The Real Groundhog Day

[gonewt2012]

When I listen to Mitt on the stump I hear essentially the same message that Bush 43 used to project.

Here's George --> www . youtube. com/watch?v=b1xJTNORyG0&NR=1&feature=endscreen

Here's Mitt --> www . youtube. com/watch?v=b1xJTNORyG0&NR=1&feature=endscreen

Now, not that there's anything wrong with this message ... greater personal liberty, reign in government, etc.

But is that what Bush did?

Is that what Mitt will do?

Can anyone deny that we made the wrong choice back in 2000?

Listen to this very carefully --> www . youtube . com/watch?v=xk0-bR3fwZo&feature=related. Listen to what McCain had to say about the 5.6 trillion dollar debt at the time. Bush 43 doubled that debt and before you post any excuses about that think hard about how why anything that you say couldn't also apply to President Obama.

I'm not saying that Norquist is wrong, quite the contrary, the guy makes eminent sense. Baseline budgeting that grows the government at twice the rate of growth of the economy or worse is just madness. We have a spending problem not a revenue problem. Any fool can see that 1.07*X > 1.02*X and anyone not afraid of numbers can integrate that out in the time dimension and understand why we are where we are today.

But by the same token, Republican rank and file seem to be blind to the greedy grasp of the constituencies represented by their leadership who would make the debt problem worse by abolishing taxes on high income. That might be a great aspiration, but is now the time to do that?

Those at the top of the party liked George back in 2000 and they like Mitt now. It's not like we can look to the Democrats for any type of insurgency that will result in a solution to the debt crises and by definition, how can we possibly deny that the Republican leadership has failed the American people on this issue?

Eventually, if it isn't addressed, the debt very well might take down the two-party system, but that doesn't necessarily have to happen ... but the only real possibility is if the Republican rank and file saves the people in control from themselves by forcing them to take the tough medicine.

Face it, a vote for Mitt is most likely a vote for more of the same.

 

[Full-Auto]

When I listen to Mitt on the stump I hear essentially the same message that Bush 43 used to project.

Here's George --> www . youtube. com/watch?v=b1xJTNORyG0&NR=1&feature=endscreen

Here's Mitt --> www . youtube. com/watch?v=b1xJTNORyG0&NR=1&feature=endscreen

Now, not that there's anything wrong with this message ... greater personal liberty, reign in government, etc.

But is that what Bush did?

Is that what Mitt will do?

Can anyone deny that we made the wrong choice back in 2000?

Listen to this very carefully --> www . youtube . com/watch?v=xk0-bR3fwZo&feature=related. Listen to what McCain had to say about the 5.6 trillion dollar debt at the time. Bush 43 doubled that debt and before you post any excuses about that think hard about how why anything that you say couldn't also apply to President Obama.

I'm not saying that Norquist is wrong, quite the contrary, the guy makes eminent sense. Baseline budgeting that grows the government at twice the rate of growth of the economy or worse is just madness. We have a spending problem not a revenue problem. Any fool can see that 1.07*X > 1.02*X and anyone not afraid of numbers can integrate that out in the time dimension and understand why we are where we are today.

But by the same token, Republican rank and file seem to be blind to the greedy grasp of the constituencies represented by their leadership who would make the debt problem worse by abolishing taxes on high income. That might be a great aspiration, but is now the time to do that?

Those at the top of the party liked George back in 2000 and they like Mitt now. It's not like we can look to the Democrats for any type of insurgency that will result in a solution to the debt crises and by definition, how can we possibly deny that the Republican leadership hasn't failed the American people on this issue?

Eventually, if it isn't addressed, the debt very well might take down the two-party system, but that doesn't necessarily have to happen ... but the only real possibility is if the Republican rank and file saves the people in control from themselves by forcing them to take the tough medicine.

Face it, a vote for Mitt is most likely a vote for more of the same.

I deny making the wrong choice.

But maybe you wanted AL the boar Gore to become a billionaire on our dime.

 

[gonewt2012]

Nope. I voted for McCain in 2000 and I got the lapel pin to prove it.

Like lynyrd skynyrd said ".. now does your conscious bother you?"

Bush 43 was an unmitigated disaster for this nation. There is no denying that.

 

[Skull Pilot]

The real groundhog day happens every election day where the flock keeps voting for the same politicians and yet expects something different to happen

 

[gonewt2012]

The real groundhog day happens every election day where the flock keeps voting for the same politicians and yet expects something different to happen

Yeah there's some truth to that for sure. The world will never fail to deliver irony ... such as the apparent reality that the only thing that will save the establishment is ultimately an insurgency in the party whose ostensible meme is the status quo.

 

[Inthemiddle]

We have a spending problem not a revenue problem.

This tired line continues to be incredibly stupid and short sighted. The truth is, we have both. Yes, spending needs to be curtailed. The rate at which government spending increases needs to be reduced. But we also need to increase revenue at this point. Regardless of rights or wrongs in the past, the fact still remains that we now have an enormous outstanding public debt. It's incredibly silly to suggest that the way to overcome the debt is to now starve off government spending. If an individual has outstanding debt, do they simply stop providing for their basic needs so they can pay off the credit cards? Or do they plan out ways to save some money while also going out to get a second job?

 

[gonewt2012]

We have a spending problem not a revenue problem.

This tired line continues to be incredibly stupid and short sighted.

1.07*X > 1.02*X

Any new money the government taxes will be spent, not applied to the deficit/debt.

If you allow baseline budgeting to continue such that every government program grows at 7% while the economy grows and around 2 or 3%, the result is obvious.

And that doesn't even account for the things we can't control the rate of growth in such as SS and Medicare.

This is just history repeating itself. It happened to the Soviets, the British, the Turks, the Dutch, the French, the Spanish, the Romans and the Greeks in roughly that reverse order and it's happening to us now.

The problem we've had in the past is that people with the opinion quoted would make deals with people on the supposedly other end of the political spectrum such that both sides would get what they want at the expense of everyone else.

You want to tax more? Fine. Fight it out with the super rich.

In the meantime, balance the checkbook. Either that or kiss your country goodbye.