“If Mr. Paul wants to be taken seriously he needs to do more than pull political stunts that fire up impressionable libertarian kids in their college dorms.”
– Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., speaking on the Senate floor, quoting a Wall Street Journal editorial attacking Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky.
I supported Senator Barry Goldwater for President in 1964 as a classical liberal or libertarian, as did Ronald Reagan.
Today I support Senator Rand Paul for President in 2016.
Senators McCain and Graham remind me of Governor Nelson Rockefeller, another progressive Republican.
Mike Huckabee: Thank you, Rand Paul
Rand Paul Fires Back At Filibuster Critics, Shocks Glenn Beck With Revelation
Shep Smith Offends John McCain W Interventionist Comment Grills Him Over Rand Paul
SA@TAC – What’s a ‘Neoconservative?’
SA@TAC – Ronald Reagan: Isolationist
SA@TAC – John McCain Supports Al-Qaeda
John McCain ATTACKS Rand Paul’s Filibuster
Laura Ingraham: Neoconservative view has clearly hurt the GOP (Rand Paul interview 3/08/13)
STAND WITH RAND
Rand Paul: Time To Bring Troops Home, Cut Foreign Aid, And Fix Entitlements – CNN 3/11/2013
“I Don’t Think We Should Go To War On ONE Person’s Authority” Rand Paul
What is classical liberalism?
Background Articles and Videos
Mind blowing speech by Robert Welch in 1958 predicting Insiders plans to destroy America
Mr. Conservative: Barry Goldwater at the 1964 Republican National Convention
Sen. Rand Paul on America’s Newsroom w/ Megyn Kelly to discuss the Brennan Filibuster – 3/7/13
Rand Paul Fires Back At Filibuster Critics, Shocks Glenn Beck With Revelation
Michelle Malkin: Did Rand Paul’s Filibuster Refurbish The Republican Party’s Tarnished Brand? 3/7/13
Sen. Paul appears on CNN’s Newsroom with Dana Bash- 3/7/2013
#StandWithRand Rand Paul Filibuster Highlights
Rand Paul Interview: Rush Limbaugh (7 March 2013)
Drone Strikes: Where Are Obama’s Tears For Those Child Victims?
Yes, Lethal Drone Attacks on Americans Are Allowed, Says Atty General
“The Obama administration believes it could technically use military force to kill an American on U.S. soil in an “extraordinary circumstance” but has “no intention of doing so,” U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said in a letter disclosed Tuesday.”*
It’s starting to happen. Attorney General Eric Holder says lethal drone attacks without due process on Americans while on American soil, are hypothetically legal. A surprising Republican Senator is standing against it. Do Republicans and Democrats make exceptions for their own “teams?” Cenk Uygur breaks it down.
Sean Hannity & Krauthammer Talk Excitement in GOP Grassroots on Rand Paul Filibuster & Spending Cuts
Drone Strikes on American Citizens, on US Soil. Sen. Rand Paul Talks with Sean Hannity
Reality Check: Sen. Rand Paul’s Talking Filibuster of John Brennan
Rand Paul blasted Obama for using drone strikes against American citizens
Rand Paul “Senators McCain & Graham Voted FOR Indefinite Detention Of Americans!”
What’s ‘Cooler’ Than Being ‘Cool’? Rand Paul’s Filibuster, According To Fox News’ The Five
Importing the War on Terror: Glenn Greenwald & Activist Trevor Timm on Domestic Drone Surveillance
Obama’s Chilling Secrecy, From Denying Drone Program’s Existence to Stonewalling on Legal Memos
Former White House press secretary Robert Gibbs revealed over the weekend he was initially instructed to deny the existence of the Obama administration’s targeted killing program overseas. Even though the administration has since backed down from that stance, it continues to stonewall members of Congress on releasing the Justice Department memos explaining the program’s legal rationale. Unanswered questions around the program have held up the confirmation of CIA nominee John Brennan. “For a program that is so far reaching and that has so many consequences — not just in the word, but for the rule of law — the Obama administration has an obligation to be far more transparent than they’ve been so far,” says Jameel Jaffer, deputy legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union.
US drones killed almost five thousand people
Special court to approve of killing Americans with drones?
Obama’s Kill List, Drones, & Assassinating U.S. Citizens
Amazing – Obama Caught in Bald-Faced Lie on White House Sequester
Sequester- President Obama says $85B in spending cuts WILL kick in Friday
Judge Napolitano: Facts About Sequester Caught Up To Obama “His Scare Tactics Are Reprehensible”
Obama’s big lie and massive deficits: spending addiction disorder (SAD)
By Raymond Thomas Pronk
Crisis and fear mongering as well as blame shifting are again running rampant among the ruling political elites in Washington over out-of-control government spending and what to do about it.
President Barack Obama and progressive Congressional Democrats want to increase federal government spending by increasing taxes through closing so-called “tax loopholes” or more precisely eliminating existing tax deductions and credits in the Internal Revenue code.
House Speaker John Boehner and conservative Congressional Republicans want to decrease government spending and decrease tax rates by also eliminating “tax loopholes.” There is no middle ground to negotiate given the diametrically opposed positions of the political parties. This was not always the case.
Early in his first term Obama delivered a speech in the White House titled “A New Era of Responsibility,” captured on the YouTube video titled “Obama will cut deficit in half FEB 2009.” He said, “We cannot, and will not, sustain deficits like these without end. Contrary to the prevailing wisdom in Washington these past few years, we cannot simply spend as we please and defer the consequences to the next budget, the next administration, or the next generation.
“We are paying the price for these deficits right now. In 2008 alone, we paid $250 billion in interest on our debt — one in every 10 taxpayer dollars. That is more than three times what we spent on education that year; more than seven times what we spent on VA health care.
“So if we confront this crisis without also confronting the deficits that helped cause it, we risk sinking into another crisis down the road as our interest payments rise, our obligations come due, confidence in our economy erodes, and our children and our grandchildren are unable to pursue their dreams because they’re saddled with our debts.
“And that’s why today I’m pledging to cut the deficit we inherited in half by the end of my first term in office. This will not be easy. It will require us to make difficult decisions and face challenges we’ve long neglected. But I refuse to leave our children with a debt that they cannot repay — and that means taking responsibility right now, in this administration, for getting our spending under control.”
The last George W. Bush deficit for fiscal year 2008 was nearly $459 billion. If Obama was serious about meeting his pledge of cutting the deficit in half by the end of his first term, the deficit should have been less than $230 billion for fiscal year 2012. Obama did the exact opposite of what he promised the American people he would do in February 2009. Instead of cutting the deficit in half, he doubled the deficit to more than a trillion dollars for each fiscal year he has been in office as the table below clearly shows:
Summary of Spending Outlays, Tax Receipts, Deficits (-) or Surpluses, 2005-2013
(in millions of dollars)
Fiscal Year
Spending Outlays
Tax Receipts
-Deficit +Surplus
President (Party)
House Control
SenateControl
2005
2,471,957
2,153,611
-318,346
Bush (R)
Republicans
Democrats
2006
2,655,050
2,406,859
-248,181
Bush (R)
Republicans
Democrats
2007
2,728,686
2,567,985
-150,701
Bush (R)
Democrats
Democrats
2008
2,982,544
2,523,991
-458,553
Bush (R)
Democrats
Democrats
2009
3,517,677
2,104,989
-1,412,588
Obama (D)
Democrats
Democrats
2010
3,456,213
2,162,724
-1,293,489
Obama (D)
Democrats
Democrats
2011
3,603,061
2,303,466
-1,299,595
Obama (D)
Republicans
Democrats
2012
3,538,286
2,449,093
-1,089,193
Obama (D)
Republicans
Democrats
2013 est.
3,803,364
2,901,956
-901,408
Obama (D)
Republicans
Democrats
Source: The Budget for Fiscal Year 2013, Historical Tables, Table 1.1http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2013/assets/hist.pdf
These massive and unprecedented deficits required that the national debt be increased to pay for the government’s out-of-control spending and for Congress to increase the debt ceiling to $16.4 trillion. On Aug. 2, 2011 President Obama signed into law The Budget Control Act of 2011. This ended the so-called debt ceiling crisis by increasing the debt-level immediately by $400 billion and allowing Obama to ask for another increase of the ceiling by $500 billion with Congressional approval in the future. The law established the Congressional Joint Select Committee on Debt Reduction, better known as the “super committee,” with the task of reducing the deficit by $1.5 trillion by Dec. 23, 2011. The super committee failed to accomplish its assigned task.
This triggered the sequestration provisions in the law requiring across-the-board cuts in government spending of $1.2 trillion over 10 years with a corresponding increase in the debt-level by $1.2 trillion. Both Democrats and Republicans voted for the sequestration when they passed the law. However, the original idea for sequestration came from White House congressional relations chief Rob Nabors and Jack Lew, who was then budget director, whom with Obama’s approval presented the idea to Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, according to Bob Woodward as documented in his book “The Price of Politics.“
On Jan. 31, Congress suspended the borrowing limit or debt ceiling of $16.4 trillion for three months until May 19.
By March 1 Congress needed to cut $1.2 trillion from the growth in the Congressional Budget Office baseline for fiscal years 2013 through 2021 or the sequestration would be triggered. These automatic spending cuts had to come from both discretionary and mandatory spending.
Under the sequestration order for fiscal year 2013, signed by Obama on Mar. 1, there needs to be a $85.3 billion cut in growth in federal government budget authority of which $42.7 billion is defense, $28.7 billion non-defense discretionary, $9.9 billion Medicare and $4 billion other mandatory.
For fiscal year 2013 the total federal government spending outlays are estimated to be about $3.8 trillion with estimated total tax revenues of about $2.9 trillion resulting in a deficit of about $901 billion. The sequestration impact for fiscal year 2013 is an estimated $44 billion cut in spending outlays or about 1.4% of total federal government spending.
The crisis and fear mongering and blame shifting is never-ending as Congress must now agree to a fiscal year 2013 continuing resolution by March 31. Meanwhile the U.S. economy is on the verge of another recession with higher unemployment rates and many more millions of unemployed Americans.
The absence of leadership in Washington to budget to estimated tax receipts and by so doing live within the means of the American people is the core problem. The solution would require the repeal of Congress’s baseline budgeting process whereby current spending levels are used to determine future funding requirements by adding increased funding for population growth, inflation and other factors to the current level of spending. The congressional budget baseline process totally ignores estimated tax receipts or revenues as a budgetary constraint. The result is massive unsustainable deficits.
Obama’s new era of responsibility was pure propaganda prevarication. Obama’s age of fiscal insanity and spending addiction disorder continues to destroy jobs, wreck the economy and kill the American dream. Neither progressive Democrats nor Republicans have the will, courage, integrity, wisdom and vision to balance the federal budget. Truly unbelievable.
Includes legal tender notes, gold and silver certificates, etc.
The first fiscal year for the U.S. Government started Jan. 1, 1789. Congress changed the beginning of the fiscal year from Jan. 1 to Jul. 1 in 1842, and finally from Jul. 1 to Oct. 1 in 1977 where it remains today.
To find more historical information, visit The Public Debt Historical Information archives.
Balderdash! Sen. Rand Paul demolishes Obama’s sequester scare tactics
Hooray for SEQUESTRATION…
Illegal Immigrants Released from Detention Centers…
Bernanke Urges Sequestration Alternative
The Obama Sequester: He Was For It, Before He Was Against It
Obama Then and Now: I was for the sequester and now I am against it
Rand Paul: Obama Claiming To Have Cut Debt By $2 Trillion Is Absurd – 2/13/2013
Paul Ryan confronted on sequester
The Truth about Sequestration
Fiscal Cliff: 5 Facts about the Federal Budget (animated) (2012)
Sequestration 101
Sequestration and transfer authority
Rand Paul: Sequester Is A Pittance – 2/19/2013
Rand Paul to Obama on Sequester: Stand Up, Be a Leader and Just Do the Right Thing
Sen Paul Sequester Barely Cuts Any Icing From Cake
Greenspan: Odds of Sequestration Occurring Are Very High
Krauthammer: ‘Republicans Should Do Nothing’ On The Sequester
Next big challenge facing DC: The sequester
US military fighting against ‘sequester’ cuts
What is the March 1 sequester!…
Sessions Criticizes Composition Of Sequester, Says Surging Domestic Spending
Understanding the Sequester with David Sirota
Obama Senior Adviser: Haven’t Talked To Congressional Leaders About The Obama
Bob Woodward: Sequester was Obama’s Solution
Drama Obama Pleas For Delay To Sequestration Cuts
Jay Carney: Yes the Sequester Idea Was Put Forward by the President’s Team
Flashback: Obama promises veto stopgap alternative to sequester cuts
Bob Woodward on ‘The Price of Politics,’ Fiscal Fight
In summer 2011, a partisan Congress sparred with the White House on how to solve the U.S. debt crisis. Judy Woodruff talks to journalist Bob Woodward about his new book, “The Price of Politics,” about how Washington’s politicians couldn’t look past their own political aspirations in order to forge a deal.
Our Lying President – Debate lie on sequestration
White House Already Backpedaling On Obama Sequestration Comments
Bob Woodward talks about his new book ‘The Price of Politics’
Fox & Friends Rips Obama On Sequester: Is It ‘Blackmail’ To Get More Tax Hikes
CBO Director: “We haven’t seen a specific proposal” from Obama on replacing
OBAMA despises his OWN idea: the SEQUESTER
Obama:Congress Putting Thousands Of Jobs At Risk
Markets Will React Big When Reality Sets In
Peter Schiff: Obama recession will be worse than the Obama recovery
John Lennon – Give Peace or Sequester A Chance (Original Video Tape)
John Boehner: The President Is Raging Against a Budget Crisis He Created
Obama invented the ‘sequester’ in the summer of 2011 to avoid facing up to America’s spending problem.
A week from now, a dramatic new federal policy is set to go into effect that threatens U.S. national security, thousands of jobs and more. In a bit of irony, President Obama stood Tuesday with first responders who could lose their jobs if the policy goes into effect. Most Americans are just hearing about this Washington creation for the first time: the sequester. What they might not realize from Mr. Obama’s statements is that it is a product of the president’s own failed leadership.
The sequester is a wave of deep spending cuts scheduled to hit on March 1. Unless Congress acts, $85 billion in across-the-board cuts will occur this year, with another $1.1 trillion coming over the next decade. There is nothing wrong with cutting spending that much—we should be cutting even more—but the sequester is an ugly and dangerous way to do it.
By law, the sequester focuses on the narrow portion of the budget that funds the operating accounts for federal agencies and departments, including the Department of Defense. Exempt is most entitlement spending—the large portion of the budget that is driving the nation’s looming debt crisis. Should the sequester take effect, America’s military budget would be slashed nearly half a trillion dollars over the next 10 years. Border security, law enforcement, aviation safety and many other programs would all have diminished resources.
How did the country find itself in this mess?
During the summer of 2011, as Washington worked toward a plan to reduce the deficit to allow for an increase in the federal debt limit, President Obama and I very nearly came to a historic agreement. Unfortunately our deal fell apart at the last minute when the president demanded an extra $400 billion in new tax revenue—50% more than we had shaken hands on just days before.
It was a disappointing decision by the president, but with just days until a breach of the debt limit, a solution was still required—and fast. I immediately got together with Senate leaders Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell to forge a bipartisan congressional plan. It would be called the Budget Control Act.
The plan called for immediate caps on discretionary spending (to save $917 billion) and the creation of a special House-Senate “super committee” to find an additional $1.2 trillion in savings. The deal also included a simple but powerful mechanism to ensure that the committee met its deficit-reduction target: If it didn’t, the debt limit would not be increased again in a few months.
But President Obama was determined not to face another debt-limit increase before his re-election campaign. Having just blown up one deal, the president scuttled this bipartisan, bicameral agreement. His solution? A sequester.
With the debt limit set to be hit in a matter of hours, Republicans and Democrats in Congress reluctantly accepted the president’s demand for the sequester, and a revised version of the Budget Control Act was passed on a bipartisan basis.
Ultimately, the super committee failed to find an agreement, despite Republicans offering a balanced mix of spending cuts and new revenue through tax reform. As a result, the president’s sequester is now imminent.
Both parties today have a responsibility to find a bipartisan solution to the sequester. Turning it off and erasing its deficit reduction isn’t an option. What Congress should do is replace it with other spending cuts that put America on the path to a balanced budget in 10 years, without threatening national security.
Having first proposed and demanded the sequester, it would make sense that the president lead the effort to replace it. Unfortunately, he has put forth no detailed plan that can pass Congress, and the Senate—controlled by his Democratic allies—hasn’t even voted on a solution, let alone passed one. By contrast, House Republicans have twice passed plans to replace the sequester with common-sense cuts and reforms that protect national security.
The president has repeatedly called for even more tax revenue, but the American people don’t support trading spending cuts for higher taxes. They understand that the tax debate is now closed.
The president got his higher taxes—$600 billion from higher earners, with no spending cuts—at the end of 2012. He also got higher taxes via ObamaCare. Meanwhile, no one should be talking about raising taxes when the government is still paying people to play videogames, giving folks free cellphones, and buying $47,000 cigarette-smoking machines.
Washington must get serious about its spending problem. If it can’t reform America’s safety net and retirement-security programs, they will no longer be there for those who rely on them. Republicans’ willingness to do what is necessary to save these programs is well-known. But after four years, we haven’t seen the same type of courage from the president.
The president’s sequester is the wrong way to reduce the deficit, but it is here to stay until Washington Democrats get serious about cutting spending. The government simply cannot keep delaying the inevitable and spending money it doesn’t have.
So, as the president’s outrage about the sequester grows in coming days, Republicans have a simple response: Mr. President, we agree that your sequester is bad policy. What spending are you willing to cut to replace it?
— Mr. Boehner, a Republican congressman from Ohio, is speaker of the House.
A version of this article appeared February 20, 2013, on page A15 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: The President Is Raging Against a Budget Crisis He Created.
The 2013 United States federal budget is the budget to fund government operations for the fiscal year 2013, which is October 2012–September 2013. The original spending request was issued by President Barack Obama in February 2012.[1] The actual appropriations for fiscal year 2013 must be authorized by the full Congress before the budget can take effect, in accordance with the United States budget process.
The Budget Control Act of 2011 mandates caps on discretionary spending, which under current law will be lowered beginning in January 2013 to remove $1.2 trillion of spending over the following ten years. In addition, several temporary tax cuts are scheduled to expire at the beginning of the 2013 calendar year, including the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts on income, capital gains, and estate tax, which had been extended in a 2010 tax deal, as well as a payroll tax cut that began as a result of the 2010 deal and had been most recently extended in an early 2012 tax deal. The combination of sudden spending cuts and tax increases has led to concerns about significant negative effects on the economy in the wake of the weak recovery from the late 2000s recession.
History
Budget Control Act and the Deficit Reduction Committee
The Budget Control Act of 2011 was passed in August 2011 as a resolution to the debt-ceiling crisis. The fiscal year (FY) 2013 budget is the first to be affected by the second of two rounds of budget cuts specified in the act. (The first round of cuts has already been applied to the ten years beginning in FY2012.) For this second round of cuts, the Budget Control Act had formed the United States Congress Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction, sometimes referred to as the “supercommittee”, to identify at least $1.2 trillion in cuts over the ten years beginning with FY2013, and specified automatic across-the-board cuts of the same amount, equally split between security and non-security programs, if no such budget reduction legislation was passed by Congress.[4]
On November 21, 2011, the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction announced that it did not reach a deal on the budget-cutting legislation, raising the possibility that the automatic cuts would be activated if the full Congress could not enact its own deficit reduction legislation by December 23, 2011. The supercommittee’s lack of an agreement was attributed to the refusal of Republicans to consider any tax increases, combined with Democratic insistence on including these revenue increases such as the expiration of the Bush tax cuts, which under current law expire at the end of 2012.[5]
Initial proposals
President Obama’s February 2012 budget message to Congress addressed themes of economic crisis and response, an updated defense strategy, taxation fairness, income equality, fiscal responsibility, and investments in education and research to help the U.S. compete economically. He wrote: “The way to rebuild our economy and strengthen the middle class is to make sure that everyone in America gets a fair shot at success. Instead of lowering our standards and our sights, we need to win a race to the top for good jobs that pay well and offer security for the middle class. To succeed and thrive in the global, high-tech economy, we need America to be a place with the highest-skilled, highest-educated workers; the most advanced transportation and communication networks; and the strongest commitment to research and technology in the world. This Budget makes investments that can help America win this race, create good jobs, and lead in the world economy.”[6]
Key elements of the President’s budget for fiscal year (FY) 2013 included expiration of a variety of tax cuts for couples earning over $250,000 ($200,000 if single), short-term stimulus measures to support job growth, and targeted tax cuts for families and businesses. The budget included 2013 revenues of $2.9 trillion or 17.8% GDP (up from $2.5 trillion or 15.8% GDP in 2012) and spending of $3.8 trillion or 23.3% GDP (similar to the prior year in dollar terms but below the 24.3% GDP in 2012). The projected 2013 deficit was $900 billion (5.5% GDP), down from the 2012 deficit of $1.3 trillion (8.5% GDP).[7]
Over the 2013-2022 period, the budget essentially freezes defense and non-defense discretionary spending in dollar terms, such that these categories shrink relative to a growing economy, from 8.7% GDP to 5.9% GDP. Mandatory spending (e.g., Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and other safety net programs) remain around 14% GDP. Net interest rises from 1.5% GDP to 3.3% GDP. Revenues rise steadily during the period from 17.8% GDP to 20.1% GDP, averaging 19.2% GDP.[8] Debt held by the public rises from $12.6 trillion to $18.7 trillion, but remains flat around 77% GDP during the period.[9]
On May 16, 2012, the United States Senate voted on a 52-page Republican budget amendment billed as a summary of the nearly 2,000 pages in the Obama administration’s 2013 budget proposal. The amendment was defeated by a unanimous 99–0 vote, which paralleled the House of Representatives having voted a similar rejection in March by a count of 414–0. Those defeats of the Republicans’ amendments marked the second year in a row such summary bills met unanimous opposition.[10] In explaining their votes against, Congressional Democrats disputed whether the Republican summary accurately represented the Obama budget proposal; by contrast, Congressional Republicans claimed that their amendment included ample data taken directly from said budget.[11]
Legislation begins to be passed
On July 31, 2012, a tentative deal was announced to fund the government from October 2012 through March 2013 through a continuing resolution, with spending rates slightly higher than the FY2012 levels. The deal was reached because Republicans were eager to avoid a prolonged dispute that could threaten a government shutdown just before the upcoming 2012 general elections.[12] The bill, the Continuing Appropriations Resolution, 2013, was passed in the House 329–91,[13] passed in the Senate 62–30,[14] and signed by President Obama on September 28, 2012.[15]
On August 1, 2012, the House and Senate passed competing bills on the extension of the Bush tax cuts. The House bill would extend all the tax cuts for one year, while the Senate version would allow taxes to rise on incomes over $250,000. The passage of the bills was reported as being intended as political cover; progress on tax legislation was not expected until after the November elections.[16]
In late December, the Republican House leadership proposed legislation that would allow tax cuts to rise relative to 2012 levels only for annual income over $1,000,000. The proposal was known as “Plan B”, and was intended to force the Senate and the Obama administration to pass it and delay further negotiations until the following month, when Republicans were expected to use the reaching of the federal debt limit as leverage. However, the House vote on the plan was abruptly cancelled on December 20, 2012 after it became clear that the bill did not have enough support to pass, due to conservative members of the House who would not support any legislation that would raise taxes without also cutting spending.[17]
On December 28, 2012, the Senate passed the Disaster Relief Appropriations Act, 2013 to provide for $60.4 billion in additional spending to cover recovery costs from Hurricane Sandy, which had hit the northeastern United States in late October. The bill passed the Senate 62–32, but faced uncertain prospects in the House.[18]
At around 2 a.m. on January 1, 2013, the Senate passed a compromise bill, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, by a margin of 89–8. The bill would delay the budget sequestration by two months, and bill includes $600 billion over ten years in new tax revenue relative to extending 2012 levels, which is about one-fifth of the revenue that would have been raised had no legislation been passed. The revenue would come from increased marginal income and capital gains tax rates relative to their 2012 levels for annual income over $400,000 for individuals and $450,000 for couples; a phase-out of certain tax deductions and credits for those with incomes over $250,000 for individuals and $300,000 for couples, an increase in estate taxes relative to 2012 levels on estates over $5 million, and expiration of the two-year-old cut to payroll taxes, which is applied to income under the Social Security Wage Base, which was $110,100 in 2012. All these changes would all be made permanent.[19][20] House Speaker John Boehner promised a prompt vote on the Senate bill, but the prospect of the House passing an amended bill raised the prospect that legislation might not be enacted by the end of the 112th Congress at noon on January 3.[21]
Analysis
Implications of the Budget Control Act
Main articles: Budget Control Act of 2011 and United States fiscal cliff
The automatic cuts of $1.2 trillion resulting from the absence of a deal from the supercommittee over ten years would be split equally between security and non-security programs, and include $500 billion in cuts to the Department of Defense. The FY2013 defense budget would be reduced 11%, from $525 billion to $472 billion, after already having been cut from $571 billion in the first installment of cuts in the Budget Control Act. Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta initially gave the total cut figure as 23%.[22] The planned cuts include reductions in troop levels, a modest limit in pay raises for soldiers starting in 2015, an increase in health fees for veterans, delays in the construction of new naval ships and in the purchasing of new fighter aircraft such as the F-35, and the possibility of a round of base closings within the United States, but cuts to special operations, cyberwarfare, and intelligence programs were avoided.[23] Initial reports had also suggested that the number of carrier battle groups might be reduced from 11 to 10,[22] although it was later determined that the number of aircraft carriers would not in fact be cut.[24] Some Republicans in Congress advocated reversing the cuts to the military, citing the effect on national security, and Secretary Panetta has opposed the cuts, calling them “devastating” and raising “substantial risk of not being able to meet our defense needs.” President Obama has promised to veto any legislation seeking to avoid the cuts, and House Speaker John Boehner also indicated his commitment to following the cuts in the Budget Control Act.[5][25] According to the Center for American Progress, several Presidents have significantly reduced defense spending after wars, without compromising national security. Defense spending in 2011 remained high by historical standards, adjusted for inflation.[26]
The Budget Control Act also specifies automatic cuts of 7.8% to domestic programs and 2% to Medicare, while Medicaid and Social Security will be unaffected. These entitlement programs were protected from cuts in return for the absence of new revenues in the Budget Control Act.[27]
The automatic cuts to domestic programs would include cuts of up to 11% to science research and development agencies such as the National Institutes of Health, NASA, and the U. S. National Laboratories run by the Department of Energy. It is anticipated that this could cause federal grant acceptance levels to fall into the single digits, a consequence which has been called catastrophic for academic institutions by Michael Lubell of the American Physical Society. The cuts could also endanger politically controversial research such as climate change research programs in NASA and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.[28] Due to the role of scientific research in economic growth and job creation, and given international competition in this field, the cuts have been opposed by professional and academic organizations, and federal support of research and development has been called “an area of U.S. investment too critical to be cut” by the American Association for the Advancement of Science.[29][30]
Ten-year projections
Annual rates of increase in major revenue categories budgeted for the 2012-2022 period were:
Individual income taxes: 8.4%
Corporation income taxes: 8.2%
Social insurance (mainly payroll) taxes: 6.6%
Total tax revenues: 7.6%
Annual rates of increase in major spending categories budgeted for the 2012-2022 period were:
Defense: 1.8%
Non-defense discretionary: 1.6%
Social Security: 5.8%
Medicare: 6.6%
Medicaid: 8.5%
Net interest: 14.2%
Total spending: 5.0%[31]
Changes in revenues primarily represent a return to the long-run average. Tax revenues historically have averaged around 18% GDP. The subprime mortgage crisis resulted in significant declines in revenues due to high unemployment and reduced economic activity, with revenue falling to a record low 15% GDP. President Obama’s budget preserves the Bush income tax cuts for couples earning below $250,000, while eliminating some tax exemptions and deductions (tax expenditures).[32]
Defense and non-defense discretionary expenses are essentially frozen in real dollar terms for the 2013-2022 period, growing at or below the rate of inflation. Department of Defense spending rose at an annual rate of 8% between 2000 and 2011; this amount includes both the baseline and war spending. Non-defense discretionary spending rose at an annual rate of 6.6% between 2000 and 2011. Mandatory spending is mainly driven by demographic changes (i.e., an aging population, with fewer workers per retiree), healthcare cost increases per capita, and Social Security cost of living adjustments. Interest costs represent a return to more typical interest rates as the economy recovers along with the growing public debt.[32]
Total revenues and spending
The Obama administration’s February 2012 budget request contained $2.902 trillion in receipts and $3.803 trillion in outlays, for a deficit of $901 billion.[33] The budget projects a reduction in the deficit to $575 billion by 2018 before rising to $704 billion by 2022.[34]
Total receipts (in billions of dollars)::
Item
Requested[33]
Individual income tax
1,359
Corporate income tax
348
Social Security and other payroll tax
959
Excise tax
88
Customs duties
33
Estate and gift taxes
13
Deposits of earnings and Federal Reserve System
80
Other miscellaneous receipts
21
Total
2902
Total outlays by agency (in billions of dollars):
Agency
Discretionary
Mandatory
Total
Department of Defense including Overseas Contingency Operations
666.2
6.7
672.9
Department of Health and Human Services including Medicare and Medicaid
80.6
860.3
940.9
Department of Education
67.7
4.2
71.9
Department of Veterans Affairs
60.4
79.4
139.7
Department of Housing and Urban Development
41.1
5.2
46.3
Department of State and Other International Programs
56.1
3.4
59.5
Department of Homeland Security
54.9
0.5
55.4
Department of Energy
35.6
–0.6
35.0
Department of Justice
23.9
12.7
36.5
Department of Agriculture
26.8
127.7
154.5
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
17.8
–0.02
17.8
National Intelligence Program
52.6
0
52.6
Department of Transportation
24.0
74.5
98.5
Department of the Treasury
14.1
96.2
110.3
Department of the Interior
12.3
1.2
13.5
Department of Labor
13.2
88.4
101.7
Social Security Administration
11.7
871.0
882.7
Department of Commerce
9.5
–0.5
9.0
Army Corps of Engineers Civil Works
8.2
–0.007
8.2
Environmental Protection Agency
9.2
–0.2
8.9
National Science Foundation
7.4
0.2
7.5
Small Business Administration
1.4
–0.006
1.4
Corporation for National and Community Service
1.1
0.007
1.1
Net interest
246
0
246
Disaster costs
2
0
2
Other spending
34.0-
61.7
29.5
Total
1,510
2,293
3,803
References
^ Riley, Charles (February 13, 2012). “Obama unveils $3.8 trillion budget”. CNNMoney. Retrieved February 13, 2012.
^ Hensarling, Jeb (November 22, 2011). “Why the Super Committee Failed”. The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved December 9, 2011.
^ Murray, Patty. “Deficit-reduction chair says she’s not done working for compromise”. Retrieved December 14, 2011.
^ Lisa Mascaro; Kathleen Hennessey (July 31, 2011). “U.S. leaders strike debt deal to avoid default”. Los Angeles Times.
^ ab Steinhauer, Jennifer; Cooper, Helene; and Pear, Robert (22 November 2011). “Panel Fails to Reach Deal on Plan for Deficit Reduction”. The New York Times: p. A18. Retrieved 7 December 2011.
^ President Obama-The Budget Message of the President-February 2012
^ OMB-President Obama’s 2013 Budget-Summary Tables S5 and S6
^ Steinhauer, Jennifer (1 August 2012). “Leaders Reach Tentative Deal on Spending to Avoid Fight Before Election Day”. The New York Times: p. A11. Retrieved 1 August 2012.
^ Weisman, Jonathan (14 September 2012). “House Republicans Welcome Back Ryan, and His Vote, on a Spending Measure”. The New York Times: p. A13. Retrieved 21 September 2012.
^ “U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 112th Congress – 2nd Session: On the Joint Resolution (H.J.Res. 117)”. United States Senate. Retrieved 1 October 2012.
^ “Status of Appropriations Legislation for Fiscal Year 2013″. Library of Congress. Retrieved 1 October 2012.
^ Weisman, Jonathan (2 August 2012). “House Approves One-Year Extension of the Bush-Era Tax Cuts”. The New York Times: p. A12. Retrieved 21 September 2012.
^ Weisman, Jonathat (21 December 2012). “Boehner Cancels Tax Vote in Face of G.O.P. Revolt”. The New York Times: p. A1. Retrieved 1 January 2013.
^ Hernandez, Raymond (29 December 2012). “Senate Passes $60.4 Billion for Storm Aid; Bill’s Fate in House Is Unclear”. The New York Times: p. A15. Retrieved 1 January 2013.
^ Weisman, Jonathan (1 January 2013). “Senate Passes Legislation to Allow Taxes on Affluent to Rise”. The New York Times. Retrieved 1 January 2013.
^ Hook, Janet; Hughes, Siobhan (1 January 2013). “Fiscal-Cliff Focus Moves to House”. The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved 1 January 2013.
^ Steinhauer, Jennifer; Weisman, Jonathan (1 January 2013). “G.O.P. Anger Over Tax Deal Endangers Final Passage”. The New York Times. Retrieved 1 January 2013.
^ ab Bumiller, Elisabeth (23 November 2011). “Despite Threat of Cuts, Pentagon Officials Made No Contingency Plans”. The New York Times: p. A20. Retrieved 7 December 2011.
^ Bumiller, Elisabeth; Shanker, Thom (27 January 2012). “Defense Budget Cuts Would Limit Raises and Close Bases”. The New York Times: p. A12. Retrieved 3 February 2012.
^ Stewart, Phil (21 January 2012). “U.S. won’t cut carrier fleet to fix budget, Panetta says”. Reuters. Retrieved 3 February 2012.
^ Steinhauer, Jennifer (23 November 2011). “Automatic Military Cuts May Stand in Congress”. The New York Times: p. A20. Retrieved 7 December 2011.
^ Center on American Progress-A Historical Perspective on Defense Spending-July 2011
^ Bendavid, Naftali (21 November 2011). “Congress’s Deficit ‘Bomb’: Scary or Not?”. Washington Wire. The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved 7 December 2011.
^ Hand, E. (2011). “Debt deal sets day of reckoning”. Nature476 (7359): 133–134. doi:10.1038/476133a. PMID 21833060. edit
^ Ham, Becky (25 November 2011). “Science, Engineering Groups Urge Lawmakers to Protect R&D”. Science334 (6059): 1079. doi:10.1126/science.334.6059.1079.
^ “Open Letter to the United States Congress Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction”. Stand With Science. Retrieved 7 December 2011.
^ OMB-President Obama’s 2013 Budget-Summary Table S4 and S5
^ ab CBO-Long Term Economic Outlook-January 2012
^ ab “Fiscal Year 2013 Budget of the U.S. Government”. United States Office of Management and Budget. Retrieved 13 February 2012.
^ Weisman, Jonathan (2012-02-10). “Obama Budget Bets Other Concerns Will Trump the Deficit”. New York Times. Retrieved 2012-04-22.
Rand Paul Gives The Tea Party Response To The President’s State of the Union Address
Marco Rubio – 2013 State of the Union – GOP Response w/ Water Break (12:01) (English)
Transcript: Obama’s State Of The Union Address As Prepared For Delivery
Mr. Speaker, Mr. Vice President, Members of Congress, fellow citizens:
Fifty-one years ago, John F. Kennedy declared to this Chamber that “the Constitution makes us not rivals for power but partners for progress…It is my task,” he said, “to report the State of the Union – to improve it is the task of us all.”
Tonight, thanks to the grit and determination of the American people, there is much progress to report. After a decade of grinding war, our brave men and women in uniform are coming home. After years of grueling recession, our businesses have created over six million new jobs. We buy more American cars than we have in five years, and less foreign oil than we have in twenty. Our housing market is healing, our stock market is rebounding, and consumers, patients, and homeowners enjoy stronger protections than ever before.
Together, we have cleared away the rubble of crisis, and can say with renewed confidence that the state of our union is stronger.
But we gather here knowing that there are millions of Americans whose hard work and dedication have not yet been rewarded. Our economy is adding jobs – but too many people still can’t find full-time employment. Corporate profits have rocketed to all-time highs – but for more than a decade, wages and incomes have barely budged.
It is our generation’s task, then, to reignite the true engine of America’s economic growth – a rising, thriving middle class.
It is our unfinished task to restore the basic bargain that built this country – the idea that if you work hard and meet your responsibilities, you can get ahead, no matter where you come from, what you look like, or who you love.
It is our unfinished task to make sure that this government works on behalf of the many, and not just the few; that it encourages free enterprise, rewards individual initiative, and opens the doors of opportunity to every child across this great nation.
The American people don’t expect government to solve every problem. They don’t expect those of us in this chamber to agree on every issue. But they do expect us to put the nation’s interests before party. They do expect us to forge reasonable compromise where we can. For they know that America moves forward only when we do so together; and that the responsibility of improving this union remains the task of us all.
Our work must begin by making some basic decisions about our budget – decisions that will have a huge impact on the strength of our recovery.
Over the last few years, both parties have worked together to reduce the deficit by more than $2.5 trillion – mostly through spending cuts, but also by raising tax rates on the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans. As a result, we are more than halfway towards the goal of $4 trillion in deficit reduction that economists say we need to stabilize our finances.
Now we need to finish the job. And the question is, how?
In 2011, Congress passed a law saying that if both parties couldn’t agree on a plan to reach our deficit goal, about a trillion dollars’ worth of budget cuts would automatically go into effect this year. These sudden, harsh, arbitrary cuts would jeopardize our military readiness. They’d devastate priorities like education, energy, and medical research. They would certainly slow our recovery, and cost us hundreds of thousands of jobs. That’s why Democrats, Republicans, business leaders, and economists have already said that these cuts, known here in Washington as “the sequester,” are a really bad idea.
Now, some in this Congress have proposed preventing only the defense cuts by making even bigger cuts to things like education and job training; Medicare and Social Security benefits.
That idea is even worse. Yes, the biggest driver of our long-term debt is the rising cost of health care for an aging population. And those of us who care deeply about programs like Medicare must embrace the need for modest reforms – otherwise, our retirement programs will crowd out the investments we need for our children, and jeopardize the promise of a secure retirement for future generations.
But we can’t ask senior citizens and working families to shoulder the entire burden of deficit reduction while asking nothing more from the wealthiest and most powerful. We won’t grow the middle class simply by shifting the cost of health care or college onto families that are already struggling, or by forcing communities to lay off more teachers, cops, and firefighters. Most Americans – Democrats, Republicans, and Independents – understand that we can’t just cut our way to prosperity. They know that broad-based economic growth requires a balanced approach to deficit reduction, with spending cuts and revenue, and with everybody doing their fair share. And that’s the approach I offer tonight.
On Medicare, I’m prepared to enact reforms that will achieve the same amount of health care savings by the beginning of the next decade as the reforms proposed by the bipartisan Simpson-Bowles commission. Already, the Affordable Care Act is helping to slow the growth of health care costs. The reforms I’m proposing go even further. We’ll reduce taxpayer subsidies to prescription drug companies and ask more from the wealthiest seniors. We’ll bring down costs by changing the way our government pays for Medicare, because our medical bills shouldn’t be based on the number of tests ordered or days spent in the hospital – they should be based on the quality of care that our seniors receive. And I am open to additional reforms from both parties, so long as they don’t violate the guarantee of a secure retirement. Our government shouldn’t make promises we cannot keep – but we must keep the promises we’ve already made.
To hit the rest of our deficit reduction target, we should do what leaders in both parties have already suggested, and save hundreds of billions of dollars by getting rid of tax loopholes and deductions for the well-off and well-connected. After all, why would we choose to make deeper cuts to education and Medicare just to protect special interest tax breaks? How is that fair? How does that promote growth?
Now is our best chance for bipartisan, comprehensive tax reform that encourages job creation and helps bring down the deficit. The American people deserve a tax code that helps small businesses spend less time filling out complicated forms, and more time expanding and hiring; a tax code that ensures billionaires with high-powered accountants can’t pay a lower rate than their hard-working secretaries; a tax code that lowers incentives to move jobs overseas, and lowers tax rates for businesses and manufacturers that create jobs right here in America. That’s what tax reform can deliver. That’s what we can do together.
I realize that tax reform and entitlement reform won’t be easy. The politics will be hard for both sides. None of us will get 100 percent of what we want. But the alternative will cost us jobs, hurt our economy, and visit hardship on millions of hardworking Americans. So let’s set party interests aside, and work to pass a budget that replaces reckless cuts with smart savings and wise investments in our future. And let’s do it without the brinksmanship that stresses consumers and scares off investors. The greatest nation on Earth cannot keep conducting its business by drifting from one manufactured crisis to the next. Let’s agree, right here, right now, to keep the people’s government open, pay our bills on time, and always uphold the full faith and credit of the United States of America. The American people have worked too hard, for too long, rebuilding from one crisis to see their elected officials cause another.
Now, most of us agree that a plan to reduce the deficit must be part of our agenda. But let’s be clear: deficit reduction alone is not an economic plan. A growing economy that creates good, middle-class jobs – that must be the North Star that guides our efforts. Every day, we should ask ourselves three questions as a nation: How do we attract more jobs to our shores? How do we equip our people with the skills needed to do those jobs? And how do we make sure that hard work leads to a decent living?
A year and a half ago, I put forward an American Jobs Act that independent economists said would create more than one million new jobs. I thank the last Congress for passing some of that agenda, and I urge this Congress to pass the rest. Tonight, I’ll lay out additional proposals that are fully paid for and fully consistent with the budget framework both parties agreed to just 18 months ago. Let me repeat – nothing I’m proposing tonight should increase our deficit by a single dime. It’s not a bigger government we need, but a smarter government that sets priorities and invests in broad-based growth.
Our first priority is making America a magnet for new jobs and manufacturing.
After shedding jobs for more than 10 years, our manufacturers have added about 500,000 jobs over the past three. Caterpillar is bringing jobs back from Japan. Ford is bringing jobs back from Mexico. After locating plants in other countries like China, Intel is opening its most advanced plant right here at home. And this year, Apple will start making Macs in America again.
There are things we can do, right now, to accelerate this trend. Last year, we created our first manufacturing innovation institute in Youngstown, Ohio. A once-shuttered warehouse is now a state-of-the art lab where new workers are mastering the 3D printing that has the potential to revolutionize the way we make almost everything. There’s no reason this can’t happen in other towns. So tonight, I’m announcing the launch of three more of these manufacturing hubs, where businesses will partner with the Departments of Defense and Energy to turn regions left behind by globalization into global centers of high-tech jobs. And I ask this Congress to help create a network of fifteen of these hubs and guarantee that the next revolution in manufacturing is Made in America.
If we want to make the best products, we also have to invest in the best ideas. Every dollar we invested to map the human genome returned $140 to our economy. Today, our scientists are mapping the human brain to unlock the answers to Alzheimer’s; developing drugs to regenerate damaged organs; devising new material to make batteries ten times more powerful. Now is not the time to gut these job-creating investments in science and innovation. Now is the time to reach a level of research and development not seen since the height of the Space Race. And today, no area holds more promise than our investments in American energy.
After years of talking about it, we are finally poised to control our own energy future. We produce more oil at home than we have in 15 years. We have doubled the distance our cars will go on a gallon of gas, and the amount of renewable energy we generate from sources like wind and solar – with tens of thousands of good, American jobs to show for it. We produce more natural gas than ever before – and nearly everyone’s energy bill is lower because of it. And over the last four years, our emissions of the dangerous carbon pollution that threatens our planet have actually fallen.
But for the sake of our children and our future, we must do more to combat climate change. Yes, it’s true that no single event makes a trend. But the fact is, the 12 hottest years on record have all come in the last 15. Heat waves, droughts, wildfires, and floods – all are now more frequent and intense. We can choose to believe that Superstorm Sandy, and the most severe drought in decades, and the worst wildfires some states have ever seen were all just a freak coincidence. Or we can choose to believe in the overwhelming judgment of science – and act before it’s too late.
The good news is, we can make meaningful progress on this issue while driving strong economic growth. I urge this Congress to pursue a bipartisan, market-based solution to climate change, like the one John McCain and Joe Lieberman worked on together a few years ago. But if Congress won’t act soon to protect future generations, I will. I will direct my Cabinet to come up with executive actions we can take, now and in the future, to reduce pollution, prepare our communities for the consequences of climate change, and speed the transition to more sustainable sources of energy.
Four years ago, other countries dominated the clean energy market and the jobs that came with it. We’ve begun to change that. Last year, wind energy added nearly half of all new power capacity in America. So let’s generate even more. Solar energy gets cheaper by the year – so let’s drive costs down even further. As long as countries like China keep going all-in on clean energy, so must we.
In the meantime, the natural gas boom has led to cleaner power and greater energy independence. That’s why my Administration will keep cutting red tape and speeding up new oil and gas permits. But I also want to work with this Congress to encourage the research and technology that helps natural gas burn even cleaner and protects our air and water.
Indeed, much of our new-found energy is drawn from lands and waters that we, the public, own together. So tonight, I propose we use some of our oil and gas revenues to fund an Energy Security Trust that will drive new research and technology to shift our cars and trucks off oil for good. If a non-partisan coalition of CEOs and retired generals and admirals can get behind this idea, then so can we. Let’s take their advice and free our families and businesses from the painful spikes in gas prices we’ve put up with for far too long. I’m also issuing a new goal for America: let’s cut in half the energy wasted by our homes and businesses over the next twenty years. The states with the best ideas to create jobs and lower energy bills by constructing more efficient buildings will receive federal support to help make it happen.
America’s energy sector is just one part of an aging infrastructure badly in need of repair. Ask any CEO where they’d rather locate and hire: a country with deteriorating roads and bridges, or one with high-speed rail and internet; high-tech schools and self-healing power grids. The CEO of Siemens America – a company that brought hundreds of new jobs to North Carolina – has said that if we upgrade our infrastructure, they’ll bring even more jobs. And I know that you want these job-creating projects in your districts. I’ve seen you all at the ribbon-cuttings.
Tonight, I propose a “Fix-It-First” program to put people to work as soon as possible on our most urgent repairs, like the nearly 70,000 structurally deficient bridges across the country. And to make sure taxpayers don’t shoulder the whole burden, I’m also proposing a Partnership to Rebuild America that attracts private capital to upgrade what our businesses need most: modern ports to move our goods; modern pipelines to withstand a storm; modern schools worthy of our children. Let’s prove that there is no better place to do business than the United States of America. And let’s start right away.
Part of our rebuilding effort must also involve our housing sector. Today, our housing market is finally healing from the collapse of 2007. Home prices are rising at the fastest pace in six years, home purchases are up nearly 50 percent, and construction is expanding again.
But even with mortgage rates near a 50-year low, too many families with solid credit who want to buy a home are being rejected. Too many families who have never missed a payment and want to refinance are being told no. That’s holding our entire economy back, and we need to fix it. Right now, there’s a bill in this Congress that would give every responsible homeowner in America the chance to save $3,000 a year by refinancing at today’s rates. Democrats and Republicans have supported it before. What are we waiting for? Take a vote, and send me that bill. Right now, overlapping regulations keep responsible young families from buying their first home. What’s holding us back? Let’s streamline the process, and help our economy grow.
These initiatives in manufacturing, energy, infrastructure, and housing will help entrepreneurs and small business owners expand and create new jobs. But none of it will matter unless we also equip our citizens with the skills and training to fill those jobs. And that has to start at the earliest possible age.
Study after study shows that the sooner a child begins learning, the better he or she does down the road. But today, fewer than 3 in 10 four year-olds are enrolled in a high-quality preschool program. Most middle-class parents can’t afford a few hundred bucks a week for private preschool. And for poor kids who need help the most, this lack of access to preschool education can shadow them for the rest of their lives.
Tonight, I propose working with states to make high-quality preschool available to every child in America. Every dollar we invest in high-quality early education can save more than seven dollars later on – by boosting graduation rates, reducing teen pregnancy, even reducing violent crime. In states that make it a priority to educate our youngest children, like Georgia or Oklahoma, studies show students grow up more likely to read and do math at grade level, graduate high school, hold a job, and form more stable families of their own. So let’s do what works, and make sure none of our children start the race of life already behind. Let’s give our kids that chance.
Let’s also make sure that a high school diploma puts our kids on a path to a good job. Right now, countries like Germany focus on graduating their high school students with the equivalent of a technical degree from one of our community colleges, so that they’re ready for a job. At schools like P-Tech in Brooklyn, a collaboration between New York Public Schools, the City University of New York, and IBM, students will graduate with a high school diploma and an associate degree in computers or engineering.
We need to give every American student opportunities like this. Four years ago, we started Race to the Top – a competition that convinced almost every state to develop smarter curricula and higher standards, for about 1 percent of what we spend on education each year. Tonight, I’m announcing a new challenge to redesign America’s high schools so they better equip graduates for the demands of a high-tech economy. We’ll reward schools that develop new partnerships with colleges and employers, and create classes that focus on science, technology, engineering, and math – the skills today’s employers are looking for to fill jobs right now and in the future.
Now, even with better high schools, most young people will need some higher education. It’s a simple fact: the more education you have, the more likely you are to have a job and work your way into the middle class. But today, skyrocketing costs price way too many young people out of a higher education, or saddle them with unsustainable debt.
Through tax credits, grants, and better loans, we have made college more affordable for millions of students and families over the last few years. But taxpayers cannot continue to subsidize the soaring cost of higher education. Colleges must do their part to keep costs down, and it’s our job to make sure they do. Tonight, I ask Congress to change the Higher Education Act, so that affordability and value are included in determining which colleges receive certain types of federal aid. And tomorrow, my Administration will release a new “College Scorecard” that parents and students can use to compare schools based on a simple criteria: where you can get the most bang for your educational buck.
To grow our middle class, our citizens must have access to the education and training that today’s jobs require. But we also have to make sure that America remains a place where everyone who’s willing to work hard has the chance to get ahead.
Our economy is stronger when we harness the talents and ingenuity of striving, hopeful immigrants. And right now, leaders from the business, labor, law enforcement, and faith communities all agree that the time has come to pass comprehensive immigration reform.
Real reform means strong border security, and we can build on the progress my Administration has already made – putting more boots on the southern border than at any time in our history, and reducing illegal crossings to their lowest levels in 40 years.
Real reform means establishing a responsible pathway to earned citizenship – a path that includes passing a background check, paying taxes and a meaningful penalty, learning English, and going to the back of the line behind the folks trying to come here legally.
And real reform means fixing the legal immigration system to cut waiting periods, reduce bureaucracy, and attract the highly-skilled entrepreneurs and engineers that will help create jobs and grow our economy.
In other words, we know what needs to be done. As we speak, bipartisan groups in both chambers are working diligently to draft a bill, and I applaud their efforts. Now let’s get this done. Send me a comprehensive immigration reform bill in the next few months, and I will sign it right away.
But we can’t stop there. We know our economy is stronger when our wives, mothers, and daughters can live their lives free from discrimination in the workplace, and free from the fear of domestic violence. Today, the Senate passed the Violence Against Women Act that Joe Biden originally wrote almost 20 years ago. I urge the House to do the same. And I ask this Congress to declare that women should earn a living equal to their efforts, and finally pass the Paycheck Fairness Act this year.
We know our economy is stronger when we reward an honest day’s work with honest wages. But today, a full-time worker making the minimum wage earns $14,500 a year. Even with the tax relief we’ve put in place, a family with two kids that earns the minimum wage still lives below the poverty line. That’s wrong. That’s why, since the last time this Congress raised the minimum wage, nineteen states have chosen to bump theirs even higher.
Tonight, let’s declare that in the wealthiest nation on Earth, no one who works full-time should have to live in poverty, and raise the federal minimum wage to $9.00 an hour. This single step would raise the incomes of millions of working families. It could mean the difference between groceries or the food bank; rent or eviction; scraping by or finally getting ahead. For businesses across the country, it would mean customers with more money in their pockets. In fact, working folks shouldn’t have to wait year after year for the minimum wage to go up while CEO pay has never been higher. So here’s an idea that Governor Romney and I actually agreed on last year: let’s tie the minimum wage to the cost of living, so that it finally becomes a wage you can live on.
Tonight, let’s also recognize that there are communities in this country where no matter how hard you work, it’s virtually impossible to get ahead. Factory towns decimated from years of plants packing up. Inescapable pockets of poverty, urban and rural, where young adults are still fighting for their first job. America is not a place where chance of birth or circumstance should decide our destiny. And that is why we need to build new ladders of opportunity into the middle class for all who are willing to climb them.
Let’s offer incentives to companies that hire Americans who’ve got what it takes to fill that job opening, but have been out of work so long that no one will give them a chance. Let’s put people back to work rebuilding vacant homes in run-down neighborhoods. And this year, my Administration will begin to partner with 20 of the hardest-hit towns in America to get these communities back on their feet. We’ll work with local leaders to target resources at public safety, education, and housing. We’ll give new tax credits to businesses that hire and invest. And we’ll work to strengthen families by removing the financial deterrents to marriage for low-income couples, and doing more to encourage fatherhood – because what makes you a man isn’t the ability to conceive a child; it’s having the courage to raise one.
Stronger families. Stronger communities. A stronger America. It is this kind of prosperity – broad, shared, and built on a thriving middle class – that has always been the source of our progress at home. It is also the foundation of our power and influence throughout the world.
Tonight, we stand united in saluting the troops and civilians who sacrifice every day to protect us. Because of them, we can say with confidence that America will complete its mission in Afghanistan, and achieve our objective of defeating the core of al Qaeda. Already, we have brought home 33,000 of our brave servicemen and women. This spring, our forces will move into a support role, while Afghan security forces take the lead. Tonight, I can announce that over the next year, another 34,000 American troops will come home from Afghanistan. This drawdown will continue. And by the end of next year, our war in Afghanistan will be over.
Beyond 2014, America’s commitment to a unified and sovereign Afghanistan will endure, but the nature of our commitment will change. We are negotiating an agreement with the Afghan government that focuses on two missions: training and equipping Afghan forces so that the country does not again slip into chaos, and counter-terrorism efforts that allow us to pursue the remnants of al Qaeda and their affiliates.
Today, the organization that attacked us on 9/11 is a shadow of its former self. Different al Qaeda affiliates and extremist groups have emerged – from the Arabian Peninsula to Africa. The threat these groups pose is evolving. But to meet this threat, we don’t need to send tens of thousands of our sons and daughters abroad, or occupy other nations. Instead, we will need to help countries like Yemen, Libya, and Somalia provide for their own security, and help allies who take the fight to terrorists, as we have in Mali. And, where necessary, through a range of capabilities, we will continue to take direct action against those terrorists who pose the gravest threat to Americans.
As we do, we must enlist our values in the fight. That is why my Administration has worked tirelessly to forge a durable legal and policy framework to guide our counterterrorism operations. Throughout, we have kept Congress fully informed of our efforts. I recognize that in our democracy, no one should just take my word that we’re doing things the right way. So, in the months ahead, I will continue to engage with Congress to ensure not only that our targeting, detention, and prosecution of terrorists remains consistent with our laws and system of checks and balances, but that our efforts are even more transparent to the American people and to the world.
Of course, our challenges don’t end with al Qaeda. America will continue to lead the effort to prevent the spread of the world’s most dangerous weapons. The regime in North Korea must know that they will only achieve security and prosperity by meeting their international obligations. Provocations of the sort we saw last night will only isolate them further, as we stand by our allies, strengthen our own missile defense, and lead the world in taking firm action in response to these threats.
Likewise, the leaders of Iran must recognize that now is the time for a diplomatic solution, because a coalition stands united in demanding that they meet their obligations, and we will do what is necessary to prevent them from getting a nuclear weapon. At the same time, we will engage Russia to seek further reductions in our nuclear arsenals, and continue leading the global effort to secure nuclear materials that could fall into the wrong hands – because our ability to influence others depends on our willingness to lead.
America must also face the rapidly growing threat from cyber-attacks. We know hackers steal people’s identities and infiltrate private e-mail. We know foreign countries and companies swipe our corporate secrets. Now our enemies are also seeking the ability to sabotage our power grid, our financial institutions, and our air traffic control systems. We cannot look back years from now and wonder why we did nothing in the face of real threats to our security and our economy.
That’s why, earlier today, I signed a new executive order that will strengthen our cyber defenses by increasing information sharing, and developing standards to protect our national security, our jobs, and our privacy. Now, Congress must act as well, by passing legislation to give our government a greater capacity to secure our networks and deter attacks.
Even as we protect our people, we should remember that today’s world presents not only dangers, but opportunities. To boost American exports, support American jobs, and level the playing field in the growing markets of Asia, we intend to complete negotiations on a Trans-Pacific Partnership. And tonight, I am announcing that we will launch talks on a comprehensive Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership with the European Union – because trade that is free and fair across the Atlantic supports millions of good-paying American jobs.
We also know that progress in the most impoverished parts of our world enriches us all. In many places, people live on little more than a dollar a day. So the United States will join with our allies to eradicate such extreme poverty in the next two decades: by connecting more people to the global economy and empowering women; by giving our young and brightest minds new opportunities to serve and helping communities to feed, power, and educate themselves; by saving the world’s children from preventable deaths; and by realizing the promise of an AIDS-free generation.
Above all, America must remain a beacon to all who seek freedom during this period of historic change. I saw the power of hope last year in Rangoon – when Aung San Suu Kyi welcomed an American President into the home where she had been imprisoned for years; when thousands of Burmese lined the streets, waving American flags, including a man who said, “There is justice and law in the United States. I want our country to be like that.”
In defense of freedom, we will remain the anchor of strong alliances from the Americas to Africa; from Europe to Asia. In the Middle East, we will stand with citizens as they demand their universal rights, and support stable transitions to democracy. The process will be messy, and we cannot presume to dictate the course of change in countries like Egypt; but we can – and will – insist on respect for the fundamental rights of all people. We will keep the pressure on a Syrian regime that has murdered its own people, and support opposition leaders that respect the rights of every Syrian. And we will stand steadfast with Israel in pursuit of security and a lasting peace. These are the messages I will deliver when I travel to the Middle East next month.
All this work depends on the courage and sacrifice of those who serve in dangerous places at great personal risk – our diplomats, our intelligence officers, and the men and women of the United States Armed Forces. As long as I’m Commander-in-Chief, we will do whatever we must to protect those who serve their country abroad, and we will maintain the best military in the world. We will invest in new capabilities, even as we reduce waste and wartime spending. We will ensure equal treatment for all service members, and equal benefits for their families – gay and straight. We will draw upon the courage and skills of our sisters and daughters, because women have proven under fire that they are ready for combat. We will keep faith with our veterans – investing in world-class care, including mental health care, for our wounded warriors; supporting our military families; and giving our veterans the benefits, education, and job opportunities they have earned. And I want to thank my wife Michelle and Dr. Jill Biden for their continued dedication to serving our military families as well as they serve us.
But defending our freedom is not the job of our military alone. We must all do our part to make sure our God-given rights are protected here at home. That includes our most fundamental right as citizens: the right to vote. When any Americans – no matter where they live or what their party – are denied that right simply because they can’t wait for five, six, seven hours just to cast their ballot, we are betraying our ideals. That’s why, tonight, I’m announcing a non-partisan commission to improve the voting experience in America. And I’m asking two long-time experts in the field, who’ve recently served as the top attorneys for my campaign and for Governor Romney’s campaign, to lead it. We can fix this, and we will. The American people demand it. And so does our democracy.
Of course, what I’ve said tonight matters little if we don’t come together to protect our most precious resource – our children.
It has been two months since Newtown. I know this is not the first time this country has debated how to reduce gun violence. But this time is different. Overwhelming majorities of Americans – Americans who believe in the 2nd Amendment – have come together around commonsense reform – like background checks that will make it harder for criminals to get their hands on a gun. Senators of both parties are working together on tough new laws to prevent anyone from buying guns for resale to criminals. Police chiefs are asking our help to get weapons of war and massive ammunition magazines off our streets, because they are tired of being outgunned.
Each of these proposals deserves a vote in Congress. If you want to vote no, that’s your choice. But these proposals deserve a vote. Because in the two months since Newtown, more than a thousand birthdays, graduations, and anniversaries have been stolen from our lives by a bullet from a gun.
One of those we lost was a young girl named Hadiya Pendleton. She was 15 years old. She loved Fig Newtons and lip gloss. She was a majorette. She was so good to her friends, they all thought they were her best friend. Just three weeks ago, she was here, in Washington, with her classmates, performing for her country at my inauguration. And a week later, she was shot and killed in a Chicago park after school, just a mile away from my house.
Hadiya’s parents, Nate and Cleo, are in this chamber tonight, along with more than two dozen Americans whose lives have been torn apart by gun violence. They deserve a vote.
Gabby Giffords deserves a vote.
The families of Newtown deserve a vote.
The families of Aurora deserve a vote.
The families of Oak Creek, and Tucson, and Blacksburg, and the countless other communities ripped open by gun violence – they deserve a simple vote.
Our actions will not prevent every senseless act of violence in this country. Indeed, no laws, no initiatives, no administrative acts will perfectly solve all the challenges I’ve outlined tonight. But we were never sent here to be perfect. We were sent here to make what difference we can, to secure this nation, expand opportunity, and uphold our ideals through the hard, often frustrating, but absolutely necessary work of self-government.
We were sent here to look out for our fellow Americans the same way they look out for one another, every single day, usually without fanfare, all across this country. We should follow their example.
We should follow the example of a New York City nurse named Menchu Sanchez. When Hurricane Sandy plunged her hospital into darkness, her thoughts were not with how her own home was faring – they were with the twenty precious newborns in her care and the rescue plan she devised that kept them all safe.
We should follow the example of a North Miami woman named Desiline Victor. When she arrived at her polling place, she was told the wait to vote might be six hours. And as time ticked by, her concern was not with her tired body or aching feet, but whether folks like her would get to have their say. Hour after hour, a throng of people stayed in line in support of her. Because Desiline is 102 years old. And they erupted in cheers when she finally put on a sticker that read “I Voted.”
We should follow the example of a police officer named Brian Murphy. When a gunman opened fire on a Sikh temple in Wisconsin, and Brian was the first to arrive, he did not consider his own safety. He fought back until help arrived, and ordered his fellow officers to protect the safety of the Americans worshiping inside – even as he lay bleeding from twelve bullet wounds.
When asked how he did that, Brian said, “That’s just the way we’re made.”
That’s just the way we’re made.
We may do different jobs, and wear different uniforms, and hold different views than the person beside us. But as Americans, we all share the same proud title:
We are citizens. It’s a word that doesn’t just describe our nationality or legal status. It describes the way we’re made. It describes what we believe. It captures the enduring idea that this country only works when we accept certain obligations to one another and to future generations; that our rights are wrapped up in the rights of others; and that well into our third century as a nation, it remains the task of us all, as citizens of these United States, to be the authors of the next great chapter in our American story.
Thank you, God bless you, and God bless the United States of America.
Full Text of Rand Paul’s Tea Party Response to State of the Union
Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul delivered the Tea Party rebuttal to Obama’s State of the Union speech
These are the prepared remarks of Rand Paul’s Tea Party rebuttal to President Obama’s State of the Union Speech. Follow U.S. News’s live coverage here.
I speak to you tonight from Washington, D.C. The state of our economy is tenuous but our people remain the greatest example of freedom and prosperity the world has ever known.
People say America is exceptional. I agree, but it’s not the complexion of our skin or the twists in our DNA that make us unique. America is exceptional because we were founded upon the notion that everyone should be free to pursue life, liberty, and happiness.
For the first time in history, men and women were guaranteed a chance to succeed based NOT on who your parents were but on your own initiative and desire to work.
We are in danger, though, of forgetting what made us great. The President seems to think the country can continue to borrow $50,000 per second. The President believes that we should just squeeze more money out of those who are working.
The path we are on is not sustainable, but few in Congress or in this Administration seem to recognize that their actions are endangering the prosperity of this great nation.
Ronald Reagan said, government is not the answer to the problem, government is the problem.
Tonight, the President told the nation he disagrees. President Obama believes government is the solution: More government, more taxes, more debt.
What the President fails to grasp is that the American system that rewards hard work is what made America so prosperous.
What America needs is not Robin Hood but Adam Smith. In the year we won our independence, Adam Smith described what creates the Wealth of Nations.
He described a limited government that largely did not interfere with individuals and their pursuit of happiness.
All that we are, all that we wish to be is now threatened by the notion that you can have something for nothing, that you can have your cake and eat it too, that you can spend a trillion dollars every year that you don’t have.
I was elected to the Senate in 2010 by people worried about our country, worried about our kids and their future. I thought I knew how bad it was in Washington. But it is worse than I ever imagined.
Congress is debating the wrong things.
Every debate in Washington is about how much to increase spending – a little or a lot.
About how much to increase taxes – a little or a lot.
The President does a big “woe is me” over the $1.2 trillion sequester that he endorsed and signed into law. Some Republicans are joining him. Few people understand that the sequester doesn’t even cut any spending. It just slows the rate of growth. Even with the sequester, government will grow over $7 trillion over the next decade.
Only in Washington could an increase of $7 trillion in spending over a decade be called a cut.
So, what is the President’s answer? Over the past four years he has added over $6 trillion in new debt and may well do the same in a second term. What solutions does he offer? He takes entitlement reform off the table and seeks to squeeze more money out of the private sector.
He says he wants a balanced approach.
What the country really needs is a balanced budget.
Washington acts in a way that your family never could – they spend money they do not have, they borrow from future generations, and then they blame each other for never fixing the problem.
Tonight I urge you to demand a new course.
Demand Washington change their ways, or be sent home.
To begin with, we absolutely must pass a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution!
The amendment must include strict tax and spending limitations.
Liberals complain that the budget can’t be balanced but if you cut just one penny from each dollar we currently spend, the budget would balance within six or seven years.
The Penny Plan has been crafted into a bill that millions of conservatives across the country support.
It is often said that there is not enough bipartisanship up here.
That is not true.
In fact, there is plenty.
Both parties have been guilty of spending too much, of protecting their sacred cows, of backroom deals in which everyone up here wins, but every taxpayer loses.
It is time for a new bipartisan consensus.
It is time Democrats admit that not every dollar spent on domestic programs is sacred. And it is time Republicans realize that military spending is not immune to waste and fraud.
Where would we cut spending; well, we could start with ending all foreign aid to countries that are burning our flag and chanting death to America.
The President could begin by stopping the F-16s and Abrams tanks being given to the radical Islamic government of Egypt.
Not only should the sequester stand, many pundits say the sequester really needs to be at least $4 trillion to avoid another downgrade of America’s credit rating.
Both parties will have to agree to cut, or we will never fix our fiscal mess.
Bipartisanship is not what is missing in Washington. Common sense is.
Trillion-dollar deficits hurt us all.
Printing more money to feed the never-ending appetite for spending hurts us all.
We pay higher prices every time we go to the supermarket or the gas pump. The value of the dollar shrinks with each new day.
Contrary to what the President claims, big government and debt are not a friend to the poor and the elderly. Big-government debt keeps the poor poor and saps the savings of the elderly.
This massive expansion of the debt destroys savings and steals the value of your wages.
Big government makes it more expensive to put food on the table. Big government is not your friend. The President offers you free stuff but his policies keep you poor.
Under President Obama, the ranks of America’s poor swelled to almost 1 in 6 people last year, reaching a new high as long-term unemployment left millions of Americans struggling and out of work.
The cycle must be broken.
The willpower to do this will not come from Congress. It must come from the American people.
Next month, I will propose a five-year balanced budget, a budget that last year was endorsed by taxpayer groups across the country for its boldness, and for actually solving the problem.
I will work with anyone on either side of the aisle who wants to cut spending.
But in recent years, there has been no one to work with.
The President’s massive tax hikes and spending increases have caused his budgets to get ZERO votes in both houses of Congress. Not a single Democrat voted for the President’s budget!
But at least he tried.
Senate Democrats have not even produced a budget in the time I have been in office, a shameful display of incompetence that illustrates their lack of seriousness.
This year, they say they will have a budget, but after just recently imposing hundreds of billions in new taxes, they now say they will include more tax hikes in their budget.
We must stand firm. We must say NO to any MORE tax hikes!
Only through lower taxes, less regulation and more freedom will the economy begin to grow again.
Our party is the party of growth, jobs and prosperity, and we will boldly lead on these issues.
Under the Obama economy, 12 million people are out of work. During the President’s first term 800,000 construction workers lost their jobs and another 800,000 simply gave up on looking for work.
With my five-year budget, millions of jobs would be created by cutting the corporate income tax in half, by creating a flat personal income tax of 17%, and by cutting the regulations that are strangling American businesses.
The only stimulus ever proven to work is leaving more money in the hands of those who earned it!
For those who are struggling we want to you to have something infinitely more valuable than a free phone, we want you to have a job and pathway to success.
We are the party that embraces hard work and ingenuity, therefore we must be the party that embraces the immigrant who wants to come to America for a better future.
We must be the party who sees immigrants as assets, not liabilities.
We must be the party that says, “If you want to work, if you want to become an American, we welcome you.”
For those striving to climb the ladder of success we must fix our schools.
America’s educational system is leaving behind anyone who starts with disadvantages.
We have cut classroom size in half and tripled spending on education and still we lag behind much of the world.
A great education needs to be available for everyone, whether you live on country club lane or in government housing.
This will only happen when we allow school choice for everyone, rich or poor, white, brown, or black.
Let the taxes you pay for education follow each and every student to the school of your choice.
Competition has made America the richest nation in history. Competition can make our educational system the envy of the world.
The status quo traps poor children in a crumbling system of hopelessness.
When every child can, like the President’s kids, go to the school of their choice, then will the dreams of our children come true!
Washington could also use a good dose of transparency, which is why we should fight back against middle of the night deals that end with massive bills no one has read.
We must continue to fight for legislation that forces Congress to read the bills!
We must continue to object when Congress sticks special interest riders on bills in the dead of night!
And if Congress refuses to obey its own rules, if Congress refuses to pass a budget, if Congress refuses to read the bills, then I say:
Sweep the place clean. Limit their terms and send them home!
I have seen the inner sanctum of Congress and believe me there is no monopoly on knowledge there.
If they will not listen, if they will not balance the budget, then we should limit their terms.
We are the party that adheres to the Constitution. We will not let the liberals tread on the Second Amendment!
We will fight to defend the entire Bill of Rights from the right to trial by jury to the right to be free from unlawful searches.
We will stand up against excessive government power wherever we see it.
We cannot and will not allow any President to act as if he were a king.
We will not let any President use executive orders to impinge on the Second Amendment.
We will not tolerate secret lists of American citizens who can be killed without trial.
Montesquieu wrote that there can be no liberty when the executive branch and the legislative branch are combined. Separation of powers is a bedrock principle of our Constitution.
We took the President to court over his unconstitutional recess appointments and won.
If necessary, we will take him to court again if he attempts to legislate by executive order.
Congress must reassert its authority as the protector of these rights, and stand up for them, no matter which party is in power.
Congress must stand as a check to the power of the executive, and it must stand as it was intended, as the voice of the people.
The people are crying out for change. They are asking for us to hear their voices, to fix our broken system, to right our economy and to restore their liberty.
Let us tonight let them know that we hear their voices. That we can and must work together, that we can and must re-chart our course toward a better future.
America has much greatness left in her. We will begin to thrive again when we begin to believe in ourselves again, when we regain our respect for our founding documents, when we balance our budget, when we understand that capitalism and free markets and free individuals are what creates our nation’s prosperity.
Text of Senator Marc Rubio’s response to the Union address on Tuesday night
Good evening. I’m Marco Rubio. I’m blessed to represent Florida in the United States Senate. Let me begin by congratulating President Obama on the start of his second term. Tonight, I have the honor of responding to his State of the Union address on behalf of my fellow Republicans. And I am especially honored to be addressing our brave men and women serving in the armed forces and in diplomatic posts around the world. You may be thousands of miles away, but you are always in our prayers.
The State of the Union address is always a reminder of how unique America is. For much of human history, most people were trapped in stagnant societies, where a tiny minority always stayed on top, and no one else even had a chance.
But America is exceptional because we believe that every life, at every stage, is precious, and that everyone everywhere has a God-given right to go as far as their talents and hard work will take them.
Like most Americans, for me this ideal is personal. My parents immigrated here in pursuit of the opportunity to improve their life and give their children the chance at an even better one. They made it to the middle class, my dad working as a bartender and my mother as a cashier and a maid. I didn’t inherit any money from them. But I inherited something far better – the real opportunity to accomplish my dreams.
This opportunity – to make it to the middle class or beyond no matter where you start out in life – it isn’t bestowed on us from Washington. It comes from a vibrant free economy where people can risk their own money to open a business. And when they succeed, they hire more people, who in turn invest or spend the money they make, helping others start a business and create jobs.
Presidents in both parties – from John F. Kennedy to Ronald Reagan – have known that our free enterprise economy is the source of our middle-class prosperity.
But President Obama? He believes it’s the cause of our problems. That the economic downturn happened because our government didn’t tax enough, spend enough and control enough. And, therefore, as you heard tonight, his solution to virtually every problem we face is for Washington to tax more, borrow more and spend more.
This idea – that our problems were caused by a government that was too small – it’s just not true. In fact, a major cause of our recent downturn was a housing crisis created by reckless government policies.
And the idea that more taxes and more government spending is the best way to help hardworking middle-class taxpayers – that’s an old idea that’s failed every time it’s been tried.
More government isn’t going to help you get ahead. It’s going to hold you back.
More government isn’t going to create more opportunities. It’s going to limit them.
And more government isn’t going to inspire new ideas, new businesses and new private sector jobs. It’s going to create uncertainty.
Because more government breeds complicated rules and laws that a small business can’t afford to follow.
Because more government raises taxes on employers who then pass the costs on to their employees through fewer hours, lower pay and even layoffs.
And because many government programs that claim to help the middle class, often end up hurting them instead.
For example, Obamacare was supposed to help middle-class Americans afford health insurance. But now, some people are losing the health insurance they were happy with. And because Obamacare created expensive requirements for companies with more than 50 employees, now many of these businesses aren’t hiring. Not only that; they’re being forced to lay people off and switch from full-time employees to part-time workers.
Now does this mean there’s no role for government? Of course not. It plays a crucial part in keeping us safe, enforcing rules, and providing some security against the risks of modern life. But government’s role is wisely limited by the Constitution. And it can’t play its essential role when it ignores those limits.
There are valid reasons to be concerned about the president’s plan to grow our government. But any time anyone opposes the president’s agenda, he and his allies usually respond by falsely attacking their motives.
When we point out that no matter how many job-killing laws we pass, our government can’t control the weather – he accuses us of wanting dirty water and dirty air.
When we suggest we strengthen our safety net programs by giving states more flexibility to manage them – he accuses us of wanting to leave the elderly and disabled to fend for themselves.
And tonight, he even criticized us for refusing to raise taxes to delay military cuts – cuts that were his idea in the first place.
But his favorite attack of all is that those who don’t agree with him – they only care about rich people.
Mr. President, I still live in the same working-class neighborhood I grew up in. My neighbors aren’t millionaires. They’re retirees who depend on Social Security and Medicare. They’re workers who have to get up early tomorrow morning and go to work to pay the bills. They’re immigrants, who came here because they were stuck in poverty in countries where the government dominated the economy.
The tax increases and the deficit spending you propose will hurt middle-class families. It will cost them their raises. It will cost them their benefits. It may even cost some of them their jobs.
And it will hurt seniors because it does nothing to save Medicare and Social Security.
So Mr. President, I don’t oppose your plans because I want to protect the rich. I oppose your plans because I want to protect my neighbors.
Hard-working middle-class Americans who don’t need us to come up with a plan to grow the government. They want a plan to grow the middle class.
Economic growth is the best way to help the middle class. Unfortunately, our economy actually shrank during the last three months of 2012.
But if we can get the economy to grow at just 4 percent a year, it would create millions of middle class jobs. And it could reduce our deficits by almost $4 trillion dollars over the next decade.
Tax increases can’t do this. Raising taxes won’t create private-sector jobs. And there’s no realistic tax increase that could lower our deficits by almost $4 trillion. That’s why I hope the president will abandon his obsession with raising taxes and instead work with us to achieve real growth in our economy.
One of the best ways to encourage growth is through our energy industry. Of course solar and wind energy should be a part of our energy portfolio. But God also blessed America with abundant coal, oil and natural gas. Instead of wasting more taxpayer money on so-called “clean energy” companies like Solyndra, let’s open up more federal lands for safe and responsible exploration. And let’s reform our energy regulations so that they’re reasonable and based on common sense. If we can grow our energy industry, it will make us energy independent, it will create middle-class jobs and it will help bring manufacturing back from places like China.
Simplifying our tax code will also help the middle class, because it will make it easier for small businesses to hire and grow.
And we agree with the president that we should lower our corporate tax rate, which is one of the highest in the world, so that companies will start bringing their money and their jobs back here from overseas.
We can also help our economy grow if we have a legal immigration system that allows us to attract and assimilate the world’s best and brightest. We need a responsible, permanent solution to the problem of those who are here illegally. But first, we must follow through on the broken promises of the past to secure our borders and enforce our laws.
Helping the middle class grow will also require an education system that gives people the skills today’s jobs entail and the knowledge that tomorrow’s world will require.
We need to incentivize local school districts to offer more advanced placement courses and more vocational and career training.
We need to give all parents, especially the parents of children with special needs, the opportunity to send their children to the school of their choice.
And because tuition costs have grown so fast, we need to change the way we pay for higher education.
I believe in federal financial aid. I couldn’t have gone to college without it. But it’s not just about spending more money on these programs; it’s also about strengthening and modernizing them.
A 21st century workforce should not be forced to accept 20th century education solutions. Today’s students aren’t only 18-year-olds. They’re returning veterans. They’re single parents who decide to get the education they need to earn a decent wage. And they’re workers who have lost jobs that are never coming back and need to be retrained.
We need student aid that does not discriminate against programs that non-traditional students rely on – like online courses, or degree programs that give you credit for work experience.
When I finished school, I owed over $100,000 in student loans, a debt I paid off just a few months ago. Today, many graduates face massive student debt. We must give students more information on the costs and benefits of the student loans they’re taking out.
All these measures are key to helping the economy grow. But we won’t be able to sustain a vibrant middle class unless we solve our debt problem.
Every dollar our government borrows is money that isn’t being invested to create jobs. And the uncertainty created by the debt is one reason why many businesses aren’t hiring.
The president loves to blame the debt on President Bush. But President Obama created more debt in four years than his predecessor did in eight.
The real cause of our debt is that our government has been spending $1 trillion more than it takes in every year. That’s why we need a balanced budget amendment.
The biggest obstacles to balancing the budget are programs where spending is already locked in. One of these programs, Medicare, is especially important to me. It provided my father the care he needed to battle cancer and ultimately die with dignity. And it pays for the care my mother receives now.
I would never support any changes to Medicare that would hurt seniors like my mother. But anyone who is in favor of leaving Medicare exactly the way it is right now, is in favor of bankrupting it.
Republicans have offered a detailed and credible plan that helps save Medicare without hurting today’s retirees. Instead of playing politics with Medicare, when is the president going to offer his plan to save it? Tonight would have been a good time for him to do it.
Of course, we face other challenges as well. We were all heart broken by the recent tragedy in Connecticut. We must effectively deal with the rise of violence in our country. But unconstitutionally undermining the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding Americans is not the way to do it.
On foreign policy, America continues to be indispensable to the goal of global liberty, prosperity and safeguarding human rights. The world is a better place when America is the strongest nation on earth. But we can’t remain powerful if we don’t have an economy that can afford it.
In the short time I’ve been here in Washington, nothing has frustrated me more than false choices like the ones the president laid out tonight.
The choice isn’t just between big government or big business. What we need is an accountable, efficient and effective government that allows small and new businesses to create middle class jobs.
We don’t have to raise taxes to avoid the president’s devastating cuts to our military. Republicans have passed a plan that replaces these cuts with responsible spending reforms.
In order to balance our budget, the choice doesn’t have to be either higher taxes or dramatic benefit cuts for those in need. Instead we should grow our economy so that we create new taxpayers, not new taxes, and so our government can afford to help those who truly cannot help themselves.
And the truth is every problem can’t be solved by government. Many are caused by the moral breakdown in our society. And the answers to those challenges lie primarily in our families and our faiths, not our politicians.
Despite our differences, I know that both Republicans and Democrats love America. I pray we can come together to solve our problems, because the choices before us could not be more important.
If we can get our economy healthy again, our children will be the most prosperous Americans ever.
And if we do not, we will forever be known as the generation responsible for America’s decline.
At a time when one showdown after another ends in short-term deals that do little or nothing about our real problems, some are starting to believe that our government leaders just can’t or won’t make the right choices anymore.
But our strength has never come from the White House or the Capitol. It’s always come from our people. A people united by the American idea that, if you have a dream and you are willing to work hard, nothing should be impossible.
Americans have always celebrated and been inspired by those who succeed. But it’s the dreams of those who are still trying to make it that sets our nation apart.
Tonight, all across this land, parents will hold their newborn children in their arms for the first time. For many of these parents, life has not gone the way they had planned.
Maybe they were born into circumstances they’ve found difficult to escape. Maybe they’ve made some mistakes along the way. Maybe they’re young mothers, all alone, the father of their child long gone.
But tonight, when they look into the eyes of their child for the first time, their lives will change forever. Because in those eyes, they will see what my parents saw in me, and what your parents saw in you. They will see all the hopes and dreams they once had for themselves.
This dream – of a better life for their children – it’s the hope of parents everywhere. Politicians here and throughout the world have long promised that more government can make those dreams come true.
But we Americans have always known better. From our earliest days, we embraced economic liberty instead. And because we did, America remains one of the few places on earth where dreams like these even have a chance.
Each time our nation has faced great challenges, what has kept us together was our shared hope for a better life.
Now, let that hope bring us together again. To solve the challenges of our time and write the next chapter in the amazing story of the greatest nation man has ever known.
Thank you for listening. May God bless all of you. May God bless our president. And may God continue to bless the United States of America.
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SERVICE
STAR - TREASURY FINANCIAL DATABASE
TABLE 1. SUMMARY OF RECEIPTS, OUTLAYS AND THE DEFICIT/SURPLUS BY MONTH OF THE U.S. GOVERNMENT (IN MILLIONS)
ACCOUNTING DATE: 01/13
PERIOD RECEIPTS OUTLAYS DEFICIT/SURPLUS (-)
+ ____________________________________________________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________
PRIOR YEAR
OCTOBER 163,072 261,539 98,466
NOVEMBER 152,402 289,704 137,302
DECEMBER 239,963 325,930 85,967
JANUARY 234,319 261,726 27,407
FEBRUARY 103,413 335,090 231,677
MARCH 171,215 369,372 198,157
APRIL 318,807 259,690 -59,117
MAY 180,713 305,348 124,636
JUNE 260,177 319,919 59,741
JULY 184,585 254,190 69,604
AUGUST 178,860 369,393 190,533
SEPTEMBER 261,566 186,386 -75,180
YEAR-TO-DATE 2,449,093 3,538,286 1,089,193
CURRENT YEAR
OCTOBER 184,316 304,311 119,995
NOVEMBER 161,730 333,841 172,112
DECEMBER 269,508 270,699 1,191
JANUARY 272,225 269,342 -2,883
YEAR-TO-DATE 887,778 1,178,193 290,415
http://www.fms.treas.gov/mts/mts0113.txt
Clinton, Biden, Cuomo, Kerry in 2016, What’s the difference?
Dinah Washington: What Difference A Day Makes
O’Reilly on Hillary Benghazi Testimony: If Any Politician Should Be Advertising Teflon, It’s
Chairman Royce on Fox News “Special Report with Bret Baier” on Sec Clinton testimony
012313 – Sen. Rand Paul on the Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer discussing Benghazi h
Explosive: Sen. Rand Paul To Hillary Clinton – I Would Have Fired You
John McCain Confronts Hillary Clinton On Benghazi: Your Answers ‘Are Not
Marco Rubio Grills Hillary Clinton About Benghazi Testimony
GOP Rep.: Clinton let Benghazi consulate “become a death trap”
[HIGHLIGHTS] Hillary Clinton Testifies On Libya Benghazi Attack [FULL]
LATEST NEWS : Clinton on Benghazi: No delays in decision making
Death And Deceit In Benghazi – Did Obama Amind Try Hide The Truth? – W Bret Bair
Glenn Beck Analyzes U.S. Consulate Attack in Benghazi, Libya
Lebanon seizes 150 tons of Libyan arms en route to Syrian rebels
Benghazi-Gate: Connection between CIA and al-Qaeda in Libya and Syria, with Turkey
CNBC: Benghazi is not about Libya! “It’s An NSC Operation Moving Arms & Fighters Into Syria”
SYRIA CRISIS: US ADMITS arms sent to Syria find ISLAMIST EXTREMISTS [WEST FU
Syrian opposition getting ‘daily shipments’ of arms
LATEST NEWS : Clinton on Benghazi: No delays in decision making
Murder Of Chris Stevens In Benghazi Attack Ordered By American Military Leadership
Benghazi Lies
OBAMA CONFRONTED ON BENGHAZI – Stutters Through Response
Top AFRICOM Leader General Carter Ham Was Never Ordered to Save US Men in Ben
President Obama Comments on the Attack in Benghazi, Libya
Michael Scheuer: Mrs Clinton Has Blood on her Hands Everywhere
FMR CIA Chief on ‘Benghazi-Gate’: “The Democrats Are Very Good At Watching People Die”
Benghazi-Gate: Ex-CIA Michael Scheuer “Obama’s Benghazi Cover-up Worse than
Michael Scheuer Slams CNN Host Over Libya: ‘You’re Just Carrying the Water for Mr. Obama
Sen. Rand Paul on Benghazi: ‘Where in the hell were the Marines?’
Clinton Grilled on Benghazi Attacks in Congressional Inquiry
By Paul Stanley
“…An emotional and frustrated Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton traded barbs with legislators on Capitol Hill in her appearances Wednesday before Senate and House committees searching for answers in the attacks in Benghazi, Libya, on Sept. 11, 2012, that killed a U.S. ambassador and three security personnel.
Clinton’s day began first thing on Wednesday morning when she appeared before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and will end later in the day before the House committee.
“I take responsibility,” Clinton told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. “Nobody is more committed to getting this right. I am determined to leave the State Department and our country safer, stronger and more secure.”
But soon after making her statement claiming responsibility, Sen. Rob Johnson (R-Wis.) seemed to back Clinton in a corner when he suggested “a simple phone call” to sources in Benghazi might have determined there was no protest at the American Embassy. “Why wasn’t that known?” asked Johnson.
Clinton initially said it was not policy to make inquiries before the FBI investigation was completed, but fired back at the GOP senator when she was pressed on the issue. “With all due respect, what difference at this point does it make?” she said. “We have four dead Americans. It’s our job to figure out what happened and make sure it never happens again. People were tying in real time to get to the information.”
She also said the deaths were extremely “personal” to her.
Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) also pressed the secretary on why additional security was not in place. He also revealed that he had met with Ambassador Chris Stevens approximately two months before his death and that he expressed “his deep and grave concerns about security in Benghazi.”
Clinton said those concerns never reached her desk.
“I did not see these requests. They did not come to me. I did not approve them. I did not deny,” she said.
However, a review by an independent board concluded that “systemic failures” resulted in the consulate being at risk to attacks and that no organized protest were planned or were in place at the time of the attacks.
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), the son of former presidential candidate and House member Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas), further pressed Clinton by criticizing her for not reading the cables requesting more security. “Had I been president and found out you did not read the cables from Benghazi and from Ambassador Stevens, I would have relieved you of your post,” said Paul. “I think it’s inexcusable.”
However, neither members of the House or Senate asked Clinton why the initial attacks were blamed on an amateur video that insulted Islam.
Clinton’s appearance was postponed for several weeks due to her health. She is expected to step down from her post in the coming days and will most likely be replaced by Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), and who, like Clinton, ran unsuccessfully for the White House.
Prior to her being appointed as Secretary of State during President Obama’s first term, Clinton served as the first lady when her husband, former President Bill Clinton, served two terms in the White House. She went on to be elected as a U.S. Senator from New York prior to serving as the nation’s top diplomat.
She is also mentioned as a potential 2016 Democratic presidential nominee. …”
Angry Clinton Explodes at Questioning on Libya Protest: ‘We Have Four Dead Americans…What Difference at This Point Does It Make?’
Madeleine Morgenstern
“…Secretary of State Hillary Clinton erupted at Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) during his questioning Wednesday over whether there were protests in Benghazi, Libya before the deadly assault on the U.S. diplomatic mission.
Johnson was insisting that the American people were “misled” about protests that supposedly occurred over an anti-Islam video, similar to those that had taken place at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo hours earlier on Sept. 11, 2012. It was later determined there had been no protests in Benghazi and the assault was labeled a terrorist attack.
“Do you disagree with me that a simple phone call to those evacuees to determine what happened would have ascertained immediately that there was no protest?” Johnson asked Clinton during the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing. “That was a piece of information that could have been easily, easily obtained, within hours if not days.”
“Senator, when you’re in these positions, the last thing you want to do is interfere with any other process going on — ” Clinton started to answer.
” — I realize that’s a good excuse,” Johnson cut in.
“Well, no, it’s the fact,” Clinton said sharply, adding that there are questions being raised “even today” about what precisely happened in Benghazi.
She continued, “Now, we have no doubt they were terrorists, they were militants, they attacked us, they killed our people. But what was going on and why they were doing what they were doing, is still — ”
Passerby pushes suicide jumper off bridge in frustration
China bridge jumper ‘gets a push’ 1
The Deal with Jack Hunter: Ignoring Rand Paul’s Budget
Sen. Rand Paul: People in Congress Don’t Deserve to Manage Any More Money
Rand Paul: We Should Let Dems Raise Taxes And Then Let Them Own It -
Rand Paul: We Should Let Democrats Raise Taxes
Rand Paul On The Fiscal Cliff: Spending Cuts Are Fiction, The Tax Increases Should Be Too
Sen. Rand Paul on $500B in Spending Cuts: The American People Are Ready
Senator Rand Paul on Neil Cavuto about $500 Billion spending cut S.162
TEA PARTY THE ANSWER TO GOVT. SPENDING?: Sen. Rand Paul: $500 billion budget cuts
Rand Paul: I’m Mad At My Dad! I Had 500 Billion In Cuts, Now He Comes Out With A Trillion!
Since President Obama wants to grow government and make all Americans dependent upon the Government and Democratic Party, let the Democratic Party and Obama jump from the fiscal cliff.
They will own the resulting recession and will be committing political suicide.
Do not negotiate with a person or party that wants to jump off the cliff by raising taxes on all Americans.
The Republican Party should stop negotiating with the person responsible with the massive spending problem resulting in huge deficits and over $5 trillion of new national debt.
Neither the Democratic Party led by President Obama, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi nor the Republican Party led by House Speaker Boehner, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, are capable of balancing the budget of the U.S. government.
The table below summarizes the failed 10 year record of both political parties in controlling government spending that have produced massive fiscal-year deficits and an ever increasing national debt.
Summary of Tax Receipts and Spending Outlays of theUnited States Government for Fiscal Years 2002-2012[in million of dollars]
Fiscal Year
Tax Receipts
Spending Outlays
Deficits (+) or Surplus (-)
2002
1,853,225
2,011,016
157,791
2003
1,782,108
2,159,246
377,139
2004
1,879,783
2,292,628
412,845
2005
2,153,350
2,472,095
318,746
2006
2,406,675
2,654,873
248,197
2007
2,567,672
2,729,199
161,527
2008
2,523,642
2,978,440
454,798
2009
2,104,358
3,520,082
1,415,724
2010
2,161,728
3,455,931
1,294,204
2011
2,302,495
3,601,109
1,298,614
2012
2,449,093
3,538,286
1,089,193
Source: Department of the Treasury, Final Monthly Treasury Statements of Receipts and Outlays of the United States Government for Fiscal Years 2002-2012, table 1.
Simply tell the American people that the Republican Party wants no tax increase for any American and is willing to have a Fiscal Year 2014 budget of $3 trillion that represents a real spending cut of over $500 billion.
Obama rejected the proposal and jumped. Rest in peace.
Pass Senator Rand Paul’s $500 billion spending cuts for Fiscal Year 2014!
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SERVICE STAR - TREASURY FINANCIAL DATABASE TABLE 1. SUMMARY OF RECEIPTS, OUTLAYS AND THE DEFICIT/SURPLUS BY MONTH OF THE U.S. GOVERNMENT (IN MILLIONS) ACCOUNTING DATE: 11/12 PERIOD RECEIPTS OUTLAYS DEFICIT/SURPLUS (-) + ____________________________________________________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________ PRIOR YEAR OCTOBER 163,072 261,539 98,466 NOVEMBER 152,402 289,704 137,302 DECEMBER 239,963 325,930 85,967 JANUARY 234,319 261,726 27,407 FEBRUARY 103,413 335,090 231,677 MARCH 171,215 369,372 198,157 APRIL 318,807 259,690 -59,117 MAY 180,713 305,348 124,636 JUNE 260,177 319,919 59,741 JULY 184,585 254,190 69,604 AUGUST 178,860 369,393 190,533 SEPTEMBER 261,566 186,386 -75,180 YEAR-TO-DATE 2,449,093 3,538,286 1,089,193 CURRENT YEAR OCTOBER 184,316 304,311 119,995 NOVEMBER 161,730 333,841 172,112 YEAR-TO-DATE 346,045 638,152 292,107 - - - - - - - - 0REPORT ID: STM0P081 USER ID : DATE: 2012-12-10 TIME: 18.47.19 PAGE http://www.fms.treas.gov/mts/mts1112.txt
“You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.”
Abraham Lincoln
Why Rand Was Right to Endorse Romney
“I did not come to praise the progressive Republican establishment but to replace them.”
Raymond Thomas Pronk
SA@TheDC – Conservatism for What?
Open Memo To Republican Party: No more progressives or your party will go the way of the Whigs.
Dewey, Eisenhower, Nixon, Bush, Dole, Bush, McCain, and Romney–Progressive Republicans all.
Since the end of World War II, the only conservative libertarian Republican elected President was Ronald Reagan and the progressive Republicans or Rockefeller Republicans did not want him.
Millions of Independent conservatives as well as Republican conservatives stayed home in 2012 or did not vote for either Romney nor Obama, get a clue Republican Party establishment.
I stayed home.
The time has come for tea party candidates to form their own political party.
The Republican Party like the Democratic Party is controlled by progressive Republicans that favor big government intervention in the economy and abroad.
Conservatives are leaving the Republican Party in droves.
The only way to get a politician or political party’s attention is to not vote for them.
Have we got your attention.
I doubt it.
Why would any progressive vote for a Republican progressive?
Why would any conservative–traditional, national defense, social, religious, fiscal or libertarian–vote for a progressive Republican.
Neoconservatives are not conservatives, they are right-wing progressives from the Democratic Party.
Soon the number of independent voters will exceed the number of registered Democrats as well as the number of registered Republicans.
All the Republican Party had to do in 2012 was nominate a conservative, instead the Republican Party establishment nominated a progressive.
Some people and parties never learn.
Romney did not get the young vote.
Ron Paul did in the primaries.
Barack Obama got the majority of the young vote–18-29.
For sheer stupidity and arrogance read the post below from a Romney volunteer and their get out the vote software or website failure!
Romney’s team did not the basics down.
Should be a Havard Business School case study in how not to run a campaign.
Senator Rand Paul for President in 2016!
Senator Rand Paul
Why ‘Mitt Romney’ Lost
The Ultimate Mitt Romney Flip-Flop Collection
“Can’t Be Worse Than Obama”
“The Libertarian View”
SA@TAC – What’s a ‘Neoconservative?’
SA@TheDC – Confronting American Empire
SA@TAC – No Excuse: Mitt Romney’s Case for American Empire
SA@TAC – Ronald Reagan: Isolationist
SA@TAC – Conservatism in Exile
RNC or WWE?
Snakes on a Campaign: Mitt Romney by the Southern Avenger
How Romney and Republicans Can Appeal to Libertarians
Ron Paul on Fox News ~ Election Day Analysis 11/6/12
RON PAUL on THE TONIGHT SHOW with JAY LENO (09/04/2012)
Rand Paul Eyes 2016 Run
Alex Jones It’s gonna get BAD! 7.nov.2012
Collectivism Running America: Alex Jones Report
G. Edward Griffin – The Collectivist Conspiracy
Mind blowing speech by Robert Welch in 1958 predicting Insiders plans to destroy America
Mr. Conservative: Barry Goldwater at the 1964 Republican National Convention
Reagan – A Time For Choosing
Turnout shaping up to be lower than 2008
“…
A drop in voter turnout in Tuesday’s election didn’t keep President Barack Obama from winning a second term.
Preliminary figures suggest fewer people voted this year than four years ago, when voters shattered turnout records as they elected Obama to his first term.
In most states, the numbers are shaping up to be even lower than in 2004, said Curtis Gans, director of American University’s Center for the Study of the American Electorate. Every state is showing lower numbers than in 2008, Gans said. Still, the full picture may not be known for weeks because much of the counting takes place after Election Day.
“This is one of those rare elections in which turnout in every state in the nation went down,” Gans said.
In Texas, turnout for the presidential race dropped almost 11 percent from 2008. Vermont and South Carolina saw declines that were almost as large. The drop-off was more than 7 percent in Maryland, where voters approved a ballot measure allowing gay marriage.
With 97 percent of precincts reporting, The Associated Press’ figures showed more than 118 million people had voted in the White House race, but that number will go up as more votes are counted. In 2008, 131 million people cast ballots for president, according to the Federal Election Commission.
Experts calculate turnout in different ways based on who they consider eligible voters. A separate, preliminary estimate from George Mason University’s Michael McDonald put the 2012 turnout rate at 60 percent of eligible voters. That figure was expected to be revised as more precincts reported and absentee votes were counted. …”
What is Project Orca? Well, this is what they told us:
Project ORCA is a massive undertaking – the Republican Party’s newest, unprecedented and most technologically advanced plan to win the 2012 presidential election.
Pretty much everything in that sentence is false. The “massive undertaking” is true, however. It would take a lot of planning, training and coordination to be done successfully (oh, we’ll get to that in a second). This wasn’t really the GOP’s effort, it was Team Romney’s. And perhaps “unprecedented” would fit if we’re discussing failure.
The entire purpose of this project was to digitize the decades-old practice of strike lists. The old way was to sit with your paper and mark off people that have voted and every hour or so, someone from the campaign would come get your list and take it back to local headquarters. Then, they’d begin contacting people that hadn’t voted yet and encourage them to head to the polls. It’s worked for years.
From the very start there were warning signs. After signing up, you were invited to take part in nightly conference calls. The calls were more of the slick marketing speech type than helpful training sessions. There was a lot of “rah-rahs” and lofty talk about how this would change the ballgame.
Working primarily as a web developer, I had some serious questions. Things like “Has this been stress tested?”, “Is there redundancy in place?” and “What steps have been taken to combat a coordinated DDOS attack or the like?”, among others. These types of questions were brushed aside (truth be told, they never took one of my questions). They assured us that the system had been relentlessly tested and would be a tremendous success.
On one of the last conference calls (I believe it was on Saturday night), they told us that our packets would be arriving shortly. Now, there seemed to be a fair amount of confusion about what they meant by “packet”. Some people on Twitter were wondering if that meant a packet in the mail or a pdf or what. Finally, my packet arrived at 4PM on Monday afternoon as an emailed 60 page pdf. Nothing came in the mail. Because I was out most of the day, I only got around to seeing it at around 10PM Monday night. So, I sat down and cursed as I would have to print out 60+ pages of instructions and voter rolls on my home printer. Naturally, for reasons I can’t begin to comprehend, my printer would not print in black and white with an empty magenta cartridge (No HP, I will never buy another one of your products ever again). So, at this point I became panicked. I was expected to be at the polls at 6:45AM and nothing was open. I was thankfully able to find a Kinko’s open until 11PM that was able to print it out and bind it for me, but this is not something I should have had to do. They expected 75-80 year old veteran volunteers to print out 60+ pages on their home computers? The night before election day? From what I hear, other people had similar experiences. In fact, many volunteers never received their packets at all.
At 6:30AM on Tuesday, I went to the polls. I was immediately turned away because I didn’t have my poll watcher certificate. Many, many people had this problem. The impression I got was this was taken care of because they had “registered me”. Others were as well. But apparently, I was supposed to go on my own to a Victory Center to pick it up, but that was never communicated properly. Outside of the technical problems, this was the single biggest failure of the operation. They simply didn’t inform people that this was a requirement. In fact, check out my “checklist” from my ORCA packet:Notice anything missing? My guess is the second “Chair (if allowed)” was supposed to be “poll watcher certificate” but they put chair twice. This was an instruction packet that went out to 30,000+ people. Did no one proof-read it?
So, I headed back home to see if I could get my certificate. I called their official help line. It went unanswered. I tried their legal line. Same thing. I emailed them. No response. I continued to do this for six straight hours and never got a response. I even tried to call three local victory centers. All went straight to voicemail.
While I was home, I took to Twitter and the web to try to find some answers. From what I saw, these problems were widespread. People had been kicked from poll watching for having no certificate. Others never received their pdf packets. Some were sent the wrong packets from a different area. Some received their packet, but their usernames and passwords didn’t work.
Now a note about the technology itself. For starters, this was billed as an “app” when it was actually a mobile-optimized website (or “web app”). For days I saw people on Twitter saying they couldn’t find the app on the Android Market or iTunes and couldn’t download it. Well, that’s because it didn’t exist. It was a website. This created a ton of confusion. Not to mention that they didn’t even “turn it on” until 6AM in the morning, so people couldn’t properly familiarize themselves with how it worked on their personal phone beforehand.
Next, and this part I find mind-boggingly absurd, the web address was located at “https://www.whateveritwas.com/orca”. Notice the “s” after http. This denotes it’s a secure connection, something that’s used for e-commerce and web-based email. So far, so good. The problem is that they didn’t auto-forward the regular “http” to “https” and as a result, many people got a blank page and thought the system was down. Setting up forwarding is the simplest thing in the world and only takes seconds, but they failed to do it. This is compounded by the fact that mobile browsers default to “http” when you just start with “www” (as 95% of the world does).
By 2PM, I had completely given up. I finally got ahold of someone at around 1PM and I never heard back. From what I understand, the entire system crashed at around 4PM. I’m not sure if that’s true, but it wouldn’t surprise me. I decided to wait for my wife to get home from work to vote, which meant going very late (around 6:15PM). Here’s the kicker, I never got a call to go out and vote. So, who the hell knows if that end of it was working either.
So, the end result was that 30,000+ of the most active and fired-up volunteers were wandering around confused and frustrated when they could have been doing anything else to help. Like driving people to the polls, phone-banking, walking door-to-door, etc. We lost by fairly small margins in Florida, Virginia, Ohio and Colorado. If this had worked could it have closed the gap? I sure hope not for my sanity’s sake.
The bitter irony of this entire endeavor was that a supposedly small government candidate gutted the local structure of GOTV efforts in favor of a centralized, faceless organization in a far off place (in this case, their Boston headquarters). Wrap your head around that.
I’m on Twitter at @JohnEkdahl if you have any questions.
Ron Paul’s rEVOLution: The Man And the Movement He Inspired (Broadside/HarperCollins, 2012)
Ron Paul’s two presidential campaigns have galvanized a mass movement for smaller government, sound money, and an end to our interventionist foreign policy. This genuinely spontaneous movement has featured blimps, “money bombs,” the rEVOLution logo, and thousands of college students chanting “End the Fed” at campuses across the country. Somehow the message Ron Paul had been advancing for 30 years caught on in an era of financial collapse, bailouts, unprecedented deficits, and the two longest wars in American history. Brian Doherty, a senior editor at Reason and author of several books on libertarian history, has been covering Ron Paul since 1999. In his new book he looks at Paul’s background, his early years in Congress, his 1988 Libertarian presidential run, his recent campaigns, the grassroots activists who joined the Ron Paul revolution, and indeed the election of Senator Rand Paul. Join us to hear two close observers of Ron Paul discuss “the man and the movement he inspired.”
Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) Discusses ‘Ron Paul’s Revolution’
Ron Paul’s two presidential campaigns have galvanized a mass movement for smaller government, sound money, and an end to our interventionist foreign policy. This genuinely spontaneous movement has featured blimps, “money bombs,” the rEVOLution logo, and thousands of college students chanting “End the Fed” at campuses across the country. Somehow the message Ron Paul had been advancing for 30 years caught on in an era of financial collapse, bailouts, unprecedented deficits, and the two longest wars in American history. Brian Doherty, a senior editor at Reason and author of several books on libertarian history, has been covering Ron Paul since 1999. In his new book he looks at Paul’s background, his early years in Congress, his 1988 Libertarian presidential run, his recent campaigns, the grassroots activists who joined the Ron Paul revolution, and indeed the election of Senator Rand Paul.
Dionysium with Brian Doherty author of Ron Paul’s Revolution
“Bernard Whitman, Democratic strategist, argues that Republicans are uncomfortable with Mitt Romney, who has effectively been running for president for 8 years. The audience at CPAC doesn’t like him, but the one thing he has going for him is his business credentials. Although, his business credentials don’t resonate with the Independent and Democratic base. His biggest problem is that he doesn’t have a clear concise economic plan. In order to reach out and grab conservatives he has to make them believe he is in the only viable candidate that can bring economic renewal to America and beat President Obama.”
Ann Coulter “We Elected A Man Based On The Color Of His Skin” pt.1
Ann Coulter “We Elected A Man Based On The Color Of His Skin” pt.2
Ann Coulter endorses Ron Paul in 2012
One Minute of Ann Coulter Playing With Her Hair At CPAC
Laura Ingraham Crushes On Arianna At CPAC
HuffPost Talks To ‘Joe The Plumber’ At CPAC
Ron Paul at CPAC 2012!
Mark Levin Plays Audio Clips Of Mitt Romney’s CPAC 2012 Speech
Newt Gingrich’s Speech at CPAC 2012 | High Quality |
A Conservative A Liberal & A Moderate Walk Into A Bar… Bartender Says…” Foster Friess
Full Speech Rick Santorum at CPAC 2012
Breitbart and company make an enterence CPAC 2012
Andrew Breitbart on the the new Citizens United movie on the occupy movement at CPAC 2012
Art at CPAC again
Steven Malanga – Public Sector Unions
Voices of CPAC Taylor Thompson Ron Paul fan
.
Rand Paul full speech at CPAC 2012
Senator Marco Rubio Addresses CPAC 2012
Mitch McConnell at CPAC 2012
Rick Perry CPAC 2012 Speech (2/9/2012)
RGA Chair Bob McDonnell’s speech at CPAC 2012
Brad Stine Brings The Wussification Of America To CPAC 2012
John Boehner “No One Loves Congress” (HEY! Something We Can ALL Agree On!)
Representative Jim Jordan Addresses CPAC 2012
Allen West CPAC 2012 Full Speech
Congressman Steve King 2012 CPAC Speech
CPAC 2012: Lt. Col. Oliver North
Ted Cruz at CPAC 2012
CPAC 2012: Occupy Protesters & Anti-gay Activists
Ron Paul cites ‘travel constraints’ as reason for skipping CPAC
By Felicia Sonmez
“…Ron Paul, the two-time winner of the Conservative Political Action Conference straw poll, isn’t attending this year’s conference in Washington because of “travel constraints” – but the Texas congressman hasn’t held a campaign event since Tuesday.
The American Conservative Union, which hosts the annual confab, Republican presidential candidate Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) addresses supporters during a caucus night party Tuesday, in Golden Valley, Minn. His campaign has been quiet since. (Jim Mone – AP) said in a statement last week that Paul’s son, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), would address the conference in his father’s stead “due to the travel constraints of his Presidential campaign.”
And Paul’s press secretary Gary Howard told the Houston Chronicle on Tuesday that “we have too much campaigning to do across the country.” …”
FOX News:Judge Napolitano Talks Ron Paul,Mitt Romney,Rick Santorum on Freedom Watch
Ron Paul on Freedom Watch w/ Judge Nepalitano (1-5-12)
SA@TAC – Taking the ‘Neo’ Out of ‘Conservative’
SA@TAC – The End of Right-Wing Progressivism?
SA@TAC – No Excuse: Mitt Romney’s Case for American Empire
SA@TAC – Newt Gingrich is Not a Conservative
SA@TAC – Compassionate Conservative Rick Santorum
Mitt Romney takes Iowa, Who will take New Hampshire? The Progressives!
SA@TAC – Daniel McCarthy on Neoconservatism
An interview with The American Conservative Editor Daniel McCarthy on the state of the American Right in 2010 and how the neoconservatives turned the GOP into the “War Party,” corrupting, devaluing and damaging conservatism for most of the decade prior.
SA@TAC – What’s a ‘Neoconservative?’
Libya and Syria: The Neocon Plan to Attack Seven Countries in Five Years
GBTV: Progressives in the Republican party
Glenn Beck on Progressivism Part 1
Glenn Beck on Progressivism Part 2
Glenn Beck on Progressivism Part 3
Glenn Beck on Progressivism Part 4
Glenn Beck on Progressivism Part 5
Glenn Beck on Progressivism Part 6
Making Sense of the Conservative Movement
What’s the Modern Definition of a Conservative?
Movie Magic Crippled Conservatives
The Bulwarks of the Conservative Movement
Progressives have taken over the Republican Party as they did the Democratic Party.
Romney, Gingrich, Santorium and Perry are big government progressives that try to fool the American people into believing that they are conservatives that support limited government.
All four “talk” conservative while they “walk” progressive and expand the size and scope of Federal and state governments.
What is even worse is all four are also neoconservatives that want the United States to police the world and empire or nation build abroad–spread progressivism over the entire world–with an interventionist aggressive foreign policy!
The neoconservatives want war with Iran and Syria.
Progressives want government intervention at home and abroad.
Do not let the so-called “conservative” talk radio show hosts fool you that they favor one of the Republican progressive candidates as their “conservative” choice.
None of the Republican progressive candidates are either conservative libertarians or conservative traditionalists, they are big government Republican neoconservative progressives.
The Republican progressives want to make the American people dependent upon war.
The Democratic progressives want to make the American people dependent upon welfare.
Both political parties are running budget deficits exceeding $1 trillion and will never run balanced budgets or pay off the national debt.
The American people pay the bills in taxes, inflation, damaged bodies and their lives.
Only the American people can stop Republican and Democratic progressives.
Keep in mind that most of the media are either Democratic or Republican progressives including many of the so-called “conservative” talk radio show hosts.
Many of these talk radio show hosts are neoconservative progressives that support Romney, Gingrich, Santorium and Perry.
These talk radio show hosts fear that the American people are starting to wake up to the fact that all four Repubican presidential candidates that they support and praise are neoconservative progressives.
This includes Bennett, Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity, Hewitt, Levin, Medved and Ingraham.
The American people are reading and discovering that Republican candidates are big government neoconservative progressives and not conservative libertarians or conservative traditionalist.
Do not be fooled by either the Republican neoconservative progressive candidates nor your favorite talk radio show hosts.
I have been in the conservative movement since Barry Goldwater ran for President in 1964.
I am a classical liberal or what in America is called a libertarian.
I identify my political philosophy as classical liberal or traditional libertarian or simply conservative.
SA@TAC – The Great Neo-Con: Libertarianism Isn’t ‘Conservative’
I have read and reread the works of Smith, Burke, Bastiat, Say, Menger, Mises, Hayek, Friedman, Sowell, Rand, Rothbard, Nock, Nash, Kirk and many others.
For many years I voted the lesser of two evil progressives by voting for Republican candidates that I knew were neither libertarians nor traditional conservatives.
Only one President, Ronald Reagan, was a conservative libertarian, but he was a disappointment for he failed to reduce the size and scope of the Federal government.
I am no longer a Republican, but an independent.
Life is too short and I have wised up.
I will no longer vote for the lesser of two evils for the simple reason it is still evil.
The only Republican presidential candidate that is clearly not a progressive but a classical liberal or traditional libertarian is Ron Paul.
The only Republican presidential candidate that wants to decrease the size and scope of the Federal government, balance the Federal budget, bring the troops home and eliminate the progressive income tax, IRS, Federal Reserve System, and many government departments, agencies and programs is Ron Paul.
The only way to stop the progressives of both political parties is to vote for candidates that truly believe in the Constitution and limited government.
This will take decades to accomplish and another political party with the financial backing of the American people.
Progressives control both political parties, media, professions, colleges, unions, and most large businesses.
It will not be easy, but it can be done over time.
Do not be fooled by the neoconservatives who are actually right-wing progressives who left the Democratic Party.
Now and in the future I will not support or vote for any Republican or Democratic candidate for any public office that is a progressive or neoconservative.
As they say in Texas, fool me once shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.
Republican Neoconservative Progressive Candidates
Party Establishment Choice: Mitt Romney
Rush Limbaugh Admits Mitt Romney is a GOP Disaster if nominated
John McCain endorses Mitt Romney for President
Mitt Romney gets Endorsement from George H.W. Bush (12-22-11)
The story of two men trapped in one body
Mitt Romney: I’m Progressive
Mitt Romney: “R” Does Not Stand for Republican
The Real Romney?
Mitt Romney on the Contract with America
See Mitt Romney Promote an Individual Mandate
Romney anti-Gingrich ad “Baggage”
Smiling (Restore Our Future)
Newt Gingrich Vs Mitt Romney 2012 Ad
SA@TAC – No Excuse: Mitt Romney’s Case for American Empire
Party Base Choice: Newt Gingrich
Newt Gingrich on abortion in 1991: “Relax and accept it”
Newt Gingrich: We should respect pro-abortion Republicans
Newt Gingrich: There’s plenty of room for pro-abortion Republicans
Newt Gingrich Admits He’s a Progressive in the Theodore Roosevelt Tradition
Newt Gingrich is a Progressive Rockefeller Republican
Newt Gingrich: I’m a Wilsonian
Newt Gingrich: I supported Rockefeller over Goldwater
Newt Gingrich FDR was Greatest President of the 20th Century
Newt Gingrich: Progressives took over both parties
Sean Hannity endorses Newt Gingrich
The REAL Newt Gingrich
SA@TAC – Newt Gingrich is Not a Conservative
Newt Gingrich is Toast
Neoconservative Religious Right Choice: Rick Santorium
SA@TAC – Who’s a Republican?
SA@TAC – Compassionate Conservative Rick Santorum
Santorum: pursuit of happiness harms America
Rick Santorum says he’s “proud” of his earmarks
Rick Santorum – Unelectable
Senator Rick Santoum A Big Washington Insider & Spender
Senator Rick Santorum Admits Voting for Ear Marks and The Bridge To Nowhere
Rick Santorum On Earmarks “Congress Appropriates Money! That’s What Congress Is Supposed To Do”
Rick Santorum hearts turncoat Arlen Specter
Rick Santorum on gay marriage
Rick Santorum Opposes Gay Marriage and Adoption
Santorum: pursuit of happiness harms America
Ron Paul Destroys Rick Santorum On Iran! – Iowa Republian Presidential Debate
cnn – rick santorum: barack obama’s foreign policy is appeasement
Dennis Kucinich on Santorum’s attacks on Ron Paul
Rand Paul Exposes Rick Santorum: He’s a Reckless & Trigger-Happy Big Spender
SA@TheDC – Conservatism for What?
SA@TAC – Constitutional Conservatives?
Republican Party Conservative Libertarian Choice: Ron Paul
Ron Paul – The Founders gave Government one Role: Protecting Liberty
Ron Paul Ad – Life
Thanksgiving Family Forum – Ron Paul Highlights
SA@TheDC – Conservatism for What?
Ron Paul on Iowa Caucus, Spending Cuts, Opponents
Ron Paul Ad – Plan
Ron Paul: The Economy
Ron Paul: Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney Are “Consistently Inconsistent”
Veteran Ron Paul Calls Newt Gingrich A Chicken Hawk Draft Dodger!
“Blessed are the Peacemakers:” Ron Paul’s Christian Foreign Policy
Congressman Ron Paul, MD – We’ve Been NeoConned
Ron Paul on Just War, War Breaking Families
SA@TAC – Ronald Reagan: Isolationist
SA@TheDC – “I Like Ron Paul Except on Foreign Policy”
“No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.”
~Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution
SA@TheDC – The Terrorists Have Won
SA@TheDC – Assassinating the Constitution
SA@TheDC – Does Newt Gingrich Want the Constitution to ‘Die?’
Farewell Bill of Rights
Any tea party supported representative, Senator or Representative, that voted for the NDAA section 1031 with the indefinite detention of American citizens by the military without legal due process will be targeted for defeat in the next election.
These politicians apparently have never read nor understood the U.S. Constitution that they swore an oath to protect and defend.
The tea party people are going to be real upset when they find out about this.
Shame on Congress.
Defeat all politicians who voted for this!
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012
S.1867 National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 – Indefinite Detainment of US Citizens
Martial Law NDAA Snatch Grab
Obama Signs NDAA Marial Law ∞ Legal Holocaust End of Human Rights Ron Paul Revolution
Obama’s Deception of the Indefinite Detention Bill
Military Could Detain Americans Indefinitely
“Shut Up. You Don’t Get a Lawyer!”: The Defense Authorization Act Guts Civil Liberties
Obama Administration Demanded Power To Indefinitely Detain U.S. Citizens
Ron Paul – USA Is Setting Up For A Military Dictatorship *It Happened*
AMERICA IS GONE!! Listen to this… It is over! WAKE UP PLEASE!!!.
Treason in the US Senate
Sen. Kirk on Fox News talking detainee language in Defense Authorization bill
S. 1867 The End Of America
Sen. Jeff Merkley – Why He Did Not Vote For S 1867
Alex Jones: Senate wants martial law in America
Battlefield: America – Have the Terrorists Won?
National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 and The Trading With The Enemy Act of 1917 (Every 10yrs)
Bringing the War of Terror Home
Indefinite Detention of Americans under New NDAA Bill
THE END TO OUR FREE CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC – RAND PAULS - NEW NDAA SENATE BILL
National Defense Authorization Act:The End of America
US Senate – Terror Detainee Policy
Stewart Rhodes: Senate Has Declared War on American People 1/3
Stewart Rhodes: Senate Has Declared War on American People 2/3
Stewart Rhodes: Senate Has Declared War on American People 3/3
JACL Director Floyd Mori: NDAA Bill is A Move Back to The Dark Ages 1/2
JACL Director Floyd Mori: NDAA Bill is A Move Back to The Dark Ages 2/2
Three myths about the detention bill
By Glenn Greenwald
“…Condemnation of President Obama is intense, and growing, as a result of his announced intent to sign into law the indefinite detention bill embedded in the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). These denunciations come not only from the nation’s leading civil liberties and human rights groups, but also from the pro-Obama New York Times Editorial Page, which today has a scathing Editorial describing Obama’s stance as “a complete political cave-in, one that reinforces the impression of a fumbling presidency” and lamenting that “the bill has so many other objectionable aspects that we can’t go into them all,” as well as from vocal Obama supporters such as Andrew Sullivan, who wrote yesterday that this episode is “another sign that his campaign pledge to be vigilant about civil liberties in the war on terror was a lie.” In damage control mode, White-House-allied groups are now trying to ride to the rescue with attacks on the ACLU and dismissive belittling of the bill’s dangers.
For that reason, it is very worthwhile to briefly examine — and debunk — the three principal myths being spread by supporters of this bill, and to do so very simply: by citing the relevant provisions of the bill, as well as the relevant passages of the original 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force (AUMF), so that everyone can judge for themselves what this bill actually includes (this is all above and beyond the evidence I assembled in writing about this bill yesterday):
Myth # 1: This bill does not codify indefinite detention …”
“… Myth #2: The bill does not expand the scope of the War on Terror as defined by the 2001 AUMF
“… Myth #3: U.S. citizens are exempted from this new bill …”
“…Fascism ( /ˈfæʃɪzəm/) is a radical authoritarian nationalist political ideology.[1][2] Fascists seek to rejuvenate their nation based on commitment to the national community as an organic entity, in which individuals are bound together in national identity by suprapersonal connections of ancestry, culture, and blood.[3] To achieve this, fascists purge forces, ideas, people, and systems deemed to be the cause of decadence and degeneration.[3] Fascists advocate the creation of a totalitarian single-party state that seeks the mass mobilization of a nation through indoctrination, physical education, discipline and family policy (such as eugenics).[4][5] This state is led by a supreme leader who exercises a dictatorship over the fascist movement, the government and other state institutions.[6] Fascist governments forbid and suppress opposition.[7]
Fascism promotes political violence and war as actions that create national regeneration, spirit and vitality.[4][8] It views violence as a fact of life that is a necessary means to achieve human progress.[9] It exalts militarism as providing positive transformation in society and providing spiritual renovation, education, instilling of a will to dominate in people’s character and creating national comradeship through military service.[10] Fascists commonly utilize paramilitary organizations for violent attacks on opponents or to overthrow a political system.[11]
Fascism opposes class-based identity and society, it is thus both anti-bourgeois and anti-proletarian; and individualist based identity and society.[12] It is opposed to many ideologies, including conservatism, liberalism, and two major forms of socialism: communism and social democracy.[13] It opposes a variety of economic, political and social systems, it is opposed to democracy, parliamentary systems, is anti-clerical, and holds a distinctive opposition to capitalism.[14] It rejects egalitarianism, materialism, and rationalism in favour of action, discipline, hierarchy, spirit and will.[15]
In economics, fascists oppose economic liberalism (as a bourgeois movement) and Marxism (as a proletarian movement) for being class-based movements.[16] Fascists present their ideology as that of an economically trans-class movement that advocates resolving economic class conflict to secure national solidarity.[17] Fascists advocate: a state-directed, regulated economy that is dedicated to the nation; the use and primacy of regulated private property and private enterprise contingent upon service to the nation or state; the use of state enterprise where private enterprise is failing or is inefficient; and autarky.[3] They are hostile to finance capitalism, plutocracy, the “power of money”, and internationalist economics.[3]
Fascism was founded during World War I by Italian national syndicalists who combined left-wing and right-wing political views, but Italian fascism gravitated to the right in the early 1920s.[18][19] Italian Fascists described fascism as a right-wing ideology in the political program The Doctrine of Fascism: “We are free to believe that this is the century of authority, a century tending to the ‘right,’ a fascist century.”[20][21] However they also officially declared that although they were “sitting on the right” they were generally indifferent to their position on the left-right spectrum, as being a conclusion of their combination of views rather than an objective, and considering it insignificant to their basis of their views that they claimed could just as easily be associated with “the mountain of the center” as with the right.[22] There is a running dispute among scholars about where along the left/right spectrum that fascism resides.[23][24][25][26] …”
Government Social Security | Social Security Scheme | History of Social Security
Social Security and Medicare to go bankrupt earlier than expected – CBS News
Deficits, Debts and Unfunded Liabilities: The Consequences of Excessive Government Spending
Ron Paul – End Medicare, Social Security & Medicaid?
John Stossel – Government’s Ponzi Scheme
Power of the Market – Social Security
Milton Friedman – The Social Security Myth
Your Boss Doesn’t Really Pay Your Social Security Tax
How Does a Ponzi Scheme Work?
Your Money: the Ponzi Scheme Explained
Dick Armey: Social Security is a Ponzi scheme
Rand Paul In The ’90s: Medicare Is Socialism And Social Security Is A Ponzi Scheme
Limbaugh – ‘I Want To Applaud’ Perry’s Claim That Social Security Is A Ponzi Scheme
Paul Ryan: Hiding Spending Doesn’t Reduce Spending
Peter Schiff, Ron Paul, Max Keiser – Social Security Ponzi Scheme
Two Former Social Security Officials Admit The System Is Not Much Different from a Ponzi Scheme
Perry Fires At Rove & Romney: Social Security Is A “Ponzi Scheme” And A “Monstrous Lie”
Fox ‘Straight News’ Anchor MacCallum Defends Perry’s Claim That Social Security Is A ‘Ponzi Scheme’
Social Security and Medicare use a pay as you go system to fund Social Security and Medicare benefits to those who are entitled to them.
Current workers pay Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes.
These tax revenues are used to pay the benefits to Social Security recipients and those on Medicare who have incurred medical bills.
Both Social Security and Medicare are running deficits–they are paying out more in benefits than they are collecting in payroll taxes.
President Obama is proposing that payroll taxes for Social Security be cut.
In other words for a period of time the current workers can stop paying into the Ponzi scheme of Social Security.
This only increase the size of the Social Security deficit and is fiscally irresponsible.
To correct the situation requires either the raising of payroll taxes or the cutting of benefits to Social Security recipients.
Few Democratic or Republicans politicians will clearly tell you these facts.
Both Social Security and Medicare must be reformed so they are no longer a Ponzi scheme run and controlled by the federal government.
Instead of the federal government running the Ponzi scheme and spending your money as it sees fit, individuals need to control and own their retirement and health insurance plan accounts.
If a private retirement or health insurance plan was run like Social Security or Medicare, they would go broke and those responsible might very well go to jail for fraud and theft of funds.
Texas Governor Rick Perry and Texas Congressman Ron Paul are right, Social Security is a Ponzi scheme.
This Ponzi scheme for funding Social Security and Medicare needs to be stopped.
Paul has an even better idea.
Let’s give every American the right to opt out of Social Security and Medicare.
These individuals could purchase their own retirement and health insurance plans that they own and control.
Those Americans all ready receiving Social Security and Medicare and those electing to stay in the current system would be permitted to do so.
Tea Party Trashing: Dems Blame Tea Party For Credit Downgrade
Sen. Rand Paul on balancing the budget
03/17/11: Sen. Rand Paul Introduces Five-Year Balanced Budget Plan
Rubio Joins Floor Debate: No Spending Bills Without A Budget
Lee Joins Floor Debate: No Spending Bills Without A Budget
“Defending the Tea Party Against Sen. John Kerry”
Michele Bachmann Calls on President to Demand Geithner’s Resignation
Ron Paul on Bloomberg: Out of Control Spending Responsible for Downgrade
The Tea Party demands that the Democratic and Republican Party establishments live within the means of the American people by balancing the budget every year.
If either political party had done this when they were in power, Standard & Poor’s would not have downgraded the Treasury Securities of the United States.
The Democratic Party controlled both the Senate and House of Representatives from January 2007 through January 2011 and ran up massive budgetary deficits and together with a $787 billion stimulus package increased the National Debt by nearly $7,000 billion.
The S&P downgrade was a direct result of this massive spending and huge increases in the National Debt that have now exceeded 100% of Gross Domestic Product.
Now the President, his propagandists and fellow Democrats blame the tea party for the downgrade–the big lie repeated over and over again.
The truth is the Tea Party pointed out that both political parties were not fiscally responsible and future budgets needed to be balanced or in surplus.
This requires massive cuts in the budget baseline itself and not just reductions in the rate of growth of the budget baseline.
S-1 FY2012 Tea Party’s Balanced/Surplus Budget(Nominal Dollars in Billions)
Fiscal Year
Outlays
Revenues
Surpluses
Debt Held By Public
2012
2,500
2,500
0
10,900
2013
2,800
2,800
0
10,900
2014
3,000
3,000
0
10,900
2015
3,200
3,200
0
10,900
2016
3,300
3,300
0
10,900
2017
3,400
3,500
100
10,800
2018
3,500
3,700
200
10,600
2019
3,600
3,900
300
10,300
2020
3,700
4,000
300
10,000
2021
3,800
4,300
500
9,500
2012-2021
32,800
34,200
1,400
n.a.
The political elites are aware that the American people know they are being lied to and many of the current Senators and Representatives will be replaced by candidates who truly believe in fiscal responsibility and a constitutional republic.
While it may take several elections to accomplish this, President Obama will be fired by the American people for his failure of leadership in deliverying a peace and prosperity economy.
Cut, Cap & Balance! Senators Paul, Lee and Vitter want a Constitutional Amendment
Sen. Toomey holds press conference on bill to protect seniors and active military
Sen. Toomey on Fox and Friends discussing the debt debate
Mark Levin Interviews Congressman Jim Jordan Who Supports Cut,Cap And Balance
The Lee-Toomey-Paul Cut, Cap and Balance Act Press Conference
Sen. Rand Paul Supports Cut-Cap-Balance Pledge
Lee Says Debt Plan Must Have Balanced Budget Amendment
7-21-11 – Ron Paul on the Debt Negotiations & Cut, Cap and Balance
Sen. Rand Paul on Fox Business w/ Lou Dobbs – 07/20/11
Ron Paul on The Lou Dobbs Show: Explains Why he didn’t vote for the Cut, Cap and Balance Bill
Ron Paul on WMAL Morning Majority: Talks about Dept Limit & Cut, Cap, and Balance
Ron Paul Ad – Conviction
Bachmann: “I can not vote to raise the debt ceiling”
Thomas Sowell
Debt-Ceiling Chicken
“…The national debt-ceiling law should be judged by what it actually does, not by how good an idea it seems to be. The one thing that the national debt-ceiling has never done is to put a ceiling on the rising national debt. Time and time again, for years on end, the national debt-ceiling has been raised whenever the national debt gets near whatever the current ceiling might be.
Regardless of what it is supposed to do, what the national debt-ceiling actually does is enable any administration to get all the political benefits of runaway spending for the benefit of their favorite constituencies — and then invite the opposition party to share the blame, by either raising the national debt ceiling, or by voting for unpopular cutbacks in spending or increases in taxes.
The Obama administration is a classic example. When all its skyrocketing spending bills were being rushed through Congress without even being read, the Democrats had such overwhelming majorities in both the Senate and the House of Representatives that Republicans had all they could do to get a word in edgewise — even though their words had no chance of stopping, or even slowing down, the spending of trillions of dollars.
Now that the bill is coming due for all that spending and borrowing, Republicans are suddenly being invited in to share the blame for either raising the national debt ceiling or for whatever other unpopular measures will be legislated.
Many years ago, someone said, “If you didn’t invite me to the big take-off, don’t invite me to the crash landing.” This was Obama’s big spending spree, but “bipartisanship” requires Republicans to either split the bill or be blamed if the government shuts down or defaults.
What would happen if there were no national debt-ceiling law?
Those who got the political benefits from handing out trillions of dollars of the taxpayers’ money (plus borrowed money) would also get the clear and sole blame for the resulting skyrocketing national debt and all the unpopular consequences.
Those people who want serious and substantial spending cuts are absolutely right in what they want. There are not only government programs that need to be cut but whole government agencies, including Cabinet-level Departments, that are not merely useless but positively harmful on net balance.
There are a lot of things that could be cut, and should be cut, instead of defaulting on the nation’s debts. But that is not likely to happen, if Obama and his media chorus can instead blame the Republicans for forcing a government shutdown or a credit default. …”
How to Freeze the Debt Ceiling Without Risking Default
Next year, the government will have 10 times more income than it needs to honor its interest obligations.
By Pat Toomey
“…As members of Congress debate whether to raise the U.S. debt ceiling—the limit on our government’s debt—we should all agree on at least one thing: Under no circumstances is it acceptable for the U.S. to default on its debt. Not only are we morally obligated to honor our debts, but we benefit greatly from the nearly universal conviction that those who lend to us will always be repaid, on time and in full. We should never undermine that conviction.
Fortunately, even if Congress doesn’t raise the debt ceiling, a default on our debt need not follow when our borrowings reach their limit in the next few months. I intend to introduce legislation to make sure of this.
For months, some political leaders and commentators have argued that failure to raise the debt ceiling would necessarily cause the U.S. to default on its debt. President Obama’s Council of Economic Advisors chairman, Austan Goolsbee, recently warned, “If we get to the point where you’ve damaged the full faith and credit of the United States, that would be the first default in history caused purely by insanity. I don’t see why anybody’s talking about playing chicken with the debt ceiling.”
In fact, if Congress refuses to raise the debt ceiling, the federal government will still have far more than enough money to fully service our debt. Next year, for instance, about 6.5% of all projected federal government expenditures will go to interest on our debt, and tax revenue is projected to cover about 67% of all government expenditures. With roughly 10 times more income than needed to honor our debt obligations, why would we ever default?
To make absolutely sure, I intend to introduce legislation that would require the Treasury to make interest payments on our debt its first priority in the event that the debt ceiling is not raised. This would not only ensure the continued confidence of investors at home and abroad, but would enable us to have an honest debate about the consequences of our eventual decision about the debt ceiling. …”
Rand Paul Amendments Debate: Patriot Act – 05/26/11 Pt.1
Rand Paul Amendments Debate: Patriot Act – 05/26/11 Pt.2
Harry Reid attacks Rand Paul to enforce Patriot Act
Sen. Rand Paul Against Renewal of PATRIOT Act
THE PATRIOT ACT – Senator Rand Paul
Sen. Rand Paul: “I Rise In Response to a Scurrilous Accusation”
Bachmann Addresses Security Provisions
Go to a judge and get a warrant.
Vote against the renewal of The Patriot Act.
Background Artcles and Videos
Judge Andrew Napolitano Natural Rights and The Patriot Act part 1 of 3
Judge Andrew Napolitano Natural Rights and PATRIOT ACT Part 2 of 3
Judge Andrew Napolitano : Natural Rights and The Patriot Act! (Part 3/3)
USA PATRIOT Act
Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001
“…The USA PATRIOT Act (commonly known as the “Patriot Act”) is an Act of the U.S. Congress that was signed into law by President George W. Bush on October 26, 2001. The title of the Act is a contrived three letter initialism (USA) preceding a seven letter acronym (PATRIOT), which in combination stand for Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001.[1] The Act dramatically reduced restrictions on law enforcement agencies’ ability to search telephone, e-mail communications, medical, financial, and other records; eased restrictions on foreign intelligence gathering within the United States; expanded the Secretary of the Treasury’s authority to regulate financial transactions, particularly those involving foreign individuals and entities; and broadened the discretion of law enforcement and immigration authorities in detaining and deporting immigrants suspected of terrorism-related acts. The act also expanded the definition of terrorism to include domestic terrorism, thus enlarging the number of activities to which the USA PATRIOT Act’s expanded law enforcement powers can be applied.
On May 27, 2011, President Barack Obama signed a 4-year extension of three key provisions in the USA Patriot Act: roving wiretaps, searches of business records (the “library records provision“), and conducting surveillance of “lone wolves” — individuals suspected of terrorist-related activities not linked to terrorist groups.[2] …”
4/14/11: Sen. Rand Paul Speaks Out Against the Continuing Resolution
Senator Lee explains the enforceability of a balanced budget amendment
Senator Pat Toomey Explains That Failing To Raise Debt Limit Doesn’t Cause Default
Neither the Republican Party nor Democratic Party Fiscal Year 2012 budget proposals are the road to peace and prosperity but a Tea Party budget with balanced budgets most definitely is:
Which Budgets Are Balanced And Living Within The Means of The American People?
S-1 FY2012 Tea Party’s Balanced/Surplus Budget(Nominal Dollars in Billions)
Fiscal Year
Outlays
Revenues
Surpluses
Debt Held By Public
2012
2,500
2,500
0
10,900
2013
2,800
2,800
0
10,900
2014
3,000
3,000
0
10,900
2015
3,200
3,200
0
10,900
2016
3,300
3,300
0
10,900
2017
3,400
3,500
100
10,800
2018
3,500
3,700
200
10,600
2019
3,600
3,900
300
10,300
2020
3,700
4,000
300
10,000
2021
3,800
4,300
500
9,500
2012-2021
32,800
34,200
1,400
n.a.
George H W Bush read my lips
Boehner on GMA: To Create Jobs, Let’s Cut Spending & Stop The Tax Hike — Now
The Republican Party establishment still does not get it nor are they listening to the tea party movement or the American people.
The tea party movement is being betrayed by the Republican Party establishment in Washington D.C. by Senators Toomey, Lee, Rubio and DeMint and House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan.
Starting this year, all fiscal year budgets from here on out must be balanced by cutting spending outlays including the closing of Federal Departments.
Taking ten to twenty-five years to balance the budget is simply neither serious nor fiscally responsible.
Gentlemen, your plans do not live within the means of the American people.
Gentlemen, your plans are fiscally irresponsible and your budgets are massively unbalanced.
Gentlemen, your plans would increase the National Debt by several trillion dollars over the next ten years.
Gentlemen, your plans would not get the American economy on a high growth path needed to create over 30 million new full-time jobs that are needed now and not in ten years.
Gentlemen, your plan is a disappointment and a disgrace.
Stop protecting the budget baseline and in turn the Federal Government Departments, and start balancing the budget in Fiscal Year 2012 by permanently closing Federal Departments, agencies and programs.
Congratulations, you are repeating the mistakes that led to the Republican Party losses in 2006 and 2008.
Only Senator Rand Paul’s proposed Fiscal Year 2012 Budget proposal comes close to understanding the scope and urgency of the fiscal crisis.
Unfortunately, the Federal Government does not have the luxury of waiting five years to balance the budget.
In less than three years the economy will be in another recession as a direct result of Congress not balancing the budget in a timely manner.
By then the credit rating agencies will have downgraded Treasury debt and interest rates will be significantly higher making matters even worse.
Any Senator or Representative that votes for either Senator Toomey’s or Representative Ryan’s plan deserves to be defeated in the next election.
Budget to the estimated tax revenues not the CBO budget baseline.
Streamline the Federal Government by closing ten Federal Departments.
Cap the National Debt Limit at $15,000 billion and start paying off the National debt within five years.
Cut the budgets of the remaining Departments including the Department of Defense by 20% and total compensation for all Government employees by 20%.
Pass the FairTax with a 25% (excluding the tax) or 20% (including the tax) national retail sales consumption tax on the sale of new goods and services to replace all Federal taxes.
The United States of America needs to return a peace and prosperity economy with a constitutional republic that is limited in both size and scope.
The United States of America needs to abandon the warfare and welfare economy with a collectivist state that is not limited in either size or scope.
The American people want a choice not an echo of President Obama’s Democratic Party Fiscal 2012 budget proposal.
Gentleman, back to the drawing boards–start cutting and balancing–earn you pay.
Background Articles and Videos
Ron Paul on FOX News 05/25/11
U.S. Debt Rating Drops to “Negative”
Summary of Outlays, Revenues (Receipts), Deficits, Surpluses Fiscal Years 1980-2010(Nominal Dollars in Millions)
Fiscal Year
Outlays
Revenues (Receipts)
Deficits (-), Surpluses
1980
590,941
517,112
-73,830
1981
678,241
599,272
-78,968
1982
745,743
617,766
-127,977
1983
808,364
600,562
-207,802
1984
851,805
666,488
-185,367
1985
946,344
734,037
-212,308
1986
990,382
769,155
-221,277
1987
1,004,017
854,288
-149,730
1988
1,064,417
854,288
-155,178
1989
1,143,744
991,105
-152,639
1990
1,252,994
1,031,958
-221,036
1991
1,324,226
1,054,988
-269,238
1992
1,381,529
1,091,208
-290,321
1993
1,409,386
1,154,335
-255,051
1994
1,461,753
1,258,566
-203,186
1995
1,515,742
1,351,790
-163,392
1996
1,560,484
1,453,053
-107,431
1997
1,601,116
1,579,232
-21,884
1998
1,652,458
1,721,728
69,270
1999
1,701,842
1,827,452
125,610
2000
1,788,950
2,025,191
236,241
2001
1,862,846
1,991,082
128,236
2002
2,010,894
1,853,136
-157,758
2003
2,159,899
1,782,314
-377,585
2004
2,292,841
1,880,114
-412,727
2005
2,471,957
2,153,611
-318,346
2006
2,655,050
2,406,869
-248,181
2007
2,728,686
2,567,985
-160,701
2008
2,982,544
2,523,991
-458,553
2009
3,517,677
2,104,989
-1,412,688
2010
3,456,213
2,162,724
-1,293,489
For a history of the Federal Government’s Receipts (Revenues), Outlays, and Deficits and Surpluses
Let me tell you how it will be;
There’s one for you, nineteen for me.
‘Cause I’m the taxman,
Yeah, I’m the taxman.
Should five per cent appear too small,
Be thankful I don’t take it all.
‘Cause I’m the taxman,
Yeah, I’m the taxman.
(if you drive a car, car;) – I’ll tax the street;
(if you try to sit, sit;) – I’ll tax your seat;
(if you get too cold, cold;) – I’ll tax the heat;
(if you take a walk, walk;) – I’ll tax your feet.
Taxman!
‘Cause I’m the taxman,
Yeah, I’m the taxman.
Don’t ask me what I want it for, (ah-ah, mister Wilson)
If you don’t want to pay some more. (ah-ah, mister heath)
‘Cause I’m the taxman,
Yeah, I’m the taxman.
Now my advice for those who die, (taxman)
Declare the pennies on your eyes. (taxman)
‘Cause I’m the taxman,
Yeah, I’m the taxman.
And you’re working for no one but me.
Taxman!
The Contrast on Taxes – Pro-growth reform or Job Crushing Tax Hikes
The Budget Debate’s Missing Ingredient – Economic Growth
Paul Ryan at the Economic Club of Chicago: Shared Scarcity vs Renewed Prosperity
Neither higher taxes nor more deficits and a higher national debt are the path to economic growth and prosperity.
President Obama hides in his budget proposal a tax rate increase to 44% for the so-called rich whose businesses create wealth and jobs in America .
This is a great speech or talk by House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan.
Unfortunately, while Paul Ryan talks the talk, his proposed Republican Budget simply does not walk the walk.
Congressman Ryan hides the Republican Party’s deficit in the open yet the press cannot even figure it out.
The proposed Ryan Republican budget for fiscal year 2012 results in an estimated deficit of $995 billion dollars or about another $1,000 billion increase in the national debt.
Yes, this is better than President Obama’s estimated Fiscal Year 2012 budget deficit of $1,101 billion.
Yet both proposed budgets are not fiscally responsible but business as usual for the Democratic and Republican Party establishments.
Neither the Republican nor Democratic Party budget proposals are the road to peace and prosperity but a Tea Party budget with balanced budgets most definitely is:
Which Budgets Are Balanced And Living Within The Means of The American People?
S-1 FY2012 Tea Party’s Balanced/Surplus Budget(Nominal Dollars in Billions)
Fiscal Year
Outlays
Revenues
Surpluses
Debt Held By Public
2012
2,500
2,500
0
10,900
2013
2,800
2,800
0
10,900
2014
3,000
3,000
0
10,900
2015
3,200
3,200
0
10,900
2016
3,300
3,300
0
10,900
2017
3,400
3,500
100
10,800
2018
3,500
3,700
200
10,600
2019
3,600
3,900
300
10,300
2020
3,700
4,000
300
10,000
2021
3,800
4,300
500
9,500
2012-2021
32,800
34,200
1,400
n.a.
The real problem is out of control government spending and unbalanced budgets for nearly three more decades.
Paul Ryan long and winding road to a balanced budget in twenty-five years or longer is not a path to prosperity but a road to economic stagnation and financial ruin for the United States.
I applaud Paul Ryan’s growth and jobs message.
However, more and more deficit spending and an ever increasing national debt are a recipe for failure.
Stop spinning and distracting us Mr. Ryan.
Balance the budget in Fiscal Year 2012 or you too will be replaced with someone from the tea party movement who will balance the budget and really cut spending.
Senators DeMint, Lee and Paul are on the right track for a peace and prosperity balanced budget that would cut spending by permanently closing Federal Departments.
Rand Paul “I Don’t Think We’re On A Path To Balancing The Budget”
3/09/11: Sen. Rand Paul on balancing the budget
03/17/11: Sen. Rand Paul Introduces Five-Year Balanced Budget Plan
Rep. Garrett explains the RSC plan to balance the budget in less than ten years on “Stossel”
However, five years is simply too slow and the cuts are too small.
The United States economy is on the brink of another recession that must be prevented by balancing the budget now to restore business and consumer confidence that Congress understands both the scope and urgency of problem.
Time is running out on both the Democratic and Republican Party establishment and their leadership.
With over thirty million American searching for a full time job, the American people will vote out of office both big spending Democrats and Republicans.
Food and gasoline prices as well the prices of imports and other goods and service are going up as the Federal Reserve devalues the dollar by massively increasing the money supply with so-called qunatitative easing.
In other words the purchasing power of your money is falling in value to pay for the Federal Government’s out of control spending.
Ron Paul: There’s Too Much Bipartisanship in Spending and Welfare/Warfarism
Ron Paul: Fall of the Federal Empire
The tea party movement wants balanced budgets and absolutely no increase in the National Debt ceiling.
Any Republican or Democratic in the House or Senate that votes for unbalanced budgets starting in Fiscal Year 2012 and an increase in the National Debt ceiling should be voted out of office in the next election.
Rep. Garrett dissects the debt ceiling with Judge Napolitano
Neither Taxman Obama nor The Long and Winding Road Ryan are the stairway to heaven with peace and prosperity.
George Michael – The Long And Winding Road
The Beatles The Long & Winding Road (2009 Stereo Remaster)
The long and winding road
That leads to your door
Will never disappear
I’ve seen that road before
It always leads me here
Lead me to your door.
The wild and windy night
That the rain washed away
Has left a pool of tears
Crying for the day.
Why leave me standing here?
Let me know the way.
Many times I’ve been alone
And many times I’ve cried,
Anyway you’ll never know
The many ways I’ve tried.
And still they lead me back
To the long, winding road
You left me standing here
A long, long time ago
Don’t leave me waiting here
Lead me to your door.
But still they lead me back
To the long winding road
You left me standing here
A long, long time ago (ohhh)
Don’t keep me waiting here (don’t keep me waiting)
Lead me to your door. (yeah yeah yeah yeah)
The tea party movement and the American people are looking for the piper of living within ones means with balanced budgets and a dollar that is stable in value or purchasing power.
The American people will be calling the tune and throwing out of office both Democrats and Republicans who waste the people’s hard earned money on all that glitters–warfare and welfare.
The American people are looking for a rock and not being rolled by yet another articulate but fundamentally deceitful politician.
Led Zeppelin-Stairway to Heaven
“Stairway To Heaven”
There’s a lady who’s sure all that glitters is gold
And she’s buying the stairway to heaven.
When she gets there she knows, if the stores are all closed
With a word she can get what she came for.
Ooh, ooh, and she’s buying the stairway to heaven.
There’s a sign on the wall but she wants to be sure
‘Cause you know sometimes words have two meanings.
In a tree by the brook, there’s a songbird who sings,
Sometimes all of our thoughts are misgiven.
Ooh, it makes me wonder,
Ooh, it makes me wonder.
There’s a feeling I get when I look to the west,
And my spirit is crying for leaving.
In my thoughts I have seen rings of smoke through the trees,
And the voices of those who stand looking.
Ooh, it makes me wonder,
Ooh, it really makes me wonder.
And it’s whispered that soon if we all call the tune
Then the piper will lead us to reason.
And a new day will dawn for those who stand long
And the forests will echo with laughter.
If there’s a bustle in your hedgerow, don’t be alarmed now,
It’s just a spring clean for the May queen.
Yes, there are two paths you can go by, but in the long run
There’s still time to change the road you’re on.
And it makes me wonder.
Your head is humming and it won’t go, in case you don’t know,
The piper’s calling you to join him,
Dear lady, can you hear the wind blow, and did you know
Your stairway lies on the whispering wind.
And as we wind on down the road
Our shadows taller than our soul.
There walks a lady we all know
Who shines white light and wants to show
How everything still turns to gold.
And if you listen very hard
The tune will come to you at last.
When all are one and one is all
To be a rock and not to roll.
And she’s buying the stairway to heaven.
Background Articles and Videos
47% See Major Changes in Defense, Social Security, Medicare As Necessary to Big Budget Cuts, 36% Don’t
“…Most voters know they want to cut government spending in a serious way, but despite the ongoing national budget-cutting debate, they don’t seem to recognize what that’s going to take.
The majority of U.S. federal spending is allotted to national defense, Social Security and Medicare. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that just 47% of Likely U.S. Voters correctly recognize that it is necessary to make major changes in those areas to make truly significant long-term cuts in government spending. Thirty-six percent (36%) don’t believe big changes in these three areas are needed, while another 17% aren’t sure. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
This marks virtually no change from early April but shows increased voter awareness from February of last year.
The most high-profile plan for changing Medicare that’s currently on the table is the one proposed by Republican Congressman Paul Ryan of Wisconsin. That plan, which includes allowing individuals to purchase private health insurance as an alternative and raising the eligibility age from 65 to 67, has been denounced by most Democrats and even has drawn the criticism of Republican presidential hopeful Newt Gingrich.
But despite the attention politicians and pundits are giving Ryan’s plan, public views of it are virtually unchanged from late last month. Twenty-six percent (26%) of voters continue to favor Ryan’s budget proposal, while 34% are opposed to it. The plurality (40%) is not sure what they think of the plan. …”
“…New facts released by the office of House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis., reveal a hidden tax increase in President Obama’s budget proposal. Obama’s plan would, these facts demonstrate, impose a 20 percent increase in the top income tax rate – a significantly greater increase than the president has admitted.
The news media fancies itself a watchdog, so if the president is going to dramatically hike taxes, one would hope that Americans would hear about it first. But thus far, there has been almost no coverage of these stealth tax hikes. On Monday, Washington Post fact-checker Greg Kessler confirmed the veracity of Ryan’s claims. Whether other major media outlets report on them will be the true test.
Segment 1: Bureau of Labor Statistics Official Unemployment Rate (U-3) Increased To 9.0% With 13.7 Million Americans Unemployed and Total Unemployment Rate (U-6) Increased To 15.9% With 24.4 Million Americans Seeking Full Time Job–Economy Adds 244,000 Jobs But Initial Unemployment Claims Hit Eight Month High of 474,000!–Videos
Segment 1: Ron Paul Is Running For President of The United States In 2012!–The Third Time Is The Charm–A Man Of Integrity–A Candidate For Peace and Prosperity–Neither A Big Government Warfare Republican Nor A Massive Government Welfare Democrat–A Man Of And For The American People–A Tea Party Patriot–Ron Paul–Videos
Segment 2: President Obama’s Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Speech Of April 13, 2011–Eat The Rich And Killing The American Dream Class Warfare–Cuts National Security Spending and Raise Taxes On The Rich–Produces Massive Deficits, National Debt, and Higher Unemployment For 12 More Years–Progressive Radical Socialist Economic Stagflation–Videos
Segment 3: The FairTax (National Consumption Sales Tax) vs. The Flat Tax (One Rate Federal Income Tax)–Who Pays The Most Federal Individual Income Tax? Videos
Segment 1: Tea Party Movement Demands Passage of Balanced Budget Amendment and The FairTax As The Price For Raising The National Statutory Debt Limit of $ 14,294,000,000 One Last Time By $1,000,000,000,000!–Videos
Segment 2: The FairTax (National Consumption Sales Tax) vs. The Flat Tax (One Rate Federal Income Tax)–Who Pays The Most Federal Individual Income Tax? Videos
Segment 1: 3,500,000 Million Americans Unemployed in March 2011 Still Exceeds Great Depression High of 13,000,000 In March 1933–The Obama Depressions Continues–Bureau of Labor Statistics: 8.8% Official Unemployment Rate (U-3) vs. Gallup Unemployment Rate of 10.0%–Nonfarm Payroll Increased By 216,000–The Government Makes The Depression Worse!–Videos
Segment 2: Obama’s Anti-American, Anti-Capitalist, Anti-Growth, Anti-Jobs, and Anti-Security Energy Policy–Videos
Segment 3: Republican Establishment Will Propose A Ten Year $6,200 Billion Cut In Spending Over Ten Years–The Problem Is It Does Not Balance The Budget For Another Five Years At The Earliest–Tea Party Movement Demands Balanced Budgets Starting In 2012 For The Next Ten Years!–A Jet Plane To Prosperity Not A Path To Prosperity–Videos
Segment 4: Just One More Thing Congressman Ryan: When Does The Republican’s Path To Prosperity Balance The Budget?–The Twelth of Never!–Videos
For additional information and videos on the above segments:
Segment 1: 3,500,000 Million Americans Unemployed in March 2011 Still Exceeds Great Depression High of 13,000,000 In March 1933–The Obama Depressions Continues–Bureau of Labor Statistics: 8.8% Official Unemployment Rate (U-3) vs. Gallup Unemployment Rate of 10.0%–Nonfarm Payroll Increased By 216,000–The Government Makes The Depression Worse!–Videos
Segment 2: Obama’s Anti-American, Anti-Capitalist, Anti-Growth, Anti-Jobs, and Anti-Security Energy Policy–Videos
Segment 3: Republican Establishment Will Propose A Ten Year $6,200 Billion Cut In Spending Over Ten Years–The Problem Is It Does Not Balance The Budget For Another Five Years At The Earliest–Tea Party Movement Demands Balanced Budgets Starting In 2012 For The Next Ten Years!–A Jet Plane To Prosperity Not A Path To Prosperity–Videos
Segment 4: Just One More Thing Congressman Ryan: When Does The Republican’s Path To Prosperity Balance The Budget?–The Twelth of Never!–Videos
For additional information and videos on the above segments:
Segment 1: The Truth And Consequences About Undeclared Wars–Real Strange Bedfellows–Obama Allies U.S. with Libyan Rebels Including Islamic Jihadists, Moslem Brotherhood, and Al-Qaeda!–Give Peace A Chance–AC-130 Gunship–A-10 Warthogs–F-15E Strike Eagles and Special Operation Smash Squads
Segment 2ne Unconstitutional and Undeclared War Too Many: The Great Pretender, Peace Candidate And Noble Peace Prize Winner, President Barack Obama Undeclared War On Libya’s Muammar Ghaddafi In Defense Of Libyian Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) Rebels Linked To al-Qaeda and The BP Libyian Oil Deal Linked To Obama Campaign Contributions–A Political Payoff!–Obama Has To Go In 2012–Videos
Segment 3:Earthquake Damages Japanese Nuclear Plant At Fukushima Daiichi, Four Explosions and Four Nuclear Reactors Flooded With Seawater To Contain Release Of Radioactive Material and Plant Released Radioactive Materials To Stop Pressure Buildup–Partial Meltdown Of Nuclear Core Feared–Radioactive Material Escaping From Plant–Over 250,000 Ordered Evacuated From 20 Kilometer (12.4 Miles) Radius From Plant–Videos
Segment 1: The Washington Political Elites of Both Parties Are Not Serious About Balancing The Federal Budget And Funding Entitlement Liabilities–Send In The Clowns–Don’t Bother There Here–Videos
Segment 2, Gallup–U.S. Unemployment Hits 10.3% In February 2011 Vs. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) U.S. Unemployment Rate Declined By .1% To 8.9% in February 2011 With Job Creation of 192,000 In February 2011–Over 13.7 Million Americans Unemployed More Than Worse Month of Great Depression!
For more information and videos related to this show click on links below:
President Obama’s Saint Valentine’s Massacre of The American People–Fiscal Year 2012 Budget Buster–Spending $3,729 Billion–Taxes $2,627 Billion–Deficit $1,101 Billion–Dead On Arrival–DOA– 3 Million Tea Party Patriots To March On Washington D.C. On Friday, April 15, 2011 In Protest!
For more information and videos related to this show click on link below:
S-1 FY2012 Tea Party’s Balanced/Surplus Budget(Nominal Dollars in Billions)
Fiscal Year
Outlays
Revenues
Surpluses
Debt Held By Public
2012
2,500
2,500
0
10,900
2013
2,800
2,800
0
10,900
2014
3,000
3,000
0
10,900
2015
3,200
3,200
0
10,900
2016
3,300
3,300
0
10,900
2017
3,400
3,500
100
10,800
2018
3,500
3,700
200
10,600
2019
3,600
3,900
300
10,300
2020
3,700
4,000
300
10,000
2021
3,800
4,300
500
9,500
2012-2021
32,800
34,200
1,400
n.a.
Tax Rates are High Enough Already
Bachmann: Why I Cannot Support This Deal
Will Ron Paul Or Rand Paul Run For President In 2012?
The American people and the tea party movement want the Federal Government to balance the budget by stop spending money the Federal Government does not have.
Neither the Democratic Party nor the Republican Party will listen to the American people.
The Republican Party would balance the budget in 2040 and would run a nearly $1,000 billion deficit in Fiscal Year 2012!
The Democratic Party would balance the budget with massive increases in taxes that would wreck the economy and destroy jobs.
I fully support Ron Paul for President and Michele Backmann for Vice-President in 2012.
The tea party movement and the vast majority of the American people will support this ticket.
The Republican Party should start listening to Senators Rand Paul, Jim DeMint and Mike Hill in the Senate and Ron Paul and Michelle Bachmann in the House of Representatives if they want to get re-elected.
Otherwise you will get the boot.
Freshman Tea Party Rep. – “get that boot ready”
PIMCO Dumps US Treasuries
Pimco’s Clarida Says U.S. Has No Long-Term Fiscal Policy
Background Articles and Videos
It’s Simple to Balance The Budget Without Higher Taxes
To balance the Fiscal Year 2012 Federal Budget requires spending cuts of about $1,500 billion assuming President Obama’s Fiscal Year 2012 Budget is about $4,000 billion and tax receipts and outlays are $2,500 billion.
Federal tax receipts for Fiscal Year 2012 will be between $2,000 to $2,500 billion.
President Obama will most likely propose a Fiscal Year 2012 budget of approximately $3,800 billion to $4,000 billion.
President Obama’s is expected to submit his Fiscal Year 2012 Federal Budget on or about Monday, February 14, 2011.
The only way to get to a balanced budget in Fiscal Year 2012 is to permanently close or eliminate Federal Departments and agencies and cut entitlement spending including Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and welfare programs.
Neither political party has the leadership, vision, will or courage to do this.
The tea party movement candidates will be replacing both Democratic and Republican Senators and Representative who do not vote for a balanced budget in Fiscal Year 2012 in 2013.
The tea party movement is watching closely both the Democratic and Republican Party establishments.
Background Articles and Videos
A detailed look at the Rand Paul spending bill
“…Want to save $500 billion this year? Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., has a way to do it.
Is it realistic? Maybe not every part of it, but have a look below and judge for yourself. I don’t think his total removal of rental subsidies is unreasonable — the fact that Section 8 is a total failure doesn’t justify dumping its beneficiaries into oblivion. But there’s also no reason every agency has to see its budget increase every year, and a lot of these cuts really do make sense. Most of them simply represent a return to 2008 levels of spending — remember that a 30 percent cut is less than it seems when an agency’s budget been increasing by 40 percent over the last few years.
Why fund NASA at traditional levels if President Obama has scaled back its mission? Why not let Indian tribes manage their own trust funds, especially considering the federal mismanagement? Why not realign our military bases abroad, sell unused federal buildings (something Obama has already begun doing), transfer some national parks to the states, and end the wasteful corporate subsidies that come out of the Departments of Energy and Commerce?
Of course, even this bill would only cut this year’s record deficit by one-third. But if you can bring discretionary spending down a notch with something like it, then cut Defense further as the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq wind down, you’ve gotten to the point where you can look Americans in the eye and tell them you’ve done everything you can, and it’s time to do something about Social Security and Medicare to save the nation from long-term financial collapse.
Peter Schiff- ‘Greatest Economic Collapse in US History’ (26-Jan-11)(FINANCE & ECONOMICS series)
Budget Deficit Projected to Grow to $1.5 trillion; Obama Pledges Spending Freeze
Updated Charts: November 8, 2011
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SERVICE
STAR – TREASURY FINANCIAL DATABASE
TABLE 1. SUMMARY OF RECEIPTS, OUTLAYS AND THE DEFICIT/SURPLUS BY MONTH OF THE U.S. GOVERNMENT (IN MILLIONS)
ACCOUNTING DATE: 09/11
PERIOD RECEIPTS OUTLAYS DEFICIT/SURPLUS (-)
+ ____________________________________________________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________
PRIOR YEAR
OCTOBER 135,293 311,656 176,363
NOVEMBER 133,563 253,850 120,287
DECEMBER 218,919 310,329 91,410
JANUARY 205,239 247,873 42,634
FEBRUARY 107,520 328,429 220,909
MARCH 153,358 218,745 65,387
APRIL 245,260 327,950 82,689
MAY 146,794 282,721 135,927
JUNE 251,048 319,470 68,422
JULY 155,546 320,588 165,043
AUGUST 163,998 254,524 90,526
SEPTEMBER 245,189 279,795 34,607
YEAR-TO-DATE 2,161,728 3,455,931 1,294,204
CURRENT YEAR
OCTOBER 145,951 286,384 140,432
NOVEMBER 148,970 299,364 150,394
DECEMBER 236,875 315,009 78,134
JANUARY 226,550 276,346 49,796
FEBRUARY 110,656 333,163 222,507
MARCH 150,894 339,048 188,154
APRIL 289,543 329,929 40,387
MAY 174,936 232,577 57,641
JUNE 249,658 292,738 43,080
JULY 159,063 288,439 129,376
AUGUST 169,246 303,388 134,143
SEPTEMBER 240,153 304,723 64,569
* Rounded to Millions
Includes legal tender notes, gold and silver certificates, etc.
The first fiscal year for the U.S. Government started Jan. 1, 1789. Congress changed the beginning of the fiscal year from Jan. 1 to Jul. 1 in 1842, and finally from Jul. 1 to Oct. 1 in 1977 where it remains today.
To find more historical information, visit The Public Debt Historical Information archives.
Rand Paul Responds to State of the Union Address on CNBC Kudlow Report 1/25/11
Rand Paul Explains His Plan To Cut 500 Billion In Federal Spending
Representative Ron Paul On The Need To Cut Spending
Ron Paul Responds to Obama’s State of the Union Address
The 2011 State of the Union Address: Enhanced Version
Rep. Paul Ryan Gives Republican Response to the State of the Union Address
America Reacts: Paul Ryan giving The Republican Response to SOTU
Rep. Mike Pence: Obama Signals More Spending in State of the Union
Inhofe Responds to the 2011 State of the Union Address
Rep. Michele Bachmann Delivers Tea Party Response to State of the Union
America Reacts: Michelle Bachmann giving The Tea Party response to SOTU
Glenn Beck-01/26/11-A
Rand Paul (01.25.11 – Senatorial Update)
The tea party movement wants a Constitutional limited Federal government, both in size and scope.
The tea party movement wants Federal Government spending or outlays to be cut so they equal tax receipts–a balanced budget starting in Fiscal Year 2012.
This means that Federal spending will need to be cut by over $1,000 billion to about $2,500 billion.
President Obama would freeze Federal Government spending at about $3,800 billion dollars resulting in another year of over $1,200 billion in deficit spending and another $1,200 billion increase in the national debt.
The Republican Party wants to cut Federal Government spending or outlays to Fiscal Year 2008 levels of about $3,000 billion.
Keep in mind that in Fiscal Year 2008 the tax receipts were $2,524 billion, outlays were $2,982 billion and the deficit was $458 billion
To get to a balanced budget the Federal outlays would need to be about $2,500 billion or slightly above the Federal budget outlays for Fiscal Year 2005 of $2,472 billion.
President Obama’s Office of Management and Budget estimated Fiscal Year 2012 tax receipts to be $2,926 billion.
Unfortunately Federal tax receipts for Fiscal Year 2012 are estimated to be $2,500 billion or less due to the continuing economic recession and high rates of unemployment.
As a result both Federal Individual Income and Social Security tax receipts are running much lower than originally estimated.
In other words the Republicans would need to cut outlays to Fiscal Year 2005 levels and not Fiscal Year 2008 to balance the budget .
Neither the Republican Party establishment nor Representative Paul Ryan’s road map does this.
The only people in the House of Representative that would seriously do this is Representative Ron Paul and the recently elected tea party movement Republicans numbering less than sixty in the House of Representatives and Senate including Michele Bachmann and Senator Rand Paul.
Both the Democratic and Republican Party establishments will not cut spending to balance the budget in Fiscal year 2012 or for that matter the next five years.
Keep in mind that total Federal tax receipts for Fiscal Year 2010 were $2,161 billion, outlays were $3,455 billion and the Federal deficit was $1,291 billion.
For the first three months of Fiscal Year 2011, Federal tax receipts were $ 531 billion, outlays were $ 902 billion and the Federal deficit was $370 billion.
These numbers are from the Department of Treasury:
Table 1. Summary of Receipts, Outlays, and the Deficit/Surplus of the U.S. Government, Fiscal Years 2010 and 2011, by Month
In other words for the current Fiscal Year 2011 budget that the Democratic Party never passed will result in a budget deficit of over $1,500 billion!
In just three years President Obama and the Democratic Party would have run up deficits totalling over $4,000 billion.
Both President Obama and the Democratic Party simply have no credibility, competence or desire in balancing the Federal budget.
President Obama statement in his State of the Union address that:
“So tonight, I am proposing that starting this year, we freeze annual domestic spending for the next five years. (Applause.) Now, this would reduce the deficit by more than $400 billion over the next decade, …”
is beyond laughable.
President Obama’s statement is fiscally irresponsible and dangerous.
President Obama is an empty suit that is wrecking the economy, destroying jobs and destroying the American Dream.
You Want How Much?!
Whatever President Obama’s Fiscal Year 2012 proposed budget is and I suspect it will exceed $3,700 billion with an estimated deficit of over $1,000 billion, it will be dead on arrival when it reaches Congress in mid-February.
The only way to cut over $1,000 billion in Federal expenditures or outlays for the Fiscal Year 2012 budget is to close entire Federal departments and agencies and cut drastically the budgets of the remaining departments and put both Social Security and Medicare on an actuarial sound basis.
Everything must be on the table and subject to cuts in spending and benefits including defense expenditures and entitlements such as Social Security and Medicare.
Obama Care must and will be repealed in its entirety within three years if not sooner.
For now Congress should not fund one cent for Obama Care, it is a major budget buster besides being unconstitutional.
Neither political party has the leadership, vision, will or courage to do this.
When President Obama says targeted investments what he means is yet another round of political payoff to his supporters in the form of increased Federal spending.
Both President Obama and the Democratic Party have been responsible for the destroying jobs and wrecking the economy with their failed stimulus package and Obama Care.
In just two years over $3,000 billion was added to the National Debt and for over 20 months the official unemployment rate (U-3) has been over 9% and the total real unemployment rate (U-6) had been over 16%.
The stimulus package simply did not keep the official unemployment under 8% or less as promised.
The stimulus package was a failure in creating jobs.
More government spending or investment will have the same result.
Both political parties are fiscally irresponsible.
The American people want balanced budgets every year.
The American people are tired of being mislead and lied to by both political parties.
The American people want fiscally responsible government, one that lives within it means or tax receipts–balanced budgets.
The American people want tax reform–the FairTax.
Neither political party will balance the budget nor pass the FairTax.
The American people are ahead of the political establishment, ruling class and political media pundits in Washington, D.C.
I fully expect that the Fiscal Year 2012 budget proposed by President Obama will exceed $3,700 billion and the Republican Party’s budget will exceed $3,000 billion.
I fully expect that Federal tax receipts for the next two years will be $2,500 billion or less.
I fully expect that the Federal deficits will be over $1,500 billion in Fiscal Year 2011 and over $700 billion in 2012.
I fully expect that Congress will increase yet again the ceiling on the National Debt by another $1,000 billion in 2011 to over $15,300 billion and another $1,000 billion in 2012 to over $16,300 billion.
I fully expect that the official unemployment rate or U-3 will be between 9% and 11% for the next 24 months.
If the economy starts to recover the result will be an increase in the labor participation rate to a range of 66% to 67% and an increase in those in the labor force.
Therefore the official unemployment rate as measured by U-3 will go over 10% and may be 11% and the total real unemployment rate as measured by U-6 will go over 17% and may be 18% later this year or early next year.
When this happens those politicians who have refused to face the reality and consequences of these massive deficits by cutting Federal Government spending will be voted out of office.
Until the tea party movement elects a majority in the House and Senate and a new President and replaces the big spender warfare and welfare progressives and government interventionists in both parties, the economy will stagnate with high unemployment rates and increasing inflation rates.
For the next two years the official unemployment rates (U-3) will be above 9% with over 15 million Americans unemployed and the real total unemployment rates (U-6) will be above 16% and over 25 million Americans seeking full-time employment.
The time has come for the tea party movement to either takeover the Republican party or establish another political party.
The current leadership of both political parties simply does not have the vision, will, and courage to balance the budget every year and reform the Federal tax system.
The current leadership of the Republican party must balance the Fiscal Year 2012, 2013 and 2014 budgets and pass the FairTax if they want the support of the tea party movement.
Dan Mitchel with Cavuto if the Republicans won’t cut spending run them out of town
If they fail to do so the current Republican leadership will be replaced by tea party movement leaders who will “walk the talk” and cut spending to balanced budget levels and pass the FairTax.
Until then demand that your representative and Senators have a Fiscal Year 2012 budget of $2,500 billion, freeze outlays or spending at $2,500 billion for five years to pay down the national debt and pass the FairTax!
Then go forward with a balanced budget amendment and repeal of the income tax 16th amendment to the United States Constitution.
The time has come to replace the current warfare and welfare economy and government with a peace and prosperity economy and constitutional government.
Join the Second American Revolution and support the tea party movement.
I will only vote for candidates that will balance the budget and pass the FairTax.
It is about time both were accomplished.
The FairTax: It’s Time
As a classical liberal or American libertarian and independent, I hope to support a Ron Paul/Michele Bachmann ticket in the 2012 Presidential race.
Ron Paul / Michele Bachmann Student Town Hall @ UofMN – Sponsored by YAL – 2 of 9
Ron Paul / Michele Bachmann Student Town Hall @ UofMN – Sponsored by YAL – 3 of 9
Ron Paul / Michele Bachmann Student Town Hall @ UofMN – Sponsored by YAL
Background Articles and Videos
National Debt- How Much Is A Billion Dollars?
Is Obama’s State of the Union meaningless?
Preview of the State of the Union Address
Inside the White House: The State of the Union Address
Paul Ryan at AEI
Paul Ryan at Brookings: Prosperity vs Austerity
Paul Ryan: A Plan for Prosperity
Congressman Ryan Responds to Misguided Attacks on Roadmap
Getting a Grip on the Deficit
Rep. Bachmann: Cut Spending to Avoid Tax Increases
Text of Obama’s State of the Union Address
“…All these investments -– in innovation, education, and infrastructure –- will make America a better place to do business and create jobs. But to help our companies compete, we also have to knock down barriers that stand in the way of their success.
For example, over the years, a parade of lobbyists has rigged the tax code to benefit particular companies and industries. Those with accountants or lawyers to work the system can end up paying no taxes at all. But all the rest are hit with one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world. It makes no sense, and it has to change. (Applause.)
So tonight, I’m asking Democrats and Republicans to simplify the system. Get rid of the loopholes. Level the playing field. And use the savings to lower the corporate tax rate for the first time in 25 years –- without adding to our deficit. It can be done. (Applause.) …”
“…We are living with a legacy of deficit spending that began almost a decade ago. And in the wake of the financial crisis, some of that was necessary to keep credit flowing, save jobs, and put money in people’s pockets.
But now that the worst of the recession is over, we have to confront the fact that our government spends more than it takes in. That is not sustainable. Every day, families sacrifice to live within their means. They deserve a government that does the same.
So tonight, I am proposing that starting this year, we freeze annual domestic spending for the next five years. (Applause.) Now, this would reduce the deficit by more than $400 billion over the next decade, and will bring discretionary spending to the lowest share of our economy since Dwight Eisenhower was President.
This freeze will require painful cuts. Already, we’ve frozen the salaries of hardworking federal employees for the next two years. I’ve proposed cuts to things I care deeply about, like community action programs. The Secretary of Defense has also agreed to cut tens of billions of dollars in spending that he and his generals believe our military can do without. (Applause.)
I recognize that some in this chamber have already proposed deeper cuts, and I’m willing to eliminate whatever we can honestly afford to do without. But let’s make sure that we’re not doing it on the backs of our most vulnerable citizens. (Applause.) And let’s make sure that what we’re cutting is really excess weight. Cutting the deficit by gutting our investments in innovation and education is like lightening an overloaded airplane by removing its engine. It may make you feel like you’re flying high at first, but it won’t take long before you feel the impact. (Laughter.)
Now, most of the cuts and savings I’ve proposed only address annual domestic spending, which represents a little more than 12 percent of our budget. To make further progress, we have to stop pretending that cutting this kind of spending alone will be enough. It won’t. (Applause.) …”
“…In fact, the best thing we could do on taxes for all Americans is to simplify the individual tax code. (Applause.) This will be a tough job, but members of both parties have expressed an interest in doing this, and I am prepared to join them. (Applause.)
So now is the time to act. Now is the time for both sides and both houses of Congress –- Democrats and Republicans -– to forge a principled compromise that gets the job done. If we make the hard choices now to rein in our deficits, we can make the investments we need to win the future.
Let me take this one step further. We shouldn’t just give our people a government that’s more affordable. We should give them a government that’s more competent and more efficient. We can’t win the future with a government of the past. (Applause.) …”
68% Prefer A Government With Fewer Services, Lower Taxes
“…The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 68% of Likely Voters prefer a government with fewer services and lower taxes rather than a more active one with more services and higher taxes. This is virtually identical to last month and consistent with findings since September. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
Since Rasmussen Reports began polling on the question in November 2006, support for a smaller government with fewer services and lower taxes has ranged from a low of 55% in July 2007 to a high of 70% in August 2009.
Twenty-two percent (22%) of voters say they prefer a government with more services and higher taxes, down three points from December. Support for a more activist government over the past four years has ranged from 19% in August 2009 to 32% in late July 2007.
Even a plurality of Democrats (47%) now favors a government with fewer services and lower taxes. But that finding is dwarfed by the 90% of Republicans and 67% of voters not affiliated with either political party who feel that way. …”
“The budget should be balanced, the Treasury should be refilled, public debt should be reduce, the arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands should be curtailed lest Rome become bankrupt, and the assistance to foreign lands should be curtailed lest Rome become bankrupt. People must again learn to work, instread of living on public assistance.”
~Marcus Tullius Cicero
“A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned – this is the sum of good government.”
“If The Debt Limit Isn’t Increased It’s Going To Cause Problems” Ron Paul & Rand Paul Interview
Geithner Urges Lawmakers to Increase Federal Debt Limit
New National Debt Record
Congressman-Elect Mulvaney on Debt Ceiling
Peter Schiff – How the Government can Avoid Default
Debt Ceiling Balanced Budget
Boehner Floor Speech Opposing the Dems National Debt Limit Hike
DeMint Says No Lifting Debt Ceiling Without Cuts Then Can’t Name Any Specifics Besides Earmarks
Ron Paul to Congress: Refuse to Raise the Debt Ceiling!
Paul Ryan on debt ceiling increase: “A proud moment” for Speaker Pelosi?
Need for a Limited Government
We Must Cut Spending
Expert: Republicans Will Raise Debt Ceiling
Peter Schiff with Tom Woods – Government Nonsense
Bond bubble – with Peter Schiff and Marc Faber Aug 23-2010
More debt, please
END THE FED!
The Day the Dollar Died
The tea party movement wants constitutional government of limited size and scope.
This requires cutting Federal spending and balanced or surplus budgets.
This would require the cutting of Federal spending of over $1,000 billion from the current level of Federal expenditures to balance government revenues and outlays.
If the budget is not balanced or in deficit with outlays exceeding revenues, then the national debt ceiling must be increased.
If the budget is balanced or outlays equal revenues, then the debt ceiling need not be increased.
If the budget is in surplus or revenues exceed outlays, then the debt ceiling can be lowered.
Yet the Republican Party is already talking about spending cuts of only $100 billion and a level of government outlays of 2008 which would mean an unbalanced budget or budget deficits and more debt.
Paul Ryan Says U.S. Will Avoid Defaulting on Debt
A $100 billion cut in spending is simply a joke when a balanced budget would require cuts of over $1,000 billion.
With estimated tax revenues of about $2,600 billion the budget for Fiscal Year 2011 needs to be cut by more than $1,000 billion dollars.
The tea party is already being sold out by the Republican Party establishment in Washington D.C.
Any Republican who votes for raising the debt ceiling is voting for more government budget deficits and more debt to make up the shortfall in tax revenues.
In other words these Republicans are not in favor of Constitutional limited government but business as usual.
Either vote for balanced budgets now or face defeat in November 2012.
Dan Mitchel with Cavuto if the Republicans won’t cut spending run them out of town
The real alternative to defaulting on the national debt is cuts in Federal government spending levels that balance the budget.
The tea party movement wants Federal government spending to be cut and the debt ceiling to remain the same and eventually lowered.
Start closing Federal Departments and terminating Federal government employees.
The American people have had enough of both political parties out of control government spending and month after month of deficits spending and a rising national debt.
The Federal Government can avoid defaulting on the debt by immediately terminating Federal Government employees.
Where do make the cuts in spending?
How limited in size and scope should the constitutional republic of the United States be:
Milton Friedman on Libertarianism
Lew Uhler on Responsible Government Spending 01
Lew Uhler – Cut the Size of Washington 02 SD
Lew Uhler – Right Size of Government 03 SD
Controlling Leviathan: The Battle for Limited Government
Eight Reasons Why Big Government Hurts Economic Growth
The Optimum Size of Government
Optimal Size of Government Conference, Volume 1
Optimal Size of Government Conference, Volume 2
Start by closing permanently the following Federal Departments:
1. Department of Agriculture
2. Department of Commerce
3. Department of Education
4. Department of Energy
5. Department of Health and Human Resources
6. Department of Housing and Urban Development
7. Department of Interior
8. Department of Labor
9. Department of Transportation
10. Department of Veteran Affairs.
Have ten up and down votes in the House of Representatives for closing these Federal Departments by the end of the Fiscal Year 2011 on September 30, 2011.
The ruling class of both political parties having been fiscally irresponsible for decades.
The American people have put the political elites on notice, cut spending, balance the budget and no more hikes in the national debt ceiling.
Shut the Federal government down or the American people will shut you down by voting you out of office.
Ron Paul and Rand Paul are right.
Government spending should be limited by the amount of tax revenues that are collected.
There must be a balanced budget rule that says that the total budget for a fiscal year cannot exceed the revenue collected in the previous fiscal year or the estimated tax revenues for the current year, which ever is lower.
No balanced budget rule, then no debt ceiling raise.
Congress does not need to raise the debt ceiling.
Congress needs to start cutting spending starting now.
If the means closing entire Federal Department so be.
The Republican establishment point of view is represented by former Senator Santorum.
Santorum on Debt Ceiling, Spending Cuts
The tea party movement point of view is represented by Michele Bachmann with a proposed $450 billion in Federal spending for the current budget year compared to Paul Ryan and the Republican Party leadership proposal of $50 to $100 billion.
Confronting Reckless Federal Spending
Actually over $1,000 billion needs to be cut to have a balanced budget, which means everything including Defense and entitlement needs to be cut.
The American people are way head of both political parties and big media as to what needs to be done.
What is irresponsible is both political parties have been increasing the debt ceiling for decades.
Enough is enough.
If the current members of Congress cannot do the job, the tea party movement will find others who will cut spending by closing Federal Departments, agencies and reform entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
Start sending out the pink slip or termination of employment notices–downsize the Federal Government now.
If President Obama refuses to have the Federal Government operate on tax revenues only, then President Obama will be the person blamed for forcing the Federal Government into default on its Treasury obligations.
Refuse to Raise The Debt Ceiling!
The party is over! The piper must be paid.
Doris Day sings The Party’s Over
The party’s over
It’s time to call it day
They’ve burst your pretty balloon
And taken the moon away
It’s time to wind up
The masquerade
Just make your mind up
The piper must be paid
The party’s over
The candles flicker and dim
You danced and dream
Through the night
It seemed to be right
Just being with him
Now you must wake up
All my dreams must end
Take off your makeup
The party’s over
It’s all over, my friend
Now you must wake up
All my dreams must end
Take off your makeup
The party’s over
It’s all over, my friend
Background Articles and Videos
Quantitative Easing and Unemployment
Tom Woods Smashes Central Bank Dogma on Freedom Watch 12/21/10
Debt Ceiling
“…The Second Liberty Bond Act of 1917 established a statutory limit on federal debt.[96] Congress had previously approved each debt issuance separately. The debt limit provided the U.S. Treasury with more leeway in the administration of debt, allowing for modern management techniques in government finance.
The U.S. Treasury Department now conducts more than 200 sales of debt by auction every year. The Treasury has been granted authority by Congress to issue such debt as was needed to fund government operations as long as the total debt (excepting some small special classes) does not exceed a stated ceiling.
The most recent increase in the U.S. debt ceiling to $14.3 trillion by H.J.Res. 45 was signed into law on February 12, 2010.[97]
Economics 101 – It’s Simple to Balance The Budget Without Higher Taxes!
Meltzer Says U.S. Economic Programs Have Been `Foolish’
Ron Paul – Dr. Allan Meltzer
Deficits are Bad, but the Real Problem is Spending
No Compromise: Issa, Ryan and Cantor Will Cut Runaway Federal Spending
Eric Cantor Discusses Tax Rates, Ending Earmarks & Cutting Spending On Fox News Sunday
Rand Paul: GOP must consider military spending cuts
Ron Paul on the Deficit, Government Spending, and Military Industrial Complex (1988)
The tea party movement is expecting the Republican Party to balance the Fiscal Year 2011 and 2012 budgets or face the consequences or fate in 2012 of the big spending Democrats in this past election.
Instead the Republican Party is talking about a Fiscal Year 2008 level of total outlays of about $3 trillion dollars.
This is definitely an improvement over President Obama’s estimated budget deficits exceeding over $1,000 billion in FY 2010 and FY 2011.
However, it still would not come close to balancing the budget in FY 2011 where tax revenues are expected to be about $2,567 billion.
Unfortunately the deficit would be about $400 billion for the total combined on-budget and off-budget.
Refer to the following receipts and outlay estimates at:
Table 1.1—SUMMARY OF RECEIPTS, OUTLAYS, AND SURPLUSES OR DEFICITS (−): 1789–2015
The total estimated tax revenues for FY 2011 and FY 2012 are $2,567 billion and $2,926 billion respectively for the combined on-budget and off-budget.
The total estimated outlays for FY 2011 and FY 2012 are $3,834 billion and $3,755 billion respectively for the combined on-budget and off-budget.
The total estimated deficits for FY 2011 and FY 2012 are $1,267 billion and $828 billion respectively for combined on-budget and off-budget.
To balance the combined on-budget and off-budget the FY 2011 outlays would need to about the level of Fiscal Year 2005 of $2,472 billion.
To balance the combined on-budget and off-budget the FY 2012 outlays would need to about the level of Fiscal Year 2008 of $2,983 billion.
Either balance the budget or face the consequences in 2012.
Stop dithering.
Start shutting down entire Federal Departments, agencies and programs.
Milton Friedman on Libertarianism (Part 4 of 4)
Pass the FairTax and limit future outlays or expenditures for the total on-budget and off-budget to 80% of previous year’s tax revenue from the FairTax.
The FairTax: It’s Time
The remaining 20% of FairTax revenues would go to pay down the debt.
Time for some real change and hope.
Stop spending our future and balance the budget.
Stop Spending Our Future – The Crisis
Background Articles and Videos
Keynesian Economics vs. Austrian Economics
Keynesian Predictions vs. American History | Thomas E. Woods, Jr.
Why You’ve Never Heard of the Great Depression of 1920 | Thomas E. Woods, Jr.
Warren Harding and the Forgotten Depression of 1920
by Thomas E. Woods, Jr.
“…The economic situation in 1920 was grim. By that year unemployment had jumped from 4 percent to nearly 12 percent, and GNP declined 17 percent. No wonder, then, that Secretary of Commerce Herbert Hoover – falsely characterized as a supporter of laissez-faire economics – urged President Harding to consider an array of interventions to turn the economy around. Hoover was ignored.
Instead of “fiscal stimulus,” Harding cut the government’s budget nearly in half between 1920 and 1922. The rest of Harding’s approach was equally laissez-faire. Tax rates were slashed for all income groups. The national debt was reduced by one-third. The Federal Reserve’s activity, moreover, was hardly noticeable. As one economic historian puts it, “Despite the severity of the contraction, the Fed did not move to use its powers to turn the money supply around and fight the contraction.”2 By the late summer of 1921, signs of recovery were already visible. The following year, unemployment was back down to 6.7 percent and was only 2.4 percent by 1923.
It is instructive to compare the American response in this period to that of Japan. In 1920, the Japanese government introduced the fundamentals of a planned economy, with the aim of keeping prices artificially high. According to economist Benjamin Anderson, “The great banks, the concentrated industries, and the government got together, destroyed the freedom of the markets, arrested the decline in commodity prices, and held the Japanese price level high above the receding world level for seven years. During these years Japan endured chronic industrial stagnation and at the end, in 1927, she had a banking crisis of such severity that many great branch bank systems went down, as well as many industries. It was a stupid policy. In the effort to avert losses on inventory representing one year’s production, Japan lost seven years.”3
The U.S., by contrast, allowed its economy to readjust. “In 1920–21,” writes Anderson, “we took our losses, we readjusted our financial structure, we endured our depression, and in August 1921 we started up again. . . . The rally in business production and employment that started in August 1921 was soundly based on a drastic cleaning up of credit weakness, a drastic reduction in the costs of production, and on the free play of private enterprise. It was not based on governmental policy designed to make business good.” The federal government did not do what Keynesian economists ever since have urged it to do: run unbalanced budgets and prime the pump through increased expenditures. Rather, there prevailed the old-fashioned view that government should keep spending and taxation low and reduce the public debt.4 …”
Historical Tables provides data on budget receipts, outlays, surpluses or deficits, Federal debt, and Federal employment over an extended time period, generally from 1940 or earlier to 2011 or 2015.
Table 1.1—SUMMARY OF RECEIPTS, OUTLAYS, AND SURPLUSES OR DEFICITS (−): 1789–2015
High Taxes and High Budget Deficits
The Hoover–Roosevelt Tax Increases of the 1930s
by Veronique de Rugy, Fiscal Policy Analyst, Cato Institute
“…Conclusion
The tax increases of the 1930s coincided with large
deficits and economic stagnation. While the monetary and
trade policy mistakes of the 1930s are now widely
understood, the tax policy mistakes are less appreciated.
As Congress grapples with today’s budget deficit and
mediocre economic growth, it should look to the tax cuts
of the 1920s for inspiration rather than the failed “budget
balancing with high taxes” approach of the 1930s.”
The tea party movement supported many candidates for public office in the 2010 elections.
Some lost and some won.
One candidate for public office had a record of failure if you believed the press and lost several races for public office in the past.
The person lost his job.
The person failed in business.
The person lost a state representative race.
The person had a nervous breakdown.
The person lost a state house speaker race.
The person lost a U.S. Senate race.
The person lost the nomination to be U.S. Vice President.
The person lost again a U.S. Senate race.
The person finally ran for President of the United States.
The person won.
The person was Abraham Lincoln, one of America’s most respected Presidents, was the first Republican President of the United States.
One tea party supported candidate who lost for a second time a U.S. Senate race was Christine O’Donnell of Delaware.
Tea Party Favorite Christine O’Donnell
O’Donnell’s Internal Opposition
Delaware is a very liberal state where union endorsements and support play a big role in determining who wins a state-wide election.
Delaware’s Senator for 36 years had been Joe Biden, the current Vice-President of the United States.
Christine O’Donnell lost the U.S. Senate race in 2008 against Senator Biden who was running for both Senator and Vice-President of the United States.
Christine O’Donnell lost again the U.S. Senate race in 2010.
Character and integrity matter and ideas have consequences.
A person with character and integrity and the right ideas does not always win a political race.
Christine O’Donnell has character and integrity and the right ideas.
Like Abraham Lincoln, I do not believe the American people have heard the last from Christine O’Donnell.
Many tea party movement supported candidates did win the privilege of governing their state and to represent the citizens of their state in Congress and the Senate.
Four standout.
Vicky Hartzler: A Friend to Small Business in Congress
Rand Paul: ‘It’s a Tea Party Tidal Wave’
REPLAY: Marco Rubio acceptance speech
NIKKI HALEY (R-SC)
NIKKI HALEY (R-SC) on HANNITY GOP Gubernatorial Candidate
Vicky Hartler was elected to represent Missouri’s 4th District in the United States House of Representatives.
Rand Paul was elected to represent Kentucky as Senator in the United States Senate.
Marco Rubio was elected to represent Florida as Senator in the United States Senate.
Nikki Halley was elected to govern South Carolina as Governor.
All four favor limited Constitutional government, balanced budgets, lower taxes, less regulation, capitalism and a free market place.
The Founding Fathers were men of character and integrity and knew that ideas have consequences.
The Founding Fathers–Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Franklin and others– gave the American people the benefit of their wisdom contained in The Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution.
The Founding Fathers gift to the American people was a representative republic with separation of powers and a system of checks and balances.
On Tuesday the American people elected a few of their fellow citizens to represent them in Congress and the Senate and govern their states.
The tea party movement goes to Washington and will have its own caucus in the House and Senate.
Rand Paul on Tea Party’s Future
Only time will tell whether the American people choose wisely.
Background Articles and Videos
Tea party candidates win in Fla., Ky.; lose Del.
“…Two tea party champions won high-profile Senate elections Tuesday, spearheading a likely cadre of libertarian-leaning Republicans who will press party leaders to be more adamant about lower taxes, less spending and smaller government.
Rand Paul of Kentucky and Marco Rubio of Florida rocked the GOP establishment last spring by routing leadership favorites in party primaries. Then they beat back Democrats’ efforts to paint them as too extreme, winning comfortably on Tuesday. However, another well-publicized tea party darling, Christine O’Donnell of Delaware, lost to Democrat Chris Coons. She also won a stunning GOP primary victory, beating longtime Rep. Mike Castle, but she failed to extend her popularity to the broader November electorate. …”
A common list of the failures of Abraham Lincoln (along with a few successes) is:
1831 – Lost his job
1832 – Defeated in run for Illinois State Legislature
1833 – Failed in business
1834 – Elected to Illinois State Legislature (success)
1835 – Sweetheart died
1836 – Had nervous breakdown
1838 – Defeated in run for Illinois House Speaker
1843 – Defeated in run for nomination for U.S. Congress
1846 – Elected to Congress (success)
1848 – Lost re-nomination
1849 – Rejected for land officer position
1854 – Defeated in run for U.S. Senate
1856 – Defeated in run for nomination for Vice President
1858 – Again defeated in run for U.S. Senate
1860 – Elected President (success)
That looks like a pretty glum résumé, making you wonder how he ever made it to the top. But when you really think of it, to run for office or high positions so many times, you have to have something on the ball and have more successes than meet the eye. …”