LMAO, as you see the argument slipping away, the insults begin. Once again Obama INHERITED these Bail outs he did not create them.. try again.
The AIG Bailout began in 2008 The Auto Bailout Began in 2008 The TARP Bailout began in 2008 The Merrill Lynch Bailout Began in 2008 The majority of the additional spending was already COMMITTED before Obama took office. On Apr 16, 4:06 pm, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> wrote: > Hey SugarShack: > > Here ya go: > > http://www.federalbudget.com/ > > This is all Obama's..... > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 3:53 PM, VT VirtualTruth > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > Really? > > > The AIG Bailout began in 2008 > > The Auto Bailout Began in 2008 > > The TARP Bailout began in 2008 > > The Merrill Lynch Bailout Began in 2008 > > The majority of the additional spending was already > > COMMITTED before Obama took office. > > > You want to try again with this erroneous statement > > or better yet you want to supply FACTS proving this statement? > > > On Apr 16, 3:31 pm, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Except for the current Administration who within less than 90 days, has > > > expanded the federal bureauacracy ten fold, and increased the size of the > > > budget larger than all budgets combined in our entire 230 year history. > > > President Obama makes George Bush look like a fiscal conservative, and we > > > all know that he wasn't. The point being, is that your comparison is > > > moot. America made a mistake, and it is time to limit the damage now > > > Sean!!! > > > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 3:26 PM, VT VirtualTruth > > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > Sounds great but we all have seen what REALLY happens when Republicans > > > > have no one to challenge their fiscal actions or policies. They > > > > doubled the Debt > > > > took a budget surplus and turned it into a record deficit and grew > > > > government > > > > faster than any other Administration in history. > > > > > On Apr 16, 3:13 pm, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > What point does this make? That Clinton was a Tax & Spend Democrat, > > > > wherein > > > > > a Republican Congress and their "Contract With America" held his feet > > to > > > > the > > > > > fire? > > > > > > Nothing in this audio report disputes the facts that I submitted > > earlier. > > > > > You have Newt Gingrich, and a Republican controlled Congress that was > > > > > responsible for a budgetary surplus, period. Clinton had literally > > > > nothing > > > > > to do with the surplus, and if it were not for a Republican > > controlled > > > > > fiscally conservative Congress, who Clinton successfully fought over > > and > > > > > vetoed their balanced budget Amendments, we would have had deficit > > > > > spending!! > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 3:08 PM, VT VirtualTruth > > > > > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > > > I will let the actual news reports of November 11, 1995 > > > > > > make my point. > > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6KRnWkh45U&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fcrooksan. > > > > .. > > > > > > > Clinton invested in the future US economy and the result was > > > > > > robust GDP growth that grew the economy out of deficits. > > > > > > Republicans consider this incorrectly as wasted money. > > > > > > > Bush decided to give the surplus away as tax cuts to > > > > > > the rich with the ridiculous idea that the money would > > > > > > bleed down to others. The result was Bush starved the > > > > > > country of much needed future investments. > > > > > > > Obama now must maintain the normal amout of forward > > > > > > investment in the country's future AND make up for the > > > > > > 8 years Bush starved the economy of stimulus investment > > > > > > capital. > > > > > > > On Apr 16, 2:01 pm, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Hello Sean!! > > > > > > > > Good to see ya!! > > > > > > > > Thank you for sharing your homoerotic far left extremist talking > > > > points > > > > > > with > > > > > > > the group! I know that members such as Fritzie, Biffie, Cosmo-ie > > and > > > > > > other > > > > > > > far left extremists are proud of you for picking up on and > > mimicking > > > > the > > > > > > > likes of that gal who is the husband and splashes diesel behind > > her > > > > ears > > > > > > for > > > > > > > perfume....Whuz-Her-Name....Rachael Maddow, and the other crazed, > > > > > > demented > > > > > > > Moonbat, Keithie Olberman, but I digress. > > > > > > > > Let's review your premise, and I quote: > > > > > > > > "That the Republican Congress was NOT the reason for this > > balanced > > > > > > > budget (during > > > > > > > the Clinton Administration). That Clinton stood up to the Rhino's > > > > (Rhino > > > > > > > being a derogatory term for Republican)" > > > > > > > > ===== > > > > > > > > Sean, let us actually review the facts, and not revisionist > > history. > > > > Of > > > > > > > course, all of the data I have attached here can be documented. > > > > Please > > > > > > feel > > > > > > > free to ask questions if there is anything that you get confused > > on > > > > or > > > > > > are > > > > > > > frustrated over not comprehending: > > > > > > > > It is true, that the federal budget deficit tumbled from $255 > > > > billion in > > > > > > > 1993 to approximately $117 billion in 1996, and that by 1999, > > there > > > > was > > > > > > an > > > > > > > actual surplus versus a deficit in our national budget. > > > > > > > > In February 1993 President Clinton announced his new > > Administration's > > > > > > first > > > > > > > economic program: a $16-billion "fiscal stimulus." The spending > > > > package > > > > > > is > > > > > > > later abandoned by the Democratic Congress as too fiscally > > > > irresponsible. > > > > > > > > In February 1993 President Clinton wins passage of his > > $250-billion > > > > tax > > > > > > > hike; which New York Senator Pat Moynihan accurately describes as > > > > "the > > > > > > > largest tax increase in world history." > > > > >http://www.archive.org/stream/proposedconstitu00unit/proposedconstitu. > > .. > > > > > > > > Nevertheless, President Clinton's "Tax and Spend" policy passes > > the > > > > > > Democrat > > > > > > > Controlled Congress, without a single Republican vote. The > > package > > > > > > contains > > > > > > > approximately $2 of new spending for every $1 of new taxes. > > > > > > > > In September 1993 the Clinton White House lobbies to defeat the > > > > > > bi-partisan > > > > > > > Penny - Kasich deficit-reduction bill, which would have cut > > federal > > > > > > spending > > > > > > > and the deficit by $90 billion over five years. The Clinton > > White > > > > House > > > > > > and > > > > > > > the Democrat controlled Congress prevailed, and the Penny-Kasich > > > > Deficit > > > > > > > Reduction Bill was defeated. > > > > > > > >http://www.archive.org/details/pennykasichamend00unit > > > > > > > > In January 1994 Bill and Hillary Clinton unveil "ClintonCare." > > The > > > > > > proposed > > > > > > > hostile federal takeover of one-seventh of the U.S. economy would > > add > > > > at > > > > > > > least $700 billion to the deficit over the next six years, > > according > > > > to > > > > > > the > > > > > > > Congressional Budget Office (CBO). > > > > > > > >http://www.heritage.org/research/healthcare/bg1276.cfm > > > > > > > > In September 1994 the President furiously lobbies liberal > > Democrats > > > > in > > > > > > > Congress to oppose a Balanced Budget Amendment -- a measure > > supported > > > > by > > > > > > 75 > > > > > > > per cent of the American public. Labor Secretary Robert Reich is > > a > > > > little > > > > > > > too honest when he confirms most Americans' suspicions about this > > > > > > > Administration: "The President is against simply balancing the > > > > budget." > > >http://www.thefreelibrary.com/The+red-ink+blues.(budget)-a017863046 > > > > > > > >http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/7416/tales.html > > > > > > > > In October 1994 President Clinton signs into law his $30-billion > > > > "crime > > > > > > > bill." The Los Angeles Times describes the legislation as a > > > > > > > "once-in-a-lifetime federal spending bonanza" containing "a vast > > > > array of > > > > > > > new social programs" including federally funded exotic-dance > > classes, > > > > > > > sensitivity-training courses, and midnight-basketball leagues. > > The > > > > cost > > > > > > of > > > > > > > the Clinton bill has to be shaved after the Democratic House of > > > > > > > Representatives rejects the original version as too expensive. > > > > >http://www.nytimes.com/1994/10/18/us/the-1994-campaign-the-president-. > > .. > > > > > > > > In January 1995 Bill Clinton submits a 1996 budget plan that > > calls > > > > for > > > > > > $12 > > > > > > > trillion of spending over the next seven years and $200-billion > > > > deficits > > > > > > for > > > > > > > as far as the eye can see. Even Washington Post reporter David > > Broder > > > > > > blasts > > > > > > > the document as a "symbol of Clinton's failed leadership." > > Because of > > > > the > > > > > > > debt Clinton is adding, writes Broder, "the annual net interest > > is > > > > > > projected > > > > > > > to climb from $198 billion in 1993 to $270 billion in 1997 -- > > when it > > > > > > will, > > > > > > > for the first time, be larger than the projected defense budget." > > > > > > > >http://www.reason.com/news/show/30153.html > > > > > > > > -- In March 1995 Clinton again helps torpedo the Balanced Budget > > > > > > Amendment > > > > > > > -- this time by strong-arming five Democratic senators, who had > > > > > > campaigned > > > > > > > as champions of the amendment -- to flip-flop and vote no. > > > > > > > > -- In June 1995, under pressure from the newly elected GOP > > Congress, > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > Clinton submits a new, revised budget proposal. It still doesn't > > > > balance > > > > > > the > > > > > > > budget by 2002. > > > > > > > -- In July 1995 the Clinton White House begins its successful > > > > > > "Medi-scare" > > > > > > > strategy to undermine public support for a GOP plan to rein in > > > > stampeding > > > > > > > Medicare costs. Even the Washington Post editorializes that the > > > > Clinton > > > > > > > Administration has become a gang of "medagogues." On Medicare and > > > > > > Medicaid, > > > > > > > the White House is "engaged in an > > ... > > read more » --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
