Dumb Letters to the Plain Dealer, Part CCXV = "MY Republican Party . . . right now and ALWAYS!"

[HughBeaumont]

http://blog.cleveland.com/letters/2010/04/the_facts_about_democrats_and.html

Today's woefully unfactual toolbagger comes from Cleveland, who's responding to a letter appropriately asking "Where were the Tea Party nutters for the past 8 years when Bush was genuinely wasting trillions and doubling the national debt". So leave it up to our revisionist fiends in the Glen Beckiverse to . . . . straighten things out .. . . geez.

A letter writer Friday needs to "check the facts," as he advises others to do.

Congress -- specifically, the House of Representatives -- is in charge of appropriations. Under President Ronald Reagan, the deficit went up under a Democratic-controlled House. Same with President George H.W. Bush. Under President Bill Clinton, the deficit went up, until Republicans took control of Congress and cut spending to balance the budget. Under President George W. Bush and the six years of Republican control of the House and Senate, the deficit went up -- and the party suffered losses in 2006 and 2008.

But even at George W. Bush's worst, the deficit, was less than 3 percent of GDP. Under President Barack Obama and his Democratic-controlled Congress, the deficit has increased to nearly 12 percent of GDP.

The question is not, where were the Tea Partyers? The question is, will the Democratic Party be held accountable for its irresponsible spending?

Joe Campese, Cleveland

:wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf:

I mean, where do you begin? Where do you end? Did he miss the President's veto power? Did he miss the Bush Rubberstamp-o-rama? Was he above ground during both Reagan and Bush II's ballooning of the debt, mostly to help rich people and the MIC? Did he grossly fail Revisionism 101?

Didn't really take long for someone to shoot this nutter down in the comments section. It's sad, really.

[WeDidIt]

1. Barack Obama doesn't hide deficit spending on the war

like Bush did for six budgets.

[gratuitous]

2. Quick! Change the metrics

As we switch dizzily between deficit spending numbers to (purported) percentages of GDP and back again, as it suits the writer. I'd say it's pathetic argumentation, but the writer probably isn't even aware that he's doing it, and if you pointed it out, you'd get the blank, bovine stare of the True Believer, followed by the snarled rictus when the One True Faith is questioned.

[unpossibles]

3. sadly no amount of facts will enlighten them. Know why?

Because in my experience with the hardcore right (and sadly, I do know quite a lot more than a few...), any form of apology or admission of error is nothing but a sign of weakness. In other words, for them to admit that Bush (or Reagan or Bush I) made mistakes, they would have to admit that they supported that president, and they can't/won't do that.

Now, I know the left can be stubborn too, but every lefty I know (and gladly they are more numerous than the righties I know) admits errors and mistakes all of the time, not because they are weak, but because they know it's part of being human. In a similar vein, the left is capable of both supporting their president/party AND criticizing the same without it being a disconnect because we seem capable of seeing things with the complexity required. Republicans (and fake Libertaricons) are almost across the board "My (republican) President can do no wrong" without once stopping to consider the disconnect required to scream for individual rights while voting against gay marriage equality.

They have answers for this, and don't care if they are rooted in fact or not. They will say that Bush's spending was the fault of Democrats in Congress and Bill Clinton, that Valerie Plame was not a CIA agent, that Katrina was the fault of poor people and Democrats, that Gore lost fair and square, that Iraq had WMD, that Congress knew everything Bush knew about Iraq, etc., and reality-based information will slide off their backs like water off a duck. It's getting harder and harder for me to respect them. Just last weekend, some teabagger told me, after complaining about how wrong taxes are and how it's theft, that "slavery was not so bad for the slaves"!!! I was aghast! I started to argue and when he stood his ground I realized the futility of it, and walked away, partially because he's a friend's father and I did not want to damage my friendship. But a total WTF moment indeed. The same guy, while he complained about how corrupt Barney Frank and other Democrats were, was later bragging about working as an accountant to launder millions of dollars through off-shore banks to avoid taxes! Seriously! He was so unaware of his own hypocrisy that I literally had to walk away, as my counter arguments were starting to get pretty heated.

[HughBeaumont]

5. Life is like one big competition to them.

All that matters is that they WIN. Results from that win don't matter. Front runners all the way.

All I know is that I'll NEVER see eye-to-eye on economic issues with a TeaBirther. NEVER.

[quiet.american]

4. K&R nt

[HughBeaumont]

6. Maybe the TeaDouches should read this .. . . sheds some light.

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2010/04/what-made-the-us-government-so-big/39460/