Thursday, April 14, 2011

The pResident Proving Once Again He Has No Serious Plan

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Birthplace of Independent Conservatism


The "O'Man" On Budgetary Matters:



The transcript of the speech for those who wish to slice and dice the pResidents remarks.

In a nutshell the pResident's speech amounts to fluff. A vision to redefine America along the lines of class envy and class warfare. While promising 4 trillion dollars in savings over 12 years the pResident's plan will continue to grow the federal Leviathan in such a way as to increase the people's reliance on Big Brother even more so that today.

The pResident is a good speaker. His vision is right out of the textbook experiences written by the socialized governments that now find themselves in deep trouble. States like Greece, Portugal, and Comrade Fidel's paradise.

You have heard the speech, and read the text. Now it is up to each individual to make up his or her own mind and then vote accordingly in 2012. The differences between the pResident's vision for America, and that of his subjects is quite different. Soon we will know which direction this nation will take. That of a free people or a nation whose people are so reliant on Big Brother that the liberty once fought for and enjoyed for over 200 years disappears forever.


Via: Memeorandum

20 comments:

  1. Exactly how does Ryan's plan differ in regards to class envy and class warfare? If one proposal balances tax increases with spending cuts represents class envy and class warfare then obviously a plan that includes tax cuts and spending cuts doubles down on the class envy and class warfare doesn't it?

    I do agree that Obama's plan follows the wrong socialism and should actually adopt the models of socialist countries like Germany, France, and the Scandenavian countries.....you know, the successful socialist countries!

    So, in 2012 which REPUBLICAN candidate should we vote for, who has already announced their candidacy? Romney? Pawlenty? Who else is officially in the race?

    ReplyDelete
  2. TAO - Given the current potential candidates {I believe Trump has "tipped"} the answer is none of the above. Which includes "The Donald."

    ReplyDelete
  3. The reality is that not one single candidate on the right has proposed anything in regards to the budget and the deficit and as such the Obama plan is the only one to which one can vote on...in light of the fact that a majority of voters (aka subjects) do agree that the rich can be taxed more, do agree that corporations should be taxed, and do not want to see medicare and or social security tampered with...the Obama budget does reflect the will of the people.

    So, there is no need for the republicans to even field a candidate this election...and thank god because the choices are slim on the right...

    ReplyDelete
  4. Oh he has a "Plan" alright, but it's a plan that we are not going to like or want.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I did a search for "Democratic plan to save Medicare". I couldn't find anything.......Look, I agree, Tao, Mr. Ryan's plan is exceedingly problematic. But at least the man has a plan. AND, in my opinion, the only way that we're going to be able to solve this health-care mess, in general, and Medicare, specifically, PERIOD, is to utilize the good ideas from both parties - in this instance, competition AND appropriate oversight. I refer you to Dr. Ezekial Emanuel's (yes, he's Rham's brother) excellent book/blueprint, "Healthcare, Guaranteed". He lays the whole thing out extremely well, I think.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Remember, "THE LESSER OF TWO EVILS" and right now Obama is the only one running nationally who has a "Plan" not one single Republican running for the Presidency has offered a plan nor have any of them endorsed the Ryan Plan.

    Thus, from an election perspective Obama is the only plan out there to vote for....Ryan may have his plan but he is not in the running for the Presidency in 2012.

    So again, I know no one on this blog is going to vote for Obama but as it stands right now your "lesser of two evils" doesn't have a plan for the deficit and the Ryan plan is only a political foil that the Republicans are using for a bargaining chip...the party its self has not endorse anything and with Obama running what he stated in his speech yesterday is the democratic platform.

    So, as it stands right now for the election of 2012 there is only one candidate currently running with an actual plan for the deficit.

    ReplyDelete
  7. The President (and really, that whole juvenile "pResident" thing is beneath you), is offering a very simple, politically realistic plan: make large accross the board cuts in spending, while ending the Bush tax cuts.

    That's where the 4 trillion comes from, by the way, and anyone who actually takes a few minutes to learn about it knows that it's goofballs like Paul Ryan who invented that whole 4 trillion number in the first place.

    You guys have to grow up and realize that tax rates are historically and irresponsibly low, especially when juxtaposed with the historical state of the economy. We have to pay our bills now - not ten or twenty years from now. This is how GHW Bush and Clinton were able to balance the books in the 90's. They cut spending AND raised revenues. Reagan did it to, by the way!

    "You," libertarians and conservatives, and religious right, have to cooperate, you have to compromise, you have to negotiate. You are not the only Americans. People - real, actually living fellow citizens of the United States - voted for Obama, our President, too, ya' know.

    Lots of people, a majority in fact, disagree with the far right and libertarians on this plain issue: We believe sometimes you HAVE to raise taxes. You can no more endlessly cut taxes then you'd want to revert to a primitive, tribal society.

    You guys here fall into ever shrinking minorities when you break down the issues. We want functional Medicare and Social Security systems, unemployment and disability insurance, workers' compensation, schools, hospitals, roads, cops, firemen, safe water, ground and air, parks, libraries, museums, and on and on and on.

    Welcome to 21st Century America.

    Killing the social compact is political suicide in the long run and national suicide period.

    We also want pretty large police and military states, free trade, neo-liberal laizzez faire economics, and all sorts of other dumb, easy, bad ideas. Americans are a mixed-up bunch.

