OK, lets remember what this post is about, It is not about the insults or the nickname you are trying to give me, LMAO.
It is not about the FUBAR called Bush trickle down economics. It is about the fact that Bush inherited an annual Budget Surplus, turned this surplus into a record deficit and doubled the National Debt while robbing working class Americans future Social Security benefits in the greatest transfer of wealth in history through the Bush Tax cuts that bought the 2004 election and gutted the future of America and destroyed the Bush Republicans as was shown by the 2006 and 2008 election results and the subsequent economic collapse that resulted in the multiple Bailouts begun in the fall of 2008 to keep the country from experiencing another Economic collapse of 1929, and the GOP's effort to remain in power by hi-jacking yet another grass roots movement like they did with the Religious Right. The Teabaggers are the new grass roots movement to be plundered by the GOP. On Apr 16, 4:43 pm, Keith In Tampa <[email protected]> wrote: > Hey SugarShack!! > > All folks named "Sean" or "Shawn" have a nickname of "SugarShack" Just ask > former Buccaneer QB Shawn "SugarShack" King, or former Buccaneer RB Reggie > Sean "SugarShack" Cobb. > > I was opposed to the bailouts, and believed them to be a mistake. The only > way for market corrections if for the market to correct itself, not by > government bailouts. They have never worked, and this is once again a part > of failed Kenysian economics that don't work!! > > Do we once again want to revisit how we got to this financial quagmire > Sean? Do we want to once again play the "Blame Game" and point out who is > responsible for this economic quagmire?? It wasn't George Bush or the Bush > Administration!! > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 4:33 PM, VT VirtualTruth > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > 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 > > ... > > 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. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
