The Bi-partisan "gang of six" had suggested a plan that would have cut 4.7 TRILLION from the deficit, but because the Republicans would rather see America suffer as a means of drumming up support for the 2012 election they soundly rejected it. The "Gang of Six" was BI-PARTISAN" panel of respected Republicans as well as Democrats, but the Republicans STILL rejected it. Now there is a 12 man (six Republican, and six Democrats) super committee trying to do the same thing, but only on a smaller scale, and I bet they (the Republicans) will STILL reject any plan that doesn't give them 100% of what they "want."<quoted text>
Look at him go! In his attempt to defend Obama's desire to add and average of 1 trillion to the debt every year for the next 10 years, he reverts to spending by Bush, which, under the republican congress had been trimmed to a near balanced budget.
During the years of Bush presidency and republican congress, deficits were going DOWN, not up. After the Iraq war had begun and the Bush tax cuts were in place, govt revenues went up and deficits went down. That is, until......well, you know the rest. I wonder-since the increased spending in the Bush admin took place when the democrats had control of the House and Senate, why did the democrats authorize all of the spending? Interesting.
All that said, from your post in which you rail against Bush, you clearly have a problem with deficit spending, unless it is used to boost the economy. If that is the case, why are you supporting the candidate who wants to deficit spend roughly 1 trillion a year for the next decade? Why are you supporting a candidate who WANTS to add nearly 15 trillion to the debt over the next 10 years? Why would you pick the candidate whose PLAN is to run higher deficits than the others, add more to the debt than the others, and have deficits moving upward, rather than downward, as the others do? This is all very puzzling.
Are you able to explain your hypocrisy re: obama and deficits?
Oh, and regarding the whole Bush tirade... I bring Bush back into things often because you have to understand that the problems we face right now didn't just magically appear the moment Obama took office. Not EVERYTHING is Bush's fault, however, you are foolish if you think we are not still feeling the repercussions of his actions from eight years in office. This is commons sense... the next President will have to contend with issues left over from the Obama administration, good or bad as well.