phna wrote:to provide money for things like SCHIP*, job retraining, k-12 education, humanitarian aid, and reducing foreign oil, the only spending items mentioned in the graph.
(*BUSH vetoed a bill to enhance SCHIP last year despite a bipartisan effort to pass it!)
SCHIP was a steaming pile of crap, and it should've been vetoed. It was nothing more than a clandestine attempt by Dems to move lower-middle class people from private insurance to government insurance.
It is a valid to question to ask how will Obama pay for his plans. But it is an entirely fallacious conclusion to assert as you do, that "liberals" think just cutting one area will support it. Prehaps that bloated government bureaucracy that Bush createe, F.A.T.A.S.S (the Federal Aviation Transportation Administration & Security Sector, or whatever it is called) could be trimmed down too, or is it too liberal for you?
Stop concluding anyone that pokes holes in the arguments made is a "liberal".
The WSJ ran a great column the other day about who Obama's biggest foes are now. The answer? His own party's leaders in the House, that's who
. Carter & Clinton ran into the exact same issue when they were elected, their Party's House leaders just assumed they were there to rubber-stamp their agenda. And they'll fight to get it done.
And consider his staff: What's the over-under on the time it takes for the first Obama appointee to write a tell-all book? A year?
[img width=472 height=40]http://media.kansascity.com/images/champions_blue.gif[/img]
"For 15 years...KU won every time. There was no rivalry" - Frank Martin