The Idiot-in-Chief will bankrupt us

Quote from Mav88:



We know that future projections are pretty hard, but it's even harder when all the assumptions about it are biased towards the rosy side to make yourself look better.

In addition to everything else, now they're adding a new wrinkle. These massive new spending items on the budget, like the bailout, have been secretly(?) converted to NPR (net present value accounting) to make them look smaller. Had Obama and Geithner not made these secret(?) changes, the budget deficit would have been over 2 trillion this fiscal year, instead of 1.8 trillion. The administration wanted it to look better, for, ahem, political reasons. An onlooker discovered this when he saw that the budget deficit for march had magically(?) gone down by 175 billion in april.

It is safe to assume, according to the article, that this administration has plans to use these kind of accounting obfuscations for all of its multi trillion dollar investments, making their cost projections a farce. (hint: they will cost much more than obama says)

This isn't the typical gov't cheesy accounting we're all use to, no, this is stepping it up considerably to a whole new level of depravity.

note: it even effects things like whether they will allow banks to pay back tarp money, because if the banks pay it back, it <i>increases the deficit</I>, as hard as that is to believe.

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/federal-deficit-becomes-nearly-indecipherable/
 
Quote from vhehn:

after a thousand years of every why question being answered by a natural process at what point do people like you concede that there is no supernatural deity in control of things? i guess never because you have an emotional need to believe .
Can you imagine the ignorance level of someone who asks you to provide a formal proof for a negative?

I was going to explain further, but "people like me" include stephen hawking and Einstein. So I think I'm in good company. I guess we just aren't as smart as people like you.

I just said neither can be proved or disprove, and I have an emotional need to believe? You are the one advocating a theory that's unproven. I'm simply saying it is unproven. Look at yourself. You are the NEW dogmatics. I don't mind you believing, just like I don't mind my mother believing in heaven, but you are both in the same category.

One a side note, many religious people have emotional needs. Yours is the need to feel intellectually superior to the "dumb creation folk". Unwittingly, you fall into the same category you so wish to be above.
 
Quote from Thunderdog:

Vhehn, hardcore ideologues can't be reasoned with. You know this well from your exchanges on religion. It is no different in politics. With hardcore ideologues, it's six of one or half dozen of the other. You can present ideas to the unthinking, but you can't make them think.

Mix such behavior with a high level of vindictiveness Thunderdog.
 
Quote from fhl:

...These massive new spending items on the budget, like the bailout, have been secretly(?) converted to NPR (net present value accounting) to make them look smaller. Had Obama and Geithner not made these secret(?) changes, the budget deficit would have been over 2 trillion this fiscal year, instead of 1.8 trillion. The administration wanted it to look better, for, ahem, political reasons...


I wonder why BO would even bother?

His sheeple don't care anyway.
 
Quote from jonbig04:

I was going to explain further, but "people like me" include stephen hawking and Einstein. So I think I'm in good company. I guess we just aren't as smart as people like you...
Sorry, but you can't claim Einstein as one of your own either. Einstein was misquoted and misinterpreted a lot, either innocently or otherwise. Einstein was not a theist. He was a pantheist who, in his wonderment, essentially referred to nature as god. It was a poetic reference rather than a literal one. He had disputed his alleged belief in a personal god. Einstein and his comments having been deliberately taken out of context by those with theist leanings who wanted him on their side. Meanwhile, there were others who were admonishing him for "not being Jewish enough."
 
Quote from Thunderdog:

Sorry, but you can't claim Einstein as one of your own either. Einstein was misquoted and misinterpreted a lot, either innocently or otherwise. Einstein was not a theist. He was a pantheist who, in his wonderment, essentially referred to nature as god. It was a poetic reference rather than a literal one. He had disputed his alleged belief in a personal god. Einstein and his comments having been deliberately taken out of context by those with theist leanings who wanted him on their side. Meanwhile, there were others who were admonishing him for "not being Jewish enough."
correct:

Einstein described belief in God as "childish superstition" and said Jews were not the chosen people, in a letter to be sold in London this week, an auctioneer said Tuesday.
The father of relativity, whose previously known views on religion have been more ambivalent and fuelled much discussion, made the comments in response to a philosopher in 1954.

As a Jew himself, Einstein said he had a great affinity with Jewish people but said they "have no different quality for me than all other people"."The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=080513122249.m3ds3b6j&show_article=1
 
Quote from Thunderdog:

Sorry, but you can't claim Einstein as one of your own either. Einstein was misquoted and misinterpreted a lot, either innocently or otherwise. Einstein was not a theist.

I NEVER SAID HE WAS A THEIST!

lol what are you talking about?
 
Quote from jonbig04:

I NEVER SAID HE WAS A THEIST!

lol what are you talking about?
Sorry, my mistake.

But, judging by the evidence, I don't think he was agnostic either.
 
Back
Top