Not so fast, the leopard hasn’t changed its spots:
President Obama’s modest proposal to slice $17 billion from 121 government programs quickly ran into a buzz saw of opposition on Capitol Hill yesterday, as an array of Democratic lawmakers vowed to fight White House efforts to deprive their favorite initiatives of federal funds.
Back in 2004, Carl Rove was talking grandly about a permanent Republican majority. In 2008, Democratic strategists gleefully foretold the end of the GOP.
Hubris is perhaps the only thing in Washington that is thoroughly non-partisan.
The wheel never stops turning.
How tough can it be to find waste in the Federal Budget? I mean, fire Con. Murtha, Sen. Stevens, and Sen. Byrd and you’d probably have close to $18 billion right there, wouldn’t you? Other easy targets ought to be the Dept. of Education, Dept. of (No) Energy, farm subsidies for tobacco, milk, whatever else might be on that pork list, and the list goes on forever, just like any government program. If we could get energy from these unending governmental programs we’d be energy self-sufficient for all time.
Only in Washington would anyone have the hubris to actually make a big deal about these “cuts” while simultaneously proposing the biggest increase in spending and the deficit in our history.
Are we really that stupid as to fall for this?
Although I’ve got to admit it took a pretty sharp knife to want to eliminate the Department of Education “attache” position in Paris to the tune of $600K savings. I mean how will we ever educate “the children” without consultation with the French?
And even if Congress were to go along, which it won’t, the Administration has used all these savings already to increase funding for God knows how many assinine programs to implement the change they believe in.
When you start selling converting 11,000 contractor jobs to Civil Service positions in Acquisition Reform move in DOD as a “jobs creation” program you can see that transparency and honesty are still foreign concepts in our Nation’s capital.
If our auto industry was run like this they would be a failed enterprise – oh wait they are about to be run like this.
God help us as we don’t seem to be able to help ourselves.
Part of the cuts that Obama has proposed is to slash $50M from the Public Safety Officer’s Death Benefit program from $110 to $60 million. I’m a police officer (starting as a fed on the 26th of this month) and I’m disgusted! He looked over the entire federal budget and found this program as excessive and wasteful?
My fellow cops and I have a word for guys like this….scumbag.
Part of the cuts that Obama has proposed is to slash $50M from the Public Safety Officer’s Death Benefit program from $110 to $60 million. I’m a police officer (starting as a fed on the 26th of this month) and I’m disgusted! He looked over the entire federal budget and found this program as excessive and wasteful?
My fellow cops and I have a word for guys like this….scumbag.
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/warner-todd-huston/2009/05/08/obama-cut-slain-officers-benefits-half-wheres-media-outrage
Actually that is a scam as well. What Attorney General Holder said was that, based on recent data the amount required to fully fund the requirement wasn’t as much as previously budgeted so they were cutting the fund but that, should the need arise, they would spend the money just as before.
So they are claiming a cut in something they were not planning on spending while assuring all that they will spend as needed nonetheless.
So if I decide I don’t need a vacation this year I can claim to have cut my spending by the amount – even though I wasn’t going to spend it.
More Washington doubletalk from an Administration that ran on change and transparency.
I beginning to see right through them – hopefully millions more will come the next election.
What they aren’t telling you is that one of the spending increases is related to costs in The House for an election year . They are looking for a $90 million increase to handle these costs.
They are vague on what “election year” means – the claim is that because it’s the 2nd year of an election cycle that costs go up due to an increase in legislation and mailings to constituents.
B.S.
It’s so they can use taxpayer dollars to mail election materials to their constituents. It’s a disgusting money grab.
And fairly typical. It’s supported by San Fran Nan, so you know this one will go thru and be kept uber quiet.
Hubris? Isn’t that a coin with “Stupidity” on one side and “Arrogance” on the other? I forget which one is considered “heads”. Er, doesn’t matter.
Had this thought this morning, “how much is our current financial outlook consistent with the outlook of Lesser Developed Country borrowings during the 1970’s and 80’s?”
I’ve been too busy to post recently, but if you look at the conditions surrounding the defaults of these LDC governments and their impact on the world banking community, how is it that our current crop of policy makers can’t make the connection–or connect the dots–that borrowing like a third-world kleptocracy is an unsustainable policy choice?
Fed info, and a really informative backgrounder, here:
http://www.fdic.gov/bank/historical/history/191_210.pdf
.
Hey don’t forget, he cut out the prayer breakfast, too! That would cost 50-100 K to attend or host. Give him credit..LOL.
BTW, don’t you wish Karl Rove was correct then?
b2
Alas, Rove was an arrogant a$$ himself. The Reps went on an illegal alien amnesty binge, coupled with poor political decisions on Iraq, that paid merry hell with the elections in 2006 and 8.
Rove’s stupidity was much of the problem. The party hasn’t recovered yet, and I don’t see them doing so anytime soon. So many issues could be used by the Reps to hammer Obama and the McGovern/Neo-Marxist wing of the Dems, who dominate the party these days. But the Reps are simply too hammered from the Neo-Con Rum they can’t see straight. And, they aren’t listening to the grassroots of the party. The outlook is kinda grim from here.
I find it amusing that the media seems to totally ignore the fact that when John McCain suggested saving 1/2 of 1% of the budget by banning earmarks, his opponent totally belittled the amount as irrevelant.
Now, when President Obama suggests cutting 1/2 of 1% of the budget he is roundly lauded for “making the hard decisions” on the budget.
I’ll bet anyone here could find ten times as much waste in the federal budget in a heartbeat.
But the difference is that we would actually be serious about cutting waste. Obama’s “cuts” appear to be suspiciously cosmetic. They are virtually all strongly supported in the Congress, and, therefore, will mysteriously survive the budget process.
Sure can. Starting with the one himself. Alas, his position is mandated by the constitution. That would be $400K/year by itself.
re “Rove’s stupidity”
In the context of his work, IE winning elections for his boss, I wouldn’t say he’s stupid.
As to what you said referring to the Repubs, well Grumpy in Joisey, I’d say we’ll all be out in the wilderness until folks like yourselves (gently) take your head out of your a$$es and make the party of Lincoln viable once more. Wanking and postulating from the sidelines don’t help. As I’ve said a million times hereabouts you can’t win the big one without a political party organization, despite how many times you watch “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington”.
b2