obama is spending like crazy

[Shortstop]

Mccain wasn't much of a choice though, with him the government would have been in disarray.
Obama won by default, not a big choice when you compare the two.

Excellent point.

Obama's approval rating is dropping faster than a girl's dress on Prom Night.

[wtf]

he is not going to make it through the normal "honeymoon" period of 100 days

the knives are out already

[reno cool]

as opposed to legit views like:
right wingers "love to exploit" poor people and "deny them basic necessities"
or how bout "those that have money didn't earn it"
or "The government does many things to ensure the rich prosper"
????

and youre calling other people fairy tales and propaganda?

you make illogical foolish claims with no support and then have the nerve to criticize conservative views? if progressive means that you subscribe to the creed of karl marx (from each according to his ability, to each according to his need), then you my friend are fooling yourself if you think thats "forward thinking".



so basically your idea of government is mob rule?

laws exist from individual rights. you are born with natural rights. you have the right to defend (by force) your life, your liberty, and your property. laws are no more than the substitution of a common force for these individual forces.

do yourself a favor and read The Law by Frederick Bastiat.

http://www.constitution.org/law/bastiat.htm

The law becomes perverted when it punishes one's right to self-defense in favor of another's acquired right to plunder.

"simple ignorance" ? coming from you?

One step at a time there professor. I've yet to mention what a just society would look like. I'm talking within the context of our current society. Ultimately we have human rights (property rights don't really fit there).
However, in this society govt creates laws to protect property rights and other things. It pays for police and prisons. It builds roads so that business can be done. It invades foreign countries to establish markets and steal resources. All for whose benefit?.....Business

Why? Because the people that run govt are the same that run business. 99% of what govt does is to stimulate and protect business.

I will even make the claim that the only reason they have some social programs is because mass starvation and homelessness would be bad for business.

[daggerkobe]

What happened on 9/11 took everybody by surprise.

O RLY?

"There were lots of warnings."
— Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld

"This was not something that had to happen."
"They simply failed."
— Thomas H. Kean

"They don't have any excuse because the information was in their lap, and they didn't do anything to prevent it."
— Senator Richard Shelby

"I don't believe any longer that it's a matter of connecting the dots. I think they had a veritable blueprint, and we want to know why they didn't act on it."
— Senator Arlen Specter

"Should we have known? Yes, we should have. Could we have known? Yes, I believe we could have because of the hard targets [CIA operatives were tracking]."
— Representative Porter Goss

"As of September 10th, each of us knew everything we needed to know to tell us there was a possibility of what happened on September 11th."
— Assistant Attorney General Michael Chertoff

"Had one human being or a common group of human beings sat down with all that information, we could have gotten to the hijackers before they flew those four airplanes either into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon or the ground of Pennsylvania."
— Senator Bob Graham

"If you put all those pieces together, I don't say you could have prevented September 11th, but there might have been some warning, had it been handled properly."
— Vice President Dick Cheney


They all must be in a "Liberal conspiracy" to smear Dumbya's administration, right? Oh wait.... everyone quoted here is a REPUBLICAN, except Senator Bob Graham.

I wouldn't be suprised if Clinton received over 100 legitimate threats saying Al Qaida was planning a major attack against the U.S.

This is how the Clinton Administration delt with terrorist threats....
according to Richard Clarke (man behind the ""Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US" and "al Qaeda planning to hijack planes" memos):

Clinton declared "a war on terror before the term became fashionable." This was back in 1996, after the first World Trade Center attack, the Bush assassination attempt, the Khobar Towers attack, and the Oklahoma City bombing. (On Page 127, Clarke notes that it's possible that al-Qaida operatives in the Philippines "taught Terry Nichols how to blow up the Oklahoma Federal Building." Intelligence places Nichols there on the same days as Ramzi Yousef, and "we do know that Nichols's bombs did not work before his Philippines stay and were deadly when he returned.")

Page 225: Thwarted al-Qaida's efforts to establish a militant Islamist state in Bosnia. Clinton's efforts to quell the war in the Balkans "defeated Al Qaeda when it had attempted to take over Bosnia by having its fighters dominate the defense of the breakaway state from Serbian attacks."

Pages 79-84: Responded to Saddam Hussein's assassination attempt on George H.W. Bush with force. He ordered the bombing of Iraq's intelligence headquarters, which, Clarke says, paired with a "stark warning" to the Iraqis, "successfully deterred Saddam from ever again using terror against us."

Pages 112-21, 129: Responded to Iran's role in the 1996 Khobar Towers attack with an unspecified "intelligence operation" intended to deter further Iranian terrorism.

Page 186: Responded to the African embassy bombings with strikes on terrorist camps in Afghanistan and a chemical plant in Sudan, even though he anticipated criticism for the timing. (The strikes took place on Aug. 20, 1998, at the height of the Lewinsky scandal.) According to Clarke, Clinton said: "Do you all recommend that we strike on the 20th? Fine. Do not give me political advice about the timing. That's my problem. Let me worry about that."
Pages 211-12: Worked to prevent al-Qaida attacks planned for the millennium. In December 1999, Clinton's National Security Adviser Sandy Berger "convened the Principals [Cabinet-level officials] in crisis mode. 'We have stopped two sets of attacks planned for the Millennium. You can bet your measly federal paycheck that there are more out there and we have to stop them too. I spoke with the President and he wants you all to know.' " Clarke adds: "It was the sort of attention we needed in the summer of 2001."

Page 225: Recognized early on that terrorism was a primary post-Cold War threat, and "greatly increased funding for counterterrorism and initiated homeland protection programs."


This is how Dumbya responded to terrorist threats:

CRAWFORD, Tex., April 10 -- President Bush was in an expansive mood on Aug. 7, 2001, when he ran into reporters while playing golf at the Ridgewood Country Club in Waco, Tex.

The day before, the president had received an intelligence briefing -- the contents of which were declassified by the White House Saturday night -- warning "Bin Ladin Determined To Strike in US." But Bush seemed carefree as he spoke about the books he was reading, the work he was doing on his nearby ranch, his love of hot-weather jogging, his golf game and his 55th birthday.

After the tragedy of 9/11 happened, Bush implemented many different measures of which the democrats were opposed to all. He promised that another attack would NOT happen under his watch and it never did even though the threats kept coming in and were indeed carried out in other countries across the globe.

You keep repeating this like it means something. This is akin to installing smoke alarms after your house burns down and your family perishes in the fire. Too little too late.

If you honestly think al Qaeda couldn't hijack more planes if they wanted after 9/11, you're a moron. But 9/11 wasn't about killing Americans.... it was about crippling our economy and sending a message. They accomplished both flawlessly.... thanks to the lazy fvck sleeping on the job.

While Bush's overall performance in the White House was questionable, he did an incredible job keeping our country safe and I sure hope Obama does the same.

Wow, you really are thick headed, aren't you?

Your comment that 9/11 could have been prevented with minimal work on Bush's part is pure bullshit.

I'm not the only one saying it, dumbass. Read above.

Why can't you understand the simple fact that its congress that decides how money is spent and NOT the president?

The retroactive tax increase that went through during the Clinton administration was passed when democrats controlled both houses of congress.

I challenge you to make a chart showing our country's deficit and the effect democratic controlled congress's had on it as compared to republican controlled congress's. You won't do it because you know it confirms what I have been saying all along. Democrats waste taxpayer money far worse than republicans.

Do you really want to go there?

[daggerkobe]

MYTH #1: The 1998–2001 budget surpluses resulted from courageous sacrifices by President Clinton and the Republican Congress.

Fact: The end of the Cold War and the tax receipts from an economic and dot-com boom balanced the budget.

A popular narrative credits President Bill Clinton's tax and spending policies with finally balancing the federal budget from 1998 through 2001. In reality, the deficit was temporarily eliminated by two factors largely outside the control of the President and Congress: the end of the Cold War and the late-1990s economic and stock market boom.

The Clinton presidency saw a budget deficit of 3.8 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) transformed into a 1.3 percent of GDP budget surplus. Nearly this entire 5.1 percent of GDP shift occurred among tax revenues, defense spending, and net interest costs.[1]

1. Tax revenues rose by 2.2 percent of GDP. While President Clinton's 1993 tax increases increased revenues somewhat, they did not fully take off until 1997 when the economy began booming, triggered in part by capital gains tax relief.
2. Defense spending dropped by 1.4 percent of GDP. The end of the Cold War brought a "peace dividend" that temporarily reduced defense spending from 4.4 percent of GDP to an under-funded 3.0 percent—a reduction of one third.
3. Net interest spending fell by 1.0 percent of GDP. This was a residual of the lower debt ratio resulting from the revenue and defense movements. Slightly lower interest rates were also a contributing factor.

