Patrick Ruffini writes another one of those “the left is screwing everything up, the right can capitalize on 
this with our silly nonsensical slogans and policy proposals” blog entries and winds up:
The right will be galvanized to action by the theft of the free enterprise system. What will the left be galvanized by?
Me: A competent and consistent well working government in the tradition of the American people.
One of the only reasons George W. Bush won the electoral college in 2000 (while losing the popular vote) was that the Democrat in office had done such a good job the American people figured that there was a limited amount of harm a conservative Republican president could do – we had surpluses for Christ’s sake – and even under those circumstances the Republican had to run as a “compassionate conservative” and not the fringe sort of Palin/Limbaugh conservative that the Republican base now thinks is a normal person. Seriously, how could you not look at the Republican leadership and prominent Republicans like Jindal, Palin, etc. and not laugh your ass off?
The Republican party is now in “crazy base world” and has no way out for the near term. Even if they knock off a few Dems in conservative districts next year, they’re likely to react to McCain’s loss by picking a diehard “savior” who’s likely to have the same sort of electoral luck when the Republicans tried that strategy in 1964 and when the Democrats tried the liberal version in 1972 and 1984.
Should that happen, 2016 is less likely to be 1968 or 1980 as they so badly want, but rather, its likely to be a 1940.
Ruffini is an idiot. And if guys like him are the future of the Republican party, I’m grinning all the way to 2016. He tries to ignore 2001-2009, a period in which the Federal government grew to its largest size ever, our deficit peaked in the trillions, and the government’s intrusiveness into peoples’ personal lives is greater than ever (illegal wire-taps of American citizens, Schiavo, legislating bedroom matters between consenting adults, etc.).
No Patty-cakes, you can’t yet again say Bush II failed conservatism. For eight years, Bush II embodied conservatism in all of its ugly hypocrisy. It’s not about smaller government, it’s about steering contracts to your buddies in the defense and energy and finance sectors. It’s not about freedom, it’s about limiting freedom. It’s not about personal responsiblity, it’s about placing the blame on others (the Iraq disaster is the Iraqis’ fault, Katrina was black folks’ fault, economic collapse was poor peoples’ fault).
What a joke of a party. What a knee-slapper of an “intellectual” who tries to bolster “conservatism” but is too much of a coward to confront the obvious — with Republicans in charge, you get a) disastrous failed military invasions, b) huge deficits, c) bigger government than ever, and d) a Recession bordering on a Depression.
Sorry, but Americans aren’t buying this line of shit any longer. They might not like Obama, but they’re certainly never going to vote Republican again.
So bring on Palin and Jindal and Cantor. Each one is another nail in conservatism’s coffin. Not to mention a great source of amusement for me and my fellow Americans.
Patrick’s party thinks the Earth is 6,000 years old.
Republicans indebted America, acted lawlessly, and their reckless militancy has endangered America.
Republicans believe that through repetition they can hide or twist those realities. Hopefully repetition of the facts by an informed citizenry can effectively counter that.
The Republican Debtor Party left America in over $8+ TRILLION dollars in debt while expanding government’s size and invasiveness.
The Republican Lawless Party eliminated basic rights, including Habeas Corpus and the Geneva Conventions, and even violated America’s own law against torture.
The Republican Warmonger Party lied US into the Iraq War, taking their eye off the balls in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
That’s just a quick accounting. A thorough review of Republican indebtedness, lawlessness, and warmongering for the last eight years will also include:
On the debt, economist Joseph Stiglitz estimated that Republican Bush’s policies indebt America by around $10.35 TRILLION. But that doesn’t entirely account for the trillions wiped out because Republican lawlessness eliminated sensible financial regulation and failed to enforce the regulations that were still on the books.
On the legal front, Republican’s embrace of lawlessness allowed unlawful surveillance of the American citizenry, rendition (kidnapping), torture (war crimes), and the serial politicization of science that endangered not just individual species but also recklessly gambled the biosphere. Republicans conveniently ignored laws that protected species, the environment, human health, and even ignored laws that would have addressed global climate change (something the majority of Republicans still conveniently deny is even happening).
On the military front, Republican’s embrace of warmongering had them using fear for political purposes on the home front (the very definition of terrorism) but also had Republican’s misdirecting American military resources to chase fantasy threats (in oil laden Iraq) while ignoring the Taliban (that harbored the Al Qaeda terrorist network that attacked US) even as the Taliban regained a foothold in Afghanistan and spread their militant ideology to nuclear armed neighbor Pakistan.
Responding to Republicans is like playing a broken record: when Republicans falsely claim they are the Party of Fiscal Responsibility or the Law Enforcement Party or the Military Party, it needs to be quickly and endlessly responded to with the facts: Republicans are DEBTORS, LAWLESS, and WARMONGERS. On all three fronts Republican “strengths” have been a hoax.
