Republicans lie about "explosion of spending" under Obama

[Dr.Drock]

Look, by "willful choice" I meant that the government had an option of balancing its budget by withdrawing some of the services it provides -- like the army, or social security. It still can do it tomorrow -- but it does not mean, that exercising that option would not lead to a catastrophe and, therefore, would be completely irresponsible.

Are we clear now?

Yes... it is -very- clear that the government did not HAVE to borrow anything, contrary to your claim. This defeats your enture argument that the decline in revenues is the reason for the deficits, as nothing necessitated that spending not follow a similar decline.

Not that I expect you to admit this.

I admit that instead of piling up the debt, Obama could have simply disband the military, cancel social security and medicare. The economy would fold down, so Obama would have to abolish the rest of the government and default on the existing debt, and the US of A will cease to exist soon after.

I still don't think that this was the course of action that Obama should have taken, but I admit that in that case the government would not have to borrow a dime. Satisfied?

And yes, it does defeat the whole argument that the decline in revenues is the reason for the deficits. The real reason, as I see it now, was Obama's incomprehensible determination to save the US from being destroyed by the decline in the government revenues. Republicans should demand that Obama be hanged for that despicable crime.

Cutting spending and decreasing the debt will cause the US of A to cease to exist soon after.


Those sentiments are making it much easier to understand why Obama has so much more support than Ron Paul. RIP common sense.

 

[M14 Shooter]

as nothing necessitated that spending not follow a similar decline.

Nothing, except it was needed to save the US from turning into Somalia. Look, if you goal was to make yourself looking like a fool, there's no need to continue, you have already succeeded ten times over.

Says she who argues that "have to" and "choose to" mean the same thing.