GOP Hypocrisy

Rune

Mjölner
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/02/opinion/krugman-four-fiscal-phonies.html?_r=1&src=me&ref=general


Mitt Romney is very concerned about budget deficits. Or at least that’s what he says; he likes to warn that President Obama’s deficits are leading us toward a “Greece-style collapse."[h=6][/h]So why is Mr. Romney offering a budget proposal that would lead to much larger debt and deficits than the corresponding proposal from the Obama administration?
Of course, Mr. Romney isn’t alone in his hypocrisy. In fact, all four significant Republican presidential candidates still standing are fiscal phonies. They issue apocalyptic warnings about the dangers of government debt and, in the name of deficit reduction, demand savage cuts in programs that protect the middle class and the poor. But then they propose squandering all the money thereby saved — and much, much more — on tax cuts for the very,very rich.
 
It has been obvious all along, to anyone paying attention, that the politicians shouting loudest about deficits are actually using deficit hysteria as a cover story for their real agenda, which is top-down class warfare. To put it in Romneyesque terms, it’s all about finding an excuse to slash programs that help people who like to watch Nascar events, even while lavishing tax cuts on people who like to own Nascar teams.


http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/02/opinion/krugman-four-fiscal-phonies.html?src=me&ref=general
 
this is your mainstream political establishment. Democrats and Republicans, firmly entrenched in fearmongering class warfare to make all of you proles terrified of the other side, while both left and right work to enslave you to the corporations making those politicians very wealthy. welcome to your new freedom.
 
this is your mainstream political establishment. Democrats and Republicans, firmly entrenched in fearmongering class warfare to make all of you proles terrified of the other side, while both left and right work to enslave you to the corporations making those politicians very wealthy. welcome to your new freedom.

Why don't you get out from behind your keyboard and show those fat cats?
 
this is your mainstream political establishment. Democrats and Republicans, firmly entrenched in fearmongering class warfare to make all of you proles terrified of the other side, while both left and right work to enslave you to the corporations making those politicians very wealthy. welcome to your new freedom.

Good gerneral sentiments, but....no comment on the hypocrisy? All four GOP candidates would have the debt become larger than Obama's plan.
 
Good gerneral sentiments, but....no comment on the hypocrisy? All four GOP candidates would have the debt become larger than Obama's plan.

the only nominee i've ever supported here is Dr. Paul. i'm assuming you're referring to gingrich, romney, santorum, and whoever your fourth individual is that would increase the debt.
 
The nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget recently published an overview of the budget proposals of the four “major” Republican candidates and, in a separate report, examined the latest Obama budget.



here’s what it tells us: According to an “intermediate debt scenario,” the budget proposals of Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, and Mitt Romney would all lead to much higher debt a decade from now than the proposals in the 2013 Obama budget. Ron Paul would do better, roughly matching Mr. Obama. But if you look at the details, it turns out that Mr. Paul is assuming trillions of dollars in unspecified and implausible spending cuts. So, in the end, he’s really a spendthrift, too.



http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/02/opinion/krugman-four-fiscal-phonies.html?src=me&ref=general
 
The nonpartisan Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget recently published an overview of the budget proposals of the four “major” Republican candidates and, in a separate report, examined the latest Obama budget.



here’s what it tells us: According to an “intermediate debt scenario,” the budget proposals of Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, and Mitt Romney would all lead to much higher debt a decade from now than the proposals in the 2013 Obama budget. Ron Paul would do better, roughly matching Mr. Obama. But if you look at the details, it turns out that Mr. Paul is assuming trillions of dollars in unspecified and implausible spending cuts. So, in the end, he’s really a spendthrift, too.



http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/02/opinion/krugman-four-fiscal-phonies.html?src=me&ref=general

yeah, I read this article and it took me 20 minutes to stop laughing after krugman called paul a 'spendthrift'. pure comedic gold.
 
the only nominee i've ever supported here is Dr. Paul. i'm assuming you're referring to gingrich, romney, santorum, and whoever your fourth individual is that would increase the debt.

No, he was retardedly lopping Paul into the mix.

I just got back from the caucuses, btw, and represented the good Dr.
 
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/02/opinion/krugman-four-fiscal-phonies.html?_r=1&src=me&ref=general


Mitt Romney is very concerned about budget deficits. Or at least that’s what he says; he likes to warn that President Obama’s deficits are leading us toward a “Greece-style collapse."[h=6][/h]So why is Mr. Romney offering a budget proposal that would lead to much larger debt and deficits than the corresponding proposal from the Obama administration?
Let's see the figures.
 
the only nominee i've ever supported here is Dr. Paul. i'm assuming you're referring to gingrich, romney, santorum, and whoever your fourth individual is that would increase the debt.

the fourth individual who would increase the debt would be Obama......the authority cited, after examining Obama's proposed '13 budget, concludes....

Over the long-term, the President’s budget would not constrain rising debt, as retirementand health care costs continue growing faster than the economy. According to theAdministration’s own estimates, debt would grow as a share of the economy past 2022 –exceeding 93 percent by 2035 and nearly 125 percent by 2050. These levels would be both economically constraining and ultimately unsustainable
 
Back
Top