There was no surplus. That was debunked years ago.
Posted By: sam on 2008-09-20
In Reply to: How's that for a kick in the head? - myrtle
And the Democrats are largely responsible for the shape we are in. John McCain tried to pass legislation in 2005 to regulate Fannie/Freddie. However, Chris Dodd (head of banking and commerce committee, and largest recipient of Fannie/Freddie contributions) and the Democrats blocked it. Fannie/Freddie started this freefall in the economy. Obama is #2 on the contributions list. John McCain is wayyyyy on down the list. Then the democrats (the ones sitting now) pushed by Chris Dodd and Barney Frank in turn pushed fannie/freddie to give all those subprime loans to minorities and lower income folks, to people with either no credit or bad credit, knowing full well most of them didn't have a hope in heck of paying it back...it is THOSE mortgages we are going in hock to pick up.
Franklin Raines, James Johnson, Jamie Gorelick, Timothy Howard...all Democrats, two of them Obama advisors...ALL walked away from Fannie with golden parachute of MILLIONS after cooking the books.
And WE are picking up the tab.
NOBAMA, NODEMOCRAT, NO WAY, NO HOW!!
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Like all those years of prosperity, budget surplus
scorched earth administration?
Over and over, this has been debunked
Why can't we have intelligent discussion of the issues that need to be sorted out by the candidates. Where do they actually stand and yes, BACKED BY FACT. We should try. This is an important election.
who debunked it?
The fine drivebys, like NBC, CBS, ABC, CNN, etc.? A female caller on Rush Friday said it was on her credit card bill. So debunk that.
The drive-bys are SO in the tank for Obama they're literally desperate. I pity you.
Shame on you....as been debunked.
http://www.audacityofhypocrisy.com/2008/08/30/dailykos-rumors-debunked-here-is-sarah-palin-pregnancy-photo-on-feb-10th-2008/
IT has been debunked. The woman who...
said she was a member has recanted. She has always been registered republican. Her husband was a member several years ago.
Obama's pastor as recently as last year said "God dam* AMerica." Both Obama and his wife attended that church for 20 years.
Comparing the statements...and the person who made them...I would say there is no room to accuse Sarah Palin about her husband than to accuse Obama and his wife about their pastor/mentor/friend who married them and baptized both of their children.
Can we leave this nonissue now?
and came in with a huge surplus!
I repeat....there was no surplus...
that was just clever use of word. It was a "projected" surplus, and it was contingent upon a cap on federal spending for 15 years, and no added federal programs. There was no real "surplus" sitting around.
Mea culpa on the borrowing. I have already said Bush spent like a drunken sailor. Spending needs to be curbed. Neither candidate is willing to say what I think needs to be done...no more new programs and stop the ones that are not working. When we get back in the "black" again, then we can look at increasing programs. Throwing more money at stuff is obviously not the answer.
The budget surplus from BC was a ...
PROJECTED surplus that would happen over 10 years IF no added spending, IF no added programs. Even if the war in Iraq had not happened, Congress could not go 10 years without adding spending and added programs. You act as if there was 559 billion dollars laying around. There wasn't.
I realize that you have bought into the whole socialist class warfare thing. Like O's hero Alinsky said...it doesn't matter if it is the truth or not...it just matters if you can make them believe it.
And they darned sure have made sure you believe it.
Clinton had a surplus because he had a...sm
Republican Congress. Left to his own devices, he would have put us belly up, have no fear.
Bush, has a Democratic Congress at the end of his term, who have really jacked up the national debt, all on their own (war not included, thank you very much).
Not that old surplus crud again....lol
do the research...there was no "surplus." It was a surplus that COULD be IF spending was not increased over like 10 years. Like Congress could go 10 years without increasing spending. Clinton did NOT leave a surplus.
Surplus-Are we forgetting 9-11
Are you all forgetting that 9 months after being elected we were attacked on our own soil, with thousands of people losing their lives and NY City a disaster? What do you think that did to the surplus and the need to protect our country. How short your memory is until the next time it happens and they you will be begging for a stronger president than we have now.
All of this has been debunked! Link inside. sm
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html?page=1&c=y
debunked. The woman who said she was a member...
recanted. Sorry. Maybe you should have vetted your source a little better.
Debunked. Woman recanted....
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/02/alaska-party-official-says-palin-was-not-a-member/
Debunked? see inside for link
Associated Press, 10/15/08. Click link below.
We insist bc issue has NOT been debunked because
Still waiting for the courts to decide.
Actually Bill O'Reilly debunked this.
ACORN is not taking over the census for entire states or the entire US......however, they will be conducting the census for certain areas. So they won't be in charge of the whole shebang, but they will be doing this for some areas.....which in itself is scary considering the fraud that went on during this past presidential election.
Do a search on this board. This is old news, debunked. nm
.
People keep insisting BC issue has been debunked
You really do need a reality check here. Obama "could be" the next president? The electoral college is going to confirm the WAY more than comfortable 192 electoral vote lead he holds over McCain (365 vs 173). I hate to break this to you, but the pubs' October surprise is not going to be a November surprise, December surprise, a 2009 surprise or any other kind of surprise. I have answered your BC ramblings before and will not take any more of my time to try to get this through your thick skull again. Like I said, if I were you I would not hold my breath. Everything else in your post is pure fantasy. I prefer to take my politics with some semblance of substance.
The surplus also followed him out eh? We know because it's now in the bank accounts of the rich.
A lot of people made a lot of money during the Clinton years - that's real money, honey, and they're still rich, accounting for our current revenues. Without the Clinton boom years your president's buds (and your president himself, let us remind you) wouldn't have gotten their 100,000 tax break checks. Sure, the boom couldn't hold, but the point is that the favorable conditions created by a sounder Democratic fiscal policy allowed that boom to come about.
Now all we have is empty coffers, slashed public spending, and China owns us. Big improvement huh? Oops, but people like Frist are still getting over big time on their big time stock trades - all's clear in the upper 1% But since you likely aren't in it, it's hard to see what you find so appealing about being a credit slave one paycheck away from poverty. Is that working out good for you?
Democratic = surplus - Republican = debt
Based on Congressional accounting rules, at the end of his presidency Clinton reported a surplus of $559 billion.
After 8 years of Bush...As of September 2008, the total U.S. federal debt was approximately $9.7 trillion.
The myth of the Clinton surplus - been disproved -sm
A lot of democrats keep pushing this bogus claim that there was a surplus when in fact there never was. This has been discussed on this board, so by this message I'm assuming you never saw the message or went the the US Treasury website to check it out. Below is a link to it and explains what really happened.
The US National Debt proves there was never a surplus, and the article explains why people claim otherwise for political reasons. - good read. Even my most conservatives friends bought into this surplus craze, and said they were glad their eyes were opened.
I'll credit another poster for origianlly posting this (it's been so long I forget who now).
http://www.letxa.com/articles/16
Phoney outrage over baseless, debunked accusations
x
Bush inherited a 559 billion surplus nuff said? NM
x
Bush inherited a 559 billion surplus nuff said? NM
x
BTW, Popular Mechanics pretty much debunked all the myths you speak of.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html
The myth of the Clinton surplus...I'm a libertarian but I am sick of hearing this..SM
http://www.letxa.com/articles/16
For this you have to wait at least 3 years and 8 months , maybe 7 years and 8 mohths...nm
nm
Not quite- 2 years Catholic, 2 years Muslim. NM
X
Oil/oil revenue surplus in Iraq…to reconstruct or not to reconstruct? sm
That is the question. The Bush boo/boo just keeps getting bigger and bigger. http://www.slate.com/id/2081831/
Oil/oil revenue surplus in Iraq…to reconstruct or not to reconstruct? sm
This is the correct link. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/06/world/middleeast/06surplus.html?ref=worldspecial
In 100 years, no one will that's for sure. NM
...
Could be, he's never come on TV? Years ago maybe?
x
oh, okay, but he followed him for 20 years!
nm
Which was 4 years ago....
nm
You were 16 years old once...
what if it was said about you, about your daughter if you had one....or about your mother when you were 16?.....come ON now. YOu know how vulnerable girls are at that age. That was a really really really LOW below the belt hit. Mean and nasty.
Except for the first 6 years.
In other words, 75% of the time. Even when they did, they didn't. It's kinda hard to advance a meaningful agenda when being subjected to the acid ink in the runaway veto pen.
I think it's because he's up in years
I also get the same impression, but to be realistic one must consider that she may become President if something were to happen to him.
what, are you now 2 years old?
i just have to roll my eyes sometimes.
Well, a few years ago when we had that...
stocket market tank (all though it did not last all that long) was enough for me...took my 401K money (not a huge amount, but I need it to be there) and put it in traditional IRA's that in federally insured bank. I am not young enough to let it build back up with stock market ups and downs. Younger folks a lot more years in the work force can wait for it to build back up (and it always has), but I can't take the risk.
I don't think small private banks are at risk.
It was much worse than this when Carter was in the White House and we managed to get through that...this too shall pass. A little saying I once heard seems to sum it up...."When one door closes, another opens, but it is he11 in the hallway for awhile." :)
The only way we'd get another 8 years is
if the dems are still in control against a pub president.
I heard the above comment in either an ad or in the debate itself and I almost flipped. You don't hear much about it yet, but it will come out sooner or later (and hopefully sooner).
Yes in in the last two years
the econmy took a dive. Gas prices rose and made the price of everything soar. That is what you get under democratic leadership.
I did years ago n/m
nm
That's over three years old......you just now
X
For 2 years out of 8
x
I'm sure you will be for the next 4 years
all the way to the bank with other people's hard earned money...
maybe in 100 years
Our kids will tell stories about us working six days a week, all hours of the day and night to stay at home with them. About how we had no health insurance, but somehow we managed to pay those hospital bills. How the mortgage broker tried to get us to refinance one more time, but we saw through the scam. How did we ever make a car payment for 5 years without going crazy? How we competed with workers in a virtual world and still managed to out produce them. Maybe they will think that we were pretty tough too. I think we are!
Just the first of many to come in the next 4 years....
sorry, I have to raise taxes; sorry, I have to continue the war in Iraq; sorry, I can't provide healthcare for everyone; sorry, I have to change the constitution; sorry, I can't keep any of the promises I made while campaigning; sorry, I have no experience dealing with terrorists, sorry, I fooled you into voting for me.
GP, my DH and I have been saying this for years. sm
We have long been advocates of sending the illegals back, closing our borders, cut the pork, etc. I am so glad there are others out there. This is going to my sens and reps. Especially as DH gave them all an earful yesterday. We need everybody out there to send this along.
I don't have 10-20 years. I have 4
unless I want to work until I'm 70 or 80. What kind of mind will i have then? Will I be able to figure out what a doc is saying?
I'll probably be one of those homeless people in another 10 years unless they straighten out all the problems. I certainly will not be able afford the taxes we pay on our property, even though it's free and clear of a mortgage. At tha rate they expect taxes to rise, I'll be out on the streets.
The O will not be able to stop it. There's too many factors changing the economy. I'm just hoping things wil l straighten out, but I no longer have any faith in our government, no matter who runs the country. The so-called respresentaves are only out for themselves in the past few years and it doesn't matter who's in charge.
Write your congressmen or senators and what do you get? A "canned" letter that they will take your suggestions "under consideration" and "are doing whatever they can to fix the situation". I'm tired of it. It's the same old, same old.
O has reneged on some of his promises already. He spoke in all those other countries when he was running for prez (and isn't there a law against going to a foreign country to make promises(?) if he becomes president? He smoothed over so many countires that they thought they were finally going to get a prez that would straighten out the U.S. and all of a sudden, he is for Israel and against the Muslin terrorists communities. "Scuse me, butl lying to other ountries doesm't cut it.
I can only hope that O will keep some of his other promises bvut I don't see how he can with the economy the way it is at this pointl So all those people who voted for O with the hope of change (remember those who stated they would not have to worry about their mortgage, etc.), it ain't gonna happen.
O is a smooth talker and I almost fell for his ideas, but when I started to really think about it, there's no way he can accomplish all he plans to do, even in 8 yeras.
Well, I'll get off my soap box now. These opinions are mine and mine alone. You may not agree with my thoughts, but there's no reason to bash me for my honest opinion. 
Yes, I am better off than I was 8 years ago...(sm)
However, since two years ago and the advent of the democratic congress, I am a tad worse....
but still better than the Clinton years.
Bracing for getting even worse under the O.
It's a fact that the economy always downturns under a democratic congress....double whammy with a democrat in the white house, too.....oh joy, what a ride we're all in for.
|
