Obama Urges Spending Curbs for Somebody, But Not Him

Associated Press headline, “Obama urges spending curbs, hands out $15 billion.”

After not quite a month in office, I’ve begun to change my opinion on the President. I thought at first he was a useful idiot, a tool of the powerful Democrat Spending Machine.

I no longer think he’s useful, and “idiot” may be too high a compliment.

“If we confront this crisis without also confronting the deficits that helped cause it we risk sinking into another crisis down the road,” the president warned. “We cannot simply spend as we please and defer the consequences to the next budget, the next administration or the next generation.”

It’s barely a week since Obama disregarded calls to trim the so-called Stimulus Package, the Porkulus Bill. Billions of dollars of non-stimulus spending items went into that bill, then Obama followed up with another $250 billion or so for the mortgage industry.

Obama has spent more money in 30 days than any President in history. I would not be surprised to find he spent more than all previous Presidents combined.

And he has the gall to say we have to get spending under control? Does he even have a clue what he’s doing? First he says we must spend for the good of our economy, then he says we need to stop spending for the good of the economy.

What the heck is he doing? He’s not just saying an doing two different things – he’s actually saying to different things at the same time.

I see today he’s also pledged $900 million to rebuild Gaza. Didn’t we also sell Israel the weaponry to destroy Gaza to halt terrorist attacks? When the Palestinians re-attack Israel, will we also help rebuild Jewish settlements? Where did Obama suddenly get this $900 million?

Next up, nationalized banks, nationalized healthcare, a few more trillion dollars in spending, followed by another call for fiscal responsibility?

What got us into this mess was government intervention pressuring banks into lending to people who couldn’t pay their loans back and individual and corporate greed and a attitude of immediate gratification and a complete disregard for the debt our grandchildren will inherit. And somehow, the fix for this mess is to pressure banks into lending to people who can’t pay their loans back and individual and corporate greed and a attitude of immediate gratification and a complete disregard for the debt our grandchildren will inherit. Are these people nuts?

No wonder there’s a movement afoot for a Chicago Tea Party. We’re taking money away from the grandchildren in red states and giving it to inept governments in blue states. And now Obama says those same grandchildren better get their spending under control. It’s worse than Orweillian. It’s obtuse and deranged. It’s destructive.

Please stop helping, Mr. President, before we become a third world country.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
Advertisements

7 thoughts on “Obama Urges Spending Curbs for Somebody, But Not Him

  1. Tea Party – a coalition of citizens and organizations concerned about the recent trend of fiscal recklessness in government…dedicated to the Washington, D.C. effort specifically sponsored by the American Spectator, the Heartland InstituChasing the Wind #187; Obama Urges Spending Curbs for Somebody, But Not Him

    Like

  2. If you want to limit power, limit money. Always FOLLOW THE MONEY! Tell me what you think of my idea to take the country back:

    Dear Conservative Friend and Fellow Citizen,

    I hate the IRS for many reasons, not the least of which is that each INDIVIDUAL American is at the mercy of the federal government as well as the states. What if the tables were turned?

    I would like to see a system in which the federal government got its funding from the states, then the states got their funding from its citizens. Therefore, the citizens would have a layer of protection (the state) between his checkbook and the long arm of Uncle Sam.

    The states, then, would dictate how much money the federal government would receive, limiting central government power (hoo rah!) The amount owed by each state would be based on the census. Therefore, states like California who have allowed illegal immigration for political purposes would have to die by the same sword and owe more money as a result of their political policy.

    Think about it: how can it be that the federal government has SO MUCH MONEY that they can send money back to the states? It almost smacks of money laundering. If the feds did not an almost unlimited ability to tax, they would not have the ability to return money that they should not have taken in the first place. We could shrink the federal government and strip Congress of a LOT of power. We definitely need that now with the corruption at levels you would not believe if someone had written it into a novel.

    The Fair Tax is better than the current IRS, but I would like to see it taken a step further, and thus my proposal. If you think this idea has merit, please post it on your web site, blog about it, propose it to your elected officials.

    Devon Young
    “Audacity of Common Sense”
    “We ARE Sarah Palin”
    http://www.AudacityOfCommonSense.com

    Like

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s