Obama campaign talk becomes budget reality

There seems to be a new sheriff in town…

From the Washington Post:

“President Obama delivered to Congress yesterday a $3.6 trillion spending plan that would finance vast new investments in health care, energy independence and education by raising taxes on the oil and gas industry, hedge fund managers, multinational corporations and nearly 3 million of the nation’s top earners.

The blueprint, meanwhile, would overhaul programs across the federal bureaucracy to strengthen assistance for millions of people who have borne the consequences of what Obama called “an era of profound irresponsibility,” helping them pay for college, train for better jobs and save for retirement while taking less of their earnings in taxes.

The ambitious agenda for the fiscal year that begins in October would not come cheap. This year’s budget deficit, swollen by spending to combat a severe recession, would hit a record $1.75 trillion, or 12.3 percent of the overall economy, under the president’s plan, the highest since 1945. While Obama inherited the bulk of that gap, his budget would make room for a fresh round of spending that could hit $750 billion to prop up troubled financial institutions.

Next year’s deficit would approach $1.2 trillion. But Obama proposes to cut that figure roughly in half by the end of his first term, in large part by levying nearly $1 trillion in new taxes over the next decade on the nation’s highest earners, defined as families with gross income of more than $250,000 a year….

With its immense scope and bold prescriptions, Obama’s agenda seeks to foster a redistribution of wealth, with the government working to narrow the growing gap between rich and poor. It is likely to spark fierce political battles on an array of fronts, from social spending to energy policy to taxes.”

198 comments Add your comment

Joey

February 27th, 2009
6:52 am

Better to be near the top here than the last post on “Republican give themselves a tongue-lashing”

Jay, you are the man. You know and understand so clearly what is wrong with the Republican Party. You have such a clear plan for how to save Republicans from themselves.

Clearly there is no option for you. You must step up before it is to late. You must convert to Republicanism and lead the Party out of this mine-field. Please do not abandon us. Please, now before it is to late.

Thank you in advance for your help.
Your reverent follower, JDB

Mrs. Godzilla

February 27th, 2009
6:55 am

Budgeting realities scare the old base. Let’s be sensitive to their fears and don’t forget to hug a republican today.

GodHatesTrash, Superstar

February 27th, 2009
7:03 am

Mrs. G., you’ll have to wait until they come out from under their beds.

Dave R

February 27th, 2009
7:11 am

And our government continues to mortgage our future, while the media provides the Vaseline.

I Report/ You Whine

February 27th, 2009
7:14 am

(Can we get a list of words and phrases that cause comments to get rejected, apparently my nickname is one of them?)

~~~~~~

Ushering us to oblivion is what I like to call it-

America is dying but it laughs, as was once said of the Roman Empire. A grinning Obama greets unemployed Americans as they whisk past the memorabilia section of grocery stores in search of Spam to eat on their inaugural commemorative plates.-AmSpec

I got a question, why do liberals have to disguise their true intentions behind a cloak of “Conservatism,” even as they say Conservatism is “dead?”

GodHatesTrash, Superstar

February 27th, 2009
7:19 am

How about changing your screen-name to “I Whine, And I Whine”?

Truth in advertising, you silly Bookman RightWingnutterbutter!

I Report/ You Whine

February 27th, 2009
7:20 am

19 state lawmakers failed to pay taxes, report says, Wilkinson said House and Senate leaders are now discussing what should happen to the 16 House members and three senators in wake of the disclosure.-Wall Mounted Restroom Fixture

I know what we can do with them, appoint them to Oblahma’s kabinet.

DB, Gwinnettian

February 27th, 2009
7:22 am

I Report/ You Whine, Jay’s just applying a those Bush-era Gitmo Justice principles to posting.

Henceforth you’ll be provided with the posting rules on a need-to-know basis.

RW-(the original)

February 27th, 2009
7:23 am

$787,000,000,000.00 Porkulous bill–Obama

$350,000,000,000.00 TARP–passed by Bush, held for Obama to decide whether to spend

$275,000,000,000.00–Housing relief–Obama

Add to that the $401,000,000,000.00 that Congress is just now sending to Obama that they’ll claim was last year’s budget bill. Can you really blame that one on Bush when Obama signs it and Bush has no say in that spending going under his name?

Is it really fair to say Obama “inherited” the bulk of a 1.75 trillion dollar deficit? Hardly

AmVet

February 27th, 2009
7:25 am

Wow, the Credibility-free Party has been a bunch of busy little beavers of late.

As ever they’ve shown the party discipline and valorous courage to take on the really big challenges facing America, as they tackle critical issue after critical issue:

First, led by that fresh new face in the GOP (???), Jim DeMint, they approved a ultra-critical ban on the reinstatement of the so-called “Fairness Doctrine” that would threaten conservative talk radio. The RNC chair, HeadRush, has got his boys, moving quickly on these national priorities, I tell you.

Secondly, there’s……………….uh………………..

Then they……………………um……………….

Well I guess there’s not a lot more to report on the Republiconneds accomplishments, other than the usual bellyaching and armchair quarterbacking. Business as usual by The Old White Guy Party of Dixie.

Speaking of the Old “New” South, this made me think of several of our “conservative” friends here who deep down inside are still pining secessionist traitors, neo-Nazis, skinheads and/or Klansman:

The Southern Poverty Law Center’s report, “The Year in Hate,” found the number of hate groups grew by 54 percent since 2000. The study identified 926 hate groups — defined as groups with beliefs or practices that attack or malign an entire class of people — active in 2008. That’s a 4 percent jump, adding 38 more than the year before.

Emasculated always still ultra-violent by nature, rest assured that one of these angry white southern males is hoping to be the next James Earl Ray. And his cousins here will celebrate like robed nuts at a cross-burning..

Eric

February 27th, 2009
7:25 am

“the government working to narrow the growing gap between rich and poor.”

1. That gap is closing all by itself, thanks to the recession

2. The same questions lefties can’t seem to find an answer to:

HOW
DO
WE
PAY
FOR
THIS?

I Report/ You Whine

February 27th, 2009
7:26 am

Thanks but no thanks, Trash Supersimp, if anything I might change it to, “I am not a whiny little liberal that apparently has nothing better to do then blubber to the Wall Mounted Restroom Fixture about other people on their blogs.”

Besides, I kinda like the new handle.

DB, Gwinnettian

February 27th, 2009
7:26 am

I eagerly await the sad and woeful tales of those struggling to get by on 1.25 million per year, who are looking at being socked with a confiscatory 8% hike in that one million 100K that’s now in the top marginal rate.

However will they cope with a tax rate that will be–gasp–what it was during Clinton’s terms in office?

DB, Gwinnettian

February 27th, 2009
7:27 am

Eric, the answer to your question is “taxation.” It’s what governments generally do to pay for stuff. Thanks for asking!

DB, Gwinnettian

February 27th, 2009
7:29 am

Mornin’ RW. would it be unfair to ask if you are among those in the running for Jim Wooten’s columnist slot? Reason I ask is, I noticed in today’s dead-tree that they’ve got (I think) Candidates F-J’s writing samples printed for review – now I want to go back and read the earlier ones and weigh in.

If you’d rather not say that’s fine, just wondering.

RW-(the original)

February 27th, 2009
7:31 am

DB,

You could confiscate every dollar earned by every person in this country making a quarter mill and you still couldn’t pay for this. You go right on believing this little class warfare fantasy though, but don’t say you weren’t warned.

DB, Gwinnettian

February 27th, 2009
7:31 am

Speaking of screen names, I’d been thinking about adopting some over-the-top rightie handle just for a bit of double-irony. Something like “Hairy Reed’s Disney Train” or suchlike.

(But that would be wrong.)

RW-(the original)

February 27th, 2009
7:36 am

DB,

I was not one of the finalists, however I did get a nice reply welcoming me to send in unpaid guest columns. The only problem I had with the process was that the AJC asked for links to samples of original writing and they never read any of the ones I provided.

DB, Gwinnettian

February 27th, 2009
7:37 am

“You could confiscate every dollar earned by every person in this country making a quarter mill and you still couldn’t pay for this.”

I guess that kind of answer is why I find it hard to take modern-era conservatives seriously. It’s like they refuse to acknowledge that such a thing as “marginal tax rates” exist–in your reply, for example, you’re implicitly saying that Obama is reaching back and applying his rather modest tax hike to the income BELOW 250K.

I don’t know if you meant to do that, but such sleights-of-hand seem to just pour out without effort.

and honestly? I haven’t looked at any recent SWAG analysis from anyone as to just what would be required in the way of tax rates to, honestly, bring us within shouting distance of balanced. Gots ye a linkee that’s not going to require brain bleach, i’m all eyes. (well for a few minutes anyway)

Oh, one other thing, I hope you’ll pardon the somewhat personal intrusion, but when you say “off to the forest” is that a colorful way of describing the (field?) work that you do, or are you literally capable of hitting the trails most days? It’d be cool if the latter were true but sadly I assume it’s probably the former…

DB, Gwinnettian

February 27th, 2009
7:40 am

“The only problem I had with the process was that the AJC asked for links to samples of original writing and they never read any of the ones I provided.”

Ah, there’s your problem. One should never actually monitor one’s crummy little blog to learn the depressing reality of traffic generated.

Dave R

February 27th, 2009
7:42 am

And Jay? Hope & Change is no sheriff; he’s more like a benevolent dictator with the Congress he has now.

G

February 27th, 2009
7:42 am

Much of what passes these days for libertarianism is predicated on some faulty notion that each citizen possesses not only the rights of a citizen, but sovereign rights as well.

That is, they disavow a government “of the people, by the people, and for the people” in favor of a government of the persons, by the persons, and for the persons.

I think the best solution would be for all these people that believe that taxation is stealing should print their own currency, and let the chips fall where they may. Make your case for sovereign rights in a court of law.

The other method for funding government is by conscription. You could just have a government representative come into your home or business and take things whenever they need something. You could have zero taxation with this method.

Wouldn’t that be a perfect world?

RW-(the original)

February 27th, 2009
7:48 am

DB,

Off to the forest has many meanings, but it usually involves being out amongst the trees.

I don’t maintain a blog at all and never did with the thought of any ad/traffic generation. It’s, as I guess you figured out, a pain in the rear after a while.

RW-(the original)

February 27th, 2009
7:53 am

AmVet

February 27th, 2009
8:04 am

Obama, along with the rest of the republic, inherited a cesspool of filth and corruption. Left primarily by a Republican White House along with the nearly as equally culpable aiders and abetters in a Democratically controlled US Congress.

The man inherited the reins of government from a morally bankrupt administration more distrusted and discredited than even Nixon/Agnew. And one, more amazingly incompetent than even Carter/Mondale.

And a gridlocked legislative body so feckless and self-serving as to be laughable, were all of this not so damned serious and painful.

And those in the twin partisan “bases” never did, and never will, stop shucking and grinning for their “side” or even acknowledge what dupes they were/are.

Bring on the competitive democracy.

Dave R

February 27th, 2009
8:08 am

G, a “faulty notion” that I have sovereign rights? Please tell me why I do not have the right to govern my own actions? Under whose authority do I not have those rights?

Yours?

Please, please, please tell me who governs me and by what right, if not me? And try better than you did on your FairTax argument from days ago.

One final point: “Government of the people, by the people and for the people” appears nowhere in the Declaration of Independence nor the Constitution. It was spoken by Abraham Lincoln, one of the biggest proponents of a strong Federal government we ever had. After all, he went to war to preserve it. Nice speech, but the Founding Fathers didn’t believe that crap.

Paul

February 27th, 2009
8:14 am

Pres Obama has a point. He did inherit a deficit. One produced by his predecessor with lots and lots of acquiescence from Democrats.

RW-(the original) has a point. Obama expanded the deficit far past the amount he inherited, even discounting the bailout or the honesty in accounting changes with war costs.

We may have a new sheriff, but the badge is the same. Pentagon costs up four percent. Remember the federal spending as a percentage of GDP discussion from the other day? Four percent of a low number, say, 100 million, is a lot less in absolute terms than 4 percent of 500 Billion. Lots of talk about halting production of big-ticket weapons systems, such as the F-22 fighter. I believe the Bush Administration had already pretty much stopped it, then industry and local politicians started a campaign to spend a few billion more. If Obama ratifies the Bush decision, Republicans will give Obama the blame and Republicans will give Obama the ‘credit.’

But in other defense areas, from preserving American presence in such crisis-ridden troublespots as, say, the vacation discrict of Germany or the continuing presence in Kosovo (I keep waiting for that Christmas to come – the one by which we were supposed to have left. Thanks, Clinton and Bush. And now Obama).

In this area, at least, we now have Bush the Third.

The President has a point – if we were to wait for fiscal solvency to address certain issues, they’d never get addressed. I have to think, though, if Bush had proposed the Medicare cuts Obama did the headlines would be full of Democratic denounciations.

One thing I’ve been thinking about with this ‘redistribution’ thing. If much of the wealth accumulation of the upper tier has been accomplished through taking advantage of more-favorable tax rate schemes than ordinary income tax rates, why shouldn’t the gov’t redress this to put all earnings on a more equal taxation level? Obama has already done this by cutting out some of the nonsense, like taxing hedge fund managers’ gazillions at income tax rates, not capital gains rates.

But, if you have a wealthy person who got that way by pretty much spending a few decades by earning and saving and not using trusts and those all-too ill-defined ’shelters’ of the rich, just paying regular income taxes each year..

why should that person get hammered, again?

Mike

February 27th, 2009
8:15 am

Whether you like it or not, you have to give Obama credit for doing what he said he was going to do regarding taxes and budgetary priorities.

gttim

February 27th, 2009
8:16 am

HOW
DO
WE
PAY
FOR
THIS?

I wish you wingnuts would have been asking this during the Reagan, Bush and Bush administrations. You guys didn’t seem to be to fiscally conservative while they were sinking billions into advanced weapons that never worked, giveaways to the agribusiness corporations, wars that were going to pay for themselves and welfare for the military industrialist complex. But now when we want to help people who need food, shelter and a safety net you get all high and mighty? Please

RW-(the original)

February 27th, 2009
8:18 am

Jay B,

Did you know that somewhere around the 20 to 25 comment range your column disappears on refresh and goes straight to comments? More of us and less of you may be a good thing in our minds, but being as how this is your blog the powers that be should at least force us to scroll past you if we choose to be so rude.

Paul

February 27th, 2009
8:19 am

I think ya’ll got the intent, but just to make certain, I should’ve typed ” If Obama ratifies the Bush decision (to halt F-22 production), Republicans will give Obama the blame and DEMOCRATS will give Obama the ‘credit.’

And, regarding forces pullback for Kosovo and other places, I keep waiting for it to happen. Dangling paragraph, there. Sorry Jay. You gave us that spiffy ability to proof our comments before hitting ’submit.’ Okay, okay, I’ll use it.

Hey, reading my stuff before publishing it. What a concept! Maybe Congress could do it too, ya’ think?

AmVet

February 27th, 2009
8:22 am

WE THE PEOPLE of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union,
establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common
defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to
ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the
United States of America.

GodHatesTrash, Superstar

February 27th, 2009
8:22 am

G, the Founders were pretty clear that ‘murica was for rich white men.

The RightWingnutterbutters think the Founders were gods, but they put their pants on one leg at a time, or had their slaves do it.

RW-(the original)

February 27th, 2009
8:26 am

Sorry Jay. You gave us that spiffy ability to proof our comments before hitting ’submit.’ Okay, okay, I’ll use it.

Paul,

Where is this spiffy ability of which you speak? (Other than just reading of course) Maybe I need coffee.

DB, Gwinnettian

February 27th, 2009
8:27 am

RW, thanks for linkee. It’s the WSJ so the brain bleach will only need be applied at half-strength…

I’ve gotten a bit into it, will have to read more later, as, alas, my own forest awaits. Later, all.

Dave R

February 27th, 2009
8:32 am

GHT, the Founder Fathers believed that America was for FREE men.

AmVet, glad you can read (wasn’t sure you could), but do you know and understand what those words MEAN? And that’s just the preamble. Do you stop there, or do you move forward and read all the parts concerning INDIVIDUAL rights?

Paul

February 27th, 2009
8:34 am

RW-(the original)

Your are correct. All I meant was the ability to scroll thru what I’d just typed before hitting ‘Submit Comment.’

Try your daughter’s Starbucks. That stuff has about three times the caffeine!

I see Pres Obama has picked up the phrase “create or save three million jobs.” Or save. Talk about wiggle room. Wow. I’d love to see how they calculate THAT.

AmVet 8:22

That sounds like a pretty attractive proposal. Where’d you get it? Heritage Foundation? MoveOn? I gotta know who wrote it before I can decide if I like it or not!

Goldie

February 27th, 2009
8:36 am

Twenty-plus years of “trickled on” Reaganomics is what created this big pile of elephant dung we’re facing today… there’s no good answer for correcting the mess we’re in now, and President Obama is forced to choose the alternative to the Repugs’ borrow-n-spend policies of incompetence: roll-back the Bush tax cuts that were given to the wealthiest Americans. Too bad Obama’s waiting 2 years for that roll-back to take effect — America will have to suffer in the meantime!

G

February 27th, 2009
8:37 am

The middle class is the backbone of economic success of America. If the middle class has no income growth, then they will not have merely no spending growth, but lose spending power as prices rise.

The easy credit phenomenom was just a short sighted means to increase spending power of the middle class without having their income grow.

The rich class doesn’t seem to understand their wealth cannot increase(and they always want more) if middle class income does not ultimately increase. As the saying goes, you can’t get blood from a stone.

After 8 years of Bush making a huge shift of the tax burden from the wealthy to the middle class and keeping the income growth of the middle class minimal, things have finally come to a head. The wealthy got so greedy they wanted to pay less and charge more.

It’s time for the wealthy to abate their greed for the good of all Americans and to give back to the country that enabled them to become wealthy.

RW-(the original)

February 27th, 2009
8:40 am

I see Pres Obama has picked up the phrase “create or save three million jobs.” Or save.

PresBO has been using that all along. What’s sick is that the dutiful and toady media has picked it up rather than asking him just what the h e double hockey sticks that’s supposed to mean.

Bud Wiser

February 27th, 2009
8:44 am

* The Dow at a 10-year low.
* A tax cheat running the IRS
* Another tax cheat as the Chief of Staff
* A trillion-dollar plus federal deficit
* Over one-half of voters relieved of any federal tax liability
* Government mandated limits on executive compensation
* Three failed attempts and still no Commerce Secretary
* Tom Daschle rides his free limo into the sunset – after paying taxes he evaded.
* The White House performance czar turns out to be a tax cheat also
* Lobbyists hired to work for the Obama Administration
* The census gets politicized
* Double government spending in one year
* Increasing home loan mortgage rates across the board
* Millions of Americans made dependent on government
* Moving unionization-by-intimidation forward
* Welfare checks become “tax cuts.”
* Illegal aliens free to work on taxpayer-funded “stimulus” projects
* Welfare reform reversed, states ordered to increase welfare roles
* Move to silence critical talk radio shows
* Selling Senate seats
* Obama books in religious sections of book stores
* More government workers, not private sector jobs
* A government bureaucracy to intrude on doctor/patient relationships
* Stage set for medical services rationing
* Annual welfare checks for middle income families

Ah yes, nice, nice indeed, but only a partial list of things we can call the “ Change we can
Believe In
“.

Adding a 4 trillion (that’s a lot of zeroes, like the people that are pushing this agenda) deficit then complaining about your predecessor’s deficits sounds a bit, well, pedestrian, and comes off as essentially, for lack of a better word, stupid.

And there are still people that just loooove this man! Sort of reminds me of a phrase that I think I came up with, a takeoff of a PT Barnum phrase of note, that goes something like this:

“No politician will ever be voted out of office by underestimating the intelligence of the average American voter.”

tcoach

February 27th, 2009
8:46 am

gttim,

So anyone who objects to the spending in this administration could not possibly have said anything about Bush spending?

Also if they did not say anything about Bush’s spending, are they not allowed to see the error of their ways and thus reject Obama’s spending?

Or do you feel because Bush and company spend mass amounts of money, that their actions mean that it is now OK for Obama to spend as much as he wants for whatever program he wants?

If you do not feel it is OK for Obama to spend as he wishes, then approx. what is the limit at which point you believe he is spending to much of yours and my hard earned money?

I hope you will answer these in an attempt to gain understanding in a civil debate. However if this is going to be a run of name calling then I regret that i took the time to pose a question of you.

I look forward to your response and hope you will take the time to answer them.

Dave R

February 27th, 2009
8:47 am

They do, G. At a 35% tax rate. For virtually NO services. What’s acceptable to you Socialists? 50%? 75%? What?

And why no answer about my sovereign rights, G? Perhaps you forgot this little Amendment in the Bill of RIGHTS:

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people

Then try reading some of the Founding Father’s writings regarding INDIVIDUAL liberty and rights.

TnGelding

February 27th, 2009
8:53 am

G

February 27th, 2009
8:37 am

The wealthy pay the bulk of the income taxes collected. The problem is so much of what the federal government spends is borrowed, much of it from foreign entities. It owes itself $4.306 trillion, more than $2 trillion to the Social Security Trust Fund (slush fund?) alone. We all need to pitch in and get the budget balanced after the economy starts growing again, if it ever does.

Paul

February 27th, 2009
8:54 am

G

[[After 8 years of Bush making a huge shift of the tax burden from the wealthy to the middle class]]

I believe Pres Bush reduced the marginal rates on the lower and middle classes, taking some off the roles completely; expanded credits for such things as child care and other things so families got money ‘back’ even if they paid no taxes. Much of the rest of how gov’t was financed was through borrowing.

RW-(the original)

My impression was when Pres Obama began the stimulus talk it was to “create” n million jobs. Once it was in and he knew people would track it for that ‘accountability’ thing it became ‘create or preserve.’

GodHatesTrash, Superstar

February 27th, 2009
9:01 am

Hairsplitting. FREE, especially in the South, meant rich. And white, of course. And most states gave the franchise only to property owners until the 1850s. The poll tax lasted in some areas (virtually all in the South) until the 1960s, which meant you had to pay for the right to vote.

In South Carolina, there was no direct voting for Presidential candidates until after the War of Northern Aggression. The South Carolina Senate, which had a property-owning requirement for membership, was like the British House of Lords – many seats were essentially hereditary, families that dominated certain areas would pick the Senators, and those senators (not the House) picked the presidential electors, not the eligible voters.

So the first time the voters of SC picked the presidential electors directly was 1868, over 75 years after SC joined the Union.

I know, I know, the terrible truth and the facts get in the way of conservative idolatry/ideology all the time… stamp your feet and tantrum if you must, but that’s just the way it is.

All the jingoistic flag-waving and chest-thumping about the good ol’ days can’t change history.

TnGelding

February 27th, 2009
9:01 am

Bud Wiser

February 27th, 2009
8:44 am

I suspect Daschle owes much more, that’s why he was so quick to ride off into the sunset. I’ve proposed a tax amnesty. Can you honestly say you haven’t “fudged” a little on yours at least once over the years?

Observer

February 27th, 2009
9:04 am

Jay’s Headline: Obama campaign talk becomes budget reality

Let’s see, Obama criticized McCain during the campaign for wanting to attack the budget with a chainsaw. He (Obama) said that he would go through the budget line by line with a scalpel. So far, I’ve seen him go through the budget line by line with a bottle of “Miracle Grow”.

His (lack of) stimulus bill increased the budget of EVERY department within the executive branch of government. I don’t recall him making that promise on the campaign trail.

Between the stimulus and the $410 billion omnibus bill passed earlier this week, he’s funded the pork project wish list of every democrat member of the legislative branch. I don’t remember that promise.

Now, he wants a budget that will increase the deficit to the unheard of level of $1.75 TRILLION. I don’t remember that campaign promise either.

I do remember a promise of “transparency” in the new administration. I guess Obama’s definition of transparency is passing the most expensive piece of legislation in history without giving anyone – not even the legislators themselves, much less the American public – the ability to read it first.

Based on our neophyte president’s record so far, I don’t think I’d be writing a column applauding his follow through on campaign promises – unless, of course, I was a partisan hack who didn’t want to be constrained by something as trivial as the facts.

Bosch

February 27th, 2009
9:07 am

@8:44 – why do people plagarize things?

Hey Jay – how about a plagarization rule – you do it – you’re gone.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Wasn’t trickle down economics supposed to redistribute wealth and make everybody happy healthy and prosperous?

Bosch

February 27th, 2009
9:09 am

Paul,

I know this is kind of a crazy thing to ask, but do you really hold politicians at their word to the nth degree?

RW-(the original)

February 27th, 2009
9:12 am

Paul,

I first noticed the create or save back when the speeches were being made from behind the phony seal of The Office of the Transition or whatever he called that make believe office. It began long before Porkulous I became law.

Davo

February 27th, 2009
9:15 am

“With its immense scope and bold prescriptions, Obama’s agenda seeks to foster a redistribution of wealth, with the government working to narrow the growing gap between rich and poor.”

The best way to eliminate the ‘growing gap’? Kill the middle class.

Thanks for nothin, Obama. Your principles are not mine. A more blatant statesment of socialism I have never seen.

AmVet

February 27th, 2009
9:15 am

Paul, you know, my friend.

Why this concept, that is WAY past due, gets little or no traction form the sovereign people leads me to believe they are utterly cow towed to the duoploy. Stupid is as stupid does.

Speaking of which, many here realize that you are a great Constitutional Scholar, Dave R, while the rest of us toil along merely as the enlightened, free thinking and concerned citizenry.

Whenever someone compresses a matter as complex as this down to sound bites and slogans, you know their depth of knowledge is obvious. For mastery of this, Dave I suggest you read the Collective Works of Dusty. Shallow as the Platte River, that graduate of the Goebbels School of Cheerleading and Propaganda could one day be a real idol of yours.

Like your knowledge of sunspot activity and “energy”, it would appear that you yet again miss the mark, IF you contend the concept of us a sovereign people was not an integral part of the founding of this nation.

From your semi-coherent ramblings, it is damned near impossible to ascertain exactly what you posit. But it appears you are a full blown anarchist, where everybody has the right to do jolly well as they please (or “govern their own rights”), and legally determine what their liberties are or aren’t, given their own sense of duty, overseen by NO ONE or nothing else. If so, this is just more of your uninformed childish nonsense.

Popular sovereignty or the sovereignty of the people is the belief that the legitimacy of the state is created by the true will or consent of its people, who are the source of ALL political power. It is closely associated to the social contract philosophers, among whom are Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Popular sovereignty expresses a concept and does not necessarily reflect or describe a political reality. It is often contrasted with the concept of parliamentary sovereignty. Benjamin Franklin expressed the concept when he wrote, “In free governments the rulers are the servants and the people their superiors and sovereigns.”

This has NOTHING to do with the different rights reserved for the Federal Government versus those of the states, whose constitutions virtually all parallel the US Constitution.

Left to intentionally misinformed, Republiconned knuckle-draggers like you, there would be no Republic.

And you would neither feel any obligation whatsoever to obey the common laws as one of the sovereign people, or pay for your share of the shared resources (which is your goal anyway, I presume) nor contribute to the nation’s continuance (well that may be the case already).

Wish I could stay to hear what William Jennings Bryan has to clarify regarding the sovereign people of the United States of America, but duty calls.

Someone’s gotta pay for the corporate destruction of capitalism and the Bush Crusades while the “faithful” base sits here and blogs all day long.

Pray for rain…

fed up

February 27th, 2009
9:21 am

Let’s hope he starts to keep some of the other campaign promises he made. Or at least quits breaking some of them. I’m thinking O.B.A.M.A. does stand for the latest e-mail joke I got One Big A$$ Mistake America.

Dave R

February 27th, 2009
9:21 am

GHT, Hence, the wording in the 10th amendment. I’ll take 50 different states over one all knowing, all encompassing Federal government any day.

Bosch

February 27th, 2009
9:23 am

Davo,

Socialism is not okay, but somehow fascism was under the Bush administration was not a problem? Somehow that was okay?

I’ll take socialism over fascism any day.

GodHatesTrash, Superstar

February 27th, 2009
9:26 am

AmVet – still LOL.

Hey – has anyone ever seen Dusty and Dave R at the same time?

GodHatesTrash, Superstar

February 27th, 2009
9:29 am

I too, must run.

Looking forward to catching up on the stentorian tortuous jingoistic chest-beating and flag-waving RightWingnutterbutters later, though.

Ciao!

Davo

February 27th, 2009
9:30 am

Lucky you for you Bosch…you get both!

Citizen of the World

February 27th, 2009
9:30 am

We have a lot of problems that need to be addressed. We can keep ignoring them and hope they go away … oops, we’ve tried that. We could give a bunch of tax breaks to the rich and powerful and trust that their wealth will trickle down … no, that won’t work. We can give a free hand to business and industry and have faith that their own self interest will guide them to act responsibly … uh, reality check!

Looks like the only thing to do is face our problems head on and try to fix them. That’s going to take money — money we don’t have. But when your roof leaks, do you wait until you have the money in your pocket to fix it? Or do you borrow to fix it now so it doesn’t get worse and bring your whole house down? If we don’t do something, these problems are going to get worse, and they’re only going to cost more to fix later.

GodHatesTrash, Superstar

February 27th, 2009
9:31 am

I wonder what the South Carolina Food Inspection Department would be like without the folks in the Federal gummint them backing them up.

Poop in your peaches, anyone?

TnGelding

February 27th, 2009
9:33 am

Observer

February 27th, 2009
9:04 am

That $1.75 trillion was for FY2009, the current year. The proposed Fy2010 budget has a deficit of 1.171 trillion. Still totally unacceptable. We’re sitting on at least $40 trillion in household wealth, even with the decline in the stock markets. Why can’t we increase taxes and just freeze spending to get back near balance? The tax part could be accomplished by just letting ALL the tax rate cuts Bush signed into law expire next year as scheduled. I do favor eliminating the estate tax tho. By leaving that money with the heirs it will continue to produce revenue every year, instead of a one time bonanza.

RW-(the original)

February 27th, 2009
9:34 am

Paul,

In case you’re interested it looks like the genesis of the “or save” weasel words was in November of 2008.

“The plan will mean 2.5 million more jobs” by 2011, Obama said. His Web site clarified that the plan would “save or create” that many jobs.

He’s been pretty careful to include “or save” ever since.

getalife

February 27th, 2009
9:35 am

Shocking, a President is doing what he said in his campaign.

He took a 36% stake in Citibank.

Japan and India banks cede control to government.

In Germany, they are torching luxury cars.

Economy shrinks the most in 25 years.

But enough with the doom and gloom.

Ford will reopen an engine plant to provide jobs.

Hillbilly Deluxe

February 27th, 2009
9:36 am

I’ll readily admit that all this financial stuff with all these zeros has surpassed my level of understanding. I think the vast majority of those in Washington and Wall Street are in the same boat but they’ll never admit it.

Bosch

February 27th, 2009
9:43 am

Hillbilly Deluxe,

I agree – and that definitely goes for people on the blog here. :-)

Dave R

February 27th, 2009
9:45 am

AmVet, it’s hard to believe that someone who allegedly swore an oath to protect and defend the Constitution would be so willing to ignore it.

Are you enlightened? No.

Are you concerned? Probably.

Are you free-thinking? Absolutely NOT! You’d have to think first in order to be free-thinking.

My comment had NOTHING to do with the rights of states, but rather the rights of INDIVIDUALS! Which is what the 10th amendment pretty much sums up (unless you have been brain-dead since birth).

And for the 10th time, moron, I’m not a Republican. I’m a Constitutionalist, which is why you have so much trouble trying to refute simple statements by me that you cannot hope to ever understand. And if you did have a brain cell that still worked, you’d know that even a Constitutionalist still believes in the role of government, as opposed to an Anarchist. But government should exist ONLY to protect me from those who would take my life, liberty or property through the use of force or fraud. That’s IT!

But like a typical brain-dead liberal (sorry for the redundancy, there) you like to change the rules of the argument when you can’t make a cogent, logical case.

You keep thinking of “people” as the masses, rather than people meaning INDIVIDUALS. The Founding Fathers did not write about democracy being a good thing, but rather a bad thing in it’s truest form. That is why we have a Republic.

You are the most mean-spirited, morose, negative poster on Jay’s blog. You do not add the the conversation around here; you merely exist to whine and complain. You provide no suggested solutions. Frankly, I don’t think you’re up to providing any. That would take real, independent thought.

Something you have yet to prove exists within you.

RealityKing

February 27th, 2009
9:48 am

-6% GDP for the last quarter, second one in arow.

Well that’s it! One traditional recession.. And the last thing Obama, his drunk band of progressively free spenders and their liberal cheerleading squad can blame on Bush.

Dave R

February 27th, 2009
9:49 am

Bosch, can you even define Fascism? Because if you could, instead of using it as an ignorant liberal punchline, you might try to use some other word to describe the government Bush ran.

It was many things, depending on the moment. But Fascist? Not even close.

Paul

February 27th, 2009
9:49 am

Hi Bosch!

[[why do people plagarize things?]]

I wondered what happened to my “word of the day” calendar…

[[do you really hold politicians at their word to the nth degree?]]

The part of me that holds to honor and not liking my intelligene insulted does.

The realist in me doesn’t.

I suppose part of it gets back to the attitude of the politician. If they state what they believe, then situations invervene and they change, that’s understandable (it’s also a big difference of the nonreport back Bush and the return and report Obama).

I also understand it when it’s an attempt to avoid embarrassment.

But I do not care for it when it’s a calculated “how can I score political points” or “I wonder if they’ll buy this” attitude.

Rep Charlie Rangel with his repeated tax violations, and Spkr Pelosi’s protecting him, is a good example.

Paul

February 27th, 2009
9:50 am

Bosch

Eeaaaggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!! (No, I wasn’t channeling Howard Dean). I forgot!!!

12 hours 10 minutes!

Davo

February 27th, 2009
9:50 am

February 27, 2009
Ron Paul: the Federal Reserve Is the Culprit

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/025578.html

So ya…the truth.

Dave R

February 27th, 2009
9:51 am

GHT, how many cases of salmonella did we have back in the 50’s and 60’s? You know, back before all those great government regulations put in place to protect our food supply?

GHT? Hello?

CommunistAJC

February 27th, 2009
9:53 am

Capitalism is headed toward extinction. What most of you moronic libs don’t understand is the fact that you will all be unemployed too. Bookman and the rest of you trolls don’t realize that this country is rich BECAUSE of capitalism and not government. No more blaming Bush because this recession is officially Obama Hussein’s.

Bosch

February 27th, 2009
9:54 am

Dave R,

Why yes I can – would you like me to post it? – can you define socialism?

Dave R

February 27th, 2009
9:57 am

Why, yes I can. Here it is:

Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.

Now, please tell me how this definition differs from what we are moving towards in Washington D.C. today, and go ahead and make your case what Bush’s term was fascist.

CommunistAJC

February 27th, 2009
10:05 am

Dave R,
If Obama Hussein changed the flag and put a sickle and hammer on it these morons would still ask you for proof.

I Report/ You Whine

February 27th, 2009
10:06 am

Enter your comments here

Paul

February 27th, 2009
10:08 am

RW-(the original) 9:12

Thanks for the information. It really hit me a couple weeks ago when I saw a DNC guy and an RNC guy on a split screen, interviewer ran a video of Pres Obama talking about “creating job,” the RNC guy said “creating” and the DNC guy said “create or preserve.”

your 9:34

They figured it out pretty quickly, didn’t they?

AmVet 9:15

Yeah, I know (grin).

I read an article about how, duing the height of the Vietnam War, some college kids (who looked like the typical college kid of that era), as part of a political science class, went door to door with a petition. People read it, hurled epithets like (GD hippies! Communists! and slammed the door.

What the people read was “all created equal… with Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness… That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government…”

From our Declaration of Independence.

getalife

[[Ford will reopen an engine plant to provide jobs.]]

Who are you today? Mr. Merry Sunshine? Really, that’s good news. And not just an assembly plant. A manufacturing plant. This is good.

CommunistAJC

February 27th, 2009
10:08 am

Cllint Eastwood rocks.

Eastwood thinks political correctness has made society humourless.

London, February 27 (ANI): Acting legend Clint Eastwood , 79, apparently believes that political correctness has rendered modern society humourless, for he accuses younger generations of spending too much time trying to avoid being offensive.

The Dirty Harry star insists that he should be able to tell harmless jokes about nationality without fearing that people may brand him “a racist”.

“People have lost their sense of humour. In former times we constantly made jokes about different races. You can only tell them today with one hand over your mouth or you will be insulted as a racist,” the Daily Express quoted him as saying.

“I find that ridiculous. In those earlier days every friendly clique had a ‘Sam the Jew’ or ‘Jose the Mexican’ – but we didn’t think anything of it or have a racist thought. It was just normal that we made jokes based on our nationality or ethnicity. That was never a problem. I don’t want to be politically correct.

We’re all spending too much time and energy trying to be politically correct about everything,” he added. (ANI)

Bosch

February 27th, 2009
10:09 am

Paul,

You forgot? My God man, what’s wrong with you? You must be pre-occupied or something. I thought you were having some kind of fit. I hope you’re okay now.

You lost your word of the day calendar? Dammit Paul, I liked it when you had that calendar – it was so educational.

Wait a minute, you sly one, is “intelligene” one of your fancy words?

I hate it when the realist in me wins out, most of the time, it’s so depressing.

“But I do not care for it when it’s a calculated “how can I score political points” or “I wonder if they’ll buy this” attitude”

Good lord, why do you even keep up wit politics then? I’m surprised you haven’t had a real fit of some kind.

Will you give my question a shot? Wasn’t trickle down economics designed to redistribute wealth as well?

I Report/ You Whine

February 27th, 2009
10:10 am

Ooops.

I got a blog technology request, how about a “Post A Comment” button on page one that jumps you to the bottom of the most recent page, that way we don’t have to scroll through all of Taxpayer’s blubbering?

And it would be nice too if you could put a counter in the sidebar somewhere that keeps track of the number of emails the Wall Mounted Restroom Fixture receives from liberals whining about me each day.

Thank you in advance,

Signed, the blogger formerly known as Management

Jay

February 27th, 2009
10:12 am

Management, your right to your ID has been restored, sorry about that.

Paul

February 27th, 2009
10:15 am

Hillbilly Deluxe 9:36

S.I. Hayakawa was a Calif senator in the 70s-80s. Guy was a semantist – loved the study of words. When he went to Washington he was taken aback by all the huge sums with all those zeroes.

He wrote how he figured out how to cope and forget the zeroes and the difference between ‘million’ and ‘billion’ (or in our day, ‘trillion’ and ‘gazillion’):

“A member of the committee will say, for instance, ‘Here’s an appropriation for such and such. It was 1.7 for 1977. So for the 1978 budget we ought to make it 2.9.’ So all we do is add 1.2; that’s not hard. The next item is 2.5. The members discuss it back and forth and someone says, ‘Let’s raise it to 3.7.’ They look around at each other. Everybody in favor? Yes, sir, okay. So in five minutes we have disposed of $2 billion – not $2 million – $2 billion! I never realized it could be so easy. It’s all simple addition. You don’t even have to know subtraction.”

Bosch

Hey, irony for you, too! I’ll bet you (backatcha) spewed coffee through your nose onto your keyboard when I wrote “not liking my intelligene insulted”

I would never insult anyone’s intelligene. Let alone their intelligence.

I think that’s what RW-(the original) would call a “keyboard actuator input error.”

11 hours 45 minutes

I Report/ You Whine

February 27th, 2009
10:17 am

Cool, if the dimwit president you stuck your neck out for has no real accomplishments other than burning through the US Treasury, then make some up for him-

WAR “DEVELOPMENTS:” Obama sets 2010 Iraq withdrawal- Wall Mounted Restroom Fixture/Jihad

“Withdraw” except for the tens of thousands that he doesn’t withdraw.

Just like “Betrayus” planned to do 2 years ago.

TnGelding

February 27th, 2009
10:17 am

CommunistAJC

February 27th, 2009
9:53 am

Capitalism has failed us. The boys on Wall Street got a little too clever with their risk aversion schemes. How can you continue to defend Bush? Get real. O! is trying to save capitalism but it might be too late. I’ve always liked the true communist model anyway. Even Casro has abused it tho. It’s hard to be in power and not reap the rewards as others live in poverty.

Taxpayer

February 27th, 2009
10:18 am

Good morning, Jay. I’m off to a late start this morning. I ran out of Geritol last night. Anyway, it looks like Andy is back in a new costume. That’s nice. I see Obama has put together quite the budget. What’s not to like about that other than the fact that he should have just gone back to the 90% tax rate on the Republicans. That would really give them something to “Report” about. And, the sooner we quit making those FU-2 Raptures, the better. We don’t need any more of that just. Drones are much more cost effective in today’s fight against terrorists. But, we do need some way to park them in remote locations with sensors keeping an eye out for the bad guys so they can strike at the most appropriate time. Then, there’s that absolute waste of good money on agribusiness that Saxby was so proud of. At least Bush had the sense to oppose that one but Saxby was determined to have his way then. Times have changed and the time to change is upon us. Long live Obama. When can we vote on giving him more than two terms.

RW-(the original)

February 27th, 2009
10:20 am

Paul,

I bet you could have gotten away with intelligene. If anybody called you on it you could have linked them to the genome project.

TnGelding

February 27th, 2009
10:20 am

I Report/ You Whine

February 27th, 2009
10:17 am

Reagan and Bush are responsible for $10 trillion of the national debt to date, and Bush will be credited with another $5 trillion at least. I agree with you about the troop withdrawal tho. Totally unacceptable.

Taxpayer

February 27th, 2009
10:25 am

Good morning to you too, Andie.

I Report/ You Whine

February 27th, 2009
10:25 am

Jay- No biggie, thanks.

TN- So this gives the democrats the right to unload whatever remains in the Treasury?

We’ve admitted to our mistakes and are correcting them, proof of this can be found by all the liberal concerns about our “well being.”

Let’s talk about the future, shall we?

Paul

February 27th, 2009
10:26 am

HillyBilly Deluxe

As Bosch pointed out, when I lose my word of the day calendar everything falls apart. Sen Hayakawa was not simply a semantist, he was also a semanticist. Words really do have meanings.

Bosch

That “say something to see what political points I can score” and “what will they believe” thing: that’s another thing driving my evaluation of Spkr Pelosi – the whole torture thing. I’m sure she’s not happy with much of what happened at Abu Ghraib and some other instances. But on the specific issue of how high-level detainees with specific knowledge would be treated in the months following 9-11 when we didn’t have a clue what would happen next: I think she was okay with the plans. Until it became public, she knew of her involvement (there goes that ‘embarrassment’ thing again) and saw a chance to score points.

Let me just say ‘tricke down’ is one of those things I see that sound good in theory but get messed up in practice. Too many intervening factors. As far as if it was designed to ‘redistribute wealth’ – some will take issue with that, as ‘redistribute’ means to take what is and reapportion it, while ‘trickle down’ was, I believe, intended to create new wealth and have in turn generate more wealth at the lower economic levels.

11 hours 34 minutes

Paul

February 27th, 2009
10:30 am

RW-(the original)

[[I bet you could have gotten away with intelligene. If anybody called you on it you could have linked them to the genome project.]]

Bosch did. Now you’re gonna have the conspiracy theorists on this blog speculating if you were cloned from Bosch of if Bosch was cloned from you!

CommunistAJC

February 27th, 2009
10:33 am

TnGelding,
uh yeah, communism has worked out great in Cuba. Yeah, I can safely say that I would never take advice from you. Capitalism has failed us? Gee, we’ve had over 200 years of it and has made us the richest nation on Earth. You’re a confused person Ms. TnGelding. You may be suited for a life in North Korea or Cuba. You obviously don’t like America. I was defending Bush? When was I doing that? If Obama Hussein is trying to fix capitalism then why is it tanking on a daily basis?

Earl

February 27th, 2009
10:35 am

Only a democrat would think of spending their way out of debt. Do fat democrats eat their way out of obesity too? Same principle. Survey the folks in line for free things…ya know Those That Must be Kept and see how many voted democrat. Don’t hate us because we planned better. You can hate us because we’re beautiful though, that’s cool.

G

February 27th, 2009
10:35 am

I find it ironic that the same “deficit hawks” lose their bearings on the issue of marginal tax rates for the wealthiest Americans.

If we intend to pay for Bush’s wars, much less President Obama’s programs, we have no choice but (at a minimum) returning to the Clinton era marginal rates. It is only “class warfare” when the rich are losing out.

I’ve lived most of my life on the short end of the trickle, so I feel no sympathy for the wealthiest among us b*tching about something they can most certainly afford. Assuming that those people actually put their “tax cuts” into the US stock market back in the 1980s, they presently do not. They put their money in the HK, Singapore, and other Asian markets with a higher return.

Giving the wealthy tax breaks to outsource America’s wealth is horrible tax policy.

This issue is what drew me to Prsident Obama from the beginning, and I couldn’t be more pleased that he’s delivering.

Bosch

February 27th, 2009
10:36 am

Dave R,

Our means of producing and distributing goods are still done by private businesses – ones who are failing because they put all their profits in their CEOs and stockholders pockets and are cutting jobs and asking the government to pick up the slack – that’s not socialism – that’s failing capitalism.

Actually, fascism like socialism is impossible to define because there are many different types. It’s rhetorical – and sometimes I like using rhetoric – but I can back up my rhetoric with and opinion.

Fascism: An ideology that promotes extreme nationalism, one-party system ruled by dictator or promoted cronies, corporate protectionism, and is extremely anti-liberal (as they are seen as the enemy). Fascists also promote military power as a means of exerting national agenda, social darwinism, and social interventionism.

And if you’d like a run down of how it ties in the the past administration here’s a good list (in my opinion):

14 points of Fascism

Dave R

February 27th, 2009
10:38 am

Taxpayer, your ignorance shines brightly, even at this late hour of the morning.

Let me ask you a question regarding the F-22 Raptor.

If you had son, daughter, grandson or granddaughter in either the U.S. Air Force or the Navy, would you be happy with them flying aircraft that were designed in the late 60’s or early 70’s with their airframes being built 37 years ago, as was the F-15, or 35 years ago, as was the F-14 or 33 years ago, as was the F-16 or 29 years ago, as was the F/A-18?

Just wondering if you have any idea what it takes to serve in the military and have to use equipment that is supposed to keep you alive when it was built before the user was born.

Now tell us all about how bad that F-22 Raptor really is . . .

Taxpayer

February 27th, 2009
10:38 am

If the intent of trickle down was to have it trickle down but it did not trickle down then the intent of trickle down was not met so trickle down, if its intent is to be met, must be renamed to “pass some around, you porker” and forceably trickle it down so that pass some around becomes the new trickle down. Otherwise, just admit that trickle down never was what it was portrayed to be. It was never about helping to maintain a vibrant economy. It was about making a few rich, richer. That’s all. And, trickle down is just a Republican code for yellow rain. Yup. We’re on to you.

Paul

February 27th, 2009
10:40 am

Earl

[[Only a democrat would think of spending their way out of debt.]]

So I guess Pres Reagan and Pres Bush thought about spending their way INTO debt?

[[Do fat democrats eat their way out of obesity too?]]

Sure! If they change what they eat and how they eat. They’re still eating. In some cases, the same or more. But it’s different content.