Debt Ceiling Fight: Despite Lamestream Media Propaganda Claims, Sometimes ‘Compromise’ Is NOT A Good Thing

1 Kings 3:16-25

One day two women came to King Solomon, and one of them said: Your Majesty, this woman and I live in the same house. Not long ago my baby was born at home, and three days later her baby was born. Nobody else was there with us. One night while we were all asleep, she rolled over on her baby, and he died. Then while I was still asleep, she got up and took my son out of my bed. She put him in her bed, then she put her dead baby next to me. In the morning when I got up to feed my son, I saw that he was dead. But when I looked at him in the light, I knew he wasn’t my son.

“No!” the other woman shouted. “He was your son. My baby is alive!”

“The dead baby is yours,” the first woman yelled. “Mine is alive!”

They argued back and forth in front of Solomon, until finally he said, “Both of you say this live baby is yours. Someone bring me a sword.” A sword was brought, and Solomon ordered, “Cut the baby in half! That way each of you can have part of him.”

Splitting the baby in half in the name of “compromise” is NOT a good thing, for the record.

Democrats are people who are VERY happy with a dead baby.  The nearly 54 million babies they have killed in the abortion mills ought to be proof enough of that.

You can’t turn on your television or read a newspaper or a magazine without being told that compromise is good, and the Republicans are not compromising enough.

Obama ranted at a recent press conference, “Can the Republicans say yes to anything?”

Well, to quote the idiotic chant of certain famous fool, “Yes, we can!”

Republicans said “yes” to the Ryan Plan.  They also said “yes” to the ONLY plan that actually is in writing and actually passed in either branch of Congress.  Both the Ryan Budget and the cut, cap and balance bill would have averted the debt ceiling crisis that looms in front of us now.  But could the DEMOCRATS say “yes” to anything?  Not only did they say “no” to the Ryan budget, but they actually refused to say anything at all regarding the cut, cap and balance plan as Harry Reid tabled it without allowing a vote.  Harry Reid shut down debate and refused to allow the House-passed plan to come up for a vote because he doesn’t want the Democrats to have to go on record rejecting a balanced budget amendment – which would prove that whenever a Democrat talks about balancing the budget or actually cutting spending they are LYING.

Reid also demonized the cut, cap and balanced bill as “the worst legislation in the history of this country.”  Because he must have been all FOR the Democrat-passed Fugitive Slave Act.

And of course, you find out that Democrats couldn’t even say yes to the Obama budget, which would have increased the debt by $12 TRILLION and which failed in the Democrat-controlled Senate 97-0.  And that was an abject disgrace and proves as much as anything what a completely failed leader Obama truly is.

So it’s demagogic and dishonest to say that the Republcans somehow can’t say yes to anything, or even to suggest that the Democrats can.  For the record, the Democrats have produced NO plan; they have utterly FAILED to lead.  So they frankly have nothing to say “yes” to to begin with.

Barack Obama and the Democrats are despicable liars and demagogues.  Unfortuntely, the American people are becoming the sort of bad people who believe lies.

If the country were at some 50-50 balance between liberalism and conservatism, maybe one would be justified in calling for “compromise” with Democrats now.  But thanks to Obama, it simply isn’t.  We’ve veered wildly to the left, and so at this point when were more like 70-30 liberal, “compromise” just means status quo Obama liberalism.  No thanks.

After the 2008 election, Republicans came hat in hand seeking compromise with newly crowned King Obama.  But King Obama said unto them:

“Elections have consequences, and at the end of the day, I won.”

It’s kind of funny now that – after a historic ASSKICKING of Democrats by Republicans in 2010, suddenly Republicans are supposed to “compromise” with the Democrats who ran roughshod over them for the preceding two years of libery tyranny.

Is it a good thing to compromise, the way the media keeps framing this issue?

Keep in mind, the Republicans won a landslide victory in November 2010 after Democrats utterly refused to do anything to cut their reckless and radical spending.  They didn’t “compromise”; they were dragged to this point by the most massive political defeat in more than 70 years.  To try to claim that Democrats are “compromising” now is rather like claiming that Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan graciously decided to “compromise” after World War II.  They got their asses kicked over their ears, and the rest is just reality, not “compromise.”

And the Republicans ALREADY HAVE compromised.  Keep in mind the do NOT want to raise the debt ceiling; rather, they want to cut spending NOW (and if we WERE to cut spending now, we wouldn’t NEED to increase the debt ceiling).  The Republicans are willing to raise the debt ceiling; they are NOT willing to go back on promises they ran on and won on and increase taxes.

Also keep in mind that Democrats have also ALREADY RAISED TAXES BY $500 BILLION (i.e. half a TRILLION dollars).

Why on earth should “compromise” mean that they should agree to raise taxes again?  Particularly when Democrats have produced ZERO plans to cut spending and are essentially saying “Trust us not to screw you like we did the last three times we told you to trust us on cutting spending.”

Republican Speaker of the House John Boehner apparently actually had an agreement in principle with Obama to raise taxes by yet ANOTHER $800 billion on top of the $500 billion ObamaCare tax hike.  But almost immediately thereafter Obama welched on his own deal, demanding an extra $400 billion.

The New York Times – falsely and demagogically characterizing the Republicans as “The Party That Can’t Say Yes” (That already demonstrated to be an outright dishonest lie above) said of this reneged-upon deal:

“So, on the eve of economic calamity, the Republicans killed an overly generous deal largely over a paltry $400 billion in deductions.”

A paltry $400 billion.”  Only liberals could be so stupid and so utterly depraved.  This is proof-positive that hundreds of billions of dollars mean absolutely nothing to these people.  They are recklessly irresponsible fools before this country collapses never to rise again.

If the New York Times was honest (they are not, of course – which explains why they are virtually bankrupt), then they would be pushing Obama to agree to accepting $400 billion LESS in revenues.  After all, it’s only “a paltry $400 billion,” right???  These people live in a realm of dishonest lunacy.

Is compromise a good thing?

How about this for a compromise.  Suppose we propose to eradicate the 72 million registered Democrats in the United States.  Get out that great big giant can of RAID and just wipe out all these cockroaches.  Well, the “reasonable” thing to do according to liberals would be to compromise.  So obviously on this principle Democrats would be all for a plan to eradicate 36 million Democrats; because that would be going halfway, after all.

Obama and the Democrats have repeatedly cited “corporate jets” in their recent demagoguery and demonization.  This is EXACTLY parallel to the fiasco of the “luxury tax” that annihilated the yacht construction and maintenance industries in the early 1990s:

The general thinking is that the rich can afford it, and an extra 10 percent tax isn’t going to stop the fat cats from indulging in their toys. What most people don’t realize is that those able to buy a new boat also have the ability to decide not to buy. And that is what they have done.

Since the luxury tax came into effect last Sept. 30 for newly ordered boats, nobody has bought a new boat on which the tax would apply! The National Marine Manufacturers’ Association, the industry association that tracks such things, can’t find a single sale in the whole country! Not one! However, the association has been able to document in excess of 100,000 layoffs (blue-collar workers — not fat cats) and numerous boat manufacturers going out of business. All during which not a single dollar of luxury tax has been collected.

A more detailed article on the 1990 tax and how it is remarkably similar to what Obama and Democrats are now proposing is available here.

It is the same failed fools with the same failed Marxist class hatred mindset.  The Democrats rescinded that tax in 1992 – but not until they destroyed more than a 100,000 jobs.  Their policy was based on Marxism and hate.  And it failed then just like it will fail now.

EVERY SINGLE TIME we have cut income tax rates we have INCREASED REVENUE.  And EVERY SINGLE TIME we have increased income tax rates we have DECREASED REVENUE.  What history proves is that when we increase the income tax rates “on the rich,” the rich respond by sheltering their money as they are forced to massively cut back on their job-creating investments by protecting themselves.  And what invariably happens is that the percentage of tax revenues paid by “the rich” dwindle while the percentage of tax revenues paid by the poor (in the form of excise taxes) increase.  This is a documented fact going back to the days of FDR:

Do you see what happened?  FDR kept raising income tax rates on “the rich” and demanding they pay more; but revenues from income taxes fell from 38% of revenue to only 24% of revenue (and corporate tax revenues fell from 43% to 29%) , while revenue from excise taxes borne mainly by the poor (e.g., liquor taxes, cigareete taxes) skyrocketed from 19% of total revenues collected to 47% of total revenues collected.

This is what happens in actual FACT.

If that isn’t enough, even OBAMA acknowledged that it would be stupid to raise taxes in a recession:

…In August 2009, on a visit to Elkhart, Indiana to tout his stimulus plan, Obama sat down for an interview with NBC’s Chuck Todd, and was conveyed a simple request from Elkhart resident Scott Ferguson: “Explain how raising taxes on anyone during a deep recession is going to help with the economy.”

Obama agreed with Ferguson’s premise – raising taxes in a recession is a bad idea. “First of all, he’s right. Normally, you don’t raise taxes in a recession, which is why we haven’t and why we’ve instead cut taxes. So I guess what I’d say to Scott is – his economics are right. You don’t raise taxes in a recession. We haven’t raised taxes in a recession.”

Our economy is still in terrible, terrible shape.  79% of Americans say we are still in a recession.  And to quote Obama, “you don’t raise taxes in a recession.”

So how about if I listen to Barack Obama and argue that raising taxes would be an utterly TERRIBLE “compromise” to make.

Advertisements

Tags: , , , , , , ,

6 Responses to “Debt Ceiling Fight: Despite Lamestream Media Propaganda Claims, Sometimes ‘Compromise’ Is NOT A Good Thing”

  1. HL Says:

    I’ve been thinking that if 50 Americans, who have lived their lives as fiscal conservatives aka living within ones means, were put in charge of cutting spending, serious cuts could be made in days. Not weeks, months or over ten years.
    We could cut the almost 1 BILLION dollars we are sending over seas to repair Mosques in Egypt and elsewhere. This is just one example of wasting our money that I read today.
    It is sickening and immoral how this administration is spending money WE DON’T HAVE!!!

  2. A Jew Says:

    As a kid, I believed basically whatever the media said. I’m sure that can be said for most people. As I’ve grown, the discrepancies between what the media said, and what was happening started piling up. Now, I see how blinded we are. It’s nice to see some people aren’t sheep. The same media that presents Jews in a bad way, also demonize good working politicians. It’s a real sad world we live in, and that our children will live in. Obama needs to get kicked out of the white house NO ONE likes him.
    You’re so right when you say that the Dems. can’t get a plan drafted. I don’t know if I fully agree with Cut, cap, balance…but I would have liked to see if the Senate would at least debate/amend it and put it on Obama’s desk. That way instead of Reid kicking it to the sidelines, titles would read Obama says F U to Americans (Technically). I can say I knew we should’ve never voted for this guy, but I never thought he’d be THIS BAD. Anyways, hopefully we can stop this.

  3. Michael Eden Says:

    A Jew,

    I actually DID know he’d be this bad.

    When I saw the Jeremiah Wright sermon revelations – which clearly revealed a Marxist-based “church” that was anti-Israel, anti-American and racist besides, with the “No, no, no. Not God bless America. God DAMN America” – I knew Obama was a genuinely evil man. I had a vision, you could definitely say.

    The thing about “progressives” is they “progressively” become more and more despicable and wicked the more power they amass for themselves. Take Hitler and Auschwitz: he didn’t start that stuff immediately in 1933; he wormed his way to it. It was “progressive” (again to put it in terms of liberals’ favorite word).
    And in the same way, if a Hitler or a Stalin came to power in the USA, it wouldn’t be like an “Iron Curtain” immediately descending over America; they would be as radically leftist and evil as they could be within the system, and they would keep pushing and pushing to gain more power and impose more of their agenda.

    As an evangelical (and I don’t even mind the label “fundamentalist”) Christian, I love and pray for the Jews and pray for the peace of Jerusalem (Psalm 122:6). I believe the Jews were and are God’s chosen race of people, through whom He revealed Himself, through whom He prophesied, and through whom Messiah came. And the same Book that makes me believe those things also causes me to believe that God is most certainly NOT done with the Jews or with Israel – and that Jerusalem continues to be the spiritual epicenter of planet earth. I believe that as a Christian and because I am a Christian.

    As an American, I also understand that Israel is a tremendous friend to the USA. Apart from England, Israel is OUR VERY BEST FRIEND IN THE WORLD. And having a stable Israel in the Mediterranean saves us from having to maintain a massive Navy presence in the region to protect vital US interests (such as oil and such as the Suez Canal and the Strait of Hormuz). Most people don’t realize our aid to Israel is a relatively cheap investment considering what we would have to spend if Israel were not watching our back.

    What the Dems are doing is playing demagogic chicken with this crisis. They haven’t bothered to come up with their own plan (until possibly today with Reid, but it STILL consists of a bunch of vague promises rather than any kind of specific proposals or figures) because they waited for Republians to lead, planning to attack them the moment they did. Meanwhile, Obama doesn’t WANT to solve this crisis; he wants to create a HUGE disaster and then try to blame the Republicans. Why? Because he’s completely failed; he’s got NOTHING to run on. His ONLY hope is to blame somebody else. So if we get our credit rating lowered, he wants to say, “This is Bush’s fault!” It’s an abject disgrace.

    One last thing: Bush saw the threat of Iran and tried to warn the world – but DEMOCRATS DEMONIZED HIM FOR IT:

    THE NATION – Democrats rip Bush’s Iran policy – Presidential candidates say a new intelligence report shows that the administration has been talking too tough.
    By Scott Martelle and Robin Abcarian
    December 05, 2007

    Democratic presidential candidates teamed up during a National Public Radio debate here Tuesday to blast the Bush administration over its policy toward Iran, arguing that a new intelligence assessment proves that the administration has needlessly ratcheted up military rhetoric.

    While the candidates differed somewhat over the level of threat Iran poses in the Mideast, most of them sought to liken the administration’s approach to Iran with its buildup to the war in Iraq.

    “I vehemently disagree with the president that nothing’s changed and therefore nothing in American policy has to change,” said New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton. “We do know that pressure on Iran does have an effect. I think that is an important lesson.”

    Delaware Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr., chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said the new intelligence report indicated that Iran dropped its program before international pressure came into play.

    “It was like watching a rerun of his statements on Iraq five years earlier,” Biden said. “Iran is not a nuclear threat to the United States of America. Iran should be dealt with directly, with the rest of the world at our side. But we’ve made it more difficult now, because who is going to trust us?”

    The debate was aired without a studio audience over NPR, live from the Iowa State Historical Museum. It covered Iran, China and immigration, offering the contenders a chance to delve more deeply into subjects that often receive less detailed debate treatment.

    Clinton and Biden were joined by Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards, Connecticut Sen. Christopher J. Dodd, Ohio Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich, and former Alaska Sen. Mike Gravel.

    New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson missed the debate to attend the funeral of Cpl. Clem Robert Boody in Independence, Iowa. Boody was a Korean War soldier whose remains Richardson had helped retrieve from North Korea earlier this year.

    The National Intelligence Assessment report on Iran, released Monday, was the focus of the first third of the two-hour debate.

    The assessment concluded that Iran halted its nuclear program in 2003 largely because of international pressure — reversing a conclusion made two years ago that the nation was aggressively pursuing nuclear weapons.

    Like most everything else he disagreed with Democrats on, BUSH WAS RIGHT.

    A nuclear armed Iran is utterly unacceptable to anyone who doesn’t want to see Armageddon. And a vote for Obama all but guaranteed that Armageddon.

  4. Michael Eden Says:

    HL,

    You’re right.

    We wouldn’t have to raise the debt ceiling if we seriously cut spending RIGHT NOW TODAY.

  5. hislily77@yahoo.com Says:

    Here is the clip about the insane spending going on in the Obama administration. We are literally giving millions of dollars to those who are determined to destroy us.

    http://nicedeb.wordpress.com/2011/07/27/us-tax-dollars-funding-cairo-mosque-makeovers/#comment-51760

  6. Michael Eden Says:

    hislily,

    We should give them money to sharpen their knives so it will be easier to cut our throats.

    Liberalism is cultural suicide.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: