Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Here’s “slammersworldwillnotbecensored” in a nutshell.

Posted 2 years ago on Feb. 13, 2012, 9:45 a.m. EST by factsrfun (8656) from Phoenix, AZ
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

This is a response to him, on a discussion we were having:

What a pathetic little slimy bug you are not fit to soil the sole of a real American, I shouldn’t be surprised considering the Republican “leadership” crawling around with their hats in their hands begging, “Please Mister Jobcreator, if I kiss the other cheek, stick my tongue a bit father in your hole, or bring you a cup of TEA might you think about creating a job, Sir, please?” What a bunch of wimpy little pansies. You might want to call your mommy before you read the rest of this.

I didn’t start this tread to prove your a lying weasel that’s just your natural tendency. So you start off by saying that I’m lying because I implied that Clinton had balanced the budget:

“There was no paydown on the debt when Clinton was president......hahaha”

I gave you a six month period where the debt was reduced:

“This is not the site that I used in the 1990’s but it will work, “Total Public Debt” 01/15/1998-06/15/1998 went down by 7,344,179,582 dollars, I know that’s only half a year but your underlying point was that Clinton didn’t balance the budget and is a LIE”

You accuse me of continuing to lie by picking dates.

“hahaha.....yeah, you can find drops in nearly every year at some point, often around the time of the yearly tax filing deadline..”

“You are picking dates that are part of two different budgetary cycles, and manipulating the statistics to attempt to prove a false assertion of "balance".......”

I invite you to prove your point.

“Cool OK we can actually settle this you show me the 6 month period where debt went down during the Bush years and you will be right, if you don't then I am.”

You run away from your statement.

“you show me a budget year without deficit and it's settled, but there isn't one........”

Then the classic switch.

“I can demonstrate a similar reduction in spending by Bush43/Republican Congress, in the reduction of the amount of yearly deficit from the high of 595 Billion in 2004 to the low of 500 Billion in 2007...THAT is how the GOP deals with problems”

This is so like a conservative, where you make the point that ADDING 500 billion to the debt over 12 months is BETTER than taking 7 billion off in 6 months and all the people who believe that should agree with you.

This is why we can’t fix our problems so many people at the table have no desire to have an honest conversation. We have elected Republicans who are willing to publicly say they don’t believe in evolution, now that’s King George crazy, so in a nutshell, our problem is that people vote Republican.

62 Comments

62 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 4 points by shooz (17705) 2 years ago

I like that!!!!!!!!

(R)epelican'ts are "King George crazy", and just as narcissistic!!!!!

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (8656) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

Howdy shooz, bring back ZenDog!

[-] 1 points by shooz (17705) 2 years ago

I'll give it a try tonight. He may just need a break from all the BS.

[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

this place is so serious and full of arguments to be made to the constant well BS

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (8656) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

Good morning Matt, I hear where your coming from, but I do think understanding tatics is important, if you see FOX news, it's useful to know the tricks they use, that's really why I want to expose this guy. (I don't need strokin' plenty of rl people think I'm smart.) I plan to do a general post on the subject because people have brought this up and maybe the grownups should talk about it.

[-] 1 points by shooz (17705) 2 years ago

I came here knowing the attacks would be strong and coordinated.

I was not mistaken.

I am also undaunted............................:)

[-] 0 points by fairforall (279) 2 years ago

what a goob.

have you changed anyone's mind here shooz?

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (8656) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

Shooz

Thank you for all you do, trun around and take a bow.

We're going get through this somehow.

If the good Lord's willin and the creek don't rise. We're all gona share, in that prize..

Don't turn away, from the fight, you know, that you're right.

Come back, come back let's say let's have a big old party today....

[Removed]

[-] -2 points by slammersworldwillnotbecensored (-184) 2 years ago

too bad his whole assertion was wrong, and now he's hiding in the corner wetting himself, instead of owning up to it.....

[-] 2 points by shooz (17705) 2 years ago

Yet it wasn't exactly wrong, you are King George crazy!

[-] -2 points by slammersworldwillnotbecensored (-184) 2 years ago

you are obviously callow and retarded....

but, we already knew that....

[-] 2 points by shooz (17705) 2 years ago

Of course all of your personas would.

Do all of you also realize, you ARE King George crazy, or do you let them all get lost in your pointless verbiage?

[-] -1 points by slammersworldwillnotbecensored (-184) 2 years ago

sorry buddy, I only have one name at a time.......the persona is always the same.....don't block my comments and I won't have to re-signup

[-] 2 points by shooz (17705) 2 years ago

I have no bots, and so have no way to do what you are accusing me of.

You on the other hand speak of "we", so you must be speaking of those "we" within you.

Yepperz, King George crazy.

[-] 0 points by slammersworldwillnotbecensored (-184) 2 years ago

I represent a larger segment of the population than you......that's "we"

[-] 1 points by shooz (17705) 2 years ago

Really???

Just another figment of your imagination.

I talk to more people in meat space, all the time who are finally figuring out just how badly they've been screwed by (R)epelican'ts.

Hopefully, you'll catch up some day.................:)

[-] 0 points by slammersworldwillnotbecensored (-184) 2 years ago

My experience is the opposite, and I travel frequently......

[-] 1 points by shooz (17705) 2 years ago

This may be true, but then you search for that which is contrary.

[-] -1 points by slammersworldwillnotbecensored (-184) 2 years ago

no, I just have normal conversations with people.....

[-] 1 points by shooz (17705) 2 years ago

If your posts here are any indication, you have a serious problem with normal conversations.

You should look into that.

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (8656) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

every cut and paste is true to what was said please go on.

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (8656) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

If people want to wade through your nonsense, you act like your saying something when your real intent to distort and misinform. A FACT that is easily seen whenever your ask to stand by your statements.

[-] -1 points by slammersworldwillnotbecensored (-184) 2 years ago

I stand by ALL my statements......

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (8656) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/NPGateway

Date Debt Held by the Public Intragovernmental Holdings Total Public Debt Outstanding

03/30/2000 Not Available Not Available 5,788,541,874,357.52

08/22/2001 Not Available Not Available 5,779,164,972,811.46

Here we see at the end of President Bill Clinton’s presidency that public debt was stable for 15 months. It is your position that by picking dates it is easy to show this happening at any point. I have ask you to demonstrate this at any other time in the past 40 years, as I know it is a lie, and you have failed to do so. So you continue to call me a lair when there ample evidence that I am not so you continue to prove that you are.

[-] -1 points by slammersworldwillnotbecensored (-184) 2 years ago

05/03/2001 Not Available Not Available 5,636,663,639,692.83

05/11/2001 Not Available Not Available 5,637,839,303,470.87

06/15/2001 Not Available Not Available 5,632,910,105,449.16

06/18/2001 Not Available Not Available 5,634,686,176,609.17

.

Swings of over 150 Billion dollars don't equate to "stable"........sorry

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 2 years ago

Guys: seriously. You're wondering why traffic on this site is dwindling? Who is a thread like this going to impress?

I don't even care who is right.

[yawn]

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (8656) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

really tried to make it clear this thread is just to show what an idiot bully "slammer" is. He's all over so I thought why not expose him here, if you haven't ran into this guy, that's cool you might like my other posts or my bio.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 2 years ago

Who cares? What does any of this have to do with any kind of objective for Occupy?

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (8656) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

not sure how you wandered into this thread, but this guy spreads his lies all over, I think it's good to know who is here to have an honest discussion and who is not, I invite you to read my other post and/or bio for more actions related work.

[-] 1 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 2 years ago

I wandered into this thread because you made an issue of it. You're making an effort to draw attention to this childish bickering that you're engaging in. I don't even care which of you is right and which of you is wrong. How does that matter? You're creating a divisive distraction.

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (8656) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

Been reading some of your other stuff, I'm starting to believe your afraid of your tactics being exposed, can’t think of any reason you keep coming here, if you don’t like the food don’t go to the restaurant.

[-] 2 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 2 years ago

My original reasons for coming here are expressed clearly enough in this post:

http://occupywallst.org/forum/vote-or-else-this-will-all-be-a-pointless-exercise/

And yes, I've been participating less and less since then. Every once in a while I come back to see what kind of progress Occupy has been making. And I tend to be disappointed to find threads like this one. Or people who want to spend all day complaining about "trolls". Or people who want to scapegoat somebody else for their problems. Or people who want to demonize all Republicans or conservatives, as though none of the 99% are Republicans, or conservatives.

I did hire a fantastic new employee through this site though, so I got something out of it at least. When people complained about unemployment, I didn't just say, "Get a job!" I said, "Here's how to get a job. I have a job available. Who wants it?" Most everybody here only heard, "Get a job!" But one person heard the real message and is benefiting now.

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (8656) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

Ok so that's a good post, I plan one for the same propose but in a different tone, I "worte" it in my head this am will post tomorrow maybe later today after reading yours, got me wanting to act. I am proably going to leave this one after posting a gerenal post for people like yourself (serious) to discuss the merit of discussing tatics used by FOX and others. As far as R vs D goes I just think the R's just want to keep transfering more and more power to the powerful and balance can't be found in the party anymore, I really do have a number of serious posts up here didn't think this would get so big.

[-] 1 points by richardkentgates (3269) from Fort Walton Beach, FL 2 years ago

Way to go. This thread brings you down to his level. Buy into more party line bullshit, that will fix everything. Can't you see the progress it has already brought about :/

[-] 2 points by factsrfun (8656) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

Hey I see this guy all over the place just want to expose him for what he is, I have few better posts on here, or at least a few people tell their good.

[-] 0 points by JuanFenito (847) 2 years ago

What is this about anyway???? Who wants to pay down the debt when we can just float it? It's worked fine for the past 50 years, why not just keep racking up the debt? I don't care who ends up having to pay for it.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by slammersworldwillnotbecensored (-184) 2 years ago

here are the hard numbers of total debt added over presidential terms, by congressional power breakdown:

Reagan:

FY82-FY89

FY82-FY87 REP House/DEM Senate = 1208 Billion (201B yr) FY88-FY89 DEM House/Senate = 507 Billion (253.5B yr)

Total: 1715 Billion

Bush41:

FY90-FY93

All Years: DEM House/Senate = 1554 Billion (388.5B yr)

Total: 1554 Billion

Clinton:

FY94-FY01

FY94-FY95 DEM House/Senate = 562 Billion (281B yr) FY96-FY01 REP House/Senate = 834 Billion (139B yr)

Total: 1396 Billion

Bush43:

FY02-FY09

FY02-FY07 REP House/Senate = 3200 Billion (533.3B yr) FY08-FY09 DEM House/Senate = 2902 Billion (1451B yr)

Total: 6102 Billion

Obama:

FY10-CURR

FY10-FY11 DEM House/Senate = 2881 Billion (1440.5B yr)

Total-CURR = 3445 Billion

Obama is difficult to factor by party, there has not been an actual budget for almost two years, appropriations have all been made using continuing resolutions rather than actual budgets......

But, as you will see by the hard numbers, Regardless of the President, when the Democrats control Congress they DOUBLE the amount of added debt over their Republican counterparts......and Congress is where spending appropriations begin, The House has control of the checkbook.......

[-] -1 points by slammersworldwillnotbecensored (-184) 2 years ago

here are the hard numbers of total debt added over presidential terms, by congressional power breakdown:

Reagan:

FY82-FY89

.

FY82-FY87 REP House/DEM Senate = 1208 Billion (201B yr)

FY88-FY89 DEM House/Senate = 507 Billion (253.5B yr)

.

Total: 1715 Billion

.......................

Bush41:

FY90-FY93

.

All Years: DEM House/Senate = 1554 Billion (388.5B yr)

.

Total: 1554 Billion

...................

Clinton:

FY94-FY01

.

FY94-FY95 DEM House/Senate = 562 Billion (281B yr)

FY96-FY01 REP House/Senate = 834 Billion (139B yr)

.

Total: 1396 Billion

...............

Bush43:

FY02-FY09

.

FY02-FY07 REP House/Senate = 3200 Billion (533.3B yr)

FY08-FY09 DEM House/Senate = 2902 Billion (1451B yr)

.

Total: 6102 Billion

......................

Obama:

FY10-CURR

.

FY10-FY11 DEM House/Senate = 2881 Billion (1440.5B yr)

.

Total-CURR = 3445 Billion

.

