If a $100 Billion Cut in Spending is "Draconian," How Would You Describe a $TRILLION Spending Bill?

Big spending Dems to continue false attacks on fiscal hawks. Nothing new about that!

Not so long ago a bill coming from Congress costing billions was reason for concern among those who take fiscal responsibility seriously. In the first two years of the Obama-Reid-Pelosi triumvirate trillion became the new billion. Even then there seemed little concern for spending. No longer did anyone balk at tossing in another twenty, fifty or one hundred billion into a spending bill which totaled around a trillion dollars. Obama's stimulus, health care and agency budgets drove the budgetary red ink through the ceiling resulting in the most massive peacetime deficits in the nation's history.

Now that the horse has bolted, Obama wants to close the barn door. In his Weekly Radio Address he described the budget he will introduce on Monday as one that will address the problem of rising deficits. "After a decade of rising deficits, this budget asks Washington to live within its means," he said. He went on to describe a five year spending freeze that he expects will cut the deficit by $400 billion over ten years and total savings of over one trillion.

Of course freezing spending at the stratospherically high levels set by Obama and the Dems in the last two years seems an odd way of establishing financial discipline.

Why No Dems Decrying Obama's "Draconian" Cuts?
Even cuts of $100 billion per year isn't much considering the size of the deficit expected to be $1.5 TRILLION this year. But that's Obama's starting point. It's also the GOP starting point. After an initially timid request to cut only $74 billion, House Republicans stiffened their spines and came back with a plan to cut $100 billion as they had promised during last fall's campaign.

House GOP leaders also revealed a plan to cut $32 billion from spending for this year. Senate Dem leader Harry Reid responded with the usual canned outrage calling the proposed cuts "draconian." If $32 billion is draconian, what about Obama's proposed reductions?

Why no outrage from Reid over Obama's cuts? Because Reid knows they are unlikely to happen. Obama will TALK about fiscal responsibility while giving a wink and a nod to Democrats in congress as they continue spending like there is no tomorrow.

Reid's attacks on Republicans are nothing more than the usual scare politics Democrats have employed for decades to derail any real fiscal discipline in Washington. Any day we can expect the standard parade of victims brought to Capitol Hill to tell us why the massive double digit increases in agency budgets over the last two years are all that keeps a poor family from starving.

Some Perspective

As this repeat with the usual suspects plays out remember that other members of your family and associates may be less well informed and more susceptible to the parade of victims than you are. You'll need to counter the scaremongering coming from Democrats with easily understood information. The following video makes a great presentation to help in that cause:




And if that doesn't do the trick, show your friends, family and associates the information about public school employees in Illinois cashing it in with huge pensions. All at taxpayer expense. It's likely that the same thing is happening in your state.

The bottom line is that there is plenty that can and should be cut from government spending. One hundred billion is a drop in the bucket and certainly not enough. Those who suggest cuts of that size are "draconian" should be laughed off the stage!