And that’s to say nothing of the fact that, y’know, Obama has astronomically increased the Bush deficit in a matter of months. It would be like if somebody flicked me on the arm and I kind of swatted at them, no big deal. Then somebody else clobbers me over the head with a 2×4 and I knee them in the groin. Would anybody really be confused as to why being whacked in the head with a wooden plank prompted a more violent reaction than being flicked on the arm? A dollar of Bush deficit is just as bad as a dollar of Obama deficit. The problem is that Obama has to haul his deficit around in a luxury ocean liner and Bush could fit his in a sailboat, by comparison.

I don’t even know why I’m bothering– if libs like Gillie need this explained, they’ll never be convinced.

While I respect his blogging about Iran and the libertarian in me enjoys his commentary on the drug war, none of his positions these days are distinguishable as anything “conservative.” Yet his last book, was about the “conservative” soul and he is the token “conservative” on shows like Bill Maher’s if he bashes Bush and loves Obama.

What took the cake was his display of a small child’s head in the aftermath of Israel/Palestinians battling. Honestly, when you’re blogging pictures of children’s dead bodies and swooning over whether Levi Johnston will do Playgirl, who the fuck can take you seriously? Maybe he’s got some bad weed (see recent incident where judge dropped federal marijuana possession charges against him so he wouldn’t worry about gaining US citizenship) or something, but the Palin obsession, rabid characterization of tea baggers and the right etc. just get so old. I might as well be reading DailyKos.

It’s a very hollow argument when the only time you can take on the left is when you’re directly affected, ie war on drugs, ban on HIV positive travellers, gay marriage. As if all the non-pot smoking, HIV negative heterosexuals don’t matter and have nothing to add to the debate.

Bush cut taxes, boosted spending, and racked up $100-$400 billion deficits. Numerous liberatarians, conservatives and Republicans protested the deficits, i.e. Bush’s spending increases, and rightly slammed him for it. gillie was too busy drinking the Kool-Aid at Kos and Puffington Host to ever notice. THEREFORE: libertarians, conservatives and Republicans now have NO RIGHT to protest Obama’s gargantuan spending increases and existentially-threatening and $1.6 trillion deficits that threaten the very foundations of our Republic.

That’s the kind of “logic” only a left-liberal could believe, or even dream up.

There might be hope for him yet.

#12 As the links in #5 show, Stim. spending + bailouts are responsible for the spending.
As I said, if it does not work and the if the economy does not improve, we got problems.

“That’s right, gillie, you lose.”
A nonrepublican knows his point is proven when a moonbat like NDT had declares victory.

When the economy gets right and the reckless bush tax cuts expire we should see those numbers level out and we can get back to what we had under clinton, balanced budgets.

Gilltard! This is such a PERFECT example of the blatant dishonesty of the left. Giving Clinton the credit for balanced budgets that Republicans campaigned on, wrote, and forced Clinton to sign.

When the economy gets right and the reckless bush tax cuts expire we should see those numbers level out and we can get back to what we had under clinton, balanced budgets.

You want to try to explain that one? Where’s the money going to come from? There’s no tech boom like Clinton enjoyed, which caused treasury revenues to pour in DESPITE massive tax increases. Nobody’s hiring. Nobody’s spending on expanding. Chairman Obama’s threatening to punish anyone who does. So where the hell is the money going to come from???

Those “reckless Bush tax cuts” created RECORD treasury revenues. Why in Christ’s name would you want to cut that off? Further, money flows like water toward the path of least resistance. Throw up dams in the form of increased taxes, it’s just going to flow elsewhere.

How is the economy going to “get right” when we have an angry chump doing everything he can to make damn sure that doesn’t happen? Where’s the money going to come from?

I sincerely want to know.

#5 – Economic contraction that begun in 2007 is mostly responsible for those numbers.

Oh Giltard, you really do amuse! You regurgitate talking points without even bothering to consider if they are appropriate or not.

First, let’s just remind everyone that the economic contraction that the “Economic contraction that begun in 2007″ began in December of 2007, a year AFTER Democrats took over both houses of congress.

Then perhaps you would care to tell us how an economic contraction is responsible for Obama drastically increasing the size and scope of the federal govt?

And how is the contraction responsible for Obama spending more than all previous presidents combined?

How is the contraction responsible for the increase in Democrat spending over Republican spending?

You see, Gilltard, when the people who give you your talking points say “the recession is responsible for those numbers” they arent referring to ANY of the above, they are referring to the budget deficit, trying to claim that the deficit has increased because the recession has caused revenue to dry up.

But nobody is talking about the deficit. He was talking about spending and growth in government, neither of which are even remotely affected by the amount of revenue coming in.

You really ought to try and understand the talking points you regurgitate before vomiting them forth.

That’s right, gillie, you lose.

You blabbered that other Republicans and conservatives never protested or objected to Republican spending, and you got slapped with facts showing that they did.

Now, since you lost, you blabber and spin and try to change the rules, ignoring what you were presented and demonstrating the fact that you are neither arguing in good faith or willing to recognize anything other than your Obama ideology.

I was refering to protests on the street. (as you darn well know)

And again, the answer is no.

That’s right, gillie, you lose.

You blabbered that other Republicans and conservatives never protested or objected to Republican spending, and you got slapped with facts showing that they did.

Now, since you lost, you blabber and spin and try to change the rules, ignoring what you were presented and demonstrating the fact that you are neither arguing in good faith or willing to recognize anything other than your Obama ideology.

And meanwhile, let’s see about those tax cuts.

President Obama is proposing to add more than $85 billion to the nation’s budget deficits over the next decade to extend two tax breaks for the working poor, a move critics on Wednesday blasted as a violation of Obama’s pledge to pay for new policies.

“Since these two policies . . . represent expansions of tax cuts first enacted in the 2001 tax bill, extension of the policies are incorporated in the baseline projection of current policy,” the documents explain in a footnote.

So again, Bush cut taxes for EVERYONE, not just “the rich”. Do you also call those cuts “irresponsible”, gillie — especially since your Obama’s “stimulus” EXTENDED them?

When the economy gets right and the reckless bush tax cuts expire we should see those numbers level out and we can get back to what we had under clinton, balanced budgets.

Was there a viable third party running that proposed small government? No.

Had fun researching this one.

Indeed, in a matter of 30 minutes in April, I came up with a list of ten posts (9 from 2006 alone) where we criticized the GOP on spending in Bush Era. And we were far from alone. Bloggers like Stephen Green, R.S. McCain, Dan Riehl and Glenn Reynolds (to name the four whose names come most readily to mind) took Bush to task in the same manner Andrew once did. Not to mention the editorial writers at the Wall Street Journal.

Just because you can’t say word one against Teh One doesn’t mean the rest of us share your devotion to your Messiah. Once again, you project onto others the fact that you are intellectually and emotionally incapable of anything other than blind obedience to Barack Obama.

Did you still vote republican? Yes

There you go.