Just Another Obama Lie Which He Hopes Will Cause Republicans to Cave on Sequestration

February 27, 2013 in Uncategorized

Barack Hussein Obama invented Sequestration

Obama LaughingNow it looks like Obama and his Thugs miscalculated on Sequestration. They have been using the imminent implementation of Sequestration to conspire with their media minions  in attempting to coerce the Republicans to once again cave to  Community organizer’s wicked lying  propaganda rants that have increased in volume and intensity as we approach the February 1st implementation.

The Republicans didn’t cave immediately and thereby created  a potentially disastrous political dilemma for Our Dear Leader. His political cohorts are telling him that if Sequestration becomes effective and the sky doesn’t fall, Barack will have a sever credibly problem, even among his loyal supporters.

If you take a look at the GDP math below that shows about a half cent hit for every non sequestrated GDP dollar, or even if you don’t, there is only one unquestionable conclusion that becomes evident.

Obama’s rants on Sequestration are a contrived comedy about  “Much A do about Nothing ”

That’s Right! There is no appreciable affect on our economy, even if he jawbone’s Ben Bernake  into saying so!

Call Your Senators and Representatives and tell them to let Sequestration to go into affect so that we can bring our $16.6T ever increasing Debt Crisis under control!

Analyses of Sequestration Affect on 2013 GDP:

The size of a nation’s economy is the total value of the spending on goods and services in the nation in a year. This spending occurs in the form of transactions within and between these three sectors. The flip side of this spending is production, because you can buy only what has been produced. So we can also measure an economy based on its production. Therefore, when you add up all of these transactions—and the value of foreign trade—the result is gross domestic product, or GDP. The formula for GDP is:

GDP = C + I + G + (Ex – Im)

where “C” equals spending by consumers,
“I” equals investment by businesses,
“G” equals government spending and
“(Ex – Im)” equals net exports, that is, the value of exports minus imports. Net exports may be negative.

According to Infoplease the  composition of GDP breaks down roughly as follows:

Consumption:   65%

Investment:       15%

Government:     20%

Net Exports:     0.0%

The CBO Projection for 2013 GDP is $16.198Trillion

2013 without Sequestration

C = $16.198T X .65 =10.5287 Trillion

G = $16.198T X .2 = $3.2396 Trillion

I =  $16.198T  X .15 =$2.4297 Trillion

2013 with Sequestration  

Assumes that the only variable is the $85B removed from  G, the Government Budget Contribution  while  C, I  remain constant

$16.198T – .085T =$16.113 T

C = $10.5287 Trillion

G = $3.2396T- .$085T = $ 3.1546 Trillion

I =  $2.4297 Trillion

What is the affect of Sequestration on GDP?

(Sequestration GDP  divided by Non-Sequestration GDP   minus 1) x 100 = Percent

($16.113T/ $16.198T) -1  = 0.0099 = .99% or about 1%

The $85B in Sequestration would reduce GDP by 1-cent for  every dollar of a  Non Sequestration GDP.

 

Since one-half of the $85T in Sequestration is slated for FY 2014, Sequestration will reduce the  FY 2013 Sequestration GDP  by about one-half a penny  for every  Non Sequestration dollar.

[subscribe2]

Barack Obama’ war on America; Criminal Illegal Aliens Being Released Into Our Communities

February 27, 2013 in Uncategorized

Barack Obama’ war on America

Posted by  Judson Phillips  on February 27, 2013 at 6:22am in Tea Party Nation Forum

Criminal ReleaseBarack Obama and the Party of Treason hate America.   It is no longer a policy difference.  With Obama and the far-left shills for the Democrats, it has never been about policy.   They do not want to debate issues and let the best idea win.  They want to defeat anyone who disagrees with them at all costs.

Now the Obama Regime is showing its total contempt and hatred for those who disagree with it.

How are they doing this?

In advance of the Budget Sequestration that is set to start on March 1st, the Obama Regime is releasing illegal aliens into American communities.

The sequestration has not even hit yet and the Obama Regime is trying to hurt Americans

The illegal aliens being released are not simply illegal aliens, but these are criminal illegal aliens.    These are illegal aliens who have been charged or convicted of criminal offenses.  Usually it is more than one.

Instead of deporting these criminal aliens, the Department of Homeland Security is literally turning them out of the prisons.    Where is most of this happening?

Arizona.

That is no accident.

Arizona is a red state.  Arizona dared to defy Barack Obama and even took him to the Supreme Court and won.

Over the weekend, in Pinal County, Arizona, DHS released hundreds of criminal illegal aliens.  They did not even notify the local sheriff they were releasing these criminals.

The Obama Regime claims they must do this because of the upcoming budget sequester.

The sequester is not causing the release but the Obama Regime is desperate to create a crisis.

Why?

What happens if the modest 2% cut in spending goes through?

Probably nothing.  Most Americans will not see any change.

That is the great fear of the Obama Regime.

If the world does not end with this modest spending cut, then the Republicans and the American people will start asking, what else can we cut.  Where else can we cut?

For Barack Obama who is determined to bankrupt America before the end of his second term, this is unacceptable.

So Barack Obama is releasing criminal illegal aliens onto the streets of at least one red state.

How many people will die because Obama is releasing criminal illegal aliens?  How many people will be injured?   How many crimes will be committed?

Obama doesn’t care.  Arizona is a red state.

He doesn’t care because for Obama, the ends justify the means.   Obama does not care that he took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution because the Constitution means nothing to him.    Obama does not care because he hates America and Americans.

Instead of being responsible, Barack Obama is trying to make the spending cuts as painful as possible.  Instead of stopping a few of those crony grants to “green energy” projects, he is keeping the Navy tied up in port.  Instead of cutting advertising to promote food stamps, he is releasing criminals on the streets to rampage and make the people of America pay for daring to elect Republicans to try and stop him.

Barack Obama is hell bent on destroying America.  Americans will die because of his desire to punish those who disagree with him.

The question is will the Republicans in Washington ever stand up to him?

 

Read more at: http://www.teapartynation.com/forum/topics/barack-obama-s-war-on-america

[subscribe2]

Is US Concealed Carry in Jeopardy?

February 25, 2013 in Uncategorized

siSigners“The people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full possession of them.”
— Zacharia Johnson, delegate to Virginia Ratifying Convention

John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton and  Zacharia Johnson would be surprised and amazed by the shenanigans being perpetrated against our 2nd Amendment Rights.

The following is extracted from Wikipedia:

Prior to the 1897 supreme court case Robertson v. Baldwin, the federal courts had been silent on the issue of concealed carry. In the dicta from a maritime law case the Supreme Court commented that state laws restricting concealed weapons do not infringe upon the right to bear arms protected by the Federal Second Amendment.[58]

In the majority decision in the 2008 Supreme Court case of District of Columbia v. Heller, Justice Antonin Scalia wrote;

“Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues … The majority of the 19th-century courts to consider the question held that prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons were lawful under the Second Amendment or state analogues.”[59]

Heller was a landmark case because for the first time in United States history a Supreme Court decision defined the right to bear arms as constitutionally guaranteed to private citizens rather than a right restricted to “well regulated militia[s]”. The Justices asserted that sensible restrictions on the right to bear arms are constitutional however an outright ban on a specific type of firearm, in this case handguns, was in fact unconstitutional. The decision is limited because it only applies to federal enclaves such as the District of Columbia.

On June 28, 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the handgun ban enacted by the city of Chicago, Illinois, in McDonald v. Chicago, effectively extending the Heller decision to states and local governments nationwide.[60] Banning handguns in any jurisdiction has the effect of rendering invalid any licensed individual’s right to carry concealed in that area except for federally exempted retired and current law enforcement officers and other government employees acting in the discharge of their official duties.

In a sweeping ruling on a Colorado case, the Tenth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decreed that there is no Second Amendment right to carry a concealed firearm in public. The broad wording of the decision in Peterson v. Martinez creates a far-reaching national precedent against carrying a loaded handgun outside the home.

consequently, one can be fairly certain that this case will make its way to the Supreme court. A court that in 2008 created the legal fiat that “Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited.”

Should we be worried about a Supreme Court Decision? You betcha!

Remember what happened with ObamaCare! We can’t always trust the courts anymore because they have been packed with incompetent, unprincipled ideologues that can be easily manipulated  When the Progressives can’t get their way with legislation, they use the courts to bypass the will of the people.

If Barack Hussein Obama has the opportunity to choose a Supreme Court Justice before this case is heard, our Second Amendment Rights will be in serious jeopardy!

 

 

 

 

 

If Sequestration is Repealed, Will America Become the Next Weimar Republic?

February 24, 2013 in Uncategorized

hyperinflation1The Weimar Republic is the name given to the federal republic and parliamentary representative democracy established in 1919 in Germany to replace its pre-WWI imperial form of government. It was named after Weimar, the city where the constitutional assembly took place. The Weimar‘s Constitution was signed on August 11, 1919 and was deposed by Hitler’s Third Reich ascendency in February/March 1933. During its fourteen year existence the Weimar Republic was burdened by hefty reparations imposed by the victors of WWI, political extremist from both the Left and Right as well as rampant hyperinflation that permitted Hitler to seize power  and dissolve the Constitution.  The caption below the above photo of a one Hundred Million Mark note[A mark was equivalent to our $1-dollar bill] reads:  In 1923, a German housewife burned mark notes in her kitchen stove since it was cheaper to burn marks than to buy firewood.

 

 

weimar-wheelbarrow-1-loaf-breadThe vision most vividly embedded into the minds of  school children studying the era is one of a wheelbarrow filled with thousands or millions of marks  to purchase a single loaf of bread! The photo at left taken during this period, depicts that scenario.

When Barack Hussein Obama came into office, our FY2009  Budget stood at $3.1Trillion. Today the FY2013 Budget is at $3.8Trillion. Sequestration, which is a program devised by President Obama, cuts $85B across-the-board from THE RATE OF INCREASE of theFY2012 budge of 3.72Trillion. It DOES NOT DECREASE  the FY2013 total budget amount from that of FY2012. Of the phantom $85B in cuts, half isslated to be  removed from Defense Spending  and half from Entitlement Spending. The $85B in phantom cuts represents measly 2.2% of our $3.8T Budget.

The FY2013 Budget consists of 60% Mandatory Spending and 40% Discretionary Spending. Mandatory spending is spending that is required under existing law. In passing, it needs to be noted that while Defense spending represents 19% of the FY2012 Budget, it is slated for 50% of the FY2013 Sequestration cuts.

Last Fall, Jim Rogers, the founder of Rogers International Commodity Index and economic guru,” predicted that America is headed to a “Financial Armageddon”. Rogers stated  that he was absolutely convinced that the economy would burst soon after the election. He  also stated that he has never been a supporter of the policy of quantitative easing.[ The Federal Reserve can just create dollars out of thin air by buying up assets like long-term Treasuries or mortgage-backed securities from commercial banks and other institutions. These “thin air” dollars created by the Federal Reserve flow into the banks, and in turn are pumped into the U.S. economy and ultimately reduce our long-term interest rates. The theory is that when long-term interest rates go down, investors  have a greater incentive to spend their money.] Jim Rogers is also quite certain that our Government needs to cut spending in order to reduce our burgeoning debt. Rogers also stated that German Chancellor Angela Marker and Obama were promoting policies which were just another disguise for hiding the real state of their economies.

www.usgovernmentpending.com is estimating that the US debt to GDP will exceed 100% for 2012.  Two American economists, Carmen Reinhardt and Ken Rogoff, argue that growth slows sharply in countries where the ratio of debt to GDP exceeds 90 percent.

So there you have it. Barack Hussein Obama is jawboning Congress about Sequestration, seeking even  more deficit spending that will most certainly result in even slower growth, less jobs and further US credit rating downgrades.  Are you going to push back on the President and his propaganda squads and support a strong America, or are you going to sit idly by and watch our economy and country slide further into the abyss?

 

Nanny State – No More 2 liter Bottles Of Soda With Pizza Dilivery – Mayor Bloomberg’s Soda Ban

February 24, 2013 in Uncategorized

bloomNew Yorkers You Are A Bunch Of Sheep’s To Put Up With This Crap!!
Nanny State – No 2 liter Bottles Of Soda With Pizza Delivery – Mayor Bloomberg’s Soda Ban

Nanny Bloomberg unleashes his ban on large sodas on March 12 — and there are some nasty surprises lurking for hardworking families.

Say goodbye to that 2-liter bottle of Coke with your pizza delivery, pitchers of soft drinks at your kid’s birthday party and some bottle-service mixers at your favorite nightclub.

They’d violate Mayor Bloomberg’s new rules, which prohibit eateries from serving or selling sugary drinks in containers larger than 16 ounces.

Justice For Gun Owners – You Are Racist & Corrupt If You Support The 2nd Amendment – Jeanine Pirro Weighs In!

February 24, 2013 in Uncategorized

Chicago CopChicago Police Superintendent Says You Are Racist & Corrupt If You Support The 2nd Amendment Or  If You Support Any Politian That Supports The 2nd Amendment!
Justice For Gun Owners – You Are Racist & Corrupt If You Support The 2nd Amendment – Jeanine Pirro Weighs In!
Unbelievable!!!!!

