1) Using FreedomWorks as a SOURCE is an epic fail.
2) It's standard Washington economics. They never actually CUT spending, they cut the percentage of the increase. Actually cutting baseline spending alienates potential voters.
EDIT: Spelling.
Obama Disguises Military Budget Increase as a Cut
Matt
2012/01/28 16:05:02
|
|
|||||
|
2 votes
|
|
7% | ||
|
21 votes
|
|
72% | ||
|
6 votes
|
|
21% | ||
Wednesday, January 11, 2012 02:54 PM
By: Dick Armey
From the FreedomWorks website.
A top news story of the day is that President Barack Obama is supposedly
cutting almost half a trillion dollars from the defense budget. But
this is simply not true.
President Obama is not cutting a single dime out of the military budget.
He is actually substantially increasing military spending over the next
several years. Washington has once again cleverly disguised a spending
increase as a “cut.”
This is how it all works: the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has a
baseline that predicts what will happen over the next decade given
current projections of taxation and spending. It shows that military
spending will dramatically increase over the next 10 years.
President Obama’s $480 billion in military spending “cuts” are only from
the bloated CBO baseline. This means that he is merely reducing
projected military spending, as opposed to cutting current spending.
Military spending will continue to rise under President Obama’s plan,
just at a slightly slower rate. Why has this sparked so much
controversy? Self-identified neoconservative Bill Kristol said that the
so-called cuts “would decimate our military.”
<strong>More at the link provided</strong>
Read More: http://www.newsmax.com/DickArmey/Obama-Military-Bu...
And then . . . Let's not forget about the Commerce clause.
The Federal govenment can and should regulate commerce.
Health care, which involves mulitiple businesses, certainly also involves commerce, and it is therefore subject to regulation from that standpoint as well.
Yes, I've got it. I bet you wish you did.
Who knows though. You may get your way.
The US Supreme Court is weighed down by Right Wingers who have a history of making terrible decisions harmful to this nation . . . Most notably the Citizens United decision.
i suppose that the general welfare, now, also prescribes internet for all. or gasoline for all. or rent/mortgage for all.
ummm... the federal gov't can only regulate INTERSTATE commerce. that's not right or left. that's well trodden constitutional ground.
Health care has existed since the dawn of humanity and before.
Apes and monkeys even pick bugs and parasites off of each other to prevent sickness. For Keerist sake . . . the Federal Government should at least have higher standards than monkeys. The need for health care is obvious to most of humanity, apes, monkeys, and other living things . . . but Republicans are too slow and stupid to catch on.
. . . Pathetic.
And how much of the health care industry does not involve interstate commerce?
Using that clause to its fullest is putting the s tate govts out of business.
Give me even ONE case to support your claim.
Are you referring to GW Bush's "No Child Left Behind"
Inititative?
Are you referring to the School Lunch Program initiated by Harry Truman in 1947?
What are you talking about?
I am talking about increasing regulations, paperwork, generally taking increasing control.
Setting speed limits on roads.
Or are you just lashing out?
Come on . . . If you have something worthwhile to say, I'm all ears.
Please enlighten us as to what the Soviet Constitution had to say.
. http://www.departments.buckne...
ARTICLE 1. The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics is a socialist state of workers and peasants.
ARTICLE 2. The Soviets of Working People's Deputies, which grew and attained strength as a result of the overthrow of the landlords and capitalists and the achievement of the dictatorship of the proletariat, constitute the political foundation of the U.S.S.R.
ARTICLE 3. In the U.S.S.R. all power belongs to the working people of town and country as represented by the Soviets of Working People's Deputies.
ARTICLE 4. The socialist system of economy and the socialist ownership of the means and instruments of production firmly established as a result of the abolition of the capitalist system of economy, the abrogation of private ownership of the means and instruments of production and the abolition of the exploitation of man by man, constitute' the economic foundation of the U.S.S.R.
ARTICLE 5. Socialist property in the U.S.S.R. exists either in the form of state property (the possession of the whole people), or in the form of cooperative and collective-farm property (property of a collecti...
. http://www.departments.buckne...
ARTICLE 1. The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics is a socialist state of workers and peasants.
ARTICLE 2. The Soviets of Working People's Deputies, which grew and attained strength as a result of the overthrow of the landlords and capitalists and the achievement of the dictatorship of the proletariat, constitute the political foundation of the U.S.S.R.
ARTICLE 3. In the U.S.S.R. all power belongs to the working people of town and country as represented by the Soviets of Working People's Deputies.
ARTICLE 4. The socialist system of economy and the socialist ownership of the means and instruments of production firmly established as a result of the abolition of the capitalist system of economy, the abrogation of private ownership of the means and instruments of production and the abolition of the exploitation of man by man, constitute' the economic foundation of the U.S.S.R.
ARTICLE 5. Socialist property in the U.S.S.R. exists either in the form of state property (the possession of the whole people), or in the form of cooperative and collective-farm property (property of a collective farm or property of a cooperative association).
ARTICLE 6. The land, its natural deposits, waters, forests, mills, factories, mines, rail, water and air transport, banks, post, telegraph and telephones, large state-organized agricultural enterprises (state farms, machine and tractor stations and the like) as well as municipal enterprises and the bulk of the dwelling houses in the cities and industrial localities, are state property, that is, belong to the whole people.
All I can do is smile as I read and realize that those of the knee-jerk reaction against all things OBAMA respond as expected.
Sigh.
We as a country are like a car filled with children, with one guy trying to back us from the lip of a cliff and a large portion trying to drive us over because they don't like the driver doing the backing.
I actually find this news reassuring. Coming as it does from Dick Armey, I find it somewhat reliable, because his heart is in the right place. Now what you're saying is that Obama is trying to keep his base, but is flat-out lying to them.
But what's all this about reductions in force? Why does he do this, and still spend more money, in nominal terms, next year than this? Or do you deny that he is actually reducing any force strength?
_____________________________...
Tuesday January 10, 2012 13:24 by Mais Azza - IMEMC & Agencies
Accompanied by a US aircraft carrier, 9,000 US troops including airmen, missile interceptor teams, marines, technicians and intelligence officers are scheduled to land in Israel in the coming weeks. Many will stay up to the end of the year as part of the US-Israeli Army deployment in readiness for a military engagement with Iran, aiming at a synchronized military front against Iran.
US Third Air Force Lt. Gen. Frank Gorenc commented in his visit two weeks ago that the coming action is more a "deployment" than an "exercise,”. The joint force will now be in place ready for a decision to attack Iran's nuclear installations or any combat emergency.
After Tehran had released a bulletin about another Iranian naval exercise at the Strait of Hormuz in February, US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak and the two army chiefs, US Gen. Martin Dempsey and Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz decided to announce the coming of the force on Thursday night, Jan. 5.
http://aljazeerah.info/News/2...
Funny that she ignores that the English and Arabic versions spew two opposite viewpoints. My neighbor often reads it for me.
She searched for these and found them.
By the time we spoke on Monday, the ones she saw ("really scary") were gone.
Very few people ever saw the groups of hundreds of thousands all communicating briefly, it's like a disposable cell phone for extremists.
Things are really firing up, I feel it, can you?
Any clue???
Is that why you couldn't find the story on a legitimate website?