Kristen,     National debt when Obama was sworn in, $10.6 Trillion,  National debt as of 10/20/16  $19.8 trillion.  Increase from Obama's inauguration, 87% with three months to go, he has doubled the national debt unless you want to quibble over a few hundred billion.

You need to go to the source, not democracy now or occupy democrat or what ever site you use, they lead you astray.

http://treasurydirect.gov/NP/debt/search?startMonth=01&startDay=20&startYear=2009&endMonth=10&endDay=23&endYear=2016

Your numbers and Kristen's aren't that far apart and are reasonably accurate.  Why the dig at her source?

Tax revenues increased after the Bush tax cuts and they have increased after just about every tax cut in recent history.

Although that is fun to say, historic data doesn't bear that out.  Tax cuts MAY have a stimulus effect, particularly in a booming economy, but it is nowhere near a hard and fast rule.  Tax cuts cause an immediate loss in revenue.  Beneficial effects (if any) take years to show up.  While President Reagan did indeed cut income tax rates (justifiably IMHO) he also increased taxes and eliminated a number of deductions that resulted in increases in revenue.  Of course, President Bush #1 had to go back on the "Read my lips" promise to deal with budget deficits.

http://money.cnn.com/2010/09/08/news/economy/reagan_years_taxes/

As far as the Bush 2 tax cuts, they had the effect of adding to the reduction in revenue during 2001, 2002 and 2003.  Revenue did not reach 2000 levels until 2005.  The state of the economy has FAR more impact on revenue than changing tax rates.  The economy was coming off the tech crash of 1999/2000.  The Bush tax cuts did nothing to increase revenue during that time period. I believe you are confusing correlation and causation.

SPENDING INCREASED TOO, THAT IS WHY WE HAVE A DEBT PROBLEM.  Tax increases will further slow the economy and lower revenues in the long term.   You can't tax a country into prosperity.

Can't disagree with the first part and last part.  The middle part is certainly speculation. 

Obama owns the national debt and people are sick of his whining that it is Bush's fault, he had 8 years to fix it, in his first 2 years he owned congress too.  No excuses, Obama is a failure.

Lots of people "own" the debt, I don't lay blame on one particular person, it has been a group effort.  The 2008/2009 crash was certainly a major contributor, probably to the tune of increasing the total debt by +/- $5 trillion.  So was the Afghanistan war, Iraq war, entitlements, increased unemployment benefits, increased SNAP costs and Medicare Part B expansion.  As far as spending, the President/Congress has only ever reduced spending (over the last 50 years) in 2010, 2012 & 2013, when compared to the year before.  Damn that Obama! 

Your  and my grand children are the ones that will have to deal with this mess Obama  caused by many administrations and probably the resultant revolution when it hits the fan and the millions getting free shit now get the gravy train shut down because the US is forced to default.

With a minor (and accurate) change, this is true.

SO if a candidate says something that should be taken as gospel then?  Apply to Hillary as well then?

If someone is merely accused of something, without any proof, they are automatically guilty then?  Apply to Hillary as well then?

Because groping is a far cry short of treason, murder, corruption, dereliction of duty, willful destruction of evidence, etc.

Just want to see where the hypocrisy line is.

'Gimp

I don't support Hillary. I'd be very happy to see her held to account.

To answer your basic questions: if someone is caught saying they do something, it is not unfair to take them at their word. When said person is then accused of doing what they said they do, those accusations naturally hold more weight. No, it doesn't mean they are automatically guilty.

And Hillary, and Bill don't have tons of skeletons?  They all have skeletons.  I am  still voting for Trump because if Hillary wins western civilization as we know it is ASSURED to be gone.

You'd be better off focusing your energies on the Senate, but if you can vote for someone as unprincipled and despicable as Donnie, well, I'm sorry.

When did being a liberal equate to being such a bad thing?  I thought political discourse was a good thing, or is groupthink really the way to go?

About the time when the left wing realized that they controlled the media, the schools, academia  and much of the courts. They then realized that if they made a "movement" or a "cause" out of something they could effect real change. Then they were "educated" or came to the conclusion that everything was better in Europe and the socialist ways they do things is superior to our provincial, back waters ways and set abut changing that.

Once the left did this, the reaction from the right was, "You're either with us, or agin' us!" Black or white, no shades of gray. They laid out hard, inflexible "principles" and "core values" that must be adhered to or... your agin' us. The right wing has been boxed into just AM talk radio, the internet and Fox News. From these places they provide plenty of slogans and derogatory phrases to attack the enemy with. They get repeated again and again.

These media outlets proclaimed "liberal" a dirty word and it has stuck amongst the right wing faithful.

I have read several different sources, quoting different people, all of who say that Hillary is a devote Methodist.

Lucifer will be quoting Hedly Lamar from Blazing Saddles lumping Methodists in with all other manner of thugs soon.



Sent from my iPad . Squirrel!!

So...more die first then?

Unacceptable. How about you condemn violence in your own community and condemn aggressiveness by those stopped by police.

If the cops shoot everyone on sight, none of them will die.  Obviously no one wants that extreme. I just suggest we've moved too far toward that end of the spectrum, starting with the Reagan administration and bringing us to the militarized forces we have today.

Then what's up with the Mexican flags at La Raza rallies and people reclaiming the southwest for Mexico? Are they first generation, later, what?

There are two separate houses in my neighborhood that fly Irish flags along side the US flag. Having never lived anywhere else, I can't really say what it's like, but I think you always have some pride in where you are from and the people that you descended from. I imagine that if I were to move to a foreign country I might still display the US flag from time to time.

I hear people in the south still fly Confederate flags and they used to say stuff like- "The South will rise again!". What the hell is up with that?