WH submits budget with 1.3 Trillion deficit

As long as we have two separate definitions of what constitutes a "spending cut" we will never reach a compromise on this issue.

One side thinks a cut is a decrease in the rate of growth from the base line, while the other believes a cut should be an actual reduction to the base line.

The former will just bankrupt us as a slower rate. It would appear the latter will actually cause some to take to the streets in search of their free stuff.
 
Seems like a lot of people in this thread should be voting for Ron Paul based on the comments I'm seeing.

He's the only one actually addressing these issues and not just spewing rhetoric.
 
I always love the theory of let's take money out of the hands of people who know how to create more weath and jobs and give it to the government.

People with that way of thinking just make me laugh and glad that I at least have a sense of common sense.
 
Not true. Bush got Congress to work with him on several bipartisan projects, as did Clinton and Bush before him. The current President really has no interest in working with anyone though.
 
You will hear, of course, LOTS of criticism of Obama's budget, BUT, his 2011 tax rate is 15.4% of GDP - the lowest since 1950. Reagan's lowest tax rate was 18.5 % of GDP. Compared to Romney's plan, Obama's 2013 Budget is 19.2% of GDP - Romney's is 17% of GDP. When looking at the income levels they're both even on the Middle Class, BUT, Obama's is 1.8% of lowest 20% and Romney's is 3.4%. The highest 1%? Obama's is 36.3% - Romney - 25.9%. Fairest? The American people should decide.

Hook'em!!!
texasflag.gif
 
Militaryhorn,

At least Ron Paul wants to change things. At least he wants to make actual cuts. At least hes trying.

If theres a chance in hell, Ill take it, which is more than I can expect for any of the these other clowns.
 
Obama only missed his election promise to cut the debt by half of the amount he inherited (about 10 trillion) by 9 trillion or so.

I don't think he even bothered to submit a budget his first 3 years. He only submits one now to use as a campaign tool. We should charge the cost of preparing that 250+ page monstrosity to his reelection campaign.

I hate to think what he can do if he gets a second term.
 
Deez,

That is absolutely correct. Even people who want the US to dominate the world militarily have to realize that it wont matter if we dont change things in a major way at home. Ron Paul is the only one who doesnt grand stand and tell people what they want to hear. He tells them what they need to hear. He isnt pandering or sucking up to the mainstream. There is a reason his numbers 4 years later have doubled or tripled from what they were in 08. More and more people are seeing through the nonsense that the other candidates are selling.

Romney talks about having the strongest military in the world while the US is dead broke. For a guy who has worked in the private sector and become very rich doing it, the fact he can say things like that in the face of our current situation is unbelievable.

I personally think a lot of America's foreign problems will be solved if we change our foreign policy drastically, and focus on actually protecting the land we actually live on.
 
But that's just it - even with cuts in defense, the only reason he's doing that is so that he can raise it in other areas. He has yet to show ANY interest in cutting spending with the aim of actually reducing overall spending. It is all about shifting from column A to column B.
 
Gecko nailed this one and my only defense against this socialistic movement is my congressman and my senators and they damn well better not agree to this nonsense.
 
Bush had a 22% approval rating when he left. He also left about a 400 billion deficit, and repubs, conservatives, and libs alike were howling at the spending. You can ignore that if you wish, but there are countless examples of pissed off conservatives and republicans. What is even worse is Obama comes in and is elected because he promised to end all those "reckless spending policies that got us into this mess", and was going to "go through the budget line by line" to end the waste, cut spending and get us out of the ditch. That is what he pledged to the American people. That was his word. That is who he told us he was, and that he was going to change the way we do business in washington. well.....HIS ACTIONS are he is a fvcking moron. Instead of doing what is right for the country in cutting government waste, and spending he has excalated it to the point of 1.2 - 1.6 TRILLION dollar deficits year on year. He has handed taxpayer funds to failed businesses, added entitlements (excepting those who give him money), and spent more money in a little less than 4 years than all previous presidents from George Washing to Clinton COMBINED. He is Bush on steroids, he is a fvcktard, and he needs to be held accountable by those who oppose his ideology, but also those who howled at the bush spending and voted for this dumbass. You lefties need to hold one of your own accountable for being WORSE than the man who preceeded your guy particularly when your guy took everything that sucked about GWB and multiplied it. Those are the very simple facts about Barack Obama. He sucks. He is the worst economic president in history, and it isnt even close.
 
If Obama's budget is so great, how about the Senate go ahead and pass it as is....It would be the first budget you passed in over a 1000 days and you would see all of your at jeopardy Senators lose their seats, if it is so great pass it, the american people dare you!!! C'mon Reid!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

NEW: Pro Sports Forums

Cowboys, Texans, Rangers, Astros, Mavs, Rockets, etc. Pro Longhorns. The Chiefs and that Swift gal. This is the place.

Pro Sports Forums

Recent Threads

Back
Top