fucktoyprincess
Posts: 2337
Status: offline
|
Republicans were silent about the national debt under Reagan and both Bush administrations (10 trillion worth). How interesting that now they suddenly have an issue about the debt. Under G.W. Bush the Republican mantra was that "deficits don't matter!" I guess that should be interpreted as "deficits don't matter when Republicans are in office".
Federal spending under Obama has actually gone up at a much slower rate than under Reagan and both Bush administrations.
Republicans also need to get real if we want to stop our annual deficits and start repaying our national debt. We will need to raise taxes. Even if the federal deficit is eliminated, we still need to find $16 trillion. That’s not going to happen without a tax hike.
When it comes to raising taxes on the wealthy, Republicans have been obstructionist.
And, when it comes to political nominations, the obstructionism that the Republicans are currently engaged in is absolutely unprecedented. The Republicans are obstructing nominations that they agree with just to obstruct.
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/06/22/right-wing-blogger-covers-up-gops-historic-obst/185849
Quoted from the above article:
GOP's Historic Obstruction Of Obama Judicial Nominees
As the ABA noted in its letter, Obama nominees William Kayatta, Jr., Robert Bacharach, and Richard Taranto "are consensus nominees who have received overwhelming approval from the Senate Judiciary Committee." In addition, Kayatta and Bacharach have "the staunch support of" the Republican senators from their home states. And Taranto, who is nominated to a court with nationwide jurisdiction, has the "endorsement of noted conservative legal scholars."
Senate Republicans have announced that they are blocking all three of these nominees along with every single one of Obama's judicial nominees until after the presidential election, regardless of whether they would be good judges.
This level of obstruction has no precedent during the Bush administration. Since 1980, in fact, judicial confirmations have often continued through the summer and early fall of a presidential election year.
In 2004, when Bush ran for reelection and Republicans narrowly controlled the Senate, Democrats allowed the Senate to confirm every single non-controversial Bush appellate nominee. Furthermore, Senate Democrats even allowed Republicans to confirm a nominee who was opposed by a majority of the Democratic caucus.
On June 24, 2004, the Senate confirmed the nomination of Bush appellate court nominee Diane Sykes even though 27 of the 49 Senate Democrats opposed her nomination. On the same day, the Senate also confirmed the nominations of appellate court judges Peter Hall and William Duane Benton.
Following those confirmations, there were no Bush appellate court nominees left that did not have significant Democratic opposition or other problems preventing their confirmations. Of the 12 appellate court nominees pending on July 1, 2004, one, Claude Allen, withdrew after being caught shoplifting; six, Terrence Boyle, Richard Griffin, Susan Neilson, Henry Saad, David McKeague, and Carolyn Kuhl did not have the support of their home state Democratic senators; four, Priscilla Owen, Brett Kavanaugh, William Myers, and Janice Rogers Brown, had strong opposition from Senate Democrats; and one, Thomas Griffith was nominated in May 2004 and did not have a hearing until after the election.
_____________________________
~ ftp
|
Hypocrisy.....a tale of two Rice's - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread