This week the Senate finally approved the $410 Billion Omnibus Spending bill, chock full of 9000 earmarks that Obama opposed during the campaign but signed into law anyway secretly, behind closed doors.
It’s a brazen fiscal looting of our treasury, and our children’s treasury.
I hesitate to use language like looting, but doesn’t this feel like that? Despite widespread opposition (calls against the stimulus bill were reported to be 90 to 1), with no press coverage allowed, Obama signed an omnibus spending bill with 9000 pet pork projects that, combined with the stimulus bill, will represent an 80 percent spending increase in discretionary spending, from $378 billion to $680 billion. In other words, in private, against our will, he took all our money – sounds like looting to me.
Obama’s not the only two-faced actor in this ugly drama. Here’s what Shailagh Murray at the Washington Post had to say early this morning,
The bill represents a bonanza for federal agencies that felt a budget squeeze for much of President George W. Bush’s two terms.
Wow – that’s got to be a world record for revisionist history. Wasn’t it just last week that Democrats, including Obama, were blasting the GOP for having the nerve to criticize Obama’s socialist spending spree when they were so “irresponsible” during the Bush years? Now the media is trying to float the idea federal agencies were “squeezed” during the Bush years and now receive proper nourishment at Obama’s fat teat (that we paid for).
Hogwash!
Honestly, how stupid do they think we are? At this point, I’d like to apply the old cliché that “they can’t have it both ways” but they’re actually making a pretty good living having it both ways.
Obama and the newscrats (those in the news media that propogate the views of Democrats, especially those of new progressive-socialists like Obama, Sanders, Frank, Soros, etc…) want us to feel they’re not bad for spending too much because Bush also spent too much. Now they want us to feel they’re good for spending too much because Bush starved our withering federal agencies.
The ugly truth is the Democrats were very bad then for forcing Bush to spend too much and very bad now for spending way too much themselves.
Yes, Bush came advertised as a “compassionate conservative” and would probably have spent more than other GOP Presidents, but Bush had to compromise with Democrats, more than other GOP Presidents, because Democrats would not support the War on Terror (in Iraq, Afghanistan and domestically) otherwise. Bush could not compromise on measures to keep America safe so the Democrat’s cooperation had to be bought year after year with compromises on spending.
This is true even though Democrats were in the minority during Bush’s first 6 years because they held more than enough seats to filibuster or block any legislation they did not want. How many times did you hear loud public opposition from Congressional Democrats to a Bush War-on-Terror proposal only to see the measure pass with bi-partisan support? Ever wonder why, if Democrats could have blocked it?
I believe they knew Bush was right on War-on-Terror issues but feigned opposition to appeal to their base and win concessions on other Democratic priorities like growing the size of government. Remember – these were the years when Move-on.org, building on their success in 2004, began to intimidate Democratic lawmakers to pass their progressive agenda that included stopping the war and growing the size of government.
According to the Heritage Foundation:
From 2001 through 2008, domestic programs grew 23 percent faster than inflation, due in part to large increases for education (35 percent), health research (37 percent), and veterans’ benefits (54 percent).
Hardly the “budget squeeze” Ms. Murray at the Post described. What’s even worse? Dodd & Frank, armed with the filibuster bat, prevented reforms, by Bush and McCain, of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, resulting in the “worst financial crisis since the Great Depression”. Thanks Democrats!
Now, in the latest of cruel ironies, Obama and the Democrats will again rape the federal treasury and, remarkably, at the same time, blame Bush for starving a federal government that ate very well during the last eight years because the Democrats made a Faustian trade with Bush – a sort of pork-for-peace extortion.
Extortion, now looting. I’m afraid to ask what’s next.
