Friday, February 12, 2010
Exagggeration, Lies, & Blame Game Vs. TRUTH & REALITY
But, the Obama administration is making it clear that they are continuing with their modus operandi, and keeping allegiance to the failed liberal philosophy of increased government spending. Obama needs to freaking STOP this runaway freight train of spending before it literally wrecks this country. STOP In the Name of Love! Obama STOP for the love of this country. Stop bankrupting this country into oblivion. Please stop pillaging the American people’s wallets!! Please stop stealing from future generations! So, Mr. President, Stop in the Name of LOVE!!!
Here is a fun video and an interesting article below.
Ten Years Ago? Seriously? By: Keith Hennessey
On Monday when releasing his budget the President said:
The fact is, 10 years ago, we had a budget surplus of more than $200 billion, with projected surpluses stretching out toward the horizon. Yet over the course of the past 10 years, the previous administration and previous Congresses created an expensive new drug program, passed massive tax cuts for the wealthy, and funded two wars without paying for any of it -– all of which was compounded by recession and by rising health care costs. As a result, when I first walked through the door, the deficit stood at $1.3 trillion, with projected deficits of $8 trillion over the next decade.
This is a common refrain from the President and his team.
Argument: The previous administration and previous Congresses created an expensive new drug program … without paying for any of it.
•Response 1: Yes, we did. At the time, Congressional Democrats tried and failed to create an even more expensive new drug program without paying for it. (Mr. Obama was not in the Senate at the time.)
•Response 2: This Medicare drug program is ongoing. If the President thinks it is too expensive, then he should propose to make it less expensive. If instead he thinks it should be paid for, then he should propose other spending cuts or tax increases to offset the future costs. Pending health care legislation would instead expand this expensive benefit and pay for the expansion, but would do nothing about paying for the ongoing base costs to which the President is objecting. The past six years of deficit spending from this benefit is beyond President Obama’s control. The future spending is not. He could do this through reconciliation with 51 votes in the Senate.
Argument: The previous Administration and Congresses funded two wars without paying for it.
•Response 1: The Obama Administration is continuing these wars without paying for them, and expanding forces in Afghanistan without paying for that.
•Response 2: Two of those years were with Democratic majorities in the House and Senate. There were legislative attempts to end the Iraq efforts, but none to end the Afghanistan efforts. I don’t remember anyone in the Democratic majority Congress (including then-Senator Obama) making a serious run at cutting other spending or raising other taxes to offset the war costs. Last year Rep. Obey proposed a war tax and was quickly silenced by his colleagues.
Argument: The previous Administration cut taxes for the wealthy without paying for it.
•Response 1: Setting aside the mischaracterization “for the wealthy,” President Obama proposes to extend a significant portion of that tax relief “without paying for it.”
•Response 2: If all the Bush tax cuts are left in place bracket creep will soon cause total federal taxes to once again climb above their historic average of just over 18% of GDP. Repealing these tax cuts would mean the government would be taking far more from the private sector in taxes than it has in the past. I believe taxes are not too low.
•Response 3: Our medium-term and long-term deficit problems are driven by the growth of entitlement spending: Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Raising taxes will not slow this spending, it will just buy us a few years of delay and slow economic growth.