Obama, in Kansas I believe, actually quoted Teddy Roosevelt (famous for: "speak softly and carry a big stick"--although that was not what Obama was trying to USE Roosevelt for). What is funny about that is that it tended to almost validate Glenn Beck's KOOKY habit of going back to Teddy Roosevelt as one of the main sources of the modern 'progressive" (a term I refuse to use) movement. If Obama wants to claim Roosevelt as a "progressive" founder, mightg Beck be right? Not really. Oh, I am willing to believe that Teeddy Roosevelt was somewhat of a Big Government man--which would fit him right in withcurrent GOP politicians (INCLUDING TEA PARTY POLITICIANS--many of themn). But Teddy Roosevelt was a complex man, and I submit that breakng up TRUSTS and business combinations was vERY CONSERVATIVE. It is one reason that teh wrod "mavierck" appears in teh name of this blgo, since it is my strong positon that we should ELIMINATE BIG MERGERS ("too gib to fail" came from those). And yes, Roosevelt charged up San Juan Hill (actually a hill of a different name). I just don't see Teddy Roosevelt as Barack Obama, despite Glenn Beck's strange view of the world. FDR (another Rooosevelt) was actualy the "ather" of modern leftism in America: what I call teh "magic wand tehory of government", which is that all the Federal Government has to do to "solve" problems is wave a magic wand. I diress (not really).
The GOP won a massive victory in Novermber of 2010 SPEAKING LOUDLY on deficits and debt. They would speak even more loudly as they supposedly tried to "cut" spending for the previous year--last spring--even at the cost of DEMOXCRATS shutting the government down (by refusing to accept House limitations on spending=, even though our Constitution gives the House thePOWER to NOT SPEND MONEY THAT THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTTATIVES DOES NOT APPROVE. Well, the GOP spoke LOUDLY, but carried a little stick (you should be proud of me taht I did not use a different last word in that quote). Despite blustering, and claims of "victory, the GOP CU NOTHING.
Then came the disastrous "debt ceiling debate".. Again theGOP spoke LOUDLY, but carried a litttle stick. We endined up with that stupid "supercommittee", while the GOP actually CUT NOTHING. No, supposed "cuts" ten years from now DON'T COUNT. That is thepoint of this article. The GOP, today, signed off on yet another "omnibus spending bill" of ONE TRILLION DOLLARS. However, this time ther GOP did not even SPEAK LOUDLY. Since the debt ceiling debacle, the GOP has steadily backed away from what was the WINNING ISSUE in the 2010 eletions. Has ever a party snatched DEFEAT form the jaws of VICTORY this quickly? First the GOP let the fictional "debt ceiling debate" take the focus off SPENDING, and then the GOP went along with Obama to put the focus directly on "jobs". I am proven right every day on what I said firt a week or two ago: The GOP has ABANDONED the concept of reducing deficits and controlling debt: waht I call teh 20 TRILLION dorllar lie. The GOP has bought COMPLETELY into that LIE, and yuou should VOTE THEM ALL OUT OF OFFICE FOR IT.
Nothing illustrates this more clearly than that fraudulent "payroll tax clut", which the GOP has embraced. Remember, that is the ONE-YEAR "stimulus" which the GOP allowed Obama to insert in the previous "year-end" pressure on Congress to get out of town before Christmas. That COST us (along with extension of unemployment benefits) some $150 BILLINO DOLLARS this year--added directly to the debt, requiring that debtr ceiling rise (at least 140 BILLION of it) that the GOP spoke so LOUDLY about in the debt ceiling debate. Extending these same "stimulus" measures for another year, after they FAILED to do anything this year but add to the deficit and to the debt, will add (with miscellaneous otehr things, including a Medicare "doc fix", about 180 BILLIN dollrrs to "next year's (actually this year's, as the fiscal lyear has already startedl) deficit, AND to the amount the debt ceiling will have to be raised in about a year. Will teh HYPOCRITES of the GOP speak LOUDLY about the NEXT required rise in the debt ceiling? If they do, everyone will rightly laugh at them.
"But Skipoi, the GOP does not want to be responsible for taking $10,000 more out of the paycehcks of 160 millon Americans. You can't win elections by taking away this kind of BRIBE." (Hacker BOoy, hacking into this blog NOT on behalf of Rupert Murdoch: "Skip, you made that up. Americans are not getting an extra $1000 in their paychecks. On average, it is maybe $1000.) Skiip (taking contorl back from Murdoch stooge Hacker Boy): Oh, I forgot. $10,000 was MY proposal. I figured that if we are going to BRIBE peple, why not make the bribe worthwhile. "But, Skip, We can't AFFORD $10,000 for 160 million Americans." Well, I am glad you finaly got th epoint. We CAN'T AFFORD $1000 for 160 million Americacans (more than $1000 billion dollars a year, or 1 TRILLIN dollars again over ten years). "But Skip, the GOP has promised to "fully pay for the payroll tax cut', the unemployment benefits, and all of the rest."
Ah. Now we come to it: the Orewellian Big Lie that the GOP has embraced even more fullly than Obama and the Democrats. This is the 20 TRILLION dollar LIE. Remember my previus analysis of this LIE? Assume, for the sake of simplicity, that we now had a BALANCED BUDGET (lol). Hoq qouls you keep that budget balanced? Obviously, you would have to "pay for" every addtion to spending or reduction in revenue. BUT. REmember, a "balanced budget" is for ONE YER. Say you took that (assumed) balanced budget, and ADDED 20 TRILLION dollars in deficits for NEXT YEAR. Would you still have a "balanced budget"? Not a chance. You would suddenly have a 20 TRILLION dolalr deficit. And we could not afford it, as we cannot afford the "payroll tax cut" and extension of unemployment benefits. We CAN afford the Preal (not "stimulus" gimmick) "Bush tax cuts", but that is anotehr article (where you should note that the PART--mopst of the Bush tax cuts going to the middle class and poorer people--of the "Bush tax cuts" "for the rich" is only about 70 billion dollars a year, while Obama and the GOP are adding DOUBLE that amount to the deficit every year with these "siimulus" TAX GIMMICKS, and paying people not to work).
