On Fri, 24 May 2013 01:00:33 +0000, quack:
> On Thu, 23 May 2013 18:59:53 -0500, Mitchell Holman wrote:
>
>> MattB . <
trdel...@spamnogmail.com> wrote in
>>
news:hc5tp89dbcfhbg23n...@4ax.com:
>>
>>> On Thu, 23 May 2013 15:48:26 -0500, Mitchell Holman
>>> <
nomailverizon.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>MattB . <
trdel...@spamnogmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Yet under Obama you not only still have them they have more power.
>>>>> Face it Politicians don't ever give up power ounce given. Liberals
>>>>> just claim to.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Republicans champion smaller government.
>>>>
>>>> But everytime they get power, government
>>>>grows by leaps and bounds.
>>>>
>>>> Why is that, do you think?
>>>>
>>>>
>>> The Democrats get into power and it grows more.
>>
>>
>> Wrong.
>>
>> Government shrank under Clinton.
>>
>> Government grew under both Reagan
>> and Bush.
>>
>>
http://www.cato.org/blog/king-fiscal-squeeze-isbill-clinton
>
> And it has shrunk under Obama.
No, it hasn't. If government shrank under Chairman Obama you would be
calling him a traitor, Nazi, and Republican. But please do provide an
example of how government has shrunk under Obama. A real example, not
just an opinion that Paul Krugman or Rachel Bladdow farted.
"Mitchell Holman" makes a valid point, correctly observing that the size
and power of government has always expanded when Republicans held power.
This is why I oppose Republicans, because I recognize them for the pseudo-
libertarian theofascists they really are. I even abandoned my lifetime
support for the Libertarian Party after it was overrun by "former"
Republicans fleeing their Party like rats on a sinking ship.
This has not stopped leftards like quack from accusing me of being a
Republican sympathizer, their crack-addled brains unable to distinguish
between libertarianism and theofascism. In fact, I am so far left that I
have gone around full-circle and only appear to be to the right of
bleating quacktards who believe politics is flat.