Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I believe the national debt has gone-up since the founding of Murrca!
And it will continue to go up if we continue to succeed at home and in the world. Our National Debt will be larger 10 and then 100 years from now, barring an asteroid hit or loss of a major war within our borders.
Both parties are responsible! Government deficit and POWER grew under Bush and under Obama. People need to wake up. Republicans are not the party of small government like they claim to be. At least Democrats are honest about what they are.
Ahhh, one minute the Republicans are responsible, the next minute, both of them are to blame..
got it..
Care to tell me why federal spending has been falling since the GOP has taken over Congress?
Ahhh, one minute the Republicans are responsible, the next minute, both of them are to blame..
got it..
Care to tell me why federal spending has been falling since the GOP has taken over Congress?
Difference is Democrats say we need to invest money in our country. Republicans say we need to cut spending, limit government, make it small, yet they spend just as much as Democrats.
Republicans are hypocrites and hve managed to brainwash their base into believing they are really for small government, HAH
Difference is Democrats say we need to invest money in our country. Republicans say we need to cut spending, limit government, make it small, yet they spend just as much as Democrats.
Republicans are hypocrites and hve managed to brainwash their base into believing they are really for small government, HAH
The Democratic Party long ago ceased to follow any consistent principles opting instead to do those things which help them win elections without worrying about right and wrong.
In 2008, Democrats nominated a community organizer who had never done anything in his political life except run for the next higher office and even voted present to avoid collecting political baggage that could hurt him in future elections.
We could say he, along with his party, have learned to specialize in winning elections.
The advantage of this approach is the freedom of office holders to do whatever they like once in office since they haven't boxed themselves in with statements of principle that could come back to haunt them later on.
Bart Stupak and Bush Sr. can tell you all about that.
Now Republicans would like to play by the same set of rules as Democrats by saying just enough to appease one group without offending another and always leaving wiggle room for later on when the time comes to play it safe politically and do nothing.
The Democratic Party long ago ceased to follow any consistent principles opting instead to do those things which help them win elections without worrying about right and wrong.
In 2008, Democrats nominated a community organizer who had never done anything in his political life except run for the next higher office and even voted present to avoid collecting political baggage that could hurt him in future elections.
We could say he, along with his party, have learned to specialize in winning elections.
The advantage of this approach is the freedom of office holders to do whatever they like once in office since they haven't boxed themselves in with statements of principle that could come back to haunt them later on.
Bart Stupak and Bush Sr. can tell you all about that.
Now Republicans would like to play by the same set of rules as Democrats by saying just enough to appease one group without offending another and always leaving wiggle room for later on when the time comes to play it safe politically and do nothing.
Enter Trump:
You are 100% right to point out that Obama is an example of a lack of principles. Literally, virtually everything that Obama blasted Bush for to the cheers, chants, and faints of the audiences, he has now endorsed and often out done Bush on....that same audience is either fine with it, makes excuses for it, or just plain ignorant about it.
Obama blasted Bush for a no-contract subsidy to Halliburton and promised never to do it, Obama then did it.
Obama blasted Bush for an increase in no-bid contracts as the height of irresponsibility, Obama has surpassed Bush on no-bid contracts.
Obama blasted Bush for having lobbyists in the WH, Obama has more lobbyists in the WH.
Obama blasted Bush for the debt, Obama has added more debt and that debt is set to rise again and that is not counting a 1 Trillion a year rise if interest rates rise back to recent historic norms as seen under Clinton and Bush.
Obama blasted Bush for earmarks increasing and promised to lower earmarks to 1994 levels be veto if necessary, Obama has already had more earmarks than Bush, biggest increase when his own party was in power.
Obama said Bush wasn't transparent enough and promised to wait 5 days before signing bills into laws, he not only broke it on his first bill, but most of them, etc...
Etc....
For Obama to have a strong approval with Democrats shows that politics is more about being loyal to your "team" than being loyal to your principles.
However, the Republicans have a similar, if not quite as sheepish lack of principles.
Difference is Democrats say we need to invest money in our country. Republicans say we need to cut spending, limit government, make it small, yet they spend just as much as Democrats.
Republicans are hypocrites and hve managed to brainwash their base into believing they are really for small government, HAH
Demcorats say "invest" because they know idiot Demcorats will not equate this to spending.
welfare spending is NOT "investing".. You want investing, you create JOBS.. You encourage companies to stay here, but Democrats demonize these very individuals and then SPEND, (NOT INVEST) in keeping people poor..
There is a HUGE difference between spending, and investing.. you clearly dont know the difference
The Balanced Budget Act intended to balance the budget by 2002. The majority of cuts to achieve this were in Medicare payments to hospitals and doctors. This cut was promptly reversed between 1999-2000.
The majority of war spending was done off the books via supplimental emergency appropriations. The people were not asked to sacrifice to fund the war effort. Instead, they were tossed a tax cut bone. The public tends to ignore the debt when they get a bone.
Both parties have demonstrated they are big spenders. The difference , if any, is how it's spent. Re-election so often depends on bringing the bacon home.
Strongly agree. Bringing the bacon back to the special interest groups that influence, & not just to one's own home.
Our political processes have increasingly become accepted systems of legal corruption.
Never mind ... I didn't read the posts above me and someone else made my point ... my bad.
El Nox
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
