Republican’s Made Today’s Deficits

Economic Downturn, Financial Rescues, and Bush-Era Policies Drive the Numbers













Economic Downturn, Financial Rescues, and Bush-Era Policies Drive the Numbers

Click to download the PDF of this Report

By Kathy Ruffing and James R. Horney via

If not for the tax cuts enacted during the Presidency of George W. Bush that Congress did not pay for, the cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that began during that period, and the effects of the worst economic slump since the Great Depression (including the cost of steps necessary to combat it), we would not be facing these huge deficits in the near term.

While President Obama inherited a bad fiscal legacy, that does not diminish his responsibility to propose policies to address our fiscal imbalance and put the weight of his office behind them. Although policymakers should not tighten fiscal policy in the near term while the economy remains fragile, they and the nation at large must come to grips with the nation’s deficit problem. But we should all recognize how we got where we are today.

The rest of the story

The libertarian Democrat, revisited

So there’s no confusion, my personal politics are independent in nature. I find politics in general to be a cut-throat mass manipulation for power which undeservedly rewards those with power and also undeservedly punishes those out of power. Ultimately, neither situation is good for our nation. My interest is in doing the things that are good for our nation. And that is why I find this next article intriguing.

by Dante Atkins via Daily Kos: State of the Nation

The year 2006 was shaping up to be a good one for Democrats. The toxic combination of George W. Bush and the corruption and cronyism of the Republican Congress was brewing a perfect storm that seemed to be pointing to Democratic victories in areas where they might not otherwise be expected. And nowhere was that more true than in the Mountain West.

In this land of big sky, rugged earth, and independent spirits, Democratic candidates were not only on the verge of winning big in the competitive areas such as Colorado and Montana, but they were also fighting hard in the deepest of red areas: strongly conservative states such as Wyoming and Idaho. The prevailing wisdom was that these areas preferred Republicans because voters demanded less government interference in their lives and thus tended to side with the small-government conservatives against big-government “tax-and-spend” liberals.

It was in this context that on October 2 of that year, Markos Moulitsas e-penned an editorial in an unlikely place: the electronic version of the libertarian publication CATO, appropriately dubbed CATO Unbound. In his essay, “The Case for the Libertarian Democrat,” Moulitsas quoted a then-pseudonymous Daily Kos diarist to explain the common cause then forming between those with libertarian ideals and those with a progressive vision:

As hekebolos further noted, defense contractors now have greater say in what weapons systems get built (via their lobbyists, blackmailing elected officials by claiming that jobs will be lost in their states and districts if weapons system X gets axed). The energy industry dominates the executive branch and has reaped record windfall profits. Our public debt is now held increasingly by private hedge funds. Corporations foul our air and water. They plunder our treasury.

This list, I’m sure, could be added to. Oil and oil services companies can even dictate when and how the most powerful nation on earth decides to go to war. A cabal of major corporate industry is, in fact, more powerful than the government of the most powerful nation on earth–and government is the only thing that can stop them from recklessly exploiting the people and destroying their freedom.

That, in essence, is why I am a Democrat, and why my original blog post on libertarian Democrats struck a chord with so many. We cherish freedom, and will embrace any who would protect it. But that necessarily includes, in this day and age, the government.

(Click for the rest of the story) It’s worth your time, IMO.

On Obama’s Afghanistan Speech

What I heard, saw, and felt. Obama invoked patriotism. A clear explanation of history (as we know it). Goals were set and an ending defined. Obama’s clear and steady gaze, a commander using power words. I felt he believed what he was saying.

I believe there’s more to this speech than what we heard and watched, as follows.

Doing the math. $30 B a year divided by a troop strength of 100,000 equals $300,000.00 for each soldier per year. Hmmm, with that kind of money somebody’s be gettin rich. Who?

Political trade-offs. Certain Democrats and many Republicans want more war. Why? I’ll let you answer that. The President wants Health Care reform, and a better domestic economy. Do you get the picture?

Some Gun Nuts ARE Nuts

I support our constitution but people should use common sense and not bring guns to political or any other public gathering. All it would take for people to get hurt, or worse, is for somebody lighting off a string of firecrackers and pandemonium breaks out.

Consequently, I believe these Gun Nuts showing up at recent political events if not legally crazy then have an agenda to provoke chaos which goes way over the line of having an open discussion on health insurance reform.
Therefore, these people are agent provocateur’s.

Look at the video.