Calling In The Markers

The most galling thing about the Bush Administration was it gave the Dems – the party of Tip O’Neill and Ted Kennedy and Barney Frank – the opportunity to try to claim to be the party of fiscal responsibility with a straight face.

I told myself down all those long years “if, heaven forfend, those chattering chipmunks get into power again, they’ll revert to their true colors. Of course, it’ll bankrupt the country…”

Of course, I was right…

President-elect Barack Obama warned of dire and long-lasting consequences if Congress doesn’t pump unprecedented dollars into the national economy, making an urgent pitch Thursday for his mammoth spending proposal in his first speech since the election.”In short, a bad situation could become dramatically worse” if Washington doesn’t go far enough to address the spreading crisis, the Democrat said as fresh economic reports showed an outlook growing increasingly grim.

…but it’s probably not worth bragging about.

So, all you “Hope and Change” voters; if your kids ask you “why can’t I find a job, and why does a house cost me 15% interest” one of these years, have you started working on your response yet?

(And yes, I know Bush spent like a crack whore with a gold card. I was warning Republicans of this in 2000. And there’s nothing about “a bad spender” that justifies “a worse spender”, so just (to coin a phrase) move on).

Posted

January 9, 2009

Business, The Economy and The Markets, Money, Socialism American Style

Mitch Berg

Tags:

Comments

3 responses to “Calling In The Markers”

penigma

January 9, 2009

Actually, it was Ronal Reagan AND GWB that gave the Dems the right to call themselves fiscally responsible, oh, and the fact that THEY ACTUALLY BALANCED THE BUDGET.

By the way Mitch, this is one of the ugly little truths about conservatives, you are lead around by your nose by a bunch of corporatists who NEVER gave a rats behind about fiscal conservatism, they just wanted to raid the treasury, and they talked about limited government to allow them to a. get you lemmings to vote for them and b. get rid of regulation which kept them from looting the middle class and polluting the hell out of the world.
penigma

January 9, 2009

Oh, and the REALLY galling thing is, you show considerable ability to criticize Bush now, but refused to do so in any meaningful way prior to being defeated in elections.

In short, your complaint appears to be more about political victory (or defeat) than any sense of responsiblity that you helped put this a-hole in office OR despite your ability to now see reality (to a degree) the other really galling thing is, despite it staring you in the face that your party was all hat and no cattle, you STILL claim to be the party of ANYTHING responsible, let alone fiscal responsibility.
Mitch Berg

January 9, 2009

Peev,

I know your current MO is never to answer questions, and to just let your verbal diarrhea loose in its full gushing glory.

But…:

Actually, it was Ronal Reagan AND GWB that gave the Dems the right to call themselves fiscally responsible, oh, and the fact that THEY ACTUALLY BALANCED THE BUDGET.

Really?

When did the Democrats “BALANCE” the “BUDGET”?

I don’t mean 1961 (and John F Kennedy would puke if he saw the party his brother leads today). I mean since Reagan.

If you need to look it up in the Code of Hammurabi, go ahead.

By the way Mitch, this is one of the ugly little truths about conservatives, you are lead around by your nose by a bunch of corporatists who NEVER gave a rats behind about fiscal conservatism, they just wanted to raid the treasury, and they talked about limited government to allow them to a. get you lemmings to vote for them and b. get rid of regulation which kept them from looting the middle class and polluting the hell out of the world.

It’s, er, an interesting conspiracy theory.

Really.

No, seriously. That’s all it is, and that’s all you have. It’s bone simple to conjure up some huge, far-reaching depravity to explain things that you can’t through basic logic and fact.

Which is all you ever do!

Oh, and the REALLY galling thing is, you show considerable ability to criticize Bush now, but refused to do so in any meaningful way prior to being defeated in elections.

Again, rubbish. As I’ve noted many times, I was a Forbes/Kemp supporter in 2000.

So – as with pretty much anything you say – you’re wrong.

Feel free to answer that “balanced budget” question, though.