Racism and Tea Partiers Part Deux

[Ominous Gamer]

More of that image problem again. No claims of racism this time, just thieves who don't understand Norman Rockwell or Roosevelts' Four Freedoms speech, and are offended by the constitution. What kind of people steal from an 8th grade history classroom?

[CitizenCain]

What kind of people steal from an 8th grade history classroom?

Liberals! (They are the ones who constantly preach that property rights don't exist, so they're clearly the prime suspects.)

[EyeKhan]

Liberals! (They are the ones who constantly preach that property rights don't exist, so they're clearly the prime suspects.)

Chacha is the only one defending his, err, manhood. There's no need for me to be present (in fact, a stunningly pressing imperative not to be). But this is why god created webcams.

So now you want to fuck Chacha and Cain?

Tear, I had no idea you were such a whore. I'm impressed.

I was just about to respond to Loli that you're the type to watch, not participate.

[']['ear]

I was just about to respond to Loli that you're the type to watch, not participate.

My fondness of "Being There" notwithstanding, I have always been a participant. But I'll pass on the "strange men from the internet" experience, thanks.

[CitizenCain]

My fondness of "Being There" notwithstanding, I have always been a participant. But I'll pass on the "strange men from the internet" experience, thanks.

Just as well. I'd have to charge double if Chacha wanted you to watch me fuck him.

[EyeKhan]

Just as well. I'd have to charge double if Chacha wanted you to watch me fuck him.

Fuck me? No no no no. *I'm* in the driver's seat buddy. *You* probably wouldn't even give a reach around. Fucking selfish conservative bitch.

[CitizenCain]

Fuck me? No no no no. *I'm* in the driver's seat buddy. *You* probably wouldn't even give a reach around. Fucking selfish conservative bitch.

I sure as hell won't now that you've called me a conservative, you mother-fucker.

[EyeKhan]

I sure as hell won't now that you've called me a conservative, you mother-fucker.

Alright, alright. I admit it, I stepped over the line. Just because your libertarian ideology has an uncanny resemblance to the nation destroying "starve the beast" strategy doesn't mean you're a conservative. Sorry for the cheap shot.

[Loki]

Alright, alright. I admit it, I stepped over the line. Just because your libertarian ideology has an uncanny resemblance to the nation destroying "starve the beast" strategy doesn't mean you're a conservative. Sorry for the cheap shot.

Pray tell when was the last time "conservatives" actually implemented that strategy?

[Being]

Pray tell when was the last time "conservatives" actually implemented that strategy?

When was the last time they cut taxes while increasing the deficit?

[EyeKhan]

Pray tell when was the last time "conservatives" actually implemented that strategy?

They try but it just ends up piling up debt. Nobody's willing to throw old people off Medicare, poor people off Medicaid, and shrink the military to a purely defensive force....

[']['ear]

Pray tell when was the last time "conservatives" actually implemented that strategy?

2001-2009

[Loki]

2001-2009

US Federal Spending:

Year Total Spending-fed
2000: 1789.22
2001: 1863.19
2002: 2011.15
2003: 2160.12
2004: 2293.01
2005: 2472.20
2006: 2655.44
2007: 2728.94
2008: 2931.22
2009: 3107.36

That's an increase of about 6.3% per year.

[']['ear]

You forgot the tax cuts.

[CitizenCain]

Alright, alright. I admit it, I stepped over the line. Just because your libertarian ideology has an uncanny resemblance to the nation destroying "starve the beast" strategy

Uhuh. And who was it who posted the "starve the beast doesn't work" article, and from what ideological camp does the website/magazine which published that article hail?

Seriously... even the conservatives aren't as bad about "us vs them [and that's all that exists]" as you fucking liberals are.

[Ziggy Stardust]

US Federal Spending:

Year Total Spending-fed
2000: 1789.22
2001: 1863.19
2002: 2011.15
2003: 2160.12
2004: 2293.01
2005: 2472.20
2006: 2655.44
2007: 2728.94
2008: 2931.22
2009: 3107.36

That's an increase of about 6.3% per year.

Or a total increase of 73%

How much is it each month?

Seriously... even the fucking conservatives aren't as bad about "us vs them [and that's all that exists]" as you fucking liberals are.

Fixed that for you in the name of fair and balanced

[']['ear]

"Starve the beast" was coined by David Stockman, IIRC. While never an official policy, it was supposedly a sub rosa strategy of the Reagan administration. If not, Stockman should have stfu, eh?

[']['ear]

Or a total increase of 73%

And still not including the dramatic decrease in revenues from the tax cuts.

[Loki]

Federal revenues increased 25% between 2000 and 2008 (they fell in 2009 due to the recession).

[']['ear]

But they did not keep pace with government growth. "Starve the beast" FTW!

PS I see that you compound revenue growth but not spending increases. That's honest.

[Loki]

You do realize that "starving the beast" means cutting taxes, not increasing spending, right? The whole point is that by cutting taxes, Republicans would be able to coerce Democrats into cutting spending. The reality is that tax cuts are strongly correlated with spending increases over the last several decades.

[']['ear]

Yes, I know what starving the beast is. Do you? After all, you are the one who started tallying federal spending in response to a "starve the beast" discussion. Shouldn't you have been tallying tax cuts?

[Loki]

Considering that tax revenues increased, it wasn't a very successful strategy. And again, what kind of an individual who'd be pursuing this strategy would increase spending by record numbers? Are you next going to argue that the war in Iraq, the subscription drug bill, and No Child Left Behind were all elaborate attempts to starve the government of funds?

[CitizenCain]

Are you next going to argue that the war in Iraq, the subscription drug bill, and No Child Left Behind were all elaborate attempts to starve the government of funds?

Stop giving him ideas. He's more than ridiculous enough without your help, thank you.

[']['ear]

Considering that tax revenues increased, it wasn't a very successful strategy. And again, what kind of an individual who'd be pursuing this strategy would increase spending by record numbers? Are you next going to argue that the war in Iraq, the subscription drug bill, and No Child Left Behind were all elaborate attempts to starve the government of funds?

It didn't work, because the GOP increased spending. The temptation to appease voters is too great, for both parties. But there are still many conservatives that espouse "starve the beast." It is, after all, the policy of the God-idol Reagan.

Then what was W's rational?



Cain: Just cut it out, man. You're being an ass.

[CitizenCain]

Then what was W's rational?

Being electable by appealing to fuck-ass liberal swing voters who won't vote for national candidates who don't throw vast amounts of tax dollars at every social ill. That's the whole rationale behind the "neo"/"compassionate" part of the post-Reagan American conservative movement.

Cain: Just cut it out, man. You're being an ass.

Eat shit and die.

[']['ear]

LIBRULZ!!!!

Tell me how you don't care. You're cool is wearing thin.

[Loki]

It didn't work, because the GOP increased spending. The temptation to appease voters is too great, for both parties. But there are still many conservatives that espouse "starve the beast." It is, after all, the policy of the God-idol Reagan.

Then what was W's rational?

So you're admitting that no one has actually pursued this strategy?

[']['ear]

I said nothing of the sort. Why would you make crap up like that? David Stockman actually claimed it.

[CitizenCain]

LIBRULZ!!!!

Tell me how you don't care. You're cool is wearing thin.

Good one, Lewk. Your the best.