….Reuters reports that Obama's proposed budget would cut the deficit by $1.1 trillion over 10 years. Are you kidding me? We wouldn't even come close to balancing the budget if we applied all those cuts in one year, BUT SPREAD OUT OVER 10 YEARS, THEY ARE INSULTING. PLUS, MANY OF THESE "CUTS" WOULD BE SOLELY THE RESULT OF BRINGING TROOPS HOME FROM IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN.
We also learned that Obama's deficit for 2011 would not be the outrageously obscene $1.5 trillion the Congressional Budget Office revealed last month, which was already substantially above last year's $1.3 trillion, but a staggering $1.65 trillion.
With their signature audacity and cynicism, WHITE HOUSE OFFICIALS DUBBED THE ADMINISTRATION'S 10-YEAR PLAN A "DOWN PAYMENT" ON FUTURE DEFICIT REDUCTION. I'm not sure that even George Orwell could wrap his arms around such sophistry. To call an enormous increase in an already gargantuan budget deficit a "down payment" on anything (other than this nation's imminent financial ruin) does violence to the English language….
So we're going from investments to down payments on deficit reductions but both at the same time this year. It takes someone with a lot chutzpah to try to make that sale.
Grover Norquist, head of Americans for Tax Reform
…..He made three observations. First, he says that THE ADVANTAGEOUS POSITION REPUBLICANS NOW ENJOY STEMS FROM "THE HEROIC VICTORY" IN THE SENATE IN BLOCKING THE OMNIBUS SPENDING BILL. Had the Senate Republicans not stood firm, they would have deprived Republicans of the opportunity to touch the budget for nearly a year. (Norquist says of the wavering and retiring Republican senators, "I had no leverage. Mitch McConnell somehow walked them back. How'd he do it? Someday I'll get up the nerve to ask him.") INSTEAD, OFF THE BAT REPUBLICANS ARE SEEN CUTTING, AND OBAMA IS SEEN SPENDING.
SECOND, IN NORQUIST'S VIEW, SOMETIMES A PROLONGED BATTLE IS BETTER THAN A QUICK CAPITULATION by the other side. He points to Tim Pawlenty (2012 candidate alert!). He says, "Why isn't Tim Pawlenty a star like Chris Christie? It's 'cause no one saw him do it. His budget veto [as Minnesota governor] was overruled by the state supreme court. HE WENT TO THE DEMOCRATS AND SAID HE'D FIGHT TO THE BITTER END. THEY CAVED." Norquist said if the fight had gone on for two months, Pawlenty would "be a budget cutting star." In sum, A PROLONGED FIGHT WITH THE WHITE HOUSE, IN NORQUIST'S EYES, WORKS TO REPUBLICANS' ADVANTAGE.
And finally, he is optimistic that House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan's 2012 budget will be "fairly close to the closing position" on the budget. In his view, "All the pressure is on Obama to spend, and all the pressure on [the Republicans] is to cut."
We'll see if he's right, and if Obama made a fatal political miscalculation.
I think a prolonged fight with the White House works for the Republicans. During the lame duck session of congress, Obama quickly caved on tax cuts and got an enormous bounce in his approval ratings. The Democrats were unhappy, but that didn’t hurt Obama. Likewise, a prolonged fight will work for the Republicans simply because what they represent is what the American public knows is the right thing for the country. But here’s another look at what I’m seeing.
And here is the money quote: “Obama isn’t failing to lead. He is very cleverly leading us toward an irreversible expansion of the welfare state.”
In case you forgot: 2012? 2011 still needs budget
As Congress and President Obama clash over the 2012 budget, THEY DO SO WITHOUT HAVING EVER SIGNED INTO LAW A SPENDING PLAN FOR THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR. Seven months remain in fiscal 2011, and so far the government has been funded by a series of stopgap measures that maintain spending mostly at 2010 levels.
The democrats crowed when they swept into power in 2007 that they would no longer have off budget items like funding for the war. But the 2011 budget has everything off budget since the Democratic Congress never passed a budget.
Government shutdown would be GOP's fault
HOUSE MINORITY WHIP STENY HOYER SAID TUESDAY THAT THE BLAME WILL FALL ON REPUBLICANS SHOULDERS IF THERE’S A GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN LATER THIS YEAR.http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0211/49577.html#ixzz1E4JVABEU
As the House kicked off debate on a funding measure for the rest of 2011, the Maryland Democrat told reporters that Democrats will do everything they can to avoid closing federal agencies.
“If the government shuts down, it will be the Republicans’ responsibility,” he said.
I placed this right after the story that the Democrats failed to pass a budget and asking the question, why are the Democrats talking about this and trying to blame the Republicans in advance? It appears the old adage that every time you point a finger at someone three of them are pointing back at yourself seems to apply. And if the Democrats had passed a budget there would be no shutdown possible.
Sarah Palin: The Truth Behind the White House’s Budget Spin
Today the White House finally produced its proposal for the 2012 budget. Beware of the left’s attempt to sell this as “getting tough on the deficit,” because as an analysis from Americans for Tax Reform shows, the White House’s plans are more about raising taxes and growing more government than reducing budget shortfalls.
The fine print reveals a White House proposal to increase taxes by at least $1.5 trillion over the next decade. If you want to know how minuscule their proposed $775 million-a-year budget “cuts” really are, please look at this chart. The proposed cuts are so insignificant – less than 1/10 of 1% of this year’s $1.65 trillion budget deficit – that they are essentially invisible on the pie chart. That speaks volumes about today’s budget.
I already commented on this, but to refresh your memory. If we had a household budget of $4000 per month and one of the breadwinners lost their job so our income was only $2500, this is the equivalent of cutting our monthly expenditures by 80 cents.
Meanwhile at the NY TIMES
On paper, PRESIDENT OBAMA’S NEW $3.7 TRILLION BUDGET IS ENCOURAGING. It MAKES A NUMBER OF TOUGH CHOICES to cut the deficit by a projected $1.1 trillion over 10 years, which is enough TO PREVENT AN UNCONTROLLED EXPLOSION OF DEBT in the next decade and, as a result, reduce the risk of a fiscal crisis.
The questions are whether its tough choices are also wise choices and whether it stands a chance in a Congress in which Republicans, who now dominate the House, are obsessed with making indiscriminate short-term cuts in programs they never liked anyway. THE REPUBLICAN CUTS WOULD EVISCERATE VITAL GOVERNMENT FUNCTIONS while not having any lasting impact on the deficit.
The Times goes on to lament “a refusal by lawmakers to face the inescapable need to raise taxes at some point.” So the Times as a good mouthpiece for the Democrats have never met a tax increase they didn’t like and didn’t support.
Rocky and the Republicans
Rocky Marciano was the only heavyweight champion who never lost a single fight in his whole career-- and, at the time, he seemed the least likely fighter to do that. In many a boxing match, he was battered, bruised and bleeding.
ONE OF THE REASONS MARCIANO TOOK SO MUCH PUNISHMENT IN THE RING WAS THAT HE HAD SHORTER ARMS THAN MOST OTHER HEAVYWEIGHTS. It was easier for others to hit him than for him to hit them.
IN A SENSE, REPUBLICANS TODAY ARE IN A SIMILAR POSITION IN THE POLITICAL ARENA. With most of the media heavily tilted toward the Democrats, Republicans are going to get hit far more often than they are going to get in their own punches.
The difference is that Rocky Marciano understood from the beginning that he was going to get hit more often, and prepared himself for that kind of fight. HIS STRATEGY WAS TO CONCENTRATE ON DEVELOPING PUNCHES POWERFUL ENOUGH TO NULLIFY HIS OPPONENTS' GREATER NUMBER OF PUNCHES.
Republicans take the opposite approach from that of Rocky Marciano-- and often with opposite results. That may be why they managed to lose both houses of Congress and the White House in recent years, in a country WHERE THERE ARE MILLIONS MORE PEOPLE WHO CALL THEMSELVES CONSERVATIVES THAN THERE ARE WHO CALL THEMSELVES LIBERALS.
Here’s a must read column by Dr. Thomas Sewell.
Confessions of a San Francisco voter
….DURING THE 2008 PRIMARY THE LIBERAL LEFT AND THE DEMOCRATS EXPOSED WHO THEY REALLY ARE. What was done to Hillary Clinton by the Democratic Party and the complicit media SHOOK ME OUT OF MY OLD BELIEF SYSTEM. I broke free from the self-limiting anger and hate created by the left and the media towards the right.http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/02/sarah_and_the_san_francisco_po.html
For years I accepted the leftist line. Things I never cared about trying to make sense of, or tried to form my own real opinions about, suddenly became important to me.
IT WAS LIKE I HAD BEEN IN AN ABUSIVE RELATIONSHIP WHERE I HAD BEEN LIED TO AND PUSHED AROUND FOR SO LONG THAT I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT THE TRUTH WAS ANYMORE. I began to think for myself and ask questions I never thought to ask before. Instead of taking the word of my abusers, I went in search of my own answers, and through my research REALIZED THAT THE THINGS I THOUGHT WERE TRUE WERE NOT. It didn't take me long to discover that there were many of us out there who underwent the same awakening and personal and emotional transformation.
Now I am being courted by another potentially abusive lover. The Republican Party.
I am a little relationship shy right now and AM ENJOYING BEING AN INDEPENDENT VOTER AND THINKER. I love my freedom. I love the freedom to think for myself. And when I believe in something it is because I'VE DONE MY OWN RESEARCH TO SUPPORT OR DENY THE "FACTS" I'M GIVEN. I WILL NO LONGER BE FOOLED. A "news" personality/anchor or corrupt politician can no longer tell me how to think or feel. And now, when I hear the left repeating the same old lies and using the same tactics of hate and personal destruction, I am determined to break the chains of intolerance and lies that keep so many on the left captive to a destructive belief system….
Here’s the story of a wakeup call and what it means.
GM to pay $400 million in worker bonuses
Less than two years after entering bankruptcy, General Motors will extend millions of dollars in bonuses to most of its 48,000 hourly workers as a reward for the company's rapid turnaround after it was rescued by the government.
The payments, disclosed Monday in company documents, are similar to bonuses announced last week for white-collar employees. The bonuses to 76,000 American workers will probably total more than $400 million — an amount that suggests executives have increasing confidence in the automaker's comeback….
Shouldn’t GM be paying bonuses to the American taxpayer? The Union workers didn’t have to give up anything in the government take over and the government still owns billions in stock. Shouldn’t that money come back to the federal government?
Arpaio leads in early poll to replace John Kyl
MARICOPA COUNTY SHERIFF JOE ARPAIO led a field of potential Republican Senate candidates in Arizona with 21 PERCENT IN A POLL OF LIKELY GOP PRIMARY VOTERS LAST WEEK.
REP. JEFF FLAKE, who announced his candidacy for the seat of retiring Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) on Monday, FINISHED SECOND WITH 16.8 PERCENT in the Summit Consulting Group survey. FORMER REP. J.D. HAYWORTH took third, WITH 16.6 PERCENT. He was unsuccessful in his primary challenge to Sen. John McCain last year….
Nelson Below 50 Percent in New Poll
FLORIDA DEMOCRATIC SEN. BILL NELSON SHOULD BE RELIEVED GOP FORMER GOV. JEB BUSH HAS INDICATED HE WON'T CHALLENGE HIM IN NEXT YEAR'S Senate race, because a new poll shows the Democrat would come up short.
A Mason-Dixon poll out this morning shows that in a matchup between Bush and Nelson, NELSON WOULD LOSE BY 8 POINTS, 49 PERCENT TO 41 PERCENT.
The poll of 625 registered voters was conducted on Feb. 9 and 10 and has a margin or error of 4 percentage points.
What Bias Looks Like
MEGAN MCARDLE EXPLORES THE CAUSES AND CONSEQUENCES OF ACADEMIA’S LIBERAL SKEW. In her concluding section, she notes that one problem with excluding conservatives from academia is THAT IT “MAKES SCHOLARSHIP WORSE.”
Unless we assume what to many liberals is “proven” by their predominance in academia–that conservative ideas have no merit–leaving conservatives out means that important viewpoints are excluded. WE ARE NEVER THE BEST INTERROGATORS OF OUR IDEAS. It requires motivated critics to lay bare our hidden assumptions, our misreading of the data, our factual inaccuracies. No matter how scrupulously honest you try to be, you are no substitute for an irritated opponent thinking, “That can’t possibly be right!”
IF YOU BUILD A GROUP WITH THE SAME ASSUMPTIONS, YOU CAN ALL TOO EASILY GO WRONG.
. . . it’s healthier if different groups, with different taboos, all have a place in the quest for truth. Monoculture is as unhealthy for ideas as it is for agriculture.
I highly recommend reading this link and go to review the comments as well (they are very informative). I have to agree with this. At one time when I worked as a Manufacturing Director, I had a manager who thought exactly like I did. It worried me to no end because we needed to disagree to insure we weren’t overlooking anything important. When two people think exactly the same, one of them isn’t necessary.