[QUOTE=David Jamieson;1017086]well, I’m willing to accept the results of the elections and we can argue about policy after!
unlike tea bag idiot whiners who can’t seem to accept election results. lol[/QUOTE]
Can you show us where they have challenged any election results please?
[QUOTE=David Jamieson;1017087]They bankrupted your country before Obama took office.[/QUOTE]
Oh I forgot, it’s all Bush’s fault. :rolleyes:
If Bush already bankrupted the country, can you explain how Obama has a bigger national debt than Bush?
[QUOTE=David Jamieson;1017088]I don’t agree with your view of humanity. You are all too quick to dehumanize people based on their income or country of origin, so your opinion carries no weight with me for that fact alone.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, that working for your family and not others is something only us sociopaths believe in.
How is it dehumanizing to say I believe that everyone in this country has the greatest opportunity available and we don’t need Government programs to succeed and prosper?
[QUOTE=David Jamieson;1017088]You call 30 million of your countrymen “bums” and by proxy of that you deem them undeserving of all the rights and privileges granted by proxy of being a US citizen.[/QUOTE]
Please show where our Constitution grants us all the right/priveledge to free, Government subsidized healthcare.
[QUOTE=David Jamieson;1017088]less thinking like yours would be better in my opinion. You are old fashioned and your ideas are destructive of the constitution and bill of rights.[/QUOTE]
Thinking like mine is what gave us this country. Our Founding Fathers despised Government and they wanted as little of it as possible.
If you are correct, please show us all what massive Government entitlement programs were enacted by the Founding Fathers. Please show us what rate of income taxes they took from the people. In short, back up your assertions. 
[QUOTE=1bad65;1017123]Oh I forgot, it’s all Bush’s fault. :rolleyes:
If Bush already bankrupted the country, can you explain how Obama has a bigger national debt than Bush?[/QUOTE]
ok, it’s called simple math.
you take the debt created by the Bush admin over the last decade.
He started with a surplus by the way, and then you add Obama’s year in office to that decade and you get the total debt.
+- that’s all there is too it.
are you actually trying to say that Obama has created more debt than Bush?
What grade of math did you complete?
[QUOTE=1bad65;1017126]Yeah, that working for your family and not others is something only us sociopaths believe in.
How is it dehumanizing to say I believe that everyone in this country has the greatest opportunity available and we don’t need Government programs to succeed and prosper?
Please show where our Constitution grants us all the right/priveledge to free, Government subsidized healthcare.
Thinking like mine is what gave us this country. Our Founding Fathers despised Government and they wanted as little of it as possible.
If you are correct, please show us all what massive Government entitlement programs were enacted by the Founding Fathers. Please show us what rate of income taxes they took from the people. In short, back up your assertions. :D[/QUOTE]
Are you saying you want to go back a couple of hundred years, re-institute slavery and live within a state of rebellion? Do you honestly think you are that?
[QUOTE=David Jamieson;1017127]ok, it’s called simple math.
you take the debt created by the Bush admin over the last decade.
He started with a surplus by the way, and then you add Obama’s year in office to that decade and you get the total debt.[/QUOTE]
Ok, so why is Obama’s one year of debt bigger than Reagans 8 years and GHW Bush’s 4 years in office COMBINED? That’s math. And whether you like it or not this formula is correct:
Obama’s debt > Reagans debt + GHW Bush’s debt
[QUOTE=David Jamieson;1017127]+- that’s all there is too it.[/QUOTE]
Yup, my formula just about spells it out.
[QUOTE=David Jamieson;1017127]are you actually trying to say that Obama has created more debt than Bush?[/QUOTE]
No, but I appreciate you asking me if I said that rather than just saying I said it.
However, after 4 years of Obama, he will have spent more than Bush did in 8 years. And that’s not counting Obamacare. :eek:
[QUOTE=David Jamieson;1017127]What grade of math did you complete?[/QUOTE]
Some college. You?
[QUOTE=David Jamieson;1017128]Are you saying you want to go back a couple of hundred years, re-institute slavery and live within a state of rebellion? Do you honestly think you are that?[/QUOTE]
STFU with race and slavery. You’re like a broken record.
I didn’t once even used the **** word in this thread. Why in the world are you bringing it up? Are you doing this bad in the debate you have to once again try and infuse race into the debate like you do everytime you are at a loss for words?
I’m for smaller Government. PERIOD. If you cant understand that, you’re a waste of time to deal with.
[QUOTE=1bad65;1017132]Ok, so why is Obama’s one year of debt bigger than Reagans 8 years and GHW Bush’s 4 years in office COMBINED? That’s math. And whether you like it or not this formula is correct:
Obama’s debt > Reagans debt + GHW Bush’s debt
Yup, my formula just about spells it out.
No, but I appreciate you asking me if I said that rather than just saying I said it.
However, after 4 years of Obama, he will have spent more than Bush did in 8 years. And that’s not counting Obamacare. :eek:
Some college. You?[/QUOTE]
So I’m right and you’re just obfuscating things and not only that, you’re throwing out guesses and predictions! solid.
