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.
do realize that they are talking about the FY2009 Omnibus Appropriation Bill that Bush didn't sign before he left office. That was Bush's budget. You can add to that the bill he did sign and the TARP bill.
H.R.2638
Quote:
Division A provides continuing appropriations for all agencies and activities that would be covered by the regular fiscal year 2009 appropriations bills, until enactment of the applicable regular appropriations bill or until March 6, 2009, whichever occurs first. Emergency FY09 appropriations for LIHEAP and advanced technology vehicle manufacturing loans are also included. Division B provides $22.9 billion in emergency supplemental appropriations for relief and recovery from hurricanes, floods, and other natural disasters. Division C provides $487.7 billion in FY09 funding for the Department of Defense. Division D provides $40 billion in FY09 funding for the Department of Homeland Security. Division E provides $72.9 billion in FY09 funding for Military Construction and Veterans Affairs.
do realize that they are talking about the FY2009 Omnibus Appropriation Bill that Bush didn't sign before he left office. That was Bush's budget. You can add to that the bill he did sign and the TARP bill.
so, your twisted logic is that because Bush didn't do his job and sign the appropriation bill into law, he isn't responsible for any of the spending??? What a joke.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest
Clearly you are math challenged because not only did the $750B get returned to the taxpayers, and credited towards Obama, but Obama also signed bills into law that cost hundreds of billions of dollars.. He's spent TRILLIONS of dollars, and these are bills HE SIGNED..
Its not my OPINION that Obama signed bills into law in 2009 for hundreds of billions which PROVES that 4% is WRONG.. ITS A FACT.. The only way 4% could be accurate is if the federal governments budget was $20T a year... its not.. you are wrong, or you dont understand basic elementary math..
Nope.. not at all defensive, just trying to educate the x.... (I'd be banned for filling in the x)
Its again not my OPINION that Obama signed these laws.. Even Obama admits it to be true..
so, your twisted logic is that because Bush didn't do his job and sign the appropriation bill into law, he isn't responsible for any of the spending??? What a joke.
Actually that would be YOUR twisted logic, blaming Bush for bills SIGNED by Obama
And it wasnt Bush that failed to do his job, it was the Democratic Congress who failed to provide a bill to be signed.
Someone needs to return to school to learn about the budgeting process again..
The 2009 fiscal year began October 1, 2008, nearly four months before Obama took office. The budget for the entire fiscal year was largely set in place while Bush was in the White House.
Clearly you are math challenged because not only did the $750B get returned to the taxpayers, and credited towards Obama, but Obama also signed bills into law that cost hundreds of billions of dollars.. He's spent TRILLIONS of dollars, and these are bills HE SIGNED..
Its not my OPINION that Obama signed bills into law in 2009 for hundreds of billions which PROVES that 4% is WRONG.. ITS A FACT.. The only way 4% could be accurate is if the federal governments budget was $20T a year... its not.. you are wrong, or you dont understand basic elementary math..
Nope.. not at all defensive, just trying to educate the x.... (I'd be banned for filling in the x)
Its again not my OPINION that Obama signed these laws.. Even Obama admits it to be true..
again the 3/11/09 bill was the bill that bush should have sign while he was in office, that was the appropriation bills that bush pushed off and didn't sign. If you twisted logic is that bush didn't do his job and sign the bill so he isn't responsible, I guess he could use the same logic and say he isn't responsible for failing to protect us from the 9-11 attacks because he was busy reading about a goat.
and when Cato says,
Quote:
Obama’s FY2009 performance is like a relief pitcher (Obama) who enters a game in the fourth inning trailing 19-0 and allows another run to score. The extra run is nothing to cheer about, of course, but fans should be far more angry with the starting pitcher (BUSH).
they are talking about the 3/11/09 bill. Obama signed it, but is was Bush's budget, 100%
again the 3/11/09 bill was the bill that bush should have sign while he was in office, that was the appropriation bills that bush pushed off and didn't sign. If you twisted logic is that bush didn't do his job and sign the bill so he isn't responsible, I guess he could use the same logic and say he isn't responsible for failing to protect us from the 9-11 attacks because he was busy reading about a goat.
and when Cato says,
they are talking about the 3/11/09 bill. Obama signed it, but is was Bush's budget, 100%
H.R.2638? BUSH signed this bill, because he wanted to pay for his wars. this was ALSO a continuing resolution thru march.
NO IT WASNT.. If Obama signed it, then its OBAMAS spending.
I dont give a rats patute about what Cato says because EVERYONE in the WORLD knows OBAMA SIGNED the bill.. It was even written until AFTER Obama was sworn into office because the incompetent Democrats in Congress didnt get it done...
Tell me, when Bush came into office in 2001 and the economy was beginning to falter, who's recession was that, Clinton's or Bush's? checked myself, of course you blamed Clinton for what Bush inherited, a bit of hypocrisy? //www.city-data.com/forum/13880443-post45.html
Quote:
LIE, Bush inherited a recession
Bush inherited a recession, but Obama didn't????
You also claiming that the private debt surplus from Clinton's FY2001 budget should be credited to Bush's??? REALLY???? sorry, had trouble writing that, I was laughing so much....
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest
NO IT WASNT.. If Obama signed it, then its OBAMAS spending.
I dont give a rats patute about what Cato says because EVERYONE in the WORLD knows OBAMA SIGNED the bill.. It was even written until AFTER Obama was sworn into office because the incompetent Democrats in Congress didnt get it done...
Sorry all of the the Budget resolution was passed and handed off to Bush by 6/5/09. Congress did their job, Bush didn't.
FACT is FY2009 was 100% BUSH's mess. You seriously think the FY2009 spending would have been any lower if Bush was in office thru 2009???
Your opinion has been overridden by Cato. Not really a liberal think tank.... I'll take Cato's analysis over your twisted logic and unsupported beliefs. buy by.
Last edited by buzzards27; 04-25-2011 at 10:36 AM..
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.
