Any predictions for tomorrows employment report?

Markle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Markle wrote:REAL unemployment, 15.1%.

An improvement, though modest, on what he inherited. Bush inherited 8.1% U6 unemployment. It was at 15.4% when he left.

What was the average U6 unemployment rate during the administration of President George Walker Bush?

What has been the average during the administration of President Barack Hussein Obama?

So what youre saying is that President Obama has dropped the U6 unemployment rate all the way from 15.4% down to 15.1% over 3 1/2 years. Wow...at that rate of decline, when would President Obama have it back down to 8.1%?

Markle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Markle wrote:Revenues to IRS AVERAGED $1.875 TRILLION during Bush's first 3 years in office, before the BUSH TAX CUTS took effect. Gee...that's nearly President Barack Hussein Obama $1.3 TRILLION DEFICIT each year since Obama took office.

Hey, Markle, how long does it take for a tax cut to "take effect"? No copy and paste, please. Just explain to me, in your own words, how long you feel it takes for a tax cut to "take effect" and why.

Is there something in my post which was not clear?

As you know...it was the Democrat driven housing/mortgage/finiancial meltdown which caused the recession and spike in unemployment.

boards of FL wrote:

Markle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Markle wrote:Revenues to IRS AVERAGED $1.875 TRILLION during Bush's first 3 years in office, before the BUSH TAX CUTS took effect. Gee...that's nearly President Barack Hussein Obama $1.3 TRILLION DEFICIT each year since Obama took office.

Hey, Markle, how long does it take for a tax cut to "take effect"? No copy and paste, please. Just explain to me, in your own words, how long you feel it takes for a tax cut to "take effect" and why.

Is there something in my post which was not clear?

As you know...it was the Democrat driven housing/mortgage/finiancial meltdown which caused the recession and spike in unemployment.

I'll ask the question again, Markle. How long does it take for a tax cut to "take effect", and why? This isn't a trick question or anything. I'm simply asking you to explain yourself. Can you do that without copy and paste? Are you capable of staying on task and responding to that which I am asking of you?

reaper1948 wrote:

Markle wrote:

ButtMan wrote:

Markle wrote:

As you know...it was the Democrat driven housing/mortgage/finiancial meltdown which caused the recession and spike in unemployment.

That's just the oddest thing how that works.
The meltdown happened several years after Clinton had left office but he was to blame. But the unemployment now is happening several years after Bush left office but he's not to blame.
I dunno, bud. Sure looks like the democrat is always guilty and the republican is always innocent.
But you know what, you may be right because it was always the same way with Gorgeous George too. No matter how many times he hit somebody below the belt, the crowd kept on a cheerin him. And the same thing with his oppoent George Gourgeous. His crowd kept a cheerin him too.
Funny thing though how both Georgeous George and George Gorgeous got paid for being who they were. But the crowd had to foot the bill for all of it.

I did not say President William Jefferson Clinton was solely to blame but cute try! He expanded the programs and, as you well know, Chris Dodd and Barney Frank continued the destruction.

"Professional wrasslin" from 50 years ago? Whew, you are desperate.

You know though there was one hell of a surplus in social security when Clinton left office until Bush raided it on his first attack on Iraq.

I never was much of a fan of Clinton until I started reading what he really accomplished in office and Bush destroyed most of it. And I used to be a repug.

boards of FL wrote:

Markle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Markle wrote:Revenues to IRS AVERAGED $1.875 TRILLION during Bush's first 3 years in office, before the BUSH TAX CUTS took effect. Gee...that's nearly President Barack Hussein Obama $1.3 TRILLION DEFICIT each year since Obama took office.

Hey, Markle, how long does it take for a tax cut to "take effect"? No copy and paste, please. Just explain to me, in your own words, how long you feel it takes for a tax cut to "take effect" and why.

Is there something in my post which was not clear?

As you know...it was the Democrat driven housing/mortgage/financial meltdown which caused the recession and spike in unemployment.

I'll ask the question again, Markle. How long does it take for a tax cut to "take effect", and why? This isn't a trick question or anything. I'm simply asking you to explain yourself. Can you do that without copy and paste? Are you capable of staying on task and responding to that which I am asking of you?

Markle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Markle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Markle wrote:Revenues to IRS AVERAGED $1.875 TRILLION during Bush's first 3 years in office, before the BUSH TAX CUTS took effect. Gee...that's nearly President Barack Hussein Obama $1.3 TRILLION DEFICIT each year since Obama took office.

Hey, Markle, how long does it take for a tax cut to "take effect"? No copy and paste, please. Just explain to me, in your own words, how long you feel it takes for a tax cut to "take effect" and why.

Is there something in my post which was not clear?

As you know...it was the Democrat driven housing/mortgage/financial meltdown which caused the recession and spike in unemployment.

I'll ask the question again, Markle. How long does it take for a tax cut to "take effect", and why? This isn't a trick question or anything. I'm simply asking you to explain yourself. Can you do that without copy and paste? Are you capable of staying on task and responding to that which I am asking of you?

As you well know, it depends on the circumstances.

"Tax Cuts" will begin to affect the economy BEFORE they are put in place as we near the November election and it becomes more and more obvious that we will no longer suffer under President Barack Hussein Obama, his massive spending, taxes, ObamaCare and egregious regulations.

Markle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Markle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Markle wrote:Revenues to IRS AVERAGED $1.875 TRILLION during Bush's first 3 years in office, before the BUSH TAX CUTS took effect. Gee...that's nearly President Barack Hussein Obama $1.3 TRILLION DEFICIT each year since Obama took office.

Hey, Markle, how long does it take for a tax cut to "take effect"? No copy and paste, please. Just explain to me, in your own words, how long you feel it takes for a tax cut to "take effect" and why.

Is there something in my post which was not clear?

As you know...it was the Democrat driven housing/mortgage/financial meltdown which caused the recession and spike in unemployment.

I'll ask the question again, Markle. How long does it take for a tax cut to "take effect", and why? This isn't a trick question or anything. I'm simply asking you to explain yourself. Can you do that without copy and paste? Are you capable of staying on task and responding to that which I am asking of you?

As you well know, it depends on the circumstances.

"Tax Cuts" will begin to affect the economy BEFORE they are put in place as we near the November election and it becomes more and more obvious that we will no longer suffer under President Barack Hussein Obama, his massive spending, taxes, ObamaCare and egregious regulations.

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:

Markle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Markle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Markle wrote:Revenues to IRS AVERAGED $1.875 TRILLION during Bush's first 3 years in office, before the BUSH TAX CUTS took effect. Gee...that's nearly President Barack Hussein Obama $1.3 TRILLION DEFICIT each year since Obama took office.

Hey, Markle, how long does it take for a tax cut to "take effect"? No copy and paste, please. Just explain to me, in your own words, how long you feel it takes for a tax cut to "take effect" and why.

Is there something in my post which was not clear?

As you know...it was the Democrat driven housing/mortgage/financial meltdown which caused the recession and spike in unemployment.

I'll ask the question again, Markle. How long does it take for a tax cut to "take effect", and why? This isn't a trick question or anything. I'm simply asking you to explain yourself. Can you do that without copy and paste? Are you capable of staying on task and responding to that which I am asking of you?

As you well know, it depends on the circumstances.

"Tax Cuts" will begin to affect the economy BEFORE they are put in place as we near the November election and it becomes more and more obvious that we will no longer suffer under President Barack Hussein Obama, his massive spending, taxes, ObamaCare and egregious regulations.

I think you are being rather presumptuous about Mitt Romney's chances. It is going to be fun to watch you the day after the election. You may be making anti-Obama rants all the way until January 2017, LOL. I hope you don't run out of steam before then.

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:

Markle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Markle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Markle wrote:Revenues to IRS AVERAGED $1.875 TRILLION during Bush's first 3 years in office, before the BUSH TAX CUTS took effect. Gee...that's nearly President Barack Hussein Obama $1.3 TRILLION DEFICIT each year since Obama took office.

Hey, Markle, how long does it take for a tax cut to "take effect"? No copy and paste, please. Just explain to me, in your own words, how long you feel it takes for a tax cut to "take effect" and why.

Is there something in my post which was not clear?

