I cannot understand how people (read-- Republicans, others who are opposed to Obama, etc) are all of a sudden up in arms about national debt. Were you sleeping the past eight years? You know, those past eight long years when we went from having a 50 BILLION dollar surplus with Clinton (but I know, we can't say anything good about him because *gasp* he's immoral) to having a TRILLION dollar deficit.
Last year, with the cost of the Iraq War, we spent $800 billion (yes B as in Billion) on ONE department-- the Defense. Now, as my husband is a part of the military and we get a nice check from them each month AND they pay his tuition, we are big fans of the Defense Department. However, I also know that it's not tuition dollars costing them $800 Billion a year-- our check isn't THAT nice.
It just seems rather hypocritical that people were in favor of spending to keep our country "safe." Who cares about being safe when you don't have money to feed your family? What's the difference really? Shouldn't we also be spending money on making sure American families are economically "safe"?
I totally understand that there are different ideas on economics. Some believe that government spending is the worst thing that could happen right now-- and I completely believe in the right to have that opinion and that it has definite validity. Others think that the only way to get out of this recession is for the government to spend its way out-- another point that has serious evidence backing it up. I am not an economics guru. In fact, I've never even taken an econ course. So who am I to talk?
What I don't understand is how people are suddenly so upset about government spending. What about the 700 Billion G. W. Bush pushed through last year? What about the 1 Trillion deficit he wrapped up in a bow and left on Obama's desk? Where were Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh then? Where were their charts and t-shirts complaining about Bush's spending? Rush came up with a genius idea--- the authority to spend money should be divided based on the popular vote from the election. Wait, didn't Gore win the majority vote? Where was his 51%?
It is a given fact that Congress loves to spend money. Republican (see the 70 billion tacked on the package in Republican tax cuts in the last two days) or Democrat (see the 132 million for STD prevention-- job creation? Interesting). That's their job-- bring home the bacon (or pork...) to their constituents. The only difference now is the party in control. The actions are the same. Stimulus package--- stimulus package. Yupp, looks the same to me.
I'm not saying don't complain. I'm asking for people to be consistent. If you railed against spending during the Bush years-- fantastic. Keep on railing. But don't pretend like Obama is the first President to spend spend spend, cause he's not the first, and he won't be the last. But your opinion on government spending shouldn't change depending on what party is in power.
I'm not a fan of the spending package. Pete is. But at least we remain consistent in opposing each other :)
7 comments:
I am so with you on this! No matter who is pushing the "stimulous" through it's a bad idea. It's not about "parties," anymore...and yet people can't get past the title REPUBLICAN OR DEMOCRAT. I used to like listening to talk radio, but now it's like rubbing glass shards into my eyeballs. The "right" hosts are so extreme it's down right redic.
GREAT POST!
One of the selling points of republicans is supposed to be their fiscal conservatism, and it is beyond me how Bush got away with all that spending... We're having the same problem with our "governator" here, and its totally insane. CA residents are NOT getting tax refunds this year. Thanks AHHNOLD.
Pork only belongs in sandwiches, not legislation... that being said complaining about domestic spending and not defense spending is not hypocrytical, the two are not both apples.
The idea would be that in the land of opportunity an individual should do for themselves... except drive planes and tanks.
Oh please brohammas. Every society has those who can't do for themselves and part of the definition of "society" is to band together to provide for those who cannot provide for themselves. I am so sick of this "pork" talk. Senators and Representatives are SUPPOSED to bring federal dollars back to their districts. It's only called pork when it isn't coming to YOUR community.
Pardon Kansas!?!
It's hard for me to hear well when my tongue is in my cheek.
If Obama's spending plan actually provided money to infrastructure and other public jobs like FDR's works projects programs, then it MIGHT be worth the price tag, instead I've got over 200 people doling out my taxpayer money to programs in their states that don't benefit the whole. Federal tax money should benefit all Americans, i.e defense, infrastructure etc..., state taxes should pay for the state needs. By the way, I am Ann's sister-in-law. Caleb is very cute.
Post a Comment