If Dems are really concerned about fiscal responsibility, why're they lifting the debt cieling $1.8 Trillion?

I think it's better to accept responsibility now than at some undetermined point in the future. Conservatives should try that some time.

I oftentimes forget approximately approximately this kind of question /taunt yet what the hell. interior the ninety's Clinton surprisingly a lot proved that the terrific thank you to enhance the economic equipment became to pay down the deficit, and redistribute wealth proper down yet marginally. it worked. It worked extra useful then the trickle down economics we've had until now or because of the fact that. I, as a liberal, could rather decide to return to this. Simultaneoulsy regardless of the undeniable fact that Japan became demonstrating What to do and what to no longer do whilst the banking industry collapses. Economists all surprisingly a lot agree, and bear in strategies that economists, like scientists are surprisingly a lot a political, that once teh banking industry threatens to break down you are able to borrow borrow borrow to maintain it from doing so. in actuality between the terrific errors Japan made in coping with their zombie economic business enterprise challenge became no longer borrowing and spendind rapid adequate to maintain the equipment afloat. and that's what we are doing precise now. protecting the equipment afloat. We have a tendency t take our worldwide economic capability with no attention yet on the tip of 2008 we our economic equipment became keeping its breath under damocles' sword. Spending funds to stay afloat is all we are able to do... Thats why George W Bush, and Barack H Obama, 2 adult men who could no longer be extra ideologically opposite, agreed on the path of action. the different ingredient that Economists agree on is that once the job restoration fee is definitely in hand the spending has to quit. You dont decide to do it too quickly regardless of the undeniable fact that it rather is the two important to no longer wait too long because of the fact its no longer sustainable. whilst the time comes taxes will could be raised and the debt paid down. that's how we,as a rustic, will fix what we, as a rustic, broke. it is going to require some sacrifice on our section. yet an incrementaly larger tax is the sacrifice we could pay for permitting this to ensue to ourselves. and there is nothign incorrect with the persons of a rustic utilising the borrowing capability of its democratically elected government to stay remote from a entire economic fall down.

Bush Administration tax cut denies military families increase in child tax credit.

The Washington Post, the House version of the Bush Administration plan "wouldn't help many of those serving in Iraq." One solider who will not benefit is Army Specialist Shoshana Johnson, the soldier and single mother who was wounded twice in the same convoy as Jessica Lynch. ("Ex-POW's Family Accuses Army of Double Standard on Benefit," Washington Post, October 24, 2003; "The New Senate Child Credit Legislation - What It Does and Does Not Do," Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, June 25, 2003; "Whose Child Is Left Behind," Children's Defense

Bush Administration budget cuts force more than 200,000 veterans to wait for health care. Over 200,000 United States veterans have to wait more than six months for a medical visit because of health care shortages. ("VA Health Care Funding Alert," Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States Press Release, January 31, 2003)

Bush Administration cuts $1.5 billion from military family housing. The Bush Administration cut $1.5 billion for military family housing, despite Department of Defense statistics showing that in 83,000 barracks and 128,860 family housing units across the country are below standard. ("Nothing But Lip Service," Army Times, June 30, 2003; "House Appropriations Committee Approves $59.2 Million for Ft. Hood," U.S. Rep. Chet Edwards Press Release, June 17, 2003)

Bush Administration underfunded veterans' health care by $2 billion. The Bush Administration's 2004 budget underfunded veterans' health care by nearly $2 billion. ("Vets Health Low on Bush's Priority List," The Hill, September 17, 2003; "Support for Troops Questioned," Washington Post, June 17, 2003; U.S. Department of Veterans' Affairs, September 2002)

Bush Administration proposal would end health care benefits for 173,000 veterans. More than 173,000 veterans across the country would be cut off from health care because of Bush Administration proposed budget cuts and its plan requiring enrollment fees and higher out-of-pocket costs. ("Support for Troops Questioned," Washington Post, June 17, 2003)

These are some of the great things that the great Conserative Republican party did for us. I am a retired Vet and can't ger into a VA hospital. Bush sure helped us.

action speaks louder than words

not that the Republicans are fiscally conservative

both Republicans and Democrats are bankrupting America

what's even dumber is the millions of voters who are still voting to bankrupt themselves

bad math?

Because they aren't concerned with fiscal responsibility, or rather they think that "helping" the American people with the stimulus, health care bill, and whatever 1000+ page bills they have in making is more important thereof.

You mean as an alternative to the 5 debt ceiling increases during the Bush Administration/Republican Congress?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic...

Democrat and fiscal responsibility are three words that should never be used in the same sentence.

NO DEMOCRAT in the history of the USA has EVER been interested in *fiscal anything*!

That is a very good question.

You mean the debt that bush made?