What You Don't Know About Sequestration, and The Deficit

Chart from OurFuture.org

In this clip from the Rachel Maddow Show, Rachel notes an amazing list of things that happened on Tuesday (all linked here):

 - Alaska has passed a law that could arrest law enforcement officers if they enforce gun laws they don't like (wha?)
- Arkansas Governor vetoes anti-abortion ban
- Indiana Senate passes one of those "transvaginal ultrasound" laws just for those who want an "abortion pill" (but not two of them!)
- Illinois elected a new Congresswoman to replace Jesse Jackson Jr.
- Biden meets with retired military for help on gun control
- Patrick Leahy makes announcement on gun control
- Chuck Hagel got confirmed as Defense Secretary
- Pennsylvania GOP forging ahead with vote-rigging scheme
- SCOTUS is votion on the voting right act

 . . .and a whole, whole lot more. A lot happened, and this entire clip (not to mention the entire show) is worth watching. But, what I want you to watch--and get everybody else you know to watch--is the part that begins at 5:15, when Rachel starts talking the dreadful boring "sequestration," or "the sequester," if you prefer. Except she not only makes it not boring, she will teach you something you didn't know. [Story continues below]

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

The amazing thing that you don't know (statistically speaking), is that the budget deficit has been dropping. Every year since President Obama has been in office, the deficit has been going down. Not up, down. Only 6% of Americans surveyed knew that, and far and away a majority think it has gone up. Oh, and the sequestration thing that is some sort of vague nod toward "getting serious" about the deficit. . .has no effect on the deficit.

So, watch it, please? Thanks. Oh, and here's another article if you want to know more:

Deficit Is Falling Dramatically, But Only 6% Know That

In Case You Were Wondering: It's Not About the Budget

Those were the days! Picture from Think Progress

As in 1995, the big government shutdown is not really about the budget. It's about riders. Culture war ultra-conservative issues shoe-horned into the budget bill. It's a cornucopia of conservative crap is what it is. It amounts to blackmail: give us everything our tea baggers tell us they want, or we will shut down the government. NPR? Planned Parenthood? That stuff isn't really about the budget, and everybody knows it.

[Excerpt]

FLASHBACK: GOP Insistence On Unrelated Policy Riders Shut The Government Down In 1995



This morning, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) took to the Senate floor and announced that, while Republicans and Democrats had essentially agreed what spending cuts should be included in a bill to keep the government operating, a shutdown was likely because of the GOP’s insistence on unrelated policy riders. . .
 
Read more at: Think Progress

Captain Obvious: Rich People Don't Need Tax Cuts

This really should go without saying. I remain completely unconvinced that tax cuts for the wealthy are necessary, or can be justified. The "Bush Tax Cuts" of 2001 and 2003 were originally implemented because of the budget surplus we had at the time. They were passed under reconciliation rules, with an intentional 10-year sunset, because they weren't paid for. They've been in effect for 10 years, and have not proven to "create jobs" at all--quite the contrary--even though that seems to be the sole defense for extending them.

Letting them expire, even if we let all of them expire, does not amount to a "tax hike," let alone an "Obama tax hike." It simply would revert the tax rates to what they were in the 1990s, a time when rich people were getting along just fine, thank you very much. 

Today, the Senate is supposed to vote on 1) an extension of the middle-class (below $250,000 per year) tax cut, and 2) an extension on monies made above a quarter million dollars per year.  Republicans are expected to filibuster both of them. I'm curious how they will spin voting against tax break extensions for the entire country. No doubt, it will still be the ridiculous spin we've been hearing on the issue on the Sunday talk shows for months now.  There is no legitimate reason for them to block these votes. They could simply vote on both--attempt to extend both--and have zero political fallout. But they probably won't. So they'll have to rely on their--admittedly effective--considerable spinning skills to save their bacon.

I for one don't really care if any of the tax breaks are extended. For someone in my tax bracket, the savings from the Bush tax cuts is negligible anyway.  And if we're being honest, and are really concerned about the deficit/national debt (I really could use a little help knowing the difference, as could most politicians and pundits) all of the tax cuts should probably expire. That would save a helluva lot of money, and would make an extension of unemployment benefits a non-issue.

Rachel Maddow Exposes the "Deficit Hawk" Lie

One of the many issues of the diffused agenda of conservatives and tea baggers is the deficit. You'd think that when Republicans are in office, the deficit hawks have been in power, and spending is brought under control. And, by the same logic, when Democrats are in office, they spend willy-nilly, and run up massive deficits, heedless of the consequences.

Not really. Check out this clip from The Rachel Maddow Show (yep, her again). Seriously. Especially if you are in the camp that believes this myth. At about 2:41 in this video, Rachel shows a graph comparing Republican spending vs. the current Democratic health care reform plan. See if you can talk around that one.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Thank You, President Hoover! Bush's Big Deficit

Photo from Raw Story

Great. And how much do you want to bet, if Barack Obama wins the Presidency, the right-wing blow holes will try to blame this allll on him?

[Excerpt]

Bush to leave a record budget deficit of $482 billion

President Bush will leave his successor with a record-high budget deficit of $482 billion, according to an administration estimate released Monday.White House officials blamed the slowing economy and a $150-billion bipartisan stimulus package for the worsening picture for the 2009 fiscal year, but Democrats cited the president's tax cuts and fiscal management over his eight years in office. . .

Read more at: Los Angeles Times