Uni , psych major with a minor in religious studies. I know that’s not math, but hey, you asked.
[QUOTE=David Jamieson;1017137]So I’m right and you’re just obfuscating things and not only that, you’re throwing out guesses and predictions! solid.[/QUOTE]
It’s not a guess, it’s Obama’s own numbers.
If those numbers are accurate, what then? 
[QUOTE=1bad65;1017143]It’s not a guess, it’s Obama’s own numbers.
If those numbers are accurate, what then? ;)[/QUOTE]
in 4 years? where are these numbers published?
[QUOTE=1bad65;1017132]Ok, so why is Obama’s one year of debt bigger than Reagans 8 years and GHW Bush’s 4 years in office COMBINED? That’s math. And whether you like it or not this formula is correct:
Obama’s debt > Reagans debt + GHW Bush’s debt[/QUOTE]
National Debt as of January 31, 1981 - $935,075,000
National Debt as of January 31, 1989 - $2,682,666,000
Increase from 1981: $1,747,591,000
National Debt as of January 31, 1993: 4,076,124,000
Increase from 1989: $1,393,458,000
Increase from 1981: $3,141,049,000
National Debt as of January 31, 2001: $5,716,071,000
National Debt as of January 31, 2009: $10,632,080,000
Increase from 2001: $4,916,009,000
National Debt as of April 30, 2010: $12,948,739,000
Increase from 2009: $2,316,659,000
It would seem to me that $2,316,659,000 is less than $3,141,049,000. That would make your assertion that President Obama’s increase in the National Debt is higher than the amounts contributed to it by the Administrations of Ronald Reagan and George Herbert Walker Bush flatly untrue.
However, the amount added to the National Debt by President George Walker Bush is higher than the amount added by Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush combined.
That’s math. :eek:
I should note that my numbers from the previous post are not adjusted for inflation. The inflation adjusted numbers are:
1/31/81 - $2,242,626,690
1/31/89 - $4,716,494,610
Increase: $2,473,867,920
1/1/93 - $6,149,700,460
Increase from 1981 - $3,907,073,770
1/1/01 - $7,036,447,900
1/1/09 - $10,804,146,300
Increase from 2001 - $3,767,698,400
Looks like, when adjusting for inflation, George W. Bush’s increase is actually lower than the combined increase by Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush. Both increases are still higher than that of Barack Obama ($2,316,659,000).
[QUOTE=David Jamieson;1017149]in 4 years? where are these numbers published?[/QUOTE]
Right here:
"President Barack Obama’s budget would produce $9.3 trillion in deficits over the next decade, an eye-popping figure that threatens his ambitious goals to overhaul health care and explore new energy sources, congressional auditors said.
The new Congressional Budget Office figures that emerged Friday offered a far more dire outlook for Obama’s budget than the new administration predicted just last month — a deficit $2.3 trillion worse. It’s a prospect even the president’s own budget director called unsustainable."
Entire article:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29791927/
And the article clearly states those are CBO figures.
RC, it appears I was off somewhat.
But you must admit, after 4 years of Obama, at the rate we are going and using his own projections, his 4 years of debt will be greater than 12 years of Reagan/GHW Bush.
And your numbers also show us one more thing: $2,316,659,000. That’s the amount of new debt Obama tacked on from Jan 09- April 2010. That’s the biggest amount of any President ever, over a ~16 month period. Is this good in your eyes?
And remember RC, your numbers do not include Obamacare. Add that in, and its another $200 billion+ in debt. :eek::eek::eek:
[QUOTE=David Jamieson;1017137]
Uni , psych major .[/QUOTE]
Well, that explains a lot…
[QUOTE=Kansuke;1017254]Well, that explains a lot…[/QUOTE]
You’re kind of an asswipe.
This is fun.:rolleyes:
Forget that following members around here to harass them is now a short lived hobby, or you can’t go the week without looking for people to be rude to?
[QUOTE=KC Elbows;1017706]You’re kind of an asswipe.[/QUOTE]
You might want to talk to a psych major about that obsession…
[QUOTE=1bad65;1014531]Looks like more incumbent Democrats had a bad night on election day. Arlen Specter lost, despite having been in the Senate for decades and having Obama’s support.
And Rand Paul, Ron Paul’s son and the candidate endorsed by the Tea Party, won over 60% of the vote in his race.
Source:
http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/05/18/tuesday.primaries/index.html?hpt=T1[/QUOTE]
thats crazy ay… i didnt think ron paul had so much love… that was a good look… who knows maybe one day he’ll be a real contender for the throne… or should i say, “regency”… being representative and temporary by definition and all…
hmmn it appears the troll has gotten enough lucidity going to take his meds and remember his password. lol
I think when he says : “that explains a lot” what he means is that he now understands why he is wrong on virtually every point he has expressed here when he has expressed a point and isn’t just throwing his feces about. 
welcome back trollboy kansuke, you weren’t missed.
lol