Recommended Posts
kallend 2,184
QuoteQuoteQuote
Yes, it IS pretty simple. That is, once you stop trying to blame one particular individual.
Well, the ONLY single individual who had the power to stop it was the president. He chose not to -not surpringly since he proposed the RECORD DEFICIT in the first place.
Did even read what you just wrote?? Forget your prejudice over the deficit for one moment, it is blinding you to the facts of how our government runs.
Two houses of congress, the House of representatives and the Senate, had the power to stop it before it ever went to the President. He couldn't do anything until they did.
Maybe you should take a class in civics to help you understand.
Ummm - on the matter of civics class: the House and Senate are NOT single individuals. Please read what I write instead of making it up for me.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
Some choice tidbits (it sounds like this guy has been reading my posts)
QuoteSince 1961, the federal government has run deficits in all but five years. Only the surplus of 1969 stemmed from deliberate policy: a 10 percent income surtax reluctantly passed by Congress in 1968.
The others (1998-2001) mostly reflected good fortune: the end of the Cold War, resulting in a 40 percent drop in defense spending as a share of the economy, and an unexpected surge in taxes from the economic boom.
Neither was a policy act of the Clinton administration or the then-Republican Congress.
Good fortune (although the budgets were only balanced by "borrowing" money from Social Security in those years) for which neither POTUS nor Congress were responsible.
QuoteSecond, he assumes big savings in Medicare by freezing reimbursements to doctors and hospitals - a policy Congress won't adopt.
He is saying that the Congress won't adopt proposed policies. How about that? Congress saying "no" and increasing spending. Hmmm.... That doesn't fit into the "Bush is responsible for all budgetary evils" paradigm...
QuoteThe only way Bush could balance the budget would be by not following Bush's policies.
Actually, we are hoping Congress won't follow Bush's policies.
QuoteThe most telling figures in his budget involve his proposal to eliminate or dramatically reduce 151 programs, for savings of $18 billion. That's six-tenths of 1 percent of federal spending.
What's telling, though, is that Congress will probably reject even many of these proposals.
Congress rejecting proposals. Oh, yes. THEY control the purse strings.
QuoteAlready, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are 44 percent of federal spending. In 2007, these programs cost $1.2 trillion, more than double all defense spending.
Blasphemy!!!! No way this fits in with the spin! Asshole facts,
QuoteBut most Americans don't seem bothered. That's why both parties devote so little effort to addressing government spending or the deficits.
As a society, we seem to have made a choice. It is to not control government.
Wait. We need to peg this guy as a Democrat of a Republican so we know which side should hate or love him.
QuoteDemocrats have spent seven years denouncing Bush's tax cuts, but are willing to repeal only the cuts benefiting those with incomes above $250,000.
Okay. He's a right-wing evangelical racist Republican for suggesting badly of the Dems.
QuoteWhen Republicans created the Medicare drug benefit (2007 cost: $41 billion), it was simply added onto existing benefits.
No, wait. He's a leftist bleeding-heart pinko communist terrorist sympathizer.
QuoteThe fact that we are not debating the possible consequences is a cop-out - but it is a cop-out in which the public is conspicuously complicit.
A cop out to single out blame to one person when all are at fault.
My wife is hotter than your wife.
Quotethe House and Senate are NOT single individuals. Please read what I write instead of making it up for me.
If you'd quit the spin, your posts would be far easier to interpret. Knock off the defense attorney semantics.
We know that in the House, 218 people had the ability to stop it and did not. (This does not take into account subcommittees, committees, etc)
We know that in the Senate, 50 people had the ability to stop it and did not.
A bill does not make it to the president - UNTIL THE CUKING CONGRESS OKAYS IT! Bills need not be affirmatively stopped - they must be affirmatively voted through!
My wife is hotter than your wife.
QuoteA bill does not make it to the president - UNTIL THE CUKING CONGRESS OKAYS IT! Bills need not be affirmatively stopped - they must be affirmatively voted through!
If they're willing to stop all government action.
That was the dilemna Pelosi faced with the Iraq appropriations. Bush vetoed their affirmative actions. They only way they could force their way is to not fund the troops at all and Bush knew this was not a politically feasible option for them.
The GOP had no qualms forcing a shutdown of the government during Bill Clinton's Administration, but that had some consequences - a company I was associated with (Silicon Graphics) was damaged by these shutdowns that froze government orders.
As I've suggested recently, we can't pretend that the government works so simply at the civics lesson we get in grade school. We have to look at it using the college version of how our govenrment works. In that one, the real world one, George Bush is at least 10 times more powerful than Nancy Pelosi. Maybe 100 times.
KelliJ 0
QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote
Yes, it IS pretty simple. That is, once you stop trying to blame one particular individual.
Well, the ONLY single individual who had the power to stop it was the president. He chose not to -not surpringly since he proposed the RECORD DEFICIT in the first place.
Did even read what you just wrote?? Forget your prejudice over the deficit for one moment, it is blinding you to the facts of how our government runs.
Two houses of congress, the House of representatives and the Senate, had the power to stop it before it ever went to the President. He couldn't do anything until they did.
Maybe you should take a class in civics to help you understand.
Ummm - on the matter of civics class: the House and Senate are NOT single individuals. Please read what I write instead of making it up for me.
I am very well aware of that. The House and Senate are bodies made up of individuals, each with a vote. The House and Senate, each as a body, have a say in passage of any bill. They can also override the President.
The President is required by law to submit to Congress a budget. He has no choice! Congress, on the other hand, is not required to approve that budget. They have the final say. The question wasn't what single individual, the question was what branch of government.
Clear you mind of your hatred and you will see things much more clearly.
billvon 3,132
Both the president and congress have a significant role in determining what the budget of the US government is. The president proposes it, congress passes it, the president approves it. Both branches of government share the credit (or the blame) for any given budget.
QuoteThe GOP had no qualms forcing a shutdown of the government during Bill Clinton's Administration, but that had some consequences - a company I was associated with (Silicon Graphics) was damaged by these shutdowns that froze government orders.
Yes. I had a field training exercise for that weekend, as well, and we had to improvise a training plan that required no money at that point.
Quotewe can't pretend that the government works so simply at the civics lesson we get in grade school.
No. But we can work towards that part. Civics doesn't teach about sex, money and power.
QuoteIn that one, the real world one, George Bush is at least 10 times more powerful than Nancy Pelosi. Maybe 100 times.
He has the same power over Pelosi that Clinton had over Gingrich. And yet, Congress had the balls to do it. Yes, balls. And they said, "We'll take the heat, too." Because it was about doing the right thing, not about passing the buck.
Yeah - as much as I am not a fan of the Republicans, I give them credit for having the balls to stand up and shut down the government.
My wife is hotter than your wife.
But unlike that point in the 90s, we are bordering on recession and we have 100,000 men and women in a hostile land. The consequences for this pissing match might be too high.
Quoteit may be as simple as that - the Democrats need to grow a backbone.
But unlike that point in the 90s, we are bordering on recession and we have 100,000 men and women in a hostile land. The consequences for this pissing match might be too high.
And the consequences of NOT doing it may be even greater.
My wife is hotter than your wife.
Did even read what you just wrote?? Forget your prejudice over the deficit for one moment, it is blinding you to the facts of how our government runs.
Two houses of congress, the House of representatives and the Senate, had the power to stop it before it ever went to the President. He couldn't do anything until they did.
Maybe you should take a class in civics to help you understand.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites