Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Wednesday, September 28, 2016

The Republican Congressional leadership pushed their $3.5 trillion federal budget – including massive program cuts and a plan to privatize Medicare – through the House of Representatives on a party-line vote Thursday afternoon. While the Republican plan is sure to be killed in the Senate, where Democrats maintain control, the so-called Ryan budget, named for House Budget Committee chair Paul Ryan (R-WI), serves as an election-year marker in the partisan debate over spending, taxes, and deficits.

“We think America is on the wrong track,” said Ryan, a rising GOP star sometimes mentioned as a vice presidential nominee. “We think the president is bringing us to a debt crisis and a welfare state in decline.”

Retorted Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA): “The more people know about that budget, the more people know it hurts them in their lives.”

Opposing the Obama administration’s proposals to raise rates on the country’s wealthiest taxpayers  as well as on the oil industry, the Ryan budget would instead reduce taxes roughly $400,000 a year on those earning $1 million plus annually – by extending the Bush tax cuts, establishing a new and lower top rate of 25 percent, and repealing tax increases in health care reform. Although Ryan has often stated that these revenue losses would be compensated by closing tax loopholes and preferences, none are specified in the budget passed today.

“In essence, this budget is Robin Hood in reverse — on steroids,” said Robert Greenstein, president of the nonpartisan and progressive Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, whose studies are widely respected on both sides of the aisle. “It would likely produce the largest redistribution of income from the bottom to the top in modern U.S. history and likely increase poverty and inequality more than any other budget in recent times (and possibly in the nation’s history). “

What the Ryan budget does outline clearly — as Greenstein’s analysts have noted — is the Republican plan to end Medicare as a guaranteed safety net for all seniors while transforming it into a voucher system that will provide less coverage at higher cost. By raising Medicare’s eligibility age from 65 to 67, the plan will create a new “donut hole” that leaves thousands of seniors without affordable coverage of any kind. And although the Republican plan claims to preserve traditional Medicare as an option, its provisions would encourage private insurers to pull in healthier beneficiaries while leaving those who are sicker and more expensive to insure in the government program.

The Ryan budget proposes overall spending cuts of $5.3 trillion over the coming decade, eliminating or reducing transportation improvements, education assistance, scientific research and a host of other programs. The Republicans do not explain how roads, bridges, and airports will be repaired, how the American workforce will compete with those educated in competing countries, or the effects of foregoing scientific and technological advances achieved by subsidized research. The ultimate result, as a recent Congressional Budget Office report indicated, may well be an America diminished beyond recognition – without actually achieving a balanced budget in the next  two decades.

  • LittleStream

    This just points out the truth in the Forrest Gump line “Stupid is as stupid does” Not to mention greedy, on the take.

  • No surprise, just the Republican agenda in writing. Slavery for everyone but the very rich. It doesn’t even achieve the balanced budget they talk about so often. B… S… beyond belief.

    • ObozoMustGo

      Elsa, your crack pipe is waiting for you! Nice try on the “slavery” reference, too, you racist, bigotted leftist nutjob!

      Have a nice day!

      • crawl back under your rock, nazi ass kisser,

        • ObozoMustGo

          You leftists obviously dont like being called what you are, do you? Cant wait for you to bring out the anti-semitic rants against Jews next, like all you leftist nutjobs do.

          FOR THE RECORD: You lefties like socialism, or variations of socialism. You are drawn to big government, redistributionist socialist policies, no doubt. Admit it. OK! Now that you have wilfully admitted what you are, lets all take note of the FACT that Hitler was the head of the NAZI party. What does NAZI stand for? Come on, you know it…. that’s right. NAZI stands for National SOCIALIST Party. Hmmmmmmmm….. Does anyone else get the irony here?

          Just telling the truth! Have a nice day!

          • Drew_a

            You think a 400,000$ tax cut on those making 1million$ or more is responsible exactly which revenues are going to fill the deficit?

          • ObozoMustGo

            Hi Drew. I hope you are well. Two things:

            1) How exactly does someone making $1M get a $400K tax break? Think about it. You’re being snowed with a statement that is deliberately designed to stoke your class envy. Look at facts. Resist temptation to give in to hatred of others for what they have or earn.

            2) Who’s money is it? The government’s or the guy that earned it?

            See you soon, buddy! 🙂

          • Drew_a

            It’s in the article bozo. we are commenting on the article…. I think…. That goes back to my reoccuring question how valueable is his work to the economy how valuable is the work he does to innovate society? Any rich person who works in capital management doesn’t innovate, doesn’t supply a positive service to the country (negative because like socialism he syphons the money out for himself) and so it shouldn’t be his money hell let the government take it all! If he cured cancer sure he can keep it. If he invented an engine that can use carbon dioxide from the air to power it he can keep it. If he developed a strain of vegatation that was tasty and can grow anywhere with limited effort he can keep it. Things are great btw, how are you? I’ve been curious if you were alright you left me hanging on our last exchange.

          • ObozoMustGo

            Drew, I didnt leave you hanging on purpose. The weekend came and they changed the memo site and I lost my log in. Didnt realize it until Tuesday, I think. And things are well. Busy at work, but I enjoy our dialogue very much.

            RE: “how valuable is his work” —> good question. First, the amount of money someone makes is in direct proportion to: 1) Demand for what they do; 2) Their ability to do it; and 3) The difficulty of replacing them. That’s it. Think about it. It has nothing to do with nobility or socially redeeming qualities. Second, for you to say that a “rich person who works in capital management doesnt innovate or supply a positive service” demonstrates a lack of understanding of how capitalism works. At the heart of capitalism is what? CAPITAL (money) . You cant start a business without capital. You have an MBA. What are the factors of production? Land, Labor, Capital, and Enterprise. All four are needed to run a business. The guy that structures and supplies capital is equally important as the guy that supplies the raw materials. Without one another, the business doesnt work, does it? So, whether or not I like the investment banker, it doesnt really matter.

            Also, I personally can vouch for the fact that rich people do NOT bury their money. I am not rich, but I make my living consulting to early stage companies. By the way, many of the clean energy companies. Those companies are start-ups that have a business idea and new technology they are trying to develop. They dont have the millions needed to develop and commercialize the technology. But rich people do. Rich people aggregate their funds with venture capitalists for the possibility of large profits, but with huge risks. The business guys write a business plan, present it to the VC, and if the VC likes it, he invests. That investment then translates into hiring people. I have personally worked with at least 20 companies that started up with nothing but a rich guy’s money and now employ combined several thousand people and a few of them are even public companies. This is how it works, Drew. I live it. Anyone that tells you otherwise is simply uneducated or prefers a leftist and socialist agenda.

            Gotta run. Talk to you soon.

          • Drew_a

            Well I’ll be happy to wait for your rebuttle. It’s sad that my weekends aren’t hopping too often. — So I can’t say you’re wrong. And you being in the industry (startup companies) you get to see where the capital side is the most beneficial. But then also you should see who the innovators of society are, the skilled labor with ideas are the engineers, among others. Not those who exclusively work with paper. The income discrepencies are bad… real bad. How is someone with a great idea supposed to have the capital to utilize it? Capital management professionals can obviously help, but are they really doing anything more than leaching? If the engineer (or other skilled labor person) was properly compensated in the first place he would’ve been able to not be taken advantage of in the first place. Anyway none of that matters in this instance yeah the financer does what’s best the engineer and for society. That’s really not what I’m refering to it’s companies like Microsoft that issues 300million$ in bonds for no understandable reason. They should be financing their operations with their profit not giving it away in the forms of dividends. And yeah so we agree on people shouldn’t be compensated at a societal integrity level towards their income. But then there ethics have to be kept in check by the government. I want to share a piece of my idealogy to make future conversations easier. I really don’t want to protect the people’s entitlement programs with lots of conviction maybe a little but not much. What I really try to advocate is that the rich have to much influence over everything, and the one’s that suffers are those with the mind and ideas to bring society forward. Like programmers, machinery engineers, professors, and others I can’t think of. They are the one’s we need to raise, and as long as investment bankers can make 10 figures and influence politics that is never going to happen. I’d like to tell you have a nice day, but you are so mean to everybody else. But have at least ok day. =|

          • ObozoMustGo

            Lots of good stuff in here. I gotta run. I’ll save the email and respond on Monday. See you later!

      • TheOldLadySpeaks

        Yeah Right – lool who’s calling who a nut job – you seem to be filling that position quite well!! Maybe you should sign up for some anger management sessions – seems that you need them from your rants!!

        • ObozoMustGo

          Hi Old Lady!

          Exactly what rants are you talking about?

          Have a nice day!

  • dawnowens

    Are they trying to GUARANTEE riots this summer?

    • ObozoMustGo

      Dan… Only if the leftist nutjobs WANT to riot. 99% of the dupes wont even know why they are rioting, other than they’re gonna scream louder for more freebies that they themselves do not earn! And believe me, rioting WILL NOT do your side any good. In fact, it will insure Obozo’s crushing defeat.

      Have a nice day!

  • mncold

    Another dimwitted Republican plan to put this country on the path of Mexico or a third world country. So what is everyone without health insurance to do? I know everyone can chant with Palin and Ryan – “Die, Baby, Die!!”

  • Welcome to let’s try to kill off the under $1,000,ooo population. Break the backs of the middle and lower SES

  • Absolute crap as always from the republicans rich stay right and pay nothing for that status, while America slaves away.

  • meworryalot

    Have we gone mad?

    Who needs the Cold War, terrorists, or big rocks from outer space?; we are doing it to ourselves.

    I think we will see the Occupy movement on steroids when the sleeping masses start to understand what is being done to them (us, that is!). That is a real risk, and no one in power seems to see that.

    • Osama bin Laden understood that box cutters and airplanes would not bring America to its knees. He knew very well that we along with our so-called leadership would do the job for him. Fear and distrust of our institutions have accomplished what no foreign power has ever even come close to doing.
      .
      We’ve spent over a decade now on wars that seem to have accomplished nothing except the deaths of our sons and daughters and a factured treasury. You are right, who needs the Cold War (perhaps Mitt thinks so), or terrorist when we have leadership like Ryan and his ilk in the House.

  • Elsa Obuchowski

    I hope voters will remember this in November and vote Democratic. Whoever the Democrat for Congress is in your district, he or she may not be perfect, but Step 1 in putting and end to “Robin Hood in reverse” is to return control of the House to the Democrats (and, one hopes, gain a veto-proof Democrat majority in the Senate).

