Priority #1 for Republicans

Cal Thomas's picture

For newly empowered congressional Republicans, priority one must be an extension of the Bush tax cuts. There should be enough votes not only from a new Republican majority, but also from some of the decimated and dispirited (and even newly elected) Democrats. If President Obama is smart, he won’t veto the bill.

If the tax cuts are allowed to expire, everyone who gets a paycheck and has taxes withheld is going to see less money in the “net” column starting Jan. 1.

Bloomberg.com has published some calculations. It reports that, according to the Tax Institute at H&R Block, “for a married couple earning $80,000 a year, increased taxes would drain $221.48 in withholding from a semi-monthly paycheck. Married individuals earning $240,000 a year” (just under the $250,000 standard President Obama defines as “rich”) “would lose $557.78 to withholding in a single semi-monthly paycheck.”

Double these figures for a month and multiply by 12 and you quickly see the additional drain on the economy at a time of anemic 2 percent growth.

Another example from Bloomberg: teachers, teacher aides and custodial workers who make from $20,000 to $40,000 per year would lose an estimated $50 per paycheck, which is significant at a time when every dollar counts.

President Obama has been telling us how much is enough for us to make. Instead, we should be telling him how much of our money we will allow government to take and spend. That is the theme emerging from the midterm election.

To further personalize the cost of allowing the tax cuts to expire, visit a handy government cost calculator called www.mygovcost.org. Type in your level of education, age and current income and the calculator will reveal what future taxes are likely to cost (these are estimates as everyone’s circumstances differ).

You will also see how much your money could earn if you invested in the private sector instead of having it go to the federal government. The enormous interest figure should rebut arguments by Democrats who claim reforming Social Security by allowing money to be invested in the stock market would bankrupt the elderly.

There are a number of other credible sources Republicans could use to stop and reverse runaway spending. The Heritage Foundation’s Brian Riedl has identified $343 billion in specific spending cuts the next Congress might enact in the fiscal 2012 budget.

Riedl acknowledges that cutting spending won’t be easy. That’s because every dollar spent by the government attracts self-interested supporters. But he maintains the identified cuts should be achievable. Read his spending cut targets at heritage.org.

The public is in the mood for repairing America’s crumbling financial house. Democrats will have a more difficult time demagoguing spending cuts when they have been primarily (though not entirely) responsible for the ocean of red ink.

The Debt Commission will issue its report on Dec. 1. Many conservatives suspect it will include a call for tax increases. Republicans should say “no” to any tax hikes and focus entirely on government overspending and misspending.

Many of us are ready for strong medicine. “We can’t afford it” still rings in the ears of those old enough to remember what parents or grandparents said when we asked for an expensive toy as a child, or a car at 16.

That Puritan ethic remains in the DNA of many Americans. It is now up to Republicans to get it out and remind us of what fiscal and personal responsibility can do to restore financial solvency.

It may take a while and there will be some discomfort and even pain involved. But in the end, we will all be better off than we are now and much better off than we will be if we fail to reduce our unsustainable debt.

[Cal Thomas is America’s most widely syndicated op-ed columnist, appearing in more than 600 national newspapers. He is the author of more than 10 books and is a FOX News political contributor since 1997. Email Cal Thomas at tmseditors@tribune.com.] ©2010 TRIBUNE MEDIA SERVICES, INC.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Cyclist and PTC Observer

What is so sad - is that the very persons who are delivering a much-needed service are being penalized because of some unwritten law that certain companies/organizations in this country are 'untouchable'! A laborer is worth his hire - and physicians who are delivering such amazing results to so many who are suffering diseases that are now treatable because of early detection, etc. will not continue to do so because of incompetency, fraud, and corruption in the government and the private sector. It's not just the government IMO.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
True DM

It's true that it's not just the government, but it would be a lot better without the government.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
PTC OBSERVER
Quote:

but it would be a lot better without the government.

No organization or group can function effectively without some structure. The goal is to find balance between regulation and de-regulation. . . in sync with our Constitution. The goal is for 'the people' to correctly assume their responsibility in this 'government of the people, by the people, for the people'.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
Bonkers

I didn't say all doctors, I said most. Just get in line for those willing to treat you.

Courthouserules
Courthouserules's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/02/2010
PTC Observer

What you are saying is NOT what the new health plan is about and won't happen.
Wouldn't that be American? You are not good enough for this doctor, only that doctor!

Money talks is what we are trying to do away with!

Not everyone works for ATT or Banks or the military!

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
Won't happen

unlike the government's position that you can force someone to buy something they don't want, government hasn't yet told doctors that they MUST treat government patients. I suppose that's coming though.

Get in line....

Money does talk and government will never be able to make everyone equal.

Welcome to the real world pal.

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
Debt Plan Would Cut Taxes...

Social Security, Medicare

Nov. 10 (Bloomberg) -- A presidential commission’s leaders proposed a $3.8 trillion deficit-cutting plan that would cut Social Security and Medicare, reduce income-tax rates and eliminate tax breaks including the mortgage-interest deduction.

The co-chairmen of the panel appointed by President Barack Obama suggested reducing Social Security spending by raising the retirement age to 68 in about 2050 and 69 in about 2075. The plan also would slow the rate at which benefits grow. The savings would come between 2012 and 2020.

“This country’s out of money and we better start thinking,” said co-chairman Erskine Bowles. Without “tough choices,” he said, “we’re on the most predictable path toward an economic crisis that I can imagine.”.......

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
23% Medicare cut for physicians

I wad appalled to see this in the Sat. AJC. Cutting the pay of those who deliver the medical service instead of seriously cutting the fraud and corruption that has been identified and validated in Medicare and Social Security is disgusting - and benefits only those who profit from the fraud and corruption. A physician who treats breast cancer shared what this cost and previous cuts in Medicare will mean to the delivery of her service. If this Congress does not do it's job, and make the tough decisions - THEY'RE OUT NEXT TIME WE HAVE A CHANCE TO VOTE FOR OR AGAINST THEM!! Let's hope that the House follows through with 'transparency' - and our representatives are really working for us!

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
Sad, isn't it Davids mom?

And just think, the "Guv" really doesn't know the size of this fraud problem. Care to guess what's going to happen when the "Guv" opens health care to the masses?

As for the Medicare cut, it's another "Guv" program that - while it was well meaning to some - cannot continue to provide benefits as both cost and number of participants increase. If left unchecked it will consume evermore budget resources and crowd out other programs.

BTW, keep an eye on California as Governor Elect Brown tries to reel in state pensions. Should be interesting to watch.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Cy
Quote:

As for the Medicare cut, it's another "Guv" program that - while it was well meaning to some - cannot continue to provide benefits as both cost and number of participants increase. If left unchecked it will consume evermore budget resources and crowd out other programs.

The operative word - COST! There have been many specials on TV enumerating many areas of 'fraud' and 'corruption' in the cost of our medical care/ the spending in our military/ etc. It amazes me that the 'investigations' just stop at a certain point. (Just short of the 'profiteers') - and the 'cuts' begin just short of those who are REALLY profiting. As for Jerry Brown - The Terminator tried to mess with the pensions - and he didn't get too far. I agree - it will be interesting to watch!! Hope you and everyone are enjoying this day – tomorrow – rain predicted.

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
Yup Davids mom

It's going to rain the next two days. Unfortunately, that cloud cover is going to obscure what would have been an excellent opportunity - very brilliant magnitude - to see the International Space Station going overhead tomorrow evening. Stay dry.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
DM - Medicare

As it turns out I was sitting next to a board member of the AMA this week coming back from California, it was his opinion that in the not too distant future most physicians will simply stop taking Medicare patients.

Too much time on paperwork, government oversight, and not enough money to justify it.

You see in America, even among physicians, if you don't make money you simply don't do it. Government healthcare solved!

Of course government could always force them to provide service, right?

Courthouserules
Courthouserules's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/02/2010
PTC Observer

What are all the doctors going to do when half the population, pretty soon, are on Medicare?

Just treat rich people or people making enough to pay them cash, or a few high wage earners who have company insurance?

The dudes might have to work harder for less, you think?

Ever see the payroll of a hospital? $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.

Chris P. Bacon
Chris P. Bacon's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/28/2010
The "Catfood Commission"

I'm loving this: the presidential commission balances the budget primarily on the backs of the elderly, so the pundits have taken to calling this the "Catfood Commission", for obvious reasons.

AtHomeGym
AtHomeGym's picture
Online
Joined: 01/18/2007
Cy, Taxes & Traveling

You on the move again?

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
Hey Gym

I'm home bound till next year.

Chris P. Bacon
Chris P. Bacon's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/28/2010
Interesting plan, cyclist.

The plan in its current form takes some huge chunks out of a lot of sacred cows.

I was surprised at how much came out of the heretofore sacred Defense budget. Scrapping the fifth generation F-35 joint strike fighter is huge, it would mean job security for Kevin King, since the A10 Warthog would be pressed into service for the upcoming war with China in 2018.

Military retirees and dependents really come up on the short end of the stick. Increased costs and co-pays for everyone who is not on active duty, gutting the VA hospital system, dismantling DOD schools, whew!

All of the tactical vehicles that are the hard lessons learned from fighting desert/mountain/hard terrain wars are summarily scrapped.

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
Bacon,

I see where Pelosi was most upset about the cuts to social programs. Let's see who squeals the most.

alanf33
alanf33's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/31/2006
If priority one is to keep the Bush tax cuts

then priority two should be to cut deeper! I (and I suspect most) would have much fewer issues paying increased state and local taxes if my input to the Feds was more like the 2 or 3 percent that it should be (to fund those items defined in our constitution).

Spyglass
Spyglass's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/28/2008
delete..

(

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
You thought it was 'free"?

Everyone on this board needs to get a grip on reality. Our premiums for HC will continue to go up.

It won't be too long before companies realize that it is easier to pay fines than to pay for healthcare.

There is going to be a sea change in the way healthcare is paid for and delivered in the country.

Remember all of this in 2012.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
PTC OBSERVER

What to you see as the 'sea change'?

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
Sea of Change

How about this, insurance companies exiting this market.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
Cyclist/Mom - sea change

Cyclist you are correct, insurance companies are in the market to make money. If they believe the cards are stacked against them by the FEDS, they will simply leave the market.

The other is that companies would leave the market of providing health care insurance to their employees. Simply easier for them to allow the government to do it for them.

The government will ultimately "self insure" and we will in the end have a government run health care system, which was the point anyway. The uproar about single payer healtcare would be solved because we would simply get our healthcare through the state. Exactly what the Democrats intended.

As I said, things are going to change dramatically over the next five years unless this law is repealed. We can't have it both ways a private system and a public system. It has to be one or the other, unless you are rich. You know like the rich political elite that is currently in power in Congress. They will pay for their private healtcare and the "masses" will only have one choice, the government.

In the meantime, get ready for your taxes to go up to support the future government run system, and get ready for your premiums to go up as the insurance companies attempt to participate. There increases sure to draw fire from the left and restrained by new "laws" commissions, etc. Then they exit and companies right along with them.

That....is sea change defined.

jpopeye
jpopeye's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/21/2005
Observer

Your prediction about insurance companies exiting the market leaving a government takeover (the sea change) is hard to follow. If business wants to make money they don't do it by running from markets. As for the fear of a government take over - how would this work? The government wants more business participation because for Uncle Sam taxes = revenue. You can't operate without revenue.

Georgia Patriot
Georgia Patriot's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/17/2010
Single Payer

is what the government wants. Insurance as we now know it will no longer exist. Get ready for the lines and poor quality care. -GP

Chris P. Bacon
Chris P. Bacon's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/28/2010
Single Payer? Hardly

There is a small but vocal group of folks (not unlike the Tea Partisan!) who want a single-payer solution. The vast majority of first world countries, with the important exceptions of Canada and England, have eschewed "single payer" in favor of a "shared responsibility" approach.

This is the system that countries like France, Belgium, Netherlands, Germany, etc have adopted, and a main reason why France's health care is rated #1 in the world (caveat: the US has better health care...to those that can afford it). The USA's overall health care rating is 37th in the world.

What "shared responsibility" means is a matrix of cost containment. The government will pay so much, insurance will pay so much, and an individual will pay so much for a given procedure. At any time, an individual can "jump to the head of the line" if he/she is willing to pay more money out of pocket for private care. Hospitals are largely private.

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
Really? Obama has said he is for Single Payer

as are most Progressives in Congress.

Here in their own words.

Support Single Payer

http://www.democrats.com/single-payer-petition

Here is Obama in his own words talking about Healthcare and building the Structure and Framework for overhauling (Singlepayer) Healthcare.

http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/wed-october-27-2010-barack-obama

You have to go way back to Oct 27th to hear it.

Progressives own words. All you have to do is listen.

Georgia Patriot
Georgia Patriot's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/17/2010
Single Payer? Absolutely!

With the unread health care bill, the structure is being built to destroy private health insurance with the government coming in to save the day with a single payer system. Government will be the provider and not have to worry about little things like making a profit, just raise taxes and print more money to loan itself. America is beginning to discover this administration's marxist policies that will destroy our way of life. Here is what Obama thinks about it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpAyan1fXCE -GP

Courthouserules
Courthouserules's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/02/2010
ptc observer

The law WILL NOT be repealed---modified, yes.

We simply CAN NOT afford for health care to increase any more as it was doing every year 15-20%. There was less and less market for such costly insurance. Most companies were on their way out of it or only paying a small partial.

The work still needed is very complicated and has a thousand variables.

Large deductibles is one.
Special groups for special people is another.
Some could join Medicare or Medicaid.
Tax credits for companies paying for it.
Automatic health insurance for those earning a certain maximum at certain facilities.
Tax on hospitals.
Extra tax on doctors earnings above a certain maximum.
Extra tax on manufacturers of hospital equipment.
Wholesale prescription drugs for certain groups.
Do triage on illegals and sen d them home after stabilizing.
THERE IS NO END TO THE VARIABLES!

The fact remains that we can not go on raising the costs without end on the American Citizens.

If private companies ever had any intention to control the costs they would have already done it by now---they aren't going to. They screwed up just as the banks, etc., did. Hogs, pigs, greedy thugs, bullies, no sympathy for the poor.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
CHRS/PTC/CY
Quote:

We simply CANNOT afford for health care to increase any more as it was doing every year 15-20%.

This is the crux of the problem IMO. Insurance companies pay the cost - they don't set the cost. We have to follow the $$$ further than the insurance companies. . .they are a scapegoat target IMO. When one gets an itemized bill from a hospital - and you are charged .25 for a band-aid - something is wrong!! CHRS is thinking in the right direction - many variables and known and unknown consequences of actions regarding repealing the bill. The bill will be tweaked - but not repealed. Check what Congressmen have as health insurance - and check what the bill offers citizens. If the cost of health care continues to escalate - small businesses will never be able to 'insure' their employees. One will have to belong to a large insurable group to get decent coverage - or be rich!!

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
Davids mom

Now we are on the same playing field with respect to the true driver of health care costs - it's not the insurance companies.

Now the trick is to rein in these costs without resorting to government imposed wage and price controls. If the guv did impose controls then investments say for R&D work for medical technologies and new cures will, IMO, go elsewhere. Unfortunately, that's the road that CHR$ is taking.

The reality is it's all about profit. That's the system that we have. Take profit out of the picture and our health care would resemble something of the distant past.

Courthouserules
Courthouserules's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/02/2010
cyclist

Oh, you don't know how far off you are!

The non-profit hospitals have the same problem as do the for-profit hospitals--doctors are all for-profit, and so are medical companies.

There is nothing wrong about operating a hospital, a doctor doing well, or medical companies making a profit. The problem is no matter what their profit currently is, they continue to increase it as much as is possible at the expense many times of the patient and the tax-payer.

Al;l that is OK also, but when the costs reach a "zenith" where further increases will only serve a portion of the populace (their duty), then efficiency must be introduced, manditory when necessary.

It is about 30% of our economy at the current time, heading for 50%, I don't see how a new eddicient plan can possibly do worse than that, and will at the same time treat all people---one as well as another.

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
OK CHR$

Go ahead, take profit out of the picture and see what you have.

As for those non-profit organizations - didn't Grady try to shut down its dialysis center. Was there not an up-roar about some illegal’s that would be denied treatment since they couldn't afford it? Let's not forget that ole Cynthia Tucker wrote a piece about compassion and those poor and sick illegal immigrants. Her motives are for you CHR$ to pay for their treatment. Got to love those craaaazy liberals.

AtHomeGym
AtHomeGym's picture
Online
Joined: 01/18/2007
CHR & Medical Costs

Here's an example: Last month, I went to my Primary Care Provider to get a Flu shot(you know, those things you can get at most Pharmacies for $25). He billed Aetna (my insurance) $94.00. Because of their nogotiated contract, Aetna paid him $73.99. I paid nothing. Now how is anyone supposed to make any sense out of stuff like that?

Courthouserules
Courthouserules's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/02/2010
GYM

You should be able to decipher from what "facts" you stated to see that doctors want a minor office call for anything. They have hundreds of employees standing around a lot. (especially at the hospital.)

The shots cost the doctors and the dime stores selling them with a hired out-of-date Nurse aid, pay about .25 a shot to the seller (wholesaler).

Your insurance is very expensive (paid mostly by an employer, so they pay more than most. Oh, were you the one paying $24,000 a year premiums?
Mine pays them .05 for the shot and about 24.00 to administer it safely!

Wouldn't it be nice however if everyone, including poor and kids, could get one for $.25? Plus you volunteering after learning how to give them.

Like you said, there is no sense in something like that!

AtHomeGym
AtHomeGym's picture
Online
Joined: 01/18/2007
CHR & Shots

I do believe some shots are available free of charge from the County Health Dept.

Courthouserules
Courthouserules's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/02/2010
GYM

Well you worded it properly: "some shots are available free at the Health Department."

Remember that they were "rationed" a while back and they (health department) gave all of the shots they ordered to themselves, teachers, officials, sheriff, doctors,
retired, but to no average person or school child!

I think it was determined that they could have had many more shots to give if they had not been afraid of committing maybe more money for them than the county would pay for!
Later they tried for more, but gone!

Now what kind of paperwork do you think they would demand if someone without insurance walked in there for a flu shot?

That sounds like Reagan's "safety net" crap.

We aren't India or Africa---where only the upper classes, who you know, and officials have insurance and medicine!

Don't tell me it is raining!!!!!

I think maybe you read Exodus 21-20 NIV, maybe a lot?

AtHomeGym
AtHomeGym's picture
Online
Joined: 01/18/2007
CHR & What I Read

Sorry to disappoint you but I never read Exodus. I'm more of a US News & World Report kinda guy!

Spyglass
Spyglass's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/28/2008
That's the problem, it's not insurance anymore..

It's healthcare. Big difference. You don't call Allstate for an oil change do you?

When I was growing up in the late 60's...my folks paid for all our Dr visits and only invoked insurance when something "big" happened. That's the way it should be now.

Courthouserules
Courthouserules's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/02/2010
spy

No, and you can't roller-skate in a buffalo herd!

Courthouserules
Courthouserules's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/02/2010
SPY

In the 60's a doctor visit may be $10!
Now they can be $200, plus x-rays and labs of maybe $300.

More than many make a week!

Of course if you choose never to go to a doctor it will cost you nothing!
The funeral home will want $7,000 however from your family.

Average wage in USA (Household) $45,000.
Average major medical cost $17,000.

Biggest industry in USA Medical

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Spyglass

Continue to enjoy good health. . and stay out of the operating room and a hospital room. . .the cost is devastating if you don't have insurance. If you have a friend or relative who has just experienced a hospital stay - ask to see their bill.

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
Davids mom is right!

Medical care is expensive.

So what will the new healthcare law do to lower it? Will it roll back the cost of drugs, medical equipment, hospital/facility expensive and civil suits? And finally, will this healthcare law cap or control salaries and ROI/profit for new technologies? The answer is no.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
The bill

If we had leaders in Congress who could use their expertise/or the expertise of EXPERTS to identify and prosecute the companies/individuals involved in fraud and corruption in the cost of medical equipment, hospital maintenance, etc. . . we should be able to stop this escalation of health care cost. One should admit that fraud and corruption has a lot to do with the escalation - and who gets paid from whom for re-election. (These companies/individuals give funds to all candidates!) It’s a mess – but continuing to use NO as an excuse does not lead to a solution. . .IMO

Spyglass
Spyglass's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/28/2008
You didn't address my comment..

Of course it's expensive, it's the best in the world...why should it be free? What have you ever gotten for free that's worth much?

Fact is, many think they don't need insurance, "they're healthy"...why do I need it? Piss poor mindset that too many take.

Just as you can't wait to buy car insurance until after you wreck..

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Bush's tax cuts
Quote:

For newly empowered congressional Republicans, priority one must be an extension of the Bush tax cuts

Gosh - I'm in the company of the 'rich'. Obama has already said he's extending the tax cuts for all except those who make $250,000 and more. . .on to the next priority. Like business, married couples and others have 'legal' deductions that they can make to lower what they owe the IRS. MAJOR ADVISE: Get a good CPA to tackle this. . .that's what 'business' does. Don't rely on the 'could a should a' calculations. Each individual should look at his/her own tax situation. THEN - if you come up on the losing end - do what you have to do!

AtHomeGym
AtHomeGym's picture
Online
Joined: 01/18/2007
DM & The "Bush Tax Cuts"

When/where did Obama say he would extend the tax cuts except those who make $250K & more? Haven't seen that anywhere.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
From the article
Quote:

(just under the $250,000 standard President Obama defines as “rich”) “would lose $557.78 to withholding in a single semi-monthly paycheck.”

. . and every discussion of the 'tax cuts'. The Republicans have been stating that they wanted the tax cuts extended for everyone - not just those who make under $250,000.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Quote: It may take a while
Quote:

It may take a while and there will be some discomfort and even pain involved. But in the end, we will all be better off than we are now and much better off than we will be if we fail to reduce our unsustainable debt.

It appears that the 'Republicans' are willing to give 'Congress' more than 18 months to accomplish this. We'll see. The message that neither party seems to hear is GET THE WORK DONE - AND GET US OUT OF THIS MESS ASAP!! If the 'politics' as usual continues - and grid lock continues.. . well we'll see. There are valid arguments for the different views on how to solve our problem. Compromise and cooperation is essential in order to heal this mess. What the Republicans 'do' will tell the story of this election.

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
Let's see,

this new session of Congress takes office on January 3, and Bush's tax cuts expire on January 1. How's this going to work? Perhaps retroactively?

Georgia Patriot
Georgia Patriot's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/17/2010
Georgia Patriot

Vote will be Jan 3rd retroactive to 1/1/2011. -GP

Chris P. Bacon
Chris P. Bacon's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/28/2010
Hey Georgia Pat

Tell us again how making the Bush tax cut permanent will cut the federal deficit.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
CRISPY
Quote:

Teabaggers have such funny accents...they pronounce "Negro" with two "G"s

Ouch! Paints many with a 'broad brush' - but that is how many 'minority' citizens view the Tea Party because of the Don't Tread On Me and other signs that were seen at their rallies. (These signs were prevalent at anti-civil rights rallies)

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
Care to share those racist facts?

Do you have any actual facts on that or just homilies?

Did you know that the teaparty fielded 30 BLACK Conservative candidates?

Did you know that 15 of those BLACK candidates won their primaries?

Did you know that 3 of those BLACK candidates won their elections?

Did you know that EVERY BLACK non-incumbent race was backed by the teaparty?

Did you know that I being of the BLACK community is also a Teaparty member as are the other 67 members that regularly go with me to events?

Do you even know what the Gadsden flag means or symbolizes?

Probably not.

The continued use of this issue without facts simply shows yours and bacons ignorance. Bacons tagline as was his other one shows who is the closet racist. He took the other tagline off his post when others started complaining, but like any good little closet racist he/she just can't help shining a light on them self.

Thanks to both of you for keeping the cockroaches of progressivism in the light.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Observeofu

(I is?) How many minorities are members of the Tea Party? (Facts please) Having more pigmentation in ones skin does not make one 'BLACK'. (Note John Boehner) It is important that minorities are represented in both parties in our democracy. (I was made aware of what the Gadsden Flag meant to the person who carried it and the Confederate Flag as they spit on me - but that was years ago - and hopefully does not mean the same today, but minorities are not convinced that a transformation has occurred.) Herman Cain is a brilliant Black man who expresses his views artfully - but his narrative represents his views - not the Black community – a community that does not yet trust the sincerity of the Tea Party movement. Most Tea Party concerns represent the concerns of the majority of the American people - there is no denying that. It is the separatist/segregationist ideas that keep popping up in the rhetoric that keeps minorities at bay. You should inform yourself beyond the 'right' agenda - you don't have to agree with the 'facts' - but at least be aware of them, and how others perceive them! Those who were successful in their elections had other than just Tea Party support. . . and there are Tea Party groups that do not support those who carry the Confederate Flag. Don't Tread On Me = States Rights. Back in the day - the right to keep my people in slavery. It is a shame that a flag with such historical meaning to us as a nation and to our military would be/is used to express the right of states to deny others their rights. (Improper use by hateful individuals) The Gadsden Flag is not a symbol that encourages my participation in an organization. I have met Black people with your 'right' views. Keep your principles - but don't allow your presence to be a facade to acceptance of all races. . .there are Tea Party groups who support racism. (That's a fact!) Another FACT - not all Tea Party groups are racist.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
The Gadsden Flag

I am very aware of the history of the Gadsden Flag.

Note my quotes:

Quote:

It is a shame that a flag with such historical meaning to us as a nation and to our military would be/is used to express the right of states to deny others their rights. (Improper use by hateful individuals) The Gadsden Flag is not a symbol that encourages my participation in an organization.

My experience/opinion is based on how it was used towards me and mine.

Quote:

(I was made aware of what the Gadsden Flag meant to the person who carried it and the Confederate Flag as they spit on me - but that was years ago - and hopefully does not mean the same today, but minorities are not convinced that a transformation has occurred.)

One does not feel comfortable when one sees The Gadsden Flag at rallies - along with other hateful signs against 'minorities'.

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
again I ask:Where is the proof that the Gadsden flag was used

in your words in the "Anti-Civil Rights" movement.

Besides I believe wood was used to make poles to hold up flags.. are you also against wood?

And please show us this evidence you have of the racist teaparty's again I ask you to present proof.

I have searched ever since you said this the other day I cannot find one reference to a Gadsden flag used in the 60's anti-civil rights movement. Please share.

opusman
opusman's picture
Offline
Joined: 08/08/2008
Flag history not about slavery

Please the Gadsen flags origin and means had and has absolutely nothing to do with slavery. Please check your facts.

The Gadsden Flag: "Don't Tread on Me"

The flag was first flown aboard a Colonial Troop ship on January 4th, 1776.

This was the flag of the American Colonies at the time of the American Revolution against England.

It features a rattlesnake above the warning, "DON'T TREAD ON ME". The rattlesnake had become a traditional symbol of the American Colonies. The most obvious reason for this is that the rattlesnake was only found in the American Colonies (and in abundance, to the dismay of settlers) and nowhere else in the world. The origin of the slogan (Don't Tread On Me) pertains to the snake's deadly strike and the idea that it is best to leave them alone.

The American Revolutionary period was a time of intense but controlled individualism - when self-directing responsible individuals again and again decided for themselves what they should do, and did it- without needing anyone else to give them an assignment or supervise them in carrying it out.

Such a person was the patriot Colonel Christopher Gadsden of South Carolina. He had seen and liked a bright yellow banner with a hissing, coiled rattlesnake rising up in the center, and beneath the serpent the same words that appeared on the Striped Rattlesnake Flag - Don't Tread On Me. Colonel Gadsden made a copy of this flag and submitted the design to the Provincial Congress in South Carolina.

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
Again DM shy on facts long on rhetoric

Addendum: DM Said: "Having more pigmentation in ones skin does not make one 'BLACK'."

So here we are. In order to be Black in America you must first be judged to be Black enough. No not from a White person but by the Black community. For someone who "CLAIMS" to be so for civil rights and not for any type of bigotry. You just exemplified the worst in all of us. To judge not on the Character of a person but on the color of that person. Seems the only one here that harbors a bigoted idea is you and not the Teaparty.

You did not address a single question I address to you.
You say "It's a FACT" that there are Teaparty groups that support Racism but yet again you offer no proof other that your say so. Are you the foremost authority on that subject or is this just more hateful rhetoric?

You have been hung up on race since the day I first started posting here. Race should NEVER be an issue. The Teaparty movement goes beyond the race spectrum and the false premise of the racist dialectic.

You do know that Alveda King is supportive of the Teaparty right. The last time I checked she is pigmented enough for your acceptance and I believe she has some acquaintance with the Civil rights issues.

I may have a mixed heritage but does that not make me pigmented enough for you? Are we really going there?

You remember Obama is of mixed race. Apparently he is pigmented enough for you.

I am so glad the rest of America does not harbor such bigoted feelings as yours and bacon's.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
I'm observing you Observerofu
Quote:

Having more pigmentation in ones skin does not make one 'BLACK'."

Tanning salons do quite well in Fayette County. - and the reason to 'note' Boehner. He proudly claims his Irish heritage - and no one disputes that. That comment had nothing to do with your commitment to your racial background. THERE ARE BLACK CONSERVATIVES! I have never ignored that FACT! My contribution was/is to explain why many minorities shy away from the southern Republican Party - and some Tea Party groups. The question: Why is this explanation so difficult for you to understand - oh one who relies on FACTS? THERE ARE NOT A LOT OF MINORITIES IN EITHER GROUP. Some members that I know in the Tea Party certainly support the movement going beyond the race spectrum - BUT IT HASN'T. NOT RHETORIC - JUST THE FACTS. One does not have to be of ‘mixed racial heritage’ to be Conservative or Progressive. One chooses his/her political standing based on their personal experience and understanding of how the specific political doctrine affects the lives of their family members. IMO.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
observeofu - FYI

FYI. In 2005I joined this discussion with the express purpose of discussing 'race' and diversity. I was met with a view that I had never been exposed to before - a definite view against 'diversity' as had been experienced in this state - and an almost hateful view of 'blacks'. Over the past six years - from discussion - minds may not have been changed, but at least others have been exposed to different experiences regarding race and diversity. 'Race' is an issue in this country - like it or not - that is a sad reality. It is a sign of progress that members of our families are able to articulate their individual views - and a relative of the Kings has that right just like the rest of us. There are very few Americans, especially in Georgia, that do not claim 'mixed' heritage of one culture or another - that is what makes us Americans. Our DNA should not and DOES NOT determine our social/political views. It is our life experience and our education that determines most of our views. In today's world, you can ascertain 'facts' by just using 'Google' 'yahoo' or 'bing'. Please present your facts - that support your logic. Not difficult to do the research. THERE ARE NOT MANY MINORITIES IN THE TEA PARTY MOVEMENT. Check it out! As to your other 'questions' - I see where Bacon called you ignorant. Does he define you - or do your words define you? As to your other questions - sorry, but I didn't see in his response any reference to your family. Was this deleted?

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
Numbers or percentages matter not

You and others want to show a quota of blacks in the movement. The question is WHY?

Why does it matter. Black Americans make up about 17.5% of America's racial makeup. So if 18% of the Teaparty were black would that make it a non-racist entity? Again I ask WHY?

Does the Black Democrat elected politicians make up 18% of all elected officials?

No they don't. So using your logic one must assume that Democrats are therefore Racist.

How many blacks were presented in this years election by the DNC?

Fewer than a dozen so again your logic dictates that the DNC is Racist. See how silly that is?

The fact is the Teaparty is open to all people. Rather all blacks, some or just a few join is up to us.

The fact is there are more of us then you libs like to admit to. It doesn't fit the rhetoric.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Observerofu
Quote:

The fact is the Teaparty is open to all people. Rather all blacks, some or just a few join is up to us.

Why don't you quit while you're still making just a little sense? Who is this 'us' who determines how many 'blacks' join the Tea Party? This is America - and we do have freedom of 'choice' regarding our politics. The fact is - you have less than the 11 or 12% of blacks that populate our country. There are Latinos who have made a choice not to join. Many blacks have made a choice not to join. MANY WHITES HAVE MADE A CHOICE NOT TO JOIN. Both parties are losing 'joiners' due to major distrust of the ethics of politicians - regardless of 'color'. Many here can read the reports on membership of Tea Party groups; many here noted the attendance at Tea Party functions; many here noted the diversity at the inauguration and the John Steward 'rally'. What all Americans are hoping for is a Congress that will work for the American people. . .regardless of political party.

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
Well DM let me explain it clearly

The US is minorities. It is up to US to decide what is best for US not the democrat party not the republican party not you or anyone else. The problem is and has been to many of US have allowed a party to dictate to US how we will live our lives.

That is changing. Slowly but surely. The black vote creep is moving away from the democrats and as more of US move into the middle and upper class we see where the massive taxation and spending is getting US.

Does that help? You see unlike you I don't hang my blackness out like a flag.

My personality is in my works not my color.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
observerofu

Minorities in this country are composed of individuals who make their decisions based on their experiences - past and present. I am extremely proud of my blackness, my heritage, and my accomplishments. I will wave my flag as long as I can! (As do 'whites', Latinos, Asians, and 'others') We are Americans - striving to learn how to live with one another as well as with the rest of the humans on this planet. My color is an important part of who I am in these United States. No American should ever deny who they are - or try to 'fit in' by denying who they are. What organization are you working with to fulfill your goal for 'minorities'? In Georgia, the separation of 'race' among our political parties has become painfully apparent. There is a multi-racial group that is identifying the underlying causes for this occurrence in 2010 - and working to take steps for Georgians and Americans to stop this return to self-segregation. (After all – Georgia, in my view, has made remarkable progress in race-relations since 1965.) There are good Americans in both parties of different races and genders who are in sync with the goals of ‘minorities’. I don't think there are many 'white' readers of this discussion who would 'deny' their 'whiteness' - nor should they!! RACE HAS BEEN AN ISSUE IN THIS COUNTRY SINCE IT'S FOUNDING. We as individuals have varied experiences as Americans. We are living in a period where the younger generation is exposed through the arts to the varied experiences of Americans of a different color. A wise aunt told us that we should never allow one party to take our vote for granted . . . however, circumstances have allowed this to happen. One important lesson that minorities have learned in this country - is that it takes action on all levels to institute change. It is up to US (your identification of minorities) to be prepared to assume the responsibility of American citizenship by using all of our skills to the best of our ability; working hard for our family and community; supporting our fellow countrymen. Is this different from the goal of any ‘main stream’ American? There are other ‘minority’ contributors in this discussion who do not focus on ‘race’ – five years ago I announced that my participation was to focus on ‘race’. . .and that is what I do. I also share my opinion on other subjects – from my unique point of view. There are MANY women and blacks that do not share my point of view. My point of view is based on my personal experience – as is yours.
Thanks for your explanation. I do not agree with your view of the 'black' vote and the 'creep' of movement of the 'black' middle class away from the Democratic Party. The 'talented tenth' in the Black community is well aware of their responsibility to the 90% of the community that is still experiencing the result of Jim Crow; inadequate educational opportunities; lack of jobs, etc. Taxation without representation is not unknown to the Black community. I congratulate you on your political stance - but you nor I speak for the Black community. . .only for ourselves.

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
Without all of the words that is exactly what I said

DM you have to remember you started this thread with the claim that the TEAPARTY or at least some are racist. Then you scoffed at the minorities in the teaparty.

I just wanted a little proof is all. Since I too just so happen to be part of that minority that apparently is not in the teaparty I was curious of yours and bacons evidence.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_kmnew/is_200411/ai_n8596507/

btw- the Black creep-It began there DM. Many of us see the democrats talking a good game but it seems every time a black man or woman steps up to the plate the good ole democrat party would rather we just sat back down. It took a Republican to move us from the backstage to the bright lights. Many of us will remember.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Observeofu
Quote:

Without all of the words that is exactly what I said

LOL!! NOT!!!!!!

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Observerofu

You take a report from 2004 - and a comment by Ms.Brazile to justify your logic?

Quote:

btw- the Black creep-It began there DM. Many of us see the democrats talking a good game but it seems every time a black man or woman steps up to the plate the good ole democrat party would rather we just sat back down. It took a Republican to move us from the backstage to the bright lights. Many of us will remember.

Today is 2010 - and the 'creep' never materialized. Many of us were/are aware of Ms. Rice's brilliance - and were thrilled when she was named as Secretary of State. You have a right to your opinion - but many of us saw what the Republicans did to Colin Powell. Many of us saw what the Republicans did to John McCain - trying to intimate that his 'black' daughter was from an illicit relationship. Many of us are watching closely as the Republicans try to figure out what to do with Michael Steele. Ms. Rice, like many women and minorities is Conservative - but she too is weary of the racist rhetoric that has been seen at Tea Party rallies - and she also has been made aware of the ignorance that has been expressed on many social networking sites. You are entitled to your viewpoint - but you haven't changed mine nor I yours. Have a great weekend.

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
Long on rhetoric and no substance

"Ms. Rice, like many women and minorities is Conservative - but she too is weary of the racist rhetoric that has been seen at Tea Party rallies"

Care to share proof of that one as well?
Or is this more of your homilies, hyperbole and suppositions?

I guess Clarance Thomas name means nothing. I guess Ms Rice saw nothing but support from the dems? Ummm huh ok.

You might want to read this before you post this again.
http://votingfemale.wordpress.com/2010/04/07/lefts-racists-attacks-again...

"A tea party supporter running against House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., Lollar says he's finding support in unexpected places.

The 38-year-old U.S. Marine Corps reservist recently walked into a bar in southern Maryland decorated with a Confederate flag. It gave his wife Rosha pause.

"I said, 'You know what, honey? Many, many of our Southern citizens came together under that flag for the purpose of keeping their family and their state together,'" Lollar recalled. "The flag is not what you're to fear. It's the stupidity behind the flag that is a problem. I don't think we'll find that in here. Let's go ahead in."

Once inside, they were treated to a pig roast, a motorcycle rally — and presented with $5,000 in contributions for his campaign."

"WASHINGTON, DC — The Independent Women’s Forum today denounced as blatantly racist several editorial cartoons featuring Dr. Condoleezza Rice, National Security Advisor and President Bush’s nominee for Secretary of State. These cartoons clearly draw upon centuries of deep-rooted, wicked and indefensible portrayals of black women.
“The depiction of Dr. Condoleezza Rice by Jeff Danziger, Pat Oliphant and Garry Trudeau as an ebonics speaking, big-lipped, black mammy who just loves her ‘massa’ is a disturbing trend in editorial cartoons,” said Michelle D. Bernard, senior vice president of the Independent Women’s Forum. “These cartoons take the racism of the liberals who profess respect and adoration for black Americans to a new level. It is revolting.”"

Like my tag line says: Annoy a liberal-Use facts and logic

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Clarence Thomas???? LOL!
Quote:

I guess Clarance Thomas name means nothing.

Did you really go there? LOL!

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
You're not annoying Obsererofu

just entertaining. Good night, pleasant 'conservative' dreams. I am pleased that you feel loved and respected by those who share your beliefs . . . so do I. However - not all Americans truly embrace us for us. Ms. Rice has earned the respect of the American people. Read her book - you may find it enlightening. She is a brilliant pragmatist - whose parents loved her and taught her pride, integrity, and a drive for excellence in all that she did. Calling all liberals racist is going over the top - don't you think? I have never stated nor do I think that all conservatives are racists. Anyway - good night. (your facts from Fox News and other right media does not change the perception and distrust that many minorities in this country have of the Republican/Conservative Party.

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
You still failed to provide the proof for your statements

When I make a statement I give a link to backup what I state. You simply make the statement and expect it not to be challenged.

Oh well it's been real and it's been fun but not real fun.

Chris P. Bacon
Chris P. Bacon's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/28/2010
Good question, NotLindsey
Observerofu wrote:

You and others want to show a quota of blacks in the movement. The question is WHY?

First and foremost, we ask this question because we like to watch you squeal in indignation and jump through the most convoluted hoops to avoid answering that question.

Secondly, and more importantly, you and the Tea Party have a long, rich history of exaggerating both the depth of your membership and the degree of acceptance in the community. You want us to take this "on faith". Most rational people realize that the Tea Party is little more than a small but nonetheless very vocal group of over-50 white middle class men with an overdeveloped sense of privilege.

The sad reality is that numbers-wise, there are very, very few non-whites in the Tea Party as an overall percentage of membership. How few? We don't know, tea party organizations refuse to disclose this information. Thus, we're at a stalemate, leaving blowhards such as yourself to use "weasel words" (such as "plenty of coloreds" and "lots and lots of blacks") and anecdotal evidence ("but...but...Herman Cain!").

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
Postscript - Bacon

Your postscript

"Tea Party: The GOP outreach program for the special-education set. Now with more fascism!"

You do realize that fascist ((National Socialist German Workers' Party, NSDAP) were in fact socialist? Following the last world war the "progressives" were very adept at obscuring this fact and somehow attributing "conservatives and right wingers" with fascism. They did this primarily through public education.

The fact is Hitler was first and foremost a progressive socialist (progressive).

Just for the record, you may want to take that last bit off your insult to the Tea Party. (I am not a member by the way)

NUK_1
NUK_1's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/17/2007
Ehhh, c'mon Crispy Bacon

There's obviously a lot of women involved in TP, including recent candidates, some of whom actually won. South Carolina not only has a governor heavily endorsed by the TP, but she's also a Sikh which made history. Rising star Marco Rubio doesn't look like some 50-ish white dude to me either.

The Tea Party doesn't have a "long and rich history" of anything yet. While I think the media has overstated all things TP this year, they certainly had an impact in the elections. Everything else that happens going forward is kind of unknown at this point, and the TP can then be judged in a clearer focus over time. If they keep funding and backing very dumb and flawed candidates like an Angle, Palin or O'Donnell or go down the Moral Majority road, they'll fade away quickly. If they find some more serious candidates like a few that just got elected in big races and are certainly "talking a good game" so far, they could become a real force.

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
Bacon you have become a pretty good race baiter yourself.

by now you are probably a master at baiting. ;-O

Unlike you I have personal knowledge of the Teaparty's varied membership. Also unlike you race is not an issue for us. Only liberals and progressives pretend to be race neutral when in reality it is all you care about.

MLK would not recognize the Democratic party today. You care more about the color of one's skin then the character of their soul.

You see bacon we have already peeked in your closet "buddy" and it pretty scary and dark.

Sad, an old tired useless radical from the 60's who can't seem to be relevant anymore except here and not very at that.

You going to attempt to insult my family now? Call my daughter a crack whore? Come on show us all again what a class act you really are.

America spoke on Nov 2nd there bacon "old" boy. You can either deal with it or not I for one could not care less.

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
Tax cuts and cuts in spending have historically reduced deficits

The deficit spending and borrowing is on a unsustainable path.

Unhindered spending has increased the deficits to record levels adding $2.7 TRILLION to the National Debt in just the last 2 years alone.

This debt is creating a future that our children will have to bear. WE are robbing their future for OUR gain so that WE can be comfortable now.

Congress needs to cut federal spending sharply and quickly.

Just a blast from the past...
"The problem is spending. The latest ratings by the National Taxpayers Union tell us that during the 2003-04 session, only 13 members of Congress -- a record low number -- voted to actually reduce the overall outlays of the federal government."

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=4017

Bush's record spending COMBINED with the spending created by Congress and now this Administrations love of Government has created the mess we are in.

American's are taxed at every level already. Since our Government has seen fit to make America into a consumer society and force our Manufacturing overseas we need to spend money individually to continue the economic growth. To do this we have to have income commensurate with our expenditures.
This course cannot continue. A correction was bound to happen. This generation and the next will need to become familiar with the word "austere". Austerity is our current future.

A continued increase in taxes to fund Government spending combined with a lack of economic opportunities will continue to sink us into the swamp we find ourselves in.

We have to cut our sacred cows NOW. A phased out slow reduction will be easier to swallow but swallow we all must.

Defense
Medicare
Social Security
Welfare
UNIONS

All should be on the chopping block to some degree. We can no longer afford our "sacred cows" to go on without reigning them in.

America is BROKE and on the verge of bankruptcy. You want socialized healthcare go to Canada. I hear the skiing is great this time of year. But you better hurry they are cutting their "cows" even as we speak.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Observerofu

Let's see:

Cut 'defense': An open invitation to those who seek to destroy us.

Cut 'Medicare': Can be done by cutting fraud and corruption - but one may find serious fights from those who 'profit'.

Cut 'Social Security: Messing with 'widows and children' is as dangerous as striking out at 'mother and apple pie' - but again, can be cut if the fraud and corruption is seriously addressed.

Cut 'Welfare': That will take some doing - since so many people have been able to stay 'afloat' during this recession because of their 'welfare' check. (Unemployment check)

Cut UNIONS: Not much of a threat in Georgia. But go for it.

Observerofu
Observerofu's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/14/2010
DM it will not be easy

and never said it would be. We can no longer afford to allow feel good programs, keeping would be dictators in check and un-controlled spending.

Those "Happy Days" are over. The Fed in particular Benberyankme just Monetized our debt after swearing under oath not to. Do you know what that means?

Inflation. More than likely run away rampant style Wiemar inflation. No one expects this to work so why did they do it?

Should the dollar crash inflation won't be the only thing we have to worry about.

QE2 is designed as an orderly decline of the dollar. Noticed gas prices lately?

AtHomeGym
AtHomeGym's picture
Online
Joined: 01/18/2007
OOU, DM, Deficit & Earmarks

Democrats have controlled Congress since Jan 2007--what's that done for us? Earmarks: Mom, be sure to get in line early to get your ticket for that hi-speed rail to Charlotte that will cost all of us around 100M before it's finished--started by the 37M "Grab" by Rep. John Lewis. What? You don't WANT to go to Charlotte? How about just a round-trip (with picnic lunch) for a "day out"? Oh, I see, you'll be riding the "Trolley" downtown from Centennial Park to the King Center, willya? Another waste of dollars. Have fun now, ya'hear!

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
AHG

The big problem now is getting the federal government out of deficit spending. It is possible that the funds for these Southern projects (if coming from the feds) will be part of the painful process of ending the federal deficit. . . and those workers who were going to work on these 'projects' can collect their unemployment. By the way - I live in Fayetteville, drive a car (a habit gained from living in the LA area) and have little use for MARTA or a trolley. I visit the King Center often - since most who visit Atlanta want to go there. (and it doesn't really matter their 'hyphenation' designation.)

Georgia Patriot
Georgia Patriot's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/17/2010
You Cut the Deficit

by not spending money you don't have!!! I know there are a few that say we have to "spend our way out of this recession", that is like digging more to get out of a hole!! Cutting taxes will do more to stimulate the economy and create jobs than any of the bogus porkulas/stimulas garbage ever will. A stable fiscal policy with low taxes is what business is looking for. Government needs to realize, it is not their money, it belongs to whoever EARNED it and the ones who earned it want it spent frugally and efficiently. Lower taxes and no more "earmarks", that would be a start. -GP

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
GP
Quote:

Lower taxes and no more "earmarks", that would be a start.

The trend of the American voter is to demand that every legislator refuse earmarks -BUT THEIR ELECTED LEADER! (Another result of our 'me first' syndrome)

hutch866
hutch866's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/28/2005
Dm

Wasn't that a plank in Obama's platform, no more earmarks? How's that worked for us so far?

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
hutch

Check the record: Isakson took his BIG share of earmarks for Georgia - and he was re-elected. The American people spoke. Earmarks are OK if they benefit their state. So much for that. The people have spoken.

hutch866
hutch866's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/28/2005
Dm

You're dodging the question Mom, Obama said he would STOP the earmarks, did he lie?

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Lie?

Show me and Obama where he or any other president has the power to 'stop' earmarks? The Congress showed this and other administrations how 'Washington' works. Until we the people demand that this practice stops - the Isakson's of our government will continue to take those steps which benefit their states. . that's why we re-elect them!

Using the blame Bush/Obama argument will not solve our problem of deficit spending - unbalanced budgets.

hutch866
hutch866's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/28/2005
Dm

Did he say it or not, simple question, yes or no, he's the one who said he would stop them, he must have felt he could. Campaign rhetoric? Say anything to get elected? I love it that you blame Isakson, yet can't say anything about the one who PROMISED to stop them. So tell me Mom, did he promise or not?

AtHomeGym
AtHomeGym's picture
Online
Joined: 01/18/2007
Hutch & Earmarks

Hutch, in fairness, I blv his campaign promise was to "reduce Earmarks to below 1994 levels", not to eliminate them completely.

Recent Comments