Another Krugman article? Please. Next up, an article from the daily kos?
Does SeriouslyWrong now support Gov. Romney?
Does SeriouslyWrong support the Paul Ryan budget?
Does he understand what Posner was saying? And does he think he is a Marxist?
Romney supporter. Very good to know though I always knew he was a Republican.
Paul Ryan budget?
Last edited by Havakasha; 04-02-2012 at 01:58 PM.
I don't know what to make of Posner or your post. Blame Bush? Anti free enterprise? Anti capitalism?
Here's what I know about Ryan's budget - "Paul Ryan budget passes on partisan vote"
Enough said: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0312/74651.html
SeriouslyWrong needs to read more from Posner (not that I agree with everyting he says}. Of course he doesnt know what to make of it since Posner is a true Conservative who is willing to criticize our Capitalist financial system. He is the kind of person Seriouslywrong would automatically call a Liberal or Socialist or Marxist. Only problem is he is Reagan appointee and a true Conservative. Face it SeriouslyWrong is a Schiff zombie.
Notice that HE couldnt answer what HE thinks of Paul Ryan's budget. Chicken.
Last edited by Havakasha; 04-02-2012 at 03:15 PM.
Let me steal one from you - you Krugman Zombie.
Do your taxes yet? How much is your highfalutin tax accountant saving you this year??
Hell, I criticize our system. I hate it that jobs are getting shipped overseas to reduce costs. In fact, there ought to be a law. How's that?
I think it is crystal clear that Romney has a good read on Obama.
The GOP's Hypocrisy on Small Government
Tommy Bottoms-Co-host of The Ugly Truth Radio, Editor of ShelleyWynterShow.com, Syndicated Columnist
Conservatives and the Republican Party have supposedly been long time advocates of the idea of government having a limited role in our lives and in business. This pseudo small government mantra has been amplified even more over the last several years with the rise of the TEA Party. Add in a cable news network that unashamedly defends and promotes the hypocrisy of right wing ideologues; the propaganda becomes deafening.
Over the last few months the GOP Presidential candidates have participated in about a dozen debates and campaigned around the country’s key primary states with each candidate attempting to ‘out-TEA-Party’ their opponents. With the exception of Congressmen Ron Paul, they are all looking to win over the highly misinformed Fox News constituency, while simultaneously downplaying their roles in big government.
Mitt Romney, a moderate conservative, has spent the last several months trying to up his far right wing street cred. Romney constantly attacks Obama’s Affordable Health Care Act and its individual mandate as example of out of control ‘big government’. Yet it was the health care reform that Romney introduced while the governor of Massachusetts that was the blueprint for Obama’s health care plan. Romney supporters claim the only reason he passed such ‘big government’ program was because of the strong liberal influence in the state of Massachusetts. Which sounds to me like ‘big government’ is ok, as long as it works for you politically.
TEA Party queen, Michelle Bachman, constantly touts her record of the most consistent conservative in the GOP field. And she is partially correct. She consistently decries the increasing financial drain of the ‘welfare state’, yet her husband’s clinic readily accepts Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement checks. Bachmann also doesn’t seem to have a problem with ‘big government’ when it comes to farm subsidies. According to her congressional financial disclosure forms, Bachmann and her husband had a financial stake in her father-in-law’s farm, and between 2006 and 2009 her and her husband received somewhere between $32,000 and $105,000 in income from good ol’ Uncle Sam.
And then there’s the evil genius, Newt Gingrich. Gingrich recently referred to President Obama as the ‘Welfare President’ after a report came out that more than 40 million Americans rely on food stamps to eat. He launched this attack against Obama without acknowledging the hypocrisy of himself receiving more than $1.6 million lobbying for Fannie & Freddie Mac, or as he would like to call it; ‘consulting fees’.
But the most dangerous of the Newt’s numerous hypocrisies concerning the role of government is his recent assertion that if elected President he would not only ignore Supreme Court rulings that he did not agree with but would send US Marshalls to arrest judges to have them ‘explain’ their decisions. Is this is what conservatives view as limited government? Newt’s plan not only tears apart the constitution but nullifies the balance of powers between the branches of government that the country on which the country was founded.
When in public love to tout the virtues of a limited government but privately seek to take advantage of big government programs when it suits them politically or financially. In Newt’s case, he views ‘big government’ as perfectly fine as long as you are only looking to use it to reshape your image from villain to super-villain.