Rand Paul on Mitt Romney

So like so many other right wing Tea Nuts , you want to pick and choose what part of the Constitution that you agree with. Originally Posted by WTF

You say "selective embrace" of the Constitution by Tea Party members wasn't your point? Of which post? I bring your attention to this early post of yours in this thread, #11 to be precise. It wasn't directed at me, but it's what got me involved. That and the follow-up post #13.

I think seniors would take exception...he sought to cut back on their services to pay for the expanded services.

What you have failed to address is the fact that SS is not the problem in regards to present taxes. They have run a surplus. The military has spent that surplus.

Now you might want to do away with SS and take that tax money and spend it on Defense. If so, take the question to the people. Let them decide.

I think you and I both know the answer to that question but that is the real question. Current tax rates will not cover current Defense expenses. Take that simple equation to the people. Originally Posted by WTF

You see, Social Security (SS) does fall under Social Services (SS), but let's not get the two confused. Social Security does not provide for: internet service, wireless service, cell phone service, extending unemployment to 99 weeks, etc. Here are some facts about Odumbo’s Social Service Programs:

Odumbo’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, the stimulus package, made several changes in the food stamp program, adding billions in spending and expanding eligibility to allow millions more people to qualify for the benefit. The maximum food stamp level was raised by 13 percent (about $44 a month for a three-person household). In addition, because of rising unemployment, the bill suspended the provision that requires able-bodied recipients without children to work at least half-time. This undoubtedly has added many more people to the rolls.

Odumbo also wants to end payments by low-income earners into Social Security; thus increasing SS's long-term deficit by almost 60%.

The FY 2010 appropriations bill included a $5 billion funding increase over FY 2009 levels, but it also lifted the cap on spending altogether. A little-known provision in the FY 2010 defense appropriations bill allows elevating SNAP’s annual funding to “such sums as necessary” in emergency cases where annual appropriations may be too low.

Odumbo’s FY 2011 budget proposed to continue to expand the program and further increase funding. Odumbo’s proposed budget projected outlays of $75 billion for FY 2011, which is $36 billion more than outlays in FY 2008. Odumbo also asked to extend the new entitlement authority under the FY 2010 defense appropriations bill and suspend the work requirement for another year. Odumbo’s plan would have also greatly expanded eligibility by increasing the asset test from $2,000 to $10,000 and by not counting refundable tax credits as income. This would make many more people eligible for food stamps.

Finally, there is Odumbocare – and every analysis, except Odumbo’s, shows that it will be unsustainably expensive.

So, since taking office Odumbo has done nothing but push for and create additional unfunded entitlements. Until the Dimocrats stop spending, there will be no change. Promising to stop spending in 2018 is not equivalent to making cuts now; never was, and never will be.








http://www.heritage.org/research/rep...the-next-steps

I bring your attention to this early post of yours in this thread, #11 to be precise. This is what got me involved. Originally Posted by mastermind238

You do realize that we have Supreme Court Justices that disagree on what is Constitutional and what is not.

That I agree with your specific point , does not negate my general point.
The Tea Nuts use/misuse the Constitution to rationalize their military spending. To make it ten times worse...they do not want to actually tax theirself enough to pay for their wants.

That is idiotic in my book.

http://www.warresisters.org/pages/piechart.htm

To be fair, the liberals do not want to be taxed enough to cover all their "compassionate" spending, either.

http://www.warresisters.org/pages/piechart.htm

Total Outlays (Federal Funds): $2,650 billion
MILITARY: 54% and $1,449 billion
NON-MILITARY: 46% and $1,210 billion

HOW THESE FIGURES WERE DETERMINED

urrent military” includes Dept. of Defense ($653 billion), the military portion from other departments ($150 billion), and an additional $162 billion to supplement the Budget’s misleading and vast underestimate of only $38 billion for the “war on terror.” “Past military” represents veterans’ benefits plus 80% of the interest on the debt.*

Originally Posted by WTF

This chart is also at warresisters. They claim this is a deception, yet it's been the benchmark used to examine government expenses since LBJ. Social Security is a tax, and it's a government outlay. What needs to reiterated here is the fact that Odumbo wants to end the requirement for low-income earners to pay into Social Security. Odumbo then wants to raise taxes on folks making $200,000 to $250,000 income earners and subsidize Social Security with those payroll taxes.


Another chart from Heritage.org