So, Who'has read all the way through Obama's Budget?Follow

Joe Liebermann is both at once.

You're not using Smash as your comparison to make yourself moderate are you? Because he's so far left socialism is afraid of him.

I'm honestly asking because I don't see you post a whole lot in political threads except to get right wing nut jobs to clarify.

I think we should drown the streets in the blood of the bourgeoisie until the drains scab over and the verminous capitalist leeches drown in their own offal.

So yeah, I'm pretty moderate.



We should keep a watch on comrade Smasharoo, just in case. For the good of the revolution.

Edited, Mar 2nd 2009 4:19pm by Kavekk

I read your article, and I disagree with the views expressed in it. The writer chides Obama for switching spending to the budget as opposed to "behind the scenes spending" that is added on outside the official budget. While there is a reduction in overall defense spending, Obama is also planning on slowing the war effort and ending it within a year or two. The less spending goes along with that plan. One paragraph caught me in particular:


There in lies the difference between the Obama administration and the Bush (and Reagan) administration(s). I think Obama realizes we can't rely on ourselves only as defenders of the world. It's too big a burden and is extremely unrealistic. The Bush years crushed our foreign image; never mind allying with other nations, we actively antagonized the rest of the world. Meanwhile, America was embroiled in a conflict that every year showed how we were slipping from our position as number 1; more than just militarily (although the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq certainly showed that, what with being stuck in the countries years after the mission was accomplished, having abysmal recruitment rates, and constant casualties), but economically and diplomatically as well.

America right now is reprioritizing. But you're right. If we are destroyed within the next 8 years by things that those 40 billion could have prevented without a doubt, such as a Chinese invasion, or a well-placed nuke, or unmanned drone planes, then I will agree you had a point.

See you in 8 years, and GTFO.

Smash is the only person I've ever met that might just be left of me.

Might? I had my right nut removed because I wanted to make sure I tilted to the left.

Oh...I just figured it was an ex-girlfriend thing.

I just wanted to be more like Lance.

The point wasn't about whether you agree or disagree with Obama's "plan", but to show that Obama is, in fact, cutting military spending, not increasing it.

Since you agree that "less spending goes along with that plan", and "that plan" is presumably a reference to Obama's plan, can I assume you agree that when Smash said that Obama is going to increase military spending, he was incorrect?

Yeah, it's pretty sad there aren't many sensible conservatives posting here any more. It irks me when people just spew talking points and then scramble around in some half-baked fantasy land trying to rationalize them.

I'm a pragmatist more than anything. I want things to work, and I want whoever is in power to plan for the long term.

It would help terrifically if 90% of the liberals on this board didn't use arguments that primarily consist of "You're a conservative so you must be wrong... and EVIL!".



Like "Trickle down economics doesn't work", "gap between rich and poor is growing", "Corporate Welfare", "Mission Accomplished", "Iraq was all about oil", "Iraq didn't have any WMDs", "We're torturing innocent people in Gitmo", "Consensus on Global Warming", etc? And don't get me started on the sheer regularity with which arguments are ignored and replaced with an assumed religious right position instead...

Yeah. "irks" is a good word.



And yet, you voted (I'm guessing) for a guy who's response to falling government revenues as a result of a collapsing economy is to engage in the most massive spending increase in US history. What's the long term plan there?

I could even accept this as a philosophical difference of opinion on economics, but isn't it the least bit strange that the same people who have been absolutely bashing Bush for running a deficit are suddenly suspiciously silent on the issue? Where are all those people for whom a deficit seemed to be the number one most important economic fact in existence? Did they all just stop posting here? No... Sure looks like the same names.


Following party talking points? Spewing rhetoric? Might want to look in the mirror there Sammy. Unless you can honestly say you never once criticized Bush for deficit spending in the last 8 years...

FTFY


Even the right wing nuts in Canada sound like commies to Gbaji.

So you're a Democrat?

Edited, Mar 3rd 2009 9:36am by Timelordwho

No, you'd be a democrat--maybe a more moderate to conservative one but a democrat nonetheless. The modern republican is either entirely disenfranchised or ******* insane.

I'm a conservative. It's not my fault your country's polarized.