Obama is picking our pockets isn't he?
|
|
|||||
|
17 votes
|
|
89% | |||
|
1 vote
|
|
5% | |||
|
1 vote
|
|
5% | |||
ShareThis
campaign refused to pay the cost of police protection for the
President's Durham campaign stop on Monday. The entire Obama
administration can be summed up in these five words: Obama gives speech,
we pay.
Since when has this President taken personal
responsibility for his actions, their effects or their costs? Every
American ought to be able to see by now the pattern that he has repeated
since he took office:
1. Give sweeping speech proclaiming grand but vague vision.
2. Lowball the real cost of executing that vision and pay for much of it with debt.
3. If policies are enacted and then generate unintended consequences, blame the results on the previous administration.
4.
If policy costs are shown to be more than the administration predicted,
blame private sector “greed” and political obstruction.
The
stimulus bill was supposed to cost $787 billion. The Congressional
Budget Office calculated late last year that the bill will increase the
federal deficit by $831 billion over 10 years. Obamacare was supposed to
cost less than $1 trillion. But Obama and Democrats in Congress got to
that figure by cooking the books. For example, the law raised Medicaid
payments to doctors but simply did not fund those payments after 2014.
It expanded Medicaid eligibility, part of which states have to fund
themselves. And of course individuals have to buy insurance if they
don't have it now, and insurers have to pay for the costs of mandated
coverage such as insuring “children” until age 26.
Obama loves
the idea of replacing coal and oil power with wind and solar power. So
he directs billions of dollars in taxpayer money to wind and solar
projects. Solyndra, which went bankrupt after the Obama administration
gave it $535 million in loan guarantees, was just one of these projects
we were forced to subsidize.
Obama likes trains. So he committed
$8 billion in debt-financed stimulus funding to trains, and the
Democratic Congress added another $2.5 billion.
The President
really enjoys spending money on things he thinks will make our lives
better. He just doesn't like paying for it. He expects others (mostly
our children) to do that at some undefined point in the future.
Obama
sets the grand vision (which, conveniently, doles out money to
political constituencies he favors) and lets others figure out how to
pay for it later. That's why the budget he proposed this year grows the
federal debt from $15.7 trillion this year to $25 trillion a decade
later. Sticking the taxpayers of Durham with a $20,000 bill for his
campaign speech is just par for the course with this guy. If only the
American taxpayer, like Durham, had an anonymous donor to step in and
pick up the tab.
Comments
To improve the chance of seeing your comment posted here or published in the New Hampshire Union Leader:
- Identify yourself. Accounts using fake or incomplete names are suspended regardless of the quality of posts.
- Say something new, stay on topic, keep it short.
- Links to outside URLs are discouraged, if used they should be on topic.
- Avoid comments in bad taste, write well, avoid using all capital letters
- Don't cite facts about individuals or businesses without providing a means to verify the claim
- If you see an objectionable comment please click the "Report Abuse" button and be sure to tell us why.
Note: Comments are the opinion of the respective poster and not of the publisher.
Spike said:
I am pleased that a private citizen paid $20,000 of the security cost
of the Obama campaign stop. If it constitutes a private, in-kind
campaign contribution, the real question is: By what right does the
government regulate such a gift? Why do we think we are entitled to
know who the donor is? It does not present the "appearance of
corruption" (see the nearby editorial on the Montana court case); it
does not buy favors from Mr. Obama; we all know what he is and the
private citizen gave that money because he agrees and wishes to support a
campaign stop. The Republican Party should set aside its zeal to catch
someone in a technical violation (as the Democratic Party still clings
to the technical violation it pinned on Rep. Guinta two years ago) and
move on to real issues. They are abundant.
(Report Abuse)
June 26, 2012 5:32 am
Bob Lake said:
This editorial clearly illustrates how low the repugs have become. They
act like the children on the bus that abused the bus monitor. Sad
little children. They try to hurt their opponents by hitting below the
belt and not discussing the real issues. They have no solutions for
health care, immigration etc. NADA! The party of NO and old white men.
Thankfully, they are not for long. The smart young people of all colors
are coming to save this country from these haters.
(Report Abuse)
June 26, 2012 7:46 am
roy lain said:
Who would pay $20,000 to hear Obama talk maybe $5.00.
