Three Charts to Email to Your Right-Wing Brother-In-Law

You didn't give a source for your claim.

The President's budget for 2008 totaled $2.9 trillion.
SOURCE;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_United_States_federal_budget

Total requested spending is $3.83 trillion and the federal deficit is forecast to be $1.56 trillion in 2010 and $1.27 trillion in 2011. Total debt is budgeted to increase from $11.9 trillion in FY2009, to $13.8 trillion in FY2010, and $15.1 trillion in FY2011.
SOURCE;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_United_States_federal_budget

Them's the facts Jack- or Wyane.....

Simple math class taught me that 3.83 trillion divided by 2.9 trillion is a 32.07% increase in spending WayneH. That's a fact!

Now- tell me again why your charts are not as phony as a 3 dollar bill?

If you get tricked into thinking that Obama has made things worse and that we should go back to what we were doing before Obama -- tax cuts for the rich, giving giant corporations and Wall Street everything they want -- when those are the things that caused the problems in the first place, then we will be in real trouble.

Before Obama? Yes- like Obama stopped giving giant corporations and Wall Street everything they want? Wake up Wayne- your asleep at the wheel!

VL wrote: Imperial statistical data...

Which empire are you referring to? England? Japan? Germany?

Vice Lord wrote: Thanks Wayne

Good stuff

Yes, Thanks, Wayne... I emailed them to my Dad... He still thinks Limbaugh is intelligent too... rofllol

LadyJazzer wrote:

Vice Lord wrote: Thanks Wayne

Good stuff

Yes, Thanks, Wayne... I emailed them to my Dad... He still thinks Limbaugh is intelligent too... rofllol

Hey LJ- tell your dad to log in here in 285bound- we have some questions I think he can answer for us- like where it all went wrong - you know.

Vice Lord wrote: Oh brother


Imperial statistical data over the last 50 years paints a different picture my friend. First lets get you into reality, then we'll go from there

Don't confuse VL with numbers and charts. He has a tough enough time with English.

What is Imperial statistical data? From the days of the Kings and Queens? LOL. VL, you best stick to the dog track bets.

Just took another look at that first graph Wayne. Care to explain to all of us how the policies in 2008 were "Republican" policies when both houses of Congress were populated with a majority of Democrats? Can we then say that it was the Republican policies that resulted in the budget surpluses when Clinton sat behind the Resolute Desk in the Oval Office using this same principle? Or, more likely, are you trying to convince us that the Democrats deserve all the credit and none of the blame in every instance.

One more clear example of how figures don't lie but liars figure.

It doesn't matter what you post, VL...

A) They won't believe you anyway, or will say that it's not valid because they didn't come from an approved wingnut source;

They'll go back farther in time to try to prove you wrong. (A favorite is to go back to FDR to justify it...Of course, if you go back to Hoover, you can blow that out of the water, so you end up just going farther back in time to try to justify what we already know--the "let the rich get richer" does not create jobs, and does not "trickle down" to anyone...)

But it's still entertaining....

Care to give us that same graph by which party controlled Congress and thus the purse strings VL? Didn't think so.

Why can't you ALL admit that whatever party is in charge runs up debt! One for needless war the other for ineffective social programs. So simple.