Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CBS News)   CBS: National debt rose more under Obama than Bush; also, the Pirates are a bigger joke than the Royals and Justin Bieber is way lamer than Shaun Cassidy   (cbsnews.com) divider line 316
    More: Interesting, President Bush, End of World War II in Europe, gross domestic products, pirates  
•       •       •

1820 clicks; posted to Politics » on 20 Mar 2012 at 1:42 PM (3 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



316 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-03-20 02:16:28 PM  

Cletus C.: ghare: Cletus C.: ghare: Cletus C.: Amazing. Bush dealt immediately with Clinton's dot-com crash, had to dig the country out of the physical, psychological and economic fallout from the 9-11 attacks and waged two wars, almost half of which were warranted.

Obama has focused on trying to get a car to run on bean sprouts.

Number of towers destroyed on Obama's watch : zero.
Number of Bin Ladens killed on Bush's watch: zero.

I'd say his ivory tower is teetering.

Number of times you have been correct about anything: zero.

Good point. Zero is the number of tax-cut checks I have received from the Obama government. I remember at least two of those gems during Bush. Sweet.

Yet Obama is piling up more debt. Weird.


OK, so now we see you failed economics and can't even fill out a 1040ez. You;re a bright one, Cletus.
 
2012-03-20 02:16:52 PM  

DrippinBalls: CPennypacker
DrippinBalls: CPennypacker
DrippinBalls: CPennypacker
DrippinBalls: Didn't we do this yesterday and all of the obama ass-kisser's swore that this was a lie? And everybody who knows this is the truth is called a liar? And dickheads (i.e. obama supporters) can't do math?

So, we get to do it again?

You mad bro?

No, should I be? I can be if needed.

You sound mad

No, scooter, doing just fine, thanks for asking.

Seriously, you should vote democrat tho. Nice slashy.

That right? really? Wow. Democrats = liars. Republicans = liars. Thanks. I'll right my own name in this year. Or Drew, depending on his sobriety.


Both sides are liars, but Republicans are evil too, so vote Democrat.
 
2012-03-20 02:18:23 PM  
The national debt has about doubled every 8 year presidency pretty much since the end of WWII.
Bush ~ doubled the debt from 6 to 11 trillion.
Obama will ~ double the debt from 11 trillion to 20 trillion.

Why is surprising to anyone.
 
2012-03-20 02:18:49 PM  

DarwiOdrade: HeadLever: DarwiOdrade: 0bama isn't nearly as funny,

I'll agree with you there. He hasn't tried to choke on a pretzel yet. Biden on the other hand..... That guy is a riot.

I've never seen anyone actually try to choke on a pretzel. Care to give us a demo?


theshaeman.com
 
2012-03-20 02:18:58 PM  

CPennypacker: ...Both sides are liars, but Republicans are evil too, so vote Democrat.


Santorum's not a liar. He may be a batshiat insane theocrat, but he's telling you exactly what he and the rest of the GOP actually want.

And helping the economy is not on their list of concerns. Nor the budget.
 
2012-03-20 02:19:39 PM  
Good point. Zero is the number of tax-cut checks I have received from the Obama government. I remember at least two of those gems during Bush. Sweet.

Yet Obama is piling up more debt. Weird.


Wow. You really are not very bright, are you? Maybe cutting tax refund checks while in the middle of some crazy stoopid war is part of the reason for the mess we're in now.

idiot.
 
2012-03-20 02:20:46 PM  

HeadLever: DarwiOdrade: I know what you're saying - the article doesn't come right out and say Obama is responsible for incurring all of that debt, which is technically correct. But then tell me what's the point of reporting those meaningless numbers in the first place?

Do you actually think that they are meaninless? You have to be kidding. Maybe politically inconvienient for the party in 'power'. However, they are very important, beyond who did what. They have a very grave consequence for this entire country if they are left unchecked. In graphical form:

[endoftheamericandream.com image 640x466]

If you want to play the blame game, please continue. Petty arguing and pointing the finger at the 'other' side will only serve to make comprimise all that more difficult. We don't need more gridlock. We need folks to realize what kind of problem we have and actually do something about it.


I just want to point out that there are 2 parties in power and this whole mess happened while the purse strings were moving back and forth.

Both sides propose policies that could help solve the problem, but each is so concerned with political one-upsmanship and the 365-day-a-year re-election campaign we've allowed to take over that they won't compromise with each other.

In short, our political system is failing. We need constitutional changes to put in place a parliamentary system, and we need to scrap geographically based representation.
 
2012-03-20 02:20:56 PM  

ghare: Cletus C.: ghare: Cletus C.: ghare: Cletus C.: Amazing. Bush dealt immediately with Clinton's dot-com crash, had to dig the country out of the physical, psychological and economic fallout from the 9-11 attacks and waged two wars, almost half of which were warranted.

Obama has focused on trying to get a car to run on bean sprouts.

Number of towers destroyed on Obama's watch : zero.
Number of Bin Ladens killed on Bush's watch: zero.

I'd say his ivory tower is teetering.

Number of times you have been correct about anything: zero.

Good point. Zero is the number of tax-cut checks I have received from the Obama government. I remember at least two of those gems during Bush. Sweet.

Yet Obama is piling up more debt. Weird.

OK, so now we see you failed economics and can't even fill out a 1040ez. You;re a bright one, Cletus.


You don't remember those tax rebates? All of a sudden a nice check shows up in the mail. No forms to fill out or anything. Just because.

I'm still waiting at the mailbox for the Obama check. Maybe Solyndra got it all.
 
2012-03-20 02:21:08 PM  

HeadLever: DarwiOdrade: HeadLever: DarwiOdrade: 0bama isn't nearly as funny,

I'll agree with you there. He hasn't tried to choke on a pretzel yet. Biden on the other hand..... That guy is a riot.

I've never seen anyone actually try to choke on a pretzel. Care to give us a demo?

[theshaeman.com image 423x300]


Aw - strict interpretation is only good when you're defending someone you agree with?
 
2012-03-20 02:21:12 PM  

MindStalker: The national debt has about doubled every 8 year presidency pretty much since the end of WWII.
Bush ~ doubled the debt from 6 to 11 trillion.
Obama will ~ double the debt from 11 trillion to 20 trillion.

Why is surprising to anyone.


I don't know how suprising it shold be, but hopefully we will wake up and atually do something about it before it is loo late.
 
2012-03-20 02:21:47 PM  
That right? really? Wow. Democrats = liars. Republicans = liars. Thanks. I'll right my own name in this year. Or Drew, depending on his sobriety.


Really? Hope you can spell it better than you spell "write".

another idiot.
 
2012-03-20 02:22:02 PM  
DarwiOdrade
derpdeederp: DarwiOdrade derpdeederp: DarwiOdrade
Just take a guess - what reason do you imagine the author might have had for choosing that particular day that doesn't correspond to any significant change in policy, bur rather simply the name on the Oval Office door?

Umm Racist, thats the right answer right?

Swing and a miss - try again?

War on women?

Strike two. Care to try for a third?


It was the day Bush left the presidency and Obama took over?

/man this three strikes thing makes me have to be serious. Thats no fun.
 
2012-03-20 02:22:18 PM  
i never knew cbs was so racist.
 
2012-03-20 02:23:30 PM  

HeadLever: DarwiOdrade: I know what you're saying - the article doesn't come right out and say Obama is responsible for incurring all of that debt, which is technically correct. But then tell me what's the point of reporting those meaningless numbers in the first place?

Do you actually think that they are meaninless? You have to be kidding. Maybe politically inconvienient for the party in 'power'. However, they are very important, beyond who did what. They have a very grave consequence for this entire country if they are left unchecked. In graphical form:

[endoftheamericandream.com image 640x466]

If you want to play the blame game, please continue. Petty arguing and pointing the finger at the 'other' side will only serve to make comprimise all that more difficult. We don't need more gridlock. We need folks to realize what kind of problem we have and actually do something about it.


OH, you mean the chart that assumes fiscal policy doesn't change for 50 years?
 
2012-03-20 02:23:38 PM  

ghare: CPennypacker: ...Both sides are liars, but Republicans are evil too, so vote Democrat.

Santorum's not a liar. He may be a batshiat insane theocrat, but he's telling you exactly what he and the rest of the GOP actually want.

And helping the economy is not on their list of concerns. Nor the budget.


Any religious person who discriminates against gays and uses the bible to justify it but doesn't follow every other line of the bible to the letter is a hypocrite and a liar.
 
2012-03-20 02:23:58 PM  
Soup4Bonnie
DrippinBalls: I'll right my own name in this year.

It will be left out.


Nope, got one vote.I'm in, biatch!
 
2012-03-20 02:24:04 PM  

derpdeederp: DarwiOdrade
derpdeederp: DarwiOdrade derpdeederp: DarwiOdrade
Just take a guess - what reason do you imagine the author might have had for choosing that particular day that doesn't correspond to any significant change in policy, bur rather simply the name on the Oval Office door?

Umm Racist, thats the right answer right?

Swing and a miss - try again?

War on women?

Strike two. Care to try for a third?

It was the day Bush left the presidency and Obama took over?

/man this three strikes thing makes me have to be serious. Thats no fun.


That's an established fact, not a reason. Sorry, you're out.
 
2012-03-20 02:24:21 PM  
I see the Fark IndependentTM talking point today has moved to the national debt, since their whole 'OBAMA CAN'T FIX THE ECONOMY' argument collapsed like a house of cards.

Good luck with that, fellas.
 
2012-03-20 02:26:05 PM  
DarwiOdrade
That's an established fact, not a reason. Sorry, you're out.


Damn it, when you make up all the rules I always seem to lose.
 
2012-03-20 02:26:23 PM  
to be fair, before Bush walked out the door of the buffet, he piled on medicare part D, Iraq, and Afghanistan on top of Obama's plate instead of throwing it in the garbage.
 
2012-03-20 02:26:24 PM  

DarwiOdrade: Aw - strict interpretation is only good when you're defending someone you agree with?


You don't agree with the numbers presented? Nah, you can't be that blind. You just don't like how they are presented because you think it makes Obama look bad.

Circle the wagon, boys. We have some unflattering facts to address. Deflector shields at full power

/lol
 
2012-03-20 02:26:35 PM  
urbangirl

That right? really? Wow. Democrats = liars. Republicans = liars. Thanks. I'll right my own name in this year. Or Drew, depending on his sobriety.


Really? Hope you can spell it better than you spell "write".

another idiot.


Sorry, typed quick. Meant 'write'. Happy now? Got relatives in Lexington. All idiots, just like you. Vote obama. 90% taxes for everyone, except me.
 
2012-03-20 02:28:10 PM  
We've gone through other economic downturns without this kind of spending. But the last three years has been all Bush's fault. No really, we have CHARTS!!!!
 
2012-03-20 02:28:34 PM  

DirkValentine: HeadLever: DarwiOdrade: I know what you're saying - the article doesn't come right out and say Obama is responsible for incurring all of that debt, which is technically correct. But then tell me what's the point of reporting those meaningless numbers in the first place?

Do you actually think that they are meaninless? You have to be kidding. Maybe politically inconvienient for the party in 'power'. However, they are very important, beyond who did what. They have a very grave consequence for this entire country if they are left unchecked. In graphical form:

[endoftheamericandream.com image 640x466]

If you want to play the blame game, please continue. Petty arguing and pointing the finger at the 'other' side will only serve to make comprimise all that more difficult. We don't need more gridlock. We need folks to realize what kind of problem we have and actually do something about it.

OH, you mean the chart that assumes fiscal policy doesn't change for 50 years?


It is based upon the CBO Extended Baseline and Alternative analyses. It is not necessarily that policies will not change, but that spending and revenues will follow some projections with respect to GDP.
 
2012-03-20 02:28:47 PM  
The morons are out in force today. Is it friday?
 
2012-03-20 02:29:04 PM  
The Fark guide to politics:

Good thing happens = Obama did it
Bad thing happens = Bush/Republicans did it
 
2012-03-20 02:29:37 PM  

HeadLever: DarwiOdrade: Aw - strict interpretation is only good when you're defending someone you agree with?

You don't agree with the numbers presented? Nah, you can't be that blind. You just don't like how they are presented because you think it makes Obama look bad.

Circle the wagon, boys. We have some unflattering facts to address. Deflector shields at full power

/lol


What the representation of those numbers doesn't show is that the rate of change on that graph is dropping pretty quickly - the country is turning the corner and starting to add less to the national debt. There are a lot more things that have to happen on the revenue side before we start shrinking the debt, but deficits are plummeting.
 
2012-03-20 02:41:53 PM  

vpb: It's almost as if Obama were spending money to fix something. And almost as if government revenues were related to the economy.


no, it's the obama tax cuts mostly. you know those tax cuts you used to biatch about under bush that obama revived right before their sunset date because he cares more about getting elected than this country?
 
2012-03-20 02:43:07 PM  

lexslamman: but deficits are plummeting


The defictis in 2 to 3 years are expected to reduce down to about 4 to 2 % of GDP. However, this year's deficit has recently been adjusted up to 1.2 Trillion (new window)

They are projected to plummet in a couple of years, but that has been the mantra for quite some time. For some reason*, we cant seem to get below that 1Trillion mark. Yes, there are some brighter signs for the economy in the medium to short term, however, the long term still remains bleak. Here is a good synopsis of these latest projections. (new window, pdf)

*I would argue the reason is the continuing deleveraging with respect to the exploded household debt and increased savings rate.
 
2012-03-20 02:43:40 PM  
p.twimg.com

and yet obama spent less than any of his recent republican predecessors.
 
2012-03-20 02:43:55 PM  

HeadLever: DirkValentine: HeadLever: DarwiOdrade: I know what you're saying - the article doesn't come right out and say Obama is responsible for incurring all of that debt, which is technically correct. But then tell me what's the point of reporting those meaningless numbers in the first place?

Do you actually think that they are meaninless? You have to be kidding. Maybe politically inconvienient for the party in 'power'. However, they are very important, beyond who did what. They have a very grave consequence for this entire country if they are left unchecked. In graphical form:

[endoftheamericandream.com image 640x466]

If you want to play the blame game, please continue. Petty arguing and pointing the finger at the 'other' side will only serve to make comprimise all that more difficult. We don't need more gridlock. We need folks to realize what kind of problem we have and actually do something about it.

OH, you mean the chart that assumes fiscal policy doesn't change for 50 years?

It is based upon the CBO Extended Baseline and Alternative analyses. It is not necessarily that policies will not change, but that spending and revenues will follow some projections with respect to GDP.


I admire your perseverence in this thread.
 
2012-03-20 02:44:19 PM  
The rich own every dime of the debt. Tax the fark out of them.
 
2012-03-20 02:47:30 PM  

Cletus C.: You don't remember those tax rebates? All of a sudden a nice check shows up in the mail. No forms to fill out or anything. Just because.

I'm still waiting at the mailbox for the Obama check. Maybe Solyndra got it all.


Have you checked your 401K lately? Maybe you should compare what your 401K balance was in 1/20/2009 and compare it to what it is today. I'm sure the gains from your 401K are bigger than the rebate check you are referring to.
 
2012-03-20 02:49:48 PM  

FlashHarry: [p.twimg.com image 483x350]

and yet obama spent less than any of his recent republican predecessors.


You are misreading your own graph. Obama's rate is still positive, which indicates an increase in spending over previous administrations. He is spending more, but not increasing the rate as fast as previous presidents.
 
2012-03-20 02:53:09 PM  

Crunch61: The rich own every dime of the debt.


Erm, no. Yes they should pay thier fair share, but as taxpayers, it is ownership we all have whether we like it or not.
 
2012-03-20 02:55:16 PM  

Crunch61: The rich own every dime of the debt. Tax the fark out of them.


You sound poor.

And your are likely to stay that way with that kind of attitude.

Here, have some gubmint cheese.
 
2012-03-20 02:57:07 PM  
Well there is only one solution, immediate income tax increase of 50% across all tax brackets. That will fix the deficit problems and provide a "surplus" to pay down the debt.
 
2012-03-20 02:57:20 PM  

Crunch61: The rich own every dime of the debt. Tax the fark out of them.


2nd
 
2012-03-20 02:59:45 PM  

BillCo: Crunch61: The rich own every dime of the debt. Tax the fark out of them.

You sound poor.

And your are likely to stay that way with that kind of attitude.

Here, have some gubmint cheese.


Seriously, did the fox news comments feature go down or something? Whats with the influx of trollish morons in this thread?
 
2012-03-20 03:00:29 PM  

derpdeederp: Change metrics!! Make Obama look better you racist bastards!!


I don't know where you came from, but you've shot up to the top of a very select list of shiatposters in a very short time.
 
2012-03-20 03:01:29 PM  

CPennypacker: Seriously, did the fox news comments feature go down or something?


They're busy over here. Link (new window)
 
2012-03-20 03:03:08 PM  

FlashHarry: [p.twimg.com image 483x350]

and yet obama spent less than any of his recent republican predecessors.


That's an interesting graphic. Would you mind sharing the source of your data?
 
2012-03-20 03:04:09 PM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: CPennypacker: Seriously, did the fox news comments feature go down or something?

They're busy over here. Link (new window)


How...Christian...of them.
 
2012-03-20 03:06:49 PM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: CPennypacker: Seriously, did the fox news comments feature go down or something?

They're busy over here. Link (new window)


That was painful.

How are people that ignorant of the reality around them able to find their way to the internet?
 
2012-03-20 03:07:17 PM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: CPennypacker: Seriously, did the fox news comments feature go down or something?

They're busy over here. Link (new window)


I like the interesting confluence of "Stand Your Ground" gun laws, permissive concealed carry, and a neighborhood watch.
 
2012-03-20 03:07:43 PM  
talkingpointsmemo.com (new window)
 
2012-03-20 03:18:02 PM  

HeadLever: Crunch61: The rich own every dime of the debt.

Erm, no. Yes they should pay thier fair share, but as taxpayers, it is ownership we all have whether we like it or not.


But you can't take blood from a stone. You can try to burden the poor and middle class with the debt but that isn't good for the economy.
 
2012-03-20 03:19:43 PM  

Headso: HeadLever: Crunch61: The rich own every dime of the debt.

Erm, no. Yes they should pay thier fair share, but as taxpayers, it is ownership we all have whether we like it or not.

But you can't take blood from a stone. You can try to burden the poor and middle class with the debt but that isn't good for the economy.


Oh, come on. I, for one, am looking forward to living in a shiatty cyberpunk novel and starving to death in the shadow of the Weyland-Yutani building.
 
2012-03-20 03:21:47 PM  
HeadLever
lexslamman: but deficits are plummeting

The defictis in 2 to 3 years are expected to reduce down to about 4 to 2 % of GDP. However, this year's deficit has recently been adjusted up to 1.2 Trillion (new window)

They are projected to plummet in a couple of years, but that has been the mantra for quite some time. For some reason*, we cant seem to get below that 1Trillion mark. Yes, there are some brighter signs for the economy in the medium to short term, however, the long term still remains bleak. Here is a good synopsis of these latest projections. (new window, pdf)

*I would argue the reason is the continuing deleveraging with respect to the exploded household debt and increased savings rate.


Household debt and increased savings rate shouldnt have an direct effect on the national deficit, as government spending is not directly linked to consumer debt. I could see it if you are arguing that deleveraging consumer debt stiffled the multiplicable properties of stimulus spending on consumption, and therefore why we have an extended recovery and lower government revenue. Not sure how your connection to household debt was relating to deficits.
 
2012-03-20 03:24:39 PM  

Headso: HeadLever: Crunch61: The rich own every dime of the debt.

Erm, no. Yes they should pay thier fair share, but as taxpayers, it is ownership we all have whether we like it or not.

But you can't take blood from a stone. You can try to burden the poor and middle class with the debt but that isn't good for the economy.


Somewhat true for the poor. Middle Class, not so much. Is it good for the enonomy? No, but neither is exploding debt and balloning interest obligations. Taxing the rich is not going to get us out of this mess alone.
 
Displayed 50 of 316 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report