Other spending across the government dropped by 0.5 percent of GDP, with most savings attributed to a reduction in the cost of unemployment benefits as the economy grew.

President Clinton and the Republican Congress did not play a leading role in the stock market and dot-com boom (nor the subsequent bust), and did not cause the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union. Yet those two variables explain the vast majority of the swing from deficits to surplus. To the extent that lawmakers deserve credit, it is for staying out of the way. Spending on other programs was generally held in check, free trade was promoted, and Washington resisted urges for additional tax increases or regulations that would have killed the goose laying the economic golden egg.


So, it was Clinton's '93 tax increases, his cuts in military spending and the dot com boom which led to the surplus, certainly not the neonitwit congress.

[DwightShrute]

problems that the republicans created the last 8 years

couldn't be further from the truth

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4qyNiueqKY

[daggerkobe]

couldn't be further from the truth

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4qyNiueqKY

So now Youtube has become the beacon of truth for the neonitwits and not blogs?


"President Bush advocated the "Ownership Society." According to the New York Times, "he pushed hard to expand home ownership, especially among minorities, an initiative that dovetailed with his ambition to expand the Republican tent — and with the business interests of some of his biggest donors. But his housing policies and hands-off approach to regulation encouraged lax lending standards."

He insisted that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (the GSE) meet low-income housing goals and advocated government loans to help low-income homeowners make down-payments.

The Bush administration also replaced Fannie and Freddie's chief regulator in 2003 immediately after the regulator published a report warning of the risks posed by the GSE."

[DwightShrute]

So now Youtube has become the beacon of truth for the neonitwits and not blogs?


"President Bush advocated the "Ownership Society." According to the New York Times, "he pushed hard to expand home ownership, especially among minorities, an initiative that dovetailed with his ambition to expand the Republican tent — and with the business interests of some of his biggest donors. But his housing policies and hands-off approach to regulation encouraged lax lending standards."

He insisted that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (the GSE) meet low-income housing goals and advocated government loans to help low-income homeowners make down-payments.

The Bush administration also replaced Fannie and Freddie's chief regulator in 2003 immediately after the regulator published a report warning of the risks posed by the GSE."

You believe anything the NY TIMES prints?

They couldn't be any further left and with an obvious agenda against Bush. Quoting anything from the NY times is the same as quoting from Cracked or Mad magazine.

Even Clinton admits that he and the Dems screwed it up

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfGWxqsKFmY

NY TIMES

[daggerkobe]

Typical neonitwit response.... when confronted with facts, demonize the source.

Youtube users >>>>>>>>>> Journalists?

Here's some more facts to chew on:

In 2004, HUD ignored warnings from HUD researchers about foreclosures, and increased the affordable housing goal from 50% to 56%. The MBS were very attractive to Wall Street, and while Fannie and Freddie targeted the lowest-risk loans, they still fueled the subprime market as a result. Subprime mortgage loan originations surged by 25% per year between 1994 and 2003, resulting in a nearly ten-fold increase in the volume of these loans in just nine years.

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has conceded that self-regulation of investment banks contributed to the crisis. The SEC relaxed rules in 2004 that enabled investment banks to substantially increase the level of debt they were taking on, fueling the growth in mortgage-backed securities supporting subprime mortgages.

Hmmmm, who was the president again in 2004 when all these lax policies and warnings were being ignored? Kinda reminds you of 9/11, doesn't it?


neonitwits quoting blogs and now Youtube users.

[DwightShrute]

Typical neonitwit response.... when confronted with facts, demonize the source.

Youtube users >>>>>>>>>> Journalists?

Here's some more facts to chew on:

In 2004, HUD ignored warnings from HUD researchers about foreclosures, and increased the affordable housing goal from 50% to 56%. The MBS were very attractive to Wall Street, and while Fannie and Freddie targeted the lowest-risk loans, they still fueled the subprime market as a result. Subprime mortgage loan originations surged by 25% per year between 1994 and 2003, resulting in a nearly ten-fold increase in the volume of these loans in just nine years.

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has conceded that self-regulation of investment banks contributed to the crisis. The SEC relaxed rules in 2004 that enabled investment banks to substantially increase the level of debt they were taking on, fueling the growth in mortgage-backed securities supporting subprime mortgages.

Hmmmm, who was the president again in 2004 when all these lax policies and warnings were being ignored? Kinda reminds you of 9/11, doesn't it?


neonitwits quoting blogs and now Youtube users.

SPIN SPIN and more SPIN

They are facts that just happen to be posted on youtube. The same info you posted are on that the video

The Democrats blocked the Bush Administration's attempt to regulate sub prime mortgages and the Democrats paid the senators to block it. Read it and watch the video again http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4qyNiueqKY

Read and make you own decision based on facts and not the left wing propaganda.

[daggerkobe]

I go to Youtube for music videos and sports bloopers not political enlightenment.

What bills did the Democrats block?
List them.

You sound as delusional as an ex-poster named Panic. Could it be....

[DwightShrute]

I go to Youtube for music videos and sports bloopers not political enlightenment.

What bills did the Democrats block?
List them.

You sound as delusional as an ex-poster named Panic. Could it be....

Before the NYtimes went in the tank for the left wing nut jobs it reported back in 2003

http://www.audacityofhypocrisy.com/2008/09/18/ny-times-sept-2003-bush-proposed-tightening-oversight-of-fannie-mae-and-freddie-mac-the-democrats-of-congress-blocked-it/

NY TIMES SEPT 2003: BUSH PROPOSED TIGHTENING OVERSIGHT OF FANNIE MAE AND FREDDIE MAC - THE DEMOCRATS OF CONGRESS BLOCKED IT



New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae

By STEPHEN LABATON
The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.
Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry.
The new agency would have the authority, which now rests with Congress, to set one of the two capital-reserve requirements for the companies. It would exercise authority over any new lines of business. And it would determine whether the two are adequately managing the risks of their ballooning portfolios.
The plan is an acknowledgment by the administration that oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — which together have issued more than $1.5 trillion in outstanding debt — is broken. A report by outside investigators in July concluded that Freddie Mac manipulated its accounting to mislead investors, and critics have said Fannie Mae does not adequately hedge against rising interest rates.

… Among the groups denouncing the proposal today were the National Association of Home Builders and Congressional Democrats who fear that tighter regulation of the companies could sharply reduce their commitment to financing low-income and affordable housing.
”These two entities — Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — are not facing any kind of financial crisis,” said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ”The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.”
Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed.
”I don’t see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,” Mr. Watt said.

[DwightShrute]

I go to Youtube for music videos and sports bloopers not political enlightenment.

What bills did the Democrats block?
List them.

You sound as delusional as an ex-poster named Panic. Could it be....

Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005 - google it

The Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005 is currently being cited as McCain's attempt to stop the current crisis and its death was at the hands of the democrats.

McCain - Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005 (Democrats blocked reform)
Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005
Bill Summary
1/26/2005--Introduced. Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005 - Amends the Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992 to establish: (1) in lieu of the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), an independent Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Agency which shall have authority over the Federal Home Loan Bank Finance Corporation, the Federal Home Loan Banks, the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae), and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac); and (2) the Federal Housing Enterprise Board. Sets forth operating, administrative, and regulatory provisions of the Agency, including provisions respecting: (1) assessment authority; (2) authority to limit nonmission-related assets; (3) minimum and critical capital levels; (4) risk-based capital test; (5) capital classifications and undercapitalized enterprises; (6) enforcement actions and penalties; (7) golden parachutes; and (8) reporting. Amends the Federal Home Loan Bank Act to establish the Federal Home Loan Bank Finance Corporation. Transfers the functions of the Office of Finance of the Federal Home Loan Banks to such Corporation. Excludes the Federal Home Loan Banks from certain securities reporting requirements. Abolishes the Federal Housing Finance Board.

I can go on and on and on and on

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2083758/posts

[daggerkobe]

So NY Times is only credible when it benefits you? Typical neonitwit.

But that doesn't answer what bills the Democrats supposedly blocked. There was only one reform bill that was ever introduced.... by a DEMOCRAT senator named John Corzine. It did not make it through the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee, which was MAJORITY Republican at the time.

So the Youtube video showing neonitwits grand-standing then doing NOTHING shows what, exactly???? Exactly, NOTHING.

Actions speak louder than words.....

"President Bush advocated the "Ownership Society." According to the New York Times, "he pushed hard to expand home ownership, especially among minorities, an initiative that dovetailed with his ambition to expand the Republican tent — and with the business interests of some of his biggest donors. But his housing policies and hands-off approach to regulation encouraged lax lending standards."

He insisted that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (the GSE) meet low-income housing goals and advocated government loans to help low-income homeowners make down-payments.

The Bush administration also replaced Fannie and Freddie's chief regulator in 2003 immediately after the regulator published a report warning of the risks posed by the GSE."

In 2004, HUD ignored warnings from HUD researchers about foreclosures, and increased the affordable housing goal from 50% to 56%. The MBS were very attractive to Wall Street, and while Fannie and Freddie targeted the lowest-risk loans, they still fueled the subprime market as a result. Subprime mortgage loan originations surged by 25% per year between 1994 and 2003, resulting in a nearly ten-fold increase in the volume of these loans in just nine years.

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has conceded that self-regulation of investment banks contributed to the crisis. The SEC relaxed rules in 2004 that enabled investment banks to substantially increase the level of debt they were taking on, fueling the growth in mortgage-backed securities supporting subprime mortgages.

[daggerkobe]

Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005


Again, a bill that never made it to the floor. It was killed by the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.... which the Republicans held MAJORITY!!!!!! Richard Shelby (Alabama - R) was the chairman.

So how did the Democrats kill it, exactly?

[DwightShrute]

So NY Times is only credible when it benefits you? Typical neonitwit.

But that doesn't answer what bills the Democrats supposedly blocked. There was only one reform bill that was ever introduced.... by a DEMOCRAT senator named John Corzine. It did not make it through the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee, which was MAJORITY Republican at the time.

So the Youtube video showing neonitwits grand-standing then doing NOTHING shows what, exactly???? Exactly, NOTHING.

Actions speak louder than words.....

"President Bush advocated the "Ownership Society." According to the New York Times, "he pushed hard to expand home ownership, especially among minorities, an initiative that dovetailed with his ambition to expand the Republican tent — and with the business interests of some of his biggest donors. But his housing policies and hands-off approach to regulation encouraged lax lending standards."

He insisted that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (the GSE) meet low-income housing goals and advocated government loans to help low-income homeowners make down-payments.

The Bush administration also replaced Fannie and Freddie's chief regulator in 2003 immediately after the regulator published a report warning of the risks posed by the GSE."

In 2004, HUD ignored warnings from HUD researchers about foreclosures, and increased the affordable housing goal from 50% to 56%. The MBS were very attractive to Wall Street, and while Fannie and Freddie targeted the lowest-risk loans, they still fueled the subprime market as a result. Subprime mortgage loan originations surged by 25% per year between 1994 and 2003, resulting in a nearly ten-fold increase in the volume of these loans in just nine years.

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has conceded that self-regulation of investment banks contributed to the crisis. The SEC relaxed rules in 2004 that enabled investment banks to substantially increase the level of debt they were taking on, fueling the growth in mortgage-backed securities supporting subprime mortgages.

Spin it anyway you want to but even Clinton says so http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfGWxqsKFmY

Listen the NYtimes wasn't always in the tank for the far left as it is now. It's a rag now and that is why hardly anyone reads it anymore and will likely go bankrupt this year if not in 2010. Spin that!

I win!

[daggerkobe]

[DwightShrute]

we agree to disagree. I see all different reports and with an open mind, absorb the information and form an opinion. While things would be a lot easier and popular to always blame Bush, I choose not to be so misguided but rather true to my beliefs.

You will see the same information and choose to look at it differently and as long as you are true to yourself, then that is all that matters.

Go Canucks Go

[daggerkobe]

[therber2]

I go to Youtube for music videos and sports bloopers not political enlightenment.

What bills did the Democrats block?
List them.

You sound as delusional as an ex-poster named Panic. Could it be....

Actually I would trust non-biased Youtube video "journalism" over your Media journalists. I have the completely opposite opinion here. "Professional" journalists of the media are paid, and mostly all have a biased agenda. I will admit though CNN and FOX news are slightly entertaining. They both always give me a good laugh. It is no source of, as you say, political enlightenment.

[Boner_18]

We're soon gonna get to see how he deals (or more likely doesn't deal) w/ North Korea.

[daggerkobe]

Actually I would trust non-biased Youtube video "journalism" over your Media journalists. I have the completely opposite opinion here. "Professional" journalists of the media are paid, and mostly all have a biased agenda. I will admit though CNN and FOX news are slightly entertaining. They both always give me a good laugh. It is no source of, as you say, political enlightenment.

[DwightShrute]

Actually I would trust non-biased Youtube video "journalism" over your Media journalists. I have the completely opposite opinion here. "Professional" journalists of the media are paid, and mostly all have a biased agenda. I will admit though CNN and FOX news are slightly entertaining. They both always give me a good laugh. It is no source of, as you say, political enlightenment.

voice of reason

[therber2]

Yes. Unbiased, as opposed to biased videos of which there are an abundance of on youtube. Regardless, one always has the option of changing the proverbial channel; where as from other sources it is merely an illusion.

[daggerkobe]

Right. Youtube posters must uphold the journalistic integrity of all wannabes that post on Youtube. Every political video along with 100000 conspiracy theories must meet the stringent fact checking process of Youtube and must remain unbiased in their pursuit of the truth. Or...... other Youtubers will make hurtful comments.



You neonitwits are better than any standup comedians I have ever seen.

[DwightShrute]

Right. Youtube posters must uphold the journalistic integrity of all wannabes that post on Youtube. Every political video along with 100000 conspiracy theories must meet the stringent fact checking process of Youtube and must remain unbiased in their pursuit of the truth. Or...... other Youtubers will make hurtful comments.



You neonitwits are better than any standup comedians I have ever seen.

Typical left wing response. Name calling and spinning. There must be a handbook out there that you guys are all using cause I know exactly what you will say next.

to free thinkers!

[daggerkobe]

You "free" thinkers cost us 8 million jobs, 10,000 American lives, $1.5 Trillion war and record deficits.

[DwightShrute]

You "free" thinkers cost us 8 million jobs, 10,000 American lives, $1.5 Trillion war and record deficits.

case and point!

page 24 of the handbook?

[daggerkobe]

Pages 1-200 of "US History 2001-2008: How a president achieved 17% approval rating, lowest on record."

[DwightShrute]

you are right and I am wrong

[DwightShrute]

Pages 1-200 of "US History 2001-2008: How a president achieved 17% approval rating, lowest on record."

OK if you say so, and after the liberation of Iraq and after spending nearly $750,000,000 on the election, McCain still got $60 million votes.

Spin that!

1,389
Days Until Barack Obama is Out of Office

[jon101]

Obama "Families who make under $250k per year will not see one penny of tax increases"

Fact:
Cigarette smokers who are mostly poor have been hit with the largest federal tax increase in history!

So he has already broken his promise not to tax, what do you think he'll do next?

Tax your ass! Indirectly so he can talk his way out of it!

Inflation is an indirect tax!Cigarette taxes are a scam that government should have put schip from the federal budget and not the pockets of smokers who pay more taxes than non smokers!

[losturmarbles]

Obama "Families who make under $250k per year will not see one penny of tax increases"

Fact:
Cigarette smokers who are mostly poor have been hit with the largest federal tax increase in history!

So he has already broken his promise not to tax, what do you think he'll do next?

Tax your ass! Indirectly so he can talk his way out of it!

Inflation is an indirect tax!Cigarette taxes are a scam that government should have put schip from the federal budget and not the pockets of smokers who pay more taxes than non smokers!

add the death tax to that list

http://www.nodeathtax.org/deathtax/history

[daggerkobe]

omfg...... you never heard neonitwits whine like this when Dumbya quadrupled gas prices, costing each driver approxmiately $2000-3000 a year in added fuel costs. But they whine about tax on cigarettes when they probably don't even smoke.

[DwightShrute]

who's Dumbya?