Politics
When Water Reaches the Ceiling, Don’t Raise It–Start Pumping!
I believe we need to bring back an important word that people hesitate to use in politics:
Lie.
Have you noticed that politicians usually skirt that little word? The news anchor says, “Do you think you lied about this or that?” The answer usually comes back, “Well, it might be an untruth , but”….or “I wouldn’t call it a lie, but…”
That’s not good enough anymore. We are being told a number of lies by our government because we are in grave trouble and there is much to cover up. We don’t tolerate lies in our personal lives and dealings, and we shouldn’t in the civil sphere either.
The current lie being told is that we need to raise the United States debt limit or go into default. They’re lying to us because because they need to scare us into getting their way–to keep on spending recklessly.
But it’s a lie–and it’s time we called their bluff.
Yes, we can with integrity oppose the raising of the US debt ceiling; No it will not cause a default or put in jeopardy “the full faith and credit of the United States;” And we must oppose it at this hour because our burgeoning debt is grossly immoral and could cause a collapse of the entire world economy.
Now is the time to say NO.
I cannot un-wrap this subject better than Redstate.com and the Heritage Foundation have done in the following articles. Please read them carefully and do everything in your power to oppose the raising of the US debt ceiling.
It’s not time to raise the ceiling. It’s already far too high. We need to start pumping the flood of government debt out of the precious dwelling we call the United States of America.
On April 25, Redstate exposed the debt ceiling lie quite clearly. Here is their take:
“Reporters, Democrats, and even some Republicans have begun repeating an infectious lie in the prelude to the debt ceiling debate. Secretary of Treasury Tim Geithner started it off and it has been repeated by reporters in print, on radio, and on television, including Fox News.”
“The lie is very simple: a failure to raise the debt ceiling will cause a default on American debt. This is utterly and categorically a lie. Anyone who says otherwise is a liar.”
“As Senator Pat Toomey noted the other day,
“Next year, about 7 percent of all projected federal government expenditures will go to interest on our debt. Tax revenue is projected to cover at least 70 percent of all government expenditures. So, under any circumstances, there will be plenty of money to pay our creditors.”
‘Moreover, as the Congressional Research Service has noted, the Treasury secretary himself has the discretion to decide which bills to pay first in the event that a cash flow shortage occurs.’
“Nonetheless, the media and Democrats keep repeating the lie. And it is a lie.”
“Veronique de Rugy and Jason Fichtner chronicled debt ceiling fights in the Washington Times and, from their writing, we can categorically show it to be a lie to claim a failure to raise the debt ceiling will cause a default on American debt obligations.”
‘In 1985, Congress waited nearly three months after the debt limit was reached before authorizing a permanent increase. In 1995, 4 1/2 months passed between hitting the ceiling and congressional action. And in 2002, Congress delayed raising the debt ceiling for three months. In each case, the U.S. and the economy survived.’
“Not only did the economy survive, but the United States did not default on its debt obligations, the United States did not lose its credit rating, and interest rates did not go up as a result of the default.”
“To say that failing to raise the debt ceiling will cause a default is a lie and anyone who says it is a liar.”
“If we fail to raise the debt ceiling and do default, it will not because because of a failure to raise the debt ceiling. It will be because Barack Obama and Tim Geithner chose to default for political gain.”
“Again, as Senator Toomey points out:
‘As the Congressional Research Service has noted, the Treasury secretary himself has the discretion to decide which bills to pay first in the event that a cash flow shortage occurs. Thus, it is he who would have to consciously, and needlessly, choose to default on our debt if the debt ceiling is not promptly raised upon reaching it. It takes a lot of chutzpah to preemptively blame congressional Republicans for a default only he could cause.'”
The Heritage Foundation gives this wise explanation to the debt ceiling debate:
“All across Western Europe—the land of platinum-plated social benefits, the 35-hour work week, tony retirement plans and government-funded health care—countries are coming to the realization that they can no longer afford these luxuries amid skyrocketing deficits. Yet here in the United States, as we face a $14.3 trillion deficit, some are calling for increasing our government’s ability to borrow even more money without any concern for spending reform. Congress can’t allow that to happen, lest we become the Europe of the West.”
