READERS' VIEWS:DEBT CEILING DEBATE
Where was debt-buster McConnell in Bush years?
I wonder when the conversion to austerity struck Sen. Mitch McConnell? From Jan. 20, 2001 to Jan. 20, 2009, there wasn't a word of caution from him saying we need to scale back our spending.
From Jan 21, 2009 on, it seems the only notable thing he has said is that he intends to make President Barack Obama a single-term president. McConnell was one of the primary enablers of the $6-trillion-plus Bush administration deficit.
Never miss a local story.
Did he ever say no to President George W. Bush on spending? No. Most people when they get in arrears, like the United States is, have to cut their spending and get a second job — if one is available.
It's about time McConnell told the United States to get a second job — and the only way to do that is for taxes to go up.
As the Chrysler ads with Lee Iacocca said: "Lead, follow or get out of the way." We elected McConnell to lead. So far he has misled and pretended he was a patriot.
No objections before
The national debt ceiling was raised from $5.7 trillion to $9.85 trillion during the George W. Bush presidency — a 71.9 percent increase in the national debt.
As part of the bailout package, the Bush administration included legislative wording that would allow the debt ceiling to be raised to $11.3 trillion after his presidency ended — a 97.6 percent rise.
The Bush administration was responsible for ushering in $11.3 trillion of our current $14.3 trillion national debt.
Two key congressional leaders always voted in favor of raising the debt ceiling during the Bush administration. They were House Speaker John Boehner and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.
These are the same two congressional leaders who vehemently oppose raising the debt ceiling in 2011.
Focus on constituents
Sen. Mitch McConnell has once again demonstrated his priorities. He thinks Republicans should vote to keep our nation from defaulting on our debt, not to preserve the economy or simply because it's the right thing to do, but because it would destroy the Republican Party brand and put the party in a bad position going into the next elections.
Senator, for the sake of your constituents, please put the interests of Kentuckians and the rest of the country ahead of your partisan political interests. You work for us, not for the Republican Party.
Smoke and mirrors
Seriously? U.S. Rep. Geoff Davis wants to balance the budget and do it by constitutional amendment?
Laughable. This is the legislator's equivalent of a serial killer writing in blood and on the victim's body, "Stop me before I kill again!"
Davis and congressional Republicans are responsible for accumulating more debt during fiscal years 2001-2009 than all other administrations combined.
Their failed fiscal policies damaged this nation more than our enemies during that period.
Yet the Republicans and their incredibly gullible surrogates, the Tea Party, would sell us the concepts that Republicans are fiscally responsible and that doing the same thing would have a different result.
Unbelievable and insane.
Rich should pay more
It seems Republicans couldn't care less about the average citizen than their rich brethren who give massive amounts of money to their election funds.
To prove my point, ask yourself: Should a person living in a huge multi-million dollar mansion pay the same property tax and insurance as a person living in a two-bedroom, one-bath cottage?
Should a person who drives a brand new Rolls Royce pay the same amount in insurance premiums as someone who drives a 10-year-old Ford or Chevy?
No. Why? They have a lot more to lose. It's as simple as that. And the list goes on and on. So why does it upset Republicans to tax the ultra-rich as they should be? Ask yourself that as well.
Darrell G. Gross
Present-day Neroes: Republican members of Congress fiddling while Rome burns.