Republican Ryan's budget sets political course for party in 2014

Comments (146)
GCGriswold wrote:

HMM, sounds like the same old GOP budget hat! Wish congress could do something constructive for a change!

Apr 01, 2014 10:44am EDT  --  Report as abuse
SunnyDaySam wrote:

Another Republican ‘plan’ with no chance of ever going anywhere. At least they’re consistent… Another good reason to Vote anti-R 2014/2016

Apr 01, 2014 10:46am EDT  --  Report as abuse
gcf1965 wrote:

GC, Ryan is trying to do something constructive, but the vote buying DNC and RINO politicians are more concerned about keeping votes than helping America.

Apr 01, 2014 10:54am EDT  --  Report as abuse
RoyN wrote:

Not one penny should be taken from the poor of the USA untill all foreign aid has been stopped. The tax payers of this country foot the bill of the Federal Budget, so we should look after our own before we look after anyone else.

Apr 01, 2014 11:04am EDT  --  Report as abuse
SunnyDaySam wrote:

Ryan was in office the whole bush/GOP ‘lost decade’ when they controlled BOTH houses AND the Presidency. Why didn’t the Republican’ts pass a balanced budget amendment then? They didn’t even bring it up for a vote.

Apr 01, 2014 11:06am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Whipsplash wrote:

As predicted when most of us posted yesterday that ryan’s budget would hurt the poor and needy, help the wealthy, and screw the middle class.
Purge the stinch from Washington.
Vote every republican out of every office every cance you get!

Apr 01, 2014 11:12am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Lounsbury wrote:

Who knows what a cut means anymore? Journalism has devolved into a left wing propaganda support mechanism that has gotten so bold and open in their support of the Democratic Party that we’re even seeing commercials by MSNBC where they have taken the Democratic Party platform and turned it into an ad for the values and programs the “news” organization supports. What’s a cut? What’s austere? What’s an increase? You simply cannot pull facts from “the news” any more.

Truth isn’t derived from consensus, but this is exactly what articles like this are hard at work doing. They move the goal posts so often that when you hear claims the things that Republicans support are increasing and things that Democrats are decreasing you have to ask the question “Based on what?” and then prepare to argue about what the definition is, is and then explain why you asked. It’s beyond the ability of any rational person to sift through and come to conclusions unless he or she analyzes the numbers themselves and draws their own conclusions. Even then the raw numbers are so distorted that you may have to go back in time to be able to figure out what they were before freakanomics to establish a baseline from which “sane” can be measured as you ignore all the nonsense since then and just do the minus the hysterical screaming from left wing blows that you’re crazy, or he’s been discredited or that this, that or the other thing was discredited.

Example… Is the military going to see an increase? Is it an increase from Chuck Hagel’s broad daylight rape of the military as he shrinks it to pre WWII levels? Is Medicare being cut? Is that including the shifting sands of Obamacare and taking into account how things are now as opposed to when the change actually occurs?

It’s sad that you can read something like this and have no idea whatsoever if anything in it is true.

Apr 01, 2014 11:13am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Speaker2 wrote:

Wishful thinking and as if we don’t already spend too much money on defense.

Apr 01, 2014 11:14am EDT  --  Report as abuse

The only social program which should NOT be cut at all is Social Security. Workers and employers have paid into this system, so it is not an “entitlement”. It is a fully funded retirement system which people were forced to participate in, and once they retire they should not have to worry about their monthly payments being tampered with. All of the other welfare programs which pay people to sit at home on their butts and do nothing should be totally eliminated.

Apr 01, 2014 11:17am EDT  --  Report as abuse

@gcf1965, thanks for giving me a laugh calling is ‘constructive’ ….

Increasing defense spending, gutting Medicare, and cutting social programs at same time is not ‘constructive’.

It also says save trillions by repealing the PPACA, but last I saw the CBO estimated that repealing it would cost about 750 billion if my memory serves? Who is right the non partisan CBO or the highly partisan Paul Ryan.

Apr 01, 2014 11:22am EDT  --  Report as abuse
majkmushrm wrote:

Note to Rep. Ryan. The US already spends waaaaaay to much on the military. The only justification for US levels of military spending is an empire. Of course, empires are supposed to support themselves by exacting tribute from the conquered, not from the empire’s citizens. See Empire, Rome or for that matter, Empire, British.

Apr 01, 2014 11:24am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Bakhtin wrote:

When have Republicans ever said anything else? They are a one trick pony.

Apr 01, 2014 11:31am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Rich_F wrote:

what people don’t realize is the US economic footing is like a ferrari going 210mph towards a brick wall. this budget will slow the car to 150mph but not remove the wall. at least he’s giving it a college try it’s more than i can say for everyone else who talk a good game but when it comes time to sacrifice go get it from someone else.

Apr 01, 2014 11:32am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Elizabeth5250 wrote:

Yep same old party TAKE from the POOR and MIDDLE CLASS to keep the WEALTHY from paying THEIR FAIR SHARE

WAKE UP AMERICA!

Apr 01, 2014 11:35am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Elizabeth5250 wrote:

Yep same old party TAKE from the POOR and MIDDLE CLASS to keep the WEALTHY from paying THEIR FAIR SHARE

WAKE UP AMERICA!

Apr 01, 2014 11:35am EDT  --  Report as abuse
4825 wrote:

Obama and the Dems seem to be guiding us through a lost decade. We are just over halfway wondering through it with little to no improvement and no leadership. The Republicans are trying to help the country get on a firm footing but the Democrats keep kicking the stool out from under America’s feet. At least we have November 2014 and November 2016 to vote out the spend-oholic Democrats. Spending money to the Democrats is like a drug is to a drug addict. They can’t help their self so we have to take away their ability to help them break the habit. VOTE ANYTHING BUT DEMOCRAT in November.

Apr 01, 2014 11:35am EDT  --  Report as abuse
tiktin wrote:

Under Ryan’s proposal, by 2024 the United States will have defaulted on the national debt, the dollar will be worthless, and the western economies will have collapsed. In other words, it’s too little and too late.

Apr 01, 2014 11:36am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Rich_F wrote:

>>It is a fully funded retirement system

not quite. they are running deficits now and will bankrupt in 20 years + there’s no money sitting anywhere just a bunch of federal government IOU’s that are becoming worth less every day. if you are under 30 don’t expect to see anything more than a pittance from this entitlement.

Apr 01, 2014 11:37am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Brown54 wrote:

More people vote for a living than work for a living.

Paul Ryan’s budget plan is a plan for Democrats to take the house, keep the Senate, and keep the White House.

Republicans come off as anti-people, anti-Latino, anti-poor people, anti-sick people, and pro-rich.

The GOP does not get it.

Apr 01, 2014 11:40am EDT  --  Report as abuse
rb82414 wrote:

GOP, when will they ever learn that the people in this country are too fat and lazy to survive without handouts. Ryan should resign and go home to Wisconsin. Who cares if the debt hits 20, 25 or 30 trillion?

Apr 01, 2014 11:45am EDT  --  Report as abuse
castaway5555 wrote:

Nothing new here – Ryan and the GOP have long worshipped at the feet of President Hoover who watched this nation plunge into Depression and said, “Let nature take its course,” and “If cuts have to be made, we’ll cut domestic programs.” The GOP philosophy is the philosophy of failure. But it sounds good, it sounds wise, it sounds tough … but under Hoover, everyone suffered, including the wealthy who, then and now, were too dumb to see what was happening until it was too late.

Apr 01, 2014 11:46am EDT  --  Report as abuse
sandman839 wrote:

gcf1965 What the Greedy Old Party is trying to do is bankrupt this country with failed policy. There is an easier way to balance the budget and that is to simply fix our infrastructure. More jobs means more revenue. It worked after the Great Depression, the Reagan Recession and it will work after the Great Recession. But then who wants facts? The right only wants to make the rich richer. Even if the top 2% spent most of their money in the U.S. it would not be enough to fuel this country.

Apr 01, 2014 11:47am EDT  --  Report as abuse

And inequality gains momentum until the guillotines come out.

Apr 01, 2014 11:47am EDT  --  Report as abuse

Rich_F, the reason it is “running a deficit now and will be bankrupt in 20 years” is because the money that was paid into SS was supposed to be left there strictly to pay the retirement benefits of those who paid into it. As usual, the bums in Congress couldn’t keep their greedy hands off of such a windfall and raided the fund, most likely to give it to the other bums on welfare.

Apr 01, 2014 11:49am EDT  --  Report as abuse

Lots of poor people work. More than 10 million American workers live in poverty, because their jobs don’t pay them enough to get by and/or their employer only offers them part-time hours. Half of all fast-food workers, for example, are forced to rely on public programs like food stamps and Medicaid to supplement meager wages. And lots of poor people are poor because they can’t find work, or are not physically able to work. There are three job applicants for every job opening in this economy. Blacks have a 12 percent unemployment rate and Hispanics have an 8 percent jobless rate. A quarter of adults with a disability live in poverty.

Apr 01, 2014 11:49am EDT  --  Report as abuse
NickKatz wrote:

We already spend more on Defense than any other country in the world. We spend more than the next 14 all added together. This bill calls for raising spending on defense by more than the 7th largest defence budget in the entire world. To put it in perspective the increase alone is more than half of what Russia (3rd highest defense budget in the world) spends total on defence.

Sounds like a “path to prosperity” for the defense contractors that paid for these campaigns.

Apr 01, 2014 11:50am EDT  --  Report as abuse
chuck2 wrote:

The R Plan AKA “let them eat cakes” will of course (maybe) go nowhere The latter is NOT the core issue, the real issue is adumbed down culture in this “new USA” does not seem to note this hammers, again, middle and lower end while putting up even wider gaps in the wealth or “no wealth” that grows like economic cancer across this nation.

The absurdity of even more take ways from the people, this Reverse Robin Hood Ryan R plan is obviously just and extension and expansion of today’s attacks on “under top 3% incomes”. Yet as real wages go down, inflation (real world not gov measure) goes up, loss of upward mobility and college education less affordable, the sheeples graze silently, the solution being more entertainment/various levels of arena sports to distract from reality. Yep, distract the masses, while the barbarians come over the wall (streets AKA as went Rome, even down to mass imports as money folks made more that way.

Apr 01, 2014 11:56am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Bakhtin wrote:

Paid posters trotting out lame party sound-bites are so funny, with their total denial of easily observable real-world experience.

@Rich_F

You need to learn the difference between an extrapolation and a prediction. It would also help if you stopped watching Fox, because those clowns don’t know the difference either.

Apr 01, 2014 11:57am EDT  --  Report as abuse
gcf1965 wrote:

Waahaaa, the GOP is taking from the poor and giving to the rich…. Please, enough with the uninformed, uneducated stupidity! There are so many programs to “help” the poor it isn’t funny. There was a time when young people thought about their future, thought about how they could make a living and what tehy needed to do to make it in life. Today, with so many handouts and the liberal mantra of everyone deservesa trophy just for playing people no longer think about what they have to do to make it in life. Far too many decide that life will just happen, that a good job and high salary will simply be waiting for them to collect it. They do little and put forth little effort in securing their future because liberalism has taught them that they are owed a place in life and that working for it is only a personal decision not a requirement. When they fail in life as they will do, then they look to the most liberal politicians and activist who in turn further promote this entitlement by instilling the mindset that now the uneducated, unskilled, and unmotivated need a living wage while flipping burgers and stocking shelves. It is liberalism that has taken form the poor, long before they were even old enough to understand what poor is. Promoting dependency on government, satisfaction with living off the efforts and work of others, and teaching them they are incapable of anything better. The cycle has to be broken, liberalism must be killed, and personal responsibility and self-worth must be promoted.

Apr 01, 2014 11:57am EDT  --  Report as abuse
5yak5 wrote:

What? No additional tax cuts for the rich? Come on Paul, start paying attention to the program. Go all the way.

Apr 01, 2014 11:58am EDT  --  Report as abuse
gcf1965 wrote:

Sadly true Brown54. People, for the most part, have no concern for doing what is right, only what benefits them personally the most.

Apr 01, 2014 12:01pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
mb56 wrote:

Same old nonsense… trample on the poor while giving the military that spends 4X as much as any other nation on earth a budget increase.

Apr 01, 2014 12:04pm EDT  --  Report as abuse

Quote from 4825 ‘Obama and the Dems seem to be guiding us through a lost decade. We are just over halfway wondering through it with little to no improvement and no leadership.’

Dec 2008–
Economy shrinking at 7-8% annual rate
Losing ~750K jobs a month

March 2014–
Economy growing at ~2% annual rate
Gaining ~150K-200K jobs a month (latest estimate)

ARE things great? by no means, but they are ALOT better then in 2008.

Lets compare this to Bush 2′s term.

Dec 2000
GDP growing by 2.4% annual rate
Gained 142,000 jobs

Dec 2008
GDP shrinking at 7-8% rate
Losing ~750K jobs a month

To add, Bush was the first President in ages to leave office with a net negative job growth.

So if you where to compare the two terms, obviously Bush was a lost decade(well 8 years) while we are recovering from that, so far, during Obama’s tenure. But there are still 2 years to go, but most economists think it only going to get better.

I just hope America has learned its lesson, the last two GOP Presidents who served for two terms completely blew up our deficits/debt with plans like this one, Reagan put the whole deficit spending thing on steroids, then after Bush 1 and Clinton started to get it under control, Bush 2 blew off the doors. That is why it is called ‘voodoo’ economics, this whole trickle down theory. It has been proven not to work TWICE, yet the GOP wants to try it again and again? Is not one of the definitions of insanity trying to do the same thing over and over again and hoping for new result?

Apr 01, 2014 12:07pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
gcf1965 wrote:

urownexperience wrote “A quarter of adults with a disability live in poverty.”

Perhaps if we stop teaching kids that it is ok to drift through life, dropout of school, and have 4 kids by the time they’re 20 because the government will pay their way then we could afford to help those that really need and deserve a social safety net.

Why is it that you rarely see the disabled or the working poor at protests. It is almost exclusively the young, able bodied that are screaming for more handouts.

Apr 01, 2014 12:07pm EDT  --  Report as abuse

@urownexperience has a very good point, much of the working poor receives the ‘handouts’ that Ryan and the right rail so hard against. Well raise the minimum wage so these people will not be in poverty and they will not be eligible for those benefits. The way it is set up now, the USA taxpayer is basically subsidizing the profits of companies like Wal Mart and McDonalds.

Apr 01, 2014 12:09pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
mb56 wrote:

Perhaps Ryan and his gang would be better served making it harder for companies like Caterpillar, GE, etc. and people like Romney to avoid paying $billions in taxes by funneling income overseas in financial shell games – but that just makes too much sense.

Apr 01, 2014 12:11pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
JackVG wrote:

DEFENSE SPENDING is an euphemism. Way too much “Defense Spending” is nothing less than feeding overpriced Defense Contractors for military equipment that is either not needed or is purchased to keep voters employed, thus happy, so that they will re-elect the incumbents. Too much of this Defense Spending is cloaked in mystery. Foreign Aid falls along the same lines. We sure are complacent “suckers”.

Apr 01, 2014 12:11pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
gitmojo wrote:

The cost savings that Ryan’s budget proposal creates could be realized by eliminating waste,fraud, bureaucracy, and duplication.
If more effort, make that SOME effort, were made in in this bloated, inefficient zeppelin of a government no actual aid or defense would be cut.
The bucket is extremely porous. Fix the bucket.

Apr 01, 2014 12:17pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
TheGame2 wrote:

When will the non elite idiots of conservative political leanings finally figure out that it’s the Waltons, The Koch Brothers, The Romneys and Ryans, who are THE TAKERS NOT THE MAKERS?
When I was 20 years old no one knew of “The Walton Family”. Now, they are worth more than the poorest 38% of Americans wealth combined. That didn’t come from “hard work”. Their employees depend on federal aid and food stamps to survive because the Waltons want to keep it ALL. THAT’S STEALING + GREED BEYOND COMPREHENSION.
The Koch Sucking Brothers made $12 BILLION each in profits last year in addition to helping to destroy the environment. Imagine if they had settled for $2 Billion and gave the rest BACK as INCOME to their employees who actually need the money to live reasonable lives.
There is more than enough money in this country to pay for social needs and social security. The problem is people like the Waltons and Koch Sucking Brothers stealing from their workers to create wealth beyond imagination or comprehension for their greedy a$$es.

Apr 01, 2014 12:17pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
mb56 wrote:

“this budget will slow the car to 150mph but not remove the wall. at least he’s giving it a college try”
=======
College try?? How exactly is giving Defense a budget increase while cutting social programs a *rational* approach? Our Defense spends 4X as much as any other nation on Earth, is the biggest single budget item, AND has the highest amount of outright waste of any other area of Government according to the CBO. MOST *RATIONAL* PEOPLE when faced with tightening their belt would FIRST target biggest discretionary area of their budget with the most waste… but not Republicans… they INCREASE that budget area….

Apr 01, 2014 12:20pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
zigo wrote:

Stop investing in roads and education to cut taxes to invest the money in roads and education … in China!

Apr 01, 2014 12:23pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
TomMariner wrote:

I got it that the more voters who know that the evil Republicans are going to take vote-buying goodies away before the country collapses. The choice of images of Ryan at CPAC, a month ago emphasizes that non-liberals are dastardly fun-stoppers.

But the liberal roots show through in the article — “Medicare entitlement for the elderly”. The ONLY programs in the thousands that write checks to individuals, Social Security and Medicare, were at least partially funded by paycheck deductions every week for 40 years, and are therefore not an “entitlement”. And Ryan is not proposing that current seniors, who have already paid, get whacked — those ten years away from 65 are those who would have alternate means.

But a great liberal trick is to throw the trillions of dollars of SSA and Medicare money into a big pot with the Medicaid, income maintenance, etc. so those evil Republican-voting seniors can take the hit for the Democrat voting gift recipients.

I can’t wait until Ryan is considered a “front runner”. He can expect to get “Christied” by the Democrat-faithful press — there will be the equivalent of moving traffic cones four mornings on 2 lanes out of 50 that get blown up into an evil plot. Rep Ryan, like Governor Christie be painted as so stupid he wouldn’t have seen Russia grabbing Ukraine until the flags went up in Crimea. (OK, nobody could be that incompetent.)

Apr 01, 2014 12:26pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Speaker2 wrote:

gcf1965 wrote: “Perhaps if we stop teaching kids that it is ok to drift through life, dropout of school, and have 4 kids by the time they’re 20 because the government will pay their way then we could afford to help those that really need and deserve a social safety net.”

Perhaps if we have sex education early in school and provide teens free birth control, maybe we can reduce the teen baby explosion and we won’t have the problem of young women unmarried with babies.

Just saying No and crossing your legs or as one republican’s solution, place an apple between their knees does not work.

Apr 01, 2014 12:28pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
ReasonRules wrote:

So we are the world’s strongest military but Paul is increasing defense spending, and reducing anyone’s Medicare and Affordable Health Care? Hmmm sounds like his salary will avoid any of these cuts, but will the majority of us American’s? It would appear not.

Apr 01, 2014 12:31pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
jmbuch wrote:

If all the taxes from republican tax cuts for the rich , since Reagan , had been collected and all the loopholes and subsidies to very profitable corporations and wealthy individuals that pay historically low taxes and in some cases received refunds , had been closed or eliminated over the last 10 years , the debt would have been cut by more than half .Two unfunded wars taken off would have lowered it even more . Not to mention the “balanced budget” that Bill Clinton handed GWBush at the end of Clintons term . Republicans , Paul Ryan specifically , live in a Ayn Rand fantasy world . The wealthy oligarchs in control and owning every thing on one side and the subservient low class masses on the other , the ones born to serve the wealthy , regardless of the costs to themselves . What choice will they have ? Now will come voting according to how much money or property you have . Elimination of all regulations on business’ and corporations , elimination of any welfare(except corporate , of course),Medicare and Medicaide , the ACA , SNAPs ; the only huge jobs program to get increased funding is the Defense budget . Of course , our fundamentalist evangelical leaders will need it to force Christianity and Democracy down the rest of the worlds throat . I wonder if any one realizes that Ayn Rand applied for and received Medicare and Social Security in her later years . Kind of hypocritical , don’t you think ?

Apr 01, 2014 12:33pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
gcf1965 wrote:

But Tom, holding power, buying votes, and keeping your political ties intact are far more important than doing what is best for the nation. Doing what is right means democrats lose power and become irrelevant.

Apr 01, 2014 12:36pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
GA_Chris wrote:

Reduce medicaid by increasing the minimum wage, and implementing a co-pay for all recipients

decrease military spending.. it’s ridiculous… Try investing in education, so that we have better people who can avoid stupid wars…

Apr 01, 2014 12:37pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SoutherRican wrote:

The difference between Republicans and Democrat’s is Welfare. Democrats want social welfare, Republicans in Corp. and that is why I’m now an independent.

Apr 01, 2014 12:38pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
AlkalineState wrote:

“Increased defense spending…”

There it is. The pork that is killing us, they want more of it. While pretending to be lean.

Apr 01, 2014 12:43pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
azwi wrote:

Ryan, McCain and the whole GOP they represent the party of death!

Apr 01, 2014 12:44pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
HansUM wrote:

“Republicans’ credentials as the party of fiscal prudence” – are you kidding me? That pretense made for discussion and debate two decades ago as Republicans aimed to re-establish fiscal prudence destroyed during the Reagan administration. The George W Bush administration destroyed any hope for that pretense with its huge, deliberate, and very liberal deficit spending. Republicans count their blessings that Democrats have been unable to establish those “fiscal prudence” credentials for themselves!

Apr 01, 2014 12:44pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
gcf1965 wrote:

“Just saying No and crossing your legs or as one republican’s solution, place an apple between their knees does not work.” It worked in the era before liberalism decided that personal responsibility was too much to ask.

Apr 01, 2014 12:50pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
9knights wrote:

That’s right; add more money to defense. We could use it there since we have twice as much money in defense than all of Europe and Russia combined. That’s a great way to cut the budget. Eddie Munster needs to disappear from the national scene and go back to his cheese farm in Wisconsin.

Apr 01, 2014 12:51pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
gcf1965 wrote:

“Well raise the minimum wage so these people will not be in poverty and they will not be eligible for those benefits.” ….or instead of more handouts in the form of unearned pay raises, teach them that hard work and good choices will help them get a better than minimum wage job and provide for them through life, not just til the next time that the hard working and motivated leave tehm behind again.

No one will ever benefit long term through handouts and giveaways except liberal politicians.

Apr 01, 2014 12:54pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
jw_collins wrote:

Hmmm….sounds as if there may be need for a couple of line items like new prisons and cemeteries.

Apr 01, 2014 1:01pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
marndt wrote:

Paul Ryan has been called a rising star in the Republican party. More like a malignant cyst growing on the face of reason and humanity. Paul Ryan is the poster child for Republican hypocrisy. He’s spent several terms wallowing at the public trough. He has Cadillac healthcare benefits which he will receive for life. When out of office he’ll get a lucrative pension for life. Quite a reward for someone who despises affordable healthcare for all Americans and Social Security.

Apr 01, 2014 1:02pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Bakhtin wrote:

gcf1965…

perhaps you should take your rant to the red states, as they have the highest percentages of welfare recipients, so they are obviously teaching kids to drift through life being dependant on the government.

http://knowledgecenter.csg.org/kc/content/proposed-rules-give-states-more-power-fight-food-stamp-fraud

And didn’t you say you were ex-military? If so, you made a whole career out of depending on the government for absolutely everything.

Apr 01, 2014 1:06pm EDT  --  Report as abuse

GCF1965 said ‘Perhaps if we stop teaching kids that it is ok to drift through life, dropout of school, and have 4 kids by the time they’re 20 because the government will pay their way then we could afford to help those that really need and deserve a social safety net.’

Your ‘theory’ is not backed up by facts…

1. High school graduations rates are at/near all time highs

2. The teenage pregnancy rate is at/near all time lows also

Thank you for being a shining example for just how delusional the right has become in the last 6 years.

Apr 01, 2014 1:07pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Gideon_71 wrote:

We can do as democrats want, and take more money from businesses to give to people who are not working, hurting businesses and preventing them from offering jobs…

Or, we can cut spending, save money, and let businesses hire people by getting the tax monkey off their backs.

Apr 01, 2014 1:13pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Sandman619 wrote:

Oh good. Lets make the poor suffer, as we continue the stagnation of the middle class to 2 lost decades. But at least will be fighting wars all across the world while the working poor suffer at home. Conservatives are becoming unimaginative & boring. Of course, killing the state insurance exchanges will go over really well

Apr 01, 2014 1:14pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
robertb3456 wrote:

GOP economic policy summed up in a word: “Mine.” Typical.

Apr 01, 2014 1:15pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
gcf1965 wrote:

Why all the backlash against cutting handouts? There are more people living off other people’s effort and work than ever before and few seem to take issue with this. The vast number of these people who chose, directly or indirectly, to be here is staggering. Too many deciding that scraping by and geting what they can form government is better than working hard and making a better life. Too many that habitually and routinely make poor choices in life because they never learn to make better choices because liberalism has spread out not a safety net, but a dependency net.

As for the military, there is a reason we sleep soundly at night not worrying about Russia annexing New England or China taking over Hawaii. I do advocate for real waste reduction while simultaneously modernizing a very old military machine.

Why has our society decided against teaching independence and responsibility while embracing mediocrity like pop culture, elimination of morality, law enforcement by popular consensus, and a host of other society destroying agenda items.

Apr 01, 2014 1:16pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SLSamg wrote:

At this point, I would rather put money into the military than paying people to do nothing and have children who do nothing. Military creates new industries, keeps foreign policy strong, and furthers the sciences. Maybe create programs for volunteering as mandatory for all people able to work on welfare. If the budget can ever be balanced the economy will have a positive effect. If the people who collect unemployment can make it 10 years on their own, jobs can be recreated to fill the gaps. Hard work is the answer and can balance a lot out.

Apr 01, 2014 1:17pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SunnyDaySam wrote:

So, they want to pay off the deficit (that was mostly created during Republican’t administrations) by sticking the poor and elderly. How Republican of them. Vote Anti-R.

Apr 01, 2014 1:18pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Speaker2 wrote:

@G personal responsibility FC1965, and just exactly when and where was this so called era personal responsibility?

This country was founded by liberal thinkers. The founder of the country, T. Jefferson and Ben Franklin, were liberals. The founders of the Republican Party were liberals. Liberals are forward thinkers.

Apr 01, 2014 1:22pm EDT  --  Report as abuse

I’m an independent, no Dem, and Ryan’s ideas are crap. We should spend less, not more, on Military, and spend more on domestic side, not less, with so many jobs lost.

Apr 01, 2014 1:23pm EDT  --  Report as abuse

What a surprise, the GOP wants more wealth redistribution FROM the bottom TO the top.

And the chuckleheads that make up their base are eating it up. Nevermind the FACT that republicans states are heavily dependent on government assistance, and TAKE more money in federal tax dollars than they pay. Sorry to burst your bubble, teabaggers. These are the states that receive the most federal funding per tax dollar paid:

1. New Mexico: $2.63

2. West Virginia: $2.57

3. Mississippi: $2.47

4. District of Colombia: $2.41

5. Hawaii: $2.38

6. Alabama: $2.03

7. Alaska: $1.93

8. Montana: $1.92

9. South Carolina: $1.92

10. Maine: $1.78

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/11/states-federal-taxes-spending-charts-maps

Note: this article is from 2012, but it is nice because not only does it break down which states recieve the most in federal funding, it also breaks down which states with pay more in taxes than they take and those which receive more in federal funding than they pay.

It’s clear that it’s actually rural states that have “government dependency” written ALL over them.

Apr 01, 2014 1:23pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Naksuthin wrote:

Once again Republicans cave to their masters…the military contractors.
With increase spending on the military we are throwing away more money on needless mindless military waste
Look at it this way.
In the past 12 years we’ve spent over 5 TRILLION DOLLARS ON DEFENSE.
Yet in that same period we have been engaged in a war against a bunch of illiterate farmers in Afghanistan who have no aircraft carriers, no cruise missiles, no drones, no attack helicopters, no nuclear submarines, no night vision goggles.
And are we winning that war?
NO. FOR THE PAST 12 YEARS THEY HAVE BEEN KILLING US SOLDIERS AT WILL..just like they did the Russians 30 years ago. And they show NO signs of letting up.
In fact the US military is desperate to find a political solution that would give the Taliban much of what they want in exchange an agreement which would let the US pull out in a face saving attempt to say “we didn’t win…but we didn’t lose either.”

The US military and their huge multi trillion dollar budget is no match for a bunch of illiterate farmers who have waged THE LONGEST WAR IN US HISTORY against the most expensive army on earth….and who show now signs of letting the US military off the hook.

Talk about a WASTE OF MONEY

Apr 01, 2014 1:23pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Naksuthin wrote:

Once again Republicans cave to their masters…the military contractors.
With increase spending on the military we are throwing away more money on needless mindless military waste
Look at it this way.
In the past 12 years we’ve spent over 5 TRILLION DOLLARS ON DEFENSE.
Yet in that same period we have been engaged in a war against a bunch of illiterate farmers in Afghanistan who have no aircraft carriers, no cruise missiles, no drones, no attack helicopters, no nuclear submarines, no night vision goggles.
And are we winning that war?
NO. FOR THE PAST 12 YEARS THEY HAVE BEEN KILLING US SOLDIERS AT WILL..just like they did the Russians 30 years ago. And they show NO signs of letting up.
In fact the US military is desperate to find a political solution that would give the Taliban much of what they want in exchange an agreement which would let the US pull out in a face saving attempt to say “we didn’t win…but we didn’t lose either.”

The US military and their huge multi trillion dollar budget is no match for a bunch of illiterate farmers who have waged THE LONGEST WAR IN US HISTORY against the most expensive army on earth….and who show now signs of letting the US military off the hook.

Talk about a WASTE OF MONEY

Apr 01, 2014 1:23pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
TheInsomniac wrote:

End the wars. Stop giving tax breaks to people who don’t need them. Preserve the social safety net. Invest in infrastructure at home, not abroad.

Where are these principles in the GOP’s plan?

Apr 01, 2014 1:24pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Redford wrote:

About time. 17 trillion in debt and counting.

Apr 01, 2014 1:24pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Redford wrote:

About time. 17 trillion in debt and counting.

Apr 01, 2014 1:24pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
brotherkenny4 wrote:

We must increase defense spending so that we can adequately protect our opium/heroin investment in Afghanistan. We’ll want to steal Venezuelas oil too.

Apr 01, 2014 1:25pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
AlkalineState wrote:

Ryan made an ass out of himself in the last election, when he bashed the stimulus. Then his letters surfaced where he was requesting stimulus dollars for his District. He got the money.

This is like a 40-year-old man, living in his parents’ basement…. complaining about how mom cooks the eggs.

Apr 01, 2014 1:33pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
rawbitz wrote:

Republicans would never suggest this plan if it had any real chance of becoming law. If it did become law it would alienate enough of the tea party base to effectively wipe the party out.

Apr 01, 2014 1:33pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SunnyDaySam wrote:

TheInsomniac wrote: ‘End the [bush/GOP] wars. Stop giving tax breaks to people who don’t need them. Preserve the social safety net. Invest in infrastructure at home, not abroad….’

That was exactly President Obama’s common-sense plan when we elected him the first time. I remember. I thought it was a great idea but I didn’t calculate The Republican’ts sabotaging and obstructing all of that.

Apr 01, 2014 1:34pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Pulsamsara wrote:

Emmigration looks better everyday! :)

Apr 01, 2014 1:34pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
gcf1965 wrote:

Naksuthin wrote – “Yet in that same period we have been engaged in a war against a bunch of illiterate farmers in Afghanistan who have no aircraft carriers, no cruise missiles, no drones, no attack helicopters, no nuclear submarines, no night vision goggles.
And are we winning that war?”

Perhaps if the whining liberal bleeding hearts, that were as all in on these wars as GW was, would let the military fight the war with the goal of winning we could be done there. Instead, they are more concerned with not killing people. War is hell! I don’t like it anymore than anyone else, but to be successful, there are going to be casualties. And while there can be an effort to minimize collateral damage, that is NOT the goal of war, there are going to be civilians killed, women and children even. Its cruel and devastating, but to end it sooner rather than later, it needs to be fought to win, not minimize damage.

It is the smarter militants that are using liberalism against us, knowing they can operate out of civilian areas, using farmers and women and children as cover with immunity. If our forces were feared because they were there to win, the militants would be hiding in caves like obama bin laden.

Apr 01, 2014 1:39pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Pulsamsara wrote:

Republicans and Democrats… ‘Conservatives’ and ‘Liberals’

…are all just punching in at the tree.
http://goo.gl/pZQzUK

Unga Bunga – tribal banter and same ol’ talking points. Old. Tired.

Apr 01, 2014 1:39pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
gcf1965 wrote:

“(that was mostly created during Republican’t administrations)” – facts please Sunny, your lies have no power here.

Apr 01, 2014 1:41pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
DennisMyers wrote:

How can you add work requirements to programs meant to help those who cannot find work?

Apr 01, 2014 1:43pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
brotherkenny4 wrote:

gcf1965: the working poor are busy working and only the young slackers kids as you call them can take to the streets, and must, for the poor who cannot fight for themselves because they are in a battle to survive. Do you really think anyone that would fall for your lies read reuters? It’s bizzare.

Apr 01, 2014 1:46pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Single5erver wrote:

Unfortunately, this new budget ignores the point of economics on a national level. The purpose of taxes on a national level is not to pay for spending (governments can print money). The purpose is to pull money that has previously been put in circulation (debt). If there is too little money in circulation it kills economic growth. So when there is high unemployment and low inflation it indicates there is not enough money in circulation. This is the exact wrong time to be reducing spending: especially spending that helps the middle class and working poor that grows the economy faster than spending that helps the already wealthy.

Apr 01, 2014 1:46pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SunnyDaySam wrote:

gcf1965: Funny link:
‘American Thinker is your garden-variety right-wing site for people who believe Jesus personally hand-delivered the Constitution to the founding fathers.’
HuffPo

you got anything, you know, not partisan in the extreme? I doubt it.

Apr 01, 2014 1:53pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SunnyDaySam wrote:

gcf1965 wrote:“(that was mostly created during Republican’t administrations)” – facts please Sunny’

sure thing. even with easy-to-understand graphs:
bush/Obama policies affecting the deficit:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/ezra-klein-doing-the-math-on-obamas-deficits/2012/01/31/gIQAnRs7fQ_story.html
and the Deficit by President:
http://www.businessinsider.com/who-increased-the-debt-2012-9

you got any facts?

Apr 01, 2014 1:59pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
4825 wrote:

The Democrats are like your good friend that goes with you to the casino and sits with you while you are at the poker table. Man you have some good times with that friend. Your poker hand is strong and you have been winning but the bet has gone beyond the cash you have with you. Your friend encourages you, not by offering you money out of his pocket, but instead tells you “you should put up your house and stay in the game, you can’t lose with a hand like the one you have”. You take his advice and hock your home seeing the bet. You throw out your good hand as others around the table do the same. Lo and behold, someone at the table has a better hand than you do and you lose it all. Your friend looks at you and says “man, I thought you had it.”. Well, the Democrats are our friends but are doing exactly the same thing to us with their lack of willingness to get our fiscal house in order. When it is all said and done after the destructive policies have killed the country then they will look at us and say, “man, I thought that would have worked”. What good is it then?

Apr 01, 2014 2:01pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SunnyDaySam wrote:

btw; here’s another good one:
http://www.businessinsider.com/whos-responsible-for-budget-deficit-2012-8

Apr 01, 2014 2:01pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
4825 wrote:

@SunnyDaySam- Is that Washington Post the same one that gives Obama all those Pinocchios, you know, the one they give out to liars?

Apr 01, 2014 2:07pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
gcf1965 wrote:

Sunny, the only reason you discredit a sight that promotes objective, verifiable facts is that you disagree. All of the information there in the article are easily verified.

Sunny, from the very article you posted a link to
“So, yes, the chart is basically accurate, but it’s not particularly meaningful.”
Interpreted, it means this is twisted talking points that do not present an accurate picture. Sad when even your own “proof” goes against you.

Apr 01, 2014 2:23pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
kehenaliving wrote:

they change the date and lower the 55 number to 54! Same old republican ancient ideas. Give the military more money They are bought and sold by the defense industry.

Apr 01, 2014 2:27pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SunnyDaySam wrote:

Hey 4825. Do you ever have any facts at all? or just name-calling like gcf1965? Can you dispute any FACTS in the WaPo article? I’m betting no. c’mon paid poster – earn your money for a change.

Apr 01, 2014 2:33pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
gcf1965 wrote:

USA, I don’t believe I mentioned any comparison about high school grad rates or teen pregnancy. I was referring to the fact that even if the points you make are correct, there are far too many growing up expecting that life will simply be served to them on asilver platter.

As for high school grad rates, that doesn’t mean much considering many do not have even basic skills to make it in life. UNC professor just published a paper on college athletes showing many had third grade reading levels. As an adult student who went back to school in 2010, I recal a conversation I had with my English teacher stating that very few high school graduates IN COLLEGE were prepared for the level of work presented to them. Why? Because they are used to being rewarded for just being present. While graduation rates may be higher, that doesn’t mean a whole lot considering the state od US education and the performance od US kids.

Apr 01, 2014 2:35pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SunnyDaySam wrote:

gcf1965 – thanks. I thought you had no real facts at all and I was correct. btw; math is hard, I know.

Apr 01, 2014 2:41pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
4825 wrote:

SunnyDaySam- Tell me again what it is that makes you think I am paid to do this so I can prove you wrong again?

Apr 01, 2014 2:42pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
gcf1965 wrote:

Sunny, do you even read the articles you post as your “proof”? From your next article:

“But, of course, if we’re doling out blame, we need to bring two other parties into the conversation.

First, Congress, which approved all of the decisions above.[Who was in charge of congress those years at the end of GWs term?]

Second, us–the American citizenry–the folks who voted Presidents Bush and Obama and Congress into office. [i.e., those Americans calling for more spending by way of more handouts and unaffordable entitlements]

Apr 01, 2014 2:51pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
StevierayFan wrote:

The left and right need to meet somewhere in the middle to come up with a sensible plan to fix not just the deficit but a whole slew of issues. As I read comments from the obvious left bashing the right and the right bashing the left I wonder if it is even possible to find middle ground anymore. We have all been so blinded by the mainstream media it is frightening. FOX and CNN can run the same story with two totally different viewpoints and infuriate both parties. Personally I have never supported Paul Ryans budget proposals, parts of it maybe but never in it’s entirety. This one is no different.

Apr 01, 2014 2:52pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Whatsgoingon wrote:

Path to prosperity? GOP’s consist with “war to prosperity,”, dems like “tax to prosperity,” and they both support “print to prosperity…” Yet all these bring prosperity to the Chinese, as we either handed them billions of “rebuilding projects,” or borrow more at growing interest rates. Left or right, they are equally bad.

Apr 01, 2014 3:00pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
gcf1965 wrote:

Sunny takes and article that even the author says is meaningless to argue a non issue. Let me guess, public school prodigy?

Apr 01, 2014 3:07pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
gcf1965 wrote:

Sunny is like the Black Knight in Monty Python, even after utter defeat, he still keeps pretending he is in the fight

“King Arthur: [after Arthur's cut off both of the Black Knight's arms] Look, you stupid Bastard. You’ve got no arms left.

Black Knight: Yes I have.

King Arthur: *Look*!

Black Knight: It’s just a flesh wound.

Apr 01, 2014 3:10pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SunnyDaySam wrote:

4825 wrote: ‘SunnyDaySam- Tell me again what it is that makes you think I am paid to do this so I can prove you wrong again?’

ok, you’re hiding behind a protected account. Nobody can see what you’ve posted or anything. Only paid posters do that. Me, you can look back at everything I’ve ever posted. ok?

Apr 01, 2014 3:22pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SunnyDaySam wrote:

gcf1965 wrote: ‘First, Congress, which approved all of the decisions above.[Who was in charge of congress those years at the end of GWs term?]‘

So, by your logic, the GOP Congress is responsible for everything during Obama’s administration. I knew it!

Apr 01, 2014 3:25pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
4825 wrote:

@SunnyDaySam- I am going to let you in on a little secrete that many users on here already know, except maybe Bakhtin. Not doing this to make you look foolish even though I feel certain some folks have had some chuckles at your expense with your paid poster accusations. Here is your secrete, if you attempt to pull up past posts on any user you can do so by clicking their name at the top of the post; with one exception. That exception is that you can not pull up past posts from any user that has numbers without letters. Test it to see that I am correct. So as you can see, there is no protected account paid for by anyone and anyone can have it. You just got yourself all worked up because I often prove you and Bakhtin wrong. This just happens to be one more of those times. :)

Apr 01, 2014 3:55pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Robert76 wrote:

Where are the cuts to subsidies to very wealthy corporations? Where are cuts to benefits that the politicians receive? And block grants to states instead of medicare will mean states like Texas will be able to just throw grandpa and grandma under the bus. Stealing money from medicare (which is financed by a medicare payroll tax) and giving even more to the highest funded military in the world? It is time to throw these people out of office!

Apr 01, 2014 3:59pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
4825 wrote:

@SunnyDaySam- One last thing, pardon the spelling by dropping the e from secrete for the proper spelling of secret in my post above.

Apr 01, 2014 4:01pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
gcf1965 wrote:

Sunny, you need a little more work on who held congress from 2006 on. It is really quite easy to find, but for your ease I will tell you; the DNC gained control of house AND senate in 2006.

Apr 01, 2014 4:03pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SunnyDaySam wrote:

4825 wrote: ‘ That exception is that you can not pull up past posts from any user that has numbers without letters.’

so, why do you think you have to hide like that? You can change it. Otherwise, my ‘paid poster’ comment stands.

Apr 01, 2014 4:04pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
gcf1965 wrote:

“so, why do you think you have to hide like that? You can change it. Otherwise, my ‘paid poster’ comment stands.” Confronted with facts and willfully ignoring them. Like most liberals, saving face is more important than being right.

Apr 01, 2014 4:13pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SunnyDaySam wrote:

gcf1965 wrote: ‘Sunny, you need a little more work on who held congress from 2006 on. It is really quite easy to find, but for your ease I will tell you; the DNC gained control of house AND senate in 2006.’

Ok, so who held both houses AND the Presidency from 2000-2006? And btw, Ryan, Boehner, Cantor, etc. were in office the whole ‘lost decade’

Apr 01, 2014 4:14pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
gcf1965 wrote:

Here is what the left wants to see, not budget cuts, but redistribution.
http://www.westernjournalism.com/prepare-cringe-see-school-ordered/

Apr 01, 2014 4:19pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
4825 wrote:

@SunnyDaySam- I did not do it intentionally because I did not realize this when I initially signed up but learned quickly how it worked. No need to change it after the fact, as it is what it is. Conservatives are very quick learners. Sorry I did not tell you this sooner. :)

Apr 01, 2014 4:24pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
AlkalineState wrote:

If tax cuts for the rich, really worked to stimulate the economy ….. what happened under Bush?

Apr 01, 2014 4:29pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SunnyDaySam wrote:

uh, gfc1965: you didn’t answer my question. I’m shocked!
‘Ok, so who held both houses AND the Presidency from 2000-2006? And btw, Ryan, Boehner, Cantor, etc. were in office the whole ‘lost decade’

Apr 01, 2014 4:30pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SunnyDaySam wrote:

4825 wrote: ‘Conservatives are very quick learners.’
no, by definition, they are not:
con·serv·a·tive
kənˈsərvətiv/noun
1. a person who is averse to change and holds to traditional values and attitudes, typically in relation to politics.

ie: Don’t learn Anything!

Apr 01, 2014 4:33pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Trichiurus wrote:

I see many of you have no problem with a socialistic welfare-state that is growing by leaps and bounds, while the economic health of the nation is perpetually assaulted by this administration’s repressive regulations, economic incompetence, and tunnel-vision of the nation’s future.

Apr 01, 2014 4:40pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
gcf1965 wrote:

I am trying to show that from 2004 to 2007 deficits were in steady decline, reaching 160 billion. That following year of DNC control, deficits jumped to 458 billion and the second year of DNC control jumped to 1.412 TRILLION. The left like to talk about how obama has brought down the deficit, but this is only true in that he (DNC Congress) more than tripled it first and it is still about 50% higher than when he took office. Hmmmmmm.

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/download_multi_year_2000_2014USb_15s2li101mcn_G0f

You will need to chose your timeframe.

Apr 01, 2014 4:42pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
TheNewWorld wrote:

“The document aims to bolster Republicans’ credentials as the party of fiscal prudence, but could open them up to fresh attacks from Democrats, who are calling for steps to reduce the gap between the rich and poor.”

Fiscal prudence? If they were fiscally prudent they would raise taxes to pay for their wars, and cut defense spending in half instead of hosing us domestically. This isn’t a fiscally prudent budget. Not in the least.

Apr 01, 2014 4:51pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
gcf1965 wrote:

Ok, so who held both houses AND the Presidency from 2000-2006? And btw, Ryan, Boehner, Cantor, etc. were in office the whole ‘lost decade’

I thought it was rhetorical since it is contra to your argument and not a consideration of your post about highest deficits and spending. But during those years it was GOP overseeing a slight rise during a bi-partisan war and subsequently overseeing the return to lowered deficits, almost returning to surplaus before the DNC took over again. You are easy to argue with, you disprove most of your own points. Thanks dude.

Apr 01, 2014 4:55pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
crod526 wrote:

Who new that little Eddie Munster was going to grow and be such a total tool

Apr 01, 2014 4:56pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SunnyDaySam wrote:

‘Republican budget proposes deep cuts in domestic programs’

Why doesn’t that headline read:

‘Republican budget proposes deep cuts in Corporate Welfare’?

gee, I wonder…

Apr 01, 2014 5:13pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SunnyDaySam wrote:

gcf1965 wrote: ‘I am trying to show that from 2004 to 2007 deficits were in steady decline’

Why choose that time? bush/GOP took BOTH houses and the Presidency in 2000. We all know that. and btw, they took over a surplus. whatever happened to that? Fact is, the Republican’ts had total control and they did NOTHING about the debt, in fact, they tripled it!

Apr 01, 2014 5:25pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
AlkalineState wrote:

‘Fiscally prudent’ increases in defense spending and getting the F-35 cost above the paltry trillion dollars we’ve spent on it. That program needs money :)

Apr 01, 2014 5:35pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SunnyDaySam wrote:

Fact is, the Republican party has lost credibility on everything they formerly had for ammo:
They used to campaign on “national security’
then 9-11 happened on their watch. During the time they had both houses AND the Presidency, I would add. Condi Rice had the memo…
They used to campaign on ‘We’re best for the economy’
And then, well, you know what happened. Personally, my 401k tanked and I’d have to be 93 before I could retire. (President Obama brought it back bigtime.) I’m retired now.
In short, the formerly GOP has lost it’s way. They have NOTHING to offer Average Americans at all. Until they lose these extreme fringe people, they will lose nationally forever. this former Independent is anti-R from here on.

Apr 01, 2014 5:43pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
CMEBARK wrote:

The money they propose for Defense is not for the troops…it’s for weapon systems that their supporters control.

Apr 01, 2014 5:59pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
sabrefencer wrote:

Im for absolutely getting rid of obamacare, before it costs us 2 trillion dollars….but, to cut the monies from protecting the aged , infirm and really poor…is a perfect formula, for not getting elected…Id cut foreign aid to almost nothing…Id recall all our troops in europe and let the Europeans protect themselves with their words….Id study the increase of employees in our federal programs under obama….id look at all our assistance plans, with a fine tooth comb…id make sure, they adhere to stated policies..id look into programs like food stamps,that are so rife with corruption, they are sold allover for pennies on the dollar…yes, ill bet, we can balance the budget, by just making sure we have a properly run govt and not one that is run thru sound bites on TV….

Apr 01, 2014 6:00pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
TheNewWorld wrote:

@SunnyDaySam

Are you getting paid by the DNC. I noticed in one of your rants you mentioned the GOP having the House and Senate and Presidency during the Bush Decade… Obviously Presidents only hold office a maximum of 8 years, and during Bush’s Presidency the GOP held the Senate only 4 years, and the House 6 years. The DNC had 2 years of House, Senate, and Executive control and they too didn’t put forth a budget. The DNC has failed where the GOP has failed too. I wouldn’t wear a cheerleader outfit for either party, but I guess you love your DNC pom poms.

Apr 01, 2014 6:21pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
JamesChirico wrote:

Obamacare repeal costs money according to CBO!

The taxes don’t get paid, therefore Ryan is lying!

His budget does not balance until 2039. Unless draconian cuts to deductions like mortgage interest, business employee benefits, Medicare enrollee payment occur, it is impossible to balance the budget in a decade. We spend more on the military than all discretionary spending combined minus Medicaid/unemployment.

Apr 01, 2014 6:27pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SunnyDaySam wrote:

‘However, his plan contains few specifics about this alternative…’

Because Average Americans will reject it. Just like we rejected the Republican’ts in 2012!

btw; if Ryan had any courage at all, he’d spell it out. He and the GOP Do Not!

Apr 01, 2014 7:07pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SunnyDaySam wrote:

AlkalineState wrote:Fiscally prudent’ increases in defense spending and getting the F-35 cost above the paltry trillion dollars we’ve spent on it. That program needs money :)

oh man, don’t even get me going on the f-35 boondoggle – I’m an aviation guy!

Apr 01, 2014 7:11pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

Here’s the Ryan plan. Cut Social Security and Medicare which are mostly paid for by payroll deductions from the 63% of us who work, increase Defense spending (which is already more than the combined total of the next 20 countries on the list of who spends the most) and give the wealthiest and Corporations (who already have a function tax rate of 12.5%) huge tax cuts. Then almost 1/2 of his savings comes from repealing ACA. Where he gets that number is anyones guess. The CBO certainly doesn’t recognize those costs. Only 4825 thinks this is a good plan….lol

Apr 01, 2014 7:15pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

TheNewWorld…I agree..to a point. The Democrats haven’t put forth a constructive plan to fix anything in decades. Obama’s 2014 Budget would actually increase the debt by $5T more over the next 10 years. But the Republican plan is beyond belief. Jeez…they really need to wear patches like NASCAR that identify their Corporate sponsors. Ever check out Paul Ryan’s voting record during the Bush years. He voted for the highway bill that authorized the “Bridge to Nowhere”. Republicans exploded the budget during the Bush administration. And they’d do it again in a heartbeat. The Democrats in Congress are incompetent. The Republicans are down right evil!

Apr 01, 2014 7:30pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
AlkalineState wrote:

@sabrefencer: “Id study the increase of employees in our federal programs under obama…”

Well, here I’ll get you started on your big study. There isn’t any. Because federal employment has gone DOWN under Obama (not up). That’s a well-known fact, and has been for a while:

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/09/09/816761/flabbergasted-rand-paul-learns-public-employment-decreased-under-obama/

Apr 01, 2014 7:45pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
m_thomas wrote:

To think Ryan is engaging in “class warfare” is an understatement. He is protecting the wealth sector at the expense of Americans from all classes, and merely shifting money spent on safety net programs to the already bloated out-of-control military which, together with the wealth sector, controls this Empire and together believe they control the world.

$5 billion was spent by Washington to put neo-Nazis in control of Ukraine last month and another $1 billion was just approved by almost all of Congress for aiding Ukraine’s Right Sector – Europe’s first fascist government since WWII. But the ultra-right GOP wants to gut the remainder of the safety net that insures security for all Americans.

Ultra-right conservatives and extremists call Obamacare “socialized medicine”. They and Ryan’s approach is best defined as “Nazified medicine”.

Apr 01, 2014 7:51pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
AlkalineState wrote:

Some good graphs and data here relating to private vs. public sector employment in Bush and Obama terms:

http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2013/04/public-and-private-sector-payroll-jobs.html

Apr 01, 2014 7:55pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
GeorgeBMac wrote:

The Ryan Budget:
Take from the poor Americans and give it to the rich ones…

To some, that will actually make sense…

BTW, seniors — he STILL wants to privatize Medicare! Watch Out!

Apr 01, 2014 8:12pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
GeorgeBMac wrote:

The Ryan Budget:
Take from the poor Americans and give it to the rich ones…

To some, that will actually make sense…

BTW, seniors — he STILL wants to privatize Medicare! Watch Out!

