PDA

View Full Version : the “starve the beast” strategy



Qtec
06-10-2012, 01:37 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">This entire approach by Karl Rove and, formerly, the Bush administration is what’s popularly known as the “starve the beast” strategy. Republicans, because of their successful self-branding as “fiscal hawks,” are able to run up huge deficits. They’ve done this under all three recent Republican administrations. And then, when Democratic President X enters office, the Republicans blame the subsequent fiscal fallout on the Democratic administration — you know, because Democrats always spend and tax too much. So Rove et al went nuts with big spending on tax cuts and wars, resulting in massive increases in long-term deficits and debt, and they’re blaming President Obama for it. Why? Because they can. President Obama happens to be president now, even though he inherited this crap-on-a-stick from Bush/Rove. And Bush/Rove are exploiting the fact that voters aren’t bright enough to see the larger picture. </div></div>

They do it every time.

link (http://bobcesca.com/blog-archives/2012/06/starving-the-beast-roves-awful-new-ad-buy.html)
Q

LWW
06-10-2012, 02:21 AM
So the dems in congress were forced to run a $1,600B deficit because te reps ran a $160B deficit?

Have you no shame?

Stretch
06-10-2012, 02:46 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So the dems in congress were forced to run a $1,600B deficit because te reps ran a $160B deficit?

Have you no shame? </div></div>

Have you no facts? St.

LWW
06-10-2012, 08:35 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Stretch</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So the dems in congress were forced to run a $1,600B deficit because te reps ran a $160B deficit?

Have you no shame? </div></div>

Have you no facts? St. </div></div>

You mean like ones incited and you ignored because the party doesn't allow you to think independently?

Stretch
06-10-2012, 10:16 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Stretch</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So the dems in congress were forced to run a $1,600B deficit because te reps ran a $160B deficit?

Have you no shame? </div></div>

Have you no facts? St. </div></div>

You mean like ones incited and you ignored because the party doesn't allow you to think independently? </div></div>

Thanks for confirming you have nothing but brainless prattle. St.

Soflasnapper
06-10-2012, 10:52 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Stretch</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So the dems in congress were forced to run a $1,600B deficit because te reps ran a $160B deficit?

Have you no shame? </div></div>

Have you no facts? St. </div></div>

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif Nice one!

LWW just HATES phony stats, unless they are handy for his case.

$160 billion is an entirely phony number, reflecting only on-budget deficits (ignoring the emergency spending which was all borrowed money and part of the true deficit), and also ignoring the borrowing from the SS surplus (which lowers the stated deficit number, but adds that exact number to the debt).

Soflasnapper
06-10-2012, 11:01 AM
In my view, even the stated 'starve the beast' rationale is a lie. It's a late to the game lame excuse for what they did as to deficits, after promising balanced budgets, to alibi the results that their critics predicted, and which they denied. So rather than admit a titanic failure, instead, Pee Wee Herman style after he falls down, they falsely claim 'I meant to do that,' and gave this reason.

It's actually just an excuse for the kleptocracy regime they put in place. And that's the purpose of the outcome as well.

It isn't that they particularly want to end the social programs that are in place, so much as they want to steal from them, kleptocracy style.

They stole hundreds of billions through criminal conduct in the S&L debacle. They've stolen trillions of dollars in the military budget to flow those proceeds to the MIC. And they robbed trillions from the housing fraud. What's their next big score?

Not paying the money owed to the SS trust fund, because it's allegedly an insolvent system based on a Ponzi scheme. But the payoff is the $2.5 trillion (whatever it is) doesn't require TAXING THEM and their donors to fund this payback, which they intend to default on. More for them, whatever the cost.

There is no over-arching principle behind this, except facilitating theft on a monstrous scale.

Soflasnapper
06-10-2012, 11:26 AM
As to Reagan, we must think one of two things as to his deficits.

One, he was sincere, but sincerely confused and misled, that what he promised-- a balanced budget in his first term-- would be the result of his fiscal policies.

Or, that he was lying his keister off, an entirely cynical liar, who KNEW his fiscal policies would do the entire opposite of what he promised, and as an exercise of REAL POLITICK tough love, fooled the people into going along with his lies, so that the magic of 'cutting the allowance' could eventually bring social spending under control. At the expense of adding double the debt existing as of when he came into office onto the balance sheet of this country, tripling it ($0.9 trillion up to $2.7 trillion).

I may have a soft spot for that man (ok, that's not true at all!), but I rather think him an incompetent naif instead of a Machiavellian mastermind of anything.

So I take his and his cheer-leading squad's later claims as bald-faced self-serving excuse making that they only came up with after the original claims proved incredibly wrong, and verified his critics' predictions from the beginning before he got his policies put in place.