Tag Archives: drug addict

Senator Mark Pryor in favor of debt deal: “We must continue making tough decisions to reduce our debt”

Mark Pryor voted for the Debt Deal on August 2, 2011.  He said, “We must continue making tough decisions to reduce our debt. ” However, I don’t think cutting 22 billion out of projected increases in a 3.6 trillion budget is “making the tough decision to reduce our debt.”

Aug 01 2011

Statement by Senator Mark Pryor In Support of the Bipartisan Solution to Raise the Debt Ceiling

1. “The debate over raising the debt ceiling has been difficult…” After the vote he stated, “This has been an ugly process and an unnecessary process.”

Only because liberals in Congress are addicted to overspending like a drug addict is to his drugs. Have you ever heard a drug say he was going to kick the habit and then you invite him in and he steals your shirt to go buy more drugs!!!!

2. “…but essential to reduce the deficit…’

Are you kidding me. The projected debt will now be over 20 trillion in a few years instead of 23 trillion. Also once our credit rating is downgraded in a few months then all the projections will have to increased because we will be paying more interest. SENATOR PRYOR DID YOU THINK OF THAT WHEN YOU WERE PROTECTING ALL YOUR VOTERS SPECIAL INTERESTS THAT LIVE OFF OF GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS LIKE FOOD STAMPS (34 billion in 2007 but 72 billion today, 40 million people in the USA). We are reaching the point of no return.

3. “…avoid default…”

Why make a big deal about default when your refusal to cut spending has allowed us to rack up huge deficits and possibly get our credit rating downgraded in the next few months. Orrin Hatch makes it clear that the solution is “cut, cap and balance” and his speech on the floor this morning made that point.

4. “…and provide more certainty in our economy….”

THE ONLY CERTAINTY WE WILL HAVE IN OUR ECONOMY IS THAT WE WILL BE JOINING GREECE SOON!!!!!  

5. “We started with harmful, partisan plans and advanced to an agreement on a bipartisan, practical solution.”

The only partisan politics according to you is done by the Tea Party activists that are outside your office shouting: “DON’T TAKE US DOWN THE SAME PATH AS GREECE!!!!” By the way can you say that you disagree with their conclusion? You got the same numbers in front of you.  

6. “While not perfect, I plan to vote for this bill. It makes a nearly $1 trillion in spending cuts…”

You mean it will not raise the debt to 23 trillion in the next 1o years but it will take 12 years before the country goes bankrupt with that much debt.

7. “…and sets the stage for long-term savings…”

Let’s talk about longterm savings. It sounds like you care about our savings accounts. Babies born today have around  $45,000.00 they already owe as their part of the national debt.  In 10 years that “savings” will put the amount owed to new born babies around $70,000.00. That seems that the term “savings” is not a proper term to use in this case.

8. “It does so without dismantling safety net programs such as Social Security and Medicare, which would have been unacceptable to hundreds of thousands of Arkansans.”

The dismantling of these programs is coming if we do nothing. Did you know that the baby boomers will be completely on Social Security by 2029 and all three of these programs will beyond repair by then.  EVEN BILL CLINTON KNOWS THIS!!! 

9. Though it is a step in the right direction, we must continue making tough decisions to reduce our debt.

These are tough decisions but all you want to do is kick the can down the road.

10. “Arkansans have shared with me how truly frustrated they are about the gridlock in Washington, DC.  I agree.”

THE ONLY REASON YOU SAY THAT ARKANSANS ARE FRUSTRATED IS BECAUSE YOU SENSE THAT THIS STATE IS GOING CONSERVATIVE AND YOU AND MIKE ROSS ARE THE ONLY DEMOCRATS LEFT. IN 2012 YOU WILL BE THE ONLY ONE LEFT AND IN 2014 YOU WILL FACE THE FRUSTRATED ARKANSAS VOTERS YOURSELF.

11. “We need to work better together in order to put Americans back to work and earn back their trust.”

PUTTING AMERICANS BACK TO WORK DOES NOT MEAN ALLOWING UNEMPLOYED WORKERS TO STAY ON UNEMPLOYMENT FOR A 2 YEAR PERIOD OR BALOONING OUR FOODSTAMP ROLLS TO COVER 40 MILLION!!! SOUNDS LIKE YOU WOULD RATHER HAVE PEOPLE DEPENDENT ON YOUR GOVERNMENT STIMULUS AND GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS THAN WORKING IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR. OF COURSE, YOUR OBAMACARE IS NOT TOO POPULAR DOWN HERE EITHER. 

_______________________

Here are the real facts about where government spending is going:

Debt Deal: Spending in Perspective

Posted by Tad DeHaven

The following chart looks at total projected federal spending according to the Congressional Budget Office’s adjusted March baseline and its score of the debt deal. The chart only considers the reduction in outlays resulting from the deal’s cap on discretionary spending, which the CBO says will save $917 billion over the next ten years.  It does not consider the $1.2-$1.5 trillion in future “deficit reduction” that Dan Mitchell discusses here.

Total spending under debt deal

Excluding outlays for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, which are unlikely to materialize, total spending over the next ten years would be about $43 trillion under the discretionary spending caps instead of $44 trillion. In other words, even if Congress holds to the caps — and even if the “deficit reduction” targets established in the bill are achieved — the federal government’s spending binge will continue. If this is a “win” for the limited government crowd, I’d hate to see what the Beltway establishment would consider a “loss.”

Brummett:”Political dysfunction” caused by Fox News?

Washington Could Learn a Lot from a Drug Addict

Fox News is the number one by far because it does not take the liberal bias that everyone is sick of. However, liberals just can’t stand that Fox News has risen to the top.

John Brummett in his article Who to blame? Here’s the answer, August 1,  2011, Arkansas News Bureau observed:

People will try to tell you that all politicians are equally to blame for this political dysfunction by which our nation has flirted with downgraded credit, debt default and global economic turmoil.

They merely will be providing insulation for those really mostly to blame.

So let us peel away such insulation. Let us lay it out in order of blame:

1. Tea party extremists in the Congress, who are penny wise and pound foolish

2. Mainstream Republicans in the Congress, because they could have fallen in behind Speaker John Boehner’s twice-aborted adult discussions with President Obama. Instead they cowered and tucked tail as soon as the kook caucus on the right fringe invoked the specter of primary opposition from the strident extreme.

3. All of us in the great American apolitical center, “independents” who go one way in one election and the other in the next.

4. Fox News, because it exacerbates the above.

Why no blame for Democrats? I ran out of space. The strident leftists, moveon.org and the talking heads on MSNBC, would surely be coming up shortly.

I think that Brummett is looking at the wrong issue. The problem is overspending by Congress and we should be addressing that. I do think we have “political dysfunction” but I believe it is because the liberals in Congress are addicted to spending like a drug addict is addicted to his drugs. I think that his point number 3 is very good, but point number 4 is dead wrong. Fox News is doing everything they can to expose the liberals’ addiction to overspending which is the root of our problem.

In the clip above Reagan promises to cut the size of government, but look what Congress did to him a few years later.

___________________

President Reagan got his tax-rate cuts through Congress later that year (1981).  But because they were being phased in gradually, the economic pain they were designed to alleviate lingered well into 1982. High deficits persisted, and he faced enormous pressure to raise taxes.

The president had no interest in increasing taxes, but he agreed to consider some kind of compromise with Congress. His representatives began meeting with members of House Speaker Tip O’Neill’s team to find some way to hammer out a deficit-reduction pact. So began what, in our opinion, became the “Debacle of 1982.”

From the outset, the basic idea of the GOP participants was to trade some kind of concessions on the tax front for a Democratic agreement on spending cutbacks. The negotiators knew that Ronald Reagan would be hard to sell on any tax hikes. So they included a ploy they felt might overcome his resistance: a large reduction in federal spending in return for a modest rise in business (but not individual) taxes.

The ratio in the final deal — the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982 (TEFRA) — was $3 in spending cuts for every $1 in tax increases. It sounded persuasive at the time. Believing it to be the only way to get spending under control, most of the president’s colleagues signed on. He disliked the tax hikes, of course, but he agreed to it as well.

The cuts never came

You don’t have to be a Washington veteran to predict what happened next. The tax increases were promptly enacted — Congress had no problem accepting that part of the deal — but the promised budget cuts never materialized. After the tax bill passed, some legislators of both parties even claimed that there had been no real commitment to the 3-to-1 ratio.

In fact, spending for fiscal year 1983 was some $48 billion higher than the budget targets, and no progress was made in lowering the deficit. Even tax receipts for that year went down — a lingering effect of the recession, which the additional business taxes did nothing to redress.

_________________________

Washington Could Learn a Lot from a Drug Addict because they are both addicted. A drug addict is addicted to his drugs and Washington is addicted to spending.