Obamacare Has Helped Seniors Save Over $6 Billion On Their Prescription Drugs

[FORD]

Iraq is half the Middle East?

Our deficits were nowhere near as bad 10 years ago. Bush's budget deficits were in the low hundreds of millions compared to Obama's trillion-plus deficits.

That's because Chimp didn't include his wars in the budget. He still poured the money down the toilet, he just left it off the books. That's why there was an appearance of a huge jump when Obama took office, because he put the wars on the books.

Chimp started out with the surplus that Clinton left him. He gave that away to the rich tax dodgers and it was all downhill from there.

[SunisinuS]

Iraq is half the Middle East?

Our deficits were nowhere near as bad 10 years ago. Bush's budget deficits were in the low hundreds of millions compared to Obama's trillion-plus deficits.

And Clinton's Surpluses.

[Warham]

Bullshit....

http://www.factcheck.org/2012/08/medicares-piggy-bank/

Is factcheck.org the final word, FORD?

Who checks their facts?

[Warham]

That's because Chimp didn't include his wars in the budget. He still poured the money down the toilet, he just left it off the books. That's why there was an appearance of a huge jump when Obama took office, because he put the wars on the books.

Chimp started out with the surplus that Clinton left him. He gave that away to the rich tax dodgers and it was all downhill from there.

Actually, tax revenue increased under Bush because of the tax cuts. Even now, Obama enjoys record revenues due to those cuts, but his spending is out of control. Bush spent like a drunken sailor, but Obama's taken it to another level.

[SunisinuS]

Actually, tax revenue increased under Bush because of the tax cuts. Even now, Obama enjoys record revenues due to those cuts, but his spending is out of control. Bush spent like a drunken sailor, but Obama's taken it to another level.

So let's see...the population has remained static?

Will the next Prez after BHO spend less on 330 million than 300 million?

Wow that damn math.

Instead, perhaps the next 30 million will have healthcare...so therefore get an education, and get jobs, and not worry about a simple bad tooth or a broken ankle marginalizing them for the next 10 years...and pay taxes?

Wow what a bad plan to keep everyone healthy and paying taxes....you are right...DOWN WITH HEALTHCARE!

I am convinced...over and out.

[FORD]

Is factcheck.org the final word, FORD?

Who checks their facts?

Fact check is owned by the Annenberg Foundation. As in Walter Annenberg, a good friend of your Messiah Ronald Reagan.

So no "liberal bias" there........

[Warham]

So let's see...the population has remained static?

Will the next Prez after BHO spend less on 330 million than 300 million?

Wow that damn math.

What are you talking about? Tax revenues are increasing every year (despite an unemployment rate of about 8%. The unemployment rate during the Bush years was between 5-6%, but I digress), but spending is outpacing revenue.

I thought you had "degrees".

[Warham]

Fact check is owned by the Annenberg Foundation. As in Walter Annenberg, a good friend of your Messiah Ronald Reagan.

So no "liberal bias" there........

One thing about Reagan. Many Democrats loved him as much as Republicans. They voted for him despite not liking his policies because they thought he was a good guy.

[FORD]

Actually, tax revenue increased under Bush because of the tax cuts. Even now, Obama enjoys record revenues due to those cuts, but his spending is out of control. Bush spent like a drunken sailor, but Obama's taken it to another level.

Yes, but the right wingers never complained about Chimpy's spending (yeah, I remember YOU did, to some extent. But not the right wingers in Congress or the corporate media).

It's all part of something called the "two Santa Claus theory".....

The Two Santa Claus Theory

The Two Santa Claus Theory is a political theory and strategy published by Jude Wanniski in 1976, which he promoted within the United States Republican Party.

According to Wanniski, the theory is simple. In 1976, he wrote that the Two-Santa Claus Theory suggests that "the Republicans should concentrate on tax-rate reduction. As they succeed in expanding incentives to produce, they will move the economy back to full employment and thereby reduce social pressures for public spending. Just as an increase in Government spending inevitably means taxes must be raised, a cut in tax rates—by expanding the private sector—will diminish the relative size of the public sector." Wanniski suggested this position, as Thom Hartmann has clarified, so that the Democrats would "have to be anti-Santas by raising taxes, or anti-Santas by cutting spending. Either one would lose them elections."

The theory states that in democratic elections, if Democrats appeal to voters by proposing more spending, then the Republicans cannot gain broader appeal by proposing less spending. The first "Santa Claus" of the theory title refers to the Democratic party which promises spending. The "Two Santa Claus Theory" recommends that the Republican party must assume the role of a second Santa Claus by not arguing to cut spending but rather offering the option of cutting taxes.

This theory is a response to the belief of monetarists, and especially Milton Friedman, that the government must be starved of revenue in order to control the growth of spending (since, in the view of the monetarists, spending cannot be reduced by elected bodies as the political pressure to spend is too great).

[SunisinuS]

What are you talking about? Tax revenues are increasing every year, but spending is outpacing revenue.

I thought you had "degrees".

Lol you are an anarchist huh?

See...as the population increases...more firehouses have to be built.

Name why maintaining something that Ben Franklin even thought was important is not important to you?

Ever even play "SimCity"?

See, as population increases...resources need to....and just cutting spending because you are 70 and think "a nickel used to buy a lot" is just creating slums. I do not want to see Favelas* in the US like I saw in Brazil.

Get a grip and solve the problems Warham....don't spout platitudes you hear from old people that never got past 5th grade math.

Sorry that you hate degrees. One of mine was in Economics. That probably Really pisses you off.

[FORD]

One thing about Reagan. Many Democrats loved him as much as Republicans. They voted for him despite not liking his policies because they thought he was a good guy.

Probably a bit of a stretch to say I thought he was a "good guy". But he had good taste in jelly beans. And compared to Poppy & Chimpy, he looks a lot better, I guess.

[Warham]

In my mind, there are two fiscal parties in Washington. There are the far-left Democrats and then the near-center Republicans. Neither one wants to really reduce the size in government. I'd cut everything across the board, defense, welfare, etc by a certain percentage to get it under that 2.7 Trillion. There should be a constitutional amendment to balance the budget or keep it even at 95% of revenue so that we can actually pay down the debt.

[SunisinuS]

In my mind, there are two fiscal parties in Washington. There are the far-left Democrats and then the near-center Republicans. Neither one wants to really reduce the size in government. I'd cut everything across the board, defense, welfare, etc by a certain percentage to get it under that 2.7 Trillion. There should be a constitutional amendment to balance the budget or keep it even at 95% of revenue so that we can actually pay down the debt.

How did Clinton do it and why do Republicans today (after 8 years of their leadership) not do it?

Clinton even did it without a law.....wow just smart or what?*

*BTW Clinton had a degree.

[Warham]

Name why maintaining something that Ben Franklin even thought was important is not important to you?

Sorry that you hate degrees. One of mine was in Economics. That probably Really pisses you off.

Ben Franklin would probably think he was on some alien world if he saw what we've become. I wouldn't want the Founding Fathers to have to see this. They were much wiser than anyone in Congress today.

Your degrees don't piss me off at all but I've seen many educated people who are clueless about reality.

[FORD]

Far left Democrats in Washington?

There's no such thing (sadly).

It would be difficult to name 10 in the House that are even significantly left of center. Doubt you could name 5 in the Senate.

And none in the White House