Where we bring you fresh opinions on Idaho government, observations on life in general, great recipes, and an opportunity to comment on them all!

RSS Feeds, Etc.

Get New Posts Via Email! Enter your e-mail address and hit the 'Subscribe' button. Your address will never be sold or spammed.


Where we bring you fresh opinions on Idaho government, great recipes, and an opportunity to comment on them!.





Conservative News

General Interest

Idaho Falls Links

Idaho Politics

Left-Leaning Idaho

Libertarian Links

Pro-life Organizations

Jerry Sproul, CPA

Please take a moment to visit our sponsors!

David Ripley: Very Disturbing Glimpse into Medical Ethics

February 17th, 2010 by Halli

Idaho Chooses Life

There has been some real push-back to a guest opinion we published by Mary Ann Kreitzer entitled, “Terminal Sedation: Abortion for the Elderly”. There have been some very good points made. It is wrong to cast a wide shadow of condemnation on those many men and women who devote themselves to caring for people as they face death.

At the same time, it is just foolish to ignore disturbing trends in modern medicine, in which seniors and the disabled are being ushered into premature death.

To help encourage a fuller understanding of these threats to the sanctity of human life, we republish here a news story which appeared yesterday in The Gazette, a Montreal newspaper:

Doctors back ‘right to die’

Consultation; But MDs oppose assisted suicide

The Gazette
February 16, 2010 2:59 PM

Euthanasia is already a reality in Quebec hospitals, the president of the federation of Quebec medical specialists, told a National Assembly committee yesterday.

Doctors know when death is “imminent and inevitable,” Gaétan Barrette explained.
But doctors are aware they can be charged with murder if they administer a “palliative sedative” before a patient is on his or her last breath.

Geoffrey Kelley, chairman of the committee, explained that MNAs will hear about 30 expert witnesses on “dying with dignity” to prepare a paper for a travelling public consultation this fall.
Barrette told the committee the issue of euthanasia could not be discussed in Quebec 50 years ago, comparing it with the evolution in thinking about abortion.

“Doctors are ready to debate euthanasia,” Barrette said. And like abortion, he said, limits must be established. Not every patient will want euthanasia and not all doctors will agree to perform the procedure.

Barrette explained that a patient who is lucid consults with a doctor, friends and family members before requesting euthanasia.

For patients who are not lucid, a biological will can guide relatives who must decide.
The patient could have a terminal disease, like cancer. And patients at the “end of life” could be babies born with serious medical difficulties or seniors whose bodies are shutting down, one system after another.

“It’s a cascade,” Barrette said. “We can’t invent it. We see it. There are safeguards.”
Barrette said palliative care, using opiates to ease the pain, is also an important facet of end-of-life care.

“The choice of the patient is his choice,” he said. “We want legislation in tune with the wishes of the public.”

Polls indicate a high percentage of Quebecers favour euthanasia, including doctors.
But Barrette and Yves Lamontagne of the Quebec College of Physicians told the committee that doctors do not want to perform assisted suicides.

“We are not there to execute people,” Lamontagne said.

Euthanasia, the decision to end life when death is imminent and inevitable, is “extremely complex and emotionally charged,” Lamontagne added.

Yves Robert, secretary of the College, told the committee that Quebec is the only jurisdiction in Canada where patients can refuse medical treatment, which can lead to death.

“It doesn’t exist elsewhere in Canada,” Robert said. “We are ahead. Can we go farther?”

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Family Matters, Guest Posts, Idaho Pro-Life Issues, Presidential Politics | No Comments »

Representative Tom Loertscher: House Highlights February 15, 2010

February 17th, 2010 by Halli

By Rep. Tom Loertscher, R-Bone

One of the unusual things about this session of the legislature is that we have now come through five full weeks and JFAC, at the end of the week, has finally set a target number for the budget. On normal years this happens in the first or second week at the latest. It was thought prudent to wait until the January revenues were in. It is down even more and the adjustment to the current fiscal year’s budget will be bigger as well.

The Director of the Department of Health and Welfare came before the House committee explaining how the shortfall and reductions have affected them. One bright spot in all of this is that the providers are assisting in finding ways to cut expenses.

The discussion about the Katie Beckett program (help for severely disabled kids) continues to be a focus of discussions with Health and Welfare. After the rules failed in the committee for proposed premium payments, I asked the Department to collect some data to see what could be saved under their proposal. I met with two of the head people in Medicaid and they have put together some data that at least gives the members of the committee information on which to make an informed decision. I don’t agree with the method they used to come up with payments, which is based on a percentage of gross income. The Federal Government doesn’t even tax on gross income.

I keep my ears open while at home each weekend and it is interesting to hear the comments about our situation. One idea that came up was to look into how anesthesiologists are reimbursed for their services under Medicaid for dental services. It seems that they are paid much more for dental services than for any other procedure, even in the O.R. That is a bit strange and I will be looking into that. It makes me wonder just how many other areas like this we can find if we just try.

It is a whole new game this year and it provides us with the opportunity to reevaluate everything we do in State Government. While speaking with the folks from Medicaid, I couldn’t help myself but to remind them about how we got to this spot. When times are good and we have a lot of your money, it has been easy to become lax in how we determine eligibility. A few years ago we had an “any door policy”, which was used to sign people up for every service they qualify for, even though they may have only needed one specific thing. In those days an application for Food Stamps would get you a Medicaid card even though you might not have needed it. And then we wonder why Medicaid has grown so much over the years.

Another question that came up this weekend was, “What is the mood in Boise these days?” My response was that there a lot of long faces around this place, some from legislators and more in the agencies. It seems to be more fun for some around here to spend a lot of other people’s money than it is to say “no.” As for me, I think of the people’s money with great respect. We should have been much more careful all along. Heaven only knows that I have been saying it often enough at the Statehouse.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Guest Posts, Idaho Legislature, Rep. Tom Loertscher, Taxes | No Comments »

David Ripley: Have Our Hearts Grown Cold?

February 16th, 2010 by Halli

Idaho Chooses Life

WorldNetDaily carried an important story late last week about fresh evidence of Planned Parenthood’s corporate policy of helping cover up the sexual abuse of teenage girls – as well as a pattern of violating state laws requiring parental consent before an abortion is committed against a girl.

The intrepid Lila Rose produced a sting tape of an abortuary run by Planned Parenthood in Alabama. Posing as a 14-year old girl, Ms. Rose asked for their help in skirting the parental consent law and protecting her 31-year-old “boyfriend”.

Not a problem, said the staffer. “As long as you consented to having sex with him, there’s nothing we can truly do about that”, the counselor adds. This, despite the fact that Alabama law makes it clear that 14-year-old girls cannot give legal consent because they are children.

The smoking-gun tape was so concrete that the Alabama Department of Health undertook an investigation of the abortion center, producing a 38-page report documenting that the Planned Parenthood operation systematically ignored two key laws designed to protect young girls: The first requires parental consent before an abortion. The second requires reporting suspected cases of sexual abuse to law enforcement officials for investigation.

“The Health Department report documents the same malpractice that we have found in state after state,” Rose is quoted as saying. “Sexually abused minors are being neglected by Planned Parenthood, which puts its own ‘abortion-first mentality’ before child protection.”

There is no doubt that the failure to report suspected sexual abuse is systematic, a corporate policy of sorts, throughout the Planned Parenthood empire. Several years ago we reviewed available data on reporting of sexual abuse in Idaho and found a huge discrepancy between reports filed and teenage pregnancy rates. The data strongly suggests that this reluctance to report abuse is as true in Idaho as it is everywhere else.

Please stop and ponder that for a moment. In effect, Planned Parenthood is engaging in a criminal conspiracy to protect predators, to enable the continued sexual abuse of teenage girls across the country.

Yet the public tax dollars continue to be pumped into the organization. Sometimes a public relations problem – but never a criminal charge against the corporate culture at Planned Parenthood.

Where is the outrage?

Compare the reaction this Planned Parenthood story has received with the fever pitch after the ACORN tapes were revealed.

While public outrage was fed by Glenn Beck, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh and others, even allies in Congress had to feign a shared indignation and move to block ACORN funding. (In fact, there are still ACORN stories up on Hannity’s website).

But no story, no big tv interview, no petitions to stop public funding of Planned Parenthood. About the only place we were able to find a clear expression of moral outrage was on David Horowitz’s blog.

Is the lack of outrage due to the chilling of our hearts? Can we not feel the tremendous damage that Planned Parenthood is doing to America’s children? The sexualizing and abuse of our children, particularly our daughters, may be a crime of greater long-term magnitude than even the slaughter of preborn children.

Our failure to rise up and demand an end to our collective partnership with Planned Parenthood is an indication that we need some very serious prayer efforts, begging the Lord to lead us into repentance.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

Richard Larsen: President’s Day has Lost Significance

February 16th, 2010 by Halli

By Richard Larsen

It is with some misgivings that I approach the third Monday of February each year. The day used to have great significance. But through the years, the day we celebrate as President’s Day has become less and less significant to our national psyche and more and more successful as a day of retail bargains. I don’t lament the latter, but the loss of the significance of the day as a celebration of George Washington’s and Abraham Lincoln’s birthdays is troublesome.

During the last full year of George Washington’s presidency, congress decided to honor him with a national day of recognition. Throughout the 19th century and for most of the 20th, the nation honored our first president, acknowledging his integral role in the founding of the United States of America. His significance in leadership leading to the Declaration of Independence; his success on the battlefields of the Revolutionary War; his deep sense of morality which led him to decline a kingship in the colonies; his leadership through the first eight years of the republic, have become lost on several generations, even to the point of rewriting history textbooks mitigating his role in the founding of the nation. His life contributions were recognized as a national holiday until 1968.

Another amazing president who devoted his life to the preservation of the republic, was born in February. Abraham Lincoln’s birthday, February 12, appeared on calendars from the year of his death in 1865 until the 1960s when acknowledgment of his birth was merged with that of Washington’s. His dedication to the preservation of the republic as a union of states, and his role in abolishing the tarnishing and immoral practice of slavery are experiencing the same historical revisionism Washington’s legacy is. Merging the two birthdays into one national holiday has eviscerated the significance of the day, and has added to the diminution of reverence, honor, and respect owed both of them.

To further dilute the significance of the day, the placement of the apostrophe has become almost indistinguishable, though the meaning is clear. The placement of the apostrophe like this, President’s Day, implies that it’s a day that belongs to one president, which would presumably be Washington, since he predated Lincoln. The placement of the apostrophe like this, Presidents’ Day, implies that it’s a day that belongs to many presidents. Even Richard Nixon, in his first President’s Day proclamation following passage of the “Long Weekend Act,” declared that the day should be used to celebrate all past presidents, not just Washington and Lincoln. That’s a little disconcerting.

Sadly, we have only two national holidays celebrating births, and only one of those is American born. One celebrates the birth of Christ, while the other celebrates the birth of Martin Luther King, Jr. Acknowledgment of Kings’ significant role in continuing the movement started by Lincoln is appropriate, but should not, in my humble opinion, take precedence over the contributions of Washington and Lincoln.

This plays well into the hands of those who engage in the revision of history, who rather than articulating the stupendous accomplishments of those who have preceded us, within their historical context, rather look at historical figures through the “enlightened” and politically correct prism of the contemporary perspective. Since the 1960s. textbook publishers have scrambled to rewrite American history in such a way as to make more space for specific demographics which don’t include deceased white men, like Washington, Lincoln, and Christopher Columbus. These have become the personas non grata of politically correct historians. The trend has also not been kind fo the role Christianity and Christian values have contributed to making America the nation it is today. Author Frances FitzGerald has referred to this historical revisionism as “the most dramatic rewriting of history ever to take place.”

A dear friend of mine who teaches high school history told me, “I remember a textbook we had which (I’m not kidding) gave a whole page to some 16 year old girl in the Revolution (I have forgotten her deeds) and only one paragraph on Washington (including as general!).”
As goes our history, so goes our national observances. As Peter Roff in U.S. News said this week, “Washington’s birthday has been transformed into something almost unrecognizable while Lincoln’s birthday, which is also worthy of observance, has for all practical purposes ceased to exist.”

These men have done so much not just for the creation, and molding of a nation based on freedom and equality, but laid the very foundations for the quality of life we enjoy here in these United States. With the continued diminution of their contributions being played out on the stage of political correctness, the responsibility is ours as parents and grandparents to teach and inform our posterity of their contributions. Those values they espoused, promulgated, fought for, and defended, should not be lost on the next generation of Americans.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Guest Posts, Presidential Politics | No Comments »

David Ripley: New Conscience Protection Bill Introduced in Idaho Senate

February 13th, 2010 by Halli

Idaho Chooses Life

On Friday morning, the Idaho Senate State Affairs Committee voted to introduce a revised conscience protection bill, SB 1353, sponsored by Sen. Chuck Winder and nine other members of the Idaho Legislature. It provides for “Freedom of Conscience for Health Care Professionals” working here, in six critical areas of health care.

