New Era of Spend and Blame

[stampede2873]

New York Post

Excerpt:

As if voters right now are looking for somebody just not as bad as the GOP. As if his campaign slogan wasn't "Change You Can Believe In," but rather "Vote for Me. I'm Not as Bad as Republicans."

Anyway, Republicans tried this out-of-control spending derby -- and just look where that got them. In a few short years, they lost control of every single lever of power exactly because of this kind of behavior.

Yet in even less time, Obama has put away his promises of Hope and Change and tossed aside the idealism of his campaign about remaking politics in Washington.

This article says it better than I can.

 

[DukeLaCrosse]

mr. right-wing propaganda strikes again. republicans good, democrats bad blah blah blah

 

[Legzman]

mr. right-wing propaganda strikes again. republicans good, democrats bad blah blah blah

how is this propaganda? Obama is throwing away money like handfuls of sand in the desert. I dunno, best analogy I could think of. But he is outta control with his spending!

 

[Hot Mega]

mr. right-wing propaganda strikes again. republicans good, democrats bad blah blah blah

GOPers are back in the only roles they're good at, labeling others and fomenting sentiment against something.

 

[stampede2873]

mr. right-wing propaganda strikes again. republicans good, democrats bad blah blah blah

Thanks Duke, glad you could acknowledge my contributions! :thumbsup:

I will ask though... did you read the article before you posted or did you just reflex action?

Did the GOP spend during their time.... YES!!!

Is Obama planning to outspend his GOP counterpart...YES!!!.

If you can't see that, then you really don't care do you.

If you are willing to open and read threads that I start, then at least have some kind of intelligent retort.

I am dumber now for reading your post.... your not welcome.

 

[Hot Mega]

Did the GOP spend during their time.... YES!!!

Is Obama planning to outspend his GOP counterpart...YES!!!.


I am dumber now for reading your post.... your not welcome.

Sometimes it's not about how much you spend but what you're spending it on..no?

All transfers of capital are not automatically categorized as "spending". Sometimes transfers of capital are investments.

 

[titsrock]

If the Republicans invested in the things that Obama wants to invest in--infrastructure, education, healthcare (prescription bill excepted)--perhaps our country wouldn't be a shithole in need of all of this spending?

The Republicans have proven to be good at spending money foolishly on warmongering which achieved nothing except massive debts and deficits.

If Deficits were of no concern for Dick Cheney and the Republicans when they were in charge, why are they a concern now? Oh, I see...tax dollars spent on occupying foreign countries and no bid contracts to cronies = good; tax dollars spent on "America" = bad...

Now I get it...

The Republican Party nominated a candidate for president--John McCain--who admitted he knew nothing about economics. He, in turn, chose Sarah Palin, someone who knows nothing about anything. He could've chosen a Republican economic person as his runningmate. He didn't. His mistake.

Would America be better off with Republicans, who conducted the economic collapse, remaining in charge to turn their backs on America and the American worker?

I almost wonder what America would be like with McCain and the Republicans in charge now to see them turn their backs on the economy..and watch the U.S. dissolve literally. 45% unemployment...crime rates soaring...Rich vs Poor blood in the streets...banks on fire..This is the dream scenario for the Republican Party.

 

[stampede2873]

Titsrock... if he really wanted to help alleviate the national debt, wouldn't you think he would have worked toward that goal first? and then moved on to other programs?

If the guy complains about inheriting a trillion dollar debt... solve it first. Not spend ever more money that absolutely no one has!

Lets break it down to a personal level.... Your on a limited budget... but you have just enough to pay your bills, but you need a car. Would you over extend yourself to get that car or would you wait until you knew you could afford it first?

 

[Hot Mega]

If the Republicans invested in the things that Obama wants to invest in--infrastructure, education, healthcare (prescription bill excepted)--perhaps our country wouldn't be a shithole in need of all of this spending?

The Republicans have proven to be good at spending money foolishly on warmongering which achieved nothing except massive debts and deficits.

If Deficits were of no concern for Dick Cheney and the Republicans when they were in charge, why are they a concern now? Oh, I see...tax dollars spent on occupying foreign countries and no bid contracts to cronies = good; tax dollars spent on "America" = bad...

Now I get it...

The Republican Party nominated a candidate for president--John McCain--who admitted he knew nothing about economics. He, in turn, chose Sarah Palin, someone who knows nothing about anything. He could've chosen a Republican economic person as his runningmate. He didn't. His mistake.

Would America be better off with Republicans, who conducted the economic collapse, remaining in charge to turn their backs on America and the American worker?

I almost wonder what America would be like with McCain and the Republicans in charge now to see them turn their backs on the economy..and watch the U.S. dissolve literally. 45% unemployment...crime rates soaring...Rich vs Poor blood in the streets...banks on fire..This is the dream scenario for the Republican Party.

Good post.

:hatsoff::glugglug:

 

[stampede2873]

I almost wonder what America would be like with McCain and the Republicans in charge now to see them turn their backs on the economy..and watch the U.S. dissolve literally. 45% unemployment...crime rates soaring...Rich vs Poor blood in the streets...banks on fire..This is the dream scenario for the Republican Party.

You edited your post... So I didn't see this.

Republicans would not be in power. Remember, the house and the senate are controlled by Dems... as it was during GWB's presidency.

So what your saying is, under a republican pres and a dem dominate house and senate, the status quo would remain. Okay, gotcha.

 

[titsrock]

Titsrock... if he really wanted to help alleviate the national debt, wouldn't you think he would have worked toward that goal first? and then moved on to other programs?

If the guy complains about inheriting a trillion dollar debt... solve it first. Not spend ever more money that absolutely no one has!

Lets break it down to a personal level.... Your on a limited budget... but you have just enough to pay your bills, but you need a car. Would you over extend yourself to get that car or would you wait until you knew you could afford it first?

The only mistake that Obama and the Dems have made thus far is not ending both occupations in Iraq/Afghan. The political cover of ending the war (We can't afford these "wars" anymore) is right in front of the Democrats' faces. I have no idea if/when the Dems will ever end these wars. The Republicans can be the "peace party" right now by saying "the job is done, we're not nation builders and the war budget can be better spent elsewhere" etc.

The overall American deficit and the yearly Gov't budget are different things. Obama could return the Gov't to a surplus in a couple of years. But to actually tackle the broader deficit requires much more drastic action.

In your hypothetical--if I could afford to qualify for a car loan, and I decided that that car would help me get to a better paying job, than I'd buy that car. It would be an econobox, not a Porsche. And I wouldn't take out a never-ending car loan with never-ending compound interest. But in order to afford the car, I wouldn't go out and buy a house.

So, in sum, you do have to spend money to make money...but you have to be smart about it.

 

[Friday on my mind]

You edited your post... So I didn't see this.

Republicans would not be in power. Remember, the house and the senate are controlled by Dems... as it was during GWB's presidency.

So what your saying is, under a republican pres and a dem dominate house and senate, the status quo would remain. Okay, gotcha.

I need to point out that dems were not in power in congress for the vast majority of GWB's presidency.They only won a majority in 2006 in the house and then the senate was not untill the last election in 2008.Bush had a rubber stamp republican house and senate for his first 6 years.
As others have said there is spending and then there is spending IMO.What Bush ran huge defecits to do was to fund his very expensive military adventures and tax cuts for a very select few.And what have we got now to show for that spending? Very little IMO,a weak economy and the spending on the wars has just been throwing money down a rat hole with not much of value in return.Right now we need govt to spend to keep the economic foundations of our economy, the banks etc from collapsing.And as much as some may not like the truth it is the republicans who have to bear the overwhelming portion of the blame for that situation.America needs to spend more on some things and less on others.We need investment at home on things like infrastructure and education in order to compete worldwide.What we need to cut drastically (like at least 50% if not 75%) is our spending on things like the military and misguided military adventures.We can't afford anymore to have both guns and butter and really the guns (the defense budget) buys us almost nothing of value and is just a huge giveway to defense contractors.Its like the new F-22 fighter the air force is getting.What a monumental waste of money,we already have the best fighters in the world and no potential adversary has anything close but we need a new generation of fighter? Only a country with a lot of brainwashed sheep would allow such.God bless america.:bowdown:

 

[D-rock]

If the Republicans invested in the things that Obama wants to invest in--infrastructure, education, healthcare (prescription bill excepted)--perhaps our country wouldn't be a shithole in need of all of this spending?

Republicans are also good at other things. I'm sure there are a bunch of Republicans out there thinking, even if they don't have the balls to admit it at the moment, "Hmmm...if only we would have given the rich even more tax breaks and cut even more regulations on businesses we wouldn't be in this mess right now." It's sounds kind of insane but it's probably true.

 

[Hot Mega]

The only mistake that Obama and the Dems have made thus far is not ending both occupations in Iraq/Afghan.

We can't let terrorist extremists grab a foothold in Afghanistan again and that battle must be won IMO.

Where Bush when terribly wrong (among other things) was using the GWOT as an excuse to railroad Saddam Hussein and invade Iraq. In so doing, he jeopardized the front in Afghanistan.

The Iraqis have a will to fight against extremists whereas no such will existed in Afghanistan and there the intervention remains necessary.

After all, there are those there who are responsible for killing Americans and would like to kill more.

They need to be stopped.

 

[stampede2873]

Hey, bad economic policies are bad economic policies.

I'm not rich... I barely make ends meet.

Oh.. and Friday, the F-22 was designed to be a multi-use aircraft. Meaning all Services will be using it, and it was designed to be easily converted for use.

USAF - Ground runway launch
USN - Carrier Launch
USMC - VSTOL

The aircraft was designed to be service interchangable and in the end, save the DoD money instead of the expense of servicing the various aircraft the Military currently uses.

spending on things like the military and misguided military adventures.

I served under Clinton... His deployment record for the military in his 8 years was nearly triple that for the entire deployment record for the US in its history. Thanks to him, I was out of country for almost 3 years.

Also, this world is not a utopia... I wish it was, but the military is a viable asset to this country's defense.

 

[Hot Mega]

I served under Clinton... His deployment record for the military in his 8 years was nearly triple that for the entire deployment record for the US in its history. Thanks to him, I was out of country for almost 3 years.

That's interesting! What Clinton policy was directly responsible for you being deployed overseas for 3 years???

 

[meesterperfect]

how is this propaganda? Obama is throwing away money like handfuls of sand in the desert. I dunno, best analogy I could think of. But he is outta control with his spending!

at least he backed it up with a second sentance this time.

 

[titsrock]

You edited your post... So I didn't see this.

Republicans would not be in power. Remember, the house and the senate are controlled by Dems... as it was during GWB's presidency.:eek:

So what your saying is, under a republican pres and a dem dominate house and senate, the status quo would remain. Okay, gotcha.

I edited my post because, according to the board rules, we're not supposed to immediately post responses to ourselves. We're supposed to combine our posts into a single post, when we can.

This is why it's become a fool's errand to discuss serious matters with Republicans at this point. You think the Democrats controlled Congress throughout Dubya's reign of incompetence? Seriously. Dude. Get the facts.

 

[E-Ann-Hilden]

Tax and spend or No Tax and spend.... Take your pick! Either way it equals a larger deficeit....

 

[meesterperfect]

intersting:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0209/19303.html

Robert Byrd, democratic senator says Obama is doing all he can to make a power grab.
meaning, doing whatever he wants.