The repugicans have a little issue ...

Here's something interesting to think about.  If the government does not come up with a budget plan by December 31,  a whole series of budget actions will take place because of legislation Congress passed, and the President approved, last summer. The reason that legislation passed was to put a temporarily budget in place with both sides agreeing that the deficits the government is running need to be controlled.
Ben Bernanke, chairman of the Federal Reserve Board of Directors, told Congress that such massive cuts in government spending would result in a recession because current economic situations are weak. Now the President and Congress are arguing over - get this - cuts to government spending.  Apparently they are trying to negotiate cuts in spending that are just different from the cuts they've already passed.

What's the difference? Is it just a matter of degree? If, as Bernanke said, the "fiscal cliff" we might ride over on 12/31/2012 is going to be bad for us, why should we expect that different cuts would be any better? So, we're going to roll down a fiscal hill instead of falling off a fiscal cliff? Seems like much ado about nothing. We're fucked either way.



When the repugicans last controlled the government, they spent like drunken sailors - approving two wars and a new part D for Medicare, none of which they funded. Instead, they cut taxes for the wealthy. The national deficit rose at a much faster rate under the "small government conservatives" than it has under any Democrat.