Republi-Bush Disaster To Cost An Additional $9 Trillion Over Next Decade!
Etch
spending") taxes while increasing spending at record rates to finance
southern slush-fund dependents for 8 years wasn't bad enough in the $5
trillion it cost America in debt increase just in those 8 years,
projections now show an additional $9 Trillion in added impact to our
national debt as the full long-term impacts of the Republi-Bush
disaster are assessed.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Obama administration will raise its 10-year
budget deficit projection to approximately $9 trillion from $7.108
trillion in a report next week, a senior administration official told
Reuters on Friday.
"The new forecasts are based on new data that reflect how severe the
economic downturn was in the late fall of last year and the winter of
this year," said the administration official, who is familiar with the
budget mid-session review that is slated to be released next week.
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE57K4XE20090821
In other news, proven fraud and disgrace was recently seen hopelessly
pretending to live in a local in Starke contrast to his know locality,
as he continues to cower from stating a medal earned in his fake
military career, knowing he would be prosecuted under the Stolen Valor
Act if he did.
Franklin Etch: Rooting Out Fraud and Disgrace In The Land of the Free
edi...@netpath.net
a year in office, don't you think OBAMA deserves credit - or blame -
for what's going on at some point?
http://www.redstate.com/erick/2009/08/04/where-is-your-townhall/ is
the all-states, continually-updated calendar of "town halls."
http://www.Internet-Gun-Show.com - your source for hard-to-find stuff!
Etch
We are still operating on last year's budget. That is how government
financing works. Other than the stimulous package, of which a bit
over 10% has been spent, we are operating on the empty coffers Bush
left behind with his massive spending, slashed taxes, economic
downturn and long term spending committments (Iraq, Afghanistan,
unfinanced Perscription Drug entitlement program, etc.).
The time to assess how Obama is doing will be the period starting next
year. The way it usually works is there will be a rough period as the
adjustments are felt, before the positive impacts are felt.
Reagan was looking like a disaster economically all the way through
1982 and into 1983 before the positive side of his policies started
showing up, just in time for the 1984 elections. Reagan had the
advantage of having followed a President (Carter) who raised the
national debt by a lower percentage than any subsequent president,
with the possible exception of Clinton. Still Reagan's policies led
to a trippling on the national debt. Obama will have to add an
additional $6 trillion to that which is projected before he will match
that margin.
BTW: Have you notice the poster who pretends to be a "Colonel" with
27 years of military experience, including two wars, still hasn't been
able to state a medal he ever earned out of fear of prosecution under
the Stolen Valor Act?
Franklin Etch: Rooting Out Fraud and Disgrace in the Land of the Free
Etch
> On Aug 22, 9:36 am, "edi...@netpath.net" <edi...@netpath.net> wrote:
>
> > Obama's been president more than six months now. After more than half
> > a year in office, don't you think OBAMA deserves credit - or blame -
> > for what's going on at some point?
>
> >http://www.redstate.com/erick/2009/08/04/where-is-your-townhall/is
> > the all-states, continually-updated calendar of "town halls."
>
>
> We are still operating on last year's budget. That is how government
> financing works. Other than the stimulous package, of which a bit
> over 10% has been spent, we are operating on the empty coffers Bush
> left behind with his massive spending, slashed taxes, economic
> downturn and long term spending committments (Iraq, Afghanistan,
> unfinanced Perscription Drug entitlement program, etc.).
>
> The time to assess how Obama is doing will be the period starting next
> year. The way it usually works is there will be a rough period as the
> adjustments are felt, before the positive impacts are felt.
>
> Reagan was looking like a disaster economically all the way through
> 1982 and into 1983 before the positive side of his policies started
> showing up, just in time for the 1984 elections. Reagan had the
> advantage of having followed a President (Carter) who raised the
> national debt by a lower percentage than any subsequent president,
> with the possible exception of Clinton. Still Reagan's policies led
> to a trippling on the national debt. Obama will have to add an
> additional $6 trillion to that which is projected before he will match
> that margin.
This should have read "Obama will have to add an additonal $6 trillion
to that which is projected before he will match the rate of increase
over merely what Bush added ($5 trillion) that Reagan did for the
ENTIRE national debt. Obama would have to add $20 trillion to the
national debt to match Reagan's debt performance standard.
r wiley
<edi...@netpath.net> wrote in message news:e86a5351-879e-4040...@32g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
> Obama's been president more than six months now. After more than half
> a year in office, don't you think OBAMA deserves credit - or blame -
> for what's going on at some point?
Don't be silly. Herbert Hoover served one term. When FDR was running for
his third term he was still blaming Hoover for the economy.
rw
Harry Nadds
> On Aug 22, 9:36 am, "edi...@netpath.net" <edi...@netpath.net> wrote:
>
> > Obama's been president more than six months now. After more than half
> > a year in office, don't you think OBAMA deserves credit - or blame -
> > for what's going on at some point?
>
> >http://www.redstate.com/erick/2009/08/04/where-is-your-townhall/is
> > the all-states, continually-updated calendar of "town halls."
>
>
> We are still operating on last year's budget. That is how government
> financing works. Other than the stimulous package, of which a bit
> over 10% has been spent, we are operating on the empty coffers Bush
> left behind with his massive spending, slashed taxes, economic
> downturn and long term spending committments (Iraq, Afghanistan,
> unfinanced Perscription Drug entitlement program, etc.).
>
> The time to assess how Obama is doing will be the period starting next
> year. The way it usually works is there will be a rough period as the
> adjustments are felt, before the positive impacts are felt.
>
> Reagan was looking like a disaster economically all the way through
> 1982 and into 1983 before the positive side of his policies started
> showing up, just in time for the 1984 elections. Reagan had the
> advantage of having followed a President (Carter) who raised the
> national debt by a lower percentage than any subsequent president,
> with the possible exception of Clinton. Still Reagan's policies led
> to a trippling on the national debt. Obama will have to add an
> additional $6 trillion to that which is projected before he will match
> that margin.
>
> BTW: Have you notice the poster who pretends to be a "Colonel" with
> 27 years of military experience, including two wars, still hasn't been
> able to state a medal he ever earned out of fear of prosecution under
> the Stolen Valor Act?
>
> Franklin Etch: Rooting Out Fraud and Disgrace in the Land of the Free
Congress is responsible for the budget. Demorats have controlled
congress for 3 years. Your Messiah has spent more in 100 days than all
other Presidents in history combined. YEBBITBUSH !!
COL. BILL KILGORE
Your responding to a moron in California named Lou Velasquez who works for
Toyota of Torrance as a lube & oil specialist. He suffers from some severe
personality issues, and posts to Usenet under at least three aliases. The
funny part is that he also answers and talks to himself (mainly because
nobody else will). By his own admission, he voted for Bush - twice and his
current political opinions hold about as much water as Bill Clinton's
thoughts on marital fidelity. Ignore him and he will soon go away.
ChasNemo
> <edi...@netpath.net> wrote in message
>
> news:e86a5351-879e-4040...@32g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Obama's been president more than six months now. �After more than half
> > a year in office, don't you think OBAMA deserves credit - or blame -
> > for what's going on at some point?
>
> >http://www.redstate.com/erick/2009/08/04/where-is-your-townhall/is
> > the all-states, continually-updated calendar of "town halls."
>
>
> Your responding to a moron in California named Lou Velasquez who works for
> Toyota of Torrance as a lube & oil specialist. �He suffers from some severe
> personality issues, and posts to Usenet under at least three aliases. �The
> funny part is that he also answers and talks to himself (mainly because
> nobody else will). �By his own admission, he voted for Bush - twice and his
> current political opinions hold about as much water as Bill Clinton's
> thoughts on marital fidelity. �Ignore him and he will soon go away.
Proven fraud and disgrace Col. Bill Kilgore loves to post bogus
information to try to prove his detecting skills. He's claimed at
least three or four positive ID's for us but can't even manage to use
a small Hell, MI area white pages telephone directory. No wonder he's
never driven anyone off Usenet (as he also claims falsely)!
Etch
> <edi...@netpath.net> wrote in message
>
> news:e86a5351-879e-4040...@32g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Obama's been president more than six months now. After more than half
> > a year in office, don't you think OBAMA deserves credit - or blame -
> > for what's going on at some point?
>
> >http://www.redstate.com/erick/2009/08/04/where-is-your-townhall/is
> > the all-states, continually-updated calendar of "town halls."
>
>
> Your responding to a moron in California named Lou Velasquez who works for
> Toyota of Torrance as a lube & oil specialist. He suffers from some severe
> personality issues, and posts to Usenet under at least three aliases. The
> funny part is that he also answers and talks to himself (mainly because
> nobody else will). By his own admission, he voted for Bush - twice and his
> current political opinions hold about as much water as Bill Clinton's
> thoughts on marital fidelity. Ignore him and he will soon go away.
Hey proven fraud and disgrace "Col Bill Kilgore" a proven Timothy S.
Watson sock who cannot name a medal earned in his fabricated and oft
boasted 27 year, multi war military career out fo fear of prosecution
under the Stolen Valor Act.
I don't recall mentioning a NAME of the fraud being referenced, yet
here you are (of course, minus naming of a medal)
As for your obsession with Tomaxo, I believe you were long ago invited
to post everything you have connecting Tomaxo to Lou Valezques of
Toyota of Torrance, yet, predictably you ran away with piss in your
pants.
Here's you big chance Timmeh bore. The poster "Tomaxo" clearly stated
a medal he earned in his actual military career (something you
humiliatingly cannot do). As you now pretend to know his actual
identity, why don't you do a quick military.com search on "Lou" and if
he doesn't show up there report everything you've got proving Tomaxo
is Lou for violation of the Stolen Valor Act.
If you DO NOT DO THIS, accept yourself as a proven coward, fraud and
disgrace who makes things up about people in retaliation for their
PROVING you are a fraud and disgrace.
Franklin Etch: Rooting Out Fraud and Disgrace in the Land of the Free.
Etch
> On Aug 22, 11:54 am, Etch <frank.e...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Aug 22, 9:36 am, "edi...@netpath.net" <edi...@netpath.net> wrote:
>
> > > Obama's been president more than six months now. After more than half
> > > a year in office, don't you think OBAMA deserves credit - or blame -
> > > for what's going on at some point?
>
> > >http://www.redstate.com/erick/2009/08/04/where-is-your-townhall/is
> > > the all-states, continually-updated calendar of "town halls."
>
>
> > We are still operating on last year's budget. That is how government
> > financing works. Other than the stimulous package, of which a bit
> > over 10% has been spent, we are operating on the empty coffers Bush
> > left behind with his massive spending, slashed taxes, economic
> > downturn and long term spending committments (Iraq, Afghanistan,
> > unfinanced Perscription Drug entitlement program, etc.).
>
> > The time to assess how Obama is doing will be the period starting next
> > year. The way it usually works is there will be a rough period as the
> > adjustments are felt, before the positive impacts are felt.
>
> > Reagan was looking like a disaster economically all the way through
> > 1982 and into 1983 before the positive side of his policies started
> > showing up, just in time for the 1984 elections. Reagan had the
> > advantage of having followed a President (Carter) who raised the
> > national debt by a lower percentage than any subsequent president,
> > with the possible exception of Clinton. Still Reagan's policies led
> > to a trippling on the national debt. Obama will have to add an
> > additional $6 trillion to that which is projected before he will match
> > that margin.
>
> > BTW: Have you notice the poster who pretends to be a "Colonel" with
> > 27 years of military experience, including two wars, still hasn't been
> > able to state a medal he ever earned out of fear of prosecution under
> > the Stolen Valor Act?
>
> > Franklin Etch: Rooting Out Fraud and Disgrace in the Land of the Free
>
> Congress is responsible for the budget.
Wow...so when are the right wing pundits going to start praising the
Democratic Congress of the 80s for the massive GDP growth under
Reagan?
>Demorats have controlled
> congress for 3 years.
Actually Democrats controlled Congress for 2 1/2 years (since January
2007), meaning they impacted two budget cycles, only one of which
concluded before the Republi-Bush economic disaster happened. As the
root causes of the disaster lay in the tax slashing, spending
increasing, entitlement expanding years of the Bush-Republican-
Congress period of 2001-2006, there is little point of my mentioning
how stupid you look right now.
>Your Messiah has spent more in 100 days than all
> other Presidents in history combined. YEBBITBUSH !!
The funnest part of this statement is you have to combine Bush's
emergency spending request into this number to make it happen. No
further explanation is needed to make you look even stupider than your
already did.
>- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Etch
> <edi...@netpath.net> wrote in messagenews:e86a5351-879e-4040...@32g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
> > Obama's been president more than six months now. After more than half
> > a year in office, don't you think OBAMA deserves credit - or blame -
> > for what's going on at some point?
>
...
> Don't be silly. Herbert Hoover served one term.
Few who actually understand economics blame Hoover fully for the
disaster that caused the Great Depression, as they understand it was
based more significantly on the policies of Harding and Coolidge
before him. Hoover merely refused to do anything useful to stop the
complete economic implosion that followed, allowing the disaster to
run so deep that it would take a full decade to recover from.
Thankfully, we got an FDR-like president in office in the early phases
of the Republican-caused disaster this time, so the depth of the
disaster could be limited, allowing for a much quicker recovery.
> When FDR was running for
> his third term he was still blaming Hoover for the economy.
He was correctly pointing out that the depth of the Republican
economic disaster was largely attributable to Hoover's complete
inaction, which is why it took so long to recover from.
>
> rw
Etch
> On Aug 22, 1:04 pm, "COL. BILL KILGORE" <wskilg...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > <edi...@netpath.net> wrote in message
>
> >news:e86a5351-879e-4040...@32g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > Obama's been president more than six months now. After more than half
> > > a year in office, don't you think OBAMA deserves credit - or blame -
> > > for what's going on at some point?
>
> > >http://www.redstate.com/erick/2009/08/04/where-is-your-townhall/is
> > > the all-states, continually-updated calendar of "town halls."
>
>
> > Your responding to a moron in California named Lou Velasquez who works for
> > Toyota of Torrance as a lube & oil specialist. He suffers from some severe
> > personality issues, and posts to Usenet under at least three aliases. The
> > funny part is that he also answers and talks to himself (mainly because
> > nobody else will). By his own admission, he voted for Bush - twice and his
> > current political opinions hold about as much water as Bill Clinton's
> > thoughts on marital fidelity. Ignore him and he will soon go away.
>
> Proven fraud and disgrace Col. Bill Kilgore loves to post bogus
> information to try to prove his detecting skills.
Yes, he sure does, which always results in humiliating embarassment,
as was the case in my response to this post, copied below, which, of
course, he won't be able to respond to, meaning he will again have to
accept his permanent status as cowardly proven fraud and disgrace who
has to make stuff up in retaliation for being proven a faud and
disgrace.
"As for your obsession with Tomaxo, I believe you were long ago
invited
to post everything you have connecting Tomaxo to Lou Valezques of
Toyota of Torrance, yet, predictably you ran away with piss in your
pants.
Here's you big chance Timmeh bore. The poster "Tomaxo" clearly
stated
a medal he earned in his actual military career (something you
humiliatingly cannot do). As you now pretend to know his actual
identity, why don't you do a quick military.com search on "Lou" and
if
he doesn't show up there report everything you've got proving Tomaxo
is Lou for violation of the Stolen Valor Act.
If you DO NOT DO THIS, accept yourself as a proven coward, fraud and
disgrace who makes things up about people in retaliation for their
PROVING you are a fraud and disgrace. "
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.radio.talk.dr-laura/msg/6634a3718606ad36?hl=en&
>He's claimed at
> least three or four positive ID's for us but can't even manage to use
> a small Hell, MI area white pages telephone directory. No wonder he's
> never driven anyone off Usenet (as he also claims falsely)!- Hide quoted text -
Beam Me Up Scotty
> On Aug 22, 10:02 am, "r wiley" <rawi...@southslope.net> wrote:
>> <edi...@netpath.net> wrote in messagenews:e86a5351-879e-4040...@32g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
>>> Obama's been president more than six months now. After more than half
>>> a year in office, don't you think OBAMA deserves credit - or blame -
>>> for what's going on at some point?
>
>
> ...
>
>> Don't be silly. Herbert Hoover served one term.
>
> Few who actually understand economics blame Hoover fully for the
> disaster that caused the Great Depression, as they understand it was
> based more significantly on the policies of Harding and Coolidge
> before him. Hoover merely refused to do anything useful to stop the
> complete economic implosion that followed, allowing the disaster to
> run so deep that it would take a full decade to recover from.
[" During the 1939�1942 period, the UK depleted much of its gold stock
in purchases of munitions and weaponry on a *cash and carry* basis from
the U.S. and other nations. "]
This was what brought us out of the Depression, without it we might
still be in depression. The War supply sales started in 1937 with the
prep for the war.....
> Thankfully, we got an FDR-like president in office in the early phases
> of the Republican-caused disaster this time, so the depth of the
> disaster could be limited, allowing for a much quicker recovery.
>
Obama is selling us down the road to ZERO GROWTH and that means a drop
and then stagnation. We have had a drop but are still falling and we
will be near bottom for decades with Socialism sitting on teh economic
system.
>
>> When FDR was running for
>> his third term he was still blaming Hoover for the economy.
>
> He was correctly pointing out that the depth of the Republican
> economic disaster was largely attributable to Hoover's complete
> inaction, which is why it took so long to recover from.
Some of what FDR did was started under Hoover in a smaller form and
expanded under FDR.... the problem is that FDR made everything worse.
Hoover was stupid and tried to fix the free market like Bush did
later.... The Government can't fix it because they can't even
understand what they are meddling in.
We are headed for a half century of flat economics due to government
interference in the economy. Enjoy the fruits of your labor, we will be
a BIG France and will have zero growth and high unemployment like
France. They generally have GDP so close to zero growth that the margin
of error is enough for them to actually be in a negative GDP on almost
any given year that they claim growth.
--
*BE VERY CONCERNED*
It's been said that a Communist is just a Socialist - - - with a gun.
Beam Me Up Scotty
Never heard anyone tear them a new asshole for their job, even if they
were dragged kicking and screaming by the voters and Reagan, back into
reality.
--
*BE VERY CONCERNED*
Democrats/socialists impose their rules on a capitalist economy and then
complain about the way capitalism works with socialist-prescribed rules!!
Tomaxo
> On Aug 22, 10:04 am, "COL. BILL KILGORE" <wskilg...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > <edi...@netpath.net> wrote in message
>
> >news:e86a5351-879e-4040...@32g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > Obama's been president more than six months now. After more than half
> > > a year in office, don't you think OBAMA deserves credit - or blame -
> > > for what's going on at some point?
>
> > >http://www.redstate.com/erick/2009/08/04/where-is-your-townhall/is
> > > the all-states, continually-updated calendar of "town halls."
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Yes, this is absolutely true. I stated, as a mere matter of factual
note (not being a blustering posuer like the "Col. Bill Kilgore"
sock), a medal (one of many) recieved for my service. While not
posting under a name I claim to be my actual name, for reasons of
avoiding kook stalkers, proven-fraud-and-disgrace would certainly have
me in a pinch if his statement were true, as odds are the Lou
Valesques person who apparently works (or worked) at a place I never
worked at or set foot in, likely never served in the military (or at
least likely never earned the medal I stated). Thus, proven fraud and
disgrace "Col. Bill Kilgore" would FINALLY be a "force to be reconned
with" as he could report "Lou" for violation of the Stolen Valor Act
(the reason the Kilgore sock himself humiliatingly avoids mention of a
medal earned in his made up multi-war career).
Poor, suffering Timothy S. Watson sock "Col. Bill Kilgore.
COL. BILL KILGORE
"Tomaxo" <tom...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:37b27b06-9a00-477e...@a39g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
Lawn mower, ant hill, you know the drill. <chortle>
Tomaxo
> "Tomaxo" <tom...@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> news:37b27b06-9a00-477e...@a39g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
> On Aug 22, 10:39 am, Etch <frank.e...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Aug 22, 10:04 am, "COL. BILL KILGORE" <wskilg...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > <edi...@netpath.net> wrote in message
>
> > >news:e86a5351-879e-4040...@32g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > > Obama's been president more than six months now. After more than half
> > > > a year in office, don't you think OBAMA deserves credit - or blame -
> > > > for what's going on at some point?
>
> > > >http://www.redstate.com/erick/2009/08/04/where-is-your-townhall/is
> > > > the all-states, continually-updated calendar of "town halls."
>
In other words, you accept your status as cowardly proven fraud and
disgrace who has to make things up about people in retaliation for
their proving you to be a fraud and disgrace who cannot name a medal
earned in your fraudulent military career out of fear of prosecution
under the Stolen Valor Act.
The funny part is, everyone already knows this.
COL. BILL KILGORE
"ChasNemo" <chas...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:e8bc736d-ec3c-47de...@a26g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 22, 1:04?pm, "COL. BILL KILGORE" <wskilg...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> <edi...@netpath.net> wrote in message
>
> news:e86a5351-879e-4040...@32g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
>
> > a year in office, don't you think OBAMA deserves credit - or blame -
> > for what's going on at some point?
>
> >http://www.redstate.com/erick/2009/08/04/where-is-your-townhall/is
> > the all-states, continually-updated calendar of "town halls."
>
> >http://www.Internet-Gun-Show.com- your source for hard-to-find stuff!
>
> Your responding to a moron in California named Lou Velasquez who works for
> severe
> personality issues, and posts to Usenet under at least three aliases. ?The
> funny part is that he also answers and talks to himself (mainly because
> current political opinions hold about as much water as Bill Clinton's
Proven fraud and disgrace Col. Bill Kilgore loves to post bogus
information to try to prove his detecting skills. He's claimed at
least three or four positive ID's for us but can't even manage to use
a small Hell, MI area white pages telephone directory.
Been there done that, including the complete Michigan DMV databases and the
drivers license databases, as well as all public databases in and around
Livingston County, Michigan. Bottom line:
There is NO actual person named "Charles Nemo" anywhere, except for inside
the sick imagination of Denise (Jaq D. Hawkins) Channing late of Norwich,
England.
No wonder he's
never driven anyone off Usenet (as he also claims falsely)!
Handgunner
Pope St. Dr. Charlie Sharpe
DaveS529
Vicky (animaux) Goswitz
Stephen Jay Morris
Timothy Scott Watson
.....just to name a few. <guffaw>
Tomaxo
dog.com> wrote:
> Etch wrote:
> > On Aug 22, 10:02 am, "r wiley" <rawi...@southslope.net> wrote:
> >> <edi...@netpath.net> wrote in messagenews:e86a5351-879e-4040...@32g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
> >>> Obama's been president more than six months now. After more than half
> >>> a year in office, don't you think OBAMA deserves credit - or blame -
> >>> for what's going on at some point?
>
> > ...
>
> >> Don't be silly. Herbert Hoover served one term.
>
> > Few who actually understand economics blame Hoover fully for the
> > disaster that caused the Great Depression, as they understand it was
> > based more significantly on the policies of Harding and Coolidge
> > before him. Hoover merely refused to do anything useful to stop the
> > complete economic implosion that followed, allowing the disaster to
> > run so deep that it would take a full decade to recover from.
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Not only did FDR put America in a position to be able to provide the
massive lend lease assistance (facilitated by massive infrastructural
spending into dams (for electrification), ship yards, roads, bridges,
etc) you mention, but he put America on track to simultaneously take
on and defeat the world's two largest super powers, then become the
world's largest industrial/economic powerhouse following the war,
driving what would become America's largest sustained growth period in
history.
You basic-economics challenged Fox-drone idiots will bring up FDR's
legacy at your peril, which, of course, is why Obama is rope-a-doping
you into this discussion to begin with.
Even Eisenhower was wise enough to realise building infrastructure (in
his case via the wildly successful Interstate Highway Act) was the
best way to insure America's economic (and military) success.
This fake-conservative revisionist history you clowns spam (praying
your audience will not actually read up on the subject you feign
knowledge about) impresses no one outside of the Republi-kook fringe,
and even most of them know they are lying when they repeat it.
leonox1
>
> Actually Democrats controlled Congress for 2 1/2 years (since January
> 2007), meaning they impacted two budget cycles, only one of which
> concluded before the Republi-Bush economic disaster happened. As the
> root causes of the disaster lay in the tax slashing,
Just one point - after Bush reduced tax rates, government revenue
*increased*
Now how do you account for that?
Clave
news:h6pgg9$cdn$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
<...>
> .....just to name a few. <guffaw>
We're still here, Sherlock Pusscake.
No go count my posts again, bitch.
Jim
Tomaxo
> "ChasNemo" <chasn...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:e8bc736d-ec3c-47de...@a26g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
> On Aug 22, 1:04?pm, "COL. BILL KILGORE" <wskilg...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > <edi...@netpath.net> wrote in message
>
> >news:e86a5351-879e-4040...@32g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > Obama's been president more than six months now. ?After more than half
> > > a year in office, don't you think OBAMA deserves credit - or blame -
> > > for what's going on at some point?
>
> > >http://www.redstate.com/erick/2009/08/04/where-is-your-townhall/is
> > > the all-states, continually-updated calendar of "town halls."
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
other than your laughable inclusion of the two above that were you, I
couldn't help notice Clave's demonstration of your bluff again being
called.
You're pretty much getting your ass kicked by everyone today, aren't
you? But then, what's new, right Timmeh?
Etch
> On Aug 22, 1:44 pm, Etch <frank.e...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Actually Democrats controlled Congress for 2 1/2 years (since January
> > 2007), meaning they impacted two budget cycles, only one of which
> > concluded before the Republi-Bush economic disaster happened. As the
> > root causes of the disaster lay in the tax slashing,
>
....
> Just one point - after Bush reduced tax rates, government revenue
> *increased*
>
> Now how do you account for that?
Population Growth and growth in GDP spurned on primarily by $5
trillion in pump-priming spending.
That was easy....Next..
Etch
BTW: Just in case you are trying to be sneaky and suggest that the
increase in revenue of 2001 over 2000 was somehow tied to the Bush tax
cuts (something I presume you to have been smart enough not to have
been trying to suggest), you must surely realize that was the last
year in which a Clinton budget was in effect.
Here's the revenue per year breakdowns and the Presidency that
produced the budget for that year.
2000 3457.77 (budget created under Clinton)
2001 3756.33 (budget created under Clinton)
2001 3756.33 (budget created under Clinton)
2002 3388.04 (budget created under Bush)
2003 3671.43 (budget created under Bush)
2004 3594.74 (budget created under Bush)
2005 4017.01 (budget created under Bush)
2006 4435.76 (budget created under Bush)
2007 4725.27 (budget created under Bush)
2008 4823.51 (budget created under Bush)
2009 4608.07 (budget created under Bush)
Thus, the first year in which a Bush budget produced revenue in excess
of that produced by the last Clinton budget was 2005, a full four
years of multi-trillion dollar deficit spending and population growth
later.
Surely you don't consider this something to boast about, do you?
Beam Me Up Scotty
> On Aug 22, 11:16 am, Beam Me Up Scotty <Then-Destroy-Everyth...@talk-n-
> dog.com> wrote:
>> Etch wrote:
>>> On Aug 22, 10:02 am, "r wiley" <rawi...@southslope.net> wrote:
>>>> <edi...@netpath.net> wrote in messagenews:e86a5351-879e-4040...@32g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
>>>>> Obama's been president more than six months now. After more than half
>>>>> a year in office, don't you think OBAMA deserves credit - or blame -
>>>>> for what's going on at some point?
>>> ...
>>>> Don't be silly. Herbert Hoover served one term.
>>> Few who actually understand economics blame Hoover fully for the
>>> disaster that caused the Great Depression, as they understand it was
>>> based more significantly on the policies of Harding and Coolidge
>>> before him. Hoover merely refused to do anything useful to stop the
>>> complete economic implosion that followed, allowing the disaster to
>>> run so deep that it would take a full decade to recover from.
Dams for electrification is not teh most efficient, it take way too much
labor and ecological and farm land to create it considering the return.
It wasn't the deciding factor for us to sell supplies to the UK.
Building the power plants near the cities and ship yards would have been
much more efficient.
>
> You basic-economics challenged Fox-drone idiots will bring up FDR's
> legacy at your peril, which, of course, is why Obama is rope-a-doping
> you into this discussion to begin with.
Your Government education is showing.... You only need to look for teh
truth. You Libs have been trying to indoctrinate generations of kids
that FDR and his Alphabet soup of Government Social programs solved our
Depression and it's a fact that it was the infusion of Gold from war
related commerce that raised our GDP and grew us out of Depression.
> Even Eisenhower was wise enough to realise building infrastructure (in
> his case via the wildly successful Interstate Highway Act) was the
> best way to insure America's economic (and military) success.
The Interstate plan was stolen from Hitlers Germany.
> This fake-conservative revisionist history you clowns spam (praying
> your audience will not actually read up on the subject you feign
> knowledge about) impresses no one outside of the Republi-kook fringe,
> and even most of them know they are lying when they repeat it.
The government schools can only indoctrinate and make idiots of just so
many empty heads. ther will always be some people that can use logic to
discover your lies in the Socialist revisionist text books. Your lies
often contradict themselves.
--
*BE VERY CONCERNED*
After 40 years of *Liberals* mired down in a war on poverty, with no end
in site and no *exit strategy* or plan for *redeployment* ....here we
are. - Talk-n-Dog -
Tomaxo
dog.com> wrote:
> Tomaxo wrote:
> > On Aug 22, 11:16 am, Beam Me Up Scotty <Then-Destroy-Everyth...@talk-n-
> > dog.com> wrote:
> >> Etch wrote:
> >>> On Aug 22, 10:02 am, "r wiley" <rawi...@southslope.net> wrote:
> >>>> <edi...@netpath.net> wrote in messagenews:e86a5351-879e-4040...@32g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
> >>>>> Obama's been president more than six months now. After more than half
> >>>>> a year in office, don't you think OBAMA deserves credit - or blame -
> >>>>> for what's going on at some point?
> >>> ...
> >>>> Don't be silly. Herbert Hoover served one term.
> >>> Few who actually understand economics blame Hoover fully for the
> >>> disaster that caused the Great Depression, as they understand it was
> >>> based more significantly on the policies of Harding and Coolidge
> >>> before him. Hoover merely refused to do anything useful to stop the
> >>> complete economic implosion that followed, allowing the disaster to
> >>> run so deep that it would take a full decade to recover from.
Bullshit. Electricity is carried over long distances. The shipyard
in Portland Oregon were provided electricity by far away dams on the
Columbia without issue. Besides, just where in the vicinity of
Manhattan did you have in mind for massive hydroelectric dams. The
atomic bombs that ended WWII would have been impossible without
electricity produced by public projects.
Massive growth in commerce produced massive growth in cities in the
areas of these projects. FoxNews drones like to make statements like
"the problem with projects like the Golden Gate Bridge is that once
the project is completed, all of the jobs go away". The idiocy behind
this mindset (like your own) is the idea that the commerce produced by
the project itself did not produce expanential growth in productivity
for the communities impacted by the project (those recieving
electricity, or , in the case of the Golden Gate bridge, a route for
traffic northward to and from the city of San Fransisco).
>
>
>
> > You basic-economics challenged Fox-drone idiots will bring up FDR's
> > legacy at your peril, which, of course, is why Obama is rope-a-doping
> > you into this discussion to begin with.
>
....
> Your Government education is showing....
As is your over-compensating attempt at condescension
>You only need to look for teh
> truth. You Libs have been trying to indoctrinate generations of kids
> that FDR and his Alphabet soup of Government Social programs solved our
> Depression and it's a fact that it was the infusion of Gold from war
> related commerce that raised our GDP and grew us out of Depression.
he he he keep talking...this is hillarous
>
> > Even Eisenhower was wise enough to realise building infrastructure (in
> > his case via the wildly successful Interstate Highway Act) was the
> > best way to insure America's economic (and military) success.
>
...
> The Interstate plan was stolen from Hitlers Germany.
and? Are you now going to say the economy car was a bad idea because
Hitler Germany produced it? How about the jet?
>
> > This fake-conservative revisionist history you clowns spam (praying
> > your audience will not actually read up on the subject you feign
> > knowledge about) impresses no one outside of the Republi-kook fringe,
> > and even most of them know they are lying when they repeat it.
>
> The government schools can only indoctrinate and make idiots of just so
> many empty heads. ther will always be some people that can use logic to
> discover your lies in the Socialist revisionist text books. Your lies
> often contradict themselves.
The overwhelming majority of expansion in government growth during the
period from Carter to Obama occured during Republican presidencies.
The fact you chose not to pay for it merely shows you are COWARDLY
socialists. Quit trying to project.
> --
>
> *BE VERY CONCERNED*
>
> After 40 years of *Liberals* mired down in a war on poverty, with no end
> in site and no *exit strategy* or plan for *redeployment* ....here we
> are. - Talk-n-Dog -- Hide quoted text -
ChasNemo
> "ChasNemo" <chasn...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:e8bc736d-ec3c-47de...@a26g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
> On Aug 22, 1:04?pm, "COL. BILL KILGORE" <wskilg...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > <edi...@netpath.net> wrote in message
>
> >news:e86a5351-879e-4040...@32g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > Obama's been president more than six months now. ?After more than half
> > > a year in office, don't you think OBAMA deserves credit - or blame -
> > > for what's going on at some point?
>
> > >http://www.redstate.com/erick/2009/08/04/where-is-your-townhall/is
> > > the all-states, continually-updated calendar of "town halls."
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
We seem to have hit a nerve, bogus boi. Of course you have no proof
of anything. As usual. Liar. <snicker>
COL. BILL KILGORE
"Clave" <ClaviusNo...@cablespeed.com> wrote in message
news:2MidneCcwakm8A3X...@cablespeedmi.com...
> "COL. BILL KILGORE" <wski...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:h6pgg9$cdn$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
> <...>
>
>> .....just to name a few. <guffaw>
>
> We're still here, Sherlock Pusscake.
>
Why would your name be on any list, except perhaps in the yellow pages under
"party clowns for hire".
COL. BILL KILGORE
Not at all. We do, however, accept our status as the one poster here who
can rattle your cage to a point where you start churning out so many posts
under so many aliases that it becomes obvious you've lost touch with
reality.
in retaliation for
their proving you to be a fraud and disgrace who cannot name a medal
earned in your fraudulent military career out of fear of prosecution
under the Stolen Valor Act.
We have numerous military awards, decorations and medals - too many to
mention here and nobody here worth mentioning them to.
Habla, Lou?
Clave
A better question to ask yourself is why you took me *off* your little lits,
Pusscake Timmeh.
The rest of us know why, but no one here expects you to admit your own
impotence.
Jim
PSE SCAN 19
returning with the tossed frizbee firmly in mouth "COL. BILL KILGORE"
<wskilg...@yahoo.com> wrote:
<snip>
Timothy S. Watson: Generator of hundreds of usenet socks, amongst
them proven fraud and disgrace "Col. Bill Kilgore" accepts his status
as busted posuer who cannot name a medal earned for fear of certain
prosecution under the stolen valor act, while others can do so with
complete impunity, due to the validity of their claims.
Now, having been so completely laughed out of contention for his "Lou"
bluff, Kilbore has become the ultimate laughing stalk of usenet.
But don't worry, pse.scan.19 is listening.
pse scan 19: Providing Free Conversation To The Delusional
Beam Me Up Scotty
--
*BE VERY CONCERNED*
"By pursuing his own self interest he frequently promotes that of
society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it. I
have never known much good done by those who affected to trade for the
public good" - Adam Smith -
Tomaxo
dog.com> wrote:
> Etch wrote:
> > On Aug 22, 10:03 am, Harry Nadds <hoofhearte...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> On Aug 22, 11:54 am, Etch <frank.e...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>> On Aug 22, 9:36 am, "edi...@netpath.net" <edi...@netpath.net> wrote:
> >>>> Obama's been president more than six months now. After more than half
> >>>> a year in office, don't you think OBAMA deserves credit - or blame -
> >>>> for what's going on at some point?
> >>>>http://www.redstate.com/erick/2009/08/04/where-is-your-townhall/is
> >>>> the all-states, continually-updated calendar of "town halls."
The existence of "Corporations" involves "socialist-prescribed
rules". Republicans merely ignore this when pretending to be
anti-"socialism" because it involves "their" kind of socialism.
leonox1
Yes, easy, but unfortunately, incorrect.
Thanks to the Bush tax reductions, there were more jobs created, and
most working people saw higher salaries.
It's true the IRS got a smaller piece of the pie, but it was a larger
pie, so they came out ahead.
Etch
> On Aug 22, 6:39 pm, Etch <frank.e...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 22 août, 14:33, leonox1 <wsjames...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Aug 22, 1:44 pm, Etch <frank.e...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Actually Democrats controlled Congress for 2 1/2 years (since January
> > > > 2007), meaning they impacted two budget cycles, only one of which
> > > > concluded before the Republi-Bush economic disaster happened. As the
> > > > root causes of the disaster lay in the tax slashing,
>
> > ....
>
> > > Just one point - after Bush reduced tax rates, government revenue
> > > *increased*
>
> > > Now how do you account for that?
>
> > Population Growth and growth in GDP spurned on primarily by $5
> > trillion in pump-priming spending.
>
> > That was easy....Next..
>
....
> Yes, easy, but unfortunately, incorrect.
>
> Thanks to the Bush tax reductions, there were more jobs created, and
> most working people saw higher salaries.
>
> It's true the IRS got a smaller piece of the pie, but it was a larger
> pie, so they came out ahead.
Above is a perfect example of the Republi-shill poster that is stuck
on stupid, even after the facts have been presented to him.
Below are the facts:
(WARNING: for those few idiots that don't realize that budgets are
created in the year preceding the year they effect, this may be
painfully confusing).
2000 3457.77 (budget created under Clinton)
2001 3756.33 (budget created under Clinton)
2002 3388.04 (budget created under Bush) huge reduction in revenue
2003 3671.43 (budget created under Bush)
2004 3594.74 (budget created under Bush)
2005 4017.01 (budget created under Bush) revenue finally beats 2001.
2006 4435.76 (budget created under Bush)
2007 4725.27 (budget created under Bush)
2008 4823.51 (budget created under Bush)
2009 4608.07 (budget created under Bush) Last year under a Bush
budget.
Thus, the first year in which a Bush budget produced revenue in
excess
of that produced by the last Clinton budget was 2005, a full four
years of multi-trillion dollar deficit spending and population growth
later. ZERO of the anemic marginal increase in revenue for that year
can be attributed to the tax cuts, once deficit spending and
population increase are factored in.
Franklin Etch: Rooting Out Fraud and Disgrace in the Land of the Free.
leonox1
You must actually give the benefits of tax cuts time to take effect.
As your own figures show, after Bush increased tax revenue over 45% in
his term. Not the doubling that Reagan did, but still impressive,
After Bush take over Clinton's mess, he increased tax revenue until
the Democrats took over Congress.
John Q Public
> On Aug 24, 10:54�pm, Etch <frank.e...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Aug 24, 6:25�pm, leonox1 <wsjames...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Aug 22, 6:39�pm, Etch <frank.e...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
Guys, its the Dems stimulus bill, its the dems cap & trade and
healthcare...., cry all you want
but you guys own it now and cryin about Bush now only makes you look
stupid, you own it all hook, line and "SINKER"