Bush’s visit to Indy to help Rep. Sodrel stuff his coffers with campaign money made the Washington Post. Bush’s new strategy for the Republicans looks pretty much like the same old thing: Scare people, lie about the Democrats, and line your pockets with money from his corporate cronies.
War on Terror this, Democrats are going to take your money that, blah, blah, blah. We’ve heard it all before. He can say what he wants. At this point, it’s just a bunch of hot air. There is simply no getting around the fact that Bush and his Congressional supporters just aren’t good at governing. Despite spending like drunken sailors, we’re no safer. In fact, the Iraqi debacle has made the world more dangerous and our military weaker. We’re in debt up to our eye balls and communist China is our creditor.
One party rule has been really bad for the United States. We need some checks and balances and, frankly, gridlock in Washington. Bush isn’t going anywhere in 2006, so that means that Sodrel and his Republican compatriots need to go.
I used to be a drunken sailor. I only spent my own money; Bush is spending my money, my kids money, my grandkids money, etc…
Mike Sylvester
My apologies for insulting drunken sailors!
We hear a lot of talk about cutting the deficit in half. In fact they have talked about it as far back as I can remember. I am 49 years old and I simply cannot remember a surplus year, can you? Who has been running this country, the politicians or the voters? I hear people complain, but do we ever take action?
There are two sets of books our politicians like to keep, the General and Unified budgets. The Unified Budget includes every government expense while the general budget excludes social security and Medicare. Social Security has its own dedicated tax, which by law cannot be used to pay for anything but Social Security costs, United States Code Title 42, Chapter7, Subchapter VII, Sec. 911 (a). Social Security can buy US Treasuries just like you or I, but the money must be repaid. Currently the Social Security Trust fund owns $1.6 Trillion in Special US Treasuries, which is included in the $8 Trillion National debt.
Politicians like to use the Unified Budget because they can show a lower deficit number. For example in 2004 Bush and our Representatives passed a Unified Budget resulting in a $553.6 billion deficit. The problem is they included Social Security and Medicare taxes as well as the interest their trust funds earned, which are dedicated to paying Social Security and Medicare costs, not general budget items. Excluding these dedicated tax revenues and interest payments, the General Budget deficit was $726.1 Billion. Who wants to report bad news to those you represent? We might not vote for them in the next election. Then again, maybe it is us, we simply do not want to hear the bad news and keep asking for more government services.
In 2005 there was Katrina and now we have the Rx Medicare drug program. The deficit this year is going to be what, $800 Billion? Interest on the Debt in 2005 was over $450 Billion or 40 cents of every dollar you pay in Federal Income Taxes. In 1952 only 16 cents went to pay interest on the debt.
The problem is, they could eliminate the unified budget deficit and we would still have a very large general budget deficit. Its time we laid off these fuzzy math politicians for our sakes as well as our children. Can anyone just say no to two more years?
William Larsen,
I can carefully read your documentation of the budget crisis and understand it,but many people dont want to,because it makes the ‘wrong people’ look bad).Just give out a few slogans mixed with social issues,and point out what we have to fear.
Today’s news is filled with accounts of increasing unrest of very organized marches for immigrant rights,and that’s OK on the surface except there’s a concerted effort not to distingush legal from illegal immigrants.Everyone is ‘just an immigrant’like gramma and grampa’
The Bush administration has used social issues to emotionalize and motive people to get them to the polls…gay marriage and abortion being 2 prime examples.Both parties need Hispanic votes, and thats the bottom line of marches for immigrants. Both parties MUST embrace the hispanic vote. So the Dems will play the social values game in a new way too, now Im afraid.We have Ted Kennedy, Georges Bush, Hilary Clinton,Harry Reid,and a few others all agreeing that amnesty from illegal status of immigrants and an automatic upgrade to ‘legal worker’ is the way to solve the ‘border problem’.It solves it for having available cheap labor to be sure.
Many of us feel we have no credible government anywhere, at the state level( not specifically Indiana)or the Federal level.
