Koios
Recreational Kibitzer
- Nov 12, 2012
- 2,841
- 117
- 48
Let me get this straight: You say nobody in Washington is willing to cut anything. I say force them to do so with Mack Penny. You repeat nobody in Washington is willing to cut anything.
I've attempted to be civil and straight forward with you but if you're wondering why all the ridicule, that's it.
So, one more time, can you explain why you think Mack Penny would not work to balance the budget?
If I thought for a second that was within the realm of possibility, I'd have a waking wetdream to an extent I'd need to call SERVPRO(r).
Ah yes, when you can't debate with logic and reason or address a question with specificity, attack the messenger.
Want to try again, sans ad hominem attacks?
Now then, Children, once again: we've had feel-good benchmarks most of our adult lives; how's it workin' out?
Answer: none too well.
So if setting a goal sans a way to achieve it has proven folly, perhaps a new approach is adviseable. Yeah?
Okay; so what? Maybe fences along the border oughta stop at some point. Where is that?
We have X number of folks in federal prision. Who gets out?
Deportations are costing Y. Who stays here?
Them dang military uniforms cost Z. What's not needed? Or maybe, what do we scale back our standing army to? Fewer soldiers? If so, by how much?
I could go on ad nasseum. To have cuts, that actually reduce costs, you need identify where we're actually cutting.
But maybe if none dare say which, what we have is what the People want. If so, just fucking fund it and move on. The will of the People has been served.
Are you seeing? (Of course not.)
Last edited: