Biden On The Economy: “We Have To Spend Money To Keep From Going Bankrupt”

Vice President Joe Biden doesn’t understand why everyone is so worried about the economy. Everything seems just fine to him. Don’t you people get it? The government has to spend money to keep from going bankrupt!

Vice President Biden plans a political broadside this afternoon in the home district of Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.), accusing the senior Republican lawmaker of joining in his party’s smear of the $787 billion Recovery and Reinvestment Act.
“To those who say that our economic decisions ‘have not produced jobs, have not produced prosperity, and simply have not worked’ I say, take a look around,” Biden will say, according to prepared remarks obtained by The Washington Post.
“I say, ‘Don’t let your opposition to the Recovery Act blind you to its results,’” Biden plans to say in the Richmond speech. “‘Come see what I see everywhere I go: workers rehired, factories reopened, cops on the street, teachers in the classroom, progress toward getting our economy back on the move.’”

There’s a reason why serious-minded people don’t rely on anecdotal evidence. Just because you look around and see a factory opening or a school being built doesn’t mean everything is peachy. When I look at America’s economic situation, I keep seeing this graph which was originally put out by the Obama administration to sell the “stimulus” spending spree and has now been updated to show actual unemployment numbers:

image

And I see this chart showing Bush-era deficits and projected Obama-era deficits:
image

And I read analysis like this one indicating that our debt situation has grown so bad the federal government is being forced to push up interest payments on our national debt in order to keep our international creditors buying it. And not only that, it’s so bad that Medicare is already in an operating deficit and the government’s ability to issue Social Security checks is very much in danger.
And, finally, I recognize (using logic and reason) that any jobs the “stimulus” spending Biden is so proud of are only going to last as long as the spending does. And that as bad as things are now, things will be even worse once the tax bill for all this spending catches up with us.
So, yes Mr. Biden. We’re looking around. We’re just not wearing your rose-colored glasses.

Tags: , ,


«
»
  • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ proof_positive

    boob: You forgot to mention that Reagan agreed to sign the tax increase if Congress would promise to cut spending.

    Two guesses as to which group of scum sucking, lying politicians didn’t keep their end of the bargain!

    I’m sure it simply slipped what passes for your mind!

  • http://ndgoon.blogspot.com/ goon

    Change we can believe in. Talking about liberal sock puppets this guy is the poster boy.

  • Eneils Bailey

    And these idiots had the nerve to make up Dan Qualye jokes.

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    or the other thing where the executive does not spend what congress appropriates. It is called fund impoundment and it is legal.

    I won’t call you a liar, but Congress made the practice of impoundment illegal. It’s an impeachable offense.

    This was in 1974. You need to keep up with current events better.

  • bill-tb

    First rule when you are looking dumb, don’t look dumber than dumb.

    My guess the Colonel Obama shuck and jive has crashed into shovel ready reality.

    Hey it worked on the Kenyans when he was giving Odinga a hand.

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    They can’t disappear it. I just sent it to my Kindle.

    Oh wait.

  • J.L.

    Of course Republicans never said to do “nothing”. They offered a plan that included tax cuts, which of course puts more money in people`s hands, so that they can therefore spend more. What a concept! So what`s the Dog barking about?

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    Whistler: Nixon used to impound funds all the time. He was taken to court and lost. Then congress clamped down on him by passing some law.
    That is why I said Nixon screwed up a good thing.

    Wouldn’t that mean that Nixon was doing a good thing and the Congress and the courts screwed it up?

  • gustave776

    Joe, do you know the definition of a OXY-MORON

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    Biden’s an idiot. The bailouts started over a year ago. Mortgage bailout bill, stimulus checks, Tarp 1 and 2, and the Porkulus bill.

    They’ve all failed. They are making the situation worse.

    Keynes is dead.

  • Kay

    We were talking about this around the dinner table tonight and I sarcastically made the comment that the VP had “less brains than an ant” (with apologies to ants everywhere)…

    Does Biden REALLY understand what he’s talking about??

  • http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

    PS: Damn Nixon screwd up a good thing.

    I couldn’t find a source just now, but I’m pretty sure that passed over Nixon or more likely Ford’s veto.

    It would only make sense the president would NOT sign that legislation.

  • http://Verizon.com/ ND in MD

    Somewhere in Deleware a village is missing its idiot.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/america_is_back/#c397018 DINO

    Woof posts a very good chart and one we’re already on.

    If your spouse racks up the credit cards and moves to Texas, you don’t quit your job, sell your house and go live in a box. You keep moving forward. And if there’s things you can do to increase your income like getting an education, you go into debt to finance that.

    But you stems were hoping you had reached the goal of destroying government. Not a chance. The democrats will just spend us into debt and raise taxes on the rich, and everyone else if they have to. The uglier it gets, the easier it will be to start soaking the wealthy and get back all the gains they made in the last 30 years.

    “TAX THE WEALTHY TO KEEP US ALL HEALTHY”

    Watch and learn. It’s a whole new ball game. People in distress aren’t going to want to protect the rich and the powerful anymore.

    You people are betting on the wrong horse.

  • stewartized

    Clinton. The Democratic congress. Why we needed tax cuts in the first place.

  • http://ndgoon.blogspot.com/ goon

    DINO the sock puppet said: Woof posts a very good chart and one we’re already on.

    If your spouse racks up the credit cards and moves to Texas, you don’t quit your job, sell your house and go live in a box. You keep moving forward. And if there’s things you can do to increase your income like getting an education, you go into debt to finance that.

    But you stems were hoping you had reached the goal of destroying government. Not a chance. The democrats will just spend us into debt and raise taxes on the rich, and everyone else if they have to. The uglier it gets, the easier it will be to start soaking the wealthy and get back all the gains they made in the last 30 years.

    “TAX THE WEALTHY TO KEEP US ALL HEALTHY”

    Watch and learn. It’s a whole new ball game. People in distress aren’t going to want to protect the rich and the powerful anymore.

    You people are betting on the wrong horse.

    More Classism from the Moron from Oregon, do you play any other socks moron? You sound like a broken fucken record, that is skips back to the previous verse on and on, never taking a breath.

  • jimmypop

    There’s the alternative that comes from doing nothing,

    we are going to wind up with inflation and have trillions in debt. the path we chose was MUCH worse.

  • Bat One

    So far we are in a deflationary mode.

    The inflation caused by LBJ’s reckless spending (“Guns and Butter”) and Nixon’s accomodation of his liberal detractors (“We’re all Keynesians now.”) didn’t really start roaring til Jimmy Carter added more deficit fuel to the fires.

    The Obama budget and deficit projections were based on some really delusional assumptions which are already proving to have been ludicrous. Real deficit projections should average out to about $1 trillion per year for at least the next decade.

    We WILL have inflation, and more likely another round of Carteresque stagflation.

  • Brent

    Somewhere in Deleware a village is missing its idiot.

    Yeah, but they intentionally got rid of him. They sent him to congress.

  • Brent

    The inflation caused by LBJ’s reckless spending (“Guns and Butter”) and Nixon’s accomodation of his liberal detractors (“We’re all Keynesians now.”) didn’t really start roaring til Jimmy Carter added more deficit fuel to the fires.

    Are you trying to say that deficits cause inflation? How, pray tell?

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/entry/homosexuality_is_wrong_-_a_compendium move_zig

    Reagan’s deficits?

    So the Democratic Congress that fought him every step of the way had nothing to do with overspending, hey?

  • ellinas

    Bat One. I wonder why you are omitting Reagan’s deficits.

  • http://idwn.blogspot.com/ Caner

    Change we can believe in.

  • robert108

    President Reagan had to rebuild the military and intel that Carter gutted. The funny thing is that when the Dems run the economy into the ground with wasteful social spending, then kill growth with taxation and regulation, it’s the next Republican who gets blamed for the “deficits”, as if Dems aren’t the original(FDR) deficit spenders with their social engineering schemes that never create any growth, except growth in spending.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/america_is_back/#c397018 DINO

    So the Democratic Congress that fought him every step of the way had nothing to do with overspending, hey?

    The Congress was not democratic. The Senate was under republican control from 81-87, 6 of the 8 reagan years.

    The House gave him everything he wanted. If you try and deny that it means any good things you credit reagan for get credited to the “democratic Congress.”

  • http://insanereindeer.blogspot.com/ Kenny

    “If your wife spends…”

    Well, if you are responsible for that debt, you cut your spending as much as is humanly possible. You decide not to buy the brand new car. You skip meals out.

    You tighten your belt.

    This is NOT a reason to spend more money…

    “Deflationary spiral”

    As real as the unicorn.

    Deflation fixes the economy. People have less money to spend, so stores drop prices. People start shopping again, and the economy improves.

    The perfect example is Reagan. In the shortest recession in recent history, after the bottom fell out in the stock market in the 80s, Reagan did nothing. Despite his dtractors, the economy rebounded in 7 months. Just barely long enough to be called a recession.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/america_is_back/#c397018 DINO

    Deflation fixes the economy.

    Except for that tiny detail where incomes drop but the debt is still based on the past.

    You have an answer for everything. They’re wrong, but they’re answers.

  • http://insanereindeer.blogspot.com/ Kenny

    Except for that tiny detail where incomes drop but the debt is still based on the past.

    As opposed to the massive inflation of prices during the Great Depression while unemployment hit 25%, and FDR deliberately destroyed food to keep prices high?

    Schmuck.

    You have an answer for everything. They’re wrong, but they’re answers.

    You’ve never proven me wrong before. And you’re certainly not going to start here.

    Deflation doesn’t cause unemployment. It is a RESPONSE to unemployment and falling prices. Anyone who wants prices to stay high while people make less money is either a moron or a jackass. Or, in your case, both.

  • http://www.avamayhemme.com/ fashionista

    hopefully will ge better

  • http://aresay.blogspot.com/ Aresay

    ALMOST FOR YEARS STILL TO GO OF………… http://stopthepresses2.blogspot.com/

  • http://verizon.com/ ND in MD

    Reagan’s deficits?

    So the Democratic Congress that fought him every step of the way had nothing to do with overspending, hey?

    Good point Zig:

    As I recall, during the Reagan Presidency, the Democrat controlled Congress kept whining about his budget cuts, and when Sick Willie was running in 92, he kept whined about the GHWB and Reagan budget cuts. Truth is, nobody lost their welfare checks and during the Reagan Presidency, revenues to the federal treasury doubled from $600B to $1.2 T.

  • 2Hotel9

    “I say, ‘Don’t let your opposition to the Recovery Act blind you to its results,’” We are not blind to the results, massive and steadily rising unemployment, factories closing AND being torn down so they can never reopen, money being devalued, Democrats responsible for all of America’s problems. We see it all, and we clearly see that Joe Biden is a fucking moron.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/author/realitybasedbob/ realitybasedbob

    In 1982 alone, he signed into law not one but two major tax increases. The Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act (TEFRA) raised taxes by $37.5 billion per year and the Highway Revenue Act raised the gasoline tax by another $3.3 billion.

    According to a recent Treasury Department study, TEFRA alone raised taxes by almost 1 percent of the gross domestic product, making it the largest peacetime tax increase in American history. An increase of similar magnitude today would raise more than $100 billion per year.

    In 1983, Reagan signed legislation raising the Social Security tax rate. This is a tax increase that lives with us still, since it initiated automatic increases in the taxable wage base. As a consequence, those with moderately high earnings see their payroll taxes rise every single year.

    In 1984, Reagan signed another big tax increase in the Deficit Reduction Act. This raised taxes by $18 billion per year or 0.4 percent of GDP. A similar-sized tax increase today would be about $44 billion.

    The Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 raised taxes yet again. Even the Tax Reform Act of 1986, which was designed to be revenue-neutral, contained a net tax increase in its first 2 years. And the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1987 raised taxes still more.

    Image and video hosting by TinyPic

    The year 1988 appears to be the only year of the Reagan presidency, other than the first, in which taxes were not raised legislatively. Of course, previous tax increases remained in effect. According to a table in the 1990 budget, the net effect of all these tax increases was to raise taxes by $164 billion in 1992, or 2.6 percent of GDP. This is equivalent to almost $300 billion in today’s economy.

  • budsmoke

    Biden was chosen for VP as a deterrent to possible assassins. Obama may be leading us down the wrong path, but Biden as Pres would be a whole lot worse. If you thought Bush was stupid, you haven’t heard of Joe.

  • 7734Cat

    Not for nothing do they make fun of this guy on Sat. Night Live. They have him pegged perfectly as the village idiot.

  • 2Hotel9

    That is quite a unique cut&paste; lie, cyberstalkerboob. History revisionism, it is all Democrats have.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/america_is_back/#c397018 DINO

    The best way to cure any economic problems is to put conservatives in cages.

    Gotta run.

  • http://www.indymedia.org/en/index.shtml Angry Vertebrate

    Bat One, if the Japanese had enacted Keynesian policies that would’ve led to inflation according to conservative economists. Yet Japan had years of deflation.

    Either conservatives are wrong on Keynesian Economics or you’re wrong on Japanese policy. I’ll accept that both are wrong as an alternative too.

  • robert108

    AV: It’s Keynesian “economics” that is wrong, and it’s obvious to any learned economist. His theories are only used by Marxists to kill growth. All demand is not equal, and so “aggregate demand” is a bullshit concept. In addition, the only thing govt can do for economic growth is to stay out of the private sector so that privately owned and controlled capital can create wealth.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/ likwidshoe

    And yet again, nobody from the left even attempts to explain Biden’s bullshit statements.

    Meanwhile, the lies of no new taxes remains unanswered…

  • Bat One

    AV,

    What you should accept is that both inflation and deflation are essentially monetary phenomena. That is, too much money in circulation is inflationary, while too little is deflationary. Large, sustained budget deficits can be inflationary as well, but not with immediacy of an over-expanded money supply.

    Normally, control of the money supply is strictly the responsibility of the Fed, an arrangement designed to specifically insulate questions of, interest rates, money supply and price stability from the tawdry influences of partisan politics. But the actions of Obama’s Treasury Department and its blatant misuse of TARP and other such “recovery” programs has had an additional “money creation” effect on the economy. The creation of money is no longer the sole preserve of a non-partisan Fed, and we will all pay an inflationary price for that unwise and un-voted power grab by Team Obama.

    I will acknowledge, as before, that much of what is commonly called “Keynesian” today goes well beyond what Lord Keynes himself advocated. But then a JFK “liberal” wouldn’t be at all comfortable in today’s Democrat party either.

  • Bat One

    The best way to cure any economic problems is to put conservatives in cages.

    But then there would be no one left who understood economics.

  • Bat One

    WOOF, Dino,

    Do either of you two know what deflation is, or how to cure it? I doubt it!

    There is no small irony here. Japan’s so-called “Lost Decade” was a deflationary recession brought on by a sudden drop in real estate values. Sound familiar?

    The reason that deflationary recession is known as the “Lost Decade” is because the Liberal Democrat Japanese government spent ten years and hundreds of billions of dollars in enormous Keynesian deficits trying to cure the problem by stimulating the country’s economy. That too should sound vaguely familiar.

    But here’s the punchline: It didn’t work!

    That chart above is interesting, but applicable only if the right solution to the problem is not applied. And monstrous federal deficits and take-overs of large swaths of the private sector economy ain’t the right solution to either the deflation or the recession. Just ask the Japanese.

  • Bat One

    And yet again, nobody from the left even attempts to explain Biden’s bullshit statements.

    That’s because they all think he is being serious and profound, and they are themselves too witless to know any better and disagree.

  • http://www.indymedia.org/en/index.shtml Angry Vertebrate

    I agree with your response Bat One, but the Japanese (and Obama) spent billions to try to prop up failing businesses. The Keynesian response would have been to stimulate demand, not reward failure.

  • ellinas

    And yet again, nobody from the left even attempts to explain Biden’s bullshit statements.

    Meanwhile, the lies of no new taxes remains unanswered…

    likwidshoe on July 17, 2009 at 07:50 pm

    Why should we explain or care what Biden says?
    We allow Bat One to explain such trivial bullshit.

