I mean wtf are these people doing? Another $410 billion for nothing?

[SilverStone05]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29392525

Let the bleeding commence.

WASHINGTON - The Democratic-controlled House approved $410 billion legislation Wednesday that boosted domestic programs, bristled with earmarks and chipped away at policies left behind by the Bush administration. The vote was 245-178, largely along party lines.

Republicans assailed the measure as too costly — particularly on the heels of a $787 billion stimulus bill that President Barack Obama signed last week. But Democrats jabbed back.

"The same people who drove the economy into the ditch are now complaining about the size of the tow truck," said Rep. James McGovern, D-Mass., pointing out the large increase in deficits that President George W. Bush and GOP-controlled Congresses amassed.

From the GOP side, Rep. Jeb Hensarling of Texas said the legislation was "going to grow the government 8.3 percent ... but the family budget which has to pay for the federal budget only grew at 1.3 percent last year."

The debate occurred one day after Obama told Congress in a prime time television address that he intends to cut deficits in half over the next four years, and one day before he submits tax and spending plans for the coming year. Given the extraordinary costs of the financial industry bailout and the stimulus, the White House projects this year's budget shortfall will be $1.5 trillion, triple the previous record of $455 billion in 2008.

In a symbolic bow to the recession, Democrats included in the spending measure a prohibition on a cost-of-living increase for members of Congress for the year.

Overall, the legislation would provided increases of roughly 8 percent for the federal agencies it covered, about $32 billion more than last year.

The bill is intended to allow smooth functioning of the government through the Sept. 30 end of the fiscal year. The Senate has yet to vote on its version.

After persuading lawmakers to keep earmarks off the stimulus bill, Obama made no such attempt on the first non-emergency spending measure of his presidency. The result was that lawmakers claimed billions in federal funds for pet projects — a total of 8,570 earmarks at a cost of $7.7 billion, according to Taxpayers for Common Sense. Majority Democrats declined to provide a number of earmarks, but said the cost was far smaller, $3.8 billion, 5 percent less than a year ago.

Among the earmarks was one sponsored by Rep. Howard Berman, D-Calif., who secured $200,000 for a "tattoo removal violence outreach program" in Los Angeles. Aides said the money would pay for a tattoo removal machine that could help gang members or others shed visible signs of their past, and anyone benefiting would be required to perform community service.

Rep. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., said the bill included at least a dozen earmarks for clients of PMA Group, a lobbying company now at the center of a federal corruption investigation.

"It's simply not responsible to allow a soon-to-be-criminally indicted lobbying firm to win funding, all borrowed, in this bill," he said. No charges have been filed against the firm or its principals, although the company's offices were raided earlier this month, and it has announced plans to disband by the end of the month.

Federal prosecutors are investigating PMA Group's founder and president, Paul Magliochetti, who is a former top aide to Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., chairman of the House Appropriations subcommittee that funds defense programs.

In remarks on the House floor, Republican leader John Boehner urged Obama to veto the legislation, citing earmarks.

At the White House, press secretary Robert Gibbs responded only in general terms whether that was possible.

"There is great concern in this building and by the president about earmarks," Gibbs said. "Without having looked specifically at a piece of legislation, I'm hesitant to throw out that four-letter word, `Veto.'"

After eight years without control of the White House, congressional Democrats also used the legislation to target several policies of former President Bush.

Under the bill, Mexican-licensed trucks are banned from operating outside commercial zones along the border with the United States. The Teamsters union, which supported Obama's election last year, had sought the move. The Bush administration backed a pilot program to permit up to 500 trucks from 100 Mexican motor carriers access to U.S. roads.

Bush administration restrictions on travel to Cuba were loosened in the legislation, to permit more frequent visits and expand the list of family members permitted to make trips to see relatives on the Communist nation-island.

Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Wash., took aim at a provision that he said would vastly broaden the government's ability to invoke the threat of climate change to halt economic development. "Most all of the shovel-ready projects on the trillion-dollar stimulus bill would in fact be at risk," he said.

Nominally, the provision halts implementation of a Bush-era regulation that lists the polar bear as a threatened species, and Rep. David Obey, D-Wis., and chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, said it would merely give the new administration 60 days to decide its fate.

Democrats also inserted a provision into the bill to end a program that allows students in the District of Columbia to use federal funds to attend private schools of their choice. Boehner, who helped establish the program as part of a political bargain several years ago, called the move "hideous."

 

[jond]

lol at msnbc news.

 

[Ski_Banker]

They're saving you from yourself, silly.

Check it out: Lets spend $50 Bln to stabilize (subsidize...) the low/middle income housing market, but then cut the mortgage interest deduction for households over $250k. *IF* that provision passes, at a $250k income threshold, you're gonna see houses over $1MM tank another 50%.

At least the latest bill allows Washington DC residents to now use Federal funds for private schools. Wouldn't want those Congressional-kids to learn from, and what it's like in, the real world.

Un-Fucking real.

 

[NSX-Stalker]

Bah.. that's nothing. I see your 410 billion and raise you 3.6 trillion.

Why the f*ck are we spending a trillion on universal health care next year.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/02/26/obama-budget/

President Obama on Thursday unveiled a $3.55 trillion budget for next year, a spending plan that sets aside billions for health care and the ailing financial industry and keeps the federal deficit north of $1 trillion.

The fiscal 2010 budget increases taxes on the wealthy but still forecasts a deficit of $1.2 trillion, though the president and his budget director Peter Orszag said the administration has identified $2 trillion in long-term reductions to keep with the president's pledge of halving the deficit by 2013.

But Obama said "we must add to our deficits in the short-term to provide immediate relief to families and get our economy moving."

In addition to next year's spending, Obama proposed more immediate changes that would push spending to $3.94 trillion in the current year. That would result in a record deficit Obama projects will hit $1.75 trillion, reflecting the massive spending being undertaken to battle a severe recession and the worst financial crisis in seven decades.

Obama and Orszag pledged to make big investments in energy, education and health care.

The fiscal 2010 budget sets aside a "reserve fund" of $634 billion as a "down payment" on the costs of universal health care coverage over 10 years.

The budget, while not specifically calling for additional bank bail out funds, also creates a budget allocation of $750 billion for the Treasury Department to purchase financial assets of struggling banks. This amount is $50 billion larger than the first bank bailout.

The administration say it has no current plans to request the extra money to prop up the banks, but if it does the $750 billion in rescue funding is expected to directly cost taxpayers about $250 billion. Under government accounting, funds used to purchase bank assets are not scored on a dollar-for-dollar basis.

The budget outline calls over 10 years for $637 billion in higher taxes on the estimated 5 percent of taxpayers with annual adjusted income of $250,000 or more. For taxpayers who earn less than that, the budget seeks $770 billion in tax cuts or tax refunds.

The president, who gave an overview of the fiscal 2010 budget Thursday morning, said he is beginning the long-term task of restoring fiscal discipline despite massive deficit spending he claims is necessary to kick-start the economy.

"There are some hard choices that lie ahead," Obama said. "We're going to go through our books, page-by-page, line-by-line to eliminate waste and inefficiency."

But Republican leaders criticized the proposed spending plan as a poor example of fiscal discipline.

"I agree with the president that we need to make some tough decisions regarding how we spend taxpayer dollars. Unfortunately, at this juncture, while the American people are tightening their belts, Washington seems to be taking its belt off," Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said in a statement.

"This budget makes clear that the era of big government is back, and Democrats want you to pay for it," House Minority Leader John Boehner said in a statement.

The budget extends the middle class tax cuts passed by the Bush administration in 2001 and 2003, but lets cuts for the wealthy expire to help pay for his plan. Those cuts were due to expire at the end of 2010. If Congress approves Obama's recommendations, the Bush tax cuts would expire only for couples making more than $250,000 per year.

The president's reserve fund for health care covers roughly two-thirds of the anticipated 10-year cost of universal health care -- projected at $1 trillion.

The administration will work with Congress to locate the remaining funds to finance the plan. The White House contends by directly telling Congress how much universal health coverage is projected to cost, it can devote more time to debating the methods of achieving coverage instead of getting bogged down in conflicting cost estimates.

The $634 billion down payment on expanding health care coverage would come in part from a $318 billion increase over 10 years in taxes on the wealthy, defined as couples making more than $250,000 per year and individuals making more than $200,000. The tax increase would occur by reducing the benefit the wealthy get on tax deductions.

The other half of the down payment on Obama's drive toward universal health care -- $318 billion -- would come from curtailing payments to hospitals and insurance companies under Medicare and drug payments under Medicaid.

