I Agree with Liberals

There's one thing in which liberals always try to pick a fight with me on: spending. It's the solution on which we differ. Liberals always complain to me that the Bush administration has spent like drunken sailors. Well... liberals all need to brush up on their civics lessons, because the President doesn't spend a dime. Nonetheless, I'll concede the point that Bush has been all too supportive of the Republican Congress during his first six years, in spending far too much money. Point conceded.

The reality is that Bush's apparently evil tax cuts have driven quarter-after-quarter of economic growth, and like Reagan did in the 1980s, he has actually INCREASED federal treasury revenues. Those revenues are at all-time highs, and the revenue side of the equation is not what has caused today's astronomical deficit: SPENDING is the problem. But again I'll further agree: Bush has been far to supportive of a Congress with seemingly endless purse strings.

Yet how do the liberals propose we fix this? We elect liberals who promise to spend more money!!! All while promising to raise taxes in a sputtering economy, something "The Chosen One" has even admitted would be a bad idea. Oh but wait a minute... please allow me to clarify: none of these liberals have come out and actually said, "I promise to spend more money." Or... wait a minute, while most elected to Congress have never actually said that, Obama DID (and a majority of the people still voted for him??? - go figure!!!).

But as the electorate should have done with Obama but didn't: let's examine the record. When Democrats took over the Congress two years ago, they promised that they would only embark on "Pay as You Go" spending, or "paygo" for short; they ran on that ticket! Oh goody; makes sense!!! I'm sure glad they've done that. Or... have they??? Oh come on, even Obamazombies should be able to answer this one: NO, they have not done that. In fact, according to the Wall Street Journal, they have not. In fact, they've broken their promise on 12 separate occasions, increasing new deficit spending by a whopping $398 billion!!! And the outrage over "Bush's spending" from the press and liberals (but I repeat myself) is where??? That's right: nowhere to be discovered!!!

But yet here we go again. The last time we had both a Democrat President and a Democrat-controlled Congress, it was Bill Clinton. I happen to remember that Clinton strolled in to office and shouted, "We need an economic stimulus package!!!" (because Bush's tax increases stalled our economy - d'oh just study history folks!!!). He proposed $90 billion in stimulus spending, and the Democrat-controlled Congress aid, "That's irresponsible!!!" and killed it. And Clinton never thereafter had a single one of his proposed budgets approved by Congress (two of those eight years Congress were even controlled by his own party!).

But even today's Democrats are different from Clinton-era Democrats. Even before Obama comes in to office, the Democrat-controlled Congress is begging for billions and billions of stimulus spending.

So to all of my liberal friends who complain about spending over the last eight years? You ain't seen NOTHIN' yet!!!

I quote the article below:

As Congress gears up to pass another spending "stimulus" bill, there's one political silver lining: Democrats are being forced to abandon the pretense of fiscal conservatism known as "pay as you go" budgeting.

Late last week the leader of the House Blue Dog Coalition, Tennessee Democrat Jim Cooper, announced that with Barack Obama about to enter the White House, "I'm not sure the old rules are relevant anymore." Why not? Because, Mr. Cooper said, "It would be unfair to the new President to put him in a budget straitjacket."

Democrats ran on "paygo" in 2006, promising to offset any new spending increases or tax cuts with comparable tax increases or spending cuts. Once in charge on Capitol Hill they quickly made exceptions, waiving paygo no fewer than 12 times to accommodate some $398 billion in new deficit spending -- not that the press corps bothered to notice. That didn't stop Majority Leader Steny Hoyer from announcing in May that "We're absolutely committed to paygo. Speaker [Nancy Pelosi] is committed to paygo. I'm very committed to paygo. Our caucus is committed to paygo."

Yet now Mr. Cooper is delivering official last rites, as the Washington spending machinery powers up in earnest. Paygo was always a big con designed not to reduce spending but to stop tax cuts. It was invented to stop the GOP Congress and then a Republican President, but it is inconvenient when Democrats run the show. With the recession available as an excuse for just about anything, get ready for the first $1 trillion federal budget deficit. And don't expect any howling from the Blue Dogs.