An existential Threat to Leftists Ideology

[grggngll]

This is the existential threat to liberalism. It's about the lie being exposed, not the paltry decrease in the increase. Hence the sound and the fury.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/..._ideology.html

[SalisburySage]

Nbody is paying attention to Obama's lies and scare tactics. They are so ludicrous and makes him look like a silly A##SS.

[Cameron]

The sequester, which is Obama's idea, is an existential threat to leftist ideology.

Do you hear yourselves?

[pickles]

So if the sequestration goes through, and the economy doesn't grow, and all of the economists say it was because of the sequestration, then will all the supply side economists admit that their policies are fatally flawed?
Or will they blame the President for the result of the sequestration, and the slowing of the economy?

Time will tell, but I have a pretty good idea what will happen. It's the same song and dance we've been getting for 30 years, in the face of ever increasing evidence that supply side economics is fatally flawed.

[zenwalk]

Yes. Which gets us back to the thread on stupidity versus ignorance.

[Norman]

Yes indeed, John Kerry was correct.

[The Astute Reader(tm)]

Another pointless post from the AmThunk SpamBot.

[Rael]

Yes indeed, John Kerry was correct.

Do you really agree that spending just a little bit more than last year is a disaster waiting to happen? Both parties are dysfunctional but all this wailing over a less than anticipated spending increase seems downright silly to me. Are you really going to suggest that there isn't 2.1% of fat in the federal budget that can safely be cut? It is both party's fault that they cannot agree on which fat to cut to get the 2.1%. They need to stop trying to position the blame and roll up their sleeves and act like adults. I need to prioritize my spending in my household. Presumably you do as well. Why can't we hold our fearless leaders to the same small standard that everyone expects of us? Ok, I can dream can't I?

[grggngll]

So if the sequestration goes through, and the economy doesn't grow, and all of the economists say it was because of the sequestration, then will all the supply side economists admit that their policies are fatally flawed?

The economy is not growing, it is stagnant.
It won't grow because of anything 0 has proposed or will propose from here to eternity.

Or will they blame the President for the result of the sequestration, and the slowing of the economy?

Time will tell, but I have a pretty good idea what will happen. It's the same song and dance we've been getting for 30 years, in the face of ever increasing evidence that supply side economics is fatally flawed.

Have you looked at the overwhelming evidence that sucking wealth out of the economy to pay for an ever growing government that does not produce anything does not work?

[grggngll]

Do you really agree that spending just a little bit more than last year is a disaster waiting to happen? Both parties are dysfunctional but all this wailing over a less than anticipated spending increase seems downright silly to me. Are you really going to suggest that there isn't 2.1% of fat in the federal budget that can safely be cut? It is both party's fault that they cannot agree on which fat to cut to get the 2.1%. They need to stop trying to position the blame and roll up their sleeves and act like adults. I need to prioritize my spending in my household. Presumably you do as well. Why can't we hold our fearless leaders to the same small standard that everyone expects of us? Ok, I can dream can't I?

The 0-bots here have no clue. And the slightest inkling gets quickly repressed for the reason the author explained. On the plantation or off. They choose on, happily sacrificing 20,000,000 that will not get a job any time soon. Buy hey their intentions are what counts.

[Joy in Mudville]

The economy is not growing, it is stagnant.

are you lying or just horribly uninformed?

[SemiAuto]

Gee, one would have to be completely deaf to the GOP squealing like nubian goats over the sequester to buy this bit of spin.

[banner1124]

Do you really agree that spending just a little bit more than last year is a disaster waiting to happen? Both parties are dysfunctional but all this wailing over a less than anticipated spending increase seems downright silly to me. Are you really going to suggest that there isn't 2.1% of fat in the federal budget that can safely be cut? It is both party's fault that they cannot agree on which fat to cut to get the 2.1%. They need to stop trying to position the blame and roll up their sleeves and act like adults. I need to prioritize my spending in my household. Presumably you do as well. Why can't we hold our fearless leaders to the same small standard that everyone expects of us? Ok, I can dream can't I?

The problem is that sequestration is not just cutting the fat... it's cutting period with no distinction between what's fat and what's not. It was designed to be awful so that the government would get off it's arses and pass something that makes sense. Unfortunately the Republican's are busy obstructing and Obama is busy campaigning and nobody's actually doing their freaking job so no alternative is getting passed.

[banner1124]

are you lying or just horribly uninformed?

We've all seen enough of gurgle to know that he's both lying AND horribly uninformed

[SemiAuto]

The new rumblings match what's been going on behind the scenes for months. Governors have publicly signed on to letters bashing Obama and praising House Republicans' efforts, but privately their offices have been urging lawmakers to work harder to avoid potentially devastating cuts — particularly those that could hit local programs.

The GOP likes to talk about fiscal restraint but they don't like to deliver on it.

The GOP likes the federal feeding trough just as much as the faux liberals on the left.

[pickles]

The GOP likes to talk about fiscal restraint but they don't like to deliver on it.

The GOP likes the federal feeding trough just as much as the faux liberals on the left.

Sounds eerily like the debate during the stimulus plan.

I agree w your main point though.

And at least the libs want to pay for their spending, and don't function under a demonstratably false economic theory.

So, imo, they win.

[Rael]

The problem is that sequestration is not just cutting the fat... it's cutting period with no distinction between what's fat and what's not. It was designed to be awful so that the government would get off it's arses and pass something that makes sense. Unfortunately the Republican's are busy obstructing and Obama is busy campaigning and nobody's actually doing their freaking job so no alternative is getting passed.

True, but any agency that cannot take this small across the board cut and figure out how to make it work is probably an agency in need of much greater cuts starting at the top.

[SemiAuto]

Sounds eerily like the debate during the stimulus plan.

I agree w your main point though.

And at least the libs want to pay for their spending, and don't function under a demonstratably false economic theory.

So, imo, they win.

If you think $16 trillion in debt and trillion dollar deficits are a win then I suppose.

The faux liberals don't want to pay for their spending. They want others to pay for their spending. Its legalized plunder pretending to be civilized.

[pickles]

If you think $16 trillion in debt and trillion dollar deficits are a win then I suppose.

The faux liberals don't want to pay for their spending. They want others to pay for their spending. Its legalized plunder pretending to be civilized.

Oh so the Dems are solely to blame for the deficit?

History, and even yourself previously, beg to differ.

Taxation isn't plunder. It's been WRITTEN INTO THE CONSTITUTION FROM THE BEGINNING.

[pickles]

If you think $16 trillion in debt and trillion dollar deficits are a win then I suppose.

The faux liberals don't want to pay for their spending. They want others to pay for their spending. Its legalized plunder pretending to be civilized.

Oh so the Dems are solely to blame for the deficit?

History, and even yourself previously, beg to differ.

Taxation isn't plunder. It's been WRITTEN INTO THE CONSTITUTION FROM THE BEGINNING.

You do support the Constitution right?