Ryan to Obama: I’ll See Your Budget and Raise You $5.3T in Cuts
House Republicans threw down the gauntlet in an election year, offering today a counter to President Obama’s budget plan as Congress barrels toward an April 15 budget deadline — and the country plummets further into a deficit crisis.
“We’ve become a nation of net takers versus makers,” House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.) said in his remarks on the 2013 Path to Prosperity at the American Enterprise Institute.
He called the escalating debt drama “the most predictable crisis we’ve ever had in this country.”
Ryan’s budget proposes $5.3 trillion in spending cuts over the next decade compared to the president’s budget, slashing the deficit to $797 billion next year as opposed to Obama’s $977 billion deficit projection. It wouldn’t wield the same budgetary ax against the Pentagon, and cuts debt as a share of the economy by 15 percent over the next decade. It repeals Obama’s healthcare law and introduces a competitive-bidding process to determine the growth of government’s financial contribution to Medicare.
It also proposes major tax reform to lower rates and broaden the base: Instead of the current six income tax brackets, the GOP budget whittles the code down to two brackets of 10 percent and 25 percent. The corporate tax rate would be cut to 25 percent. It prevents $1.9 trillion in tax increases that would go into effect under the president’s plan.
Ryan said that bipartisanship support for simplifying the tax code, cutting spending and overhauling soon-to-be-bankrupt Medicare — a plan he has worked on with Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) — is only growing.
“We are seeing a situation where an emerging consensus is there, but it’s not to be gotten with the current leadership in place,” Ryan said.
The new budget essentially mirrors the 2012 Path to Prosperity but with some provisions pushed by Democrats in Congress, including Wyden’s premium support model for Medicare and other tax reform measures including removing loopholes.
The White House was not one of those partners in consensus. In a statement this morning, Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer predictably blasted the Republican plan as not abiding by its fairness doctrine.
“The House budget once again fails the test of balance, fairness, and shared responsibility. It would shower the wealthiest few Americans with an average tax cut of at least $150,000, while preserving taxpayer giveaways to oil companies and breaks for Wall Street hedge fund managers,” Pfeiffer said. “What’s worse is that all of these tax breaks would be paid for by undermining Medicare and the very things we need to grow our economy and the middle class – things like education, basic research, and new sources of energy. And instead of strengthening Medicare, the House budget would end Medicare as we know it, turning the guarantee of retirement security into a voucher that will shift higher and higher costs to seniors over time.”
He accused Ryan of reaching for the same “wrong-headed theory” that led to the recession in the first place.
“The president believes we cannot return to a failed theory that didn’t lead to the growth of jobs, incomes, or the economy,” Pfeiffer said. “That’s why he put forward a balanced approach that reduces the deficit by over $4 trillion. It’s an approach that asks the wealthiest to pay their fair share, makes tough cuts to programs we can’t afford, and strengthens Medicare with reforms that would reduce overpayments to drug companies, improve the quality of care, and protect Medicare’s commitment to America’s seniors.”
The president was welcoming the Irish taoiseach to the White House for a St. Patrick’s Day celebration — which Ryan also went to after his AEI address — and had not yet commented on the proposal. Obama will be traveling to Nevada, New Mexico, Oklahoma and Ohio beginning tomorrow to promote his energy plan.
House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) was quick to back up the Budget chairman, applauding Ryan for “putting together a budget worthy of the people we serve.”
“The national debt now exceeds the size of our entire economy, but the president is proposing more spending and higher taxes, while Senate Democrats haven’t passed a budget in more than 1,000 days,” Boehner said. ”Far from ignoring our debt crisis, Republicans are again proposing responsible solutions to tackle it once and for all, including cutting spending, reforming our broken tax code, and strengthening health and retirement security. We also propose reversing the president’s policies that are driving up gas prices, and implementing an ‘all-of-the-above’ energy strategy to help address rising energy costs and create jobs.”
Knowing that presentation is as important as the message this year, Republicans rolled out the budget with a three-minute video featuring Ryan.
“Our plan takes power away from Washington and gives it back to the individual,” Ryan says in the video. “Because it’s the American people, not bureaucrats in Washington, who make this nation what it is.”
Congressional Democrats responded with a coordinated attack accusing Ryan’s budget of putting the country on a path to a government shutdown by reneging on the Budget Control Act, the agreement that brought an end to the crisis over raising the debt ceiling and created the super committee.
The Republican budget shields the Defense Department from some of the $487 billion in cuts brought on by sequestration. Six congressional committees, excluding Armed Services, are asked to find $261 billion in savings to help offset the automatic cuts triggered by the super committee’s failure.
Ryan proposed turning on budget reconciliation for the first time in six years to pre-empt sequestration.
“They have shown that a deal with them isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on and they are threatening families across America yet again with the prospect of a government shutdown,” Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) said. “…This budget shows that they are more concerned with appeasing their extreme base than actually working with us to reduce the deficit.”
D.C. Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton (D) criticized the budget for setting up a showdown by keeping House appropriators at $1.028 trillion in discretionary spending for FY 2013 while the Senate will keep at the higher $1.047 trillion level agreed to in the August debt-ceiling agreement.
“Six months away from the start of the fiscal year, the House Republican budget sets us on an ominous path,” Norton said.
“People have limits on credit cards,” Boehner fired back at Democrats in a press conference. “That doesn’t mean that you’re required to spend up to the limit, it just says you can’t spend any more than that.”
Any House budget plan is essentially DOA in the upper chamber, where senators have not passed a budget in more than three years.
“They have unanimously rejected the president’s budget,” noted Rep. Todd Young (R-Ind.). “Here again the House Budget Committee has tried to find common ground in our proposal, but we can’t participate in these discussions by ourselves. Others may have ideas that we could embrace, but we’ll remain at an impasse as long as they stay on the sidelines. Our country needs everyone at the table.”
At AEI, Ryan warned that if allowed to go through, Obama’s budget “will take down this economy.”
“The problem with the president’s budget is he raises these taxes but uses them to spend more money,” he said. “We should not be spending money we don’t have … and consigning our kids to an ugly future.”
Putting forth their budget alternative before the April 15 deadline is simply following the rule of law, he said.
“If we don’t like the direction the president is taking the country … then we feel we have the moral obligation and responsibility to show the country how we would do things differently,” Ryan said. “…We believe that Americans should make this decision, not some politicians in a super committee.”
Andrew Napolitano – From Stamp Act To ObamaCare
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNacjBldkuA&feature=player_embedded#!
Republicans are desperate to prevent the Affordable Care Act from going into effect. They know it will be as popular as Medicare and will ensure a long-term allegiance to the Democratic party in the US, just as the New Deal and the Great Society did. They are terrified and hope to end it through any means possible. That is what this budget is all about. They know quite well that once in effect the ACA will create a shift (to the left) in the center of gravity in American politics to which the GOP, in order to continue to be a viable party, will have to adjust to or become irrelevant. This is their last shot basically.
CW, you are correct – and that is the best reason to oppose it. Once a generation or two has grown up with this lunacy, it will be impossible to get rid of, because so many will be dependent on it and will be unable to conceive of any other solution.
What will be the result? Until the system crashes, which appears to be a maximum of about 50 years judging by the European example, we will have a system more unequal than now – those with money or political connections will get good care, and those without will get so-so care. Broken bones and sniffles will be treated just fine, but anything big will put you on a waiting list.
This is worth acquiring at great expense…why exactly?
Actually, your analysis on the European health care system is not correct. Moreover, which one are you speaking of specifically, as they are not all the same? The French system, for instance, has quite a bit to be admired. They spend about half as much as we do per person, get better care and outcomes, and live longer. No one in France goes bankrupt if they get cancer like here in the US. Therefore, if you are the type who is concerned about wasteful spending they seem to be doing it better than us (and for a lot less money). Germany has a system similar to France and if you ask anybody who lives there and gets care from that system, they are, like the French, very satisfied.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=92419273
http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/jun2007/gb20070628_579158.htm
“No one in France goes bankrupt if they get cancer like here in the US.”
Please cite specific instances of that which would indicate significant occurrence of that declaration. I’m all ears…or eyes or somethin’. More likely the French and Brit will never receive proper treatment and die before they have a chance to go bankrupt. A little study will indicate to you that the French love their system. So you have that part right! But a little further study will indicate to you that the entire system is going broke and nobody knows how to make it fiscally sound. And a little further study will indicate to you that the average Frenchman is either too stupid and/or dependent to give a damn. So you and the French may have something in common! Congratulations!
Bingo.
In Canada, the quality of care you get is largely dependent on where you live. (I have relatives all over.)
If you live in a rich province, like someplace that exports oil, for example, you get good care.
If you don’t, well, not so much.
There’s a reason that rich people from all over the world come to America when they need medical care. It is NOT socialized medicine that brings them here.
“we will have a system more unequal than now – those with money or political connections will get good care, and those without will get so-so care.”
that time is now.. Codevilla
It’ll be popular among those who think they’ll be getting more “free stuff.” However, in case you have not noticed, Medicare and Medicaid are the entitlement programs with the most financial problems. It seems the government does a lousy job of managing health care systems (throw in the VA health care as well) and controlling costs. There’s an inconvenient truth for you.
Yes, we’re desperate to prevent the government from turning us into livestock under the rubric of “affordable health care”.
“….will ensure a long-term allegiance to the Democratic party in the US, just as the New Deal and the Great Society did.”
No argument there. Ensuring long-term dependency upon hard-working, taxpaying, fellow citizens and institutionalized poverty for generation after generation. Two magnificent concepts brought to us courtesy of the Democrat Party. It’s a beautiful thing to behold. Thanks for bringing this uplifting vision for America to our attention!
I suggest that you peruse the articles I provided links to above, which are loaded with statistics and facts, before you insert your foot in your mouth any further. Moreover, Business Week isn’t known to be some liberal rag either. If you have a discrepancy with what they say I would be happy to discuss that. However, you need to stipulate what exactly you disagree with and be specific. Otherwise, STFU.
You internet bad bays make me hot. Profanity is sexy.
I applaud Ryan for his courage in confronting reality. His proposed cuts are a step in the correct direction.
We as a people need to decide if we are going to live according to the thinking of the Founders as articulated in Article 1 Section 8′s enumerated and limited powers, or if we are better off living as Marx and Keynes would have it with a centralized, debt driven, mandated economy where the federal government attempts utopia.
When we chose the former, prior to the progressive takeover after 1900, we had the most dynamic economy the world had ever witnessed. Since then we have gradually lost ground dropping to our current accelerated state of demise having apparently decided that Marx and Krugman offer a better future than Smith and Friedman do. The absurdity of our conscious decsion to abandon the economics that provided our unparraleled success marks our likely permanent ruin.
I commend Ryan for trying. I wish he would offer and argue more boldly, we are at the edge of economic disaster. I doubt what is left of the Republicans will have the ability to carry the day. There are too few Ryans remaining. The progressives are just about finished with their demented intentions which deny reality at every opportunity.
Our Greek moment awaits.
3..2..1..Let the demagoguery begin while the republicans grab their ankles and keep their mouths shut. Obviously I don’t expect much of a fight from the “girly-men” repubs.
My thoughts exactly Jack. Boehner and McConnell are eunuchs. They’ll roll over the very second the dems start whaling and gnashing teeth. It all sounds fine and dandy now, but on April 16th (or sooner) we’ll all be left with a pig in a poke, just like the last couple dozen times….
So, Obummer and the Reds keep pushing to make the government over-spending worse at a geometrically increasing rate, while the Reps keep saying, “well, maybe we’ll start thinking about maybe, some day, oh, 10 or 20 years from now, we’ll start nibbling away at the grossly excessive federal government over-spending.”
Stop nibbling. Cut federal spending by at least $1.2T per year, and then pay down the horrendous debt that you’ve built up over the last 80 years.
The GOP will, once again, find dealing with lies and emotional appeals difficult. The Dems have already lied about his Medicare plan, the accuse Ryan of ignoring Simpson-Bowles which they themselves summarily ignored. They talk about “balance” but we played that game before – they get the tax hikes but never quite manage to come up with the budget cuts. Reid said there were absolutely no spending cuts he would consider without tax increases being included. Geithner said they had no plan to balance the budget. Obama speaks about his concerns about the deficit but does nothing about it – like so many things. They say the Ryan plan won’t pass but forget that Obama’s budget was hammered last year and this year’s budget is a joke. Republicans have all the ammunition they need – now let’s see if they’ll use it.
Call their bluff. Agree to a deal wherein the spending cuts take place immediately and the tax hikes come in five years.
Ryan is just being a reasonable and civil person doing the job he’s supposed to do!! What a total contrast to the demagoguing morons that know darn well that the only way they can con people is by ‘using’ the media morons; once called “journalists”.
In the movie “300″, king Leonides talks to the king of Persia because he said, “… we can be civil”. Ryan is being “civil” … what comes next may be a stack of
Persian bodies in defiance of tyranny.
Go Ryan goooooooo!!!!!!
Exactly so. But the political demagoguery worked in Greece for years. The Dems are ideologically pretty similar to European pols, so it is no surprise they model themselves after the feckless pandering done in Europe.
Weak tea.
This is still way more than we can afford to spend.
If we are really going to be serious, at least $400 Billion less should be spent next year, for a maximum deficit of $ 400 Billion.
Did ANYONE mean it when we said we would go back to 2008 levels???
Yes, but it’s a start in the right direction. We did not get where we are in one fell swoop, and we will not get where we should be in one step, either.
If Ryan gets everything he wants, the economy will show the good effects almost instantly, and in a year or two the results will be too obvious even for the lying MSM to cover up.
That will provide the needed support for MORE changes in the right direction.
THAT is how it works. Refusing to settle for anything less than everything we want is a 100% guarantee that we will make ZERO progress.
Somebody at least is trying to lead this nation.
Unfortunately, not anyone who is running for President, and certainly not any Democrat.
The real deficit we have with the small c communists is the loyalty deficit to this nation. That won’t be fixed until we root them out of the DOJ, State Department, Energy, Education…and the traitors in the media who have raped our information stream.
Our biggest concern is not that entitlements are unsustainable, although that is an enormous strain our our free market system. It is that the small c communist encampments are incompatible with the freedoms and liberties that we should be holding much more dear than we are.
The creeping totalitarianism disguised as “liberal” policy is killing us softly.
The Republicans show absolutely no signs of recognizing that we are in the death throes of a successful overthrow. Paul Ryan is fighting for our lives.
The “candidates” are tripping over themselves to discuss nonsense and trivialities, spouting platitudes and slogans. We have been given a choice of Herman’s Hermit, George Jetson, Genital Ben and R2D2.
Heaven help us.
One man is trying to have an adult conversation in the Tower of Babel that is the Republican Party.
The Ryan plan is Voodoo ll (actually, more like Voodoo lll or lV).
Voodoo Economics is what G.H.W. Bush called Ronald Reagan’s plan to cut taxes, increase military spending, and balance the budget. He, of course, caved and became a team player and his son would later take Voodoo Economics (aka “trickle-down economics) to new heights (or debts, pun intended).
As was predicted, it didn’t work – unless your definition of “worked” was that the tax burden was shifted more and more off the shoulders of the rich and the corporations while the income for the very top soared and income for the middle class started to flat line (check out the graphs of those three trends to see that taxes as a percent of GDP is at an all time low while income disparity is worse than some Third World countries). Instrumental in the decline of the middle class, of course, was the beginning of a war on unions that has also undermining the middle class. We are seeing rampaging war on the unions as Republican-controlled legislators carry out the blue print handed to them by A.L.E.C. (http://alecexposed.org/wiki/ALEC_Exposed).
The national debt starting taking off and soared under Reagan and his successors with the Democrat administrations of Clinton and Obama curiously doing better at keeping it under control than the two Bush administrations as any graph of these two things show. Go figure, the Republicans are now wetting their pants over deficits they were primarily responsible for.
And, now we have yet ANOTHER snake-oil salesman with yet ANOTHER proposal for the rubes and yahoos. Suck up the kool-aid, cfbleachers, they’ve got your number and any con artist knows that the best marks are the ones that have been fooled before.
Paul Ryan is clueless. He is a career politician. He doesn’t know jack about the economy. Has he ever run a business? Has he ever produced a product, or provided a service that anybody needed? He is an egghead academic masquerading as the savior of the US economy. He is a joke. How you people take him seriously is beyond me. He is an embarrassment to true conservatives.
The Ryan 2013 Budget is a joke. It is totally unrealistic. Paul Ryan is a fool if he actually believes his own budget has any chance of coming to fruition in the real world. The Ryan 2013 Budget isn’t a policy-based document. It is a political statement. Nothing more, nothing less. How you people take it seriously is beyond me.
If the Ryan 2013 Budget (that hopes to cut US budget deficits), is the best that the Republican Party can offer, then America is royally screwed, as according to page 5, the first time that the US resumes a budget surplus is in… 2040.
The Ryan 2013 Budget is pathetic. It is Big Government Republicanism at its finest. It assumes that revenues will miraculously grow from $2.4 Trillion to $4.6 Trillion in 10 years by cutting taxes. Which is totally and utterly preposterous as anyone with an IQ above room temperature can surmise/deduce. And the Ryan 2013 Budget will EXPLODE the size of the federal government from $3.6 Trillion to $4.9 Trillion in 10 years.
If the Ryan 2013 Budget is the best that the Republican Party can come up with (in the most aggressive case, it will grow revenues to be greater than outlays, at the earliest in just about 30 years) then it is all over. Adios America.
Take a look at this worthless piece of trash here: http://budget.house.gov/UploadedFiles/summary_tables.pdf
Wow, someone else sees what a joke Paul Ryan’s budgets are. This doesn’t balance the budget until the year 2040! Half the people reading this will literally be dead before Ryan’s plan balances the budget! Absurd!
Paul Ryan also supports TARP, the Patriot Act, and NDAA indefinite detention. …this guy’s supposed to be a small-government conservative!?
Look at his actual record, people. Paul Ryan is a a big-government guy all the way.
In the future “conservatives” will support ObamaCare — just like they now support Medicare & Social Security.
In the future when they try to pass ChavezCare, “conservatives” will march & carry signs saying “Keep your Government hands off my ObamaCare”.
Think it can’t happen?
Today “conservatives” & the pathetic Tea Party overwhelmingly support Medicare & Social Security — & they also support Ted Kennedy’s Immigration Act of 1965 (90% of immigrants are from the Third World). “We support all LEGAL immigration. It is ILLEGAL immigration that we are opposed to.”
So “conservatives” & the pathetic Tea Partiers support Medicare & Social Security & Ted Kennedy’s Immigration Act of 1965… Great! Wonderful!
The country will implode before it gets that far. We are past the tipping point in both national and personal debt, everything and anything done now is and will only delay the depression and collapse that is coming.
Conservatives do not support Medicare & Social Security.
Many Republicans do.
It’s actually a good litmus test for who is a conservative and who is not.
Paul Ryan, making big government progressive levels of spending appear to be conservative for 3 years. The man who voted for every single big spending bill of the last decade or more has found that voters are really stupid and it really only matters what you say, how you frame it and no one seems to look at the details. I looked at the details, no thanks Mr Big Government Progressive (R) Ryan.
Now, if you want to frame this properly, then I would be happy to be happy about the savings in comparison to pipe dream Obama’s budget. Frame it like this…
Hi, I am Paul Ryan, I, like every other chicken shit good for nothing loser (R) House and Senate member, have given up hope of bringing our nation back to reasonable levels of spending and within its constitutional bounds. We have thrown our lot in with the progressive democrats and plan to bring you all the spending they do, but for different priorities. Yes, we know this will eventually cause the next generations to become slaves, but f^ck them, what matters is that we bear absolutely not one single burden we can toss onto their backs. That is what America is about, sloughing blame, unaccountability, no consequences, no requirement to sacrifice today to have tomorrow.
Thank God, I’m not the only one who sees through this impostor.
Paul Ryan is part of the problem. He is a just another career politician. He has never run a hot dog stand in his life. How is he any different than Obama?
Paul Ryan voted for Medicare Part D, No Child Left Behind, the TARP Bailouts etc. etc. etc. How is he a conservative? He is a disgrace to the Republican Party! The last thing Conservatives need is this impostor speaking for us.
I am not quite as detestful for Paul Ryan as you are. But you are right about him being a poor spokesperson. I think he is generally a conservative, but more of a go along to get along like most of the rest of our (R) friends in congress. I am actually more detestful of those people who raise him up onto a pedestal as a paragon spokesman. Like Allen West, Jindal, Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, who have been elevated well beyond their accomplishments, I do not dislike any of those specifically so much as I dislike them being rolled out unvetted with unnearned acclaim. I think all of them deserve some praise, but based on factual votes and factual accomplished legislation or stopped legislation if needbe. I come out hard on Paul Ryan mostly because way too many people come out on Paul Ryan as if he were someone who is extraordinary.
I liked his beatdown on Obama in the televised health care meeting. I like much of what he says. I hate much of what he has voted for and much of his reasoning behind those votes.
You put Rand Paul into that group? If we have Rand Paul’s plan instead of Paul Ryan’s absurd plan, the budget would be balanced in five years instead of Paul Ryan’s 30 years. 30 years!
That’s still not as good as his dad, of course. Ron Paul would cut one trillion of actual spending, (not just cuts in the rate of increases), the first year, and would balance the budget in three years. Without raising taxes.
But, the Taxed Enough Already party and the fake “small government conservatives” would rather vote for big government, Patriot Act, NDAA guys like Romney, Santorum, and Gingrich. Go figure.
Mr. Ryan is correct in that the current state of affairs cannot continue. No, his budget plan will not pass w/o changes (what plan gets passed by congress doesn’t).
Mr. Ryan is extraordinary in that he is one of the few gents who actually earns his money by proposing legislation. At the present his plan is the smartest most well thought out plan in quite some time. If anybody thinks that the french system is so superior, bear in mind the huge taxes the french pay for the system and the drag on the french economy it causes. It is symptomatic of all the Euro countries (with the exception of Ger.)and is unsustainable into the future. One only has to look at GB, Greece etc… If free healthcare costs a consistant 10% unemployment I’ll buy my own thank you. Mr. Ryan’s plan is guide for the future that shows real promise and until the Dems can come up with anything we should try to get on the right track before its too late.
Ryan said, “We should not be spending money we don’t have … and consigning our kids to an ugly future.”
It is the goal of the administration to limit American population growth and make up the difference needed with the importation of foreign labor.
American children are a burden to society. They require care, so they reduce the ability for parents to concentrate on work. A bonus to having a reduced number of children is that there will be fewer people to protect the country and thus less ability to raise an effective army. What is necessary are strong backs and weak minds to get the grunt work done. Of course, since we do not produce much here in America, there will be no great need for imported workers either.
These are not speculative daydreams. Each can be found prominently in the radical Leftist literature. So, if we can agree that Mr. Obama has any goals for America at all, the foregoing are among them.
“Ryan said, “We should not be spending money we don’t have … and consigning our kids to an ugly future.””
And then what does Paul Ryan’s very own plan do? It continues to spend money we don’t have For The Next 30 Years! 30 years!
Paul “I like TARP, Patriot Act, and NDAA indefinite detention” Ryan is a joke. Vote this big-government, big-spender, fake conservative out.
I am sick and tired of treating the symptom without addressing the disease. Globalism is the disease. The only thing between freedom and tyrannical globalism is American Independence. Everything the left does is meant to overwhelm the system to collapse the individual. It is nauseating to discuss taxes, the economy, entitlements, environmentalism, class warfare, etc because they are all tools to end liberty of the American people. Two generations from now, our grandchildren will wonder why we let the left push us off the cliff. Every topic mentioned should first identify this disease and then point out the progressive distraction on the table for debate. Ryan is right, but he’s arguing by allowing the left to mis-frame the debate. The fact is that federal democrats are promoting mass violence and starvation. Not quite the humanitarians they pretend to be.
I notice that ‘huskerslovebo’ doesn’t troll PJM
Efforts by congressional Republicans to move toward a balanced budget are commendable. However, we can not count on Congress after Congress staying true to that program over the 10 years it will take to balance the budget under even the most optimistic projections, let alone 30 years. The only way to assure that Congress continues on the path to budgetary responsibility is a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution.
Of course, such an amendment restricting Congress’ power will never get two-thirds vote in Congress. Therefore, the first step must be to reform the amendment process itself to enable the states to initiate amendment proposals without having to go through the unused, uncertain, and outmoded mechanism of a convention. Then we would have a realistic possibility of passing a BBA and returning the federal government to its original constitutional bounds. See http://www.timelyrenewed.com
Wow, Awesome perfect sutff
[img]http://i1069.photobucket.com/albums/u476/marry38382/xray.jpg[/img]
Paul Ryan: “Hey, I’ve got an idea, let’s LOWER taxes on the rich and corporations – you know, the same ones that have GAINED the most over the past 30 years, especially since the financial meltdown – and we’ll pay for it by cutting all that fluff like medical care for the poor and elderly, student loans, foodstamps AND THEN we can renege on our promise last year to match cuts in military spending with cuts in social programs and INSTEAD let military spending – which in the U.S. ALREADY amounts to more than the REST OF THE WORLD COMBINED spends on THEIR military – continue to rise. And, oh wait, there’s MORE. We’ll also renege on the agreements we won last year regarding cuts to the budget by cutting MORE money than we agreed to in that negotiation where we used the threat to let the U.S. default on it’s debt as a bargaining chip that allowed us to get 98% of what we wanted but cost the U.S. it’s first-ever downgrade in it’s credit rating.
And, stand by, this an election year and I’m sure we can find even MORE wonderful ways to move the burden of government off the backs of the rich and corporations. Hey, we’re the freaking Republicans!!”
I am waiting for the day when some conservative politician has the nerve to say “He’s lying” when little o spews forth completely false statistics and high-sounding projections of future benefits, which anyone with a brain knows have no relationship to reality.