Jump to content

Good 'ol Bush Days


Guest 2smart4u
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest 2smart4u

Remember the good 'ol days when Bush was president and the deficit was a mere 459 Billion? Today it was announced the deficit has hit 1.4 Trillion, 3 times what it was under Bush. One would think some serious belt-tightening was in order, but instead Obama and his merry band of leftist elfs are pushing ahead with ObamaCare, estimated at almost another Trillion. The CBO estimates this number could go much higher (as government estimates usually do).

Since the Anointed One has tripled the deficit in less than a year, one has to wonder what America will look like in another 3+ years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember the good 'ol days when Bush was president and the deficit was a mere 459 Billion? Today it was announced the deficit has hit 1.4 Trillion, 3 times what it was under Bush. One would think some serious belt-tightening was in order, but instead Obama and his merry band of leftist elfs are pushing ahead with ObamaCare, estimated at almost another Trillion. The CBO estimates this number could go much higher (as government estimates usually do).

Since the Anointed One has tripled the deficit in less than a year, one has to wonder what America will look like in another 3+ years.

Check your facts. The deficit grew under Bush. Bush inherited a surplus and that surplus turned into a deficit during his administration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember the good 'ol days when Bush was president and the deficit was a mere 459 Billion? Today it was announced the deficit has hit 1.4 Trillion, 3 times what it was under Bush. One would think some serious belt-tightening was in order, but instead Obama and his merry band of leftist elfs are pushing ahead with ObamaCare, estimated at almost another Trillion. The CBO estimates this number could go much higher (as government estimates usually do).

Since the Anointed One has tripled the deficit in less than a year, one has to wonder what America will look like in another 3+ years.

I don't know what your point is here? How many times does it have to be explained to you that Obama HAD TO SPEND ALL OF THAT MONEY to avoid another GREAT DEPRESSION. I was all for letting the banks fail, but I'm 22 and idealistic. I longed to see people jumping out their windows on Wall Street. However, as much as I wanted that and a bunch of Americans THINK they wanted that, it really wouldn't have boded well for anybody. And what was so great about the Bush days? We've spent almost 700 billion dollars in Iraq. Thanks the FAILURE OF GEORGE W. BUSH to focus on the "good" war, we're about to spend a shit-ton of money to go lose in Afghanistan. If you really believe times were "good" under George W. than you're F**KING crazy. Don't forget whose watch this shitstorm of Wall Street spendspendspend got started under. That's not to exempt Barack Obama who was in Congress at the time, or Nancy Pelosi who did nothing as Speaker of the House to avert disaster, or Harry Reid. For me, Barack Obama is a bit of a let-down, but Mr. Bush destroyed this country. Seriously, it will never recover from the F**KING mess it became while he was president. I want to see Republicans do things better when they get the House and Senate in 2011 (while I'd like to see this avoided, I think you're right about the 2010 elections).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As has been pointed out repeatedly, a country cannot tighten its belt when it is on the verge of an economic meltdown. The problem is that the economy was already shutting down. The only way out is to spend money to stimulate the economy. If we had not incurred that debt, the economy would have collapsed. Make your argument if you want to but at least be honest enough to acknowledge why this was done.

In three years if we do it right, we will be stronger economically than we have been in a long time. We will have a new health care system that will take better care of our people and save us money that we won't be channeling to insurance companies that don't produce anything. We will have invested in green technologies and infrastructure, thereby creating jobs in the United States and putting our country on a sustainable path for the future. We will have stopped spending insane amounts of money on military ventures that are not necessary. We will have begun a transition away from fossil fuels that we should have begun 35 years ago. In short, we will have started to act like a nation of responsible adults who understand that the only way to build a sound future is to plan for it and not try to speculate our way into it with a massive Ponzi scheme that is destined to collapse eventually.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know what your point is here? How many times does it have to be explained to you that Obama HAD TO SPEND ALL OF THAT MONEY to avoid another GREAT DEPRESSION. I was all for letting the banks fail, but I'm 22 and idealistic. I longed to see people jumping out their windows on Wall Street. However, as much as I wanted that and a bunch of Americans THINK they wanted that, it really wouldn't have boded well for anybody. And what was so great about the Bush days? We've spent almost 700 billion dollars in Iraq. Thanks the FAILURE OF GEORGE W. BUSH to focus on the "good" war, we're about to spend a shit-ton of money to go lose in Afghanistan. If you really believe times were "good" under George W. than you're F**KING crazy. Don't forget whose watch this shitstorm of Wall Street spendspendspend got started under. That's not to exempt Barack Obama who was in Congress at the time, or Nancy Pelosi who did nothing as Speaker of the House to avert disaster, or Harry Reid. For me, Barack Obama is a bit of a let-down, but Mr. Bush destroyed this country. Seriously, it will never recover from the F**KING mess it became while he was president. I want to see Republicans do things better when they get the House and Senate in 2011 (while I'd like to see this avoided, I think you're right about the 2010 elections).

You can remind idiots like 2stupid4words all you want. They will never listen. They don't care about the facts. All they care about is the little fantasy world they've built for themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest 2smart4u
As has been pointed out repeatedly, a country cannot tighten its belt when it is on the verge of an economic meltdown. The problem is that the economy was already shutting down. The only way out is to spend money to stimulate the economy. If we had not incurred that debt, the economy would have collapsed. Make your argument if you want to but at least be honest enough to acknowledge why this was done.

In three years if we do it right, we will be stronger economically than we have been in a long time. We will have a new health care system that will take better care of our people and save us money that we won't be channeling to insurance companies that don't produce anything. We will have invested in green technologies and infrastructure, thereby creating jobs in the United States and putting our country on a sustainable path for the future. We will have stopped spending insane amounts of money on military ventures that are not necessary. We will have begun a transition away from fossil fuels that we should have begun 35 years ago. In short, we will have started to act like a nation of responsible adults who understand that the only way to build a sound future is to plan for it and not try to speculate our way into it with a massive Ponzi scheme that is destined to collapse eventually.

"The only way out is to spend money and stimulate the economy"? Obama has already proven "spend money" and "stimulate the economy" are oxymorons when used together.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The only way out is to spend money and stimulate the economy"? Obama has already proven "spend money" and "stimulate the economy" are oxymorons when used together.

Except for the fact that it worked. But then the facts don't matter to you. They never do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The only way out is to spend money and stimulate the economy"? Obama has already proven "spend money" and "stimulate the economy" are oxymorons when used together.

Coming from just a plain old moron, that doesn't mean much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...