Skip to comments.
$1.6 trillion "is a big number" - Rahm Emanuel
Washington Post (proudly part of the statist media regime) ^
| June 19, 2009
| Ceci Connolly
Posted on 06/20/2009 8:59:24 AM PDT by SeattleBruce
White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel acknowledged that $1.6 trillion "is a big number" that forced administration aides and congressional staff to rework the plan. "Everybody now is going to take these bills back and come in below $1 trillion," he said yesterday.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
TOPICS: Issues; Parties; U.S. Congress; U.S. Senate
KEYWORDS: healthcare; obama; senate; singlepayer
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-49 next last
Gee, you think? Let's get this in just shy of 1 Trillion...oh, those wacky Marxists...money is just a plaything to them...grrrrrr....
To: SeattleBruce
Like “just under one trillion” is a small number?
2
posted on
06/20/2009 9:00:30 AM PDT
by
keats5
(Not all of us are hypnotized.)
To: SeattleBruce
Perhaps they should bring in Dr. Evil to make these announcements.
3
posted on
06/20/2009 9:01:06 AM PDT
by
pnh102
(Regarding liberalism, always attribute to malice what you think can be explained by stupidity. - Me)
To: SeattleBruce
"Everybody now is going to take these bills back and come in below $1 trillion," he said yesterday. Oh, good. Whew. I was worried there for a minute.
Asshole.
4
posted on
06/20/2009 9:01:09 AM PDT
by
Texas Eagle
(If it wasn't for double-standards, Liberals would have no standards at all. -- Texas Eagle)
To: SeattleBruce
Yes Rahm good job. Now get back to class.
5
posted on
06/20/2009 9:03:26 AM PDT
by
I Hate Obama
(Just remember - if the world didn't suck, we would all fall off.)
To: SeattleBruce
“Reworking” the number, not the plan.
To: SeattleBruce
The last Republican Congress budget was fiscal 2007: $160 billion budget deficit. And we use to scream about that!
7
posted on
06/20/2009 9:04:01 AM PDT
by
avacado
To: Texas Eagle
Just get it under the Trillion mark and we can sell it to the suckers.
They didn't do their homework on this to start with. They could have massaged the numbers to around $500 billion, it's just a number, nobody’s going to hold them to it.
8
posted on
06/20/2009 9:05:38 AM PDT
by
Recon Dad
(Cogito cogito ergo cogito sum - MARSOC DAD)
To: keats5
Geithner knows a number beginning with T might get the public’s attention.
9
posted on
06/20/2009 9:07:38 AM PDT
by
Yardstick
To: SeattleBruce
Ernst Röhm Emanuel Ballerina, White House Chief of Staff
10
posted on
06/20/2009 9:08:12 AM PDT
by
Vaquero
("an armed society is a polite society" Robert A. Heinlein)
To: Recon Dad
If they go from 1.6 trill to 900 bil either they cut out services or they cut out waste. If they cut waste, why didn’t they do that the first time?
11
posted on
06/20/2009 9:09:01 AM PDT
by
EQAndyBuzz
(Climate change alarmists are Warm-Mongers. Now that's funny right there. I don't care who you are.)
To: avacado
Wow, $160 billion seems like small potatoes now. Amazing the difference an election can make.
To: Recon Dad
They didn't do their homework on this to start with. They could have massaged the numbers to around $500 billion, it's just a number, nobodys going to hold them to it.I think they did do their homework, except they can't find a way to keep it under $1 trillion.....it is that large, burdensome and out of control already.
Just imagine what reality will look like.
13
posted on
06/20/2009 9:09:45 AM PDT
by
Erik Latranyi
(Too many conservatives urge retreat when the war of politics doesn't go their way.)
To: keats5
Yeah, it’s, like, “80% Off! Big savings!!!”
14
posted on
06/20/2009 9:10:06 AM PDT
by
Larry Lucido
(Why excerpt your own blog? If its that damned important, then (Excerpted. Click here to read more))
To: SeattleBruce
1,000,000,016,640 One trillion, sixteen thousand six hundred and forty Pennies [ One cube measuring 273 x 273 x 273 feet ] From right to left (to scale), we have the same old football field, then the Lincoln Memorial (yes, the one pictured on the back of the penny), then the Washington Monument (555 feet tall), then our cube of one trillion pennies, then the Empire State Building (1,250 feet tall), then the Sears Tower (1,450 feet tall). So, now, the question you're dying to ask: How many Pennies would it take to fill the Empire State Building? value $10,000,000,166.40 (Ten billion, one hundred and sixty-six dollars and forty cents) width 273 feet height 273 feet thickness 273 feet total weight 3,125,000 tons height stacked 986,426 Miles area (laid flat) 89,675.2 acres
15
posted on
06/20/2009 9:13:28 AM PDT
by
Eye of Unk
("If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace." T. Paine)
To: SeattleBruce
When you’re playing with other people’s money, it’s always “only a number”. Rahm wants to make us think they care. In truth: they could not care less. Power is its own reward for those who exercise it without license.
16
posted on
06/20/2009 9:14:27 AM PDT
by
andy58-in-nh
(You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life.)
To: SeattleBruce
Under Obama, $1.6 trillion is a small number. Pocket change.
To: avacado
Yep, and the media and the Democrats were screaming bloody murder about it. Now that we have a liberal- Democrat controlled Congress and Presidency, they they think deficits in the trillions are just fine and dandy.
I hate the media with a passion. Will the stupid half of America ever wake up or are they too brain-washed? Or is that brain-dead?
To: SeattleBruce
New york’s Empire State Building contains 37 million cubic feet of space (minus
the antenna structure). Using our cubic foot of pennies (49,152 total), it’s just a simple
multiplication problem - 37,000,000 x 49,152 = 1,818,624,000,000 pennies.
1.8 trillion pennies.
19
posted on
06/20/2009 9:16:04 AM PDT
by
Eye of Unk
("If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace." T. Paine)
To: Recon Dad
They could have massaged the numbers to around $500 billion, it's just a number, nobodys going to hold them to it. Amen. The only numbers they care about are poll numbers.
It's too bad we can't call Gallup, Rasmussen, Zogby, etc.
Or can we?
20
posted on
06/20/2009 9:16:43 AM PDT
by
Texas Eagle
(If it wasn't for double-standards, Liberals would have no standards at all. -- Texas Eagle)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-49 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson