Truth Before Dishonor

I would rather be right than popular

White House Debt Graph Lies

Posted by John Hitchcock on 2011/07/30


It’s to be expected from this White House. The Obama Administration couldn’t tell the truth if their lives depended on it.

Read the whole article. HT Ocean Shores Patriot

Here’s a glimpse:

This graphical mis-truth has another major flaw. While showing 8 years of “domestic and defense spending” for President Bush, the White House propaganda bar shows no spending whatsoever for the Obama administration.

Lastly, the farm bill was passed in 2008 by a Democrat congress over George Bush’s VETO. That spending should fall on Pelosi and Reid, not Bush. The farm bill was $300 billion so almost that entire part of the chart does not belong to Bush.

Integrity is a thing of the past as far as the Democrat leadership is concerned. They don’t need no stinkin’ integrity!

Advertisements

2 Responses to “White House Debt Graph Lies”

  1. […] the Democrat leadership is concerned. They don’t need no stinkin’ integrity! ________ Cross-Post Filed under Congress, Culture and Society, Debt Ceiling, Defecate Spending, Demagoguery, […]

    Like

  2. DNW said

    I’ve been avoiding entering this discussion for a number of reasons: preoccupation, inertia, and the fact that as with most discussions of this kind it repeats themes and constitutes reconfirmations of certain things we already know much to our disappointment. Chiefly among them is that the first order of business for much of the Washington DC political class is preserving the power and the directive privileges of the Washington DC political class.

    In fact this is so much a truism, as someone here or associated here noted via a news link, that when it becomes obvious to the old guard that certain elected officials, say, Taxed Enough Already affiliated members of the House, do not share this nesting agenda as their primary goal, old guardsmen like John Conyers are left so flabbergasted as to find the motivation of the constitutional purists as psychologically incomprehensible.

    Are “they” lying to us then? Of course they are lying to us. But they either believe that the lying is insignificant because on their view untruths metamorphose into social truths as they create and re-create human reality through rhetorical incantation and political directive, or they believe that the “expert” are justified in lying to the “inexpert” because the inexpert couldn’t possibly understand or appreciate the significance of the truth anyway.

    And the significance of any political or economic truth whatever? That government must grow ever larger, and society be ever more tightly managed and bound together by both the filaments of unconsciously internalized obligation and acquiescence (i.e., politically correct programming), and the practical imperatives of negotiating one’s way through such a comprehensive and all encompassing system of direction and apportionment ( i.e., where do you “quit” to, in a socialist society?).

    Put simply, what we see as as a regrettable and logically inevitable loss of freedom incident to progressive political policies, they see as an added bonus leading to further qualitative social and attitudinal shits that only enhance the prospect of further politically directed social “evolutions”.

    Now, if what I am saying is a fair description of the taken-for-granted sociopolitical agenda of a significant minority in Congress, and a probably even more significant minority of the ideologically motivated bureaucratic class, then what can be done other than to, as Grover Norquist terms it, “starve the beast” at some point, come hell or high water?

    Because this issue is really, and as we all know perfectly well, more about the political predicates that determine how we shall, or shall be allowed, to live, than it is about mere “debt”. And all you ever get when you agree to more fiscal bondage in order to fund the lifestyles of state dependent f—- ups, is more f— ups expecting a state dependent lifestyle for themselves, and more legal yokes and harnesses for you.

    As long as the grazing is good for them, what makes anyone thing that they will concern themselves with who plants and cultivates?

    So, I’ve got a hobby farm and a deer rifle, John has his Marine Corps training and determination, and AOTC has her machine shop. You can build almost anything on a Bridgeport. So we’ll be OK.

    Too bad about Perry though …

    Like

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

 
%d bloggers like this: