Posted by
GFC on Thursday, February 12, 2009 1:16:34 PM
I have a few thoughts on the following statement by President Obama during Monday's press conference.
"But what I -- what I've been concerned about is some of the language that's been used suggesting that this is full of pork and this is wasteful government spending, so on and so forth. First of all, when I hear that from folks who presided over a doubling of the national debt, then I just want them to not engage in some revisionist history. I inherited the deficit that we have right now, and the economic crisis that we have right now."
Funny that you mention revisionist history Mr. Obama. Your party had control of both houses the past two years. You were even a senator in the majority during that time. Perhaps, just maybe, you and your party helped to shape the budget during that time. Every time you say "the last eight years" you should be saying "the 6 years before my party gained control of the legislature in 2007". Then you would be avoiding the revisionist history to which you object.
Coincidently, the deficits ballooned and the economic crisis hit at this same time.
Isn't your biggest objection to Republican fiscal policy during the years before the Democrats gained control of the legislature that they shouldn't have cut taxes? You seem much more bothered by that than by excessive spending. Why aren't massive tax increases part of your "stimulus" bill. Is it perhaps because you know that tax cuts help stimulate the economy, create jobs and fend off recession?
Why is deficit spending bad when Republicans do it, but good when you do it? Sure Republicans had deficit spending, but you propose much greater quanties of it. Do you not see the difference between a little deficit spending and massive amounts of it? Perhaps drinking a few beers isn't good, but is a person who drinks a few beer wrong for saying downing gallons of hard liquor is a bad idea?