four more years of bush / cheney?

Don Quixote

Don Quixote

cancer survivor
Contributor
17 of mittens key advisers are former bush advisers

mittens calls cheney a wise and knowledgeable man

mittens is using cheney to fund raise

this is what mittens is bringing to us - 4 more years of bush/cheney chicanery
 
Damocles said:
12. We've had Bushspending on steroids, we have the Pill Bill on steroids, we've had a surge in Afghanistan...

Bush III sucks as President, it's time to let him go.
Click to expand...

that is a republican lying talking point

iraq is over and afghanistan is winding down

domestic spending is down

try again
 
Don Quixote said:
that is a republican lying talking point

iraq is over and afghanistan is winding down

domestic spending is down

try again
Click to expand...

Down? Compared to what? 1.2 Trillion per year deficit predicted even with an assumption of tax increases... That isn't a talking point, it is what Obama's proposed budget (so bad that not even one Democrat, not even one, voted for it in the Senate) predicted for the next 20 years...

It is only "down" if you assume that barely slowing the growth of some programs means it is "lower"...

Iraq was "winding down" when Bush was in office, Afghanistan's surge didn't happen until Obama was there. That it is "winding down" now doesn't change that it has done nothing permanently positive in Afghanistan. Remember how we were going to "return the focus" to Afghanistan?

This guy is a disaster, for us and for future generations.

I can't believe that people even try to say this guy is "fiscally conservative". It's preposterous on its face.
 
I don't think we'll ever see anything like the Bush/Cheney admin again. Even with Romney, I would expect him to focus roughly 100% more on the economy & domestic issues. I think a large part of Bush's failure w/ the economy was the fact that he basically ignored domestic policy - negligence, borne of his obsession w/ Iraq.

And on the foreign policy front, let's definitely hope we never see anything like that again. I have enough faith in Romney that he won't be a complete idiot & pursue a careless, costly policy in the same vein as what we saw w/ the Bush admin.
 
Onceler said:
I don't think we'll ever see anything like the Bush/Cheney admin again. Even with Romney, I would expect him to focus roughly 100% more on the economy & domestic issues. I think a large part of Bush's failure w/ the economy was the fact that he basically ignored domestic policy - negligence, borne of his obsession w/ Iraq.

And on the foreign policy front, let's definitely hope we never see anything like that again. I have enough faith in Romney that he won't be a complete idiot & pursue a careless, costly policy in the same vein as what we saw w/ the Bush admin.
Click to expand...

The main problem with Bush was that Bush wasn't running the show and was clueless about what was happening around him. The PNAC war hawks and Cheney were calling the shots.
 
Bijou said:
The main problem with Bush was that Bush wasn't running the show and was clueless about what was happening around him. The PNAC war hawks and Cheney were calling the shots.
Click to expand...

I'm surprised that there hasn't been more coverage & scrutiny of PNAC and its influence on that admin. That group really changed the course of history.
 
Onceler said:
I'm surprised that there hasn't been more coverage & scrutiny of PNAC and its influence on that admin. That group really changed the course of history.
Click to expand...

There's been a lot of coverage, but most of it in alternative media sources. They're still around, under the name FPI (Foreign Policy Initiative).
 
LOL.. When I first saw the thread title, I just knew it must be a liberal upset with Obama. After all, he expanded the Patriot Act, left Gitmo open, and extended Bush's tax cuts, while outspending Bush 2 to 1. Still not quite there on gay marriage, but he's 'coming around,' so he says. If I were a devout liberal, this guy would have me seeing red.

And Don, if "domestic spending" is down, it's only because the $5 trillion we've spent has not generated any more money to spend.
 
Dixie said:
LOL.. When I first saw the thread title, I just knew it must be a liberal upset with Obama. After all, he expanded the Patriot Act, left Gitmo open, and extended Bush's tax cuts, while outspending Bush 2 to 1. Still not quite there on gay marriage, but he's 'coming around,' so he says. If I were a devout liberal, this guy would have me seeing red.

And Don, if "domestic spending" is down, it's only because the $5 trillion we've spent has not generated any more money to spend.
Click to expand...

Oh - are you back in "he's just like Bush?" mode?

Seems like only yesterday you were in "he's a dangerous communist" mode...
 
Damocles said:
Down? Compared to what? 1.2 Trillion per year deficit predicted even with an assumption of tax increases... That isn't a talking point, it is what Obama's proposed budget (so bad that not even one Democrat, not even one, voted for it in the Senate) predicted for the next 20 years...
Click to expand...

Your ability to fuck up pretty much everything is so few words is astounding.

(1) There are two parts to the deficit equation, spending and revenue. Saying that the deficit is higher than previously does not necessarily mean that spending is higher than previously. (2) The deficit us projected to be $1.3T in 2013, not in any year thereafter and certainly not for the next 20 years. (3) That $1.3T deficit does not include an assumption of tax increases. (4) There was no vote on Obama's 2013 budget proposal.


Damocles said:
It is only "down" if you assume that barely slowing the growth of some programs means it is "lower"...
Click to expand...

Yes, that's down and that definition of down is something that pretty much everyone agreed with in the late 1990s.


Damocles said:
Iraq was "winding down" when Bush was in office, Afghanistan's surge didn't happen until Obama was there. That it is "winding down" now doesn't change that it has done nothing permanently positive in Afghanistan. Remember how we were going to "return the focus" to Afghanistan?

This guy is a disaster, for us and for future generations.

I can't believe that people even try to say this guy is "fiscally conservative". It's preposterous on its face.
Click to expand...

Yeah, except for spending being down and passing a bill that substantially reduces the deficit over the long-term and agreeing to spending cuts in the near term and trying to increase revenues to help bring the deficit under control, I guess.

What's preposterous is pretending that anyone who refuses to talk about increasing taxes, which includes the entire Republican caucus in the House and probably the Senate, is "fiscally conservative."
 
Also too:

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) — Of all the falsehoods told about President Barack Obama, the biggest whopper is the one about his reckless spending spree.

As would-be president Mitt Romney tells it: “I will lead us out of this debt and spending inferno.”

Almost everyone believes that Obama has presided over a massive increase in federal spending, an “inferno” of spending that threatens our jobs, our businesses and our children’s future. Even Democrats seem to think it’s true.

But it didn’t happen. Although there was a big stimulus bill under Obama, federal spending is rising at the slowest pace since Dwight Eisenhower brought the Korean War to an end in the 1950s.

Even hapless Herbert Hoover managed to increase spending more than Obama has.
Click to expand...

And a chart:

MW-AR658_spendi_20120521163312_ME.jpg



http://www.marketwatch.com/story/obama-spending-binge-never-happened-2012-05-22?pagenumber=1
 
Onceler said:
I don't think we'll ever see anything like the Bush/Cheney admin again. Even with Romney, I would expect him to focus roughly 100% more on the economy & domestic issues. I think a large part of Bush's failure w/ the economy was the fact that he basically ignored domestic policy - negligence, borne of his obsession w/ Iraq.

And on the foreign policy front, let's definitely hope we never see anything like that again. I have enough faith in Romney that he won't be a complete idiot & pursue a careless, costly policy in the same vein as what we saw w/ the Bush admin.
Click to expand...

I generally agree with this. I do think that trying to relitigate Bush would be a mistake for the current Admin as well. I don't think "He's Bush!" will work forever and into the end of time for perpetual victory any more than "He's Carter!" worked for republicans in perpetuity.
 
"But it didn’t happen. Although there was a big stimulus bill under Obama, federal spending is rising at the slowest pace since Dwight Eisenhower brought the Korean War to an end in the 1950s."

Wow - that's pretty astounding. Shows how effective propoganda is....
 
General Buck Turgidson said:
Also too:



And a chart:

MW-AR658_spendi_20120521163312_ME.jpg



http://www.marketwatch.com/story/obama-spending-binge-never-happened-2012-05-22?pagenumber=1
Click to expand...

LOL. This ignores the baseline that was massively increased with the stimulus and the 400 Billion in March.

Seriously, it plays on the fact that nobody understands baseline budgeting. The reality: Bush overspent by 400 Billion, Obama set a new baseline with 1.2 Trillion deficit and predicts to continue that deficit level even after an assumption of tax increases and the assumption of wars ending for the next 20 years in his own projections.

That he's pretty satisfied with the new baseline and is "growing slowly" after that is actually quite funny and shouldn't be promoted by people who pay attention.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top