I don't think anyone would say that the Obama economy is perfect, but 73 months of unprecedented...

[Skull Pilot]

And yes Campbell I notice you haven't addressed my post.
It takes a better person to deal with information that is contrary to what you want to believe.
Like most, apparently, you just want to ignore it and keeping posting up what you want to believe.

Bush assumed a balanced budget with surpluses projected all the way to a paid off debt. Guess what the cowboy wannabe did? That's right sport's fans, cut tax rates for rich folks twice, started two wars, one totally unnecessary, never cut spending a dime and doubled the national debt from $5.7 to $11.9 trillion. What a leader!

Idiot.
Bush assumed an economy falling into recession as a result of CLinton's raising taxes and the bust of the dot com boom. Also he inherited Clinton's failed terrorism policy that caused 9/11.
Quit blaming Bush, dumbshit. Obama and the Dems own this economy and this foreign policy and everyone knows they have failed.

And let's not forget that Clinton signed the deregulation that caused the too big to fail fiasco and he signed it in December of his last year in office

 

[bripat9643]

If a Republican were president, the RWnuts would be raving about this economy 10 threads a day.

If a Republican were president, it would be something to rave about.

Yep, that Republican Congress has been kicking ass with the jobs and economic improvement bills. You are such a rube. A Republican president is not required for Congress to act. If they put up a real bill with honest intentions, there is no doubt the president would sign it.

A "real bill," meaning a Democrat reelection slush fund. That's all these so-called "jobs bills" are. They provide Democrats with money to bribe people into voting Democrat.

If I had my way, it would be unconstitutional to pass anything called a "jobs bill."

So how do you propose the president changes anything to improve your economic outlook with no bills, no EOs?

You've had a republican Congress for over a year and they have done nothing.

Jobs bills don't improve anything. Dismantling our behemoth government would be a good start. Eliminate the EPA.

 

[Iceweasel]

The economy sucks and libtards are polishing obama's turd furiously for the upcoming election. Anyone that isn't sniffing obama's anal fumes knows it.

Bullshit. The American economy has fully recovered from W's job killing follies, but until the tax code is reformed, Reagan's tax restructuring is still sending all income to the top 5%, and the workers are screwed.

Conservatives refuse to acknowledge any of this and are now pretending the world was better off under Bush.

It was because during the entire 8 years we never had 15% unemployment...like ever.

Bush was hammered for much better numbers. A real 5% was considered a national disaster. Now we have phony numbers fluffed up with part timers and people that gave up or retired early.

Prove It!!

It has been many times here and elsewhere. If you refuse to accept it, it's on you, not me or anybody else.

 

[Iceweasel]

It's an incredibly stupid point of view. You are declaring that no one can support a political ideology and look objectively at the data. All you are doing is preening yourself as some kind of moral high ground. That you think it's credible is what laughable.

Yes, I've come to the conclusion that adherence to a partisan ideology ultimately and literally distorts thought processes.

What I've not yet fully determined is whether hardcore partisans can't be objective due to this, or whether they consciously choose not to be objective and are simply dishonest. My guess, at this point, is that it's some combination therein, dependent upon the situation. Whichever, there is no reason to believe them on pretty much anything, because they are not rational.

And regarding the "moral high ground", I find that pretty ironic. Hardcore partisans are still the minority in this country, they're just much louder. In other words, there are far more of me than there are of you, so there is nothing special about me.

Rather, hardcore partisans have convinced themselves that they and their "side" have all the answers. That sounds pretty narcissistic to me. Yet another reason not to take them seriously.
.

What you determine or not isn't relevant to anyone but yourself. That was my point. Why does it need to be further explained to you?

A hardcore partisan is someone that stands with their party no matter what. I see a whole shitload of criticism of the GOP by conservatives here and pretty much everywhere I look. So I don't think you even know what the term means, you simply throw it out there as a means to dismiss opinions that differ from your own.

I'm not even a party member but that's too much for your toggle switch brain.

Well, it looks like I'll have to find a way to proceed without your approval then, huh?
.

OMG!!!!

He called you a.....a.....a .....a fence-sitter!!!!
(post #31)

You're not gonna put up with that, are ya'??????

I'm used to it from hardcore partisan ideologues.

A hardcore partisan ideologue's biggest threat is not a hardcore partisan ideologue from the "other side". They're easy.

A hardcore partisan ideologue's biggest threat is someone who chooses to think for themselves.

But I appreciate your concern!
.

You are a joke, not a threat. You claim to be a financial guy, yet you listen to talk radioso much you can discern which shows your clients listen to. As if all listeners were of the same mind. As if they had the time to listen that frequently. As if anyone with half a brain gets into political discussions with their customers.

And I told you many times I don't belong to a party yet it won't fit your narrative so you simply continue on with the insult. I have core beliefs as a conservative and it doesn't change with the issues, candidate or time of day. Somehow you find that inferior to your way of thinking.

The fact that you think you come here and pose some kind of a threat to people just means you are petty and smug with no commitment to anything but your hollow ego. Nothing more.

 

[Campbell]

Yes I know you have trouble with nuance. It's okay. I'm used to it. Here's more from, you know, actual economists:

Was the Obama Stimulus a Success or a Failure?

Compared to Bush??

Who negotiated the Iraq Agreement? Yeah, a real leader.

We should have never been in Iraq. If Saddam Hussein hadn't tried to assassinate Bush's Daddy we never would have been. Oh well.....just cost about 4500 young American lives and another 35,000 seriously wounded. As far as the expense.......at least a trillion dollars.

Who negotiated the Iraq Agreement, dumbshit? Yeah, Bush. It takes a LEADER to negotiate a peaceful resolution. It takes a buffoon to fuck it all to hell.

Don't call me Dumbshit Asshole!!!

We never had any business in Iraq to begin with. The Republicans had been looking for an excuse to invade Iraq ever since Saddam Hussein tried to assassinate George HW Bush in 1993. This letter written to Bill Clinton in 1998 and signed by all the key Republicans proves it:

December 18, 1998

The Honorable William J. Clinton
President of the United States
Washington, DC

Dear Mr. President,

We are writing you because we are convinced that current American policy toward Iraq is not succeeding,
and that we may soon face a threat in the Middle East more serious than any we have known since the end
of the Cold War. In your upcoming State of the Union Address, you have an opportunity to chart a clear
and determined course for meeting this threat. We urge you to seize that opportunity, and to enunciate a
new strategy that would secure the interests of the U.S. and our friends and allies around the world.
That strategy should aim, above all, at the removal of Saddam Hussein's regime from power. We stand ready
to offer our full support in this difficult but necessary endeavor. The policy of containment of Saddam
Hussein has been steadily eroding over the past several months. As recent events have demonstrated, we
can no longer depend on our partners in the Gulf War coalition to continue to uphold the sanctions or to
punish Saddam when he blocks or evades UN inspections. Our ability to ensure that Saddam Hussein is not
producing weapons of mass destruction, therefore, has substantially diminished. Even if full inspections
were eventually to resume, which now seems highly unlikely, experience has shown that it is difficult if
not impossible to monitor Iraq's chemical and biological weapons production. The lengthy period during
which the inspectors will have been unable to enter many Iraqi facilities has made it even less likely
that they will be able to uncover all of Saddam's secrets. As a result, in the not-too-distant future we
will be unable to determine with any reasonable level of confidence whether Iraq does or does not possess
such weapons. Such uncertainty will, by itself, have a seriously destabilizing effect on the entire Middle
East. It hardly needs to be added that if Saddam does acquire the capability to deliver weapons of mass
destruction, as he is almost certain to do if we continue along the present course, the safety of American
troops in the region, of our friends and allies like Israel and the moderate Arab states, and a significant
portion of the world's supply of oil will all be put at hazard. As you have rightly declared, Mr. President,
the security of the world in the first part of the 21st century will be determined largely by how we handle
this threat. Given the magnitude of the threat, the current policy, which depends for its success upon the
steadfastness of our coalition partners and upon the cooperation of Saddam Hussein, is dangerously inadequate.
The only acceptable strategy is one that eliminates the possibility that Iraq will be able to use or threaten
to use weapons of mass destruction. In the near term, this means a willingness to undertake military action
as diplomacy is clearly failing. In the long term, it means removing Saddam Hussein and his regime from power.
That now needs to become the aim of American foreign policy. We urge you to articulate this aim, and to turn your Administration's attention to implementing a strategy for removing Saddam's regime from power. This will require a full complement of diplomatic, political and military efforts. Although we are fully aware of the dangers and difficulties in implementing this policy, we believe the dangers of failing to do so are far greater. We believe the U.S. has the authority under existing UN resolutions to take the necessary steps, including military steps, to protect our vital interests in the Gulf. In any case, American policy cannot continue to be crippled by a misguided insistence on unanimity in the UN Security Council. We urge you to act decisively. If you act now to end the threat of weapons of mass destruction against the U.S. or its allies, you will be acting in the most fundamental national security interests of the country. If we accept a course of weakness and drift, we put our interests and our future at risk.

Sincerely,

Elliott Abrams Richard L. Armitag William J. Bennett
Jeffrey Bergner John Bolton Paula Dobriansky
Francis Fukuyama Robert Kagan Zalmay Khalilzad
William Kristol Richard Perle Peter W.Rodman
Donald Rumsfeld William Schneider, Jr. Vin Weber
Paul Wolfowitz R. James Woolsey Robert B. Zoellick

 

[Campbell]

And yes Campbell I notice you haven't addressed my post.
It takes a better person to deal with information that is contrary to what you want to believe.
Like most, apparently, you just want to ignore it and keeping posting up what you want to believe.

Bush assumed a balanced budget with surpluses projected all the way to a paid off debt. Guess what the cowboy wannabe did? That's right sport's fans, cut tax rates for rich folks twice, started two wars, one totally unnecessary, never cut spending a dime and doubled the national debt from $5.7 to $11.9 trillion. What a leader!

Idiot.
Bush assumed an economy falling into recession as a result of CLinton's raising taxes and the bust of the dot com boom. Also he inherited Clinton's failed terrorism policy that caused 9/11.
Quit blaming Bush, dumbshit. Obama and the Dems own this economy and this foreign policy and everyone knows they have failed.

What an idiot!! Bill Clinton raised taxes in early 1993 while he still had a Democrat congress. He then proceeded to have eight of the most successful years this country has had since the 2nd WW. If you're gonna argue with me get your shit straight.

 

[Mac1958]

Yes, I've come to the conclusion that adherence to a partisan ideology ultimately and literally distorts thought processes.

What I've not yet fully determined is whether hardcore partisans can't be objective due to this, or whether they consciously choose not to be objective and are simply dishonest. My guess, at this point, is that it's some combination therein, dependent upon the situation. Whichever, there is no reason to believe them on pretty much anything, because they are not rational.

And regarding the "moral high ground", I find that pretty ironic. Hardcore partisans are still the minority in this country, they're just much louder. In other words, there are far more of me than there are of you, so there is nothing special about me.

Rather, hardcore partisans have convinced themselves that they and their "side" have all the answers. That sounds pretty narcissistic to me. Yet another reason not to take them seriously.
.

What you determine or not isn't relevant to anyone but yourself. That was my point. Why does it need to be further explained to you?

A hardcore partisan is someone that stands with their party no matter what. I see a whole shitload of criticism of the GOP by conservatives here and pretty much everywhere I look. So I don't think you even know what the term means, you simply throw it out there as a means to dismiss opinions that differ from your own.

I'm not even a party member but that's too much for your toggle switch brain.

Well, it looks like I'll have to find a way to proceed without your approval then, huh?
.

OMG!!!!

He called you a.....a.....a .....a fence-sitter!!!!
(post #31)

You're not gonna put up with that, are ya'??????

I'm used to it from hardcore partisan ideologues.

A hardcore partisan ideologue's biggest threat is not a hardcore partisan ideologue from the "other side". They're easy.

A hardcore partisan ideologue's biggest threat is someone who chooses to think for themselves.

But I appreciate your concern!
.

You are a joke, not a threat. You claim to be a financial guy, yet you listen to talk radioso much you can discern which shows your clients listen to. As if all listeners were of the same mind. As if they had the time to listen that frequently. As if anyone with half a brain gets into political discussions with their customers.

And I told you many times I don't belong to a party yet it won't fit your narrative so you simply continue on with the insult. I have core beliefs as a conservative and it doesn't change with the issues, candidate or time of day. Somehow you find that inferior to your way of thinking.

The fact that you think you come here and pose some kind of a threat to people just means you are petty and smug with no commitment to anything but your hollow ego. Nothing more.

Snarl snarl!!

All this drama, too funny.
.

 

[Campbell]

And yes Campbell I notice you haven't addressed my post.
It takes a better person to deal with information that is contrary to what you want to believe.
Like most, apparently, you just want to ignore it and keeping posting up what you want to believe.

Bush assumed a balanced budget with surpluses projected all the way to a paid off debt. Guess what the cowboy wannabe did? That's right sport's fans, cut tax rates for rich folks twice, started two wars, one totally unnecessary, never cut spending a dime and doubled the national debt from $5.7 to $11.9 trillion. What a leader!

Idiot.
Bush assumed an economy falling into recession as a result of CLinton's raising taxes and the bust of the dot com boom. Also he inherited Clinton's failed terrorism policy that caused 9/11.
Quit blaming Bush, dumbshit. Obama and the Dems own this economy and this foreign policy and everyone knows they have failed.

And let's not forget that Clinton signed the deregulation that caused the too big to fail fiasco and he signed it in December of his last year in office

George W. Bush screwed things up. Bill Clinton left an unemployment rate of 4.3%, a balanced budget with surpluses projected all the way to a paid up debt. The first thing Bush did was to cut taxes twice, 2001 and 2003. It's what Republicans do.....they've done it ever since Reagan screwed everything up:

The Republicans never have seen a tax cut for corporations and the rich they didn't like but never have quit spending for their pet projects and war machine:

These figures came from the bureau of the debt....they're easily verified:


......................................................Total U S Debt......................................................

09/30/2009 $11,909,829,003,511.75(80% Of All Debt Across 232 Years Borrowed By Reagan And Bushes)

09/30/2008 $10,024,724,896,912.49(Times Square Debt Clock Modified To Accommodate Tens of Trillions)

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(Second Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation to block Democrat opposition)

09/30/2002 $6,228,235,965,597.16

09/30/2001 $5,807,463,412,200.06(First Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation to block Democrat opposition)

09/30/2000 $5,674,178,209,886.86(Administration And Congress Arguing About How To Use Surplus)

09/30/1999 $5,656,270,901,615.43(First Surplus Generated...On Track To Pay Off Debt By 2012)

09/30/1998 $5,526,193,008,897.62
09/30/1997 $5,413,146,011,397.34
09/30/1996 $5,224,810,939,135.73
09/29/1995 $4,973,982,900,709.39
09/30/1994 $4,692,749,910,013.32 (Bill Clinton raised tax rates)
09/30/1993 $4,411,488,883,139.38 ( Debt Quadrupled By Reagan/Bush41)
09/30/1992 $4,064,620,655,521.66
09/30/1991 $3,665,303,351,697.03
09/28/1990 $3,233,313,451,777.25
09/29/1989 $2,857,430,960,187.32
09/30/1988 $2,602,337,712,041.16
09/30/1987 $2,350,276,890,953.00
09/30/1986 $2,125,302,616,658.42
09/30/1985 $1,823,103,000,000.00
09/30/1984 $1,572,266,000,000.00
09/30/1983 $1,377,210,000,000.00

09/30/1982 $1,142,034,000,000.00(Total Debt Passes $1 Trillion)((Reagan Slashed Tax Rates To Pre Depression Levels)

09/30/1981 $997,855,000,000.00

 

[Mac1958]

Snarl snarl!!

All this drama, too funny.
.

...you are petty and smug with no commitment to anything but your hollow ego. Nothing more.

Grr! Grr!
.

 

[Iceweasel]

And yes Campbell I notice you haven't addressed my post.
It takes a better person to deal with information that is contrary to what you want to believe.
Like most, apparently, you just want to ignore it and keeping posting up what you want to believe.

Bush assumed a balanced budget with surpluses projected all the way to a paid off debt. Guess what the cowboy wannabe did? That's right sport's fans, cut tax rates for rich folks twice, started two wars, one totally unnecessary, never cut spending a dime and doubled the national debt from $5.7 to $11.9 trillion. What a leader!

Idiot.
Bush assumed an economy falling into recession as a result of CLinton's raising taxes and the bust of the dot com boom. Also he inherited Clinton's failed terrorism policy that caused 9/11.
Quit blaming Bush, dumbshit. Obama and the Dems own this economy and this foreign policy and everyone knows they have failed.

And let's not forget that Clinton signed the deregulation that caused the too big to fail fiasco and he signed it in December of his last year in office

George W. Bush screwed things up. Bill Clinton left an unemployment rate of 4.3%, a balanced budget with surpluses projected all the way to a paid up debt. The first thing Bush did was to cut taxes twice, 2001 and 2003. It's what Republicans do.....they've done it ever since Reagan screwed everything up:

The Republicans never have seen a tax cut for corporations and the rich they didn't like but never have quit spending for their pet projects and war machine:

These figures came from the bureau of the debt....they're easily verified:


......................................................Total U S Debt......................................................

09/30/2009 $11,909,829,003,511.75(80% Of All Debt Across 232 Years Borrowed By Reagan And Bushes)

09/30/2008 $10,024,724,896,912.49(Times Square Debt Clock Modified To Accommodate Tens of Trillions)

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(Second Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)

09/30/2002 $6,228,235,965,597.16

09/30/2001 $5,807,463,412,200.06(First Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)

09/30/2000 $5,674,178,209,886.86(Administration And Congress Arguing About How To Use Surplus)

09/30/1999 $5,656,270,901,615.43(First Surplus Generated...On Track To Pay Off Debt By 2012)

09/30/1998 $5,526,193,008,897.62
09/30/1997 $5,413,146,011,397.34
09/30/1996 $5,224,810,939,135.73
09/29/1995 $4,973,982,900,709.39
09/30/1994 $4,692,749,910,013.32
09/30/1993 $4,411,488,883,139.38 ( Debt Quadrupled By Reagan/Bush41)
09/30/1992 $4,064,620,655,521.66
09/30/1991 $3,665,303,351,697.03
09/28/1990 $3,233,313,451,777.25
09/29/1989 $2,857,430,960,187.32
09/30/1988 $2,602,337,712,041.16
09/30/1987 $2,350,276,890,953.00
09/30/1986 $2,125,302,616,658.42
09/30/1985 $1,823,103,000,000.00
09/30/1984 $1,572,266,000,000.00
09/30/1983 $1,377,210,000,000.00

09/30/1982 $1,142,034,000,000.00(Total Debt Passes $1 Trillion)((Reagan Slashed Tax Rates To Pre Depression Levels)

09/30/1981 $997,855,000,000.00

Campbell went full auto ...AGAIN. Repeating something expecting different results is ... well ...

 

[Wyatt earp]

And yes Campbell I notice you haven't addressed my post.
It takes a better person to deal with information that is contrary to what you want to believe.
Like most, apparently, you just want to ignore it and keeping posting up what you want to believe.

Bush assumed a balanced budget with surpluses projected all the way to a paid off debt. Guess what the cowboy wannabe did? That's right sport's fans, cut tax rates for rich folks twice, started two wars, one totally unnecessary, never cut spending a dime and doubled the national debt from $5.7 to $11.9 trillion. What a leader!

Idiot.
Bush assumed an economy falling into recession as a result of CLinton's raising taxes and the bust of the dot com boom. Also he inherited Clinton's failed terrorism policy that caused 9/11.
Quit blaming Bush, dumbshit. Obama and the Dems own this economy and this foreign policy and everyone knows they have failed.

And let's not forget that Clinton signed the deregulation that caused the too big to fail fiasco and he signed it in December of his last year in office

George W. Bush screwed things up. Bill Clinton left an unemployment rate of 4.3%, a balanced budget with surpluses projected all the way to a paid up debt. The first thing Bush did was to cut taxes twice, 2001 and 2003. It's what Republicans do.....they've done it ever since Reagan screwed everything up:

The Republicans never have seen a tax cut for corporations and the rich they didn't like but never have quit spending for their pet projects and war machine:

These figures came from the bureau of the debt....they're easily verified:


......................................................Total U S Debt......................................................

09/30/2009 $11,909,829,003,511.75(80% Of All Debt Across 232 Years Borrowed By Reagan And Bushes)

09/30/2008 $10,024,724,896,912.49(Times Square Debt Clock Modified To Accommodate Tens of Trillions)

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(Second Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation to block Democrat objection)

09/30/2002 $6,228,235,965,597.16

09/30/2001 $5,807,463,412,200.06(First Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation to block Democrat objection)

09/30/2000 $5,674,178,209,886.86(Administration And Congress Arguing About How To Use Surplus)

09/30/1999 $5,656,270,901,615.43(First Surplus Generated...On Track To Pay Off Debt By 2012)

09/30/1998 $5,526,193,008,897.62
09/30/1997 $5,413,146,011,397.34
09/30/1996 $5,224,810,939,135.73
09/29/1995 $4,973,982,900,709.39
09/30/1994 $4,692,749,910,013.32 (Bill Clinton raised tax rates)
09/30/1993 $4,411,488,883,139.38 ( Debt Quadrupled By Reagan/Bush41)
09/30/1992 $4,064,620,655,521.66
09/30/1991 $3,665,303,351,697.03
09/28/1990 $3,233,313,451,777.25
09/29/1989 $2,857,430,960,187.32
09/30/1988 $2,602,337,712,041.16
09/30/1987 $2,350,276,890,953.00
09/30/1986 $2,125,302,616,658.42
09/30/1985 $1,823,103,000,000.00
09/30/1984 $1,572,266,000,000.00
09/30/1983 $1,377,210,000,000.00

09/30/1982 $1,142,034,000,000.00(Total Debt Passes $1 Trillion)((Reagan Slashed Tax Rates To Pre Depression Levels)

09/30/1981 $997,855,000,000.00

So Mr. Dumb Ass hole, why no mention of the mini rescission Clinton left Bush Jr and that's why he lowered taxes?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Still waiting ot hear how record spending and gov't dependence has helped this economy.
Food stamps are the driver of the Obama economy.

GDP growth is so low thanks to a pathetic stimulus and a lack of deficit spending.

Three things Republicans are good for:

Tax cuts for the rich

Increased spending

Increasing the national debt

It's what they do

Tax cuts for everybody translates into tax cuts for the rich in libspeak.

Spending goes through the roof when Democrats can get away with it and their base thinks Republicans are responsible, even though they don't support the social spending. It makes no sense but that's what they believe.

Liberals fight any attempt to balance the budget and blame debt on Republicans.

The Democrat party heads lie and their puppets mindlessly gobble it up. It's what they do.

God forbid that people actually earn enough money to actually afford school, medical, housing and all the things the left promises to give to us for free from the government. Boooo! Rich people Booooo!

Yep, the president has an app for running the govt. The wage adjuster is on the same page as jobs and gas.
You should ask employers why they don't pay more, not the president.

View attachment 70259

I dont have to ask, I already know. They dont pay more because they dont have to. Because Obama's policies have been such crap there is a surplus of unemployed and underemployed labor keeping wages down. With some decent pro business policies and a stable regulatory environment busineses would begin investing their hordes of cash and employment would improve. But not gioing to happen under the worst president in modern history.

Total BS.
If American business has " hordes of cash" , then by definition the business policy and regulatory environment is already great for business. It's kind of hard to argue otherwise. Employers have gotten over on wage increases for decades. It's time to hold their feet to the fire.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

If a Republican were president, the RWnuts would be raving about this economy 10 threads a day.

If a Republican were president, it would be something to rave about.

Yep, that Republican Congress has been kicking ass with the jobs and economic improvement bills. You are such a rube. A Republican president is not required for Congress to act. If they put up a real bill with honest intentions, there is no doubt the president would sign it.

A "real bill," meaning a Democrat reelection slush fund. That's all these so-called "jobs bills" are. They provide Democrats with money to bribe people into voting Democrat.

If I had my way, it would be unconstitutional to pass anything called a "jobs bill."

So how do you propose the president changes anything to improve your economic outlook with no bills, no EOs?

You've had a republican Congress for over a year and they have done nothing.

Jobs bills don't improve anything. Dismantling our behemoth government would be a good start. Eliminate the EPA.

Talk radio logic devoid of substance or merit.

 

[Mac1958]

Still waiting ot hear how record spending and gov't dependence has helped this economy.
Food stamps are the driver of the Obama economy.

Three things Republicans are good for:

Tax cuts for the rich

Increased spending

Increasing the national debt

It's what they do

Tax cuts for everybody translates into tax cuts for the rich in libspeak.

Spending goes through the roof when Democrats can get away with it and their base thinks Republicans are responsible, even though they don't support the social spending. It makes no sense but that's what they believe.

Liberals fight any attempt to balance the budget and blame debt on Republicans.

The Democrat party heads lie and their puppets mindlessly gobble it up. It's what they do.

God forbid that people actually earn enough money to actually afford school, medical, housing and all the things the left promises to give to us for free from the government. Boooo! Rich people Booooo!

Yep, the president has an app for running the govt. The wage adjuster is on the same page as jobs and gas.
You should ask employers why they don't pay more, not the president.

View attachment 70259

I dont have to ask, I already know. They dont pay more because they dont have to. Because Obama's policies have been such crap there is a surplus of unemployed and underemployed labor keeping wages down. With some decent pro business policies and a stable regulatory environment busineses would begin investing their hordes of cash and employment would improve. But not gioing to happen under the worst president in modern history.

Total BS.
If American business has " hordes of cash" , then by definition the business policy and regulatory environment is already great for business. It's kind of hard to argue otherwise. Employers have gotten over on wage increases for decades. It's time to hold their feet to the fire.

The cash - I've seen estimates of $2.5T - is overseas. If they repatriate it they'll pay huge taxes on it, a bad business move.

A corporation's first responsibility is to maximize shareholder value, not to provide jobs or anything else.

Corporate officers have a strict fiduciary - read "legal" - responsibility to maximize shareholder value. Shareholders include seniors, trusts, charities, universities, 401K plans and pensions.
.

 

[Campbell]

And yes Campbell I notice you haven't addressed my post.
It takes a better person to deal with information that is contrary to what you want to believe.
Like most, apparently, you just want to ignore it and keeping posting up what you want to believe.

Bush assumed a balanced budget with surpluses projected all the way to a paid off debt. Guess what the cowboy wannabe did? That's right sport's fans, cut tax rates for rich folks twice, started two wars, one totally unnecessary, never cut spending a dime and doubled the national debt from $5.7 to $11.9 trillion. What a leader!

Idiot.
Bush assumed an economy falling into recession as a result of CLinton's raising taxes and the bust of the dot com boom. Also he inherited Clinton's failed terrorism policy that caused 9/11.
Quit blaming Bush, dumbshit. Obama and the Dems own this economy and this foreign policy and everyone knows they have failed.

And let's not forget that Clinton signed the deregulation that caused the too big to fail fiasco and he signed it in December of his last year in office

George W. Bush screwed things up. Bill Clinton left an unemployment rate of 4.3%, a balanced budget with surpluses projected all the way to a paid up debt. The first thing Bush did was to cut taxes twice, 2001 and 2003. It's what Republicans do.....they've done it ever since Reagan screwed everything up:

The Republicans never have seen a tax cut for corporations and the rich they didn't like but never have quit spending for their pet projects and war machine:

These figures came from the bureau of the debt....they're easily verified:


......................................................Total U S Debt......................................................

09/30/2009 $11,909,829,003,511.75(80% Of All Debt Across 232 Years Borrowed By Reagan And Bushes)

09/30/2008 $10,024,724,896,912.49(Times Square Debt Clock Modified To Accommodate Tens of Trillions)

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(Second Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)

09/30/2002 $6,228,235,965,597.16

09/30/2001 $5,807,463,412,200.06(First Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)

09/30/2000 $5,674,178,209,886.86(Administration And Congress Arguing About How To Use Surplus)

09/30/1999 $5,656,270,901,615.43(First Surplus Generated...On Track To Pay Off Debt By 2012)

09/30/1998 $5,526,193,008,897.62
09/30/1997 $5,413,146,011,397.34
09/30/1996 $5,224,810,939,135.73
09/29/1995 $4,973,982,900,709.39
09/30/1994 $4,692,749,910,013.32
09/30/1993 $4,411,488,883,139.38 ( Debt Quadrupled By Reagan/Bush41)
09/30/1992 $4,064,620,655,521.66
09/30/1991 $3,665,303,351,697.03
09/28/1990 $3,233,313,451,777.25
09/29/1989 $2,857,430,960,187.32
09/30/1988 $2,602,337,712,041.16
09/30/1987 $2,350,276,890,953.00
09/30/1986 $2,125,302,616,658.42
09/30/1985 $1,823,103,000,000.00
09/30/1984 $1,572,266,000,000.00
09/30/1983 $1,377,210,000,000.00

09/30/1982 $1,142,034,000,000.00(Total Debt Passes $1 Trillion)((Reagan Slashed Tax Rates To Pre Depression Levels)

09/30/1981 $997,855,000,000.00

Campbell went full auto ...AGAIN. Repeating something expecting different results is ... well ...

I'm sure you don't want to see it but as long as I'm here you will. I was a Republican all the way up to Reagan....even voted for him the first time. You can't cut taxes and continue to spend without going in debt. The modern Republican party is responsible for the national debt. I'll never vote for another one of the scheming crooks if I live to 100.

 

[Campbell]

And yes Campbell I notice you haven't addressed my post.
It takes a better person to deal with information that is contrary to what you want to believe.
Like most, apparently, you just want to ignore it and keeping posting up what you want to believe.

Bush assumed a balanced budget with surpluses projected all the way to a paid off debt. Guess what the cowboy wannabe did? That's right sport's fans, cut tax rates for rich folks twice, started two wars, one totally unnecessary, never cut spending a dime and doubled the national debt from $5.7 to $11.9 trillion. What a leader!

Idiot.
Bush assumed an economy falling into recession as a result of CLinton's raising taxes and the bust of the dot com boom. Also he inherited Clinton's failed terrorism policy that caused 9/11.
Quit blaming Bush, dumbshit. Obama and the Dems own this economy and this foreign policy and everyone knows they have failed.

And let's not forget that Clinton signed the deregulation that caused the too big to fail fiasco and he signed it in December of his last year in office

George W. Bush screwed things up. Bill Clinton left an unemployment rate of 4.3%, a balanced budget with surpluses projected all the way to a paid up debt. The first thing Bush did was to cut taxes twice, 2001 and 2003. It's what Republicans do.....they've done it ever since Reagan screwed everything up:

The Republicans never have seen a tax cut for corporations and the rich they didn't like but never have quit spending for their pet projects and war machine:

These figures came from the bureau of the debt....they're easily verified:


......................................................Total U S Debt......................................................

09/30/2009 $11,909,829,003,511.75(80% Of All Debt Across 232 Years Borrowed By Reagan And Bushes)

09/30/2008 $10,024,724,896,912.49(Times Square Debt Clock Modified To Accommodate Tens of Trillions)

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(Second Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation to block Democrat objection)

09/30/2002 $6,228,235,965,597.16

09/30/2001 $5,807,463,412,200.06(First Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation to block Democrat objection)

09/30/2000 $5,674,178,209,886.86(Administration And Congress Arguing About How To Use Surplus)

09/30/1999 $5,656,270,901,615.43(First Surplus Generated...On Track To Pay Off Debt By 2012)

09/30/1998 $5,526,193,008,897.62
09/30/1997 $5,413,146,011,397.34
09/30/1996 $5,224,810,939,135.73
09/29/1995 $4,973,982,900,709.39
09/30/1994 $4,692,749,910,013.32 (Bill Clinton raised tax rates)
09/30/1993 $4,411,488,883,139.38 ( Debt Quadrupled By Reagan/Bush41)
09/30/1992 $4,064,620,655,521.66
09/30/1991 $3,665,303,351,697.03
09/28/1990 $3,233,313,451,777.25
09/29/1989 $2,857,430,960,187.32
09/30/1988 $2,602,337,712,041.16
09/30/1987 $2,350,276,890,953.00
09/30/1986 $2,125,302,616,658.42
09/30/1985 $1,823,103,000,000.00
09/30/1984 $1,572,266,000,000.00
09/30/1983 $1,377,210,000,000.00

09/30/1982 $1,142,034,000,000.00(Total Debt Passes $1 Trillion)((Reagan Slashed Tax Rates To Pre Depression Levels)

09/30/1981 $997,855,000,000.00

So Mr. Dumb Ass hole, why no mention of the mini rescission Clinton left Bush Jr and that's why he lowered taxes?

Unemployment Rates by President, 1948-2016

by David Coleman

Unemployment rates are viewed as indicators not just of the health of the overall economy but also in judging the success of a presidency. They tend to go hand-in-hand with economic well-being and presidential job approval.

Overview
This chart shows the official U.S. unemployment rates since the beginning of 1948.1


Average Unemployment Rates by Presidency
Johnson had the lowest average unemployment rate across his presidency at 4.2 percent. Of the presidencies that have concluded, Ford’s saw the highest average unemployment rate at over 7.8 percent, followed closely by Reagan at over 7.5 percent.

NB. The Truman average includes figures only after January 1948. The Obama average is for a presidency in progress.


This chart shows the same data sorted by lowest average unemployment rate (Johnson) through the highest (Obama).


But averages across a presidency only tell part of the story. Here’s a more detailed breakdown within each presidency.

Unemployment Rates Under President Truman
Unemployment figures prior to January 1948 aren’t readily available from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. This chart begins January 1948, nearly 3 years into Truman’s presidency.

The effects of World War II demobilization were still being felt as the economy shifted from a war footing to peacetime and then started recalibrating for the Cold War and the growth of the national security state.

Overall, unemployment rates during most of Truman’s presidency were low. A notable exception was the fall of 1949 when the effects of postwar demobilization were being fully felt and the economy went into recession. Unemployment peaked at 7.9 percent in October 1949 and then fell steadily, hovering under 3 percent by the time he left office.


Unemployment Rates Under President Eisenhower
Eisenhower inherited low unemployment rates when he took office, but they rose sharply with the recession of 1953. They recovered somewhat during the mid-1950s but climbed rapidly again in the recession of 1958. They dropped somewhat before climbing even higher at the end of his presidency in the recession of 1960-61.

When Eisenhower left office, unemployment rates were much higher (6.6 percent) than they were when he first moved into the Oval Office (2.6 percent).


Unemployment Rates Under President Kennedy
JFK came to office in the midst of a recession. The economy did recover a little, but it was unconvincing and remained underperforming well into 1963. That was reflected in an unemployment rate that remained relatively high, hovering around 5.6 percent through much of 1962 and 1963.


Unemployment Rates Under President Johnson
The unemployment rate trends of LBJ and Clinton are the only two since World War II that feature a steady decline and don’t feature an uptick. The unemployment rate at the end of Johnson’s presidency (3.4 percent) was considerably less than when his presidency started (5.5 percent). The period also coincided with a spike in government hiring with the Vietnam War abroad and massive new government initiatives at home like the War on Poverty, Medicare, and Medicaid. Johnson’s presidency also saw a long period without recession.


Unemployment Rates Under President Nixon
The first year of Nixon’s presidency saw relatively low unemployment (around 3.5 percent), but by 1970, in the midst of a mild recession, they were climbing back up to similar levels to much of Kennedy’s era (around 5.5+ percent).


Unemployment Rates Under President Ford
Another recession starting in 1973 that dragged on into 1975 saw unemployment reach a new post-World War II record of 9 percent in May 1975. The lowest it recovered to during Ford’s presidency was 7.4 percent in May 1976.


Unemployment Rates Under President Carter
The first two-and-a-half years of Carter’s presidency saw slow by steady improvement in the unemployment rate, but the 1979 energy crisis, along with spiking oil prices that came with it, push unemployment back up to just under 8 percent.


Unemployment Rates Under President Reagan
When Reagan left office, the unemployment rate was back down around 5.5 percent. But things got a lot worse before they got better. For the first time since World War II, unemployment broke 10 percent in November 1982 (reaching 10.8 percent). By the time Reagan left office in January 1989, it was back down to half that.


Unemployment Rates Under President Bush (41)
The first 18 months of Bush’s presidency saw unemployment steady at just over 5 percent. But in July 1990 they began a climb that peaked at 7.8 percent in June 1992.


Unemployment Rates Under President Clinton
Like Johnson, Clinton was in office during a period when the unemployment rate declined steadily for the duration of his presidency, reflecting a strong economy. It started around 7 percent and ended around 4 percent.


Unemployment Rates Under President Bush (43)
The economic instability after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks helped fuel a rise in the unemployment rate. It declined in June 2003 through the summer and fall of 2007 before rising sharply in 2008, peaking at 7.8 percent at the time Bush left office.


Unemployment Rates Under President Obama
When Obama assumed office, the unemployment rate was still rising sharply. It topped out at 10 percent in October 2009, hovering just below that level for the next year, before beginning a steady decline at the end of 2010 that has persisted into early-2016 and breaking through the 5 percent mark at the beginning of 2016.

1. All unemployment data are drawn from the official figures put out by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor.

 

[Skull Pilot]

And yes Campbell I notice you haven't addressed my post.
It takes a better person to deal with information that is contrary to what you want to believe.
Like most, apparently, you just want to ignore it and keeping posting up what you want to believe.

Bush assumed a balanced budget with surpluses projected all the way to a paid off debt. Guess what the cowboy wannabe did? That's right sport's fans, cut tax rates for rich folks twice, started two wars, one totally unnecessary, never cut spending a dime and doubled the national debt from $5.7 to $11.9 trillion. What a leader!

Idiot.
Bush assumed an economy falling into recession as a result of CLinton's raising taxes and the bust of the dot com boom. Also he inherited Clinton's failed terrorism policy that caused 9/11.
Quit blaming Bush, dumbshit. Obama and the Dems own this economy and this foreign policy and everyone knows they have failed.

And let's not forget that Clinton signed the deregulation that caused the too big to fail fiasco and he signed it in December of his last year in office

George W. Bush screwed things up. Bill Clinton left an unemployment rate of 4.3%, a balanced budget with surpluses projected all the way to a paid up debt. The first thing Bush did was to cut taxes twice, 2001 and 2003. It's what Republicans do.....they've done it ever since Reagan screwed everything up:

The Republicans never have seen a tax cut for corporations and the rich they didn't like but never have quit spending for their pet projects and war machine:

These figures came from the bureau of the debt....they're easily verified:


......................................................Total U S Debt......................................................

09/30/2009 $11,909,829,003,511.75(80% Of All Debt Across 232 Years Borrowed By Reagan And Bushes)

09/30/2008 $10,024,724,896,912.49(Times Square Debt Clock Modified To Accommodate Tens of Trillions)

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(Second Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation to block Democrat objection)

09/30/2002 $6,228,235,965,597.16

09/30/2001 $5,807,463,412,200.06(First Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation to block Democrat objection)

09/30/2000 $5,674,178,209,886.86(Administration And Congress Arguing About How To Use Surplus)

09/30/1999 $5,656,270,901,615.43(First Surplus Generated...On Track To Pay Off Debt By 2012)

09/30/1998 $5,526,193,008,897.62
09/30/1997 $5,413,146,011,397.34
09/30/1996 $5,224,810,939,135.73
09/29/1995 $4,973,982,900,709.39
09/30/1994 $4,692,749,910,013.32 (Bill Clinton raised tax rates)
09/30/1993 $4,411,488,883,139.38 ( Debt Quadrupled By Reagan/Bush41)
09/30/1992 $4,064,620,655,521.66
09/30/1991 $3,665,303,351,697.03
09/28/1990 $3,233,313,451,777.25
09/29/1989 $2,857,430,960,187.32
09/30/1988 $2,602,337,712,041.16
09/30/1987 $2,350,276,890,953.00
09/30/1986 $2,125,302,616,658.42
09/30/1985 $1,823,103,000,000.00
09/30/1984 $1,572,266,000,000.00
09/30/1983 $1,377,210,000,000.00

09/30/1982 $1,142,034,000,000.00(Total Debt Passes $1 Trillion)((Reagan Slashed Tax Rates To Pre Depression Levels)

09/30/1981 $997,855,000,000.00

The tax cuts weren't as big of a deal as you think
And You people always like to say how much Bush deregulated the economy but it was Clinton's removal of the once sharp dividing lines between banks, insurance companies and investment firms that set the stage for too big to fail and the meltdown

 

[Skull Pilot]

And yes Campbell I notice you haven't addressed my post.
It takes a better person to deal with information that is contrary to what you want to believe.
Like most, apparently, you just want to ignore it and keeping posting up what you want to believe.

Bush assumed a balanced budget with surpluses projected all the way to a paid off debt. Guess what the cowboy wannabe did? That's right sport's fans, cut tax rates for rich folks twice, started two wars, one totally unnecessary, never cut spending a dime and doubled the national debt from $5.7 to $11.9 trillion. What a leader!

Idiot.
Bush assumed an economy falling into recession as a result of CLinton's raising taxes and the bust of the dot com boom. Also he inherited Clinton's failed terrorism policy that caused 9/11.
Quit blaming Bush, dumbshit. Obama and the Dems own this economy and this foreign policy and everyone knows they have failed.

And let's not forget that Clinton signed the deregulation that caused the too big to fail fiasco and he signed it in December of his last year in office

George W. Bush screwed things up. Bill Clinton left an unemployment rate of 4.3%, a balanced budget with surpluses projected all the way to a paid up debt. The first thing Bush did was to cut taxes twice, 2001 and 2003. It's what Republicans do.....they've done it ever since Reagan screwed everything up:

The Republicans never have seen a tax cut for corporations and the rich they didn't like but never have quit spending for their pet projects and war machine:

These figures came from the bureau of the debt....they're easily verified:


......................................................Total U S Debt......................................................

09/30/2009 $11,909,829,003,511.75(80% Of All Debt Across 232 Years Borrowed By Reagan And Bushes)

09/30/2008 $10,024,724,896,912.49(Times Square Debt Clock Modified To Accommodate Tens of Trillions)

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(Second Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation to block Democrat objection)

09/30/2002 $6,228,235,965,597.16

09/30/2001 $5,807,463,412,200.06(First Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation to block Democrat objection)

09/30/2000 $5,674,178,209,886.86(Administration And Congress Arguing About How To Use Surplus)

09/30/1999 $5,656,270,901,615.43(First Surplus Generated...On Track To Pay Off Debt By 2012)

09/30/1998 $5,526,193,008,897.62
09/30/1997 $5,413,146,011,397.34
09/30/1996 $5,224,810,939,135.73
09/29/1995 $4,973,982,900,709.39
09/30/1994 $4,692,749,910,013.32 (Bill Clinton raised tax rates)
09/30/1993 $4,411,488,883,139.38 ( Debt Quadrupled By Reagan/Bush41)
09/30/1992 $4,064,620,655,521.66
09/30/1991 $3,665,303,351,697.03
09/28/1990 $3,233,313,451,777.25
09/29/1989 $2,857,430,960,187.32
09/30/1988 $2,602,337,712,041.16
09/30/1987 $2,350,276,890,953.00
09/30/1986 $2,125,302,616,658.42
09/30/1985 $1,823,103,000,000.00
09/30/1984 $1,572,266,000,000.00
09/30/1983 $1,377,210,000,000.00

09/30/1982 $1,142,034,000,000.00(Total Debt Passes $1 Trillion)((Reagan Slashed Tax Rates To Pre Depression Levels)

09/30/1981 $997,855,000,000.00

So Mr. Dumb Ass hole, why no mention of the mini rescission Clinton left Bush Jr and that's why he lowered taxes?

Yeah they like to ignore the fact that Clinton surfed the tech bubble out of office

 

[Skull Pilot]

Bush assumed a balanced budget with surpluses projected all the way to a paid off debt. Guess what the cowboy wannabe did? That's right sport's fans, cut tax rates for rich folks twice, started two wars, one totally unnecessary, never cut spending a dime and doubled the national debt from $5.7 to $11.9 trillion. What a leader!

Idiot.
Bush assumed an economy falling into recession as a result of CLinton's raising taxes and the bust of the dot com boom. Also he inherited Clinton's failed terrorism policy that caused 9/11.
Quit blaming Bush, dumbshit. Obama and the Dems own this economy and this foreign policy and everyone knows they have failed.

And let's not forget that Clinton signed the deregulation that caused the too big to fail fiasco and he signed it in December of his last year in office

George W. Bush screwed things up. Bill Clinton left an unemployment rate of 4.3%, a balanced budget with surpluses projected all the way to a paid up debt. The first thing Bush did was to cut taxes twice, 2001 and 2003. It's what Republicans do.....they've done it ever since Reagan screwed everything up:

The Republicans never have seen a tax cut for corporations and the rich they didn't like but never have quit spending for their pet projects and war machine:

These figures came from the bureau of the debt....they're easily verified:


......................................................Total U S Debt......................................................

09/30/2009 $11,909,829,003,511.75(80% Of All Debt Across 232 Years Borrowed By Reagan And Bushes)

09/30/2008 $10,024,724,896,912.49(Times Square Debt Clock Modified To Accommodate Tens of Trillions)

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(Second Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)

09/30/2002 $6,228,235,965,597.16

09/30/2001 $5,807,463,412,200.06(First Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)

09/30/2000 $5,674,178,209,886.86(Administration And Congress Arguing About How To Use Surplus)

09/30/1999 $5,656,270,901,615.43(First Surplus Generated...On Track To Pay Off Debt By 2012)

09/30/1998 $5,526,193,008,897.62
09/30/1997 $5,413,146,011,397.34
09/30/1996 $5,224,810,939,135.73
09/29/1995 $4,973,982,900,709.39
09/30/1994 $4,692,749,910,013.32
09/30/1993 $4,411,488,883,139.38 ( Debt Quadrupled By Reagan/Bush41)
09/30/1992 $4,064,620,655,521.66
09/30/1991 $3,665,303,351,697.03
09/28/1990 $3,233,313,451,777.25
09/29/1989 $2,857,430,960,187.32
09/30/1988 $2,602,337,712,041.16
09/30/1987 $2,350,276,890,953.00
09/30/1986 $2,125,302,616,658.42
09/30/1985 $1,823,103,000,000.00
09/30/1984 $1,572,266,000,000.00
09/30/1983 $1,377,210,000,000.00

09/30/1982 $1,142,034,000,000.00(Total Debt Passes $1 Trillion)((Reagan Slashed Tax Rates To Pre Depression Levels)

09/30/1981 $997,855,000,000.00

Campbell went full auto ...AGAIN. Repeating something expecting different results is ... well ...

I'm sure you don't want to see it but as long as I'm here you will. I was a Republican all the way up to Reagan....even voted for him the first time. You can't cut taxes and continue to spend without going in debt. The modern Republican party is responsible for the national debt. I'll never vote for another one of the scheming crooks if I live to 100.

And tell me what democrat spent less than the previous president in office regardless of party?

It doesn't matter what party the president is from every administration results in more government , more spending more debt

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Once again everyone is stuck on making this yet another useless rock throwing contest.
And this is a perfect example why nothing changes, and the same corrupt people win elections over and over and over and over.

Just know this...when the economy took a dump in 2008...our government put all hands on deck and took unprecedented steps to IMMEDIATELY not only bail out corrupt corporations and Wall Street firms, but they used OUR MONEY to give their profits back that they lost!!!!!!!
But that wasn't enough. Our government made sure that while the economy was down - Wall Street and the central banks would continue profiting even while all of us were suffering!!! To the tune of $70,000,000,000 PER MONTH!!!!!!
Even by 2012, when Wall Street was breaking records - OUR MONEY was still being pumped into the system!!

But what about us??????
Did Obama put that kind of effort into keeping Main Street from hurting??? No. And that would be HELL NO.
Even today, after 3 record breaking years, the top 7% making RECORD earnings increases...while the rest of us have lost 5% - Obama is till providing $40,000,000,000 a month for them to profit from.

Obama is not on our side, he is a corporatist/elitist just like Hillary. Just like most of Washington on BOTH sides.
And all we do is blame eachother so they just keep right on turning America into a corporate plutocracy.
But don't let that stop your next post.