Yay for spending, but not for paying for it.

Yay for spending, but not for paying for it. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

DarkSteven -> Yay for spending, but not for paying for it. (9/15/2011 5:48:55 AM)
What the hell? Obama just unveiled a new jobs bill. Summing up, it says "Let's spend money again." The Tea Partiers that damn near shut down the government a couple of months ago are mum on this one. Hasn't anyone over there figured it out yet? The time to worry about paying bills is when the spending occurs, not when the bills arrive. Sheesh....

pahunkboy -> RE: Yay for spending, but not for paying for it. (9/15/2011 5:50:35 AM)
I heard it will cost 300k per job.

Sanity -> RE: Yay for spending, but not for paying for it. (9/15/2011 6:14:05 AM)
Even the Dems are starting to grow a spine, balking over Obamas cheeky presidential campaign giveaway program Therefore the Tea Party doesnt need to be nearly as loud. quote: ORIGINAL: DarkSteven What the hell? Obama just unveiled a new jobs bill. Summing up, it says "Let's spend money again." The Tea Partiers that damn near shut down the government a couple of months ago are mum on this one. Hasn't anyone over there figured it out yet? The time to worry about paying bills is when the spending occurs, not when the bills arrive. Sheesh....

Sanity -> RE: Yay for spending, but not for paying for it. (9/15/2011 7:12:41 AM)
This, from a far left news source: quote: Some Democrats balking at Obama's jobs bill President Obama anticipated Republican resistance to his jobs program, but he is now meeting increasing pushback from his own party. Many Congressional Democrats, smarting from the fallout over the 2009 stimulus bill, say there is little chance they will be able to support the bill as a single entity, citing an array of elements they cannot abide. “I think the American people are very skeptical of big pieces of legislation,” Senator Bob Casey, a Democrat from Pennsylvania, said in an interview Wednesday, joining a growing chorus of Democrats who prefer an à la carte version of the bill despite White House resistance to that approach. “For that reason alone I think we should break it up.” quote: [image]http://msnbcmedia2.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Photo/_new/110914-nytobama-719p.grid-6x2.jpg[/image] Democrats like Senator Mary L. Landrieu of Louisiana, who does not want the oil industry singled out for tax changes, object to parts of the bill. The White House has opposed breaking it up.

thompsonx -> RE: Yay for spending, but not for paying for it. (9/15/2011 7:35:05 AM)
quote: Democrats like Senator Mary L. Landrieu of Louisiana, who does not want the oil industry singled out for tax changes, object to parts of the bill. The White House has opposed breaking it up. How difficult would it be to figure out who owns this bitch's mouth?

Sanity -> RE: Yay for spending, but not for paying for it. (9/15/2011 7:38:49 AM)
You view women who arent in total agreement with your ideology as subhuman? That seems to be a trait that many leftists have in common, for whatever reason. quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: Democrats like Senator Mary L. Landrieu of Louisiana, who does not want the oil industry singled out for tax changes, object to parts of the bill. The White House has opposed breaking it up. How difficult would it be to figure out who owns this bitch's mouth?

slvemike4u -> RE: Yay for spending, but not for paying for it. (9/15/2011 7:43:02 AM)
Is there some way you could try to be less of an asshole....or is it a requirement in order to maintain your rightist decoder ring? Said in jest in response to the insane ones generalization of "leftists"

Sanity -> RE: Yay for spending, but not for paying for it. (9/15/2011 7:46:33 AM)
I didnt write all leftists, you moron But barglebargle calls them cunts The big nosed comedian, whats-his-name calls them twats And so on

Owner59 -> RE: Yay for spending, but not for paying for it. (9/15/2011 7:47:28 AM)
So it isn`t the spending that`s making her hesitate. It`s the impact on her constituency that`s making her think about it. Only a retard would see that as anti-Obama policy.

pahunkboy -> RE: Yay for spending, but not for paying for it. (9/15/2011 7:49:31 AM)
Why not take us all to Disneyland?

Sanity -> RE: Yay for spending, but not for paying for it. (9/15/2011 7:50:44 AM)
Only a retard would refuse to see that Obama policy has long involved, to paraphrase Obama, "keeping a boot on the throat of" domestic energy production quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 So it isn`t the spending that`s making her hesitate. It`s the impact on her constituency that`s making her think about it. Only a retard would see that as anti-Obama policy.

Sanity -> RE: Yay for spending, but not for paying for it. (9/15/2011 7:52:29 AM)
I am going to Disnyland quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy Why not take us all to Disneyland? BTW, you know why Micky Mouse left Minnie Mouse dontcha Because she was fucking Goofy

DomYngBlk -> RE: Yay for spending, but not for paying for it. (9/15/2011 7:53:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarkSteven What the hell? Obama just unveiled a new jobs bill. Summing up, it says "Let's spend money again." The Tea Partiers that damn near shut down the government a couple of months ago are mum on this one. Hasn't anyone over there figured it out yet? The time to worry about paying bills is when the spending occurs, not when the bills arrive. Sheesh.... Going to save your way to prosperity are you? The problem with his proposal is that he has given the tea bagger republicans a blank check to start cutting.

Owner59 -> RE: Yay for spending, but not for paying for it. (9/15/2011 7:56:36 AM)
Don`t pretend you`re interested in jobs or American success. Your party but us in this mess and you don`t have a clue as to what to do,cept snipe and gripe and ruin our credit rating. Where`s all the jobs from bush`s tax cuts? Where`s the scary talented ideas for fixing the mess from you cons? This is why Americans trust Obama more on the economy.

slvemike4u -> RE: Yay for spending, but not for paying for it. (9/15/2011 7:56:58 AM)
So in your world two posters equals "most" ? As I said ...is there some way you could be less of an asshole? Anyway at all ?

thompsonx -> RE: Yay for spending, but not for paying for it. (9/15/2011 8:00:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity You view women who arent in total agreement with your ideology as subhuman? No. Why do you ask such an assanine question? That seems to be a trait that many leftists have in common, for whatever reason. Another of your ill informed opinions stated with no validation quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: Democrats like Senator Mary L. Landrieu of Louisiana, who does not want the oil industry singled out for tax changes, object to parts of the bill. The White House has opposed breaking it up. How difficult would it be to figure out who owns this bitch's mouth?

thompsonx -> RE: Yay for spending, but not for paying for it. (9/15/2011 8:05:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 So it isn`t the spending that`s making her hesitate. It`s the impact on her constituency that`s making her think about it. Only a retard would see that as anti-Obama policy. If by "constituency" you mean the oil companies then it would make sense.

Sanity -> RE: Yay for spending, but not for paying for it. (9/15/2011 8:08:26 AM)
Because a "bitch" as you say, is a female dog And the word you are looking for, a word you should feel intimately acquainted with, is asinine Which, that sort of post is why I wrote you off as "vapid" up above. quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity You view women who arent in total agreement with your ideology as subhuman? No. Why do you ask such an assanine question? That seems to be a trait that many leftists have in common, for whatever reason. Another of your ill informed opinions stated with no validation quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: Democrats like Senator Mary L. Landrieu of Louisiana, who does not want the oil industry singled out for tax changes, object to parts of the bill. The White House has opposed breaking it up. How difficult would it be to figure out who owns this bitch's mouth?

Sanity -> RE: Yay for spending, but not for paying for it. (9/15/2011 8:09:50 AM)
Just two examples mike, the trend is far more widespread than that. quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u So in your world two posters equals "most" ? As I said ...is there some way you could be less of an asshole? Anyway at all ?

thompsonx -> RE: Yay for spending, but not for paying for it. (9/15/2011 8:26:46 AM)
quote: Because a "bitch" as you say, is a female dog For a grown man to pretend that there is only one meaning for that word is truely asinine and proves once again that you are interested not in discussion but snark. And the word you are looking for, a word you should feel intimately acquainted with, is asinine When one concentrates on spelling errors it shows that they are not capable of addressing the discussion at hand. Would you like to discuss why she wants to make the bill a la cart or would you rather discuss spelling? Which, that sort of post is why I wrote that you are "vapid" up above. If you would prefer to discuss spelling then vapid would be an appropriate lable for your choice.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875