House Democrats ‘Deem’ Faux $1.1 Trillion Budget ‘as Passed’

[Big Fitz]

Bush spent more. He and his fellow CON$ ran up 5 TRILLION of DEBT. 8 of the 10 trillion in debt passed to Obama came from Reagan, Bush I and Bush II. CON$ervatism and debt are synonymous.

Congress moved to the RIGHT after the 2006 election and the debt got worse. CON$ervatism fails every time it is tried.

Excuse the fuck out of me, but the Left took control of Congress after the elections of 06. DUH

So you are saying that Stuttering LimpTard and Krauthammer&sickle are LIARS.
Thank you.

No I think he's saying you're so fulla shit you squeek going into the turn.

Conservatives are never conservative? What kinda fucktardery is that??? Since 2000 there has been a steady increase in Big Government Republicans... well till 2006 when they finally just voted for the real thing not liberal lite.

BTW, EdtheSpastic... since 2006 the budget and unfunded mandates have SKYROCKETED. We're up to 17 trillion now IIRC. Not that the 5 trillion bush did in over 8 years was great, but shit... even the CBO is screaming 'stop before you kill us all you fucking morons!!!'

 

[Big Fitz]

CON$ervatives never do!!!

And every time CON$ervatism fails CON$ say it failed because it wasn't CON$ervative enough. The fact remains, no matter how CON$ervative the Congress was, as it moved farther to the Right, the debt got worse.

Now we have a Liberal congress (and have had since 07) and the debt has increased even more. That shows me that both sides are inept in balancing the budget and attempting to decrease the deficit. Do you agree? What would your solution be?

Take a look at the rate of deficit increase per year since 07 when the dems got in compared to any time in the last 12 years and tell me what you see.

A freaking J curve. There is no comparison between before and after 07 as far as spending goes, and yes Bush was president for 2 of those years and submitted 2 budgets to that Dem Congress, both of which they added significantly to before passing. That in no way excusing Bush for his part of this, just pointing out a little fact the Dems like to ignore. They did it under Bush 1 and Reagan as well. The Dems have never met a budget they didn't think was to small, and didn't spend enough.

So yes both parties have been irresponsible, But Nobody has ever spent with such reckless abandon as the Democrat Congress who have ruled since 07, and Obama. Not even close.

It is pure unabated insanity in it's highest form. Any sitting politician or Government official who does not immediately cease and desist supporting any new deficit spending, and support making the cuts and tax adjustments that need to be made to stop this train wreck and try and save something for our kids should not only be voted out, but our kids might look back and think they should have been shot.

History is watching us America. Are we going to be a lesson on what not to do, like Germany's Weimar Republic? Or are we going to Invent the way to get out of this mess, Because none exists, and be an example to the world like we should be. Why is it that it is now the Liberal Europeans that finally see the un-sustainability of To much socialism and too little capitalism, while we are running as fast as we toward that very direction.

Our politicians on Both sides will never fix this. Our 2 party elections every 2 years system keeps them always focused on the next Election. What they are doing now with all this spending shows this clearly. Rational people see that all they are doing is putting off a terrible problem for a very short time. When it comes back at us it will be exponentially worse because of these short term feel good measures.

You people who are for even more spending, and blindly support the Dems in their current spending spree and government expansion orgy. May think there is nothing wrong with what they are doing, but I bet your kids and grand kids will take a very different view than you many years down the road when you are gone and they are left living in a shattered shell of what used to be the greatest most prosperous and generous nation on earth. Turned to dust in a never ending goody grab of people voting with their pocket books and ignoring the warning signs in favor of their immediate needs.

Rome really is burning people.

no no no... we've left Rome.

Welcome to Pompeii, and mount Vesuvius sounds VERY angry today.

 

[Zona]

He is not stupid, He is a lying partisan hack. There is a difference.

Kettle...black....blah blah.

balls ... mouth ... gurgel gurgle.

Thats hot.

 

[Cuyo]

You may be correct, but what is really "low life" about it is that they avoid having to say they voted on it. It's called deflection on the tough decisions, and aren't held accountable when facing their constituents.
It's not the way to pass major legislation.

I'd say it's more like lawmakers who want the amendments in order to approve the budget wanting to ensure that the budget doesn't pass, then the amendments fail. A little bit like a gas station demanding you pay before you pump. It just gets the thing done faster than re-writing the entire budget.

