http://www.jewishworldreview.com/david/limbaugh051011.php3

 

May 10, 2011 / 6 Iyar, 5771 

Obama's Scandalous War Against Domestic Oil 

By David Limbaugh 

 

The Washington Examiner reports that it's been 768 days since the
Democratic-controlled Senate passed a budget. What's the big deal? It's not
like the nation is facing financial difficulties or anything.

I realize it's convenient for President Obama to pretend he's a bystander on
fiscal matters when it suits him and to pass the buck that never stops with
him back to Congress, but how about a little leadership on the issue for a
change?

The Republican-controlled House has done its part, but Obama and Senate
Democrats continue to dither. The only time you see much activity out of
them is when Republicans force the issue, such as with Congressman Paul
Ryan's plan to balance the budget through a combination of discretionary
spending controls, structural entitlement reforms and a major tax overhaul.
Otherwise, it's as if they're either oblivious to the nation's looming
bankruptcy or cynically unconcerned.

The Examiner reveals that Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad spent
a full day explaining a proposal to the Democratic caucus but nothing
emerged because too many of Conrad's comrades "hate it." Guess why.

Wrong. It's not because it doesn't go far enough with spending cuts and
doesn't include serious entitlement reform. It's because it cuts too much
spending and doesn't raise taxes enough.

So let me get this straight. Due to reckless entitlement promises,
profligate non-defense discretionary spending, and repressive government
taxes and regulations, we are headed toward Grecian-style bankruptcy,
European-style socialism and a permanently growth-stunted economy with
soaring unemployment, and the Democrats' solution is to give us more of the
same?

Aren't you tired of these career politicians on the left side of the aisle
moralizing about the greed of the "wealthy" when these same politicians
habitually buy votes with borrowed dollars? Who are they to lecture those
who actually produce and contribute to the economy?

As Milton Friedman once asked, why aren't these politicians considered
greedy? At least the wealthy spend their own money - and add to the general
revenues through the substantial taxes imposed on them. These finger-wagging
liberal politicians, on the other hand, spend way more money than most
so-called wealthy people do, directly benefit from these expenditures of
other peoples' money and, worst of all, are bankrupting the country.

Then, instead of coming to the table to work on solving the indescribable
mess they've created for our children, our grandchildren and us, they fire
back even harder - with more class-warfare ammunition. But this time it's in
the form of scaring seniors about losing their Medicare, even though
existing seniors won't lose their benefits under the Ryan plan and even
though without reform no one will receive benefits anyway, because the
programs will be insolvent, as will the nation.

A recent Wall Street Journal editorial opined that the "odds of resolving
this (budget) debate are undercut by the fact that the two parties can't
even agree on what's causing deficit woes in the first place." Republicans
blame it on non-discretionary and entitlement spending. Obama blames it on
two wars, the prescription drug benefit program and "tax cuts for the
wealthy."

But Democrats know better than to blame our impending national bankruptcy on
wars that Obama has continued, prescription drugs that actually came in
under budget (and in any event would have been much worse under any of the
alternative Democratic proposals) and tax cuts that have not significantly
reduced revenues. 

On the tax issue, Obama fraudulently claims that continuation of the Bush
cuts for the "wealthy" will cost $500 billion in lost revenues per year. In
fact, they would cost only $70 billion per year - and that's assuming a
static economy. Perhaps in a static economy, continuation of the Bush cuts
for all tax brackets would cost $500 billion in revenues per year. But wait.
Obama favors continuing the cuts for all but the top bracket, which means
the disputed cuts - worst-case scenario - would only cost $70 billion per
year. Once again, Obama is distorting the numbers to demonize his opponents,
confuse the issue and camouflage his own position.

Spending is the problem, not the solution. The solution is to rein in
non-defense discretionary and entitlement spending and to reform the tax
code. But there happens to be a nearly insuperable obstacle that is
interfering with this: the Democrats' ideological addiction to spending and
their corrupt dependency on spending as a ticket to remaining in power.

Until Democrats lose control of the Senate and the presidency, reform is but
a fantasy. Our work is cut out for us.

 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

--------------------------
Want to discuss this topic?  Head on over to our discussion list, 
[email protected].
--------------------------
Brooks Isoldi, editor
[email protected]

http://www.intellnet.org

  Post message: [email protected]
  Subscribe:    [email protected]
  Unsubscribe:  [email protected]


*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has 
not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of 
The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT 
YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the 
included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of 
intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, 
techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other 
intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes 
only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material 
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use 
this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' 
you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtmlYahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    [email protected] 
    [email protected]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to