Typical Republican rebuttal. First line... attack and undermine your opponents with an insult(the first sign of a weak argument) while addressing and answering who? No one particular, just your fantasy opponent.
Third line... completely and totally make up a "fact". A social program costs more than a war? So you are saying that Bush started a lot of social programs in his tenure to tank the economy? Hmmm... or I know what you are saying... that the total amount of money towards social programs per year outweighs the bottom line of a war per year. But you forget every year the salaries of NASA, DOD, FBI, CIA, Marines, Navy, Air Force, Army, Coast Guard, National Guard, and even the President as commander and chief of the armed forces would be a part of the expenses of a war. Not too mention the industries that contribute clothing, steel, weapons and just about every other piece of equipment it takes for a war. Or how about the college degrees that most officers have to obtain to become officers for that war? G.I. Bill? I mean if you can lump every social program in a category, I could lump even more legit expenses to a war. Nuclear war heads, airplane technology.... That is the most ridiculous statement I have ever heard and you would be hard pressed to find a Republican not up for election that would actually agree with you on that statement.
Fourth line... another ridiculous made up "fact". To begin you use the term liberals as interchangeable with Democrats, but Bush was known as a liberal Republican. I mean in all honesty liberal and conservative have no bearings in today's discussion of politics. A liberal is a John Locke, Second Treatise of Government, believe everyone is good kind of guy. While a conservative is a Thomas Hobbes, fear Leviathan, everyone is evil kind of guy. Today we have imperial president's that are essentially puppets to the game. Congress runs the show and the Supreme Court has a lot of powers as well. Right now Congress is the majority Republican, which switched over halfway through Obama's term. Bush had a Republican majority for almost six of his eight years of his terms. So in 12 years the majority of Congress has been Republican for 7 going on 8 of them and Democrat for 4. Bush's tenure absolutely multiplied the national debt and bankrupted the country with his sense of entitlement to 'war powers' to a war he started based off lies. Bush is the one who has created this sense of entitlement and allowed for the nation to go to the government for handouts. But I jest on this point because we are entitled to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of happiness (us crazy liberals), this statement should include Health because it is based of Locke's 'crazy liberal' pamphlet.
Fifth line... claiming that the current leader has anything to do with taking the helm of a sinking ship. Killed innovation, caused rich versus poor and black versus white by just batting an eye. First, innovation is alive and well, ever hear of an iphone? Netflix? Youtube? Twitter? Little robots that can heal your heart? Secondly rich versus poor and black versus white have pretty much been around for our country's entire history. Again another complete exaggerated fabrication.
Sixth line and whatever else... propaganda? You wish people would vote how they feel? They don't? Plus the Obama birth certificate thing is such a petty thing. I mean number one any person that can become the United States president as a 'foreigner' has more appeal to me than some Skull and Bones Texan, who never even owned a ranch until his presidency and had about 6 bankrupted companies, even with all his daddy's oil money. Or the fact that he skipped his tour in Vietnam. Oh yeah and did I mention the Bush family and the Bin Laden family are basically business partners? Plus having a questionable citizenship and getting a blow job in the oral office are by far no worse than abusing your executive authority to spy on people, aka Patriot Act and Watergate, which are directly in violation of the constitution. Or how about killing off the only Democratic political family that you have to worry about in politics as the head of the CIA? I mean let's throw out a true conspiracy with the birth certificate. Bush, Nixon, Hunt and many other benefiting big R's were in Dallas that day. I think that's the equivalent to a piece of paper that could have been forged.
Another fine point! I dig the Reagan pic too... Oh so true.
first i want to touch on the vamp1ro picture. That was taken during the the Russian invasion, and they were trying to keep their country free. No ones country should be occupied by another. In a sense they were the equivalent of the founding fathers. No one said they had the same beliefs or the same message.
Your third line comment. Social Programs do cost more than wars. This isn't a big war like WW2 and I can show you links, which will be at the bottom of this reply from Financial Researchers, to prove it. Also the FBI and CIA are not considered war expenses and get paid regardless. The tax payers pay for the Armed Forces, guys and gals. You don't seem to account for how much taxes actually pay for.
You also want to mention the GI bill. Most people in the military have the option to use it, but not all do. Some save it for family members, others use it to pay off their past college loan debts. Only 1 person in your household can receive benefits from the GI Bill.
Finally to finish this part off, Obama cut NASA funding when he was elected, i have links on that as well. Also when Obama was elected, he said something along the lines of he wanted to or did cut the size of the US nuke supply by 80%..
Here are the links i was refereeing too. Each of these sites is nonpartisan.
Your fourth line. Liberals and Democrat are one in the same for the most part as is Conservatie and Republican. Also you want to go back and mention what Liberal and Conservative mean, back when this country was founded and compared to now, things are drastically different. John Locke heavily influenced the Constitution, so that proves to you that his version of liberalism is drastically different from todays. You think congress runs the show, if the president wants something passed all they have to do is sign it via executive order.
