Posted on 05/01/2009 6:54:00 AM PDT by PrairieFireConservative
The $3.5 trillion federal budget passed easily yesterday. Their was little opposition; because there is no opposition party in America. Single issue republicans destroyed the party, and thus shattered the nation’s cherished political habitat of checks-and-balances.
Like Chrysler corporation, it’s time for the Republican Party to declare bankruptcy.
Let me demonstrate.
As I list the following three fiscal facts, most single issue Republicans will roll their eyes..
With passage of the 2010 federal deficit, the U.S. will borrow nearly $9.3 trillion over the next decade -- $2.3 trillion more than the president predicted when he unveiled his budget request just one month ago.
Or, an ever-expanding national debt that would exceed 82 percent of the overall economy by 2019.
The Congressional Budget Office puts next year's budget gap at nearly $1.4 trillion. And this year's deficit is now projected to soar past $1.8 trillion, or 13 percent of the economy -- the deepest well of red ink since the end of World War II.
Boring.
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...
MSM journos who vote for Obama en masse and then blames the GOP for our 1-party rule! snort....
The GOP had better get it’s head out of it’s ass! They, too, will be accountable for the revolution.
Wow, amazing. Not only are Republicans bigots and neanderthals, those dirty dogs FORCED the poor, hapless democrats to pass an even more profligate budget than the GOP did. OMG, it’s all we can do to avoid imploding, just trying to operate a country in the shadow of those evil republicans. Do your country a favor, get a baseball bat and beat the brains out of the next republican you see. And by the way, do the same for the next heterosexual you see. It’s cool. They’ve been omitted from the hate speech bill, so they’re fair game.
“MSM journos who vote for Obama en masse and then blames the GOP for our 1-party rule! snort.”
Crazy...huh? I guess Republicans will be blamed for every Obamachev disaster because he wasn’t stopped.
I wonder what single issue he’s referring to that destroyed the Republican Party. Guns? Gays? God?
I would say spending.
George Bush and his policies opened the door for Obama. He led this country to the left and Obama is just the natural progression.
“I would say spending.”
I would say war on terror.
From 2001 to 2006, I don’t think W’s budget growth was too bad. His tax cuts were shrinking the deficits as well.
2006-2008, The Dems jammed through spending hikes. W had to trade to get the war on terror funded.
The housing bubble but and the collapse of the financial market last fall is 100% the responsibilities of the Democrats.
well, considering that they like to foam at the mouth about how one issue we are...just exactly what is that one issue? Let’s see if they can name that one issue!
Remember per Obama “Bankruptcy isn't a bad thing”. He actually likes the RNC.
When libs say “single issue” or “far right” - they ALWAYS mean prolifers. You know - the item in our founding documents - LIFE, liberty, and the pursuit....
“they ALWAYS mean prolifers”
Talk about being wrong. It’s preposterous to believe that the Republicans lost Congress majorities and the White House over the issue of abortion.
As I recall, in 2006 election, Pelosi launched a gay scandal to shut out discussion of issues. In 2008, Schumer started bank run on Indy Mac to crash the financial sector. How do you beat that? With McCainiac?
I didn’t say it was rational....they just hate prolifers, but that, because they hated the Author of life first.
Resistance to tyranny in all its forms? That’s my one issue.
Ignorance is bliss. Bush pushed just as hard for low income loans and special deals for minorities as anyone else did.
“Ignorance is bliss. Bush pushed just as hard for low income loans and special deals for minorities as anyone else did.”
I don’t believe that’s true. The Dems got alot more out of the housing bubble.
W and others tried to warn about the growth of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Do you have some proof os this assertion about Bush? I don’t believe it, unless you do.
(See: White House Philosophy Stoked Mortgage Bonfire)
If Bush was so worried about what the GSE's in 2003 were buying, why did he increase the percentage of mortgages that Fannie and Freddie were required to buy to 56% in 2004?
Cuomo's predecessor, Henry Cisneros, did that for the first time in December 1995, taking a cautious approach and moving the GSEs toward a requirement that 42 percent of their mortgages serve low- and moderate-income families. Cuomo raised that number to 50 percent and dramatically hiked GSE mandates to buy mortgages in underserved neighborhoods and for the "very-low-income."
Snip
That June Post story focused its critical reassessment of HUD's affordable-housing goals on the department's 2004 decision—during the Bush re-election campaign—to juice them up again, pushing the target to 56 percent by 2007.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.