Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ummm...which part. They are corrrect about how the price of the war was "hidden" and then Obama "unhid it."
Pure Nonsense.
It was not hidden anymore than it is today. It was still being factored into the national debt, but it was "off budget" and not mentioned in the passed annual budget. They funded the war through separate bills, often called an emergency spending bill (Does this sound familiar for everything under Obama?) Everyone knew from day one that it was off budget and all presidents/congresses have had off budget items - not that it is justified in this case.
Technically with Obama everything is off budget as he is the first president inept enough to not actually be able to pass an annual budget in the modern era. Yet you give Obama a free pass for doing something at a level far worse than Bush, while criticizing Bush for it. Partisan.
Obama: "Bush paid for the wars outside of the annual budgets in separate spending bills passed by congress, which aren't hidden, but we'll use that word since it sounds sinister. But it is a tactic so the public doesn't see all of the debt adding up at once - and Bush doing this was wrong."
Sheep: "Bush was so wrong and evil for making things off budget and using that tactic."
Obama: "So to correct this, I'll make everything off the budget and do away with annual budgets. That way everything is together passed in chunks, off the budget, exactly where I said Bush put things to hide growing debt so you can't see it growing so fast all at once - that is where I will put everything to fix it!"
Location: Georgia, on the Florida line, right above Tallahassee
10,471 posts, read 15,855,052 times
Reputation: 6438
Quote:
Originally Posted by michiganmoon
This is literally what is happening:
Obama: "Bush paid for the wars outside of the annual budgets in separate spending bills passed by congress, which aren't hidden, but we'll use that word since it sounds sinister. But it is a tactic so the public doesn't see all of the debt adding up at once - and Bush doing this was wrong."
Sheep: "Bush was so wrong and evil for making things off budget and using that tactic."
Obama: "So to correct this, I'll make everything off the budget and do away with annual budgets. That way everything is together passed in chunks, off the budget, exactly where I said Bush put things to hide growing debt so you can't see it growing so fast all at once - that is where I will put everything to fix it!"
Sheep: "Yeah Obama fixed it!"
Exactly right. Bush could present a budget that looks smaller, while still spendng huge sums on wars without it being seen as "part of the budget." Obama, makes it "part of the budget" and everyone screams, "Bush had it too!" "as part of the budget?" "Well, no. It was a seperate item!" If only Obama was like Bush. He could get his budget passed, since it wouldn't include all that other pesky money that still needed to be paid. Unlike Bush, who kept his budget nice and low. Who am I kidding, Obama will probably never get a budgest past the current congress. They got a motto. If Obama wants it, we say no.
PS. I knew a sheep once. It takes a sheep to know a sheep. You gotta watch out. Sheep are everywhere. Usually the sheepiest sheep is the sheep that calls everyone else sheep.
Exactly right. Bush could present a budget that looks smaller, while still spendng huge sums on wars without it being seen as "part of the budget." Obama, makes it "part of the budget" and everyone screams, "Bush had it too!" "as part of the budget?" "Well, no. It was a seperate item!" If only Obama was like Bush. He could get his budget passed, since it wouldn't include all that other pesky money that still needed to be paid. Unlike Bush, who kept his budget nice and low. Who am I kidding, Obama will probably never get a budgest past the current congress. They got a motto. If Obama wants it, we say no.
PS. I knew a sheep once. It takes a sheep to know a sheep. You gotta watch out. Sheep are everywhere. Usually the sheepiest sheep is the sheep that calls everyone else sheep.
You are proving yourself a sheep.
Think for a change, don't take everything Carney and MSNBC say is 100% the truth - the war debts were never hidden.
#1 Obama has never passed an annual budget, not even with 60% Democratic control of each house of congress. You are falling for nonsense when you say Obama put it in the budget, because he does not have a budget. Obama is paying for it the same way that Bush did. Obama is adding it to the debt the same way Bush did. Obama is just screaming about it unlike Bush, to cover up the fact that he, Obama, has failed miserably with his financial promises.
#2 Obama couldn't even get a single vote in the Democratically controlled congress for his irrational budget. No Democratic Senator wanted to be on record voting for such nonsense. This is an Obama problem not a Republicans in congress problem. If Obama were a real leader he could propose a sane enough budget that could at least pass the Democratic controlled Senate...or at least get a few votes.
Why do you think Obama couldn't pass an annual budget even when he held 60% of each house of congress? Because he proposed such an irrational budget that no Democrat wants to attach their name to fantasy and fairy tales for election time. We need a leader more than ever on our nation's finances and Obama has proven that he is incapable of being that leader.
Republicans were pro-deficit Bush and Reagan. Deficit cutting is now the party's ideology under Obama. Massachusetts’ state spending rose on Romney’s watch, especially in his final fiscal year 2007 budget, which proposed a 10 percent spending increase over fiscal year 2006.
Get real. Remember those famous words, "Deficits don't matter?"
In my opinion it is worth a try: nothing right now seems to be working, it couldn't get any worse. Do I remember Obama saying 3 years would turn everything around and if it didn't he shouldn't be re-elected; let's take him at his word.
The fact is this president is not a leader on anything to do with finances.
This president had total control of congress for 2 whole years and could not pass an annual budget. One of the president's proposed budgets was so ludicrous that he got ZERO votes in the Democratically controlled Senate.
We need a leader. Obama has given us broken promises and kicked the can down the road on fiscal issues.
I suppose that facts are not your strong suite. No president has control of Congress, even less total control. Secondly, in the particular case of Obama, those two years you are referring, the senate was not in total control of the Democrats as the Republicans had enough votes to fillibuster any bill. Thirdly, the president did propose many budgets, one as recent as February 2012. But with the congressional GOP's open policy of obstructionism, that proposal was dead before it got off the printing press.
Location: Georgia, on the Florida line, right above Tallahassee
10,471 posts, read 15,855,052 times
Reputation: 6438
Quote:
Originally Posted by michiganmoon
You are proving yourself a sheep.
Think for a change, don't take everything Carney and MSNBC say is 100% the truth - the war debts were never hidden.
#1 Obama has never passed an annual budget, not even with 60% Democratic control of each house of congress. You are falling for nonsense when you say Obama put it in the budget, because he does not have a budget. Obama is paying for it the same way that Bush did. Obama is adding it to the debt the same way Bush did. Obama is just screaming about it unlike Bush, to cover up the fact that he, Obama, has failed miserably with his financial promises.
#2 Obama couldn't even get a single vote in the Democratically controlled congress for his irrational budget. No Democratic Senator wanted to be on record voting for such nonsense. This is an Obama problem not a Republicans in congress problem. If Obama were a real leader he could propose a sane enough budget that could at least pass the Democratic controlled Senate...or at least get a few votes.
Why do you think Obama couldn't pass an annual budget even when he held 60% of each house of congress? Because he proposed such an irrational budget that no Democrat wants to attach their name to fantasy and fairy tales for election time. We need a leader more than ever on our nation's finances and Obama has proven that he is incapable of being that leader.
Youve' called me a sheep twice, now. I think you're a sheepier sheep than I'll ever be.
Here's a question for you. You state Obama has never passed a budget. How many budgets have been passed by a President in the last 20 years. What? You say congress passes budgets and not Presidents?
That can't be. The person I quoted said Obama has never passed a budget. Which is true, because he can't pass budgets. Maybe I just quoted an uninformed sheep who doesn't understand the budget process, but just likes to say words.
I suppose that facts are not your strong suite. No president has control of Congress, even less total control. Secondly, in the particular case of Obama, those two years you are referring, the senate was not in total control of the Democrats as the Republicans had enough votes to fillibuster any bill. Thirdly, the president did propose many budgets, one as recent as February 2012. But with the congressional GOP's open policy of obstructionism, that proposal was dead before it got off the printing press.
The fact is, a budget cannot be filibustered. There was no filibustering of any budget. Cloture is not a filibuster. Cloture sets a time restraint for debate. In example, there was a cloture on the healthcare bill, even though congress members didn't get a chance to read the entire bill. You can have cloture without a filibuster.
Yes, Obama did propose budgets. Obama could not pass a budget in the Democratically controlled Senate.
Obama couldn't even get a vote for his budget in the Democratically controlled Senate. Use your brain. Is Obama a good fiscal leader if he can't even get votes from his own party?
Youve' called me a sheep twice, now. I think you're a sheepier sheep than I'll ever be.
Here's a question for you. You state Obama has never passed a budget. How many budgets have been passed by a President in the last 20 years. What? You say congress passes budgets and not Presidents?
That can't be. The person I quoted said Obama has never passed a budget. Which is true, because he can't pass budgets. Maybe I just quoted an uninformed sheep who doesn't understand the budget process, but just likes to say words.
Yes, a budget is a bill, that congress votes on. Everyone knows this. The president also submits a budget. The president is also the leader of the country.
You are a sheep if you pass off all blame away from Obama, as you single out Bush for budget problems. So which is it? Presidents have no control over budgets (Obama) or they get the blame (Bush)? Hypocritical sheep.
If Obama were a good leader wouldn't his budget be able to get support from his own party? At least a single vote in the Senate?
Obama has let this country go without a budget even in the 2 years where he controlled both houses. A real leader would have proposed a realistic budget that at least his party could agree on. He couldn't even do that. Obama would rather kick the can down the road and propose fantasy budgets...
And break other promises...not fix SS, keep no bid contracts for under 25K, keep earmarks at high levels, not reduce the deficit, etc...
Location: Georgia, on the Florida line, right above Tallahassee
10,471 posts, read 15,855,052 times
Reputation: 6438
Quote:
Originally Posted by michiganmoon
Yes, a budget is a bill, that congress votes on. Everyone knows this. The president also submits a budget. The president is also the leader of the country.
You are a sheep if you pass off all blame away from Obama, as you single out Bush for budget problems. So which is it? Presidents have no control over budgets (Obama) or they get the blame (Bush)? Hypocritical sheep.
If Obama were a good leader wouldn't his budget be able to get support from his own party? At least a single vote in the Senate?
Obama has let this country go without a budget even in the 2 years where he controlled both houses. A real leader would have proposed a realistic budget that at least his party could agree on. He couldn't even do that. Obama would rather kick the can down the road and propose fantasy budgets...
And break other promises...not fix SS, keep no bid contracts for under 25K, keep earmarks at high levels, not reduce the deficit, etc...
"He said it could -- could -- be $60 billion," Duffy said. "It is impossible to know what any military campaign would ultimately cost. The only cost estimate we know of in this arena is the Persian Gulf War, and that was a $60 billion event." In September, Daniels disputed an estimate by Bush economic adviser Larry Lindsey -- who has since left the White House -- that war with Iraq could cost $200 billion. Daniels said he believes Lindsey's estimate was "the upper end of a hypothetical," Duffy said What would war with Iraq cost? - CNN
805 billion and still climbing. Yeah, you're right. This war cost had nothing to do with Bush.
PS, I've blamed Obama for all kinds of failures. I thought sheep were blind. Since you have no idea about me or what/how I post, then your comments are blind. Just like ...... a sheep.
PPS: I'm glad you read the link I posted that answered the questions you asked in your last post. Since you asked them again, I assume you just chose to ignore the answers. Cheers.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
