Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Why Didn't Republicans Propose $7 Trillion In Cuts When They Were In Charge?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
KingOfLostSouls Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 12:21 PM
Original message
Why Didn't Republicans Propose $7 Trillion In Cuts When They Were In Charge?
someone tossed this around amongst friends earlier


when republicans had control of the house, senate, and presidency why didn't they try to balance the budget THEN? were they just like, "well the budget surplus isn't high enough and the debt isn't high enough, lets run things up a bit more before we decide to come to jesus." it's like a pimp finding out he has two weeks left to live and goes on a hooker and blow binge before converting on his death bed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
HughBeaumont Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 12:23 PM
Response to Original message
1. Well, you can't ask that now. Goalposts, and all that.
At least according to the World's Dumbest Columnist Ever:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberal N proud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 12:28 PM
Response to Original message
2. They were too busy exploding the deficit and we were at WAR
You were either with us or against us and all that crap.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
buddysmellgood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 12:38 PM
Response to Original message
3. Deficits don't matter when they are in power
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
newspeak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 12:54 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. as with Reagan, deficits don't matter
unless they can create deficits, then publicly proclaim how they are concerned about deficits that they created, and look we've now got the solution for the deficits we created. Of course, one must wonder if the deficit was created and blatant deregulation allowed so that the environment is created to help along their agenda. And what would that agenda be? Maybe doing away with anything that helps americans (especially in this financial climate) while privatizing the shite out of everything. Selling us off to their real constituents. A bunch of damn treasonous Judas.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 12:49 PM
Response to Original message
4. Because they're damaged children who must win at any cost.
It's not about America, or governing for the people of this country. It's about winning. It's about being in control. It's about making money. They will be shape shifters if it helps them win.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
janet118 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 01:00 PM
Response to Original message
6. It's a pattern with the Republicans . . .
Blow up the deficit - Let Democrats sort it out and get blamed for it.

Sort of like, we'll have fun, fun, fun 'til daddy takes the T-Bird away.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
svsuman23 Donating Member (143 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 01:06 PM
Response to Original message
7. why hasn't ANY party proposed 7 trillion in cuts!?!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
butterfly77 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 01:08 PM
Response to Original message
8. Because they were sending...
it all over to Iraq so that them and their friends and family could take all that they wanted tax free from the missing 9 billion dollars.

Plus the fact that they and their then President were keeping the war funding off of the books so that when a Democratic President took office and put it on the books would be blamed for all of their thievery and off the books spending...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
L. Coyote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 01:09 PM
Response to Original message
9. They had not run out of debt ceiling yet??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
W_HAMILTON Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 01:48 PM
Response to Reply #9
15. The debt ceiling was raised at least seven times during the Bush administration
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
L. Coyote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 04:09 PM
Response to Reply #15
23. Which is why noone wants to loan the USA money today
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
W_HAMILTON Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 07:48 PM
Response to Reply #23
25. It's just pointing out why your offering that...
...Republicans did not cut spending during their watch is flawed.

It's not because we only just recently reached the debt ceiling; it was reached (and thus, raised) many times during the Bush administration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
roman7 Donating Member (77 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 01:11 PM
Response to Original message
10. its run the country in the ground&
run everything in the ground make tons of crooked money, cause the country to go bankrupt, beg for a bailout then say kiss our ass we want more from the poor...and we keep letting the repukes get away with it. for the sake of the united states and everything we`ve fought for in our quest for the better life for all people we must staw involved & hold tight to our democratic principles.vote democrat!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 01:11 PM
Response to Original message
11. Because they're not serious about any of this shit they're proposing.
They just want to engineer the crisis to continue through Obama's term.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PatSeg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 01:13 PM
Response to Original message
12. They don't care about spending
when they are the ones who are doing the spending. And as someone else here said, all they seem to care about is winning regardless of the outcome.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orsino Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 01:19 PM
Response to Original message
13. Their crimes have steadily escalated.
Outrage fatigue lets them get away with so much more these days.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
W_HAMILTON Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 01:45 PM
Response to Original message
14. lol
A simple -- yet very good -- question.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sinkingfeeling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 01:51 PM
Response to Original message
16. They were too busy doubling the national debt with 2 unfunded wars, tax cuts, and an unfunded drug
program for Medicare.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cbdo2007 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 02:42 PM
Response to Original message
17. Same reason they never tried to propose any kind of health care reform.
I don't know what that reason is, but that's always my first argument to a Repube who starts arguing about health care.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
City Lights Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 03:06 PM
Response to Original message
18. Deficits didn't matter then.
The rules always change when the GOP is in charge.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Life Long Liberal Donating Member (120 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 03:08 PM
Response to Original message
19. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Brickbat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 03:08 PM
Response to Original message
20. Because it's really all just a game to them. If they win, they win; if they don't win, they still
go home rich.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dawson Leery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 03:11 PM
Response to Original message
21. Because they were giving everything away to their campaign donors/owners.
Two wars, a corporate giveaway known as "medicare part d", and trillions of tax cuts to the top 1% alright by them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uncle Joe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 03:43 PM
Response to Original message
22. Because they wanted to maintain their hold on political power and they knew hacking away at critical
social programs would quickly result in Republican political losses sooner and even greater in number than what they experienced in 2008.

Had the Republicans drastically cut domestic spending and critical social programs while they held power, even their own brain washed supporters would've seen through the GOP idyllic, propaganda illusion, ie; "government is the problem" and experienced the cold, harsh reality of corporate supremacy up close and personal in such a blatant manner that the Republicans couldn't take that risk.

Now with the Democrats holding most of the political power, the Republicans have free reign and political motivation to hypocritically carp about fiscal responsibility, as if they actually gave a rat's ass, believing that no one will remember their passing of tax cuts to the mega-rich; those least needing them and waging war Carte Blanche; which blew up the budget and surplus that they inherited from the Clinton Administration.

The Republicans also believe that if the Democrats get sucked in to accepting foolish Republican proposed cuts in critical domestic programs, the Democrats will pay the brunt of the political price as their supporters primarily believe in a "public good" and the "public good" is the thing getting screwed.

Thanks for the thread, KingOfLostSouls.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wiggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-07-11 04:18 PM
Response to Original message
24. Had to create a crisis first. Shock doctrine and all. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Aug 23rd 2014, 05:11 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC