Tag Archives: Paul Ryan

Hold the Line!

Hold the line

Reuters -- Washington, D.C. -- 7-27-11

Tea Party faithfuls are reminding Speaker Boehner that his seat as speaker is dependent upon him living up to their expectations. Expectations that the runaway spending in Washington will end under his leadership.

Wearing t-shirts adorned with “Hold the Line” a large contingent of small-government activists held court at capitol hill on Wednesday. Their show of  solidarity wasn’t about dealing with a foreign enemy, but a domestic one – ourselves. Conservative Americans are asking the right side of the isle to stand firm against Harry Reid’s progressive, extremist caucus on the issue of the national debt.

As children we were showered with the notion that if nothing was done about federal spending that grandchildren would be left with a bill they could not pay. Well, it’s not grandchildren anymore, the United States of America is broke thanks almost entirely to overspending on Democratic entitlement programs.

Rand Paul at D.C. Hold the Line event.

While Democrats and establishment GOP paint the “hold the line” mantra as near psychotic ramblings from an extremist cult – the Tea Parties have it right and Republicans should pay attention – it’s the Constitution, stupid.

Republicans have been forced to water-down budget solutions time-after-time while the Senate Democrats produce nothing. The way this should work is that the House passes their version of a bill, if the Senate doesn’t agree with the bill they offer their version and finally the two sides meet in conference committee to hash out a compromise. Harry Reid has no intention of compromising.

Republicans passed Cut,cap and balance – the Senate Democrats offered no alternative. In fact, they just tabled the bill instead of debating and voting on it as Reid had promised.

Republicans passed the Ryan plan – the Senate Democrats offered no alternative and killed that legislation too.

The kind of brinkmanship being offered by Democrats in the Senate and White House is dangerous. The fact that Republicans are faltering instead of meeting the challenge is disheartening.

What we need now is leadership from the House GOP. Demand that the Senate supply their version of a budget fix and force a conference committee. That is how it is supposed to work. This cycle of pass a bill, Harry hates it, water it down, try to pass it, the House hates it, change it again… is nauseating.  The fact that the House GOP is largely being led around by the nose by Senate Democrats is embarrassing.

Cut,cap and balance is the starting point – it is the line. It’s already passed the House and Republicans should be demanding real negotiations from the left instead of turning tail and looking for more giveaways to  the progressives.

Perhaps we need our own version of Mel Gibson in “The Patriot” running against the tide of fleeing soldiers yelling over and over “HOLD THE LINE .. HOLD THE LINE” while waving the American flag.

Mr. Speaker “HOLD THE LINE!”

They Aren’t Taking This Seriously

Obama and ReidThe debt mess is a huge mess and a whole slew of people aren’t serious about cleaning it up.

Yesterday, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) scored John Boehner’s plan and said that it only cut the deficit by about one trillion dollars over ten years. That same office scored Harry Reid’s plan and said that it would cut twice that in the same time period. Neither are serious efforts at curtailing spending.

Our current national debt stands at $14.3 trillion dollars. We ran a $1.4 trillion deficit just this year. Boehner’s plan wouldn’t even fix the amount we overspent this year and Reid’s wouldn’t cut enough out of future deficits to remedy the amount of overspending for which Obama is to blame.

Paul Ryan was serious when he presented his framework that the DNC killed by showing images of grandma being pushed over the cliff in a wheelchair. Seriously? Of course not.

Cut, Cap and Balance was a serious proposal to finally end the runaway spending in Washington, killed by the Democrats in the Senate and Obama threatened to veto it even if it had passed.

Our members of Congress are not taking this seriously – why not? Probably because a large portion of Americans aren’t paying attention and both Republican and Democrat politicians know it. These are the moderates in America. They don’t closely follow the news, but show up at the polls after having read an article or two the weekend before. There may be no way to get those voters to pay attention other than by letting August 2nd happen without a deal.

The media isn’t taking things seriously either. They are using the same scare tactics as the Democrats. Throwing “default” and “credit rating downgrade” around as if those things aren’t going to happen within a few years one way or another. Why isn’t the main stream media revealing the truth about what August 2nd would really bring if no deal is reached?

First, on August 2nd, there will be no default – none. Not one t-bill will have its yields unpaid. In fact, the Constitution requires that Congress pay those obligations and we will have more than enough in regular revenues to service that debt for the next few years.

There is also enough revenue to pay the troops, send out Social Security checks and take care of Medicare beneficiaries. These, however, are choices that the Obama administration can make. The President could order the Treasury to pay government union employees before funding Social Security or Medicare. Only the President could decide not to pay seniors while funding one of his own priorities and he has levied a veiled threat at our retirees stating that he might just do that.

If our credit rating were to drop to AA+ from AAA, there would not be a worldwide scramble to dump U.S.-backed securities. AA+ would be on-par with other high-quality investments and would still be one of the safest in the marketplace. It is unlikely that an auction would fail or that an interest rate increase (and price drop) would be required to keep investors buying the nation’s debt.

Since Harry Reid and his band of miscreants have said NO to every single viable attempt to cut our deficits and balance the budget, the debt ceiling will do it for them. If no deal is reached, on August 2nd Congress will no longer have the authority to issue more debt. They will have to service the interest on existing debt, pay our troops, issue social security checks, pay Medicare claims and not much else until they can come to agreement on how to fix the mess that they have gotten us into. They will finally have to take the national debt seriously.

Democrat Plan Will Cause Country to Die Sooner

Kathleen SebeliusObama-appointed Health and Human Services Secretary, Kathleen Sebelius is supporting President Obama and congressional liberals in their concerted effort to kill America sooner.

To make sure that no critically-thinking Americans stop them on their reckless spending binge, Kathleen channeled the oratory prowess of Alan Grayson who last year told us that Republicans want us to “die quickly”. In her testimony to the House Education and Workforce Committee, Sebelius echoed Mr. Grayson’s concerns.

“If you run out of the government voucher and then you run out of your own money, you’re left to scrape together charity care, go without care, die sooner. There really aren’t a lot of options.”

The left-wing extremists in our government know that any cut to entitlements threatens there very base of power. They buy votes by handing out gifts from the treasury. Americans have to be bold enough to say, no thank you Madame Secretary, we can’t afford this anymore – we can’t afford YOU anymore.

It is becoming obvious that voters are going to be barraged with an entire line of messaging based on only emotion – no facts, no realization that we’re broke, no compromise – just pure emotion. We’ll be told that any cuts will harm children, kill grandma, or cause the earth to be destroyed by global warming/climate change/human-caused disasters or whatever.  The truth is that if nothing is done, everyone will be harmed, all children will suffer, everybody will die quicker.

If we do not cut entitlements – the nation will fall into bankruptcy. Look at Greece, Ireland, Portugal, the list goes on.

Democrats aren’t coming up with any solutions, just poking holes in the well-thought plans of the House Republicans – Paul Ryan’s plan. Instead. senate democrats are position a status-quo Medicare bill as having savings in it. Senate Budget Committee Charman Kent Conrad (D-ND) is proposing a Medicare bill as a contrast to the House GOP plan. Unfortunately for America, there is absolutely zero deficit reduction in the bill.

“There are savings in Medicare, modest savings to pay for the doc fix,” Conrad said.

The doc-fix is Congress’ annual fix to a shortcoming in Medicare that would underpay doctors for their services. The underpayment would be so significant as to force many out-of-practice. Sen. Conrad’s bill proposes unspecified cuts in Medicare so that more money can be paid to physicians, but does nothing to reduce the deficit.

The Democrats plan simply proves that the current Medicare model cannot continue to exist – it must be reformed. It can’t afford to pay doctors and Sen. Conrad’s cuts will reduce services to seniors in some way.

The major differences in Sen. Conrad’s plan and Rep. Ryans is that Ryan’s reform phases in changes so that seniors aren’t immediately affected and that Rep. Ryan’s plan reduces the deficit – Sen. Conrad is fine with the status quo and hurting seniors to keep it that way.

It is expected that progressives would attack Paul Ryan’s honest attempt to save the country from its fiscal mess. Now, it appears that other house GOP members are quietly stepping back from supporting the plan they voted for. Dave Camp, Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee has already stated that he will not creating the chairman’s mark-up on Ryan’s proposed entitlement reforms.

If the Democrats status quo entitlement plan is allowed to continue, the America our parents and grandparents gave us –  will “die quickly”.

Paul Ryan’s Budget: America- Our Financial Chickens Have Come Home To Roost And It Ain’t Pretty!

Congressman Paul Ryan's Budget Proposal

Congressman Paul Ryan has proposed a Budget for 2012 which he calls “The Path To Prosperity: Restoring America’s Promise”.

When comparing Congressman Ryan’s Budget Resolution with President Barack Obama’s Proposed Budget there is absolutely no question that given the choice, Congressman Ryan’s Budget is the better of the two. Democrat critics have described his Budget Proposal as “Republicans trying to balance the budget on the backs of the poor”.  Personally, I do not believe that Congressman Ryan’s proposed budget goes far enough, and I am by no means wealthy!

While Congressman Ryan’s proposed Budget addresses some essential issues, I believe he is still playing into the typical political games that our politicians play. Critics can say that the plan is an attempt to “balance the budget on the backs of the poor” all they want, but just because they say it doesn’t make it true. For me to take any politician the least bit seriously when they talk about balancing the budget or getting spending under control, they are going to have to stick their necks out and say things that will most definitely be twisted completely out of context by the opposite side of aisle, and quite possible be admonished by the same side of the aisle.

The fact of the matter is if someone doesn’t make the tough choices, none of us are going to have the opportunity to balance our Federal Budget ever again. We are not going to have a nation to worry about a budget for! We are systematically destroying everything that our Founding Father’s dreamt of by bowing to the criticisms of political agendas.  For most Americans- and I include myself in this group- the numbers are quite simply overwhelming. The enormity of the situation we are in financially as a nation does not make any sense at all to most Americans because we cannot honestly fathom what the numbers mean. Unfortunately, rather than facing the facts most people have chosen to simply stick their heads in the sand and ignore it.

The overall outline of Congressman Paul Ryan’s budget, which he calls, “The Path To Prosperity: Restoring America’s Promise”  is that he will cut $6 trillion, reform entitlements and cut taxes. That sounds great! However, cutting the $6 trillion happens over a period of 10 years, NOT IMMEDIATELY! This is still not enough!

There are some definite positives in Congressman Ryan’s budget, the main one being is that it will repeal Obamacare- the Democrat’s health care bill that Obama and the Democrats rammed down the throats of the American people! This is an absolute must, in my opinion, if we are to have any hope in the future as a nation.

Another positive issue that Congressman Ryan’s budget  addresses that is essential is it eliminates  “hundreds of duplicate programs”. This is an absolute must! We are wasting trillions of dollars every year with one government agency overlapping several other government agencies. Multiply this by one hundred and you can see how much money is being wasted when Congressman Ryan’s budget “eliminates HUNDREDS– with an “s”- of duplicate programs”.

I guess it’s true what they say- we did not get into this position overnight, and we are not going to get out of it overnight. However, the interest alone that we will pay even in Congressman Ryan’s 10 year plan is still astronomical! One of the “Key Facts” in Congressman Ryan’s Budget Proposal is that it “puts us on the path to balance and pay off” our debt. I see that the plan is a good start, but should not be seen as the plan to get us out of debt as a nation. We still need to go back to the chopping block and cut more unnecessary spending.

Call me a simple girl, if you will, but it just makes things much simpler if you term things down to the basics. To understand something you have to put it in terms you can process. For the sake of this article, we are going to put the Government Budget and look at it through the eyes that we look at our household budget. I know- this is not the way the Government sees things. They believe they have an entirely different set of rules that apply to them. Oh, wait a minute! Let me correct myself! The Government does not feel that any of the rules apply to them! It seems that most all politicians – Democrats and Republicans alike- feel that they are above the law. The time has come for this to stop! They may see themselves as the elite, but they are not!

My husband and I are going to be the hypothetical example I am going to use to prove how and why the Government Budget should be changed.

The way I see things, if you don’t have the money, you have to cut the budget no matter what it takes. I realize this does not make sense to politicians because this is just common sense. Our politicians have proven to us that common sense is missing in Washington!

Common sense tells us that if my husband loses his job, we have to adjust our spending. If we have been responsible we have a savings account so we are prepared for the rainy day emergencies such as a job loss.

There is the possibility that we have not been able to start a Savings Account. So to keep things on an apples-to-apples comparison, we know that the Federal Government has absolutely no savings.

Even if we do not have a savings account, there’s a good possibility we have credit cards. Here is where the choice comes in. If we are irresponsible we can keep our spending habits the same and just charge things to our credit card- that is, assuming we have credit left on the cards.

If we are responsible we slash our household budget to the absolute necessities until he is able to find another job. If that means we have to leave our 4 bedroom home and move our family- which includes 5 children- into a smaller home, then this is what we must do. Entertainment- which for our family consists of mostly activities we can do together and cost nothing- must be cut to family movies at home or simply playing the backyard. We do whatever it takes until we get back on track. Yes, this means we make tough choices. Yes, this means our family is not as comfortable as we are accustomed to.

This is what the Federal Government should have done years ago! This is what we should do now! However, I know this will never happen. There are too many politicians playing too many political games. There is no one willing to step up to the plate and make the tough decisions.  Our elected officials are more concerned about getting re-elected in the next election than they are about what is necessary to get our country back on the road to financial prosperity. This is Democrats and Republicans alike.

I realize that I am one of the very few people who have this viewpoint. Everyone has their sacred cow. I have no sacred cow- this includes our National Security. My solution for cutting the National Security budget is simple. Bring our entire military men and women home and put them on our borders. The world doesn’t like us being the world police, and we have no business being the world police.

When I married my husband neither of us were independently wealthy. The day we got back from our honeymoon we found out that there had been some mismanagement by his business partner and they had to shut the doors to their business. He was without a job! And we had just gotten married! That day I told him I married him for better or for worse, richer or for poorer. I told him if it meant we had to live in a cardboard box then so be it, as long as we were in the cardboard box together.  I meant every word I said!

Over the years we’ve had situations come up where we use this as a regrouping moment. I have reminded him, “Baby, if I need to find us a cardboard box, I’ll start now.” Thankfully things have never reached that point for us. I know this is not true for many people in our country today.

America needs to realize that if we do not make some very tough decisions NOW then eventually we will ALL be living in cardboard boxes!  We will all be trying to simply survive. There will be no money at all to pay for the Entitlements that everyone refuses to give up. The American public needs to realize and accept this and our politicians need to learn and accept this! Unlike what President Obama seems to think is the reality, we cannot just turn on the printing press and print more money. Eventually things will catch up to you.

When you cut through all of the political speak we are still simply kicking the can down the road. If Americans are serious about “Restoring America’s Promise” on “The Path To Prosperity” we are going to have to all face the facts about where we are as a country! We’ve buried our heads in the sand long enough.

As President Obama’s former Pastor, Rev. Wright said, “America, the chickens have come home to roost”! Our financial situation has caught up to us! Our poor choices over the years now have brought us serious consequences! America, we must wake up and smell the chicken poop! It’s nasty and it stinks. But no matter how much we try to avoid it, if we don’t make the tough choices we are all going to be stepping in piles and piles of the chicken poop that the “chickens that came home to roost” have left!

***
See http://conservativedailynews.com/?p=9664 for companion article.

Help Wanted: Conservative Statesmen

The Tea Party is getting larger and stronger all the time. It is now a force to be reckoned with in Congress, in state legislatures across the fruited plain, and in the daily news cycle. Yet it lacks one thing. One thing that if present would take it from a force to be reckoned with to an irresistible force. What the Tea Party lacks is the one thing the Founding Fathers had in abundance. And what is that? Statesmen. People like Samuel Adams and Patrick Henry were integral to the American Revolution and the establishment of the Constitution. The Tea Party lacks the latter-day equivalents of Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, George Washington and James Madison. Politicians the Tea Party has aplenty. Statesmen, though, are sorely lacking.

Using the Tea Parties analogy to the American Founding, I think you can fairly compare people like Palin and Bachmann to Henry and Sam Adams. That isn’t enough though. We need people like Paul Ryan, and yes, Chris Christie (even if I am not completely sold on him). People who are sensible and pragmatic and educated and experienced. If we want real change, I think the founding of our country is a good model to look at. Hopefully, we can avoid a physical revolution. I believe the founders died so we wouldn’t have to go there. But they do provide a good model for getting things back on the right track. We should look at the whole model. If things had ended in Boston Harbor, we would still be a protectorate of the United Kingdom right now. That isn’t good enough. – ALRMCoug

In response to ALARMCoug’s blog post, HighHorse came back with this bit of analysis concerning the Tea Party:

There is no Samuel Adams on the scene in America today. The centrist Republican establishment sees to it that a modern day Samuel Adams or Thomas Jefferson will not get anywhere in America.

Your example is interesting because Samuel Adams, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison were known radicals even in that day. The Tea Party of today is radical as were those guys mentioned. We can expect a watered down version that will never create real change in our country. Moderates will see to it that the true radicals never have representation.

It isn’t just bloggers that recognize the need for leaders of our nation who possess the qualities found in such abundance among those who brought forth the United States of America. Academics see it as well:

The raising up of that constellation of “wise” Founding Fathers to produce America’s remarkable Constitution, whose rights and protection belong to “every man,” was not a random thing…. One historian called our Founding Fathers “the most remarkable generation of public men in the history of the United States or perhaps of any other nation” (Arthur M. Schlesinger, The Birth of the Nation [1968], 245). Another historian added, “It would be invaluable if we could know what produced this burst of talent from a base of only two and a half million inhabitants” (Barbara W. Tuchman, The March of Folly: From Troy to Vietnam [1984], 18). – Neal A. Maxwell

Furthermore, the Founding Fathers recognized for themselves the remarkable nature of the founding of this nation. Describing the drafting of the U.S. Constitution. In a 1788 letter to Lafayette, he said:

“It appears to me, then, little short of a miracle, that the delegates from so many different states (which states you know are also different from each other in their manners, circumstances, and prejudices) should unite in forming a system of national Government, so little liable to well-founded objections.” 3

It was a miracle. Consider the setting.

The thirteen colonies and three and one-half million Americans who had won independence from the British crown a few years earlier were badly divided on many fundamental issues. Some thought the colonies should reaffiliate with the British crown. Among the majority who favored continued independence, the most divisive issue was whether the United States should have a strong central government to replace the weak “league of friendship” established by the Articles of Confederation. Under the Confederation of 1781, there was no executive or judicial authority, and the national Congress had no power to tax or to regulate commerce. The thirteen states retained all their sovereignty, and the national government could do nothing without their approval. The Articles of Confederation could not be amended without the unanimous approval of all the states, and every effort to strengthen this loose confederation had failed.

Congress could not even protect itself. In July 1783, an armed mob of former Revolutionary War soldiers seeking back wages threatened to take Congress hostage at its meeting in Philadelphia. When Pennsylvania declined to provide militia to protect them, the congressmen fled. Thereafter Congress was a laughingstock, wandering from city to city.

Unless America could adopt a central government with sufficient authority to function as a nation, the thirteen states would remain a group of insignificant, feuding little nations united by nothing more than geography and forever vulnerable to the impositions of aggressive foreign powers. No wonder the first purpose stated in the preamble of the new United States Constitution was “to form a more perfect union.”

The Constitution had its origin in a resolution by which the relatively powerless Congress called delegates to a convention to discuss amendments to the Articles of Confederation. This convention was promoted by James Madison and Alexander Hamilton, two farsighted young statesmen still in their thirties, who favored a strong national government. They persuaded a reluctant George Washington to attend and then used his influence in a letter-writing campaign to encourage participation by all the states. The convention was held in Philadelphia, whose population of a little over 40,000 made it the largest city in the thirteen states.

As the delegates assembled, there were ominous signs of disunity. It was not until eleven days after the scheduled beginning of the convention that enough states were represented to form a quorum. New Hampshire’s delegation arrived more than two months late because the state had not provided them travel money. No delegates ever came from Rhode Island.

Economically and politically, the country was alarmingly weak. The states were in a paralyzing depression. Everyone was in debt. The national treasury was empty. Inflation was rampant. The various currencies were nearly worthless. The trade deficit was staggering. Rebelling against their inclusion in New York State, prominent citizens of Vermont had already entered into negotiations to rejoin the British crown. In the western territory, Kentucky leaders were speaking openly about turning from the union and forming alliances with the Old World.

Instead of reacting timidly because of disunity and weakness, the delegates boldly ignored the terms of their invitation to amend the Articles of Confederation and instead set out to write an entirely new constitution. They were conscious of their place in history. For millennia the world’s people had been ruled by kings or tyrants. Now a group of colonies had won independence from a king and their representatives had the unique opportunity of establishing a constitutional government Abraham Lincoln would later describe as “of the people, by the people, and for the people.”

The delegates faced staggering obstacles. The leaders in the thirteen states were deeply divided on the extent to which the states would cede any power to a national government. If there was to be a strong central government, there were seemingly irresolvable differences on how to allocate the ingredients of national power between large and small states. As to the nature of the national executive, some wanted to copy the British parliamentary system. At least one delegate even favored the adoption of a monarchy. Divisions over slavery could well have prevented any agreement on other issues. There were 600,000 black slaves in the thirteen states, and slavery was essential in the view of some delegates and repulsive to many others.

Deeming secrecy essential to the success of their venture, the delegates spent over three months in secret sessions, faithfully observing their agreement that no one would speak outside the meeting room on the progress of their work. They were fearful that if their debates were reported to the people before the entire document was ready for submission, the opposition would unite to kill the effort before it was born. This type of proceeding would obviously be impossible today. There is irony in the fact that a constitution which protects the people’s “right to know” was written under a set of ground rules that its present beneficiaries would not tolerate.

It took the delegates seven weeks of debate to resolve the question of how the large and small states would be represented in the national congress. The Great Compromise provided a senate with equal representation for each state, and a lower house in which representation was apportioned according to the whole population of free persons in the state, plus three-fifths of the slaves. The vote on this pivotal issue was five states in favor and four against; other states did not vote, either because no delegates were present or because their delegation was divided. Upon that fragile base, the delegates went forward to consider other issues, including the nature of the executive and judicial branches, and whether the document should include a bill of rights.

It is remarkable that the delegates were able to put aside their narrow sectional loyalties to agree on a strong central government. Timely events were persuasive of the need: the delegates’ memories of the national humiliation when Congress was chased out of Philadelphia by a mob, the recent challenge of Shay’s rebellion against Massachusetts farm foreclosures, and the frightening prospect that northern and western areas would be drawn back into the orbit of European power.

The success of the convention was attributable in large part to the remarkable intelligence, wisdom, and unselfishness of the delegates. As James Madison wrote in the preface to his notes on the Constitutional Convention:

“There never was an assembly of men, charged with a great and arduous trust, who were more pure in their motives, or more exclusively or anxiously devoted to the object committed to them.” – Dallin H. Oaks

The Tea Party has its heroes to be sure:

  • Chris Christie is a fiscal genius who is reclaiming the State of New Jersey from the leftist teachers union in that state.
  • Governor Scott Walker made history as he disemboweled the public employee unions in Wisconsin.
  • Justice David Prosser of the Wisconsin State Supreme Court beat back a socialist candidate in dramatic fashion.
  • Sarah Palin is a continual thorn in Barack Obama’s side with her instantly classic Facebook posts.
  • Rush Limbaugh bedevils the progressives so much that he is their inspiration to attempt to take away our Freedom of Speech and Freedom of the Press.
  • Paul Ryan’s deficit reduction bill is so powerful that the socialists are compelled to lie about it in order to try to convince independent voters that it is evil. And we all know that the independents are the block of voters who decide elections in this country.
  • Donald Trump has revived the argument about Obama’s missing birth certificate. Stay tuned, this issue isn’t over yet!
  • Michele Bachmann is such a powerful conservative voice that she has a real shot at the Republican nomination for president in 2012.

But still, the Tea Party is missing its statesmen. We are talking about leaders of the stature of Winston Churchill, Mohandas Karamchand Ghandi, Benjamin Disraeli, and yes, Benjamin Franklin. Where are the leaders for our time? Surely we can do better than the RINO Jon Huntsman. Do we really think that Tim Pawlenty is in the same league as James Madison? Does the thought of Mitt Romney as president inspire comparisons to John Adams? Barack Obama Lite is not what this country needs. Obama is not less-filling and he sure doesn’t taste great, either.

The Tea Party needs leaders of unabashed conservatism. The Tea Party needs leaders with the courage of their convictions. The Tea Party needs leaders who respect the Constitution and who are willing to fight in defense of that inspired document of freedom. The Tea Party seeks God-fearing leaders who recognize that the State is subservient to Him who land this is. The Tea Party needs a charismatic, humble, yet strong leader who exudes confidence in the defense of liberty. The Tea Party needs the second coming of the Founding Fathers.

If Obama is to be defeated in the 2012 elections then the Tea Party must produce a leader who can rally the conservative troops. A divided conservative base will lose the election. An energized conservative base will sweep Obama into the ash heap of history. Let us pray we find our statesman before it is too late.

 

Government Shutdown Rhetoric Contains Major Fearmongering

Friday night at midnight, the U.S. Government will be effectively shutdown, babies will starve to death and Senior citizens will be lined up and shot to death in the public square by firing squads made up of Republican politicians.  While this may seem like a far-fetched scenario,  this is the main theme from Democrats that refuse to even attempt to come to a reasonable solution in the current budget debate. Keep in mind that Republicans have offered several different budget proposals, while we have yet to see anything substantial put down on paper from the Democratic side of the aisle. Big bloated, redundant, wasteful and fraudulent government programs must not be touched, to hear the Democrats tell it.

I recently called attention to the recent GOP Budget plan for 2012 that compares Obama’s proposed $9 trillion in more irresponsible spending and debt to Paul Ryan’s $6.2 trillion in cuts proposal here. We are fast approaching $15 trillion in national debt people, our world credit rating is about to fall, states are facing bankruptcy, and Democrats want to just keep right on spending us into financial Armageddon !

When looking into the effects that a federal Government shutdown would have on States, we see one glaring fact: States already in the worst financial condition would suffer the worst almost immediately. I consider this as a great reason  to shut the government down, if nothing else it will teach these states some fiscal responsibility.  Also of note is the fact that the states in the worst financial condition are mostly the blue Democratically controlled nanny states, as noted in the N.Y.Times :

“The impact of a short federal shutdown would be minimal, the association wrote in a recent briefing paper. A longer shutdown could pose problems. Even if many of the potential fiscal effects are relatively small, they could create cash-flow problems for some states already operating on tight budgets. (emphasis mine)

Illinois, for example, is currently trying to pay off a $4.5 billion backlog of bills to vendors going back to October. Bradley C. Hahn, a spokesman for the Illinois comptroller, Judy Baar Topinka, said, “A shutdown would be particularly devastating for states like ours that have no margins to cover the costs.”

Illinois also happens to be the home state of our community organizer in chief, Barack Hussein Obama, and this is very indicative of his Socialist policies that are included right in his very own bloated budget proposal.  This is the main reason we see the Democrats so opposed to cutting any government programs, as those same programs are basically  federal wealth redistribution to liberal nanny states.

UnionLaborReport.com has assembled a great report so that we can get a feeling for just how bad the budget mess is in every state of the union.

Here are just some of the findings:

Worst 10 States Total Unfunded Liabilities Debt Load:

California= $121,955,498,000
New Jersey= $103,334,055,000
Illinois= $94,330,617,000
Michigan= $51,393,100,000
Ohio= $46,537,804,000
New York= $45,858,000,000
Texas= $42,392,812,000
Massachusetts= $36,791,052,000
North Carolina= $29,246,320,000
Alabama= $24,778,329,000

Read more: http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/publius-forum/2011/04/top-worst-state-budgets-unions-have-put-every-states-budget-in-the-hole.html#ixzz1IquVfoc5

What do the majority of the above listed states have in common? Most are controlled by Democrats, with the exception of Texas, whom has a more realistic way of dealing with their budget every year. Unions are also predominant in those states, and that is how the Democrats stay in power in them. Democrats give them lavish salaries and benefits beyond what the states can afford, and the Unions in return buy the votes and campaign ads for them and also supply the get out the vote manpower to keep them in power.  Shut the government down for several weeks, and let these parasitic nanny states pay the price. Sure it will effect the rest of the states to some degree, but that will let the public see just how responsible states can operate without the federal bloated bureaucracy sucking the life out of them.
Fiscally responsible red states will continue to operate for the most part under a government shutdown.  The main agenda behind the democratic fear-mongering about babies starving and seniors dying if the government does shut down is pretty simple: Democrats are scared to death that it will expose exactly which states are sucking on the federal wealth redistribution pipeline the most, and the fact that this is where the Democrats derive their power base.  That will show the people the truth about the Democratic party of today, and how they are behind the big government expansion that has us approaching $15 trillion dollars in debt today. This is also why the Democrats failed to produce a budget last year, as those numbers would expose the truth about their last 4 years of controlling both Houses of Congress and the irresponsiblespending that occurred under their regime. All essential personnel will still be working during a shutdown. Just who is deemed essential will be determined in large part by the President. That puts him on the hottest seat of all, thus he is calling for the budget problem to be resolved.
Either install some fiscal sanity, or shut the government down and let the truth be told about which states are irresponsible spenders that won’t be able to survive very long if the federal government shuts down. That fact is already proven right here in this article. The Democratic nanny states will be in big trouble without the federal wealth redistribution of tax dollars, and will be hit the hardest. Serves them, and the ignorant voters who keep them in power, right!  I believe that would also come under the heading of true “social justice.”
Recent Entries »