California: Governor Brown thinks we’re stupid

January 6, 2012

Governor Jerry Brown’s proposed budget was released yesterday (1) and it’s… Well, this is a family show, so let’s just say it’s “interesting.”

Governor Jerry Brown proposed $92.6 billion in spending for the year starting in July, an increase of about 7 percent, which will count on voters approving $7 billion of higher taxes in November.

The spending plan foresees a deficit of $9.2 billion through the next 18 months. Almost half of that is in the current fiscal year, he said. He called for $4.2 billion in cuts, mostly to welfare and programs for the poor. If the tax increase isn’t passed, Brown’s plan would cut another $4.8 billion in support for public schools and community colleges.

In other words, the government of a state that’s already suffering from too much government spending and suicidally high levels of taxation wants to increase spending and ask the voters to tax themselves more. Makes sense? It does if you’re a California liberal Democrat. I mean, we just couldn’t cut some of the myriad of needless and redundant state boards we maintain (and whose members draw six-figure salaries). We couldn’t cut the subsidized car leases and hefty per diems our elected representatives oligarchs get (2). We couldn’t find ways to increase revenue by intelligently exploiting our vast natural resources and making California once again an attractive place to do business, now could we?

Heaven forfend! Are you mad?

No, the only way to feed Sacramento’s crack habit spending needs is to raise revenue by increasing sales and income taxes, the latter especially on those filthy, evil, rich people. (That is, small business owners who create the few jobs that still are created here.) That means We The People have to agree to those taxes.

And that means Jerry has to lie to us:

The proposed 2012 budget would slash $5.2 billion in public school funding if voters reject the tax increases Brown is trying to put on the November ballot. This would include about $200 million in cuts each to the University of California and the Cal State University systems and $4.8 billion to K-12 education and community colleges. (3)

In other words, “if you don’t agree to tax yourselves more, you must hate children! My God, THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!” It’s the typical prediction of apocalyptic doom they hit us with every single time they ask for higher taxes. And it is absolute baloney.

A little background: under Proposition 98, passed in 1988, funds for K-12 education in California must increase every year (4); it’s required by the state constitution. As you’ll see in the summary charts for the budget (PDF, via Moe Lane), Brown’s budget includes a $4.8 billion increase in K-12 funding. Look familiar? It should; that’s the same amount cited as a “slash” in funding in the above quote. In other words, the “cut in education funding” is really the elimination of a proposed increase, not a genuine cut at all.

And that’s the lie: the “cut” the Democrats are shrieking about would really be just holding education spending at it’s already-generous level. That’s why I say they think we’re stupid. They think we’ll fall for it. But they forget they’ve tried this trick before, and it hasn’t worked. Ballot proposals for tax increases have a history here of going down to defeat. I predict this one will, too.

Because we’re not as stupid as our masters think.

via The Flash Report

UPDATE: At Cal Watchdog, Katy Grimes says the Governor is holding schoolchildren hostage.

Footnotes:
(1) Not released by Jerry, though. That was supposed to be next week. Some staffer screwed up. Ooops.
(2) In fact, all three branches of government get an increase. How… nice.
(3) With an annoyed comment from me at the bottom.
(4) The law can be suspended for a year by a 2/3rds vote of the legislature. I suspect this is what will have to happen if the voters reject the tax increase.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Seriously, Debbie?

December 12, 2011

According to Congresswoman and Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (1), unemployment has not gone up under President Obama.

Huh?

Remember, she was handpicked by President Obama to be the public face of the Democratic Party. Must’ve been for her chutzpah when it comes to telling the Big Lie.

She can’t be that dumb. It must be because she thinks we’re that dumb.

Footnote:
(1) Also a nauseating race-baiter.


The kind of lies an immature, narcissistic president tells

October 23, 2011

"Tell me you love me!"

Oh, please. Don’t insult my intelligence:

Every night before he goes to sleep, the president of the United States reads 10 letters from the pile of 20,000 sent to him by Americans every day. Sometimes, he writes back. He’s even, on occasion, included a check.

“It’s not something I should advertise, but it has happened,” President Barack Obama told reporter Eli Saslow, author of the new book, “Ten Letters: The Stories Americans Tell Their President.”

I’m not sure what the bigger whopper is here: that Obama plays “secret Santa” to some of the poor, downtrodden folks in danger of losing their homes or with medical bills they can’t pay, or that a guy with an ego the size of the Grand Canyon is reluctant to talk about it.

Consider the first choice. Are you really going to tell me these people have received personal checks from the President of the United States and have stayed quiet about it? They didn’t tell their relatives? They and their relatives didn’t tell the local news? No one at the bank who cashed the check told anyone “Hey, I just cashed a check from Obama?” Word never got to the national news networks, who’d love to carry a feel-good story about their God-King?

Everyone stayed mum?

Sure. Uh-huh. I buy that. How much for the bridge, too? 

Or how about the next one, that he’s reluctant to talk about it? Barack Obama, humble? Reluctant to take credit? The man who shunned the Democratic convention hall so he could make his acceptance speech in an outdoor arena before Grecian columns, like some demigod? The man who couldn’t be bothered to appear in person at ceremonies commemorating the fall of the Berlin Wall, but sent  a video message that focused on him? Who’s famously thin-skinned about criticism and makes almost every speech on himself? Who’s sure he’s made all the right choices? Who had to have a star-studded White House birthday party –including a conga line– while the economy is still in a tank??

This Barack Obama, who probably has narcissistic personality disorder?

Yeah, you bet. And unicorns are real, too.

Look, if this turns out to be true –that Obama sent checks, not just wrote back– I’ll admit my error and apologize.

But I just don’t believe it; I think the man is lying and that his childish need for ego-stroking made him do it.

via Clarice Feldman

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Gunwalker: Holder lied, over 200 died

October 4, 2011

Is it too soon to begin the Eric holder career death-watch? After the revelation that the worst Attorney General since A. Mitchell Palmer lied to Congress, I expect we’ll be hearing Obama make the traditional “He has my complete confidence” statement — just before he throws Holder under the bus:

New documents obtained by CBS News show Attorney General Eric Holder was sent briefings on the controversial Fast and Furious operation as far back as July 2010. That directly contradicts his statement to Congress.

On May 3, 2011, Holder told a Judiciary Committee hearing, “I’m not sure of the exact date, but I probably heard about Fast and Furious for the first time over the last few weeks.”

Yet internal Justice Department documents show that at least ten months before that hearing, Holder began receiving frequent memos discussing Fast and Furious.

The documents came from the head of the National Drug Intelligence Center and Assistant Attorney General Lanny Breuer.

Links to the memos are available at the original CBS article.

According to Philip  Klein at the Washington Examiner, the Department of Justice is now trying to… nuance Holder’s testimony before Congress, saying he knew of the operation, just not its details.

Yeah. Right.

Go read the first of the linked memos and emails, from the NDIC on  July 5th, 2010 (PDF): it specifically mentions 1,500 firearms bought by straw buyers and supplied to the Mexican drug cartels. The memo from Lanny Breuer is from the Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Criminal Division, one of the highest-ranking, most important officials in the DoJ.

There are only two possibilities here: either Eric Holder lied in his testimony before Congress, or he is so derelict that he doesn’t bother to read memos from key staff on important law-enforcement operations (1), rendering him incompetent. Either way, he is unfit to be Attorney General of the United States and must be removed from office, whether by impeachment or being thrown under the presidential bus fired.

And, while were at it, how about a special prosecutor?

RELATED: Prior posts on Operation Fast and Furious.

Footnote:
(1) At least, I’d call helping to arm criminal organizations in another country “important.” Call me crazy.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Let’s see, whom should I take seriously?

August 18, 2010

The mendacious video below from the liberal pro-abortion* group Emily’s List attacking Sarah Palin has been making the rounds of the blogosphere the last few days. I haven’t much to say about it that already hasn’t been said by Ace, Ed Morrissey, and William Jacobson. So, instead, I’ll leave you with a question. But first, watch the video:

Okay, now that you’re done laughing in disbelief, watch this video from the woman they attacked:

So, here’s the question: On matters of national politics and policy, whom do you take more seriously? A Sarah Palin talking with gravity about empowering women to deal responsibly with the problems facing the nation, or a bunch of women dressed like … a dating service for furries?

Tough choice, I know.

LINKS: Former liberal feminist Tammy Bruce calls Emily’s List a bunch of reactionaries.

*(You know, as in favoring the killing of human beings before they’re born.)

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Lying or just ignorant?

September 23, 2009

President Obama read from his teleprompter before the United Nations General Assembly today. As you’d expect from the head of state of a powerful country, his speech contained many important and interesting statements. Some of them may even have dealt with reality. Among those that didn’t, however, was this whopper:

“I am proud to say that the United States has done more to promote clean energy and reduce carbon pollution in the last eight months than at any other time in our history.”

It wouldn’t be an Obama speech without some attempt to make himself look good by misrepresenting the record of his predecessor. The plain fact is that the President’s statement is a lie. Whether born of ignorance or intent, I don’t know, but a lie it is. The truth is the United States in 2005 and 2006, working through the private sector and in ad-hoc partnerships with other nations and under the eeeevvviiillll, Gaea-murdering BushChimpHitler and Darth Cheney regime reduced carbon dioxide emissions without relying on the liberal internationalist statism beloved by the watermelon crowd and their dupes. That is, through pro-growth policies that didn’t require degrading lifestyles or crippling economies, but instead emphasized new technologies and the intelligent exploitation of natural resources.

