Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obama's Budget Is The End Of An Era ["... Even The Air They Breathe"]
LA Times ^ | February 27, 2009

Posted on 02/27/2009 10:19:18 PM PST by Steelfish

ANALYSIS Obama's budget is the end of an era

The president's ambitious proposal breaks with the conservative principles that have ruled national politics since Reagan.

By Janet Hook February 27, 2009

Reporting from Washington -- Not since Lyndon B. Johnson and Franklin D. Roosevelt has a president moved to expand the role of government so much on so many fronts -- and with such a demanding sense of urgency.

The scope of President Obama's ambition was laid bare in the budget blueprint issued Thursday.

The budget would account for 24.1% of next year's estimated gross domestic product, one of the highest percentages since World War II, and would raise taxes, redistribute income, spend more on social programs than on defense, and implement policies that touch almost every aspect of Americans' lives -- their banks, healthcare, schools, even the air they breathe.

(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Government
KEYWORDS: 111th; bho44; bhobudget; marxist; obamatruthfile; porkulus; socialist; theend

1 posted on 02/27/2009 10:19:18 PM PST by Steelfish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Steelfish
The president's ambitious proposal breaks with the conservative principles that have ruled national politics since Reagan.

Bwahahaha!!! Conservative principles has been wandering in the wasteland for over a decade now. Since Reagan my ass.
2 posted on 02/27/2009 10:23:43 PM PST by arderkrag (Liberty Walking (www.geocities.com/arderkrag))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

And this is good news?

How are things going in North Korea these days? Was East Germany really better off than West Germany? There are many examples of government control of the economy. None turned out well. That even applies in the US.

FDR kept us in the Depression. LBJ’s “war on poverty” failed. In terms of its effects, it should have been called the “war on the black family” as it incentivized out of wedlock births among the poor. Since a large proportion of blacks are poor, there was a concentrated impact on the black community. It drove their illegitimacy rates sky high - around 85% if I remember right. Single parent families correlate with higher crime and incarceration. In other words, most of the problems blacks suffer today appear to have been caused by LBJ’s “war on poverty” and other government welfare.


3 posted on 02/27/2009 10:48:24 PM PST by ChessExpert (The Dow was at 12,400 when Democrats took control of Congress. What is it today?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2136635/posts

“Are you looking for a job?”

Note: This thread is updated on a regular basis.


4 posted on 02/27/2009 10:55:18 PM PST by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ChessExpert

YEP...the DEMS (creators of the Klu Klux Klan and Jim Crow Laws) sure like to keep their “constituents” on the PLANTATION of Dependency, don’t they....


5 posted on 02/27/2009 11:04:00 PM PST by goodnesswins (Conservative and fighting for freedom and liberty....whether you like it or not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: arderkrag

It’s all relative. Remember the scene in Schindler’s List when they were all herded into the Krakow ghetto ( had to look it up ), with many families sharing each house, and the man says to his wife, “Well, at least it can’t get any worse.” ?

It actually amazes me when I hear people reacting against Bush in the face of this onslaught, for not being a true conservative.


6 posted on 02/27/2009 11:08:49 PM PST by dr_lew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: dr_lew
Sorry, but some things aren't relative. I was reacting to Bush and congress for the past 8 years for not being conservative enough, I'm not going to stop now.
7 posted on 02/27/2009 11:18:02 PM PST by arderkrag (Liberty Walking (www.geocities.com/arderkrag))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: arderkrag
Sorry, but some things aren't relative.

So you're saying, <Bush> == <Obama> == <Liberal> == <Communist>, ABSOLUTELY and CATEGORICALLY ?

Because this is the only way I can understand your remark.

8 posted on 02/27/2009 11:30:56 PM PST by dr_lew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: dr_lew
Then you don't understand at all.

Obama is a socialist. Bush was a moderate. Clinton was a socialist. None of them were up to snuff, and defending someone because he was the least wrong is silly IMO. Think about this past election. I didn't vote for McCain to beat Obama - voting for the lesser evil is stupid. I voted for McCain because he was the one I agreed with the most. But I wouldn't defend him for a second if he was in office doing socialist things. Saying things like, "At least he's not as bad as X" is equivalent to defending the lesser of two evils, and is therefore wrong IMO. Either the person in office passes muster, or they are a failure.
9 posted on 02/27/2009 11:39:53 PM PST by arderkrag (Liberty Walking (www.geocities.com/arderkrag))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: arderkrag

Now perhaps it’s just that I was young (7 in ‘92, 15 in ‘00), but I would never casually throw Clinton and Barry in the same category. On the character front, yes he was a lying sleazeball. And yes, he was a lefty who liked stealing from those who work for a living to give handouts to deadbeats and dependents.

But (and correct me if I’m way off base here), he was not in the same league as Barry either in terms of policy or philosophy. He was a southern boy who (aw shucks) just wanted to help po’ folks out (come on, ya’ll can afford to give some more). Not that it’s right, but that’s a very different outlook than the Chicago thug we have now.

Barry virulently hates legitimate achievement. He is philosophically opposed to anyone who makes his way on his own labor, to those who are independent and have no need for a “community organizing” bureaucrat. His mission in life is to attack the individual freedoms that make people reject the commissars’ dictates, and turn them into dependents.

In my mind, I see Clinton taxing because that’s what it takes to give out the things he gives. Barry loves handouts to the non-earners, but even without them he would want crushing taxes *for the sake of taxes*—just to punish achievement. He wants a sniveling underclass of desperate, fearful subjects forced into urban high rise slums and begging for their government cheese.

Jimmy Carter was a terrible president, but he was more of a fool than actually evil. Clinton was more shrewd than Carter, but I’d put him much closer to Jimmy’s camp than the Barry-Pelosi-Jackson-Reid-Sharpton mentality.


10 posted on 02/28/2009 12:24:06 AM PST by BobbyT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: All
...even the air they breathe Let loose the Taxman.
11 posted on 02/28/2009 12:51:56 AM PST by carumba (The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made. Groucho)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish
The budget would account for 24.1% of next year's estimated gross domestic product...

National bankruptcy and Zimbabwe come to mind for some reason.

12 posted on 02/28/2009 1:05:24 AM PST by verklaring (Pyrite is not gold))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: arderkrag

Whoopee for you. And the payoff you get ?


13 posted on 02/28/2009 1:11:48 AM PST by STARWISE ( They (LIBS-STILL) think of this WOT as Bush's war, not America's war- Richard Miniter))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: STARWISE

A clear conscience.


14 posted on 02/28/2009 1:47:09 AM PST by arderkrag (Liberty Walking (www.geocities.com/arderkrag))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: BobbyT

I agree with you. As horrible as Bill Clinton was and he was terrible with many issues, he did not hate America. I seriously don’t believe he did. Obama is the most anti-American President we have had. Jimmy Carter was a fool during his Presidency but has moved into the dangerous category the older he gets. He makes negative comments about America overseas...that is not good.


15 posted on 02/28/2009 1:52:36 AM PST by napscoordinator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: BobbyT

Actually, I think Hillary pretty much ran the show and she was a fan of Saul Alinsky as is Obama. Bubba was a “good ol’ boy wannabe” who was fairly unique-looking and rather cynical and insecure. He understood dependents and loved the gubmint paying his light bill. I don’t think he particularlly liked women, he just seemed to like being serviced with puerile sex by what he considered to be “good-looking” women. His lifestyle has pretty much burned him out and it shows. (He didn’t count on being caught in his disrespect for the Oval Office quite like he was. He was supposed to now be enjoying “elder statesman” status by people he really wishes respected him instead of liberal sycophants.)


16 posted on 02/28/2009 4:38:12 AM PST by Twinkie (Obama is NOT Reagan !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

Saturday, February 28, 2009
Buffett: Sees Economy In ‘shambles’ In ‘09

David B. Wilkerson
MarketWatch Pulse

CHICAGO — Berkshire Hathaway Chairman Warren Buffett told shareholders Saturday that 2008 was the company’s worst year on record, as the per share value of both the Class A and Class B stock fell 9.6%. In his annual letter, Buffett said neither he nor Charlie Munger, his partner in running Berkshire, can predict winning and losing years in advance, and that no one else can. “We’re certain, for example, that the economy will be in shambles throughout 2009 - and, for that matter, probably well beyond - but that conclusion does not tell us whether the stock market will rise or fall.” Commenting on the federal government’s actions to resolve the economic crisis, Buffett said: “Economic medicine that was previously meted out by the cupful has recently been dispensed by the barrel. These once-unthinkable dosages will almost certainly bring on unwelcome aftereffects.”


17 posted on 02/28/2009 9:28:47 AM PST by KeyLargo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson