Bill Clinton: Austerity is not the answer to our ‘long-term debt problem’

Addressing the House Democratic Issues Conference, Bill Clinton asserted that austerity isn’t the way out of our “long-term debt problem,” and he suggested that the GOP is only interested in austerity measures because the president is a Democrat.

While many in the GOP establishment do seem to have forgotten their commitment to fiscal conservatism, the fact remains that our debt is still growing and the Democrats, currently running the show, refuse to consider frugality as a solution.

And how is this “growth” supposed to happen? By raising taxes further?

The status quo certainly isn’t doing the trick. Americans have already begun taking austerity measures of their own:

Perhaps it’s time for the government to follow suit.

  • Edwina

    He’s just paving the road for Hillary. Will say anything to get back in White House no matter what the loss to the country it is.

    • lainer51

      can’t blame the poor guy…. hate to see all those interns going to waste.

  • TruDat

    Doesn’t he have an intern to sexually molest?

    • SineWaveII

      No he got that out of the way before he got there.

  • Bob Smooper

    Have you noticed that Republicans talk a lot about “small government” and “austerity” but every time there is a GOP president they spend a crap load of money, build up debt, etc.

    Has there been a small government, low spending republican president since the Second World War?

    Reagan doesn’t qualify, he admitted on his final interview days before leaving the whitehouse he regretted the debt he racked up.

    So come on: name a post-war republican president who actually did “small government”.

    • Matthew Koch

      How about Ike?

      Prosperity all around and low spending.

    • JoeMusgo

      I have a question for you: How many Republican presidents have we had since WW II that have had majorities in both houses of Congress? How many Democrat presidents have we had with majorities in both houses of Congress? Democrat presidents have consistently been able to govern with Congressional majorities whereas Republicans have only rarely had majorities in both houses (GWB had 2 years).

      Reagan NEVER had majorities in both houses. So, to expect Republican presidents to implement austere measures without Congressional support is naive or disingenuous. However, both Clinton and Obama have been able to govern with majorities in both houses (each had two years), and each of them raised spending and taxes exponentially. GWB was consumed with the war on terror and his domestic policies were not nearly as conservative as they should have been.

      Can you name a Democrat president who was fiscally responsible with a Democrat majority? Clinton was forced by Congress to balance the budget and sign a Welfare Reform bill. Democrats pay lip service to fiscal responsibility only as a way of raising our taxes. Today’s Democrat party is only interesting in increasing the power and reach of government.

    • Angie (D)

      Hey Limey — go worry about your own pathetic country.

    • SineWaveII

      Well first you need to get your facts straight. Budgets and the amount of spending is controlled entirely by BOTH houses of congress.
      So during the eight years of Reagan the repubs only controlled the senate for two years and they never controlled the house. Therefore it was the democrats who spent every single penny during the Reagan and Bush 1 years.
      The repubs took control of congress in 1994 for the first time in 40 years, and proceeded to create that period of great prosperity and the balanced budget that your ilk loves to brag about. Then in 1998 the democrats gained seats in both houses and the prosperity started to slow. in 2000 the dems took the senate back and the spending started to rise again. See? That’s how it works. The dems take control of congress and spending goes out of control.
      Because it’s always the democrats who are trying to spend us into oblivion. Always.

    • TomJB

      So your point is that because no Republican president since WWII has reduced our debt that its not a solution to fiscal problems now, or are we just not allowed to do it because so-and-so didn’t? Seriously?

    • lainer51

      Have you noticed ALL democrats suck?

  • Maxx

    The answer to our debt problem is for someone to walk into the national treasury and turn off the leaf blowers. Simple as that.

  • thepoliticalchef

    Reblogged this on Thepoliticalchef's Blog and commented:
    LOL…no, let me guess…more spending and higher taxes are the answer…*SMH*

  • tredglx

    Crushing debt means little to someone still suckling the government teat.

  • Garth Haycock

    Actually, Mr. Clinton, austerity is exactly what this country needs. Remember how it worked when you were forced to allow it to happen?

  • TomJB

    We don’t need austerity. If we implemented some RESPONSIBILITY then austerity could be avoided in the future

  • Guest

    As if that jaded leg-humper brings any worthwhile input to the conversation,
    should Clinton not be skulking about somewhere,
    sniffing ladies’ bicycle seats.