The new bill clarifies some key language and creates an exception for life-threatening emergencies, a change requested by the Idaho Hospital Association.

While there were many Abortion Lobby representatives in the room, things went pretty smoothly at the print hearing. That is likely to change when the bill comes up for formal consideration – hopefully late next week. Probably the biggest battle will come over giving pharmacists and other health care professionals the right to object to dispensing so-called “Emergency Contraception”.

We did get an early signal that opposition to the bill will be led by Democrat Leader Kate Kelly. She made quite a point at the hearing of having her opposition to even considering the bill recorded in committee minutes. It seems that the only “choice” Sen. Kelly will tolerate is one which conforms to her worldview.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Constitutional Issues, Guest Posts, Idaho Legislature, Idaho Pro-Life Issues | No Comments »

David Ripley: The Need for Greater Humility in Modern Medicine

February 11th, 2010 by Halli

Idaho Chooses Life

Our dear friend, Judie Brown, published a powerful piece yesterday on the powerful trend in modern medicine to dehumanize the vulnerable, specifically the disabled.

Judie focuses on the recent story of a man long dismissed as “brain dead”. New medical tests demonstrated that he is anything but. While unable to communicate with his keepers in the normal fashion, it turns out that he is quite conscious. He accurately responded to various questions by changing his brain wave patterns in a measurable way.

She goes on to challenge what can only be described as the arrogance of today’s medical industry, and attacks the new utilitarian morality which seems to dominate medical ethics today. Persons are being evaluated on the basis of their perceived functionality – as if a person’s inability to do something we demand is the ultimate measure of whether that person is actually a human being worthy of life.

Such thinking is not just troubling, it is a dire threat to all of us. But it is equally obvious that this “morality” is the logical extension of the values embodied by Roe v. Wade.

Writes Mrs. Brown:

“[Functionality or utility has] nothing to do with the fundamental fact that a human being is. He exists from his beginning to his death regardless of his attributes or abilities. Neither his human rights, nor his identity as a person should be subjectively weighed by other individuals.”
We would add – especially weighed and discarded by those professionals empowered to withdraw life-sustaining treatment on the basis of such personal judgments.

You won’t read about this in the mainstream media, but did you know that credible studies, going back to 1991, have found that as many as 43% of those labeled “vegetative” are misdiagnosed? And that was before doctors were able to access this new technology.

The fundamental problem here is that man’s natural inclination toward arrogance and God-rebellion is showing. Without God, and His law … everything is up for debate. One opinion is as valid as another, even if it results in the death of the innocent pre-born child or the vulnerable senior.

Here’s how Wesley Smith puts it:

“The bio-ethics mainstream has rejected the sanctity of life ethic and replaced it with the so-called ‘quality of life’ ethic. It began with the claim that the inability to communicate meant that one had lost ‘humanhood’ (now called personhood). Thus today, not only unconscious but conscious patients are dehydrated to death in all fifty states and it is shrugged off as medical ethics.”

Just to raise your anxiety even higher – we must point out that this is the state of affairs even before ObamaCare is forced upon America.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Family Matters, Guest Posts, Idaho Pro-Life Issues, Presidential Politics | No Comments »

David Ripley: Idaho House Passes Health Freedom Act

February 10th, 2010 by Halli

Idaho Chooses Life

The Idaho House of Representatives passed HB391 on Tuesday by a lopsided 52-18 vote. Sponsored by Reps. Labrador, Luker & Clark, this legislation lays the groundwork for the State of Idaho to fight ObamaCare should it be shoved through the Congress.

Sadly, the vote was a strictly partisan affair. All Democrats voted against it, all Republicans voted for the measure. One would have hoped that at least some Democrats would have joined the effort to push back against Nancy Pelosi’s

frightening plan to take over America’s health care system. The current versions of this scheme would fundamentally alter the relationship of citizens to their government. It is arguable, in fact, that much of the driving mania behind ObamaCare is not compassion for the uninsured, but a deep desire to impose a European-style socialism upon the last bastion of capitalism.

Citizens would be required to buy health insurance, and private companies would be required to compete against a taxpayer-subsidized government entity as a first step toward us all into a single-payer system controlled by government bureaucrats.

The worst features of ObamaCare, of course, are the threats to life mandated by its cut to Medicare, its massive subsidies for abortion-on-demand, and the absence of conscience protections for health care providers.

HB 391 declares that “the power to require a person’s choice in securing health care services is not found in the Constitution of the United States, and is, therefore, a power reserved to the people pursuant to the 9th Amendment, and to the states under the 10th Amendment.” The legislation makes it illegal for any state official to enforce or otherwise participate in a federal health care system that violates this public policy.

You can read the legislation yourself by following this link:

The battle in the Idaho Senate is likely to be more intense. We encourage our readers to contact their state senators to urge their support for this critical legislation.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Guest Posts, Idaho Legislature, Idaho Pro-Life Issues, Presidential Politics | No Comments »

Representative Tom Loertscher: House Highlights Feb. 8, 2010

February 10th, 2010 by Halli

By Rep. Tom Loertscher, R-Bone

There is an old Irish saying, “Count your joys instead of your woes, Count your friends instead of your foes.” Our friend The Farm Bureau was in town for their annual meeting and the evening spent with them was very enjoyable and a reminder to deal with our problems the way we do down on the farm. After the conversation at my table went on for some time, Mrs. Priestly looked at me and asked if in the middle of all of our problems, if there is anything good to report?

A few good things are happening and a short list follows. We have turned down some not so good rules from some of the agencies. That’s a good thing. When rules are so burdensome or lie outside what the law intends, they need eliminating. In State affairs we have found some extra cash by implementing electronic publishing for the rules themselves.

In the elections arena we are looking at legislation to allow for online filing of campaign reports that will help save some money as well. We have forwarded a bill to the full house that asserts our state’s rights when it comes to health care. It authorizes our Attorney General to seek relief should the Congress pass health care laws that would cause increases in Idaho’s costs and would impose penalties on our people for not purchasing insurance. We will soon see legislation to implement photo voter identification. There are some changes to the redistricting law, in addition to what we did last year, that should help our rural areas. And even better news is that everyone around this place is committed to getting this done and out of town (I’m shooting for March 26 or sooner).

We have put some deadlines in place for bills to be printed. Anything beyond that point will have to pass the following test: Will the republic endure without this measure? In a year like this, it has become difficult to find the joys, but we do have them. I’ll do my best to count them.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Constitutional Issues, Guest Posts, Idaho Legislature, Rep. Tom Loertscher, Taxes | No Comments »

David Ripley: The Manic Drive for Health Care

February 9th, 2010 by Halli

Idaho Chooses Life

Pollster Scott Rasmussen has new numbers on his website today showing that Obama’s approval rating continues its inexorable downward trend. Today’s disapproval rating is 54%, his biggest negative number yet.

To put that number in perspective, remember that, a year ago, his positive approval was 65%. Now it sits at 46%.

While the president’s mishandling of the economy is certainly the over-arching context for these abysmal numbers, it is equally obvious that Obama’s obsession with taking over our health care system is the noxious, dead fish stinking up the country’s living room. Rather than taking concrete steps to support the private sector’s economic recovery, the president continues his manic drive for nationalized health care. And every version of that vision includes expanded abortion, diminished conscience rights for health care professionals and rationed care for the disabled and elderly.

Our political system depends upon an unstated presumption: Those elected to office will represent the wishes of their constituents out of enlightened self-interest. Pundits too often belittle the role of polling and other mechanisms (like election returns), which serve to hold elected officials accountable to the will of the voting public. Representatives are called by that name for a reason: they are supposed to represent the will of the people who put them into office.

President Obama’s failure to accept defeat on health care suggests that he has rejected the basic tenet necessary to a constitutional republic. He seems to suffer from that liberal delusion that he is just plain smarter than the American people.

If that is right, then ObamaCare is far from dead.

Some pundits are suggesting that a strategy has been developed: Obama will stage some public, bi-partisan forums in which he can manipulate opponents into appearing as if they are nothing more than self-seeking obstructionists. (Even if that is not an obvious conclusion – the president’s allies in the media will continue to pound that conclusion into the public consciousness). Such a media assault will become the pretext for congressional allies to abuse the budget reconciliation to enact most of his legislation.

It is in that context that two big bills now pending in the Idaho Legislature must be considered as essential to defending Idaho families.

Conscience protection for health care professionals is one essential piece of business this Legislature must enact. As of this writing, SB1270 is being rewritten to take into account a few reasonable suggestions made by folks in the medical industry and to broaden support for the legislation. We expect the bill to be reintroduced this week.

The other very important bill is sponsored by Reps. Labrador, Clark and Luker. It is called the Idaho Health Freedom Act (HB391) and is now pending on the House floor. This legislation pushes back against the federal government take-over of health care by asserting the constitutional liberties of Idaho families to make our own health care decisions.

