On Mon, 18 May 2009 15:45:24 -0400, Johnson
wrote:

jps wrote:

And were you saying the same when Bush was on the road to spending 2
to 3 trillion prosecuting a war in Iraq?

We weren't discussing Bush. We were discussing Obama's spending.

Your attention span seems to indicate ADD, if not immaturity.

I have no intention of discussing Obama's spending with you if you
weren't balanced enough to recognize the falicy of Bush's economic
stupidity.

Did you endorse his two debt financed tax cuts?

Were you okay with him keeping war funding off the budget?

Prove to me that you have a shred of balance and I'll discuss
whatever.

jps wrote:
On Mon, 18 May 2009 15:45:24 -0400, Johnson
wrote:

jps wrote:

And were you saying the same when Bush was on the road to spending 2
to 3 trillion prosecuting a war in Iraq?
We weren't discussing Bush. We were discussing Obama's spending.

Your attention span seems to indicate ADD, if not immaturity.

I have no intention of discussing Obama's spending with you if you
weren't balanced enough to recognize the falicy of Bush's economic
stupidity.

You've just labeled yourself an economic idiot with the above statement.

Did you endorse his two debt financed tax cuts?

Let's talk about the debt financed $787 billion "stimulus" bill and the
near $500 billion supplemental spending bill. Which both occured prior
to submission of and above and beyond the FY10 budgets.

Were you okay with him keeping war funding off the budget?

Sure, the war is not going to last forever. Obama's giveaway to the lazy
SOB's who refuse to work is going to bankrupt the US.

Prove to me that you have a shred of balance and I'll discuss
whatever.

Define balance and prove that you have an understanding of the word
yourself.

On Mon, 18 May 2009 19:53:28 -0400, BAR wrote:

jps wrote:
On Mon, 18 May 2009 15:45:24 -0400, Johnson
wrote:

jps wrote:

And were you saying the same when Bush was on the road to spending 2
to 3 trillion prosecuting a war in Iraq?
We weren't discussing Bush. We were discussing Obama's spending.

Your attention span seems to indicate ADD, if not immaturity.

I have no intention of discussing Obama's spending with you if you
weren't balanced enough to recognize the falicy of Bush's economic
stupidity.

You've just labeled yourself an economic idiot with the above statement.

Did you endorse his two debt financed tax cuts?

Let's talk about the debt financed $787 billion "stimulus" bill and the
near $500 billion supplemental spending bill. Which both occured prior
to submission of and above and beyond the FY10 budgets.

Were you okay with him keeping war funding off the budget?

Sure, the war is not going to last forever. Obama's giveaway to the lazy
SOB's who refuse to work is going to bankrupt the US.

Prove to me that you have a shred of balance and I'll discuss
whatever.

Define balance and prove that you have an understanding of the word
yourself.

Is your name now Johnson? So soon after stepping for DK the Prick?