Government to shut-down Friday

[Lanky Livingston]

I dont even have to guess who you're arguing with but let me say this; I like Ax too!!

Hmm, the fact that he quoted me in the post wasn't a giveaway or anything. Stooping to potshots even when I'm on your ignore list - that's a new low for you Mike!

 

[Lanky Livingston]

Dude, the ole' GOP way of doing things? Give it a rest! You mean like Nancy Pelosi telling us old people will starve if there is even a 5% cut in the program she was referring to? That's all that has been proposed in the program that brings meals to the elderly. I am sure there is 5% in the bureaucracy of that program that should be cut! I would go so far as to say the Federal Government shouldn't be involved in a program like that in the first place. States, private charities and religious bodies should be handling it!

The political game is played on both sides, sometimes one party is better at it than others. The last couple of years the Dems have done an outstanding job of making anyone who disagrees with Obama either a racist or extremist, so please stop painting one side clean and one side dirty.

Well, if you've followed my posting history, you'll know I am hard on both sides (that's what she said) and at least try to be middle of the road. My liberal side is mostly on social and environmental issues. The post was also meant to be ironic, but apparently that was missed.

And of course you like Ax, you're a blind GOP follower like he is, so he doesn't speak down to you.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

As always, rational discussion with Republicans is next to impossible, so I'm bowing out of this thread. Thanks for coming to my defense, Goaldie, but its useless. The Republicans on this board won't even concede the most basic facts (e.g.: if the final budget is not approved by both houses before the deadline, the gov't will shut down regardless), and when asked what exactly their position is, they continue to just spit rhetoric.

 

[Elephant]

As always, rational discussion with Republicans is next to impossible, so I'm bowing out of this thread. Thanks for coming to my defense, Goaldie, but its useless. The Republicans on this board won't even concede the most basic facts (e.g.: if the final budget is not approved by both houses before the deadline, the gov't will shut down regardless), and when asked what exactly their position is, they continue to just spit rhetoric.

Falling on a sword?

 

[Ax]

As always, rational discussion with Republicans is next to impossible, so I'm bowing out of this thread. Thanks for coming to my defense, Goaldie, but its useless. The Republicans on this board won't even concede the most basic facts (e.g.: if the final budget is not approved by both houses before the deadline, the gov't will shut down regardless), and when asked what exactly their position is, they continue to just spit rhetoric.

Don't go away LL-Cool Jrock, we all like you.

 

[Sarge]

As always, rational discussion with Republicans is next to impossible, so I'm bowing out of this thread. Thanks for coming to my defense, Goaldie, but its useless. The Republicans on this board won't even concede the most basic facts (e.g.: if the final budget is not approved by both houses before the deadline, the gov't will shut down regardless), and when asked what exactly their position is, they continue to just spit rhetoric.

Commie

 

[Goaldeje]

Falling on a sword?

Now THAT'S what she said!
Posted via BGO Mobile Device

 

[redskins26]

so what was it 2 billion in savings off of 1.5 trillion?

 

[Goaldeje]

Nice look at how things went down. It will be interesting to analyze once the details come out.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/10/us/politics/10reconstruct.html?_r=3&pagewanted=2&hp
Posted via BGO Mobile Device

 

[redskins26]

I was hoping that they would take the federal funding out of planned parent hood but it doesnt seem like it is going to be the case

 

[Sarge]

Repubs caved like bitches on a lot of stuff. Too bad, I was looking forward to a week or two off

 

[Goaldeje]

Figure we can kind of merge this to talking about the budget in general...

Love the first two lines of this article:

BARACK OBAMA, as we unhappily noted when he produced his budget in February, has no credible plan for getting America’s runaway budget deficit under control. Up to now the Republicans have been just as useless; they have confined themselves to provoking a probable government shutdown in pursuit of a fantasy war against the non-security discretionary expenditures that make up only an eighth of the total budget, rather than tackling the long-term problem posed by the escalating costs of entitlements. The only people with the guts to talk about such things have been various independent commissions which the two parties have ignored.

http://www.economist.com/node/18530111?story_id=18530111&CFID=161718023&CFTOKEN=10656023

 

[Lanky Livingston]

Now the battle is the deficit ceiling. If they don't raise it, the country will go belly up. Repubs are taking the hard line approach again, saying any bill to raise the deficit ceiling needs massive spending cuts attached. We'll see where this one goes - we're not out of hot water just yet...

 

[Goaldeje]

Now the battle is the deficit ceiling. If they don't raise it, the country will go belly up. Repubs are taking the hard line approach again, saying any bill to raise the deficit ceiling needs massive spending cuts attached. We'll see where this one goes - we're not out of hot water just yet...

You're right. It's about to get ugly. Both sides, to some extent, are claiming victory in the budget battle, but from what I hear, the Tea Party is very unhappy with how much Boehner compromised. The Dems just acquiesced to the largest budget cuts in history, so you know they're not happy.

I keep coming back to Libya. I know it is a small part of our budget (relatively), but I am not sure why we are there at all when we are broke. We need to cut down on military spending big time, but that is going to be difficult to do and to justify when we are fighting three wars.

 

[Henry]

Wasn't really directed at you, but the statement itself. You're not the first to repeat it.

George Bush continues to amaze. According to the left, the dumbest mother ****er ever to occupy the White House, yet able to fool the world into doing whatever he wished, including controlling, and thereby ruining, economies across the planet.

While Erkle Obama surges forward with the skill befitting a bag of hammers, and people actually believe he's smart.

Bush lowered taxes and coupled that with unprecedented amounts of increased spending. It was incredibly stupid and robbed us of very valuable maneuvering room when the economic crisis hit in '08. We had to increase spending to fend off the economic collapse but we had no money with which to do it. Obama came in promising the world, but the reality is he was stuck between an economy that was falling apart an a HUGE deficit problem. He chose to double-down on the deficit, and history will decide if that was the right call.

We've had to make some very very tough choices recently. Choices we shouldn't have had to make if Bush had had even an ounce of fiscal responsibility in his head. That's what we're seeing now. I do agree that we are far enough removed from Bush's presidency that Obama's record should stand on it's own now. Obama doesn't get a free pass. But that doesn't excuse the plate of steaming **** that Bush handed his successor two years ago. I do not think history will be kind to him.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

Bush lowered taxes and coupled that with unprecedented amounts of increased spending. It was incredibly stupid and robbed us of very valuable maneuvering room when the economic crisis hit in '08. We had to increase spending to fend off the economic collapse but we had no money with which to do it. Obama came in promising the world, but the reality is he was stuck between an economy that was falling apart an a HUGE deficit problem. He chose to double-down on the deficit, and history will decide if that was the right call.

We've had to make some very very tough choices recently. Choices we shouldn't have had to make if Bush had had even an ounce of fiscal responsibility in his head. That's what we're seeing now. I do agree that we are far enough removed from Bush's presidency that Obama's record should stand on it's own now. But that doesn't excuse the plate of steaming **** that Bush handed his successor two years ago. I do not think history will be kind to him.

Couldn't agree more. Pretty much the entire Bush presidency was a disaster, and we're like a prize fighter reeling from a powerful left hook at the moment. Should Obama have spent MORE to try and get things under control? Who knows...the stimulus was handled extremely poorly; the money could have been spent in much better ways.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

And there's Big Mike adding more great discussion to the thread.

 

[Sarge]

I do agree that we are far enough removed from Bush's presidency that Obama's record should stand on it's own now. Obama doesn't get a free pass. But that doesn't excuse the plate of steaming **** that Bush handed his successor two years ago. I do not think history will be kind to him.

It is debatable as to whether we HAD to spend money to get out of debt. It's a theory, and one that so far has proven lame.

You do know that Obama has TRIPLED the debt, right? And now, we have no payback coming into the Treasury from his liberal spending policies so he's going to raise taxes instead of cutting spending.


Told you all back before I was banished how this was going to turn out

 

[Henry]

back to blaming bush for everything. Sarge, you were right once again. Bush might as well have been named Lucifer to libs.

Not blaming him for everything. But I'm not going to pretend he didn't spend like crazy while cutting taxes. I'm not going to pretend that Obama invented deficit spending. That's as a big a conservative myth as 'it's all Bush's fault' is a liberal one.

It is debatable as to whether we HAD to spend money to get out of debt. It's a theory, and one that so far has proven lame.

I didn't say we had to spend money to get out of debt. That doesn't make any sense.

You do know that Obama has TRIPLED the debt, right? And now, we have no payback coming into the Treasury from his liberal spending policies so he's going to raise taxes instead of cutting spending.

I think you mean the deficit, not the debt. And no, he didn't unless you count the 2009 budget which was set when Bush was president.

The 2010 budget, Obama's first, which was actually lower than that of 2009, also included funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, which were not counted as part of the budget under the Bush administration. Those were considered appropriations until Obama became President and added it to the budget. So even adding that $130 billion or so in 2010, Obama's first budget was still lower than Bush's last one.

This is not to say that Obama is a thrifty guy. But blaming him for the spending in '09, which included Bush's TARP program, is one of those big myths.

 

[Goaldeje]

We are in to Obama's 3rd year though. When does it become all his responsibility? Now I get that Bush was a horrible President to most liberals but there comes a time when the pointing fingers stops and you start saying "well, what are YOU doing?" to the current Prez.

Check around the site, Mike. Most of us who have been accused of being liberal are very much asking Obama, WTF? He has not delivered on his campaign promises and seems very much over his head. We are not saying he deserves no blame at all. He deserves a LOT of blame.

But I don't understand why the Repubs have such a hard time acknowledging that he was dealt a crap hand. He has made it worse, certainly. But Bush wasn't exactly the best president since Reagan, was he? Can't we all agree both either have made or are making things worse?