Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 42 of 42

Thread: Republican Spending Cuts

  1. #26
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    259

    Thumbs down Re: Republican Spending Cuts

    As an open-ended question, when a Democratic supermajority owned the 110th and 111th Congresses, where were the American voices when we were realizing the Congressional budgets were overspending?

    It's very easy to pounce on a newly elected Republican Congress (and imagine that... the tide predictably shifted as expected), when it comes to their desires to make cuts. It's got to start somewhere.

    Looking at the 80+ amendments added to HR 1, I can't say I agree with many of them that passed, nor do I agree with a handful that were rejected. But knowing that this government has survived for a couple hundred years on a pseudo-roller coaster, I'm not at all worried about what 112 is doing.

    It just seems funny how a collective majority always seems to back Obama with the phrase: "It's only been 2 years, give him a chance..." Right now, Congress has been in session for less than 2 months, and no one's really given them a chance yet. So much for fairness among political lines.

  2. #27

    Default Re: Republican Spending Cuts

    Seems in Wisconsin the young new Republican gov. began his administration with a $ 118 million tax cut to the wealthy privileged elite. Now he expects middle class public workers to take a loss to make up for it. Isn't that the very essence of arrogant Republican politics? The real aim is to destroy unions so that there will be no money available to the Democratic Party. Look at what the people voted for--the focus group slogan was Jobs Jobs Jobs, but the Republican House of Representatives has been totally about banning abortion AGAIN. They always count on the public's stupidity and the public never lets them down. No more Wall St. regulation, that will go well; unregulated Capitalism is so perfect, and if people get poisoned food or poisoned water or poisoned air and get their life savings stolen AGAIN, well, thats the marketplace, folks, you voted for it. Defund education, tax breaks for billionaires. Its what the people want. Well maybe not want, exactly, but vote for.

    I seldom hate entire classes of people but in the case of fresh faced young Republican conservatives like the gov. of Wisconsin I make an exception. Arrogant little swine.

  3. #28
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    259

    Default Re: Republican Spending Cuts

    You're certainly right when it comes to the phrase "public stupidity." It's pretty sad how little people know about politics. I think it's sad how paper/red-taped politics have come over the last couple hundred years as well.

    Whenever a new bill comes up in Congress, I get an email alerter, and the entire text is there for me to read. Whenever I have I legitimate question or concern, my district's Congressman is in my email address book. I'm willing to bet a couple hundred million American citizens don't even come close to that amount of contact, let alone know who anyone in office is.

    Sadly, regardless of which press media bias people choose to read/listen to/watch, the only thing that gets covered in any bill that's being pushed is that percentage of the legislation that seems to be the sting, which is intentionally meant to piss certain public groups off. They don't see the other 90% of the bill or it's many dozens of amendments that may or may not be beneficial. But who has time for that when it's spent whining and complaining?

    On the one hand, there's a lot of focus on Wisconsin's governor for wanting to cut certain items. On the other hand, the part that's not making much media headlines is the Connecticut 100% Democratic run state that is pushing for taxes on almost everything. In the short term, we'll have to see which one is the one that pays off, even though Connecticut (to me) is a miniscule state that I have no care in the world for (oh, much like Wisconsin). But this wouldn't be too big of an issue, except for the fact that over 40-45 states are already in the hole for the last decade.

    Honestly, the utilitarian in me says a Union is nothing compared to the needs and goods of the entire state. The media biases want it to look like this nuclear bomb on middle-class union workers, but it's been clearly stated and documented in the bill(s) that what it's asking for is a shift in where wages are going. As much as I feel sympathy for some of their causes, their state voted for their legislators for this two-year term and that's what they get for the next two years. Depending on the outcome, the 2012 election will decide whether they keep them, or re-shift it back.

    It's definitely sounding like a game of political football. Only this time, after 4 years of Democrats hoarding the ball, the Republicans have possession on their own 2 yard line (and in this forum, they seem to be the visiting team).

  4. #29
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    259

    Default Re: Republican Spending Cuts

    Quote Originally Posted by acousticlady View Post
    (1) I'd first cut military. Don't believe in war and certainly not big weapons...

    (2) Secondly, I'd cut medicare. I believe western "medicine" has gotten so far out of control that in many respects they are doing more harm than good.

    (3) Then I would put some of the excess that would result from deeply slashing the first two of the big 3 into social security. We need to honor our elderly and afford them a comfortable existence.
    We'll all admit that 2001 was a make-it-or-break-it occurrence that basically said, "if we don't fight against this, then we'll allow you to walk all over us on our home turf." So given the end of 2001 and a year or so into 2002 or 2003, it's understandable this war was reactionary.

    (1) Now that it's been going on since then, recall some silly little document... let me pull it out of my desk drawer..., here it is... Article I Section 8 paragraphs 11-17 of the US Constitution, that basically states that the military's provisions fall under the Legislative Branch. (Yes, we know the President is the CinC by Article II.) Under those paragraphs, the responsibility for funding and maintaining the budgeting for the military indeed rests on Congressmen and their yearly budget appropriations. Also recall that up until January 2011, the House and Senate were both Democratic (super)majorities, which could have easily defunded the Defense Bill over the last 10 years. Unfortunately, when the downturn of Iraq (which was the optimal time to pull out) was shifted to that POS worthless crap country called Afghanistan, it bought the 111th Congress a commitment. Defunding the Defense Department after authorizing the Presidents' (both Bush and Obama's) military movements is probably the worst thing you can do. Placing the burden on the newly installed 112th Congress and complaining that Republicans won't reduce the Defense budget or pull out is basically telling your neighbor to clean up the poop you just left on their porch.

    (2) I don't have any intimate knowledge on Medicare, but I don't revolve my future around a government system that is neither all that reliable, or most recently, honest. We'll have to see how this investigation on the siphoning of Medicare and the many millions of dollars in stolen money by fraudulent or deceitful doctors turns out.

    (3) I don't look forward to Social Security because I don't expect it to be around by the time I get to receive it. But by that time, it wouldn't matter because I've been saving on every paycheck I received since I was 17, and unlike a lot of people in my age category, I'll probably be better off than them. But Social Security is really its own beast that deserves its other thread. Increasing an age will always piss off those who are just months away from the benefits; yet mathematically, I'm still trying to figure out exactly which age bracket won't have any money by the time they're eligible. Is it up to the 40 year-olds yet, or still in the 30s?

    Based on what's left, it literally is a trimming of the fat. Every year the steaks get bigger, but the fat gets slimmer. Looking at these HR1 amendments, there are a lot of committees that oversee committees that ensure some bureaucratic agency is nitpicking something absolutely worthless, and each of those are receiving millions of dollars annually. Those little cuts are a good start. But with every trimming of fat, sometimes a little meat goes with it. It just depends on if it's the good part that you waste, or the bad parts in the grissle.

  5. #30

    Default Re: Republican Spending Cuts

    The idea is to promote a recession or a depression in time for the next election. Seems kind of selfish, kind of destructive to the nation. Ideally your country's government should not deliberately adopt policies to harm the nation, to harm the people. And all just so Wall St. can be set even more free to steal even more money. You get the public to vote for it with diversionary """issues"""like: gay marriage, abortion, etc. The budget shortfall could soooo easily be made up by ending 2 needless wars and raising tax rates on the highest 2% of taxpayers by a modest 4%. 39% delivered a surplus for President Clinton, 35% plus two wars = economic oblivion for the US. But you have a clearly biased supreme ct, a national press that finds it more profitable to cover Lindsay Lohan's latest debacle rather than real news. No more Planned Parenthood = more abortions and more welfare but who cares when it feels so good to stick it to Planned Parenthood? Oh well.

  6. #31

    Default Re: Republican Spending Cuts

    Quote Originally Posted by bjd392 View Post
    As an open-ended question, when a Democratic supermajority owned the 110th and 111th Congresses, where were the American voices when we were realizing the Congressional budgets were overspending?



    It just seems funny how a collective majority always seems to back Obama with the phrase: "It's only been 2 years, give him a chance..." Right now, Congress has been in session for less than 2 months, and no one's really given them a chance yet. So much for fairness among political lines.
    There were some, but far from enuf to do what was needed, either within politics or public. The voices of reason are usually shouted down.

    Excuse me, but the dark side NEVER gave Obama a second of support, only wishes for his demise, even tho we were on the verge of a national economic collapse which could easily have been and still could be irreversable for this fragile top-heavy country, and reeling from Bush's wars, just to name two con made crisis he inherited. That behavior is as filthy as possible.
    Congressional cons had the last two years under Bush and did nothing worth a damn. As soon as they got near power again they started reneging on their latest promises and havn't done much yet except stymie Obama's progress. It's their pattern, lie and defile while promising the moon to the suckers that still bother to listen, and then once back even half in the saddle, they revert to the same old destructive/partisan agenda. They don't deserve any more chances, they've had many and used them as badly as they could manage. We know what they are, they have nothing good to offer, just the same ol' crap. What's 'fair' about them, ever?
    Last edited by Ron Whitfield; February 22nd, 2011 at 10:52 AM.

  7. #32
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Kahalu`u Stream
    Posts
    2,933

    Unhappy Re: Republican Spending Cuts

    Quote Originally Posted by bjd392 View Post
    As an open-ended question, when a Democratic supermajority owned the 110th and 111th Congresses, where were the American voices when we were realizing the Congressional budgets were overspending?
    I think we were watching "Law and Order" and "Sex in the City."

    Or, smoking pakalolo.....

    Be Yourself. Everyone Else Is Taken!
    ~ ~
    Kaʻonohiʻulaʻokahōkūmiomioʻehiku
    Spreading the virus of ALOHA.
    Oh Chu. If only you could have seen what I've seen, with your eyes.

  8. #33
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Kihei -currently away at school in NY
    Posts
    734

    Default Re: Republican Spending Cuts

    Quote Originally Posted by bjd392 View Post
    We'll all admit that 2001 was a make-it-or-break-it occurrence that basically said, "if we don't fight against this, then we'll allow you to walk all over us on our home turf." So given the end of 2001 and a year or so into 2002 or 2003, it's understandable this war was reactionary.

    (1) Now that it's been going on since then, recall some silly little document... let me pull it out of my desk drawer..., here it is... Article I Section 8 paragraphs 11-17 of the US Constitution, that basically states that the military's provisions fall under the Legislative Branch. (Yes, we know the President is the CinC by Article II.) Under those paragraphs, the responsibility for funding and maintaining the budgeting for the military indeed rests on Congressmen and their yearly budget appropriations. Also recall that up until January 2011, the House and Senate were both Democratic (super)majorities, which could have easily defunded the Defense Bill over the last 10 years. Unfortunately, when the downturn of Iraq (which was the optimal time to pull out) was shifted to that POS worthless crap country called Afghanistan, it bought the 111th Congress a commitment. Defunding the Defense Department after authorizing the Presidents' (both Bush and Obama's) military movements is probably the worst thing you can do. Placing the burden on the newly installed 112th Congress and complaining that Republicans won't reduce the Defense budget or pull out is basically telling your neighbor to clean up the poop you just left on their porch.

    (2) I don't have any intimate knowledge on Medicare, but I don't revolve my future around a government system that is neither all that reliable, or most recently, honest. We'll have to see how this investigation on the siphoning of Medicare and the many millions of dollars in stolen money by fraudulent or deceitful doctors turns out.

    (3) I don't look forward to Social Security because I don't expect it to be around by the time I get to receive it. But by that time, it wouldn't matter because I've been saving on every paycheck I received since I was 17, and unlike a lot of people in my age category, I'll probably be better off than them. But Social Security is really its own beast that deserves its other thread. Increasing an age will always piss off those who are just months away from the benefits; yet mathematically, I'm still trying to figure out exactly which age bracket won't have any money by the time they're eligible. Is it up to the 40 year-olds yet, or still in the 30s?

    Based on what's left, it literally is a trimming of the fat. Every year the steaks get bigger, but the fat gets slimmer. Looking at these HR1 amendments, there are a lot of committees that oversee committees that ensure some bureaucratic agency is nitpicking something absolutely worthless, and each of those are receiving millions of dollars annually. Those little cuts are a good start. But with every trimming of fat, sometimes a little meat goes with it. It just depends on if it's the good part that you waste, or the bad parts in the grissle.
    Stupid reality. Always getting in the way.......

  9. #34
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    259

    Wink Re: Republican Spending Cuts

    LOL, yeah, unfortunately.

  10. #35

    Default Re: Republican Spending Cuts

    It is easier to object than to be objective.

  11. #36

    Default Re: Republican Spending Cuts

    One of my favorite talk show hosts is Mike Malloy, another of the true lefties from Air America days. You can hear his show on your computer from KPTK, KTLK, or KPOJ, maybe some other stations too. Last night's show was particularly educational, the background on the Koch family. The family fortune was based on building oil processing units for Stalin, and routinely cheating oil producers shipping their oil in the Koch pipelines (as brought out in a lawsuit by one of the Koch heirs against other heirs). Old man Koch funded the John Birch Society. A large chunk of the Tea Party is funded by the Koch brothers, who still subscribe to the nutty John Birch Society philosophy. The governor of Wisconsin who is now trying to obliterate unions was funded in part by the Koch brothers, he is doing their bidding.

    If you ever read Ayn Rand you get a taste for the delusional anti reality politics of the John Birchers. They were noted in the '60's for denouncing DWIGHT EISENHOWER as a conscious agent of the Communist Party. Nuts. They have countless billions of dollars to play with, and they do, funding many right wing causes. I do shudder to think of what the US will become with this kind of gvt. Of course no unions, labor and all working people crushed, virtually no public services at all including no public education, no environmental protection (as you saw, castrating the EPA was one of the first things the Republicans did in their House budget). Of course no public health. Probably lots of prisons, even more invasive gvt. control of individuals. And what about John Birchers getting if not outright control over the nuclear weapons, at least the ear of the people who do? How could these nut jobs not launch countless new oil wars, or even just wars for the paranoia of it? Malloy is occasionally wrong. I really hope he is wrong on this. Really!!!

  12. #37

    Default Re: Republican Spending Cuts

    Just caught a story on MSNBC, a blogger had phoned the gov. of Wisconsin and convinced him it was one of the Koch bros, his masters, the conversation was recorded and indicated clearly that destroying unions is an organized Republican plot. Too bad the people voted for this, I wonder how, or even if, we can ever get out of this debacle.

  13. #38

    Default Re: Republican Spending Cuts

    Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker was apparently prank-called by a blogger posing as one of the billionaire Koch brothers targeted by liberal groups for their contributions to Republican politicians.
    The blogger, assuming the identity of prominent libertarian financier David Koch, claims to have had a lengthy conversation with Walker about the union protests sweeping the state capital. An editor with the online news site BuffaloBeast.com says he made the call, under Koch's identity, to Walker's office around lunchtime. The Koch impostor set several traps for Walker. At one point, he referred to the "Democratic bastards" in the Senate who left Madison to block a vote on Walker's proposal to cut union benefits and rights. At another point, the impostor said the unions were "probably putting hobos in suits" to protest. At another point, he said, "Once you crush these bastards I'll fly you out to Cali and really show you a good time."
    Walker responded: "All right, that would be outstanding." In the conversation, Walker spent most the conversation describing the steps being taken to lure Democrats back to Madison, like bringing up bills Democrats care about in their absence. The man also expressed concern about the possibility of unions "paying" to put up the absentee senators in hotels. At one point, the impostor said, "bring a baseball bat.", "I have one in my office," was the response. After a suggestion by the BuffaloBeast.com editor about "planting some troublemakers" in the crowd, Walker said "we thought about that" but decided against it.

    Democrats ripped Walker's comments on the call on the Assembly floor Wednesday morning, saying the comments had nothing to do with his assertion that legislation stripping public employees' collective bargaining rights is needed to help solve a looming budget deficit. "That's why we must fight it! That is why people must come to the Capitol and fight this!" Rep. Jon Richards of Milwaukee yelled as thousands of protesters inside the rotunda roared in approval. "This isn't about balancing the budget, this is about a political war."

    David Donnelly, national campaigns director for Public Campaign Action Fund, said his group is consulting with lawyers to see if Walker violated any Wisconsin state campaign finance laws. "In a call with who he thought to be billionaire political donor David Koch, Gov. Walker may have broken campaign finance and ethics laws," Donnelly said. "If he did, he should resign." On the call, Walker talks about speaking with Democratic Sen. Tim Cullen, one of the Democrats hiding in Illinois to stop the bill, and telling Cullen he would not budge. He describes Cullen as "pretty reasonable but he's not one of us." Cullen called the call an "astounding confirmation of what we've been saying for a couple weeks now. This bill is about the money," he told The Associated Press. "This bill is about destroying public employee unions." Cullen said he felt the call "displays a level of partisanship and pettiness on the side of the governor I don't think is going to sit well with the public."

  14. #39

  15. #40
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    259

    Exclamation Re: Republican Spending Cuts

    Meanwhile, in New England, a Teachers Union couldn't protect a potential layoff of 2000 Providence, RI school district teachers after a school board voted to make budget cuts. Granted, it's not like 2000 teachers are going to be axed, but you can probably predict the tension coming out of the uncertainty of who actually will.

    I wonder where the help is coming to save their jobs. Perhaps we should ask Providence's Democratic Mayor, 15 Democratic Councilmen, the Democratic Rhode Island Senate, the Democratic Rhode Island House, their Democratic Lt. Governor and their Independent Governor.

    After all, overspending your city's budget by $57million for such a small city of 170,000 can't be too ridiculous, right?

    Makes you wonder how hard the decision is if you have to pay a little more for your own pension, or have no job and no pension by the end of the year. Silly Wisconsin.

    I wonder how many other Blue states are going to cave in while WI gets all the media attention. Hearing the quote, "putting Providence back on solid financial footing will require shared sacrifice across our community," makes one wonder how many similar statements have been said nationwide. Should it seem odd that this is coming from their Democratic Mayor, Angel Taveres?

  16. #41

    Default Re: Republican Spending Cuts

    Tax the rich. Remember, at the 39% max rate under President Clinton (and of course no needless wars) the country was not only solvent, it was generating surpluses "as far as the eye can see". Hard to believe now, isn't it? The bush rate dropped to 35% and now the country is bankrupt, going in a hole deeper and deeper, oblivion facing us...the more people who get fired, the less money there is to buy things made by other people who will then lose their jobs, business loses money, tax receipts drop. 4 stinking %. Think of it! The USSR went belly up because it put ideology in front of realistic economics and now we are doing the same thing, insisting on framing our economy on the false notion that tax cuts for billionaires produces jobs. But jobs were never the focus of the Republicans, those tax cuts for billionaires were. And the people voted for it and they will continue to vote for it because of the Republican supreme ct's Citizens United decision, the super wealthy privileged elite will always have as much money as needed to buy all the political power they need. I don't see any good end to this. I mean unless you actually hate the US and want it to collapse, want the people to live like 3rd world peasants.

  17. #42
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Kahalu`u Stream
    Posts
    2,933

    Default Re: Republican Spending Cuts

    I remember Democratic promises back in 2008 to end our involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan. Yet we are still there, more than 2 years after the inauguration of our latest POTUS. No relief is in sight.

    It sure would make a lot of sense to me if we stopped sending money to the Middle East in the form of explosives, lead, brass, tanks, planes, vehicles and human bodies that have to be fixed or compensated for.

    I doubt this would solve all our economic problems, but it sure would help! War is an expensive proposition, no matter how you look at it.

    Is it the Republicans that are keeping us there? Or the Democrats? Or both?

    This would be an excellent spending cut!
    Be Yourself. Everyone Else Is Taken!
    ~ ~
    Kaʻonohiʻulaʻokahōkūmiomioʻehiku
    Spreading the virus of ALOHA.
    Oh Chu. If only you could have seen what I've seen, with your eyes.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •