You call this an improvement? (Representatives, ethic, politician, terrorist)

[saganista]

No, it was a "you were wrong...deal with it"....

[pghquest]

Originally Posted by saganista

No, it was a "you were wrong...deal with it"....

Nope, it seems I wasnt,

Originally Posted by saganista

Government Expenditures and Investment UP by 2.3% in the third quarter.

News Release: Gross Domestic Product

Real federal government consumption expenditures and gross investment increased 7.9 percent in the third quarter,

National defense increased 8.4 percent, compared with an increase of 14.0 percent. Nondefense increased 6.8 percent, compared
with an increase of 6.1 percent.

Where the hell did you get 2.3% when the BEA says its 7.9%.

[wade52]

Originally Posted by malamute

That really doesn't work - it's ten months actually (we're in November)

Check your calendar. Make sure it's a 2009 version. It won't be 10 months until November 20th, pal.

and you all blamed Bush for not getting rid of all the terrorists Clinton allowed into the country in his first 8 months.

Baloney.

Seriously - if you're going to blame Bush for 9-11, then you have to blame Obama for anything that happened for the same or longer time period.

Cut back on the Kool-Aid. I'm not blaming Bush for 9/11. Iraq, Afghanistan, and the trashed economy? Yes.

9/11? No.

[wade52]

Originally Posted by pghquest

Was this you focusing on the issue?

Its my thread, and you want to tell me what its about?

Just a reminder, since you'd wandered off the path.

You mean like you just tried again to do to the last one?

Would that be the self admitted communist ones?

Would this be the birth certificate issue that Clinton brought up?

So you admit teleprompers are an issue? Odd,

More commonly referred to as "healthcare" by the left..

So now Bush created issues about Obama czars, healthcare, his birth certificate, or are you again trying to change the subject from the issue, to your pretend issue?

I thought you wanted to focus on the issue, if this is true, why do you keep going to Bush? Do you want to change the issue, or pretend its about Bush?

Well atleast you recognize your posting as such.

Boo hoo hoo, there go you again with your hyperpartisan, silliness, and nothing more..

You dont get to dictate to me what my thread is about.. If you dont like the thread, and cant discuss current event, dont bother responding..

If you don't like my responses, feel free not to respond to them. It's understandable that you don't like being exposed.

[Jadex]

Originally Posted by wade52

Check your calendar. Make sure it's a 2009 version. It won't be 10 months until November 20th, pal.



Baloney.




Cut back on the Kool-Aid. I'm not blaming Bush for 9/11. Iraq, Afghanistan, and the trashed economy? Yes.

9/11? No.

Just wondering who do you think was president when the 9-11 terrorist came into this country?

[wade52]

Originally Posted by Jadex

Just wondering who do you think was president when the 9-11 terrorist came into this country?

Doesn't matter what I think. Or what you think. They got here when they got here, didn't they?

Maybe you think the terrorists made that a prime consideration. I don't.

[pghquest]

Originally Posted by wade52

Just a reminder, since you'd wandered off the path.

If you don't like my responses, feel free not to respond to them. It's understandable that you don't like being exposed.

Haha, so your best retort was that I wondered off the path in response to you going off the cliff? Oooh thats just funny

Originally Posted by wade52

Doesn't matter what I think.

At least you got one thing right.. Now all of a sudden facts arent important.. haha.. ooh you guys are way too much..

[wade52]

Originally Posted by pghquest

Haha, so your best retort was that I wondered off the path in response to you going off the cliff? Oooh thats just funny

At least you got one thing right.. Now all of a sudden facts arent important.. haha.. ooh you guys are way too much..

No...

You've got it backwards.

You're "way too much."

[saganista]

Originally Posted by pghquest

Nope, it seems I wasnt,

LOL!!!

Originally Posted by pghquest

Real federal government consumption expenditures and gross investment increased 7.9 percent in the third quarter, National defense increased 8.4 percent, compared with an increase of 14.0 percent. Nondefense increased 6.8 percent, compared with an increase of 6.1 percent.

Where the hell did you get 2.3% when the BEA says its 7.9%.

Since you appear to know nothing about the GDP numbers until I teach you, here's your next lesson:

Government Consumption and Investment includes State and Local, not just the Federal government.

Once more for the hard of hearing, Government Consumption and Investment was up 2.3% in the third quarter.

[pghquest]

Originally Posted by saganista

Since you appear to know nothing about the GDP numbers until I teach you, here's your next lesson:

Government Consumption and Investment includes State and Local, not just the Federal government.

Once more for the hard of hearing, Government Consumption and Investment was up 2.3% in the third quarter.

Who the heck was talking about stae and local governments? Should I quote the BEA again?

increase in real GDP in the third quarter primarily reflected positive contributions from personal consumption expenditures (PCE), exports, private inventory investment, federal government spending, and residential fixed investment. Imports, which are a subtraction in the calculation of GDP,
increased.

Where is local governments discussed? Ooh wait, they do discuss it..

The upturn in real GDP in the third quarter primarily reflected upturns in PCE, in private inventory investment, in exports, and in residential fixed investment and a smaller decrease in nonresidential fixed investment that were partly offset by an upturn in imports, a downturn in state and local government spending, and a deceleration in federal government spending.

So tell me again where you got 2.3% from? I provided my source, will you provide yours?