[TheRealVille]

And it's not going to be any better. Just like this past year, they will stay high as hell and be high next Christmas as well.

Yes, prices were high under Bush, just like they are now. It's fact, and in history. The thing is, under Bush they were just as high, yet now we have about the same prices, even with inflation.

[vundy33]

Yes, prices were high under Bush, just like they are now. It's fact, and in history. The thing is, under Bush they were just as high, yet now we have about the same prices, even with inflation.

LOL, I'm not disputing that! What I'm saying is that under Bush, they always went down, at the very least a little bit (07-08), in the winter...that is not happening now. At all. There comes a point when somebody needs to be held accountable because we can't keep going like this, and I am getting sick of this shit.

[MiddlesboroAlumni]

Yes, prices were high under Bush, just like they are now. It's fact, and in history. The thing is, under Bush they were just as high, yet now we have about the same prices, even with inflation.

I know it, RV. We're living in better times now! :Thumbs:

[WideRight05]

I know it, RV. We're living in better times now! :Thumbs:

I know man. Since Obama came into office, everything has changed for the better. Any problems he's had during his first four years are all because of Bush.

[TheRealThing]

(1)TRT lied, and said federal spending wasn't going down, I have shown different.



(2) Have I ever, even remotely, asked anyone here to like me?

(1) Federal spending is not going down. Hoot posted the projection was for 22.8 trillion by the end of Obama's second term, a fact I have posted several times for months. The economy under W had to absorb more than 3 tillion dollars of loss due to 9/11. The debt rose 5 trillion over 8 years of W's administration. The debt for Obama's 8 years in office will be over 12 trillion for the same period of time. Now, you can stroke it any way you want that's growth in spending even by in Keynesian Kook terms.

(2) You are starting to succeed with me! :biggrin:

[TheRealThing]

I know it, RV. We're living in better times now! :Thumbs:

I know man. Since Obama came into office, everything has changed for the better. Any problems he's had during his first four years are all because of Bush.

Happy days are here again in la-la land boys.

[WideRight05]

Happy days are here again in la-la land boys.

The unemployment rate even shot back for November. There has to be something Bush did in there somewhere to cause that even though he's been out of office four years. He's the reason to blame for the high gas prices, for grocery prices increasing like crazy, for 9/11, for the great depression....and I can't say all this and keep a straight face. :lmao:

[MiddlesboroAlumni]

Blaming Bush used to be the lefty group's trump card. Now, they have nothing.

[vector]

I looked at the clock. The national debt is rising. There may be short term fluctuations in a downward direction, but the national debt has exploded under Obama and it is not getting smaller. The national debt was $10.6 trillion 4 years ago and it now stands at $16.2 trillion. Yet you think that this web site shows that Obama is making progress "if you can read the numbers" - like I said, funny stuff.

BTW, the US debt clock projects that by this time in 2016, the national debt will have grown to $22.8 trillion. If that prediction holds true, and there is no reason to believe that it won't, Obama will have more than doubled the national debt in less than two terms in office. It's all there, if you can read the numbers.

i believe bush double the debt or i might be wrong

i don't think so nicker:

[vector]

LOL, I'm not disputing that! What I'm saying is that under Bush, they always went down, at the very least a little bit (07-08), in the winter...that is not happening now. At all. There comes a point when somebody needs to be held accountable because we can't keep going like this, and I am getting sick of this shit.

in late 2008 we where almost in a depression

[vector]

(1) Federal spending is not going down. Hoot posted the projection was for 22.8 trillion by the end of Obama's second term, a fact I have posted several times for months. The economy under W had to absorb more than 3 tillion dollars of loss due to 9/11. The debt rose 5 trillion over 8 years of W's administration. The debt for Obama's 8 years in office will be over 12 trillion for the same period of time. Now, you can stroke it any way you want that's growth in spending even by in Keynesian Kook terms.

(2) You are starting to succeed with me! :biggrin:

in 2009 about 75% spending was bush2 budget

[jetpilot]

i believe bush double the debt or i might be wrong

i don't think so nicker:

Told you Hoot.:insane:

[TheRealThing]

in late 2008 we where almost in a depression

I know I get depressed everytime I read one of your fake posts. W didn't double the debt. Federal spending did rise an average of 300 billion a year during his 8 year administration, mere chump change when cast against the back drop of Obama's deficit spending which is $1.53 trillion a year. You can't pin the 3 trillion dollar price tag for 9/11 on Bush. If anything you can chalk it up to Clinton, he's the one who didn't have the courage to take Bin Laden out when the CIA had the crosshairs on him.

[TheRealThing]

in 2009 about 75% spending was bush2 budget

Oh, tell us all about how Bush foresaw and made provision in his budget, to allow Obama to jump up the first 3 weeks of his administration and spend the very best part of a trilion dollars on his stimulus package, in which he rewarded all his cronies with the loans they all defaulted on. :please:

[vector]

I know I get depressed everytime I read one of your fake posts. W didn't double the debt. Federal spending did rise an average of 300 billion a year during his 8 year administration, mere chump change when cast against the back drop of Obama's deficit spending which is $1.53 trillion a year. You can't pin the 3 trillion dollar price tag for 9/11 on Bush. If anything you can chalk it up to Clinton, he's the one who didn't have the courage to take Bin Laden out when the CIA had the crosshairs on him.

this 3 trillon $ 9/11 figuire how you come up with this

[jetpilot]

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2...wn_it.html

[TheRealThing]

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2...wn_it.html

Pretty smart tactic. Maybe the only way for the people to see who's right. The dems will just keep defining everthing and everybody around them if we don't do something to force them out into the open. They're already out in the open for a lot of folks but not enough. The reason they can effectively redefine everything and everybody of course, is because the main stream media refuses to hold any of them accountable and spends 24 hours a day running interference, engaging in character assassinations of the republicans and helping the dems out of every jam they get themselves into.

[WideRight05]

Really? Who's President? Did he win in "red" America? Here's the map that counts. Obama had a landslide win in that red map you all are so fond of.
http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/2012/results

Blah blah blah. Liberals trying to "rub in" the victory. LOL, when you achieve your goal of running America in the ground will you be celebrating then?

[jetpilot]

Blah blah blah. Liberals trying to "rub in" the victory. LOL, when you achieve your goal of running America in the ground will you be celebrating then?

Of course not! They will be blaming Bush and/or House Republicans.

[TheRealVille]

Bitch McConnell got served. :lmao:
http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/07/politics/f...neuvering/

[TheRealVille]

[YOUTUBE="McConnell filibuters his own bill"]dGo8E3shaIQ[/YOUTUBE]

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) may have made United States Senate history today when he beat his filibustered his own bill on allowing the president to increase the debt ceiling on his own.

The bill, which would have taken the debt ceiling gun away from the head of the U.S. economy by requiring a two-thirds majority to override a presidential increase to the debt ceiling, was McConnell's idea, but when Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid agreed with McConnell's request for a vote on the bill Thursday afternoon, McConnell objected. Apparently, McConnell believed that Democrats wouldn't allow the president to have such power.

“What we have here is a case of Republicans here in the Senate once again not taking yes for an answer. This morning the Republican leader asked consent to have a vote on this proposal, just now I told everyone we were willing to have that vote --up or down vote. Now the Republican leader objects to his own idea. So I guess we have a filibuster of his own bill, so I object," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) said.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2..._bill.html

[TheRealThing]

Bitch McConnell got served. :lmao:
http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/07/politics/f...neuvering/

Mitch is just trying to preserve the function of the federal government. It is the responsibility of the House of Representatives to decide how the federal government spends taxpayer dollars. You and your ilk would circumvent the function of the US congress and grant powers to the executive branch more befitting a dictator than a US president, thereby allowing him to go around the congress on something so profound as how much debt is hung on every taxpayer. You do understand that right? Every taxpayer stands good for the money government borrows? We're a nation of self governance, not a monarchy. Guarantee you one thing, if Romney was sitting the captain's chair you wouldn't be for overthrowing the role of the House. McConnell is a lot better man than Obama will ever be. I hope you will remember your post the next time you come on here bragging about what a humanitarian you are. You're certainly no patriot.

[jetpilot]

TRT why didn't McConnell allow an up and down vote? Not able to read up on this yet but the House would never pass it....

[TheRealVille]

Mitch is just trying to preserve the function of the federal government. It is the responsibility of the House of Representatives to decide how the federal government spends taxpayer dollars. You and your ilk would circumvent the function of the US congress and grant powers to the executive branch more befitting a dictator than a US president, thereby allowing him to go around the congress on something so profound as how much debt is hung on every taxpayer. You do understand that right? Every taxpayer stands good for the money government borrows? We're a nation of self governance, not a monarchy. Guarantee you one thing, if Romney was sitting the captain's chair you wouldn't be for overthrowing the role of the House. McConnell is a lot better man than Obama will ever be. I hope you will remember your post the next time you come on here bragging about what a humanitarian you are. You're certainly no patriot.

Mitch was trying to prove a point and it backfired, plain and simple. Maybe you should send him an email, and give him some of your knowledge.

Just for the record, have I ever gave any indication that I give a rats rear what you think of me?

[TheRealThing]

TRT why didn't McConnell allow an up and down vote? Not able to read up on this yet but the House would never pass it....

Agreed the house would not have passed it. Not saying I know what was on McConnell's mind here, in fact, he handled the matter in a way that made republicans look bad. The argument was about the 60 vote threshold versus a simple majority. Maybe he hadn't realized that or maybe he did like some coaches I know, and outcoached himself. We'll see what comes of it. I guarantee you there will be more attention to this by the main stream media than there was about Benghazi, (still unanswered and unchallenged by media) or the Obama off mic comment to the Russian president about holding off on defense concessions until after the elections.

[TheRealThing]

Mitch was trying to prove a point and it backfired, plain and simple. Maybe you should send him an email, and give him some of your knowledge.

Just for the record, have I ever gave any indication that I give a rats rear what you think of me?

I know that, surely a guy like you who has called me a liar dozens of times in lieu of civil debate, doesn't expect much in the way of quarter?

[toussaints]

Go over the fiscal cliff, cause the government won't figure anything out if they keep doing the same crap they've been doing for the past 25 years. get rid of the republican and democrat titles, cause both parties suck

[vector]

Mitch is just trying to preserve the function of the federal government. It is the responsibility of the House of Representatives to decide how the federal government spends taxpayer dollars. You and your ilk would circumvent the function of the US congress and grant powers to the executive branch more befitting a dictator than a US president, thereby allowing him to go around the congress on something so profound as how much debt is hung on every taxpayer. You do understand that right? Every taxpayer stands good for the money government borrows? We're a nation of self governance, not a monarchy. Guarantee you one thing, if Romney was sitting the captain's chair you wouldn't be for overthrowing the role of the House. McConnell is a lot better man than Obama will ever be. I hope you will remember your post the next time you come on here bragging about what a humanitarian you are. You're certainly no patriot.

romney lost

[TheRealThing]

romney lost

Truly a man of few words, and the ones you do post, have the distinction of non application to the topic at hand. :biggrin:

[MustangSally]

Republicans should just let the Dems make their propossal and just vote present. Then the bills pass with the Democrats hands all over it and watch taxes go up across the board and the economy faulter again. Then the Democrats can blame no one but themselves for it. If the Republicans do anything else they will get blamed for the down turn in the economy.