  • LastHaHa

    Smugness is uglyness…the Republicans personified. Smugness is Dumbness. Same
    To be smug is to be unaware…there’s alwas an humbling factor…just when you don’t/can’t see it are you smug. Smug is a worm. Smug is a slug. Smug is a Republican smile. You can recognize it by the blank look in the eyes. Reference Gov Walker of WI

  • There’s a golden rule that says that, when faced with something inexplicable, there are two possible explanations: the cock-up theory and the conspiracy theory. When deciding which one is true, you have to remember that there are a hell of a lot more cock-ups than conspiracies, so cock-up is your safest bet.
    Here I’m baffled: the cock-up theory would imply a degree of stupidity on the part of Rep. Ryan and the GOP that is totally improbable. However, the conspiracy theory pre-supposes a degree of evil intent that is even less likely.
    Which is it?

  • I hope the GOP (Greedy Old Party) realizes that they coyuld be handing the 2012 election to Obama and more seats to Dems in both Houses. A pox of the Republican controlled House.

  • jean.powe

    Ryan’s budget is just the same old song and dance he tried to present earlier and it was voted down. We certainly do not need any of these Tea Baggers preparing a budget. The U. S. will never recover from it. They are trying to take the U. S. apart piece by piece. It will be shot down in the Senate for sure.

  • Paul Ryan is the up and coming star of the Republican Party. The so-called fiscal guru. Seriously folks, this guy is considered the best the GOPers in the House have to offer. He is suppose to know the numbers better than anyone else. I would sure hate to see a bill coming from the worst. It is painfully obvious that Ryan and the rest have never tried to make a payroll or run a business. I’ve never met a business person who would not trade a little tax increase for a boatload of demand for their products. There is no demand for the GOP budget product. It was a pile of garbage last year and part deaux is only worse. I wonder why folks are not yelling about the GOP wanting to take $800 billion away from our Medicare benefits? Ignoring the revenue portion of the deficit problem only proves that the GOP does not give a fig about tackling the federal budget…just cutting funding from those who need it most. Today in the Senate an attempt to remove the subsides from bil oil went down again. What a surprise, even the GOPers who’ve been quoted over the years believing that the subsidies are no longer needed, when given the chance to stand up for American instead voted to keep the campaign funds coming into their coffers. Pathetic.

  • Too bad so many people are buying into this class warfare and are envious of the wealthy in a free society. The Democrats can not pass a budget because they don’t want the American people see the increased spending & debt & will never pass a balanced budget amendment, if they did, they would not be able to “give” people freebies to get re-elected. The wealthy already pay more than their share while many pay nothing, while not realizing it’s the Federal Government that is taking away everyones wealth to remain in power.

    • metrognome3830

      How come there is no flag for “Stupid.” Or a red flag for TROLL ALERT.

    • ObozoMustGo

      Paul…. you’re getting like montanabill here, talking common sense. Notice the reply from metrognome3830… they just cant take it! You’re causing widespread siezures amongst the useful idiot set! psssst…. keep it up! 🙂

    • rustacus21

      No 1’s envious of the wealthy. People need to really – REALLY understand, the opportunities, benefits & ‘pampering’ the rich receive, is what ALL Americans should be receiving & DESERVE! Don’t ALL of us PAY taxes? Don’t our taxes contribute to ALL the otherwise necessary BENEFITS WE ALL ENJOY by living in a society this IS Democratic? What will it take 4 Conservatives & weak-minded fence-sitters understand that the rich are paying – 1 way or the other – for the rite to reside in this nation. The only problem is, we’re ALL paying the share they get BACK – via their TAX CUTS – which, if they get it, ALL Americans should?!!? Is that unreasonable? Is that even illogical? Does that make sense? It’s not difficult. To understand ALL Americans have a RESPONSIBILITY for the UPKEEP of THEIR nation?! The rich are shirking their responsibility – by bribery & intimidation (from thugs like Boehner, Ryan, etc.), in DENIAL of our Constitutionally guaranteed benefits, by virtue of WE THE PEOPLE, named SPECIFICALLY as beneficiaries – NO MATTER WHAT IT COSTS!!! WE THE PEOPLE ARE MORE THAN WORTH IT!!! ALL OF US!!! It isn’t designed nor was it specifically intended for the rich NOR corporatists. It says SIMPLY ‘… the People…’ That means poor, Black, rich, White, child, Latino, old, Asian, ALL AMERICANS!!!

      • ObozoMustGo

        rustacus… your crack pipe must have been really heated up this past weekend. The Constitution does NOT guarantee benefits. Not anywhere. It only insures that government is instituted to protect our God-given rights to LIFE, liberty, and the PURSUIT of happiness. The Bill of Rights then defines those God-given rights in more detail. The Constitution then sets out to define how government should be organized and the limitations on that government to infringe on individual liberties or the right of States to govern themselves where the Feds have not been given authority to do so. It might have been you that thought the preamble of the Constitution says “to provide general welfare” when it does not. It says PROMOTE general welfare which has nothing to do with providing “benefits” to certain citizens to be paid for by other citizens. ANY of the founders would be appalled at the notion of income redistribution and so-called “benefits” like food, housing, transportation, healthcare, etc. etc. being bestowed upon citizens out of the public treasury.

