Are Republicans to Blame for Washington’s Problems?

In a new book entitled “It’s Even Worse Than It Looks”, author Norman Ornstein (described by Yahoo News, a card carrying member of the “progressive” Party Pravda, as a “scholar”), blames Republican for governance problems in Washington DC. Although Ornstein, shows a flicker of willingness to lay part of the blame at the feet of Democrat’s, “progressive” anti-American bias is clearer than expensive Waterford Crystal.

On video, Ornstein describes it this way: “Democrats have moved left, to probably their own 25 yard line. President Obama’s probably around the 40. The Republicans have moved behind their own goal post.” In an obvious swipe at Tea Party reps and senators, Orenstein said: “I wouldn’t say it’s all Republicans, it’s 80-20 at this point.”

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/power-players-abc-news/blame-party-washington-problems-102604505.htm

Democrats have moved left to probably their own 25-yard line? obama’s probably around the 40? Republicans have moved behind their own goal post? Based on his personal opinion, perhaps. Historically, Orentein’s facing fourth and 99, trying to complete a Hail Mary pass with hurricane force winds in his face.

“progressives” have been moving America to the left for at least a century. Today’s totally partisan left wing extremists like obama, Pelosi and Reid have been driving America hard left since they took office. Pelosi and Reid began their latest push in 2007 when they took over “leadership” in the House and Senate. obama joined them in earnest after his 2009 inauguration.

Pelosi, who’s from an extreme leftist Congressional District in the San Francisco area, is as fringe “progressive” as is the district she represents: the birthplace and capitol of the anti-American hippie counter-culture. She responded: “Are you kidding? Are you kidding?” when asked to cite the Constitutional basis for a piece of her legislation.

Reid’s such a partisan hack that to create and support the false narrative of a “do nothing Congress” with his co-conspirator obama, the Senate under Reid’s “leadership” hasn’t passed a budget in over 1,000 days. Thanks to Reid, several dozen bills dealing with jobs, the economy, deficit reduction and reforms passed by the House have been completely ignored by the Senate.

obama’s as fringe left progressive as they come. To say that someone who’s 100% partisan, who sat in the pews of a black separatist (read Marxist) church for twenty years, who by his own admission (in writing) sought out the radicals and the Socialists while in school, who’s father was a Marxist, who’s mother and grandparents were Communists, who’s boyhood mentor was a card carrying member of the American Communist Party, who has appointed the most extreme, out of the American mainstream radicals to be his czars…to say that this individual is anything but an extremist is as intellectually dishonest as is humanly possible.

This is the trio who, after whining about obama’s predecessor having added $5 trillion to the national debt in eight years, increased that debt by over $5 trillion in under four. This is the bunch that passed their “stimulus” bill, which stole from taxpayers to pay off their political cronies on Wall Street, in unions, with “green energy” company fronts and former campaign donors/bundlers. obama openly joked about the “shovel ready” jobs the “stimulus” bill was “intended” to fund weren’t so “shovel ready” after all. Lest America forget, this is the gang who, despite loud public outcries against it by a majority of the people, used secret payoffs and backroom deals agreed to in the dead of the night behind closed doors to shove government controlled healthcare down America’s throat.

Orenstein calls what these people have done moving to their own 25-yard line, or in obama’s case, to the 40? He alleges that Republicans have moved behind their own goal post? Does Orenstein expect to be taken seriously? Under what form of delusion must one be suffering in order to plead such a case?

The Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution, the founding documents of the United States, are unsurpassed in the freedoms, rights, and opportunities they secure for the people. That there are elected Republicans who want to follow the recipe for successful governance bequeathed upon America by its founders means they either want to prevent America from being driven farther to the left, or return America to where it’s supposed to be.  Following the Constitution.  It’s really that simple.

Although it clearly wasn’t Orenstein’s intent, in a strange, almost perverse way it’s good to see a member of the institutionalized “progressive” left publicly acknowledges that some elected officials in the USA are still American. For Orenstein, his philosophical teammates and their march in lock-step “progressive” followers, that fact is seen as a negative.

Thanks to “progressives”, the most divisive, partisan, uncompromising group of politicians to exist in the past century, America is deeply divided. Either you’re an American or you’re a “progressive”. You cannot be both.

Obama’s Budget: More Tax, Borrow and Spend

The White House presented its 2012 budget Monday. A $3.8 trillion proposal which includes $1.43 trillion in new taxes on households whose incomes meet or exceed $250,000 (note: this is the new “progressive” definition of millionaires and billionaires), a fourth straight year of $1 trillion-plus deficit spending (which will require yet more borrowing), and new mandatory spending intended for the Education and Energy Departments.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0212/72792.html

As has been the case for the past three years, the White House pays lip service to calls for reduced spending. There are no efforts made to reform “entitlement” programs, which make up a sizeable majority of federal spending and will, if continuously ignored, bankrupt the country. The “spending cuts” found in this budget are largely figments of the imagination. Since America’s military is already out of Iraq, and the date for withdrawal from Afghanistan has already been announced, saying that “were the United States armed forces to remain deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan at full troop and equipment levels through 2018″ would cost X amount of money, and therefore not spending that money now constitutes spending cut is at best disingenuous. It’s like announcing that a household’s spending has been reduced by $50,000 over the next five years because they didn’t take out a 60-month loan on a new car. Within a $3.8 trillion budget, claims that reducing the Environmental Protection Agency’s spending to $8.34 billion amounts to meaningful reduction is like saying someone changes the world’s sea level by pouring a glass of water into the Pacific Ocean.

That this budget is part of a campaign strategy is both painfully obvious and not especially noteworthy, especially to voters who are aware of the obvious media bias in America. Those who have actively sought out stories that somehow managed to “escape” coverage by the “mainstream” media have seen this one coming since last year’s announcement that occupy Oval Office is running for re-election. Submitting a budget certain to garner no legislative support intentionally creates an environment which allows the current White House occupant to rail against a “do nothing” Congress. Refusals by Congress to raise taxes on “millionaires and billionaires” (that’s those who make $250,000 a year) means they’re helping the “most fortunate among us” avoid paying “their fair share”. This proposal by the White House sets up one campaign theme after another.

The budget is so bad that, like last year, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell plans to introduce it to a Democratically controlled Senate that hasn’t passed a budget in a thousand days (talk about “do nothing”).

http://news.yahoo.com/mcconnell-presidents-budget-fail-senate-205212280–abc-news.html

There seems to be no satisfying this administration’s appetite for spending. The underlying misconception that government spending stimulates long term economic growth merely stimulates the need for increased taxes to pay for the big government bureaucracies required to process the inefficient, wasteful spending. Since the day this administration took office, they have intentionally driven up spending with borrowed money. Now, they are attempting to institutionalize the spending increases with tax hikes. By stealing money under the threat of fine and/or imprisonment from the private sector that creates the wealth, they are making real economic growth more difficult.

Once again, “progressives” are calling for real, immediate tax increases in exchange for proposed, future spending cut. This is the same deal offered to Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush. In both instances, the tax hikes happened, but not the spending cuts. In each case, the tax hikes did nothing to reduce deficits because the spending continued unabated.

“progressives” fondly reminisce about the good old days when Bill Clinton was President. Those were the days when the budget was balanced. Remember those days? That was when tax rates were higher. What “progressive” Democrats selectively fail to remember is that along with those higher tax rates, a Conservative House and a Conservative Senate legislated cut spending to go along with the higher tax rates.

Unless and until there are real, immediate, meaningful spending cuts as part of a budget deal, there should be no tax increases, period.