Sorry, after barack said that he would cut the deficit in half and keep
unemployment below 8% with all of his spendathons and then failed miserably to
do either,his "math" clearly doesn't equal math
anymore.Barack could tell us at this point that 1 plus 1 equaled 2,
and I would begin to doubt it, ONLY due to barack's history with numbers.
You mean the U. S. Senate is actually serious about coming up with a budget?
That's amazing. I thought they did away with those silly details of
governing years ago.
Failed policies from the past 4 years don't give me much faith in the
Democrat plan for replacing budget cuts. I imagine it will go something like
this:1- Raise taxes, only on "the rich".2- Propose
more entitlements.3- Spend more money on stimulus programs.4- Print
more money.5- Blame any and all failures on George W. Bush.This plan won't work any better than the prior Obama plans have worked.
Cuts must happen. If our leaders cannot lead, sequestration may be the only
solution. I only wish someone could reform entitlements.
What it boils down to is there will not be 3 people doing the job of what 1
person should and can be doing. If doesn't matter if it is in defense of
domestic areas. It's time to cut spending and reducing the size of
government. The govenrment unions will have to be brought into line so the
don't bankrupt the country.
I am sure that the republican house will be excited, and they will debate this
bill on the floor, give it an up or down vote, and then Mr. Boehner will walk
over and talk to Mr. Reed and they will come up with a compromise bill and the
country will be saved!
Before the Bush tax cuts we were running a surplus, ever since we have been
running a deficit.
This government has spent about 1 trillion dollars per year more since Obama
became president. You can't tell me that there is necessity in all of that
borrowed money. Lots of things could be cut without much pain anywhere. The
Democrats only say it will take food out of childrens mouths and reduce
important jobs. Truth is, those things were paid for before Obama came on board
and increased spending by that extra trillion per year. And if the cuts happen,
the essentials will be paid for now. There is so much fat in our government you
can barely see the meat.
Thank you McClark,You just proved my final point.
McClark, MDfrom the US treasurygross federal debt at the end
of fiscal year (millions):1997 - 5,369,2061998 - 5,478,189INCREASE of 108,983 million1999 - 5,605,523INCREASE of 127,3342000 - 5,628,700INCREASE of 23,177Tell me which year there
was a surplus since gross federal debt increased EVERY YEAR.Treasury
changed the way it is reported since BO was elected, but from the treasurydirect
webpage (US Treasury), you can get day by day tallies of gross federal debt. Gross federal debt increased on average $491B when bush had a repub
congressit increased on average $977B when bush had a dem congressit
increased on average $1.7T when BO had a dem congress, andit increased on
average $1.2T when BO had a repub congress.what was your point,
again?Were you calling for a repeal of ALL the bush tax cuts?
It is plain to see that the Obama playbook reads: "Every crisis that
arises, propose taxing the rich and more spending on government
programs."Hundreds of billions of tax revenue was passed in
January. Now they want to raise taxes again?
There will be a compromise, because neither party wants to gamble on who this
will hurt the most in upcoming elections.
It is interesting that one reason Obama criticized Romney as not right for the
job of president was Romney had money in the Cayman Islands. But
here we have Jack Lew, Obama's choice to serve as Treasury Secretary, and
Lew has money in the Cayman Islands. I am sure Democrats will find
nothing wrong with this.