145 BILLION

[Cancel 2016.2]

I'm sorry. I must have missed your post about republicans decreasing ANY kind of debt.

Please be so kind as to repost.

Thanks in advanced.

LMAO...

The national debt is everything the government owes. It is the only one that matters. Neither party has lowered it since Ike. Which is exactly what I have been saying for a decade now.

 

[uscitizen]

So vote for the conservatives instead of the populists.

yeah but where are they, they all seem to lie about it.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

LOL. Don't these alleged moderates/libertarians crack you up with that stuff?

"If you guys would just nominate Ron Paul on the democratic ticket, I'd vote democratic"

IF you put a moderate up... then you have a chance at my vote. If you put up a liberal, you do not.

I have no idea why that is so hard for you to understand.

 

[LadyT]

LMAO...

The national debt is everything the government owes. It is the only one that matters. Neither party has lowered it since Ike. Which is exactly what I have been saying for a decade now.

translation:

I can't think of any examples because there are none which means your original assertion that Democrats do a better job at balancing the budget is correct Tiana. Man, I wish I was as smart as you. Guess I'll have to put you on IA now

 

[Timshel]

I will vote Dem if the candidate is actually antiwar, truly supports civil liberties, does not want to further the flow of power to the president and does not want to nationialize everything in sight.

Even dropping the last one, that is about as unlikely as getting a Republican on the Dem ticket.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Uh oh. Looks like Tiana is well on her way to owning SF. We are seeing a skewering in the works here folks.

And SF does not react well when he’s skewered. Batton down the hatches, he’s going to blow!

 

[Cancel7]

Hey you know, let’s see if this Meg can read. That might give an indication…what makes a person functionally illiterate…gender, or political ideology?

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Uh-oh, I hope he doesn't put me on IA. You know how he gets when someone cyber skewers him.

ummmmm... hey... you... yes YOU.... you know, the I am a smart liberal one.... thats right.... ummmm...

you like actually have to make a valid point if you want to skewer someone.


yeah... now.... back to your regularly scheduled ass whuppin.

 

[LadyT]

Hey you know, let’s see if this Meg can read. That might give an indication…what makes a person functionally illiterate…gender, or political ideology?

LMAO

 

[DigitalDave]

No, that’s not what I said at all.
Just forget it. I’m not repeating myself anymore, I don’t care how people want to classify what I said.

I can only really interpret it one other way, and that is the Democrats would never nominate someone we agree with, so everytime they say 'I would vote for a Dem if....' what they are essentially saying is 'I won't ever vote Dem', and you think it's funny that they would try to seem 'non-partisan'.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

translation:

I can't think of any examples because there are none which means your original assertion that Democrats do a better job at balancing the budget is correct Tiana. Man, I wish I was as smart as you. Guess I'll have to put you on IA now

you crack me up. Again.... balancing a budget is done by CONGRESS. The President signs it.

Again.... balancing a BUDGET is not the same thing as reducing DEBT. Because you are required to actually STICK TO THE BUDGET and not outspend revenues should you wish to lower your debt.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

translation:

I can't think of any examples because there are none which means your original assertion that Democrats do a better job at balancing the budget is correct Tiana. Man, I wish I was as smart as you. Guess I'll have to put you on IA now

By your standards.... Republicans are the best at fiscal responsibility. Because IKE was the last President to lower our nations debt in a fiscal year.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

I can only really interpret it one other way, and that is the Democrats would never nominate someone we agree with, so everytime they say 'I would vote for a Dem if....' what they are essentially saying is 'I won't ever vote Dem', and you think it's funny that they would try to seem 'non-partisan'.

Or they can simply ignore when we say.... I voted for Salazar and Kohl (both Dems) and continue to act like we wouldn't vote Dem just because we wouldn't vote for liberal nightmares like Gore and Kerry.

 

[DigitalDave]

Or they can simply ignore when we say.... I voted for Salazar and Kohl (both Dems) and continue to act like we wouldn't vote Dem just because we wouldn't vote for liberal nightmares like Gore and Kerry.

I've said I'll vote Obama over any Republican (other than Paul). We assclowns just like to look at the candidate based on how they align with our beliefs. Maybe that's why I didn't get this interpretation. You, Damo, and I have all voted Dem in the past.

 

[DamnYankee]

yeah but where are they, they all seem to lie about it.

That takes research of their records. As a voter, it is your responsibility.

 

[LadyT]

you crack me up. Again.... balancing a budget is done by CONGRESS. The President signs it.

Again.... balancing a BUDGET is not the same thing as reducing DEBT. Because you are required to actually STICK TO THE BUDGET and not outspend revenues should you wish to lower your debt.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2007/ The historical tables here show that throughout the last 4 presidencies only a democratic president was able to sustain a budgetary surplus. You may argue that this indicator is meaningless, however I, as a fiscally responsible voter hold budgets in high regard as do I hold politicians accountable for their budgets. Bottomline: Democrats win the budgetary battle hands down.

On to the debt:
Fact: under Clinton the accumulation of national debt slowed to an all time low. Under both bushes and Reagan, this is untrue.

Consider yourself skewered.

 

[DigitalDave]

Thanks. But I think has to mainly do with the fact that I'm not a conservative and less so do with my gender.

It takes them a while to get things through their heads. Remember how we had been telling them since the 2000 election that Bush was stupid, inept and a piss poor leader. Fast forward 6 years and they collectively started to go, "....now wait a minute he ain't so bright......."

Ehhh, I didn't get into politics until 2002-2003. Right when we were getting ready to attack Iraq. Everyone around me was telling me how wrong I was for being against the war and that Iraq was this huge threat. I just couldn't figure out how we just beat the shit out of them 10 years ago and now all of a sudden they were a superpower threatening our liberty. Didn't add up.... I wanted Osama's head, not Saddam's. My reasoning back then was a lot more simple minded, but it was right... lol

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2007/ The historical tables here show that throughout the last 4 presidencies only a democratic president was able to sustain a budgetary surplus. You may argue that this indicator is meaningless, however I, as a fiscally responsible voter hold budgets in high regard as do I hold politicians accountable for their budgets. Bottomline: Democrats win the budgetary battle hands down.

On to the debt:
Fact: under Clinton the accumulation of national debt slowed to an all time low. Under both bushes and Reagan, this is untrue.

Consider yourself skewered.

No question... out of the past four Presidents Clinton did the best. I have never argued that. My point is that NO BUDGET IS DONE WITHOUT CONGRESS. NOT ONE. A point you dems seem to have a very hard time grasping.

The REP Congress created the budget by negotiating with Clinton. They worked together. Period. Nothing you can say will change that.

The whole "Clinton sucked less than the other three" argument doesn't change the fact that he still increased the nations debt every single year in office.

Consider yourself skooled, skewered and shishkabobbed.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2007/ The historical tables here show that throughout the last 4 presidencies only a democratic president was able to sustain a budgetary surplus. You may argue that this indicator is meaningless, however I, as a fiscally responsible voter hold budgets in high regard as do I hold politicians accountable for their budgets. Bottomline: Democrats win the budgetary battle hands down.

On to the debt:
Fact: under Clinton the accumulation of national debt slowed to an all time low. Under both bushes and Reagan, this is untrue.

Consider yourself skewered.

Side note.... NO it is not an all time low.... because several Presidents actually LOWERED the nations debt. Thus, NO accumulation.

skooled, skewered and shishkabobbed yet again!

 

[LadyT]

Ehhh, I didn't get into politics until 2002-2003. Right when we were getting ready to attack Iraq. Everyone around me was telling me how wrong I was for being against the war and that Iraq was this huge threat. I just couldn't figure out how we just beat the *&^% out of them 10 years ago and now all of a sudden they were a superpower threatening our liberty. Didn't add up.... I wanted Osama's head, not Saddam's. My reasoning back then was a lot more simple minded, but it was right... lol

I think you're reasoning was a lot more sophisticated than the ones that bought that story: Bush must be telling the truth; the president wouldn't lie.