The Honesty Deficit

The President has won his tax rate hikes on the Needlessly Rich, so now in the second round of deficit-reduction he turns to...additional tax increases on the Needlessly Rich.

Why no budget-cutting? In a recent interview, President explains: "...if you look at my track record over the last two years, I cut spending by over a trillion dollars in 2011."

Really? Let's take a look at the numbers, courtesy of the President's own 2013 budget proposal. Here is the record of federal spending, from 2009 (the last Bush budget) through 2012. In parentheses are the increases over the previous year. In brackets are the changes to the Consumer Price Indices relative to the previous year:

• 2009    $3.518T
• 2010    $3.456T (-1.8%) {1.6%}
• 2011    $3.603T (4.2%)  {3.2%}
• 2012    $3.795T (5.3%)  {2.4%}

Note that Obama's proposed budgets for 2010-2012 were $3.552T, $3.834T, and $3.729T, respectively. Unless the President had in mind an even larger increase for 2011, no such cut can be found. The only year-over-year reduction in spending occurred in 2010; this was caused by the end of TARP. Also note that although his proposed 2012 budget was $105B smaller than his 2011 proposal, what was ultimately enacted in 2011 and 2012 were increasing bigger budgets. Federal spending has increased for the last two years, at a rate greater than inflation as measured by the CPI.

Apologists Defenders of the President (e.g. Jared Bernstein) claim that analyses like that depicted above are overly simplistic: "personal finances and government finances are different". How, pray tell? Isn't what really matters is how much you ultimately spend, not what you fantasized spending only to settle for not-so-much more?

The White House is implanting the "already a trillion dollars cut" lie-meme throughout the media now, and every Presidential Parrot repeats it.

This is a moment in history when one needs to dispense with pleasantries to underscore the gravity of the issue and the inadequacy of the leadership: Mr. Obama, you did not cut a trillion dollars from future budgets. Stop spreading this lie, get serious about reducing spending and reforming entitlements. Grow up, sir.

A Time for Choosing.

John Fund pens an excellent column in WSJ Opinion about the disastrous consequences of the Congressional Culture of Corruption on the GOP. Were not Republicans sent to Washington to behave unlike Democrats?

End the Enabling.

We at Deaddrifts recieved a weekend solicitation phone call from the RNC. After explaining to the "salesman" that we would be confining our political contributions to Misters McCain and Walberg (our Congerscritter) directly, the salesman attempted to persuade us otherwise. We were not amused.

The RNC must accept the fact that it had, expressed in the idiom of test pilots, "screwed the pooch" in the last seven years. Not in the manner in which the Left shrieks, but in dismantling an exciting movement of conservative ideas and philosophy of governance for forty pieces of silver and the incessant pursuit of ever-increasing political power. They have, we are sad to say, met the enemy, and they is them (hat tip to Walt Kelly).

One of our principal complaints is the noxious triad of expanding government, drunken-sailor spending, and the inevitable corruption that accompanies it. Tonight Fox News presented "Porked: Earmarks for Profit", and highlighted the shenanigans of several Republican congerscritters in adding earmarks to spending bills that ended in personal profit for the pols, including former Speaker of the House Dennis ("Mr. Permanent Minority") Hastert and California Representative Ken Calvert. Fox also discussed how the current House Republican standard-bearer, Mr. Boehner, squashed the appointment of Jeff Flake, the Arizona Republican and sworn enemy of earmarking, to the House Appropriations Committee. The reason given that Boehner gave to Flake was, well the obvious: it would put the pigs off their feed.

A Meaningless Gesture.

Obamism has declared that the DNC shall no longer eat from the Tree of the Lobbyist. Well, not quite: from the AP story:

Obama's ban on lobbyists money is not ironclad. He does accept money from lobbyists who do not do business with the federal government and he also accepts money from spouses and family members of lobbyists. He has had unpaid advisers with federal lobbying clients, and some campaign officials also previously had lobbying jobs.

The new fundraising policy is not expected to hurt the party's fundraising ability because lobbyists and PACs do not constitute a major source of money.

In other words, the proclamation means nothing. Nor will he accept contributions from Tralfamadorians.

Government, the Market-Wrecker.

We've discussed how Uncle Sugar Daddy's "Ethanol Initiative" has caused chaos in the grain markets while providing no competitive relief to increasing gasoline prices. The current Farm Bill is an even larger example of the catastrophic results when the government manipulates markets. The New York Times analyzes the current bill, and the inescapable conclusion is that once Government starts handing money out in subsidies (in this case cash payments to farmers), it becomes permanent, regardless of market conditions. Iowa Senator Tom Harkin, the champion of the continued payouts to the farmers, admits that the political pressure to continue the handouts is insurmountable, while fact that grain prices are at record highs now appears to be irrelevant.

Big Oil on the Hill.

The nation's oil companies are being summoned by the Congerscritters to explain why the shareholders (read you and me) should keep their risk rewards, and why the Gummint shouldn't shake them down for a lot of it. Congers could put it to such productive use; for example, another $200B+ farm bill.

A Prince of Earmark.

Michigan's very own Senator Carl Levin...Yowzers!

Presidential Pork Politics.

The Seattle Times reviews the candidates on earmarks: McCain against, Clinton for, Obama for and against.

Come 'an Git It!

Uncle Sugar Daddy has backed the truck up and is tossing the hams out on the curb. The Old Folks might get hams, too. Our Gummint knows no bounds in its generosity; just send the bill to the kids.

Hillary's Christmas Message.




She is the bringer of all good things to all creatures who voteth!

Just in Time for Christmas...

The NYT reports on the plentitude of pork products procured by the Congerscritters. Featured is bacon-bringing champ Senator Richard Durbin of Illinois.

Some Pork in Every Pot, and Vice Versa.

Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) has successfully spearheaded an effort to divert a million-dollar earmark that was to be directed to the Woodstock Hippie Museum, aka the Museum at Bethel Woods. The Hippie Museum's champion is billionaire Alan Gerry, who coincidentally has been giving dough to Hillary Clinton's presidential bid and Chuck Schumer's Senate campaign program - and who both earmarked the million for the museum. Of course, this time it's different. Quoth Hillary: ''[the museum will] continue to promote education, the arts, culture and tourism in the region.''

If this museum is such a great idea, why can't the private sector, i.e., Mr. Gerry, cut the check? If you believe in the need for federal support for the Woodstock Hippie Museum, then you'll salivate over NY Representative Charles Rangel's Charles Rangel Center for Public Service at City College of NY, a trifling two-million dollar earmark.