Home | Classifieds | Place Ad | Public Notices | Galleries | Kudos | Obits | Real Estate | Subscriber Services | Villager | Health Directory | Contact Us
The Verde Independent | Cottonwood, Arizona

home : opinions : opinions May 26, 2016

2/21/2013 8:01:00 AM
Letter: Letter a deliberate distortion of Democrat views

In a recent letter, Jim Barber of Camp Verde claimed that, “Democrat leadership, including President Obama, Senate Majority Leader Reid and Nancy Pelosi all claim there is no spending problem. I can’t attest to the intelligence of Reid or Pelosi.”

Not only is this factually untrue, it represents a deliberate distortion of the positions those Democrats have taken on the issue of spending.

None of those Democrats has ever said that spending should not be addressed. They have said that spending cuts that undermine the economic security of the working class; poor; elderly; women; minorities and disabled are not acceptable. They are referencing those government programs that form the “social safety net” that protects common, ordinary citizens from economic ravage such as occurred in 2007 during the Bush II, [the war criminal] administration.

In 2007, candidate Barack Obama stated, “the solution to Social Security is a simple one. Remove the cap on FICA taxation.”

That assertion was valid then and it is valid now, too. Furthermore, taxing dividend and capital gains income for FICA purposes just like “labor income” would insure the solvency of Social Security forever.

There is a significant difference from the accusation set forth from Mr. Barber and the reality of whether or not the Democrats are willing to cut spending.

Mr. Barber further asserts, “But the president is known to be an intelligent man. Therefore, he must understand what nearly every economist [emphasis added], in the country understands - that our country is headed for financial Armageddon.”

Of course, the assertion that America is headed for “financial Armageddon” is pure, unadulterated partisan piffle and complete political poppycock.

It is stated over and over again, by neoconservatives to engender fear in the American people. Its singular goal is the infusion of fear into the political process to scare the hell out of people to motivate them to return the GOP to power.

Interestingly, when the Bush II administration was engaging in very fiscally irresponsible behavior such as fighting two unfunded wars on “borrowed money”, ignoring the financial fraud of wall street and the banks, and granting fiscally irresponsible tax cuts for the wealthy elite that undermined the fiscal security of the nation, we heard nothing from neoconservative parrots about it.

Mr. Barber’s accusation is based upon the faulty assumption that the government must never, ever engage in deficit spending. There is no circumstance in which neoconservatives like Mr. Barber find it justifiable to engage in deficit spending unless that spending is done during the administration of a GOP POTUS.

Furthermore, $11.6 trillion of the $16 trillion debt accumulated by the U.S. government since 1980, was accumulated under the presidencies of GOP POTUS Ronald Wilson Reagan and George W. Bush.

Ronald Wilson Reagan tripled the national debt. George W. Bush, Bush II, doubled the national debt. That debt, derived from military spending [with borrowed money to fund two illegal wars] and tax cuts for the wealthy elite did not bother Mr. Barber one little bit.

That debt was accumulated under the auspices of the faux economic theory called “reaganomics” in which “borrow and spend” was justified as sound fiscal policy because “debt and deficits do not matter” [during GOP administrations].

Every credible economist knows that “borrow and spend” fiscal policy is not only unsustainable it is fiscally irresponsible, too.

Although not popular, tax and spend is much more fiscally responsible than the “borrow and spend” fiscal theory of reaganomics. Ronald Reagan’s very own VP, Bush I, called reaganomics “voodoo economics”. He was right, too.

I will now assert, without any verifiable proof other than my belief, that there is 25 percent waste and fraud in every agency of government including the defense department.

Let us see what kind of savings it gives to us if we accept my assertion [admittedly without verification] and we achieve a 25 percent savings over 10 years by eliminating waste and fraud in government spending. That gives us a savings from waste and fraud in defense spending of $21.5 trillion [with a “T”] over 10 years.

The current national debt is $16 trillion. I have just eliminated the entire national debt and created a $5.5 trillion [with a “T”] surplus from elimination of waste and fraud in the defense department based upon my assertion that 25 percent of defense spending represents waste and fraud.

Moreover, I have achieved this miraculous feat without undermining any of the programs that benefit the working class; poor; elderly; minorities; women or disabled people in America who rely upon government spending for their economic stability.

Furthermore, I have not undermined the national security of the United States because I have merely eliminated the waste and fraud in the defense department without cutting any of the essential funding necessary to achieve that national security.

Interestingly though, the singular thing that neoconservatives refuse to cut is the department of defense. The Military Industrial Complex [MIC] is “the” sacred cow of the GOP, and nothing must be done to prevent the expansion of the MIC domestically or globally.

I guess you could call this ironic. Then again, you could just call it “lacking common sense” because when motivated by GREED [Get Rich Eviscerating Everything Democratic], common sense is the first thing to go out the window.

Moreover, the neoconservative leadership in the GOP renowned for its lack of common sense.

John A. Bond


Related Stories:
• Letter: Was election for president or an emperor?

    Most Viewed     Recently Commented
•   Police soon will have one more reason to pull you over (4750 views)

•   What's hot in Verde Valley job market? (2956 views)

•   Cornville man charged with child molestation seeks plea (2875 views)

•   Marana man suffers skull injury, brain bleed following ATV crash (2737 views)

•   Motorcycle rider suffers head injuries in crash (2195 views)

Reader Comments

Posted: Friday, March 1, 2013
Article comment by: Bill Bassett

So, according to Mr Smith, if I make $1000 a week but have to spend $1200 each week, the only available outcome is to go broke or borrow until there is no credit available any longer. But if that were me, I think I might try another option. What would that other option be you ask? Simple,
Make more money. Yeah, make more money. Get a second job, sell some stuff, buy low and sell high, work from home, etc. etc. etc.

In the case of a nation, that option takes the form of finding new or additional tax revenues. What in the name of great Cesar's ghost is wrong with that? Sure, tighten your belt, shop around for better prices, clip coupons, but another option is to raise or earn more money. Don't even try to tell me that if you, any one of you were given a chance to make more money you wouldn't take it.

Posted: Friday, March 1, 2013
Article comment by: Jim West

For all those truly interested in learning, fallow this link and learn something. It took all of us to get into this mess, and this mess took over 80 years to happen and for a lot of reasons. Gee if it were only so simple to be a republican or democrat problem or one presedent did it all hummm don't think so.


Posted: Friday, March 1, 2013
Article comment by: nutso fasst

Ronnie and W. spent like drunken sailors and they are bad. O spends like 3 drunken sailors and he is good. Such is partisanship.

Posted: Friday, March 1, 2013
Article comment by: P F

Gee, Danny, worn out retread comedy with your self-proclaimed economic genius?

A two-fer treasure for all of us gathered ignorant cowering in the shadow of you know-it-all right wing misinformation.

I don't know who to anoint as 2nd most obnoxious, you or Jim Barber. (m j is 1st).

You are choking on the poison austerity pill and give demented Ronnie way too much credit.

Ronnie spent like a drunk sailor, too. Like W.

Posted: Wednesday, February 27, 2013
Article comment by: Danny Smith

Oh Phil, I usually refuse to get in a battle of wits with an unarmed person. According to your demi-god idol Saint Barry's logic If I make $1,000 a week and I spend $1,200 every week pretty soon I have no money or credit left. So Barry says all I have to do is go to my bank and demand they up my credit limits then I should start spending $1,600 a week and everything will be peachy. I am pretty sure who is living in a fantasy world. Barry is absolutely destroying this country and it will take another President as great as Reagan to fix the damage he is doing. It is amazing though that seemingly intelligent people can worship Obama so much though.

Posted: Wednesday, February 27, 2013
Article comment by: Re, John A. Bond

Mr. Bond (basic obnoxious narcissistic democrat) you stated that, the assertion that America is headed for “financial Armageddon” is pure, unadulterated partisan piffle and complete political poppycock.

You must either be blind, stupid or both to come up with this conclusion. Any Leader who believes it’s OK to constantly spend more than they make is pure, unadulterated partisan piffle and complete political poppycock! You have to live within your means, it’s plain and simple. Even a first grader knows 1+1 doesn’t =3. What school did you attend? Hmmm, probably the same one Obama went to! As for your idea about the 25% on waste and fraud in government you fail to mention “Welfare” but your quick to bad mouth, in a sly way, our men and women in uniform. That’s the only thing I could call ironic and “lacking common sense”.
Moreover, the loony liberal leadership in the DP (dumbocratic party) is renowned for its lack of common sense.

Posted: Wednesday, February 27, 2013
Article comment by: Phil Falbo

@ Danny

Thanks for admitting publicly you believe in fantasy.

Posted: Tuesday, February 26, 2013
Article comment by: Danny Smith

I would rather deal with Reagans "Trickle down economics" then Obama's Trickle Up Poverty" any day.

Posted: Tuesday, February 26, 2013
Article comment by: For nutso fasst

Since you thought clarification necessary:

Oligarchy: a form of government in which all power is vested... in a dominant class or clique government by the few.

Plutocrat: the rule or power of wealth or of the wealthy.

Perhaps you disagree, but, IMHO, the US presently is being pushed into an Oligarchy, if not a Plutocracy, based on the power and influence of approximately 30% of the electorate. Actually, now that Corporations are 'individuals,' and can support myriad lobbyists, less than 30%. (+/- 30% being the rigid far right).

Pushing that agenda, to me, is goose stepping to the drumbeat of that clique.

The rich and powerful need not dance with anyone since they usually rule.

You hadn't noticed?

Posted: Tuesday, February 26, 2013
Article comment by: I give up nutso

Your talent for twisting others words to reflect your (also twisted and) sadly limited level of understanding and naivete regarding what all's really going on with "money* in this world is more than I have the patience to take on.

As you please. Carry on. As I said, I for one couldn't be more pleased at all these true colors turning belly up for all to see. Their self-righteous zeal blinding them to all they're revealing about themselves only helps even more.

Posted: Tuesday, February 26, 2013
Article comment by: itsy bitsy Spider

My apologies, MJ. That was a bit overdone, but it wasn't the least bit barren.

Posted: Monday, February 25, 2013
Article comment by: nutso fasst

"...goose step with the rest of the plutocrats and oligarchs..."

Plutocrats and oligarchs goose step? I thought they were more inclined to do the Macarena--badly.

Oligarchs and plutocrats have no party loyalty. They dance with whoever has power.

"I never vote for people whose values are defined by money signs...I consider it my responsibility to speak up and hold a mirror to that arrogance…"

Thanks for the explanation. In short, you speak up for those who promise to distribute other peoples' money according to an arbitrary definition of other peoples' needs, while you simultaneously denigrate those whose money you want distributed and claim that money is not the issue. Got it!

Posted: Saturday, February 23, 2013
Article comment by: nutso fasst

In the third debate with Romney in October, 2012, Obama claimed: "the sequester is not something that I’ve proposed. It is something that Congress has proposed." Former White House Chief of Staff Jack Lew echoed Obama: "There was an insistence on the part of Republicans in Congress for there to be some automatic trigger."

Surprise, surprise, they both lied. Now we learn from our out-to-lunch media that Obama personally approved Lew’s plan to propose the mandatory trigger to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in July 2011.

Of course, for those who adulate Obama as a dashing rogue whose speech sends a thrill up their leg, this is not a significant revelation. But it does raise the question: should Democrats fear the consequences of Obama's decision?

The 'looming crisis' of the Sequester's 7.6-9.6% discretionary budget cuts is peanuts compared to John Bond's '25% solution'. At most it will 'slash' the 2013 budget of $3.35 trillion by $109 billion. The federal debt will still increase to over $17 trillion this year.

So, would the 'Bond Plan' do what he claims?

I began checking calculations with the military budget. 25% of the $7.13 trillion defense budget projected by the CBO over the next 10 years is $1.78 trillion, not the $21.5 trillion claimed by Mr. Bond. The CBO estimates the total federal debt will be $26 trillion ten years from now. $26 trillion - $1.78 trillion = $24.22 trillion debt in 2023 with a 25% cut in Defense .

Clearly, I need waste no more time verifying that Mr. Bond has not abandoned the sheer confabulations upon which his reputation rests.

Posted: Saturday, February 23, 2013
Article comment by: For Liberals are hammering the middle class

Your biased retort proves the breadth of republican cluelessness and depth of your personal denial.

Leave us not get in to your demonstrable ignorance.

Wall Street and Banks rape and pillage the US and World economy with impunity and all you do is spout off about Democrats hurting the middle class?

The only thing the 'individuals' who run Corporate America want for the middle class is to be able to force them into the 'poor' class so USA, Inc. can prosper.

All the while, you goose step with the rest of the plutocrats and oligarchs to their every lie to help make their dreams come true.

Posted: Saturday, February 23, 2013
Article comment by: Nux Man

Boehner stated Obama said "we don't have a spending problem" during the budget negotiations, and when pressed again on this Barry said he was "tired of hearing you say that" - which has never been denied by the WH, to the contrary, it became the meme of the week.
After this Pelosi made her latest famous quote, "So, it's almost a false argument to say we have a spending problem.
Then, Senator Hoyer came out with, "Does the country have a spending problem? The country has a paying for problem".
And just to kick this a bit more, Senator Harkin flatly said, "Is it a spending problem? No.", at the end of a short statement about all the wealth that is the USA, and how we really need to spend more, and then more after that.
The problem with making a denial Mr. Bond, is that these things can be verified - I found these examples after a .2 second search and all listed in the same article, it took less than 5 minutes to prove you are either grossly misinformed, or worse.
I really don't want to argue or insult, but this insults me and many others, not to mention the foolishness that finds a misguided truth in it, (Ms. Mary Jane, do you even know what your saying using that cliche' for the Tea Party? I doubt it, or maybe you really are that sick. I wouldn't vilify you for getting your news from only msnbc, I feel sorry for you).

Page 1  - Page 2 -  Page 3

Article Comment Submission Form
Comments are not posted immediately. Submissions must adhere to our Use of Service Terms of Use agreement. Rambling or nonsensical comments may not be posted. Comments are limited to Facebook character limits. In order for us to reasonably manage this feature we may limit excessive comment entries.
Submit an Article Comment
First Name:
Last Name:
Anti-SPAM Passcode Click here to see a new mix of characters.
This is an anti-SPAM device. It is not case sensitive.

Advanced Search

HSE - We want to hear from you
Find more about Weather in Cottonwood, AZ
Click for weather forecast

Submission Links
 •  Submit your feedback about our site

Find It Features Blogs Celebrate Submit Extras Other Publications Local Listings
Classifieds | Place Ad | Galleries | Kudos | Real Estate | Subscriber Services | e-News | RSS | Site Map | Find Verde Jobs | Contact Us
© Copyright 2016 Western News&Info, Inc.® The Verde Independent is the information source for Cottonwood and Verde Valley area communities in Northern Arizona. Original content may not be reprinted or distributed without the written permission of Western News&Info, Inc.® Verde News Online is a service of WNI. By using the Site, verdenews.com ®, you agree to abide and be bound by the Site's terms of use and Privacy Policy, which prohibit commercial use of any information on the Site. Click here to submit your questions, comments or suggestions. Verde News Online is a proud publication of Western News&Info Inc.® All Rights Reserved.

Software © 1998-2016 1up! Software, All Rights Reserved