Speaking of budget deficits

[gabosaurus]

Have you ever wondered where the foundation for current Federal Deficit started? I did and decided to check.
According to the Congressional Budget Office, the budget deficit for the 1992 fiscal year was $290.3 billion.
During the first two years of the Clinton administration, he passed a large tax increase that was felt almost exclusively by the top 2 percent of wage earners. That, combined with spending restraints, succeeded in not only balancing the budget, but producing a surplus that grew to over $230 billion by the 2000 fiscal year.

Then GW Bush became president. He initiated large tax cuts and started a war about the same time. He also granted more loopholes to businesses and lessened regulations on Wall Street and mortgage companies. As the result, the surplus disappeared. Replaced by a deficit that has been growing ever since.

Of course, Obama hasn't done anything to reduce the deficit. But he certainly didn't create it.

http://factcheck.org/Images/image/FederalDeficit(1).jpg

[fj1200]

Have you ever wondered...

I do wonder why you never look deeper than the superficial.

[Kathianne]

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt_histo5.htm



Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 2000 - 2012 <!-- InstanceBeginEditable name="content" --> Includes legal tender notes, gold and silver certificates, etc.
The first fiscal year for the U.S. Government started Jan. 1, 1789. Congress changed the beginning of the fiscal year from Jan. 1 to Jul. 1 in 1842, and finally from Jul. 1 to Oct. 1 in 1977 where it remains today.
To find more historical information, visit The Public Debt Historical Information (http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/mspd/mspd.htm) archives.

<tbody>
Date
Dollar Amount


09/30/2012

16,066,241,407,385.89





09/30/2011
14,790,340,328,557.15



09/30/2010
13,561,623,030,891.79



09/30/2009

11,909,829,003,511.75



09/30/2008
10,024,724,896,912.49



09/30/2007
9,007,653,372,262.48



09/30/2006
8,506,973,899,215.23



09/30/2005
7,932,709,661,723.50



09/30/2004

7,379,052,696,330.32



09/30/2003

6,783,231,062,743.62



09/30/2002
6,228,235,965,597.16



09/30/2001
5,807,463,412,200.06



09/30/2000
5,674,178,209,886.86


</tbody>

[Missileman]

Have you ever wondered where the foundation for current Federal Deficit started? I did and decided to check.
According to the Congressional Budget Office, the budget deficit for the 1992 fiscal year was $290.3 billion.
During the first two years of the Clinton administration, he passed a large tax increase that was felt almost exclusively by the top 2 percent of wage earners. That, combined with spending restraints, succeeded in not only balancing the budget, but producing a surplus that grew to over $230 billion by the 2000 fiscal year.

Then GW Bush became president. He initiated large tax cuts and started a war about the same time. He also granted more loopholes to businesses and lessened regulations on Wall Street and mortgage companies. As the result, the surplus disappeared. Replaced by a deficit that has been growing ever since.

Of course, Obama hasn't done anything to reduce the deficit. But he certainly didn't create it.

http://factcheck.org/Images/image/FederalDeficit(1).jpg

I dare you to read over this information and return with more BS about a Clinton surplus.

http://www.craigsteiner.us/articles/16

And the main question you need to answer is this: How is it a supposed budget surplus resulted in an increase in the national debt during the same period?

[Voted4Reagan]

Seeing as Gabby was just past the stage of pooping in her diapers when Clinton was President, perhaps she doesn't realize that Bill Clinton gave us the 2 biggest single tax hikes in the history of this country in order to perform this feat of financial hocus pocus. Perhaps she also forgets he was IMPEACHED.

see, back then one good thing was WE HAD A BUDGET.

Today the free spending congress (Most notably the Senate) hasn't passed a budget in 5 years.

So Gabby will I am sure explain to us why the Senate refuses to obey the BALANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT and has been in violation of the law for 5 years...

Come on Gabby.....please tell us.