As you know...it was the Democrat driven housing/mortgage/financial meltdown which caused the recession and spike in unemployment.

I'll ask the question again, Markle. How long does it take for a tax cut to "take effect", and why? This isn't a trick question or anything. I'm simply asking you to explain yourself. Can you do that without copy and paste? Are you capable of staying on task and responding to that which I am asking of you?

As you well know, it depends on the circumstances.

"Tax Cuts" will begin to affect the economy BEFORE they are put in place as we near the November election and it becomes more and more obvious that we will no longer suffer under President Barack Hussein Obama, his massive spending, taxes, ObamaCare and egregious regulations.

I think you are being rather presumptuous about Mitt Romney's chances. It is going to be fun to watch you the day after the election. You may be making anti-Obama rants all the way until January 2017, LOL. I hope you don't run out of steam before then.

boards of FL wrote:

Markle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Markle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Markle wrote:Revenues to IRS AVERAGED $1.875 TRILLION during Bush's first 3 years in office, before the BUSH TAX CUTS took effect. Gee...that's nearly President Barack Hussein Obama $1.3 TRILLION DEFICIT each year since Obama took office.

Hey, Markle, how long does it take for a tax cut to "take effect"? No copy and paste, please. Just explain to me, in your own words, how long you feel it takes for a tax cut to "take effect" and why.

Is there something in my post which was not clear?

As you know...it was the Democrat driven housing/mortgage/financial meltdown which caused the recession and spike in unemployment.

I'll ask the question again, Markle. How long does it take for a tax cut to "take effect", and why? This isn't a trick question or anything. I'm simply asking you to explain yourself. Can you do that without copy and paste? Are you capable of staying on task and responding to that which I am asking of you?

As you well know, it depends on the circumstances.

"Tax Cuts" will begin to affect the economy BEFORE they are put in place as we near the November election and it becomes more and more obvious that we will no longer suffer under President Barack Hussein Obama, his massive spending, taxes, ObamaCare and egregious regulations.

So then in the case of the Bush tax cuts, when did those "take effect" by your estimation and why?

reaper1948 wrote:

Markle wrote:

ButtMan wrote:

Markle wrote:

As you know...it was the Democrat driven housing/mortgage/finiancial meltdown which caused the recession and spike in unemployment.

That's just the oddest thing how that works.
The meltdown happened several years after Clinton had left office but he was to blame. But the unemployment now is happening several years after Bush left office but he's not to blame.
I dunno, bud. Sure looks like the democrat is always guilty and the republican is always innocent.
But you know what, you may be right because it was always the same way with Gorgeous George too. No matter how many times he hit somebody below the belt, the crowd kept on a cheerin him. And the same thing with his oppoent George Gourgeous. His crowd kept a cheerin him too.
Funny thing though how both Georgeous George and George Gorgeous got paid for being who they were. But the crowd had to foot the bill for all of it.

I did not say President William Jefferson Clinton was solely to blame but cute try! He expanded the programs and, as you well know, Chris Dodd and Barney Frank continued the destruction.

"Professional wrasslin" from 50 years ago? Whew, you are desperate.

You know though there was one hell of a surplus in social security when Clinton left office until Bush raided it on his first attack on Iraq.

I never was much of a fan of Clinton until I started reading what he really accomplished in office and Bush destroyed most of it. And I used to be a repug.

boards of FL wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Markle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Markle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Markle wrote:Revenues to IRS AVERAGED $1.875 TRILLION during Bush's first 3 years in office, before the BUSH TAX CUTS took effect. Gee...that's nearly President Barack Hussein Obama $1.3 TRILLION DEFICIT each year since Obama took office.

Hey, Markle, how long does it take for a tax cut to "take effect"? No copy and paste, please. Just explain to me, in your own words, how long you feel it takes for a tax cut to "take effect" and why.

Is there something in my post which was not clear?

As you know...it was the Democrat driven housing/mortgage/financial meltdown which caused the recession and spike in unemployment.

I'll ask the question again, Markle. How long does it take for a tax cut to "take effect", and why? This isn't a trick question or anything. I'm simply asking you to explain yourself. Can you do that without copy and paste? Are you capable of staying on task and responding to that which I am asking of you?

As you well know, it depends on the circumstances.

"Tax Cuts" will begin to affect the economy BEFORE they are put in place as we near the November election and it becomes more and more obvious that we will no longer suffer under President Barack Hussein Obama, his massive spending, taxes, ObamaCare and egregious regulations.

So then in the case of the Bush tax cuts, when did those "take effect" by your estimation and why?

boards of FL wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Markle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Markle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Markle wrote:Revenues to IRS AVERAGED $1.875 TRILLION during Bush's first 3 years in office, before the BUSH TAX CUTS took effect. Gee...that's nearly President Barack Hussein Obama $1.3 TRILLION DEFICIT each year since Obama took office.

Hey, Markle, how long does it take for a tax cut to "take effect"? No copy and paste, please. Just explain to me, in your own words, how long you feel it takes for a tax cut to "take effect" and why.

Is there something in my post which was not clear?

As you know...it was the Democrat driven housing/mortgage/financial meltdown which caused the recession and spike in unemployment.

I'll ask the question again, Markle. How long does it take for a tax cut to "take effect", and why? This isn't a trick question or anything. I'm simply asking you to explain yourself. Can you do that without copy and paste? Are you capable of staying on task and responding to that which I am asking of you?

As you well know, it depends on the circumstances.

"Tax Cuts" will begin to affect the economy BEFORE they are put in place as we near the November election and it becomes more and more obvious that we will no longer suffer under President Barack Hussein Obama, his massive spending, taxes, ObamaCare and egregious regulations.

So then in the case of the Bush tax cuts, when did those "take effect" by your estimation and why?

Markle wrote:It is simple, the Republicans spent to much money. Although the Medicare Part "D" passed by them was less expensive than the one sought by Democrats.

Compared to the massive spending of President Barack Hussein Obama and the Democrats today, what they spent was drop in the ocean.

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:

Markle wrote:It is simple, the Republicans spent to much money. Although the Medicare Part "D" passed by them was less expensive than the one sought by Democrats.

Compared to the massive spending of President Barack Hussein Obama and the Democrats today, what they spent was drop in the ocean.

Then I suppose that your continued and unending ranting about how the Democrats are responsible for ALL of our nation's fiscal ills can be construed as partisan spin..... I always thought so!

Markle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Markle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Markle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Markle wrote:Revenues to IRS AVERAGED $1.875 TRILLION during Bush's first 3 years in office, before the BUSH TAX CUTS took effect. Gee...that's nearly President Barack Hussein Obama $1.3 TRILLION DEFICIT each year since Obama took office.

Hey, Markle, how long does it take for a tax cut to "take effect"? No copy and paste, please. Just explain to me, in your own words, how long you feel it takes for a tax cut to "take effect" and why.

Is there something in my post which was not clear?

As you know...it was the Democrat driven housing/mortgage/financial meltdown which caused the recession and spike in unemployment.

I'll ask the question again, Markle. How long does it take for a tax cut to "take effect", and why? This isn't a trick question or anything. I'm simply asking you to explain yourself. Can you do that without copy and paste? Are you capable of staying on task and responding to that which I am asking of you?

As you well know, it depends on the circumstances.

"Tax Cuts" will begin to affect the economy BEFORE they are put in place as we near the November election and it becomes more and more obvious that we will no longer suffer under President Barack Hussein Obama, his massive spending, taxes, ObamaCare and egregious regulations.

So then in the case of the Bush tax cuts, when did those "take effect" by your estimation and why?

Once again...for the very, very S-L-O-W.

The Clinton Dot.Com recession began in March of 2000. If you recall, we also had a massive terrorist attack on 9/11/2001 which further crippled the economy and plunged us deeper into recession. UNEMPLOYMENT REACHED 6% before the Bush tax cuts went into effect and brought DOWN unemployment to 4.6% in 2006 and 2007 before the Democrat driven Housing/Mortgage/Financial meltdown led to this current crisis.

The DEBT over the eight years of the Bush Administration increased by $4.4 TRILLION. That’s FAR less than the damage done by the Democrats since Nancy Pelosi took over the House in 2007.

What happened when the "tax cuts you revile so much were implemented?

Revenues to IRS AVERAGED $1.875 TRILLION during Bush's first 3 years in office, before the BUSH TAX CUTS took effect. Gee...that's nearly President Barack Hussein Obama $1.3 TRILLION DEFICIT each year since Obama took office.

AFTER the BUSH TAX CUTS TOOK EFFECT, REVENUES AVERAGED $2.306 TRILLION his last FIVE years. That's $431 BILLION more per year or $2.155 TRILLION increase over five years.

WOW…how did that happen? They resulted in a $2.155 TRILLION INCREASE IN REVENUES?

Markle wrote:

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:

Markle wrote:It is simple, the Republicans spent to much money. Although the Medicare Part "D" passed by them was less expensive than the one sought by Democrats.

Compared to the massive spending of President Barack Hussein Obama and the Democrats today, what they spent was drop in the ocean.

Then I suppose that your continued and unending ranting about how the Democrats are responsible for ALL of our nation's fiscal ills can be construed as partisan spin..... I always thought so!

Please show us all where I ever said that Democrats are responsible for ALL our fiscal ills. I think you'll find that it is President Barack Hussein Obama who has said that HE IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ANYTHING...EVER.

Or is this in error?

boards of FL wrote:

Markle wrote:

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:

Markle wrote:It is simple, the Republicans spent to much money. Although the Medicare Part "D" passed by them was less expensive than the one sought by Democrats.

Compared to the massive spending of President Barack Hussein Obama and the Democrats today, what they spent was drop in the ocean.

Then I suppose that your continued and unending ranting about how the Democrats are responsible for ALL of our nation's fiscal ills can be construed as partisan spin..... I always thought so!

Please show us all where I ever said that Democrats are responsible for ALL our fiscal ills. I think you'll find that it is President Barack Hussein Obama who has said that HE IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ANYTHING...EVER.

Or is this in error?

You know that budgets are submitted the year before they are actually carried out, right? Your bar for 2009 should be red, if we are to follow the same BS line of reasoning of whoever originally created that graph.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_budget
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_United_States_federal_budget

Markle wrote:

boards of FL wrote:

Markle wrote:

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:

Markle wrote:It is simple, the Republicans spent to much money. Although the Medicare Part "D" passed by them was less expensive than the one sought by Democrats.

Compared to the massive spending of President Barack Hussein Obama and the Democrats today, what they spent was drop in the ocean.

Then I suppose that your continued and unending ranting about how the Democrats are responsible for ALL of our nation's fiscal ills can be construed as partisan spin..... I always thought so!

Please show us all where I ever said that Democrats are responsible for ALL our fiscal ills. I think you'll find that it is President Barack Hussein Obama who has said that HE IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ANYTHING...EVER.

Or is this in error?

You know that budgets are submitted the year before they are actually carried out, right? Your bar for 2009 should be red, if we are to follow the same BS line of reasoning of whoever originally created that graph.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_budget
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_United_States_federal_budget

As you know, the budget President George Walker Bush submitted to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi never came to a vote. Instead the Democrats attacked the budget for spending to much.

Cute try!

By the way, AS YOU KNOW, President Barack Hussein Obama signed the 2009 budget...in 2009.

Obama signs U.S. budget into law; Oregon gets $211 million in goodies
Published: Wednesday, March 11, 2009, 7:51 PM

WASHINGTON -- For all the critics of the $410 billion spending bill President Barack Obama signed into law Wednesday, some local officials across Oregon welcome the new money for everything from education to salmon restoration to upgrading the Pendleton Round-Up.

For more: http://www.oregonlive.com/news/index.ssf/2009/03/obama_signs_us_budget_into_law.html

You really need to read your own sources.

Floridatexan wrote:
Hi, Margin. I wondered where you were.

Y'all are wasting your time on Markle. He doesn't really understand any of this; he just has his prepackaged talking points replete with right-wing propaganda. You see, everything that happened to the US when GWB was President was just fine and dandy. But once President Obama took office, all hell broke loose. Those of you who remember it differently need to take a pill and report immediately to Sector 4.