RAF, I've learned one thing from reading your comments. When a person is really dizzy, all logic appears circular to them.

As predicted "your history of circular logic" continues...

Oh boy, RAF. The title of this article is, "Obama denounces 'radical' Republican budget plan." The article is about Republican budget plans. My comments about the defense budget, from the very first one, were not a distraction. They spoke to Republican budgets when I said, "Any budget, Democrat, Republican or compromise, that allocates as much money to defense spending as the next TWENTY highest military spending countries combined is RADICAL..."

You then came along with your typical "Our guy is no worse than your guy because your guy did the same thing our guy did" type of distraction by mentioning ONLY Obama's budget when you said, "'Hey, here is a radical idea...oh wait. It's not radical it is the truth. "Obama's Budget: 'Interest Payments Will Exceed Defense Budget' in 2019"

You created the distraction by bringing up a budget unrelated to the the Republican budget plan that this article addressed - the Republican budget - and did it by comparing some balderdash about interest payments as a result Obama's budget to defense spending.

No2 imagine that, more distraction. Not only was I not the first to bring the subject up you failed to address the red herring. Again declaring you assume to know what others are thinking or implying. Your delusion of my position on military spending is dismissive of fact, since I have declared my position many times. You also failed to address the issue that under the president’s plan our nation will soon be spending more on interest to service our debt than we will spend on defense. It would be clarifying if those that like to say our nation spends more than other nations on defense would have the same position on debt servicing and education. Then again, expecting you to attain consistency in your stated positions or step away from your history of circular logic is ironically illogical; I have doubts your comments would change on this topic either.

RhetoricAndFalderal, you were the one who first brought up the "distraction" of the defense budget by quoting, "Obama's Budget: 'Interest Payments Will Exceed Defense Budget' in 2019." Thanks for having given me the opportunity to provide additional information on the defense budget.

No2 as is your pattern, not only did you not address the issues, you also introduced another redherring that has been answered many times.

Look squirrel--->

Distraction tends to be your only retorts.

Thank you, Pluto, for that most excellent chart from the US Treasury Department. A picture is worth a thousand words.

http://i.imgur.com/QNI2F.jpg

RetiredAirForce said, 'Hey, here is a radical idea...oh wait. It's not radical it is the truth.

"Obama's Budget: 'Interest Payments Will Exceed Defense Budget' in 2019"'

I'm glad to see a person whose username would suggest they're retired from the military allude to the outrageous amounts of money spent on our military. I frequently address the out of control spending on our military -- $698 billion per year, about 4 times that of China and Russia COMBINED, as much as the top TWENTY highest military spending countries COMBINED.

I hope your comment signals that you've joined the chorus of people arguing for cutting our military spending to reasonable levels and repatriating our troops.

Paul Ryan, the man with the plan.

RAF: Facts are not the currency of the left, feelings are.

Where are the facts for your wild claims?

"• For most seniors who are in Medicare right now, Ryan's plan would change nothing. They would get the same benefits they get now. Some high-income seniors would pay more for doctor and drug coverage, starting in 2017. That's it. Rep. DeLauro's mother has nothing to fear. There will be no tornado through America's nursing homes."

• If you are 55 or over, approaching the age of Medicare coverage, Ryan's plan would change nothing else. You would get the current benefits when you reach the age of Medicare coverage.

• If you are under 55, Medicare would be substantially different by the time you qualify for coverage. Starting in 2023, the age of eligibility would begin a gradual rise. Right now benefits kick in when Americans turn 65. That eligibility age would reach 67 by 2034. Recipients would have more choices to buy coverage beyond traditional fee-for service care.

Under the Ryan plan, the government would give future seniors — again, we're talking about folks who are under 55 today — a certain amount of money to buy health care coverage. That's called "premium support." Seniors could buy coverage from a private insurer or from traditional fee-for-service Medicare. Poorer seniors would get more support; wealthier seniors would get less support. No one would be denied coverage.

SAME LINK AS BELOW

Radical?

"Last year, Democrats attacked Ryan's Medicare proposal, raising fears the program would disappear. That "Mediscare" campaign was judged the "biggest political lie of 2011" by Politifact, the Tampa Bay Times' nonpartisan fact-checking website. It looks as if Mediscare 2 may claim the biggest-lie title for 2012: Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., calls the latest plan "a Republican path to poverty that would pass like a tornado through America's nursing homes where millions of America's seniors receive long-term and end-of-life care.""

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opini...

youkillme, feel free to provide evidence to the contrary instead of the typical responce.

skippy one of the best blogs I have seen in months.