Obama is difficult to factor by party, there has not been an actual budget for almost two years, appropriations have all been made using continuing resolutions rather than actual budgets......

But, as you will see by the hard numbers, Regardless of the President, when the Democrats control Congress they DOUBLE the amount of added debt over their Republican counterparts......and Congress is where spending appropriations begin, The House has control of the checkbook.......

[-] 2 points by factsrfun (8656) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

I see your still looking for that 15 month period where the total public debt did not increase, here's a hint it was President Bill Clinton that did it. NO luck at all in proving me a lair which is what you started out to do remember? I know you need to change the subject.

[-] -1 points by slammersworldwillnotbecensored (-184) 2 years ago

you need to look again, fool.....it increased drastically several times, just because you can find two numbers, with which to manipulate statistics, doesn't mean there was no activity between those numbers......and in the final days of Clinton's Administration the debt increased 66 billion dollars from the beginning of FY01 (oct 01, 2000) until inauguration day 2001............

and the figures clearly show, under both Clinton, and Bush43 that democrats increase the debt by a figure of double, or more.....regardless of the particular president in office...........

There were NO balanced years, and NO years where debt was repaid......

And Clinton's two years of Democrat Congresses produced higher average debt than Reagan did........

Keep trying to sell those lies though, there are people stupid enough to believe them...

[-] 2 points by factsrfun (8656) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/NPGateway

Date Debt Held by the Public Intragovernmental Holdings Total Public Debt Outstanding

03/30/2000 Not Available Not Available 5,788,541,874,357.52

08/22/2001 Not Available Not Available 5,779,164,972,811.46

Here we see at the end of President Bill Clinton’s presidency that public debt was stable for 15 months. It is your position that by picking dates it is easy to show this happening at any point. I have ask you to demonstrate this at any other time in the past 40 years, as I know it is a lie, and you have failed to do so. So you continue to call me a lair when there ample evidence that I am not so you continue to prove that you are.

[-] -1 points by slammersworldwillnotbecensored (-184) 2 years ago

05/03/2001 Not Available Not Available 5,636,663,639,692.83

05/11/2001 Not Available Not Available 5,637,839,303,470.87

06/15/2001 Not Available Not Available 5,632,910,105,449.16

06/18/2001 Not Available Not Available 5,634,686,176,609.17

.

Wild up and down swings, exceeding 150 Billion dollars do not equal stable........just because you cherry pick numbers that span over more that one fiscal year doesn't make your blatant lies and manipulations of data true.....

The Treasury Dept publishes Fiscal Year debt numbers, and they are found here:

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt.htm

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (8656) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

You don’t know much about math do you? If you go up then down and end up at the same place you haven’t gone anywhere. All this is just a distraction, you said that anyone could pick a 15 month period where the debt didn’t “look” like it went up and that’s what you accused me of doing and said I was lying, now you can either show me by doing it at some other time or you could apologize and gain huge cred.

[-] -1 points by slammersworldwillnotbecensored (-184) 2 years ago

Actually I know much about math......but, you don't know much about budgets....because being at the same point over two separate budgets but going up and down in-between doesn't mean you haven't gone anywhere....it means you've added debt in the budget year, and subtracted debt in part of the next....

In the final analysis the debt went UP....EVERY single fiscal year....EVERY YEAR....do you understand "every year".........Budgets are specific cycles, and to try to make an analysis outside of that cycle is disingenuous and mere fabrication...you are a fool, and a propagandist liar......

Your lies, manipulations, and deflections don't change the fact that public debt increased EVERY fiscal year....since 1951

and on an entirely different note.....your crediting Clinton for the low deficits is interesting and foolish, as we have data under Clinton of BOTH Democrats and Republican effect on the debt.....and with deficits which exceed all of Reagan's deficits but one, Clinton/Democrat reveals itself to be the big spending liberal force that it is......and The Republicans changed that beginning in 1995.....the same result as the democrat/republican spending under Bush43......

I never said anything about a "15 month period".....I said debt goes up and down (or should I say DID) in every fiscal year, as revenue and spending do not track together......spending happens and revenue is collected but not in relation to one another......

[-] 2 points by factsrfun (8656) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

No you didn't, you just called me a lair for doing so, now you can prove your point or shut up.

I think the problem here is that as a conservative you just expect to lie and not have anyone call you on it. Of course your favorite way to lie is to call someone telling the truth a lair, then give a bunch of irrelevant facts and hope no one notices.

The other thing you guys like to do is call someone a lair, then start telling a bunch of lies to prove that everyone lies.

This conservative twisting of what someone said so they can call them a lair, was brought up in the news when a DA twisted a defendant’s testimony to convict them of perjury, sort of the new drop some coke in their bag deal I guess. I guess the DA had seen right wingers do it so much they thought it was cool.

[-] -1 points by slammersworldwillnotbecensored (-184) 2 years ago

you are a liar.......there has not been ANY paydown on the debt since 1951......you attempt to use data from two fiscal years to prove your lie......disregarding the spending/revenue cycle of budget years

end of story.......

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (8656) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

I never claimed a "pay down" What you claimed is that I was picking and chosing dates to prove my point and you DID claim ANYONE could do IT at ANY time now DO IT!! You know you can't because you know you LIED!

[-] -1 points by slammersworldwillnotbecensored (-184) 2 years ago

you did pick and choose the dates over a spectrum of more than one fiscal year......do you deny that?

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (8656) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

President Bill Clinton’s greatness transcended more than one fiscal year!

[-] 0 points by slammersworldwillnotbecensored (-184) 2 years ago

I kinda figured you'd have no response to that......

[-] -1 points by slammersworldwillnotbecensored (-184) 2 years ago

Hahahaha.....yeah, where was his "greatness" when he had a democrat congress???

[-] -2 points by slammersworldwillnotbecensored (-184) 2 years ago

Our problem is clearly people like you, those who don't understand economics, or math, apparently.......and who think they have the "facts" even when those "facts" are only small disconnected pieces of a larger picture that refutes them when assembled....

[-] 2 points by factsrfun (8656) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

Your problem is I assembled your lies and you have no way to defend them.

[-] -1 points by slammersworldwillnotbecensored (-184) 2 years ago

I already have, and you keep ducking it.....

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (8656) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

You said I was a lair because I just cherry picked numbers that anybody could do, as soon as you show me by doing it then I will move on to your other points.

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (8656) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/NPGateway

Date Debt Held by the Public Intragovernmental Holdings Total Public Debt Outstanding You called me a lair because I picked certain dates and that anybody could do it, as soon as you do I will be happy to move on to your other points. 03/30/2000 Not Available Not Available 5,788,541,874,357.52

08/22/2001 Not Available Not Available 5,779,164,972,811.46

Here we see at the end of President Bill Clinton’s presidency that public debt was stable for 15 months. It is your position that by picking dates it is easy to show this happening at any point. I have ask you to demonstrate this at any other time in the past 40 years, as I know it is a lie, and you have failed to do so. So you continue to call me a lair when there ample evidence that I am not so you continue to prove that you are.

[-] -2 points by slammersworldwillnotbecensored (-184) 2 years ago

You say they "Took off" 7 billion in 6 months.....but, during that fiscal year.....1998, the total deficit was 113 billion dollars....so I guess they "added" that in 6 months, as-well......so the point remains the same, there was no balance of a budget.....budgets run from Oct01-Sept30......what happens during any small section of that time is immaterial to the budget year......it's the final result that counts..

and if you are claiming that "Clinton" balanced a budget...YOU ARE LYING....it NEVER happened.....

as for the rest of your attacks, and your juvenile he said/she said...you being the sissy little "she" who can't imagine adhering to the facts of budget years to prove your point of a balanced budget.....don't get mad at me for your lack of understanding, go find a mirror to identify the real culprit for your issues...

and......I have found the answer to your foolish question anyway......but it doesn't change the fact that is still doesn't represent the facts of anything

Bush Innaguration Jan 20, 2001

Jan 22, 2001 - 5,728,195,796,181.57

June 22, 2001 - 5,651,584,304,624.97

.

Difference = +76,611,491,556.6

Over 10X better than your claimed Clinton "payback" in 1998

Now do you want to flipflop and start arguing fiscal budget year responsibility?........

but even this doesn't really matter, as the deficit for the entire fiscal year of 2001 was 133,285,202,313.20......so at some point during the year that lack of spending was overcome by other spending......