“The U.S. government is fast approaching its $14.294 trillion debt ceiling — the statutory limit on how much money it can borrow to finance spending. Just how big is that? To put it in perspective, it would take essentially everything that Americans produced in all of last year to pay off the existing national debt. That comes out to $45,000 of debt for each American.”
“Unfortunately, it’s all too common for Congress to reach that ceiling and keep raising its own credit limit, letting itself borrow and spend even more. In fact, Congress raised the debt ceiling from $6.4 trillion in 2002 and nine times thereafter to its present levels. Hopefully, though, this time will be different.”
“Yesterday on “Face the Nation,” Senator Mark Kirk (R-IL) said, “I will vote ‘no’ on raising the debt ceiling unless we have comprehensive, dramatic, effective, and broad-based cuts to federal spending including the reform of entitlement spending.” Sen. Kirk’s instincts are right. The solution starts with Congress. David Addington, Vice President for Domestic and Economic Policy at The Heritage Foundation, writes:
‘Federal spending has been out of control for decades, and federal borrowing has therefore also been out of control for decades. America has amassed a giant, unaffordable debt and a giant, intrusive government. This did not happen by accident. Congress passed all the laws that made it happen. Fortunately, Congress has under the Constitution all the power it needs to solve the problem it created. It needs only the will to do so and the support of the American people.'”
“Here’s how Congress should use that power. As Addington writes, Congress should not increase the debt limit until it puts the government firmly on the path to financial responsibility. And it can get there by cutting current spending, restricting future spending, and putting a more effective federal budgeting process in place.”
“The Heritage Foundation identified $343 billion of potential spending cutsthat could be made on top of the cuts passed by the House in February and the repeal of Obamacare appropriations, which the House approved in January. When it comes to future limits on spending, Congress can impose enforceable caps on out-of-control entitlement programs and pass a balanced budget amendment. The budgeting process should be reformed, too, by making it more transparent and imposing new limits on federal agencies. Merely raising the limit without reforms is the worst option, Addington says:
‘The least acceptable outcome is for Congress to continue to raise the debt ceiling over and over, doing nothing to drive down federal spending and borrowing, and to pile trillions of dollars in debt upon the shoulders of America’s children and the generations to follow.'”
“President Barack Obama and White House officials have warned of global economic Armageddonif Congress does not act now to raise the debt limit. Their warnings, though, are reckless hyperbole. A greater threat is the U.S. government’s unchecked expansion of unsustainable deficit spending. Congress must break its pattern of borrowing more and spending more by acting now to cut spending and get the government’s fiscal house in order. Only then can it avert a real crisis.”
Now that’s the TRUTH about the grossly immoral US debt and debt ceiling.
No more raising the lid. It’s time to drain the swamp to salvage the nation we call “home.”
Congressional leaders: Just say NO.
President Obama and Administration: Don’t tell us a lie.
Forget the debt ceiling and start pumping! We’re ready to help you with the clean-up and re-building of our once financially prudent nation.
But the buck stops (being borrowed and cheapened) with you.
The Worst Congress in History–Should We Look in the Mirror?
I think we just lived through the worst United States Congress in history. Since the American Republic has been around for 234 years now, that is saying something.
Of course, I wasn’t there to observe 177 of those years, but I’ve kept a pretty close view on the past thirty or forty–and nothing compares to the deception, ineptness, radical nature, and horrific policies of the 111th United States Congress.
The 80th Congress (1948) was called the “Do-Nothing Congress.” The 109th Congress (2006) has been labeled the “Vacation Congress” because they only met for 100 days. Various congresses in the 18th and 19th centuries were either extremely raucous or bitterly divided (such as over slavery).
But nothing trumps the just completed 111th Congress.
They should be named the “Destroy Everything” Congress.
I believe we need to open our eyes–and also look in the mirror.
We elected these people.
What does that say about us?
It wasn’t that long ago that you didn’t hear much about the US Senate and House of Representatives in the daily news. They weren’t much of a factor or presence. Yes, every twenty to thirty years they made a controversial decision or passed a bad bill. But that was the exception, not a daily occurrence.
Of course, 24/7 cable news and the Internet have greatly increased the spotlight on national governance. But technology does not determine the character of those who lead.
During my lifetime, most senators and congressmen were decent people regardless of party. I generally vote Republican because of the GOP’s general commitment to Judeo-Christian principles which bring liberty. But I’ve liked and supported many Democrats as well including Senators Scoop Jackson and Henry Magnuson, and President John F. Kennedy. Sam Rayburn was a heck of a House Speaker and Tip O’Neill was a decent guy who shared a congenial, after-hours relationship with President Reagan.
So the issue is not partisan. It relates to the people in office.
The elected representatives of the 111th Congress were the worst national legislators we’ve ever had. Don’t believe the spin of the past couple of week. It’s just a desperate attempt to resurrect the discredited progressive agenda. The majority of Americans aren’t buying it.
Take a look at the most recent Gallup Poll on the 111th Congress. The graph is quite enlightening:
“PRINCETON, NJ — Americans’ assessment of Congress has hit a new low, with 13% saying they approve of the way Congress is handling its job. The 83% disapproval rating is also the worst Gallup has measured in more than 30 years of tracking congressional job performance.”
“The prior low approval rating for Congress was 14% in July 2008 when the United States was dealing with record-high gas prices and the economy was in recession.”
“For the year, Congress averaged 19% approval among all Americans, tied with the averages for 1979 and 2008, and one percentage point above the 18% average for 1992. Those years were all marked by difficult economic times for the United States.”
Gallup asked another question in a July 22, 2010 poll. It had to do with which institutions give people the greatest confidence. The poll found Congress ranking dead last out of the 16 institutions rated this year. Eleven percent of Americans said they have “a great deal” or “quite a lot” of confidence in Congress, down from 17% in 2009 and a percentage point lower than the previous low for Congress, recorded in 2008.
So according to Gallup, the 111th Congress approval rating is 13% and confidence rating is 11%.
That’s pretty bad.
Why?
Let’s first look at the people and then at the policies they’ve enacted.
THE PEOPLE OF THE 111TH CONGRESS (just to name a few)
Nancy Pelosi – She will probably go down in history as the worst Speaker of all-time. From ultra-liberal San Francisco, she ruled as if everybody in America wanted to move to her progressive haven. A blank slate on America’s heritage and principles, she drove her own Congress into the electoral ditch with the greatest turnover of seats in sixty years. Her most famous quote (among many) referring to Obamacare: “We need to pass the bill so that we can find out what is in it.”
Harry Reid – The Senate majority leader from Nevada. He strong-armed Obamacare through the Senate by altering the rules and making back-room deals against the express will of the American people (Louisianna Purchase, Cornhusker kick-back etc.). Reid’s Senate didn’t pass one budget item during the past year while giving full vent to vast liberal wish lists of spending. His most famous gaffe among many: “The War is lost!” (When our fighting men and women were in harm’s way and the surge in Iraq was working.)
Barney Frank – His lack of regulation over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (which continues to this day) was one of the major factors in the collapse of the real estate market and the financial difficulties we’ve experienced since 2008. Frank is a foul-mouthed, militant homosexual whose “partner” once ran a gay prostitution ring out of his D.C. apartment.
Responding recently to President Jimmy Carter’s assertion that America is ready for a homosexual president, Franks bellowed: “It’s one thing to have a gay person in the abstract. It’s another to see that person as part of a living, breathing couple. How would a gay presidential candidate have a celebratory kiss with his partner after winning the New Hampshire primary? The sight of two women kissing has not been as distressful to people as the sight of two men kissing. And because of the Defense of Marriage Act, it’s not clear that a gay president could use federal funds to buy his husband dinner. Would his partner have to pay rent in the White House? There would be no Secret Service protection for the paramour.”
Yuck.
