Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (47295)	11/18/2010 6:04:56 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

Re: [But that sort of brinksmanship didn't work so well the last time Republicans tried it, forcing a government shutdown after their 1994 takeover of Congress.] "Its true that it didn't work out very well for the Republicans" Obviously 'didn't work so well' was an off-hand way to describe a POLITICAL setback.... Re: "many Republican's seemed to just stop caring about restraining the growth of government when the lost on this one" No, I don't think the one thing had a bit to do with the other! (After all, the Congressional GOP was 100% opposed to Clinton's budget proposal, which then passed without a single GOP vote, only on a tie-breaker vote cast by Gore... and --- contrary to all GOP predictions --- federal deficits then went on to post significant DECLINES.) No, what (IMO) killed the deficit fighting backbone of the GOP (over the last 30 years) was that many national leaders of the Party either came around to publicly professing that "deficits DON'T MATTER" (such as Cheney did, to mention just one example), thus giving POLITICAL COVER to all the deficit cowards out there... or national leaders who REPEATEDLY put forward deficit-financed budgets (Reagan, Bush I, Bush II), and set upon more and more NEW SPENDING (war after war, new entitlements, 'tax expenditures' in special favors to favored industries, etc.) thus ENABLING more and more of this irresponsible behavior in future political leaders by convincing the public that they could always have their cake and eat it too. That they could HAVE more expensive stuff TODAY (without ever paying for it), that they could just borrow the difference and somehow it would magically work out in the end.