Get a load of this! Warning: small town newpaper

[HootieMcBoob]

I know this is a weird request and I'm going to respond to this latter myself but I don't have time to now and it's driving me nuts. This is the paper from the town I grew up in. It is filled with right-wing crap generally in its editorial pages.

Is anyone in the mood to respond to this idiotic drivel with a letter to the editor? It manages to get in every RNC talking point where it comes to the deficits. Please, be my guest. Here's a sample:

In fairness, much of this was thrust on Bush. The huge budget surpluses predicted during the Clinton years were predicated on having no national emergencies, no wars and no economic turndowns. But the Sept. 11 attacks affected a large segment of the economy from the financial markets to the travel industry. Then, the government had to absorb cleanup costs, set up a new Department of Homeland Security, increase airline security and fight a war in Afghanistan. (The costs of the war in Iraq, by the way, are not included in the budget.)

The deficits also reflect Bush's initiative to establish a drug benefit under Medicare, the most significant expansion of the welfare state since the 1960s. There have been wonderful advances in medicine in recent years that enable us to treat conditions with prescription drugs that once required invasive surgery - if they could be successfully treated at all. But the costs of these medications are often far beyond what elderly patients can afford.

But absorbing even part of these costs is extremely expensive for the government as well. The cost of the new benefit was originally estimated at $400 billion, but it is now expected to reach $540 billion.

Politically, there is a nice kind of irony in seeing Bush, whose detractors claim is an extreme right-winger, going into debt to expand social spending, while Democrats, who spent half a century building up deficits and deriding balanced budgets as superstitious nonsense, pass themselves off as watchdogs of the public purse. Sure enough, they had two criticisms of Bush's spending plan: The deficit is two big and there isn't enough social spending.

http://www.observer-reporter.com/279754997512100.bsp

[flamingyouth]

1. I had dinner with someone last year who talked like that

It was a big group-type thing, and I'd never met this fool before. We were in LA, and he was a big Ah-nold supporter as well. I'd already listened to him yammer on and on about the recall, then he started in on this argument. I'd had a glass of wine and I just let the guy have it. My words just came out in a rush, and I wish I could remember exactly what I said because several people at the table congratulated me on shutting the fool up. ;-)

[Malva Zebrina]

2. wine is a great truth teller

It is no wonder that Bacchus was revered as a god.

[salinen]

3. When the same old lies

don't get the same responce, then the lies must become mega lies.

[Skittles]

4. very bad propaganda

easily refuted

[A J]

5. "The deficit is two big" WTF????

I worked for a small town newspaper, and my editor wouldn't get away with this crappy writing. This guy should get a grammar book.

[opihimoimoi]

6. The spin goes on.....

when ya got nothing else, lie.

[Papa]

7. poorly written as well "The deficit is TWO big"

Jeez.

[ignatius]

8. The increase in the Medicare bill was put in the budget in LESS

than 2 months after the repugs ramrodded it through Congress. A 34% increase in less than 2 months time, in other words, they lied about the numbers. In business, if you gave those bull shit estimates your ass would be fired and rightfully so.

The Medicare bill is a boondoggle for the pharmaceutical industry, it is illegal for drugs to be purchased from Canada at 50-70% of the cost of U S drugs, therefore eliminating group bargaining power. And guess who is the largest U S buyer of Caadian drugs? The V A, ain't that a hoot?

Clinton had the Oklahoma bombing, the attack of the Cole,the WTC bombing, Kosovo(in which not even one US soldier died) and all this while the repugs yelled, screamed,sued and basically rode his ass 24/7.

Clinton paid attention in intelligence meetings, asked questions and made sound decisions thus preventing a 9-11 attack. He was extraordinarily intelligent and didn't have to rely on "his handlers" to do his reading and thinking for him.

Finally, he did not give a budget busting tax cut to the top 1%, thus running a surplus into the LARGEST fucking deficit this country has ever known.

The rest of the world respected him and our country, the dollar was strong and investment capital came pouring into this country from the entire world.

[countmyvote4real]

9. I’ll just give you some talking points. You can use them,

shape them or just ignore:

First to blame everything from the economy to 9/11on the previous administration is irresponsible.

The Clinton surpluses were also based on the tax code at that time. Bush’s tax cuts depleted much of that.

As far as the economy, Reagan proved that ‘trickle down economics” doesn't work. It’s foolish to think that giving most Americans a $300 dollar rebate will jump-start a falling economy. It’s not exactly seed money to start a business or to make a down payment on a house.

Yes, 9/11 was unfortunate and unexpected. It costs money to invade a country like Afghanistan. We were right to respond. That’s not the case with the billion dollar snark hunt for WMD in Iraq.

The only real beneficiaries of the prescription drug plan are the welfare pharmaceutical companies. And possibly Rep Tauzin (who helped to broker the legislation) if he accepts the million dollar offer to lobby for the drug companies when he retires later this year.

There could be even greater medical advances if the Bush administration had not put restrictions on stem cell research. We’ll never know.

I share the irony of the role reversal in fiscal discipline of the two parties. However, the negative labels attached to those seeking a balanced budget are unnecessary. It’s supposed to be a law.

Finally, with the constantly growing deficit, the Bush administration’s spending habits and international paranoia, is this the time to make those tax cuts permanent or to put a man on Mars?

[no_arbusto]

10. Small world. I'm originally from WashPA.

There are a few other DUers from there too.

[zbdent]

11. Funny, because I remember W saying something to the effect

that his budget would work even if there were a downturn or an emergency.

Funny how they forget that, too.

The "economic downturn" - it wasn't a downturn. There's a difference between slowing down a car when spotting trouble ahead, and shifting it into reverse. Bush inherited the car with the foot letting up on the gas, and hit the brake.

The "war" - well, who started that?

The "national emergency" - well, if Bush and his stellar administration had done their homework and not looked for a reason to START A WAR, we probably would not have had the national emergency, especially when you consider that W was backing out of every international agreement we had which kept us in peace.

[ComerPerro]

14. Trifecta

I didn't think I would get the trifecta.

Sick asshole, he is.

[Eric J in MN]

12. What the author of that letter ignores is that seniors will be

Seniors will be paying MORE for medications in 2007 because the prices are going up faster than inflation and the bill does nothing to control that.

Visit the Consumers Union website for more on this.

[ComerPerro]

13. Wait a second, I just threw up a bit

:puke:

In fairness, much of this was thrust on Bush. The poor bastard. He must just be a victim. But I thought the GOP was the Party Of Personal ResponsibilityThe huge budget surpluses predicted during the Clinton years were predicated on having no national emergencies, no wars and no economic turndowns They were also predicated on not having some know-nothing jackass waste trillions of dollars on tax cuts for people who don't need them. But the Sept. 11 attacks affected a large segment of the economy from the financial markets to the travel industry. Yeah, nice try, but the fiscal year that showed the massive downturn ended at the end of Sept. 2001. Blaming 9/11 for Bush's terrible decisions is just shameful.Then, the government had to absorb cleanup costs, set up a new Department of Homeland Security, increase airline security and fight a war in Afghanistan. Well, you might find it intersting to learn that the administration was looking to find an excuse to justify war with Afganistan during that summer. Interestingly enough, it was also always the paln to go after Iraq. Besides, the administration has refused to fund essentials of homeland security such as emergency responders. .(The costs of the war in Iraq, by the way, are not included in the budget.)

The deficits also reflect Bush's initiative to establish a drug benefit under Medicare, the most significant expansion of the welfare state since the 1960s. There have been wonderful advances in medicine in recent years that enable us to treat conditions with prescription drugs that once required invasive surgery - if they could be successfully treated at all. But the costs of these medications are often far beyond what elderly patients can afford. Too bad that, thanks to Republicans, many elderly patients still can't afford these treatments.

But absorbing even part of these costs is extremely expensive for the government as well. The cost of the new benefit was originally estimated at $400 billion, but it is now expected to reach $540 billion. Its not an underestimate. Its called a lie. After 3 years of Bush, you should be used to them by now.

Politically, there is a nice kind of irony in seeing Bush, whose detractors claim is an extreme right-winger, going into debt to expand social spending, sorry, but I don't count corporate welfare as social spending. while Democrats, who spent half a century building up deficits and deriding balanced budgets as superstitious nonsense Maybe you don't remember Clintons 4 years of budget surpluses?, pass themselves off as watchdogs of the public purse. Sure enough, they had two criticisms of Bush's spending plan: The deficit is two big and there isn't enough social spending. Once again, I would like to point out that Corporate handouts are not social spending. Republicans only fund social programs if they know they can profit from them somehow.

[nomatrix]

15. Ask them to read the Price of Loyalty

http://thepriceofloyalty.ronsuskind.com/thebushfiles/archives/000053.html

"President Bush inherited a projected budget surplus of $5.6 trillion from President Clinton. In a Feb. 20 fax to O'Neill, Office of Management and Budget (OMB) director Mitch Daniels discussed how the administration would handle that record sum. Even after deducting the $1.6 trillion President Bush had promised in tax cuts, Daniels reckoned that $4.4 trillion remained for Social Security, debt repayment, and "additional needs." The outlook, he wrote, could become even brighter -- "there are very large opportunities and contingencies that could expand that surpluses over these 10 years." Daniels's assumptions proved wildly off-the-mark. By February, 2004, the budget surplus had disappeared, and the United States was running a $500 billion annual deficit."

What happened to $3 trillion in DoD misplaced funds?