What happened to all of the doom and gloom economic threads?

Status
Not open for further replies.
she is 100% correct


Bachmann: Obama’s spending is a ‘War on the Young’



Barack Obama is waging a “War on the Young” with the $6 trillion in national debt he has added to the national debt since taking office in 2009, according to Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann.

“That is a war on the young,” Bachmann said. “That isn’t caring about the future. That isn’t caring about America.”

Borrowing money in such an environment is a serious “generational injustice,” according to Bachmann.

“It is the greatest transfer of wealth in human history,” Bachmann said. “How does it help the poor for when government bureaucrats are earning higher salaries and bigger pensions than the average person?”

Bachmann claimed that 70 cents of every dollar intended to help the poor that gets spent by the federal government goes to benefit bureaucrats in Washington.

“That’s three dollars in food stamps for the needy and seven dollars for pensions and salaries for the bureaucrats,” Bachmann said. “How does this show that our president cares about the poor?”

She then turned her ire at what she considers the excesses of the president’s lifestyle and the $1.4 billion the gets spent on the White House. Among the examples of Obama’s taxpayer-funded excesses include his five chefs on Air Force One, the two projectionists at the White House who are on hand should the First Family want to watch a movie and the person paid to watch the Obama family dog.
 

NIGGER POOP and NIGGER CURRY getting their "info" from same source

Tee Hee











































































explain-the-image-5.jpg
 
the NIGGERS post lies and KNOW FULL well their NIGGER buds will swallow it hook line and stinker
 
OBAMAVILLES: Gypsy Encampments of the Hollywood Freeway:



On our way to downtown Los Angeles Saturday night for the annual Churchill Dinner of the Claremont Institute at the venerable Biltmore Hotel, my wife Sheryl and I took the Hollywood Freeway, a route we had taken uncountable times before.

Only something was different. Small encampments of homeless had been set up on the edge of the freeway. We were used to them under freeway bridges, but these were more elaborate, makeshift tents and blankets positioned on slopes along the freeway, so that, we speculated, they were in full view of the constant passing traffic. That way the violence frequently visited on the homeless by themselves and by others would at least partly be discouraged.

I was reminded of Victor Hanson’s poignant descriptions of the California Central Valley and also of when I lived in Southern Spain and would see impoverished gypsy encampments along the roads to Grenada and Seville. But that was decades ago and that part of Spain, Andalucia, was desperately poor then, struggling to play catch up with the rest of Europe. It did — for a while anyway.

The Hollywood Freeway was not so simple. This was a parade of the haves and have-nots, Mercedes and Lexuses, streaming past the tattered homeless: Obama’s America.

How’s that hopey-changey stuff workin’ out for ya?
 


“Here's the truth that the president won't tell you. Of every dollar that you hold in your hands, 70 cents of that dollar that's supposed to go to the poor doesn't. It actually goes to benefit the bureaucrats in Washington, D.C. — 70 cents on the dollar. That's how the president's caring works in practice. So $3 in food stamps for the needy, $7 in salaries and pensions for the bureaucrats who are supposed to be taking care of the poor. So with all due respect, I ask you, how does this show that our president cares about the poor?” — Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.), speaking at the Conservative Political Action Conference, March 16, 2013

...It took us a while to track down the original source of this claim, but it turns out that he believes he has been frequently misquoted. So, with all due respect to Rep. Bachmann, it seems worthwhile to set the record straight. Remember that child’s game of telephone, in which the whispered information gets increasingly distorted? That’s what happened here. ... Indeed, the 2013 budget documents submitted to Congress by the Agriculture Department, which manages SNAP, shows that less than 6 percent of the program is spent on administrative costs. Only 166 people manage the $82 billion food-stamp program — many outside Washington — and the budget document says that staff salaries amount to one-third of 1 percent of USDA’s budget for food and nutrition programs. Considering such statistics are easily available to a member of Congress, let alone his or her staff, it’s a wonder she never bothered to check. She just assumed “government bureaucrats” were consuming funds reserved for poor people.

A Bachmann spokesman did not respond to a request for comment...

...So Bachmann yet again earns Four Pinocchios. But there really aren’t enough Pinocchios for such misleading use of statistics in a major speech.

At CPAC, facts have a liberal bias and are to be rejected at every opportunity. Lies like this just make Michelle a better conservative.
 
Last edited:
if 166 peeps can manage 82 billion then

WE ARE WASTING TENS OF BILLIONS ON ALL OTHER PROGRAMS


Further, the original document/study includes PENSIONS etc

In addition, ASSUMING the number is correct, and I for one second, Don't believe it......it doesn't account for all other costs on state local etc level


EVEN YOU DONT BELIEVE IT
 
if 166 peeps can manage 82 billion then

WE ARE WASTING TENS OF BILLIONS ON ALL OTHER PROGRAMS


Further, the original document/study includes PENSIONS etc

In addition, ASSUMING the number is correct, and I for one second, Don't believe it......it doesn't account for all other costs on state local etc level


EVEN YOU DONT BELIEVE IT

According to Michelle Bachmann's math, SNAP administrators have an annual salary of $345 million dollars.

And yes of course there are state-level SNAP employees but state employees aren't part of the federal SNAP budget, are they?
 
if 166 peeps can manage 82 billion then

WE ARE WASTING TENS OF BILLIONS ON ALL OTHER PROGRAMS


Further, the original document/study includes PENSIONS etc

In addition, ASSUMING the number is correct, and I for one second, Don't believe it......it doesn't account for all other costs on state local etc level


EVEN YOU DONT BELIEVE IT

So provide the "correct" numbers then, dizzyboobies...

:rolleyes:
 
I believe that BOO ROW CRAPS and related get 70% of the BUDGET

Case closed

That WAPO, a DUMMY mouthpiece leapt in to attack.....shows ITS TRUE
 
I believe that BOO ROW CRAPS and related get 70% of the BUDGET

Case closed

That WAPO, a DUMMY mouthpiece leapt in to attack.....shows ITS TRUE

FEEEEELinggsss... nothing more than feeeeeeeeeeliinnngs...

This is the entire wingnut position:

"I don't care what the real numbers are, I 'feel' that they're different, so in my head, they are".
 
I posted it in post #29,935, chucklehead. It's on this page, right in front of you.

I asked for the WAPO "piece"

But you know that

Instead, you pretend you want me to read the 800 page shit

Post the WAPO hit piece
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top