Lay aside all the partisan rhetoric and return to God! Without God, Liberty
does not exist. The great society, without charity, is a complete failure.
Compulsion, by government, without protection of our God-given rights is a sham!
We will return to prosperity and honest politicians when enough honest people
come back to the fold!
What kind of message is Obama sending when he wants a tax increase on the
"wealthy" and, at the same time, he wants to continue a tax holiday on
the payroll tax for the rest of us?He claims that continuing the
payroll tax holiday will generate at least $100 billion more in private
circulation and that that $100 billion will translate to thousands of new jobs,
jobs that take people off the unemployment roles.Does he really
think that reducing taxes on the general public by $100 billion and them raising
taxes by $100 billion on the "wealthy" will put more money in private
circulation? Can he do the math? Let me help. $100 billion minus $100 billion
equals ZERO.We need jobs. We need MORE workers who pay taxes. We
need FEWER people on unemployment. If $100 BILLION in tax cuts will stimulate
job growth, then what would $200 BILLION do, or $500 BILLION? What is the magic
number? What will it take to get unemployment down to 5%?
Spending is at all time highs and taxes are at 60 year lows.PLEASE
PLEASE tell my why it is not reasonable to make adjustments to both of those
I don't think you would be happy with anything the President put forward. Look
at your arguments in this editorial. And the Republicans were putting out their
talking points before they could possibly have reviewed the budget. The
response is not in good faith, but no one should have expected a different
response from the GOP.What a comparison of the budget with Romney's
plan shows is that Romney proposes higher taxes for the poor and lower taxes for
the very rich. Sorry, but this is the wrong direction. The budget does
establish a line in the sand and will give voters the opportunity to see that
the President is oriented more towards helping the middle class and the poor,
and the Republicans are about protecting the interests of the rich. Sorry,
folks, but almost none of you are in the very rich, yet many of you act against
your own interests. See the NYT article (with video interviews) this week where
the reporter went to a Minnesota town and talked to conservatives who much
relied on government help, but then voted for people who would take it away from
I agree with this editorial except the last sentence. Americans do have the
government they deserve. I didn't but my fellow citizens elected a completely
unqualified person who promised "change" but has only delivered
business as usual in DC. A President who completely ignored the deficit
commission he appointed and then had the audacity to attack Paul Ryan who put
forth a reasonable plan that may not have been perfect but was an earnest effort
worth considering seriously. What did he offer in response? A plan? No, another
speech. We do indeed have the government we deserve. It's our children who
won't have the Country/Government they deserve.
Amen..the article is .absolutely correct!
Republicans need to tax the rich. It is against their principles, but they have
to compromise.Democrats, on the other hand, need to means test for
social security and medicare. No subsidized health insurance for retired
millionaires. It should be less of a pain for them than for the Republicans.
After all it is according to their professed principles.But I am not
holding my breath.
How many budgets has the President proposed? How many compromises?
Birth control, etc? How many times has the Republican dominated
House voted to support him? We have 139 filibusters in the
Senate. **'The Rise Of Cloture: How GOP Filibuster Threats Have
Changed The Senate' - Ben Frumin and Jason Reif - Talking Points Memo -
01/27/10 'When Democrats reclaimed the Senate majority in the 2006
midterm elections, cloture filings shot up from 68 in 2005-2006 (From Dems) to a
record 139 in 2007-2008.' (From Republicans) - article Almost DOUBLE
from a Democratic majority. What does this tell us?
Obama is not the one presenting 'more of the same'. He is being Obstructed,
every step of the way, by the Republican party. We have this
exampled by the nation's damaged credit score! Try to tell me this 'didn't
happen' because of the GOP votin g 'No' on EVERY piece of legislation, including
the Budget. The GOP is putting the well-being of it's PARTY... OVER, the well being of this country. And the Ameican
citizens, are taking notice. Why vote for someone...
...who doesn't work to help this country??
There is no "means test" when the government takes our social security
"contributions" so there can be no "means test" when it
comes time for the government to keep its promises.I do not think
that any nation can tax itself into prosperity and I do not think that any
family can spend its way into wealth.Taxes take money away from
those who work for it and taxes take money out of the hands of those who might
want to spent it for someone that they want, not for something that the
government thinks we need.I am 100% for all authorized spending by
the government. If we citizens have given the government the obligation to do
something for us, we should be willing to pay for that service. I know that
those obligations have been written down so that no one can make a mistake. I
think that most of the things that the government is doing are things that the
government has decided to do are not on that list.
What is obvious about Obama is that fact he is in way over his head. With only
two years in the senate for experience, why we elected him is a valid question.
He has no idea how to work with both sides of the aisle. Say what you want, but
Republicans have been frustrated by his refusal to discuss issues. He may be a
nice guy and charismatic, but there is a good reason why democrats and
republicans have reached the worst impasse we have had in years. His "my
way or the highway" approach has obstructed much possible legislation. He
has increased the size of government exponentially, ruined private enterprise,
increased the percentage of people depending on government support by 25%, and
created a foreign policy that has brought disrespect in the eyes of our allies
and enemies. His universalist views of a world-wide government and religion are
downright scary. Retirement after one term is critical for our country. The
only question history will have is, who was worse, Carter or Obama?
@CounterIntelligence"Obama's budget is a joke: Taking all the money
of the uberwealthy would not make a dent in his overspending."His budget has a 2013 deficit of 900 billion which is 300 billion less than
this years' projected deficit.
@Mike Richards"Does he really think that reducing taxes on the
general public by $100 billion and them raising taxes by $100 billion on the
"wealthy" will put more money in private circulation? Can he do the
math? Let me help. $100 billion minus $100 billion equals ZERO."The rich don't spend their money. Look at Romney. He's got 100 million trust
fund for his kids. Not that there's anything wrong with it... but that's 100
million that's not in the economy. 100 million in the hands of the middle class
gets spent into the economy.
alt134,Just where is that $100 million that Romney has set aside for
his kids? Is it stuffed in a mattress? Is is sitting on a shelf in a
piggy-bank or is it working hard as capital that funds businesses and employes
people?Surely you are educated to the point that you understand how
wealth is used.Surely you are not one of the ignorant who think that
rich people are just another "Scrooge McDuck" as characterized by
Disney.If the government seized that $100 million, how many
businesses would be foreced to close? How many people would lose their jobs?
What would the government do with that money? Would they use it to pay
unemployment benefits to the people that they put out of work?
atl134,$100 million in a trust fund or bank account will do much
more for the economy than $100 million spent in grocery stores. Economics 101.
Maybe the arithmetic this administration uses is the "new math".They probably need remedial help, the numbers don't add up.
'Maybe the arithmetic this administration uses is the "new math". -
1conservative | 12:21 p.m. Feb. 14, 2012 If this is true, then I
want to know what math justifies the Bush Tax cuts for the wealthy will 'create
jobs'... when unemployment shot UP, from the 7% under Bush, to the
9% when Obama took office. If these are the SAME policies, and the
Republican party claims the wealthy 'job creators' have been creating jobs while
getting a federally funded tax CUT for the last x10 years.... why
did unemployment SKYROCKET, under Republican polices? Obama's plan
to tax the wealthy, makes sense. Because continuing the SAME Bush
polices, have factually gotten the American economy, worse.
Obama would make a better car salesman than president.
When the republican independents helped nominate Obama as the democrat
candidate, I was sure that it was done with the expectation of him losing the
election. When Obama was elected I was sure that their plan backfired. Now I
feel sure that their plan succeeded.Obama is the most hated
president of my lifetime. Totally blocked in Congress by the solidarity of the
party of no and the filibuster threat in the Senate, Obama was completely
emasculated and prevented from doing the job he was elected to do. The misnomer âObamacareâ was applied to a legislative monstrosity
that was created for the business part of the health care industry. People who
would have worked toward what the people wanted and what Obama promised, health
care reform, were forbidden to participate. It is likely that Obama himself
had little or no input to the flagrant disregard for the wishes of the people.