Apr 01, 2014 8:12pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
GeorgeBMac wrote:

The Ryan Budget:
Take from the poor Americans and give it to the rich ones…

To some, that will actually make sense…

BTW, seniors — he STILL wants to privatize Medicare! Watch Out!

Apr 01, 2014 8:12pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

AlkalineState..not exactly sure what your point is here. Looking at it from an Independent point of view..the circumstances between the Bush administration and the Obama administration are radically different. Not sure a comparison means much. Start with Bush. During the Clinton years we experienced the largest peace time expansion in our nations history. Though I doubt you can point to anything that Clinton with a Republican Congress did to take credit for it. They were in major gridlock. I think the economy does just fine without federal intervention. Bush inherited an very strong economy and an annual deficit of $18B. The Bush tax breaks didn’t work because of the massive job growth during the Clinton years. Obama inherited an economy in free fall, losing massive amounts of jobs. Again we see gridlock in our government…but by the statistics in the link you provided…most of the lose in public jobs has been at the State and Local level. What specifically has Obama done to earn credit for that? I’m one of those that believes that the less the Federal Government dabbles in our economy (gridlock)..the better off we are. I hold the Clinton and Obama Administrations up as two examples of that.

Apr 01, 2014 8:26pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
gunste wrote:

G W Bush and Cheney caused me to abandon the Republican party in 2002 and reaffirming it in the next few years. The current GOP spoutings and especially Ryan will result in active opposition to the party which seems to exist for the 1% only and is ready to throw the 99% under the bus, economically, health wise and also trying to prevent them from voting. What has America come to? We need a third party of the CENTER.

Apr 01, 2014 9:02pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
geot2 wrote:

Just look at the People’s Budget –

http://cpc.grijalva.house.gov/the-peoples-budget/

’nuff said.

Dem.s – Anybody home?

I know you’ve got the Progressive caucus locked in your cellar. I hope you’re feeding them. But know you’re not.

Apr 01, 2014 9:58pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
carnivalchaos wrote:

4825: “Obama and the Dems seem to be guiding us through a lost decade.”

You’ve finally got something right. Obama and the Democrats are guiding us through a lost decade. After the disastrous Bush Presidency, backed by a Republican Congress, America suffered enormous setbacks. The Iraq War will go down in history as one of the most detrimental blunders that any American President has taken this country into. It will ultimately cost us $3-5 trillion; 4,500 US soldiers dead; 100,000 – 1,000,000 Iraqis dead; America lost credibility on the international stage; Iran has been empowered; al Qaeda now operates in Iraq. And that’s just Bush’s Iraq blunder. His domestic policy was just as disastrous. Bush is the only US President in history to cut taxes while taking the country to war. No one else has ever done that because no other President has been that stupid. And the Republicans backed Bush on it, so they’re just as stupid.

So, yes, the American people wisely chose to change course. They elected Obama to guide us through this wilderness that Bush led us into and guide us to a better tomorrow. Obama and the Democrats have succeeded, without a doubt. We are much, much better off today than we were when Bush left office. We just have to make sure we stay the course and not make the mistake of giving Republicans another opportunity to screw things up.

Ryan’s budget is just another variation of the many budgets he’s come out with before. It’s pure Republicanism. It’s all about helping the wealthy increase their profits at everyone else’s expense. Same old crap. Consider it dead on arrival.

Apr 01, 2014 11:06pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Looter wrote:

When he loses the election this year he will learn Americans are not stupid like he and his Koch brothers patrons think

Apr 01, 2014 12:56am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Bakhtin wrote:

4825 wrote:
“@SunnyDaySam- I am going to let you in on a little secrete that many users on here already know, except maybe Bakhtin. Not doing this to make you look foolish even though I feel certain some folks have had some chuckles at your expense with your paid poster accusations. Here is your secrete, if you attempt to pull up past posts on any user you can do so by clicking their name at the top of the post; with one exception. That exception is that you can not pull up past posts from any user that has numbers without letters.”

When 343434 posts I can see his post history, just like anybody else’s.

Nice try, but you are wrong. Your account is protected because you didn’t open it.

4825 wrote:
“Conservatives are very quick learners.”

This bragging is hilarious… Been there; tested it; found it wrong; way ahead of you.

Apr 02, 2014 1:36am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Bakhtin wrote:

gcf1965
“what a stupid argument. Are you telling me that just because a state that happened to cast more votes for a GOP candidate than a DNC candidate has no democrat voting mooches?”

No, I am not telling you that. Do try to keep up, and stop throwing straw-men all over the place. You make it look as though you have to invent arguments because you can’t handle the real ones.

What I am telling you is that if your assertion that Democrats go on welfare and Republicans don’t were true, the percentage on welfare would have to correlate with the percentage of Democrats in the population. In simple terms, more democrats would have to = more on welfare.

In the real world, the opposite is happening. In red states where a higher percentage hold Republican ideals, proven by their presidential voting record, they have more people on welfare, so your assertion is very obviously wrong.

gcf1965
“Here, try to read and understand this, it will give you a few inconvenient facts that you will no doubt discard.
http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/09/the_myth_of_red_state_welfare.html”

It is very easy to take apart:

Basic mistake number 1: ”To show how mindless this liberal proposition is, the “red state welfare” argument appears to be entirely based only on how each state voted in the most recent presidential election. This results in entirely junk science.”

Complete nonsense. Trying to draw a 2014 conclusion from a situation in 2000 results in junk science. History may be useful as background or context, but a conclusion today has to be based on the data from today, and saying up to date data leads to junk science is so stupid it is hard to believe anybody believes it.

Basic mistake number 2: “Furthermore, it’s equally nonsensical to just consider how a state votes for the president.”

Wrong again. The presidential vote, being national, is the most accurate proxy for dominant ideology as it is not adulterated by local issues.

*****

The author, Sierra Rayne, BTW, is notorious in academia for spending a lot of time ranting in forums about how unfair the peer-review publishing system is, accusing the publishers and editors of corruption – because they don’t publish his work.

Apr 02, 2014 2:10am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Arve wrote:

To be qualified to determine future lives of Americans, these guys should:

1. Repeal their own pensions and lifetime health care (Congress is out of touch with real lives)

2. Then, eliminate the hundreds of billions in annual offshore spending that do not benefit Americans. This would be aid to Asia, Israel, the Middle East, etc, etc, etc

3. Result – budget would be fixed.

Apr 02, 2014 7:01am EDT  --  Report as abuse
notsosmart wrote:

For the past 15 years Florida has been run by Republicans. It had a Republican governor and its’ house and senate was a majority of republicans. That said, the state is in the worst shape of most any state in the nation. You all know the school system is in the bottom three. Wages are amongst the lowest in the nation. There are very few if any major employers in the state. MLB announced the area cannot afford a baseball team. A month ago a study was released indicating Floridians can least afford a new car and at that it can only afford to purchase a vehicle worth less than $15K brand new while the average new vehicle sell for over $30K. The current Republican governor Scott bends over backwards giving subsidies to any business that will move its headquarters to Florida and it don’t have to pay the locals the same wages it paid elsewhere.
My point is, do you really want a Republican controlled Washington after I pointed out how Florida really is today?

Apr 02, 2014 12:37pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
ChilliPalmer wrote:

Mainstream media seemingly only tells part of the story or a skewed version of it. What are the details of the 7 million that have signed up for government subsidized healthcare – Granted there are exceptions to help some people who are in need of temporary subsidy (maybe as part of unemployment insurance) but we don’t really hear from the media about how many of the 7 million are free-loaders. The rest of this story is just politician’s plugging the airwaves with whatever they think will get them elected. How about some real substance?

Apr 02, 2014 1:41pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.