what is so difficult to understand. The innane claim by CF is that no one was concerned about spending during the last administration thus he concludes that this is somehow hypocritical. It's not as there were plenty who protested the war because of spending. Now you ask for links to a group called tea party-likes who existed at that time?

Let's call tea-party-likes as ones who are against idiotic spending (which is what they are). The war was protested for several reasons, one of which was spending. Do you dispute that? Because I really have no idea why you ask for some link to war protesters.

Slick, but not slick enough.

Show us any protests for the Reagan/Bush administrations "spending like drunken sailors" policy. We now call them tea baggers...obviously that is a new term...but I and others want to see some record of tax protests against Reagan/Bush. Anti-war protests are not the same thing.....NOR DID THEY CLAIM TO BE THE SAME THING. (Unless you can prove they did claim to be the same thing, of course)

 

[Vast LWC]

<Image>

Cute cartoon. Now how exactly does it refute my point?

 

[Ame®icano]

<Image>

Cute cartoon. Now how exactly does it refute my point?

You forgot to mention how much money Obama printed and injected into our system.

 

[Vast LWC]

I was at two anti-war protests. I was at the 9/12 protest.

Yup...no one was against the war because of spending.

Were you now? Which ones?

You live in Arlington, you were probably at the ones I was at, possibly even one of the ones I helped organize.

I can tell you that if there were people at those events that were protesting based on the cost of the war, they weren't advertising it.

 

[Si modo]

*sigh* And, the city was paralyzed because there were road closures before Inauguration day; because there were more road closures during Inauguration day than on Saturday; it was paralyzed because pedestrians were so restricted as to where they could be at any given time; because pedestrian traffic was very restricted; because some Metro stations were closed; it is SOP to call in extra police and emergency services during an Inauguration; and because there were a lot of persons there.

All due to the fact that there were 2 million extra people in the city.

The 30-mile radius claim is nothing I experienced at all. Hell, traffic was fine even in Arlington that afternoon.

Incomplete analysis.

Traffic was certainly hellish where I and my friends were. OK, perhaps a 10-15 mile radius. The point still stands.

Hmmm. Arlington was fine.

What point of yours still stands? That you compare two very different events and very different in logistics and think that is comparable? Okie doke.

 

[Titanic Sailor]

Bush's spending was cited as a major failure of his administration by many. It looks like Democrats never really considered his spending an issue from the looks of it, all fluff. 9000 earmarks, corporate payoffs, healthcare corruption, a state government bailout, and more coming put an end to that perception.

 

[Vast LWC]

<Image>

Cute cartoon. Now how exactly does it refute my point?

You forgot to mention how much money Obama printed and injected into our system.

To combat the pre-existing debt? Yeah, that's probably true. Doesn't contradict my point, at all.

 

[Si modo]

I still would like to see links to those tea bagger type protests during the Reagan and Bush(s) adminstrations.

I'm really wondering what is so difficult to understand. The innane claim by CF is that no one was concerned about spending during the last administration thus he concludes that this is somehow hypocritical. It's not as there were plenty who protested the war because of spending. Now you ask for links to a group called tea party-likes who existed at that time?

Let's call tea-party-likes as ones who are against idiotic spending (which is what they are). The war was protested for several reasons, one of which was spending. Do you dispute that? Because I really have no idea why you ask for some link to war protesters.

Slick, but not slick enough. ...

If you think I'm here to be slick, you're wrong. I have better things to do than to try to be 'slick' on some forum.

.... Show us any protests for the Reagan/Bush administrations "spending like drunken sailors" policy. ....

Why would I? It's a strawman.

.... We now call them tea baggers...obviously that is a new term...but I and others want to see some record of tax protests against Reagan/Bush.

Another strawman. I said spending.

.... Anti-war protests are not the same thing.....NOR DID THEY CLAIM TO BE THE SAME THING. ....

No shit. So, what is the point of making any comparison?

 

[Ame®icano]

Cute cartoon. Now how exactly does it refute my point?

You forgot to mention how much money Obama printed and injected into our system.

To combat the pre-existing debt? Yeah, that's probably true. Doesn't contradict my point, at all.

To pay off all those who supported him to get elected. He's giving away our money like it's his own.

 

[Vast LWC]

What point of yours still stands? That you compare two very different events and very different in logistics and think that is comparable? Okie doke.

Let's see, you put up an iffy-at-best argument to one of my points, don't address any of the other three, and then claim none of points are valid based on your attempted invalidation of the one point?

That's an... interesting strategy.

 

[Si modo]

What point of yours still stands? That you compare two very different events and very different in logistics and think that is comparable? Okie doke.

Let's see, you put up an iffy-at-best argument to one of my points, don't address any of the other three, and then claim none of points are valid based on your attempted invalidation of the one point?

That's an... interesting strategy.

Awwww. You're feeling neglected? I'll look and see what you are whining about to which I haven't yet addressed (or seen...doing a few things else, so forgive me if you don't get my undivided attention). BRB.

 

[jreeves]

And that justifies a oft-repeated lie......how?

what lie?

That the National Park service gave an estimate of the crowds in D.C.

Does it matter what the number of people are, if the majority of people in this country agree with the crowd?

 

[Vast LWC]

Bush's spending was cited as a major failure of his administration by many. It looks like Democrats never really considered his spending an issue from the looks of it, all fluff. 9000 earmarks, corporate payoffs, healthcare corruption, a state government bailout, and more coming put an end to that perception.

Oh, we did care that Bush was spending trillions of dollars, and we also care now that our administration has to pay the interest.

What we resent is that, aside from a few grumbles from various private groups that don't amount to a hill of beans, Republicans spend and spend and spend on all the programs that they want put in place, but as soon as a Democrat tries to spend money on one of their programs, suddenly there's a massive outcry from the right.

Do you think we didn't notice your little trick of spending all the country's money during periods when you're in charge so there's none left for the Democrats to use?

Well, we did.

 

[Si modo]

In fact, lets talk about what makes up the 1.8 Trillion dollar deficit.

1/4 of the current budget is made up of INTEREST ON PRE-EXISTING DEBT. That would of course be the 10 Trillion dollars worth of debt incurred by Reagan, Bush and Bush II.

Another 1/4 of the Debt is spent on DEFENSE.

And another 1/3 is spent on Medicare and Social Security.

The remaining tiny portion is spent on EVERYTHING ELSE.

Federal Budget Spending and the National Debt

So, what would you like Mr Obama to cut?

Defense, Social Security, or Medicare?

Because he ceratinly can't stop paying the interest on the debt that you people built up, now can he?

Tu quoque arguments don't interest me, as fallacies rarely do (except to point them out).

<Image>

Cute cartoon. Now how exactly does it refute my point?

I didn't post the cartoon and don't really care about it because I can't see it.

I was at two anti-war protests. I was at the 9/12 protest.

Yup...no one was against the war because of spending.

Were you now? Which ones?

You live in Arlington, you were probably at the ones I was at, possibly even one of the ones I helped organize.

I can tell you that if there were people at those events that were protesting based on the cost of the war, they weren't advertising it.

I don't live in Arlington. I don't recall the dates, but I do recall that the last one I attended contained a lot of similar rhetoric about numbers afterwards - over exagerations and under exagerations. That bored me.

 

[jreeves]

i was at two anti-war protests. I was at the 9/12 protest.

Yup...no one was against the war because of spending.

were you now? Which ones?

You live in arlington, you were probably at the ones i was at, possibly even one of the ones i helped organize.

i can tell you that if there were people at those events that were protesting based on the cost of the war, they weren't advertising it.

bs