  • Bat One

    AV,

    If you wish to revert to a more precise and classical definition of Keynesian economic thought I won’t object. I am a great deal more suspicious of Obama’s motives, however. And while I don’t think for a minute that he knows shit about economic or fiscal policy, I do believe he is at heart a stealth radical who would never “let a good crisis go to waste.” His so-called “stimulus”package had nothing whatsoever to do with stimulating economic growth and job creation. The intent was to spend taxpayer money (the next generation’s) solidifying Democrats in office in 2010, 2012, and beyond.

  • Bat One

    We allow Bat One to explain such trivial bullshit.

    E,

    The exquisite pleasure of having a liberal Democrat refer to his party’s choice for Vice President as “trivial” more than offsets any offense I might have taken at your trivial attempt at an insult.

  • robert108

    LGF: President Reagan didn’t veto the bill because the lying Dems agreed to cut spending as a condition for raising taxes. The spending cuts were supposed to happen separately from the tax bill, moron, so President Reagan couldn’t veto them. The Dems lied, the budget died.
    Just one more example of you lying to smear a great President.

  • ellinas

    To whom it may concern:
    I do not respond to idiots, nuts,and loons like robert180.
    It is simply not worth the time and effort to engage the deranged among us.

  • ellinas

    E,
    The exquisite pleasure of having a liberal Democrat refer to his party’s choice for Vice President as “trivial” more than offsets any offense I might have taken at your trivial attempt at an insult.
    Bat One on July 17, 2009 at 08:45 pm

    Bat. The exquisite pleasure of having a conservative believe, that we liberals aproove of everything the Democrats do, say or worship them because the are Democrats more than offsets any offense I might have taken at your trivial attempt at an insult.
    It shows how much you know. Which is not much.

  • ellinas

    boob: You forgot to mention that Reagan agreed to sign the tax increase if Congress would promise to cut spending.
    Two guesses as to which group of scum sucking, lying politicians didn’t keep their end of the bargain!
    I’m sure it simply slipped what passes for your mind!
    Proof on July 17, 2009 at 05:47 am

    Proof. You intentionaly left out the fact, that Regan forgot to use that little thing called veto, or the other thing where the executive does not spend what congress appropriates. It is called fund impoundment and it is legal.
    So much for fiscal conservatism on the part of your hero.

  • 2Hotel9

    e? You are a life long welfare whore, and you have zero knowledge of what has happened in America during the last 50 years. Fuck you, lying cunt.

  • 2Hotel9

    Don’t worry, Toot! They will “revise” that so it never happened. Get on the trolley, Jack. History is what Democrats SAY it is, not what actually happened. Don’t be a square, man.

  • Bat One

    It shows how much you know. Which is not much.

    e,

    Perhaps not so much, true. But in the realm of economics and fiscal policy what I know is clearly way more than either you or that buffoon Biden.

    Incidentally, despite your disparaging comments about R108 above, he is correct in what he stated about President Reagan’s “deal” with House Speaker “Tip” O’Neil and congressional Democrats regarding the Reagan tax rate cuts and the spending cuts which never materialized. O’Neil and the Democrats, not surprisingly, broke their promise. Perhaps that’s where a young Barack Obama got the idea.

    Of course, its easy for you to criticize Robert as a means of avoiding a serious discussion of the facts he has raised. That’s called attacking the messenger, I believe, and it is as common a ploy among liberals as a 6-4-3 double play on a baseball field. But it certainly doesn’t add anything to your dwindled credibility when instead of taking the high road as you suggest you’re seen as merely using personal insult to avoid answering issues which are apparently above your paygrade.

  • ellinas

    This was in 1974. You need to keep up with current events better.
    The Whistler on July 18, 2009 at 07:10 pm

    Agreed!

    PS: Damn Nixon screwd up a good thing.

  • 2Hotel9

    Spewing lies is all e has, it is the quintessential lying cunt. Just like all Democrats.

  • 2Hotel9

    See? It has no idea what happened when, or who initiated it. Typical lying cunt.

