By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
akuma587 on 12 December 2008
Edit Thread
Final-Fan said:
Kasz216 said:
akuma587 said:
What you are saying is true, but you are looking at things in the abstract.  And Obama actually is advocating a tax cut for the majority of Americans plus a stimulus package.

But the fact that our national debt is over $9 trillion could be disastrous in the future.  It would be irresponsible to keep dropping taxes when the debt is as high as it already is.  If we had $0 in debt, I'd be all for a tax cut, but that isn't the case.
The reason republicans aren't fiscally conservative anymore is because democrats aren't fiscally conservative and it's a dozen times easier to get spending bills passed then it is to get spending cuts passed.

If you aren't getting a big piece of the pie your constitutiants are wondering why the blue disctricts are getting so much more of the national taxpayer money.

Republicans and Democrats fight over the budget... and aren't willing to compromise.  If the democrats are going to get so much money for their plans, the republicans want at least as much money for their plans or it looks bad on them.  Etc.

That's the problem.  For one party to be fiscally conservative they both do in the modern times.

I don't think the evidence supports this argument. 

The last time Democrats controlled the White House and both sides of Congress was 1993-1994.  They raised taxes and cut spending, enabling the balanced budgets and budget surpluses of the 1990s.  (Republicans hammered on the "raised taxes" part hard enough to win historic amounts of Congressional seats.) 

The last time the Republicans controlled the White House and both sides of Congress was 2001 and 2003-2007.  Um, do I have to say it? 

On a side note, I would guess that the blue districts get more money anyway because big cities trend Democratic.

Exactly, Republicans are essentially obsessed with tax cuts because they think it is the issue that brings home the bacon (and rightfully so).  But at the same time they maintain this attitude that they are fiscally conservative, which is patently untrue.  Sure they love to complain about government, but they sure as hell don't mind spending money on it and letting it balloon up in size.

And even if Kasz argument is true, doesn't that mean that the Republicans are simply lying to the American people that they are fiscally conservative?

 



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson