#CA Dems dilemma: how to spend the surplus

[Zepp]

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/05/13/democrats-at-odds-over-californias-
multi-billion-dollar-budget-surplus/

California Gov. Jerry Brown (D) is expected to clash with his own party
over the state’s huge budget surplus.

California is expected to see a budget surplus of about $4.5 billion
thanks to a voter-approved tax increase, rising employment, increasing
home prices, a surging stock market, and tens of billions in spending
cuts.

Brown has indicated he plans to continue to cautiously restrain spending
and pay down the state’s debt, though he also hopes to increase education
funding for the underprivileged and expand the state’s Medicaid program.

The governor will release his new budget proposal at a press conference
in Sacramento on Tuesday. But lawmakers in his own party, who have a
super-majority in both chambers of the California legislature, have
already called for the additional revenue to be used to repair programs
hampered by budget cuts.

“Now, with the economic recovery finally taking hold, we can finally say:
the era of new budget cuts and additional broad-based taxes is over,”
Assembly Speaker John Perez (D-Los Angeles) announced last week. “We must
now pivot to strengthening our state, avoiding the mistakes of the past,
and preventing the devastating impacts that economic downturns can have
on our budget and the people of California.”

Perez is seeking additional funding for child care services and college
assistance. Meanwhile, other Democrats have urged the governor to restore
spending to health care services and programs for the poor.

“There is no shame, in fact there’s pride, in fighting to restore cuts to
those who have suffered the most during the budget crisis – the poor, the
elderly and the disabled,” Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg
said.

--
Subscribe:
zepps_essay...@yahoogroups.com
zepps_news...@yahoogroups.com
Unsubscribe:
zepps_essays...@yahoogroups.com
zepps_news-...@yahoogroups.com

Not dead, in jail or a slave? Thank a liberal!

[Liberal Here]

On May 13, 11:46 pm, Zepp <d...@gone.com> wrote:
> http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/05/13/democrats-at-odds-over-californ...

> zepps_essays-subscr...@yahoogroups.com
> zepps_news-subscr...@yahoogroups.com
> Unsubscribe:
> zepps_essays-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com
> zepps_news-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

>
> Not dead, in jail or a slave? Thank a liberal!

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, but the ***REAL*** question is: "Will voters ever
learn which party actually knows how to govern successfully"????

[Zepp]

In California they have.

[Liberal Here]

Time will tell. It'll take one republican gubernatorial candidate to
tell voters the state surplus means taxes are too high....never mind
total debt and infrastructure needs. Poof....a new state recession.

[Zepp]

California went through 35 years of that nonsense and saw their state
decline from best in the world to "barely better than the south".

[NoBody]

So you admit Jerry Brown and Gray Davis were just as bad?

[Zepp]

Not in the least. Republicans had control of the lege as long as they
had 34% of the seats because of that idiotic "supermajority rule" for all
budget resolutions. The Dems finally got that supermajority in both
Houses and got rid of that damn rule, and now the state can function
again.

[wy]

On 16 May, 09:47, Zepp <d...@gone.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 16 May 2013 07:16:32 -0400, NoBody wrote:

It's the old Repugnant tactic of gerrymandering the vote, rigging it
in such a way that they get to win every time because cheating is the
only way they can win at anything, with the wins often being to the
detriment to the people at large. Just like when they won more
Congressional seats even though the Democrats got a million votes
more. The concept of 50+1 doesn't register for Repugnants. But then
when you get rid of gerrymandering or supermajorities or any other
hocus pocus math Repugnants use to cheat their way to wins, the real
world takes over and positive results ensue - like a $4 billion
surplus in the state's budget. Funny how that happens, isn't it?

[Zepp]

California is doing far better than the rest of the country now that
we've thrown off the GOP tyranny.

California is the bellwether state, it's said. For America's sake, let's
hope that's true.

[wy]

Well, the lesson to learn here is to get rid of the Repugnant majority
in the House by at least 25% in 2014 just to ensure that Democrats are
able to get things done, just like they got things done back in
2009-2010. What did they call that Congress? One of the most
productive ones ever. What did they call the Congress that followed
with Repugnants ruling the House roost? Probably the least productive
ever. See how it works? It's a no brainer.

[Steve]

California will never recover from their debt.

[Zepp]

Keep in mind most Republicans WANT the American government to collapse.

[Steve]

Zepp has such a wild-eyed imagination these days.. his recent
struggles may have sent him back to the bottle.

[NoBody]

On Thu, 16 May 2013 13:47:02 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:

>On Thu, 16 May 2013 07:16:32 -0400, NoBody wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 15 May 2013 19:45:52 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 15 May 2013 12:36:57 -0700, Liberal Here wrote:
>>>
>>>> On May 15, 2:41�pm, Zepp <d...@gone.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 15 May 2013 11:17:49 -0700, Liberal Here wrote:
>>>>> > On May 13, 11:46�pm, Zepp <d...@gone.com> wrote:
>>>>> >>http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/05/13/democrats-at-odds-over-
>>>>> californ...
>>>>> >> multi-billion-dollar-budget-surplus/
>>>>>
>>>>> >> California Gov. Jerry Brown (D) is expected to clash with his own

>>>>> >> party over the state?s huge budget surplus.

>>>>>
>>>>> >> California is expected to see a budget surplus of about $4.5
>>>>> >> billion thanks to a voter-approved tax increase, rising
>>>>> >> employment, increasing home prices, a surging stock market, and
>>>>> >> tens of billions in spending cuts.
>>>>>
>>>>> >> Brown has indicated he plans to continue to cautiously restrain

>>>>> >> spending and pay down the state?s debt, though he also hopes to

>>>>> >> increase education funding for the underprivileged and expand the

>>>>> >> state?s Medicaid program.

>>>>>
>>>>> >> The governor will release his new budget proposal at a press
>>>>> >> conference in Sacramento on Tuesday. But lawmakers in his own
>>>>> >> party, who have a super-majority in both chambers of the
>>>>> >> California legislature, have already called for the additional
>>>>> >> revenue to be used to repair programs hampered by budget cuts.
>>>>>

>>>>> >> ?Now, with the economic recovery finally taking hold, we can

>>>>> >> finally say: the era of new budget cuts and additional broad-based

>>>>> >> taxes is over,? Assembly Speaker John Perez (D-Los Angeles)
>>>>> >> announced last week. ?We must now pivot to strengthening our

>>>>> >> state, avoiding the mistakes of the past,
>>>>> >> and preventing the devastating impacts that economic downturns can

>>>>> >> have on our budget and the people of California.?

>>>>>
>>>>> >> Perez is seeking additional funding for child care services and
>>>>> >> college assistance. Meanwhile, other Democrats have urged the
>>>>> >> governor to restore spending to health care services and programs
>>>>> >> for the poor.
>>>>>

>>>>> >> ?There is no shame, in fact there?s pride, in fighting to

>restore
>>>>> >> cuts to those who have suffered the most during the budget crisis

>>>>> >> ? the poor, the elderly and the disabled,? Senate President Pro

>>>>> >> Tem Darrell Steinberg said.
>>>>>
>>>>> >> --
>>>>> >> Subscribe:
>>>>> >> zepps_essays-subscr...@yahoogroups.com
>>>>> >> zepps_news-subscr...@yahoogroups.com Unsubscribe:
>>>>> >> zepps_essays-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com
>>>>> >> zepps_news-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com
>>>>>
>>>>> >> Not dead, in jail or a slave? Thank a liberal!
>>>>>
>>>>> > Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, but the ***REAL*** question is: "Will voters ever
>>>>> > learn which party actually knows how to govern successfully"????
>>>>>
>>>>> In California they have.
>>>>
>>>> Time will tell. It'll take one republican gubernatorial candidate to
>>>> tell voters the state surplus means taxes are too high....never mind
>>>> total debt and infrastructure needs. Poof....a new state recession.
>>>
>>>California went through 35 years of that nonsense and saw their state
>>>decline from best in the world to "barely better than the south".
>>
>> So you admit Jerry Brown and Gray Davis were just as bad?
>
>Not in the least. Republicans had control of the lege as long as they
>had 34% of the seats because of that idiotic "supermajority rule" for all
>budget resolutions. The Dems finally got that supermajority in both
>Houses and got rid of that damn rule, and now the state can function
>again.

And suddenly Zippo stops talking about governors and and about the
legislature...

[NoBody]

Please name and cite these prominent Republicans (or are you just
shooting your mouth / foot off again?).

[Salty Stan]

On May 17, 7:16 am, NoBody <NoB...@nowhere.com> wrote:

So...ever get an answer to that?

[Christopher Helms]

On May 13, 10:46 pm, Zepp <d...@gone.com> wrote:
> http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/05/13/democrats-at-odds-over-californ...

> zepps_essays-subscr...@yahoogroups.com
> zepps_news-subscr...@yahoogroups.com
> Unsubscribe:
> zepps_essays-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com
> zepps_news-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com
>

> Not dead, in jail or a slave? Thank a liberal!

How the fuck did California go from having massive, crippling deficits
to a surplus in so short a time?

[Zepp]

Start with Grover Norquist. Let's add Phil Gramm. Paul Ryan. The
Pauls.

[Zepp]

That's because I wasn't talking about them, bubbles. You were. Remember?

[wy]

It got rid of Repugnants.

[Zepp]

Yup, he did. So tell us, bubbles, do you have any kind of opinion on
that, or is this just more of your troll bullshit?

[Zepp]

That's EXACTLY what happened.

[Zepp]

The last election was so overwhelmingly Democratic (super majorities in
both houses) that the GOP lost its ability to stop all revenue bills.

[Salty Stan]

Is that what happened in Texas, too?

[Yak]

CA is having a massive love in over a 'projected' surplus. And their
track record on projections is less than stellar.

That said, this is CA. They'll figure out something stupid to do even
if they do wind up in the black for the year.

[Salty Stan]

I took a look into that article, and read that they are projecting a
$4.6 billion surplus by having tens of billions in spending
cuts.

Hmmm...

[Zepp]

Apparently not: http://www.burntorangereport.com/diary/13398/the-true-
state-of-the-texas-economy

>
> CA is having a massive love in over a 'projected' surplus. And their
> track record on projections is less than stellar.

Projected for the coming year, yes. And the reason they had such a bad
record in the past was because Republicans kept substituting wishful
thinking for reality. Now the grown-ups are in charge.

>
> That said, this is CA. They'll figure out something stupid to do even if
> they do wind up in the black for the year.

Like elect Republicans? Let's hope the people of California aren't that
stupid.

[Steve]

Already, California's leftist freaks are advocating that they halt the
spending cuts which are primarily responsible for the tiny projected
surplus.

California is deeply in debt and will be for a long time..

[wy]

Now compare that to this:

Texas cheated by stealing Obama's stimulus meant for shovel ready jobs
in order to pay down their debt. Thanks to Obama's stimulus, Texas is
doing pretty good as a result. Proving once again that it takes a
Democrat to clean up a Repugnant's mess.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/01/texas-used-stimulus-to-cover-97-of-its-deficit/70077/


So California has been able to achieve a surplus, thanks to a
Democrat, and Texas was able to balance its budget and pay down their
debt, thanks to a Democrat who gave them the money that was supposed
to go to other things - like jobs. Common denominator in solving
Repugnant fiscal woes? Democrats. Even when Repugnants talk about
and try to be fiscally responsible, they just can't do it. Why not?
Because Repugnant math doesn't work in the real world.

[MattB .]

On Tue, 14 May 2013 03:46:16 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:

>http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/05/13/democrats-at-odds-over-californias-

>multi-billion-dollar-budget-surplus/
>
>California Gov. Jerry Brown (D) is expected to clash with his own party
>over the state�s huge budget surplus.
>

How about putting some of it away for a rainy day. Also paying off
some bills. Debt.

I know that isn't the liberal way but it is a good thing.

[opel]

On 5/17/2013 10:58 AM, Zepp wrote:
> Let's hope the people of California aren't that
> stupid.

How's your budget crisis going, lol!

[Steve]

On Fri, 17 May 2013 12:02:30 -0700 (PDT), wy <w...@myself.com> wrote:

>So California has been able to achieve a surplus,

Too bad that, even if it is a surplus, it won't even make scratch in
California's debt and by this time next year the debt will be even
bigger.

[Zepp]

Hmmm indeed. The spending cuts were already in effect. The point of the
article was over which, if any, spending cuts to alleviate with the
surpluses.

Brown wants to focus on education. The lege wants to help the unemployed
and the poor.

[Steve]

<CHUCKLES> So IOW, the spending cuts that precipitated the alleged
small surplus are not going to be retained... and won't be used to
lower the debt, either.

[Zepp]

On Fri, 17 May 2013 12:06:32 -0700, MattB . wrote:

> On Tue, 14 May 2013 03:46:16 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>
>>http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/05/13/democrats-at-odds-over-
californias-
>>multi-billion-dollar-budget-surplus/
>>
>>California Gov. Jerry Brown (D) is expected to clash with his own party
>>over the state’s huge budget surplus.
>>
>>
>
> How about putting some of it away for a rainy day. Also paying off some
> bills. Debt.

Paying down debt is already factored in. Both sides have their merits;
Brown wants to put the money where it will result in higher revenue, and
the lege wants to alleviate suffering by the working poor and the
unemployed.

[Steve]

On Fri, 17 May 2013 21:10:45 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:

>On Fri, 17 May 2013 12:06:32 -0700, MattB . wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 14 May 2013 03:46:16 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>>
>>>http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/05/13/democrats-at-odds-over-
>californias-
>>>multi-billion-dollar-budget-surplus/
>>>
>>>California Gov. Jerry Brown (D) is expected to clash with his own party

>>>over the state?s huge budget surplus.

>>>
>>>
>>
>> How about putting some of it away for a rainy day. Also paying off some
>> bills. Debt.
>
>Paying down debt is already factored in.

I'd bet that California's debt will be even larger this time next
year. Leftists have no sense of fiscal responsibility. Take Zepp for
instance..

[Salty Stan]

On May 17, 3:02 pm, wy <w...@myself.com> wrote:
> On 17 May, 12:54, Salty Stan <wsjames...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>

> ss

>
> > I took a look into that article, and read that they are projecting a
> > $4.6 billion surplus by having tens of billions in spending
> > cuts.
>
> > Hmmm...
>
> Now compare that to this:
>
> Texas cheated by stealing Obama's stimulus meant for shovel ready jobs
> in order to pay down their debt.  Thanks to Obama's stimulus, Texas is
> doing pretty good as a result.  Proving once again that it takes a
> Democrat to clean up a Repugnant's mess.

There were no shovel ready jobs, but no matter, Texas would have has a
surplus with or without any stimulus money.

>
> http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/01/texas-used-stimul...

>
> So California has been able to achieve a surplus, thanks to a
> Democrat, and Texas was able to balance its budget and pay down their
> debt, thanks to a Democrat who gave them the money that was supposed
> to go to other things - like jobs.

And the U.S.A. has a $16.6 trillion debt, thanks to a Democrat.

>Common denominator in solving
> Repugnant fiscal woes?  Democrats.  Even when Repugnants talk about
> and try to be fiscally responsible, they just can't do it.  Why not?
> Because Repugnant math doesn't work in the real world.

Did in Texas, and under Ronald Reagan.

[NoBody]

Not a single name or citation.

[NoBody]

You *never* answered the question. It seems typical for you to lie,
then call someone a name when you get called on it. There must be a
special NG where Zepp has placed all the things he claims to have
posted that no one else has ever seen.

[NoBody]

On Fri, 17 May 2013 14:38:40 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:

>On Fri, 17 May 2013 07:16:23 -0400, NoBody wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 16 May 2013 16:10:57 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 16 May 2013 08:36:56 -0700, wy wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 16 May, 10:26, Zepp <d...@gone.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 16 May 2013 07:06:11 -0700, wy wrote:
>>>>> > On 16 May, 09:47, Zepp <d...@gone.com> wrote:
>>>>> >> On Thu, 16 May 2013 07:16:32 -0400, NoBody wrote:
>>>>> >> > On Wed, 15 May 2013 19:45:52 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <d...@gone.com>
>>>>> >> > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> >> >>On Wed, 15 May 2013 12:36:57 -0700, Liberal Here wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> >> >>> On May 15, 2:41�pm, Zepp <d...@gone.com> wrote:
>>>>> >> >>>> On Wed, 15 May 2013 11:17:49 -0700, Liberal Here wrote:
>>>>> >> >>>> > On May 13, 11:46�pm, Zepp <d...@gone.com> wrote:
>>>>> >> >>>> >>http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/05/13/democrats-at-odds-
>over-
>>>>> >> >>>> californ...
>>>>> >> >>>> >> multi-billion-dollar-budget-surplus/
>>>>>
>>>>> >> >>>> >> California Gov. Jerry Brown (D) is expected to clash with

>>>>> >> >>>> >> his own party over the state?s huge budget surplus.

>>>>>
>>>>> >> >>>> >> California is expected to see a budget surplus of about
>>>>> >> >>>> >> $4.5 billion thanks to a voter-approved tax increase,
>>>>> >> >>>> >> rising employment, increasing home prices, a surging stock
>>>>> >> >>>> >> market, and tens of billions in spending cuts.
>>>>>
>>>>> >> >>>> >> Brown has indicated he plans to continue to cautiously

>>>>> >> >>>> >> restrain spending and pay down the state?s debt, though

>he
>>>>> >> >>>> >> also hopes to increase education funding for the

>>>>> >> >>>> >> underprivileged and expand the state?s Medicaid program.

>>>>>
>>>>> >> >>>> >> The governor will release his new budget proposal at a
>>>>> >> >>>> >> press conference in Sacramento on Tuesday. But lawmakers
>>>>> >> >>>> >> in his own party, who have a super-majority in both
>>>>> >> >>>> >> chambers of the California legislature, have already
>>>>> >> >>>> >> called for the additional revenue to be used to repair
>>>>> >> >>>> >> programs hampered by budget cuts.
>>>>>

>>>>> >> >>>> >> ?Now, with the economic recovery finally taking hold, we

>>>>> >> >>>> >> can finally say: the era of new budget cuts and additional

>>>>> >> >>>> >> broad-based taxes is over,? Assembly Speaker John Perez
>>>>> >> >>>> >> (D-Los Angeles) announced last week. ?We must now pivot

>to
>>>>> >> >>>> >> strengthening our state, avoiding the mistakes of the
>>>>> >> >>>> >> past, and preventing the devastating impacts that economic
>>>>> >> >>>> >> downturns can have on our budget and the people of

>>>>> >> >>>> >> California.?

>>>>>
>>>>> >> >>>> >> Perez is seeking additional funding for child care
>>>>> >> >>>> >> services and college assistance. Meanwhile, other
>>>>> >> >>>> >> Democrats have urged the governor to restore spending to
>>>>> >> >>>> >> health care services and programs for the poor.
>>>>>

>>>>> >> >>>> >> ?There is no shame, in fact there?s pride, in fighting

>to
>>>>> >> restore
>>>>> >> >>>> >> cuts to those who have suffered the most during the budget

>>>>> >> >>>> >> crisis ? the poor, the elderly and the disabled,? Senate

You "forgot" to cite anywhere or any evidence that these individuals
want the government to collapse (or do you just pull names out of a
hat when you can't prove a claim).

[NoBody]

On Fri, 17 May 2013 05:58:54 -0700 (PDT), Salty Stan
<wsjam...@gmail.com> wrote:

Update: Zippo did provide names but failed to show any evidence that
they want the government to collapse. In short, he pulled a couple of
names out of a hat.

[Christopher Helms]

Actually, Texas has a 16 billion dollar deficit that they are
constantly trying to hide with Enron style accounting stunts, the
national deficit exploded under Reagan and the vast majority of
"Obamas" spending that you guys constantly complain about actually
occurred under Bush.

[NoBody]

Actually if read the above, Liberal Here brought up governors and you
responded to him.

[NoBody]

On Fri, 17 May 2013 17:28:21 -0400, Steve <steven...@yahooooo.com>

wrote:

>On Fri, 17 May 2013 21:10:45 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 17 May 2013 12:06:32 -0700, MattB . wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 14 May 2013 03:46:16 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/05/13/democrats-at-odds-over-
>>californias-
>>>>multi-billion-dollar-budget-surplus/
>>>>
>>>>California Gov. Jerry Brown (D) is expected to clash with his own party
>>>>over the state?s huge budget surplus.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> How about putting some of it away for a rainy day. Also paying off some
>>> bills. Debt.
>>
>>Paying down debt is already factored in.
>
>I'd bet that California's debt will be even larger this time next
>year. Leftists have no sense of fiscal responsibility. Take Zepp for
>instance..

Of course when the debt goes up, Zippo will try to blame it on
Republicans somehow.

[Zepp]

On Sat, 18 May 2013 09:53:10 -0400, NoBody wrote:

>>I'd bet that California's debt will be even larger this time next year.
>>Leftists have no sense of fiscal responsibility. Take Zepp for
>>instance..

May 18, 2014.

See you then, Stevie.

[Zepp]

By talking about the damage the minority in the lege did. Do try to pay
attention, dear boy.

[Zepp]

I see you excised the names before you dared reply.

So you have learned to fear Google.

By right wing standards, that's nearly intelligent.

[Zepp]

Have you ever listened to or read any of their speeches or writings?

Does the phrase, "Make government small enough that I can drown it in the
bathtub" ring any bells?

[Zepp]

Gosh, bubbles, I've affirmed that I've said it several times now. I bet
if I said my favourite colour was blue, you would chase me around
demanding that I prove blue was my favourite colour, rather than discuss
the fact that now that Republicans have been reduced in California to the
point where we can drown them in a bathtub, California is dramatically
turning into a success story.

[Zepp]

Now you're just lying, bubbles. I posted several names. In one post,
you had to remove them to reply. In another, you demanded I cite were
they specifically said it.

And California, free of Republican tyranny, is still rapidly becoming a
major success story.

[Liberal Here]

Yet no one outside of the state is hearing how the state is turning
around. Must be that dang ***LIBERAL*** main stream media

[Liberal Here]

On May 17, 10:38 am, Zepp <d...@gone.com> wrote:

> On Fri, 17 May 2013 07:16:23 -0400, NoBody wrote:
> > On Thu, 16 May 2013 16:10:57 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <d...@gone.com> wrote:
>

> >>On Thu, 16 May 2013 08:36:56 -0700, wy wrote:

> >>> Well, the lesson to learn here is to get rid of the Repugnant majority
> >>> in the House by at least 25% in 2014 just to ensure that Democrats are
> >>> able to get things done, just like they got things done back in
> >>> 2009-2010.  What did they call that Congress?  One of the most
> >>> productive ones ever.  What did they call the Congress that followed
> >>> with Repugnants ruling the House roost?  Probably the least productive
> >>> ever.  See how it works?  It's a no brainer.
>
> >>Keep in mind most Republicans WANT the American government to collapse.
>
> > Please name and cite these prominent Republicans (or are you just
> > shooting your mouth / foot off again?).
>

> Start with Grover Norquist.  Let's add Phil Gramm.  Paul Ryan.  The
> Pauls.

Awwwww, now.....you're confusing and upsetting the reichtards with
actual names.

[Liberal Here]

On May 17, 12:22 pm, Yak <y...@inbox.com> wrote:
> On May 17, 12:06 pm, Salty Stan <wsjames...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 17, 11:42 am, Zepp <d...@gone.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Fri, 17 May 2013 06:40:52 -0700, Christopher  Helms wrote:

> > > > How the fuck did California go from having massive, crippling deficits
> > > > to a surplus in so short a time?
>
> > > The last election was so overwhelmingly Democratic (super majorities in
> > > both houses) that the GOP lost its ability to stop all revenue bills.
>
> > Is that what happened in Texas, too?
>
> CA is having a massive love in over a 'projected' surplus.  And their
> track record on projections is less than stellar.
>
> That said, this is CA. They'll figure out something stupid to do even
> if they do wind up in the black for the year.

"Stupid" would be bringing rethugs back into office.

Odd that you imply the most technological advanced state can be
depended on to do something stupid. California ain't Texas, Kansas,
etc.

[Liberal Here]

On May 18, 9:52 am, NoBody <NoB...@nowhere.com> wrote:

> On Fri, 17 May 2013 14:39:23 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <d...@gone.com> wrote:
> >On Fri, 17 May 2013 07:14:16 -0400, NoBody wrote:
>

> >> On Thu, 16 May 2013 13:47:02 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <d...@gone.com> wrote:
>
> >>>On Thu, 16 May 2013 07:16:32 -0400, NoBody wrote:
>

Actually, if you understood how to count indents, you'd know I didn't
bring up governors.

[Zepp]

Word is getting out, and it's devastating. As you can tell by the
frantic "PROVE California exists"-style arm waving from our resident
wingnuts.

It'll never pecolate down to the south, though. They simply refuse to
believe that anyone could treat them better than their masters do.

[Zepp]

Read on. I've got one who can't seem to make up his mind whether I
posted actual names or not.

[Zepp]

Our little troll knows how bad the news from California is for right wing
claims that only they can fix the economy. He'll say or do anything to
deflect from the dramatic Democratic success story in California.

[opel]

On 5/18/2013 9:32 AM, Liberal Here wrote:
> Yet no one outside of the state is hearing how the state is turning
> around.

Here's why folks continue to stream out of it in an unending migration
to prosperity elsewhere:

http://www.caltax.org/research/calrank.html

California is a high-tax state, with some of the steepest sales tax,
personal income tax and corporate tax rates in the nation.

For businesses seeking to create jobs for Californians by locating or
expanding in the state, taxes can be a major obstacle. California has
the third-worst state business tax climate in the nation, according to
reports from the Tax Foundation, a national tax research organization
that tracks state taxes.

Here is how California compares to other states in terms of major taxes,
according to the Tax Foundation's March 2013 report, "Facts & Figures:
How Does Your State Compare?":

State Sales Tax: Highest in the Nation

California levies a 7.5 percent general sales and use tax on consumers,
which is the highest statewide rate in the nation. Local governments are
permitted to levy additional sales and use taxes, and the combined rate
of the additional local taxes should not exceed 2 percent. However, some
local governments have been given special dispensation to go above this
cap. Click here for the State Board of Equalization's detailed
description of the statewide sales and use tax rate, and here for
information on additional city and county sales tax rates.

Gasoline Tax: Highest in the Nation

California's combined local, state and federal gasoline taxes total 70.6
cents per gallon, the highest in the nation. (This includes the
3.5-cents-per-gallon increase approved in March 2013, effective July 1,
2013. State-by-state statistics are reported by the American Petroleum
Institute.)

Personal Income Tax: Highest in the Nation

California's personal income tax has the highest top rate and one of the
most highly progressive structures in the nation. After passage of
Proposition 30, California's top rate is 13.3 percent (including the 1
percent surcharge for mental health programs, for all personal income
taxpayers with taxable income over $1 million). Hawaii is second, with a
top rate of 11 percent. Most small businesses are S Corporations,
partnerships, or sole proprietorships, and pay their business taxes at
the rates for individuals, which makes California's taxes on small
businesses some of the most burdensome in the nation. Seven states do
not impose a personal income tax.

Corporate Income Tax: Highest in the West

"Corporations looking to relocate, or even establish, a business in the
West may shy away from California, as the state's 8.84 percent flat rate
is the highest corporate tax rate in the West," the Tax Foundation said
in 2011. Nothing has changed, as the group's 2013 State Business Tax
Climate Index report shows that other Western states still have much
lower corporate tax rates. Nationally, only eight states have a higher
top corporate tax rate than California (Alaska, Illinois, Iowa, Maine,
Minnesota, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island).

Property Tax: High, Even Under Proposition 13

In its 2013 State Business Tax Climate Index, the Tax Foundation ranks
the 50 states on property tax collections per capita. As of July 1,
2012, property taxes in California were $1,458 per capita, ranked 15th
highest nationally. Without Proposition 13, the 1978 voter-approved
initiative that set limits on property taxes for California property
owners, the state likely would rank even worse.

Many California property owners also are required to pay costly parcel
taxes. These are annual property taxes (not based upon the value of the
property) imposed by many school districts, special districts and other
jurisdictions.

[opel]

On 5/18/2013 9:33 AM, Liberal Here wrote:
> you're confusing and upsetting the reichtards with
> actual names.

[opel]

On 5/18/2013 9:41 AM, Liberal Here wrote:
> Actually, if you understood how to count indents

[opel]

On 5/18/2013 9:37 AM, Liberal Here wrote:
> California ain't Texas, Kansas,
> etc.

Oh so very true...

[opel]

On 5/15/2013 1:36 PM, Liberal Here wrote:
> Poof....a new state recession.

[Steve]

Of course

[Slackjaw]

> >>>>>> >> >>>> > Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, but the REAL question is: "Will

Honestly, Zepp. You actually believe any of the persons you named wish
to have the government collapse? Do really think that?

--
---
Truth is the cure for liberalism.
---

[Slackjaw]

The truth is that Texas is enjoying a $8.8 billion surplus. even larger
than California's, despite it smaller economy. As for the national
deficit, Obama tripled it his first year in office.

[Man of Mind]

On 5/19/2013 5:56 AM, Slapped_Fraud <wsjam...@gmail.com> sniveled:
>
> Christopher Helms replied to the political pabulum regurgitated by:
>>
>> On May 17, 5:04 pm, Faulty_Sham <wsjam...@gmail.com> knee-jerked when:
>>>
>>> On May 17, 3:02 pm, wy was refuting the low-effort thinking presented by:
>>>>
>>>> On 17 May, 12:54, Faulty_Sham <wsjam...@gmail.com> was blathering:
....
>>>> http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/01/texas-used-stimulus-to-cover-97-of-its-deficit/70077/

>>>>
>>>> So California has been able to achieve a surplus, thanks to a
>>>> Democrat, and Texas was able to balance its budget and pay down their
>>>> debt, thanks to a Democrat who gave them the money that was supposed

>>>> to go to other things - like jobs. Common denominator in solving

>>>> Repugnant fiscal woes? Democrats. Even when Repugnants talk about
>>>> and try to be fiscally responsible, they just can't do it. Why not?
>>>> Because Repugnant math doesn't work in the real world.
>>>
>>> Did in Texas, and under Ronald Reagan.

Nope, wrong on both accounts..

>> Actually, Texas has a 16 billion dollar deficit that they are
>> constantly trying to hide with Enron style accounting stunts, the
>> national deficit exploded under Reagan and the vast majority of
>> "Obamas" spending that you guys constantly complain about actually
>> occurred under Bush.
>
> The truth is that Texas is enjoying a $8.8 billion surplus.

Nope, that's completely false.. They were 'projecting' a surplus
that has yet to arrive..

http://www.voicesempower.com/the-texas-budget-boondoggle-part-2/

> even larger than California's

You really have trouble with numbers, don't you, cupcakes..

> despite it smaller economy.

California has a 'smaller economy' than Texas? *>LOL!<*

> As for the national deficit, Obama tripled it his first year in office.

Nope, that was the result of W. Bush's administration, despite your
usual 'low-effort thinking' to the contrary..

--
"If it weren't for us, who's pay for your welfare and food stamps?"

"You don't don't the difference between a typo and a grammar mistake?"

"Sigh, there are other people are smarter than you. Get over it."

"I also posted a correction - once I found I made a mistake, I stop
doing it."

"Did you know that Rush listener are on average, better education
and more intelligence that the population at large?"

"I can't help but notice how it seems liberals' posts are full
of grammar and spelling mistake, as if they can't write above
a fifth-grade level."

[Zepp]

It might have been the other day, but Friday the lege worked out an
agreement to restore $2.3 billion to the state's decimated school system,
a half billion to the teachers' pension fund, and two billion to the
state water district.

Seems a huge state budget failed to impress voters who were facing
increasing water shortages, and the possibility of a school system
collapse, leaving them with their only options being moving to a state
with real schools, or shelling out eight grand each to send the kids to
some private flat-earth academy.

[Zepp]

In fairness, he meant Texas.

>
>> As for the national deficit, Obama tripled it his first year in office.
>
> Nope, that was the result of W. Bush's administration, despite your
> usual 'low-effort thinking' to the contrary..

Bush's last budget was the biggest deficit, and they have been declining
ever since.

[NoBody]

Here's the correct context (oh this is called a citation btw):

http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2011-07-14/conversation-grover-norquist/transcript

"REHM
10:21:48
All right. You have, at one point, said that you'd like to shrink
government so much that it's small enough you could drown it in a
bathtub. That's your quote?
NORQUIST
10:22:05
The actual quote was actually from somebody who is saying, do you want
to get rid of government?
REHM
10:22:09
Right.
NORQUIST
10:22:09
And the answer was no. I don't want to abolish the government. I do
want to reduce it dramatically, in point of fact, to the size where
you could drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub, which
is hyperbole for very small.
REHM
10:22:21
Okay. Now...
NORQUIST
10:22:22
So don't get rid of it. Make it teeny. "

Now how does this translate to "wanting the government to collapse"?
Oh and your cites showing the other names you mentioned wanting the
govenment to collapse?

[NoBody]

Yes he does. He's deluded but yes he does.

[NoBody]

On Sat, 18 May 2013 15:13:02 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:

>On Sat, 18 May 2013 09:46:16 -0400, NoBody wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 17 May 2013 05:58:54 -0700 (PDT), Salty Stan
>> <wsjam...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On May 17, 7:16�am, NoBody <NoB...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 16 May 2013 16:10:57 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <d...@gone.com> wrote:
>>>> >On Thu, 16 May 2013 08:36:56 -0700, wy wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >> On 16 May, 10:26, Zepp <d...@gone.com> wrote:
>>>> >>> On Thu, 16 May 2013 07:06:11 -0700, wy wrote:
>>>> >>> > On 16 May, 09:47, Zepp <d...@gone.com> wrote:
>>>> >>> >> On Thu, 16 May 2013 07:16:32 -0400, NoBody wrote:
>>>> >>> >> > On Wed, 15 May 2013 19:45:52 +0000 (UTC), Zepp
>>>> >>> >> > <d...@gone.com>
>>>> >>> >> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>On Wed, 15 May 2013 12:36:57 -0700, Liberal Here wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>> On May 15, 2:41�pm, Zepp <d...@gone.com> wrote:
>>>> >>> >> >>>> On Wed, 15 May 2013 11:17:49 -0700, Liberal Here wrote:
>>>> >>> >> >>>> > On May 13, 11:46�pm, Zepp <d...@gone.com> wrote:
>>>> >>> >> >>>> >>http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/05/13/democrats-at-odds-
>over-
>>>> >>> >> >>>> californ...
>>>> >>> >> >>>> >> multi-billion-dollar-budget-surplus/
>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>>> >> California Gov. Jerry Brown (D) is expected to clash

>>>> >>> >> >>>> >> with his own party over the state?s huge budget

>>>> >>> >> >>>> >> surplus.
>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>>> >> California is expected to see a budget surplus of about
>>>> >>> >> >>>> >> $4.5 billion thanks to a voter-approved tax increase,
>>>> >>> >> >>>> >> rising employment, increasing home prices, a surging
>>>> >>> >> >>>> >> stock market, and tens of billions in spending cuts.
>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>>> >> Brown has indicated he plans to continue to cautiously

>>>> >>> >> >>>> >> restrain spending and pay down the state?s debt,

>though
>>>> >>> >> >>>> >> he also hopes to increase education funding for the

>>>> >>> >> >>>> >> underprivileged and expand the state?s Medicaid

>>>> >>> >> >>>> >> program.
>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>>> >> The governor will release his new budget proposal at a
>>>> >>> >> >>>> >> press conference in Sacramento on Tuesday. But
>>>> >>> >> >>>> >> lawmakers in his own party, who have a super-majority
>>>> >>> >> >>>> >> in both chambers of the California legislature, have
>>>> >>> >> >>>> >> already called for the additional revenue to be used to
>>>> >>> >> >>>> >> repair programs hampered by budget cuts.
>>>>

>>>> >>> >> >>>> >> ?Now, with the economic recovery finally taking hold,

>>>> >>> >> >>>> >> we can finally say: the era of new budget cuts and

>>>> >>> >> >>>> >> additional broad-based taxes is over,? Assembly
>Speaker
>>>> >>> >> >>>> >> John Perez (D-Los Angeles) announced last week. ?We

>>>> >>> >> >>>> >> must now pivot to strengthening our state, avoiding the
>>>> >>> >> >>>> >> mistakes of the past, and preventing the devastating
>>>> >>> >> >>>> >> impacts that economic downturns can have on our budget

>>>> >>> >> >>>> >> and the people of California.?

>>>>
>>>> >>> >> >>>> >> Perez is seeking additional funding for child care
>>>> >>> >> >>>> >> services and college assistance. Meanwhile, other
>>>> >>> >> >>>> >> Democrats have urged the governor to restore spending
>>>> >>> >> >>>> >> to health care services and programs for the poor.
>>>>

>>>> >>> >> >>>> >> ?There is no shame, in fact there?s pride, in

>fighting
>>>> >>> >> >>>> >> to
>>>> >>> >> restore
>>>> >>> >> >>>> >> cuts to those who have suffered the most during the

>>>> >>> >> >>>> >> budget crisis ? the poor, the elderly and the
>>>> >>> >> >>>> >> disabled,? Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg

Perhaps you should pay attention to the message to which I was
responding. I "excised" nothing. BTW, your claim remains bogus as
you can't seem to find anything to support that those individuals want
the government to collapse.

>

>So you have learned to fear Google.

I use it quite well as I have used it to demolish your claim about
Norquist.

[NoBody]

On Sat, 18 May 2013 15:09:40 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:

>On Sat, 18 May 2013 09:52:22 -0400, NoBody wrote:

>
>> On Fri, 17 May 2013 14:39:23 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 17 May 2013 07:14:16 -0400, NoBody wrote:
>>>

>>>> On Thu, 16 May 2013 13:47:02 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Thu, 16 May 2013 07:16:32 -0400, NoBody wrote:
>>>>>

>>>>>> On Wed, 15 May 2013 19:45:52 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com>

>>>> And suddenly Zippo stops talking about governors and and about the
>>>> legislature...
>>>
>>>That's because I wasn't talking about them, bubbles. You were.
>>>Remember?
>>
>> Actually if read the above, Liberal Here brought up governors and you
>> responded to him.
>

>By talking about the damage the minority in the lege did. Do try to pay
>attention, dear boy.

Pay attention dear boy. You just claimed you weren't talking about
them and I was. I showed you to be wrong (yet again).

[NoBody]

Before you insult, perhaps you should recall your own posts.

https://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/msg/47dffa98a4437001?dmode=source

Your apology?

[NoBody]

Strike two!

https://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.rush-limbaugh/msg/47dffa98a4437001?dmode=source

[NoBody]

On Sat, 18 May 2013 15:08:03 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:

>On Sat, 18 May 2013 09:53:10 -0400, NoBody wrote:
>
>>>I'd bet that California's debt will be even larger this time next year.
>>>Leftists have no sense of fiscal responsibility. Take Zepp for
>>>instance..
>

>May 18, 2014.
>
>See you then, Stevie.

Kindly quote in such a way that it appears you are responding to the
correct poster. Thank you.

[Zepp]

I'm supposed to believe you're anything other than a Steve sockpuppet?

[NoBody]

On Sat, 18 May 2013 15:26:47 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <de...@gone.com> wrote:

>On Sat, 18 May 2013 09:39:57 -0400, NoBody wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 17 May 2013 05:58:54 -0700 (PDT), Salty Stan
>> <wsjam...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On May 17, 7:16�am, NoBody <NoB...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 16 May 2013 16:10:57 +0000 (UTC), Zepp <d...@gone.com> wrote:
>>>> >On Thu, 16 May 2013 08:36:56 -0700, wy wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >> On 16 May, 10:26, Zepp <d...@gone.com> wrote:
>>>> >>> On Thu, 16 May 2013 07:06:11 -0700, wy wrote:

>> Not a single name or citation.
>
>Now you're just lying, bubbles. I posted several names. In one post,
>you had to remove them to reply. In another, you demanded I cite were
>they specifically said it.
>

Look at the message time stamps dimbulb. I posted a correction that
you had provided names (but still zero support of couse).

>And California, free of Republican tyranny, is still rapidly becoming a
>major success story.

BWWWAAAHAAAA!!!!!

[Zepp]

Learn to read, bubbles. I was talking about the lege.

[NoBody]

Poor Zippo's mind can't comprehend how one could respond to a message
before getting to a message in the thread that contained the names
(but still ZERO proof). Correction was issued that you had named
names.

[Zepp]

"Drown government in the bathtub." Let's start with that. Why would
anyone want a government so weak it cannot defend itself?

>
>
>>So you have learned to fear Google.
>
> I use it quite well as I have used it to demolish your claim about
> Norquist.

Really? Well, you must post it then!

[Zepp]

Nobody accused Norquist of wanting to abolish government. Just make it
weak, and defenseless, so any powerful entity could steamroller right
over it.

[Man of Mind]

On 5/19/2013 11:14 AM, Zepp wrote:
>
> On Sun, 19 May 2013 08:40:48 -0500, Man of Mind pointed out the lies told by:

>>
>> On 5/19/2013 5:56 AM, Slapped_Fraud <wsjam...@gmail.com> sniveled:
>>>
>>> Christopher Helms replied to the political pabulum regurgitated by:
>>>>
>>>> On May 17, 5:04 pm, Faulty_Sham <wsjam...@gmail.com> knee-jerked when:
>>>>>
>>>>> On May 17, 3:02 pm, wy was refuting the low-effort thinking presented by:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 17 May, 12:54, Faulty_Sham <wsjam...@gmail.com> was blathering:

......
>>>>>> http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/01/texas-used-stimulus-to-cover-97-of-its-deficit/70077/

>>>>>>
>>>>>> So California has been able to achieve a surplus, thanks to a
>>>>>> Democrat, and Texas was able to balance its budget and pay down
>>>>>> their debt, thanks to a Democrat who gave them the money that was
>>>>>> supposed to go to other things - like jobs. Common denominator in
>>>>>> solving Repugnant fiscal woes? Democrats. Even when Repugnants
>>>>>> talk about and try to be fiscally responsible, they just can't do
>>>>>> it. Why not?
>>>>>> Because Repugnant math doesn't work in the real world.
>>>>>
>>>>> Did in Texas, and under Ronald Reagan.
>>
>> Nope, wrong on both accounts..
>>
>>>> Actually, Texas has a 16 billion dollar deficit that they are
>>>> constantly trying to hide with Enron style accounting stunts, the
>>>> national deficit exploded under Reagan and the vast majority of
>>>> "Obamas" spending that you guys constantly complain about actually
>>>> occurred under Bush.
>>>
>>> The truth is that Texas is enjoying a $8.8 billion surplus.
>>
>> Nope, that's completely false.. They were 'projecting' a surplus that
>> has yet to arrive..
>>
>> http://www.voicesempower.com/the-texas-budget-boondoggle-part-2/
>>
>>> even larger than California's
>>
>> You really have trouble with numbers, don't you, cupcakes..
>>
>>> despite it smaller economy.
>>
>> California has a 'smaller economy' than Texas? *>LOL!<*
>
> In fairness, he meant Texas.

I doubt it.. Slackbrain isn't any good with numbers..

>>> As for the national deficit, Obama tripled it his first year in office.
>>
>> Nope, that was the result of W. Bush's administration, despite your
>> usual 'low-effort thinking' to the contrary..
>
> Bush's last budget was the biggest deficit, and they have been declining
> ever since.

True fact..

--
"The Republicans are the party that says
government doesn't work and then they get
elected and prove it." --P. J. O'Rourke

[Slackjaw]

Kurt has a bit of a reading comprehension problem. We've come to expect
it.

> >
> >> As for the national deficit, Obama tripled it his first year in
> office.
> >
> > Nope, that was the result of W. Bush's administration, despite your
> > usual 'low-effort thinking' to the contrary..
>
> Bush's last budget was the biggest deficit, and they have been
> declining ever since.

AFTER Obama's inauguration in 2009 he and the Democrat Congress ADDED
almost a trillion bucks in "supplemental" spending. Bush's share of the
2009 deficit was about $0.5 trillion. Democrats ADDED the rest after he
left.
2007 Last Bush/GOP deficit = $235,256,210,704.89 (deficits had been
FALLING)
2010 1st Obama/Democrat deficit = $1,579,467,302,556.05

You do the Math.

[Slackjaw]

> >>>>>>>> >> >>>> > Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, but the REAL question is: "Will

You claimed he (and other Republicans) wants the government to collapse.

> Just make
> it weak, and defenseless, so any powerful entity could steamroller
> right over it.

And your source for this is?

[NoBody]

Ah the last refuge of Zippo the coward - claim that I am someone else.
What at least he's a predictable "no-challenge" poster.

[NoBody]

Now you're just getting embarrassing. "You claimed he wanted "the
government to collapse". What he said in context bears no
relationship to the extreme you attempted paint him. Face it Zippo,
you again have no point and you're squirming as much as possible
rather than admit your error.

You also claimed that several others (named) wanted the government to
collapse and have provided nothing to support your blathering.

[NoBody]

Even after I provided his words and context you continue to lie about
them. Where did he say he didn't want the goverment to be able to
defend itself. Oh and you forgot to apologize for accusing me of
doing something I didn't do (excise the names). Are you that callous
with your dishonesty?

>>
>>
>>>So you have learned to fear Google.
>>
>> I use it quite well as I have used it to demolish your claim about
>> Norquist.
>
>Really? Well, you must post it then!

Already have done so.

[NoBody]

Yeah I wasn't expecting one from a lib...

[NoBody]

<crickets.wav>

[NoBody]

<zippy-crickets.wav>

[NoBody]

The tweeting birds in his head....

[Man of Mind]

On 5/19/2013 9:49 PM, Slapped_Fraud <wsjam...@gmail.com> sniveled:
>
> On 5/19/2013 11:14 AM, Zepp replied to:
>>
>> On Sun, 19 May 2013 08:40:48 -0500, Man of Mind elicited a knee-jerk from:

>>>
>>> On 5/19/2013 5:56 AM, Slapped_Fraud <wsjam...@gmail.com> sniveled:
>>>>
>>>> Christopher Helms replied to the political pabulum regurgitated by:
>>>>>
>>>>> On May 17, 5:04 pm, Faulty_Sham <wsjam...@gmail.com> knee-jerked when:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On May 17, 3:02 pm, wy was refuting the low-effort thinking presented by:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 17 May, 12:54, Faulty_Sham <wsjam...@gmail.com> was blathering:

.......
>>>>>>> http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/01/texas-used-stimulus-to-cover-97-of-its-deficit/70077/

>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So California has been able to achieve a surplus, thanks to a
>>>>>>> Democrat, and Texas was able to balance its budget and pay down
>>>>>>> their debt, thanks to a Democrat who gave them the money that was
>>>>>>> supposed to go to other things - like jobs. Common denominator in
>>>>>>> solving Repugnant fiscal woes? Democrats. Even when Repugnants
>>>>>>> talk about and try to be fiscally responsible, they just can't do
>>>>>>> it. Why not? Because Repugnant math doesn't work in the real world.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Did in Texas, and under Ronald Reagan.
>>>
>>> Nope, wrong on both accounts..
>>>
>>>>> Actually, Texas has a 16 billion dollar deficit that they are
>>>>> constantly trying to hide with Enron style accounting stunts, the
>>>>> national deficit exploded under Reagan and the vast majority of
>>>>> "Obamas" spending that you guys constantly complain about actually
>>>>> occurred under Bush.
>>>>
>>>> The truth is that Texas is enjoying a $8.8 billion surplus.
>>>
>>> Nope, that's completely false.. They were 'projecting' a surplus
>>> that has yet to arrive..
>>>
>>> http://www.voicesempower.com/the-texas-budget-boondoggle-part-2/

*>cricket.wav<*

>>>> even larger than California's
>>>
>>> You really have trouble with numbers, don't you, cupcakes..
>>>
>>>> despite it smaller economy.
>>>
>>> California has a 'smaller economy' than Texas? *>LOL!<*
>>
>> In fairness, he meant Texas.

*>cricket.wav<*

> has a bit of a reading comprehension problem

I see that you've again deflected from answering with a valid
counter-argument with your usual childish personal attacks..

We've come to expect that of you fright-wingers..

>>>> As for the national deficit, Obama tripled it his first year in office.
>>>
>>> Nope, that was the result of W. Bush's administration, despite your
>>> usual 'low-effort thinking' to the contrary..
>>
>> Bush's last budget was the biggest deficit, and they have been
>> declining ever since.
>
> AFTER Obama's inauguration in 2009

Do you really want to go there?

> You do the Math.

You've already proven yourself incompetent at "Math", slapped_fraud..

--
"What to know what it is?"

"Hmm, you right away from that Kurt. Why is that?"

"I posted my answers, hoe could you mis them?"

"When you plagairized those equations you made one glaring error."

"If you were to ball a ball 500 miles above the Earth's surface"

"Oh, the units are in energy - kg x ft^2/sec^2"

"Anyway, I didn't even bother to out in the units in the equation"

"You don't don't the difference between a typo and a grammar mistake?"

"Sigh, there are other people are smarter than you. Get over it."

"I also posted a correction - once I found I made a mistake, I stop
doing it."

"Did you know that Rush listener are on average, better education
and more intelligence that the population at large?"

"I can't help but notice how it seems liberals' posts are full
of grammar and spelling mistake, as if they can't write above
a fifth-grade level."

[Slackjaw]

> >>> >>>> >> >>>> > Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, but the REAL question is: "Will

Does anyone even take Zepp seriously anymore?

[Man of Mind]

On 5/20/2013 6:45 AM, Slapped_Fraud <wsjam...@gmail.com> sniveled:
>
> Man of Mind was noting the evasions and obfuscations posted by:

>>
>> On 5/19/2013 9:49 PM, Slapped_Fraud <wsjam...@gmail.com> sniveled:
>>>
>>> On 5/19/2013 11:14 AM, Zepp replied to:
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, 19 May 2013 08:40:48 -0500, Man of Mind elicited a knee-jerk from:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 5/19/2013 5:56 AM, Slapped_Fraud <wsjam...@gmail.com> sniveled:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Christopher Helms replied to the political pabulum regurgitated by:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On May 17, 5:04 pm, Faulty_Sham <wsjam...@gmail.com> knee-jerked when:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On May 17, 3:02 pm, wy was refuting the low-effort thinking presented by:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 17 May, 12:54, Faulty_Sham <wsjam...@gmail.com> was blathering:

.........

>>>>>>>>> http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/01/texas-used-stimulus-to-cover-97-of-its-deficit/70077/
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So California has been able to achieve a surplus, thanks to a
>>>>>>>>> Democrat, and Texas was able to balance its budget and pay down
>>>>>>>>> their debt, thanks to a Democrat who gave them the money that was
>>>>>>>>> supposed to go to other things - like jobs. Common denominator in
>>>>>>>>> solving Repugnant fiscal woes? Democrats. Even when Repugnants
>>>>>>>>> talk about and try to be fiscally responsible, they just can't do
>>>>>>>>> it. Why not? Because Repugnant math doesn't work in the real world.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Did in Texas, and under Ronald Reagan.
>>>>>
>>>>> Nope, wrong on both accounts..

*>cricket.wav<*

>>>>>>> Actually, Texas has a 16 billion dollar deficit that they are
>>>>>>> constantly trying to hide with Enron style accounting stunts, the
>>>>>>> national deficit exploded under Reagan and the vast majority of
>>>>>>> "Obamas" spending that you guys constantly complain about actually
>>>>>>> occurred under Bush.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The truth is that Texas is enjoying a $8.8 billion surplus.
>>>>>
>>>>> Nope, that's completely false.. They were 'projecting' a surplus
>>>>> that has yet to arrive..
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.voicesempower.com/the-texas-budget-boondoggle-part-2/

*>cricket.wav<*

>>>>>> even larger than California's
>>>>>
>>>>> You really have trouble with numbers, don't you, cupcakes..
>>>>>
>>>>>> despite it smaller economy.
>>>>>
>>>>> California has a 'smaller economy' than Texas? *>LOL!<*
>>>>
>>>> In fairness, he meant Texas.

*>cricket.wav<*

>>> has a bit of a reading comprehension problem
>>
>> I see that you've again deflected from answering with a valid
>> counter-argument with your usual childish personal attacks..
>>
>> We've come to expect that of you fright-wingers..
>

> you don't have the intellectual or emotional maturity to warrant
> a relevant response.

Keep telling on yourself, as you lamely try to dance away
from how your comparison to Texas' non-existent "surplus"
to California's falls apart under scrutiny..

>>>>>> As for the national deficit, Obama tripled it his first year in office.
>>>>>
>>>>> Nope, that was the result of W. Bush's administration, despite your
>>>>> usual 'low-effort thinking' to the contrary..
>>>>
>>>> Bush's last budget was the biggest deficit, and they have been
>>>> declining ever since.
>>>
>>> AFTER Obama's inauguration in 2009
>>
>> Do you really want to go there?
>>
>>> You do the Math.
>>
>> You've already proven yourself incompetent at "Math", slapped_fraud..

*>cricket.wav<*

[Zepp]

You do. You keep following me around like a little lost puppy.

[Man of Mind]

On 5/20/2013 8:50 AM, Zepp wrote:
>
> On Mon, 20 May 2013 11:39:39 +0000, Slapped_Fraud <wsjam...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> NoBody was regurgitating the usual right-wing pabulum:

>>
>>> On Sat, 18 May 2013 16:28:46 +0000 (UTC), Zepp wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, 18 May 2013 08:33:51 -0700, Liberal Here wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On May 17, 10:38 am, Zepp <d...@gone.com> wrote:
>>>>>>

>>>>>> On Fri, 17 May 2013 07:16:23 -0400, NoBrained whined/opined:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, 16 May 2013 16:10:57 +0000 (UTC), Zepp replied:
........

>>>>>>>> Keep in mind most Republicans WANT the American government to
>>>>>>>> collapse.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please name and cite these prominent Republicans (or are you
>>>>>>> just shooting your mouth / foot off again?).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Start with Grover Norquist. Let's add Phil Gramm. Paul Ryan.
>>>>> The Pauls.
>>>>>
>>>>> Awwwww, now.....you're confusing and upsetting the reichtards with
>>>>> actual names.
>>>>
>>>> Read on. I've got one who can't seem to make up his mind whether I
>>>> posted actual names or not.
>>>
>>> Poor Zippo's mind can't comprehend how one could respond to a message
>>> before getting to a message in the thread that contained the names (but
>>> still ZERO proof). Correction was issued that you had named names.
>>
>> Does anyone even take Zepp seriously anymore?
>
> You do. You keep following me around like a little lost puppy.

You have quite the 'fan club', and they appear to have missed you..

[Zepp]

Please feel free to ignore me then, Stevie.

[Zepp]

I noticed on my return that message volume here was down to under 50 a
day.

[Salty Stan]

On May 20, 10:49 am, Man of Mind <baron.von.m...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/20/2013 8:50 AM, Zepp wrote:
>

ss

>
> >>>> Read on.  I've got one who can't seem to make up his mind whether I
> >>>> posted actual names or not.
>
> >>> Poor Zippo's mind can't comprehend  how one could respond to a message
> >>> before getting to a message in the thread that contained the names (but
> >>> still ZERO proof).  Correction was issued that you had named names.
>
> >> Does anyone even take Zepp seriously anymore?
>
> > You do.  You keep following me around like a little lost puppy.
>

I look forward to reading your posts, Zepp. I think you provide an
important and revealing insight into the thought processes of a
typical, rank-and-file liberal.