Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Brucelee
PL-You simply don't know how to read. Nowhere did I suggest that the current House (which has been in office for less than 2 months) is going to "solve" this issue.
What I did suggest is that Obama is a socialist of the highest order. So, the fact that he is talking about the Feds making investments ought to make any rational person 
Yes, radical changes need to be made. No, radical changes are not yet being proposed. It is notworthy that that the POTUS summarily ignored his own panel's recommendations on debt reduction.
That Obama is some leader.
Right down the tubes |
ahhhhh yer back pedalin'.... you said the Congress would not allow Obama to blow out our budgets anymore and of course they are blowing it out just the same...plus or minus 2% of course depedning how you look at the budget implications of making the 01 and 03 tax cuts permanent. (that's A LOT of welfare checks and govt cheese to eliminate should get you about .0001% of the $700 billion.
For the record, after 8 quarters from innauguration, Obama's discretionary spending fo 109% is roughly in between Reagan and Clinton on low end (100% over their respective predecessors) and below Bush Sr. and Bush Jr.'s 115% increase for those two. That's mostly due to the fact that the massive bail outs of AIG, Citigroup, Goldman, etc, Fannie and Freddie, the autos, etc nearly all came under Bush jr and his buddy Hank Paulson, same with Bush Senior in the S&L banking crisis. Also, the notion that Obama is a socialist is really sort like saying that Tom Coburn is a fascist. A bit of an exaggeration to say the least since when you analyze their differences on discretionary spending you're talking about billions upons billions going to the same FOR PROFIT special interests in banking, healthcare and defense. And of course their stock prices have all surged 100% since all of this supposed socialism.
Put it this way, for there to be even be 5% of "Obama socialism" for the masses there has to be some corporate special interest profiting six or seven times that amount first. This notion that the govt will change drastically from a one corrupt political party to another is just fodder for right and left wing talk radio and "news" networks. These guys spend more time cutting deals with each other than anything else.
Let me leave you with George Washington's wisdom. He was Federalist who was very suspicious of the role that political parties would ultimately play in shaping the country. He felt that a partisan would ultimately be a servant to his party rather than being a servant to his nation. Our first President could not have been more right.