[fj1200]

Umm, there is no BBA.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57400369-503544/national-debt-has-increased-more-under-obama-than-under-bush/
By MARK KNOLLER (http://www.cbsnews.com/8300-503544_162-503544.html?contributor=41947) /
CBS NEWS/ March 19, 2012, 6:55 PM
National Debt has increased more under Obama than under Bush


[*=left]671 Comments
(http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57400369-503544/national-debt-has-increased-more-under-obama-than-under-bush/#postComments)/
[*=left]Shares/
[*=left]Tweets/
[*=left]Stumble/
[*=left]Email (?subject=Your%20friend%20has%20shared%20a%20CBSNe ws%20link%20with%20you&body=National%20Debt%20has%20increased%20more%20un der%20Obama%20than%20under%20Bush%20-%20Political%20Hotsheet%0Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.cbsnews .com%2F8301-503544_162-57400369-503544%2Fnational-debt-has-increased-more-under-obama-than-under-bush%2F)
[*=left]More +


http://i.i.com.com/cnwk.1d/i/tim/2012/03/19/chart_620_deficit_120319.jpgCBS
(CBS News) The National Debt has now increased more during President Obama's three years and two months in office than it did during 8 years of the George W. Bush presidency.The Debt rose $4.899 trillion during the two terms of the Bush presidency. It has now gone up $4.939 trillion since President Obama took office.
The latest posting from the Bureau of Public Debt at the Treasury Department shows the National Debt now stands at $15.566 trillion. It was $10.626 trillion on President Bush's last day in office, which coincided with President Obama's first day.
The National Debt also now exceeds 100% of the nation's Gross Domestic Product, the total value of goods and services
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here you go bambots, from CBS NEWS hardly a right wing propaganda site.
Your chump obama has been on a borrowing and spending spree that beats any ever indulged in in the history of mankind!
Math and the numbers do not lie Gabby.
WHY IS OBAMA SPENDING MORE THAN THE SUM TOTAL EXPENDITURES OF ALL THE OTHER PRESIDENTS COMBINED?
ANYBODY??

[fj1200]

WHY IS OBAMA SPENDING MORE THAN THE SUM TOTAL EXPENDITURES OF ALL THE OTHER PRESIDENTS COMBINED?
ANYBODY??


Debt is not the same thing as spending.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Debt is not the same thing as spending.

No argument on that. However it is when its borrowed money being spent. As is the case now when the government borrows 43 cents of every dollar that it spends.
Actually its insanity to borrow to spend more than one's yearly intake IMHO.
WHAT IS WORSE IS THAT SO MUCH OF IT IS TOTALLY UNNECESSARY SPENDING.-Tyr

[Missileman]

WHAT IS WORSE IS THAT SO MUCH OF IT IS TOTALLY UNNECESSARY SPENDING.-Tyr

That is spending they need to figure out how to make illegal.

[hjmick]

Just checking to see if Gabs blamed Bush...



She didn't disappoint...

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

That is spending they need to figure out how to make illegal.

That is the new billion dollar question. How to stop the graft , corruption and special political favors.

Obama is now shooting holes into the sinking ship to let the water out! What is even worse is the people on the ship with no lifeboats left are praising him for his genius and courage in doing so!!--Tyr

[Anton Chigurh]

The graphic posted in the OP isn't from the CBO. It uses cherry picked CBO figures, using the projected budget "surplus" prior to 2001 then using actual dollars beginning in 2001. Really a tired old trick.

If you actually go to cbo dot gov and LOOK, instead of fucking "fact check" you'll see there was never a "surplus" in actual dollars, there was only a projected one that never came to fruition.

The tax increases weren't what "reduced" the projected deficits, the Gramm-Rudman act was. Because it made it the law of the land to have a projected balanced budget. It did NOT require there to be a actual balanced budget. When the SCOTUS declared Gramm-Rudman unconstitutional, the spending frenzy in Congress was ON! Throw in the trillion dollar damage to the economy caused by the 9/11 attacks, and you see the piglets in Congress really lined up at the tit, unchecked.

If you look at actual revenue, it was actually MUCH higher under Booooosh either by percentage of GDP or in actual dollars - no matter how you want to measure it - than it ever even came close to under Clinton. Clinton's Fed received far less revenue with the higher taxes, than Boooosh's did with the lower ones. By far. Way far.

Boooosh had record revenues (which are still records) and the actual deficit in real dollars was trending DOWN. And the national average unemployment rate was 4.9%. The source of the higher revenue? 30 million+ more people working and paying income taxes. This trumps taxing the "rich" every time it is tried. Put the fucking people back to work instead of having them on unemployment and food stamps, and revenue will soar.

I know I am wasting my time posting this to Gabby, since I have posted it before and it was ignored, only to see her later on, start yet another thread with more lies from the left.

Therefore it is proven she is not at all interested in the facts, only interested in regurgitating the spoonfed Gerber of the left. And doing it repeatedly in spite of the actual facts. We know she is not merely a dupe, too smart for that. Therefore we must conclude she is simply dishonest to boot.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

The graphic posted in the OP isn't from the CBO. It uses cherry picked CBO figures, using the projected budget "surplus" prior to 2001 then using actual dollars beginning in 2001.

If you actually go to cbo dot gov and LOOK, you'll see there was never a "surplus" in actual dollars, there was only a projected one that never came to fruition.

The tax increases weren't what "reduced" the projected deficits, the Gramm-Rudman act was. Because it made it the law of the land to have a projected balanced budget. It did NOT require there to be a actual balanced budget. When the SCOTUS declared Gramm-Rudman unconstitutional, the spending frenzy in Congress was ON! Throw in the trillion dollar damage to the economy caused by the 9/11 attacks, and you see the piglets in Congress really lined up at the tit, unchecked.

If you look at actual revenue, it was actually MUCH higher under Booooosh either by percentage of GDP or in actual dollars - no matter how you want to measure it - than it ever even came close to under Clinton. Clinton's Fed received far less revenue with the higher taxes, than Boooosh's did with the lower ones. By far. Way far.

Boooosh had record revenues (which are still records) and the actual deficit in real dollars was trending DOWN. And the national average unemployment rate was 4.9%. The source of the higher revenue? 30 million+ more people working and paying income taxes.

I know I am wasting my time posting this to Gabby, since I have posted it before and it was ignored, only to see her later on, start yet another thread with more lies from the left.

Therefore it is proven she is not at all interested in the facts, only interested in regurgitating the spoonfed Gerber of the left. And doing it repeatedly in spite of the actual facts. We know she is not merely a dupe, too smart for that. Therefore we must conclude she is simply dishonest to boot.

Your presentation of what Gabby does and how she rejects any proof that refutes her progressive philosophy is dead on the mark. What is sad is that she does the same in regards to proof of the dangers of Islam too. Of course being a good little leftist stooge she must also defend the leftist ally the Islamists...

[Robert A Whit]

I dare you to read over this information and return with more BS about a Clinton surplus.

http://www.craigsteiner.us/articles/16

And the main question you need to answer is this: How is it a supposed budget surplus resulted in an increase in the national debt during the same period?

I concur with the Steiner report. I have long argued that one can't have a surplus so long as deficits keep rising. All it means to say you have a surplus is you failed to pay your bills. Clinton sadly wanted to say he had a surplus despite the need to pay down bills.

[Robert A Whit]

The graphic posted in the OP isn't from the CBO. It uses cherry picked CBO figures, using the projected budget "surplus" prior to 2001 then using actual dollars beginning in 2001. Really a tired old trick.

If you actually go to cbo dot gov and LOOK, instead of fucking "fact check" you'll see there was never a "surplus" in actual dollars, there was only a projected one that never came to fruition.

The tax increases weren't what "reduced" the projected deficits, the Gramm-Rudman act was. Because it made it the law of the land to have a projected balanced budget. It did NOT require there to be a actual balanced budget. When the SCOTUS declared Gramm-Rudman unconstitutional, the spending frenzy in Congress was ON! Throw in the trillion dollar damage to the economy caused by the 9/11 attacks, and you see the piglets in Congress really lined up at the tit, unchecked.

If you look at actual revenue, it was actually MUCH higher under Booooosh either by percentage of GDP or in actual dollars - no matter how you want to measure it - than it ever even came close to under Clinton. Clinton's Fed received far less revenue with the higher taxes, than Boooosh's did with the lower ones. By far. Way far.

Boooosh had record revenues (which are still records) and the actual deficit in real dollars was trending DOWN. And the national average unemployment rate was 4.9%. The source of the higher revenue? 30 million+ more people working and paying income taxes. This trumps taxing the "rich" every time it is tried. Put the fucking people back to work instead of having them on unemployment and food stamps, and revenue will soar.

I know I am wasting my time posting this to Gabby, since I have posted it before and it was ignored, only to see her later on, start yet another thread with more lies from the left.

Therefore it is proven she is not at all interested in the facts, only interested in regurgitating the spoonfed Gerber of the left. And doing it repeatedly in spite of the actual facts. We know she is not merely a dupe, too smart for that. Therefore we must conclude she is simply dishonest to boot.

I am trying to see if I can say that better. Nope. Nuh uhh. No can do. Course I would have left out some of those words designed to upset women, but nope, can't do.

Here are more keys to remember. Bush was able to both cut taxes and have a much higher revenue than Clinton. Note also the final budget of Clinton where he spent 1.8 trillion dollars to do what Obama is doing, only it takes Obama over 3.6 trillion dollars to get the same job done.

Some will protest and say, wait, what about war. The largest expense in war is still the pay to the men. And they get a bit more than normal in war zones. But we are not spending much in ordinance. Some of this can be chalked up as training. When I was based in Germany, my pay was the same were it in a state of the USA. Combat duty pay is not cheap, but it is not why Obama blows 1.8 trillion dollars more than Clinton spent.

If one recalls how it worked for General Franks, he did most of his spending on funds to the alliance in Afghanistan plus ordinance. He had next to nothing in Afghanistan for our troops. I suspect democrats blanked it out of their minds that Franks brilliant plan that worked was to have Afghans fighting their own war with him in support.

As to Saddam, Franks must have enough troops since they waded thorough Saddam's army like plucking the heads off chickens. We had much better troops, much better equipment and much better planning than Saddam had, so he lost his bid to say rich. Franks did in 3 weeks what some claimed could not be done.

For all the bragging Obama did about Iraq, all he did was keep going with the Bush deals and doctrine. Bush had already agreed to leave Iraq.

[Anton Chigurh]

some of those words designed to upset womenThere was nothing designed to upset women, or anyone else for that matter. The words were designed to state the truth, nothing more. If the truth upsets anyone, fuck 'em.

[Robert A Whit]

There was nothing designed to upset women, or anyone else for that matter. The words were designed to state the truth, nothing more. If the truth upsets anyone, fuck 'em.

Do you talk that way to your mother, sisters, aunts, children or do you confine that filth to this forum?

[Anton Chigurh]

Do you talk that way to your mother, sisters, aunts, children or do you confine that filth to this forum?I do not worry about whether my words upset you. Being upset is a choice YOU make. No one forces you to be upset. I don't spend any time at all worrying about what might upset people or what their perceptions are. We can't control perceptions and we can't control others' choices, so there's no sense concerning ourselves with it one little bit.

I'm just a brash, no shivagitter Texan. It is what it is. Your choice of how to react is just that - your choice and what I do has zero effect on it whatsoever.

I never gave them hell. I gave them the truth and they thought it was hell.

[Kathianne]

There was nothing designed to upset women, or anyone else for that matter. The words were designed to state the truth, nothing more. If the truth upsets anyone, fuck 'em.

Robert's looking to become the minute saver of women. Pay him no heed. He is what he is, there is no escaping where his heart is at, not with the ladies. If he actually comes to an awakening, it will be noted. This is not it.