It is little wonder that the business controlled media had no
trouble in demeaning and antagonizing the public against Obamacare. The
business world and their minions picked and poked at everything they could to
criticize Obama, there was nothing âover the topâ. The public
became convinced of the false notion that there was a conservative and a liberal
media. The truth is there is only one philosophy in the media. Itâs
called business. The really bad thing done in the campaign against
Obama, was the seemingly deliberate economic recession promoted by republicans
and fellow travelers by the businessmen who controls employment of American
workers. Ask why they act in such a way, they answered âwe are unsure
about the futureâ. Even now, the anti-Obama, anti-people
forces are marshaled against America testing whether or not people have the
right, acting through their government, to regulate and control commercial
business.Or whether freedom of religion can be used to exempt their
actions from the rule of law outside and beyond the right to believe and
worship. Such as in business operations and advertising their belief in the
public square. It is a true fact that business has always ruled the
lives of people. It is also true that if the American experiment is to have any
chance of success, the people must somehow gain control.
I was also disappointed with the president's budget but not for the same
reasons. As it appears unemployment will remain chronically high, President
Obama should have tried some trickle up economics instead of his own trickle
down and Bush's He should be proposing the federal government become an
employer of last resort, rebuilding infrastructure like the New Deal. We have
already had trickle down on a truly massive scale, granting big banks unlimted
cheap credit. Why not a little tricke up (and immediate relief for America's
massses) for a change?
Marxist,Who provides the money to hire people for public projects?
Is that money just sitting there waiting for a "good cause" or is that
money taken from hard working people who are forced to pay for the sloth of a
government that would take money out of the private sector and give to the lazy,
the incompetent, the slothful; those who would not take a job if they could get
government assistance to stay on the dole?Government projects extend
the problem. The money that is taken from you and from me to finance government
projects could have been paid to the butcher, the baker and the candle-stick
maker; but, instead, the government would have them go out of business so that
it can take its 80% off the top and then give 20% as wages.Look at
history. Read it. Understand it. Run the numbers and see for yourself how
little good has ever been done with "public works projects". Those
projects extended the misery. They devalued human lives.My
relatives suffered greatly because of FDR. Their lives were made miserable by
@ pagan...it seems you have forgotten about the President's last feeble attempt
at submitting a budget proposal... it was voted against by every single Senator
to include Democrats so don't call Republicans obstructionists. btw- have
you noticed that the economy and stock market are performing much better since
the 2010 elections- maybe Boehner, Ryan, Cantor et al holding the line on
spending (not cutting but at least stopping the growth) has helped a little.
President's budget proposals have always been, more or less, a political
statement. They are never passed by Congress. The Pres. outlines his priorities,
but Congress holds the purse strings so they are the ones who then craft and
pass the legislation. The Republicans running for Pres.--Romney and
Santorumn have both outlined their economic proposals, thou I've yet to read an
article dissecting their proposals. Maybe once the Republican primaries are
over? Diane Rehm on NPR had an excellent program discussing Obama's
budget proposal with (conservative) Stephen Moore of the Wall Street Journal
Editorial board, Norman Ornstein of the (conservative) American Enterprise
Institute and Jared Bernstein, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities/former
economic adviser to Joe Biden.
Somewhat of a change in rhetoric, but no change in policy. After all, it's an
election year. Mr. Obama is not allowed to say "hello" until its
effect on the election is analyzed.
To "marxist" where has trickle up economics worked? They tried it in
the Soviet Union, and all that resulted was trickle up poverty. The poor
remained poor, but the rich also became poor. Is that what you want?You don't get people working and inventing by making them comfortable doing
Easter is coming soon - I think the Easter Bunny is more believable than Obama.
The man has ZERO credibility. Really - if Obama was running your business would
you be investing in the company or updating your resume? What a joke of a
president. Even the far lefty Obama zombies - the few that do actually have
brains - would all be bringing up MS Word to update their resumes. This man
couldn't run a lemonade stand. The 2013 budget - fiction, lies, pork and more
debt. There you go.
Alfred E Newman of MADD MAGAZINE once said "what me worry"? It reminds
me of the majority of the Obama zombies. The national debt is now near 16
trillion and growing and Obama's people ignorantly suppose there are no
consequences. Take a look at Greece - that is America in a couple of years. Cars
burning in the streets as people demand their entitlements from a bankrupt
government.... it's the Obama model. No debt cutting in this budget either -
just more and more debt....buying votes for November. Barack Hussin Obama mm mm
'@ pagan...it seems you have forgotten about the President's last feeble attempt
at submitting a budget proposal... it was voted against by every single Senator
to include Democrats so don't call Republicans obstructionists.' - red state
pride | 2:42 p.m. Feb. 14, 2012 Give me something BESIDES 139
filibusters from the Republican party... **'The Rise Of Cloture: How
GOP Filibuster Threats Have Changed The Senate' - Ben Frumin and Jason Reif -
Talking Points Memo - 01/27/10 When Democrats reclaimed the Senate
majority in the 2006 midterm elections, cloture filings shot up from 68 in
2005-2006 (From Dems) to a record 139 in 2007-2008.' (From Republicans) ..and I will! With Republican majority in the House, and almost
DOUBLE the filibusters in the Senate from Democrats, the Republican party is
doing NOTHING to help this country. Ergo, Obstruction.
How many budgets have this President passed? Zero. And
yet, it's "Obama's fault." The man is President. Not 'magic.' How many budgets have Democrats voted against? You don't know. Because you can't even support your claims.
Reasons for filibusters? Poor decisions by an incompetent president.Be glad for "checks and balances" and "separation of
powers", or we'd have more problems.
'Reasons for filibusters? Poor decisions by an incompetent president.' - worf |
6:58 p.m. Feb. 14, 2012 No, REAL reasons worf. Not Fox
News talking points. As, our LAST President, George W. Bush.... doubled the national debt. And we are STILL paying for the wars he
could not support himself.
I am starting to think that Obama is not the ONLY problem with America - the
American people are transforming right before our eyes into Greeks - yes all
those nanny state hand out takers who WANT the government to take care of their
every need. This stenchy ideology is spreading across America like a cancer and
like cancer the eventuality will be fatal. Greece is bankrupt and people are
burning cars in the streets - many other socialist European countries are doing
the same. "Socialism is great until you run out of other peoples
money" a great leader once said. 50% of America is ripe for socialism -
they want socialism and they would burn the US constitution in the street if
they could. So - how do we as a nation remain free and sovereign going forward
with this sort of mentality? We don't. I give this country 20 years and we will
no longer be a free nation unless we uproot the socialist/Marxist leaders in
power today. It will be CNN showing cars burning in the streets of NY and LA as
people DEMAND their welfare checks and their other promised handouts ....but the
piggy bank will be empty and the Chinese flag will be flying above the White
House. At that point there will be no more freedom of speech - just uniforms and
People keep voting for Ivy leaguers and complain when things don't work out.
Sounds to me like another phenomenal example of Einstein's definition of
Mike Richards:: " Just where is Romney's 100 million?? " In the Cayman
Islands. Thats where all people put their tax shelter money. You gonna vote for
a guy who hides his money to avoid paying taxes, and then wants to run for
president? A guy who opposed the car industry bailout and is claiming he is from
Michigan? I got news for you and Romney. Michigan, and America dont want you
To "homebrew" you realize that if we know about Romney's $100 million
in the Cayman Islands, that it isn't hidden.You should also pay
attention to what was said. Romney's money is controlled by a blind trust.
That does not mean that there are a bunch of blind people managing his money, it
means that he has no control over how his money is invested or where it is
located. He can direct them how he wants his money handled, but in the end he
has little to no control.The question that you should be asking is
how can a person go through the dirtiest poltical environments and come out