Yea, like I would even open a link from Rolling Stone on politics

lol were you not alive in 2000-2006 when the republicans had control of the presidency and both houses of Congress and proceeded to go on an unprecedented orgy of unfunded pork spending and costly popular programs like Medicare PT D, while cutting taxes at the same time?

Man it must be nice to establish a stereotype of yourself as the small govt waste-cutters, knowing that your low-information-voter base will never believe otherwise now matter how much you raise spending, cut taxes for your rich buddies, and bloat the deficit.

Thanks for demonstrating the mechanism that allows the republicans to keep their stereo type as the small govt champion of the little guy, despite doing the exact opposite.

Should be pretty easy to refute Rolling Stone if they're full of **** no? I've seen that article posted in multiple forums now, and so far the only republi-bot response I've seen to it is to just keep mum and wait for it to go away.

Which Obama has raised to new levels.

jfc stop trying to pretend either party is better or worse than the other, they are both super duper awful

as much as I hate to agree with suzzer99, at least he isnt a hypocrite. Republitards are hypocritical *******s who spout off about limited/smaller government, and then grow the **** out of it (Reagan included). At least Obama isn't being two-faced about the stunts he is pulling.

Most intelligent statement I've read in the politics forum like ever.

gdp in Jan 09 was what -6.5 we lost what a million jobs the month obama took oath, and that winter 08-09 before any obama policies could go into effect, we lost what 5 million jobs? this is what a decade of republican fiscal policy got us. so he got a depression. obama passed a modest stimulus 1/3 of which was tax cuts and every credible public or private study says it created or saved 2-5 million jobs, auto industry saved and credit crunch eased, the recession ended we have had a like 20 str8 months of private sector growth.


now with republicans dead set on defeating obama and threatening default and world wide economic factors against him and cutting public sector jobs and cutting spending at a time of record low interest its no wonder we arent recovering fully. its sabotage for political gain. and dont tell me the parties are the same. and save me your randian AC fantasy libertarian dream world. we have economists in the country that dont teach at utah state or denver community college but rather harvard and yale and they tend to agree that u are stupid.

kilt them pirates kilt bin laden kilt quadafi now he comin for mittens

It's an atack piece written by a very liberal author. That skews facts, language and quotes to his very liberal leanings.

Is anyone shocked that the richest 400 americans tax rate is pretty well the capital gains rate. But why use that as the cut off? After all it claims the party of the 1%. Where is the stats on the 1%? could it be that most of the 1% is closer to 30% and then you might have to talk about the bottom 46%. It also ignores all the corporate taxes that were paid before they recieved that money.

It does not talk about that Bush lowered the taxes for everyone. That Obama has furthered lowered those taxes for the middle income lower tax brackets. That Obama agreed to extend those rates for everyone. If revenue is so important then why is that not equally wrong or the Dems equally to blame for agreeing to the extension.

It does not mention any spending or problems with goverment spending just assumes all the spending is necessary and the bill need to be paid. It fails to mention that that no Dem proposal for tax increases would allow all the bills to be paid.

Blames the debt deal on Reps and gives the Dems a pass. It was all Republicans fault, we could have had a 4 trillion deal. Yeah right. the parties still can not agree on 1 trillion in cuts, but this article acts like they would have agreeed on 3 trillion if it were not for the Reps refusal to raise taxes. That is real in depth reporting. Why then is it not the Dems fault if they agreed 3 trillion could be trimmed by just not agreeing to get rid of these wasteful spenditures?

Wow,such keen economic advice ITT. The leaders of Greece are nodding their heads furiously in agreement.

cause greece=usa and raising the marginal rates on millionaires 3% and some low interest borrowing and spending on cops and roads in a depression is just oh so radical. thought anatta said to spare him from stupid people.

what do i expect talking to people who think fdr extended the great depression through government spending and it only ended with WW2 which was funded by what church bake sales. use greece instead of 1990's japan or 2011 data on stimulus or any other data the real economists at real schools look at.

anatta spitting the hot fire as usual

to say nothing about the merits of annata's poasts, I can't be the only one absolutely floored that anatta apparently follows politics

He did do that.

Oops not all Harvard and Yale economist agreed with Obama.

http://scottslant.blogspot.com/2009/...oe-bidens.html

There's been quite a bit of crossover between SE and Politics lately. Clark's made some appearances, Bitchface was here for a while, and plenty others.

Why are you saying this as fact? If the triggers are removed I think that's right, and there's a chance that Fitch my downgrade, but its far from a certainty, particularly if Obama will really veto ways around the trigger. A second downgrade is problem and would dwarf the other consequences in all likelihood, but you cant say its definitely going to happen.

I see anatta doesn't respect the education provided by institutions such as Utah or Denver community college but I bet they both have intro to economics courses in which their students are taught what the term depression means (in case Harvard and Yale don't come knocking on anetta's door). anetta should be congratulated on successfully recognizing that Greece and the USA are two different countries. After completion of a community college level economic course maybe anetta will see the dangers of uncontrolled government spending and the lessons that should be learned by Greece's example.

My explanation is everyone looks at Riverman's posting history to find out who to bet against and then sees all these threads he's posting in in the politics forum and decide to stop by and see whats up

I just thought this was relevant, anatta:

http://gun.io/blog/the-governments-2...d-application/

"Durbin, breaking with Dems, applauds GOP offer on taxes as a breakthrough"

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/1...-breakthrough-

"As part of a broader plan to rein in entitlement spending and reform the tax code, Toomey had offered to raise tax revenues $250 billion over 10 years. “What I said was, we should set a goal of getting all the tax rates lower by 20 percent--across the board... And then let’s find the combination of deductions that we would diminish, and exclusions that we would treat as taxable income," Toomey recalls. "I was willing to accept that the $250 billion ... revenue increase would come from the top two [tax] brackets, which was another huge concession to the Democrats. That by definition makes the tax code more progressive."

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/...ke_610027.html

Why one or the other? How bout drastically cut both?

Uhh, don't you see?

I'm pretty sure out of the 130 countries,(or whatever it is) we have troops in, we could figure out how to scale that back some without risking our National security.
What do we have like 58K troops in Germany? What a massive waste of $$ while Germany spends bupkis on their own National defense.