You are such a fool, and you'll go to any length to try and claim a falsehood is true......

What do you say now...fucktard?

Now it's not hidden at the bottom of a comment thread, it's right out in the open for all to see what a goddamn fool you really are....and how slim your grasp of facts really is.....

[-] 2 points by factsrfun (8656) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

So your new argument is that adding 500 billion to the debt is better than 113 billion?

A far as the rest goes, I knew you would take the bait you are such an easy fish, if I hadn’t wanted you to take the bait I would have talked about the 15 month period fool.

So now you want to take credit for the first six months of the Bush adminastrtion when he hadn’t even passed his first budget yet? I assume a rigorously honest person like you have never suggested that Clinton’s success was somehow tied to things Reagan did? Right? Actually if people would like to look you have pulled out 6 months of a 15 month period where there was no increase in the total debt owned by the government, all thanks to President Clinton.

[-] -1 points by slammersworldwillnotbecensored (-184) 2 years ago

now your flipping and saying budget focus is important?......interesting

and in all examples there is rise and fall above and below the beginning and end numbers.....there is no straight-line "pay-off" of anything....

like paying off a portion of a credit card balance and then charging it up again the next week...while claiming you're paying off the balance.....

thanks for falling into that trap......

and ONCE AGAIN budget appropriations begin in the Congress.....so nothing was due to Clinton, it was all Republicans......Clinton begrudgingly came along....kicking and screaming....

and much of Clinton's success was due to Reagan, the longest period of sustained peacetime economic growth in American history began under Reagan and continued until 2007.......Clinton was nothing special......

you also fail to address the "high times" Clinton experienced over his entire presidency......times inherited from the previous administrations........and, he left 9/11, Enron, Chinese market evolution, and the DotCom crash to Bush43 as he exited office, just in time......

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (8656) from Phoenix, AZ 2 years ago

Here's what I said:

"In the summer of 2001 Alan Greenspan testified before Congress that, “We are on track to pay the debit off completely within 10 years.........the biggest economic threat facing America is that we will pay our debit off too quickly and then Washington might not spend the money wisely.” Now he used Greenspan speak but this is what he said, then we pasted the Bush tax cuts and the rest is history."

You called me a lair. here's where we ended up.

"http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/NPGateway

Date Debt Held by the Public Intragovernmental Holdings Total Public Debt Outstanding

03/30/2000 Not Available Not Available 5,788,541,874,357.52

08/22/2001 Not Available Not Available 5,779,164,972,811.46

Here we see at the end of President Bill Clinton’s presidency that public debt was stable for 15 months. It is your position that by picking dates it is easy to show this happening at any point. I have ask you to demonstrate this at any other time in the past 40 years, as I know it is a lie, and you have failed to do so. So you continue to call me a lair when there ample evidence that I am not so you continue to prove that you are."

You're still trying to change the subject, and distort rather than inform.

[-] 0 points by slammersworldwillnotbecensored (-184) 2 years ago

Once again.......you are picking and choosing numbers that aren't comparable.......

you begin in FY2000 and end in FY2001

FY2000 = OCT 1999-SEPT 2000

Beginning debt: 5,656,270,901,615.43

Ending Debt: 5,674,178,209,886.86

Deficit: -17,907,308,271.43

.

FY2001: OCT 2000-SEPT 2001

Beginning Debt: 5,674,178,209,886.86

Ending Debt: 5,807,463,412,200.06

Deficit: -133,285,202,313.20

the debt was NOT stable, it was up and down, and just because you cherry-pick numbers to lie and distort the facts doesn't make it true......

The total debt dropped to:

05/03/2001 Not Available Not Available 5,636,663,639,692.83

05/11/2001 Not Available Not Available 5,637,839,303,470.87

06/15/2001 Not Available Not Available 5,632,910,105,449.16

06/18/2001 Not Available Not Available 5,634,686,176,609.17

so debt was added to bring it to the final figure, and subtracted from the original figure many times over......like paying off part of a credit card balance and then buying something else shortly after......but, at the end of the reconciled year the balance was HIGHER in every case....there was no paydown, and no "balance"......NEVER....

Why do you keep trying to spread that lie?