Recently, Unions and assorted leftist groups have been spreading word on how they plan to “protest” town-hall meetings and anything Republican or Conservative in nature. These people do not want to ask questions and then give someone a chance to answer as we see in the following video. These astroturf puppets have been given a set of things to scream at people with no knowledge of whether it is actually true. Interruption is the game, no matter how foolish they look in doing it. Take for instance the now jailed star of the latest lesson in the leftists civil discourse of today, one former Radio host of the now defunct Liberal Air America radio network, Nicole Sandler. She is the one being led away in handcuffs for the nasty rhetoric and rudeness displayed here that the left now deems the new civil discourse in America.
All of a sudden this nasty, vile, mouthpiece of the left tries to convince everyone that all she wanted was Allen West to answer her questions.(after the handcuffs are slapped on her) Is she so ignorant as to not understand that her and her cohorts are all on video tape screaming nonsense and lies just to interrupt Allen West ? It is all right there for all of America to see. Take note of the biggest lie the leftists are trying to infect America with today: ” Republicans budget plan will take away Seniors Medicare.” Anyone with an ounce of education can read Paul Ryan’s budget plan and see that it in fact, preserves medicare for future generations of Americans and doesn’t take it away from anyone. Medicare cannot continue as it now stands. Changes have to be made, yet everywhere we turn this lie is being repeated over and over, especially by the leftist media puppets. Now we shall see the leftist media puppets try to spin this nasty, uncivil incident perpetuated by a group of leftists at the West town-hall as some kind of denial of free speech.
Town-hall style meetings are supposed to be about having a discussion about the issues the public is concerned about, not screaming nonsense and lies with the only goal being to shut down the town-hall and not let the representative talk. This is the plan of the left for this summer.They know real Americans are fed up with trillion dollars deficits and anti-American Liberal ideology. The left is desperate, just watch them here. Watch the video and listen to the new civil discourse of the left on full display here. We the people, just as Allen West says during this vile display, will not be intimidated by a loudmouthed minority from the left posing as concerned citizens. They are only fooling themselves. Share this information with everyone you know today, show them exactly what the Obama supporters and political operatives of the left’s new civil discourse looks like. Then remember this little episode when you go to the polls in 2012. These people are against everything American, especially prosperity and freedom from an overbearing Government. I certainly know which side I will be on come Nov. 2012, and will vote against these anti-Americans every chance I get.
Because the U.S. has, relative to its ‘AAA’ peers, what we consider to be
very large budget deficits and rising government indebtedness and the
path to addressing these is not clear to us, we have revised our outlook
on the long-term rating to negative from stable. (emphasis mine)
Of note there, is the recognition of our huge debt problem, and the failure of our Congress and President to seriously address this issue. The path to addressing our dangerous debt problem is not clear to the analysts at Standard and Poor’s, simply because the irresponsible spending that is responsible for trillion dollar deficits continues unabated. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see that President Obama and the Liberal Democratic party in charge of the U.S. Senate refuse to cut back on a government so bloated that we will no longer be able to pay our bills on time in the very near future. The United States credit card is maxed out, and now the mathematically challenged tyrants in the Democratic party, along with Barack Obama want to raise the debt limit on the credit card drawn on the taxpayer’s account. The end result in this game will be more taxes slapped onto the backs of an already hurting working class in America.
Pictured at the left is former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi. I provide the picture lest we forget just who she is, as she has been prettymuch missing in action during the recent massive budget battles in Congress. Gone are the times of her daily idiotic TV statements such as the infamous, ” We have to pass the Health-care bill to see what’s in it ” statements. So what is going on with the self-appointed San Fran Queen of the far left Liberals ? This woman is largely responsible for the last four years of crushing debt that got pushed onto the American people while she was ramrodding the leftist agenda through Congress unabated. With the debt ceiling fight looming in Congress that will prove to be a serious expose’ of just what Pelosi’s maniacal actions as Speaker have done to America, it now appears that Obama and company are shunning her and pushing her into irrelevance. Enter Pelosi’s long time House Democratic nemesis, one Steny Hoyer.
It now appears that when it comes to the budget/debt ceiling battles in Congress Steny Hoyer ( D-MD) is the person who is now leading the Democratic house minority, not Nancy Pelosi. With Obama in perpetual campaign mode today for the 2012 elections, this move appears to be an attempt to distance himself from the radical leftist Liberal agenda that he demanded from Congress the past two years. This is an obvious attempt to fool the voters into thinking Obama has moved to the center, and all we have to do is look at the trillion dollar deficits he continues to pile onto our children’s backs to see how disingenuoushe truly is there. Hoyer is playing the part of a Blue Dog, bipartisan-worshipping moderate perfectly today. This has to be just what the Obama handlers are demanding in keeping in line with his fake move to the center propaganda for reelection. Over at The Hill.com we see the following headline:
Obama-Hoyer bond forms as Pelosi rejects budget deal.
The informal alliance has propelled the minority whip into the spotlight of the spending debate, bolstered his reputation as a centrist deal-maker and even led some Democrats to suggest he should lead the caucus in the looming talks over raising the nation’s debt limit.
I find it quiet interesting that when, for four straight years, we watched as Steny Hoyer promoted the far left agenda that is largely responsible for our massive debt problem of today, yet all of a sudden he is being painted as some sort of centrist politician concerned with our debt problems. I find this similar to Charlie Sheen being made the CEO of the Betty Ford drug addiction enter. Hoyer has had a huge hand in America’s massive deficits for four straight years, and we are supposed to believe that he is some kind of savior? He voted in lockstep with Pelosi’s far left Liberal big government expansion agenda at every turn, yet we are being led to believe that he is all of a sudden some type of Blue-Dog Democrat who wants to cut back on big government and install some fiscal sanity into our government today? Get real folks, this is all a nasty game of trying to make Obama appear as a born again centrist while he destroys what’s left of America if he is reelected in 2012. I,m not buying it and apparently neither is the much-respected Standard and Poor’s rating index. Scroll back up there to the first paragraph, and then you decide if you believe this nonsense that Hoyer and Obama are actually working to cut spending and get our debt down to a manageable level.
Stockbridge, GA – Potential Republican presidential candidate and longtime corporate executive Herman Cain responded to President Obama’s speech at 1:45 p.m. Wednesday, April 13, 2011 regarding his budget proposal, saying:
President Obama’s address proved yet again that he values ideology over basic economics and leadership.
His budget employs his typical class warfare tactics, insisting on taxing America’s job creators into oblivion for what he deems “fairness.” In doing so, he makes clear his willingness to further cripple our economy in exchange for pushing his wealth redistribution agenda and abandonment of the free enterprise system.
President Obama also took the opportunity to blame everyone but his own administration for this economic disaster, shifting blame to the Bush administration, Congressional Republicans and America’s highest earners, neglecting his own administration’s reckless spending.
Instead of using this speech as an opportunity to preview a budget that could significantly pay down our mounting debt through meaningful spending cuts and entitlement reforms, he again insisted on saddling America’s job creators with an even heavier tax burden to pay down the debt. Meanwhile, Congressman Ryan proposed his own budget that reduces the national debt by $6 trillion without raising taxes on a single American family or business.
Most importantly, actions speak louder than words. President Obama claims that his budget proposal would cut $4 trillion in just 12 years. Can we really trust a man who vowed time and time again that his administration would cut the budget deficit in half, but instead, brought our budget deficits to record levels in just half a term in the White House?
Indeed, since President Obama just filed his re-election candidacy papers, Americans today got their first televised campaign speech for 2012: all talk, no leadership.
Obama explained his vision for the road to deficit reductions on Wednesday. In a speech that was light on details and heavy on the campaign rhetoric, he reminded Americans of the things most critical to his “progressive vision”.
Obama claims that his plan will cut $4 Trillion from budget deficits over 12 years. Where would that leave the total debt which now totals more than $14 trillion?
To sum it up, everything is on the table, except social security, and perhaps not transportation, education or clean energy. Tax hikes are definitely on the table, but only for the very rich. The video and full text is below for your perusal.
Good afternoon. It’s great to be back at GW. I want you to know that one of the reasons I kept the government open was so I could be here today with all of you. I wanted to make sure you had one more excuse to skip class. You’re welcome.
Of course, what we’ve been debating here in Washington for the last few weeks will affect your lives in ways that are potentially profound. This debate over budgets and deficits is about more than just numbers on a page, more than just cutting and spending. It’s about the kind of future we want. It’s about the kind of country we believe in. And that’s what I want to talk about today.
From our first days as a nation, we have put our faith in free markets and free enterprise as the engine of America’s wealth and prosperity. More than citizens of any other country, we are rugged individualists, a self-reliant people with a healthy skepticism of too much government.
But there has always been another thread running throughout our history – a belief that we are all connected; and that there are some things we can only do together, as a nation. We believe, in the words of our first Republican president, Abraham Lincoln, that through government, we should do together what we cannot do as well for ourselves. And so we’ve built a strong military to keep us secure, and public schools and universities to educate our citizens. We’ve laid down railroads and highways to facilitate travel and commerce. We’ve supported the work of scientists and researchers whose discoveries have saved lives, unleashed repeated technological revolutions, and led to countless new jobs and entire industries. Each of us has benefitted from these investments, and we are a more prosperous country as a result.
Part of this American belief that we are all connected also expresses itself in a conviction that each one of us deserves some basic measure of security. We recognize that no matter how responsibly we live our lives, hard times or bad luck, a crippling illness or a layoff, may strike any one of us. “There but for the grace of God go I,” we say to ourselves, and so we contribute to programs like Medicare and Social Security, which guarantee us health care and a measure of basic income after a lifetime of hard work; unemployment insurance, which protects us against unexpected job loss; and Medicaid, which provides care for millions of seniors in nursing homes, poor children, and those with disabilities. We are a better country because of these commitments. I’ll go further – we would not be a great country without those commitments.
For much of the last century, our nation found a way to afford these investments and priorities with the taxes paid by its citizens. As a country that values fairness, wealthier individuals have traditionally born a greater share of this burden than the middle class or those less fortunate. This is not because we begrudge those who’ve done well – we rightly celebrate their success. Rather, it is a basic reflection of our belief that those who have benefitted most from our way of life can afford to give a bit more back. Moreover, this belief has not hindered the success of those at the top of the income scale, who continue to do better and better with each passing year.
Now, at certain times – particularly during periods of war or recession – our nation has had to borrow money to pay for some of our priorities. And as most families understand, a little credit card debt isn’t going to hurt if it’s temporary.
But as far back as the 1980s, America started amassing debt at more alarming levels, and our leaders began to realize that a larger challenge was on the horizon. They knew that eventually, the Baby Boom generation would retire, which meant a much bigger portion of our citizens would be relying on programs like Medicare, Social Security, and possibly Medicaid. Like parents with young children who know they have to start saving for the college years, America had to start borrowing less and saving more to prepare for the retirement of an entire generation.
To meet this challenge, our leaders came together three times during the 1990s to reduce our nation’s deficit. They forged historic agreements that required tough decisions made by the first President Bush and President Clinton; by Democratic Congresses and a Republican Congress. All three agreements asked for shared responsibility and shared sacrifice, but they largely protected the middle class, our commitments to seniors, and key investments in our future.
As a result of these bipartisan efforts, America’s finances were in great shape by the year 2000. We went from deficit to surplus. America was actually on track to becoming completely debt-free, and we were prepared for the retirement of the Baby Boomers.
But after Democrats and Republicans committed to fiscal discipline during the 1990s, we lost our way in the decade that followed. We increased spending dramatically for two wars and an expensive prescription drug program – but we didn’t pay for any of this new spending. Instead, we made the problem worse with trillions of dollars in unpaid-for tax cuts – tax cuts that went to every millionaire and billionaire in the country; tax cuts that will force us to borrow an average of $500 billion every year over the next decade.
To give you an idea of how much damage this caused to our national checkbook, consider this: in the last decade, if we had simply found a way to pay for the tax cuts and the prescription drug benefit, our deficit would currently be at low historical levels in the coming years.
Of course, that’s not what happened. And so, by the time I took office, we once again found ourselves deeply in debt and unprepared for a Baby Boom retirement that is now starting to take place. When I took office, our projected deficit was more than $1 trillion. On top of that, we faced a terrible financial crisis and a recession that, like most recessions, led us to temporarily borrow even more. In this case, we took a series of emergency steps that saved millions of jobs, kept credit flowing, and provided working families extra money in their pockets. It was the right thing to do, but these steps were expensive, and added to our deficits in the short term.
So that’s how our fiscal challenge was created. This is how we got here. And now that our economic recovery is gaining strength, Democrats and Republicans must come together and restore the fiscal responsibility that served us so well in the 1990s. We have to live within our means, reduce our deficit, and get back on a path that will allow us to pay down our debt. And we have to do it in a way that protects the recovery, and protects the investments we need to grow, create jobs, and win the future.
Now, before I get into how we can achieve this goal, some of you might be wondering, “Why is this so important? Why does this matter to me?”
Here’s why. Even after our economy recovers, our government will still be on track to spend more money than it takes in throughout this decade and beyond. That means we’ll have to keep borrowing more from countries like China. And that means more of your tax dollars will go toward paying off the interest on all the loans we keep taking out. By the end of this decade, the interest we owe on our debt could rise to nearly $1 trillion. Just the interest payments.
Then, as the Baby Boomers start to retire and health care costs continue to rise, the situation will get even worse. By 2025, the amount of taxes we currently pay will only be enough to finance our health care programs, Social Security, and the interest we owe on our debt. That’s it. Every other national priority – education, transportation, even national security – will have to be paid for with borrowed money.
Ultimately, all this rising debt will cost us jobs and damage our economy. It will prevent us from making the investments we need to win the future. We won’t be able to afford good schools, new research, or the repair of roads and bridges – all the things that will create new jobs and businesses here in America. Businesses will be less likely to invest and open up shop in a country that seems unwilling or unable to balance its books. And if our creditors start worrying that we may be unable to pay back our debts, it could drive up interest rates for everyone who borrows money – making it harder for businesses to expand and hire, or families to take out a mortgage.
The good news is, this doesn’t have to be our future. This doesn’t have to be the country we leave to our children. We can solve this problem. We came together as Democrats and Republicans to meet this challenge before, and we can do it again.
But that starts by being honest about what’s causing our deficit. You see, most Americans tend to dislike government spending in the abstract, but they like the stuff it buys. Most of us, regardless of party affiliation, believe that we should have a strong military and a strong defense. Most Americans believe we should invest in education and medical research. Most Americans think we should protect commitments like Social Security and Medicare. And without even looking at a poll, my finely honed political skills tell me that almost no one believes they should be paying higher taxes.
Because all this spending is popular with both Republicans and Democrats alike, and because nobody wants to pay higher taxes, politicians are often eager to feed the impression that solving the problem is just a matter of eliminating waste and abuse –that tackling the deficit issue won’t require tough choices. Or they suggest that we can somehow close our entire deficit by eliminating things like foreign aid, even though foreign aid makes up about 1% of our entire budget.
So here’s the truth. Around two-thirds of our budget is spent on Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and national security. Programs like unemployment insurance, student loans, veterans’ benefits, and tax credits for working families take up another 20%. What’s left, after interest on the debt, is just 12 percent for everything else. That’s 12 percent for all of our other national priorities like education and clean energy; medical research and transportation; food safety and keeping our air and water clean.
Up until now, the cuts proposed by a lot of folks in Washington have focused almost exclusively on that 12%. But cuts to that 12% alone won’t solve the problem. So any serious plan to tackle our deficit will require us to put everything on the table, and take on excess spending wherever it exists in the budget. A serious plan doesn’t require us to balance our budget overnight – in fact, economists think that with the economy just starting to grow again, we will need a phased-in approach – but it does require tough decisions and support from leaders in both parties. And above all, it will require us to choose a vision of the America we want to see five and ten and twenty years down the road.
One vision has been championed by Republicans in the House of Representatives and embraced by several of their party’s presidential candidates. It’s a plan that aims to reduce our deficit by $4 trillion over the next ten years, and one that addresses the challenge of Medicare and Medicaid in the years after that.
Those are both worthy goals for us to achieve. But the way this plan achieves those goals would lead to a fundamentally different America than the one we’ve known throughout most of our history.
A 70% cut to clean energy. A 25% cut in education. A 30% cut in transportation. Cuts in college Pell Grants that will grow to more than $1,000 per year. That’s what they’re proposing. These aren’t the kind of cuts you make when you’re trying to get rid of some waste or find extra savings in the budget. These aren’t the kind of cuts that Republicans and Democrats on the Fiscal Commission proposed. These are the kind of cuts that tell us we can’t afford the America we believe in. And they paint a vision of our future that’s deeply pessimistic.
It’s a vision that says if our roads crumble and our bridges collapse, we can’t afford to fix them. If there are bright young Americans who have the drive and the will but not the money to go to college, we can’t afford to send them. Go to China and you’ll see businesses opening research labs and solar facilities. South Korean children are outpacing our kids in math and science. Brazil is investing billions in new infrastructure and can run half their cars not on high-priced gasoline, but biofuels. And yet, we are presented with a vision that says the United States of America – the greatest nation on Earth – can’t afford any of this.
It’s a vision that says America can’t afford to keep the promise we’ve made to care for our seniors. It says that ten years from now, if you’re a 65 year old who’s eligible for Medicare, you should have to pay nearly $6,400 more than you would today. It says instead of guaranteed health care, you will get a voucher. And if that voucher isn’t worth enough to buy insurance, tough luck – you’re on your own. Put simply, it ends Medicare as we know it.
This is a vision that says up to 50 million Americans have to lose their health insurance in order for us to reduce the deficit. And who are those 50 million Americans? Many are someone’s grandparents who wouldn’t be able afford nursing home care without Medicaid. Many are poor children. Some are middle-class families who have children with autism or Down’s syndrome. Some are kids with disabilities so severe that they require 24-hour care. These are the Americans we’d be telling to fend for themselves.
Worst of all, this is a vision that says even though America can’t afford to invest in education or clean energy; even though we can’t afford to care for seniors and poor children, we can somehow afford more than $1 trillion in new tax breaks for the wealthy. Think about it. In the last decade, the average income of the bottom 90% of all working Americans actually declined. The top 1% saw their income rise by an average of more than a quarter of a million dollars each. And that’s who needs to pay less taxes? They want to give people like me a two hundred thousand dollar tax cut that’s paid for by asking thirty three seniors to each pay six thousand dollars more in health costs? That’s not right, and it’s not going to happen as long as I’m President.
The fact is, their vision is less about reducing the deficit than it is about changing the basic social compact in America. As Ronald Reagan’s own budget director said, there’s nothing “serious” or “courageous” about this plan. There’s nothing serious about a plan that claims to reduce the deficit by spending a trillion dollars on tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires. There’s nothing courageous about asking for sacrifice from those who can least afford it and don’t have any clout on Capitol Hill. And this is not a vision of the America I know.
The America I know is generous and compassionate; a land of opportunity and optimism. We take responsibility for ourselves and each other; for the country we want and the future we share. We are the nation that built a railroad across a continent and brought light to communities shrouded in darkness. We sent a generation to college on the GI bill and saved millions of seniors from poverty with Social Security and Medicare. We have led the world in scientific research and technological breakthroughs that have transformed millions of lives.
This is who we are. This is the America I know. We don’t have to choose between a future of spiraling debt and one where we forfeit investments in our people and our country. To meet our fiscal challenge, we will need to make reforms. We will all need to make sacrifices. But we do not have to sacrifice the America we believe in. And as long as I’m President, we won’t.
Today, I’m proposing a more balanced approach to achieve $4 trillion in deficit reduction over twelve years. It’s an approach that borrows from the recommendations of the bipartisan Fiscal Commission I appointed last year, and builds on the roughly $1 trillion in deficit reduction I already proposed in my 2012 budget. It’s an approach that puts every kind of spending on the table, but one that protects the middle-class, our promise to seniors, and our investments in the future.
The first step in our approach is to keep annual domestic spending low by building on the savings that both parties agreed to last week – a step that will save us about $750 billion over twelve years. We will make the tough cuts necessary to achieve these savings, including in programs I care about, but I will not sacrifice the core investments we need to grow and create jobs. We’ll invest in medical research and clean energy technology. We’ll invest in new roads and airports and broadband access. We will invest in education and job training. We will do what we need to compete and we will win the future.
The second step in our approach is to find additional savings in our defense budget. As Commander-in-Chief, I have no greater responsibility than protecting our national security, and I will never accept cuts that compromise our ability to defend our homeland or America’s interests around the world. But as the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Admiral Mullen, has said, the greatest long-term threat to America’s national security is America’s debt.
Just as we must find more savings in domestic programs, we must do the same in defense. Over the last two years, Secretary Gates has courageously taken on wasteful spending, saving $400 billion in current and future spending. I believe we can do that again. We need to not only eliminate waste and improve efficiency and effectiveness, but conduct a fundamental review of America’s missions, capabilities, and our role in a changing world. I intend to work with Secretary Gates and the Joint Chiefs on this review, and I will make specific decisions about spending after it’s complete.
The third step in our approach is to further reduce health care spending in our budget. Here, the difference with the House Republican plan could not be clearer: their plan lowers the government’s health care bills by asking seniors and poor families to pay them instead. Our approach lowers the government’s health care bills by reducing the cost of health care itself.
Already, the reforms we passed in the health care law will reduce our deficit by $1 trillion. My approach would build on these reforms. We will reduce wasteful subsidies and erroneous payments. We will cut spending on prescription drugs by using Medicare’s purchasing power to drive greater efficiency and speed generic brands of medicine onto the market. We will work with governors of both parties to demand more efficiency and accountability from Medicaid. We will change the way we pay for health care – not by procedure or the number of days spent in a hospital, but with new incentives for doctors and hospitals to prevent injuries and improve results. And we will slow the growth of Medicare costs by strengthening an independent commission of doctors, nurses, medical experts and consumers who will look at all the evidence and recommend the best ways to reduce unnecessary spending while protecting access to the services seniors need.
Now, we believe the reforms we’ve proposed to strengthen Medicare and Medicaid will enable us to keep these commitments to our citizens while saving us $500 billion by 2023, and an additional one trillion dollars in the decade after that. And if we’re wrong, and Medicare costs rise faster than we expect, this approach will give the independent commission the authority to make additional savings by further improving Medicare.
But let me be absolutely clear: I will preserve these health care programs as a promise we make to each other in this society. I will not allow Medicare to become a voucher program that leaves seniors at the mercy of the insurance industry, with a shrinking benefit to pay for rising costs. I will not tell families with children who have disabilities that they have to fend for themselves. We will reform these programs, but we will not abandon the fundamental commitment this country has kept for generations.
That includes, by the way, our commitment to Social Security. While Social Security is not the cause of our deficit, it faces real long-term challenges in a country that is growing older. As I said in the State of the Union, both parties should work together now to strengthen Social Security for future generations. But we must do it without putting at risk current retirees, the most vulnerable, or people with disabilities; without slashing benefits for future generations; and without subjecting Americans’ guaranteed retirement income to the whims of the stock market.
The fourth step in our approach is to reduce spending in the tax code. In December, I agreed to extend the tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans because it was the only way I could prevent a tax hike on middle-class Americans. But we cannot afford $1 trillion worth of tax cuts for every millionaire and billionaire in our society. And I refuse to renew them again.
Beyond that, the tax code is also loaded up with spending on things like itemized deductions. And while I agree with the goals of many of these deductions, like homeownership or charitable giving, we cannot ignore the fact that they provide millionaires an average tax break of $75,000 while doing nothing for the typical middle-class family that doesn’t itemize.
My budget calls for limiting itemized deductions for the wealthiest 2% of Americans – a reform that would reduce the deficit by $320 billion over ten years. But to reduce the deficit, I believe we should go further. That’s why I’m calling on Congress to reform our individual tax code so that it is fair and simple – so that the amount of taxes you pay isn’t determined by what kind of accountant you can afford. I believe reform should protect the middle class, promote economic growth, and build on the Fiscal Commission’s model of reducing tax expenditures so that there is enough savings to both lower rates and lower the deficit. And as I called for in the State of the Union, we should reform our corporate tax code as well, to make our businesses and our economy more competitive.
This is my approach to reduce the deficit by $4 trillion over the next twelve years. It’s an approach that achieves about $2 trillion in spending cuts across the budget. It will lower our interest payments on the debt by $1 trillion. It calls for tax reform to cut about $1 trillion in spending from the tax code. And it achieves these goals while protecting the middle class, our commitment to seniors, and our investments in the future.
In the coming years, if the recovery speeds up and our economy grows faster than our current projections, we can make even greater progress than I have pledged here. But just to hold Washington – and me – accountable and make sure that the debt burden continues to decline, my plan includes a debt failsafe. If, by 2014, our debt is not projected to fall as a share of the economy – or if Congress has failed to act – my plan will require us to come together and make up the additional savings with more spending cuts and more spending reductions in the tax code. That should be an incentive for us to act boldly now, instead of kicking our problems further down the road.
So this is our vision for America – a vision where we live within our means while still investing in our future; where everyone makes sacrifices but no one bears all the burden; where we provide a basic measure of security for our citizens and rising opportunity for our children.
Of course, there will be those who disagree with my approach. Some will argue we shouldn’t even consider raising taxes, even if only on the wealthiest Americans. It’s just an article of faith for them. I say that at a time when the tax burden on the wealthy is at its lowest level in half a century, the most fortunate among us can afford to pay a little more. I don’t need another tax cut. Warren Buffett doesn’t need another tax cut. Not if we have to pay for it by making seniors pay more for Medicare. Or by cutting kids from Head Start. Or by taking away college scholarships that I wouldn’t be here without. That some of you wouldn’t be here without. And I believe that most wealthy Americans would agree with me. They want to give back to the country that’s done so much for them. Washington just hasn’t asked them to.
Others will say that we shouldn’t even talk about cutting spending until the economy is fully recovered. I’m sympathetic to this view, which is one of the reasons I supported the payroll tax cuts we passed in December. It’s also why we have to use a scalpel and not a machete to reduce the deficit – so that we can keep making the investments that create jobs. But doing nothing on the deficit is just not an option. Our debt has grown so large that we could do real damage to the economy if we don’t begin a process now to get our fiscal house in order.
Finally, there are those who believe we shouldn’t make any reforms to Medicare, Medicaid, or Social Security out of a fear that any talk of change to these programs will usher in the sort of radical steps that House Republicans have proposed. I understand these fears. But I guarantee that if we don’t make any changes at all, we won’t be able to keep our commitments to a retiring generation that will live longer and face higher health care costs than those who came before.
Indeed, to those in my own party, I say that if we truly believe in a progressive vision of our society, we have the obligation to prove that we can afford our commitments. If we believe that government can make a difference in people’s lives, we have the obligation to prove that it works – by making government smarter, leaner and more effective.
Of course, there are those who will simply say that there’s no way we can come together and agree on a solution to this challenge. They’ll say the politics of this city are just too broken; that the choices are just too hard; that the parties are just too far apart. And after a few years in this job, I certainly have some sympathy for this view.
But I also know that we’ve come together and met big challenges before. Ronald Reagan and Tip O’Neill came together to save Social Security for future generations. The first President Bush and a Democratic Congress came together to reduce the deficit. President Clinton and a Republican Congress battled each other ferociously and still found a way to balance the budget. In the last few months, both parties have come together to pass historic tax relief and spending cuts. And I know there are Republicans and Democrats in Congress who want to see a balanced approach to deficit reduction.
I believe we can and must come together again. This morning, I met with Democratic and Republican leaders in Congress to discuss the approach I laid out today. And in early May, the Vice President will begin regular meetings with leaders in both parties with the aim of reaching a final agreement on a plan to reduce the deficit by the end of June.
I don’t expect the details in any final agreement to look exactly like the approach I laid out today. I’m eager to hear other ideas from all ends of the political spectrum. And though I’m sure the criticism of what I’ve said here today will be fierce in some quarters, and my critique of the House Republican approach has been strong, Americans deserve and will demand that we all bridge our differences, and find common ground.
This larger debate we’re having, about the size and role of government, has been with us since our founding days. And during moments of great challenge and change, like the one we’re living through now, the debate gets sharper and more vigorous. That’s a good thing. As a country that prizes both our individual freedom and our obligations to one another, this is one of the most important debates we can have.
But no matter what we argue or where we stand, we’ve always held certain beliefs as Americans. We believe that in order to preserve our own freedoms and pursue our own happiness, we can’t just think about ourselves. We have to think about the country that made those liberties possible. We have to think about our fellow citizens with whom we share a community. And we have to think about what’s required to preserve the American Dream for future generations.
This sense of responsibility – to each other and to our country – this isn’t a partisan feeling. It isn’t a Democratic or Republican idea. It’s patriotism.
The other day I received a letter from a man in Florida. He started off by telling me he didn’t vote for me and he hasn’t always agreed with me. But even though he’s worried about our economy and the state of our politics, he said,
“I still believe. I believe in that great country that my grandfather told me about. I believe that somewhere lost in this quagmire of petty bickering on every news station, the ‘American Dream’ is still alive…
We need to use our dollars here rebuilding, refurbishing and restoring all that our ancestors struggled to create and maintain…We as a people must do this together, no matter the color of the state one comes from or the side of the aisle one might sit on.”
I still believe as well. And I know that if we can come together, and uphold our responsibilities to one another and to this larger enterprise that is America, we will keep the dream of our founding alive in our time, and pass on to our children the country we believe in. Thank you, God bless you, and may God bless the United States of America.
Several of our staff and I made the jump to live internet radio. The Plain, Hard Truth aired it’s first show on Thursday, April 14th at 8pm Pacific/11pm Eastern. Our continuing fixed who time will be 7pm Pacific/10pm Eastern.
While CDN is our serious side, the radio outlet is meant to show that we are human, not just word-churning, progressive-mashing, cynics. Ok, maybe it still will show that, but we’ll laugh about it .. or something.
This was our first episode so give it a listen as Michelle, Allenah and I talk about the worthlessness of zero tolerance rules, possible Presidential candidates Donald Trump and Mitch Daniels, the battle over budget cuts and the upcoming feature film, Atlas Shrugged.
You can listen to the archive version of the show with the player below (don’t forget to tweet and share it – we rock .. or something.
The first headline I encountered at 4 am about the government shutdown soap opera that we have been inunindated with for weeks now, is truly puzzling. From FoxNews.com; ‘Historic’ Deal Made to Avoid Closure . It might just be time to sign FoxNews up as head of promotions for Obama’s 2012 Continuing to trash America Re-election campaign by the looks of things here. The only two things that are historic concerning this situation is the fact that we will continue to spend record amounts of tax payer dollars that will be borrowed from other countries thus piling on record debt, and the historic amount of flat out fear-mongering and lies that were told to the people by the media in this fiasco.
To put it in one simple sentence, our government wants the American people to believe that Obama and our Congressional representatives are some kind of heroes for putting us under what now will be sure to surpass $15 trillion dollars of national debt. According to the Washington Times,our national deficit will reach almost $2 trillion dollars in 2011. That means that we are on a pace to spend $2 trillion more dollars than the U.S. treasury is projected to take in this year.
Mr. Obama’s budget projects that 2011 will see the biggest one-year debt jump in history, or nearly $2 trillion, to reach $15.476 trillion by Sept. 30, the end of the fiscal year. That would be 102.6 percent of GDP — the first time since World War II that dubious figure has been reached.
And the budget projects the government will run a deficit of $1.645 trillion this year, topping 2009’s previous record by more than $230 billion. By contrast, 2007’s deficit was just $160 billion altogether.
Check the above numbers over one more time, and we see that, yes, we are truly in “historic” times today, at least as far as our government’s spending us into financial Armageddon goes, anyway. We can expect President Obama to be championed as a real hero and budget hawk , (in the media fluff sure to come out today) that has saved the lives of millions of people due to his wizardry during this fake budget debate. Millions of lives were saved, according to lunatic Democratic Congresswoman Louis Slaughter, (D- NY) who told us all yesterday on national TV, that the Republicans wanted to kill women by de-funding the abortion promoters over at Planned Parenthood. You can watch this disgusting display of shameful rhetoric right here:
Oh yes, maybe this person truly does have the fitting last name of Slaughter , as in Slaughtering the idea that the Democrats are calling for a new “civil discourse” in America today. That episode right there should be enough get her kicked right the hell out of the people’s government, period. What say the voters of New York about that truth ?
Since I mentioned the sure to come trumpeting of Obama and company as heroes that avoided millions of deaths from a government shutdown earlier, let’s take a browse around the news right now at 5:35 am the Saturday morning that followed this “historic” action. Let the spin begin. Over at yahoo.com we see Obama’s own version of, ‘lets make heroes out of the idiots that are bankrupting America, spin:”
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – President Barack Obama said on Friday that compromises by both Democrat and Republican lawmakers involving “painful” spending cuts had secured a budget deal and avoided a shutdown of the U.S. government
In remarks at the White House less than an hour before a midnight deadline to shut the government down, Obama thanked the leaders of both parties for reaching an agreement he said delivered the deepest spending cuts in U.S. budget history (emphasis mine)
Painful spending cuts Mr. President? 38 billion is nothing when stacked up next to your current Historic Deficit Spending of 2011.
Deepest spending cuts in U.S. budget history? Total dollars in spending cuts are only historic due to the fact that you have already jacked up our national deficits and debt to unprecedented levels. The true number would be found in the percentage of the budget dollars that are being cut as compared to other years.We see lots of spin using the word historic again that amount to nothing more than Liberal math being used to perpetuate budget gimmickry through catch-phrases designed to hide the truth.
Over at TheDeseret news we see more fluff and spin here , in which the politicians were made out to have been digging ditches and plowing fields by hand for the past six weeks !
The deal came together after six grueling weeks and an outbreak of budget brinksmanship over the past few days as the two sides sought to squeeze every drop of advantage in private talks. (emphasis mine)
Six grueling weeks? Let me remind the intelligent, open-minded readers of the facts about those six grueling weeks there. First of all, this is the first time in six weeks that these elitists haven’t taken a four and a half day weekend. That’s right, I don’t consider it a grueling week when you cut out at noon on Thursday afternoon and return to work on Tuesday at whatever time you chose to saunter in to work for the people. As a matter of fact, we need time clocks and punch-in cards for these phony elitists today, then we shall wee who is actually working forty-plus hours a week like the people paying their salaries, and who isn’t. This is a continuation of the lie that said every politician up on the hill worked all night to try to get a budget deal done. Do they really think the people are so stupid that they will believe that lie? Half of the misfits in Congress can’t stay awake and pay attention during legislative debates during normal working hours, that is when they chose to actually show up, and we are supposed to believe they worked, 60 or 70 hours straight all of a sudden ? Take a look at some of these politicians, it looks like they can barely stand up long enough to make a fifteen minute speech, let alone work for three days straight.
The Hill.com has a pretty decent, all-inclusive breakdown of this debacle here.
The agreement, which came after days of partisan sparring and rhetorical drama, would fund the government through the end of September and cut $78.5 billion compared to Obama’s proposed but never enacted fiscal 2011 budget. (emphasis mine)
When they mention $78.5 billion in budget cuts total there, note the keywords compared to Obama’s 2011 budget proposal. That proposal also increases our deficit in 2011 to a record $1.9 trillion dollars. So no in reality, we are not cutting 78.5 billion from anything there. That is why the realistic total budget cuts for 2011 in this latest deal is mostly stated at around a paltry $38 billion.
So there we have it folks, record deficit spending will continue for the rest of 2011 as we march towards the bankruptcy of the United States of America, and the media propagandists will force-feed the people about how the traitors in Congress, along with Barrack Hussein Obama are to be worshipped as tirelessly working heroes who saved millions of American lives by averting a government shutdown. The propaganda media machine of the left is the only group working overtime here, and it shows. In the meantime, taxpayers are still forced to pay for the Planned Parenthood murder of babies through abortions, the EPA is still passing illegal laws and regulations without going through Congress first, and gasoline prices are skyrocketing. These heroes actually look more like zeroes from my vantage point here.
The catch-phrase propaganda term of the day; “Historic.” Watch for it.
UPDATE, Sunday Morning, April 10th, 2011. Fox has the following headline:
George Soros (pictured clapping in article intro) is up in New Hampshire planning the New World order as he thinks it should be, including re-structuring America’s financial system. He can’t do that if our system is in sound shape, so now he is surely clapping as the media makes champions out of Obama and our Politicians, as they continue our irresponsible deficit spending in 2011 towards the “fundamental transformation of America” that Obama bragged about in 2008. The internet is soon to be our sole source of unbiased, government-influence free sources of real news and information. Historic Deal, my rear end.
He is the primary author of a compromise to keep the government operating for the rest of the year with the largest spending reduction in history – 63 percent of the original GOP request of $61 billion. Republicans also got a potpourri of sweeteners, like up-or-down votes on politically painful subjects like President Obama’s health care law and federal subsidies for Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion provider. Not too shabby for a guy who held only one of three seats at the negotiating table. (emphasis mine)
Spinning numbers with the statement of the largest spending reduction in history – 63% of $61 billion disgusts me to no end here Fox. Here. let me help you with the cold hard truth: $38 billion in cuts is only a record because of the record deficits Obama and the Dems have created in the last two years. $38B isnt squat, when we see almost 2 trillion in deficit spending in 2011 alone. Clear enough ? Mark my words, when America is declared bankrupt and defaults on the $14 trillion in debt loans in the very near future, I,m going to personally rub your faces in this crap for calling it historic and lying to the people about what is really happening here. At some point, we the people must hold the media propagandists accountable for these types of lies and skewed information. Furthermore, calling this a GOP victory is another lie. Boehner didnt win anything, just votes on Planned parenthood’s murder machine and Obamacare that the Harry Rid-controlled Senate will throw in the trash. Also, I notice the EPA defunding vote isn’t mentioned. As far as reducing spending and creating a business-friendly atmosphere to repair our economy, defunding the EPA is the most important issue. Funnt how the media is trying to sweep that topic right under the carpet once again. Pathetic.
If we listen to the bastardization of truth coming from Washington D.C., we should believe that if we cut the budget, if Congress acts responsibly and cuts spending – babies, young children, the old, the infirmed, kittens, puppies and yes .. unicorns will be starved, beaten, robbed, neglected .. killed. Lament the unicorns and kittens while forgetting your own grandchildren if you follow that line of bull crap.
Here a Democrat Representative makes the case that the current budget hold-up is the same as “bombing innocent civilians”
Harry Reid and his cronies are crying foul because they lost, failed and are still failing. They lost the 2010 election. They failed to pass a budget last year when they had a progressive, liberal, Democrat majority in both houses and control of the White House.
They are still failing because they are making illogical, false, propaganda-like statements to a newly awakened American majority; the just right-of-center America; the true America.
Harry and his band of miscreants failed to pass a budget last year. FAILED at one of the most important tasks given to Congress – a task specifically outlined in the Constitution of the United States. While passing a number of resolutions celebrating this holiday or that, commemorating a statue here or a library there and the infamously craptastic health care reform they rammed down our throats, they did NOT do what they were elected to do. They did NOT pass a budget. They did NOT keep care of the nation with which we entrusted them. They killed the unicorns.
Harry Reid has stated that the budget stalemate is due to extremist ideology – for once, he is right. Progressive, left-wing extremist ideologues have been and are driving the Democrats to destruction. They are holding up the entire budget to fund the industrialized baby-killers: Planned Parenthood.
If Planned Parenthood were such a worthy institution, wouldn’t it be able to attract enough funding from generous donors? If health care were it’s major need for federal funds, wouldn’t most of their patients already be on Medicaid? The answer to all of that is .. YES. Planned Parenthood isn’t about parents, parenthood or women – it’s about abortions. The extreme left-wing of the Democrat party is going to shut down the government to protect one special interest group – abortion factories.
This isn’t about abortion per se, the real point of contention is the spending of hard-earned, good-hearted Americans on something they may not agree with. If a woman wants to end her pregnancy there are those that might say that her individual liberty outweighs that of the child’s. I’m not one, but they are out there. While the Supreme Court has ruled that a woman has a right to choose, the rest of America should not be forced to pay for her decision. Just because I have the right to own a gun, does not require the whole of America to buy me one or even help – in fact, I would be insulted if it did.
When the liberals are whining about the entitlements that people may have suspended or that they may lose, realize that if you agree with them, you are stealing from your fellow Americans and future generations to support failed government entitlement programs that everyone knows do NOT work.
So when you see pictures of burglars breaking into the houses of the retired, kids starving, schools in decline .. just remember – it’s the unicorns that are really taking the brunt of GOP budget cuts – the rest of us .. really just don’t matter at all.
The federal government has a spending problem, and everybody knows it. Now thanks to grassroots activists like you who have helped form the largest groundswell rejection of big government spending this country has ever seen, Capitol Hill finally has enough real fiscal conservatives to begin the hard work of reforming the federal budget.
But it won’t be easy. Public employee unions, big government advocates and special interest lobbyists are all clamoring that we can’t possibly cut spending. We need your help to make sure our elected officials know that the grassroots movement is with them and is supporting them while they make these tough decisions.
This year the federal budget will run more than $1.5 trillion in deficit, and more than 40 percent of every dollar we spend is borrowed. Runaway spending is at the core of this problem. More than 70 percent of the federal budget is mandatory spending on entitlement programs and interest payments on the national debt. These programs must be reformed in order for the country to regain its fiscal footing. But let’s also not fall into the same old trap of being afraid to look at defense spending as well. The government’s paramount job is to keep us safe, but that doesn’t mean there isn’t any waste or porkbarrel spending in the Defense Department.
Take action today by filling out the form below to remind your senators and representative that you support cutting spending to help balance the budget.
With an estimated budget gap of $2.4 Billion for 2012, residents might think that Governor Purdue would be searching high and low for ways to close the gap. The State can’t run deficits like the federal government, so in the end, Purdue has to cut something, why not this?
Senate Bill 13 (SB13) would have narrowed the spending gap by $540 million. It did so with $400 million in cuts that Purdue said she would support, and the remainder from three special funds that she did not want to see touched: funds that are spent at her discretion. The three funds are the Golden Leaf Foundation, One North Carolina Fund, and the Job Development Investment Grant.
Republicans are saying that they won’t attempt to override the veto – why should they? The part of the bill she is fighting against is traditionally a Republican play. The money being fought over is used to lure companies into the state by giving them grants, tax breaks, construction funds, etc.
“This bill started out as a way to help North Carolina secure $400 million in additional savings from state government agencies during this difficult budget time,” Perdue said in a statement. “I suggested that bill to the General Assembly and was ready to sign that legislation. But the bill in its current form forces a one-time cash-grab from funds that are intended to create jobs and spur economic development. That’s not the right move for North Carolina, where jobs simply must be our No. 1 priority.” – From WRAL.com
Tax cuts and public money for corporations, or “corporate welfare” has been something that the left typically rails against. They would prefer to see that money spent on the poor, not companies. This is trickle-down economics at its core! Is Bev Purdue channeling Reagan? No.
Purdue is perhaps realizing that if the economy turns around and the job situation gets better, she must be able to take credit. The only way she can do that is if she was personally responsible for bringing in new employers. This is the cheese with which she intends to catch corporate mice. If she no longer controls the cheese, she no longer controls the message.
Another possibility is cronyism – not with the corporations, but the three organizations/funds that would have lost hundreds of millions of dollars and possibly become defunct.
It just isn’t really clear why she did it and North Carolinians have to hope she can find that $540 million and another $1.85 Billion to avoid massive layoffs and shutdowns.
Progressives are up-in-arms over the loss of government jobs that will occur due to the kinds of deep budget cuts House Republicans are pushing. House Speaker John Boehner’s response to them was clear, truthful and responsible
In the last two years, under President Obama, the federal government has added 200,000 new federal jobs. If some of those jobs are lost, so be it. We’re broke.
Liberals are painting the Speaker as a mean-hearted elitist for the most polarizing and honest and succinct part of the entire response – “So be it”.
Speaker Boehner isn’t saying that he doesn’t care if people lose jobs. He’s is telling it like it is. We are out of money and can no longer afford to pay all these people. Companies do it, families do it and finally our government is figuring out that it must also do so.
If a business’ model fails and it is unable to create the revenue needed to pay its bills, lay-offs occur. If a family becomes short of cash, they might stop paying to have the lawn mowed or the car washed. If the government cannot afford the 200,000 people that Obama added to the Federal pay rolls, lay-offs are required – So be it!
Our government has taken on more debt in the last two years than in the entirety of its history – all under one President and a Pelosi/Reid lead Congress. Those irresponsible policies have already cost numerous liberal Congressional members their jobs and Nancy Pelosi the leadership of the house. Failing to reverse the trend may cost more short-sighted, over spending progressives their seats – so be it!
The government is doing too much and none of it that well. If becoming fiscally responsible with our Federal checking account costs a few union-protected, unnecessary jobs in government organizations that aren’t even Constitutionally provided for – So Be It!