In Obama's Six Years as President, he has...

[gipper]

I will say ONE thing for you weird ass right wrongers on this message board. You all cling tightly to the idea that if you repeat a lie often enough that somehow it becomes the truth. To bad for you it doesn't work that way.
But don't let that stop you from repeating the lies. They are kinda funny sometimes.

Would you please be so kind as to outline the lies in the OP?

He claims that all of the debt increase in Obama's presidency was done by Obama. That's a lie.

The OP does not claim the debt increase was done all by Obama. It merely points out the increase of the national debt incurred under Big Ears.

Presidents since Reagan have been judged by the increase in national debt during their presidency. Why should it be any different under BO?

Next you are going to claim that BO is working diligently to reduce the national debt.

When his term ends, the national debt could be $20 trillion. In affect, he will have nearly doubled the national debt in eight years and keep in mind, tax revenues to the Treasury are at all time highs.

Libs like to criticize Reagan for his deficit spending and they are right to do so, but of course they are disingenuous, since they refuse to criticize BO for his much greater deficit spending.

 

[Paperman299]

I will say ONE thing for you weird ass right wrongers on this message board. You all cling tightly to the idea that if you repeat a lie often enough that somehow it becomes the truth. To bad for you it doesn't work that way.
But don't let that stop you from repeating the lies. They are kinda funny sometimes.

Would you please be so kind as to outline the lies in the OP?

He claims that all of the debt increase in Obama's presidency was done by Obama. That's a lie.

The OP does not claim the debt increase was done all by Obama. It merely points out the increase of the national debt incurred under Big Ears.

Presidents since Reagan have been judged by the increase in national debt during their presidency. Why should it be any different under BO?

Next you are going to claim that BO is working diligently to reduce the national debt.

When his term ends, the national debt could be $20 trillion. In affect, he will have nearly doubled the national debt in eight years and keep in mind, tax revenues to the Treasury are at all time highs.

Libs like to criticize Reagan for his deficit spending and they are right to do so, but of course they are disingenuous, since they refuse to criticize BO for his much greater deficit spending.

"Reagan proved that deficits don't matter." - Dick Cheney. Republicans have gleefully increased spending for years, but now they want to be seen as "fiscal conservatives." Dude. Obama was saddled with a ridiculous deficit from the start (and the worst economic crisis since Hoover with it). Yet it's been Obama, as opposed to Reagan or George W., who has been decreasing spending from where it was set when he took office.

Why should we believe Republicans would do a better job of putting us on the road to surplus when their MO's been to spend, spend, spend?

 

[TemplarKormac]

Obama was saddled with a ridiculous deficit from the start

And had every opportunity to fix it. Did he? I already took Anti to the woodshed for claiming Obama had the lowest spending rate since the 1950's, care to give it a go?

Yet it's been Obama, as opposed to Reagan or George W., who has been decreasing spending from where it was set when he took office.

Oh? By converting Obama's debt into 1980 dollars, 1954 dollars, and 1934 dollars would mean he outspent each president in those respective time periods. When you do conversely with those presidents debt in 2014 dollars, Obama would still outspend them, by as much as 30 to 1, or 2 to 1.

Obama has been in office for six years, he has had ample opportunity to fix the debt and deficit and he did not, because Republicans could not assert themselves or force Obama's hand, and Democrats did not want to cut spending, instead they wished to 'take a scalpel' to it instead. Look where that has gotten us. You can only blame the predecessor, and stick to a years old mantra of "Bush did it." Those talking points have been rendered obsolete.

I will note that the budget deficit for this year exceeded at least $1.05 trillion before the end of the fiscal year in September.

 

[gipper]

I will say ONE thing for you weird ass right wrongers on this message board. You all cling tightly to the idea that if you repeat a lie often enough that somehow it becomes the truth. To bad for you it doesn't work that way.
But don't let that stop you from repeating the lies. They are kinda funny sometimes.

Would you please be so kind as to outline the lies in the OP?

He claims that all of the debt increase in Obama's presidency was done by Obama. That's a lie.

The OP does not claim the debt increase was done all by Obama. It merely points out the increase of the national debt incurred under Big Ears.

Presidents since Reagan have been judged by the increase in national debt during their presidency. Why should it be any different under BO?

Next you are going to claim that BO is working diligently to reduce the national debt.

When his term ends, the national debt could be $20 trillion. In affect, he will have nearly doubled the national debt in eight years and keep in mind, tax revenues to the Treasury are at all time highs.

Libs like to criticize Reagan for his deficit spending and they are right to do so, but of course they are disingenuous, since they refuse to criticize BO for his much greater deficit spending.

"Reagan proved that deficits don't matter." - Dick Cheney. Republicans have gleefully increased spending for years, but now they want to be seen as "fiscal conservatives." Dude. Obama was saddled with a ridiculous deficit from the start (and the worst economic crisis since Hoover with it). Yet it's been Obama, as opposed to Reagan or George W., who has been decreasing spending from where it was set when he took office.

Why should we believe Republicans would do a better job of putting us on the road to surplus when their MO's been to spend, spend, spend?

Let's see...Rs spend spend and D's spend spend...yet you leftists think Rs are different than D's. Is that crazy?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Obama was saddled with a ridiculous deficit from the start

And had every opportunity to fix it. Did he? I already took Anti to the woodshed for claiming Obama had the lowest spending rate since the 1950's, care to give it a go?

Yet it's been Obama, as opposed to Reagan or George W., who has been decreasing spending from where it was set when he took office.

Oh? By converting Obama's debt into 1980 dollars, 1954 dollars, and 1934 dollars would mean he outspent each president in those respective time periods. When you do conversely with those presidents debt in 2014 dollars, Obama would still outspend them, by as much as 30 to 1, or 2 to 1.

Obama has been in office for six years, he has had ample opportunity to fix the debt and deficit and he did not, because Republicans could not assert themselves or force Obama's hand, and Democrats did not want to cut spending, instead they wished to 'take a scalpel' to it instead. Look where that has gotten us. You can only blame the predecessor, and stick to a years old mantra of "Bush did it." Those talking points have been rendered obsolete.

I will note that the budget deficit for this year exceeded at least $1.05 trillion before the end of the fiscal year in September.

Why are you claimed that Obama increased the national debt in 2009?

How much are you claiming HE increased it by in 2009?

Give me the number and we'll debate cause and effect from there.

.,.if you dare...

 

[TemplarKormac]

Why should we believe Republicans would do a better job of putting us on the road to surplus when their MO's been to spend, spend, spend?

Neither Republicans or Democrats are capable of doing a good job, much less their overall job. So, where does that leave you?

 

[NYcarbineer]

I will say ONE thing for you weird ass right wrongers on this message board. You all cling tightly to the idea that if you repeat a lie often enough that somehow it becomes the truth. To bad for you it doesn't work that way.
But don't let that stop you from repeating the lies. They are kinda funny sometimes.

Would you please be so kind as to outline the lies in the OP?

He claims that all of the debt increase in Obama's presidency was done by Obama. That's a lie.

The OP does not claim the debt increase was done all by Obama. .

Okay...assuming that's possible, let's ask the OP directly...

...how much of the debt increase do you blame Obama for, based on his direct actions, and in keeping with the basic principle of cause and effect.

Let's see if he can support your defense of him.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I will say ONE thing for you weird ass right wrongers on this message board. You all cling tightly to the idea that if you repeat a lie often enough that somehow it becomes the truth. To bad for you it doesn't work that way.
But don't let that stop you from repeating the lies. They are kinda funny sometimes.

Would you please be so kind as to outline the lies in the OP?

He claims that all of the debt increase in Obama's presidency was done by Obama. That's a lie.

The OP does not claim the debt increase was done all by Obama. .

Okay...assuming that's possible, let's ask the OP directly...

...how much of the debt increase do you blame Obama for, based on his direct actions, and in keeping with the basic principle of cause and effect.

Let's see if he can support your defense of him.

As you can see, the OP is not about to take on this challenge.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Why are you claimed that Obama increased the national debt in 2009?

How much are you claiming HE increased it by in 2009?

Give me the number and we'll debate cause and effect from there.

.,.if you dare...

Huh?

Perhaps you should read back a few pages, genius.

 

[TemplarKormac]

.how much of the debt increase do you blame Obama for, based on his direct actions, and in keeping with the basic principle of cause and effect.

See where I blamed Bush for the $1.903 trillion he incurred in his last year in office? Or can you not read?

 

[TemplarKormac]

I will say ONE thing for you weird ass right wrongers on this message board. You all cling tightly to the idea that if you repeat a lie often enough that somehow it becomes the truth. To bad for you it doesn't work that way.
But don't let that stop you from repeating the lies. They are kinda funny sometimes.

Would you please be so kind as to outline the lies in the OP?

He claims that all of the debt increase in Obama's presidency was done by Obama. That's a lie.

The OP does not claim the debt increase was done all by Obama. .

Okay...assuming that's possible, let's ask the OP directly...

...how much of the debt increase do you blame Obama for, based on his direct actions, and in keeping with the basic principle of cause and effect.

Let's see if he can support your defense of him.

As you can see, the OP is not about to take on this challenge.

Whether I took the challenge or not does not infer whether I was right or wrong. Issuing a challenge is a way for you to hide an inferior argument. All too predictable.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Would you please be so kind as to outline the lies in the OP?

He claims that all of the debt increase in Obama's presidency was done by Obama. That's a lie.

The OP does not claim the debt increase was done all by Obama. .

Okay...assuming that's possible, let's ask the OP directly...

...how much of the debt increase do you blame Obama for, based on his direct actions, and in keeping with the basic principle of cause and effect.

Let's see if he can support your defense of him.

As you can see, the OP is not about to take on this challenge.

Whether I took the challenge or not does not infer whether I was right or wrong. Issuing a challenge is a way for you to hide an inferior argument. All too predictable.

No, the inferior argument is your baseless charge that Obama himself is the sole cause of all the debt that has been accumulated since he became president.

 

[NYcarbineer]

.how much of the debt increase do you blame Obama for, based on his direct actions, and in keeping with the basic principle of cause and effect.

See where I blamed Bush for the $1.903 trillion he incurred in his last year in office? Or can you not read?

Just because you were wrong in more than one place doesn't make you right about Obama.

 

[TemplarKormac]

He claims that all of the debt increase in Obama's presidency was done by Obama. That's a lie.

The OP does not claim the debt increase was done all by Obama. .

Okay...assuming that's possible, let's ask the OP directly...

...how much of the debt increase do you blame Obama for, based on his direct actions, and in keeping with the basic principle of cause and effect.

Let's see if he can support your defense of him.

As you can see, the OP is not about to take on this challenge.

Whether I took the challenge or not does not infer whether I was right or wrong. Issuing a challenge is a way for you to hide an inferior argument. All too predictable.

No, the inferior argument is your baseless charge that Obama himself is the sole cause of all the debt that has been accumulated since he became president.

Did I say that? $6.103 trillion belongs to him. The other $1.9 trillion belongs to Bush. I never once blamed Obama for creating all $8 trillion of it. Perhaps you would benefit from reading my OP again. Stop putting words in my mouth and read, damn it.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Well I guess I know why some of my threads die so quickly, they are irrefutable.

Say what?

 

[TemplarKormac]

Just because you were wrong in more than one place doesn't make you right about Obama.

And you aren't? Being a cheerleader for a failed leader doesn't make you an expert on him. I've laid out the facts, it's your turn to sully an attempt to disprove them.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Well I guess I know why some of my threads die so quickly, they are irrefutable.

Say what?

What

 

[LoneLaugher]

Well I guess I know why some of my threads die so quickly, they are irrefutable.

Say what?

What

Attaboy! Do as you are told and we might make something of you yet.

Next directive: Stop claiming victory in threads. You've never beaten down a single person here. Especially.....stop claiming victory in threads before others have even weighed in. It's very childish.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Stop claiming victory in threads.

I win. Deal with it.

 

[TemplarKormac]

You've never beaten down a single person here.

And you have yet to pose a challenge to any of my arguments. I invite you to try. Put forth some effort.

Especially.....stop claiming victory in threads before others have even weighed in

I waited almost 4 hours. Nobody chose to respond, so the natural assumption was that the intended targets of this thread had no argument to pose in rebuttal. Just like the rest, you aren't doing so either.