I fail to see the logic?

[kentuck]

They want to cut the deficit?

Let's see...

We are spending about $700 billion per year on war and armaments. That added up to about $7 trillion dollars over the last 10 years.

We have spent about $4 trillion dollars on the Bush taxcuts over the past 10 years.

When I add that up, that comes to about $11 trillion dollars.

So that is what they address in the Debt Commission, right?

NO! They overlooked those two small items that did so much damage to our budget deficit. They chose to look at social programs, like Social Security.

But Social Security did not add one penny to the deficit. In fact, the deficit would have been worse if they had not borrowed from the SS fund to pay for many of their pet projects.

It makes no sense.

Why not fix that which caused the deficit, namely, defense and taxcuts?

A lot of politicians seem to have their heads in the sand, in my opinion.

[jody]

1. Disagree re "heads in the sand". IMO their heads are rectally positioned. n/t

[Ganja Ninja]

2. It isn't about the deficit or logic.

It's about stealing the Social Security trust fund.

[Crazy Dave]

3. It's us against them, they against us

Dems and repug politicians will side together, bi-partisan, to vote on any bill that will fuck the middle and lower class citizens.

[madmax]

4. Thank you, thank you have been saying this to

anyone and everyone. Not many seem to get it! :banghead:

It's just so out there, so obvious that this war is sucking us dry of money, our servicemen and the after care those who return home will require and more.

Yet, it's the 'entitlements' that drive them up a wall. It's the word, 'entitlement' it's sounds like a give away. There's something about the word that makes people instantly go on the offense.

[xchrom]

5. recommend -- they've been 'sensibly' talking about cuts to SS for so

long -- as if it were 'problem' that could ONLY be addressed by cuts -- i'm surprised
that so many of us are surprised.

the minute the commission was created -- this was going to be the outcome.

[zeemike]

6. Because logic tells us that if you privatize SS

You will infuse trillions into the stock market and those that are "in" the market will suck it up big time.
Cutting defense or addressing taxes would only take money away from those same people.
In other words it is the golden rule...he that has the gold makes the rule.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

7. They're out to kill the New Deal at any cost to the middle class

They represent multinational corporations, the rich, people who think they'll hit life's lottery some day, and the easily manipulated sheeple who will continue to vote against their best interests.

In that context, their logic is transparent.

[TomClash]

8. They addressed defense spending but . . .

. . . not the tax cuts.

None of their recommendations will be enacted anyway. No one likes their solutions.

[Bandit]

9. If we did what you suggest how could Republicans empty the US Treasury and give it to their wealthy

friends who in turn kick much of it back for Republican campaigns? Obama seems to be right there at the trough with all the Republican pigs as well.

[jody]

10. Late post but I was delayed. Cartoon below captures your thought and Pogo's insight.

Have a happy evening because I am!

[LWolf]

11. Since when do political power plays have anything to do with logic? nt

[bluestate10]

12. My views.

Defense spending should be cut and relentlessly scrutinized hence forth. Any waste must be squeezed out. Having made that observation, I find your reflexive defense of SS misguided. Funding for SS comes out of the pockets of every working person. 84% of federal tax and even more of SS related taxes are supplied by taxpayers from blue states. Nancy Pelosi immediately panned SS related proposals from the debt commission. Pelosi's reaction shows the blindness of our democratic party leaders. The fact is that 90% of SS recipients live in red states and vote for republicans. Pelosi's correct action should be to band with incoming tea party republicans to push the bubble on spending. Pelosi should fight to reduce federal subsidies to states and push to have states keep 45% more of federal income taxes paid by their citizens. What the tax changes would lead to is blue states like New York, California, Michigan, Illinois, Massachusetts, et al will have money to pay for initiatives like green energy, social programs for their citizens, K12 and college level education, road and bridge building and repair. Tax changes of the type proposed will result in red state politicians like Haley Barbour, Imhofe, Sessions standing before their angry citizens to try to explain that blue states have supported red state citizen's living standards for decades. Pelosi pushing to prevent well thought-out adjustments to SS will bail out extreme right wing politicians across the south and interior west and will only hasten the day when a democrat will not get elected anywhere. If Pelosi thinks that Californians are happy about 46% of their federal tax dollars being sent to red states, she is wrong. Pelosi's blindness cost democrats on November 2 and will cost democrats more damage if Pelosi is re-elected minority leader over wiser democratic politicians like Marcy Kaptur of Ohio. The Ohio Congresswoman is open to working with tea partiers in situations on issues like job security and removal of wasteful spending. Pelosi and Harry Reid should look upon activities of anti-tax, anti-spending tea partiers to remove spending set asides that politicians like Imhofe and Sessions are fighting for. Californians and Nevadans are tax donors, the states that Imhofe and Sessions represent are enormous tax beggars. Removal of set asides cuts off the head of the extreme right wing snake and forces red state citizens to realize how much more effective blue state governance is than their own.

[Initech]

13. The war contractors have the politicians in their back pockets.

And because of that no politician will ever address that we spend way too much money on defense. By all means we should absolutely end all wars (most of which we're 90% responsible for) and withdraw our troops. Only then can we begin to rebuild our economy.