[Robert A Whit]

I do not worry about whether my words upset you. Being upset is a choice YOU make. No one forces you to be upset. I don't spend any time at all worrying about what might upset people or what their perceptions are. We can't control perceptions and we can't control others' choices, so there's no sense concerning ourselves with it one little bit.

I'm just a brash, no shivagitter Texan. It is what it is. Your choice of how to react is just that - your choice and what I do has zero effect on it whatsoever.

I never gave them hell. I gave them the truth and they thought it was hell.

Perish the thought. I am not upset. I hoped that you had manners. But your not having manners is how you put that best foot forward as I have to come to understand. Though I am not upset, your good messages are well done. Too bad for you that filth comes naturally to you.

I tried to tell AT also (not about cussing that way) that people reading you will pass judgment. If you want them to notice you for filth, far be it for me to want your messages to be clear and well taken.

[Anton Chigurh]

Perish the thought. I am not upset.Anyone with better than 5th grade reading comprehension knows my use of "you" was general, not specific. Imbecile.

You've run into one of those people you almost never do, who really and truly and without reservation, doesn't give a damn what you or anyone else thinks. These are intellectually and socially liberated sorts who are at least twice as dangerous as the typical person.

You know that show, "Touched by an Angel?" Well this ain't it.

[aboutime]

Robert. The time has come for me to finally admit how I feel about attempting to deal with you in a civil way.

And sadly. As you endlessly tell me, and others how UPSET we are.

Only one thing comes to mind. And this is a sincere effort to let you know.

Nothing more needs to be said.......4606

http://youtu.be/XVSRm80WzZk

[Kathianne]

Perish the thought. I am not upset. I hoped that you had manners. But your not having manners is how you put that best foot forward as I have to come to understand. Though I am not upset, your good messages are well done. Too bad for you that filth comes naturally to you.

I tried to tell AT also (not about cussing that way) that people reading you will pass judgment. If you want them to notice you for filth, far be it for me to want your messages to be clear and well taken.

Kind of a macro moderator, no license necessary? Cool, we'll see how that works for you. You claim that Abbey, whoops, you called her out on 'thanking you' for service, in spite of literally tens of posts to that end. Oh well, you have Mundame.

The rest of boys and girls? You've pretty much slammed them all at one time or another.

[Robert A Whit]

http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Robert A Whit http://www.debatepolicy.com/images/debate_policy/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?p=621770#post621770)

Perish the thought. I am not upset. I hoped that you had manners. But your not having manners is how you put that best foot forward as I have to come to understand. Though I am not upset, your good messages are well done. Too bad for you that filth comes naturally to you.

I tried to tell AT also (not about cussing that way) that people reading you will pass judgment. If you want them to notice you for filth, far be it for me to want your messages to be clear and well taken.




Kind of a macro moderator, no license necessary? Cool, we'll see how that works for you. You claim that Abbey, whoops, you called her out on 'thanking you' for service, in spite of literally tens of posts to that end. Oh well, you have Mundame.

The rest of boys and girls? You've pretty much slammed them all at one time or another.

I had no idea you loved the curse words used by Anton. Oh well, from now on I don't plan to mention that to him. I will remind you that even when not wanted, you barge right in.

As to your spin about Abbey, that was not calling her out. I know she is much better is all.

[Robert A Whit]

Fine, you got it.

[Robert A Whit]

Anyone with better than 5th grade reading comprehension knows my use of "you" was general, not specific. Imbecile.

You've run into one of those people you almost never do, who really and truly and without reservation, doesn't give a damn what you or anyone else thinks. These are intellectually and socially liberated sorts who are at least twice as dangerous as the typical person.

You know that show, "Touched by an Angel?" Well this ain't it.

Well, you want to curse, so be it. Even Kathianne jumped on me for seeking you to display some caution and reason. If you want to look that bad, who am I to object.

[Anton Chigurh]

Well, you want to curse, so be it. Even Kathianne jumped on me for seeking you to display some caution and reason. If you want to look that bad, who am I to object.Hey dickhead - this is a free speech forum where the owner doesn't censor language. Don't like it? Put me on block, very simple.

[Robert A Whit]

Robert's looking to become the minute saver of women. Pay him no heed. He is what he is, there is no escaping where his heart is at, not with the ladies. If he actually comes to an awakening, it will be noted. This is not it.

Is that right Kathianne. It appears you approve Antons use of the F bomb. I will of course note that you approve. I am what I am. But not what you call me. My heart has always been for the good. Even though you love fights.

No, it is not my awakening, I simply think Anton has a gift for words, a gift to explain and who am I to ask him to drop his F bomb. You don't mind, me either.

I cautioned him he is losing effect talking that way but you support him, no problem with me.

[Robert A Whit]

Hey dickhead - this is a free speech forum where the owner doesn't censor language. Don't like it? Put me on block, very simple.

How quickly you diverted this from a topic you handled very well, where I complimented you immensely then you whirled around to pick a fight.

I think I will stick around to see if you mature.

[Anton Chigurh]

How quickly you diverted this from a topic you handled very well, where I complimented you immensely then you whirled around to pick a fight.I didn't pick a fight, smegma head. I merely answered YOUR deflection. And quashed it nicely, I might add.

[aboutime]

Robert. Why is it....You are the only person here who has accused nearly every other member of something while you,

in your infinite lack of wisdom, and selfishness always instantly ARE the victim of every other member?

Obviously you can't see, or recognize that reality. So, instead of just getting along. You make everyone your enemy here?

If you think the TWILIGHT ZONE suggestion was harsh, and only about Poor Little Robert.

You ain't seen nothing yet. And you won't because I refuse to lower myself to your standards.

[Robert A Whit]

I didn't pick a fight, smegma head. I merely answered YOUR deflection. And quashed it nicely, I might add.

Certainly you picked a fight. I realize like a person with turrets syndrome, you simply can't control yourself. Don't beat that back of yourself too hard by patting yourself too hard on the back.

What amazes me most is that I actually praised your post. That I felt you nailed it.

Little did I realize your next plan of action was to keep cursing me out.

[Anton Chigurh]

Certainly you picked a fight.Nonsense. Only in your addled mind. I merely corrected you on the intent of my words. They were NOT "designed to offend women" as you claimed.

But clearly, they did offend a smegma head.

[Robert A Whit]

Nonsense. Only in your addled mind. I merely corrected you on the intent of my words. They were NOT "designed to offend women" as you claimed.

But clearly, they did offend a smegma head.

You said you don't care who you offend. And you keep proving it.

When a man compliments you, your reaction is to engage in more cursing.

Then you brag you come from Texas and simply do not care.

You can't win this one. You are as bad as those defending Clinton or Obama.

[aboutime]

Nonsense. Only in your addled mind. I merely corrected you on the intent of my words. They were NOT "designed to offend women" as you claimed.

But clearly, they did offend a smegma head.


Anton. It appears to be a massive Smegma Sunday, kind of day. No matter what you, or I say. It offends the Smegmentality.

[Robert A Whit]

Anton. It appears to be a massive Smegma Sunday, kind of day. No matter what you, or I say. It offends the Smegmentality.

Here you go again. Yes, there is one so called smegma head. And the man has been asked very nicely to please end his offenses by not saying the F bomb. But since you and Kath lectured me, I guess you types like the F bomb. I note how you keep whining too just for the record.

Oh, you will no doubt want the final word. Good. It is yours.

[Anton Chigurh]

You said you don't care who you offend. And you keep proving it.

When a man compliments you, your reaction is to engage in more cursing.No dumbass, you were merely corrected on your inaccurate statement. And, you've made another one.

I never said people wouldn't be offended, I merely stated the fact that it's their choice if they are and what I say or do has nothing at all to do with their choice.

