Tag Archives: Democrat

Is opposition to 1.6 trillion dollar deficits rooted in racism?

Consider this video of Democrat Sheila Jackson Lee.

Fox News explains. (H/T The Other McCain)

Excerpt:

Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Texas, suggested during a House floor speech Friday that raising the debt ceiling was being held up by members of Congress because President Obama is black.

“Only this president–only this one–only this one has received the kind of attacks and disagreements and inability to work,” she said. “Only this one. Read between the lines.”

“What is different about this president that should put him in a position that he should not receive the same kind of respectful treatment of when it is necessary to raise the debt limit in order to pay our bills?” she added.

A member of the Congressional Black Caucus, Jackson Lee said the debt limit was raised many times under previous Democratic and Republican presidents. “In the minority community that is the question that is being raised. Why is this president being treated so disrespectfully?”

[…]Towards the end of her speech, Jackson Lee said she hoped that race was not getting in the way of solving the debt crisis.

“I cannot imagine coming this far in my life, that of my children’s life and that of others to come to a point where we would use the uniqueness and the difference of this president to treat him differently. If that is not getting in our way, then there’s no reason why we can’t come together and solve this problem,” she said.

Stacy McCain points out that Sheila Jackson-Lee voted against the debt ceiling increase when George W. Bush was President:

To the sin of racial demagoguery, Jackson-Lee adds also blatant hypocrisy because (as Don Surber reminds usshe voted against raising the debt ceiling when Bush was president. And y’know who else voted against raising the debt ceiling during the Bush administration?

If it’s racism to vote against debt ceiling increases, then that makes Sheila Jackson-Lee a racist. Actually, making distinctions about race at all is racist. Which means that the people on the left who keep making these distinctions are racists. The left is obsessed with dividing people along racial lines.

Would the Republican “cut, cap and balance” plan solve the debt crisis?

Let’s take a look at the Republican “Cut, Cap and Balance” plan, as reported by CBS News.

Excerpt:

The House next week will take a vote to raise the debt ceiling and pass a balanced budget amendment, House Republican leaders said today.

The plan is unlikely to go anywhere, since a balanced budget amendment would likely fail in the Democrat-led Senate, but GOP leaders nevertheless called it a serious plan to raise the debt ceiling. They said President Obama and Democrats have failed to come up with an equally serious plan.

“We asked the president to lead,” House Speaker John Boehner said in a press conference today. “We asked him to put forward a plan — not a speech, a real plan — and he hasn’t. We will.”

The “cut, cap and balance” proposal would make raising the debt ceiling contingent on Congress sending a balanced budget amendment to the states. It would also cap government spending at 18 percent of Gross Domestic Product over the next 10 years.

The plan would raise the debt ceiling by $2.4 trillion, since that is the increase requested by the president. However, the plan would actually make even more in spending cuts — as much as $111 billion in 2012 alone.

[…]Boehner said the House would vote on the “cut, cap and balance” plan and then decide how to proceed from there.”I don’t want to preclude any chance of coming to an agreement, but [Democrats have] been unwilling to put a real plan on the table,” Boehner said. “Without serious spending cuts or real reform to entitlement programs, this problem is not going to be solved.”

That’s what the Republicans would do if they were in control. The balanced budget amendment would cap spending at 18% of GDP, so that we would never have a debt crisis ever again. That’s the right solution, except that the Democrats cannot give up the idea of buying votes with the money they steal from job creators. They just can control their addiction to spending.

Now, let’s take a look at who caused the debt crisis, with this House Budget Committee article by fiscal hawk Paul Ryan. (H/T Washington Post)

Excerpt:

While President Obama has recently professed a newfound — and vague — desire to cut government spending, it’s useful to recall what the President has actually done since taking office in 2009. The President signed into law a massive spending spree that plunged us deeper into debt, and failed to deliver on its promise to create jobs.

  • 24% Increase in Base Spending. Non-defense discretionary spending grew by 24% for the first two years of the Obama Administration, adding $734 billion in spending over the next 10 years.
  • Record Government Spending. The Federal government will spend $3.6 trillion this year, 24% of gross domestic product (GDP) and the highest burden on the economy since World War II. Spending has historically averaged a little over 20% of GDP.
  • President’s Budget Makes Matter Worse. According to CBO, the President’s budget never spends less than 23% of GDP and by the end of the decade rises to 24% of GDP. His budget’s failure to address the drivers of our debt threatens the health and retirement security of America’s seniors, and the economic security of all Americans. The President’s budget seeks to spend $46 trillion in government spending over the next decade, and has subsequently fought against House Republican efforts to restrain his spending appetite down to $43.5 trillion.

During the four years when Nancy Pelosi was the Speaker of the House, and Harry Reid was in control of the Senate, the Democrats packed 5.34 trillion dollars onto the national debt.

Democrats mandate that gay history be taught in California schools

From the Christian Post. (Note that the Democrat governor has now signed the bill)

Excerpt:

On Tuesday, a bill that would make the state the first to require textbooks and history classes to include the study of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Americans as well as those with disabilities passed in the state assembly. The bill also bans material that reflects negatively on gays.

The measure passed along a party line vote, 49-25, with one Republican voting in favor. It is now on its way to Democrat Gov. Jerry Brown. Brown has not indicated whether or not he will sign it. Former Republican Gov. Schwarzenegger vetoed a similar bill five years ago.

On a whole, Republicans are against the bill. According to The Associated Press, Republicans refer to it as a “well-intentioned but ill-conceived bill.” Concerns are raised that it would indoctrinate children to accept homosexuality.

Openly gay Democrat Assembly Speaker, John Perez, is pushing for the governor to sign the bill. “This bill will require California schools to present a more accurate and nuanced view of American history in our social science curriculum by recognizing the accomplishments of groups that are not often recognized,” he said, according to the New York Daily News.

If signed, the bill could take effect as early as the 2013-2014 academic year. The measure leaves it up to the local school boards on how to implement the policy. However, it will require school districts to adopt textbooks and other materials to cover the new agenda. California is one of the largest buyers of textbooks, causing fear that this bill could affect school systems throughout the country.

[…]The bill is formally supported by the California Teachers Association, several school districts and a progressive religious organization, according to SF Chronicle. It is opposed by many churches and conservative organizations.

Democrat governor Jerry Brown signed the bill on Thursday.

And the Pacific Justic Institute adds:

A controversial bill that would require public schools to emphasize the roles and contributions of LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) people has now passed both houses of the California legislature and is expected to be signed into law by Gov. Jerry Brown within days. Legal experts predict, though, that SB 48 will affect schools across the nation.

“The reality is that the major textbook manufacturers do not create different textbooks for each state,” noted Brad Dacus, president of Pacific Justice Institute. “Instead, they seek to comply with mandates in the largest states, especially California and Texas. As a result, many smaller states are pressured into approving California-focused instructional materials, which must now cater to the gay history mandate.”

There are lots of ways to respond to an event like this:

  • we can vote for more Republicans
  • we can vote to lower taxes, shrink government and privatize education
  • we can vote for more school choice, so parents decide where children go to school
  • we can vote for more federalism – more local control of education issues
  • we can train and educate Christian lawyers to argue for parent’s rights in court
  • etc.

It’s very important for Christians to understand what it means to vote Democrat. It means you go to work and earn money that will be used to indoctrinate your children to disrespect your Christian worldview. That’s why Democrats favor a well-funded, top-down, centralized, state-run education system. And it’s up to parents to vote smarter.

UPDATE: Reader Todd K. sends me this article from City Journal, the journal of the Manhattan Institute.

Excerpt:

California’s budget crisis has reduced the University of California to near-penury, claim its spokesmen. “Our campuses and the UC Office of the President already have cut to the bone,” the university system’s vice president for budget and capital resources warned earlier this month, in advance of this week’s meeting of the university’s regents. Well, not exactly to the bone. Even as UC campuses jettison entire degree programs and lose faculty to competing universities, one fiefdom has remained virtually sacrosanct: the diversity machine.

Not only have diversity sinecures been protected from budget cuts, their numbers are actually growing. The University of California at San Diego, for example, is creating a new full-time “vice chancellor for equity, diversity, and inclusion.” This position would augment UC San Diego’s already massive diversity apparatus, which includes the Chancellor’s Diversity Office, the associate vice chancellor for faculty equity, the assistant vice chancellor for diversity, the faculty equity advisors, the graduate diversity coordinators, the staff diversity liaison, the undergraduate student diversity liaison, the graduate student diversity liaison, the chief diversity officer, the director of development for diversity initiatives, the Office of Academic Diversity and Equal Opportunity, the Committee on Gender Identity and Sexual Orientation Issues, the Committee on the Status of Women, the Campus Council on Climate, Culture and Inclusion, the Diversity Council, and the directors of the Cross-Cultural Center, the Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Resource Center, and the Women’s Center.

I don’t agree with Heather McDonald on everything, but this article is awesome.