We ask for your help in seeing that both bills become law.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Guest Posts, Idaho Legislature, Idaho Pro-Life Issues, Presidential Politics, Taxes | No Comments »

Richard Larsen: Now This is Profligate Spending

February 8th, 2010 by Halli

By Richard Larsen

I’m genuinely concerned for the health of our president. At least his mental health. With increasing frequency, he evinces signs of delusion. Or maybe he thinks we’re too ignorant to recognize it. Either way, there’s ample evidence of a mental separation from reality that should be of great concern to all of us.

For example, in his State of the Union address last week, he said “Our government is deeply in debt after what can only be described as a decade of profligacy.” This statement immediately brings to mind the editorial cartoon the Journal ran a couple weeks ago where the president was attempting to fly a paper airplane that said “Blame Bush” on the side of it, and a citizen was telling him, “It doesn’t fly anymore.” It really doesn’t, especially as it deals with government spending.

In 2006, the last year the Republicans controlled congress, the federal deficit, which is tax receipts for the year minus spending, was $248 billion. But on the heels of the presidents’ comments last week, he attempts to float a lead balloon of a budget that boasts $3.8 trillion in federal government spending, more than a 50% increase over 2006 figures, and a whopping $1.6 trillion deficit. That’s fully 7 times larger than the deficit was in 2006. If the last decade represented “profligate” spending, what does that make his proposed spending? Profligate times 7? At this rate of spending growth and irresponsible fiscal policy, the U.S. will join Greece, Spain, and Portugal in having its debt instruments, bonds, notes and bills, downgraded and highly suspect to astute investors.

The news about Greece’s likely default on its debt sank markets around the globe this week. Part of the problem is that their deficit is estimated at 12.7% of GDP (gross domestic production), with debt above 110% of GDP. To put that in perspective, the U.S. right now has a deficit which is 10.6% of GDP and total national debt, with this week’s increase of $2 trillion by congress, now standing at 100% of GDP. For those who wish that the U.S. was more like Europe, at least from a financial perspective, you’ve gotten your wish. We’re about to join the ranks of nearly bankrupt countries from Europe!

Most of our federal government debt is financed by selling treasuring bonds, notes, and bills. The Chinese government currently owns about 23% of all the outstanding U.S. debt. With all this spending proposed by Obama, the assumption is made that China, and investors around the world, will be willing to buy our paper (debt). But a Chinese official said a few weeks ago, before Obama rolled out his new spend-thrift budget, that there is not enough money in the world to buy all the U.S. treasuries needed to fund Obama’s spending.

Obama also said last week, “We can’t simply move beyond this crisis; we have to address the irresponsibility that led to it, and that includes the failure to rein in spending….” While castigating a previous administration with a fraction of the deficit that he’s proposing, and a budget a third smaller than what he’s proposing, he has the audacity to claim that he’s “reining in spending?” He’s not reining in anything, but kicking and spurring the federal spending stallion into a full gallop, and he’s heading for a cliff.

The president also said, “It would be a terrible mistake to borrow against our children’s future to pay our way today….” Yet that’s exactly what he’s proposing. His new budget calls for an astonishing $1.7 trillion in new taxes, including the expiration of the Bush tax cuts. We will not be paying for his full $3.7 trillion budget even with all those increased taxes…our children will be. Didn’t Bernie Madoff just go to prison for doing the same thing? What the president is proposing is multigenerational larceny and a federal government Ponzi scheme.

He also made a big deal in his State of the Union address that he would freeze discretionary spending, which is about 7% of the federal budget, for three years…starting next year! That’s after he already boosted discretionary spending by 20% his first year in office. So his proclaimed “spending freeze” is no more than a façade, where the 20% increases from this year are locked into place, starting next year. Discretionary spending typically increases about 3% per year, so he’s proposed “reducing spending” growth by only locking in discretionary spending by twice that amount!

When there is such a detachment from what one says versus what one does, it moves beyond cognitive dissonance, and into the realm of detachment from reality, which is associated with a number of mental disorders. We truly hope he isn’t smitten with any of these, but the evidence is increasing daily.

If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Constitutional Issues, Guest Posts, Politics in General, Presidential Politics | No Comments »

« Previous Entries Next Entries »

Copyright © 2oo6 by Powered by Wordpress          
Ported by ThemePorter - template by Design4 | Sponsored by Cheap Web Hosting