The GOP is desperate for a failing economy......sic

[Dad2three]

Democrats have been calling the shots since 2009. Own up to their failure and be the loser that fate intended.

I agree, since 2009 Dems have called the shots AND the GOP has made it priority one to block EVERYTHING on Obama's agenda!

His agenda needed blocking.

Haven't learned from 35 years of "trickle down" huh? Fukkn morons!

I've learned a long time ago that what Democrats support has failed every time it's been tried. Thinking handing one person another person's money will motivate them to do better has costs this country $22 trillion dollars over 50 years with NO success.

GET THE FUKKK OFF YOUR RIGHT WING TALKING POINTS YOU DUMBFUKKK


You realize a HUGE portion of that "$22 trillion" was Medicare right? That it LBJ's great society cut the REAL poverty by HALF?

BUT I AGREE, OVER THE LAST 30+ YEARS THE GOP WARS ON THE WAR ON POVERTY HAS BEEN MORE SUCCESSFUL!

 

[Conservative65]

Democrats have been calling the shots since 2009. Own up to their failure and be the loser that fate intended.

I agree, since 2009 Dems have called the shots AND the GOP has made it priority one to block EVERYTHING on Obama's agenda!

His agenda needed blocking.

Haven't learned from 35 years of "trickle down" huh? Fukkn morons!

I've learned a long time ago that what Democrats support has failed every time it's been tried. Thinking handing one person another person's money will motivate them to do better has costs this country $22 trillion dollars over 50 years with NO success.

GET TYE FUKKK OFF YOUR RIGHT WING TALKING POINTS YOU DUMBFUKKK


You realize a HUGE portion of that "$22 trillion" was Medicare right? That it LBJ's great society cut the REAL poverty by HALF?

BUT I AGREE, OVER THE LAST 30+ YEARS THE GOP WARS ON THE WAR ON POVERTY HAS BEEN MORE SUCCESSFUL!

You do realize that claim about Medicare is wrong. It was spend on social welfare programs.

 

[rdean]

shut the hell up. YOUR stinking Democrats had a supermajority for the first two years and instead of working on the economy. they worked to have a NEW Government Entitlement put on YOUR children's backs. so you and Obama spewing this crap can go take a flying leap. this is OBAMA'S economy. nobody is wishing we fail. but him and his nasty party.

LPOS

A couple of months not two years.

Why does your kind lie all the time. Isn't that like anti Christian or something? Bearing false witness?

 

[tigerred59]

Well guys, I called it....banned....again. LOLOLOLOLOL

 

[Dad2three]

I agree, since 2009 Dems have called the shots AND the GOP has made it priority one to block EVERYTHING on Obama's agenda!

His agenda needed blocking.

Haven't learned from 35 years of "trickle down" huh? Fukkn morons!

I've learned a long time ago that what Democrats support has failed every time it's been tried. Thinking handing one person another person's money will motivate them to do better has costs this country $22 trillion dollars over 50 years with NO success.

GET TYE FUKKK OFF YOUR RIGHT WING TALKING POINTS YOU DUMBFUKKK


You realize a HUGE portion of that "$22 trillion" was Medicare right? That it LBJ's great society cut the REAL poverty by HALF?

BUT I AGREE, OVER THE LAST 30+ YEARS THE GOP WARS ON THE WAR ON POVERTY HAS BEEN MORE SUCCESSFUL!

You do realize that claim about Medicare is wrong. It was spend on social welfare programs.

Let me guess, the US poor have refers, microwaves and TV's? lol


This chart from Pew Research shows the poverty rate across racial lines going all the way back to 1963.

'

As you can see from the report prior to 1967, the overall poverty rate was nearly double what it eventually became "when all the programs were in place" by 1967, so Perino's suggesting that things are now worse than they were before these programs is flat-out false. From 1963 through the year 2000, ending when economic policies of Bill Clinton that balanced the budget by slightly raising taxes on the rich, the general trend for people of all races was for the poverty rate was to go down. After 2000, when President George W. Bush implemented his tax cuts, which went largely to the richest 10 percent of the population, the poverty rate has been slowly creeping back upward. Now, clearly there are other factors involved here.


Killing those zombie lies about the war on poverty

 

[tigerred59]

(sigh)....sometimes as american's we have to shake our heads in complete and total disbelief of a party, ie the GOP-igs who refuse to work with the president to get shit done for this country, simply because??????. Is it because they're against his policies, is it because they have a better direction or is it because anything that brings success to this black president with unilateral cooperation is a death sentence to these nuts back home with their supporters????

I'm am absolutely amazed when I hear these neo nuts whine about our economy, which started off in the double digits and now lingers at almost 4%. I am amazed at how these morons don't mind spending yet more trillions overseas to fight a war, WE WILL NEVER WIN, but will speak on the poor getting a couple a hundred to eat.

Now these morons are desperate to find the perfect fool, ie House Leader, who not only won't work with Obama, who not only will sanction their already lame dismal congressional record of 0% effectiveness thus far this year, but who will try his or her best to derail the successes of the OBama administration, because....PUTTING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE FIRST IS A FOREIGN ENTITY TO NUTS WHO DON'T KNOW ANY BETTER.

God please help save this country from the GOP Trash heap, and their ignorant supporters, please!!

This is God's country. Obama does not care for either one very much.

Any minute of any day Obama wants to cancel the regular schedule programming and speak his mind he can. So if you want to blame anyone for this mess start at the top.

Mess? The only mess is the GOP congress

 

[tigerred59]

His agenda needed blocking.

Haven't learned from 35 years of "trickle down" huh? Fukkn morons!

I've learned a long time ago that what Democrats support has failed every time it's been tried. Thinking handing one person another person's money will motivate them to do better has costs this country $22 trillion dollars over 50 years with NO success.

GET TYE FUKKK OFF YOUR RIGHT WING TALKING POINTS YOU DUMBFUKKK


You realize a HUGE portion of that "$22 trillion" was Medicare right? That it LBJ's great society cut the REAL poverty by HALF?

BUT I AGREE, OVER THE LAST 30+ YEARS THE GOP WARS ON THE WAR ON POVERTY HAS BEEN MORE SUCCESSFUL!

You do realize that claim about Medicare is wrong. It was spend on social welfare programs.

Let me guess, the US poor have refers, microwaves and TV's? lol


This chart from Pew Research shows the poverty rate across racial lines going all the way back to 1963.

'

As you can see from the report prior to 1967, the overall poverty rate was nearly double what it eventually became "when all the programs were in place" by 1967, so Perino's suggesting that things are now worse than they were before these programs is flat-out false. From 1963 through the year 2000, ending when economic policies of Bill Clinton that balanced the budget by slightly raising taxes on the rich, the general trend for people of all races was for the poverty rate was to go down. After 2000, when President George W. Bush implemented his tax cuts, which went largely to the richest 10 percent of the population, the poverty rate has been slowly creeping back upward. Now, clearly there are other factors involved here.


Killing those zombie lies about the war on poverty

We just had a huge hiring frenzy at our company and the results are in, 75% of the people we hired...blacks, mostly young usta be welfare women.....25% of the people that were hired, elderly whites, especially women in their late 60's. That's who tops America's unemployed.

 

[tigerred59]

Sure.

No rebuttal. You must be a democrat.

If by "failing" you meant the most consecutive months of private sector job growth EVER, cutting Dubya's deficits by 2/3rds and slowly getting US out of Dubya's mess, YES!

People make and have less, everything costs more. Net? Failure.

THAT can't be true, we had 8 years of Dubya/GOP "job creator" policies??? Come on, get honest

We've had almost 7 years of Obama food stamp user creators. Get honest.

If that is the case are we too assume that under Bush, everybody was working and nobody was on gov. assistance? And if that is true, what happened?

 

[Dad2three]

No rebuttal. You must be a democrat.

If by "failing" you meant the most consecutive months of private sector job growth EVER, cutting Dubya's deficits by 2/3rds and slowly getting US out of Dubya's mess, YES!

People make and have less, everything costs more. Net? Failure.

THAT can't be true, we had 8 years of Dubya/GOP "job creator" policies??? Come on, get honest

We've had almost 7 years of Obama food stamp user creators. Get honest.

If that is the case are we too assume that under Bush, everybody was working and nobody was on gov. assistance? And if that is true, what happened?

Dubya just had a false economy that was built on both public debt and private debt as he cheered on the Banksters subprime bubble. Without homeowners using their homes as ATM's his first 7 years had 1% growth. His last year saw negative "growth"

 

[tigerred59]

(sigh)....sometimes as american's we have to shake our heads in complete and total disbelief of a party, ie the GOP-igs who refuse to work with the president to get shit done for this country, simply because??????. Is it because they're against his policies, is it because they have a better direction or is it because anything that brings success to this black president with unilateral cooperation is a death sentence to these nuts back home with their supporters????

I'm am absolutely amazed when I hear these neo nuts whine about our economy, which started off in the double digits and now lingers at almost 4%. I am amazed at how these morons don't mind spending yet more trillions overseas to fight a war, WE WILL NEVER WIN, but will speak on the poor getting a couple a hundred to eat.

Now these morons are desperate to find the perfect fool, ie House Leader, who not only won't work with Obama, who not only will sanction their already lame dismal congressional record of 0% effectiveness thus far this year, but who will try his or her best to derail the successes of the OBama administration, because....PUTTING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE FIRST IS A FOREIGN ENTITY TO NUTS WHO DON'T KNOW ANY BETTER.

God please help save this country from the GOP Trash heap, and their ignorant supporters, please!!

Your claim of refusing to work with the President is translated to say that the GOP won't bend over, grab their ankles, and let the President do whatever the hell he wants.

When you play the race card, you lose.

Don't you mean the millions more poor people now on food stamps than before Obama became President despite your claim that things are better. If unemployment is down and the economy is better, as you claim, why are so many millions more getting handouts than when the President whose ass you kiss took over?

 

[tigerred59]

Sure.

No rebuttal. You must be a democrat.

If by "failing" you meant the most consecutive months of private sector job growth EVER, cutting Dubya's deficits by 2/3rds and slowly getting US out of Dubya's mess, YES!

People make and have less, everything costs more. Net? Failure.

THAT can't be true, we had 8 years of Dubya/GOP "job creator" policies??? Come on, get honest

We've had almost 7 years of Obama food stamp user creators. Get honest.

Yep, GOP took the House for the last 6 years of Obama. Weird they control the spending right?

You're a dingbat. The Republicans took over in the House in 2011 and the Senate in 2015. Seeing that it's 2015, Democrats have controlled the House for 2 years of the Obama administration, the Senate for 6 and obviously the presidency for almost 7. In other words Republican have had control of the House for less than 5, the Senate for 8 months and 0 for the presidency.

That accounts for the sluggish economy and the booming deficit.

We've seen what putting an unqualified black man in a government job did to the country.

Sure Bubba, sure. It was because he was black huh?


Conservatives just ignore facts and reality. They have "faith" that their ideology is correct.

It was because he was unqualified to do the job yet elected to meet a concept you Liberals wanted.

My ideology has worked for me because I choose to work instead of expecting someone else to work so it can be handed to me.

Congrats, a lot of people chose to work and a lot of people don't....how the hell is that Obama's fault you moron?

 

[tigerred59]

If by "failing" you meant the most consecutive months of private sector job growth EVER, cutting Dubya's deficits by 2/3rds and slowly getting US out of Dubya's mess, YES!

People make and have less, everything costs more. Net? Failure.

THAT can't be true, we had 8 years of Dubya/GOP "job creator" policies??? Come on, get honest

We've had almost 7 years of Obama food stamp user creators. Get honest.

If that is the case are we too assume that under Bush, everybody was working and nobody was on gov. assistance? And if that is true, what happened?

Dubya just had a false economy that was built on both public debt and private debt as he cheered on the Banksters subprime bubble. Without homeowners using their homes as ATM's his first 7 years had 1% growth. His last year saw negative "growth"

I have over and over and over explained, as have you, that the Bush economy was a CREDIT ECONOMY.......Banks were throwing credit cards at people, banks were lending money by the barrel, banks were swindling homeowners into these high end equity loans....all superficial, all based on credit consumption, all false and when the bill came due, tax payers and Bush was ready to bail.

 

[tigerred59]

I agree, since 2009 Dems have called the shots AND the GOP has made it priority one to block EVERYTHING on Obama's agenda!

His agenda needed blocking.

Haven't learned from 35 years of "trickle down" huh? Fukkn morons!

I've learned a long time ago that what Democrats support has failed every time it's been tried. Thinking handing one person another person's money will motivate them to do better has costs this country $22 trillion dollars over 50 years with NO success.

GET TYE FUKKK OFF YOUR RIGHT WING TALKING POINTS YOU DUMBFUKKK


You realize a HUGE portion of that "$22 trillion" was Medicare right? That it LBJ's great society cut the REAL poverty by HALF?

BUT I AGREE, OVER THE LAST 30+ YEARS THE GOP WARS ON THE WAR ON POVERTY HAS BEEN MORE SUCCESSFUL!

You do realize that claim about Medicare is wrong. It was spend on social welfare programs.

I know that facts to you idiots is like Kryptonite, but Medicare and Disability top the charts of socialized spending in this country, dude that is fact...google the shit if you have doubt.

 

[tigerred59]

So NO you CAN'T give ANY policies the Dems passed Jan 2007-Jan 2009 that changed Dubya's policies

GOP will have had the House for 6 of Obama's 8 years and the Senate for 4..



LOL

Day 1 on Obama? Oh when he was blocked on almost EVERYTHING as the US economy was tanking?


Debunking the Myth: Obama's Two-Year Supermajority


A supermajority is a filibuster-proof 60 or more Senate seats, allowing one party to pass legislation without votes from the other,

Don't forget: the president needed a supermajority because of the Republicans' unprecedented use of the filibuster as an obstruction tactic -- they've used it more than 400 times.

But here's the deal -- the real deal -- there actually wasn't a two year supermajority.

This timeline shows the facts.

President Obama was sworn in on January 20, 2009 with just 58 Senators to support his agenda.

He should have had 59, but Republicans contested Al Franken's election in Minnesota and he didn't get seated for seven months.

The President's cause was helped in April when Pennsylvania's Republican Senator Arlen Specter switched parties.

That gave the President 59 votes -- still a vote shy of the super majority.

But one month later, Democratic Senator Byrd of West Virginia was hospitalized and was basically out of commission.

So while the President's number on paper was 59 Senators -- he was really working with just 58 Senators.

Then in July, Minnesota Senator Al Franken was finally sworn in, giving President Obama the magic 60 -- but only in theory, because Senator Byrd was still out.

In August, Senator Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts died and the number went back down to 59 again until Paul Kirk temporarily filled Kennedy's seat in September.

Any pretense of a supermajority ended on February 4, 2010 when Republican Scott Brown was sworn into the seat Senator Kennedy once held.Do you see a two-year supermajority?

I didn't think so.


Debunking the Myth: Obama's Two-Year Supermajority

You really are stupid.

The Republicans took the House in 2011. That's

So NO you CAN'T give ANY policies the Dems passed Jan 2007-Jan 2009 that changed Dubya's policies

GOP will have had the House for 6 of Obama's 8 years and the Senate for 4..



LOL

Day 1 on Obama? Oh when he was blocked on almost EVERYTHING as the US economy was tanking?


Debunking the Myth: Obama's Two-Year Supermajority


A supermajority is a filibuster-proof 60 or more Senate seats, allowing one party to pass legislation without votes from the other,

Don't forget: the president needed a supermajority because of the Republicans' unprecedented use of the filibuster as an obstruction tactic -- they've used it more than 400 times.

