"HK" wrote in message
...
...for deficits.



WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The White House on Monday predicted a record deficit
of $490 billion for the 2009 budget year, a senior government official
told CNN.
The White House blames a faltering economy and the stimulus package for
the increased budget deficit.

The White House blames a faltering economy and the stimulus package for
the increased budget deficit.

The deficit would amount to roughly 3.5 percent of the nation's $14
trillion economy.


- - -

George W. Bush, the most incompetent and fiscally irresponsible president
in U.S. history.


yawn

Eisboch

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"HK" wrote in message
...
...for deficits.



WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The White House on Monday predicted a record deficit
of $490 billion for the 2009 budget year, a senior government official
told CNN.
The White House blames a faltering economy and the stimulus package for
the increased budget deficit.

The White House blames a faltering economy and the stimulus package for
the increased budget deficit.

The deficit would amount to roughly 3.5 percent of the nation's $14
trillion economy.


- - -

George W. Bush, the most incompetent and fiscally irresponsible president
in U.S. history.


yawn

Eisboch


I thought the purse strings were controlled by a Democrat Congress.

On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 17:57:09 -0700, CalifBill wrote:


I thought the purse strings were controlled by a Democrat Congress.

Yeah, that's the ticket.

http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

wrote:
On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 17:57:09 -0700, CalifBill wrote:


I thought the purse strings were controlled by a Democrat Congress.

Yeah, that's the ticket.

http://zfacts.com/p/318.html


Bilious Bill repeats that trash about once a month, hoping, I suppose,
to convince himself it is true. The reality is the Dems have a tiny
majority in Congress, not enough to control anything, and, of course,
deficits rose sharply in the Republican Administrations, partly because
the Republican presidents wanted to saddle future generations with debt
so high necessary social programs would have to be cut to service that debt.

wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 07:00:03 -0400, hk wrote:

wrote:
On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 17:57:09 -0700, CalifBill wrote:


I thought the purse strings were controlled by a Democrat Congress.
Yeah, that's the ticket.

http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

Bilious Bill repeats that trash about once a month, hoping, I suppose,
to convince himself it is true. The reality is the Dems have a tiny
majority in Congress, not enough to control anything, and, of course,
deficits rose sharply in the Republican Administrations, partly because
the Republican presidents wanted to saddle future generations with debt
so high necessary social programs would have to be cut to service that debt.


Well there was a war


If you are referring to the current president's war on Iraq that was
started for partisan political reasons, yes, there was a war, and along
with it, tax breaks to help us not pay for it.

So many Republicans have told so many lies about the war, I can't keep
the characters straight anymore. Was it Bush, Cheney, or McCain who told
us our troops would be greeted with flowers, it would be a short war,
and the Iraqis would pay for it. Oh, and of course, "the surge has
worked," even though the purpose of the surge was to buy time for the
Iraqi politicans to settle their differences, split the oil revenues
evenly and work together to make their country a going concern. NONE of
that has happened yet, but...THE SURGE HAS WORKED!

Bullship upon bullship.

..

On Jul 29, 10:56*am, wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 10:10:54 -0400, hk wrote:
Well there was a war

If you are referring to the current president's war on Iraq that was
started for partisan political reasons, yes, there was a war, and along
with it, tax breaks to help us not pay for it.

http://zfacts.com/p/447.html* * * * * * * * * *
Without the war the deficit pretty much goes away

http://www.vdare.com/guzzardi/health_care.htm
Without better care for illegals than I can afford, you could say
pretty much the same thing. All the while I am getting turned down for
coverage or can't afford the meds the doctors say I should be on for
an extended life.... What's your point?

On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 08:23:24 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:

On Jul 29, 10:56*am, wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 10:10:54 -0400, hk wrote:
Well there was a war

If you are referring to the current president's war on Iraq that was
started for partisan political reasons, yes, there was a war, and along
with it, tax breaks to help us not pay for it.

http://zfacts.com/p/447.html* * * * * * * * * *
Without the war the deficit pretty much goes away

http://www.vdare.com/guzzardi/health_care.htm
Without better care for illegals than I can afford, you could say
pretty much the same thing. All the while I am getting turned down for
coverage or can't afford the meds the doctors say I should be on for
an extended life.... What's your point?

His point...to provide Harry a forum to spew his crap. Of course, he's not
the only one...

wrote:
On Jul 29, 10:56 am, wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 10:10:54 -0400, hk wrote:
Well there was a war
If you are referring to the current president's war on Iraq that was
started for partisan political reasons, yes, there was a war, and along
with it, tax breaks to help us not pay for it.
http://zfacts.com/p/447.html
Without the war the deficit pretty much goes away

http://www.vdare.com/guzzardi/health_care.htm
Without better care for illegals than I can afford, you could say
pretty much the same thing. All the while I am getting turned down for
coverage or can't afford the meds the doctors say I should be on for
an extended life.... What's your point?


As you well know, there are perfectly legitimate and absolutely legal
ways for you to obtain the meds you say you "should be on for an
extended life."

As for being turned down for coverage, what do you expect the insurance
companies to say, considing your medical problems? Your best choice is
to vote for Obama, because he will deliver a program that makes medical
insurance available to you at a price you can afford.

Or, you can continue to be used by the Republicans, who don't give a
schitt about those who cannot afford health care or health care. That
way, you'll fit in with your boys here, and you'll be able to continue
to whine about the health care some "illegals" get.

Your unwillingness to vote your own interests will shorten your life.

wrote:
On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 10:10:54 -0400, hk wrote:

Well there was a war

If you are referring to the current president's war on Iraq that was
started for partisan political reasons, yes, there was a war, and along
with it, tax breaks to help us not pay for it.

http://zfacts.com/p/447.html
Without the war the deficit pretty much goes away


Yeah, so when the bills began to pile up, a smart president would have
come before the people and said that it was also important for them to
sacrifice a bit, too, and therefore he was going to urge congress to put
into abeyance tax cuts and whatever else was necessary to pay for his
foreign misadventure.

Instead, president idiot is leaving a big mess for the next guy, a mess
quite a bit more significant than a stained blue dress.