Budget Panel: obama Deficit Plan Saves Less Than Advertised

If anyone actually believes that this "obama" plan will do anything positive for this County they should think about obamacare. Just like obamacare, you can bet there is a bunch of hidden shit that will wind up costing us billions and cut into the savings. It will probably require hiring thouands of new government employees to implement and somehow it will give huge amounts of money to unions and other of obama's cronies.

Never trust this man, ever. He is a liar. He lies when it is easier to tell the truth. It is a compulsion.

And don't forget there is always an agenda. His desire to turn us into a third world country out weighs any sense of sanity. He is a liar and should not be trusted...

From FoxNews

A leading panel of budget experts estimated Thursday that President obama's latest spending plan does not save as much money as the White House initially claimed and is about $1.5 trillion more expensive than the Republican plan.

Since he delivered a major fiscal policy address last week, obama and other officials have touted that the White House plan would cut $4 trillion over 12 years. Using that figure, they've claimed it's very similar to a House Republican plan which supposedly would cut $4.4 trillion over 10 years.

But given that most budget outlines use a 10-year window, as required by law, the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget tried to offer an apples-to-apples comparison -- and determined obama's proposal would actually cut deficits by $2.5 trillion over the next decade. It credited the president for "moving the ball forward," but said that based on Congressional Budget Office assumptions, the plan doesn't do enough to tackle the debt crisis.

"It appears unlikely that the policies proposed in the president's framework would be sufficient to reduce debt to a manageable level," they wrote.

In response, the White House claimed that using the 10-year window, the president's budget plan would cut $2.9 trillion, not $2.5 trillion. And officials continued to stand by the claim that it cuts $4 trillion over 12 years. A White House aide suggested the president's plan would save more than the committee claims in part because of a "failsafe" provision that would trigger additional spending cuts if debt reduction goals are not met.

Read the rest at the link above...

Obama Throws Down Gauntlet on Tax Hikes, Republicans Blast Deficit Plan

There is so much wrong with what obama said today that I don't even know where to begin.

Let's start with the obvious, obama is a socialist dumbass who wants to make our Country into Europe. Which is funny because Europe doesn't even want to be Europe anymore.

Another obvious point, well, obvious to anyone with half a brain, we DON'T HAVE A REVENUE PROBLEM, WE HAVE A SPENDING PROBLEM. Why do democrats absolutely refuse to see that you can't spend money you don't have? Many of them are wealthy, so maybe in their personal lives they can spend and spend and never run out of cash. It's not the case for our Country, and they are SPENDING OUR MONEY, not their own.

If obama thinks that taxing small business owners is a good idea, he is even more stupid than I thought, and that's pretty damn stupid. Our economy will never grow, people will never be enticed into starting a business and hiring people as long as democrats keep up this anti-business agenda.

Entitlement spending in this Country is out of control. It has been for a long time. Everyone knows it but nobody, until Paul Ryan, wants to address it. Passing it on to the next bunch has been the way to do it for far too long.

obama thinks that kicking the Republicans in the nuts hard and often is the way to bipartisan legislation? He really is out of touch with reality. His fantasy world is dragging our Country further and further from the path set out by our Founding Fathers. He doesn't give a damn about the Constitution. He proves that almost daily.

I don't know if anyone has addressed the duplicate and triplicate programs that were pointed out a month or so ago, but that would be easy pickings toward reducing spending. If we were to halt all aid to corrupt countries, there is another bunch of money. Haiti and North Korea are examples of this. The governments are so corrupt that any aid money we send them goes right into the bank accounts of the corrupt leaders.

How about all the money we give to mexico to help fight the never ending drug war? Again, it is lining the pockets of corrupt government officials and their flunkies.

At some point, all of these associations need to be examined or we will continue to send American tax dollars to places that it does no good. The tax dollars would be better used here, fixing our own problems.

obama needs to get a taste of reality. If he can't or won't, he needs to hire a czar with some sense, somebody that isn't a thug and isn't from chicago...

From FoxNews

President Obama, outlining his latest deficit-reduction proposal, called Wednesday for both parties to work together to balance the budget and put America on a path toward paying down its debt. But the address left both sides digging in on one crucial issue -- taxes.

In a case of an unstoppable force meeting an immovable object, Obama said he absolutely would not allow tax cuts for those making above $250,000 to be extended.

Republicans said they absolutely would not accept a new tax hike. "Any plan that starts with job-destroying tax hikes is a non-starter," House Speaker John Boehner said in a written statement.

Based on the response of Republican members of Congress -- as well as several likely presidential candidates -- the address may have served to inflame the debate rather than reset it. Tax hikes weren't the only plank in Obama's budget plan, but they generated the most criticism.

"The only concrete proposal that he proposed was raising taxes," House GOP Leader Eric Cantor said afterward. "That solution falls far short of dealing with the kind of crisis that we're facing."

Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., skewered the president's address, accusing him of "exploiting people's emotions of fear, envy and anxiety."

The response previewed a grueling battle as both parties prepare to trudge through a new set of budget issues in the months ahead. The speech also served as an opening argument for the 2012 campaign, and Obama drew a clear line between his long-term budget plan and Republicans'.

In the speech at George Washington University, he positioned his spending plan as a more "compassionate" alternative to one introduced last week by Ryan. He applauded Republicans for putting a plan on the table to address entitlements, but the praise stopped there.

"The way this plan achieves those goals would lead to a fundamentally different America than the one we've known certainly in my lifetime," Obama said, calling the GOP plan "deeply pessimistic." He suggested Republicans were giving up on basic functions of government.

"It's a vision that says if our roads crumble and our bridges collapse, we can't afford to fix them. If there are bright young Americans who have the drive and the will but not the money to go to college, we can't afford to send them," Obama said of the Republican plan. "It's a vision that says America can't afford to keep the promise we've made to care for our seniors."

The president claimed his proposal would cut $4 trillion from the deficit in 12 years or less. He drew several lines in the sand as he explained how he planned to get there.

Accusing Republicans of cutting services to seniors and poor children while cutting taxes for the rich, Obama said: "That's not right, and that's not going to happen as long as I'm president."

The president's proposal would deal with entitlements like Medicare and Medicaid, but avoid the major changes being pushed by Ryan. The president opposes turning Medicaid into a block-grant program for states and making Medicare seniors purchase government-subsidized insurance, as Ryan proposed. Rather, he vowed to make other changes he claims will extract more than $300 billion in savings from those programs over the next decade. Plus he pushed cuts in discretionary spending, including to defense.

But where Obama departed most sharply from Republicans was his call for rolling back the Bush tax cuts for the most well-off Americans -- meaning a tax hike for households making more than $250,000, or the top 2 percent of wage-earners. Republicans and Democrats had agreed to extend all the Bush tax cuts for two years, but Obama said Wednesday, "I refuse to renew them again" for the top tier.

"The most fortunate among us can afford to pay a little more. I don't need another tax cut," he said.

Republicans have roundly opposed a tax hike for anyone and condemned the proposal, before and after the speech.

"The last thing we should be doing is raising taxes on job-creators, entrepreneurs and small business owners across America," former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, a likely presidential candidate, said in a statement.

Ryan said he was "very disappointed" with the president, calling his speech "excessively partisan, dramatically inaccurate and hopelessly inadequate."

"What we heard today was a political broadside from our campaigner in chief," Ryan said. "Rather than building bridges, he's poisoning wells."

Read the rest at the link above...

Ryan Budget Aims to Help a Nation of Government Addicts Recover

Ryan has taken the budget debate to a whole new level. He is addressing the actual issues our Country is facing. Entitlement spending has been ouot of control for a long time and no politician has been willing to touch it. In the past, any mention of cutting entitlement spending was he kiss of death for a politician, but the time may be right for it. Millions of people are realizing that we are headed for disaster.

If something doesn't change now, there won't be money for ANY entitlements for ANYONE...

by Gary Bauer - Human Events

I’m glad Republicans, led by House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), are having “an adult discussion” with the American people about the kind of sacrifices needed to avert economic collapse. We are a nation of adults who appreciate candor and boldness from our elected representatives.

But we are also a nation of addicts hooked on government largesse. Breaking our deep dependence on government will take patience and perseverance.

To a nation of government addicts, Rep. Ryan has taken on the role of addiction interventionist. His budget is rooted in a sobering reality: that without fundamental change, America faces “economic collapse.”

It would slash federal spending by $6.2 trillion over 10 years, cutting the federal budget deficit from 9% of the gross domestic product (GDP) to 1.6% by 2021. It would freeze government spending at 2008 levels, end corporate welfare, and reform the tax code and health care.

Ryan’s is the first legislative attempt to address the major source of our long-term fiscal imbalance: entitlements. Ryan doesn’t tackle Social Security, but he does propose fundamental reforms of Medicaid and Medicare.

Any former addict will tell you that the first step to recovery is to admit that there’s a problem. But many Democrats won’t even do that, and are blasting Ryan for his bold proposal. In unveiling his budget plan, Ryan himself acknowledged that he was handing the Democrats a “political weapon.”

And they’ve been firing that weapon with typical abandon. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D.-Calif.) claimed that the Ryan budget would “deprive seniors of meals” and amounted to a “war on women.”

Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the new head of the Democrat National Committee, said Ryan’s plan was a “death trap for seniors.”

Another liberal critic claimed that the proposed budget cuts amount to a “repeal [of] the 20th century.”

I support Ryan’s goal and admire his courage. But let’s not forget just how many Americans benefit from some form of government assistance, and therefore how many Americans we can expect to resist budget cuts.

Call it government mission creep. Over the last century, government has taken over large segments of the economy that the Founders never intended. Economist Gary Shilling estimates that 58% of Americans are dependent on the government for “major parts of their income.” These include scores of millions of teachers, bureaucrats, entitlement recipients, government contractors, those who live in public housing, and much more. Shilling predicts that the share of Americans highly dependent on government will grow to 67% by 2018.

Polls show most Americans understand that government spending has gotten out of control. A recent poll found that most Americans oppose raising the debt ceiling.

But other polls find that most Americans don’t want cuts to the programs they benefit from. The most recent Gallup poll shows that two-thirds of Americans oppose cutting Social Security benefits, and that a clear majority is against cutting Medicare.

I have heard from a lot of conservatives frustrated over what they consider Republican unwillingness to make substantial budget cuts. Their impatience is understandable. The last time Republicans controlled Congress and the White House, they did not win high marks for budget responsibility.

Read the rest at the link above...