No you mention the party majority in congress, seems to change all the time. But there is a reason people keep electing republicans into office, don't you think? The idea of smaller govt is a great idea. But the republicans twist that and make it into what they want it to be. And most of them just act like they support that message and are the same as the dems who want huge govt that is in every aspect of life.
I don't get why people who don't like republicans throw Bush around, when 75% of the republicans, I know have hated him since day one. Also it wasn't Bush who started that government hand out nonsense, i'm not saying he didn't continue it. But everyone since Carter has done it. Carter is the man who put this country on the path to where its going to today and hell i am sure it can be traced back even further than that to Nixon and before. Also you end with Locke again and let me point out to you again, that Liberals in the past compared to the liberals of today are nothing close to the same thing
Just so you can research some of your stuff, Locke was the founding bais oft he republican party. Look up the "Two Treatises of Government".
Your fifth line. Obama did take the helm of a sinking ship and it wasn't his fault it was the reckless spending of the Bush administration. Obama promised that he would not increase the national debt and spending and look what he has done. He has already out spent Bush. Now its not just Obama trying to cause Rich vs. Poor and Black vs. White.. Its both sides of the party, i thought this country was well passed stuff like that but i guess i was wrong. I do agree with you calling him out on innovation as it hasn't gone down, but it has gone down some. Look at all the business that have moved over seas due to the rate they are taxed in America. The iphone isn't even created in the US.
Your sixth line.. People should vote for whoever they want. But they should be opened up to all the facts about that person, be he republican or democrat. If Obama was born outside of the United States, he can still become president, due to the fact his mother was a citizen. Its just the fact that they can't seem to produce a valid document with a government seal from Hawaii on it.
Now i would like to ask you why you keep bringing Bush back up? All of this country's problems are not his fault, they come from way before him and some are even brand new that come directly from Obama. You want to mention the Bush and Bin Laden family being partners thats fine, whats wrong with that? Just because Osama was a bad apple, doesn't mean you can judge the rest of his family. Thats like saying you have that crazy uncle in the KKK and people find out and then want to judge your whole family based off knowing that tiny bit about your uncle, is that fair?
Now you mention that 4th amendment violating Patriot Act. It was supported by a majority of both parties, its just done to take away from the freedom of the American people. Did you know that Obama fully supports the Patriot Act and resigned it when he took office and has said he would resign it again.
I have nothing to say in a serious thread about conspiracy theories being thrown around.
Now I would like to state that whatever I haven't mentioned is due to me agreeing with you on part of it.
Anyway to finish this thread off. I would like to post an article, I wrote on the debt issue and how Obama is destroying this country financially.
First off Bush was president for 3 months in FY2009, the budget that Bush submitted was expected to have a deficit of $450 - $500 billion.
Obama added some things to the budget I give him credit for what he requested or what he signed for, and sadly I can only come up with a few.
1.) $410 billion ominbus package
2.) $860 billion jobs stimulus package
3.) $90 billion war funding package that was needed for HIS decision to expand the war efforts in Afghanistan and this is separate from troops requested by General McChrystal.
I could also add 50% of the TARP funds that left for his administration that did not even become available until January 15th 2009
Add up the numbers 410b+860b+90b = $1.36 trillion, now add in his share of TARP 1.36+350b=$1.71 trillion.
TARP was passed in October 2008 and only 50% was available then. Not all of the money for the Stimulus has been spent, approximately $280 billion remains unspent so you can deduct that if you wish dropping Obama's share down to $1.43 trillion
FY2010 was less as most people assume it was. It was estimated to be $125 billion less than FY2009 which had a deficit of $1.4 trillion, the actual deficit was $1.6 trillion
Yeah, I know I did not provide any CBO data, could that be because that data is not yet available from the CBO and the only thing it show is ESTIMATES?
Should I add that CONGRESS can pass any budget that they want? They can accept the budget submitted by the President or can pass one of their own design?
Should I mention that a man with no hands can count on his fingers the number of republicans that voted FOR the FY2009 budget, every single republican in the House and Senate voted AGAINST the budget.
Presidents do not spend, congress spends and in the 4 years that democrats controlled congress they have added more than $5.4 trillion to the national debt. Compare this to the $3.88 trillion added by the 12 year total added by the republicans.
Under Obama, the democrats increased the national debt an annual average $1.7 trillion each year
How did they fare under Bush? democrat annual average $975 billion, republican average $491 billion
Going back to Clinton, just so we can get 6 year and 12 year averages
Democrats had an annual average of $1.01 trillion per year (6 years)Republicans had an annual average of $348.9 billion (over 12 years)
1.02/.3489 = 2.89 times more spending.
You figure it out, I did.
Just keep in mind that congressional terms start in January.
Democrats took control of congress in January 2007. The spending increased by 9.3% with the first budget passed by the democrats (2007 vs 2008) and then increased 17.94% from 2008 to 2009. Spending for FY2010 while lower than FY2009 is still 28.91% higher than the spending in 2007