I think I can explain the attitude. Over simplified, of course, but that's all I'm capable of.

This is posted simply for the drive by viewers, since as we all know (those of us who watched "Thankyou For Smoking")(or already felt this way), the people on the either side of this discussion are not about to be convinced that they are the slightest bit wrong.

W's excess drove us over the edge. It was done at random, foolishly, with his minions (or Cheney) manipulating the situations. Or simply not caring.

He (and his buddies) profited enormously via oil, services, military contracts, and all the assorted hardware. He killed many people in the process, both publicly (hey, just how many people died in Bush's wars over the last 7 years) and privately. Cheney hit squads anyone? Just part of normal military operations that happened to report up via the VP's office.

Military "investment" affects a very small amount of people, providing focused jobs in some areas, but not much else. It produces stuff that does nothing for our roads, schools, healthcare, or general public welfare. I'll assume some of the R&D gets fed back into commercial devices, having some positive affect, but not much. Bottom line, it is a net negative across the board if there is not an immediate need (blow up someone who's trying to blow us up), and it is easy to throw money around on dumb stuff because you are called unpatriotic if you argue with it.

Don't assume I don't think the military is not an important component of our national infrastructure. Of course I do.

But the Bush years showed a huge imbalance in how the funds were gathered (tax cuts) and spent, and undermined the economy at a far faster rate than is reasonable to assume it can be fixed in a mere 8 year double term.

So, we have combination of Bush stupidy being manipulated by Cheney evil, with the next level down being administered by "true believers", who saw their mission as cutting government departments. And the easiest way to do that would be for their leaders to be incompetent, allow them to control staffing, and make sure the previous people (experts, techocrats, experienced agents who won't toe the line) are either directly pushed out or hounded out.

Care to tell me what happened at the whistleblower's office? You know, the office that is in charge of investigating whistleblower complaints since if they went through normal channels they'd be silenced? Their own people were pushed out, illegally, in the exact manner the agency was created to stop.

No good, none, can come from that. That administration was a perfect storm of incompetence and malice.

So now it O's turn. And what does he have? A steaming pile of shit. Eight years of W made sure of that. Economy in shambles, oversight wiped out, multiple war fronts we can't support, a runaway health system, huge swaths of the country spiralling down, and for what?

Clinton's surplus had this country on a hell of an upward trajectory financially. Did you forget that? This country could have rode the housing bubble for a LOT longer if W didn't tank the economy. I don't pretend it could last forever, it had to fall sooner or later, but if a lot more people had jobs, it would have been far gentler.

No, it is pretty easy for some of us to guage the difference.

O's various spending seems overwhelming to those who see it being all thrown away. I assume you feel there will be no payback, and just make everything worse.

I don't pretend he's perfect, all sunshine and happiness. But he's obviously smarter (way, not just a little), than anyone he was competing against. The question seems to be whether he will use those brains for his personal benefit or for the country, and if for the country, push it in a direction you don't like.

I like the majority of the directions he is going. I have no idea if the payback (or paydown) numbers thrown around are the slightest bit realistic. The key difference is I am SURE McCain would have followed on Bush's policies, for the most part, and McCain didn't know shit about economics.

So no matter what, it's better than the alternative.

He has to spend the money, huge amounts, at this point. If he doesn't, we are dead. We will stagnate, and our international competitors will pick us clean until we are in full blown isolationist mode.

Oh well.

Without the financial collapse Obama would not have been swept in.

A lot of people are in significant agreement with his social policies. ;-}

So I consider it a crisis, a perfect moment, with winners and losers.

With the stock market and housing collapse, he's put in a position of having to deal with no-win situation. But it sure granted him the presidency.

With the Greenhouse gasses == human harm EPA ruling, he essentially got all the leverage he needed to take on energy interests, across the entire spectrum of production to consumption.

With the autos tanking, he was handed the industry on a silver platter. Which means he has to do something, and why not have some fun with it?

Sure, he has a social policy bend that pisses you off. Oh well. I like most of them. I'll expect it to go too far, And in 10 years there to be another "get off welfare" push, and it'll swing around. At that point, maybe the economy is strong, maybe not, but that portion is long overdue for some help after the Bush years.

I know there will be a shitload of abuse, there always is. But I'd rather see a lot of people screw the system for a few dollars apiece, then a few at the top rake in billions and just tank the whole damn thing for the fun of it.

Crisis == Opportunity

Always.

BTW: Hey A'Scott: Am I full of shit, or is box, or is it somewhere in between? I don't claim to be able to analyze 8 years ago, but I sure as hell remember the good times, and anything I was reading at that time talked about the surplus.

The combined tax cuts with the "emergency" war allocations pretty much wiped it out, and we've been digging deeper ever since.

Gridlock is fine when the country is going in a good forward motion.

Gridlock right now would simply solidify our downward spiral.

You may be good with that, you can go camping in the woods as the world goes to shit, but I can't. I depend on the infrastructure and some semblance of a rational society.
It has not been rational for the last 8 years.

So a vote for gridlock is a vote to lock into the US as it has been. Nope, seen it, don't want to see it again.