Oklahoman Editorials on the OK Legislature -- Not Flattering but True!

When this site was started it was with the understanding that we would call it like we saw it.  At the time the Democrats were selling out to special interests but now we can truthfully say that it looks like it is not only Democrats but Republicans as well.  Unfortunately it has been happening in the halls of Congress and  now it is appearing in our legislatures around the Country.  Special interests are taking precedence over the taxpayers with budgets being negotiated behind the scenes.  Because I live in Oklahoma, I have been covering the final days of the Oklahoma Legislature and have taken away from this process that it is not the way to do business.  We, the taxpayers, deserve better than this.  We have a right to see the budget before it is voted on and signed by the Governor because the members of the legislature are using our tax dollars.

The Oklahoman newspaper decided to do two editorials yesterday that describe the lack of common sense out of our Oklahoma legislators.  These people get paid almost $40,000 a year for four months in session along with State Medical Insurance like they are a full time State employee.  We hear how they meet in committee and work so hard during the other eight months.  If this session is an example of the best they can do in eight months before session, the citizens of Oklahoma deserve a rebate of their salaries because they are grossly overpaid.  I already thought we have too many Representatives and Senators for such a small state who are paid too much money in comparison to what teachers are paid for 9-10 months of work.  Now I know it is a fact.

Maybe if they spent less time on social issues and more time on passing a budget earlier in the session so taxpayers know exactly what is in the budget, our state would be better run.  How about requiring legislators to write their own bills instead of using lobbyists?  Why do they submit 1200 bills a session?  How many bills can you pass on abortion -- forgot that is the #1 issue not infrastructure from some of the Representatives.  How many bills has this group of legislators passed since coming to the legislature as the majority party that have been declared whole or partly unconstitutional or told if you pass that bill it will be overturned by the Courts?  Is this the best that Oklahoma can do with our elected representatives because it is not good enough IMHO!

Now understand why they cannot do a two year budget because they wait until the last few days to pass a one-year budget so no one has a chance to see what is in the budget until it is passed.  Did they fund education first?  NO!  Same as it has been since they passed funding education first in 2002 -- only one time have they honored that pledge and as usual it did not get funded first this year so public schools will continue to tread water.  These are the people we send to Oklahoma City to be our voices?  Looks like we need new voices as this bunch of Representatives are not doing their job.  We also need less Representatives because it is obvious that having 101 for this small state leads to inability to get the job done for the citizens of Oklahoma.

If the Capitol fell down would this group of Representatives tell everyone that it was more important to give a small tax cut to 51% of the people where only the rich see real cuts then fix the Capitol?  These people who are elected should be hanging their heads in shame instead of claiming a job well done -- they didn't do their job to fix infrastructure and haven't for sometime.  They have been cutting education funding, not giving pay raises to state employees (they finally get one this year), and allowing our roads and bridges to deteriorate and now you can add the deteriorating Capitol Building to that list.

Since the days when Todd Hiatt was Speaker, it has gone downhill.  With more Republican elected to the the House every two years it seems more social issues take center stage while education and infrastructure continue to take a back seat but look we have 'open carry' come this November.  That's more important then funding necessary items it seems.

Oklahoma House members kick the can on Capitol bond issue
The Oklahoman Editorial | Published: May 25, 2012  

It apparently will fall to Oklahoma voters to fix the state Capitol. The men and women who occupy the building have no stomach for it. 

The House of Representatives voted 77-15 Wednesday against a $200 million bond issue to pay for repairs at the Capitol, which has been in bad shape for years. Rep. Earl Sears, R-Bartlesville, said members want the building repaired but, “I think it is a clear message that we need to find another alternative in funding.” Like what? Democrats called for a pay-as-you-go approach. That's nonsense.

Our guess is Oklahomans would approve using a bond issue to repair the Capitol because they get it. They understand that when their home needs significant repairs or remodeling, they can get a loan to pay for the work instead of trying to pay for it out of pocket immediately. In deciding whether to make the loan, the bank assesses the applicant's current debt and his ability to pay back the amount being requested. If everything checks out, the loan is granted.
Bond underwriters have done the same with Oklahoma and found that we can absolutely afford to borrow the amount needed to repair the Capitol, and then some. Bond issues are routinely used by states, including Oklahoma, for such infrastructure needs. And low interest rates make borrowing now all the more sensible. 

But that argument goes nowhere with lawmakers because they're worried about being labeled as deficit spenders like members of Congress. House Republicans had been most vocal in opposition, but as Wednesday's vote showed they have plenty of company from Democrats. These folks must pay cash for their homes and automobiles and for every major home repair.
The Capitol will get repaired someday, at a price much higher than today. Wonder if those who voted against this bond issue will take credit for that when the time comes?

Read more: http://newsok.com/oklahoma-house-members-kick-the-can-on-capitol-bond-issue/article/3678262#ixzz1w0fCX3s7

Then my nominee for the most stupid defeat of a bill was the one dealing with a child support fee being collected from deadbeat parents by the state. I had to read the editorial twice to make sure I was comprehending what I was reading.  How could this bill have not have passed with a unanimous vote?  It makes no sense to me why anyone but a deadbeat parent would be against the bill.  Why should the parent/child who is owed back child support have to pay a fee to the state.  Since the state has the means to collect from tax refunds and go after deadbeat parents, why not collect the fee from the deadbeat parent so the taxpayer isn't picking up the tab?  The bill made sense so what am I missing here?

Oklahoma lawmakers spike sensible child-support bill
The Oklahoman Editorial | Published: May 25, 2012 

Occasionally, legislative votes are real head-scratchers. Opposition to a child support measure certainly falls into that category. 

House Joint Resolution 1113, by state Rep. Jason Nelson, R-Oklahoma City, would have approved Department of Human Services rules allowing the agency to recoup part of the cost of collecting delinquent child support payments by assessing a fee on those who fail to make payments. The fee was a whopping $25 for the delinquent parent to cover processing costs involved in collection efforts. The rules would have allowed the agency to also collect back child support payments from a parent's income tax refund.

Basically, deadbeat dads (or moms) would have been forced to pay a fee and lose tax refund money when they fail to do financially right by their children. That seems like common sense to us. Yet the measure failed 47-46, needing 51 votes to pass. 

Currently, Nelson noted, taxpayers are covering the cost of fees required for collection efforts; the proposed rules would have placed that burden back on those creating the expense in the first place. Critics called it a backdoor effort to fund DHS through fee increases and said it was unfair to add to the burden of those who struggle to pay child support. 

We don't see how the fee is so egregious. Some may honestly struggle to make payments, but too often delinquent child support is just a form of child neglect. 

State Rep. Mike Reynolds, R-Oklahoma City, actually suggested the fee should be assessed on the child or the custodial parent, since they and not the deadbeat parent get the benefit of collecting the delinquent child support payment. We wish that were a joke. 

Unfortunately, dozens of lawmakers sided with the deadbeats and against the children needing financial support. We wish that were a joke, too.

Read more: http://newsok.com/oklahoma-lawmakers-spike-sensible-child-support-bill/article/3678260#ixzz1w0gtQXXI

Where is the Common Sense in the Oklahoma Legislature?  If this Legislature is an example of having a lot of social conservatives, then I would recommend we go back to electing economic conservatives who understand not fixing infrastructure today will cost more tomorrow and that our students are the leaders of future and deserve a great education not some of the mediocre ones they get in some Oklahoma schools.  My kids went to Norman schools after we moved here from Texas receiving a first rate education that should be available to every student in the state.

INHOFE: OBAMA PAYS LIP SERVICE TO FISCAL CRISIS

Senator Inhofe (R-OK) is right once again on how Obama has dealt with the financial crises. Guess you could say that Obama has made it much worse and now wants to make it even worse with his tax and spend philosophy on issues he wants and everyone else needs to go away.

INHOFE: OBAMA PAYS LIP SERVICE TO FISCAL CRISIS

April 13, 2011

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), a strong fiscal conservative with a proven track record, today blasted President Obama’s speech on the nation’s fiscal crisis.

“We’re long past the time for lip service to the fiscal crisis our nation now faces,” said Inhofe. “Yet that is what the President insists on giving us—another speech.

“When Obama first came into office, he spent $800 billion on a failed stimulus plan that focused too much on his social programs. Then he appointed a commission to figure out why we’re spending so much money. Then he submitted a budget that included even more spending and failed to address the items put forward by his own commission. It doesn’t take a commission to figure out how to cut spending.

“In his fiscal year 2012 budget request, which was submitted this past Valentine’s Day, President Obama again took a pass when it came to laying out steps to reduce the deficit. Instead, his budget actually called for $8.7 trillion in additional spending a doubling of the national debt in five years. Now he is urging that we reduce the debt by enacting a giant tax increase. Washington has a spending problem – not a revenue problem.

“Since Obama took office, federal spending has exploded by 25 percent, which has caused a record-breaking deficit of $1.65 trillion for this year alone. And now that the bill is coming due, he is calling for trillions in new taxes, which will hurt our economy and job growth. What President Obama and Democrats don’t seem to understand is our deficit is not at a record high because Americans hard work is taxed too lightly. On the contrary, our deficit is too high because Washington’s spending is out of control, and we need to end it.”

