On Feb. 19, President Obama publicly threatened to further display his executive incompetence. Out of a $3.6 trillion budget he proclaimed that as the executive who proposed the sequester plan and signed it into law as a “compromise”, he can’t find anywhere to cut 2.4 percent in future spending except by letting first responders and teachers go and cutting the benefits and services for those on Medicare. That’s a “cut” in the future increase and not a cut in existing expenditures.
Why should any services be cut?
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 73 percent of new jobs in the last five months of 2012 were government jobs.
If Obama just quit spending more money for new bureaucrats to write and enforce unneeded oppressive regulations we don’t want, he would have a good start in cutting the budget. Every new regulation, by definition, takes a little more freedom from us as individuals and our society as a whole. It’s his job as the executive to manage budget expenditures, cut waste, make operations efficient and save money so we should be operating with a surplus — just like the chief executive of any company does. That’s his executive responsibility and a duty for which he is accountable.
Instead of accepting his responsibility and accountability, he blames Congress. Evidently he can’t figure out how, or is afraid of being held accountable for, managing the administration of our government. Rather than being bold and innovative in finding an economic managerial solution he makes a blatant play to avoid accountability and, as he has so often in his life, blame someone else. Obama has said he wants Congress to kick the can down the road and come up with a “common sense plan” to make cuts. Obama has carte blanche authority to make “common sense” cuts now. Why doesn’t he? Why doesn’t he act like an executive, a leader, and make decisions? Is it fear of being held accountable?
Out of millions of federal employees with hundreds of thousands of redundant mid-level managers administrating thousands of useless and oppressive regulations that impede economic freedom and growth without any noticeable social benefit that provide no tangible results or service. Yet Obama can’t figure out what to do to save money without first cutting those on the front lines that directly provide our public services. It appears we do not have a mid-level manager much less a chief executive.
Bill Sandry
Mesa
smartvoter posted at 10:22 am on Sun, Mar 3, 2013.
Willie- I have said before and I'll say it again Bill Clinton shut down military bases all around the world.
My brother-in-law was in the air force and he told me that the largest aircraft they have (I can't remember the name of ,the one that's bigger then the c-130) costs 1millon dollars minimum every time it takes off. Now multiply that by all the planes, f-16 f-15 all the helicopters ,all the fuel ,the up keep, now multiply that by all the bases shut down.
That's hundreds of millions of dollars a month saved.
In the end he made America weaker all over the world. Shortly after the world trade center was bombed, military barracks were bombed the USS Cole was bombed.
Yes he walked away with a surplus but look at the price we've paid since. Clinton opened the flood gates to terrorism.
You on the left may consider him your hero but not me. He did America no favors.
onerebel posted at 5:32 pm on Sat, Mar 2, 2013.
The big difference between Clinton and Obama, Clinton was willing to work with the Republican's that controlled congress for 6 of the 8 years he was in office. Funny how it was ALL the President Bill Clinton that balanced the budget and not Congress yet now it's ALL the Republican Congress's fault for the debt. I thought Clinton did a pretty good job right up to the point he was to be impeached. However many believe that of our current problems date back to some of his programs, as you can see here.
http://www.businessinsider.com/how-bill-clintons-balanced-budget-destroyed-the-economy-2012-9
Arizona Willie posted at 12:14 pm on Sat, Mar 2, 2013.
A business executive is exactly the WRONG type of person to be President.
There has not been one single successful President who was a businessman.
Carter was a peanut faming executive
The Bushes were oil company executives and were both disasters who doubled and quadruled the national debt.
Clinton was a POLITICIAN his whole life and had the most successful Presidency to date. He took office with a huge debt left by Bush the Older and left office with a surplus in the Treasury. The ONLY President to do so in recent history.
Obama was always a POLITICIAN and he, once again, took office presiding over a HUGE national debt created by Bush the Lesser's vanity wars and with the country in a great recession ( some called it a Depression ) and, despite the opposition of Republicans at every turn, managed to get the economy on the right track again. It has a LONG way to go but at least he turned it around.
EVERY President who was a business executive has been a FAILED President.
smartvoter posted at 10:27 am on Sat, Mar 2, 2013.
Icecat: Welcome to the discussion group.
First thing you need to know is thst left wingers have no use for facts that don't fit their pre-concieved views. If Rachel Maddow or Chris Mathews didn't say it -it aint true, as far as they are concerned.
See Willie we can do it to.
We definitly need someone else in the white house, maybe someone with a brain and an understanding of the American way and the Constitution not the nation destroyer that we have now.
Mitt Romney would have been the better choice but the low information voters out numbered the SMARTVOTERS.
I sure hope all you liberals are ready for whats coming because when Obama and the demos tax us into the poor house there won't be anymore for them to steal.It's not just the republicans and the rich it's you to. Obama is an equal opportunity taxer.
onerebel posted at 7:41 pm on Thu, Feb 28, 2013.
IceCat, Your absolutely right, both those companies are publicly traded stock companies and I DO know that and admit it. However you must know that Microsoft's Bill Gates is a Obama supporter, and General Electric has received close to 25 million in stimulus money. G.E's CEO Mr. Immelt was also selected to head President Obama's jobs panel, which helps decide corporate tax policy. Ironic wouldn't you say? I was just trying to ruffle a few Liberal's feathers with a little sarcasm, kinda like MSNBC does every day! [wink]
VofReason posted at 12:32 pm on Thu, Feb 28, 2013.
I too would like to welcome IceCat and add the Liberals here are in charge of the "facts". This despite the reality that we have now had a leiberal President in power for 4 years running and have not seen measureable results in unemployment, deficit reduction, or the economy. Further, you can niddle ariound the edges however you like, but there is still the fact that we are spending 1 trillion more than is taken in on a yearly basis and no amount of tax increase will ever fix that. Additionally, whatever "facts" you want to present, that means we are spending way more than we should. Where am I wrong?
Leon Ceniceros posted at 12:30 pm on Thu, Feb 28, 2013.
If the President and the Democrats didn't want Sequestration...then why did President Obama sign this Law?
Why did almost every single Democrat Congressman/Congresswoman vote for it?
Why did almost every single Democrat Senator vote for it?
The majority of the Congress and the Senate who voted "AGAINST SEQUESTRATION" .....were...........REPUBLICANS !!!
The Sequestration Bill was very thought out. The Bill that the Congress approved 268 to 161, the Senate approved 74 to 26, and that the Democrat President of the United States, Barack Hussein Obama, signed into Law the ..."BUDGET CONTROL ACT OF 2011".....explained in great detail..."EXACTLY".....WHERE EVERY SINGLE DOLLAR THAT WAS GOING TO BE CUT FROM THE BUDGET CAME FROM......EVERY GOVERNMENT OFFICE THAT WAS TO BE AFFECTED WAS NAMED. EVERY KNEW WHAT WAS COMING...FROM THE PRESIDENT ON DOWN.
Arizona Willie posted at 8:11 am on Thu, Feb 28, 2013.
IceCat: welcome to the discussion group.
First thing you need to know is that right wingers have no use for facts that don't fit their pre-conceived views. If Rush didn't say it -- it ain't true, as far as they are concerned.
Spewing lies generated by Rush and co-horts and right wing think tanks is de-rigeur.
Of course, they don't believe they are lies.
Any inconvenient facts that Liberals post are dismissed as " left-wing media " etc. etc. etc.
Second thing to know is that no one ever changes anyone else's mind. :)
We all just come here and have our say but don't count on converting anyone.
IceCat posted at 7:35 am on Thu, Feb 28, 2013.
The author's letter is full of untruths. One example is this comment:
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 73 percent of new jobs in the last five months of 2012 were government jobs.
w.bls.gov/web/empsit/ceshighlights.pdf
Government employment continued
to edge down in January (-9,000), on
trend with its average monthly job loss of
6,000 in 2012. Employment changed
little over the month at the federal, state,
and local government levels.
In total, government has shed 704,000
jobs since July 2008, approximately the
time when both state and local
governments reached employment peaks.
Local government education accounted
for over half of the jobs lost during this
time, while local government, excluding
education accounted for about one-third.
Over the same period, federal
government employment has remained
essentially unchanged, on net.
IceCat posted at 7:24 am on Thu, Feb 28, 2013.
Both Mircosoft and GE are publicly traded companies owned by stockholders from around the world, all with different values. Onerebel to say these companies are liberal owned is utter nonsense.
onerebel posted at 9:03 pm on Wed, Feb 27, 2013.
Thanks Truth for pointing out how Liberal owned Microsoft and General Electric a huge Obama supporter with the CEO he hand picked to be in his circle, are a bunch of cheats!![wink]
truth posted at 3:32 pm on Wed, Feb 27, 2013.
THIS IS WHAT THE GOP DOESN'T WANT THE VOTERS TO KNOW.
truth posted at 3:29 pm on Wed, Feb 27, 2013.
Whirlpool Corp. WHR -2.23%had 85% of its cash offshore at the end of last year, and Microsoft Corp. MSFT -1.40%had about 87% overseas as of Sept. 30. Truck-parts supplier Wabco Holdings Inc. WBC -2.36%had only 3% of its cash in the U.S. at the end of last year and is buying back shares with borrowed money, but 91% of its sales are generated overseas.
truth posted at 3:28 pm on Wed, Feb 27, 2013.
General Electric Co. GE -2.48%had only about a third of its $85.5 billion in cash in the U.S. at the end of September, even though the U.S. accounted for about 45% of the conglomerate's revenue.
truth posted at 3:26 pm on Wed, Feb 27, 2013.
At the end of last year, Johnson & Johnson JNJ -0.89%kept all of its $24.5 billion in cash outside of the U.S., which accounted for 46% of its revenue generation.
truth posted at 3:20 pm on Wed, Feb 27, 2013.
Illinois Tool Works Inc., ITW -2.78%a diversified manufacturer, had $2.1 billion in cash at the end of September, but none of that was in the U.S., where it generates more than 40% of its revenue. At the end of last year,
VofReason posted at 1:13 pm on Wed, Feb 27, 2013.
Hmmm. Bill Clinton had the opposing party in control of congress. Wonder how he was able to get some pretty major things (welfare reform) accomplished? We know President Obama doesn't know how to say "Welfare reform" but real leaders lead. What our President has brought to the big stage is Chicago politics at their (gulp) finest- make very bad course decisions and blame everyone else for failures. Payoff friends and publicly criticize and condemn enemies. Yup, textbook Chicago politics.
chatmandu002 posted at 10:52 am on Wed, Feb 27, 2013.
Bill,
We had our chance at a real executive in the White House but the takers out numbered the makers and voted for social justice and socialism instead.
chatmandu002 posted at 10:49 am on Wed, Feb 27, 2013.
Bill,
We hear you and know you are telling the truth.
Obama = No hope, No change, No transparency, No leadership but lots of first-class travel.
Cerulean posted at 7:41 pm on Tue, Feb 26, 2013.
The other day I was listening to the radio and a call-in caught my attention.
So here is my attempt to paraphrase the comment; He said,” I am a gun loving Republican. I concede, however, that the President won the election. If I quit working because I did not like my CEO, I would be in a heap of trouble. Republicans can’t quit working just because they do not like the President, it is irresponsible, and those that do should be fired.”
onerebel posted at 7:40 pm on Tue, Feb 26, 2013.
Mr. Obama’s political advisers have set up Organizing for Action, a organization that is aimed at supporting the president’s policy agendas. Those donors who give or raise $500,000 will be invited to a meeting with Mr. Obama, raising the question, who really has their hand on the cash cow teats?[wink]
Ateam1 posted at 6:18 pm on Tue, Feb 26, 2013.
Oh Yes, Obamas Golfing ,Partying ,ETC ETC, All = Budget contrtol? AIRFORCE 1 NEVER COOL'S OFF!! Please Explain, downtown.
downtownresident posted at 6:01 pm on Tue, Feb 26, 2013.
Bill,
He's thwarted at every turn by folks who don't have a clue, like you.
The expense of this little game the pols are playing will hurt the economy for years.
But, it's very good for the self centered children in Congress. Here's a built-in cash cow they can milk every time these deadlines come along. A million here, a million there, it's campaign money in the bank every 3 months, from special interests and lobbyists. Why kill the cash cow. Let's do this every 3 months and we'll make billions.
Politicians make me sick.
Don't blame Obama, he's not the problem here, it's the career politicians (children) and their new cash cow. It's here to stay.