Hmmmm. The Weekly Standard, a Senate Republican Budget Committee chart and a CBO projection. It's the truth! LOL

No Facist, The dems are for more government, and the repubs are for big business, so what is the difference? For me, it is not having the messed up people in our government making more decisions for me. I make my own decisions. I have a job, and more business, equals more jobs. It is pretty logical. All the people who are for Dems, can't make a decision for themselves. They need all the crooks in the government to make their decisions. I also do not like being broke. you might, but I don't. Acceptance of idiocy, breeds a new standard. God help this country if Obama gets re-elected.In the words of Thomas Jefferson, "I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." and most important "Most bad government has grown out of too much government." It is amazing that words from the 17 and 1800's still have meaning today.

Hey, here is a radical idea...oh wait. It's not radical it is the truth.

"Obama's Budget: 'Interest Payments Will Exceed Defense Budget' in 2019"
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obam...

Actually, I think we have WAY too much government. We should start eliminating alot of positions. That would save us millions of dollars.

Salary of retired US Presidents.......$450,000 for life
Salary of House/Senate members........$174,000 for life
Salary of Speaker of the House........$223,500 for life
Salary of Majority/Minority Leaders...$194,400
for life
And ontop of these salaries, they get Cadillac healthcare benefits for them and their families all paid for by us!

Average salary of a soldier DEPLOYED IN AFGHANISTAN............................$38,000
Average income for seniors on Social Security...............................$12,000
I think we found where the cuts should be made!

Radical = Being one of the wealthiest countries on Earth and having a political party that signed "no tax - borrow only" pledge to pay for any deficits.

Radical = not having national interest payments exceeding the entire defense budget by 2019.

You literally cannot make this stuff up, and the Dems lap it up like dogs!

I don’t blame the President for digging deep into the political rhetoric of the past to deflect from the failure of his presidency. He supported and expanded a failed stimulus started by President Bush (that’s right GOP you are culpable) the spending has resulted in a small if any stabilization of the economy, sure he can go on about how much worse it would have been if he hadn’t acted. Any worse than it will be down the road by adding an enormous amount to the national debt, probably not.

His healthcare plan is being ripped to shreds by the Supreme Court as unconstitutional, yes I know it is being portrayed as a political decision, 4-4 with a swing vote from one Justice, but even that lone justice cannot deny the unconstitutionality of the mandate in the bill. Many Liberal or Democrat pundits that support nationalized healthcare have even stated having a tough time justifying the mandate in the current healthcare bill. Perhaps this could have been ironed out if they had read the bill before they passed it, just a thought.

He doesn’t know what to do about Afghanistan, yes he was handed it by Bush, however he hasn’t really strayed from the strategy of the previous disaster of an administration, but that hasn’t stopped his base from giving him a pass on the entire thing despite pre-election promises. I guess he can hang his hat on that one as a screw up nobody is hammering him for.

The President has a tough job and considering the amount of stress Obama must be under due to things not working out well I cannot blame the man for lashing out at a budget that was passed and intended to accomplish what he can’t, let’s have a little objectivity folks, the Presidents ego needs our support.

Radical = not adding $5 trillion to the deficit in 4 years, and continuing to borrow forever to the point that the country's economy collapses. That's Obama's plan. By his own officials' admission his deficits are "unsustainable."

This congressional Republican budget, however, is something different altogether. It’s a Trojan Horse. Disguised as deficit-reduction plan, it’s really an attempt to impose a radical vision on our country. It’s nothing but thinly veiled Social Darwinism. It’s antithetical to our entire history as a land of opportunity and upward mobility for everyone who’s willing to work for it — a place where prosperity doesn’t trickle down from the top, but grows outward from the heart of the middle class. And by gutting the very things we need to grow an economy that’s built to last — education and training; research and development — it’s a prescription for decline.” -- President Obama

tthompson: Right, sir! Precisely right. Also, there is no substantive difference between economic liberty and social liberty.

Obama uses the word "fairness" in the same way and as much the rest of us uses the word "freedom".

No2 I'm glad you liked the links. IroNicly in your attempt make a point you skipped right over the golden nugget of the stories. The very reason the rep party brought forth the framework for the presidents budget for a vote or action is because not a single person on the dem side of the isle would do it.

"...no Democrats sought to introduce it."

"No Democratic senator was willing to support it..."

Honestly I don't like any of these politicians. Each one has a couple good things they stand for and a million bad things. If anyone right for this country ever did run the people wouldn't elect him/her anyway so why bother talking about it?! Case in point I shut my yap & done reading political junk. Oh and if the gop gets their way (which I don't think they will) we won't have any doctors around here.

Radical = spending what you take in

It's so very easy for the Democrats to mount attacks instead of coming up with their own budget to bounce ideas and come to an agreement. It's lazy, it's political, and it's extremely harmful to the country. Obama's budget was so radical it didn't get one vote in Congress. Not in the Senate with last years, and not in the House last month.
Come on Democrats in the Senate, where is your budget in three years???????
Are the Republicans the only ones who care about America and it's salvation from Greece outcome? Must be.

It was mentioned so not quite a change of subject;) but while I originally supported Obamacare I now GREATLY hope that the supreme court rules that the federal govt can not force someone to buy something because to me, logic would say that if that's the case, they also have NO BUSINESS denying the right to buy something. Right??

bebe53, if you had read the FIRST link that your conservative buddy, RAF, provided in his April 3, 2012 at 11:38 p.m. comment, you would have read, "White House officials said Rep. Mick Mulvaney (R-S.C.), the sponsor of the alternative, was using Obama's top-line spending and revenue numbers as a budget proposal, without any specifics. On the House floor, Budget Committee Ranking Member Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) agreed that Mulvaney's amendment was not, in fact, Obama's entire budget proposal." [ http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/ho... ]

Exactly as I previously stated, this was a REPUBLICAN sponsored bill and NOT Obama's budget bill that they voted on.

As for the Senate vote, if you had read the SECOND link provided by your buddy RetiredAirForce, you would have read, "Ninety-seven senators voted against a motion to take it up." [ http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/16334... ]

Exactly as I stated in my previous post, the vote was to table discussion of the bill, and not a vote to pass it.

bebe53, people that lack the will to read or the ability to comprehend what they've read should be very careful about questioning the stupidity and/or ignorance of others. And, RAF, I'd like to thank you for the links you provided.

BillyClydePuckett said, "Votes in the House for the Obama Budget = 0 (that includes both sides of the aisle)"

That was not the Obama budget, Billy. It was a proposal brought forward by a Republican representative. It represents the worst of procedural shenanigans. Not even the Republican who proposed the bill voted for it.

Case in the Senate very similar. Politically motivated, election year procedural shenanigans by the Republican minority leader. Plus, the vote in the Senate was not to pass the bill; it was whether or not to table discussion of the bill.

saxcat70 said on Apr 3, 2012 at 6:47 p.m.:

'I voted. also sent a friend up to vote in my wife's place. I saw her name in the book and knew she wasn't gonna. name and address, that's all you need'

saxcat70
Apr 4, 2012 at 7:21 a.m.
Suggest removal

ty gandalf. no body wastes government resources like the left.
-

Repuds are such stand up people!!

Votes in the House for the Obama Budget = 0 (that includes both sides of the aisle)
Votes in the Senate which has a Democratic majority and does not need one Republican vote to pass whatever budget they come up with = 0 (hard to vote yes since the Democrats in the Senate have not presented a budget in three years).
Total votes for all budgets prepared by the Democrats in 2012 = 0 FROM EITHER PARTY
So, what do the Democrats stand for? What do they want in a budget? Given that they control the presidency and the Senate wouldn't you think they would be 2/3 of the way to getting whatever they want passed?
No new ideas, no ideas that they are willing to bring forward to the American people and admit they have voted yes on. What a collection of Luddites.

Here is how proud all of the elected Dems in the house and senate are of this president's budgets.

http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/ho...

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/16334...

Wanna see how UNLIKELY it is that Obama gets ousted? Take a look, Romney is the WORST candidate ever fieded by either party.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/...

Huh youkill I thought the Ryan budget had "bi-partisan support? Guess not. Lets hope that Romney selects Ryan as his Veep and runs of that budget, I certainly hope they do. Talk about a nail in their coffin.
Spark- The republicans have a plan its the individual mandate(Obamacare), originally it was a republican idea in the face of Hillary care which was employer based. Funny how things change when another person passes the same exact plan!! Instant Socialism!! The individual mandate was created and endorsed by the heritage foundation!!

http://healthcarereform.procon.org/view....

youkillme - So propose a better budget! Why is that so hard for you democrats to figure out? They have no budget to propose and sit and play the blame game. It is pathetic!

An administration that has refused to propose a budget for 3 1/2 years should raise RED FLAGS for EVERY American citizen! WHY would you find them fiscally responsible in ANY way? What a life! I would love to spend the money of others on lavish vacations, parties, and buying favors. Oh yeah, I forgot the hugely expensive photo op ordered over New York! AND EVEN BETTER, not being held accountable! One would have to be insane to support a budget or a budget cut when living this life style. Hmmmm....but, maybe he is counting on the last 7 states of the " 57 states" picking up the tab for the fun.

The House passed Ryan's radical 2013 budget manifesto by a vote of 228-191. His budget would gut the social safety net, but give so much in tax cuts to the rich and corporations that it would still increase the national debt. Not one Democrat in the House voted for Ryan's nightmare and they were joined by 10 Republicans in voting no.

They told me if I voted for McCain we would have an imperial presidency and they were right.

Can't wait until this community organizer leaves the Oval Office.

Hardtobelieve - The first mistake Obama made was focusing on Obamacare rather than the failing economy. Even many that support him will admit to that. By the way, we are taking about a budget here. Not a kool-aid plan that will bury this country deeper. Or is he going to continue to blame the last in charge? Last time I checked, when you are hired to lead, the responsibility is in your hands. The last time I checked, writing unlimited checks without money in the account doesn't make you a smart leader. Yes, Bush was also guilty of that and we are all witnessing a President that will take that stupidity to a whole new level.

I like this quote: "It's a Trojan horse. Disguised as deficit reduction plan, it's really an attempt to impose a radical vision on our country," Obama said in excerpts of his speech released Tuesday. "It's nothing but thinly veiled social Darwinism."

In fact, Ryan's budget has a higher deficit over 10 years than the CBO baseline that was revised last month. This baseline has the health care bill in it.

On the other hand, the president's budget makes too many tax cuts too. He should have curbed spending further and kept the baseline tax model. He could have come out better than Ryan with respect to the deficit.

Will people ever remember that before Reagan, we had tax rates at 70% and did great. Not to suggest we go back there but 25% is ridiculous. Even Ronnie's 28% had to be raised in a few years; by the GOP.

Spark: Republicans oppose Obamacare and have a plan of their own. OH WAIT, they don't have one. Interesting.

Ezoner, most Americans that lack critical thinking skills have believed the military-industrial fear machine of Democrat and Republican administrations for decades now. One man, President Dwight D. Eisenhower, tried warning us about the unwarranted influence of the military-industrial complex when he said, "In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist."

Our military budget is now $698 billion a year... about FOUR times what China and Russia COMBINED spend. As much as the next TWENTY highest military spending countries COMBINED. How can anyone credibly justify that level of spending? We find our country initiating wars and military actions all over the world without Congressional approval. Most Americans don't think twice when they hear that American troops have been sent, by the President, to one country or another. It's become an expectation that America will take care of every "problem" by bullying others with our military force.

The ridiculously high amount of military spending is, indeed, one of the major causes of hostilities toward America. We've used our huge defense budget to bully and interfere in the internal affairs of other countries for decades. It's time to repatriate our troops and reduce our military spending to realistic levels and stop redistributing the wealth of the middle class to the military-industrial complex owners under the guise of "national defense."

Poo -- Any budget that makes cuts that reduces our military based upon your numbers risks the fact that there are many nations out there that want to destroy the US, the US economy and kill our citizens. That would make your recommendation radical and worst of all dangerous.

Any budget, Democrat, Republican or compromise, that allocates as much money to defense spending as the next TWENTY highest military spending countries combined is RADICAL and amounts to nothing more than REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH from the middle class to the economic elitist owners of our military industrial complex.

As apposed to the budget he doesn't have? Interesting.

Didn't he (Obama) say basically the same thing last year about the Ryan Plan? Anybody seen the Obama Plan? He likes to blame Congress tho he forgets it is his SENATE that hasn't done a darn thing about a budget.

Evidently cutting taxes (again) for the wealthy which then results in shrinking revenues which then leads to cuts in education, cuts to health care for our elderly and poor, less money for infrastructure and ultimately shifts more of the tax burden on the middle class is not considered radical by Republicans. To them it's not a departure from tradition, it's called Reaganomics, which is not unlike progressives description of being hit in the eye with yellow rain.

Short of being hit in the eye with yellow rain, the Republican "trickle down economics" is a complete failure. With income taxes for the top 1 or 2 percent at an all time low, I don't see all of the jobs that were promised by the Bush tax cuts.

And now another of his pet projects, Solar Trust goes belly-up. The money they got made Solendra look like small potatoes.

Radical, a word often associated with Pres. Obama. No Senate budget in 3 years and defeat of his budget in house by all. Radical dude.

Talk about out of touch...... He must have one of those California medical leave smoking scripts.....

Since the last two budgets this President has put forth have been voted down by his own party and the Ryan budget had bi-partisan support who exactly is the radical?

"impose a radical vision on our country." What a joke! His term has been one big radical change to our country....can't get much more radical! But as he said, just wait til he gets thru this election and he will have even more flexibility. Now that's scary!

All empty talk-No budget passed by the Senate in three years and Obama just keeps spending while he shreds the Constitution. History (if we have any after this guy) will write this chapter as when America hit the bottom of the barrel.