Republican math: 22 million + 96 million = less than 10 million

[rdean]

44 - FEC report details lavish Republican spending, including nearly $2,000 at Voyeur West Hollywood

The RNC had more than $22 million on hand when Steele arrived last year, but is down to under $10 million now despite raising $96 million during that time, records show.

------------------------------------

Micheal Steele, one of the most vocal critics of President Obama's handling of money is one of the best fundraisers the GOP has ever had. Except, he also knows how to spend. Are Republicans really the best choice to be running the countries finances? Have we seen this type of Republican Money Management before?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

44 - FEC report details lavish Republican spending, including nearly $2,000 at Voyeur West Hollywood

The RNC had more than $22 million on hand when Steele arrived last year, but is down to under $10 million now despite raising $96 million during that time, records show.

------------------------------------

Micheal Steele, one of the most vocal critics of President Obama's handling of money is one of the best fundraisers the GOP has ever had. Except, he also knows how to spend. Are Republicans really the best choice to be running the countries finances? Have we seen this type of Republican Money Management before?

Obama and Pelosi just sank the country $2 TRILLION more in debt and you are worried what the RNC (not government) is spending?

Nice attempt at diversion.

 

[uscitizen]

Hey you do not encourage contributions by saying you have plenty of money.

 

[boedicca]

And guess what - all of the donations to the RNC were VOLUNTARY.

If people don't like it, they can withhold future donations; I doubt the OP donated in the first place.

 

[boedicca]

Hey you do not encourage contributions by saying you have plenty of money.

How oblivious. A big war chest does attract donations. Why did The One give up on matching campaign financing (despite his promise to use it) and instead focused on raising money (much of it suspect) over the internet?

 

[amrchaos]

Are you saying that the Democrats gave out mandates for money?

If that was the case, no one give a democrat a penny!

 

[rdean]

44 - FEC report details lavish Republican spending, including nearly $2,000 at Voyeur West Hollywood

The RNC had more than $22 million on hand when Steele arrived last year, but is down to under $10 million now despite raising $96 million during that time, records show.

------------------------------------

Micheal Steele, one of the most vocal critics of President Obama's handling of money is one of the best fundraisers the GOP has ever had. Except, he also knows how to spend. Are Republicans really the best choice to be running the countries finances? Have we seen this type of Republican Money Management before?

Obama and Pelosi just sank the country $2 TRILLION more in debt and you are worried what the RNC (not government) is spending?

Nice attempt at diversion.

Hmmm, let's see.
5 to 7 trillion for a Republican "gift" to the drug companies.
2.5 trillion dollar tax cut (more than half to the top 5%)
Tax cut while waging two wars totaling 3 trillion (that's insane)

And what does Obama do? He spends more money to keep our shattered economy out of a Republican manufactured "Great Depression", which seems to have worked. But according to Republicans, Obama is the bad guy? Is this happening, or is it the hash?

 

[Jarhead]

44 - FEC report details lavish Republican spending, including nearly $2,000 at Voyeur West Hollywood

The RNC had more than $22 million on hand when Steele arrived last year, but is down to under $10 million now despite raising $96 million during that time, records show.

------------------------------------

Micheal Steele, one of the most vocal critics of President Obama's handling of money is one of the best fundraisers the GOP has ever had. Except, he also knows how to spend. Are Republicans really the best choice to be running the countries finances? Have we seen this type of Republican Money Management before?

Obama and Pelosi just sank the country $2 TRILLION more in debt and you are worried what the RNC (not government) is spending?

Nice attempt at diversion.

Hmmm, let's see.
5 to 7 trillion for a Republican "gift" to the drug companies.
2.5 trillion dollar tax cut (more than half to the top 5%)
Tax cut while waging two wars totaling 3 trillion (that's insane)

And what does Obama do? He spends more money to keep our shattered economy out of a Republican manufactured "Great Depression", which seems to have worked. But according to Republicans, Obama is the bad guy? Is this happening, or is it the hash?

Everyday I get to see who the partisan people are on this forum.
Look at what you wrote. It is humorous. Maybe true. But humorous.

You refer to a republican initiative as a gift without proof and you call a democratic initiative a success without proof.

What you believe is fact, what others beleive is fiction.
Maybe being that way works for you, but it does not work for America.

 

[VaYank5150]

And guess what - all of the donations to the RNC were VOLUNTARY.

If people don't like it, they can withhold future donations; I doubt the OP donated in the first place.

And doesn't it give you a warm a fuzzy feeling that people are willing to donate to the RNC, so their "representatives" can go and have a nice night out on the town watching lesbian sex acts, but will fight tooth and nail to keep our government from providing affordable health coverage for their fellow citizens?

 

[boedicca]

I'd rather have the RNC spend $2K on recreation than to see our government increase the deficit to nearly $2T this year alone.

Your outrage, which you are free to express, is sorely lacking in perspective.

(The RNC has fired the person who organized this outing btw - accountability, probably a new concept to you.)

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Obama and Pelosi just sank the country $2 TRILLION more in debt.

 

[rdean]

Obama and Pelosi just sank the country $2 TRILLION more in debt and you are worried what the RNC (not government) is spending?

Nice attempt at diversion.

Hmmm, let's see.
5 to 7 trillion for a Republican "gift" to the drug companies.
2.5 trillion dollar tax cut (more than half to the top 5%)
Tax cut while waging two wars totaling 3 trillion (that's insane)

And what does Obama do? He spends more money to keep our shattered economy out of a Republican manufactured "Great Depression", which seems to have worked. But according to Republicans, Obama is the bad guy? Is this happening, or is it the hash?

Everyday I get to see who the partisan people are on this forum.
Look at what you wrote. It is humorous. Maybe true. But humorous.

You refer to a republican initiative as a gift without proof and you call a democratic initiative a success without proof.

What you believe is fact, what others beleive is fiction.
Maybe being that way works for you, but it does not work for America.

Actually, if you bother to do any research on the Republican drug money give away, it becomes pretty clear.

Funnier still coming from Reaganomics expert Bruce Bartlett:

Moreover, there is a critical distinction--the drug benefit had no dedicated financing, no offsets and no revenue-raisers; 100% of the cost simply added to the federal budget deficit, whereas the health reform measures now being debated will be paid for with a combination of spending cuts and tax increases, adding nothing to the deficit over the next 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office. (See here for the Senate bill estimate and here for the House bill.)

Maybe Franks isn't the worst hypocrite I've ever come across in Washington, but he's got to be in the top 10 because he apparently thinks the unfunded drug benefit, which added $15.5 trillion (in present value terms) to our nation's indebtedness, according to Medicare's trustees, was worth sacrificing his integrity to enact into law. But legislation expanding health coverage to the uninsured--which is deficit-neutral--somehow or other adds an unacceptable debt burden to future generations. We truly live in a world only George Orwell could comprehend when our elected representatives so easily conflate one with the other.

Republican Deficit Hypocrisy - Forbes.com

Bruce Bartlett is a former Treasury Department economist and the author of Reaganomics: Supply-Side Economics in Actionand Impostor: How George W. Bush Bankrupted America and Betrayed the Reagan Legacy. Bruce Bartlett's new book is: The New American Economy: The Failure of Reaganomics and a New Way Forward. He writes a weekly column for Forbes.

 

[DiamondDave]

And guess what - all of the donations to the RNC were VOLUNTARY.

If people don't like it, they can withhold future donations; I doubt the OP donated in the first place.

And doesn't it give you a warm a fuzzy feeling that people are willing to donate to the RNC, so their "representatives" can go and have a nice night out on the town watching lesbian sex acts, but will fight tooth and nail to keep our government from providing affordable health coverage for their fellow citizens?

Nope... hence why I do not donate to the RNC nor any political party

But that does not take away from the fact that the government should not be in the business of trying to use itself and our tax revenues as a wealth redistribution scheme and playing nanny or nurse to people who are responsible for their own personal upkeep and well being

 

[rdean]

What it does prove is that Republicans really know how to raise money. 96 million? That's a lot of teabags.

It also shows they are bigger spenders than than the Democrats ever were. No wonder the deficit exploded during the Bush administration. And what did Bush do? He left the cost of war off his budgets. They weren't real budgets, they were lies. Bush hid the cost. Steele has tried to hide the cost. Notice a "pattern" here?

 

[boedicca]

And look at how much Obama has exploded the deficit!

 

[rdean]

And look at how much Obama has exploded the deficit!

Google Image Result for http://s3.mediamatters.org/static/images/item/deficit-20090714.jpg

About 33 percent of the swing stems from new legislation signed by Mr. Bush. That legislation, like his tax cuts and the Medicare prescription drug benefit, not only continue to cost the government but have also increased interest payments on the national debt.

Mr. Obama's main contribution to the deficit is his extension of several Bush policies, like the Iraq war and tax cuts for households making less than $250,000. Such policies -- together with the Wall Street bailout, which was signed by Mr. Bush and supported by Mr. Obama -- account for 20 percent of the swing.

About 7 percent comes from the stimulus bill that Mr. Obama signed in February. And only 3 percent comes from Mr. Obama's agenda on health care, education, energy and other areas.

------------------------------------------

And remember, Bush didn't include either war in his budget.

The really strange part is the Republicans trying to blame this on Obama. This is very recent history. Only a couple of years old. How can they lie and not expect anyone to notice? Truly the "Party of Delusion".

 

[boedicca]

^^^ Complete and utter b'loney.

Just take a look at Obama's nearly $4T budget and the Stimulus package. He added massively to the deficit - and ObamaCare will make it worse.

 

[rdean]

^^^ Complete and utter b'loney.

Just take a look at Obama's nearly $4T budget and the Stimulus package. He added massively to the deficit - and ObamaCare will make it worse.

You add no links because you are lying. Just making it up.

 

[boedicca]

I don't need links. I have a memory.

Obama's first budget was nearly $500B more than Bush's last one. He also added $800B in Stimulus.

In addition, he is not using the TARP repayments to reduce the deficit; but is recycling them into pork.

Do the math.

 

[rdean]

I don't need links. I have a memory.

Obama's first budget was nearly $500B more than Bush's last one. He also added $800B in Stimulus.

In addition, he is not using the TARP repayments to reduce the deficit; but is recycling them into pork.

Do the math.

Bush didn't include the cost of either war. That right there was 3 trillion unaccounted for. Bush also left off the cost his his drug bill that will cost anywhere from 5 to 15 trillion.

What did Obama even spend anything on other than trying to save a ruined economy and for the first time including the cost of two wars in his budget.