Maybe it's not the best way to pass major legislation. But it's not sleazy or tricky or anything like that. Like I said, completely identical to passing the underlying bill, then the amendment.

If you hate the budget, lets attack it. But the procedure? It just ain't the conspiracy some of you want it to be.

The procedure in which the budget was passed should be attacked.
again....

Never before -- since the creation of the Congressional budget process -- has the House failed to pass a budget, failed to propose a budget then deemed the non-existent budget as passed as a means to avoid a direct, recorded vote on a budget, but still allow Congress to spend taxpayer money.

Your source op-ed is, as I'm sure you're aware, extremely biased. What you fail to grasp is, when you pass via self-executing rule ("Deem and pass"), you do in fact pass the original budget by a majority vote.

Your opinion doesn't change what's happening, neither does italicizing words like procedure and bolding words like should.

Now a 3rd time, it is procedurally identical, identical, to passing the budget first, then the amendments.

 

[Cuyo]

House Democrats ‘Deem’ Faux $1.1 Trillion Budget ‘as Passed’ - HUMAN EVENTS

Never before -- since the creation of the Congressional budget process -- has the House failed to pass a budget, failed to propose a budget then deemed the non-existent budget as passed as a means to avoid a direct, recorded vote on a budget, but still allow Congress to spend taxpayer money.

Un-fucking-believable.

<----CONGRESSIONAL DEMOCRATS

wondering how they would think that doing it this way, avoiding a vote, is actually going to help them? (haven't read the article yet)

What on earth are they thinking, even for political posturing? the same people that would try to exploit their vote on a budget are the same people that will exploit them NOT voting on a budget before this election? so what in the world did they gain?

guess i better read the article....?

Because they're not avoiding a vote!

 

[edthecynic]

You are missing the point. If they were spending like that and driving up the debt. Then they were not acting conservatively at all.

CON$ervatives never do!!!

And every time CON$ervatism fails CON$ say it failed because it wasn't CON$ervative enough. The fact remains, no matter how CON$ervative the Congress was, as it moved farther to the Right, the debt got worse.

Now we have a Liberal congress (and have had since 07) and the debt has increased even more. That shows me that both sides are inept in balancing the budget and attempting to decrease the deficit. Do you agree? What would your solution be?

Look, whether you call it a Liberal or CON$ervative Congress in 2007, the leading voices of the CON$ervative movement said that Congress moved RIGHT as a result of the 2006 election. And as Congress moved Right, the debt skyrocketed. Which just proves what I've said many times on this board, CON$ are just like Libs, .... Only MORE so.

 

[edthecynic]

Excuse the fuck out of me, but the Left took control of Congress after the elections of 06. DUH

So you are saying that Stuttering LimpTard and Krauthammer&sickle are LIARS.
Thank you.

No I think he's saying you're so fulla shit you squeek going into the turn.

Conservatives are never conservative? What kinda fucktardery is that??? Since 2000 there has been a steady increase in Big Government Republicans... well till 2006 when they finally just voted for the real thing not liberal lite.

BTW, EdtheSpastic... since 2006 the budget and unfunded mandates have SKYROCKETED. We're up to 17 trillion now IIRC. Not that the 5 trillion bush did in over 8 years was great, but shit... even the CBO is screaming 'stop before you kill us all you fucking morons!!!'

And according to no less than LimpTard, Krauthammer&sickle, and notSowell those big government RINOs were replaced with CON$ervative Blue Dog Dems moving Congress to the RIGHT, and consequently the deficit skyrocketed proving my point that CON$ never act CON$ervatively once elected. CON$always say one thing and do the opposite, but for some reason gullible people still believe what they say and not what they do. And it was no less than St Ronnie Reagan and D A R T H Cheney who said deficits don't matter.

So basically you are calling the heart and soul of the CON$ervative movement a bunch of liars.
Thank you.

 

[Charles_Main]

CON$ervatives never do!!!

And every time CON$ervatism fails CON$ say it failed because it wasn't CON$ervative enough. The fact remains, no matter how CON$ervative the Congress was, as it moved farther to the Right, the debt got worse.

Now we have a Liberal congress (and have had since 07) and the debt has increased even more. That shows me that both sides are inept in balancing the budget and attempting to decrease the deficit. Do you agree? What would your solution be?

Look, whether you call it a Liberal or CON$ervative Congress in 2007, the leading voices of the CON$ervative movement said that Congress moved RIGHT as a result of the 2006 election. And as Congress moved Right, the debt skyrocketed. Which just proves what I've said many times on this board, CON$ are just like Libs, .... Only MORE so.

Well you can keep saying it, But the rate of Deficit growth shows you are dead wrong. It shows that clearly since 07 the Dems have spent quicker by a factor of 3 or more than any other congress or president ever before them. So they may both be alike, but the libs are the ones who are "more so". Which is crazy considering the Dems come into power in 07 telling us all that Bush and the Republicans out of control spending was going to kill us all. Then they get in and more than double down on the spending. It really is surreal.

Just look at how fast the Debt has grown since 06? Only one of those years was with republican rule. The rest have been Democrat congresses.

Bush and the Republican Party added about 3.3 Trillion to the over all Debt in their first 6 years. Since the Dems took over in 07 it has ballooned by another 4.5 Trillion. So in less than 2/3's the time it took the Republicans to add 3.3 Trillion the Dems have already passed that. With Obama's Own budget protections By the time his first term is up he and the Dems in power since 07 will have added 7 to 8 Trillion to the nations Debt, and we all know they will spend more than the Budget projections.

keep defending the Dems and blaming Republicans if you want, but the Math and facts simply do not support you argument, and clear thinking people see it.

That is why we must vote them out, and who ever we replace them with must have their feet held to the fire to reverse this trend immediately.

 

[Meister]

Now we have a Liberal congress (and have had since 07) and the debt has increased even more. That shows me that both sides are inept in balancing the budget and attempting to decrease the deficit. Do you agree? What would your solution be?

Look, whether you call it a Liberal or CON$ervative Congress in 2007, the leading voices of the CON$ervative movement said that Congress moved RIGHT as a result of the 2006 election. And as Congress moved Right, the debt skyrocketed. Which just proves what I've said many times on this board, CON$ are just like Libs, .... Only MORE so.

Well you can keep saying it, But the rate of Deficit growth shows you are dead wrong. It shows that clearly since 07 the Dems have spent quicker by a factor of 3 or more than any other congress or president ever before them. So they may both be alike, but the libs are the ones who are "more so". Which is crazy considering the Dems come into power in 07 telling us all that Bush and the Republicans out of control spending was going to kill us all. Then they get in and more than double down on the spending. It really is surreal.

Just look at how fast the Debt has grown since 06? Only one of those years was with republican rule. The rest have been Democrat congresses.

But, but, but according to LimpTard.......

 

[Charles_Main]

Look, whether you call it a Liberal or CON$ervative Congress in 2007, the leading voices of the CON$ervative movement said that Congress moved RIGHT as a result of the 2006 election. And as Congress moved Right, the debt skyrocketed. Which just proves what I've said many times on this board, CON$ are just like Libs, .... Only MORE so.

Well you can keep saying it, But the rate of Deficit growth shows you are dead wrong. It shows that clearly since 07 the Dems have spent quicker by a factor of 3 or more than any other congress or president ever before them. So they may both be alike, but the libs are the ones who are "more so". Which is crazy considering the Dems come into power in 07 telling us all that Bush and the Republicans out of control spending was going to kill us all. Then they get in and more than double down on the spending. It really is surreal.

Just look at how fast the Debt has grown since 06? Only one of those years was with republican rule. The rest have been Democrat congresses.

But, but, but according to LimpTard.......

There are conservatives in the Northwest? Where Alaska?

 

[Oddball]

Well you can keep saying it, But the rate of Deficit growth shows you are dead wrong. It shows that clearly since 07 the Dems have spent quicker by a factor of 3 or more than any other congress or president ever before them. So they may both be alike, but the libs are the ones who are "more so". Which is crazy considering the Dems come into power in 07 telling us all that Bush and the Republicans out of control spending was going to kill us all. Then they get in and more than double down on the spending. It really is surreal.

Just look at how fast the Debt has grown since 06? Only one of those years was with republican rule. The rest have been Democrat congresses.

Bush and the Republican Party added about 3.3 Trillion to the over all Debt in their first 6 years. Since the Dems took over in 07 it has ballooned by another 4.5 Trillion. So in less than 2/3's the time it took the Republicans to add 3.3 Trillion the Dems have already passed that. With Obama's Own budget protections By the time his first term is up he and the Dems in power since 07 will have added 7 to 8 Trillion to the nations Debt, and we all know they will spend more than the Budget projections.

keep defending the Dems and blaming Republicans if you want, but the Math and facts simply do not support you argument, and clear thinking people see it.

That is why we must vote them out, and who ever we replace them with must have their feet held to the fire to reverse this trend immediately.

but....but....but....but....but....but....















GEORGE BOOOOOOOOOOOOOSH!!

 

[edthecynic]

Now we have a Liberal congress (and have had since 07) and the debt has increased even more. That shows me that both sides are inept in balancing the budget and attempting to decrease the deficit. Do you agree? What would your solution be?

Look, whether you call it a Liberal or CON$ervative Congress in 2007, the leading voices of the CON$ervative movement said that Congress moved RIGHT as a result of the 2006 election. And as Congress moved Right, the debt skyrocketed. Which just proves what I've said many times on this board, CON$ are just like Libs, .... Only MORE so.

Well you can keep saying it, But the rate of Deficit growth shows you are dead wrong. It shows that clearly since 07 the Dems have spent quicker by a factor of 3 or more than any other congress or president ever before them. So they may both be alike, but the libs are the ones who are "more so". Which is crazy considering the Dems come into power in 07 telling us all that Bush and the Republicans out of control spending was going to kill us all. Then they get in and more than double down on the spending. It really is surreal.

Just look at how fast the Debt has grown since 06? Only one of those years was with republican rule. The rest have been Democrat congresses.

Bush and the Republican Party added about 3.3 Trillion to the over all Debt in their first 6 years. Since the Dems took over in 07 it has ballooned by another 4.5 Trillion. So in less than 2/3's the time it took the Republicans to add 3.3 Trillion the Dems have already passed that. With Obama's Own budget protections By the time his first term is up he and the Dems in power since 07 will have added 7 to 8 Trillion to the nations Debt, and we all know they will spend more than the Budget projections.

keep defending the Dems and blaming Republicans if you want, but the Math and facts simply do not support you argument, and clear thinking people see it.

That is why we must vote them out, and who ever we replace them with must have their feet held to the fire to reverse this trend immediately.

I'm not defending the Dems and blaming the GOP, I'm blaming CON$ervatism.
In 2007 RINOs were replaced with Blue Dogs, Congress moved to the Right and the deficit rose.

I'm saying CON$ervatism fails no matter which Party tries it.

 

[Care4all]

all hogwash, the president sets the budget, and he can veto the spending of congress if he disagrees with what congress has done to his budget.

the president can veto the overspending....

the president DOES have his hand in it as well.....

this deep recession BEGAN in 2007...president bush added as a suplemental 600 billion in stimulus to reduce the effects of the recession, plus kept the wars out of the budget and added those as supplemental as well.... plus president bush told the country congress HAD TO PASS the Bailout bill for the banks in 2008...our whole country was going to supposedly collapse if congress did not give him the money HE REQUESTED for the banks....

don't even begin this rewriting history crapola....

WE KNOW WHAT HAPPENED.

 

[Oddball]

Right now, nobody is setting any budget.

We've truly descended into representative anarchy.

"Irresponsible" refers to Congress and the Obama administration — and here's why. For thousands of years, businesses, organizations, governments and even individuals have relied on a basic tool to make sure they do not spend or borrow more than they can service — it is called a budget. Yet, for the first time since 1974, when the current rules were put into effect, the U.S. House of Representatives does not intend to pass a budget resolution. The main purpose of the budget resolution is to set discretionary spending caps for the coming fiscal year.

Without a budget resolution, members of Congress are, in essence, able to spend as much money as they wish, subject only to the limitation of getting half plus one of the other members to go along with the spending proposal. The budget procedure was put in place to make sure members of Congress would not spend money as irresponsibly as many teenagers might if they were given unlimited credit cards. If teenagers were in charge of the federal budget, we might end up with a $1.5 trillion deficit this year. Ah, but we are going to have a $1.5 trillion deficit this year — and who's in charge?

<snip>

The Keynesians and socialists have run hundreds of experiments around the world for the past 70 years, inducing governments to try to spend themselves into prosperity. It doesn't work. In the 1970s, Keynesian prescriptions led to "stagflation" in the U.S. and many other countries. It was only when Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher and eventually many other leaders (using the ideas of F.A. Hayek and Milton Friedman) reversed course by cutting tax rates and curtailing spending growth that their economies began to grow rapidly without inflation.

Mr. Obama seems to have never learned these lessons, and some of his advisers, who once understood what works and what doesn't, seem to have forgotten. By nature, people like to spend other people's money, and too many in Congress loved what was billed as Keynesian economic theory because it gave them a rationale to be irresponsible spenders.

If you are confused about whom to believe, just think for a minute. If increasing government spending really could lead to increased prosperity, why limit government spending at all? From your own observations, do governments spend your money as wisely as you do? And do government workers on average work harder, and are they more productive than workers you observe in the private sector? Finally, where does government get all of that extra money to spend? If it's from taxes, does that not mean taxpayers will have less incentive to work, save and invest? If it is from borrowing more money, does that not mean everyone will have to pay more taxes in the future and hence will be worse off? And, if the government just prints the additional money, won't it be worth less, and won't workers and savers be worse off?

Responsible people, whether they are national leaders or average citizens, understand that both in their personal and public lives they cannot spend themselves into prosperity.

Obama&#039;s Fiscal Fantasyland | Richard W. Rahn | Cato Institute: Commentary

 

[Meister]

Well you can keep saying it, But the rate of Deficit growth shows you are dead wrong. It shows that clearly since 07 the Dems have spent quicker by a factor of 3 or more than any other congress or president ever before them. So they may both be alike, but the libs are the ones who are "more so". Which is crazy considering the Dems come into power in 07 telling us all that Bush and the Republicans out of control spending was going to kill us all. Then they get in and more than double down on the spending. It really is surreal.

Just look at how fast the Debt has grown since 06? Only one of those years was with republican rule. The rest have been Democrat congresses.

But, but, but according to LimpTard.......

There are conservatives in the Northwest? Where Alaska?

Idaho is one of the most conservative states in the union right now....try it...you may like it.

 

[jeffrockit]

CON$ervatives never do!!!

And every time CON$ervatism fails CON$ say it failed because it wasn't CON$ervative enough. The fact remains, no matter how CON$ervative the Congress was, as it moved farther to the Right, the debt got worse.

Now we have a Liberal congress (and have had since 07) and the debt has increased even more. That shows me that both sides are inept in balancing the budget and attempting to decrease the deficit. Do you agree? What would your solution be?

Look, whether you call it a Liberal or CON$ervative Congress in 2007, the leading voices of the CON$ervative movement said that Congress moved RIGHT as a result of the 2006 election. And as Congress moved Right, the debt skyrocketed. Which just proves what I've said many times on this board, CON$ are just like Libs, .... Only MORE so.

Not buying that argument as Congress is definitely left and has been for the past 18 mos. With that said, take a look at the increased deficit and tell me that Libs are better than the conservatives. If you are completely honest, you would have to agree that both sides are inept at balancing the budget or cutting spending. If you can't see that, you are letting partisanship guide your logic.

 

[edthecynic]

Now we have a Liberal congress (and have had since 07) and the debt has increased even more. That shows me that both sides are inept in balancing the budget and attempting to decrease the deficit. Do you agree? What would your solution be?

Look, whether you call it a Liberal or CON$ervative Congress in 2007, the leading voices of the CON$ervative movement said that Congress moved RIGHT as a result of the 2006 election. And as Congress moved Right, the debt skyrocketed. Which just proves what I've said many times on this board, CON$ are just like Libs, .... Only MORE so.

Not buying that argument as Congress is definitely left and has been for the past 18 mos. With that said, take a look at the increased deficit and tell me that Libs are better than the conservatives. If you are completely honest, you would have to agree that both sides are inept at balancing the budget or cutting spending. If you can't see that, you are letting partisanship guide your logic.

Even if you call the Congress "left," it is less "left" as a result of the 2006 election. Congress moved Right in 2007 and the debt skyrocketed.

CON$ervatism fails every time it's tried, no matter which Party tries it.

 

[daveman]

Even if you call the Congress "left," it is less "left" as a result of the 2006 election.

On what do you base this?

 

[edthecynic]

Even if you call the Congress "left," it is less "left" as a result of the 2006 election.

On what do you base this?

Don't you even bother to read the thread before you post?

 

[daveman]

Even if you call the Congress "left," it is less "left" as a result of the 2006 election.

On what do you base this?

Don't you even bother to read the thread before you post?

Humor me.