Many of these bills were made in REPUBLICAN administrations all too ready to be passed down to the next politician instead of balancing the budget then. Tax breaks we couldn't afford along with two wars has the worst of the politicians threatening the SS system instead of raising those taxes and taking the heat for the spending the House has approved.
Geez I love it when the Republican are blamed for all the out of control spending :roll:
Tex can you please explain why the Republicans are the ones getting all the blame for the war debt when the Democrats had to vote to support the wars for the US to be involved in them? :? The Republican
did not have a filibuster proof Senate so the Republicans
had to have BIPARTISAN SUPPORT for anything to pass the Senate.
For the last two years of the Bush Administration, the Dems had control of both houses, so again why are the Republicans taking blame for the war spending during that time? AGAIN there
had to be BIPARTISAN SUPPORT for anything to pass the Senate.
Then you have the first two years of the Obama Administration where the Dems could have passed any bill they wanted on a very PARTISAN vote because
they had a Filibuster proof Senate and a majority in the House so why are the Republicans taking blame for the war spending during that time too? Are you going to blame the Republicans for the war spending Obama is illegally doing in Lybia too? :roll:
Tex Wrote
along with a total reluctance of republicans to allow any taxes on the people who influence them most through our campaign bribery system of government.
Tex the Republicans might be reluctant to raise taxes on JOB CREATORS in a time when the US NEEDS JOBS but at least they are not awarding Government jobs/paychecks to their supporters. :wink: :roll:
More than two years after Obama took office vowing to banish "special interests" from his administration, nearly 200 of his biggest donors have landed plum government jobs and advisory posts, won federal contracts worth millions of dollars for their business interests or attended numerous elite White House meetings and social events, an investigation by iWatch News has found.
These "bundlers" raised at least $50,000 — and sometimes more than $500,000 — in campaign donations for Obama's campaign. Many of those in the "Class of 2008" are now being asked to bundle contributions for Obama's reelection, an effort that could cost $1 billion.
As a candidate, Obama spoke passionately about diminishing the clout of moneyed interests. Kicking off his presidential run on Feb. 10, 2007, he blasted "the cynics, the lobbyists, the special interests," who had "turned our government into a game only they can afford to play."
"We're here today to take it back," he said.
And I think we all know how Obama rewarded the Unions, ACORN, Black Panthers, and others that supprted him. :x
Maybe if Obama and the DEMS would stop repaying their campaign donors with tax payer funded jobs and contracts they wouldn't have to raise taxes on JOB CREATORS. :x
Gee here is an Idea maybe if GE actually paid taxes they could pay their CEO, Jeffery's government advisory paycheck. Got to wonder how he got a job in the government in charge of job creation when he shipped GE jobs and money out of the country to avoid paying US wages and US taxes. :? :roll: CHANGE you can believe in Tex CHANGE you can believe in. :roll:
BTW let's go back to this little gem
Many of these bills were made in REPUBLICAN administrations
Now let's look at the numbers
•President Bush expanded the federal budget by a historic $700 billion through 2008. President Obama would add another $1 trillion.
•President Bush began a string of expensive financial bailouts. President Obama is accelerating that course.
•President Bush created a Medicare drug entitlement that will cost an estimated $800 billion in its first decade. President Obama has proposed a $634 billion down payment on a new government health care fund.
•President Bush increased federal education spending 58 percent faster than inflation. President Obama would double it.
•President Bush became the first President to spend 3 percent of GDP on federal antipoverty programs. President Obama has already increased this spending by 20 percent.
•President Bush tilted the income tax burden more toward upper-income taxpayers. President Obama would continue that trend.
•President Bush presided over a $2.5 trillion increase in the public debt through 2008. Setting aside 2009 (for which Presidents Bush and Obama share responsibility for an additional $2.6 trillion in public debt), President Obama's budget would add $4.9 trillion in public debt from the beginning of 2010 through 2016.
Double the increase while the Dems had
TOTAL CONTROL OF SPENDING and Bush was in office for 8 years with the Dems controling the Congressional purse string for the last two when a majority of the spending happened. So tell us again Tex how many of these bills were racked up by REPUBLICANS? :? :roll:
Here is another question for you Tex.
Why is Obama claiming that the Elderly may not get their SS checks come Aug 3 if a deal is not reached when about a year ago the Dems were claiming there was absolutely no reason to fix SS because it was not in trouble and it was/is taking in more money than it needed to pay out beneifits? You can not have it both ways unless you are hoping the eldery are losing their memories and can't remember the Dems talking points against fixing SS just a year ago. Can we please admit Obama is scareing the hell out of the elderly so they will back him over those that are truly trying to protect them and their Grandchildrens futures from the Dems out of control spending habits.