  • ellinas

    Incidentally, despite your disparaging comments about R108 above….
    Bat One on July 18, 2009 at 07:32 pm

    Oh please get off your high horse and put on your spectacles.
    For two months when responding/referring/talking to me his starting sentence would be: “Lying Greek Faggot” followed by what ever. When he was sure it was ingrained in everybody’s mind he changed it and now only uses the initials “LGF”.
    Thank you for labeling my remarks toward him as disparaging and ignoring the fact that he has disparaged almost everyone around here.
    In closing, I would also like to bring to your and others attention that he proposed to pay me $1000 if I allow him to give me a blow job. He did this via regular e-mail.
    I do not know where he got my e-mail address but he did.
    I don’t have time for weirdos like him.I have disclosed the above incident before.
    However you are a partisan hack, and will only see things through your pink conservative glasses.

    Even if Tip O’Neil and company lied/reneged he could have used the veto on subsequent budgets.
    But methinks he made a secret deal with the Dem’s where they would take the blame, and he the high road. But he forgot. Just like Iran-Contra.

  • robert108

    Bat: When the lying greek faggot(I use the terms interchangeably, btw, one more thing he gets wrong), squeals about me in his foolish impotence, I know I’m putting my ordnance right on target.

    The “lying” part of his nickname is obvious, since he lies about everything, even when he’s confronted with his own words. The “greek” part is due to the fact that he’s always bragging about his greek heritage, and the “faggot” part is due to his many homosexual overtures to me and others here.
    He sprinkles his invective with many homo references.

    So, as you can see, “lying greek faggot” describes this troll quite accurately.

  • ellinas

    Of course, its easy for you to criticize Robert as a means of avoiding a serious discussion of the facts he has raised.
    Bat One on July 18, 2009 at 07:32 pm

    Serious discussion with him? You are joking, right?
    What planet are you from?
    He thinks and says that everybody from the left or the right is lying. claims to be the ultimate arbiter of the truth.
    He has called everybody a liar starting with Rob Port and ending with Kenny. Go ahead and disagree with him on something.

  • robert108

    In closing, I would also like to bring to your and others attention that he proposed to pay me $1000 if I allow him to give me a blow job. He did this via regular e-mail.
    I do not know where he got my e-mail address but he did.

    Another example of why he is the lying greek faggot. I never sent any such email, don’t know the faggot’s email address, and am not a homosexual, although he obviously is, at least on the fantasy level.
    He is a pathological liar, indeed.

    BTW, I am aware that “greek faggot” is redundant.

    Now to deal with some more of his lies:

    Even if Tip O’Neil and company lied/reneged he could have used the veto on subsequent budgets.

    There’s no “even if”, since the Dems made the promise, agreed to the deal, and then betrayed the agreement.
    President Reagan, being an honorable man, kept his side of the bargain.

  • Bat One

    e,

    I wasn’t calling you out for your insults directed at Robert, unimaginative thought they were. My point was that you were using them as an excuse for avoiding the issue he raised, and that is, as I noted, attacking the messenger while trying to ignore the message… an all too common and dishonest practice among those of you on the Left.

  • robert108

    He thinks and says that everybody from the left or the right is lying. Another lie from you. I only point out lies, but since you always lie, about everything, I smack your lies constantly. claims to be the ultimate arbiter of the truth. Again, you lie; I have never done any such thing.
    He has called everybody a liar starting with Rob Port and ending with Kenny. Not everybody, and only a few have been called liars, you among them, since you are habitual. For the others, I point out their lies when they tell them. Go ahead and disagree with him on something. I always try facts and logic first, except with the habitual liars like you, but when someone replies with lying smear instead of argument, I call them on their dishonesty and untruthfulness.

    Again, you have used a comment to distract from your lack of valid argument by making false attacks on me.
    Your inadequacy will not go unnoticed.

  • ellinas

    Bat One. You are wrong to assume that I avoid debate with r180.
    I have enumerated my reasons above.
    Please feel free to ignore what I said, in order to score cheap points, an all too common and dishonest practice among some of you on the right.

  • ellinas

    President Reagan, being an honorable man, kept his side of the bargain.

    Bullshit!

  • ellinas

    r180! Keep denying what you did and what you offered me.
    That is all you got. Denial. Denial and lies.
    As a matter of fact you started calling me a faggot when I declined your indecent proposal.

  • Bat One

    Please feel free to ignore what I said…

    Usually I do. Its ridiculously easy.

  • robert108

    President Reagan, being an honorable man, kept his side of the bargain.

    Bullshit!

    It’s actually a matter of history, moron. President Reagan signed their tax increase, and the Dem culture of corruption didn’t cut spending. In fact, the agreement was that they would cut $2 in spending for every $1 of tax increase. They lied.

  • robert108

    I have done no such thing. I merely told the truth and exposed you for who you really are.

    You reveal yourself for what you really are. A pathetic liar who has nothing more than lying smear, and never makes a valid argument.

  • ellinas

    Whistler: Nixon used to impound funds all the time. He was taken to court and lost. Then congress clamped down on him by passing some law.
    That is why I said Nixon screwed up a good thing.

  • ellinas

    It’s actually a matter of history, moron. President Reagan signed their tax increase, and the Dem culture of corruption didn’t cut spending. In fact, the agreement was that they would cut $2 in spending for every $1 of tax increase. They lied.
    robert108 on July 18, 2009 at 09:14 pm

    What happened to his veto on subsequent budget years?
    Did a pussy cat eat it?

  • ellinas

    Good night to all!

  • robert108

    What happened to his veto on subsequent budget years?

    Irrelevant. Once a law is passed, the President cannot veto it. Generally speaking, except for the Dem betrayal, President Reagan lowered tax rates for all Americans, which is how he rescued us from the Carter economic and foreign policy debacle. He also had to rebuild the military that Carter had gutted, in typical Dem fashion, and also had to deal with a destabilized ME, due to Carter’s pandering to the ayatollahs.
    You really don’t know about any of this? Your ignorance is astounding.

  • robert108

    Mark Antony was being sarcastic, obviously in fear for his life; I’m not being sarcastic, and I’m not in fear for my life.
    Big difference.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/entry/homosexuality_is_wrong_-_a_compendium move_zig

    Robert,

    At the risk of going OT, this line:

    President Reagan, being an honorable man …

    reminds me of what must be one of the most moving speeches in the English language.

    Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears.
    I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him.
    The evil that men do lives after them;
    The good is oft interrèd with their bones.
    So let it be with Caesar. The noble Brutus
    Hath told you Caesar was ambitious.
    If it were so, it was a grievous fault,
    And grievously hath Caesar answered it.
    Here, under leave of Brutus and the rest –
    For Brutus is an honorable man,
    So are they all, all honorable men –
    Come I to speak in Caesar’s funeral.
    He was my friend, faithful and just to me.
    But Brutus says he was ambitious,
    And Brutus is an honorable man.
    He hath brought many captives home to Rome,
    Whose ransoms did the general coffers fill.
    Did this in Caesar seem ambitious?
    When that the poor have cried, Caesar hath wept.
    Ambition should be made of sterner stuff.
    Yet Brutus says he was ambitious,
    And Brutus is an honorable man.

  • ellinas

    You have slandered me in a public forum, and there are consequences for that.
    robert108 on July 18, 2009 at 09:05 pm

    I have done no such thing. I merely told the truth and exposed you for who you really are.

  • http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/entry/homosexuality_is_wrong_-_a_compendium move_zig

    I understand.

    Of course, this was from the play by Shakespeare and wonder if any such speech actually ever took place. The theme here is of bitter irony.

    I understand your meaning with respect to Reagan, which I share.

  • 2Hotel9

    The facts, as clearly illustrated by the actions and words from Barri, Biden, and the Democrat majorities in Congress and many state Legislatures and municipal governments, are that noe of them want the economy to recover. They are hellbent on collapsing the economy and driving the people of America into poverty. All for the purpose of controlling people’s lives. This quote from Biden is simply another piece of evidence of exactly what they are, and have been for many years, doing.

    Now e will toddle in, spew more lies and bullshit, all the while screeching that everyone is being mean to it. With more of its revisionist “history” sprinkled on top.

  • http://www.rabidamerican.net/ Rabid American

    2H9, You are absolutely correct…..

    I fear that we may not be able to turn this gargantuan around if we don’t soon have something go in our favor.

    The Republican party has been infiltrated in the same way the DNC was in the 60′s. They were infested by true communists with the agenda of taking over the whole party. Their success in that endeavor has emboldened them to do the same to the GOP.

    Hence, the manifestation of the RINO, “Moderates”, and “Reach Across The Aisle” wimps, in the republican party leadership!

    The conservative wing of the GOP has been marginalized by the socially acceptable views of the “Moderate Conservative”, a “Democrat Lite” version of conservatism that is in all actuality just soft socialism.

    Unless, and until, we purge the GOP of these traitors we will continue to wallow into obscurity.

    The weakness to date of the conservative movement has allowed the communists to grab control of the government and bleed us like ticks on a mangy dog.

    The road-map is available and known since 1963 – It’s worth reading to better understand what was made a concern to Congress in January of 1963:

    http://www.uhuh.com/nwo/communism/comgoals.htm

    Read it and weep……..

  • robert108

    Thanks for all the new additions to my evidence file on you, faggot!

    As a matter of fact you started calling me a faggot when I declined your indecent proposal.

    Another lie from you, faggot! You earned that name by threatening me with homosexual rape, then denying it when I presented you with your own words. That little stunt earned you your present nickname.
    Good luck proving any of your claims in court, where evidence is required. You have slandered me in a public forum, and there are consequences for that.

  • ellinas

    What happened to his veto on subsequent budget years?

    Irrelevant. Once a law is passed, the President cannot veto it.
    robert108 on July 18, 2009 at 09:47 pm

    True that. Once passed by congress and signed by the president, he cannot veto it.

    However that was not what I am referring to. I am referring to budgets he signed and did not veto. Once he signed them he was for them, and not against them.

  • robert108

    However that was not what I am referring to. I am referring to budgets he signed and did not veto. Once he signed them he was for them, and not against them.

    Again, irrelevant to the subject here, which is the TEFRA act of 1986, where the Dem liars promised to cut $2 of spending for every $1 of increased taxes; President Reagan was deceived into not vetoing this tax increase on the basis of that promise, and the lying Dems didn’t do their part, after President Reagan did his part. Once that was passed, all subsequent budgets were distorted by that tax increase, since it was law.
    Again, your absolute ignorance of the facts shows itself.

    TEFRA removed property as a tax shelter, which triggered the S&L crash and set the stage for the subsequent property market fluctuations, including the most recent one.
    Not only do you know nothing, but you apparently lack the ability to assemble facts together to draw a logical conclusion. Pathetic.

  • ellinas

    Again, irrelevant to the subject here…
    robert108 on July 19, 2009 at 10:27 am

    It is not. You may not wish this fact away to prove your point.
    Please play with a full deck. Do not conceal any cards.

  • WOOFX

    Not in inflation adjusted dollars.

    revenues to the federal treasury doubled from $600B to $1.2 T.

    Reagan signed tax hikes in 82,84,& 87.
    Club for Growth would have him on its hit list.

  • WOOFX

    There’s the alternative that comes from doing nothing,
    Image and video hosting by TinyPic

  • sayanything-6955

    God help us if there really are people that take this idiot seriously.They have to pay folks to listen to him right?

  • WOOFX

    Yeah Stew, surpluses were threatening the economy.
    That was Al Greenspans’ slant.

    Clinton. The Democratic congress. Why we needed tax cuts in the first place.

    Image and video hosting by TinyPic

  • sayanything-6955

    I guess if they do pay people to listen to this freakshow, the bill must not be much, only 140 fools showed up in Virginia to to hear him.

  • WOOFX

    So far we are in a deflationary mode.

  • WOOFX

    Tax cuts, the Bush economy. How we got here.

Create a SAB Readerblog


Recent Comments

Powered by Disqus

Blog Advice and Support
Installs and Upgrades
Theme Modifications
Custom Plugins
Theme Design
Conversions and Relocations
Hacked Site Recovery
Mobile Apps Development