Is There a Difference between $3.6 Trillion and $3.5 Trillion?

THESE ARE OUR OPTIONS?!

(Originally posted May 2011)

Option A.  Barack Obama, Harry Reid and the Democrats on Capitol Hill want to be in charge of a government that spends $3.6 trillion per year, $2.0 trillion of it collected in taxation now and $1.6 trillion in taxation later, when the newly issued bonds mature.

Option B.  Paul Ryan, Mitch Mcconnell, John Boehner, the 8 or 10 candidates for the presidency and all the Republicans on Capitol Hill want to be in charge of a government that spends $3.5 trillion per year, $2.0 trillion of it collected in taxation now and $1.5 trillion in taxation later, when the newly issued bonds mature.

There is no fundamental difference between those two options other than who is in charge.  Maybe Ryan et. al. would spend, say, $300 billion of the money to benefit a different constituency or interest group, but the only real difference is which party has more power.  For the other 99.99999% (approximately 100% less 536/300,000,000) of the US population, there is no discernible difference between the government that Mr. Ryan wishes to sit atop and the one that Mr. Obama is ruling over today.  Neither party is really thinking in terms of how to make the people of this country more free and more prosperous.  They just want power, and they will buy that power with dollars confiscated from the ‘rich’ and given to the more needy, like T. Boone Pickens and GE for wind turbines.

Almost ALL of the discussion in and around politics is about THAT – who is in charge, who has momentum to pass his agenda, who is up/down in a poll, who can convince more rent seekers that their desires are more likely to be met by the government if Party A or Party B is in charge of the monstrosity.

We need a better brand of politicians – and SOON.

Does the GOP Have Any Spine?

Democrats are aghast that the GOP is threatening to block Chuck Hagels appointment to be SecDef with a filibuster.  They’re screaming about the “FIRST TIME IN THE HISTORY OF OUR GREAT NATION THAT. . . ”

First, I resent their casual affiliation of our great nation with their pettiness.

Second, and more on point, maybe it’s the first time because no POTUS before this one has ever dared entrust such an important job to such a known unqualified political hack.

Third, I have little hope that the GOP will stand firm in their opposition.  The leftists will throw mud and the kitchen sink at them, the mud will stick.  Then 7 or 8 of them will cave, and the episode will have accomplished nothing except a seeming confirmation of the lie that the “extremist, obstructionist idiotic right-wing nuts of the GOP are what’s wrong with this country.”

Thank you very little, Mitch McConnell.

Who wants a weaker America?

Yesterday, Senator Hagel spent eight hours bobbing and weaving, dodging questions, pleading ignorance, and equivocating.  He was supposed to be convincing a US Senate committee that he should be in charge of the largest military force ever assembled.  He failed.  Miserably.The White House has revealed its response to his failure to convince his questioners of his ability and qualifications to serve as Secretary of Defense.  The White House puppets on Morning Joe told us today that Mr Hagel was ill-prepared and that Senators McCain, Graham and others should have been more respectful of him.

A more accurate critique would be to observe that Mr Hagel is demonstrably not qualified for the position of SecDef.  Near the end of his testimony, he said “a number of questions were asked of me today about specific programs: submarine programs, different areas of technology and acquisitions, and our superior technology.  And, I’ve said, I don’t know enough about it.  I don’t.  There are a lot of things I don’t know about.  If confirmed, I intend to know a lot more than I do.  I will have to.”

Makes one wonder:  Did anyone at the White House read Mr Hagel’s resume before they sent his nomination to the Senate?  My ansewr:  YES, they did.

 A beginner, an unqualified place holder, an order-taker – that’s exactly who they want at the Pentagon.  Someone who will watch over the dismantling of America’s fighting forces and endorse the administration’s “lead from behind” approach to the increasingly unstable world order that is increasingly dismissive of the USA.  Is it possible that the administration wants America to be less important in the world?

Want to define the Obama Doctrine.  Watch Mr Hagel pretend to disavow virtually every foreign policy position he’s ever taken.  The White House knows what Mr Hagel thinks.  He believes that America is over-extended, Israel is too powerful in the Middle East and the Pentagon is bloated.

In other words . . . A Weaker America.  The Obama Doctrine.