The Anchoress has the full scoop. Be sure to read her post.

And if I may recommend a good book….

Perhaps I should buy the President a copy.

ADDENDUM: No, I’m not endorsing the idea that CO2 results in global warming climate change. My opinion is unchanged: the theory of Anthropogenic Global Warming is incorrect, verging on scientific fraud. My concern here was with the cock-and-bull story the President told.


Another campaign promise expires?

August 2, 2009

Hey, wait a second. Didn’t Tax-Cheat Timmy’s boss say during the campaign there would be no new taxes on the middle class? That was then, and this is now:

To get the economy back on track, will President Barack Obama have to break his pledge not to raise taxes on 95 percent of Americans? In a “This Week” exclusive, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner told me, “We’re going to have to do what’s necessary.”

Geithner was clear that he believes a key component of economic recovery is deficit reduction. When I gave him several opportunities to rule out a middle class tax hike, he wouldn’t do it.

“We have to bring these deficits down very dramatically,” Geithner told me. “And that’s going to require some very hard choices.”

But…but… The One said:

Of course, the Treasury Secretary’s remarks aren’t a thundering revelation; anyone who’s looked honestly at the amount of money committed under the stimulus bill and the current budget, and the amounts needed to pay for ObamaCare realizes he can pay for it only by borrowing, printing money, or raising taxes – probably some combination of all three. What’s clear is that it can’t be paid for by taxing the rich alone. That means he must raise taxes on the middle classes during a severe recession, one of the surest ways to choke a real recovery.

And Geithner’s remarks aren’t the first hint from this administration that the “no middle-class tax hike” pledge would go under the bus: Axelrod was crossing his fingers behind his back over a month ago, as was Obama’s Press Secretary. All this is just laying the groundwork for Obama himself to eventually break his promise, regretting the need to do so while blaming Bush.

Harry Truman once said that a platform is to run on, not to stand on, but I don’t think he meant “stomp it into little pieces,” either.

LINKS: Hot Air, and Hot Air again. Byron York. Sister Toldjah.


A grand, misbegotten scheme

July 28, 2009

Rich Lowry marvels at President Obama’s ability to continue telling bald-faced lies about the costs of his health plan in the face mounting evidence that its a fiscal disaster:

The Left branded George W. Bush a “liar” for making assertions about Iraq’s weapons that were supported by the evidence, but turned out not to be true. Obama is saying things that aren’t even supported by the evidence. They are routinely debunked by the independent Congressional Budget Office, but that doesn’t stop Obama from continuing to say them. It’s as if the CIA issued reports every other week in 2002 explaining that no, Iraq didn’t have a nuclear program nor any stockpiles of biological and chemical weapons, and Bush kept warning of the nonexistent WMD anyway.

Since the phantom cost-saving measures that Obama touts can’t be detected by anyone else, including Blue Dog Democrats and the CBO, Obama’s team came up with a deus ex machina. They’d create a council to come up with recommendations for Medicare. If Obama accepted them, they’d automatically go into effect unless Congress voted to block them. CBO looked at the council and estimated it’d only save a minuscule $2 billion during the next ten years, adding that “the probability is high that no savings would be realized.”

Will this stop Obama from selling health-care reform as a cost savings? Of course not. He can’t admit that he is bending the famous cost curve upward, any more than he can admit that the House plan might throw millions of people out of their private coverage or that the bill will — despite its raft of new taxes — add another $239 billion to the deficit over ten years. In its latest missive, the CBO says the numbers get even worse beyond the ten-year window. So the entire budgetary rationale of Obamacare — improving the nation’s long-term fiscal outlook — has been obliterated.

Lowery writes about how people are coming to miss the Obama of 2008, who seemed so cool, competent, and moderate. But those who paid attention know this was a carefully crafted “Potemkin village” of an image, meant to slip a radical Progressive past a generally Center-Right nation. The mainstream media colluded in this, in all but a few cases preferring to dwell on key issues such as Sarah Palin’s tanning bed and how good Barack Obama looks in jeans rather than investigating the Democratic nominee’s background and record.

But facts have a way of forcing themselves through even the most carefully crafted image. The people are seeing more and more the disconnect between the president’s words and the likely results of his plan, especially in the wake of the colossal failure of his pork fiesta stimulus package to meet any of his stated goals. They gave him his chance when he said it had to be passed NOW, before anyone had the time to really read and consider it. They can see how well that worked, and they’re wary of trusting him again with yet another massive program.

Call it a teachable moment for the public. Today’s lesson: “fool me once…” .

RELATED: Speaking of “teachable moments,” Byron York writes today on the GOP’s Teachable Moment on the Risks of Obamacare. The August recess is crucial to stopping this train wreck before it happens.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 12,874 other followers