JohnRich 4 #1 April 28, 2009 News:Treasury needs record $361B April-June borrowing The Treasury Department said Monday it will need to borrow $361 billion in the current April-June quarter, a record amount for that period. (The $361 billion estimate for borrowing this quarter compared with borrowing needs of just $13 billion in the year-ago period.) It's the third straight quarter the government's borrowing needs have set records for those periods. Treasury also estimated it will need to borrow $515 billion in the July-September quarter. The administration is projecting the federal deficit for the entire budget year ending Sept. 30, will total a record $1.75 trillion. A deficit at that level would nearly quadruple the previous record of $454.8 billion set last year...Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090427/ap_on_bi_go_ec_fi/us_treasury_borrowing Go, Obama, go! Spend, Obama, spend! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
penniless 0 #2 April 28, 2009 QuoteNews:Treasury needs record $361B April-June borrowing The Treasury Department said Monday it will need to borrow $361 billion in the current April-June quarter, a record amount for that period. (The $361 billion estimate for borrowing this quarter compared with borrowing needs of just $13 billion in the year-ago period.) It's the third straight quarter the government's borrowing needs have set records for those periods. Treasury also estimated it will need to borrow $515 billion in the July-September quarter. The administration is projecting the federal deficit for the entire budget year ending Sept. 30, will total a record $1.75 trillion. A deficit at that level would nearly quadruple the previous record of $454.8 billion set last year...Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090427/ap_on_bi_go_ec_fi/us_treasury_borrowing Go, Obama, go! Spend, Obama, spend! "It's the third straight quarter the government's borrowing needs have set records for those periods." 2 of the those 3 quarters were under a Republican administration. Can you link to the posts that you decried Bush for setting spending records. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #3 April 28, 2009 Quote Quote News: Treasury needs record $361B April-June borrowing The Treasury Department said Monday it will need to borrow $361 billion in the current April-June quarter, a record amount for that period. (The $361 billion estimate for borrowing this quarter compared with borrowing needs of just $13 billion in the year-ago period.) It's the third straight quarter the government's borrowing needs have set records for those periods. Treasury also estimated it will need to borrow $515 billion in the July-September quarter. The administration is projecting the federal deficit for the entire budget year ending Sept. 30, will total a record $1.75 trillion. A deficit at that level would nearly quadruple the previous record of $454.8 billion set last year... Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090427/ap_on_bi_go_ec_fi/us_treasury_borrowing Go, Obama, go! Spend, Obama, spend! "It's the third straight quarter the government's borrowing needs have set records for those periods." 2 of the those 3 quarters were under a Republican administration. Can you link to the posts that you decried Bush for setting spending records. BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Yeah Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idrankwhat 0 #4 April 28, 2009 Quote Go, Obama, go! Spend, Obama, spend! So, by your post it's 66% Bush's fault. Thanks Obama once again! Republican's are fed up with runaway spending. CHANGE IS HERE!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BIGUN 1,319 #5 April 28, 2009 I say we sell California to China for $11,200,153,397,451.99 and call it a day.Nobody has time to listen; because they're desperately chasing the need of being heard. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #6 April 28, 2009 Quote(The $361 billion estimate for borrowing this quarter compared with borrowing needs of just $13 billion in the year-ago period.) As we all know, the only thing that has changed in the past year is the new President. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #7 April 28, 2009 Quote2 of the those 3 quarters were under a Republican administration. I thought Obamer was going to change things in Washington? Instead he's just copying Bush, and doing it even worse. Doesn't that bother you Obamites? If you think it was bad for Bush to do, now Obama is doing it even worse, so, can you link to the posts where you decried Obama for setting spending records? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 210 #8 April 28, 2009 QuoteQuote2 of the those 3 quarters were under a Republican administration. I thought Obamer was going to change things in Washington? Instead he's just copying Bush, and doing it even worse. Doesn't that bother you Obamites? Psst....haven't you heard? He can do no wrong.Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #9 April 28, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuote2 of the those 3 quarters were under a Republican administration. I thought Obamer was going to change things in Washington? Instead he's just copying Bush, and doing it even worse. Doesn't that bother you Obamites? Psst....haven't you heard? He can do no wrong. For you dead enders He can NEVER do anything right... but you do look really silly posting all your fears Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #10 April 28, 2009 I'm guessing (again) but it's not that he can do no wrong, it's that he is trying to put right something that is wrong because of a series of events that have been in motion for a long time. Is he wrong? I don't know.... What would YOU do differently and would it work? (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #11 April 28, 2009 QuoteI'm guessing (again) but it's not that he can do no wrong, it's that he is trying to put right something that is wrong because of a series of events that have been in motion for a long time. Is he wrong? I don't know.... What would YOU do differently and would it work? Quotemmmm.... maybe be responsible. cut gov spending, hold those accountable for the financial disaster, send most of the illegals home, stop giving billions to foriegn governments, not sign the packages that have pork in them. should I go on? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,998 #12 April 28, 2009 >cut gov spending OK. What would you cut? >hold those accountable for the financial disaster . . . Who, and how would you "hold them accountable?" >send most of the illegals home . . . "Most?" So you'd let some stay? Which ones? >stop giving billions to foriegn governments . . . OK. Which ones would you stop supporting? >not sign the packages that have pork in them. Which pork would you cut? Veteran's hospital funding, perhaps? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #13 April 28, 2009 Quote I thought Obamer was going to change things in Washington? Instead he's just copying Bush, and doing it even worse. Doesn't that bother you ObamitesObamerites? Thought this sounded better...We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #14 April 28, 2009 Quote>cut gov spending OK. What would you cut? Quote cut the budget by 20% and make gov learn to work with a decrease in income just like we have to(including eack one in congress) >hold those accountable for the financial disaster . . . Who, and how would you "hold them accountable?" QuoteTake all the money and assets from those that bankrupted a company and send them to jail if fraud was used >send most of the illegals home . . . "Most?" So you'd let some stay? Which ones? Quotefirst send home anyone that had a criminal record, second anyone that does not support themselves. If you go to mexico you have to show means of supporting yourself or go home. >stop giving billions to foriegn governments . . . OK. Which ones would you stop supporting? >not sign the packages that have pork in them. Which pork would you cut? Veteran's hospital funding, perhaps? Quoteanything that couldn't pass without being tucked in a bill. in other words individual votes on each item. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,452 #15 April 28, 2009 Quotein other words individual votes on each item.There's a lot to like in that idea, but the very size of things means that there are just too many frickin' items for them to vote on them one at a time. We've gone too far in the "everything" bill direction, but we really can't have them vote on each and every little thing either. Wendy P.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #16 April 28, 2009 Quote>cut gov spending OK. What would you cut? >hold those accountable for the financial disaster . . . Who, and how would you "hold them accountable?" >send most of the illegals home . . . "Most?" So you'd let some stay? Which ones? >stop giving billions to foriegn governments . . . OK. Which ones would you stop supporting? >not sign the packages that have pork in them. Which pork would you cut? Veteran's hospital funding, perhaps? Gee I wonder why we did not hear this from the same people ...the deadenders....when THE GREAT DECIDER was in charge.. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #17 April 28, 2009 QuoteQuote>cut gov spending OK. What would you cut? >hold those accountable for the financial disaster . . . Who, and how would you "hold them accountable?" >send most of the illegals home . . . "Most?" So you'd let some stay? Which ones? >stop giving billions to foriegn governments . . . OK. Which ones would you stop supporting? >not sign the packages that have pork in them. Which pork would you cut? Veteran's hospital funding, perhaps? Gee I wonder why we did not hear this from the same people ...the deadenders....when THE GREAT DECIDER was in charge.. Quotei said these same things when Bush was potus Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #18 April 28, 2009 REALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLY.. the thing about this forum.. is.... its permanent... got a link to those hundreds of posts by you ..... like a couple hundred you have made since Obama was elected??? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BDashe 0 #19 April 28, 2009 Ahhh, we're in Q2 here people... so would that put it at 66% Obama, 33% Bush? bush was in office the first few days of Q1 this year, but all he really did was hand out a few pardons...So there I was... Making friends and playing nice since 1983 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,998 #20 April 28, 2009 >cut the budget by 20% Like I asked, what would you cut? Veteran's hospitals? Military funding? Infrastructure repair? The space program? >Take all the money and assets from those that bankrupted a company and >send them to jail if fraud was used And if it turned out that the primary reason was greed on the part of homeowners? How many would you send to jail? All of them? >first send home anyone that had a criminal record So let me get this straight. You'd pick up an illegal alien and check his background - and if it was clean you'd let him stay? How would you check his background? Where would you put him if you couldn't find anything on him? And suppose he was supporting himself by working illegally on a farm? Would you then allow him to stay in the US to continue breaking the law? >anything that couldn't pass without being tucked in a bill. in other words >individual votes on each item. That's unconstitutional. Would you try to amend the US Constitution to allow your preferred budget process? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ion01 2 #21 April 28, 2009 QuoteQuoteNews:Treasury needs record $361B April-June borrowing The Treasury Department said Monday it will need to borrow $361 billion in the current April-June quarter, a record amount for that period. (The $361 billion estimate for borrowing this quarter compared with borrowing needs of just $13 billion in the year-ago period.) It's the third straight quarter the government's borrowing needs have set records for those periods. Treasury also estimated it will need to borrow $515 billion in the July-September quarter. The administration is projecting the federal deficit for the entire budget year ending Sept. 30, will total a record $1.75 trillion. A deficit at that level would nearly quadruple the previous record of $454.8 billion set last year...Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090427/ap_on_bi_go_ec_fi/us_treasury_borrowing Go, Obama, go! Spend, Obama, spend! "It's the third straight quarter the government's borrowing needs have set records for those periods." 2 of the those 3 quarters were under a Republican administration. Can you link to the posts that you decried Bush for setting spending records. They were under a "republican" president. Lets remember that the house was democrat controlled under bush. In addition, if bush did it does that make it okay for obama? Bush was a problem too! He took us to socialism and destruction in a nice car while obama is taking us there in an SR71! Besides all that obama said he was going to bring change right! Well, if bush was putting us into debt how is putting us into more debt change? Fine, blame the economy on bush. I do....but blame obama for digging he hole a thousand times deeper. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
penniless 0 #22 April 28, 2009 QuoteAhhh, we're in Q2 here people... so would that put it at 66% Obama, 33% Bush? bush was in office the first few days of Q1 this year, but all he really did was hand out a few pardons... Amazing that it takes more than a whole calendar quarter to clean up the mess made over 8 years of irresponsible fiscal policies. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airdvr 210 #23 April 28, 2009 Quote Quote Ahhh, we're in Q2 here people... so would that put it at 66% Obama, 33% Bush? bush was in office the first few days of Q1 this year, but all he really did was hand out a few pardons... Amazing that it takes more than a whole calendar quarter to clean up the mess made over 8 years of irresponsible fiscal policies. And everyone knows the only way to fix irresponsible fiscal policy is with an increase in irresponsible fiscal policy."Barack Obama will reform federal contracting and reduce the number of contractors, saving $40 billion a year." -- Obama's "The Change We Need In Washington" "The dirty little secret is that we're growing government," McCaskill, D-Mo., said April 23 on MSNBC. "Nobody wants to say they're hiring new government employees, so we've just done $500 billion in contracting and hired people through contracts. It's a mess." "I will also go through the federal budget, line by line, eliminating programs that no longer work and making the ones we do need work better and cost less..." -- Denver AUGUST 28, 2008 "Obama will reinstate pay-as-you-go (PAYGO) budget rules, so that new spending or tax cuts are paid for by spending cuts or new revenue elsewhere." -- Obama's Blueprint for Change The $787 billion stimulus signed by Obama was drafted outside PAYGO rules at his direction. The Congressional Budget Office estimates it will increase the 2009 deficit by $185 billion, the 2010 deficit by $399 billion, and the 2011 deficit by $134 billion. I know, I know...it's all Bush's fault.Please don't dent the planet. Destinations by Roxanne Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #24 April 29, 2009 Quotemmmm.... maybe be responsible. cut gov spending, hold those accountable for the financial disaster, send most of the illegals home, stop giving billions to foriegn governments, not sign the packages that have pork in them. should I go on? This is the same sort of vague, useless crap I see when I asked the gun controllers HOW they're going to stop bad and crazy people from getting guns without taking away rights. For example, you want to send all illegals home, and cut the spending 20%. Yeah, that will work great. Blaming the Obama Administration for the deficit requires glossing over the events of the entire Fall, and saying just cut spending and pushing those bad people is exactly the sort of leadership we have with the past administration. I don't know if Jesus himself could fix this mess to your satisfaction. Odds are, Obama will fail and will not be reelected. Same would have happened with McCain (presuming he didn't drop dead for Queen Palin). Clinton entered in similar conditions, though not so dire. It wasn't till near the end of his first term that the upward trajectory began. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,500 #25 April 29, 2009 QuoteI thought Obamer was going to change things in Washington? What the fuck is "Obamer" supposed to mean? Is John really so stupid that he thinks that is how it's spelled, or is there actually a meaning to it? Someone help me out here, please!Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
