Advertisement
by Fal Dara in Shienar » Sat May 26, 2012 5:42 pm
by Azakhia » Sun May 27, 2012 3:44 am
by Ashmoria » Sun May 27, 2012 5:48 am
Gauthier wrote:Ashmoria wrote:we had a thread on this
but its sad that we so try to block out our memory of the bush administration that we think that obama passed TARP and the auto bailout money in addition to the stimulus.
If people are clueless enough to elect the corporate serial killer in November, everyone will get a brutal refresher course on just what the Jar-Jar Administration did.
by Ashmoria » Sun May 27, 2012 5:51 am
Fal Dara in Shienar wrote:How is spending 3.5 trillion dollars a year not considered a spending spree?
"Oh, I didn't increase it quite as much as other Presidents!"
...And? 3.5 trillion is 3.5 trillion no matter how you cut it. Most of all, I love the implicit assumption in the argument that Bush was something other than a spending adict himself. You know your argument is on shaky ground when it rests on the premise that Bush was something other than a prolifgate spender.
by Radiatia » Sun May 27, 2012 5:56 am
by NyxNyke » Sun May 27, 2012 6:05 am
by Wamitoria » Sun May 27, 2012 7:13 am
Fal Dara in Shienar wrote:How is spending 3.5 trillion dollars a year not considered a spending spree?
"Oh, I didn't increase it quite as much as other Presidents!"
...And? 3.5 trillion is 3.5 trillion no matter how you cut it. Most of all, I love the implicit assumption in the argument that Bush was something other than a spending adict himself. You know your argument is on shaky ground when it rests on the premise that Bush was something other than a prolifgate spender.
NyxNyke wrote:While Bush was bad, this report erroneously credits him with spending he did not do, Obama authorized spending that even Bush declined to do. But as the amount was authorized under Bush it went in his column.
by Arkinesia » Sun May 27, 2012 7:35 am
Disappointment Panda wrote:Don't hope for a life without problems. There's no such thing. Instead, hope for a life full of good problems.
by SaintB » Sun May 27, 2012 7:37 am
by Revolutopia » Sun May 27, 2012 7:45 am
Arkinesia wrote:Wamitoria wrote:Are you seriously saying that Bush only ran huge deficits because of the two years the Dems were in control of congress during his tenure.
You can't just blame Bush for the massive spending that happened in his term. Congress was also to blame, regardless of which party was in power.
Same goes for Obama—it wasn't Obama who was responsible for the slowdown in spending, and many sources acknowledge this including PolitiFact and the Washington Post, the latter of which states directly that in their view the Republicans have been the primary reason for the stabilization of government spending and that if Obama had his way spending would have been ramped up to the degree Republicans claim it has been.
They even went so far as to give Nutting's claim three Pinocchios for that reason. It's not that spending has stabilized because of Obama, which was the general claim Nutting made.
by Arkinesia » Sun May 27, 2012 7:47 am
Revolutopia wrote:Arkinesia wrote:You can't just blame Bush for the massive spending that happened in his term. Congress was also to blame, regardless of which party was in power.
Same goes for Obama—it wasn't Obama who was responsible for the slowdown in spending, and many sources acknowledge this including PolitiFact and the Washington Post, the latter of which states directly that in their view the Republicans have been the primary reason for the stabilization of government spending and that if Obama had his way spending would have been ramped up to the degree Republicans claim it has been.
They even went so far as to give Nutting's claim three Pinocchios for that reason. It's not that spending has stabilized because of Obama, which was the general claim Nutting made.
So Obama still, as if McCain, Romney, whatever Republican was in office Republicans would just be throwing away money on anything that caught their fancy. As Republicans only care about spending when they are not in charge.
Disappointment Panda wrote:Don't hope for a life without problems. There's no such thing. Instead, hope for a life full of good problems.
by Revolutopia » Sun May 27, 2012 7:51 am
Arkinesia wrote:Revolutopia wrote:So Obama still, as if McCain, Romney, whatever Republican was in office Republicans would just be throwing away money on anything that caught their fancy. As Republicans only care about spending when they are not in charge.
I did not mention any hypothetical scenarios. I only discussed what is presently happening in the real world, not in an alternate history.
Calm the hell down.
by Melkor Unchained » Sun May 27, 2012 7:53 am
A Republican Empire State wrote:Our debt is still gigantic...keep trying...
by Ryanisking » Sun May 27, 2012 7:56 am
by Melkor Unchained » Sun May 27, 2012 7:59 am
by Parpolitic Citizens » Sun May 27, 2012 8:01 am
Fal Dara in Shienar wrote:How is spending 3.5 trillion dollars a year not considered a spending spree?
"Oh, I didn't increase it quite as much as other Presidents!"
...And? 3.5 trillion is 3.5 trillion no matter how you cut it. Most of all, I love the implicit assumption in the argument that Bush was something other than a spending adict himself. You know your argument is on shaky ground when it rests on the premise that Bush was something other than a prolifgate spender.
by Melkor Unchained » Sun May 27, 2012 8:01 am
by Revolutopia » Sun May 27, 2012 8:14 am
by Melkor Unchained » Sun May 27, 2012 8:19 am
Revolutopia wrote:Melkor Unchained wrote:Point of order: any modern president would have passed TARP and the auto bailouts had he been in office at the time. Those were both middle-of-the-road political maneuvers.
You mean similar to how any modern president would have equally passed the various spending bills that Obama passed?
by Parpolitic Citizens » Sun May 27, 2012 8:21 am
Melkor Unchained wrote:Revolutopia wrote:
You mean similar to how any modern president would have equally passed the various spending bills that Obama passed?
Yup.
To be honest, I chuckle a bit when I hear conservatives rage about Obama. In 2008 I predicted he would be another business-as-usual president and I was right. My mother can't stand him, and while I'm not exactly a fan myself, I find it hilarious that Republicans suddenly "care" about spending.
by Revolutopia » Sun May 27, 2012 8:22 am
Melkor Unchained wrote:Revolutopia wrote:
You mean similar to how any modern president would have equally passed the various spending bills that Obama passed?
Yup.
To be honest, I chuckle a bit when I hear conservatives rage about Obama. In 2008 I predicted he would be another business-as-usual president and I was right. My mother can't stand him, and while I'm not exactly a fan myself, I find it hilarious that Republicans suddenly "care" about spending.
by Arkinesia » Sun May 27, 2012 8:26 am
Revolutopia wrote:Arkinesia wrote:I did not mention any hypothetical scenarios. I only discussed what is presently happening in the real world, not in an alternate history.
Calm the hell down.
And I saying in the real world, all evidence points to Republican opposition to spending only derives from there being a Democrat in office.
Disappointment Panda wrote:Don't hope for a life without problems. There's no such thing. Instead, hope for a life full of good problems.
by Wirbel » Sun May 27, 2012 8:27 am
Paragade wrote:A Republican Empire State wrote:
He hasn't reversed it. That's the problem.
You can't cut massive amounts of federal spending in a down economy, that would cause the economy to just slow down more, even Romney acknowledges this.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/2 ... 45933.html
Mikoyan-Guryevich wrote:Don't RP that your naval strike force has just launched 1000 fighter jets, this is just pure shit.
by Divair » Sun May 27, 2012 8:29 am
Wirbel wrote:Paragade wrote:
You can't cut massive amounts of federal spending in a down economy, that would cause the economy to just slow down more, even Romney acknowledges this.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/2 ... 45933.html
This is a capitalist economy. You need to cut spending to help it. Less taxes helps the capitalist economy.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Aadhiris, American Legionaries, Ameriganastan, Attestaltarragaby, Bienenhalde, Dimetrodon Empire, Einaro, Floofybit, Kreigsreich of Iron, Lanansia, Nantoraka, San Lumen, Statesburg, Stratonesia, The Black Forrest, Tycerian Empire, Umeria, Xind
Advertisement