Go Home

Wingnut Outrage

3 documents found in 0.002 seconds.

Mike's Blog Roundup

The Edge of the American West: Conservatives are outraged over an actual outrage? Color me impressed

t r u t h o u t: Why haven't any Wall Street tycoons been sent to the slammer?

St. Louis Pushes Back: Why Jimmy Carter was right: Popular wingnut blogger links to race-baiting video from white supremacist, anti-Semitic group

Where’s the Outrage?: Speaking with real patients about real end-of-life issues is incredibly difficult.

The Roger Ailes we like

43-Ideas-Per-Minute: Far right's favorite prostitute



According to Fox News, Obama is proposing a measly 10% cut in the Pentagon's declared budget. Predictably, wingnut heads are exploding.

But Justin Gardiner of Donklephant has some real facts at his fingertips in an astute comment over at center-right blog Poligazette. I'm going to lift his comment in its entirety:

A few things…

1) The Pentagon’s budget (not including expenditures for Iraq and Afghanistan) has grown from $316B in 2001 to $536B in 2009. This represents a 70% increase. So a 10% decrease is funding will take us from $536B to $483B, which is still more than the $463B the Pentagon had for 2007. All Obama is doing is preventing the budget from growing an average of 10% year after year when there’s no discernible advantage to doing so.

2) Obama has said consistently that ALL government agencies will see cuts, but the military budget is the biggest so that has to be one of the first to be addressed.

3) The United States spends more than the next 40+ countries combined in defense spending. How that’s tolerated by our taxpayers is beyond me, but I’d imagine they’d like a little of that money back at a time like this, wouldn’t you?

But to the broader point of this post, I think it would be refreshing to see these cuts being characterized as something other than an ideological win for the Dems. Cutting back right now makes sense because our current budgets aren’t sustainable.

In other words, if McCain had won the election and was proposing these cuts, what would this post say? Would you call Republican voters gullible? Would you tell people to contact their congressional reps or senators?

Well yes, exactly. Plus, remember that the declared budget doesn't include supplementary amounts for Iraq and Afghanistan or the defense spending spread around other departments like Energy (nukes), veteran care and Homeland Security. Add it all up and its closer to $1 trillion, or well over half of all government spending.

discbudg08_3e0f8_0.JPG

And no, defense spending is not good stimulus spending unless you work for a neocon think-tank. If it were, increased spending since 9/11 - almost a trillion a year - would have had a far more noticeable effect on GDP. Lets face it, we've had tax cuts for the rich and defense spending out the wazoo. If they were effective as stimuli to rescue the nation from depression, the economy wouldn't be in this state to begin with.

Crossposted from Newshoggers



Florida Blues

What is wrong with these people?  

Hypocrisy that borders on the psychotic. Where is the wingnut outrage over this? Do we hear about these two cases on CNN or FOX? As Mark A.R. Kleiman of UCLA reports:

Sun Hudson, a six-month-old boy with a fatal congenital disease, died Thursday after a Texas hospital, over his mother's objections, withdrew his feeding tube. The child was apparently certain to die, but was conscious. The hospital simply decided that it had better things to do than keep the child alive, and the Texas courts upheld that decision after the penniless mother failed to find another institution that would take the child during the 10-day window provided for by Texas law. Where, I would ask, is the outrage? In particular, where is the outrage from those like Tom DeLay, who referred to the withdrawal of Terry Schiavo's life support as "murder"? If it's appropriate to federalize the Schiavo case, what about the people being terminated simply because their cases are hopeless and their bank accounts empty? (And) Sun Hudson is dead, but 68-year-old Spiro Nikolouzos is still alive, thanks to an emergency appeals court order issued yesterday. However, his life support could be cut off at any moment. A nursing home is willing to take him: if his family can show that he will be covered by Medicaid after his Medicare runs out. Otherwise, the hospital gets to pull the plug...The two Texas cases pit the families against health-care institutions motivated at least in part by financial considerations...The notion of letting the health care providers decide, after doing a careful biopsy of the patient's wallet, strikes me as pretty damned outrageous. And it seems to me that the Right-to-Lifers ought to agree, though apparently anti-abortion groups had no problem with it when Gov. George W. Bush signed the Texas Futile Care Law.

Hypocrisy that borders on the psychotic. Where is the wingnut outrage over this? Do we hear about these two cases on CNN or FOX? As Mark A.R. Kleiman of UCLA reports:...read on