We had more troops in Korea than we had in Vietnam. We were not in the middle of a war.
To expand: You won’t hear me offer a whisper of support of Bush on this issue. None. His big-government conservatism was part of the reason I did not vote for him.
But acting as if democrats have anything remotely close to clean hands is simply idiotic. HHS has a larger budget than the defense department … you wanna name any democrats in Washington in favor of serious entitlement reform?
Social Security is the biggest item in the federal budget. What’s the response any politician – including Bush – gets when he says it needs reform?
WE are the problem. WE have chosen to keep on electing presidents and congresspeople who are responsible for this, because we have been more willing to accrue debt than to see cuts to the things WE like.
Having troops in a country does not make it a war. I was around then, and there were no casualties to speak of, and little attention paid. It certainly didn’t have any significant budget impact, unlike another war I can name.
Which leads me to something the OP omitted from the rant - Republicans refuse to take responsibility for anything. They’re just like the little kid who says a bad man came in and broke the lamp. Grow some, assholes. Right now it is, wah wah, Carter, wah wah Clinton, wah wah Barney Frank. As Jon Steward said, the buck doesn’t stop anywhere near you guys, does it?
Jon Steward?
Sounds big when it’s not being used to bomb brown skinned people in mud huts, doesn’t it?
Oh, you betcha, Bucky. Only the rich got tax cuts. You betcha, sure, sure.
Egads, it is annoying listening to braindead people like you who can’t think for themselves but can only squawk this kind of bullshit like parrots on crack.
Oh please, Republicans are aggressively and willfully stupid and will learn nothing from this except to move their next national economic ponzi scheme away from the derivatives market and to something else. Pointing out that outrageous deficit spending since the Nixon administration has always increased under Republicans by enormous percentages and decreased under Democrats is totally lost on Republicans. Under free market economic theory, Madoff’s scheme should be unregulated and stupid people left to hold the bag as the market will self-correct. And that’s what actually happens! What fun.
Your OP, unfortunately, will not even start to convince even one Republican that they are wrong in their economic outlook. There are a lot of people who listen to the corporate media propaganda everyday who are politically in the center who will drift toward the Democrats for a few years, but not one of the 30 percenter die hard Republicans nationwide will wake up, say “I was wrong” to themselves and change the way they think. Not one.
A one time $300 tax cut (even if later repeated) hardly makes up for the IOU the government gave me for my additional portion of the national debt. It’s a huge loss for me. But braindead Republicans can’t understand that it is a net loss for most Americans to be given a few hundred dollars now and saddled with tens of thousands of dollars of additional debt in the future. Only the top few percent are coming out ahead, everybody else is coming out behind by approximately the full amount of a public university education tuition for four years. WAY TO GO REPUBLICANS!!!
So Democrats are not pushing for the next tax “rebate”? :dubious:
Republicans? More like Republican’ts.
Sure it does. It ends up in a pocket eventually.
Oh, come off it. Revenue lost to the government by the tax cuts went disproportionately to the wealthy.
Completely false. In 2007, Defense got 432 billion. HHS got 70.6. And I doubt that 432 billion counts either war currently going on. Cite (PDF): http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2008/pdf/08msr.pdf
Obama is trying to avert the worst of another depression. The same was not true of Bush.
Way to combine missing the point, changing the subject, and impugning racism all in one fell swoop.
Oh, and proving my point: that some shallow-minded people are less interested in actually addressing problems than they are in taking sides in pissing contests in which they are the good guys, and people who think differently are the bad guys.
My bad. I was going off another figure – my guess is the site I was looking at was including verterans benefits in that. Dunno.
Of course, since precious few Democrats are serious about massive defense cuts – let along in favor of both that AND also in favor of trimming social programs – I think I’ll stand by my contention that their hands are far from clean.
Bush would say he was trying to head off a global clash of civilizations. You can say he was wrong, but a lot of people would argue that Obama is wrong in what his plan will accomplish.
And that is exactly what I mean by partisanship being a huge part of the problem. Both sides say it’s okay when they want to spend money we don’t have, because their goals are laudable and just. When the other guy wants to spend money, well he’s the irresponsible one.
It’s like a married couple arguing over whether they want to buy a boat or redecorate the house, neither of which they can afford. And they go to bankruptcy court blaming each other the whole time.
Look, the Republicans and Democrats both like to spend money, it’s just the Republicans who think we can do so without paying. It’s their fucking fault for deciding not to pay.
So is it the Republicans fault that you replaced Republican congresscritters with spineless Democrats who refused to stand up for themselves despite having a majority?
Uh huh. Like no democrat has submitted an unbalanced budget. Like democrats are all about fixing the single biggest cause of our shortfall, Social Security.
Twice in recent decades, Dems controlled both the WH and congress. They never balanced the budget.
And no, just because dems support raising taxes doesn’t make them fiscally responsible, any more than a pub who advocates cutting one part of the budget (and growing three others) is. Obama said he wanted to raise taxes even if it was stipulated that doing so would result in less actual income. Sorry, but that ain’t a guy that’s motivated by balancing the books.
Again: I ain’t absolving the pubs of anything. But this “it’s all the other guy’s fault” shit is childish.
Meh. Representatives do what they are elected to do. The American people keep electing demagogues rather than statesmen, and hence get what they deserve. This is why every year, the Beast list of America’s most loathsome people always features…you.
Actually, Clinton had a reasonbly sizable budget surplus one year - 2000. But that wasn’t brought about thru reduced spending or any other Clinton initiative; tax receipts were unexpectedly high - mostly due to capital gains during the internet bubble.
I wish I could put this on a bumper sticker.