Jim Bunning led the league in hit batsmen for 4 years.

Congress should pay for the things they mandate.

- Congress mandates.
- Taxpayers pay.

And a simple lesson in politics:
- Taxpayers vote for congress to ensure they only pay for things they want to pay for.

That's called democracy, like in the USA and here in the Netherlands. If you happen to have a dictatorial regime the rules are a little bit different:
- Dictator mandates
- Taxpayers pay
- Taxpayers are not allowed to vote for a dictator.

Kees


Kees

I don't necessarily think he picked the best battle, but he DOES have a good point.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704548604575097632988425818.html?mod=rss_Today%27s_Most_Popular

Mr. Bunning is merely asking the Senate to live by the rules that President Obama said it should when he signed an executive order requiring "pay-as-you-go" budgeting. "Now, Congress will have to pay for what it spends, just like everybody else," he said, only three weeks ago. But instead of backing Mr. Bunning's stand that new spending must be "paid for," the White House is attacking him.

The real story here is that Mr. Bunning is exposing pay-go as a fraud. When Mr. Obama and Democrats want to spend money on their priorities, they waive the rule by declaring an emergency. They only enforce pay-go to block tax cuts. The Senate will soon follow with another $85 billion spending bill, and rest assured that too will violate pay-go rules.

like both Bush Tax Cuts, the War, and stacks of other programs too many to list here but available on Liberal web-sites, I'd say he got "religion" much too late, but conveniently timed to leave a legacy of pseudo-budgetary caution.

The largest increases in National Debt occurred under Reagan, Bush Sr. and Bush Junior. According to the CBO, the deficit under Obama will not increase, but may show a slight surplus, which might pay down a little of the Bush Debt.

For those who don't "habla", a deficit is what you have at the end of the year when you total up Incoming versus Outgoing money and you come up short. If it hangs over until next year it becomes a debt which we all carry for as long as it takes. Recently the only Party putting up a surplus at the end of the year to reduce that debt is the Democratic Party, first under Clinton, and now, just possibly under Obama.

The difference between Republicans and Democrats doesn't come on the spending side, although the Republicans sign up for Trillions of dollars of that. The difference is that the Republican's Cut Taxes and Spend regardless of the consequences. The Democrats, constantly saddled with Republican Debt, Cut programs, shift things around, maybe return those taxes to the level where they were cut before and try to concuct themselves in a fiscally responsible manner.

Rhere's no such thing a s tax and spend Democrat. but a Cut-Tax and spend Republican is Standard Operating Procedure.

Rob

know less about American politics than the Dutch.

Than the Dutch.

Rob says The largest increases in National Debt occurred under Reagan, Bush Sr. and Bush Junior.

National debt by U.S. presidential terms

But Rob knows more about American Presidents than some Americans are willing to admit?

Unfortunately, democrats are tax and spend; republicans are just spend.

Diana

That you choose not to have a serious discussion of something because of your extreme partisanship.

http://perotcharts.com/category/challenges/budget-deficit/
Do you see the red lines??
Those are NOT Republican budgets.

....deficits throughout the Reagan, Bush I and Bush II administrations and a surplus during the Clinton Administration.

Are those the red lines you're referring to?

Can you tell the difference between the red and the blue?

The GREEN are surpluses. Look when those were.

The alleged Clinton surplus is not the point. The HUGE uprecedented Obama deficits are.

We have addressed the Clinotn illusion in the past. Look to the future.

Heck, at this point I will grant that there was a gazillion-billion-giga million dollar surplus.
That would have NOTHING to do with the current DEFICIT.

YIPPEE SKIP !!!!!!!!
I'm glad YOU like to be overtaxed.
Aside from that, since there are numerous federal programs that are in debt to the tune of trillions of dollars, there can never be a surplus.

Again, you don't see a difference between the former deficits and the current one?

I'm glad YOU like to pass you bills on to your children.

I feel sorry for your children.

Again, you don't see a difference between the former deficits and the current one?

And you don't see how the past affects the present?

or against any previously unfunded legislation previously. Apparently this is his first venture into good sense.

Rob