    Obama is dealing with reality, like a grown up. I think Boehner is as well. Reid is holding up well so far, but things could change in the senate.

    Paul Ryan is proposing a non-starter that has already damaged the GOP, but Obama will give the GOP something and somethig big. Obama and Boehner can work out big cuts - if Boehner and Ryan can let most or all of the Bush tax cuts to expire.

    This is Politics in the Real World 101.

    We shall see...

    JMJ

    ReplyDelete
  8. Malcontent - Agreed.

    He has a plan of sorts, we can at least all agree on that.

    It's a starting point, now we'll see just how serious he is with respect to honest and open negotiation.

    ReplyDelete
  9. TAO - Shall I take it you have succumbed to the lesser of two evils concept?

    I guess it will be a matter of opinion as to whom will be the lesser of two evils in 2012 since we don't yet know who the other parties standard bearer will be. Things are still evolving.

    But if a strong candidate with views I can support doesn't emerge I'll be writing in Wiley Coyote.

    But if the

    ReplyDelete
  10. JMJ - Now don't you think "the whole pResident thing" makes a nice political statement? ;)

    "We have to pay our bills now - not ten or twenty years from now."

    No argument here, I am a simple guy, that is how I and my lovely bride run our home.

    So, want to make a dent? Go after cuts in the defense budget, cuts in foreign aid, tighten the borders and stop the flow of illegals that are sucking the healthcare system dry, cut the department of education, department of energy {a real useless waste of money], stop subsidizing agri-business and others...

    Cut first where appropriate, and only then, and only if necessary {it likely won't be], consider increasing taxes.

    As a statist minded progressive that believe leviathan can and should solve all social ills and issues you become part of the problem.

    Wanting, or expecting your government to solve all your worries just creates dependency and as a result the current situation we find ourselves in.

    We shall my friend continue no doubt to walk on opposite sides of the highway of budget and fiscal issues.

    ReplyDelete
  11. @TAO-According to the Wall Street Journal, if you were to tax 100% of the income of every American who makes over $100,000 a year, you would generate a little over 1.5 trillion. That would not even cover the current budget deficit. We have to cut spending, math does not lie.

    ReplyDelete
  12. There's a choice between socialism that works very badly, and socialism that works badly but less so (see Germany), and liberty.

    Let's choose liberty.

    ReplyDelete
  13. JMJ says: "Lots of people, a majority in fact, disagree with the far right and libertarians on this plain issue: We believe sometimes you HAVE to raise taxes. You can no more endlessly cut taxes then you'd want to revert to a primitive, tribal society."

    Your entire argument goes out the window due to the fact that the government has more revenue (money coming in) coming in than ever before, after the tax cuts, and as a result of the tax cuts.

    The problem isn't that the government isn't stealing enough of the people's money. It's that it is wasting what it gets.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Trestin, Link please...

    Dmarks, what kind of liberty are you talking about? If you are for survival of the fittest kind of liberty then I would agree!

    You are right Dmarks, the government does waste money...like on wars, but if it were not for the expense of wars, and the economic activity that wars create exactly how much income would the government have?

    Cut government spending and reduce economic activity by how much? Even government waste is a positive to the GDP and GDP is a measure of the wealth of the nation...

    ReplyDelete
  15. National defense is one of the Constitutionally-defined legitimate expenses of the federal government.

    Unlike, say, free health care for rich adults (see the misnamed Children's health plan that the Democrats pushed through).

    "Dmarks, what kind of liberty are you talking about? If you are for survival of the fittest kind of liberty then I would agree!"

    Socialism is indeed survival of the fittest liberty. Under socialism, the power and survival of the ruling class is maximized.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Trestin. Not to mention that fact that Obama's plan to overtax the rich even more would directly result in rich people moving their assets out of the country, or finding ways to hide them. This would discourage investment, and result in lost revenue and jobs.

    Obama's idea on this makes no fiscal sense, but it is red meat to the jealous "class warfare" segment that thrives on appeals to jealousy and the idea that the best way to success is to steal from the successful.

    ReplyDelete
  17. How about setting an example by ending extravagant White House Parties and vacations to 5 star hotels in Spain and campaigning all over the country wasting fuel,polluting the air and the cost of Secret Service and staff that goes along with it.
    Too bad people treat Obama like a some kind of celebrity instead of a president.

    ReplyDelete
  18. And to answer Tao's question: "like on wars, but if it were not for the expense of wars, and the economic activity that wars create exactly how much income would the government have?"

    Probably less, due to chaos caused by letting our enemies attack us with impunity.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Lisa: I'd be fine with if it the Obamas paid for this with their own vast personal riches.

    ReplyDelete
  20. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703730104576260911986870054.html

    ReplyDelete

As this site encourages free speech and expression any and all honest political commentary is acceptable. Comments with cursing or vulgar language will not be posted.

Effective 8/12/13 Anonymous commenting has been disabled. This unfortunate action was made necessary due to the volume of Anonymous comments that are either off topic or serve only to disrupt honest discourse..

I apologizes for any inconvenience this necessary action may cause the honest Anonymous who would comment here, respect proper decorum and leave comments of value. However, The multitude of trollish attack comments from both the left and right has necessitated this action.

Thank you for your understanding... The management.