Flashback: Obama calls adding $4 trillion to national debt “unpatriotic”

Originally posted by sageofmonticello
reply to post by Cantmakedisup

 

I am sorry but your "proof" is extremely skewed. How about we look at what the Natioanl debt was in 2008?

$10,024,724,896,912.49
as of 9/2008

www.treasurydirect.gov...

Current Debt

$14.6 trillion

www.usdebtclock.org...

Do you really rely on Alan Colmes for unbiased info? Or do you just like to read "opinion" you agree with and makes you "feel" like you are right? The chart you reference with your "proof" is laughably incomplete and biased.

I find it funny you ask people to stop lying while you offer an alternative view that ignores facts?!?

ETA:
To say Obama is not responsible for the difference while he was in office is to say that Bush isn't responsible for the difference while he was president.


The truth is neither is completely responsible for the spending though both are and should be held accountable for the growth during their terms. They say love is blind...

edit on 26-8-2011 by sageofmonticello because: (no reason given)

You do realize that those figures do not include the cost of bank bailouts, Fannie and Freddie bailouts, stimulus etc. All put into action under Bush in the few months afterb 9/2008. I regret voting for Obama for what he hasn't done, rather than what he has done.

Originally posted by sligtlyskeptical

Originally posted by sageofmonticello
reply to post by Cantmakedisup

 

I am sorry but your "proof" is extremely skewed. How about we look at what the Natioanl debt was in 2008?

$10,024,724,896,912.49
as of 9/2008

www.treasurydirect.gov...

Current Debt

$14.6 trillion

www.usdebtclock.org...

Do you really rely on Alan Colmes for unbiased info? Or do you just like to read "opinion" you agree with and makes you "feel" like you are right? The chart you reference with your "proof" is laughably incomplete and biased.

I find it funny you ask people to stop lying while you offer an alternative view that ignores facts?!?

ETA:
To say Obama is not responsible for the difference while he was in office is to say that Bush isn't responsible for the difference while he was president.


The truth is neither is completely responsible for the spending though both are and should be held accountable for the growth during their terms. They say love is blind...

edit on 26-8-2011 by sageofmonticello because: (no reason given)

You do realize that those figures do not include the cost of bank bailouts, Fannie and Freddie bailouts, stimulus etc. All put into action under Bush in the few months afterb 9/2008. I regret voting for Obama for what he hasn't done, rather than what he has done.

I don't really understand what you are trying to say?

Can you please clarify? Your reply is phrased in a way that sounds as though you are trying to argue a counter point that I have already expressed? Did I not say

neither is completely responsible for the spending

Does that not mean that I don't find Obama entirely responsible for the debt that has been accumulated during his term? Just as I don't blame Bush for the entirety of the debt accumulated during his terms.

I simply hold them accountable. As they should be.

Would you feel better if I used the figures from 9/2009? OK. $11,909,829,003,511.75 though that takes 9 months out of Obama's presidency where as the other figure only added 3 months to it. If you follow my source you will see they only list for September. I used the figure for the one that most closely matched with Obama's timeline as president. I decided it was more accurate to add 3 months than take off 9 months. Does that not make sense to you?

I don't hold president Bush responsible for the natural disaster Katrina but I do hold him accountable for not responding correctly and timely.

I don't hold Obama responsible for the entirety of the debt accumulated but I do hold him accountable for not responding correctly and timely.

It sounds like you are agreeing with me while trying to raise a counterpoint in argument? You do realize your reply supports my position?

Am I missing something?

I say (paraphrasing) "Obama is not entirely responsible"

then you reply to me (paraphrasing)

"You do realize Obama is not entirely responsible?"

Did you actually read my whole post? Did you mis-understand what I wrote? Did you quote the wrong person?




?

reply to post by jibeho


You know what is the sad story about all this and the 4 trillions of tax payer money used, that half of it went to bailout EU banks after the 2008 market crash and we will never Even know how much of it, still the latest America bailout to Greece and then Obama was working on another one.

Because even when we bailout the banks in the US their corruption was soo linked to global banks that if they didn't get bailout the US banks would have bankrupted anyway.

Sadly using the IMF that is how US funds most of the countries around making tax payer think that is all a join venture, but what the US doesn't tell the tax payer is that while the quote is 17% for the US, US have the privilege to keep the rest of the money used for bailouts in the Federal Reserve, so we the tax payer will never really know how much more money goes into the IMF from the US, tax payers.

Deceiving, we should be raising up and demanding the corrupted politicians in Washington to step down for traitors they are only protecting big interest.