Dems, can I assume that youre outraged by this federal spending?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090309/ap_on_go_pr_wh...

You slammed Bush every day he was in office for spending taxpayer dollars, so can I assume that youre just as equally angry over Obama doing the exact same thing?

Or is it more accurate to ask - Is federal spending of tax dollars justified when spent by a Democrat president?

Update:

Gipper - The past eight years proves you dead wrong, the Dems crushed Bush every single day he was in the WH for every single federal dime he spent. And thats a historical FACT.

Update 2:

You people still dont get it do you? Of course Im not opposed to federal spending, I agree, its what the federal government does. I was just curious to see if just ONE of the Dem hypocrits in these forums who slammed Bush for federal spending would say the same thing about Obama - and I got my answer ; )

Update 3:

Amazing how this question went screaming right over the heads of the Dems in this forum. Utterly amazing.

Update 4:

Olan - Actually the article DEFINES the question and frames it perfectly.

Update 5:

I swear only a liberal could morph this question into an attack on Fox News!

Update 6:

Gipper - When did I say Dems oppose all federal spending?

Update 7:

Gipper hellooooo? Any answer at all???

14 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    Not really, Democrats aren't opposed to federal spending as a matter of principle, so it's hard to know what you're talking about.

    Edit: if it's such a historical "FACT" then provide some evidence of it.

    Edit: Still waiting for that evidence that Democrats supposedly oppose all federal spending.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    For the record, I didn't slam Bush for spending taxpayer dollars. I slammed Bush for spending borrowed dollars that we have to pay back, with interest, while repairing all the things Bush let fall apart because all that borrowed money was going to Iraq. See the difference?

    Also, I don't blame democrats for spending, That's what they do, and we knew that going in. The republicans are the ones who run on fiscal responsibility, and less spending.

  • justa
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    This is the budget from the last president, or did you think that he knocked out that huge volume between the Stimulus and health care?

    He tinkered with it a little, but that budget was written last year. Forty percent of the earmarks are by and for Republicans, so don't get too carried away with the outrage, I'm not.

    Spending federal tax dollars is what the government does, no reason to go ballistic, but what its spent on is what makes people crazy. Reps want it spent on things that benefit them, and Dems want it spent on things that benefit them.

    This time out though, we need to spend it on things that create or maintain jobs. Keeping the country employed is important to our overall health and allowing us to come out of this economic problem with a better understanding that its the middle class that needs the breaks, we cannot live well as a country on the leavings from the tables of the rich.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Don't understand how you can use an article about stem cell research to make your point.

    Federal spending has always been an issue of debate, going all the way back to the 1,000 dollar hammers bought by the pentagon in the 70's.

    who is spending, and how they spend will continue to go along party lines as it has for years. the fact that the government spends is not an issue. the issue is if the spending is worth it. so to that point, why post an article about stem cell research? if you feel bad about that, why not post an article about cancer research, or sickle cell research.

    Source(s): the article doesn't support the question
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    No, the Bush Depression paved the way for stimulus spending and insane deficits.

    I am only interested in, over the next 10 years, efforts to balance the budget. If, in 2019, or thereabouts, the budget is not balanced, I may consider voting for another Republican. If Obama and then Chelsea gets the budget under control I will continue to vote for the rational policies of the D's and reject the neocon R nightmare.

    EDIT: the argument over spending, in this context, is a waste of time. The issue is net spending. To balance the budget or not. What we spend on is a matter of public policy, debate and voting. To tax sufficiently to fund the spending is, in my opinion, required. If you don't want to pay for it (Bush) don't spend it. If you want to spend it, be man enough to tax to fund it (Clinton).

  • 1 decade ago

    If you spend it on needless wars for the profits of Haliburton and big oil, that is wrong.

    If you are spending it on infrastructure, building bridges, schools, and our health care system, then I have no problem.

    Government's size doesn't scare me, it is what the government does that scares me. Right now, they are spending money on things that Americans need. That is the difference.

    You are so wrong about your rant. Republicans and Democrats both like big government. Republicans like to spend on military and wars. Democrats like to spend on schools and society. Furthermore, Republicans spend more than they make, Democrats make more than they spend !! AND THATS A HISTORICAL FACT.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Bush deserves flack as much--or moreso-- as Obama does because the NeoCONs are a fraud, they are not true conservatives, they expanded government and the national debt exponentially.

    Obama and Bush and Clinton are the rest are all fronts for world banking cartel elites.

    get with the frikking program.

    NO MORE ACTORS FOR THE NEW WORLD ORDER.

  • Wow D -

    Obama has already spent (ordered spending - most of it hasn't happened yet) not merely more than Bush but more than the collective spending of the U.S. over all of time up to his inauguration. Nonetheless, you declare you have a problem with the PREVIOUS spending but not Obama's.

    Thank you for making our point.

  • 1 decade ago

    well at least its spending here in USA on the american people. Dont worry we all know what the 3000 pound elephant in the room is.....tax hikes..on the rich...and I am totall on board with that.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    I have no problem with federal spending... remember when Bush wanted to explore Mars and got nothing... at least Obama wants to spend it on something that will benefit people.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.