Death Toll Revised Down to 24 After Monstrous Oklahoma Tornado…100+ Injured…Children Among the Dead…Stunning Pictures…Woman Finds Dog During Interview!

WATCH on TheBlaze TV: Latest Updates on Tornado Aftermath, Including Updates From Glenn Beck in Oklahoma

Business

Testy Interview: Dem. Rep. Refuses to Say We Have a ‘Spending Problem’ — We Have a ‘Paying-For Problem’

Feb. 12, 2013 3:15pm Becket Adams

Rep. Stenny Hoyer (D-Md.) appeared on CNBC Tuesday to discuss the president’s plan to “pivot” to jobs and the economy in tonight’s State of the Union address.

However, instead of working his normal talking points about the need for increased “revenues” (taxes) and cuts to defense spending, CNBC’s Michelle Caruso-Cabrera backed the congressman into a corner over Washington’s spending addiction.

“I’ve heard Democrat after Democrat today tell me how much the president reached out to me during that last speech, and now he’s going to do it again tonight,” said Caruso-Cabrera.

“I sat in meetings with the president sitting with Republican leadership in the Senate and the House, and trying to get to a compromise,” the congressman responded.

“We didn’t get there, but he spent a lot of time in doing so. And any fair analysis would indicate that he was prepared to go to places, particularly on entitlements, that would upset his base,” he added.

“Sir, does the country have a spending problem?” Caruso-Cabrera interjected.

“Does the country have a — the country has a paying-for problem,” Rep. Hoyer answered. “We haven’t paid for what we’ve bought.”

“Are we promising too much?” she asked.

“Absolutely,” he agreed. “If we don’t pay, we shouldn’t buy.”

“How is that different from a spending problem?” She continued.

“We spent a lot of money when George Bush was President of the United States,” Hoyer replied.

“So, that’s eight years and now another eight years of a lot of spending, so we’re going on 16 years of a lot of spending now,” she replied.

“We need to stop it,” the congressman conceded, somewhat sheepishly.

“Any day,” she agreed.

Follow Becket Adams (@BecketAdams) on Twitter

(H/T: Mediaite). Featured image Getty Images.

Benghazi, IRS, AP...What's next? Only TheBlaze TV offers the truth from Glenn Beck, Andrew Wilkow, and Real News from TheBlaze. Get instant access and a free trial here.

Back to The Blaze »

Comments (89)

moreteaplease
Posted on February 12, 2013 at 4:13pm
“We spent a lot of money when George Bush was President of the United States,” Hoyer replied.
———————————
Just like a little kid ” But he did it too!!! ”

I like the way the left twists things up. “Let’s call it a ‘paying for problem’…so we can raise taxes further”
I’m sorry, but if you are continuously righting checks that your account can’t cover-then that’s a SPENDING PROBLEM.

The left will always find a way to make their bad habits our problems…or blame it on someone else. I’m not saying the right isn’t guilty of it too but the left does it with impunity and to far greater lengths.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- JRook
  Posted on February 12, 2013 at 4:23pm
  Spare me with the left or liberal nonsense about spending. both SS and Medicare trust funds can cover current expenditures so they are not the past or current spending problem. Other than the government borrowed from both to pay off past spending. So without those the other social programs only account for 10% of the governments spending. So it is clear that the poor are not the beneficiaries of past over spending by the federal government. On the other hand military contractors, infrastructure contractors, IT companies, big pharma are. So by all means address the spending problem. Just understand where it is and who benefited from excess and unfunded spending on wars, rebuilding countries we blow up. And let’s remember who pays for the lobbyists that generate the majority of the absurd spending on stuff like food stamps. It is the food producers and food suppliers who lobby for food stamps, not the poor. Follow the money and you’ll find where the spending problem really is. For example, EDS would not exist were it not for lucrative government contracts to name one of many corporate beneficiaries of over spending.
  
  Report this comment
- civilwarcometh
  Posted on February 12, 2013 at 4:25pm
  For some reason this pops into my head every time i hear one of these POS’s talk.http://weaselzippers.us/2013/02/12/tuesday-afternoon-war-porn-45/
  
  Report this comment
- moreteaplease
  Posted on February 12, 2013 at 4:29pm
  “Writing” that is.
  
  Report this comment
- AvengerK
  Posted on February 12, 2013 at 4:33pm
  It’s liberal moral relativism. Hoyer knows what he’s saying, it’s tailored to accomplish two things.
  1. Don’t admit the government is spending too much because then you have to address entitlements which are the biggest driver of the debt. Liberals want to expand entitlements further just like they’ve done with Obamacare. To admit they expanded the problem doesn’t fit into their “it’s for your own good” mantra. The moral relativism comes into it because Hoyer knows the extent of the problem and just how serious it is, but as a liberal he’s convinced that the spending must not only remain in place but expand further for the greater good. Which brings me to point two….
  2. If they admit there’s a spending problem they admit their faults. To do that means the conservatives have won the argument. It means “tax the rich” won’t cut it. It essentially means their house of cards comes tumbling down. So they keep avoiding the issue. Look no further than Obama himself. He promised to cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term. He’s added more than $6trillion to it. He’s not taken one credible step to address spending or the debt. His “we’ve cut over $1 trillion already is a duplicitous amalgam of phantom cuts, cuts already in place before he says he cut them and cuts so far ahead in the future they have no credible effect on the debt or better yet for Obama, another liberal administration can simply end them before they begin.
  
  Report this comment
- Just_Us2
  Posted on February 12, 2013 at 4:44pm
  JROOK – “both SS and Medicare trust funds can cover current expenditures” soon they will not, however, these are programs where the beneficiary pays in to the system. You ignorantly skipped MEDICAID, a system where beneficiaries take and tax payers pay. Obama care saddles states with temporarily funded mandates…the funding (our taxes), will go away, but the coverage will never go away. So you have millions of people coming on to a system that is not funded long term. The theory was that savings would cover added costs. That’s a joke. I have 20 years in the healthcare industry. Cost have risen and will continue to rise. You will not be able to keep your insurance, you will not be able to keep your doctor and you will not be able to choose your level of care. The only people this benefits are those who do not work. SS and Medicare are barely keeping afloat. States can barely fund Medicaid in it’s current form. If you add more people and more unfunded mandates (services that are provided free of charge and Obama care is brimming with them), then you are going to have a collapse in the healthcare system. Look over to California where they have massive doctor and nurse shortages. What’s the incentive for doctors to work under obamacare? A guaranteed reimbursement decrease and patient load increase. So they will have to do more for less. You cannot force them to practice medicine, so you are screwed. ANYONE who tells you different is dreaming.
  
  Report this comment
- MIBUGNU2
  Posted on February 12, 2013 at 5:07pm
  These Democrat Bozos NEVER mention that Pelosi and Reid
  were in charge of the purse strings during the 110th and 111th
  Congress, from 2006 to 2010 spent more than any Congress
  in History..and yet these CRAPWEASELS never mention this.
  they have no problem putting the whole blame on BUSH..
  DEMOCRATS are totally DISGUSTING
  http://cnsnews.com/news/article/111th-congress-added-more-debt-first-100-congresses-combined-10429-person-us
  
  Report this comment
- DoOrDie
  Posted on February 12, 2013 at 5:12pm
  JROOK, The poor aren’t part of the problem as far as you’re concerned? What about the news released today that the Obama phone program for the poor cost taxpayers 2.2 BILLION and most of it is fraud. One person came forward and has gotten over 36 free cell phones. There are a lot of spending problems in many different areas, but treating the poor or people that won’t work like middle class citizens is one big problem.
  
  Report this comment
- redfish52
  Posted on February 12, 2013 at 5:14pm
  Come on folks..no secret Stenny has been a Liberal Lap Dog for years….he’s like a dog that has been castrated…he ain’t going to stray far from the dinner bowl…
  
  Report this comment
- MIBUGNU2
  Posted on February 12, 2013 at 5:32pm
  @ RedFish
  Yea, Hoyer and Clyburn are usually the ones standing behind
  Pelosi..fighting to see who will hold her purse..sick puppies !!
  
  Report this comment
- AvengerK
  Posted on February 12, 2013 at 6:11pm
  You’re such a lefty idiot JCROOK. It’s hardly worth addressing such a vacuous cretin like you at this point but there still is a measure of satisfaction in humiliating you and your lefty drivel.
  Enjoy:
  Federal Bank of St Lous recently published a report:
  
  “SSM [(Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid)] and OPI [(Other Payments to Individuals)] are the main spending drivers over the 1970-2007 period. These expenditures accounted for 5 percent of government spending as a percent of GDP in 1950 and had increased to only 6.1 percent of GDP by 1969. However, SSM and OPI spending as a percent of GDP doubled by 2007 to 12.1 percent of GDP. SSM and OPI spending increased by another 3.6 percentage points of GDP by 2010 to 15.7 percent of GDP.” Let me dumb it down for you you idiot….the biggest drivers of the debt are Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid and OPI. What did Obamacare just do tiger? Oh yeah..expand Medicaid and called taking $500 billion from Medicare to attempt to pay for it a “spending cut”. Three card monty anyone?
  
  “Just tax the rich that’ll fix it” you say JCROOK? Great Britain recently raised the top rate. Here’s the good news…”Our calculation shows that the combination of higher VAT, higher National Insurance Contributions and increased labour and capital mobility mean that the 50% rate of Income Tax is likely to lead to a loss of tax revenue for the Government.”
  
  My God you’re an imbecile JCROOK…no really.
  
  Report this comment
- vendingdude
  Posted on February 12, 2013 at 10:26pm
  as soon as someone claims “SS trust funds” it becomes hard to read the rest of the comments because my eyes glaze over so thoroughly. WHAT TRUST FUND? There is no “trust fund” for Social Security. There is no lock box (thank you Algore), there is no special safe deposit box full of Social security donations gathering interest. AAAARRRGGGGHHHHH!
  
  Report this comment
- RobertHere
  Posted on February 12, 2013 at 11:01pm
  I tried ” But he did it too!!! ” when I was little. My dad said “invite him over and I’ll ground his **** too”. But a nation that can elected a Steny Hoyer, Pelosi, Reid, Schumer and Oh-Bama! and such needs to be retired, rendered asunder and let new nations arise from the ashes of the old.There is no middle ground and no honest person can think there is.
  
  Report this comment
tonypro
Posted on February 12, 2013 at 4:12pm
It’ll be OK, we an just continue to blame bush for 4 more years.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- MIBUGNU2
  Posted on February 12, 2013 at 5:26pm
  Lets not forget Pelosi and Reid..They have had their
  hands in our pockets for over 30 years. They BOTH
  have made MILLIONS $$$$ while serving the People.
  niceeeeeee, HUH ?? they know the game, BLAME
  someone else, and get the attention off their AZZ’s
  http://cnsnews.com/news/article/111th-congress-added-more-debt-first-100-congresses-combined-10429-person-us
  
  Report this comment
myrwo6
Posted on February 12, 2013 at 4:08pm
Boo hoo hoo! That bad old George Bush is making a presidents job too hard! Boo hoo: Now our country’s broke. Obama doesn’t know what to do, boo hoo!

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- civilwarcometh
  Posted on February 12, 2013 at 4:14pm
  Well looky here…http://weaselzippers.us/2013/02/12/if-you-took-every-american-on-food-stamps-and-gave-them-their-own-nation-they-would-be-the-27th-largest-country/
  
  Report this comment
kadster01
Posted on February 12, 2013 at 4:07pm
My ex-wife once tried to tell me that, just before I shredded the credit card.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
dmforman
Posted on February 12, 2013 at 4:06pm
Is you have a “paying for it problem,” you have a spending problem. Seriously if I buy a large ticket item and don’t have money to pay for it. I have a spending problem.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- MIBUGNU2
  Posted on February 12, 2013 at 7:59pm
  Democrats like Pelosi and Reid don’t seem to understand this,
  or they just enjoy having their heads buried in the sand..
  but they keep lining their pockets with our TAX MONEY..
  The ones that remain in congress for decades are the worse.
  our Founders didn’t intend politicians to leech on us forever..
  
  Report this comment
kfogs1957
Posted on February 12, 2013 at 4:05pm
I’m so tired of being talked down to, talked around, being told that what I see isn’t what the situation is. Stop the damn spending. What theleft does is buy votes with social programs. We don’t help people, we take care of them and in return we expect your vote. Pelosi and Hoyer are either way too stupid to hold their positions or they are blatant liars. Those reasons both work for me.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
olderjarhead
Posted on February 12, 2013 at 4:04pm
If the citizens don’t demand term limits, we are going to have to endure the over inflated self worth, of idiots from both sides. Funny how the guy that put two in OBL’s head, has no insurance after 16 years of service, but every congressperson gets a pension, and full health insurance for life, after just one term. WTF is wrong with THAT picture?

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
83plus
Posted on February 12, 2013 at 3:56pm
First president said the problem was with the health care system, then Pelosi said it was ‘budget deficit issues’ now this guy say it’s a ‘Paying-For Problem’

Make up your minds already!

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Outlaw_Josey_Wales
  Posted on February 12, 2013 at 4:14pm
  Obamacare was going to cost less than a trillion over tens years. Now it looks like it will cost $2.8 trillion over ten years. That’s $280 billion a year in tax revenue to pay for Obamacare. I’m glad to see that the President has fixed the deficit with obamacare.
  
  Report this comment
- 83plus
  Posted on February 12, 2013 at 6:06pm
  @Outlaw_Josey_Wales
  
  Sounds like what that their idea was/is, more taxes would fix what Pelosi and Hoyer have said and the health care reform part would fix what the president said the problem is.
  
  Report this comment
- Outlaw_Josey_Wales
  Posted on February 12, 2013 at 7:03pm
  Obamacare was going to cost less than a trillion over tens years. Now it looks like it will cost $2.8 trillion over ten years. That’s $280 billion a year more in new spending to pay for Obamacare. I’m glad to see that the President has fixed the deficit with obamacare.
  
  Report this comment
The Third Archon
Posted on February 12, 2013 at 3:54pm
““We didn’t get there, but he spent a lot of time in doing so. And any fair analysis would indicate that he was prepared to go to places, particularly on entitlements, that would upset his base,” he added.”
Yes because ENTITLEMENTS are the problem–ENTITLEMENTS represent over half the federal budget (lol). Now, conservatives might like to conflate a whole bunch of things as entitlements that aren’t (like Medicare and Social Security, which aren’t entitlements because one must PAY INTO them to DRAW FROM them).

““Sir, does the country have a spending problem?” Caruso-Cabrera interjected.

“Does the country have a — the country has a paying-for problem,” Rep. Hoyer answered. “We haven’t paid for what we’ve bought.””
Exactly–the problem is not “do you spend over ‘x’ amount,” the problem is “do you pay enough of what you spend that national debt does not increase faster than the rate of inflation diminishes the value of that principle of debt?” It’s a related rate problem (the rate of revenue versus the rate of spending), not a black-and-white question of “spending above x amount is bad.”

““Are we promising too much?” she asked.

“Absolutely,” he agreed. “If we don’t pay, we shouldn’t buy.””"
Well that depends entirely one what we as a society are willing to spend and what we should spend for. There’s no objective answer to this question, conservative propaganda notwithstanding–it depends upon one’s valu

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- grimmster
  Posted on February 12, 2013 at 4:04pm
  @turd archon aka encinom.
  You and others like you, with the mental condition you have will soon find yourselves out of cheetos,since momma will soon lose her job.Then you can explain how that paying for problem is working out for you, f-n idiot…….
  
  Report this comment
- Cavallo
  Posted on February 12, 2013 at 4:17pm
  There isn’t enough money in the world to pay for their spending programs. The math isn’t there. They could seize all the wealth of America’s “rich” and it still wouldn’t be enough to pay for what they are planning. 114 Trillion in unfunded liabilities. Even the optimistic administrators of the funds admit that their funds are doomed. The math doesn’t work. The only way it works right now is that we are handing out IOUs at a record pace. Once people realize that we’re unlikely to be able to pay those back (except maybe with MORE IOUs), they’ll quit buying them. That’s when the real fun begins.
  
  Report this comment
- AvengerK
  Posted on February 12, 2013 at 6:31pm
  LOL….that’s hysterical ARCHIE. That had to be one of most asinine posts you’ve ever posted. You had to contort and disjoint yourself to such a degree that it was almost painful to observe.
  
  Oh so according to your media matters approved source it’s not the ability to pay for what you’re spending but rather it’s the spending growing at a slow enough rate for you to attempt to pay for it.
  And of course when in doubt “soak the rich”..right?
  You don’t see the problem there do you sport? A little too much for your “ANARCHIST” (your emphasis) mind to process? Perhaps you should just stick to Das Kapital and your Che’ T Shirts and let better minds than yours think about this stuff. You just romanticize about the “revolution” that’s coming there’s a good “ANARCHIST” (your emphasis).
  
  Report this comment
bullcrapbuster
Posted on February 12, 2013 at 3:51pm
Anyhoo he says that George Bush caused us to have this paying for problem. What an evil bunch of manipulating Bass turbs these politicians are.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Outlaw_Josey_Wales
Posted on February 12, 2013 at 3:49pm
O.K. When some one takes out a second mortage on their home, buys two new cars, max out all their credit cards. When they can’t pay for all of this, they can say “We don’t have a spending problem we have a paying for it problem”

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- LakeHartwellSailor
  Posted on February 12, 2013 at 4:03pm
  If I make 25,000/year; but spend 32,000/year….on top of already having a debt of $160,000; wouldn’t you say I have a spending problem? That is roughly the proportional ratio of our Governments revenue to spending to debt ratio…but stated in terms that most Americans can wrap their heads around.
  
  When we speak of Government revenue (income), “investment” (spending) and debt that is in the trillions, the mindless cannot grasp how much money that really is. But if you say the US takes in 25K/year, spends 32K/year; and already owes 160K; that is something the average US citizen can grasp.
  
  Let me ask you a question, would you run your household like that and NOT expect to be ruined?
  
  Report this comment
- Outlaw_Josey_Wales
  Posted on February 12, 2013 at 4:33pm
  @LAKEHARTWELLSAILOR
  
  The National Debt, is the mother of all ajustable rate mortages.
  
  At the end of fiscal year 2001
  National debt was $5.77 trillion
  Average interest 6.06 %
  interest paid $359 billion
  
  At the end of fiscal year 2012
  National was $16.06 trillion
  Average interest 2.48%
  interest paid $359 billion
  
  Notice from fiscal year 2001 to 2012
  the debt increased 258%
  average interest went down 57.4%
  Interest paid IS THE SAME $359 billion
  
  Today $16.432 trillion @ 6.06% interest = $995 billion annual interest payment.
  6.25% interest is the 30 year average
  1981 average interest was 12.3% “note some t-bills were @21.5% interest”
  $16.432 trillion @ 12.3% = $2.02 trillion annual interest payment.
  
  We are going to be in big trouble when interest rates goes up.
  
  Report this comment
KidCharlemagne
Posted on February 12, 2013 at 3:49pm
We don’t have a spending problem…..

We have a world’s reserve currency problem….

As the issuer of the world’s reserve currency (a dollar is the smallest whole unit of debt), then that issuer is required to spend more than it receives in revenue in order to create additional units of that currency to supply the rest of the world with.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
shorelineliz
Posted on February 12, 2013 at 3:46pm
If you “bought” stuff you couldn’t “pay” for then why didn’t you send it back? If you “kept” stuff you ordered and didn’t pay for it…..isn’t that stealing Stenny? Huh? Stenny? Huh? I cannot believe he blamed Bush. Unreal.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
UNALIEN
Posted on February 12, 2013 at 3:43pm
incompetent psychopathic narcissistic parasitic liar… and those are the good traits

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Advection
Posted on February 12, 2013 at 3:42pm
…Said the wife to her husband, when all the maxed-out credit card bills came due!

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
gyro
Posted on February 12, 2013 at 3:39pm
ok whats the problem ?
dial 1800freestuff
get yours today limited quanitys available
order two gets second one free also
free shipping for the first 1million callers fron chicago
size limitations may apply in NYC

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
term limits for congress
Posted on February 12, 2013 at 3:38pm
we have a truth problem

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Advection
  Posted on February 12, 2013 at 3:45pm
  BINGO!
  
  These people are blatant liars and thieves. It’s just insane.
  
  Report this comment
term limits for congress
Posted on February 12, 2013 at 3:37pm
Gonna be a job opening at CNBC.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
SandW
Posted on February 12, 2013 at 3:34pm
The number of terminally ignorant/under-informed people on the government dole has reached critical mass. They have voting power to relect a corrupt administration to keep their government handout checks coming. This mess won’t start to get fixed until these idiots realize as an example, their healthcare costs are going to go through the roof and the procedure waiting periods will grow to weeks or months. Even so, Obama will blame the Republicans because he hasn’t spent enough money to “fix” the problems he inherited from George Bush – and the idiots will just lap that up again. Who is John Gault?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- shorelineliz
  Posted on February 12, 2013 at 3:42pm
  Tar. Feather. Run. Town. Rail. This would be a good start. Beat. Sticks. Reeds. Rods. Back. Fools. I could sure go for that too. Public. Humiliation. Stop. Checks. Senator/HOR. Salaries. Fire. All. Now. End. Plush. Gov. Pensions. Stop. Benefits. Sounds good to me. When do we start all of the above and more?
  
  Report this comment
pissantno.10
Posted on February 12, 2013 at 3:27pm
du it makes sence to me du my name is bubba, bubba bubba. and i gots me a havard degree

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- shorelineliz
  Posted on February 12, 2013 at 3:38pm
  Steny Hoyer. Steny Hoyer. The guys name is Steny Hoyer? Well that just about says it all don’t it?
  
  Report this comment
barber2
Posted on February 12, 2013 at 3:25pm
” Redistribution” not stealing.” Paying problem” not a spending problem. The Democrats have so many new definitions for old words like marriage. They just love to make ” changes.” Even when those changes fly in the face of logic and common sense.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Gonzo
  Posted on February 12, 2013 at 3:30pm
  Don’t forget that golden nugget…investment!
  
  Report this comment
- naughtycal
  Posted on February 12, 2013 at 3:39pm
  Someone tell that dumba55 that Defense spending was the only reason taxation was even allowed to exist in our Constitution is was the sole justifacation of taxation. So if he claiming we’re not paying our defense budget but are paying for the solyndra and other green energy subsities he’s full of sh&T.
  Defense is the first thing we pay not the last. We do have a paying problem he is right about that we’re barrowing to buy his hatebreed neo-socialist panty waste of party elections.
  
  Report this comment
- Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra
  Posted on February 12, 2013 at 3:55pm
  Well, they did come up with some new terms for Anal copulation, its Obamacare.
  
  Report this comment
- Outlaw_Josey_Wales
  Posted on February 12, 2013 at 6:22pm
  Redistribution = Unarmed Robbery
  
  Report this comment
Gonzo
Posted on February 12, 2013 at 3:23pm
“We need to stop it,” the congressman conceded, somewhat sheepishly.”
A kernel of truth from Stenny Hoyer? Wow, did he ever screw up! On a side note: Mrs. Hoyer, what the hell kind of name is Stenny? Were you still heavily medicated when you came up with that?

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- huey6367
  Posted on February 12, 2013 at 3:36pm
  We need to stop asking these clowns questions we know they are not going to answer. Even Obie’s base feels there is a spending problem. Although some think we are not spending enough so go with it from there.
  
  If a conservative Republican would have answered that way, they would have nailed him to the cross.
  
  Report this comment
- Link8on
  Posted on February 12, 2013 at 4:43pm
  Thought we could fix the overspending of 2006 w the 2010 elections.
  
  The 2012 elections confirmed the Tea party in the house again to cut spending.
  and it was just 5% short of replacing the current overtaxing POTUS.
  
  But the establishment cronies are keeping the tax and spend steamroller going.
  
  Report this comment
SamIamTwo
Posted on February 12, 2013 at 3:23pm
Both sides have been dismantling DoD for the past 30 some odd years.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Lord_Frostwind
  Posted on February 12, 2013 at 3:50pm
  The trend is really funny, the one responsibility that the government actually has a full claim to is defense of the nation. Over the last 30 years they have also been working to curtail firearm ownership of the civilian population.
  
  So, in essence; cut the money for the military, restrict the rights of citizens to be armed. Does that make any sense? This kind of wobbly pacifist thinking usually ends one way, conquest.
  
  Report this comment
cosette
Posted on February 12, 2013 at 3:21pm
Still blaming Bush…. After all these years. Pathetic losers.

Report this comment
Log in to Reply Reply
Exidor
Posted on February 12, 2013 at 3:21pm
Bush’s fault….again.

A paying for problem. These people are delusional.

Report this comment
Log in to ReplyReply
- Gonzo
  Posted on February 12, 2013 at 3:29pm
  I like it when they bring up Medicare Part D as a reason for our overspending, 3 years after they enacted Obamacare. Unreal.
  
  Report this comment
- gyro
  Posted on February 12, 2013 at 3:40pm
  bush is evil it is all his falt
  
  Report this comment
- MIBUGNU2
  Posted on February 12, 2013 at 8:12pm
  The ones that put O’Blamer in office are evil..
  
  Report this comment

It appears that you have Javascript Disabled. Please enable Javascript in your browser preferences for a better user experience on TheBlaze. You can not comment without Javascript enabled.