###

Obama on the campaign trail urges patience with higher gas prices

Obama jumps onboard Air Force One to fly to Pennsylvania on what is essentially a campaign stop to talk about a 'sustained energy policy' proves the man doesn't have clue about energy or high gas prices. Has he ever owned a car? Has he lived without a transportation system to get around the city? Does he care how much he is costing the taxpayers with his trips on Air Force One? The answer to all those questions is NO!

Obama is clueless to even bring up the subject of high gas prices when his Administration has approved only ONE permit to Noble Energy out of Houston for drilling in the Gulf while many permits from other companies are sitting on some Obama bureaucrat's desk waiting for approval. Three of those permits which are waiting are from Shell Oil which has a very clean record of drilling in the Gulf. The Obama Administration has ignored a Federal judge's decision to lift the moratorium. As usual, rules don't apply to Obama. Shouldn't come as a shock Obama ignores the rules when he ignored the War Powers Act and the Constitution to send our military pilots into the skies over Libya in his chosen wartime action.

“We’ve got to have a sustained energy policy that is consistent,” he said. “There is no magic formula to driving gas prices down.”

Obama reiterated his energy policy goals of reducing U.S. reliance on foreign oil by a third over the next decade and spurring investments in renewable energy sources, such as solar and wind power. He has called for a doubling of alternative energy use by 2035.

Live in a state where it is windy most of the time but ask me how much the windmill farms in western Oklahoma have cut down on my electric bill. Still waiting to see the results of more than a few cents. Windmill farms are a bad joke if Obama thinks they can provide the necessary electricity. Even Boone Pickens threw in the towel on windmill farms where he was heavily invested. Coming back from the Fiesta Bowl in January, we noticed windmill farms that the windmills were not moving due to no wind.

The fact that Obama has put so many areas off limits to drilling for oil and gas shows he could care less about finding new energy resources in the United States no matter his rhetoric. Don't think in my lifetime I have ever seen a more inept President and that says a lot with Jimmy Carter being President in the late 70's. The reason I use the word 'inept' is because Obama makes statements on renewable energy in Pennsylvania which is a big coal producing state. Obama and his EPA have placed a target on coal producing states for event shutdown of the coal industry in favor of  cleaner energy no matter the cost to the consumer, to the people in the coal producing states, or to the finances of the states. It would be like coming into Oklahoma and shutting down oil and gas.

Thought about using the word 'stupid' versus 'inept' which also fits since he has announced his intention to run for reelection as President Monday and then made what is essentially a campaign trip to Pennsylvania two days later at the same time the shutdown of government looms as he refuses to cut the budget. He doesn't think twice of spending our tax dollars to live a lavish lifestyle of parties in the White House and flying around on Air Force One for vacations and visits to states to spend a short time on the ground campaigning. Know this is a stupid question, but are we to assume the DNC is paying for that trip since it was more about campaigning? Not holding my breath for them to pay for any trip that is obviously a campaign trip because rules don't apply to Obama or the Democrats.

Obama's actions like this trip to Pennsylvania shows he has zero regard for the American people including members of Congress. We shouldn't be surprised as Obama was off to Brazil for spring break when he makes the announcement by a recording he has sent our military into a wartime situation without Congressional approval in violation of the War Powers Act. He actually made the decision on Tuesday but kept it a secret until 90 minutes before the launch of action on Friday when he called 'someone' in Congress to inform them while he was on AF One headed for vacation on our nickle.

Now Obama makes a campaign trip to Pennsylvania during budget negotiations that he says he is working so hard to complete to which I reply that is "Bravo Sierra!" Will Congress please ground AF One for a month and save the taxpayers money. Make him stay in the White House that he wanted to live in as President, but gets away from at every chance.

Maybe the Air Force should send the bill to Obama personally for the high cost of jet fuel for his trips where he is on the ground such a short time.

Obama urges patience with higher gas prices By: Hayley Peterson 04/07/11 6:19 AM
Examiner Staff Writer http://twitter.com/#!/hcpeterson

President Barack Obama gestures while speaking at the Gamesa Technology Corporation in Fairless Hills, Pa.,Wednesday, April 6, 2011. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)FAIRLESS HILLS, PA. — President Obama on Wednesday urged Americans to be patient with higher prices at the gas pump for now and trust that his administration’s energy policies will eventually tamp down on the soaring costs.

“We can’t afford to continue this kind of being in shock when gas prices go up,” Obama said from a town hall-style meeting of roughly 500 employees at Gamesa Technology Corp., a wind turbine manufacturing plant in Fairless Hills, Pa.