I think the whole game for political parties now is ‘how to frame an issue so it doesnt look like what it is'( except to our core supporters). Get ’em to the POLLS emotionalized and loyal and play on social issue fears. I used to be appalled at how ‘stupid’ Mexican peasants where when I was living in Mexico years ago. Everywhere there were slogans.’Unite for the country’etc.Is that much different from ‘support our soldiers in Iraq and their fight for freedom and democracy’? I never thought Id see USA copying ‘sloganology’ from Mexico..and in order to do Vicente Foxes bidding yet!
I can carefully read your documentation of the budget crisis and understand it, but many people don’t want to, because it makes the ‘wrong people’ look bad)……. Many of us feel we have no credible government anywhere, at the state level( not specifically Indiana)or the Federal level.
Lou, yes some people will just look the other way instead of listen. The boomers did this in 1983. Did they look at what was happening around them? Between 1971 and 1983 Social Security spent more every year than it collected in payroll tax. They tried to fix it in 1976 by raising both the tax and based, but these big patches lasted just a few years. Then all of America fell for the big fix of 1983. Raise the tax even more, increase the base, retirement age and begin taxing Social Security benefits. No one seemed to read the fine print “In 2064 social security will again face the inability to pay scheduled benefits.†Well now it is 2006 and Social Security is scheduled to pay just 73% of promised benefits in 2041.
Our my fellow boomers upset? For the most part, they seem to think they will escape the pain and fail to realize by thinking they escape the pain, they shift the pain to their children. Guess what people, potential voters under 46 outnumber all other potential voters combined!
You can make a difference. Talk to your friends, family and co-workers. Get them riled up and vote. It is time to take back this country. Have you ever seen the picture of the frog being swallowed by the pelican? The frog is choking the throat of the bird as it is half swallowed. I do not intend to give up.
Mark Souder has/will not respond to my challenge to debate him. He me be able to duck the debate this election, but if he wins this primary, he won’t the next election. Each year there is a new generation of voters who want something better.
Alan Greenspan was instrumental in the adoption of the “big fix” in ’83 that raised the payroll taxes significantly on low and middle income workers. He was also instrumental in greenlighting the Bush tax cuts of ’01. Those tax cuts are requiring us to raid social security to pay for general expenditures. So, effectively, what we have is a giant bait and switch engineered, at least in part, by Greenspan to have the burden of general expenditures fall more heavily on the shoulders of the low and middle income workers of the country. The rich are (literally) making out like bandits.
I would never vote for anyone who uses phrases like ‘Lets take back our Country’. It sounds too much like ‘family values’and has a slight hitleresque allusion.
The Federal budget is out of control and it’s very alarming. But ALL options should be open to equal discussion,including increasing taxes.
And how come when I get a tax cut it doesnt even cover my increased health insurance premium? Excuse me for sounding negative about the benefits of tax cuts,but we need also to look at them as one of the problems,as well as looking at unchecked spending.
( Read what Doug Masson just posted above)
Lou: I always wonder, “Take our country back from whom?” Who really has the right to say that? Maybe Native Americans? I’m always concerned when one group of people makes it seem as if another group is not patriotic enough, not moral enough, etc. and implies that some unspecified “they” don’t belong here.
Would you vote for someone who says “take back our country” (which you think sounds “hitlerian”), if his opponent was invading countries on a whim (which sounds a lot more “hitlerian” than the phrase “take back our country”)?
I apologize for that post. I should have made no reference to ‘hitlerian’ and ‘take back our country’ I was being too cute by half, as they say,and I hope it wasnt taken personally as it was not intended that way. it was poor taste.
It wasn’t taken personally at all. I just find it disheartening that peoples’ threshold for voting against my side is usually do low, and their threshold for voting against the other side is so high. Like, oh that guy said “YEAH!” at the Iowa caucus, he’s CRAZY!!! Now let’s talk about invading Syria!
“do” in the second line should be “so”.