(Report Abuse)
June 26, 2012 9:46 am
Mark Simonelli said:
Bob, (1) You start off by name calling (repugs) and then compare
republicans to name calling children. You must see the folly in this
argument. (2) The debt is a "real" issue. Just because the soaring debt
makes your guy look horrible, doesn't elevate other issues to national
emergencies. (3)Who is the racist? You are the one bringing race into
the discussion.
(Report Abuse)
June 26, 2012 10:13 am
Milt Cross said:
Mormon or Moron? I’ll be voting for the Mormon on Nov 6th 2012
(Report Abuse)
June 26, 2012 10:18 am
Spike said:
Bob Lake: No solutions? My solution for health care is to let people
buy it, and let people share risk, under freely negotiated terms, not
terms imposed by gunpoint and the IRS. My solution for immigration is
to enforce the border and disqualify foreign invaders from freebies,
including helpful and vital freebies, freebies that make us feel good
about ourselves, even the free protection of police and courts. You
don't want solutions. You want Republicans to lead the way toward more
entitlements and amnesty for lawbreakers--to "solve" the problems as YOU
define them--and sadly, some will, maybe even Mr. Romney--at which
point, you will continue to call them "haters."
(Report Abuse)
June 26, 2012 10:22 am
Mike Redding said:
The republican solution - "Everybody on his own, personal
responsibility". Hospital to patient, "you had a heart attack. We may be
able to fix it. It will cost you $200,000. Do you want it or not. If
not, next patient!" That is the republican way. That is their plan for
health care and everything else. Tough love, just die.
(Report Abuse)
June 26, 2012 11:00 am
Robert Rivett said:
So many parrots, so little time.
(Report Abuse)
June 26, 2012 12:38 pm
steve george said:
Mr redding what is wrong with personal responsibility? That's how it should be.
(Report Abuse)
June 26, 2012 12:49 pm
Nicole Cloutier said:
What happened to a town being proud of hosting the PRESIDENT of the
UNITED STATES? They shouldn't have invited him to Durham if they weren't
prepared to pick up the tab. I'm sorry, but if I were a cop I would
voluteer my 4 hours to make it safe for again, THE PRESIDENT, to be safe
in my town/city. I am really embarassed for the State of NH that it
was even made public that we thought about disinviting him.
(Report Abuse)
June 26, 2012 2:01 pm
Mike Redding said:
Nicole - That is a great comment. No matter which party, a town or city
should be proud to honor its President. Unfortunately, the Tea Party
Thugs don't agree with you. The President has to be republican and lilly
white.
(Report Abuse)
June 26, 2012 2:27 pm
Larry Owsowitz said:
Nicole/Mike,Did you bother to ask the TAXPAYERS of Durham if they want
to pay for this?It's easy to spend other people's money isn't it?It
doesn't matter what party the president belongs to, if it is a trip for
the purposes of getting reelected then the campaign should pick up the
tab. The president even paid for AF 1 since it was a campaign trip, to
fly to Pease. He should pay for the extra police and fire department
details(BTW, seems the Democratic Party is having some cash flow issues
with their convention, too.)
(Report Abuse)
June 26, 2012 4:31 pm
Read More: http://www.unionleader.com
Top Opinion
-
mwg0735 2012/06/27 04:21:16
“$1.2 billion to a solar company that’s building a plant in Mexico.” It’s true that the company that got the loans also recently opened a solar-panel manufacturing plant in Mexico.
“Half a billion to an electric car company that created hundreds of jobs in Finland.” the first round of government loans to Fisker Automotive . It’s true that the cars it has built so far were made in Finland.
“And tens of millions of dollars to build traffic lights in China.” . It’s true that for a time they were put together using LED lights made mostly in Asia, under a waiver the Department of Energy issued in February 2010
that the stimulus did not create any American jobs (when the Congressional Budget that President Obama has “wasted” $34 billion on investments like Solyndra
“Washington promised to create American jobs if we passed their stimulus. But that’s not what happened. Fact: Billions of taxpayers dollars spent on green energy went to jobs in foreign countries. The Obama administration admitted the truth, that $2.3 billion of tax credits went overseas, while millions of Americans can’t find a job
And you can't steal from the president because it isn't stealing to take it back. But if you try Don Presidente's men will murder you.