Irony check, from Rep. Kristi Noem, via Twitter:
Irony hint....
...and more specifics straight from the White House.
14 Comments
Comments are closed.
2024.05.06
Real liberal media for the great state of South Dakota
Irony check, from Rep. Kristi Noem, via Twitter:
Irony hint....
...and more specifics straight from the White House.
Comments are closed.
Did I hear that KN was going to offer Obama a specific budget cut suggestion---federal crop insurance? Not!!! KN does not have the first hand knowledge to know what she is saying-let alone explain her thought process. She has had over 5mths since election day to lay out her specific cuts. Since then I have not heard her speak of defense cuts, fundning at Ellsworth AFB, Lewis and Clark Water, farm subsidies, crop insurance, and the potential list could go on and on forever here in SD. What she may view as essential federal spending in SD would certainly be considered enormous waste by a KN clone in another area of this country. KN just wants to have it both ways. The day of that thought process needs to stop.
Well, Bill O'Reilly laid out his plan Wednesday night on his "Talking Points" program. Part of his solution: A brand new national sales tax on top of our existing taxes!
Any good psychic knows that's exactly what Barack Obama wants. He just doesn't dare say so, because it would cost him the 2012 election.
Meet the old pinheads. Just like the new pinheads. Just like the middle-aged pinheads. They're all pinheads. The whole bloody lot of them.
I have one idea.
No politicians should use twitter. It comes across as obnoxious.
I personally don't mind the use of Facebook because it can be used for more than snide comments.
Note to Noem take away the person twittering for you twittering responsibility so that twitter feeds reflect better of you...
Did Farm Subsidy Barbieâ„¢ offer any budget specifics of her own, or did she just giggle and say "Math is hard!"? (Right before snapping her gum, flipping her hair, and skipping away to her next lobbyist meeting.)
{CAH: don't forget tilting her head to one side. That pose is key to the image.}
Actually, Ms. Noem, with any luck, he's going to be raising YOUR taxes, because you're one of those whose taxes went down under the Bush tax cuts while the rest of us were left holding the bag. Note to history buffs: in 18th century France, the rich to paid no taxes, the middle class (a very small group) and poor paid for everything, and their national budget went like this: 30% to the military; 30% to pay the interest on the national debt; 30% to subsidize the wealthy. There were no social services at all. If you don't know what happened next on that path to prosperity, Google it.
I'm a little disappointed in Obama for not giving more specifics. I do think he is trying to use politics to swing the pendulum back to his favor by playing politics. I think Obama needs to get serious.
Noem needs to get serious also and stop using generic phrases about everything. She is starting to sound like she doesn't have a real idea in her head.
Right now I like Paul Ryan because he seems to really put forward specific ideas and appears serious about reducing the nations debt.
How about a KW as a replacement for KN? Or perhaps someone like him that has solid views about good food, essential health care, agriculture's subsidy addiction, etc. Anybody who can articulate policy would be a step up. But then are we willing to do without the
"eye candy"?
"Right now I like Paul Ryan because he seems to really put forward specific ideas and appears serious about reducing the nations debt."
Paul Ryan's "ideas" are unworkable and irrelevant because they do not increase taxes on the very rich in any real way. How many economists and economic reporters indicating such irrelevance does it take before Paul Ryan's humbug is dumped as just another bit of Retrograde Republican irrelevant mythology?
Charlie,
Tell me more about this KW fellow.
It won't make any difference if the entire earnings are taxed for every single US citizen, it still wouldn't cover the spending that certain people seem to think cannot be cut anywhere, anyhow, any way. Spending needs to be cut, but everytime anything is proposed to be cut, someone screams that is either extremist, impossible, will kill old people, will starve old people, will ensure stupidity among all the kids, etc etc etc. Until we all realize that we have overspent our budget (just like happens with our home budgets) and get real about adjusting attitudes and programs, my guess is that nothing of value will occur. Increasing taxes isn't the answer (unless Obama wants to make GE pay taxes on its millions in profits that it parks outside the US). Cutting spending is. Yes, people will lose jobs, but it isn't my responsibility to support programs just to keep a person in that job. Yes, subsidies will be cut, and for lots of them, that's just fine. Yes, the fed gov't will have to go back to what it is supposed to be responsible for, and that doesn't include what little Johnnie puts in his mouth at a school lunch, doesn't include Obamacare, doesn't include more and more regulations, etc. I honestly don't know if it is possible to solve this issue now because the politicians have to do it, and too many of them are more interested in their political careers to really care about solving the budgetary woes.
I do agree, Linda, that there's a lot of political monkey business standing in the way of practical solutions. Politicians will say a good plan is bad, just to get elected, then turn around and offer the same plan themselves less than a year later... just as Republicans like Noem did last year, saying that ObamaCare was cutting Medicare, and now turning around and embracing exactly those cuts and then some.
Linda, you are right. Bottom line: The American people in general want stuff that they can't pay for.
But corporations want stuff(giveaways-GDD business fund) , keep the profits(not pay taxes-TIF), socialize their risk(undo safety regulations-uphold their corporate veil), and abandon their responsibility(relocate when and how they want). Like people this doesn't appy to all corporations but is a real picture that we allow to be painted by some-all under the "watchful eye" of elected officials who rather seek photo ops than due the people's business.
I just want to point out that the reason for the school lunch program is that some children don't have any lunches from home. Personally, I don't care if their parents are broke or feckless or whatever, I say feed children who are hungry.
Re programs to be cut: there's not that much waste when it comes to domestic spending. The three areas that eat up most of the money are defense spending, entitlements (Medicare, Medicaid - social security actually pays for itself and most everything else, and cutting it would be chopping off a major source of revenue), and paying interest on the debt. You can't cut paying the debt. So defense spending has to go on the chopping block as well as Medicare and Medicaid.
And taxes must go up somewhere. Of course, I'm in favor of repealing the Bush tax cuts for good, considering I have never made anything close to $200,000 a year in my entire life and never will. But I'm also in favor of taxing every corporation, including all churches, of whatever faith or denomination. Because these days, churches are corporations, who involve themselves heavily in politics, get government subsidies for their educational programs, and yet expect a free ride. And I go to church every Sunday, so this is not atheism, agnosticism, or anything else. I say it's time for EVERYONE to share in the sacrifice to bring this country back to economic recovery, not just the poor and the middle class.