I thought about posting that one, but it's a bit of a straw man. It's not that Mitt thinks he can balance the budget by getting rid of PBS funding, His actual words were:
"What things would I cut from spending? Well, first of all, I will eliminate all programs by this test, if they don't pass it: Is the program so critical it's worth borrowing money from China to pay for it? And if not, I'll get rid of it. Obamacare's on my list. ... I'm sorry, Jim, I'm going to stop the subsidy to PBS. I'm going to stop other things. I like PBS, I love Big Bird. Actually like you, too. But I'm not going to -- I'm not going to keep on spending money on things to borrow money from China to pay for. That's number one."
Of course, we had a budget surplus when Clinton was in office, and we still had all these things. This was before the two unfunded wars. And Romney wants to give more money to the military--money they didn't even ask for.
But misguided though he may be (in my opinion), his position is not that it will balance the budget. It's that it isn't so critical that it is worth borrowing money from China to pay for it. Personally, I''m not so sure about that. But it's his list he's talking about, not mine.
—Captain the Reverend Lord C.S. Rowan, Lord of Glencoe, Minister of Pastafarianism, Gentleman Pirate
By reading this post, you agree that you are solely responsible for your reaction to it.
The poster takes no responsibility for any offense taken where none was meant. Except in cases of accidental microaggressions, in which case please explain it, so that we may better understand.