And this man was one of the powerful men in Washington, D.C. during the 111th Congress?
The list could go on and on–but I think you get the point.
POLICIES OF THE 111TH CONGRESS
First, they wastefully threw an 800 billion dollar stimulus program at the nation that did nothing to create jobs. The unemployment rate continued to climb because government spending does not stimulate capital creation and entrepreneurship. This was the biggest pork barrel bill in the history of the nation. Much of it went to prop up liberal causes, state governments, and unions. It was an utter waste of nearly one trillion dollars.
Then they spent an entire year going against the will of the American people and finally jamming through Obamacare last Christmas–the first step toward socialized medicine in the United States. This nearly three thousand page monstrosity is probably the worst single piece of legislation ever enacted on American soil. As a result, doctors are vowing to retire; Companies are raising rates; Over 250 groups have been exempted from the program because they’re favorites of the Administration; And this is a giant take-over of one-sixth of the American economy.
Because of the radicalness of this and other income re-distribution programs, the Tea Party Movement was born and swept many state houses, legislatures, and Congressional members out of DC in the November 2 elections.
After the election, the chastened 111th Congress should have humbly returned to their D.C. offices, voted to keep the tax rates in place, funded the government, and gone home. They had been soundly defeated and told they were taking the nation in a wrong direction.
But in a brazen, in-your-face manner, they did just the opposite. First they pushed to raise taxes on the wealth creators in America, lost, and finally capitulated. Then they pandered to their homosexual base and sent shock waves through the US armed forces by callously rescinding the “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” policy–again against the wishes of the people and especially those on the front lines.
They also tried to slip in a controversial immigration bill, and pushed for a major nuclear arms treaty with Russia that is hurtful to the United States. They have no business even treading in these waters.
But this Congress doesn’t care. They have an agenda–and they stuck it to the American people.
Rush Limbaugh described the 111th Congress this way in his radio commentary on December 16, 2010:”The damage being done by this Congress is disastrous. They are hi-jacking our country right before our eyes. We are in the middle of being raped and they know it. We said “No” in November but they are still destroying and hijacking our country right in front of our eyes. They don’t care about the country.”
That’s why I call them the “Destroy Everything” Congress.
Fortunately, in a few days, they will be gone and the 112th will take their place.
But their destructive rampage should lead us to some necessary introspection.
Many of these people, including Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and Barney Frank were re-elected in 2010. They will be diminished, but are still in office.
What does that say about us–that we could elect people such as this to guide the affairs of our nation?
In olden times, God used prophets to explain to people why they were given good kings–when they followed God and lived right–and why they were sent bad kings as judgment for their sins.
We don’t have unelected kings in our day. We don’t need an explanation. We live in democratic times where our leaders are a reflection of us.
We the people–elected the 111th Congress. They were the worst in history.
But that consequently means that we, too, just might be the worst generation in American history who elected the worst leaders.
We need to change, live good lives, and elect good leaders.
Start with yourself. Look in the mirror.
Humble yourself. Ask God to forgive you, and live a changed life.
If enough Americans do it, we just might turn our worst time into one of our best .
“If my people who are called by my name will humble themselves and pray, seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways, then I will from heaven , forgive their sins and heal their land” (2 Chronicles 7:14).
The Meaning of the Tax Rate Debate: American Socialism’s Hail Mary?
For the past week various pundits, commentators and politicians have been trying to wrap their mind around the tax rate compromise put together by President Obama and Republican leaders.
For awhile, I must confess, it was very confusing.
But now I understand.
The Obama-brokered tax rate compromise is American Socialism’s version of a Hail Mary Pass.
Let’s hope it is incomplete.
For non-football fans, a little explanation is in order. A Hail Mary pass is a desperation heave that is usually the last play of a football game. The team with the ball is behind by less than a touchdown and has much of the field to cover if they are to score and win the game. The time has clicked down to the final seconds, and there is time for only one more play.
The quarterback takes the snap and throws the ball as far as he can–usually into the end zone–hoping, saying a prayer (Hail Mary), that one of his teammates will out jump the defenders, catch the ball, score a touchdown and win the game.
One of the most remembered Hail Mary passes in history was Doug Flutie’s forty-eight yard toss on October 20, 1999 that allowed Boston College to defeat its arch-rival, the Miami Hurricanes
Barack Obama is now trying to do the same.
The tax compromise is American socialism’s desperate Hail Mary.
But before we describe the Obama Hail Mary strategy, let’s look at the confusing rhetoric of the past week. I’ve rarely seen such political confusion in all of my life.
Conservative Angst
When the tax compromise was first announced by the White House, many conservatives applauded the plan because it extended the current tax rates for two years. However, they didn’t like the extension of unemployment benefits and other special interests earmarks.
The Heritage Foundation was cautiously supportive at first, while echoing conservative concerns. In their first Morning Bell on the subject, they stated “The deal originally cut by Republicans had some good economic policy in it, but it also had a lot of harmful provisions. The temporary two-year nature of the arrangement did not provide the long-term certainty that businesses need to make long-term investment plans that create substantial economic growth and jobs.”
Tony Perkin’s Family Research Council was also ambivalent at first saying “Congress has had two years to deal with this ticking time bomb called tax relief–and they have less than 14 days to diffuse it. The Senate is scheduled to vote on a “compromise” tax package on Monday afternoon with both good and bad provisions. It does maintain the current tax rates, preserves the Child Tax Credit , and keeps married couples from being penalized. On the negative side, it’s all still temporary and raises the death tax by 35 percent.”
Liberal Concerns
Some liberals also accepted the bill because they thought it it was the best they could get after the November 2 election “shellacking.” Vice President Joe Biden reportedly told House Democrats that the tax deal cut with Republicans was a “take it or leave it” proposition that could not be changed.
Others hated it because the president caved on his pledge to raise taxes on “the rich.” During Democratic caucus meetings, various members were overheard cursing the president and his unwillingness to raise taxes on the wealthy and small businesses.
Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, a committed socialist, was so livid about the compromise that he filibustered the Senate for a grueling 8 hours and 37 minutes, speaking nearly non-stop about class warfare and the blessings of national socialism.
Fidel Castro would have been proud.
Two Who Got It Right
Though at first, there was widespread confusion over the compromise, two men got it right from the beginning.
Maybe we should elect one as president and the other as VP in 2012. They seem to be the sharpest minds in the republic.
Columnist Charles Krauthammer called it the “swindle of the year,” and said from the very beginning that the only person who truly benefits from passing it is Barack Obama. “[With this deal], the President negotiated the biggest stimulus in American history, larger than his $814 billion 2009 package.”
His column in the Washington Post is worth reading.
I don’t know where Charles got his $814 billion number–some (like Sean Hannity) question it, but still believe that Krauthammer is right. I must admit, when I first heard Charles’ take I was skeptical.
Then I began to think and pray–and concluded he was correct.
Senator Jim DeMint also made headlines by becoming the first Republican politician in Washington to declare his opposition to the tax compromise. He even threatened to filibuster the deal.
In an e-mail via DeMint’s PAC Senate Conservatives Fund, DeMint laid out why he is opposed to the tax deal.
“First, I do not want to see anyone’s taxes go up and I have been fighting for years to permanently extend all the tax rates. I disagree with the President that we cannot afford to extend these rates for everyone. It’s the people’s money and we should not raise taxes on hardworking American families.”
“But this bill does much more than simply extend tax rates. For starters, it includes approximately $200 billion in new deficit spending and stimulus gimmicks… The bill also only extends rates for two years. We don’t have a temporary economy so we shouldn’t have temporary tax rates.”
“The bill also fails to extend all of the tax rates. It actually increases the death tax from its current rate of zero percent all the way up to 35 percent. One economic study shows that this tax increase alone will kill over 800,000 jobs over the next ten years.”
“Finally, the bill now includes dozens of earmarks for special interests, including ethanol subsidies, tax breaks for film and television producers, give aways for rum manufacturers, favors for auto racing track owners, and a hand out for businesses outside [the United States].”
One reason I like Jim DeMint because he lives at 133 Street–my old office on Capitol Hill.
One other former Senator and Hollywood star, Fred Thompson, also was prescient on the error of extending unemployment benefits yet another year (totalling three years).
He remarked, “With unemployment being extended another 13 months, is it maybe time to just start calling it welfare?”
Or maybe socialism.
That’s what the battle is about.
For nearly one hundred years, a portion of our society has been trying to change America from a Christian-based, freedom-oriented society to a secular-leaning socialist model. There are many forms of national socialism, but the bottom line is trust in and control of people by ever-expanding government.
Our founding fathers called it tyranny.
Its opposite is liberty. William Penn spoke for all colonial Americans when he said, “Men must be governed by God or they will be ruled by tyrants.”
He was referring to Europe at the time.
Europe has known many forms of tyrannical governments. Prior to the Reformation, kings and princes lorded it over their subjects for hundreds of years. In the 20th century Benito Mussolini and Adolph Hitler gave birth to national socialistic regimes that became cruel and oppressive. Communist Russia took socialism a step further when it seized economic control of the State through “the barrel of gun.” More recently, European states created vast welfare states under the banner of democratic socialism.
But its all the same at the core: Power comes from government, not from the people.
European nations have experienced many forms of socialism.
Different teams. Same game.
The American experiment was exceptionally different. Backed by a Christian world view that recognized the sovereignty of God and the power of Christ in the individual, our early founders and settlers established the United States on faith, character and freedom.
This was a new “team” the world had never seen before.
This team believed in freedom. Their faith produced a great nation. “Team Tyranny” was always there, trying to even up the score. but never able to get ahead.
Then came Woodrow Wilson and his secular progressive plans, next FDR and the New Deal (vast expansion of the Federal Government), and finally LBJ and the Great Society. “Team Tyranny” was gaining ground on “Team Liberty.” The battle was enjoined. America’s future had truly turned into a competitive civilizational struggle.
Jimmy Carter was socialism’s next attempt to take the lead in the game. But he was petty and inept as a leader, and freedom-loving Ronald Reagan was swept into office. His influence kept “Team Liberty” ahead in the game for another twenty years.
Then following some missteps by the Republicans who were supposed to key players on “Team Liberty,” Barack Obama was elected to national office. In two short years he took “Team Tyranny” into the lead in American life via massive government stimuli, a takeover of various businesses and the financial sector, and finally the crowning jewel–creeping socialized medicine through Obamacare.
At that point, socialism was winning the game and Bernie Sanders was no longer the lone kook.
His team was now ahead.
But then “Team Liberty” awoke through the Tea Party Movement and concerted prayer. They “scored” big in the November 2, 2010 elections and re-gained the lead for the forces of freedom. On many fronts, freedom and common sense triumphed and was preparing to add a larger national advantage on January 3, 2011 when the new 112th Congress convenes and in 2012 when a new president can be elected.
So Barack Obama, captain of “Team Tyranny,” saw the victory slipping away and let fly with his Hail Mary.
Don’t be deceived by other members of his team that are yapping and swawking. They’re just decoy receivers that are really working for the same goal. Barack Obama was throwing to other “receivers”–Independents–who he needs to score a winning touchdown.
The Compromise was all about his re-election in 2012. Without it, socialism will not be able to win the game.
Barack Obama has not changed. He’s still a socialist-of-some-type at heart. But time was running out and momentum had swung.
He desperately heaved a Hail Mary to try and get re-elected.
Let’s hope and pray that his pass is incomplete during the Lame Duck Session.
As Heritage Foundation and many others now understand, the compromise must fail.
Then “Team Liberty” can once again get the ball back on January 3, 2011 and make permanent the tax rates, begin repealing Obamacare, and soundly defeat the socialists in 2012. Next, a new generation of leaders must stop frivolous spending, balance the budget, promote faith and morality, strengthen national defenses and encourage an American spiritual awakening.
That’s the meaning of the tax rate debate.