Michael Ramirez for December 23, 2012

  1. Th 162608920
    Sovan Premium Member almost 11 years ago

    Wait, King. Why don’t you blame those who won’t cut spending? It goes both ways. Both sides are being equally stubborn. But, to clarify your thinking about which side has the right of it, ask yourself how many times in memory has Congress increased spending; how many times in memory has Congress cut spending? The answers are always and never.

     •  Reply
  2. Missing large
    ninety_nine_percent  almost 11 years ago

    Ramirez — still helping millionaires.He wants to keep tax breaks for the benefit of the radical rich, and services like education and safety nets very small, never mind how it will affet the poor people. Only the wealthy are important, right Michael?

     •  Reply
  3. Missing large
    ARodney  almost 11 years ago

    The Republicans proposed NO specific spending cuts, because they can’t find any. There isn’t enough waste to cut any more, except in defense. Taxes have to go up, and if we want to get out of this economic slump, we need more stimulative spending. It turns out that when more Americans get to work, it’s good for the economy and reduces debt. The past twelve years have proved that vast tax cuts on the wealthy do very little to create jobs, while government spending on infrastructure and education is quite effective.

     •  Reply
  4. Img 0041
    Dapperdan61  Premium Member almost 11 years ago

    This national debt is courtesy of the Bush tax cuts & 2 wars that had no funding. There is not a lot of fat left to cut so unless the rich start paying their fair share the middle class & poor are going to get screwed AGAIN.

     •  Reply
  5. Images
    Mickey 13  almost 11 years ago

    “Awwww….. the weight of O’s spending is on the unborn. Another reason to outlaw abortion so the little fetuses can grow up to become slaves to repaying O’s deficit.”

    You purport to being a conservative. It truly amazes me how you think you are doing your cause any good by posting many of the comments you do. Not only are they illogical, they are offensive and do nothing but detract from your party’s credibility. I am a Libertarian and view the republican party’s view on social issues as still being stuck in the stone age. Your comments do little to alter that image…

     •  Reply
  6. Missing large
    Marty Z  almost 11 years ago

    Of course there is waste in government outside of the military. Here are a few ways to save (courtesy of Warren Buffer):1. Eliminate the retirement plans for the House and Senate. Let them rely on Social Security and the deductions from their paychecks, just like everyone else.2. Eliminate the government-supported health benefits for the House and Senate. Let them buy health insurance on the open market, just like everyone else.3. Make all of the children of House and Senate members attend public schools.4. When the House and Senate miss budget deadlines, stop their paychecks, with no retroactive payments when they finally do pass budgets.

    Then when they finally get around to dealing with the budget, we’ll see how many of them really want to gut social programs.

     •  Reply
  7. Smokey
    Zuhlamon Premium Member almost 11 years ago

    Obama has cut spending, and has reduced the deficit. Republicans of the Bush decade piled up the debt and now falsely posture themselves as fiscally responsible, even as they want to continue the number one cause of the red ink.

     •  Reply
  8. Images
    Mickey 13  almost 11 years ago

    “The dems are criminals ,the republicans are morons.”

    Actually what both parties have done to the economy and the deficits is criminal. Bush spent like a drunken sailor and Obama has followed suit. All the political partisan talking points aside, things are not improving, regardless of who you want to blame. From David Axelrod:

    “When President Bush took office in 2001, he inherited a $236 billion budget surplus, with a projected 10-year surplus of $5.6 trillion. When he ended his term, he left a $1.3 trillion deficit and a projected 10-year shortfall of $8 trillion.” (1)

    Considering that we are 8 years down the line and the deficit is 16 trillion, I don’t see where any positive changes have been made. Finger pointing is idiotic at this point and most of the rhetoric from both parties has the maturity level of middle school. If we could I would dump the whole lot of them and start over. Congress is full of dinosaurs and they are totally out of touch with reality. The president has contributed to the divisiveness and shown a total lack of leadership. It may have won him the last election but it split the country. We are now so divided a country nobody will even sit down and talk these issues out and even try to come to an equitable settlement. The democrats are standing firm on “we won, so it’s our way.” The republicans are so bereft of leadership they can’t even provide a united front. In the meantime, we are 16 trillion in debt, much of it held by people who would be thrilled to see our economy fail. The only reason they don’t call in our debt is they still need us to buy their stuff. Thanks for letting me share. I’m done for the day!

    Gary Johnson for President 2016. There, now I made this a partisan rant…

    (1) David Axelrod on Friday, January 15th, 2010 in an op-ed in the Washington Post.
     •  Reply
  9. Androidify 1453615949677
    Jason Allen  almost 11 years ago

    Awwww….. the weight of O’s spending is on the unborn.Awwwww…. so was Bush’s, but you didn’t seem to care back then.

     •  Reply
  10. Albert einstein brain i6
    braindead Premium Member almost 11 years ago

    The speech was about children being shot.The debt is another issue.Putting them together like Ramirez did is a lie and uncharitable at this time of year.-It’s not going to be less of a lie or more charitable after a month or the next mass shooting, whichever comes first.

     •  Reply
  11. Missing large
    Marty Z  almost 11 years ago

    The cumulative national debt has only gotten out of hand in the last 31 years. It was $1 trillion debt in Sep 1981, so all of the Presidents, Houses and Senates before 1980 didn’t spend much more than they took in. Both parties are to blame for the mess.

    Regarding government redundancy, is there no overlap between the military, CIA and DHS (Dept. of Homeland Security)?

    From Wikipedia (regarding DHS), “The Washington Post has reported that there are 1,271 government organizations and 1,931 private companies in 10,000 locations in the United States that are working on counterterrorism, homeland security, and intelligence, and that the intelligence community as a whole includes 854,000 people who hold top-secret clearances”.

    Also from Wikipedia (regarding DHS): “…The 38-acre (15 ha) site, across from American University, has 32 buildings comprising 566,000 square feet (52,600 m2) of administrative space.40 In early 2007, the Department submitted a $4.1 billion plan to Congress to consolidate its 60-plus Washington-area offices into a single headquarters complex …”

    Think about this for a moment. We’ve been paying for all of this. Do we want all of it? Are we willing to continue paying for all of it?

     •  Reply
  12. Dsc00100
    zekedog55  over 10 years ago

    Here is a Howie type reply to Howie’s"That’s because you are a fat freeloader."comment to you—-

    “Oh yeah? Well no crown ever made can fit YOUR fat head, Howie! Nyah-nyah…”

    OK, Howie-how how…you may now return to decorating your sandbox…“Mr.” Ima will be by soon to play with you.

     •  Reply
  13. Birthcontrol
    Dtroutma  over 10 years ago

    Republicans, be it Boehner, Cantor, McConnell, or Mr. Ima, love to prove they donn’t understand simple arithmatic.

     •  Reply
Sign in to comment

More From Michael Ramirez