I can then choose to be amused at their choice, but I don't give a red rat's ass about their choice.

[Anton Chigurh]

And the man has been asked very nicely to please end his offenses by not saying the F bomb.I don't fucking care if you choose to let that offend you.

Get it yet?

[Robert A Whit]

No dumbass, you were merely corrected on your inaccurate statement. And, you've made another one.

I never said people wouldn't be offended, I merely stated the fact that it's their choice if they are and what I say or do has nothing at all to do with their choice.

I can then choose to be amused at their choice, but I don't give a red rat's ass about their choice.

Well, clearly you did not want to discuss budget deficits or Clinton or Obama. Today you want to lash out at me. I made a very correct observation. That you deny it matters not to me. I did not claim you said they won't be offended. I believe some were. Some were not. Sure, and suppose somebody talked to your family as you talk here and to me even? What would you say if somebody did that to your loved ones or friends?

You want to curse using the F bomb, some here support that. Fine with me. F bomb away.

[Anton Chigurh]

Well, clearly you did not want to discuss budget deficits or Clinton or Obama.I already did that. Your reply was the toweringly stupid statement of "words designed to offend women."

If you don't like my posts:

Put




Me




On




Block.

And shut yer fucking blowhole about it.

[Robert A Whit]

I already did that. Your reply was the toweringly stupid statement of "words designed to offend women."

If you don't like my posts:

Put




Me




On




Block.

And shut yer fucking blowhole about it.

You are dangling. I won't curse you as you curse me. Bank on it.

I don't need or want to talk crudely as you talk.

By the way, since I have you dangling, why put you on ignore?

[Anton Chigurh]

You are dangling. I won't curse you as you curse me. Bank on it.

I don't need or want to talk crudely as you talk.

By the way, since I have you dangling, why put you on ignore?Always love it when the can in the kick the can game, says it has the kicker "dangling.":lol:

You're proven to be dishonest and fucking really stupid, and only useful for, kicking around.

[aboutime]

Here you go again. Yes, there is one so called smegma head. And the man has been asked very nicely to please end his offenses by not saying the F bomb. But since you and Kath lectured me, I guess you types like the F bomb. I note how you keep whining too just for the record.

Oh, you will no doubt want the final word. Good. It is yours.


Robert. What are you talking about? I dislike using that F Bomb, but sometimes. I wish you would get the hint, and assume I sent you one to either slow you down, or shut you up.
You really are a troubled person. I honestly hope my senior age increases that are coming allow me to realize, and understand when BEING STUPID is a sign NOT to keep talking here. Not telling you what to do. Just a suggestion.

[Robert A Whit]

Robert. What are you talking about? I dislike using that F Bomb, but sometimes. I wish you would get the hint, and assume I sent you one to either slow you down, or shut you up.
You really are a troubled person. I honestly hope my senior age increases that are coming allow me to realize, and understand when BEING STUPID is a sign NOT to keep talking here. Not telling you what to do. Just a suggestion.

There you go again.

I forgot. You are the perfect human being. We know it by the way you post. You know the insult that you posted.

I have read you enough to know you love to control other human beings. YES, we get it. We get it that YOU must be the center of attention and parade your perfect human form around for us all to see.

Do you understand this though.

Of all posters posting, who supposedly supported a republican, only you and Kathianne act like you have a problem with me. I expect this from the Obama supporters. But maybe you are his supporter in drag.

[aboutime]

There you go again.

I forgot. You are the perfect human being. We know it by the way you post. You know the insult that you posted.

I have read you enough to know you love to control other human beings. YES, we get it. We get it that YOU must be the center of attention and parade your perfect human form around for us all to see.

Do you understand this though.

Of all posters posting, who supposedly supported a republican, only you and Kathianne act like you have a problem with me. I expect this from the Obama supporters. But maybe you are his supporter in drag.


I don't know what you mean Robert. I have no problem with you. What does a supporter in drag look like anyway.....? 4608

[Robert A Whit]

I don't know what you mean Robert. I have no problem with you. What does a supporter in drag look like anyway.....? 4608

Well, you do know what I mean. It is your purpose to keep dragging my name into your taunts and insults all the time. Nice photo of your son by the way above.

[aboutime]

Well, you do know what I mean. It is your purpose to keep dragging my name into your taunts and insults all the time. Nice photo of your son by the way above.


Thank you Robert. Guess you just blew all of your phoniness out the window with your remark about a United States Marine, or were you talking about an Army Helo Pilot?

They probably wear those things to protect themselves from people like you.

[Anton Chigurh]

Nice photo of your son by the way above.Such a clever insult!





NOT.



You have the brain of a amoeba.

[Robert A Whit]

Such a clever insult!





NOT.



You have the brain of a amoeba.

Some day you may grow up and have one of your own.

[Anton Chigurh]

Some day you may grow up and have one of your own.You admit you have the brain of a amoeba. You're really a dim bulb.

[Robert A Whit]

You admit you have the brain of a amoeba. You're really a dim bulb.

What I admit is you are stupid.

[Anton Chigurh]

What I admit is you are stupid.That's what you wish you said.... But anyone with above your grade level education knows you admitted you have the brain of a amoeba, with your reply to me which was in context, a "yeahbut."

You're a boor and are also boring.

[Robert A Whit]

That's what you wish you said.... But anyone with above your grade level education knows you admitted you have the brain of a amoeba, with your reply to me which was in context, a "yeahbut."

You're a boor and are also boring.

The best part of you dripped down your daddy's leg.

[Kathianne]

There you go again.

I forgot. You are the perfect human being. We know it by the way you post. You know the insult that you posted.

I have read you enough to know you love to control other human beings. YES, we get it. We get it that YOU must be the center of attention and parade your perfect human form around for us all to see.

Do you understand this though.

Of all posters posting, who supposedly supported a republican, only you and Kathianne act like you have a problem with me. I expect this from the Obama supporters. But maybe you are his supporter in drag.

LOL! I'm in Robbie's head and not paying rent! Cool! Not many can say such about a real estate tycoon's head! I rock!

[aboutime]

LOL! I'm in Robbie's head and not paying rent! Cool! Not many can say such about a real estate tycoon's head! I rock!


Kathianne. LOL is right. Ya know. Whenever you post. It gives me a break from being blamed for something by Robert.

But. I am hopeful here. It's rare that he'll let me slide after telling you this. Let's watch, and enjoy the show. Bring Popcorn too!

[Robert A Whit]

LOL! I'm in Robbie's head and not paying rent! Cool! Not many can say such about a real estate tycoon's head! I rock!

I seem to be a non paying tenant in your and AT's heads for the moment.

[red states rule]

Have you ever wondered where the foundation for current Federal Deficit started? I did and decided to check.
According to the Congressional Budget Office, the budget deficit for the 1992 fiscal year was $290.3 billion.
During the first two years of the Clinton administration, he passed a large tax increase that was felt almost exclusively by the top 2 percent of wage earners. That, combined with spending restraints, succeeded in not only balancing the budget, but producing a surplus that grew to over $230 billion by the 2000 fiscal year.

Then GW Bush became president. He initiated large tax cuts and started a war about the same time. He also granted more loopholes to businesses and lessened regulations on Wall Street and mortgage companies. As the result, the surplus disappeared. Replaced by a deficit that has been growing ever since.

Of course, Obama hasn't done anything to reduce the deficit. But he certainly didn't create it.

http://factcheck.org/Images/image/FederalDeficit(1).jpg

http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/81_12820520130305110344.jpg

[aboutime]

I seem to be a non paying tenant in your and AT's heads for the moment.

Right you were Robert. But, little did you know, or realize. Just ONE can of RAID takes care of all non paying tenants, everywhere.

[Robert A Whit]

Right you were Robert. But, little did you know, or realize. Just ONE can of RAID takes care of all non paying tenants, everywhere.

Good to know Raid gets rid of you.