Stark says, “You’ve heard a lot about the Debt Limit. And I guess that’s – I don’t know how many of you are worried about it or concerned about it. The fact is I think it’s a political charade.”
“I’m afraid that the Democrats have done that in the past, threatened to shut down the government. I don’t think there’s a chance that it will happen. I think the last time somebody did, they lost enough seats in the House of Representatives to convince them it was a dumbest thing they ever did. [It] doesn’t get us anywhere, it doesn’t help anybody, and to extend the Debt Limit is nothing more – than people have described it – than that the government’s credit card doesn’t run out of resources.
(Excerpt) Read more at mrctv.org …
We have an illegal President, a Congress that tolerates criminal acts and an intentionally impotent judiciary Obama’s ineligibility: Prepare to defend America – Death of the Democratic Party ~ By Lawrence Sellin (via ~ BLOGGER.GUNNY.G.1984+ ~ (BLOG & EMAIL))
Meet the New Plan, Same as the Old Plan As Drew noted below, Obama decided to hold our nation’s credit rating hostage over the sticking point of making sure he doesn’t have to beg for another increase in the debt limit before the elections.
Reid dutifully cancelled the plan he had agreed to, at Obama’s insistence.
Reid is now proposing a slightly different plan which will address the only thing that matters to Obama, his personal political fortunes.
In the new plan, Reid suggests giving Obama his $2.5 trillion in debt limit increase — enough to get President Pissypants through his election — and comes up with another $1.4 trillion in cuts.
Those “cuts,” however, are entirely of the phantom variety — they are the anticipated savings from no longer fighting the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. That’s actual money we won’t be spending, but that is already figured on anyway, and further, that’s money that’s spent as required, or not spent as not required. Bush had counted that spending off budget, which Obama claimed was deceptive, but it is a fair way to characterize the emergency, special-conditions nature of it. Those expenses were never part of the permanent budget going forward, were they?
So Reid invents $1.4 trillion in “savings” there and adds it to what he’s already agreed to cut (about a trillion) and says, “Voila, $2.7 trillion in cuts.”
I don’t know how that extra 0.3 trillion gets tacked on there — maybe interest saved by not spending that money. I don’t know.
The point is, this is still the same $1 T Biden and his team agreed to a month and a half ago, added to some phantom cuts, to claim that there is a 1-to-1 exchange of cuts and debt ceiling increase.
The only plus here, from our perspective, is no rise in taxes, which I’m not sure I’m even counting as a plus. What I mean is: Low taxes plus high spending forever (and always increasing high spending) is no way to run a country. Something has to give here, doesn’t it? Without actually reigning in out of control spending, I’m not sure how much of a victory it is to continue to push the country towards insolvency.
But it’s unclear whether this plan could pass, in any event, as liberals are calling it a “cave” by the Democrats because they don’t get their precious tax increases.
So, the new plan:
1. Will not have the support of the House’s fiscal hawk wing, because its cuts are puny, and mostly imaginary.
2. Probably will not have support of many Democrats, because there are no tax hikes.
I don’t see this new plan going anywhere.
Democrats and the media (but I repeat myself) are calling the savings from “future wars unfought” a legitimate “cut,” because that was assumed in the Paul Ryan budget, too.
Um… yeah, this is a little hard to explain, but assuming those wars wind down, yes, we won’t be spending as much on them, and so yes, that money should be accounted for somewhere in the budget.
But this isn’t really a “cut,” and it’s definitely not a “cut” within the meaning of the Republicans‘s one-dollar-of-cuts-for-every-dollar-of-debt-limit requirement.
A Most Wonderful Human Being ~ “Movie buffs will recognize this quote from the film: “The Manchurian Candidate” starring Lawrence Harvey and Frank Sinatra.”
“Raymond Shaw is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I’ve ever known in my life.”
Movie buffs will recognize this quote from the film: “The Manchurian Candidate” starring Lawrence Harvey and Frank Sinatra. It is a riveting film, released at the very height of the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962. The film is a tale of a Soviet Communist plot where brainwashed and conditioned Korean War POWs are released back to the USA with a mission: Return home and assassinate a Presidential Candidate. The Soviets hope that in the ensuing panic and a desire for stability, that Vice-Presidential Candidate [ actually a communist dupe controlled by his wife] would be placed at the top of the ticket and swept into office sympathetically by voters.
The trained assassin Staff Sergeant Shaw [Lawrence Harvey], receives a Medal of Honor for actions in Korea. These actions were, in reality, only memories implanted into the minds of his squad members. Shaw is chosen as the assassin because he is the Step-son of the Vice-Presidential Candidate. And unbeknownst to Shaw, his mother is the planted Communist Agent who will influence his Step-Father’s actions as President. The assassination plot begin to unravel as Shaw’s former Commanding Officer, Captain Marco [Sinatra], deals with his recurring nightmare that slowly reveal discomforting details of a plot to which the soldiers are all to be accomplices. Are you totally confused? Do you think this is too fictionally fantastic? Watch the film again, but this time watch with a “different set of eyes.”
In the meantime, I have attached a short 7 minute film You Tube presentation about “Grinding America Down.” This film clip might amount to “singing to the choir” for most of you.
Grinding America Down
Still there are many, I fear, who would sincerely believe that this is only a bit of hyperbolic anti-Marxism and anti-Communism. It is so passé and overdrawn these days. Or is it? I still hear it opined: “After all, didn’t we win the Cold War? Surely, Barack Obama is not a Communist … he’s just an ordinary Liberal Leftist doing what he thinks is best for America.” We hear this every day and night from the “talking heads.” Welcome to “Conditioning 101.”
“Barack Obama is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being ever to be President.”
Grand Ole Tyrants by Thomas DiLorenzo ~ “What would cause a president to wage war on his own citizens whose liberties he had just pledged to protect?”
The very first public statement that Abraham Lincoln made after being inaugurated as the sixteenth president was an ironclad defense of slavery: “I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery in the states where it exists. I believe I have no lawful right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.” He then quoted the Republican Party platform of 1860 that said essentially the same thing; pledged his support for the Fugitive Slave Clause of the Constitution “with no mental reservations”; and supported a proposed constitutional amendment (the “Corwin Amendment”) that would have prohibited the federal government from ever interfering with slavery. In fact, it was Lincoln who instructed William Seward to see that the Corwin Amendment made it through the U.S. Senate, which it did (and the House of Representatives as well).
In the same speech, Lincoln promised a military invasion and “bloodshed” in any state that refused to collect the federal tariff on imports, which had just been more than doubled two days before his inauguration. “[T]here needs to be no bloodshed or violence, and there shall be none unless it be forced upon the national authority,” he continued. Thus, mere minutes after taking an oath to protect the constitutional liberties of American citizens, Abraham Lincoln threatened to orchestrate the murder of many of those same citizens.
What on earth was he talking about? What would cause a president to wage war on his own citizens whose liberties he had just pledged to protect? Lincoln explained in the very next sentence: “The power confided to me will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property and places belonging to the Government and to collect the duties and imposts; but beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will be no invasion, no using force against or among the people anywhere” (emphasis added). He promised to murder American citizens over tax collection.
CNS News ^ | 7/25/2011 | Patrick Goodenough
Posted on Monday, July 25, 2011 5:56:27 PM by IbJensen
CNSNews.com) – As more details about Norwegian mass murder suspect Anders Behring Breivik emerged over the weekend, some prominent voices who warn about the dangers Islamist extremism poses to the West found themselves under fire.