[the other guy]

[Image: http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9G...yJNt27-S55]What the...............Talk about thread jacking.....posting a 6 month old story unrelated to topic..................... I'm truly disappointed

RV bought up spending on first responders the democrats need to realize that all spending is not good spending,

[the other guy]

^That's the purpose of auditing, to catch this stuff.

so neither fire department needed as much money as they were collecting in taxes.

[TheRealThing]

So you are claiming Clinton now? You all sure weren't claiming him while he was in office. I remember republicans calling for impeachment. nicker:

It's impossible for you to be objective. I am not a Clinton fan because he besmirched the office of the president on the national stage. He lacked the grace to step down in the face of withering embarrassment having been impeached, fined and disbarred for lying to a federal judge, and was willing to put his personal desires above the interests of the 300 million citizens of greatest nation on earth. And, as I have said, he taught the democratic caucus how to lie with sincerity. That is not to say that we endured bad economic times during his presidency. Anybody with even the most casual familiarity of the day knows the republican held Senate, having learned the lessons of sound leadership and fiscal bearing, helped keep his feet on the primrose path established by Ronald Reagan.

But to Clinton's credit, he was willing to work with the congress in order to govern. He had to move to the middle, but at least he was big enough a man to do it. I've never had a problem with his fiscal policies and I know I've made that clear more than once. Let's return to topic. Like I said, it is a matter of undeniable record. The fiscally conservative policies of the era, which included Reagan, Bush 1, and Clinton may have been the best this land has ever known. We have that blueprint for success though it has been discarded in favor of the preferred pipe dream economics of this administration. Bush 2 would have enjoyed similar good times had it not been for the trillions lost due to 9/11 and a global recession. He didn't go on about it he just governed.

[TheRealThing]

In a matter of a few short days, the left have declared the Boston Bombing case all buy closed. Eric Holder is out in front on this one like he was in Fast and Furious. I have to admit that the stupid-O-meter has been pegged for the last four plus years but, it is still hard to take. Here's the concensus and I watched the rationale take shape as speculations ran amok during the dead air times between actual breaking news of the bombing investigation. The two brothers worked alone. They were not radicalized. They are not connected nor were they assisted or coerced by any terror group in any way. They felt isolated. They were just 'boys'.

Why even try him at all? Thanks to Chris Matthews and other left wing clairvoyants we already know the every last detail.

[nky]

So you are claiming Clinton now? You all sure weren't claiming him while he was in office. I remember republicans calling for impeachment. nicker:

He should have been impeached:eyeroll:

[nky]

As President George W. Bush had his library dedicated today can anyone imagine how the media would have treated him if it was found out that during his time in office Russia had warned about a potential Islamic Radical who they were concerned about went on and committed an act of terrorism.

[TheRealVille]

http://www.politicususa.com/conservative...acism.html

[Hoot Gibson]

http://www.politicususa.com/conservative...acism.html

Come on, RV, is this the best you can do? Who is "Rmuse" and why should any thinking human being believe that he is a conservative? Don't dodge the issue by claiming that this was just an interesting article that you posted for discussion. All this demonstrates is the kind of left wing trash web sites that you frequent that has poisoned your mind.

Conservative Calls For Obama’s Impeachment Are A Cover for Their Sore Loser Racism was written by Rmuse for PoliticusUSA

[WideMiddle03]

Come on, RV, is this the best you can do? Who is "Rmuse" and why should any thinking human being believe that he is a conservative? Don't dodge the issue by claiming that this was just an interesting article that you posted for discussion. All this demonstrates is the kind of left wing trash web sites that you frequent that has poisoned your mind.

it looks like some stupid liberal rant blog
the name should be changed to "the whine cellar"

[Wildcatk23]

As President George W. Bush had his library dedicated today can anyone imagine how the media would have treated him if it was found out that during his time in office Russia had warned about a potential Islamic Radical who they were concerned about went on and committed an act of terrorism.

You mean like this?

http://abcnews.go.com/m/story?id=91651

[vector]

then he created the biggest expansion of federal gov in our lifetime

President Bush first created an Office of Homeland Security in the White House
and then, with the Homeland Security Act of 2002, laid plans for a new
executive department. The DHS was funded with billions of dollars and staffed
with 180,000 federal employees when it opened for business on March 1, 2003.
It qualified as the largest reorganization of the federal government since 1947
when, fittingly, the Department of Defense was established.

But here’s the strange thing: unlike the Pentagon, this monstrosity draws no
attention whatsoever -- even though, by our calculations, this country has
spent a jaw-dropping $791 billion on “homeland security” since 9/11. To give
you a sense of just how big that is, Washington spent an inflation-adjusted
$500 billion on the entire New Deal.

is it working?

[nky]

You mean like this?

http://abcnews.go.com/m/story?id=91651

:Thumbs:

[RunItUpTheGut]

We were also warned of a possible attack on pearl harbor before it happened.

Nothing is ever going to change the fact that Obama will go down as the worst president in history.
I can only bet Jimmy Carter never imagined he would live to see his spot as worst president ever get taken over.

[Wildcatk23]

We were also warned of a possible attack on pearl harbor before it happened.

Nothing is ever going to change the fact that Obama will go down as the worst president in history.
I can only bet Jimmy Carter never imagined he would live to see his spot as worst president ever get taken over.

I'm just curious to what makes you say this. Besides a few on here I haven't seen anyone say that. Plus he was elected to a second term.

[TheRealThing]

then he created the biggest expansion of federal gov in our lifetime

President Bush first created an Office of Homeland Security in the White House
and then, with the Homeland Security Act of 2002, laid plans for a new
executive department. The DHS was funded with billions of dollars and staffed
with 180,000 federal employees when it opened for business on March 1, 2003.
It qualified as the largest reorganization of the federal government since 1947
when, fittingly, the Department of Defense was established.

But here’s the strange thing: unlike the Pentagon, this monstrosity draws no
attention whatsoever -- even though, by our calculations, this country has
spent a jaw-dropping $791 billion on “homeland security” since 9/11. To give
you a sense of just how big that is, Washington spent an inflation-adjusted
$500 billion on the entire New Deal.

is it working?

You tell us. Posts like this one prove once again that many folks have their opinion given to them by others. The article you 'excepted' or plagiarized those two paragraphs from ;^ http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/home..._20130228/ was published by "truthdig" who, by their own self assessment are a "news site providing: expert coverage of current affairs; thoughtful, provocative columnists, presented from a progressive point of view."
This will catch you by surprise but, news given a political slant isn't news at all. When one adds opinion to news, it stops being news and becomes OPINION. They push a social justice doctrine. Everything they publish is jaded by the same old tired liberal progressive slant.

I'll tell you one thing. If there are at least two people who love the Department of Homeland Security. That would be none other than Barack and his appointee for Secretary of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano. Sweeping legislative measures taken up under these two's leadership certainly has not diminished the level of spending by the DHS, or the torrent of illegal immigrants we see walking the streets of nearly every community in this land. They have held the gates open wide to increase the total number to over 11 million of them as admitted by this administration to be running amok so far, many of whom are getting food stamps and free health care. Some are building bombs and blowing up innocent hard working marathon runners, along with friends, family and interested bystanders. It's about like a bunch of liberal progressives the likes of truthdig, to sit around and slam spending when it can be blamed (no matter thin the point was stretched to make the connection) on conservatives.

[TheRealThing]

I'm just curious to what makes you say this. Besides a few on here I haven't seen anyone say that. Plus he was elected to a second term.

Understanding money can be a difficult concept to master. When you get a grip on what it will mean to your future and the future of your family to have to wrestle with paying back at least 23 trillion in deficit spending, (13 of which, will be attributable to BHO). You will finally see the truth of it.

At that point, it will become apparent that the utter lunacy of the Keynesian rationale, in suggesting that the US can still remain a free and vital country with that much debt was absurd on it's face.

[Hoot Gibson]

then he created the biggest expansion of federal gov in our lifetime

President Bush first created an Office of Homeland Security in the White House
and then, with the Homeland Security Act of 2002, laid plans for a new
executive department. The DHS was funded with billions of dollars and staffed
with 180,000 federal employees when it opened for business on March 1, 2003.
It qualified as the largest reorganization of the federal government since 1947
when, fittingly, the Department of Defense was established.

But here’s the strange thing: unlike the Pentagon, this monstrosity draws no
attention whatsoever -- even though, by our calculations, this country has
spent a jaw-dropping $791 billion on “homeland security” since 9/11. To give
you a sense of just how big that is, Washington spent an inflation-adjusted
$500 billion on the entire New Deal.

is it working?

You believe everything you read don't you? Maybe you should not be repeat anything that you heard or read from the "Ed Show." :biglmao:

Look up the annual cost of the Social Security program, which is only one of the New Deal programs, and then read your own post. Then laugh at yourself for being so gullible as to believe anything that comes from MSNBC.

[TheRealThing]

You believe everything you read don't you? Maybe you should not be repeat anything that you heard or read from the "Ed Show." :biglmao:

Look up the annual cost of the Social Security program, which is only one of the New Deal programs, and then read your own post. Then laugh at yourself for being so gullible as to believe anything that comes from MSNBC.

I had to laugh. On the right hand column beside the article is an ad calling for dems to stop Paul Ryan from destroying medicare. I thought it was Barack who took 780 billion out of medicare, LOL.

[vector]

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011/09/0...-trillion/

[vector]

if it is not on faux news they will not believe it


[Image: http://www.bluegrassrivals.com/forum/pic...tureid=570]






[Image: http://www.bluegrassrivals.com/forum/pic...tureid=571]

[vector]

The New Deal. Today's dollars, estimated to be $500 billion,
if we did the New Deal today. That's half a trillion.


http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2008/1...erspective


[Image: http://www.bluegrassrivals.com/forum/pic...tureid=569]

[WideMiddle03]

You believe everything you read don't you? Maybe you should not be repeat anything that you heard or read from the "Ed Show." :biglmao:

Look up the annual cost of the Social Security program, which is only one of the New Deal programs, and then read your own post. Then laugh at yourself for being so gullible as to believe anything that comes from MSNBC.

[Image: http://stickerheads.com/images/ducttape345555.jpg]

[Hoot Gibson]

The New Deal. Today's dollars, estimated to be $500 billion,
if we did the New Deal today. That's half a trillion.


http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2008/1...erspective


[Image: http://www.bluegrassrivals.com/forum/pic...tureid=569]

So your sources are the Ed Show and Rush Limbaugh? You obviously do not understand what you are reading or you would not be trying to make the case that Homeland Security has cost more than the New Deal programs. Funding for Homeland Security in 2012 was $46.9 billion. In 2012, expenditures for Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance alone was $785.78 billion. Besides, the formation of Homeland Security was a bipartisan effort. Bush just happened to be president when it was signed into law

[Hoot Gibson]

I had to laugh. On the right hand column beside the article is an ad calling for dems to stop Paul Ryan from destroying medicare. I thought it was Barack who took 780 billion out of medicare, LOL.

I think you are right. That means that Obama has taken about as much out of Medicare than as has been spent on the Homeland Security budget since 9/11.

[TheRealThing]

if it is not on faux news they will not believe it.

"truthdig" who, by their own self assessment are a "news site providing: expert coverage of current affairs; thoughtful, provocative columnists, presented from a progressive point of view."

[TheRealThing]

I think you are right. That means that Obama has taken about as much out of Medicare than as has been spent on the Homeland Security budget since 9/11.

It's amazing to see the arguments dems make to substantiate the indefensible notions of liberalism. All they have is each other to lean on for support. Everybody else knows that liberalism is a concept, the validity of which, has been debunked by trial and err over and over again. If history had even one example of success with regard to the liberal agenda, I could see why they are so determined to ram it down everybody else's throat. But, it doesn't work, it never worked and yet here we go again playing the perpetual game of liberal whack-a-mole.

[Hoot Gibson]

It's amazing to see the arguments dems make to substantiate the indefensible notions of liberalism. All they have is each other to lean on for support. Everybody else knows that liberalism is a concept, the validity of which, has been debunked by trial and err over and over again. If history had even one example of success with regard to the liberal agenda, I could see why they are so determined to ram it down everybody else's throat. But, it doesn't work, it never worked and yet here we go again playing the perpetual game of liberal whack-a-mole.

Liberals just look as failure as proof that the government has not thrown enough money at a problem. :popcorn:

[TheRealThing]

Liberals just look as failure as proof that the government has not thrown enough money at a problem. :popcorn:

Pretty good tactic if you ask me. The more miserable things become the more that proves we haven't done enough while blaming republicans for everything. I still haven't seen one (liberal) willing to step up to the plate and explain to me how it was that the fiscally conservative spending policies of the years beginning with the Reagan administration, Bush 1 and on through the Bill Clinton administration, were the boom times to die for, if that line of thought does not work. We have acid sure proof that the spending policies of that era do in fact work and work very well. While there is nearly as much proof that the policies of the Obama administration are abject failures in every possible application except for those who don't and won't work.

Why are we honoring, heck, almost worshiping the slugs? I don't get it.

[WideMiddle03]

Pretty good tactic if you ask me. The more miserable things become the more that proves we haven't done enough while blaming republicans for everything. I still haven't seen one (liberal) willing to step up to the plate and explain to me how it was that the fiscally conservative spending policies of the years beginning with the Reagan administration, Bush 1 and on through the Bill Clinton administration, were the boom times to die for, if that line of thought does not work. We have acid sure proof that the spending policies of that era do in fact work and work very well. While there is nearly as much proof that the policies of the Obama administration are abject failures in every possible application except for those who don't and won't work.

Why are we honoring, heck, almost worshiping the slugs? I don't get it.

deniel
liberals deny the fact that we have almost 50 million on food stamps
just saw a debate today where a liberal claimed that the ppl who take advantage are a "very, very small portion"
then the liberals went on to claim that conservatives would never turn down federal ade offered to them
it never ends

[RunItUpTheGut]

Someboy must have sattelite radio.....nicker: