Monday, July 18, 2011

Redistributing Wealth By Any Other Name Is Still Socialism

These Democrats just don't get it. When they are faced with the reality of what they want to do to the citizens of this country they run away. If the media was doing their job the Democrats wouldn't be able to keep hiding the truth of what they are doing. They know that once the American people wake up to what the Democrats are doing to them they would run for the hills.

We all know that Democrats want to have the power to take away wealth from the private sector so that they can control it, not you. If you pay federal income tax then you are too "rich" to vote Democratic Party. They might not start at your income but they will finish at your income sooner or later. Only half of Americans pay federal income tax. That means that if you are paying federal income tax or work for a company that pays federal income tax it's coming out of your pocket.

If Democrats have their way companies like Ford will have to pay much higher taxes in the future. That means they will have less profit to share with it's employees the UAW and stockholders. If you want to be a brainwashed Democratic Party zombie go right ahead and do it. But when things don't go the way you thought they would, just like they have for the past few years, don't blame the Republicans. When your company fires you or has little or no profits to share don't blame us. We wanted you to be in charge of distributing your wealth. And when a car become too expensive to buy new, don't blame us. We didn't want to add more taxes to the "rich". And when companies can't make a profit in this country and move overseas just remember who put that tax on them.

When Bush gave every citizen in this country a check on the recession he got from Clinton people used them to buy what they wanted. And I sold a lot of cars those months because people had the cash to buy things they wouldn't have. The Obama Stimulus hasn't even been felt by us and that is because we never seen one penny of that money. It never went to the private sector because it was used to grow our government, not jobs.

It's time we all realize what happens when Democrats get a hold of our money. They spend it for us and then they want more. No one has been saved by the Obama Stimulus. Two years later and those same jobs are on the line again. States are still going bankrupt and teachers are still getting fired. And we all own $45,000 for nothing.


  1. Below are some programs which the "new" Republican U.S. House of Representatives has proposed to cut from the federal budget:

    1) Corporation for Public Broadcasting Subsidy = $445 million annual savings.
    2) Save America 's Treasures Program = $25 million annual savings.
    3) International Fund for Ireland = $17 million annual savings.
    4) Legal Services Corporation = $420 million annual savings.
    5) National Endowment for the Arts = $167.5 million annual savings.
    6) National Endowment for the Humanities = $167.5 million annual savings.
    7) Hope VI Program = $250 million annual savings.
    8) Amtrak Subsidies = $1.565 billion annual savings.
    9) Eliminate: 68 duplicative "education programs" --- [H.R. 2274 to eliminate the "duplicate programs" was authored/introduced in Congress by Howard McKeon, R-California] = $1.3 billion annual savings.
    10) U.S. Trade Development Agency = $55 million annual savings.
    11) Woodrow Wilson Center Subsidy = $20 million annual savings.
    12) 50% Cut: funding for congressional printing and binding = $47 million annual savings.
    13) John C. Stennis Center Subsidy = $430,000 annual savings.
    14) Community Development Fund = $4.5 billion annual savings.
    15) Heritage Area Grants and Statutory Aid = $24 million annual savings.
    16) 50% Cut: Federal Travel Budget = $7.5 billion annual savings.
    17) 20% Cut: Federal Vehicle Budget = $600 million annual savings.
    18) Essential Air Service = $150 million annual savings.
    19) Technology Innovation Program = $70 million annual savings.
    20) Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) Program = $125 million annual savings.
    21) Department of Energy Grants to States for Weatherization = $530 million annual savings.
    22) Beach Replenishment = $95 million annual savings.
    23) New Starts Transit = $2 billion annual savings.
    24) Exchange Programs for Alaska Natives, Native Hawaiians, and Their Historical Trading Partners in Massachusetts = $9 million annual savings.
    25) Intercity and High Speed Rail Grants = $2.5 billion annual savings.
    26) Title X Family Planning = $318 million annual savings.
    27) Appalachian Regional Commission = $76 million annual savings.
    28) Economic Development Administration = $293 million annual savings.
    29) Programs under the National and Community Services Act = $1.15 billion annual savings.
    30) Applied Research at Department of Energy = $1.27 billion annual savings.
    31) Freedom CAR and Fuel Partnership = $200 million annual savings.
    32) Energy Star Program = $52 million annual savings.
    33) Economic Assistance to Egypt = $250 million annually.
    34) U.S. Agency for International Development = $1.39 billion annual savings.
    35) General Assistance to District of Columbia = $210 million annual savings.
    36) Subsidy for Washington DC Metropolitan Area Transit Authority = $150 million annual savings.
    37) Presidential Campaign Fund = $775 million savings over 10 years.
    38) No funding for federal office space acquisition = $864 million annual savings.
    39) End prohibitions on competitive sourcing of government services
    40) Repeal the Davis-Bacon Act = More than $1 billion savings annually

  2. 41) IRS Direct Deposit: Require the IRS to deposit fees for some services it offers (such as processing payment plans for taxpayers) to the Treasury, instead of allowing it to remain as part of its budget = $1.8 billion savings over ten years.
    42) Prohibit taxpayer funded union activities by federal employees = $1.2 billion savings over ten years.
    43) Sell excess federal properties the government does not make use of = $15 billion total savings.
    44) Eliminate: death gratuity for Members of Congress = Lord help us.
    45) Eliminate: Mohair Subsidies = $1 million annual savings.
    46) Eliminate: taxpayer subsidies to the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change = $12.5 million annual savings.
    47) Eliminate: Market Access Program = $200 million annual savings.
    48) USDA Sugar Program = $14 million annual savings.
    49) Subsidy to Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) = $93 million annual savings.
    50) Eliminate: the National Organic Certification Cost-Share Program = $56.2 million annual savings.
    51) Eliminate: the Fund for Obamacare "administrative costs" = $900 million savings.
    52) Ready to Learn TV Program = $27 million savings.
    53) HUD Ph.D. Program =?
    54) Deficit Reduction Check-Off Act =?
    TOTAL SAVINGS = at least $2.5 TRILLION approx.!
    The BIG questions are:
    1) WHAT [the HELL] are all these 54 items doing in the U.S. budget in the first place?
    2) HOW and WHY [the HELL] did they get on the federal budget to begin with?
    Additionally . . .
    Require collection of UNPAID taxes by federal employees which amounts to $1 billion in UNCOLLECTED tax revenue!
    3) WHY have federal employees been allowed to NOT pay these taxes?
    4) WHO allowed federal employees to NOT pay these taxes?

  3. The complex forces that dominate and affect a significant budget fight are often not obvious and are usually not stated. What you see and what is said is largely political misdirection.

    Like an iceberg, only a small part of the exercise is visible. This applies especially to the politics of the effort, although the actual numbers being used are often equally opaque.

    The president says he wants a big approach, one where “we eat our peas.” This would involve reducing the deficit and thus the debt over the next 10 years by $4 trillion. It is a big number, but it should be noted that the debt over that time will go up by more than $11 trillion. Thus the debt will continue to rise, even with this significant reduction, at a historically large and unsustainable rate.

    The Speaker, it is represented, originally agreed to this $4 trillion as a target. He then returned to his caucus and determined that because that number would include potentially $1 trillion in new revenue, his people would not support the effort. Thus, the Speaker has now proposed a much more modest approach of taking a reduction of $1 trillion to $2 trillion, all in spending cuts and interest savings.

    This approach, if successful, assures there will be more debt-ceiling votes and soon, as in before the next election. The president’s approach assumes the next debt-ceiling vote will come after the next election.

    These are the current political positions of the parties. They are not the actual driving forces of the confrontation. There is a much more aggressive political agenda on both sides

  4. The warnings are apocalyptic. “Armageddon,” President Barack Obama intones. “Catastrophic,” Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner insists. “Calamitous,” Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke admonishes.

    But suppose — just suppose — the unthinkable happens: Despite all the talk of deals — small, medium or large — and of clever ways to pass the political buck, Congress and Obama can’t agree on legislation to raise the $14.3 trillion debt ceiling before the U.S. government’s credit line runs out around Aug. 2.

    A few prominent Republicans, such as Minnesota Republican Rep. Michele Bachmann, a presidential candidate, say nothing much would happen and blast the administration for its “scare tactics.”

    But financial experts say hitting the debt ceiling or coming really close to it would destabilize the markets and the economy. Just how dire the consequences would be is difficult to predict, but many Americans could feel the impact almost immediately.

    We are already feeling the effects of the Obama debt and spending crisis. Raising our debt isn't a cure all. It will only make things worse later on. God help us if we have a real disaster or terrorist attack.

  5. US Congressman Was he for it before he was against it! Seems to be a reoccurring theme with Liberals!

  6. al is right. why do libs keep changing what they believe in?

  7. Because Cons do? We've voted for debt ceiling increases through how many republican presidents and now its a non-no.

    Why do republicans keep changing what they believe in?

    Yes, Chris, those people came with their 300 dollar checks and bought cars. LMAO. What a joke you are?

  8. "We've voted for debt ceiling increases through how many republican presidents and now its a non-no. Why do republicans keep changing what they believe in?"

    Maybe cause Obama flipflopped on this issue when he too thought was a bad idea, but now a good idea???

    Don't raise the ceiling, take the 2.2T in 2011 tax receipts, pay the bold holders, SS, Medicare, VA, etc and start slashing dept budgets across the board.

  9. Sorry, 'bond holders'. :)

  10. Joe Republicans bailed on Bush when he put our deficit at $200 billion and then again on TARP $700 billion. That is why Republicans lost. But Obama has taken a big debt and made it massive. He has added more debt in one year then Bush did in his entire term.

    PS the Bush rebate was a lot more then the Obama Stimulus and we don't owe anything for that one, unlike the Obama Stimulus Bill. The worse part is Bush's $300 to every citizen worked at turning the reciession around.

    I worked for a Ford dealer back then and we sold as lot of car. $300 x number of family members makes a nice down payment. My check for my family was $1,200. You really need to think things through before you say something as dumb as, "Yes, Chris, those people came with their 300 dollar checks and bought cars. LMAO. What a joke you are?" It turns our once more that you are the joke. LMAO x 4. I know you aren't as stupid as you sound. Maybe it's that pot you smoke.

  11. If Joe can't tell the difference between how much debt Bush and all the presidents before him did and the debt that Obama has done then he is just nuts. Why even bother talking to someone that can't tell the differnece between the two?


Please keep it clean and nice. Thank you for taking the time to post you thought. It means a lot to me that you do this.