But here's the deal -- the real deal -- there actually wasn't a two year supermajority.

This timeline shows the facts.

President Obama was sworn in on January 20, 2009 with just 58 Senators to support his agenda.

He should have had 59, but Republicans contested Al Franken's election in Minnesota and he didn't get seated for seven months.

The President's cause was helped in April when Pennsylvania's Republican Senator Arlen Specter switched parties.

That gave the President 59 votes -- still a vote shy of the super majority.

But one month later, Democratic Senator Byrd of West Virginia was hospitalized and was basically out of commission.

So while the President's number on paper was 59 Senators -- he was really working with just 58 Senators.

Then in July, Minnesota Senator Al Franken was finally sworn in, giving President Obama the magic 60 -- but only in theory, because Senator Byrd was still out.

In August, Senator Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts died and the number went back down to 59 again until Paul Kirk temporarily filled Kennedy's seat in September.

Any pretense of a supermajority ended on February 4, 2010 when Republican Scott Brown was sworn into the seat Senator Kennedy once held.Do you see a two-year supermajority?

I didn't think so.


Debunking the Myth: Obama's Two-Year Supermajority

I've figured out why you support Liberal policies. You can't support the three kids you have and want someone else to do it for you.

Yep, GOP took the House for the last 6 years of Obama. Weird they control the spending right?

You're a dingbat. The Republicans took over in the House in 2011 and the Senate in 2015. Seeing that it's 2015, Democrats have controlled the House for 2 years of the Obama administration, the Senate for 6 and obviously the presidency for almost 7. In other words Republican have had control of the House for less than 5, the Senate for 8 months and 0 for the presidency.

That accounts for the sluggish economy and the booming deficit.

Democrats have been calling the shots since 2009. Own up to their failure and be the loser that fate intended.

Now that you guys are in charge, do explain the gains we've all made?

 

[tigerred59]

No, dad, NOT weird. As a result, the record-setting deficit-spending ended, no more massive debt was added to the $6 trillion in new debt added on by Obama, and the annual budgets became balanced...which Obama has tried to take credit for.

The GOP says, 'YOU'RE WELCOME', Dad!

Oh right, thanks to Obama getting more revenues with ACA and increasing taxes on the top .08% of US he got US out of Dubya's les than 15% of GDP back at where Ronnie gutted it 17% of GDP, BUT STILL MUCH LOWER THAN CARTERS 19.6% OR CLINTON'S 20%. Where do you think it needs to be at?

expect to hear that sound moving forward....lLOLOLOLO

 

[tigerred59]

We already have a failing economy you moron.

Sure.

No rebuttal. You must be a democrat.

If by "failing" you meant the most consecutive months of private sector job growth EVER, cutting Dubya's deficits by 2/3rds and slowly getting US out of Dubya's mess, YES!

People make and have less, everything costs more. Net? Failure.

THAT can't be true, we had 8 years of Dubya/GOP "job creator" policies??? Come on, get honest

 

[Conservative65]

His agenda needed blocking.

Haven't learned from 35 years of "trickle down" huh? Fukkn morons!

I've learned a long time ago that what Democrats support has failed every time it's been tried. Thinking handing one person another person's money will motivate them to do better has costs this country $22 trillion dollars over 50 years with NO success.

GET TYE FUKKK OFF YOUR RIGHT WING TALKING POINTS YOU DUMBFUKKK


You realize a HUGE portion of that "$22 trillion" was Medicare right? That it LBJ's great society cut the REAL poverty by HALF?

BUT I AGREE, OVER THE LAST 30+ YEARS THE GOP WARS ON THE WAR ON POVERTY HAS BEEN MORE SUCCESSFUL!

You do realize that claim about Medicare is wrong. It was spend on social welfare programs.

I know that facts to you idiots is like Kryptonite, but Medicare and Disability top the charts of socialized spending in this country, dude that is fact...google the shit if you have doubt.

Social welfare spending on things like food stamps has increased 70% under the affirmative action President. Google the shit if you have doubt.

 

[Conservative65]

No rebuttal. You must be a democrat.

If by "failing" you meant the most consecutive months of private sector job growth EVER, cutting Dubya's deficits by 2/3rds and slowly getting US out of Dubya's mess, YES!

People make and have less, everything costs more. Net? Failure.

THAT can't be true, we had 8 years of Dubya/GOP "job creator" policies??? Come on, get honest

We've had almost 7 years of Obama food stamp user creators. Get honest.

You're a dingbat. The Republicans took over in the House in 2011 and the Senate in 2015. Seeing that it's 2015, Democrats have controlled the House for 2 years of the Obama administration, the Senate for 6 and obviously the presidency for almost 7. In other words Republican have had control of the House for less than 5, the Senate for 8 months and 0 for the presidency.

That accounts for the sluggish economy and the booming deficit.

We've seen what putting an unqualified black man in a government job did to the country.

Sure Bubba, sure. It was because he was black huh?


Conservatives just ignore facts and reality. They have "faith" that their ideology is correct.

It was because he was unqualified to do the job yet elected to meet a concept you Liberals wanted.

My ideology has worked for me because I choose to work instead of expecting someone else to work so it can be handed to me.

Congrats, a lot of people chose to work and a lot of people don't....how the hell is that Obama's fault you moron?

When you do things that allow people to continue getting a check while not working thinking it is an incentive to go to work, you're an idiot.

 

[Conservative65]

No rebuttal. You must be a democrat.

If by "failing" you meant the most consecutive months of private sector job growth EVER, cutting Dubya's deficits by 2/3rds and slowly getting US out of Dubya's mess, YES!

People make and have less, everything costs more. Net? Failure.

THAT can't be true, we had 8 years of Dubya/GOP "job creator" policies??? Come on, get honest

We've had almost 7 years of Obama food stamp user creators. Get honest.

If that is the case are we too assume that under Bush, everybody was working and nobody was on gov. assistance? And if that is true, what happened?

No one said people weren't unemployed under Bush. You want to talk about Bush yet fail to acknowledge that food stamp use went up 70% under Obama.

 

[Conservative65]

Haven't learned from 35 years of "trickle down" huh? Fukkn morons!

I've learned a long time ago that what Democrats support has failed every time it's been tried. Thinking handing one person another person's money will motivate them to do better has costs this country $22 trillion dollars over 50 years with NO success.

GET TYE FUKKK OFF YOUR RIGHT WING TALKING POINTS YOU DUMBFUKKK


You realize a HUGE portion of that "$22 trillion" was Medicare right? That it LBJ's great society cut the REAL poverty by HALF?

BUT I AGREE, OVER THE LAST 30+ YEARS THE GOP WARS ON THE WAR ON POVERTY HAS BEEN MORE SUCCESSFUL!

You do realize that claim about Medicare is wrong. It was spend on social welfare programs.

Let me guess, the US poor have refers, microwaves and TV's? lol


This chart from Pew Research shows the poverty rate across racial lines going all the way back to 1963.

'

As you can see from the report prior to 1967, the overall poverty rate was nearly double what it eventually became "when all the programs were in place" by 1967, so Perino's suggesting that things are now worse than they were before these programs is flat-out false. From 1963 through the year 2000, ending when economic policies of Bill Clinton that balanced the budget by slightly raising taxes on the rich, the general trend for people of all races was for the poverty rate was to go down. After 2000, when President George W. Bush implemented his tax cuts, which went largely to the richest 10 percent of the population, the poverty rate has been slowly creeping back upward. Now, clearly there are other factors involved here.


Killing those zombie lies about the war on poverty

We just had a huge hiring frenzy at our company and the results are in, 75% of the people we hired...blacks, mostly young usta be welfare women.....25% of the people that were hired, elderly whites, especially women in their late 60's. That's who tops America's unemployed.

It's about time those young black welfare queens got a damn job and quit expecting the rest of us to support their children.