god must bless america

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

Over those 8 years we maintained a deficit in the area of 400 billion. In three months we've gone from 400 billion to 1,750 billion. Hope this explains the concern over this 'drunken sailor' spending.

Fair enough, so it's the excess of overspending you don't like, not the principle of overspending in the first place.

You could have said that a long time ago and I would have understood, since I've always been the type that has no problem with an alcoholic having 8 beers and buckling his kid up in the backseat before driving to the store for smokes....but goddamn, it's those guys that will have 13 before they do it that really get me! Those guys, they make me incredulous!

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Fair enough, so it's the excess of overspending you don't like, not the principle of overspending in the first place.

You could have said that a long time ago and I would have understood, since I've always been the type that has no problem with an alcoholic having 8 beers and buckling his kid up in the backseat before driving to the store for smokes....but goddamn, it's those guys that will have 13 before they do it that really get me! Those guys, they make me incredulous!

maybe I think a deficit of 400 bil is manageable while going to 1,750 Bil again in 3 months isn't. If you change your analogy to 4 beers vs. 17 and a half it will make perfect sense and be correct on the ratio of the numbers. But to make it truly correct those 4 beers were consumed over 8 hrs while 17 and 1/2 were drank in 15mins.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

maybe I think a deficit of 400 bil is manageable while going to 1,750 Bil again in 3 months isn't. If you change your analogy to 4 beers vs. 17 and a half it will make perfect sense and be correct on the ratio of the numbers. But to make it truly correct those 4 beers were consumed over 8 hrs while 17 and 1/2 were drank in 15mins.

Of course my analogy is outrageous. It was meant to be. Just trying to figure out if it's just excess that bothers you, or principle.

It appears to be the former, and I'm glad we've cleared that up.

[dellinger63]

It is the excess coupled with the short time the excess has come about. And Brian your analogy was again perfect once the numbers and time were put in correct ratios.

[gales0678]

brian in my opinion Obama won because he was the alternate choice in the primary to the war hawk Hillary Clinton, the dems tried that startegy in'04 with John kerry and it didn't work , that and that alone got him by Hillary

Then with bush getting killed by the pols , the media , the world , moses could have run as the repbulican choice for president and it wouldn't have mattered - Obama walked like Funny Cide in the preakness after he beat Hillary in the primary

next election may not be so kind as the "bush factor' will be gone and the actual results of the past 4 yrs will be what the voters will look at , they will not listen to only the words

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by gales0678

brian in my opinion Obama won because he was the alternate choice in the primary to the war hawk Hillary Clinton, the dems tried that startegy in'04 with John kerry and it didn't work , that and that alone got him by Hillary

Then with bush getting killed by the pols , the media , the world , moses could have run as the repbulican choice for president and it wouldn't have mattered - Obama walked like Funny Cide in the preakness after he beat Hillary in the primary

next election may not be so kind as the "bush factor' will be gone and the actual results of the past 4 yrs will be what the voters will look at , they will not listen to only the words

And thank goodness by then we'll have four years of information to look at, instead of three months!

I welcome that debate when the time comes.

[gales0678]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

And thank goodness by then we'll have four years of information to look at, instead of three months!

I welcome that debate when the time comes.

we will have mid-term elections that will get into full swing in about another 9 months , will be interesting to see

the last dem president took a big defeat in '94 in his 1st term - will see what happens in '10

[gales0678]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

And thank goodness by then we'll have four years of information to look at, instead of three months!

I welcome that debate when the time comes.

my point being was he didn't have to look anyone in the eye in the stretch , we don't know if he can pass anyone in the stretch

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by gales0678

my point being was he didn't have to look anyone in the eye in the stretch , we don't know if he can pass anyone in the stretch

So you are comparing Obama to Bernardini??????