(snip)

“When you see what happens in the Middle East and suddenly the world oil markets get spooked, ... your gas prices are going to go up,” Obama said on a day when crude oil hit a 30-month high, “The less we import, the more control we have over what goes on at the pump.”

The president urged Americans to be patient — a familiar call from a president whose capstone health care overhaul doesn’t fully kick in until 2014. He said tamping down on gas prices will take years.

“I’m not going to guarantee every challenge is going to go away overnight,” Obama said, welcoming questions from the crowd as he floated back and forth across a small platform, his suit coat draped over a podium and his shirtsleeves rolled up. “It starts [one] step at a time, and then slowly you make progress.”

The president couldn’t resist some campaigning in his first public appearance since announcing his candidacy for re-election, particularly in a battleground state that could prove crucial to his chances of a second term.

“Coming here today I was reminded of what I said right here three years ago ... back when I wasn’t sure I was going to win the election,” he said, referring to his March 2008 campaign visit to the plant. “I am not a perfect man and I am not going to be a perfect president. … [But] I will always tell you where I stand [and] I will be honest.”

He added, “I have kept that promise.” One member of the crowd whistled for the president, and the rest followed suit with applause.

Excerpt: Read more at the Washinton Examiner

My patience has run out on the high price of fuel. Everywhere I drive I see oil wells but yet our gas is anywhere from $3.29 to $3.59. That should not be happening but then Obama and his foreign policy or lack thereof are contributing to the unrest in the Middle East which is also driving up gas prices. When you combine unrest with lack of permits to drill and produce in the Gulf or on land, you are going to be paying over $3.00 a gallon and in some states over $4.00 a gallon. The Feds can take gasoline prices out of inflation but tell that to my bank account as the cost of food is rising rapidly because of transportation costs.

Tried to book a flight lately? You will see the price of a plane ticket is through the roof especially when you throw in all the fees. Only Southwest and Frontier Airlines don't have all the fees. Doesn't bother Obama as he hops on Air Force One after flying across town on the Marine One helicopter. All to make a short trip to Pennsylvania like he is taking the commuter train in Chicago. There is no thought given to what it is costing the US taxpayer for his short trips. Yet he wants another four years? Give me a break!

On a Senate Call, a Glimpse of Marching Orders Courtesy of Sen Schumer

The fact that Senator Schumer is taking orders from Democrat Senate Caucus on how to deal with the Republican House should not shock anyone or the fact they want to portray the House Speaker and members of the House Republican Caucus in a negative light for the media.

What does shock are two things -- first is that this comes from the New York Times and second that Schumer's staff was dumb enough to leave an open mic so the media could hear his instructions to fellow Democrats.

Anyone who knows Speaker Boehner knows he is his own person and not beholding to the Tea Party movement, the Tea Party Caucus or any other group. He will meet with the Tea Party but has stayed independent which Democrats already know but why let the truth get in the way.

When the Democrats talk about the 'extreme right wing,' they don't have a clue about the Tea Party. Most Tea Party members are not 'extreme right wing' but are Americans who are fed up with overspending of the Government along with overreaching by the Government into their daily lives. That is not 'extreme right wing' but American patriotism. Liberal Democrat like Schumer and Boxer have gone so far left that anyone with common sense seems 'extreme' to them.

March 29, 2011, 12:30 pm
By JENNIFER STEINHAUER

Um, senators, ever heard of the mute button.

Moments before a conference call with reporters was scheduled to get underway on Tuesday morning, Charles E. Schumer of New York, the No. 3 Democrat in the Senate, apparently unaware that many of the reporters were already on the line, began to instruct his fellow senators on how to talk to reporters about the contentious budget process.

After thanking his colleagues — Barbara Boxer of California, Benjamin L. Cardin of Maryland, Thomas R. Carper of Delaware and Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut — for doing the budget bidding for the Senate Democrats, who are facing off against the House Republicans over how to cut spending for the rest of the fiscal year, Mr. Schumer told them to portray John A. Boehner of Ohio, the speaker of the House, as painted into a box by the Tea Party, and to decry the spending cuts that he wants as extreme. “I always use the word extreme,” Mr. Schumer said. “That is what the caucus instructed me to use this week.

A minute or two into the talking-points tutorial, though, someone apparently figured out that reporters were listening, and silence fell.

Then the conference call began in earnest, with the Democrats right on message.

“We are urging Mr. Boehner to abandon the extreme right wing,” said Ms. Boxer, urging the House to compromise on the scale of spending cuts and to drop proposed amendments that would deny federal financing for Planned Parenthood and for government agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency.

Mr. Carper continued with the theme, referring to some House Republicans’ “right-wing extremist friends.” Mr. Cardin decried Mr. Boehner’s giving into “extremes of his party.” Mr. Blumenthal closed by speaking of the “relatively small extreme group of ideologues” who are “an anchor” dragging down the budget negotiation process.How news is made . . .

Source:  New York Times

Republicans pass $60B in spending cuts in FY11 budget despite Pelosi being up to her Old Tricks -- Will someone tell her she is not in charge?

Turns out that Pelosi lost this battle before it started. Early this morning the House passed the Budget Bill with $60B in cuts including for the Foreign Aid and State Department. Ron Paul did not vote. Flake (AZ), Campbell (CA), and Jones (NC) were the only Republicans to vote with the Democrats against the bill. We have no idea why they voted against this bill. Some members of the Conference wanted even bigger cuts but looks like they voted for the bill.

This bill funds the Government until 30 September 2011. This bill has been under a continuing resolution since the Democrats in the House never had a formal budget bill for FY11 and just threw a bunch of items in the bill with no hearings and 'deemed' the budget bill. Now Pelosi wants to vote on a bill that keeps everything at the same funding levels even though she knows they went against their own rules to pass.

Wonder how the people of Oklahoma's 2nd District who returned Democrat Dan Boren to Congress feel now that he voted lockstep with the Democrats which he promised not to do. Note to the 2nd District of Oklahoma, get a better Republican candidate this time to run against Boren. Republicans in this district have run some pretty bad candidates.

Now what is the Senate going to do? Since the big battle looming in 2012 is for control of the Senate, will the Democrat Senators march in lockstep with Obama or will a few get some common sense? Time will tell.

The next test will come if Obama has the nerve to veto and shut down the Government. The buck stops at his desk! What will Obama do? Will he sign the bill with saying it is to keep the Government open and toss the Congressional Democrats under the bus or will he veto and shut down the government? Should be some interesting times ahead -- reminder this is the budget for FY11 which started 1 October 2010. Just wait until the Republicans with Paul Ryan as Budget Chair get done with the budget for FY12.  The House Republicans are doing the work of "We the People!"  Looks like the Democrats didn't hear the voters on November 2nd. 

Final passage of the bill came on a 235-189 vote before dawn, capping an all-night session (AP Photo)

House passes $60 billion in spending cuts

By DAVID ROGERS | 2/19/11 5:23 AM EST Updated: 2/19/11 7:05 AM EST

More a battering ram than a budget, a giant government-wide spending bill passed the House early Saturday morning, packing $60 billion in Republican spending cuts together with scores of legislative riders to impede President Barack Obama in carrying out his policies.

Final passage came on a 235-189 vote shortly before dawn, capping an all-night session and marathon week during which literally hundreds of amendments were debated.

The open process — and largely civil tone — represent a victory for Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio). But by moving so far right to appease his large freshman class, Boehner picked up no Democratic votes and sacrificed what many saw as his best shot of scoring a quick win in the Senate at the expense of Obama.

Instead, Senate Democrats will be more united now and Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) stronger after Saturday’s margins. And the real question becomes: can Reid, Boehner and Obama pick their way through the coming weeks without falling into a government shutdown?

The $60 billion in reductions are concentrated in the last six months of this fiscal year and represent a 14 percent cut that will severely impact Obama’s agenda at home and abroad. Foreign aid and State Department operations would be cut as much as $10 billion from Obama’s latest request. Pell Grants for low income college students are reduced, and School Turnaround Grants cut by almost two-thirds.

The Environmental Protection Agency lost $2.7 billion from its current appropriations. The Commodity Futures Trading Commission, charged with major new responsibilities under Wall Street reforms, would get a third of the funding Obama wants. And the new Republican majority would block not just federal regulators but Obama’s signature achievement thus far: healthcare reform.

Excerpt: Read more: Politico

Pelosi tried to keep funding levels the same but there was so much waste in the last budget that is still in limbo we doubt she knows just how much was wasted. She was doing what she does best -- being Obama's puppet in the House.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi introduced a stopgap
pending bill Friday night that would fund the government at
current levels through March 31, laying down a Democratic
marker against Republican efforts to cut from the budget.

The California Democrat’s resolution was introduced as
House Republican leaders tried to wrap up work on a bill
that would cut $61 billion in funding the government through
Sept. 30. If no deal is reached by March 4, the government
would shut down.

Source: Politico

Only ABC Hits Obama on Lack of Substantial Cuts in New Budget, NBC, CBS Downplay per MRC

We are not surprised that Jack Tapper, ABC's White House reporter, went after the Obama budget for Obama not taking an aggressive lead on cutting the budget.  We would have been shocked if he had not reported the facts.  Tapper is probably one of the best reporters in the White House Press Corps for telling it like it is and letting the chips fall wherever. He has never been a kneepadder for anyone which we find refreshing and wish we could say the same for all members of the White House Press Corps.

Why is it that women reporters more than men have a hard time telling the truth about this President? Even George Stephanopoulos on Good Morning America challenged Obama's Budget Director Jacob Lew. He wouldn't let him off the hook as he continued to press for answers. We never thought we would said it but Stephanopoulos has gotten much better over the years and doesn't shrink from going after someone to get the truth.

We thank the MRC for covering television for the rest of us. Their reports are always non-biased and right down the center when discussing what is happening around the television channels from the alphabet network news to cable news networks to the history channel and more. It is a service that is greatly appreciated because watching the nightly news could be pretty depressing especially as you watch the spin on CBS and NBC.  Note:  We have promised to also start checking out Media Matters to see what they have to say which should be interesting.

We sure hope the merger of NBC and Comcast provides a better news product then they have today at NBC and especially MSNBC. It would be great to see competition for Fox News and CNN, but as it stands, MSNBC is so far left that it would have to almost start over. CNN could gain shares of the audience if they would lose some of their long time people and bring in more people who are unbiased reporters that report the facts not the spin. CNN has improved over the last year but have a long way to go. They are #1 for breaking news but after that Blitzer's personal agenda creeps in like on Egypt. CBS is a joke -- gave up on them a long time ago.

Fox's Meghan Kelly and Brett Baier who replaced Brit Hume are right up there with Jake Tapper from ABC in reporting news not spin. After watching Brett Baier, it goes downhill rapidly with Shepherd Smith for his second program of the day. The 'sky is falling' Beck comes on right before Brett Baier. At least Brett Baier has always been a very calm reporter and after Beck that is needed on Fox. Does Fox News think having a screaming person seeing conspiracies everywhere is going to get them viewers? It certainly doesn't get them advertisers many who have canceled on Beck.

Beck has gotten worse not better in his conspiracy theories as news since joining Fox. Thought he was much better on CNN.  When you learn that Beck while at CNN said the American healthcare was horrible and then goes to Fox News and it becomes the best in the world, you start to wonder about his reporting. How did it change because he went from CNN to Fox?

Once again ABC has gone to the forefront with their unbiased coverage of the White House on the President's budget.

There is a major problem when it comes to news when you can actually pick out a few people who report the news not spin. It should be every last reporter that upholds the ethics they were taught when they went into Journalism. How some of these people pass for a journalist is beyond me. If they don't know what is expected of them as a reporter, then they had better reread ethics courses that are taught in journalism colleges or follow the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics to right the ship of the journalism profession. Some of these so-called journalist are an insult to people's intelligence.

If a person cannot keep out their bias when reporting, then they need to find a new line of work. The American people deserve better!

Only ABC Hits Obama on Lack of Substantial Cuts in New Budget, NBC, CBS Downplay
February 14, 2011

Of the three morning shows on Monday, only ABC's Good Morning America aggressively pushed the Obama administration on a lack of substantial cuts in the 2012 budget. NBC's Today and CBS's Early Show either downplayed the issue or didn't fully explain the President's new spending.

ABC's Jake Tapper declared that Obama's plan "shows that the President will not take the lead in any aggressive measures to reduce the debt." He also pointed out, "President Obama's budget projects at least $1 trillion in deficit reduction over ten years, but it still creates $7.2 trillion in new debt, pitting the President on a collision course with Republicans who are already saying this budget does not take the deficit seriously enough and deeper cuts are needed."

NBC's Chuck Todd ignored the new spending in the budget and instead asserted that the White House is "join[ing] the battle" with its new plan. Todd blandly repeated Obama's talking points on the cuts.

GMA co-host George Stephanopoulos actually challenged Barack Obama's budget director, Jacob Lew, wondering, "As you know, many Republicans are saying, already, that it doesn't go nearly far enough. And they countered with a budget that actually cuts, according to them, more than $60 billion this year out of federal programs. Why can't the President go that far?"

On the Early Show, reporter Bill Plante didn't highlight the new spending. Instead, he simply noted that Republicans believe the cuts aren't enough.

Finally, at the close of his report, he allowed, "But overall, all of these cuts, which Democrats and Republicans will argue over, affect only one tenth of the budget. And the only way, as the President's budget reduction commission said, to get complete, total spending cuts, is to go in to the spending in the entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare. Not on the table."

A transcript of George Stephanopoulos' interview, which aired at 7:10am EST on April (Feb) 14 can be found at MRC

Weekly Standard: Obama vs. Bush: On Debt

Even given the fact that the 2009 budget was not signed by Obama (actually makes his figures look worse), he has averaged $1.003 trillion more than Bush a year. When is it going to stop?

To put it even into more perspective is this paragraph from the article:

Obama, of course, has said the economy made him do it. But the average inflation-adjusted deficits through Obama's first two fiscal years will be more than ten times higher than the average inflation-adjusted deficit during the Great Depression. Even as a percentage of the gross domestic product, the average deficits in Obama's first two fiscal years will more than three times higher the average deficit during the Great Depression. The fact that Obama's deficits have, by any standard, more than tripled those of the Great Depression, cannot convincingly be blamed on the current recession.

Republicans knew that Obama and the Democrats were spending like drunken sailors but this was a shocker to read. Even now, Obama is purported to say his in State of the Union he wants to cut the budget deficits but at the same time he wants to raise spending. Does this mean more new programs are on the drawing and how is that going to cut the budget? There should be a freeze on all new programs because as we have learned over the years most end up on the trash heap of failed programs.

If Obama wants to really do something that would cut the budget, we have a few suggestions:

1. Admit the stimulus failed and return the excess money to the treasury.

2. Terminate all new Czar positions and their staffs created since January 2009 and return the responsibilies to the various cabinet departments/agencies. Cut the White House staff of all new positions that were created by Obama. Cut the White House staff of the First Lady. Stop the weekly parties funded on the backs of taxpayers including flying in food from Hawaii. (How much as the spending of the White House functions grown since January 2009?)

4. Put the White House on a budget for state dinners so that they are held in the White House and not outdoors in air conditioned tents that costs millions. (The economy is on its back and the Obama's continue to act like royalty with no thought about sticking to a budget for entertaining or flying around the world on a whim) Stop travel on Air Force One unless it is for official business. No more trips to states for 90 minutes and flying back to DC. No separate travel to a destination for the First Lady and children and then the President follows a day or so later. No flying the dog on his own plane separate from the family. Stop unnecessary travel for cabinet members and the Vice President. (How much as the DNC has paid for all of Obama's travel?)

5. Cut the budgets of every department/agency starting with the people hired to oversee the unnecessary regulations released. Any new positions since January 2008 should be vetted and offset by loss of another position if the new position is required. Do an across the board cut to the number of people especially supervisors employed by the each department/agency which has rapidly been growing. Make the cuts by dollar amounts not numbers so a department/agency cannot cut five lower paid people to save a supervisor. Cut unnecessary programs. Put a freeze or cuts on the pay of senior civil service employees as their salaries have skyrocketed passed the private sector.

6. Merge the EPA back into Energy and take away the power they have been using to abuse the states and private business against the wishes of the Congress.

7. Stop the abuse of using regulations by any agency to get around having a bill passed by Congress.

8. Cut the budgets of Congress and along with the number of people on their staff and the committee staffs. Cut Congressional travel except for committee members necessary trips to ensure they are getting the correct information.

9. Reform Social Security so that in 20 years, there is still money to pay retirees.

10. Defense Department could take a giant cut by stopping the mentality of bright, shiny, and new versus upgrading current weapon systems. They have wasted billions/millions on wanting something new like the F-35 or for ATE like in house VDATS by Warner Robins when upgrades to the F-16 and current ATE systems would have saved billions/millions of dollars in taxpayer money.

At the same time, we need to look at the Federal Employees Unions who fund candidates who then become President or members of Congress. Essentially they are spending millions on who they want to be their boss. Are office holders who receive millions from the Federal Employees Unions going to want to do anything to cut the union member's unnecessary jobs? We believe the answer is 'No' and why we continue to get an even more bloated government.

Somehow any mention of the words 'fiscal responsibility' by this President rings hollow after his first two years. Words without action mean nothing. What will we learn from the teleprompter tonight?

Obama vs. Bush: On Debt
7:00 AM, Jan 25, 2011 • By JEFFREY H. ANDERSON

In his State of the Union address tonight, President Obama will reportedly issue a call for "responsible" efforts to reduce deficits (while simultaneously calling for new federal spending). In light of the President's expected rhetorical nod to fiscal responsibility, it's worth keeping in mind his record on deficits to date. When President Obama took office two years ago, the national debt stood at $10.626 trillion. It now stands at $14.071 trillion -- a staggering increase of $3.445 trillion in just 735 days (about $5 billion a day).

To put that into perspective, when President George W. Bush took office, our national debt was $5.768 trillion. By the time Bush left office, it had nearly doubled, to $10.626 trillion. So Bush's record on deficit spending was not good at all: During his presidency, the national debt rose by an average of $607 billion a year. How does that compare to Obama? During Obama's presidency to date, the national debt has risen by an average of $1.723 trillion a year -- or by a jaw-dropping $1.116 trillion more, per year, than it rose even under Bush.

In fairness, however, Obama can't rightly be held accountable for the 2009 budget, which he didn't sign (although he did sign a $410 billion pork-laden omnibus spending bill for that year, which is nevertheless tallied in Bush's column). Rather, Obama's record to date should really be based on actual and projected spending in fiscal years 2010 and 2011 (plus the $265 billion portion of the economic "stimulus" package, which he initiated and signed, that was spent in 2009 (Table S-10), while Bush's should be based on 2002-09 (with the exception of that same $265 billion, which was in no way part of the 2009 budgetary process).

How do Bush and Obama compare on closer inspection? Just about like they do on an initial glance. According to the White House's Office of Management and Budget, during his eight fiscal years, Bush ran up a total of $3.283 trillion in deficit spending (p. 22). In his first two fiscal years, Obama will run up a total of $2.826 trillion in deficit spending ($1.294 trillion in 2010, an estimated $1.267 trillion in 2011 (p. 23), and the $265 billion in "stimulus" money that was spent in 2009. Thus, Bush ran up an average of $410 billion in deficit spending per year, while Obama is running up an average of $1.413 trillion in deficit spending per year -- or $1.003 trillion a year more than Bush.

Excerpt: Read More at Weekly Standard

Pence: "It Is Unacceptable That Democrat Leaders in Congress Have Abdicated Their Duty to Write A Budget"

Congressman Pence (R-IN) has now brought it the attention of the American people that "we are about to adjourn for Memorial Day break for the first time since 1974, with a House of Representatives that has not passed a budget. It is an abdication of their duty and responsibility to the American people."

Instead of rushing to pass a healthcare bill they didn't read that has turned out to be disaster or any of the rest of the Obama agenda that he demanded from Congress, they should have first done the job they are sent to Congress to do -- Budget for the United States Government. Are they afraid to tackle the budget before the November elections because then they will have to admit just how large of deficit we are talking about and how much money they plan to waste on earmarks and pork?

This should be enough to get the entire Democrat leadership of Congress kicked out on November 2, 2010, for abdicating their responsibility given them by the Constitution. No wonder the Democrats want to ignore the Constitution because they can ignore their responsibility.

Pence: "It Is Unacceptable That Democrat Leaders in Congress Have Abdicated Their Duty to Write A Budget"

Washington, DC, 05/27/10 - U.S. Congressman Mike Pence, Chairman of the House Republican Conference, made the following remarks at a press conference today in criticism of the Democrats’ inability to produce a budget:

"The American people are anxious. They know in their hearts that this tidal wave of debt is coming. And they also know that the Democratic leadership of the Congress has no plan to deal with it. Even this administration back in February offered a budget, a ten-year budget plan. You heard today, Republican solutions that are in the debate are available on the Internet.

"And yet, we are about to adjourn for Memorial Day break for the first time since 1974, with a House of Representatives that has not passed a budget. It is an abdication of their duty and responsibility to the American people.

"When families and small business, and family farms face difficult times, they sit down at the table, they sharpen their pencils, they write a budget and figure a way forward.

"It is unacceptable that Democrat leaders in Congress have abdicated their duty to write a budget. That's no answer for the American people and it shouldn't be acceptable to any American."

YOU CUT: Cong Tom Price Announcement

Support the Republicans in the House by casting your vote on what should be cut! Sign up at You Cut to be notified of these votes. It is time to show House Democrats how you cut spending actually way past time!



YouCut – a first-of-its-kind project - is designed to defeat the permissive culture of runaway spending in Congress. It allows you to vote, both online and on your cell phone, on spending cuts that you want to see the House enact. Together we can begin to change Washington's culture of spending into a culture of savings.

The response to this project has been unprecedented - within less than a week, over 280,000 people cast their votes. It's clear that the American people - fed up with the culture of spending in Washington - have embraced YouCut as a vehicle to make their voices heard.

FIRST WINNING CUT:

The House will be voting on the following spending cut, chosen by the American people, later this week.

New Non-Reformed Welfare Program$2.5 billion in savingsThe program was recently created to incentivize states to increase their welfare caseloads without requiring able-bodied adults to work, get job training, or otherwise prepare to move off of taxpayer assistance. Reforming the welfare program was one of the great achievements of the mid 1990s, saving taxpayers billions of dollars and ending the cycle of dependency on welfare. This new program, created in 2009 is a backdoor way to undo those reforms. The program currently costs approximately $2.5 billion a year. (Also proposed as part of the RSC Sunset Caucus.) Click here to learn more about this program.