[Jaim's (above) reads minds and managed to post a better written, more succinct post along the same lines just as this post was finishing up]
Jaim and NewsReference’s complaints about Bush running up record deficits rings just a bit hollow after the past 2 months.
SaveFarris: “Jaim and NewsReference’s complaints about Bush running up record deficits rings just a bit hollow after the past 2 months.”
As do the Republicans’ complaints about the Obama budget after the past 8 years.
SaveFarris has a short memory about the US debt.
Republican President Reagan more than doubled America’s debt.
Between Republican President Reagan and the first Republican Bush they more than quadrupled America’s debt.
The second Republican Bush was closing fast on doubling America’s debt himself, adding around $5 TRILLION to America’s debt.
But the $5 TRILLION of debt added by Republican Bush II is artificially low, it credits him with the SURPLUS that was handed to him by Democratic President Clinton for the fiscal year of 2001 and doesn’t debit the debt added under Bush for fiscal year 2009.
During Republican Reagan’s Presidency the US debt went from UNDER $1 trillion to OVER $2.6 trillion. When the first Republican Bush’s four years in office was finally done he’d added almost more to the debt as Reagan had in his entire eight years, leaving with the US debt at over $4 TRIILION.
US DEBT UNDER REPUBLICANS REAGAN AND BUSH I WENT FROM:
BELOW a TRILLION to OVER 4 (FOUR) TRILLION.
Again, if you offset by a year (because the President comes into office with a budget from the last President and leaves a budget for the next President) those numbers are significantly higher.
If Democratic President Obama doubles America’s debt over eight years HE WOULD STILL BE SIGNIFICANTLY MORE FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE THAN REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT RONALD REAGAN.
As it is, he’s dealing with not only Republican President Bush’s debt, he’s also dealing with the fact the Bush left office after his right wing ideology gambled America’s economy into the toilet and created the Greatest Recession since the Great Depression.
Now that everyone is saving for bad times, the only big spender left is the GOVERNMENT that the REPUBLICANS ran into debt.
Under these economic realities, “tax cuts” actually exacerbate the recession because those “tax cuts” only increase savings and reduce the spending that’s required to get America (and the global financial system) out of the recession.
Republican’s ideological blindness is what created this recession and it would significantly worsen it if they were given a free hand. It was arguably right wing ideology (right wing deregulation & Republican Hoover’s neglect) that created and exacerbated the Great Depression.
Curiously, the US Treasury’s “Debt to the Penny” only goes back through 1993, but the historical debt data below came from:
http://treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt_histo4.htm
US DEBT UNDER REPUBLICAN BUSH II:
01/20/2009 $ 10,626,877,048,913.08
US DEBT UNDER Democratic Clinton:
09/30/2001 $ 5,807,463,412,200.06
09/30/2000 $ 5,674,178,209,886.86
US DEBT UNDER REPUBLICAN BUSH I:
09/30/1993 $ 4,411,488,883,139.38
09/30/1992 $ 4,064,620,655,521.66
US DEBT UNDER REPUBLICAN REAGAN:
09/29/1989 $ 2,857,430,960,187.32
09/30/1988 $ 2,602,337,712,041.16
09/30/1981 $ 997,855,000,000.00 *
09/30/1980 $ 907,701,000,000.00 *
* Rounded to Millions
Remember, It was REPUBLICANS that said that the debt didn’t matter (at least if you’re a Republican).
Also: every Democratic President since America fought WWII has LOWERED the debt as a percentage of GDP.
The last three Republican Presidents have RAISED the debt as a percentage of GDP.
The Republican budget would create a larger deficit than that proposed by Obama.
The Republican budget assessed by Citizens for Tax Justice:
“- Over a fourth of taxpayers, mostly low-income families, would pay more in taxes under the House GOP plan than they would under the President’s plan.”
“- The richest one percent of taxpayers would pay $100,000 less, on average, under the House GOP plan than they would under the President’s plan.”
“- The income tax proposals in the House GOP plan…would cost over $300 billion more [annually] than the Obama income tax cuts in 2011 alone.”
THE REPUBLICAN BUDGET WOULD BE $300 BILLION MORE ANNUALLY THAN OBAMA’S.
The sick/funny thing is that Republicans didn’t have any idea what their budget would cost. They typed up some pages with almost no numbers, called it a “budget,” and figured that the corporate media wouldn’t ask any questions.
If Republican voters ever start doing math the Republican Party will go the way of the Dodo bird.
Farris? I think that’s called a “smack-down.”
Also: every Democratic President since America fought WWII has LOWERED the debt as a percentage of GDP.
Sorry, you lose. Carter inherited a debt that was 31% of GDP and left with a debt that was 33% of GDP.
THE REPUBLICAN BUDGET WOULD BE $300 BILLION MORE ANNUALLY THAN OBAMA’S.
Just because you say it in all caps doesn’t make it true. Your source only looked at the income side, not the spending side. Which, when you’re talking about the deficit, is much more significant.
We have to spend to get out of the GOP created deficit and recession.
Sorry, you lose. Carter inherited a debt
Okay, that’s one. Oooooh, BURN!
Your source only looked at the income side, not the spending side.
And so? You have numbers?
Didn’t think so.
SaveFarris, you’re using Republican Math.
Which means you’re either misinformed or a liar.
SaveFarris, you falsely claim that “Carter inherited a debt that was 31% of GDP, it was 35.8%.”
The Gross Federal Debt As Percentages of Gross Domestic Product has only been as low as 32.6% since 1940 according to .Gov statistics that were published under REPUBLICAN President Bush. [See archived Republican Bush WhiteHouse PDF from 2007; see pages: 130, 131].
When Democratic President Carter was sworn into office in 1977 the GFD as % of GDP was 35.8%, when Carter left office in 1981 the GFD as % of GDP was 32.6%. In 1980 it was 33.3% which is still lower than it was when he was sworn in.
By the time Republican President Reagan left office in 1989 he’d increased the GFD as % of GDP by over 20% to 53.1%.
By the time Republican President George Bush left office in 1993 the GFD as a % of GDP was 66.2%.
Between 1981 and 1993, REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT’S REAGAN AND BUSH MORE THAN DOUBLED AMERICA’S GROSS FEDERAL DEBT AS A PERCENTAGE OF GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT.
UNDER DEMOCRATIC CARTER:
1977: 35.8 %
1978: 35.0 %
1979: 33.2 %
1980: 33.3 %
(The net DECREASE under Carter is even higher if you count the year he left office: 1981)
UNDER REPUBLICAN REAGAN & BUSH I:
1981: 32.6 %
1982: 35.2 %
…
1988: 51.9 %
1989: 53.1 %
1990: 55.9 %
1991: 60.6 %
1992: 64.1 %
1993: 66.2 %
The questions, SaveFarris, are either who lied to you or why are you lying to me?
[Google HTML cache of .Gov XLS of: "Table 7.1—FEDERAL DEBT AT THE END OF YEAR: 1940–2011"]
p.s. I typed the numbers in above by hand, you’re welcome to check them.
p.p.s.
GFD as % GDP for some other years:
1976: 36.2 %
2000: 58.0 %
2001: 57.4 %
2008: 67.9 % (estimate)
2009: 68.2 % (estimate)
Republican President Bush raised the GFD as % of GDP by over 10%.
The line above was supposed to be:
SaveFarris, you falsely claim that “Carter inherited a debt that was 31% of GDP”, it was 35.8%.
Democratic President Clinton LOWERED the GFD as a % of GDP.
1993: 66.2 %
2001: 57.4 %
The Democratic Party is fiscally conservative.
The Republican Party is fiscally irresponsible.
PERIOD.
Argue all you want about which party is fiscally irresponsible. Bottom line is they both parties have been pigs when it comes to the treasury.
The only problem is that in 8 to 12 months, fiscal irresponsibility will be redefined making ol’Georgy W. look like Scrooge.
The only problem is that in 8 to 12 months, fiscal irresponsibility will be redefined making ol’Georgy W. look like Scrooge.
Iraq Invasion. Dumbass.
REPUBLICANS REAGAN, BUSH I AND BUSH II INCREASED THE SIZE OF GOVERNMENT DRAMATICALLY.
The historical budget published under Republican President Bush in 2007 shows some interesting figures on PDF pages 126 through 129 (document pages: 122-125)
(PDF pages 130 and 131 [above] correspond to the documents pages 126 and 127.)
Read: TOTAL OUTLAYS
(PDF pages 126 through 129 [document pages: 122-125])
Keep in mind that from 2006 on the figures are very rosy estimates. The real numbers were higher as I recall.
Also, keep in mind the differences between “current dollars” and “constant (FY 2000) dollars.”
For instance, “Total outlays” in:
1980 in: “In millions of current dollars: $590,941″
1980 in: “In billions of constant (FY 2000) dollars: 1,175.1″
1988 in: “In millions of current dollars: $1,064,481″
1988 in: “In billions of constant (FY 2000) dollars: $1,446.5″
1992 in: “In millions of current dollars: $1,381,649″
1992 in: “In billions of constant (FY 2000) dollars: $1,623.9″
In “current dollars,” between 1980 and 1992, Republican President’s Reagan and Bush more than doubled “Total outlays.”
In “constant (FY 2000) dollars)” between 1980 and 1992, Republican President’s Reagan and Bush increased “Total outlays” from $1.1751 TRILLION to $1.6239 TRILLION.
By golly, REPUBLICAN REAGAN AND BUSH INCREASED SPENDING any way you count it.
Bush II increased federal spending as well.
2000 in: “In millions of current dollars: $1,789,216″
2000 in: “In billions of constant (FY 2000) dollars: $1,789.2″
The 2008 numbers in the 2007 budget was rosy nonsense but takint Republican Bush’s “estimate” with a grain of salt:
2008 in: “In millions of current dollars: $2,813,592″
2008 in: “In billions of constant (FY 2000) dollars: $2,297.9″
Even by Republican Bush’s fudgey numbers he increased Federal “Total outlays” by over a TRILLION from 2000 to 2008 in “current dollars” and even measuring by Bush’s “constant (FY 2000) dollar” he increased Federal outlays by over a 1/2 TRILLION.
Those estimates don’t include a lot of things. It didn’t include the $700 billion that Republican Bush demanded just before he left office. It doesn’t even start to cover the true cost of the unnecessary Iraq War. Nor does it include most of the many TRILLIONS that, under Republican Bush, the Federal Reserve put the taxpayers on the hook for.
SMALLER GOVERNMENT CON SERVATISM IS A CON.
—————–
p.s. Keep in mind that, “Total outlays” “As percentages of GDP” is different than Gross Federal Debt as a Percentage of GDP.
By the way, “joaquin,” your hero, right winger Margaret Thatcher, bought into Republican Reagan’s voodoo economic’s cult and now Britain is paying a VERY, very heavy price for the deregulation of their financial house of cards.
Ever considered taking a course in remedial math?
translated joaquin: You can’t possibly be right. You just can’t, you can’t, you can’t. So I’m going to ignore all your actual data and say things will be worse at some later date. So there. Nyaaa.
You guys are a hooot!
Scream, shout, and call out names all you want, but the reality is that the spending this administration is taking on, on top of everything that is ‘already on the plate’ is toxic to this country’s future.
Look, I could care less, but I just have to snicker when I see you guys ignoring the future. Hey, maybe I’m wrong and you guys will be just fine.
News Reference, March 31, 2009 at 1:45 pm
SaveFarris, you’re using Republican Math.
Which means you’re either misinformed or a liar.
I vote for both.
And I have to snicker every time I see more Republican’t slime and deflect tactics from joaquin. Are you a former Democrat or a former Republican’t today? Funny how you could care less yet you still spew your mindless Republican’t dreck on a constant basis! You’re almost as funny as those guys reading the messages that the religiously insane put out about atheists…
‘Funny how you could care less yet you still spew your mindless Republican’t dreck on a constant basis!’
Huh? What are you babbling about?
Blood pressure medicine might be in order.
Joaquin, if a tree fell on your house you’d be against fixing the giant hole in your roof with your credit card.
It’s funny Parth, but I do have tons of trees, mostly Southern Pines and Oaks, on my property, and once in a while one will either snap or topple over hitting the house or something else. No problem though, there’s this thing called insurance.
No problem though, there’s this thing called insurance.
Yeah. That’s what a lot of AIGs big customers thought.
joaquin, March 31, 2009 at 4:09 pm
Huh? What are you babbling about?
I’m talking about this:
The only problem is that in 8 to 12 months, fiscal irresponsibility will be redefined making ol’Georgy W. look like Scrooge.
You have based this Republican’t fantasy about Drinky McDumbA$$ looking like Scrooge in comparison to Obama. After Obama hasn’t even been in office for 100 days.
Standard mindless Republican’t dreck without any basis in reality. Spewed by you. Do I need to draw some pretty pictures to aid you in figuring this out?
Blood pressure medicine might be in order
Dude – all I need is some of whatever you’re smoking when you come up with these delusions.
Oh – and you really shouldn’t flatter yourself, thinking that the mindless tripe coming from a Limbaugh licker like you would raise anyone’s blood pressure. I might need to wrap my ribcage after laughing so hard at your fantasies, though…
Hey, maybe I’m wrong and you guys will be just fine.
Yeah, I’m gonna go with that.
I propose a moratorium to replying to Joker. He brings nothing to the discussion, and thinks he’s Hi-LAR-ious.
Duros: I propose a moratorium to replying to Joker.
I second the motion. Shroud him.
Shunning’s too good for him.
Look, I could care less, but I just have to snicker when I see you guys ignoring the future.
“Ignoring the future”? You say this with such authority leads me to believe you think you already know the future.
Jeez, joaquin, if that’s the case, why do you have to waste money on insurance?
I generally prefer ignoring the trolltastic joaquin, but you guys turned me around with this spectacular beatdown. Seriously, that was epic, if he didn’t have the classic wingnut inability to feel shame, he might never show his face around here again..
Hey, maybe I’m wrong and you guys will be just fine.
Probably a safe bet.