Where were we? Oh, yes, we had jsut decided to "stimulate" teh economy by spending 20 TRILLION dollars more money thatn we are taking in. However, that is not the whole story. We have decided, using GOP--and Obama Democrat--logic, to "fully pay for" this 20 TRILLIN dollar defict we are creating. How are we gong to do this? Well, we are certainly NOT going to "cut" 20 TRILLION dolllars from this next year's budget. We just ADDED taht money to the deficit.--remember, creating a 20 trillion dollar deficit when no deficit previously existed. No problemo. All we have to do (so goes the Big Lie) is CUT 20 trillino dollars over the next ten years, and we will have "paid for" creating a 20 trillin dollar deifict when no deficit previously existed. Do you seee how ABSURD this is? If you don't, I am sorry for you. AND, our "cuts' o 20 trillin dollars over the next ten years will only be to "projected spending". Our gola will be to get the DEFICT down toward zero, but NOt to pay off the 20 TRILLION dollar debt we jsut created (a debt that will INCREASE as we GRADUALLLY work that 20 trillin dollar deficit down toward zero, IF that is not really a fraud).
You jsut can't LIE any worse that the GOP is lying here, unles you are an Obama Democrat (where yyou may do no more than give the GOPP a run for their money). That is because my example is not even reallly a hypothetical. By 2020, our DEBT will be 20 trillin dollars. For purposes of analysis, it is really not much different whether that debt (NOW 15 TRILLIN dollars) is created all in one year, or over a number of years. The principle is the same. Until we pay for the goverfnment WE HAVE, it is ABSURD to talk about "paying for" ADDITIONAL additions to the deficits. It is simply a LIE for the GOP to say that it is going to pay for" teh payroll tax cut extension. That extension alone will INCREASE nexte year's deficit by more than 100 BILLINO dollars, and it si absurd to suggest that you can "pay for' that ADDITONAL DEFICIT spenindg "over ten years". That is comparing apples and oranges. It would even be a LIE to suggest that we "cut" 100 billin dollars from this next year's spending, to "pay for" this additional amount being deliberately added to the deficit. IF we can "cut" 100 BILLIN dollars from this nexte year's spending, and the GOP just voted to ADD spending rather than "cut" any, we NEED that 200 billin dolllars to PAY FOR THE GOVERNMEWNT WE ALREADY HAVE (to apply to the mroe than one TRILLIN dollar deficit the GOP has voted for tis next lyear).
Do you understand that this is all a FRAUD. The "payroll tax cut" is merely a BRIBE, and the politicans are depending upon you not realizing that it will COST each and every one of you mmore than you ever get added to your paycheck in one way or another). Any fool (unless you are Aa GOP politician, or a voter who a "clever" gOP politican is able to FOOL) can see that we are MORTGAGING our future by FAILING TO PAY FOR THE PRESENT. Yu don't see this analysis in the media, because they are not interested. The politicians are not reeally interested. They WANT to keep the opton open to LIE to you about "apying for" hwaht they do. Democrats are worse, of course, than even the GOP. But I cna't sand it anymore, as this blog has told you. I REFUSE to vote for AnY GOP politican who buys into this Big LIe. Since the GOP "plan" passe dthe HOUSE with 234 votes, and verly few Democrat votes, you can see that I am telling you to VOTGE AGAINST bascially teh entire GOP (at least mbers of Congress). No, that does NOT mean that you can vote FOR Deomocats who opposed the GOP bill, because the Democrat bill was WORSE. Even though I know that, however, I simplys cannot stand to vote for peole this DISHOENST. You wil note that includes almsot EVERY TEA PARTY GOP CONGRESS PERSON ELECXTED IN W2010 on a lying platform (which is basically all of them--all of those 234 that SAY--loudly--that they are part of teh Tea Party).
There you have it. Even if you ar not as angry at these continulal lies as I am, you should be abe to see that the GOP os merely digging a hole for itself that it cn NEVER get out of. The defict/debt "issue" is basically GONE. We are back to "politics as usua", and the Tea Party has FAILED.
I DARE anyohe to disute this analysis of how you simply cannot "offset" creatino of--say--1 trillin dollars in additonal debt in ONE YEAR by "paying for it" over ten years. It cannot be done, especally if the SPENDING NEVER GOES DOWN (in real terms, and not from "projections"). It is all a house of crads. The GOP MAY be able to win this next electin based on "politics as usual", but the seeds of GOP destruction will alrready have been sown. The GOP really has spoken loudly, and carried a little stick. Too bad--despite Glenn Beck--they did not listen more carefully to Teddy Roosevelt. No I won't dispute you if yo say I could learn from Teddy as well, in terms of hyperbole and using all caps (easiest for me) for emphasis. But I, at least, am consistent, and folllow through on what I say I will do. The GOP has beomce a party of hypocritical liars and cowards (in terms of the politicans--teh peopelle being WAY AHEAD of their leaders, if naturally confused by how UNIVERSAL the lies are ).
P.S No proofreading or spell checkng (bad eyesight).