09 Apr 11
1 edit
Who woulda thunk John Boehner would have made me miss Nancy Pelosi? At least Nancy was more entertaining. As it stands now, the spinless progressive GOP politician is what is just another example of how the GOP "W" types have helped wreck the US fiscally. His only goal was cutting the budget by $60 billion. It may sound like alot until you realize that it is only 1.6% of the current deficit. But that was not too low for Mr. Boehner, no, no, no. Instaed, John agreed to a poultry $38 billion cut.
I think I prefer politicians who openly could care less about the US economy instead of those pretending to care. So since there does not seem to be any to represent my feelings, maybe I should become a Democrat.
09 Apr 11
Originally posted by whodey"...a poultry $38 billion cut"? Was he cutting the heads off of chickens?
Who woulda thunk John Boehner would have made me miss Nancy Pelosi? At least Nancy was more entertaining. As it stands now, the spinless progressive GOP politician is what is just another example of how the GOP "W" types have helped wreck the US fiscally. His only goal was cutting the budget by $60 billion. It may sound like alot until you realize that it ...[text shortened]... ince there does not seem to be any to represent my feelings, maybe I should become a Democrat.
09 Apr 11
2 edits
Originally posted by FMFThe federal budgets over the past decades have gotten America into $15.1 trillion in national debt. The president, Congress, our political parties, our representatives and we, the voters are responsible for and accountable for our continuing growth of indebtedness. It's each year's US budget deficit that feeds off an unbablanced budget.
"Page Not Found."
The 2011 US budget is projected a $1.65 trillion deficit, money that must be borrowed to cover the revenue short fall vs. expenditures allocated in the $3.82 trillion budget.
This 2011 budget is still before the Congress. The funding is based on the federal fiscal year, October 2010 through September 2011. Here we are in April of 2011, and the budget is at a political impasse in the Democrat-controlled Senate with President Obama's blessing.
The political gridlock has come about because the Democrat Congress failed in their constitutional duty to pass the budget.
This lack of responsibility on their part has allowed the voters to see that a change in direction is needed. No longer would out of control spending and deficits be tolerated.
The 2011 elections swept a Republican majority into the house. They were given a mandate from the voters across America to bring about financial responsibility, economic sanity and leadership to Washington.
Failing to pass a budget, the Democrats and president are now forced to consider budget cuts. The Republicans scaled down their cuts from $100 billion to $61 billion. The GOP's original pledge to the voters was scaled back because one third of the year had passed with the Democrats in the Senate in conflict for $6 billion in budget cuts. The Republicans want to cut Obama's $3,820,000,000 million budget by 1.6% vs. Democrats 0.16%.
You don't have to be a rocket scientist to see that the Democrats' one tenth of the GOP's cuts shows the taxpayers that their outcry for lower taxes, less spending, and smaller government falls on deaf ears. To hell with them, we represent President Obama.
The Democrats had nine months to pass the 2011 budget without any cuts or Republican support and the presidency has allowed the GOP initiative to take control of the budget.
In the interim, since passing the 2011 budget, the Republicans avoided a "government shutdown" by negotiating with the Senate stopgap bills with cuts of $20 billion.
This is the last of the ninth inning; the Republicans are ahead 2 to 0 with stopping bills; bases are loaded two outs; two strikes and two balls on Obama's Senate batter. Taking a third strike is a "shutdown", if the Democrats do not go with the additional cuts.
Taking the third ball, the Democrats game continues with stopgap bills to keep the government open. Hitting a home run, the Democrats can give the Republicans their $61 billion in cuts and pass full funding for the remaining fiscal year.
It's called bipartisanship. It's a win, win for both parties and the American taxpayers. I'm a registered independent voter who supports the $61 billion budget cuts and a "Republican shutdown" should the Democrats and Obama continue to place out country deeper into debt."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the article it would appear that the author is pleased with a $61 billion reduction, however, as he points out it is only a 1.6% cut of the deficit. How can anyone be pleased with that? In addition, the author also correctly states that Boehner promised a $100 billion reduction. What can I say, he lied.
Why is bipartisanship the goal here if both can't do any better than reducing the deficit by 1.6%? Screw bipartisanship if this is the best they can do.
09 Apr 11
Originally posted by whodeyIs it an "article", as you claim, or is it in fact a letter to the editor of a local newspaper?
In the article it would appear that the author is pleased with a $61 billion reduction, however, as he points out it is only a 1.6% cut of the deficit. How can anyone be pleased with that? In addition, the author also correctly states that Boehner promised a $100 billion reduction. What can I say, he lied.
09 Apr 11
Originally posted by whodey$61 billion is 1.6% of the total budget, not the deficit.
The federal budgets over the past decades have gotten America into $15.1 trillion in national debt. The president, Congress, our political parties, our representatives and we, the voters are responsible for and accountable for our continuing growth of indebtedness. It's each year's US budget deficit that feeds off an unbablanced budget.
The 2011 US budg ...[text shortened]... the deficit by 1.6%? Screw bipartisanship if this is the best they can do.
09 Apr 11
1 edit
Originally posted by whodeyThis is obviously a statement of your own ignorance of congressional stagnancy rather than an accurate judgment of John Boehner, there is scarcely anything in his latest actions which would make him worthy of being labeled "the spinless progressive".
Who woulda thunk John Boehner would have made me miss Nancy Pelosi? At least Nancy was more entertaining. As it stands now, the spinless progressive GOP politician is what is just another example of how the GOP "W" types have helped wreck the US fiscally. His only goal was cutting the budget by $60 billion. It may sound like alot until you realize that it ...[text shortened]... ince there does not seem to be any to represent my feelings, maybe I should become a Democrat.
Once again I can't help but come to the conclusion that you're eager to have a government shutdown, given how you are so adamantly opposed to any compromise for the sake of a working government- The tea party brown shirts are waiting impatiently in the corner Im sure, they want to seize the chance for violent revolution, perhaps thats why an agreement between republicans and democrats frustrates you so much.
09 Apr 11
Originally posted by generalissimoAll I'm saying is that a 1.6% decrease in a $3.82 trillion budget IS spinless if you are serious about cutting spending.
This is obviously a statement of your own ignorance of congressional stagnancy rather than an accurate judgment of John Boehner, there is scarcely anything in his latest actions which would make him worthy of being labeled "the spinless progressive".
Once again I can't help but come to the conclusion that you're eager to have a government shutdown, ...[text shortened]... on, perhaps thats why an agreement between republicans and democrats frustrates you so much.
09 Apr 11
The US cuts 39 billion from their aid to the poor from the US and around the world. but adds 14% (78 billion) to the military budget which is now well over 600 billion annually. Hummmmmmmm.... I'm doing the math but I still don't see any cuts. Can someone help me??? let's see cut 39 billion here, add 78 billion there and yep, nope,wait, what?? cuts?? Where?