Repubs love "balanced budgets" when Dems are in charge...

[kentuck]

Because it shackles the "big spending" Democrats and keeps them from spending on social programs that might help people. Look at the deficits under Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II, and we see deficits that grew larger under each of them. Under Bill Clinton, we saw deficits cut and a balanced budget. But we saw few programs to actually help the average American.

And just yesterday, Bush came out in favor of a "balanced budget". It's almost hilarious! This guy has run up $4trillion in debt in such a short time and has the gall to ask for a "balanced budget". And the corporate media seems to have taken him seriously. Regardless, the people get screwed either way.

[KKKarl is an idiot]

1. My thoughts exactly

suddenly he is a bastion of fiscal discipline. But in the same breath he wants congress to make his tax cuts for the wealthy permanent & pass his spending bills for the "farce in Iraq". So to balance the budget we may need to cut out welfare altogether for the poor to maintain the welfare of the rich, richer & richest (Halliburton). The repubs say we believe in "cut & run" when it comes to Iraq. On Bush's spending policy I would say he believes in "cut & spend".

[kentuck]

2. or privatize Social Security?

would be his wet dream.

[hughee99]

3. Thinking back to Clinton's presidential speeches

he was the first person to tell you about all the things he was doing to help the average American. Now that you've said it, I've thought back and can't really think of too much, though, and most of what there was happened in his first 2 years with a Democratic congress.