Have you read the NY Times recently?  Apparently our government has taken in 2.1 trillion dollars of tax revenue over the past year.  The most Clinton took in was 1.5 trillion.  40% less. Some people say it is because the wealthy reinvested their surplus (non-taxed) money into the stock market.  Some guess that the tax revenues that investment generated far surpassed the revenues from any tax increase.  Some also think that it may help explain why the Dow remains over 11,000.  Some speculate that they may have helped produce new jobs.  I hear unemployment is around 4.5%.  And there is no tech bubble about to burst this time.  I also overheard that this has cut into the deficit more than any of the most optimistic estimates.

2.1 Trillion.  Dow over 11,000.  4.5% unemployment. Stanima is right.  This economy sucks!

is supposed to grow or anything. The fact that it has stayed at the same level for 5 years means nothing. Investing in the stock market is like stuffing money in my mattress. Awesome!

My 401K is swelling!  How is your's doing?  Oh well, the world needs ditch diggers too.

that you do not know the definition of the word "growth." My guess is that your 401K is invested in the Butt Plug Fund if you are swelling. For the learning impaired please realize that "near record levels" means it ain't grown nothing. Consider that if your house were worth near its record level, it would suck.

Please explain how these tax cuts will "grow us out" of the whole Bush put us in again? 'Cause the only stuff I've seen that says that is old neocon stuff from 5 years ago -- they've since stopped trying to even peddle that -- Maybe because THEY"VE BEEN PROVEN WRONG? ...Like everything else...

Your sharade is tiresome -- we're not dumb and we're not blind my friend. It's all more fucked up than ever...you really think we don't see that?

If you take in $2.1 billion in taxes and spend $2.6 billion dollars, how rich are you?  Answer: you're bankrupt, or would be if you weren't the government.    

You cite statistics with the expertise of somebody who failed high-school math.  Moreover, what happened to your love of small government here?  If the government is taking in 600 billion more, isn't somebody getting gouged?  Or are you a strict believer in the "other-guy" tax?  

I'll tell you where the extra revenue had to come from: the oil industry.  It's not that it's record profits are overtaxed either, their taxes are a drop in the sea from what their making.  It means, though, that you and I are still getting taxed every time we go to the pump.  I haven't been spared a thing for taxes; in fact, I'm worse off than before.  More than likely, you are too, and you're just too dumb to see it.  

It might look like oil companies are being "taxed" but I suspect what is really happening with that much needed "tax revenue" is that they have "bought 10,000 shares of the US, Inc."  Along with the Chinese.  You think oil prices are ever going down now?

I've shut my car down.  I'm walking everywhere now.  Yes, now finally since the Clinton administration, I'm beginning to do better.  

Maybe you're right.  After 5 years of damage by the Bush administration, maybe the economy has finally stabilized.

Who was it that had to literally shut down the government to force Clinton's hand? Think really hard before you answer.

Which President came into a booming economy (look at the 4th quarter numner in 92)with a peace dividend and an entire new technological field about to open up (no thanks to him) and which came into a declining economy (look at the 4th qtr #s in 2000)with a massive attack on the horizon from a terrorist group that grew and thrived in the 90s?  Think really hard before you answer.

Yea, the #s are so strong you can't deny them.  So you dream up some childish reasons (BIG OIL, BIG OIL) to explain why it really isn't a good thing.  Guess what.  IT WON'T WORK IN NOVEMBER!!!.  It's July now.  You guys should start to be feeling that inevidible sense of defeat that occurs every other November.

You fellas do make me smile!

I bring you solid data and your response is "IT'S FUCKED UP!  EVERYTHING IS FUCKED UP" as a counter argument.  Very impressive rebuttal.

Have you noticed that Democrats never seem to bring up the economy anymore?  They might know something that you don't.

You just can't admit it. Your rightwinger mantra is dead my friend. It does not work and everybodys starting to see it.

I suggest you start talking about Gay Marriage and Immigration to get off the subject because you are looking like a fool with this stuff.

Oh, BTW, the economy is also fucked up -- 5 mil more people in poverty, 4 mil more without health insurance, wages are stagnant, jobs are stagnant, the deficit is still through the roof -- all since Bush & the neoconman agenda.

Plus you posted incorrect information as usual -- Clintons Fed Rev was 2.25 tril in his last year in office -- adjusted for inflation, and the difference is huge. Bushes 2.1 tril is said to be temporary -- Clintons went up every year in office. Yawwwn....we are so tired of the lies.

You can't admit you are wrong. You will stick to your same tired old dogma even in the face of facts that prove you wrong....like I said, you remind me of the OJ Jury...

It's fucked up because I say so. I love it! Where are you getting your info?  The DailyKos?  You are too funny.  

The Democrats seem to know this too since they haven't mentioned the economy since 2002.  Remember when they tried to create their own misery index in 2004 because the real misery index showed the economy was rolling?  You must have been a little embarrassed over that.  Since then, not a peep!  And guess what is going to happen in November when they tell you taxes need to be raised?  You don't need a crystal ball for that one.

Look, I know things may be tough for you.  Just pick up an extra shift or two at Chucky Cheese and you'll make rent.  If you want, I'll let you wash my SUV for a few extra bucks.  

Here are some numbers for you again so you don't say that all I did was attack you and not your argument.
REVENUES: 2.1 TRILLION
DOW: 11,000+
UNEMPLOYMENT: 4.6%

HA-HA-HA

You don't face the issue or answer the questions.  Where did the $600 billion dollars in revenue come from and who is paying those extra taxes?  And are you ahead when you're still spending 20 percent more than your revenue?  Just answer the questions, RightWinger.  

Forced Clinton's hand?  Idiocy!  Republicans put a knife to their political throats and then chickened out.  Their popularity fell to toilet-pipe level, Clinton's soared.  I remember that bit of comedy.  Forced his hand? He could have pulled a Reagan or a Bush and just let the deficit go, and hope the Republicans would attempt suicide again.  

Long before that, Clinton appointed LLoyd Benson to be Treasury Secretary, who managed to finance the debt with short-term bonds, before the "contract" Republicans took out on themselves.

The rest of your points are just as evasive, ill-informed and stupid. You might not like it if Republicans do pull off the election in November.  I believe ultimately you won't fare very well in life full of what you now consider to be good news.      

With all due respect, you have a very selective memory.  The Republicans came to Congress on the platform of balancing the budget.  The shutting down of government worked!  Yes, Clinton won a PR battle and said "Please feel my pain", but the Republicans got exactly what they wanted.  There were no annual surpluses before this.  Lloyd Benson or no LLoyd Benson, R.I.P.

This was the beginning of Clinton's triangualtion. The Republicans got what they wanted and Clinton got credit for it and all of a sudden became a "moderate" after two disasterous years governing as a liberal.

If that isn't true- Tell me what he successfully stopped the Gingrich led congress from accomplishing?  They did everyting they said they would do.  Clinton's only stand was vetoing a  partial birth abortion ban (lovely).

Sorry, but them's the facts!

What would be funny if it weren't so pathetic is that you site three pieces of some-what average (to below average information) as proof of how good the economy is while ignoring all the really bad stuff that effects most people. That is why the consumer confort index is MINUS TEN (as of 7/9) and has not been in PLUS territory since 4/2/02 when it was +1. http://www.pollingreport.com/consumer.htm

It is fucked up because REALITY says so, not me. But you refuse to admit it. I am not making this shit up:

* The Total debt when from 5 trillion to 9 trillion
* 5 million more people are in poverty
* 4.5 million have lost their health insurance
* Wages have gone down
* Inflation has gone up
* People are working longer hours for less
* He first created the largest deficit in history and now braggs that it came down to only the 4th largest in history (but is projected to go back up in coming years)
* His job growth finally made in into PLUS territory last year and has been far less than inspiring compared to Clintons or even Reagans

You gonna try to tell me this is NOT FUCKED UP? Okay Mr. O'Rielly...if you say so...

You are so tied to your "belief" that you cannot see the forrest for the trees. Either that or you are intentionally being dishonest.

I feel sorry for such a miserable soul either way.

Oh, and by the way, the reason nobody is saying how bad things are is because some things are self evident -- you don't have to say them. Like the fact that Bush is probably the biggest failure of a president we've EVER HAD!

And you still defend him! You're a freak.

If you spend 20 percent more than your revenue in a year, is that good?  If you make $100 thousand more but spend $120 more in a year, without any added assets, are you better off?  

And where is this extra revenue coming from?  After tax cuts?  If anyone told you three minus one equals four, would you take them at their word?  Where's your distrust of government here?   I know you wouldn't take that without question from Bill Clinton.  Don't you feel the least bit alarmed that you've been told what you want to hear?  That by cutting revenues you really increase revenues?  

Who's being gouged, or are they really being gouged?  

Another question: how good can an economy be if it requires the stimulas of 5 years of record deficits to show good stats?  (And ignore the really bad ones like wages.)  

I have answers to what you said about Clinton, but  I think you should answer these without referring to him.

Clinton NEVER balanced the budget.
Let's put is more another way. During the Clinton years, the budget NEVER showed a surplus.

It came close ONE year, but the National Public Debt INCREASED EVERY YEAR.

Stanima-  Thc Clinton tax increases happened before the 94 Republican revolution.  Those tax increases had something to do with bringing the Republicans in.  He promised a middle class tax cut(don't we always hear that from them?) and "worked really hard at it" but broke his word.

Look, you seem to have no grasp of logic or facts. You usually just repeat the latest diatribe you read from the DailyKos.  You're waaay out of your league.  Why don't you sit this one out?  Or better yet.  You can post funny pictures like your friend Jeremy.


Zinaval-  I brought up Clinton as a direct rebuttal to you bringing him up.  And please stop with the liberal knee-jerk "Don't bring him up" response.  He was PUSA for 8 years and his policies, domestic and foreign, still affect us 6 short years later.  We don't live in a vaccuum.  Your revisionist memory of the 90s is jarring! I've given you two responses about the budget being balanced with indisputable facts.  If it doesn't fit your prism, sorry.  We'll move on.

Your prism has officially found the difference between the government receiving good revenues and bad revenues.  Clinton had good revenues and Bush had BAD revenues.  It's ridiculous.  All those revenues came from investment.  Clinton's through the new tech sector (The Fed knew it was an illusion and based on nothing. That is why he kept raising interest rates. "Unbridaled enthusiasm") and Bush through the tax cuts.  Tax increases slow growth.  Less income, less growth, less revenues. Tax decreases increase growth.  More income, more investment, more jobs, more growth.  When exactly did lower taxes ever hurt the economy?

The budget will never be balanced until we DECREASE SPENDING.  Obviously, the Republicans are no better than the Democrats with this so it aint gonna happen.  The last two actual cuts were the military under Bush41 and Clinton(Huge mistake) and welfare reform(Huge success).  Clinton vetoed that twice before he signed it.

The economy is more than just a deficit.  Are we able to produce good jobs? Yes.  Are the markets strong? Yes. Is the GDP steadily growing? Yes.  Is consumer confidence high? Yes.  Are we keeping inflation under control? Yes.

Oil is a problem but India and China's demand has increases dramatically.  This began under Clinton's 2nd term and it is not going to stop.  We either go Nuke or drill.  Hybrids and windmills just won't cut it.

Zin that he is way out of his league:

Very good reading comprehension though.  

PS-  There are like a billion different photos online for you to cut and paste from.  You used Ralph Wiggum twice!  Very creative.  I would have gone with something like Col. Klink or Sgt. Schultz from Hogan's Heroes (Republicans=Nazis).  For the stupid theme you could have gone with Chris from Family Guy or maybe Randy from My Name is Earl.  You get an "A" for effort though.

gets all his facts:

Chimpy's budget is an even bigger clusterfuck than we thought.