Another Brilliant Plan Out of WI

[wiphan]

Originally Posted by Riot

Again, nice of you to quote numbers about a variety of different programs, and your personal opinion that the stimulus failed (not shared by most economics, btw).

But still waiting for you to show that the majority of the budget is due to some reckless Obama spending spree as you maintain.

I showed, with good data, that it isn't. I showed what the cost of the stimulus was in our debt picture (very small).

you showed one person's data and not the true cost of the stimulus package.

I don't have time to debate the entire budget with someone like you, but I will give you one thing. You stated that Obama cut Defense spending

The Department of Defense once again has the lion’s share of the discretionary federal budget, with an increase of about $8.2 billion over the 2010 Federal Budget in order to address ongoing military strategy, purchase weapons and take care of US Military. $548.9 billion is for the Department of Defense’s baseline budget, an additional $159.3 billion going to funding operations in Iraq, Afganistan and Pakistan, and an additional $33 billion for 2010 to supplement current mission requirement. The DOD is also setting a 2012 goal to create Virtual Lifetime Electronic Record (VLER), which is an agency that will create a more effective way to share health information for military. Major Department of Defense ExpendituresMilitary Operations


I guess to you a $8.2 Billion increase is a decrease in spending

[Antitrust32]

is good old Spin Doctor Beth back at it again today?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

is good old Spin Doctor Beth back at it again today?

Are you going to do nothing but curse and spew profanity again, Joey?

[Antitrust32]

wiphan, there is no point.

Obama is her Jesus... or should I say he's her Muhammed.

He walks on water, everything he touches turns to gold.

eventhough he's an extension of the devil himself, GW Bush


Its impossible to have a rational debate with someone who is so close minded. Soon you will be told you are a racist or bigot, if you havent been told that already.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

wiphan, there is no point.

Obama is her Jesus... or should I say he's her Muhammed.

He walks on water, everything he touches turns to gold.

eventhough he's an extension of the devil himself, GW Bush


Its impossible to have a rational debate with someone who is so close minded. Soon you will be told you are a racist or bigot, if you havent been told that already.

It's very possible to have a rational argument, rather than resort to the mental midget whining and personal attacks you do. Instead of telling me to shove Obama dildoes up my ass, and the absurd yammering personal attack you prefer above, why don't you quote some budget figures?

Originally Posted by Riot

[MaTH716]

Originally Posted by Riot

It's very possible to have a rational argument, rather than resort to the mental midget whining and personal attacks you do. Instead of telling me to shove Obama dildoes up my ass, and the absurd yammering personal attack you prefer above, why don't you quote some budget figures?

Whoa, they really do make em.................................



In Democratic Blue tooooooooo..........................

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by MaTH716

Whoa, they really do make em.................................

i told her to sit on it, apparantly she wants it in the ass though.


its impossible to have a rational discussion with someone who is SO close minded that she refuses to even accept another persons view. that and she's more partisan than Obama was when he was a congressman (he only voted 97% partisan politics, Riot is at 100%)

its much more enjoyable to tell her to tea bag Obama.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

i told her to sit on it, apparantly she wants it in the ass though.


its impossible to have a rational discussion with someone who is SO close minded that she refuses to even accept another persons view. that and she's more partisan than Obama was when he was a congressman (he only voted 97% partisan politics, Riot is at 100%)

its much more enjoyable to tell her to tea bag Obama.

Stay the classy Derby Trail monitor you are, Joey. You're the pride of Steve's site. I can't wait to meet you at Saratoga some day.

[wiphan]

Amazes me how it is ok for Obama without Congressional approval to be doing what we are in Libya which originally was supposed to be an overnight air strike and take days, but we are now I believe 60+ days in with no signs of a resolution. Bush may have gotten us into a bad unfunded war, but at least he got congressional approval

[Riot]

Originally Posted by wiphan

Amazes me how it is ok for Obama without Congressional approval to be doing what we are in Libya which originally was supposed to be an overnight air strike and take days, but we are now I believe 60+ days in with no signs of a resolution. Bush may have gotten us into a bad unfunded war, but at least he got congressional approval

I completely agree with that.

Oh that reminds me...spinning class at 1.

Ciao.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by wiphan

you showed one person's data and not the true cost of the stimulus package.

That is the independent Congressional Budget Offices' data. Not "one person". "The" people, who know every dime, and where it goes. The ones that tell Congress the impact of their fiscal policies.

It is precisely the true cost of the stimulus, and the effect over time. If you have different data, feel free to post it.

And yes, Obama cut $50 billion from Defense Spending over 10 years (actually the Defense Dept did) - again, your quoting of base figures means you are attributing all spending to Obama, which is simply false.

Yeah they'd never fudge the numbers.

[wiphan]

Originally Posted by Riot

That is the independent Congressional Budget Offices' data. Not "one person". "The" people, who know every dime, and where it goes. The ones that tell Congress the impact of their fiscal policies.

It is precisely the true cost of the stimulus, and the effect over time. If you have different data, feel free to post it.

Not true. This is based on an analysis by the cbpp.org of the Congressional Budget Offices. Anybody can analyze data and say what they want, but nice try.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by wiphan

Not true. This is based on an analysis by the cbpp.org of the Congressional Budget Offices. Anybody can analyze data and say what they want, but nice try.

exactly.

[Antitrust32]

one of the funniest things is that she thinks her opinion actually counts towards something.

none of our opinions will have any affect on what occurs in this worlds future. our opinions have no meaning in the long run. she's as worthless as the rest of us.

In 50 years, nobody will remember the opinions of Spin Dr Beth.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

one of the funniest things is that she thinks her opinion actually counts towards something.

none of our opinions will have any affect on what occurs in this worlds future. our opinions have no meaning in the long run. she's as worthless as the rest of us.

In 50 years, nobody will remember the opinions of Spin Dr Beth.

Yet I'm not the one who takes the poster they say they can't stand off ignore, and comes back today only to throw more flaming bags of dog **** at someone they don't like

Originally Posted by Riot

[Riot]

Originally Posted by wiphan

Not true. This is based on an analysis by the cbpp.org of the Congressional Budget Offices. Anybody can analyze data and say what they want, but nice try.

Yes. And I earlier posted the CBPP original link, which had three detailed chart breakdowns of all the data by department/organizational spending group.

As the CBPP is a respected organization, and that data has been in the public sector with peer review for some time now without any economics calling it false or misleading, why don't you quote that original page, and tell us what you think is factually incorrect about it?