        Have a nice day!

        • Drew_a

          Once again I fail to see how to rationilize that argument. The constitution doesn’t have any tax laws in it accept no taxation without representation. That supports the poor in relation to your argument. As long as the people see it fit they can tax whoever for whatever they want. That’s why I don’t like the constitution, it doesn’t have answers only arguments. I doubt the forefathers would like to see how things like the industrial revolution and the computer age lowered the costs of making things and NOT having those saving passed on to the consumer. They would probably be in full support of the ‘income redistribution’ because rustacus is right. In the spectrum of politics special interest groups don’t exist for the poor and they are what cause special interest groups. If you want to argue income distribution or class warfare who can’t ignore that it is happening all the time by the rich. Why was it once acceptable to have CM on products of 10% and CEO’s make 25% more than their skilled labor, and now CM can be in access of 70% and CEO’s can make over 20000% more than their skilled labor. It isn’t fair and saying the government has no role in this is completely false as they control the tax rate as WRITTEN IN THE CONSTITUTION.

          • ObozoMustGo

            Drew, correct The Constitution doesnt have tax laws, but does give Congress the power to tax. However, it does not allow them to tax whomever for whatever they want. In fact, it specifically prohibits such measures by saying there can be no bills of attainder. Furhter, it specifically states in Section 8:

            “The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States”

            In other words, the laws must apply to everyone equally. Right now, they dont.

            Drew, where do you come up with this stuff about “forefathers not liking industrial revolution and computer age and lowered costs not passed on to consumers”? Huh? Really, son! That’s one of the more crazy lefty statements you have made. It reminds me of Obama blaming ATMs for unemployment. Sheer lunacy. Of course they envisioned economic progress and their writings support this. Further, what confuses me about the left is this assumption that because technology is different, that somehow the principles of the Constitution dont stand. Of course they do. Principles dont change, only circumstances. So when you make laws that deal with circumstances, as those circumstances change, someone else gets screwed.

            At least you are honest enough to admit that you dont like the Constitution, Drew. Kudos for your honesty!

            You need to read a book called The Original Argument. It’s actually the Federalist Papers translated into modern English. Our founders were 100% in favor of individual liberty and self government and NOT in favor of the concepts of socialism and redistribution of income. They were exactly the opposite. How could men who were so committed to the idea of individual liberty and terrified of tyrants and despots be simultaneously in favor of enslaving those who work for the benefit of those who do not? They are 100% incompatable ideas.

            The government has NO role in dictating who gets paid how much in private enterprise. NONE. I’m not saying a CEO should be paid 20,000 times what his laborers make. But I’m not saying he shouldn’t. What I am saying is that it’s none of my business and none of the government’s damned business either. NOT in America. Not ever, not now.

            Have a nice day!

          • Drew_a

            K I’ll believe that your premise is accuarate. But increasing the marginal tax rate on the rich doesn’t make it a violation of bill of attainder. Increasing taxes doesn’t make that group guilty. There is no need to increase defense or welfare (further), so raising taxes to pay entitlements is against section 8. But there is debt, debt would be a reason to increase taxes now right? Excise tax is sales taxes and is also irrevelant But nothing is uniform as it is anyways, we have a tiered income collection policy. the tax rate of the top earners was 90 then 60 then 35. How is it uniform to drop it continously but not reinstate in? That is a big question you should answer that one for me. Also i just looked up wikipedia income tax, I love the wiki! and the effective tax rate of the top 400 is 16.6% and the top 10% is 20.7%. The upper middle class are the one’s that are suffering and that is hard to argue. If the upper middle still exist that is.

            So back to the constistution sucks, how do you decifer what is fair and uniform? And giving into the believe that technology has no relevance on how people do business is so bad for society, it’s cyanide. Really if our technology grows and tv’s sell for 600$ and only take 20$ to make how is that non-depremental to our society. Most likely that will cause unemployment in the industry and only a few will benefit. If prices dropped we will fight inflation which is better for everyone not or no longer in the industry. IT IS ALL SELFISH ANTI-COMMUNITY BS!!!!!! So the question is now how do you gauge constinionally the ability to tax uniformly when the base of taxation isn’t uniform to begin with?

            The forefathers would be appalled at the level of inequality given to people right now, so yes of course they would be against our wealth distribution because it forces people to not be equal. Not have an equal voice in our legislative process.

            They are not incompatible ideas, the right to eat, procreate, and educate yourself is far different than owning your 17th vacation home. The tyrants are the one’s that hold the economy hostage not the government. Regualation is the only thing that keep these tyrants at bay, and there needs to be more. We need efficiency above all else, and that means we need the free market to impose fairness if it doesn’t we need a way to combat it. Like the government opening a TV shop that will sell that TV for 60$ to bring down the price for the consumer and cause deflation to help society. If technology and innovation don’t combat inflation they are harmful. End of story. If you want to bring constitutional right into then we must first establish what is the capacity at which the constitution can act.

            I believe however and whatever for the betterment of overall society, but you object. Stating the benefits of a few are far more important. Read Kant “Politic Writings” for me, and I’ll read the original argument for you. =)

            If society falls apart from vast income inequality you bet your ass it’s there business, look at all the negative press Obozo gets for gas prices.

