As a businessman and accountant, he knows that Washington is taking us down hill.
Obama is now demanding that Congress allow him to raise the debt ceiling - without debate, or any spending restraint. That won’t happen. To think he will get an increase in the debt ceiling without a serious discussion with the American people is delusional. That is where the fight will be waged over the next 2 months.
Look, I’m new to Washington. I don’t pretend to have all the answers. But three decades in business has taught me how to plan and prioritize, and two years in Washington has shown me how broken this place is.
A looter who votes to take some of my money instead of all of it is still a looter.
The lesser of two evils is still evil.
Anyone who voted for the “fiscal cliff” deal should be considered our enemy. Anyone who would vote for unread bills at all should be considered unqualified for office. They voted 3 minutes after the deal was written.
Washington is bankrupt......financially and morally.....................
If we really have the energy resources of Saudi Arabia, would it be enough to pay off the deficit? Could it support our welfare state? If so, would the Left then continue to increase entitlements?
Oh, for leaders whose passion and concern might be for the individual liberty of the citizens they represent, and for the millions of yet unborn whose lives and liberties are being threatened by small men and women, obsessed with the arrogance of power over their fellow citizens now.
Except for a few brave men and women who have studied the ideas of their Declaration of Independence and Constitution, Washington is overcome with decades of departure from those ideas as led by the so-called "progressive" movement, whose ideas are based on a counterfeit set of ideas promulgated by individuals like Marx and Lenin--ideas which deny Creator-endowed life and liberty and insist upon the coercive decision making and power grants from government.
They argue and debate nothingness, and the results are being seen in the outcomes in American society today.
Oh, for leaders who can articulate the ideas of freedom and steer the debate to principles, not issues!
Here are two examples:
"It will be remembered, that a frequent recurrence to fundamental principles is solemnly enjoined by most of the state constitutions, and particularly by our own, as a necessary safeguard against the danger of degeneracy, to which republics are liable, as well as other governments, though in a less degree than others. And a fair comparison of the political doctrines not unfrequent at the present day, with those which characterized the epoch of our revolution, and which form the basis of our republican constitutions, will best determine whether the declaratory recurrence here made to those principles ought to be viewed as unseasonable and improper, or as a vigilant discharge of an important duty. The authority of constitutions over governments, and of the sovereignty of the people over constitutions, are truths which are at all times necessary to be kept in mind; and at no time, perhaps, more necessary than at present.
. . . . .
"These observations appear to form a satisfactory reply to every objection which is not founded on a misconception of the terms employed in the resolutions. There is one other, however, which may be of too much importance not to be added. It cannot be forgotten that, among the arguments addressed to those who apprehended danger to liberty from the establishment of the general government over so great a country, the appeal was emphatically made to the intermediate existence of the state governments between the people and that government, to the vigilance with which they would descry the first symptoms of usurpation, and to the promptitude with which they would sound the alarm to the public. This argument was probably not without its effect; and if it was a proper one then to recommend the establishment of a constitution, it must be a proper one now to assist in its interpretation."
The Founders' Constitution Volume 1, Chapter 8, Document 42 http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch8s42.html The University of Chicago Press
Elliot, Jonathan, ed. The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution as Recommended by the General Convention at Philadelphia in 1787. . . . 5 vols. 2d ed. 1888. Reprint. New York: Burt Franklin, n.d.
"Sitting near me on some occasion of a trifling but wordy debate, he asked how I could sit in silence hearing so much false reasoning which a word should refute? I observed to him that to refute indeed was easy, but to silence impossible. That in measures brought forward by myself, I took the laboring oar, as was incumbent on me; but that in general I was willing to listen. If every sound argument or objection was used by some one or other of the numerous debaters, it was enough: if not, I thought it sufficient to suggest the omission, without going into a repetition of what had been already said by others. That this was a waste and abuse of the time and patience of the house which could not be justified. And I believe that if the members of deliberative bodies were to observe this course generally, they would do in a day what takes them a week, and it is really more questionable, than may at first be thought, whether Bonaparte's dumb legislature which said nothing and did much, may not be preferable to one which talks much and does nothing. I served with General Washington in the legislature of Virginia before the revolution, and, during it, with Dr. Franklin in Congress. I never heard either of them speak ten minutes at a time, nor to any but the main point which was to decide the question. They laid their shoulders to the great points, knowing that the little ones would follow of themselves. If the present Congress errs in too much talking, how can it be otherwise in a body to which the people send 150. lawyers, whose trade it is to question everything, yield nothing, & talk by the hour? That 150. lawyers should do business together ought not to be expected." - Thomas Jefferson
Go Wisconsin.......one of the few states that has spine and producers ‘doers’
In the end, Joe McCarthy, from Wisconsin, was right
The AMERICAN people are broke and broken.
Money’s too tight to mention.
Because of free trade morons who promoted the de-indutrialization of the United States of America and made millions billions doing so. America was screwed the day WalMart became our largest corporation thus displacing GM. This took place about 17 years ago
If not for this de-indutrialization the Kenyan POS would get no traction. He would not be president.