So glad Crackers has his priorities straight.

Why are you all so against our troops being paid?

I just filed my taxes.  I will be STEAMED if those crooks hold up my refund.

Hey Edge, the post was about funding the troops, not about everyone else. Nor did I say I was against everyone else getting paid. So chill out, don't make assumptions, and get your facts straight about what others post.

Funny thing is, we could survive just fine without a good number of governmental departments ... such as the DoEd and DOE.  I hope they do shut it down ... people will realize how little the federal government does for us on a daily basis.

Spot On Spooman. Finally someone who actually gets it!

Rougement gets it. Sad that the Republicans hate Obama so much they'll play games with people's lives to make him look bad before the midterm elections next year. Scott Fitzgerald even said as much on Fox News about what Walker is doing in Wisconsin. Seriously, Spooman and OGDuluthian, you gotta get off this hate train. Barack Obama is the rightfully elected president of the United States. Deal with it.

I misspoke earlier: it's beyond wanting to make Obama look bad. The one issue the Republicans refuse to budge on is wanting to defund women's healthcare. Senator Reid said yesterday "the only thing holding up an agreement is ideology." He is right: the Republicans are so against funding women's healthcare that they would shut down the government and imperil our country's economic recovery over it.

Yes, my young and naive Jadiaz, this budget impasse is entirely the Republicans's fault, and if you watched more than Fox News, you'd have figured it out. The Republicans are holding America hostage because the party is at its core misogynistic.

Bill, that was the obvious tone of this post. 

Claire, I do watch more than Fox. I am not naive. No one has answered the question of why the Democrats did not pass a budget in the first place. Because you can't. So, please, quit blaming Republicans who have only held the majority in the house since January. 

This is purely the Democrats fault.

I, for one, am ready for women to take over the world. There's nothing better than a woman in control. Hmmm, Bachman together with Palin? Then you mix in the Frenchies Carla Bruni and Sheikha Mozah from Qatar and you've got a pretty good looking cabinet. "City girls just seem to find out early, how to open doors with just a smile..."

Why are you all so against Raytheon being paid?

These one people were in charge this one time. Then these other people were. Recently these one people didn't do anything. (Much like the time before when these other people didn't do anything.) Now, after a series of pseudo-crisises, years and dithering, stuff's all F'd. I totally blame these people.

Both parties' politicians have been irresponsible, stubborn, and short-sighted over the course of recent budget discussions.

Just wanted to ask edgeways where her or she got the 60% figure for military spending. The CBO says very close to 20% with Social Security slightly higer and also very close to 20%, Medicare & Medicaid around 21%, other social safety net programs around 15%, net interest near 7%, and the remainder ("discretionary spending") at roughly 17%.

Don't take my question as a disagreement of your implied point, I think we spend too much on the military, as well.

It's an interesting article, but like everyone here, fails to address the fact that Democrats controlled the House, Senate, and Presidency before and on October 1st, 2010 when this budget was supposed to be completed by. Why didn't they get it done? 

Now a whole new group is in as of January, and suddenly Republicans are the problem? Sorry, not buying that. Democrats had the majorities and the power to get this done on time, but didn't. Don't cloud the issue or pass the buck when this Budget was suppossed to be passed LAST YEAR. 

There is no one to blame but the Democrats who didn't get it done when they had the power to pass whatever budget they wanted; ON TIME.

Sure Republicans are holding out. They now control the House and instead of getting things crammed down their throats, they are extering the power given to them by the American people. 

So, I ask again, why couldn't Democrats get this done on time? And why are Republicans to blame for their failure to do so?

Thank you for having the guts to answer my question with a well thought out response. I can agree with your post.

Will said it better.

The reason the Dems didn't pass a budget is because they didn't want to head into the midterms with one of two millstones around their collective necks: Raising taxes or cutting bloated government programs.  They kicked the can down the road so that this exact ideological showdown would come about, and so they could trot out the ever-popular rhetoric, such as "Grandma will be eating dog food if we make any changes to entitlement programs!" and "Republicans want seniors and children to die!"

Unfortunately, our entitlement programs have become the single largest purchase of votes in our country's history, and Democrats will leverage that advantage until the day our country defaults on our financial obligations.

Look at the numbers.  The President can't spend dime-fucking-one without Congressional approval.  When did the deficit spending ramp up?  Yeah, that's right ... 2007.  

And while we're on the topic, what of the entitlement programs?  They constitute a much, much larger percentage of the budget.  Of course, we can't cut or reform those programs.  Too many liberals don't get it ... we're going down the same path as half of Europe.  The problem with this system is, eventually you run out of other people's money.

I'll forgive you for saying that both of our wars are "pointless."  I guess it'd be a shame if we let the parties responsible for 9/11 continue their terrorist activities.

"Look at the numbers. The President can't spend dime-fucking-one without Congressional approval. When did the deficit spending ramp up? Yeah, that's right ... 2007."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms

Looks like it ramps up when Repubs get elected, generally speaking. 

"And while we're on the topic, what of the entitlement programs? They constitute a much, much larger percentage of the budget. Of course, we can't cut or reform those programs. Too many liberals don't get it ... we're going down the same path as half of Europe. The problem with this system is, eventually you run out of other people's money."

So what you do is enact real healthcare reform. Single payer could save around $200 billion/year

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicare_for_All#Cost_analysis_of_the_bill

Per capita cost of healthcare in the US is $7290. In the UK it is $2992. Life expectancy in the UK is a year more than the US, there are slightly more doctors per person and infant mortality is way lower. Here's the kicker, healthcare cost as a % of GDP in the UK is 8.4%, here it is a massive 16%. Single payer wasn't even put on the table as the Repubs would never vote for it and insurance companies bought just enough Blue Dogs to make sure every Dem wouldn't back it either. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_system

Also, "we're going down the same path as half of Europe" is a cheap shot. The world recession was brought about by a banking and housing crisis in this country. 

"I'll forgive you for saying that both of our wars are "pointless." I guess it'd be a shame if we let the parties responsible for 9/11 continue their terrorist activities."

Are you saying Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11? Do you advocate invading Pakistan next? Iraq and Afghanistan, so far, have cost over $1 trillion. Bin Laden is where? Seems like he won to me, he goaded us into fucking ourselves over and we're still doing it.

"And if you were paying attention, you'd know that the tax cuts averaged less than $140 billion per year, total. Considering these cuts affected every tax bracket, you can hardly assert that it was just the wealthy that benefited, nor is it a large factor in the $1.5 trillion in deficit spending our current president and his party are proposing."

"In August 2010, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated that extending the tax cuts for the 2011-2020 time period would add $3.3 trillion to the national debt," National debt currently stands at over $14 trillion. That's a big chunk. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_tax_cuts#Debate_over_continuation_of_cuts

Everybody who is able to help pay down the debt, should help. Those who are able to help more, should help more. 

Anyway, I'm done doing your research for you. Like I said, the numbers don't lie.

It's the corporate welfare, stupid!

Corporations use tax loopholes the same way you write off your mortgage interest.  Please explain how GE and BofA are "tax cheats."  They're following the tax code to the letter of the law.  Don't hate the player, hate the game.  Don't like the tax laws?  Change 'em.  

But I guaranfuckingtee you that Democrats are just as culpable in the expansion of tax loopholes as any other party.  Hell, GE CEO Jeffy Immelt is buddy-buddy with the Fraud-in-Chief and serving as the head of the President's Commission on Jobs and Competitiveness.  

Rouge, I'll make this quick, as I have to go do my part to stimulate the economy:

*Your clever Wiki link clearly shows that Democrat-controlled Congressional spending is at the root of increased deficit spending, GDP be damned.

*Single payer is a fucking train wreck.  We have Canadian parents bringing their kids to the United States so they have a chance to live.  You could also save billions by giving me $100 million a year to provide medical care to the masses ... that doesn't mean the care would be good.  Life expectancy and infant mortality rates are horrible indicators when taking into account the violence and drug use of the lower classes.  You might also note the massive deficit that the UK is currently running -- close to a third of its revenues.  Try again.

*Cheap shot? Truth hurts, don't it?  It was Clinton's deregulation of relationship between lenders and investment banks, coupled with reckless borrowing by Fannie/Freddie (much of it under the CRA) that precipitated the housing and banking crisis.

*You called both wars pointless, not me.  If you feel bin Laden should remain at large without our pursuit, well, that's your perspective.  Your fearless leader Obama has now led us into Libya.  I figured you would have used them as your "the next war" example instead of Pakistan.  But I assume you consider that to be a just war, right?

*I thought we were debating the current deficit and debt, not future deficits.  But, since we're on the topic: Just last year, the CBO predicted average deficits of $600 billion between now and 2020, bringing our total national debt to around $15 trillion.  This lofty prediction is based on a more than doubling of tax revenues between now and then, while expenditures only increase 50%.  Of course, these predictions have already been rendered moot due to the Obama Administration and Congressional Dems proposing a budget that is $200 billion larger than CBO estimates, resulting in a deficit $300 billion greater.

But here's the most fucked-up thing about it: You believe the tax cuts are causing the deficit spending.  It's the spending in the first place.  The government is spending money it doesn't have.  But I will give you some credit: You come right out and admit your socialistic tendencies.  "Those who are able to help more, should help more"?  Nice.  Clearly you don't believe that people have the right to enjoy the fruits of their labor.

Nice job Beast. Too many of these whiny libs love to spew partisan rhetoric that has no truth behind their assertions, other than what they here from Oberman or the libby rags. The one and only point that can't get through their little pointy heads is that we are spending more than we have. Yo Red, how come you don't mention the 700+ Billion so-called stimulus? Or the omnibus fiscal-year 2009 appropriations bill? How about the Auto bailout? Cash for Clunkers (guffah!)? How about the INCREASE in defense spending (guffah again!). And the best of all, a multi-trillion dollar health debacle. The truth is that in compared to Bush's spending (this is what the libs like to use for a benchmark) Husssein is Bush's spending on steroids. The furthest possible outcome from what he actually promised in order to get elected. This has to infuriate the libs, as they put all of their chips on a losing hand. 

The second issue is Congress. Never before, since the creation of the Congressional budget process, has the House failed to pass a budget, failed to propose a budget then deemed the non-existent budget as passed as a means to avoid a direct, recorded vote on a budget, but still allow Congress to spend taxpayer money. Unbelievable, but true. 

For the record, the last budget from a Republican President AND a Republican Congress - FY-2007 (passed in 2006) - resulted in a $161 billion deficit at a time when unemployment was 4.6%.  That's what happened the last time the GOP was in control.

What happened when the Democrats took control in January 2007?  Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi passed a FY-2008 budget that had a $459 billion deficit - nearly three times the deficit in the immediately previous Republican-passed budget.  All before the financial forced this massive spending.

Even worse, the Democrats passed a FY-2009 budget with a staggering $1.42 TRILLION deficit. The FY-2010 budget approved by Reid and Pelosi and signed by Obama had an estimated $1.6 TRILLION deficit.

The deficit has increased from $161 billion in the last budget before Democrats took control of the Congress (FY 2007) to $1.42 trillion in the most recent fiscal year (FY 2009)—an increase of $1.26 trillion or 782%.

Consider that according to the IMF (International Monetary Fund), the United States faces an unfunded liability of $200 plus TRILLION dollars.

Face the facts redman. Your boy is addicted to the public trough and can't get his snout away from it. He's going to drive this country to bankruptcy if we don't do something immediately, like cutting TRILLIONS in spending. 

If you continue to vote Democratic, you are voting for the intentional collapse of our nations economy and fucking up any chance that our children will have to live in a world of opportunity and financial independence. Carry that on your back next time you walk to the polls and toe your party line.