Filed under: Capitalism, Democrat Corruption, Domestic Policy, Economy, Education, Health Care, Junk Science, Politics | Tags: $1.5 Trillion New Taxes, Increases Spending, The Democrats Produced a Budget
After Four Years, Senate Democrats finally decided to obey the law. They produced a budget, and it’s no surprise that they wanted to keep their ideas hidden for so long. It is revealing. The Democrat’s Budget never balances; it increases spending by 62% over ten years; and it adds $7 trillion to the national debt, in spite of raising your taxes by $1.5 trillion.
The Budget Committee, Chairman Patty Murray (D-WA), unanimously opposed balancing the federal budget. Mrs. Murray was first elected in “the year of the woman” as “the mom in tennis-shoes.” That seemed to be her only qualification at the time, or since. Democrats advance by seniority rather than qualifications. Mrs. Murray will do exactly as she is told, as she has been doing for years.
In an interview with George Stephanopoulus, President Obama explained why he doesn’t need to balance the budget.
And, so, we don’t have an immediate crisis in terms of debt. In fact, for the next ten years, it’s gonna be in a sustainable place.
Look, balancing the budget in part depends on how fast you grow. You remember– you were in the Clinton administration. The reason that you guys balanced it was a combination of some tax hikes, some spending cuts, and the economy grew.
And, so– you know, my goal is not to chase– a balanced budget just for the sake of balance. My goal is how do we grow the economy, put people back to work, and if we do that we’re gonna be bringin’ in more revenue. If we’ve controlled spending and we’ve got a smart entitlement package, then potentially what you have is balance. But it’s not balance on the backs of, you know, the poor, the elderly, students who need student loans, families who’ve got disabled kids. That’s not the right way to balance–
Obama always shifts into folksy talk, droppin’ his gs and saying things like ‘gonna’ when he’s trying to come across as just one of the folks.
Someone seems to have been telling Obama that growth is just around the corner. He speaks of America becoming a magnet for good jobs — apparently meaning new jobs in new careers that aren’t invented yet. (Probably those magical green jobs that are always just ahead). When Republicans worry about spending, and balancing the budget, we might as well be talking in an alien language.
Obama counts only the jobs created each month, neglecting to subtract the growth in the population and the growth in the numbers of people who have dropped out of the labor force, so it looks like there has been real progress in putting people back to work, when that is not the case. He goes to new factories and sees promise of future wonders. He sees the common core curriculum teaching our kids all to be able to read a complicated instruction manual. He sees government creating new technologies, new opportunities if he just has plenty of government money to “invest”in research and development, with no understanding that government is not good at new ideas.
Obama is a fierce competitor. He does not understand negotiation. He intends to win. Nobody believes in his “charm offensive,” not even his own people. He wants to force Republicans into an untenable position, so that he can win back the House in 2014, and complete his program.
He seems to have a movie running in his head that doesn’t match the reality that Republicans see. In that show, in which he is a hero, ObamaCare is the answer to Progressives’ long held dreams, and it will heal the sick and make everyone dependent on the government which will be much better for them, for the government knows best. Never mind that the cost of health care was slowly and continuously dropping, Obama is convinced that the problem is not excess spending, but the growing cost of health care. Yet ObamaCare will explode the cost, and eliminate many benefits.
The president is intent on weaning America off of nasty fossil fuels, to that end plans a big tax on carbon emissions. Since carbon does not pay taxes, this is a pure tax on the middle class, on whom he promised not to raise taxes. Carbon emissions are not responsible for global warming, for as carbon in the atmosphere has increased, there has been no warming at all for 16 years.
The movie promises to be a big flop at the box office. Lots of extravagant reviews, but it won’t make any money.
8 Comments so far
Leave a comment
“After Four Years, Congressional Republicans finally decided to obey the law.”
Or did you mean Senate Democrats?
Comment by Lon Mead March 17, 2013 @ 9:24 pmOMG Another brain freeze! Thanks Lon, of course I did.
Comment by The Elephant's Child March 17, 2013 @ 9:28 pmS’alright.
I’ve never considered Patty Murray to be the sharpest spoon in the drawer, so I for one am glad that the Dems gave her a job she didn’t have to really work at (at least for the past few years).
I think one of the problems Obama is facing is one that several far-lefty types are experiencing. They can see that what they are doing just isn’t working, but they have to keep plugging away at it because there is NO WAY that they could POSSIBLY be WRONG all this time, is there? They believe they’re smart, and smart people are NEVER wrong, are they?
Comment by Lon Mead March 17, 2013 @ 10:18 pmYou’re right of course. Patty Murray is one of my two senators. Murray has been voted dullest knife several times by the aides (though how they can tell, I’m not sure, and Maria Cantwell has been voted least effective). I’ve been redistricted into Adam Smith’s district, so I am essentially without representation. The general consensus among calmer Republicans seems to be that the Democrat party has been taken over by the sixties generation who are intent upon social justice, political correctness, ever growing government to accommodate them all and reorder society so it is nicer and more amenable to instruction from their betters. We’ve got an interesting number of committed Socialists in Congress and the administration. They really want the Republican Party to collapse or disappear, but they don’t want to overthrow the government, just improve on it. (Not too well thought out)I have never heard any Republican suggest that we would be better off without an opposing party.
Comment by The Elephant's Child March 17, 2013 @ 10:32 pmMy only correction to that is that we not dealing with the 60′s generation, but rather their students (Obama sat at the feet of Frank Marshall Davis), and they learned their lessons all too well. What Obama and other far-left liberals have been taught is all they know, and these good students defer to their teachers.
Comment by Lon Mead March 17, 2013 @ 11:17 pmWell, I’m thinking of Pelosi, Schumer, Harry Reid, Steny Hoyer, Dianne Feinstein, Maxine Waters, the old tired movers and shakers whose names and faces we all recognize, not the younger people. Aren’t they the Sixties people? I wasn’t thinking of Obama and his crowd, who were students, and learned so little. Probably never read anything seriously by anyone with whom they disagree. They have such weird ideas about Republicans in all our versions, are so incredibly ignorant about history and economics. I’ll try to avoid the phrase.You are not the first who has questioned my use of it
Comment by The Elephant's Child March 18, 2013 @ 12:31 amIt’s okay… All of them are pretty far around the bend as far as I’m concerned. If you seriously challenge their ideas, they react as if it were a personal attack (witness Sen. Feinstein’s reaction to Sen Cruz questioning her over her gun ban). Rude, mean-spirited, intellectually bankrupt, devoid of new ideas (can’t have new ideas until you get the old ones to work, you see), and dishonest on a fundamental level.
Comment by Lon Mead March 18, 2013 @ 2:01 am“Obama counts only the jobs created each month, neglecting to subtract the growth in the population and the growth in the numbers of people who have dropped out of the labor force, so it looks like there has been real progress in putting people back to work, when that is not the case.”
Not the mention that first time unemployment number has always been bigger than the jobs created number.
“In the week ending March 9, the advance figure for seasonally adjusted initial claims was 332,000, a decrease of 10,000 from the previous week’s revised figure of 342,000. The 4-week moving average was 346,750, a decrease of 2,750 from the previous week’s revised average of 349,500.” http://www.dol.gov/opa/media/press/eta/ui/current.htm
“The February jobs report showed that the U.S. added 236,000 new jobs while the unemployment rate fell to its lowest level in four years. The unemployment rate was 7.9 percent in January.” http://washingtonexaminer.com/white-house-says-jobs-report-shows-recovery-gaining-traction/article/2523671
Yet the unemployment number keeps dropping??
Comment by DD More March 19, 2013 @ 2:07 pm