Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
hmmmm, we are not suppose to take what Reagan did that has raised spending for the outlying years of his presidency, and not take what bush 1 did to expand spending in the years after his Presidency and not take the spending that passed under President Bush2 that extends after him leaving office,When the final numbers roll out after Obama leaves office, Obama will have increased the national debt by approximately 65%. This compares to Reagan increasing the national debt by 186% and GW Bush increasing it by 101%. These are real numbers based on statistical fact. Growth in the federal government has been at near stand still the past three years. The crushing deficits of the first two years along with Bush's last year were due to the economic meltdown started under Bush. God forbid we put another Republican in the White House again. Every time we do, they explode the debt much more so than any Dems.
more moronic propaganda from left-wing idiots.
first of all the "final numbers" wont be "rolled out" after obama leaves office, they will come YEARS AFTER he leaves office, because spending mandated by obamacare will SKYROCKET in outlying years after obama leaves office
libs are losers who lie to themselves
BUT WE ARE suppose to count the spending after Obama leaves office as his....
okee dokee!
Cons are so stuck on their ideology that they can't see the light of day. They have the blinders on full force and will never accept reality.
UM NO IDIOT; you really aren't "supposed to take what Reagan did". WHY? because Democrats voted for nearly all of that spending too. Unlike left-wing losers do I never tried to dictate the parameters of the dcebate. I said democrats voted for the spending of Reagan and W bush, and they DID. so when you DO include the spending in THEIR outlying years shouldn't you have to note YOUR JAACKASS PARTY MEMBERS VOTED FOR THAT SPENDING TOO?
you idiotic left-wing crybabies; crying that others are brainwashed when it is you that don't even consider what you are saying when you cry about others
Well Republicans have voted for Obama's spending also, so there ya go! What a stupid argument. You do realize the federal government employs about 1 million less people than it did under Reagan, right? You truly are goofy.
hmmmm, we are not suppose to take what Reagan did that has raised spending for the outlying years of his presidency, and not take what bush 1 did to expand spending in the years after his Presidency and not take the spending that passed under President Bush2 that extends after him leaving office,When the final numbers roll out after Obama leaves office, Obama will have increased the national debt by approximately 65%. This compares to Reagan increasing the national debt by 186% and GW Bush increasing it by 101%. These are real numbers based on statistical fact. Growth in the federal government has been at near stand still the past three years. The crushing deficits of the first two years along with Bush's last year were due to the economic meltdown started under Bush. God forbid we put another Republican in the White House again. Every time we do, they explode the debt much more so than any Dems.
more moronic propaganda from left-wing idiots.
first of all the "final numbers" wont be "rolled out" after obama leaves office, they will come YEARS AFTER he leaves office, because spending mandated by obamacare will SKYROCKET in outlying years after obama leaves office
libs are losers who lie to themselves
BUT WE ARE suppose to count the spending after Obama leaves office as his....
okee dokee!
Cons are so stuck on their ideology that they can't see the light of day. They have the blinders on full force and will never accept reality.
UM NO IDIOT; you really aren't "supposed to take what Reagan did". WHY? because Democrats voted for nearly all of that spending too. Unlike left-wing losers do I never tried to dictate the parameters of the dcebate. I said democrats voted for the spending of Reagan and W bush, and they DID. so when you DO include the spending in THEIR outlying years shouldn't you have to note YOUR JAACKASS PARTY MEMBERS VOTED FOR THAT SPENDING TOO?
you idiotic left-wing crybabies; crying that others are brainwashed when it is you that don't even consider what you are saying when you cry about others
Well Republicans have voted for Obama's spending also, so there ya go! What a stupid argument. You do realize the federal government employs about 1 million less people than it did under Reagan, right? You truly are goofy.
The size of the federal government hasn't changed significantly in the last 50 yearshmmmm, we are not suppose to take what Reagan did that has raised spending for the outlying years of his presidency, and not take what bush 1 did to expand spending in the years after his Presidency and not take the spending that passed under President Bush2 that extends after him leaving office,more moronic propaganda from left-wing idiots.
first of all the "final numbers" wont be "rolled out" after obama leaves office, they will come YEARS AFTER he leaves office, because spending mandated by obamacare will SKYROCKET in outlying years after obama leaves office
libs are losers who lie to themselves
BUT WE ARE suppose to count the spending after Obama leaves office as his....
okee dokee!
Cons are so stuck on their ideology that they can't see the light of day. They have the blinders on full force and will never accept reality.
UM NO IDIOT; you really aren't "supposed to take what Reagan did". WHY? because Democrats voted for nearly all of that spending too. Unlike left-wing losers do I never tried to dictate the parameters of the dcebate. I said democrats voted for the spending of Reagan and W bush, and they DID. so when you DO include the spending in THEIR outlying years shouldn't you have to note YOUR JAACKASS PARTY MEMBERS VOTED FOR THAT SPENDING TOO?
you idiotic left-wing crybabies; crying that others are brainwashed when it is you that don't even consider what you are saying when you cry about others
Well Republicans have voted for Obama's spending also, so there ya go! What a stupid argument. You do realize the federal government employs about 1 million less people than it did under Reagan, right? You truly are goofy.
did Obama reduce the size of the federal government by one million employees leftard? did he reduce the size of the federal government at all?? I just want to be sure what you're saying.
hmmmm, we are not suppose to take what Reagan did that has raised spending for the outlying years of his presidency, and not take what bush 1 did to expand spending in the years after his Presidency and not take the spending that passed under President Bush2 that extends after him leaving office,more moronic propaganda from left-wing idiots.
first of all the "final numbers" wont be "rolled out" after obama leaves office, they will come YEARS AFTER he leaves office, because spending mandated by obamacare will SKYROCKET in outlying years after obama leaves office
libs are losers who lie to themselves
BUT WE ARE suppose to count the spending after Obama leaves office as his....
okee dokee!
Cons are so stuck on their ideology that they can't see the light of day. They have the blinders on full force and will never accept reality.
UM NO IDIOT; you really aren't "supposed to take what Reagan did". WHY? because Democrats voted for nearly all of that spending too. Unlike left-wing losers do I never tried to dictate the parameters of the dcebate. I said democrats voted for the spending of Reagan and W bush, and they DID. so when you DO include the spending in THEIR outlying years shouldn't you have to note YOUR JAACKASS PARTY MEMBERS VOTED FOR THAT SPENDING TOO?
you idiotic left-wing crybabies; crying that others are brainwashed when it is you that don't even consider what you are saying when you cry about others
Well Republicans have voted for Obama's spending also, so there ya go! What a stupid argument. You do realize the federal government employs about 1 million less people than it did under Reagan, right? You truly are goofy.
did Obama reduce the size of the federal government by one million employees leftard? did he reduce the size of the federal government at all?? I just want to be sure what you're saying.
Like many things the government does, renewable energy And it's lobbyists are a waste of money just as is foreign aid that was wasted during the bush administration.You forgot one, money spent on a multitude of bankrupt renewable energy companies that were an absolute bust and fraudulent.So, where did Obama's $8 trillion go?
- Paid for two unnecessary wars
- Paid for extensive tax cuts to the wealthy
- Was the result of an economic collapse that led to smaller tax revenues
- Was used to pay interest on existing debt
- Was used to stimulate a crashed economy and provide jobs
Which of these should Obama not have done?
That was pennies out of our debt
Investing in new energy is still a wise long term investment
Oh....I forgot....Drill baby drill
Most everything the federal government does is an waste
exactly, what the libs don't get is that private industry and profit motive is where innovation comes from.
They are so insecure in their own ability to care for themselves that they think only momma government can do anything. But, as you said, almost everything the govt does is wasteful and unnecessary.
Once it goes beyond protecting the country and its citizens, the waste, fraud and abuse runs rampant.
Have a link for that?
Hard to do when you haven't doubled the debt
going from, 10 to 20 is not doubling? is that the new math?
11 to 18 is not doubling
it was 10.6 when he took office, it will be over 20 when he leaves, its 18.5 today. To not call that doubling is splitting hairs.
Actually, it is not doubled
It will be 19 when he leaves office and was 11 and growing when he took office. The 2009 budget was passed by Bush in Oct 2008 and was the responsiblity of Bush
Splitting hairs again. Obozo kept the Bush tax rates in place when he could have cancelled them. So most of that debt is on him. Funny how you round 10,6 to 11 but round 20,6 to 19.
Whether it actually doubles or goes up by a factor of 1.8, the fact is that obama wil have increased the debt more than any other president in 240 years
The whole federal government is stacked full of fraud and abuse... To the point of of no return.Like many things the government does, renewable energy And it's lobbyists are a waste of money just as is foreign aid that was wasted during the bush administration.You forgot one, money spent on a multitude of bankrupt renewable energy companies that were an absolute bust and fraudulent.So, where did Obama's $8 trillion go?
- Paid for two unnecessary wars
- Paid for extensive tax cuts to the wealthy
- Was the result of an economic collapse that led to smaller tax revenues
- Was used to pay interest on existing debt
- Was used to stimulate a crashed economy and provide jobs
Which of these should Obama not have done?
That was pennies out of our debt
Investing in new energy is still a wise long term investment
Oh....I forgot....Drill baby drill
Most everything the federal government does is an waste
exactly, what the libs don't get is that private industry and profit motive is where innovation comes from.
They are so insecure in their own ability to care for themselves that they think only momma government can do anything. But, as you said, almost everything the govt does is wasteful and unnecessary.
Once it goes beyond protecting the country and its citizens, the waste, fraud and abuse runs rampant.
So there's no waste, fraud, or abuse in the defense department, that you people want to make bigger and bigger and bigger?
