So who do you want to run against Obama in 2010?

[Final-Fan]

Kasz216 said:

Final-Fan said:
The situations are not equivalent.  The internet deck thing is a bad activity (I presume) that others must emulate to remain competitive, whereas what we are talking about is people who spend wastefully versus people who spend wastefully AND create huge deficits in doing so.  It's another level of bad government beyond what was being done by the first group, that the first group cannot reasonably be held responsible for.

Besides which, I've shown that the Democrats actually returned to a fiscally conservative stance, that the Republicans did not emulate when they had a similar majority.

Wasteful spending is a bad activity that other polticians must emulate to stay elected or risk getting replaced by Neocons.

Why else do you suspect the Neocons got into office?

Cutting a bunch of republican programs i wouldn't call so "Fiscally conservative".

It's not like the democrats cut anything that they wanted to fund.

Just how the former republican congress cut demcoratic programs.  Though the current president also started a few wars... two real and one imaginary.  That tends to rake in the national debt.  Add in pointless government additions like the department of homeland security...

Both sides are just fighting for their "share" of the loot at this point, striking where they can at the others money.

OK, I'm afraid I don't see how you answered my point at all.  In fact it seems to me like you totally ignored it, being fixated on the allocation of funds which is another argument entirely.  (For the record the deficits were bad even without the wars; and unnecessary wars are just an example of particularly wasteful spending, so wouldn't let anyone off the hook anyway.) 

Let's do another comparison.  Let's say that the high spending is like having extra cork in baseballs.  It gives the people using it a competitive advantage (or, at least, I seem to remember something like that -- I'm no baseball expert so if I'm worng please pretend for the sake of the example).  Other people who weren't doing this feel obligated to follow suit to keep up.  (I'd take issue with the characterization of real-life events this implies, but let's run with it.) 

So Democrats corked the baseballs.  Does that mean it's somehow their fault that Republicans also went on steroids?