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.
Back in July, remember obama refused to put out his mid-summer budget revision, along with the "document dump" on a Friday can lead one to the only logical conclusion - they know the stimulus failed to do what they promised. In addition, the admission that they were "off" by $2 TRILLION is stunning.
Then again, you are very easily stunned. Reading just about any right-wing propaganda rag seems to do the trick. Meanwhile, administrations do not have a history of releasing their initial mid-year economic review in July. W's first, for example, was released on August 22nd. Clinton's first was released on September 1st. Once again, you don't know what you are talking about.
And just as they were in January, the administration's mid-year numbers are in the same range as everybody else's. The downward momentum of the collapse carried deeper and further into the new year than most analysts had thought it would. A good part of it is in fact still with us. This documents only the remarkable extent of the screw-up that Republicans let loose into the world economy and the steepness of the challenge that anyone who came after W would have had in dealing with it.
Last edited by saganista; 08-27-2009 at 03:10 PM..
No, grasshopper, "could of" is always flat out WRONG!!! The error is typical of people who are more accustomed to the spoken word (like watching FOX News) than the written word (like reading scholarly papers).
Last edited by saganista; 08-27-2009 at 03:10 PM..
I've been wondering where the rest of the stimulus money is going to be used. It's not easy to find out, though I did learn that about $4.1B went to ACORN...
You learned that where, exactly???
I wonder if you have any understanding at all (since a lot of people seem not to) of the difference between money that "went to ACORN" and money that went to funding federally-mandated urban programs, the contracts for which ACORN might bid on (given its established expertise and experience) along with many other similar organizations.
And just as they were in January, the administration's mid-year numbers are in the same range as everybody else's.
Oh my.... I'm getting dizzy over here.
Obama and his "uniquely qualified" team were approx 30% off in their estimations. CBO, Blue Chip Eco and virtually everybody else told them they were using too "rosy" numbers - but did they listen? Of course not.
It is truly illustrative of how easily obama supporters (you) swallow a $9 trillion deficit when you were practically choking on Bush's $500 Billion deficit.
What does that say about their honesty, integrity and intelligence?
No, grasshopper, "could of" is always flat out WRONG!!!
Oh, who really cares?
Is that all you got?
Actually, I thought I wrote "could have" - sometimes the fingers get ahead of the brain or vice versa. Does it really matter?
Sometimes I'll even transpose "their" for "there" or "right" for "write" - it's not that I don't know the difference, as you must be aware, sometimes lack of time and attention is the cause.
No BFD, unless you are trying to deflect from the absolute disaster of obamanomics.
Then again, you are very easily stunned. Reading just about any right-wing propaganda rag seems to do the trick. Meanwhile, administrations do not have a history of releasing their initial mid-year economic review in July. W's first, for example, was released on August 22nd. Clinton's first was released on September 1st. Once again, you don't know what you are talking about.
And just as they were in January, the administration's mid-year numbers are in the same range as everybody else's. The downward momentum of the collapse carried deeper and further into the new year than most analysts had thought it would. A good part of it is in fact still with us. This documents only the remarkable extent of the screw-up that Republicans let loose into the world economy and the steepness of the challenge that anyone who came after W would have had in dealing with it.
are you telling me that the democratic congress was so inept that they were unable to do ANYTHING in the last 2 and 1/2 years to get our country back on track? we still have negative GDP growth and we still have rising unemployment, even with all the bailouts and the borrowed stimulus money.....
the good news is that a judge has ruled that the federal reserve is now going to have to tell where the money went. that would be a real win for transparency for a change!
I wonder if you have any understanding at all (since a lot of people seem not to) of the difference between money that "went to ACORN" and money that went to funding federally-mandated urban programs, the contracts for which ACORN might bid on (given its established expertise and experience) along with many other similar organizations.
I wonder if you are the only one who understands everything.
So, whether it's money that went to ACORN as a result of a bid, or just an outright urban grant, it doesn't really matter, does it? They got a hefty sum from the stimulus package - probably will be used for more community organizing and mobilizing of the base.
From an interview back in Jan before the bill was passed:
House Republican Leader John Boehner issued a statement over the weekend noting that the stimulus bill wending its way through Congress provides $4.19 billion for "neighborhood stabilization activities."
Sen. David Vitter, R-La., called it a "payoff" for groups' political activities in the last election. ACORN generally supports Democratic candidates and actively backed President Obama last year.
"It's just a long list of spending items," Vitter said. "It's line after line after line of favorite liberal spending programs..." and not a jobs bill at all.
No, grasshopper, "could of" is always flat out WRONG!!! The error is typical of people who are more accustomed to the spoken word (like watching FOX News) than the written word (like reading scholarly papers).
LOL- Scholarly papers..... Tell me what do you consider to be a scholarly paper?
Did you not read the last post-- they read "Scholarly papers".
LOL...so THAT'S it. BTW, I understand Obama's radical friends and associates wrote a lot of "scholarly" papers in their past lives. I probably used them to wrap fish, instead of reading them. No wonder I'm not so shmart.
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.
I probably used them to wrap fish, instead of reading them. No wonder I'm not so shmart.