          • rustacus21

            …i.e. ‘PROMOTING’/PROVIDING’ for the general welfare, in other words. I rest my case…

          • rustacus21

            Have U ever read the Federalist Papers? The signees to the Constitution all had input in the ‘structure’ of this government, from its inception. If U haven’t figured out by now, this Democracy is a counter to a monarchy, a church-run states, or dictatorships (which America was controlled by at some point, B4 it was ‘invented’ & brought to life, by Liberal/Progressives – conservatives didn’t & don’t still, have enuff intelligence…), which citizens manage & control, instead of royals, elites, corporations & oligarchs. It has been modern conservatives that have made the nation what it is now. It’s condition is circa 2001-2008. Do U deny this REALITY? Do U deny the importance of the Amendments? Do U understand ‘policies’ are merely modifications to deal w/unexpected contingencies that naturally occur in civil society? This is complicated I know, but if enuff of reality & facts lay around w/in reach long enuff, U will enevitably run out of comic books & fairy tales & gravitate to some ‘real’ adult reading… Eventually…

        • rustacus21

          U’r fixation on drugs is seriously troubling sign, which xplains why U get so off topic – ‘Provide’ or ‘Promote’, it all means the same, which is what Conservatives have failed at since Eisenhower. The psycho’s & 1/2 wits U guys turn out have been disgracefully incompetent & I’m not sure what U’r purpose is 4 trying to have a discussion over this, especially w/the last Republican U guys allowed to wreck the nation (& the world 4 that matter). We Liberal/Progressives R on POINT each & every time – even w/expert obstructionists & saboteurs blocking the way. We invented the Constitution by the way, so if nothing else, we have no problem understanding it meaning. That U guy’s problem on the other side, as the last 4 Republican administrations clearly show…

          ________________________________
          From: Disqus
          To: [email protected]
          Sent: Monday, April 2, 2012 2:07 PM
          Subject: [thenationalmemo] Re: House Passes Ryan Budget To Privatize Medicare

          Disqus generic email template

          ObozoMustGo wrote, in response to rustacus21:
          rustacus… your crack pipe must have been really heated up this past weekend. The Constitution does NOT guarantee benefits. Not anywhere. It only insures that government is instituted to protect our God-given rights to LIFE, liberty, and the PURSUIT of happiness. The Bill of Rights then defines those God-given rights in more detail. The Constitution then sets out to define how government should be organized and the limitations on that government to infringe on individual liberties or the right of States to govern themselves where the Feds have not been given authority to do so. It might have been you that thought the preamble of the Constitution says “to provide general welfare” when it does not. It says PROMOTE general welfare which has nothing to do with providing “benefits” to certain citizens to be paid for by other citizens. ANY of the founders would be appalled at the notion of income redistribution and so-called “benefits” like food, housing, transportation, healthcare, etc. etc. being bestowed upon citizens out of the public treasury.
          Have a nice day!
          Link to comment

          • ObozoMustGo

            Proof positive you are On crack rustacus. Your next hit is waiting.

  • YOU FOLKS CANT SEE THE TRUTH IF IT HITS YOU IN THE FACE.

  • YOU FOLKS CANT SEE THE TRUTH WHEN IT HITS YOU IN THE FACE….

  • Oooooooo!!!!!!! SHIT!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    • ObozoMustGo

      Classy leftist a$$hole!

      • Drew_a

        Classy comment

        • ObozoMustGo

          touché…. 🙂

  • So Ryan’s plan not only punishes poor people and awards the rich, it will in effect create an America where only the Rich have access to anything. Why would you neglect roads, bridges and Airports? Forget the safety issue a country trying to rebuild an economy would make sure its transportation systems would be at their best. And what about the scientific advances. Oh ya Republicans are creationist. They don’t need science they just know.

  • i owe my soul to the company store……..bring out the gillotine.

  • milop15

    Do you really think Queen Nancy even knows what’s in the bill ?

    • ObozoMustGo

      Very good point milop15. Very good point. Only trouble is that we’re not actually certain that Piglosi even knows how to read…. just sayin

  • ObozoMustGo

    I’m not in favor of Ryan’s plan either. It doesnt do enough. Why not present a budget that spends what we take in? Why not a balanced budget? Doesnt that make sense to not spend more than you take in? We can fight over who gets what, but why go into more debt?

    And, ahhhh…. so many useful idiots, so little time….

    1) Only in leftist nutjob world does reductions of planned increases count as cuts.

    2) Nancy Piglosi, hero of the stupid, comes out with yet another piece of evidence of what a complete MORON she is. The only way an idiot like her gets reelected is because she’s from a district filled with freaks and idiots. Don’t believe me? Go walk around in her district ona Saturday. It’s like going to a carnival freak show.

    3) Joe Conason – you have lost any shred of credibility you may have had with a line like “… president of the nonpartisan progressive…” What planet are you on? There is NO SUCH THING as nonpartisan progressive! Do you have a clue what “progressive” means? It’s code for socialist, you dope! You know that, but you’re already so far to the left that any leftist kook out there looks centrist to you. So you try to give a socialist organization credibility by calling them “nonpartisan”… Yeah, rite. Sure, sure! Maybe they are “nonpartisan” in Cuba or North Korea, or former USSR, but not here, pal. Not here!

    4) How could they be ending Medicare as a safety net if they are expanding the options around which people can access it? Duhhhhh. Further, traditional Medicare is available for those who most need it! Isn’t that a leftist staple?

    5) Roads and bridges and education are nearly exclusively the responsibilty of the States and local governments.

    You leftist nutjobs have a lot to learn. Have a nice day!

  • montanabill

    Obviously Conason didn’t get the memo from the Democrats in the Senate opposed to removing tax incentives from the oil companies. Ryan’s plan doesn’t even scratch the surface of what has to be done to get this country’s finances back in order. I’ll support ‘taxing the rich’ when REAL CUTS of trillions of dollars are enacted. In the meantime, stop the phony crying about partially reducing the spending of planned increases. By the way, Robin Hood stole tax collections from the government to give to the poor. He didn’t steal from the rich. The Democrat plan for Medicare: divert money from the fund and let it run out of money so that everyone will lose all coverage, then point at the Republicans.

    • ObozoMustGo

      montanabill…. we all are getting tired of your common sense posts! Knock it off. Leftist nutjobs cant take it!

    • kma21

      montanabill – the “governmnet” that Robin Hood stole from was Prince John. The taxes went directly into his personal “rich” pocket. So, Robin Hood did steal from the rich to give to the poor!

    • montanabill

      Prince John was the government, not too different from the supreme leader of the czars today.

  • Unbelievable. Sounds like a “Hitler” plan. Eliminate the old, lower and middle class and have only a “rich, pure” society. Republicans are in bed with the big oil companies and are only for the rich. As Elsa posted…”B…S… beyond belief.” Makes me sick….

    • ObozoMustGo

      WOW! Not even half way down the page and already we have the “slavery” reference AND the “Hitler” reference. You leftist nutjobs are good! Keep following the same script. Nobody listens anymore, except your same circle of leftist nutjobs which is much less than 20% of America ouside of NYC, San Fran the other couple of leftist nutjob bastions.

      FOR THE RECORD: You lefties like socialism, or variations of socialism. You are drawn to big government, redistributionist socialist policies, no doubt. Admit it. OK! Now that you have wilfully admitted what you are, lets all take note that Hitler was the head of the NAZI party. What does NAZI stand for? Come on, you know it…. that’s right. NAZI stands for National SOCIALIST Party. Hmmmmmmmm….. Does anyone else get the irony here?

      Just telling the truth! Have a nice day!

      • Drew_a

        Warmonging strong arm policies seem more synominous with the GOP and NAZI party if you ask me. Plus isn’t that what Ryan is trying to do anyways redistribute more of the wealth to the rich. BOZO that thing I don’t get is how you can reason this out. Who’ve mentioned that the economy isn’t static and the rich grabbing a larger percentage of the income isn’t hurting the rest then the oppisite is true. The prices of goods and development of social services have no indication of the wealth of this country. Which is completely false

        • ObozoMustGo

          Drew, we have discussed the fact that the economy is NOT a fixed pie, but an ever growing pie. It’s why we’re not still in the 1700’s in living standards. It’s why what we call “poor people” in America today generally live better than wealthy people did 200 years ago. They have cars and cell phones and microwaves and air conditioning etc. etc. Those are luxuries in most other parts of the world, even still today. To say Ryan’s plan is to steal from the poor and give to the rich is nothing more than a leftist political cliche’ that has no basis in reality. If you are objective, you know I am right. If you’re not objective, you’re locked into a radical leftist world view. And usually that leftist world view begins with the belief that “it’s government’s money and they decide how much you keep”. Conservative viewpoint is that you have a God given right to the fruits of your own labor first.

          Your statement about warmongering may be true, but it applies to BOTH parties, Drew. Obozo has gotten us involved in conflicts that even GWB did not. And the whole NAZI thing… you guys gotta give that up. Truth is, NAZI stands for National SOCIALIST Party. And socialists in America overwhelmingly dominate and run the dumbocRATic party. Their NOT in the Republican party, that’s for sure. So if anyone is a NAZI, its you guys on the left. That is FACTUAL!

          The fact that you dont get how I reason this out is exactly why you have a leftist point of view so far. It’s no doubt been developed by a one-sided, leftist view presented by the educational system to you. You see, I get the leftist view point. I told you in another discussion that I used to think like that, as well. But as I grew up and realized that working for my own self interest was pretty much how everyone worked. It’s human nature and you cannot change human nature. You cant control what people think, therefore cant control how they view acting in their own interests. Then you learn that it’s actually the greatest expression of freedom to act in your own interests (legally) and that to get what you want, you must give others what they want (ie. work for them). This is Capitalism, and while maybe it’s not perfect, it the single greatest system ever known for improving the condition of mankind on planet Earth. Socialism is exactly the opposite.

          I would encourage you to read a book written by David Mamet called “Why I am no longer a brain dead liberal”. I think you will find it helpful. David Horowitz is also a former leftist radical of the 60’s who woke up. Read his book “Radical Son”. I also think I have previously recommended Thomas Sowell’s “Basic Economics” and “Economic Facts and Fallacies”. All of those will help you to understand our viewpoint on the right. The first two, from former leftists.

          Hope this helps. Have a nice weekend, Drew.

          • Drew_a

            Snapple fact-I do like Obama, or Pelosi! Pelosi makes my brain hurt when she talks, no one in politcs other than Palin had that level of idiocy. but there are Democrats that understand military intervention for the benefit of stealing resources for a few oil tycoons and not our government or people isn’t in our best interest. As for the spread of the $ around the country I understand, I do. In a post I gave a hypothetical that argued against and said it was false. But in certain context it isn’t false. Intangible’s CANNOT create wealth only redistribute it. Things like selling off debt, securities, or even investments in the stock or bond market in which a company has saturated the market. If you aren’t moving into a new market and increasing capital that capital is simply being redistributed without building the economy. THAT IS ALSO FACT! but they don’t teach that in school or the workforce. The desire for a few to grab more and more through deception leads to inefficiency and instability. If our pop keeps growing we need to grow not just exchange, otherwise the PERCENTAGE of our money will be deluded. I capped % for a very important reason, as you seem to like books I challenge you to reference maybe a second level micro and/or macro economics book in regards to supply and demand and/or inflationary rates. The housing market is a perfect example take all you can get, when it becomes outrageous the free market will fix it. But the severity of things like these get too large and can’t be fixed before huge problems (dotcoms). So the mission of any business is too make as much as possible, if that calls for poisoning lakes, outsourcing, or even sweat shops I am cool with that, honestly I am. It’s their only function, to make money. BUT though its the businesses job to make money, it’s the governments job to make sure it’s done in a way that is for the betterment of society. so EPA to kill the poisoning, anti-free trade policies to lower the CM of outsourcing or sweat shops. Now we need to increase capital gains to 90% or kill the stock market to correct that imbalance. BOZO what is your view of tax loopholes?

          • ObozoMustGo

            Drew, starting another thread… this one is getting shortened. Go to latest post.

    • rustacus21

      … the health care companies, among many other ‘conglomerates’, has the $$$ to make Americans think in whatever ways they want. Take the Conservatives posting here; they have no clue, thinking we’re still under ‘threat’ of ‘commies’, ‘marxists’ & the like. Unable to ‘SEE’, we’re on the front edge of a plutocratic takeover of the American government, they’re equally befuddled as to what to do – or even if its a ‘GOOD’ thing or not. But to B sure – ITS NOT A GOOD THING (if U cared enuff to look it up, conservatives & realize its a really REALLY bad thing 4 a Democracy!!!). But it’s simple: vote Liberal/Progressive & all the problems go away. We can even see if Prez Obama will bleach his skin, so his success will be more ‘acceptable’ to those w/an aversion to it…

  • geewilly

    Maybe it’s time for us to pull the plug on congressional pay and benefits. If we have nothing but millionaires writing all the legislation to help themselves, they DON’T need our tax dollars to enrich themselves. How come we NEVER hear about the need to curb the spending/expense of supporting retired and former politicians? They put their families on the payroll and we get to pay the freight. Time of Congressional Pension/Benefit reform. Anyone for a citizens petition?

  • montanabill

    Forget to mention, Prince John had his Sheriff of Nottingham. Obama has Holder. Pretty much on the same order of integrity.

    • ObozoMustGo

      Now y0u’ve gone too far, montanabill… You owe an apology to Prince John and Sheriff Nottingham!

  • ObozoMustGo

    THE TRUTH ABOUT SO-CALLED “SUBSIDIES” TO “BIG OIL”
    —————————————————————————–

    If anyone is getting a “subsidy” IT’S PRETROBRAS IN BRAZIL, you leftist nutjobs. I dont heare any of you whining and b – itching about Obozo giving BILLIONS to FOREIGN OIL COMPANIES!!!!!!

    Excerpted summary from Randal Hoven’s article on American Thinker site:
    ==== begin excerpt

    Just to re-cap a few pertinent features of these “subsidies” to oil companies that Obama wants to cut.

    •They are all tax “breaks,” or earnings that oil companies get to keep, not money paid out from the US Treasury.
    •The amount of earnings not collected in taxes is about $4.3 billion per year — about 0.2% of this year’s deficit and enough to fund about 10 hours of current US government spending.
    •A full $3.55 billion of that amount (82%) is due to the way taxes are treated for all industries or manufacturers. To change these tax laws only for oil companies would require singling them out among all industries for special mistreatment. (I’m not a lawyer, but that sounds like a bill of attainder to me, something our Constitution forbids.)
    •The only tax in which the oil industry seems to get special treatment compared to other industries is intangible drilling costs. The amount of that subsidy? That would be $0.78 billion per year — enough to fund less than two hours of federal spending in 2011, and not even half the amount we are lending a foreign-owned and state-owned oil company for drilling offshore Brazil.
    •Oil companies already pay tax rates of 40-50% of income. For one company, Exxon, in one quarter of one year, that amount was over $8 billion, or almost double the so-called tax “subsidy” for all oil companies for an entire year.

    If you think oil companies enjoy some special privilege because of the money they throw around Washington, DC, consider that the Oil & Gas industry ranked only 19th in the amount of money contributed to politicians in the 2008 election cycle: $17.7 million. Who was number one? Lawyers, who contributed $126.9 million, or over seven times as much as the Oil & Gas industry. The Education lobby gave $37.4 million, more than twice as much as Oil & Gas.

    You might not realize it, but private oil companies don’t own much oil. Most oil in the ground, in fact 87% of the world’s supply, is owned by state-owned companies, and most of that by OPEC countries and Russia. Exxon, for example, owns only 0.68% of worldwide oil reserves. Venezuela owns 7.34%, more than 10 times as much as Exxon. What Exxon does is explore, drill, transport, refine, and distribute. It makes its money by doing things, not by sitting on capital.

    According to the DOE’s Energy Information Administration, every time you fill up your gas tank, more of your money goes to taxes than goes to refining costs and profits combined.

    Having said all that, go ahead and get rid of that special treatment of intangible drilling costs. Make oil companies write them down over the life of their investments, not just one year. Increase corporate taxes in the US, where corporate tax rates are already highest in the world. Collect enough money to fund the federal government for two hours.

    ==== excerpt complete

    So next time you leftist nutjobs want to hop on the “anti-big oil bandwagon” just remember who made the gasoline that runs the bandwagon you’re riding in, you useful idiots!

    Have a nice day!

  • ObozoMustGo

    Drew… continuation of discussion…

    Did the micr and macro econ thing in college. In fact, my prof was on Kennedy’s economic advisory team.. Alan Mandelstam (spelling ???? 25 ys. ago). Great guy. Funny and entertaining in teaching what is mostly a boring subject in school.

    Dont assume that because I support free market capitalism that I dont acknowledge that there are some measure of regulation required. Of course there are. But you must also know that companies are not living buildings or things in and of themselves. They are only made up of people. People that are employees who must work and live where the company is. Those people have the same interests that you do, dont they? Why would they NOT value a clean environment and clean water? Of course they do. Notwithstanding there are corrupt people (in business AND government), most of us are decent and all share/have the same desires. Long ago, companies dumped their toxic stuff in rivers. But then we learned better. Certainly regulations help guide that, but there’s a point at which regulations become disincentives to start or run businesses. When the bureacrat begins to see his purpose of exacting a measure of “social engineering” toward goals that are NOT economically related, that’s when they have gone too far. I know a CTO of a MAJOR chemical company in the US who told me 5 years ago that his/her company WILL NOT build another plant in America for a very long time. It costs too much, it takes too long, and the legal risks are too great. They still have not done so. They have built many plants overseas, however. Think of how many thousands if not millions of jobs have gone for the same exact reasons from all American companies. It’s sad to consider.

    To your last question, I actually have a very libertarian view on taxes. One low rate, no loopholes. Same for all individuals. Companie’s little or no taxes. Same thing. One low rate, no loopholes. I want global business to see America as the panacea for starting operations here. Those operations hire employees who pay taxes. Demand for employees drives up wages and earnings. Tax revenues grow with a broad tax base.

    You must understand that “loopholes” and complicated tax rules are the very means by which Congress tries to control behavior. I dont think Congress has any say over my behavior through the tax code. And I dont like how they dole out favors to their political interests with loopholes. Fair is fair is fair. Everyone treated the same under the law.

    Have great weekend, Drew!

    • Drew_a

      Yup. Nothing to say to that. except all you need to do is manipulate foriegn trade to force companies to do business with America. Everything else is spot on =)

  • This is typical re:”public can” shit. If most Americans are STILL unaware of the true agenda of these criminals after this one, they have their heads so far up their asses there’s no hope for them…or for any of us. I am selling everything and moving out of the US if this, or anything similar passes both houses. If this bunch takes over the presidency as well as both houses of our government, it will be the end of America as anything but a 3rd-world nation, and I don’t want to be there.

  • Your so right Elsa, when are the ignorant going to wake up and die right? the republicans are going to screw you all the way to the bank. Unless your very rich you can not afford to vote for these lame asses.Not one thing they have done while in office to help the people of this country only take aways and lining their fricken pokets.

  • Taken to its end point, the Ryan plan takes the country back to the days of the robber barons. Scary, no?

  • rustacus21

    The mean-spiritedness is something that echo’s back from the confederates, the British Crown loyalists, who wanted to have none of this ‘Democracy’ nonsense!!! Conservatives HATE Democracy & Americans better understand this, as they drop money like rain, in efforts to control puppets like Ryan, Romney, the entire Conservative cave clan & influencing simple-minded Conservative voters!!! After suffering 8 years of Conservative rule, Conservative voters are showing (see ‘obozo’, etc 4 reference…) signs of PTSD, w/their inability to understand what happened (2001-2009) & now are simply ‘cracked out’ from the pressure & abuse!!! I was reading a headline from 2000 (june 15 NYT n.paper) showing how the Clinton admin had FINALLY gotten the N. Koreans to the peace table w/the South. How economic, business, family visit, even infrastructure projects were all in the works & even got them to dismantle nuke installations!!! 1 year later, disaster & chaos. Don’t tell me Liberal/Progressives don’t have better initiatives/policies/ambitions, benefitting ALL Americans!!! Even got room to help the world even!!!

  • I am never voting Republican again in my life. Neither is my mother, two brothers (who used to vote Republican), my sons and their wives. One son moved out of the country he was so fed up.
    Chris Kolozsvari