The smell of hypocrisy.

I wonder if this had anything to do with it?
http://shorterandsweeter.blogspot.co...road-trip.html

I wonder if this had anything to do with it?
http://shorterandsweeter.blogspot.co...road-trip.html Originally Posted by NipLover

This video is nothing but conjecture and not one single source for his information is presented in the entire video. Let me post this again for good measure:

http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=12039

"For 2011, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects that if current laws remain unchanged, the federal budget will show a deficit of close to $1.5 trillion, or 9.8 percent of GDP. The deficits in CBO's baseline projections drop markedly over the next few years as a share of output and average 3.1 percent of GDP from 2014 to 2021. Those projections, however, are based on the assumption that tax and spending policies unfold as specified in current law. Consequently, they understate the budget deficits that would occur if many policies currently in place were continued, rather than allowed to expire as scheduled under current law."

The last sentence is key to this paragraph. What the CBO is referring to is the mother fucking Bush tax cuts that your blogger genius fails to make any mention of. He also fails to make any mention whatsoever that 1/3 of last years entire budget was dedicated to the recovery act implemented due to the recession George Jr. left behind. He appears to be using that additonal 1/3 of last years budget to draw his little race track for each subsequent year, which is completely false. Fact is that it is absolutely IMPERATIVE that these tax cuts are left to expire in order to start returning things back to normal.

Do you agree or disagree with the CBO's findings? If you disagree, I'd be curious to know why.

There are literally millions upon millions of Republicans who voted for George W. Bush that have conveniently lost track of the entire 8 year period GW was in office. There is a term used for this mysterious malady. It is more commonly known as 'selective memory'. It is easy to pick them out in a crowd. They are the ones wearing blinders!

As far as those afflicted are concerned, every problem known to mankind began before January 20, 2001 or after January 19, 2009. If there is a problem, it is either Clinton's or Obama's fault. GW who?

That's their story and they are sticking to it! Originally Posted by bigtex

There are many key indices used to measure, evaluate, and determine performance. Comparisons to established benchmarks and previously evaluated similar items is one of those key indices. Evaluating prototypes can be very difficult because of a lack of those comparisons.

What I’m trying to say is that some political groups claim that Bush is blamed for everything by liberals. That removes a focus of comparing presidential performance. Many of those same groups try to isolate or provide no context for actions taken by the President other than he is screwing up.
A quick example is harping on the number of rounds of golf the president has played. 70 something is nothing compared to spending 1020 days out of 2920 at the ranch, Camp David, or your parent’s house. More than 33% of 8 years.
There are enough real issues to discuss that we don’t need petty-assed distractions. Comparing presidents is OK. More people should do it (with more than just 1 president) before they start to bitch about the little stuff.

...you're going to NEED these programs. They simply are not optional. Originally Posted by F-Sharp

They are not explicitly authorized by the Constitution, so yes, they are not optional. They are not allowed and must be eliminated.

The Constitution was a contract that limited the federal government. Anything not explicitly authorized is prohibited. All federal programs not explicitly authorized must be canceled. No wriggle room.

Then the people and the states have the authority and option to handle any needs vacated.

On "fair share". How I hate that term. "fair share" the way the politicians use it really means who is the victim of some gangs greed. Think "doublespeak".

If you are really serious about "fair", then what we really need is to have all laws, no exceptions, be moral. I.e., each law must apply equally to everyone, everywhere, and across all time. Moral laws are logically testable. They enable a single class society, i.e., a free society. The problem is that people keep wanting to make exceptions, which fractures society into multiple classes.

Article 1, Section 8 of the United States Constitution:
"The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States"


Credit where due: I yanked that from F-Sharp's diary on McConnell and the debt ceiling.

The answer to this discussion lies in the last seven words of Article 1, Section 8. It's called the "General Welfare Clause". The Supreme Court interpreted the clause in 1937 to mean that the Constitution does indeed allow for programs such as Social Security as they are considered necessary for the general welfare of the United States. Their decision was based by and large on a report drafted in 1791 by Alexander Hamilton titled the "Report on Manufactures".