I Have A Question For Republicans

[Markle]

When Bill Clinton left a balanced budget with surpluses in line to completely eliminate the national debt by 2012, why did George W. Bush slash tax rates for the rich and double the debt from $5.7 trillion to nearly $12 trillion?

Can anyone here tell me the problem with having a national debt? And please avoid the ever popular "if you don't know then you're stupid" or similar responses.

Massive annual interest payments taking a larger and larger part of our income.

 

[Markle]

I am sure that "Brooks Jackson" is a capable author. Maybe he can explain to me why the official US government figures show no surplus?

Hmm? Who should I believe? Brooks Johnson or the US Treasury?

Tough choice, I know.

Mark

THAT WAS FACT CHECK something repubs know nothing of

What was called a "surplus" was the income from Social security and Medicare.

 

[Markle]

How dare businesses write off their expenses. Shouldn't be allowed, I feel you

So, if I manage to have a pretty good business profit one year, I can buy myself a Lear Jet and simply state that my business expense was more than my profit so screw you, tax man. Love capitalism.

You seem proud to display your ignorance of...well just plain ignorance. You can't deduct a capital investment in one year.

 

[Markle]

When Bill Clinton left a balanced budget with surpluses in line to completely eliminate the national debt by 2012, why did George W. Bush slash tax rates for the rich and double the debt from $5.7 trillion to nearly $12 trillion?

Can anyone here tell me the problem with having a national debt? And please avoid the ever popular "if you don't know then you're stupid" or similar responses.

Debt is so massive, when interest rates rise the economy will be crippled to pay interest only. The principal will never go down w/o drastic action now.

I don't necessarily agree, the government can keep paying the interest by issuing securities to the Federal Reserve, and theoretically there is no limit to how big the Feds balance sheet to get. As long as the $ is the reserve currency.....what difference does it make? USA is the only company who can "mine" dollars.

Interest rates for the government is around 0. Thirty-year mortgages about 3%. When the Feds raise interest rates to 3% and mortgages go to six, what happens to our payments on the debt? You probably don't recall but during the failed administration of Democrat President Jimmy Carter, mortgage rates reached 18 percent.

 

[Markle]

Sigh. Math doesn't lie. "Creative" accounting does. Please tell me, in any situation on the planet(other than our government) where an increase in debt equals a "surplus"?

PERFECT EXAMPLE!!!

Remember a few pages back I said Republicans just simply change the definition of Surplus and viola! No Surplus (in their minds).

He says: Please tell me, in any situation on the planet(other than our government) where an increase in debt equals a "surplus"?

But LOOK! We ARE talking about Government! And according to GOVT STANDARDS we had a surplus. NOW you want to change the meaning to mean something else.

I take it that you ARE aware of the difference between the BUDGET and our NATIONAL DEBT?

 

[ClosedCaption]

Sigh. Math doesn't lie. "Creative" accounting does. Please tell me, in any situation on the planet(other than our government) where an increase in debt equals a "surplus"?

PERFECT EXAMPLE!!!

Remember a few pages back I said Republicans just simply change the definition of Surplus and viola! No Surplus (in their minds).

He says: Please tell me, in any situation on the planet(other than our government) where an increase in debt equals a "surplus"?

But LOOK! We ARE talking about Government! And according to GOVT STANDARDS we had a surplus. NOW you want to change the meaning to mean something else.

What the government says doesn't interest me. The accounting practices that our government uses would have any company in America in serious legal trouble.

But we are talking about govt. Now you want to change the discussion into "if govt wasn't govt". According to historical standards we had a surplus. Now you want to change the definition. Only now.

Reality is our guideline here. If the country actually ran a surplus, then our total debt would be LESS from one year to the next. Like I said, math doesn't lie.

Mark

And the reality is that according to government and historical standards we ran a surplus. You think that using a different standard means reality changes according to whatever you say.

Just like I said you would. It's what you guys always do. It just like saying a track star isn't fast because you compared them to a Porsche.

 

[Redfish]

Are you ready to OPENLY fault Cheney and his sidekick, Bush, for the fiasco...Yes or No?

I've never seen so many Progressives re-write history in their own minds. Here, allow me to assist you...and your comrades.

"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow."
- President Clinton in 1998 “

[…], when I say to Saddam Hussein, "You cannot defy the will of the world", and when I say to him, "You have used weapons of mass destruction before; we are determined to deny you the capacity to use them again.”
- President Clinton , Jan. 27, 1998 – State of the Union

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
- President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998 .

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
- President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.

“Earlier today, I ordered America’s armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraqis nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors.”
“Their purpose is to protect the national interest of the United States, and indeed the interests of people throughout the Middle East and around the world.”
“Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons.”
- President Bill Clinton, Dec. 16, 1998

"We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the stability and security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction."
- Madeline Albright, Feb 1, 1998 Clinton Secretary of State

"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed."
- Madeline Albright, 1998 Clinton Secretary of State

"(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certainhe will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
- Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998 "

Update: September 8, 2005 - Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser was sentenced to community service and probation and fined $50,000 for illegally removing highly classified documents from the National Archives and intentionally destroying some of them..

[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." Letter to President Clinton.
- (D) Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, others, Oct. 9, 1998 .

"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
- Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998 .

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999 .

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 .

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002 .

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons but has not yet achieved nuclear capability."
- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002 .

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002.

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002.

"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal."
- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security. It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction."
- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

“We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002 .

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003" (Currently President Barack Hussein Obama’s Secretary of State)

I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out."
- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003

"Saddam is gone and good riddance," former President Bill Clinton said yesterday, but he urged President Bush to resist trying to get even with nations that opposed the war.

"There are German and French soldiers in Afghanistan today. Does the President want them to come home?" Clinton said at a Manhattan forum on corporate integrity.

Democrats on Iraq + WMD's (Weapons of Mass Destruction)


He [President Clinton] praised Bush and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld for their handling of the war, but said Bush should have waited longer before attacking for the "chance that either [Saddam Hussein] would have disarmed or . . . we would have had far more members of the Security Council with us."

Clinton also said Bush should not be faulted if banned weapons of mass destruction aren't found.
"I don't think you can criticize the President for trying to act on the belief that they have a substantial amount of chemical and biological stock. . . . That is what I was always told," Clinton said.

- Former President Clinton Wednesday, April 16, 2003

"Could Be One of the Great Achievements of This Administration" The vice president said he’d been to Iraq 17 times and visits the country every three months or so. "I know every one of the major players in all the segments of that society" he said. "It's impressed me. I've been impressed how they have been deciding to use the political process rather than guns to settle their differences."

- Vice President Joe Biden (D) Feb. 10, 2010

How has the war President Barack Hussein Obama said we SHOULD have been fighting going? How is the Middle East going now that President Obama is President? Oh, Afghanistan just crossed 2,330 American fatalities. Seventy percent of whom died since President Obama took office.



And now the Obama administration wants to TAKE CREDIT for the Iraq war…whew….

What a waste of space there, imbecile......Of all those people whom you cite, WHO gave the order to invade Iraq???

Bush gave the order, congress authorized and funded it, both parties in congress voted in favor of it.

No president could do such a thing solely on his own, except maybe Obama since he is not required to follow the constitution.

 

[Redfish]

The right says he never left a surplus. That's because they just simply changed what surplus means to claim it never happened.

the national debt was not eliminated by Clinton. there were a couple of years when there was a net budget surplus. But to say he "left a surplus" is simply a lie.

 

[MarcATL]

but W was responsible for a recession that started six months before he took office.

Were THAT true, what justified GWB's humongous tax cuts??? ...and why did the tax cuts continue with the TWO major wars Bush was conducting?

So even by partisan Republican dumb-dumb logic, Bush made it WORSE. Right?

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

 

[Redfish]

but W was responsible for a recession that started six months before he took office.

Were THAT true, what justified GWB's humongous tax cuts??? ...and why did the tax cuts continue with the TWO major wars Bush was conducting?

So even by partisan Republican dumb-dumb logic, Bush made it WORSE. Right?

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

9/11 made it worse. the Bush tax cuts were kept in place by Obama, if they were so terrible why did he continue them?

 

[MarcATL]

When Bill Clinton left a balanced budget with surpluses in line to completely eliminate the national debt by 2012, why did George W. Bush slash tax rates for the rich and double the debt from $5.7 trillion to nearly $12 trillion?

there was no surplus, the balanced budget was set up by Newt and bubba reluctantly agreed. then 9/11 happened. the debt was 10.6 T when obozo took over, it will be over 21 T when he leaves, he will have added more debt than all previous presidents combined. If you want to talk about debt creation, lets talk about Obama's debt.

No surplus ? So where did all those checks to everyone come from and all those paid for tax cuts to billionaires?

So let me get this straight….

Bush issued a bunch of checks and we didn’t have a surplus?
Texas “logic” for you.

No surplus, a link was provided for you spelling it out....read it, comprehend it then shut up

No point in trying to educate Progressives. If they do not see it in Media Matters, DailyKOS or The Nation it did not happen.

Studies have also shown that Progressives are far less likely to read opposing views than are Conservatives. No surprise there either. Conservatives know we have the TRUTH AND FACTS on our side and are not afraid to consider opposing views.

"Truth" like death panels. ROTFLMBAO!

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

 

[nat4900]

9/11 made it worse. the Bush tax cuts were kept in place by Obama, if they were so terrible why did he continue them?

Simple.......A congress that, regardless of the thin majority of democrats in the first 2 years of Obama's term, was NOT going to discontinue paying off the pimps (the super wealthy)....

 

[SassyIrishLass]

9/11 made it worse. the Bush tax cuts were kept in place by Obama, if they were so terrible why did he continue them?

Simple.......A congress that, regardless of the thin majority of democrats in the first 2 years of Obama's term, was NOT going to discontinue paying off the pimps (the super wealthy)....

That "thin majority" got the Obamacare disaster forced upon the people.

 

[Redfish]

9/11 made it worse. the Bush tax cuts were kept in place by Obama, if they were so terrible why did he continue them?

Simple.......A congress that, regardless of the thin majority of democrats in the first 2 years of Obama's term, was NOT going to discontinue paying off the pimps (the super wealthy)....

That "thin majority" got the Obamacare disaster forced upon the people.

Yep, dems only in the dark of night before anyone could read the bill.

 

[Redfish]

9/11 made it worse. the Bush tax cuts were kept in place by Obama, if they were so terrible why did he continue them?

Simple.......A congress that, regardless of the thin majority of democrats in the first 2 years of Obama's term, was NOT going to discontinue paying off the pimps (the super wealthy)....

the Bush/Obama tax cuts cut taxes for everyone who pays taxes, since you don't pay taxes you probably didn't know that. It wasn't just the rich, moron.

 

[ClosedCaption]

The right says he never left a surplus. That's because they just simply changed what surplus means to claim it never happened.

the national debt was not eliminated by Clinton. there were a couple of years when there was a net budget surplus. But to say he "left a surplus" is simply a lie.

Did he leave a surplus or not?

 

[kaz]

Gnat doesn't believe in stimulating the economy, he believes in politicians who stimulate him with that special little tug

Another right wing moron, chimes in.......Yes, folks like Trump can "legitimize" ANY business expense and wind up with zero tax liability.....and all this, while spewing "we billionaires live in a country that has the highest tax rate on the planet"........While still paying ZERO in taxes.

And yet 1% of the taxpayers pay 40% in taxes and 50% pay zero. Facts are not a leftist friend. You're feeling that special little tug for leftist politicians again ...

 

[kaz]

How dare businesses write off their expenses. Shouldn't be allowed, I feel you

Call it anything you want BUT IT"S WELFARE FOR THE RICH

businesses writing off their expenses is "welfare." got it. stupid mother fucker

It can be

 

[kaz]

How dare businesses write off their expenses. Shouldn't be allowed, I feel you

So, if I manage to have a pretty good business profit one year, I can buy myself a Lear Jet and simply state that my business expense was more than my profit so screw you, tax man. Love capitalism.

You seem proud to display your ignorance of...well just plain ignorance. You can't deduct a capital investment in one year.

Gnat is ignorant on a wide array of everyday topics

 

[kaz]

The right says he never left a surplus. That's because they just simply changed what surplus means to claim it never happened.

the national debt was not eliminated by Clinton. there were a couple of years when there was a net budget surplus. But to say he "left a surplus" is simply a lie.

Did he leave a surplus or not?

No, the national debt went up every year Clinton was in office