Democrats: The Modern 'Know-Nothing' Party

[PoliticalChic]

1. In "Applied Economics: Thinking Beyond Stage One," Dr. Thomas Sowell points out that many politicians do not think beyond Stage One because they will be praised (and elected) for the short term benefits but will not be held accountable much later when the long term consequences appear.


The truth can be clearly seen in the economic policy that will be voted on in November.

2. The NYTimes verifies that the Obama economic plan is less beneficial than the Ryan Plan:

a. Deficit in 2016
Obama: $529 billion
Ryan Plan $241 billion

b. Added debt over the next ten years:
Obama $6.4 trillion
Ryan $3.1 trillion

c. Balances the budget:
Obama: never
Ryan: by 2040
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/21/us/politics/house-republicans-release-budget-blueprint.html


Not even close!
To vote for the Obama economic plan, one would have to subscribe to 'I know nothing...I vote Democrat.'


Obama: When you find yourself in a hole.....stop digging.

The Obama budget deficits originated during the Bush presidency...

1. Tax cuts 2001-2002 (4 trillion over 10 years)
2. Prescription drug benefits (1 trillion over 10 years)
3. Economic meltdown of 2008 ( 3 trillion and rising)
4. Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan (2 trillion and winding down)

You post can be recognized as nothing less than an admission that Barack Obama either could do nothing to solve the problems that he was elected to eradicate due to a series of 'poison pills' hidden by the previous administration....or Barack Obama lacked the competence to do so.

You are opting for the former explanation, I, for the latter.

Only one of us is applying logic, experience and data.


Were I a liberal rather than a conservative, the term 'liar' would have entered the debate.
Have a good holiday.

 

[GoneBezerk]

Idiot, 2 wars kinda drives up the spending.

Bill Clinton only ignored the islamofascist threat and left 9/11 for Bush's lap. Bush also finished off the Clinton 1998 policy to remove Saddam from power because Bill and even Hillary didn't have the balls to do it.

Obamination instead of slowing the spending with the drawdown in Iraq, he is spending more in Afghanistan and going nuts with the checkbook on social/domestic spending. He has made it WORSE.

So, we should trust the party that ran UP the deficits to stop doing so in only 28 years.


Are you serious or is this a joke?

 

[NYcarbineer]

1. When you hear Ryan promise to balance the budget, just remember,

Reagan promised to balance the budget,

with essentially the same plan Ryan is proposing.

2. Keep in mind, Obama's deficits are all occurring under Republican tax plans; Obama's deficits are the result of Obama acting like a Republican on taxes.

Obama had a Democrat majority in congress for his first two years, and could have altered the tax plan to suit his fancy. He did not do so, and consequently he owns this current tax plan. Not to mention that the Democrats have not even bothered creating a budget in almost three years now.

I've pointed out many times that one of Obama's failings has been to follow Republican tax policy,

and I've also pointed out that we are in a tax cut death spiral, started by Reagan, continued by the GOP, now sucking in Democrats,

that we cannot get out of because the voters would rather have the free lunch of government they don't have to pay for, and they will vote out politicians who won't give them that free lunch.

 

[daveman]

Without the super committee, the spending cuts start automatically in January of 2013.

When the Bush tax cuts expire in December of 2012, Obama won't allow them to be renewed.

Spending cuts + a return to the old tax rates = deficit reduction.

Congress has been taken out of the equation. No treasonous Tea Party/Republicans to mess things up.

Another brilliant move by Obama.

Treasonous?

There you go again, confusing America with the leftist agenda.

Working against America is treason. Working against the leftist agenda is patriotic.