patrick.net

Thedaytoday says

When asked who they believed to be more responsible for the "fiscal cliff" situation, 27 percent blamed Republicans in Congress, 16 percent blamed Obama and 6 percent pointed to Democrats in Congress. The largest percentage - 31 percent - blamed "all of the above."

and what is Obama but a democrate... i mean you brainless libs are pathic

27%.................Republicans
23%.................Dem/Obama
32%.................All of the Above

So its pretty clear equally to blame.. trying to segregate out your messiah is pathetic.

Any TeaConRep that voted for the Fiscal Cliff possibility of any increase in taxes should be tried for Treason and those that voted for these Big Govt. Redistributionists should be tried as Co-conspirators.

I still don't get it. Spending , especially defense spending will have massive cuts. Taxes will be at Clinton era levels. By some accounts, the deficit will be cut in half. So we might have a recession-big deal-lets jump of the cliff.

There is literally nothing the Democrats could have done, save handing over the entire government to the Republican assholes, to avert the fiscal cliff. The fucking Republicans literally filibustered their own damn legislation when the Democrats said ok to it. You can't make this shit up.

Raising taxes the way Democrats want to do it might as well be called fiscal cliff.

Both parties share the blame, but I'm blaming spending a lot more than anything else here.

FortWayne says

Raising taxes the way Democrats want to do it might as well be called fiscal cliff.

Both parties share the blame, but I'm blaming spending a lot more than anything else here.

Perhaps. But republicans have a record of spending like drunken sailors on their first shore leave after a 10 year voyage.

The Party of blame.

FortWayne says

Both parties share the blame, but I'm blaming spending a lot more than anything else here.

Republicans spend more than Democrats. The difference is that Democrats spend on social services and Republicans spend on unjust wars. Even if the social services are wasteful, they aren't nearly as wasteful as the wars.

CaptainShuddup says

The Party of blame.

Blaming someone who caused a major fuck-up isn't a bad thing. It's called accountability.

Dan8267 says

Blaming someone who caused a major fuck-up isn't a bad thing. It's called accountability.

NO NO NO!
If BUSH went on Live TV and addressed America and said...
"I am truly sorry for any imaginary harm I may have caused the Liberals"
That would be accountability.
If a rotten coach of a football team is replaced by someone else.
Then that new Coach blamed the last coach for that teams failings in the next season. Would that be accountability?

CaptainShuddup says

Dan8267 says

Blaming someone who caused a major fuck-up isn't a bad thing. It's called accountability.

NO NO NO!

If BUSH went on Live TV and addressed America and said...

"I am truly sorry for any imaginary harm I may have caused the Liberals"

That would be accountability.

If a rotten coach of a football team is replaced by someone else.

Then that new Coach blamed the last coach for that teams failings in the next season. Would that be accountability?

Iran Contra! That's accountability.

lostand confused says

FortWayne says

Raising taxes the way Democrats want to do it might as well be called fiscal cliff.

Both parties share the blame, but I'm blaming spending a lot more than anything else here.

Perhaps. But republicans have a record of spending like drunken sailors on their first shore leave after a 10 year voyage.

They all do when they can. At the moment big spenders are Democrats as they are in charge and I blame them. If Republicans become big spenders they'll get the same treatment.

Until that happens though, Republicans are right about Democrats being big spenders.

121212 says

Iran Contra! That's accountability.

What the hell do you know about Iran Contra? You weren't even born yet.

I think I would know.

FortWayne says

What the hell do you know about Iran Contra? You weren't even born yet.

Dan8267 says

FortWayne says

Both parties share the blame, but I'm blaming spending a lot more than anything else here.

Republicans spend more than Democrats. The difference is that Democrats spend on social services and Republicans spend on unjust wars. Even if the social services are wasteful, they aren't nearly as wasteful as the wars.

I think they both are. And in many ways I'm projecting CA out of control spending on federal government, because it must be the same way.

It's human nature, people steal any place where money is flowing. CA government is rotten through the core, same is with feds.

So easy to forget Iran Contra.

So much accountability from The Gipper

FortWayne says

I think they both are. And in many ways I'm projecting CA out of control spending on federal government, because it must be the same way.

To some extent, yes. However, I've ran the numbers. The Republicans since Ronald Regan have consistently spent more money than the Democrats. The Republicans used to be the party of fiscal responsibility, but that ended with Reagan.

Yeah, they all increase spending, but the red bars are mighty larger than the blue ones.

Now, yes, the 16% that Obama increased the debt represents way more money than a corresponding 16% during the 1980s because the debt is so much larger, but the point remains that Reagan started the whole debt crisis and was a major charge-and-spender.

And remember that Dick Cheney said, "Reagan proved that deficits don't matter". The Republican Party is not the party of small government any more. It hasn't been since the 1950s.

Personally, I'd cut Federal Spending by at least 75% -- and I could do that -- but if the government is going to spend money, I'd rather it be on school lunches for children instead of drone attacks against children.

I kept saying Obama is not a biggest spender of all. Some people stubbornly refused to believe that. How Republicans and rich have influenced those gullible morons. Rich always has their way of influencing and manipulating the truth.

Nobody says

I kept saying Obama is not a biggest spender of all. Some people stubbornly refused to believe that.

I've gone on the record saying that Obama should be tried for capital crimes. So I'm clearly not an Obama supporter. I'll also go on the record as stating that Obama is either the worst or the second worst president in history, with Bush being the other.

So when I say you're full of shit it counts. The only possible way to make Obama out to be a big spender is to count the bills incurred by Bush and paid for by Obama, and that's just plain stupid.

You see, there are so many legitimate reasons to hate Obama that I don't feel any need to make any up, unlike Republicans who make up such obvious and transparent lies that any honest person has to dismiss them.

Now if you really want to get pissed about spending, get pissed about the Federal Reserve giving a few large banks $16 trillion to loan to our government at interest. The Federal Reserve is literally stealing your tax dollars and giving them to the big banks. Why doesn't that piss you off? Oh, because Republicans want those banks to get tax dollars.

Imagine if instead Congress took control of the Fed and loaned that $16 trillion to the government interest free instead of loaning it to the banks interest free? We could have paid back the entire national debt and balanced the budget and used the savings on interest payments to pay back the loan. But then no financial parasites would benefit at our expense.