Liberal Writer Calls Obama Budget a ‘Serious Plan’…Conservative Ted Cruz Reminds Him It Got ‘Zero’ Votes
- Posted on August 20, 2012 at 9:37am by
Mytheos Holt
- Print »
- Email »
Is a bill that gets unanimously rejected by every single member of the United States Senate, even when the Senate is controlled by the party of the person who proposed the bill, a serious proposal?
According to Washington Post writer EJ Dionne, yes, it is. Or at least, it is when the person who proposed that bill is the current president of the United States, Barack Obama. Dionne made that argument on Meet The Press yesterday, describing President Obama’s budget plan – a budget plan which Dionne’s co-panelist, Tea Party darling Ted Cruz, hastily pointed out was unable to get even a single Democratic vote.
“President Obama put a plan on the table that would balance the budget in twelve years, which is quicker than the Ryan budget,” Dionne sniffed on the panel. “I’m a liberal. I didn’t even agree with everything that was in that plan. But this notion that this president hasn’t put down budget proposals. He tried to reach a deal with John Boehner and that deal fell through, but he was willing to put a lot on the table.”
“How many votes did that plan get?” Cruz asked.
“That is a side issue,” Dionne responded.
“It got zero votes,” Cruz said incredulously. “Not a Democrat in the Senate voted for it. Not a one.”
“Yes, because the vote was put up there as a political matter,” Dionne huffed. “The fact is it was a serious plan and serious budgets get voted on.”
“It got zero votes in the Senate,” Cruz fired back. “That’s not a serious plan.”
Watch the exchange here, courtesy of Newsbusters:
Newsbusters‘ Noel Sheppard argues that Dionne’s defense of Obama’s policy is motivated solely by partisanship. This is possible, but there may be something to the argument that under normal circumstances an unserious piece of legislation couldn’t get voted on. Unanimous rejection by both parties in the United States Senate is not something you see often when it comes to legislation, largely because bills that would face unanimous rejection wouldn’t make it out of committee under normal circumstances.
However, when a piece of legislation is the plan advanced and owned by the president of the United States, one could easily argue that circumstances are hardly normal, a fact which Dionne seems to acknowledge in the exchange when he describes the vote as a “political matter.”
But procedural points aside, was the budget’s substance actually serious? Cruz and Dionne clearly disagreed on this point, as do other observers, but the Economist Magazine didn’t seem to think the seriousness was there. In fact, they called the budget “Unseriously unfair”:
The widely-admired Scandinavian countries collect a much larger portion of GDP in taxes not because their top earners bear a relatively larger tax burden than do America’s top earners, but because they don’t. The president’s confusion on this matter was evident in his open admission that “I agreed to extend the tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans because it was the only way I could prevent a tax hike on middle-class Americans”. But without a tax hike on middle-class Americans, there’s simply no hope for serious deficit reduction. That is, there’s no hope as long as Mr Obama insists on cutting spending with a “scalpel” and “not a machete”. Were he really serious about deficit-reduction, Mr Obama would have let all the Bush tax cuts expire.
In the absence of middle-class tax increases, or cuts in military spending much larger than Mr Obama proposed, the only realistic hope for putting America’s finances back on a sound footing is the structural overhaul of the big entitlement programmes. There‘s a lot to criticise in Paul Ryan’s plan, but at least he grasped this nettle.
That is a fairly devastating indictment, from a generally nonpartisan foreign magazine. And it may explain why not even the Senate’s most partisan Democrats could bring themselves to vote for the bill.
Popular Stories
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 704 Comments
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 543 Comments
‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 362 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 357 Comments
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 357 Comments
Faith
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 357 Comments
Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 362 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
- President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 276 Comments
- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 149 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 302 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 357 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (101)
SAWTOOTH
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 11:03amHonestly, I found this and it sums up exactly what I think this Yayhoo president!!!
http://www.ebay.com/itm/OBAMALONEY-TEE-SHIRT-GET-YOURS-TODAY-FREE-SHIPPING-/280938251311?pt=US_Mens_Tshirts&hash=item416939842f
I couldn’t stop laughing when I saw it. This guy is a joke and he is rubbing our faces in it every day!
Report Post »Gold Coin & Economic News
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 11:30amEJ Dionne got owned, but it doesn’t matter, because stupid people don’t watch Meet The Press and they will still vote for Obama anyway, just like this guy:
Report Post »https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTRqjpK6ScQ
Sirfoldallot
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 11:30amSerious, really , really ?????
Report Post »dmerwin
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 11:32amIt is a seriously flawed plan. Now I can write off Dionne as another lisping MSNBC sycophant.
Report Post »RJJinGadsden
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 11:46amOver thirty to thirty five years ago I read a book, “Brainwashed.” It discussed the origin of the term from U.S. POWs by the North Koreans, and the actions taken by both the NK side and the POWs. EJ Dionne certainly fits the bill for one of the NK successes. Apparently EJ‘s head is so far up 0bama’s rear end that he even disagrees will all of the Dems in Congress. Just think about this for a moment, even Dingy Harry Reid did not vote for that budget. That alone has a lot of wow factor.
Report Post »jzs
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 12:26pmSorry folks, you’ve fallen for a Republican flim flam. There was NO vote on President Obama’s budget. Republican Jeff Session introduced a 56 page bill (no budget is 56 pages – try 2000 or so) that he falsly claimed was President Obama’s budget, but that he actually wrote himself. It was not Obama’s budget.
This was simply a political ploy. As Pelosi said at the time, “It was a caricature of the president’s budget, so we voted against it.”
This vote was a gimmick, designed to have the exact effect it’s having on the ill-informed and ignorant.
Here’s the Romney/Ryan budget that I plan to introduce for a vote: cut taxes on the rich, increase the military budget and stop funding PBS.” That’s a one page bill. I wonder how many votes that would get in the House?
Report Post »dblaess
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 12:52pm@JZS You say it was not Obama’s plan. If it was not Obama’s plan that was voted on, then it was not a serious plan and proves that Obama has no idea of what is needed in this Country.
Report Post »JRook
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 1:28pm@Gold Coin & Economic News Or is it that even stupider people quack about the Ryan budget plan which guts the Medicare and SS programs that people actually paid into, although no politicians had the guts to listen to the actuarial analysis and fund them adequately for the baby boomer generation. So what exactly do you staunch supporters of Ryan think about his plan that doesn’t balance the budget til 2040 due to unnecessary tax cuts. What exactly will his plan bring the federal deficit to by 2040? If Ryan and Romney are so sure of their economic plan, why would Ryan’s budget not balance til 2040. Once again, a lot of talk but little if any real analysis, real policies and mediocre results. You want to vote against Obama that’s fine. But let’s not even begin to say you believe in Romney or Ryan and support policies they can neither explain or defend.
Report Post »Rothbardian_in_the_Cleve
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 1:46pm@JROOK,
“doesn’t balance the budget til 2040 due to unnecessary tax cuts.”
That isn’t true. You’ve constructed a false premise. The plan doesn’t balance because spending isn’t cut enough. No matter the tax code, the last 70 years has generated tax revenue around 18% of GDP. For example, the Obama budget continues to spend at 23% of GDP and upwards of that in out years. That is simply irresponsible. The Ryan plan spends too much (albeit much less than Obama). That is the problem, not tax code.
“guts the Medicare and SS programs”
Again, compare and contrast the Ryan proposal to the 700B theft of Medicare by Obamacare. The unfunded liabilities alone on this monstrosity could never hoped to be covered with revenue. You are either willfully blind or mathematically challenged.
Report Post »rickinpa
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 1:48pm@JZS
LOL So we’re flim flammed JZS? Why don’t you tell us how many votes Obama’s ACTUAL budget got in the DEMOCRAT CONTROLLED Senate then? If it was never actually voted on it because Harry never brought it to a vote than it, GOT ZERO VOTES RIGHT? This is the Senate that hasn’t passed a budget for three years now. Yeah it the Republicans who are flim flaming the voters?…lol
A REAL LEADER FINDS A WAY A LOSER FINDS AN EXCUSE –OBAMA AND HIS SUPPORTERS ARE FULL OF EXCUSES!
Report Post »jzs
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 3:50pmrickinpa says, “LOL So we’re flim flammed JZS? Why don’t you tell us how many votes Obama’s ACTUAL budget got in the DEMOCRAT CONTROLLED Senate then?”
The 99-0 vote was a Senate vote. You don’t know much about the Constitution do you? Hint: each state gets two Senators. But you are right that Reid didn’t bring up the vote.
Report Post »dwilco77
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 4:22pm@ jrook
You have absolutely fallen for the Dems talking points. Under Obama, Medicare is flat broke in 2024. This beginning with the 3/4 Trillion dollars taken right away to flim-flam the Public on the true costs of Obama care. Ryan’s plan leaves people 55 and over in age with their Medicare intact, and then has changes for people under 55, but still leaves those peolple with Medicare for the long-term.
Report Post »jzs
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 5:10pmFellas, can we cut the crap that President Obama is “cutting 700 billion out of Medicare?” How many times does that have to be debunked? The plan actually slows the growth of Medicare, something that, you know, you’d expect Republicans would support being the “hard choice” and “austerity” people that they are. But money isn’t being to be “cut” from Medicare. That’s false: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2012/aug/15/checking-facts-700-billion-medicare-cut/
So what have Romney and Ryan proposed instead? Exactly the same f-ing thing:
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/08/fact-check-obama-ryan-romney-backed-medicare-cuts/
“The truth is that Ryan himself endorses [the same reduction plan as Obama] in his signature budget plan – the same plan Romney has said he would sign as president if it reached his desk.
Those Medicare savings -achieved through reduced provider reimbursements and curbed waste, fraud and abuse, not benefit cuts – appear in the House Republicans’ FY 2013 budget, which Ryan authored.”
The politifact article makes the same point.
Come on people.
Report Post »SpeckChaser
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 5:59pmJZS asks, “How many times does Politifact have to be debunked?”
I have asked that same question. Let’s see what Rachel Maddow, whom you claim is beyond reproach due to her superior education, has to say about them. Here we go!
According to Maddow Politifact is a “disaster” an “embarrassment” is “like a zombie eating our national brains”
Where does she think Politifact should go? “Politifact should go away. Or at least they need to stop using the word ‘fact’ as part of their name.”
MOST IMPORTANTLY! Maddow goes on to speak of those (You in this example) who cite them as an authority. “You sully the reputation of anyone who cites you as an authority on fact-ishness, let alone fact.”
So JZS, I ask as well. How many times do we have to debunk Politifact?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/26/rachel-maddow-politifact-fired_n_1233411.html
http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2012/02/rachel-maddow-attacks-politifact-again-115053.html
On a side note, that is one of very few posts, if any, from you that has made the think you are not completely closed minded. It speaks volumes about your character to admit that you will no longer mischaracterize reductions in spending as cuts. Thank You!
Report Post »DEMOCRATS.ARE.EVIL
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 9:32pmEven Barney Frank and Rosa “The Goon” DeLauro voted against it. That‘s how serious Obama’s budget proposal was. Dionne is a stooge with absolutely no shame.
Report Post »DEMOCRATS.ARE.EVIL
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 9:38pmJZS – “Fellas, can we cut the crap that President Obama is “cutting 700 billion out of Medicare?” How many times does that have to be debunked?”
How ’bout I throw your granny over a cliff, JZS … after I feed her cat food and steal her social security check?
Report Post »jzs
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 10:24pmSpeck, you’re talking out of both sides of your mouth, like all Republicans on this issue. Your post has some merit, so I’d rate it “half true” as a whole on the Politifact scale. I’m going completely on memory here so excuse me if I get something wrong.
Yes, Maddow doesn’t like Politifact (I don’t have cable but some of her stuff is posted on youtube). The first issue I think was that the claim that Republicans “would end Medicare” was rated “lie of the year,” the year following Palin’s claim about “death panels” was rated lie of the year. That ruling was based on an interpretation of what “end Medicare” means. Republicans want to convert Medicare to a voucher program, where beneficiaries get a government check, and have to go out and get their own insurance from a for profit company. Politifact said that wasn’t “ending Medicare.” Using the most literal interpretation of the words, I agree that plan (proposed by Bush initially), isn’t “ending Medicare.” I wouldn’t call that the “lie of the year” but okay, I get it.
Plus, Maddow has been slammed a couple of times by Politifact on things she didn’t agree with. So yes, she’s got a gripe. I’d think that would make you more inclined to believe in Politifact, not less.
Politifact lays out the logic for their ratings. They have been challenged and changed their ratings, but at least you know how they make their calls.
Ya didn’t like my link to abc news either? Going with Rush o
Report Post »Free2speakRN
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 10:55am“How many votes did that plan get?” Cruz asked.
“That is a side issue,” Dionne responded.
***********************************************
HA!
Report Post »doomytram
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 11:09amEJ Dionne is such a liberal dope joke… He get‘s a chill and a thrill when the Liberal Obozo offer’s his simple plan. Obozo’s simple plan would equal a takeover by his 3rd year of his second term Yeah full dictatorship. Obozo will sell the country to China and give you to them to wade through life. He would sell America for $25 trillion and go bankrupt on our other debt.
How dare any liberal believe Ozero’s lies. The country is going to Chiner if Obozo wins. He will take over the country and you will answer to Maxine Watters for your Healthcare.
Report Post »Wango
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 10:48amCruz couldn’t answer a single question. And this is the best and brightest of the Tea Party contagion? God luck.
Jimmy Roberts lives! Sing us a little song, Jimmy.
Report Post »Rothbardian_in_the_Cleve
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 11:00amMaybe if they would have asked him his favorite song to work out to or what color of chili pepper he likes best he would have come off more learned to you.
Report Post »doomytram
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 11:04amThat Liberal is like a crack fiend and Obozo is his crack dealer. EJ Dionne needs rambles on and on constantly, and is a clueless babbling lap dog. Dionne would argue that the worst thing Obama has done during his Presidency is that he was too perfect and worked too hard.
Cruz sat back and let the Bozo Obamunist’s stick their foot in mouth for a prize, a la the Obozo show.
Report Post »What’s hard about this? Obozo‘s budgets’ have gotten 0zero votes in the last two years. Obozo’s monkey Harry Reid is a working felon and should be tarred and feathered for not passing a budget.
pdw
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 11:14amIt is sad that Cruz did answer the question with a Question that was the best respond to be given by anyone. Why should a lie be taken as fact? Word twisting is and has always been a way to push a lie forward by leaving out facts for their own advantage even when the facts say just the opposite from what is being promoted.
Report Post »bandi9
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 11:51amyou are either deaf and blind, or an idiot, or all 3. i pick C.
Report Post »mecanic
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 12:10pm@wanker…….idiot.
Report Post »yiska8
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 12:23pmAnd since when have libs answered questions????
Report Post »Deflect. Lie. Cover. Spin. Basic liberal advice from the liberal playbook.Oh, and the constant, answering a question with a question is the best way to label a lib. Remember Cruz is a lawyer. Pure verbal sparring. About time conservatives start looking to beat kooky libs at their own game. Annoying isn’t it?
Rothbardian_in_the_Cleve
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 10:29amY’all realize that NEITHER side is putting up a budget that does ANYTHING but delay the inevitable right? Ryan doesn’t balance the budget for a generation. Next year we will be at a debt to GDP ratio of 100%. Medicare is insolvent, even under Ryan’s plan. Social Security is insolvent and a ponzi scheme. Obamacare is already insolvent and won’t be repealed.
As long as we cling to this idea that there has to be some form of Social Security, Medicare, and now Obamacare/RomneyCare then it is impossible to put our financial house in order. Those will NEVER be dealt with however. Remember the last budget battle. They nearly shut down the government over a 39Billion cut. 39Billion!!!! You realize that if interest rates move 1% that it creates a current year charge to operating revenue of 170 Billion dollars. 1%!!!!!
Y’all are over here arguing about methods of execution. Obama‘s plan kills us in 5 years but Ryan’s plan kills us in 10 (or whatever). Both plans are death sentences.
Report Post »jzs
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 10:57am“Ryan doesn’t balance the budget for a generation.” Actually, that’s a very generous statement. Ryan has no plan to balance the budget. Yes, Ryan and Romney talk about reducing taxes, and they talk about increasing the military budget (both of which will obviously increase the deficit), but they have no plan on how to make up the difference, let alone actually reduce the budget. When asked both Ryan and Romney basically say, “we’ll get back to you on that part of our plan after the election.”
Even David Stockman, Reagan’s director of the Office of Management and Budget says the plan is a fantasy, saying, “In short, Mr. Ryan’s plan is devoid of credible math or hard policy choices.”
http://www.businessinsider.com/david-stockman-paul-ryan-budget-2012-8#ixzz23W97ITv1
Report Post »OhioRifleman
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 11:04am@ Rothbardian
Most of us see that already. Few will admit it.
I see it as inevitable. Even less will admit that fact.
Five years, ten years, still financially dead. What is the difference? Simple: one plan gives we civilians an extra five years to prepare ourselves for Washington’s folly. The other plan does not.
There is no stopping this nightmare. You can only mitigate its effect on your personal well-being. No one man will ever be able to stand against this travesty, and at this point I question the ability of even a hardened and focused group to stop it. We are past the point of no return.
Thus, I shall vote for the plan that gives me an extra five years to prepare for the great cluster-fracking to come. Time is a powerful ally when used right, and I am a master of using time to my advantage. Patience is not a virtue, it is a necessity for continued survival in the here and now.
“When a man knows he will be dead in a fortnight, it sure does focus his mind.”
Have a good day.
Report Post »Rothbardian_in_the_Cleve
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 11:10am@JZS,
Agreed. It is projected to balance the budget at some point but that is so far off that it is nonsensical. People want to debate Obama plan vs. Ryans. Fine. Neither fixes anything. Both pass the buck. Deficits persist, debt grows, and unfunded obligations continue perpetually. So the big difference is about class warfare and politics.
Under BOTH scenarios, the US debt to GDP ratio increases well beyond 100% (sort of a tipping point that many will argue is significant as a point of no return). Let’s look at this more closely. If you ranked the countries of the world in terms of their outstanding debt (not counting unfunded liabilities) as a % of GDP you’d see that
1. Japan is by far the worst case ever. They are gone, lost, fin. They are a zombie economy.
2. Then there are two groups of countries
A. The PIIGS. Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece, and Spain (long story about accounting and disclosure on Spain…their states are separate from the federal and reported differently)
B. Small, insignificant countries Barbados, Jamaica, Lebanon, Eritrea, St. Kitts (surpising)
3. So guess who is next. Yep. Good ole USA. Japan, PIIGS, caribean/African outliers…and then US.
Yeah, let’s continue to argue about where the deck chairs belong on the Titanic shall we?
Report Post »pdw
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 11:20amWords are the tools used to slander but at least they say they will try to create more jobs by removing the restrictions placed by this administration to prevent drilling in America by American’s. Why are there restrictions placed so their buddies in the oil business in other countries can make them lots of money. This is a war on America to make a few very rich while at the same time condemning the rich. Biting the hands that feed them. I believe most of us were warned that this causes more problems than it resolves.
Report Post »RJJinGadsden
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 11:53amOkay guys, think about this for just a moment. The last time we had a balanced budget Richard Nixon was president. The budget has been so screwed up for so long that it will take quite some time to wrangle it back being balanced. I would sure love to see it that way again, and I believe a number of you here were not born yet when we did have a balanced budget. Ryan has a better chance in the long run with his recommendations considering the overspending that 0bama is doing. And, that is mostly by fiat, not with congressional approval. So much for that Constitutional checks and balance crap right liberals?
Report Post »Rothbardian_in_the_Cleve
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 12:06pm@Gadsen,
I‘m afraid I’m going to have to take issue with your logic. For that matter, Glenn does it too. The premise is that it took X years to get here so it will take X years to fix it is fundamentally flawed. If you run your finances down over time to the point that you’ve ultimately maxed out your credit, you still have a light bill and food bill tomorrow. You don’t get to say to the electric company, “hey, it took me 5 years to get bankrupt so keep my lights on for 5 years while I undo this.” It doesn’t work that way. The amount of time it took to get here has ZERO bearing on the realities of tomorrow. NONE.
The “it takes time to fix” crowd is essentially saying that it is okay to tax and enslave unborn children to keep things going for themselves today. I find it ironic that the right is so concerned about unborn babies but not so much as to not have them be born slaves. And the idiots on the left talking about justice and paying “their fair share”. Explain to me again how unborn babies are on par with banks and the Koch Brothers? How are they not paying their fair share? Let me guess, they didn’t build that umbilical cord by themselves right?
The problem is that 99% of people can’t seem to connect the dots and those that do have made moral peace with the idea that they will get theirs and screw the future generations. Nice. God Bless America.
Report Post »mecanic
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 12:13pm@jztroll….get along little troll.
Report Post »Lord_Frostwind
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 12:20pmI think we were pretty much doomed the moment voters figured out they could vote themselves more money. Since then, it has been a feeding frenzy, and now the food is running out. You touch Social Security or Medicare and the seniors bust a gasket. You go after food stamps or welfare and all the welfare queens and their baby daddies come out of the wood work. Yeah, I think we can start singing the doom song now.
Report Post »dblaess
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 12:55pm@JZS At least they have a plan. Since the Senate. according to you, did not vote on Obama’s plan and no Obama plan was put forward, I would guess there is no Obama plan. We leadership by Romney/Ryan we have a starting point to get things under control. With Obama/Biden we have Nothing?
Report Post »justangry
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 3:38pm@Rothbardian, How does Johnson’s budget ideas rate with you? I‘m guessing not as good as Paul’s, but better than the rest.
Report Post »Rothbardian_in_the_Cleve
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 4:12pmHey Just, hope you are well.
I like that Johnson will balance the budget in 2013. No 30 year plans there. However, he is still a little too protective of some sacred cows. (ie social security) I do like the idea of de-federalizing Medicare and block granting it back to the states. However, it shouldn‘t have to pass to Washington at all as far as I’m concerned. If states want Medicare let them pass the legislation and let the residents of that state fund the recipients of that state.
I think he’s a little soft on the Fed too. It is a den of thieves and needs to be done away with…not reformed.
All in all, he’s the closest thing to the way I see economic policy should be. As a country we need to rip of the band aid and just deal with it. 10 year, 20 year, 30 year budgets are just kicking the can down the road. But Johnson is still a little GOP for my taste instead of being more of a constitutionalist. Don’t get me wrong, he’s like 10x better than Romney and 100x better than Obama. I just people really understood the gravity of our financial issues right now and had the moral strength to not steal from our grandkids.
Report Post »justangry
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 5:32pm@Rothbard, Thx man, I assumed as much. I heard about the block grants to the state, but hadn’t heard any criticisms as of yet. I’m with you on the Constitutional arguments. He sounds like a true Libertarian. A perfect example is pot. His position is to legalize it and tax it. I don’t want that either, unless they amend the Constitution. Until they do that it’s not a federal issue at all and the decision belong with the states. And the president certainly shouldn’t have any say over the matter at all other than just an opinion. I’m wondering if I’m getting only half the story there. I do hope we get to hear from him a little once Rominee’s corination is official.
Report Post »Rothbardian_in_the_Cleve
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 5:49pm@Just,
I’m with you man. I do chuckle at how the neo-cons just despise us on the drugs issue. They‘re all wrapped up neat and tight with their flags and pocket constitutions but can’t seem to articulate why it took a constitutional amendment to ban alcohol but for some reason it doesn’t to ban pot? If you read the constitution and realize that the enumerated powers are very limited, it is clear that in the absence of a constitutional amendment that this is a state issue. But, that is why you and I have issue with Johnson. It’s not the legalization….it’s the federalization.
Of course, this argument goes over everyone’s head and now the pack of wolves will show up and call us names like Pothead, Paulbot, extremist anti-war zealots, etc. Truly, truly we live in an age of enlightenment. /sarc
So where’s your head at on the November? You going Johnson or Romney? I’m in Texas so I can vote my heart and go Johnson. However, if I was back in Ohio it would be a really tough choice being in a swing state and all. So, I’ll prolly go Johnson. BTW, I chuckle at the commie / fascist thing. You know you’re really ticking people off with that.
Report Post »DomingoCafe
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 10:29amEJ Dionne a serious clone of Der Barney Frank!
Report Post »term limits for congress
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 10:28ambudget – schmudget! Won’t matter much when our currency is worthless.
Isn’t most of the stimulus spending from 3 years ago a permament part of the budget [continuing budget] now?
Report Post »eramthgin
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 10:25amNow I don’t care who you are that is damn funny! Mr. Cruz was correct. If it had been a serious budget it would have gotten votes. Funny to hear the media tool try and spin it as a serious budget.
Report Post »ThankBabyJesus
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 10:22amThat a boy!
Report Post »Gonzo
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 10:13amIf Americans would pay as much attention to the government as they do the NFL and Americon Idol, this election would be the worst blowout of all time. When you look at the polls, it‘s obvious that most people still aren’t watching what is going on. It’s sad, this is how empires fall.
Report Post »justangry
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 10:20amI don’t know, man. I pay too much attention. I’m almost OCD about it, and I’m not seeing any difference on any issues that are actually important.
Report Post »pissantno.10
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 10:25amthats if you beleve in the polls and i dont. the just poll the same people every day. in 20 years i found one old lady and that was her entertainment . they only people who called her. one day she would be liberal the next day conservitive . thats why in really dont trust polls
Report Post »The_Jerk
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 10:27amThat’s why the Romans built the coliseums. Distract the masses. Keep them entertained as you rob them blind.
Report Post »Rothbardian_in_the_Cleve
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 10:34am@ Jerk,
Bread and circus!!!
Another interesting tidbit from that same time period, while Rome was being transformed from a republic to an empire Augustus rendered the Senate useless (hmmm, executive orders, court appointees, federal reserve, alphabet soup of executive agencies). He was a one man show. However, he knew that in order to keep the people at bay he had to give them the illusion that they still had a voice (elections) and the perception that they had power by keeping the senate in place (“trappings of the republic”).
Report Post »woodyee
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 10:44amGonzo, I think you hit the nail on the head with regards to much of todays youth, but I‘m not feeling it’s overwhelming – nah, not even close. I was worried going into the Christmas season last year, but boy! how things have changed!
Cheers to the coming tsunami, sweeping and sterilizing the White house clean again!
Report Post »Gonzo
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 10:57amWoodyee, I hope you’re right. Because we all pay attention and the people we know pay attention, we think everyone else does too. I maintain that most 20-50 y/o males in this country know a helluvalot more about their fantasy football league and all the player stats than they do what’s going on in Congress or even who their Congressman is. That’s the ONLY reason this election is even close.
Report Post »Sirfoldallot
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 11:04amYup , dumb down it’s ppl , control the debate , & whaa laa a Dictator !
Report Post »OhioRifleman
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 11:12am@ Gonzo
I know people in both directions of what you suggest. The worst part is the group that knows so much about American Idol actually believe they are well-informed about politics…and they are not. They are the truly frightening actors in this sophist tragedy…
Report Post »Rothbardian_in_the_Cleve
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 11:26am@Rifleman,
Good point.
“It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized discipline and one that most people consider to be a ‘dismal science.’ But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance.” Murray Rothbard
Report Post »Detroit paperboy
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 10:06amVoting “present”and leading from behind……..the Obama way. What a waste of four valuable years.
Report Post »team1blazer
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 10:05amThe only SERIOUS plan to come out of this administration has been fast and furious….that was a serious plan to trounce on the 2nd ammendment.
Report Post »2AFirearmsDealerDotCom
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 11:25amYou forgot about the plan to build up the DHS…. Obamas personal military for civilian control…
Report Post »D-Fence
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 10:04amAll these progressives on these shows and even some of the Republicans are elitests. Cruz is not an elitest. I hope he doesn’t become one either.
Report Post »Rothbardian_in_the_Cleve
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 10:11amI’m sure party leadership and Boehner and McCain will sit him down and let him know how things work in DC. No worries.
Report Post »Wildblue3
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 10:02amIf Obama keeps pulling this stuff, the deomcratic party will become a laughing stock.
Report Post »barber2
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 10:18amWill become ?
Report Post »Detroit paperboy
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 10:01amEJ Dionne is the kid with the little lisp, who never got picked for dodge ball, got wedgys, and swirlies…..I‘m convinced that’s what makes a lib a lib………homely girls and nerdy boys, who want
Report Post »Social justice, whatever that is………grow up and seek revenge on their perceived abusers, bullies, and folks that teased them in their youth………so they became journalists, teachers and government employees……..and actors…
denkat56
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 9:59ami know it by heart, lets raise taxes, extend unemployment benifits for another 48 weeks. and then go on a vacation for about a month. tough job, im sure obama can handle it. just ask michele.
Report Post »progressiveslayer
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 9:56amI‘m well aware of Barry’s overall plan for America and I don’t like it one bit,I really don‘t want to see America reduced to third world status and that’s exactly what’s going to happen if we follow the one man wrecking ball one Barry Soetoro. His wars on coal our health care system and the constitution will be stopped come November.
Report Post »Glock31
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 9:56amand also they are NOT the Bush tax cuts. They are the rates in the CURRENT TAX LAW. If anything they are the obama tax cuts because he was the last one to have anything to do with it.
Report Post »Mandors
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 9:56amA budget from Barry the Failure? This would be what, the first he’s EVER submitted?
Report Post »woodyee
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 9:50amEJ DIONNE and CHRIS TINGLES (MATTHEWS)
What’s the difference, except that they probably both get their underpants at different Victorias Secret?
Anti-Gaybama Martians could land on the White House lawn in front of the entire press corps (“corpse” in deferrence to Gaybama) and if Gaybama said they weren’t there, so would Tingles and Dionne…
Report Post »The_Jerk
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 9:50amEJ Dionne suffers from progressivemania, a disorder where only the left hemisphere of the brain develops.
Report Post »Mandors
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 9:55amThere has to be a brain for there to be development.
Report Post »woodyee
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 9:59amThe only thing progressive about Dionne and Chris Tingles is their stupidity…
Report Post »teddrunk
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 9:48amI could put up a budget plan based on changing our financial base to one based on beaver pelts. It wouldn’t get one vote, but evidently it would be a legitimate plan.
Report Post »pavnvet
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 9:47amThree years without a budget and two of them with a super majority in the Senate. Niether Obama nor his Democrat friends want to be on the record for anything that they could be pinned down on. Leaderless, gutless and incompetent are the words that describes the whole Democrat leasership. America deserves better, America will have better come November.
Report Post »barber2
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 10:20amRomney / Ryan 2012
Report Post »grimmster
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 9:46amYep, all “serious” budget plans get zero votes…….just another left wing loser with a tingle up his leg….
Report Post »deeberj
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 9:42amThe president’s plan was a joke and not a single person voted for it. So let us stop bringing up Obama’s plan. It doesn’t exist.
Report Post »Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 9:41amIt was not a serious plan anyhow – the Democratic leadership ensured a zero vote from their party for the sake of claiming the conservatives are obstructionists, to have the continuing series of spending resolutions, and to ensure that, until after this November elections, their party cannot be pinned down and committed to a decisive decision on the economy.
They do not want to be committed on the record to showing their Communist beliefs.
Report Post »TEXASGRANNY73
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 10:01amI do believe you hit it right on the button. How you like our Ted Cruz, y’all? Tea, anyone?
Report Post »Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 10:10am@TexasGranny:
Forget the tea, come the day we win in November, I intend to celebrate with a pizza and dr Pepper.
Report Post »pissantno.10
Posted on August 20, 2012 at 10:31amstole your old mans scooter not good
Report Post »