The cost of the stimulus bill and the increased bailout support would push the deficit for this year to $1.75 trillion, nearly four times last year's record $455 billion and a percentage of the economy -- just over 12 percent -- not seen since World War II. The deficit would remain near $1 trillion over the next two years before dropping to $581 billion in 2012 and $533 billion in 2013, the year that Obama has pledged to cut the deficit he inherited in half.

Obama's blueprint awards domestic agencies budget increases, on average, of 7 percent in 2010 over 2009 levels. The Pentagon would get a 4 percent boost, to $534 billion next year, but would then get increases of 2 percent or less over the next several years.

Obama also asked for an additional $75 billion to cover the costs of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan through September, the end of the current budget year. The administration will also ask for $130 billion for Iraq and Afghanistan in 2010 and will budget the costs of operations in Iraq and Afghanistan at $50 billion annually over the next several years.

The budget also imposes higher taxes on carbon through a "cap and trade" system that generates $645 billion over 10 years in new revenue by creating an auction among utilities and companies where they purchase pollution credits. These credits cover the "price" of the pollution each utility or company producers. Those who produce less pollution can sell them to companies that produce more.

Of the $645 billion the administration intends to raise in pollution taxes, the president sets aside $120 billion for federal subsidies to develop alternative energy sources. The remainder of energy taxes will finance the "make work pay" tax credit, a $400 per individual and $800 per couple refund of their payroll taxes.

Here are some highlights from the budget:

Tax increases -- The budget will impose the Clinton-era tax rates of 36 percent and 39.6 percent for couples earning more than $250,000 and individuals earning more than $200,000. (Current policy imposes a 33 percent rate on income from $200,000 to $357,000, and a 35 percent rate above $357,000. Those rates would jump to 36 percent and 39.6 percent, respectively). This change would generate $338 billion over 10 years.

The budget would also limit tax deductions for itemized deductions for families earning more than $250,000 and individual making more than $200,000. This would generate $179 billion over 10 years.

The plans would change capital gains tax rates to 20 percent, up from 15 percent, also for individuals above $200,000 and families above $250,000. This would generate $118 billion.

Business tax increases -- The budget imposes $353 billion over 10 years in "revenue changes and loophole closures." The plan includes at least 14 different tax increases.

Tax cuts -- The budget includes a tax credit that would provide a refund on payroll taxes of up to $400 per individual and $800 per family. This costs $536 billion over 10 years.It expands the earned income tax credit, costing $32 billion over 10 years. It expands the child tax credit, costing $70 billion over 10 years. It expands IRA and 401k credits, costing $55 billion over 10 years.

Business tax cuts -- The budget eliminates capital gains for small business, costing $7 billion over 10 years. It makes the research and experimentation tax credit permanent, costing $74 billion over 10 years.

 

[SilverStone05]

They're saving you from yourself, silly.

Check it out: Lets spend $50 Bln to stabilize (subsidize...) the low/middle income housing market, but then cut the mortgage interest deduction for households over $250k. *IF* that provision passes, at a $250k income threshold, you're gonna see houses over $1MM tank another 50%.

At least the latest bill allows Washington DC residents to now use Federal funds for private schools. Wouldn't want those Congressional-kids to learn from, and what it's like in, the real world.

Un-Fucking real.

OMFG. These people are unreal.

I *refuse* to subsidize someone else's healthcare. Especially if they are fat or if they smoke. Hell with that.

 

[NSX-Stalker]

Unfortunately it appears to be a huge shit sammich... and we're all going to have to take a bite.

Either that or move to another country.. I'm thinking New Zealand.

 

[Cairo94507]

Pure redistribution of wealth. I went to school for 10 years at night while working full time as a police supervisor to earn my AA, BS, MPA and JD. By the way, I paid for my education 100% with my income as I also supported my family-no loans.

Now, my wife and I make good money-we worked hard to be able to earn what we earn. We have 1 credit card and pay it in full every month. If we don't have the $ we don't buy it-plain and simple.

Now we are having to give our hard earned $ to every piece of crap, lazy, uneducated, unskilled, mother fXXXXX in the United States. God forbid they earn their own way and buy their own home-WHAT? Come on now, we could never expect these people to help themselves. It is so much easier to stay in bed, use drugs, alcohol and collect money from every branch of government we ever heard of and some we probably have not heard of.

So the banks were trying to "help" these people out by "qualifying" them for loans they could not qualify for and never should have received. Then of course they can't make their payments, they default and go into foreclosure. So they are actually financially worse off then before they bought a home. I say the mortgage brokers, et al responsible for this mess should have to give up all of their possessions to help pay this mess off.

Oh and are these the same people going out committing all of the crimes?

Did I mention I came from a working class family and went to public schools? YEAH- F them all.

Sorry- just tired of having everyone taking money out of my wallet.

 

[john@johnhudakracing]

Pure redistribution of wealth.

+ 1

That is all American politics is about anymore.

If they gave me the money back they stole from me in the first place, I would happily have spent it this year.

 

[Ski_Banker]

Now we are having to give our hard earned $ to every piece of crap, lazy, uneducated, unskilled, mother fXXXXX in the United States. God forbid they earn their own way and buy their own home-WHAT? Come on now, we could never expect these people to help themselves. It is so much easier to stay in bed, use drugs, alcohol and collect money from every branch of government we ever heard of and some we probably have not heard of.

If ya can't beat 'em, join 'em. :biggrin:

Oh, wait... that's one of those "life lessons" our parents teach us, but good parenting is now for the birds.

 

[CL65 Captain]

Especially if they are fat or if they smoke. Hell with that.

I'm fat and I smoke!

 

[sahtt]

What happens when 51% of a democracy decide they want all their money from the other 49%? Look around.

The funniest thing about all of this is how all the "nutcases" said this would happen. Should have believed them. Let's cut the budget by 50%. But first let's blow 3.5 trillion. That's 3.5 X 1,000 X 1,000, X 1,000,000. And nobody even knows what the hell it's going for. It's not fixing the housing crisis.

The bank bail-out is one thing. At least we might get a return. What the hell is all this going for? Thanks to the union pay offs, we are putting 30-50 BILLION A MONTH IN TO A FURNACE thanks to GM. And for what?

If I live to a hundred I'll be paying this off for 70+ years.

How on God's green earth can you willingly enslave your own children in debt? You are taking 100 from your children to get 50 bucks today. This isn't fighting some war where we might get nuked otherwise. If this isn't taxation without representation I don't know what is. The people who are going to pay this all off aren't the ones who chose to spend it.

 

[john@johnhudakracing]

What happens when 51% of a democracy decide they want all their money from the other 49%? Look around.

It's that way now. Except it is probably more like 95% of the population with their hands into someone else's pockets. Politics is simply the study of wealth re-distribution.

The funniest thing about all of this is how all the "nutcases" said this would happen. Should have believed them.

Yeah. Obama is very much a tax and spend cookie cutter democrat. He's as transparent as they come.

His altruistic universal health care idea, if the support exists to get it implemented- will be a complete disaster. I predict it will cast our system, widely regarded as one of the best in the world... straight into mediocrity. Let's be frank. Look at social security... you want the same people that are now managing your retirement benefits telling you if you can get a heart transplant or not?

Government programs, like Medicaid were a disaster. Nationalizing the entire system will inevitably lead to higher taxes, increase utilization, and reduce health care quality on an individual basis. The over-regulation will impeded innovation in treatment and research, and probably lead to rationing of essential health care services and treatments.

The kicker- you won't get a choice. While you would think that people should be free to opt-out of goverment managed health insurance, the pen pushers would never have it so you'll be stuck.

If I live to a hundred I'll be paying this off for 70+ years.

If you are worried about the next generations, don't- because sure as they sun sets they don't. Administrations comes and go. I like this excerpt:

The $1.75 trillion deficit projected for this year would represent 12.3 percent of the gross domestic product, double the previous post-war record of 6 percent in 1983, when Ronald Reagan was president, and the highest level since the deficit totaled 21.5 percent of GDP in 1945, at the end of World War II.

12% of our GDP!!! Can't we let Asians do our math????

 

[leonphelpss11]

What do you guys suggest they oughta do then?? Plenty of opinions about how crappy it is, but what do you guys think they should do? What about the people that really aren't fat lazy druggies? Some people didn't ahve the same opportunities others have. Would you cut their healthcare bc of the fat lazy druggies? I know a girl that dropped out of school bc her dad left her family so her mom and her had to work full time to support her 2 younger sisters.. What if she gets sick? You suggest they should kick her to the curb? Some people aren't very fortunate and just have very crappy luck..

 

[Ski_Banker]

What do you guys suggest they oughta do then?? Plenty of opinions about how crappy it is, but what do you guys think they should do? What about the people that really aren't fat lazy druggies? Some people didn't ahve the same opportunities others have. Would you cut their healthcare bc of the fat lazy druggies? I know a girl that dropped out of school bc her dad left her family so her mom and her had to work full time to support her 2 younger sisters.. What if she gets sick? You suggest they should kick her to the curb? Some people aren't very fortunate and just have very crappy luck..

1. Good luck, and bad luck, will always happen.
2. There's always going to be poor people.
3. There's always going to be people with wealth and advantages.

If you try to eliminate the effects of these -flatten society- you get socialism.

 

[KooLaid]

What do you guys suggest they oughta do then?? Plenty of opinions about how crappy it is, but what do you guys think they should do? What about the people that really aren't fat lazy druggies? Some people didn't ahve the same opportunities others have. Would you cut their healthcare bc of the fat lazy druggies? I know a girl that dropped out of school bc her dad left her family so her mom and her had to work full time to support her 2 younger sisters.. What if she gets sick? You suggest they should kick her to the curb? Some people aren't very fortunate and just have very crappy luck..

What do you suggest?

 

[john@johnhudakracing]

What do you guys suggest they oughta do then?? Plenty of opinions about how crappy it is, but what do you guys think they should do?

They being goverment shouldn't do anything.

What about the people that really aren't fat lazy druggies? Some people didn't ahve the same opportunities others have. Would you cut their healthcare bc of the fat lazy druggies? I know a girl that dropped out of school bc her dad left her family so her mom and her had to work full time to support her 2 younger sisters.. What if she gets sick? You suggest they should kick her to the curb? Some people aren't very fortunate and just have very crappy luck..

It's called charity.

Their is a role for it, and as you saw during Katrina it doesn't start and end with government administration and bureaucracy. We are the most generous civilization in the history of planet earth. Don't worry. Millions of people willingly donate everyday because they are struck by just such a sob story.

 

[leonphelpss11]

What do you suggest?

No idea, I'm just going with the flow of things right now to see how it plays out.. Nothing I can do about it. Plenty of opinions on how crappy it is, so I'm just curious how other people if they were the advisers would advise Obama on what to do.. It's very easy to sit here n criticize him but not so easy to make decisions like him. I'm not saying I agree with everything he does and I do agree with a lot of what everyone is saying but I'm curious to what you guys think should be done??

Do you think the economy can bail it self out without help from the government? I don't think so.. Then again I could be very wrong but this is just my opinion.

Charity doesn't always work out. A community hospital here is struggling to stay open as an in/out patient clinic instead of just becoming an out-patient clinic.. Sucks for a lot of the people that didn't qualify for medicaid but are truly good people.. We don't have any generous people at all here for the healthcare. They are however very willing to donate their entire life's worth to the church though (a couple donated 2000 acres+5 million to a church when they passed away).

I think the charity thing worked for Katrina bc it was one specific area that needed help. I'm talking about the entire nation; do you really think there are enough people to donate enough for the entire nation?

 

[alum04org]

"I think the charity thing worked for Katrina bc it was one specific area that needed help. I'm talking about the entire nation; do you really think there are enough people to donate enough for the entire nation?"


No Sir, do not. The inmates have taken control of the asylum (known as Wash, DC, and +congress+).


Keep your chin up.

 

[john@johnhudakracing]

Charity doesn't always work out. A community hospital here is struggling to stay open as an in/out patient clinic instead of just becoming an out-patient clinic.. Sucks for a lot of the people that didn't qualify for medicaid but are truly good people..

So because people didn't quality for a goverment managed program such as medicaid, that in turn becomes charities failure to provide for them?

We don't have any generous people at all here for the healthcare. They are however very willing to donate their entire life's worth to the church though (a couple donated 2000 acres+5 million to a church when they passed away).

Even in death, I am sure they paid some stupid amount of tax which went to government. It probably bought a missile test, or in the piggy bank for the 18 new helicopters needed by the secret service, or for food stamps so some crystal meth addict could buy munchies, or some such non-sense.

"I think the charity thing worked for Katrina bc it was one specific area that needed help.

I was being sarcastic. If the Katrina response is the new success bar for federal aid, than we have a long road ahead of us in the next great depression.

I'm talking about the entire nation; do you really think there are enough people to donate enough for the entire nation?

Oh, so let's do it for them? I think we all know how well that worked out in former Soviet Russia.

Look, the principle behind the public money tree is simple. Their comes a tipping point where the math doesn't work.. and everyone as individuals would just be far and above better off if I just cut down the tree. Let's say I gave you a 28-40% pay raise tommorow morning by not taking your hard earned money in the first place...... Or, let's say I didn't regulate the crap out of your small business and make you pay stupid amounts for unemployment and health...... do you think you could then maybe spare some change?

The basic role of goverment is to provide for only the most essential services. Some how in America that has evolved to mean that budgets are meaningless. Here everything is priority zero, and deserves an indefinite supply of money from the magical money tree forest. You know what I think the number one problem in America is: we have too much money, and throw it at every problem we have instead of using our primitive monkey brains to do the job and solve our problems the right away.

I am all about results, and I do not believe that cycling perfectly good cash through the government inefficiency washing machine is the best way to get anything done- except maybe perhaps creating government jobs which it seems to do spectacularly well.

Here's what people forget about health care. Cool MRI machines and expensive specialists: They are !@#$% expensive to begin with, and always will be. People are living longer, they are consuming very expensive treatments (most I might add being completely unneccessarily), and generally above all- people like to live and are willing to spend big to do it and/or achieve their desired quality of life.


Enough with the rant, here are some facts:

• Last year people spent 2.5 trillion, or as I like to put it $2,500,000,000,000 on health care.
• Their are 303,824,640 people in the united states.
• That is an average cost of $8228.43 per person, ~$686/month

So, we can do one of two things to get a different result in our math. We can choose to alter the population (see other over-population thread on nsxprime), or lower the spending.


We are doing neither, back to the facts:

• Health care spending is up 9% in 2008, an on-going trend. By 2050 it will consume 1/3 of America's GDP (projected at $35.2 trillion) or 11.73 trillion dollars- $11,730,000,000,000
• By 2050 we will have a population of 518,903,000
• That is an average cost of $22605.38 per person, ~$1883/month
• This is the most conservative statistic available I could find.

You see where all of this is going? No where. Fairly Land. If you make minimum wage in 2050 then the answer is no- you can't afford your heart transplant. Sorry. Better luck next time, maybe you will get re-incarnated as a Jelly Fish.

The universal heath care trend is every pandering politician's pipe dream. Do the math anyway you like. In the US, all the people that spend the most on health care- the baby boomers are all about to retire, he is an idiot!!!

 

[BD]

By end of 2009 fiscal year, the nation will be $13 trillion in debt.

Ever heard of the Manchurian Candidate?

A guy came from no where, next thing you know, he's our leader. People are so in love with him, and they don't know why, they will do every thing he commands.

Little these people understand, Obama help raising money for African dictator during their power grabbing struggle. He supported ACORN, which was one of the cause of our current crisis. He belong to a party believes nothing but the well being of worthless citizens and Global Warming. The current Democratic party is so into their liberal social agendas they're willing to loose our nation over it. They're in a lahlah land.

Obama is so in love with himself, he rides the Air Force one like we ride our bicycle. Talk about wasting tax payer's dollars.

If we keep on tagging more debt to the $13 trillion, the dollar will collapse, the world power will shift to Asian.

Hilary Clinton's little trip to China was a joke, it was no more than getting a "feel" to see if we can borrow more money from them. The Dems want the money so bad for their social engineering programs they stopped yelling at China about Human Rights (which is also a ridiculous movement).

Keep at it Pelosi, next time Obama speaks, make sure you dress like a short bus riding cheer leader and bring some pong pongs. If you're going to cause additional economic suffering, at least entertain us.

 

[NSX GT]

You know what I say to that:

Puc_that_biach

 

[BD]

Oh yeah, Joe Biden is going to be the head of Stimulus audit squad.

This is a guy who can't spell, count, and can't figure out how to manage his own money. He's net worth is less than $200k after how many years in the senate? No wonder he's all bitter!!!

He once said "Dick Cheney is the most dangerous vise president EVER," let's see how is the most dangerous one at the end of 2011.

 

[Hasdrubal]

http://thehill.com/dick-morris/its-obama-spreading-panic-2009-02-24.html

This article explains it pretty well.

Nick

 

[SilverStone05]

I'm fat and I smoke!

You're not fat...and you pay for your own healthcare!

 

[VampNSXX]

The part that piss me off most is that all this money help who? not me or any one I work with. I pay my house and all my bills on time every time. maybe If I just don't pay nothing from now on I will see help from the government.

Fuck then we need to have a revolution. Take them down and start a need one were the working man gets the tax brake not the lazzy man and the super rich man.


AHHHHHHHH