I don't understand why Bush's debt is due to policy, but Obama's is due to the weather. Obama continued more than a few of Bush's policy decisions, especially WRT tax cuts and crony bailouts. Bush's policies are largely Obama's policies. I'm not going to play team games with anybody here. Our economy wasn't healthy before this winter and it's a non sequitur to blame our economic woes on the weather.
When local governments propose withholding, it is regional/national news. Sin taxes capitalize on dismissive attitudes toward socially unacceptable behavior. Smokers are treated as pariahs in some places. Taxes and rules targeted against them receive broad support, because smoking is so stigmatized.
Well, there's the fact that under Obama federal spending actually fell, after you adjust for inflation. Whereas Bush oversaw the bigger spending increase in US history.
Bush's debt is through rampant increases in spending, whereas Obama's debt is through the collapse of tax revenues. One is proactive and deliberate policy, whereas the other is something that can't be directly controlled, and there is no specific Obama policy you can point up which increased debt.
Bush had things like the American Dream Downpayment Assistance Act, which effectively put loan defaulters at the head of the queue to get mortgage assistance and poured half a trillion dollars through Fannie Mae to incentivise otherwise too-risky loans to poor people and those with credit defaults. Fannie Mae's executives actually protested the policies and Bush threatened to tear up their charter if they didn't implement his sub-prime incentives, which meant people who had reneged on loans could get a house without ANY downpayment. Then, when it backfired, they threw Fannie Mae under the bus, and blame Democrats, even though it was ALL because of Bush Whitehouse deliberate policies.
So, in other words, much of Bush's federal debt was spent to prop up housing prices during the bubble, with the justification of getting poor people to own their own homes. This caused both the deficit blow-out AND inflated the size of the crash, thus is responsible for the crash in tax revenues which is currently causing a deficit.
... waaaait a tick. Homeland Security funding is being held hostage? Isn't... isn't this a situation where we start hoping they shoot the metaphorical human shield?
Also that is just the weirdest goddamn thing for the GOP of all things to hold hostage. I mean, I know both sides are kinda' crazy when it comes to that, but isn't HS kinda' the GOP's baby? And they're threatening to drown it if we don't shoot throw out brown people?
Oh hells no. Now *Defense* (i.e. War), that's what the GOP gets a hard-on for.
DHS is all those overbearing, intrusive, ineffectual government agencies that they don't like, such as TSA, Customs and Border Protection, etc.
And it's not the first time they've done it. See, the political calculus is that they can then say "See?! The Democrats would rather see Homeland Security run out of money than to let us kick illegals out of the country!" It's a win-win. They can paint the Dems as wanting everyone to be less safe AND wanting illegal immigrants to have amnesty. Because, y'know....they're evil like that. And there are sooooo many people in their political base who will eat that shit up with a spoon and come back for seconds.
How do they reconcile being anti-border protection with the "keep the mexicans out" thing? Is it like they're all for "law and order" as long as the heavy hand of the law affects someone else? So complete freedom for white people and a overt "anti-brown person patrol" would suit them better I guess?
Author
Topic: Murrican Politics Megathread 2016: There Will Be Hell Toupée (Read 1572607 times)