Chicago’s Top Cop: The Racist Roots of Gun Rights?

July 5, 2011

(GunReports.com) — Chicago Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy, newly appointed by anti-gun Mayor Rahm Emanuel, has wasted no time in sharing his views on Chicagoans’ individual right to keep and bear arms, the NRA-ILA reports.

Less than a month after his approval by the City Council, McCarthy attended a service at St. Sabina’s Church (a parish led by anti-gun extremist Father Michael Pfleger) and made a speech claiming that a lack of restrictive gun control laws is “government sponsored racism.”

Those with a better understanding of history will find themselves confused trying to interpret McCarthy’s logic, as decades of scholarship have proven just the opposite; that gun control, rather than its absence, has often been used as a means of government sponsored racism.

In his 1995 Kansas Journal of Law & Public Policy article, “The Racist Roots of Gun Control,” Second Amendment scholar Clayton E. Cramer outlines the historical case that “racism underlies gun control laws.” Cramer notes that racist gun control in America stretches as far back as 1751 with a French law in the Louisiana territory that required colonists to “‘[i]f necessary,’ beat ‘any black carrying any potential weapon, such as a cane.’”

Though Superintendent McCarthy might be excused for not looking that far back, he should certainly be aware of last year’s U.S. Supreme Court opinion in the case of McDonald v. Chicago.  In a concurring opinion in that case, Justice Clarence Thomas explained that in the years preceding the Civil War, “Many legislatures amended their laws prohibiting slaves from carrying firearms to apply the prohibition to free blacks as well.” After the Civil War, little improved.  Justice Thomas writes: “Some States formally prohibited blacks from possessing firearms… Others enacted legislation prohibiting blacks from carrying firearms without a license, a restriction not imposed on whites.”

Other Reconstruction Era (and later) laws were less candid. For example, an 1870 Tennessee law barred the sale of all but the most expensive pistols, effectively disarming newly freed blacks and the poor.  New York’s Sullivan Law of 1911, requiring a permit for handgun possession, was largely targeted at Italians and other disfavored immigrant groups. (That law is still on the books.)  And the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. was denied a concealed carry permit in Alabama under a similar discretionary permitting law—even after his house had been bombed.

We suggest that in the future, Superintendent McCarthy might do a little more research before conflating respect for a fundamental individual right with its antithesis, government-sponsored racism.

http://www.gunreports.com/news/news/Chicago-Top-Cop-The-Racist-Roots-of-Gun-Rights_3148-1.html?CMP=OTC-RSS

Federal Government Discriminates and Intimidates in the Name of Diversity

February 22, 2013 in Uncategorized

Blaming AmericaThe Barack Hussein O’Bama (a.ka. Barry)  Administration has been secretly using our tax treasure to fund a racist, bigoted militant war against our government agencies. Obama is using the tactics that he fine tuned  as a Chicago “Organizer” in an attempt to  brow beat and intimidate government workers into advocating  his far left propaganda and revisionist history.  These mandatory brainwashing sessions  have been carried out in the Agriculture, Defense and numerous other Departments under the guise of  Diversity while in actuality it ‘s clandestine purpose  was and is uniformity.

Bill O’Reilly:  “Dr. Samuel Betances used his paid opposition to demean the United States and to indoctrinate his captive audience.”

“Talking Points believes the reason stuff like this goes on is the culture of liberalism that is now gripped Washington with a liberal president and senate the message is gone out progressive thought Is in.

And you know what that’s fine If it’s simply expression, but once the taxpayer gets charged for the propaganda that’s malfeasance that’s a misappropriation of taxpayer dollars.”

Bill O’Reilly is correct on his points about “…the propaganda that’s malfeasance that’s a misappropriation of taxpayer dollars.” and we as Americans have a Right and Obligation to follow-up on these charges and to insure that they cease and desist. This is after all America and not Soviet Russia during the “Cold War”.  Our forefathers, fathers, uncles and cousins shed their blood to inure the freedom and  liberty of our nation.  As the torchbearers of this generation, we must insure that this type of propaganda  and intimidation is rooted out at its core.

Call the White House, your Senators, Representatives and tell them that they are our servants and that they need to heed our admonition our face the political consequences.

Obama Continues His Raid on Medicare that Exploits Senior Citizens’ Medical Insurance

February 21, 2013 in Uncategorized

Screwed AgainRonald Reagan’s “nine most terrifying words in the English language.” are “I’m from the government and I’m here to help”

Barack Hussein Obama  and the Democrat Party proves the point with their promises to provide universal medical coverage that actually turns out to make draconian cuts to Medicare that will eliminate every remaining private Senior Citizen Medicare Advantage insurance plan in the United States.

Seniors have not only borne the brunt of artificially low interest rates by  “Helicopter” Ben Bernanke’s Fed Policies, but now endure ever decreasing funding for Medicare. This fits in with Obama’s redistribution of wealth and absolute power ideology. Take from the rich give to the poor, take from the old give to the youg, etc. You get the idea.

“Projected Medicare savings from Obamacare don’t improve the program. Instead, they pay for other new programs created under the law that aren’t even for seniors.By slashing reimbursement rates instead of introducing real reform, the health law jeopardizes seniors’ access to providers. ”

“…the Obama administration revealed that it would be significantly reducing funding for Medicare, a move that one health insurance analyst said “would turn almost every plan in the industry unprofitable.”

 

WITH ELECTION OVER, OBAMA ANNOUNCES MEDICARE CUTS TO FUND OBAMACARE

Breibart.com

by DR. SUSAN BERRY 20 Feb 2013

During the 2012 election campaign, Democrats denied that ObamaCare made $716 billion in cuts to Medicare in order to provide funding toward $1.9 trillion in new entitlement spending over the next ten years.

In an announcement on Friday, however, the Obama administration revealed that it would be significantly reducing funding for Medicare, a move that one health insurance analyst said “would turn almost every plan in the industry unprofitable.”

Health insurance stocks tumbled following the announcement that a big chunk of the Medicare cuts would come from the popular Medicare Advantage program, a market-oriented system in which participants can choose coverage by a private company that contracts with Medicare to provide all Part A and Part B benefits.

According to health care analyst Carl McDonald, the new rates proposed by the Obama administration will have the net effect of reducing payments to Medicare Advantage plans by seven to eight percent in 2014. McDonald projects:

If implemented, these rates and the program changes CMS [Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services] is suggesting would be enormously disruptive to Medicare Advantage, likely forcing a number of smaller plans out of the business and creating disarray for many seniors.

According to Richard Foster, former chief actuary to the Medicare program, ObamaCare’s cuts to Medicare Advantage will likely force half of its current participants back into the old Medicare program, originated in 1965. It is estimated that this change will cost Medicare enrollees an average of $3,714 in 2017 alone.

Democrats have long been unfriendly toward the Medicare Advantage plan, which was passed as part of the Balanced Budget Amendment of 1997 and has seen tremendous growth over the past 10 years. Today, more than 25 percent of seniors receive their health benefits through Medicare Advantage.

Regarding the cuts, America’s Health Insurance Plans’ (AHIP) president Karen Ignagni said, “Washington cannot tax and cut Medicare Advantage this much and not expect seniors to be harmed.”

Last year it was revealed that, while AHIP was openly supporting ObamaCare and working on a deal with the White House, it was also secretly funneling over $100 million to the Chamber of Commerce to be spent on advertising designed to convince Americans that the new legislation should be defeated.

The administration’s proposal is open to outside comments until March 1st, ahead of the final announcement of the cuts on April 1st.

Read more at:   http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/02/20/With-Election-Over-Obama-Announces-Medicare-Cuts-To-Fund-ObamaCare

[subscribe2]

Ladies You Don’t Need A Gun! – Grab Your Whistle!!! – Gun Control! Unbelievable!!!

February 19, 2013 in Uncategorized

ladiesYesterday afternoon video of Colorado Democrat Rep. Joe Salazar was released from a hearing in which he was arguing for the disarmament of college students (HB13-1226).

Ladies You Don’t Need A Gun! – Grab Your Whistle!!! – Gun Control!  Unbelievable!!!

His comments, oddly, were aimed particularly towards women on college campus. When statistics show that  one in four collegiate women report rape and one in five are raped, Salazar may want to pick a different segment of the population to focus on when trying to make the ridiculous case you’re about to see below.

Controversy Over A Woman’s Right To Defend Herself With A Firearm – Megyn Kelly

Sequestration: The Facts About the Policy

February 19, 2013 in Uncategorized

Islam ThreatSequestration does not cut spending, it simply reduces the rate-of-increased  spending

The Military is 1/4 of the Budget  yet it is taking 1/2 of the Sequestration Budget Hits

America at Risk: Budget Cuts Threaten Military Readiness

Sequester Main Points:

On the sequester “cuts” not being real cuts:
  • The so-called sequester “cuts” aren’t even real cuts! This year the government will spend more of your money than they did last year, and next year they will spend even more. If you spent more money year after year, you wouldn’t say you were cutting spending, so why does Washington get away with it?
  • Overspending is overspending, no matter which way you look at it. Spending $800 that you don’t have on your credit card instead of $1000, doesn’t mean you cut $200 of spending. It means you’re still overspending by $800.
  • Only an extremist would want to stop the sequester. As the National Taxpayers Union said, it is a starting point, not a finish line. Politicians will never actually cut spending if we let the spending radicals like Nancy Pelosi stop us from taking this small step forward.
  • The amount of the so-called “cuts” would be enough to run the government for only 4.5 days, and the spending radicals like Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid want us to believe that the sequester will be “devastating.”

On the President’s flip-flop:

  • As the president’s own press secretary admitted, the sequester was President Obama’s idea in the first place. American families are tired of him playing politics and blaming others for his own ideas.
  • In July 2011, a White House fact sheet praised the deal that gave us the sequester as “a win for the economy and budget discipline.” At the time, President Obama said it didn’t impact the middle class or working families. Now he says it does. He was either lying then, or he’s lying now.

 Other points:

  • What is the sequester anyway? In a nutshell, the sequester is a deal that the President signed into law that says the government will overspend a little less this year than they did last year. That’s it. So they’re still overspending.
  • A recent poll conducted by Anderson Robbins Research and Shaw & Company Research shows that 73% of Americans want the government to cut spending, while only 15% want increased spending. The time is now to do what the majority of the American people want done.
  • Everyone agrees that we need to reduce the deficit. Let’s start now by keeping the sequester in place, and making the politicians keep their promises, and uphold the laws they pass.
  • We need to become an economically sustainable nation. The sequester is a step in the right direction. Don’t let politicians and their well-connected friends stop this little bit of badly-needed progress.
  • Recently, Nancy Pelosi said that cutting Congressional pay would undermine their “dignity.” Could she be any more insulting? What about the dignity of the millions of Americans that are still out of work? Or the dignity of younger generations that will be burdened by the massive debt that paid politicians like Nancy Pelosi have racked up? What’s undignified is making a promise to the American people that you will cut spending and then trying to weasel your way out of it when the time comes, hoping that you’ll be retired before the bills come due.

 

The Heritage Foundation

Morning Bell: Spending Cuts Are Happening, One Way or Another

Amy Payne February 19, 2013 at 7:32 am

Federal budget cuts called “sequestration” are scheduled to hit in just 10 days. The sequestration cuts are not perfect—they’re a blunt instrument to cut spending, rather than a deliberative plan that sets priorities, trims entitlements, and cuts other spending. But they are law. It would be better to replace them with smarter cuts, but the reality is that Washington has to start cutting spending now. Real program reforms and a balanced budget are the only way to solve our continuing fiscal crises. So it is critical that Congress keep its word and follow through on these spending cuts to prove it is serious about bringing our budget into balance over the next 10 years. Now that the March 1 deadline is approaching, the President is urging Congress to offset the sequestration budget cuts with more tax increases. That’s simply unacceptable, says Heritage’s Grover M. Hermann Senior Fellow in Federal Budgetary Affairs, Patrick Louis Knudsen: “President Obama has already pocketed a $618 billion tax increase, so simply holding the line against taxes is a given.” Lawmakers shouldn’t be fooled by the President’s rhetoric on a “balanced” approach to sequestration or any other budget issue—that simply means he’s looking to raise taxes again. Instead, they should be focusing on true balance—balancing the federal budget in the next 10 years. Producing a budget would be a start, but balancing that budget is the way to put the country back on track. Knudsen explains:

Government spending and debt are both too high, and thisthreatens all Americans with a weaker economy and a lower standard of living. Every opportunity to reduce spending and put the government on the path to a balanced budget must be taken. Anything less is a path to defeat.

We need spending cuts that are targeted to the programs that need reforms—the entitlements that are the major drivers of our growing deficit. Sequestration leaves many programs like Social Security, welfare, food stamps, and Medicaid untouched, while having devastating effects on national security. Trying to use defense cuts to balance the out-of-control entitlement spending while we still face growing threats (Russia, China, Iran, and al-Qaeda affiliates) is a fool’s errand that will create a hollow military and do nothing to fix economic troubles. But if Congress does not replace the sequestration cuts with smarter cuts—like eliminating Obamacare funding or other ineffective programs—then the sequestration cuts will be our first step toward getting serious about federal spending. The Foundry: Conservative Policy News Blog from The Heritage Foundation

[subscribe2]