Republicans To The Right - Democrats To The Left
The Democrat Party is in the hands of the Pelosi-Obama extreme left, the Republican Party is in the hands of the Bush-Limbaugh fanatic religious right and the mindless party faithful gleefully sing along, ours is not to reason why, ours is but to do or die. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that there will be trillion dollar annual deficits for the next decade if the Pelosi-Obama left prevails, and the response from the right, narrow-minded religious platitudes.
Maybe its time for a third party that represents the rational, pragmatic majority of the country. I believe the founders would approve if we called our new party, The Enlightenment Party.
First let’s look at what we can expect from the left:
In 2010 federal outlays will be a breathtaking $3.6 trillion, or 24.1% of the projected $14.7 trillion GDP. Since federal receipts will only be $2.4 trillion, a deficit of $1.2 trillion will be incurred in fiscal 2010. This is only the beginning of a recurrent pattern: rosy growth projections for GDP, increased spending and unprecedented deficits as far as the eye can see. In this “New Era of Responsibility”, the Pelosi-Obama administration’s projected deficits dip slightly from 2012 to 2015 and then continue merrily higher for the rest of the decade without respite. In fact, the projected deficit in the Pelosi-Obama Budget is $7.0 trillion for the decade 2010 to 2019. That’s the good news!
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has concluded that, if the Pelosi-Obama budget were approved, the federal government would actually run even larger deficits averaging nearly $1 trillion a year over the next decade. The cumulative deficit from 2010-19 would be $9.3 trillion, according to the report - $2.3 trillion more than the administration’s forecast. The main reason for the difference in budget estimates is a difference in economic growth, with congressional views of long-term growth less optimistic than those of the White House.
How can anyone justify an average deficit of nearly $1.0 trillion annually from 2010 to 20019, which, according to the Pelosi-Obama budget, will be boom times? GDP will likely rise to an eye-popping $23 trillion in 2019 based on the Pelosi-Obama budget. However, expenses will grow to nearly $5.2 trillion and “taxing the rich” will not pay for it.
The left’s road to insolvency is paved with red Ink. How can the United States become insolvent? Easy, just add the Pelose-Obama deficits, as laid out in the President’s ten-year plan, to the existing $11 trillion national debt and it will not be long before the US is unable to meet its financial obligations. Presently, debt held by the Social Security Trust Fund and other governmental agencies is $4.4 trillion, plus the remainder of the debt (owed to citizens or “foreign” owners) is $6.6 trillion. Approximately 50% of US debt is owed to foreigners, up from 31% in 2000, and this debt will undoubtedly continue to climb. If China and other foreign creditors lose their appetite for US debt, the result will be catastrophic for the dollar, US interest payments and the economy.
According to the Treasury, the average interest paid on this $11 trillion debt is 3.7%. Despite this low rate, the Treasury estimates that it will pay out $450 billion in interest on Treasury debt securities in fiscal 2009. To put this is perspective, the Defense Department budget is $657 billion. This low interest rate will not last forever, particularly in an environment where the United States is incurring trillion dollar annual deficits.
Even if the national debt were not rising, it is likely that US interest payments would double to $900 billion annually as interest rates return to their historical average of 6-7%. Unfortunately, deficits will grow at an astronomical rate if we use the Pelosi-Obama budget figures as a guideline. The national debt will exceed $15.5 trillion in fiscal 2012, and annual interest payments will rise to over a trillion dollars. As foreigners become disenchanted with US Treasuries and interest rates rise, it is a virtual certainty that annual interest payments will approach $1.5 trillion.
The Pelosi-Obama plan represents change with unconscionable deficits leading us to the brink of national insolvency. And to what end - to remake the United States into a mirror image of a European social democracy? In a recession social revolution may look as appealing as alcohol to a reveler fortunately, Americans usually sober up when they see the bill.
The religious fanatics on the Bush-Limbaugh right are no better. The only good thing one can say about them is they are out of power and no longer control either house of Congress or the executive. The litmus test for belonging to this gaggle of puritans is to deny women the right to control their own fecundity. No dissent will be tolerated. The “social conservative” head cases who control the Republican Party would have drummed Mr. Conservative himself, Barry Goldwater, out of the party. Barry Goldwater was a libertarian, pro-choice, and a supporter of gay and lesbian rights. The social conservatives of today and the Goldwater conservatives of 1964 are separated by light years.
The so-called conservatives of today turn out to be prolific spenders. During the Bush years, the national budget rose from $1.9 trillion in 2001 to $3.0 trillion in 2008, and the country went from enjoying a surplus of $128 billion in 2001 to suffering a deficit of $459 billion in 2008. This has set the stage for a dramatic expansion of the deficit under the Pelosi-Obama regime and could mean that by 2012 service on the national debt could approach the levels of the entire 2001 United States budget. What a difference 12 years of reckless fiscal policy can make!
I suspect that the real conservative must be wondering what ever happened to their basic principle of small and unobtrusive government. Don’t real conservatives believe that a woman, not government, is the final arbiter of reproductive rights? Real conservatives had a live and let live attitude and would clearly support gay and lesbian rights. When did conservatives take up the cry that all Americans should be free to carry assault rifles? Real conservatives would strike a balance between an individual’s right to bear arms and the obligation of the States under their police powers to protect our citizens. Where have you gone Barry Goldwater!
Fiscal irresponsibility should not be an option for either party. Whether your liberal, socialist or conservative or any fragrance in between you have an obligation to the nation to conduct its business in a fiscally responsible manner. What Bush-Limbaugh and Pelosi-Obama have taught us is that neither side of the current political divide is competent to conduct the people’s business.
It is time for a third way, one that respects individual rights and is adept at managing the nations finances - Long Live The Enlightenment Party!
[...] Read the rest of this great post here [...]
May 10th, 2009 at 3:42 pm
Republicans and Democrats are two sides of the same coin. The “Party of Reagan” (Reagan being much of a Goldwater Conservative) strayed from what returned them to power in the 1980’s. For the last 25 years, they spent like drunken Democrats, influenced by the Dark Side of the Beltway. Many of us on the Right have been saying for years that a third-party vote is wasted. If we had voted third-party, instead of complaining, the GOP might be gone and a party more in tune with individual rights may have come forward.
Fiscal policy has been a disaster since about 1986. While the budget balanced under Clinton (in large part because of Conservative majorities in one or both houses), no one was minding the store either domestically or internationally (but I ramble).
The Right to Bear Arms is to protect the citizenry from a tyrannical government. Assault rifles are not the problem.
Abortion is a sticky topic and at some point, the hard decision on when life begins must be made. If we declare someone deadd when there is no heartbeat or brainwaves, should we not declare them alive when there are?
As a matter of minor disagreement, Rush Limbaugh does not run the GOP. In fact, over the last few years, he has been (rightly) critical of the GOP and they way in which they have strayed.
All-in-all, you have my vote on a new party!
May 11th, 2009 at 3:07 am
The Democrat party is very effectively pursuing the break-it-take-it strategy.
Go in and systematically break education, health-care, banks, auto industries, etc etc etc to the point where the only savior is Washington. It’s working perfectly! Break it Take it!
The Republican Party can thank W and all other fat Washington Republicans for the position it’s in. They are with no leader, no voice and rudderless adrift.
Unfortunately, we fiscal, tax paying, conservatives are left holding the bag and continue to subsidize the nonproductive leaches that have such a cozy home Obama’s America.
I no longer have party affiliations, but I would consider a third party. A Taxpayers Party.
May 11th, 2009 at 6:20 am
Are you kidding me?
“I believe the founders would approve if we called our new party, The Enlightenment Party.”
First of all most of the founders were also religious and as you put it “narrow-minded” in their respect for the Word of God and not just respect but fear since they knew that God holds the prosperity of this country in His hands!
Second, a third party would take years to try and build its brand with no guarantee of success. Since I don’t believe that time is on our side and the Lord Jesus Christ definitely isn’t on the side of all this corruption and sin that is going on in our country and around the world.
What we should be doing is repenting of our sins and turning to the Lord for salvation! He is our only hope and Yes that is my narrow minded view since it is an absolute truth and can not be moved or changed or negotiated…there is no middle ground!
Please turn to the Lord before it is too late!
Are you a good person?
May 11th, 2009 at 10:23 am
I have found little evidence that suggests that the majority of our founders were religious, and they certainly do not appear to have been Christian.
http://freethought.mbdojo.com/foundingfathers.html
I consider myself a libertarian and I refuse to acknowledge the modern Republican as a conservative. While I’m at it, I also denounce Fox News and their idiocy. And Bush, I cannot forgive or forget the patriot act.
Conservativism should have nothing to do with any religion or theology. Religion is a separate, personal thing that should not influence the way the government is run. Separation of church and state exists for a reason.
Libertarians are generally ardent supporters of the right to bear arms. To paraphrase George Washington, the guns of the people are the teeth of liberty. The citizen’s right to bear arms is the final check and balance against government control. It is the final defender of our freedom and should never be infringed upon. I have seen no conclusive proof that stricter gun laws cause a safer environment, and I would trade the security for the liberty even if they did.
As a last point, when the constitution says that the right to bear arms should not be infringed upon, it does not mean that you can infringe a little bit so you can be safer. There is no subtext stating “do not infringe unless someone thinks one type of weapon is too dangerous, then you can infringe to ban that one.” If I can bear it, I have the right to buy and keep it.
I really do not see why someone who is going to use a gun for criminal activities would care if he cannot buy the gun legally. Gun control only prohibits law-abiding citizens from having guns.
Go read the long version of my pro-gun rant at http://www.cincinnatusblog.com/2nd/#comments
May 12th, 2009 at 5:07 pm
Steve, I think you missed his point on the way towards your tangent. He wasn’t saying that all religion is bad, just that there are extreme religious people on the far right that would seek to limit our rights to that of their own belief system. I believe this to be as true as there being extreme leftists that are nothing more than fascists disguised as the peoples champions.
The main point being that the founding brothers, despite their different views on religion and other things, were unanimous in their belief of morality and finding the center. This whole government was originally set up with centrist views in mind. The founding brothers believed that on the far right was anarchy and on the far left fascism. They knew the importance of agreeing on the most important things.
Look at how quick we are in today’s society to attack one another; that persons a liberal, that persons a rightwing nutjob. You said something I disagree with so I’m going to attack you personally. If you’ve ever read the letters and editorials of the founding brothers, they were highly critical of each other, but their letters were littered with high praise as well. They all agreed that brotherly love was the only thing that could hold this country together. They designed this government for a highly moral people, and only a highly moral people could maintain it.
May 12th, 2009 at 8:13 pm
… isn’t that they hate abortion, but that they cannot bring themselves to admit that the Department of Defense is just as much a corporate welfare agency as any other boondoggle dreamt of by Congress.
Neither party is willing to admit that the financial crisis was caused by the Federal Reserve Commissar’s efforts to “manage” the money supply.
We managed to divorce religion and the State; let us do likewise for the economy, and most especially, for the currency; we cannot permit the State to manipulate the value of the dollar.
Faced with this rising debt, the State will simply inflate its way out of the problem. The rest of us will pay higher prices, a hidden form of taxation.
May 13th, 2009 at 3:34 pm
I can’t disagree with any of this except perhaps your tired take on Obama who is so new in office and both far smarter and less powerful than you may imagine. Forget Pelosi who is a caricature in any case.
Yes, long live the Enlightenment Party.
You are so right about the ever escalating interest payments. That is our underlying doom. It won’t be long - you’ll be around - before the dollar is no longer the world’s reserve currency. The effect will be serious but gradual.
We will become just another England. Something, it seems, we’ve been trying hard to become for a long time now.
May 17th, 2009 at 2:30 am
Dave Wagner — your comment was excellent. Thank you.
May 17th, 2009 at 2:33 am
Daniel Nixon — well said, sir. But I must say that as a gun owner and user for over 50 years I will have no more problem with being licensed to use them than I will have with being licensed to drive a car.
Assault weapons (what is an assault weapon?) could well be another matter. I agree with those who say that they are dangerous and of no practical use. Were I a collector I might have a different attitude, legitimately, but only if I were.
May 17th, 2009 at 2:53 am
Please excuse the unclosed italics in the previous post. The application was meant to apply to one word only - assault. I’ve discovered I can’t change it.
May 17th, 2009 at 2:58 am
In politics, the middle road is no way at all….John Adams. (yes, THE John Adams)
May 18th, 2009 at 4:29 am
Interesting then, that today it is the radical right that is called fascist. Taken together this implies that today’s “left” and “centrist” positions are well to the left of what the founders considered extreme left. And that the founding fathers governed to the right of what now is called extreme.
Also, if there were any Christians in the group, and no one denies that there were at least several, then what they felt were “the most important things” must have been front and center Christianity.
It’s not surprising to me that you haven’t seen the evidence but it’s not hard to find if you look. Here might be a good place to start your education:
http://www.hobbylobby.com/holiday_messages/images/messages/july4.jpg
Strange indeed that the website you gave mistakes the meaning of virtually every quote. No surprise that the founders showed strong contempt for the Roman Catholic church. But to claim thereby that they denied Scripture only betrays complete ignorance of Catholic doctrine. The Protestant Reformation started because the Roman Catholic church would not accept Scripture, but placed all authority in the hands of fallen man instead. Do you really believe that the Pilgrims or any others of the early settlers who came for religious freedom were looking for freedom from religion? A few, perhaps, but the majority desired freedom to preach “Sola Scriptura” without a church hierarchy watching over them while lining the pockets of its cardinals and bishops.
May 18th, 2009 at 8:14 am
We must remember who is calling who the fascist. The far left, ever increasingly becoming the norm in this country, are extremely quick to bandy about words like fascist and nazi because they are in the business of disinformation.
Your right though, the founding fathers saw the right as what we could now call libertarianism. They saw the left as nearly what it is today, big government and centralized power structures (like the deceptively named Federal Reserve Bank).
Today left and right are a deception. A way to keep people from looking too deeply, either within themselves or at government and what it’s really doing. The only way to fight this deception is for people to start reading again and not just entertainment books. The reason the founding brothers (the title of a book you all should read) were so smart and able to pull together this system of government is because they all were very well read, most even self taught. Nearly all the ideas that this country were founded on were not original, they were taken from various philosophers and historians. Most of them read the same books and thus were in agreement on many of the most important things.
May 19th, 2009 at 6:18 pm
It is frustrating to hear individuals express insight into the views of the “religious right” or the “right-wing conservatives” and be so wrong. Most of the time it is from someone that supports Individualism and believes he\she is the true originalist of the founding fathers. Unfortunately, Individualists have a hard problem with the strong religious beliefs and practices of the 17th century and the direct involvement of the Christian faith with the creation of the country.
May 29th, 2009 at 5:56 pm