We received a warning several times about how we can be dismantled, starting with Khrushchev who declared we can and will be defeated through education. It's been done. Relentless years they took to dismantle it, and us in the process.
Beginning with the so-called "free speech" movement that the sheep bought into. Never questioning why we need "free speech" guarantees when it's right there in the first amendment of the constitution, countless youth thought it's best to be able to hijack it by using action, such as destruction of property & even murder, akin or equal to speaking.
As the years continued, we saw the very same people invading the University classrooms as professors, continuing the de- education which eventually turned against our very fundamental belief in ourselves as good, hardworking, giving and a worthy people.
Consequently, those students grew into the working world, where they started passing on the misguided belief that we, Americans, have been wasteful, arrogant, invasive, murderous, and greedy so we don't deserve our good life while others suffer at our hands.
The media from the main stream to the Hollywood stream were all too elated to explore such "fresh" ideas without bothering to really check the source, as they have not been taught research or if they have, they are certainly not keen on taking time to do it. "History is a can of ashes and not worth sifting through." has been used as a reason. Now fresh new faces brought up by the new education had their first say on the subject, campaigned with wide eyed wonder and rosy hopeful cheeks for a man they believed we needed to finalize the change. They got what they wished for because most voters followed with equal enthusiasm after years of being told to hate the truth and hate those who tell the truth (not in so many words); after years of so called "education" that was and is false. Those that insisted in having a one party system fulfilled the dream of Khrushchev, and to the secret glee, I'm sure, of many current leaders around the world, although I'm also sure there are many who watch with trepidation.
Historically it takes many generations to turn the tide, as the spiral that has begun needs momentum. The current generations are appeased, and happy with their achievements and truly believe that better times are ahead. With appeasement comes a slow death as people are being lulled into believing in what is to come. Like freezing to death, one gets lulled into a feeling of euphoria before one goes to sleep permanently. The following generations will not know anything better, therefore it will be a true visionary who can become the leader out of the new suppression. It will be more difficult because this is happening worldwide this time, and there are no new lands to discover or migrate to where new masses could pioneer a new and better life; at least not on this globe.
To achieve total world governance, the agenda must and has started with no less than the true breakdown of American society which will take a brutal turn as more resist, but I'm sure that the appeased will think it a necessary step for the good of all. But who amongst those will take total responsibility for it all?
Sunday, August 30, 2009
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
How True is This Cartoon: Then and Now?
Moving my writings from another forum which I've closed, I ran across this response to the political cartoon below, sent to me. Then I wondered, in light of the current situation, if the cartoon itself should be updated. The budget deficit under the current Obama administration has been tripled by a runaway Democrat Party controlled Congress in less thank 6 months and they're not finished.
My original answer to the cartoon is still relevant today, so I shall let it stand.
So, what do you think?
Anni
Greenberg cartoon 08/08/2008
My original response dated August 15,2008
Real cute. Ha Ha. I did laugh.
So it kindled my interest.. how true is that cartoon???
First, we need to compare who controls the purse strings in Congress, with who is in the majority leadership there during each year. Truly it's Congress where deficits are controlled. Spending is approved and controlled by Congress and not the President, since the President can only propose a budget, large or small, and he can only veto it when presented on his desk. If Congress can over-ride his veto, most likely the President will sign it.
Here's the Congressional Budget Office record...year by year http://cbo.gov/budget/data/historical.pdf what's missing that I don't have time for is.. which side was in charge each of those years.. I know some but not all.. even with that
what we also have to consider is the domestic and world events that went on at that time which may have needed emergency funding not normally done. Scroll down on the paper for break down the cost of medicare, social security and defense spending. As to who was in majority each year, it's not noted, but there are other sources to fill in these gaps.
As you study the figures, note the record revenues collected since 2004 as I pointed out before (for those who think we don't pay enough taxes)and note year 2000 when the highest earnings were realized from the stock market during the .com era; not everyone went broke when the bubble burst. 2003 was the lowest point in the stock market for the decade so look at the revenue collected that year and then the continued growth of tax income as the economy grew and the stock market grew.
Also note debt held by public during the Clinton years & Carter years so it's not just Reagan and Bush.
By this comparison, Clinton is the worst until 2003 when the Iraq war started and as a side note, the fact that Clinton kept thwarting military budget and therefore reduced our defense spending, we have to question how come his administration outspent his predecessors overall, since you want to compare presidents per this cartoon.
Also, take note of the table : Revenues by Major Source which is an eye opener for those who think Corporations don't pay taxes.
Again also see how in residue of dot com boom, 2000, 2001, 2002 dip in markets and then growth in revenues as the economy recovered. Look at 2006 & 2007 for corporate tax revenues collected during the supposed favoritism toward corporations by tax reductions. Tax reductions started in 2003; the CBO figures bare out that tax reductions work and that people earn more and pay more when tax rates are lowered.
Here's a few more educated democrats point of view with facts: I know it's to 2006 but remember after 2006, Democrats took majority leadership in Congress, so I wouldn't want to start digging around how they handled the final years of the Bush administrations budget.
http://engram-backtalk.blogspot.com/2006/10/update-on-federal-budget-deficit.html
also, please read Clinton's support for budget balance here:
http://www.senate.gov/~rpc/releases/1997/TPBUDRES.2.htm
Believe me, I'm not happy with either side in Congress about how they waste money.
Thanks for this... I learned a lot doing the research
Anni
My original answer to the cartoon is still relevant today, so I shall let it stand.
So, what do you think?
Anni
Greenberg cartoon 08/08/2008
My original response dated August 15,2008
Real cute. Ha Ha. I did laugh.
So it kindled my interest.. how true is that cartoon???
First, we need to compare who controls the purse strings in Congress, with who is in the majority leadership there during each year. Truly it's Congress where deficits are controlled. Spending is approved and controlled by Congress and not the President, since the President can only propose a budget, large or small, and he can only veto it when presented on his desk. If Congress can over-ride his veto, most likely the President will sign it.
Here's the Congressional Budget Office record...year by year http://cbo.gov/budget/data/historical.pdf what's missing that I don't have time for is.. which side was in charge each of those years.. I know some but not all.. even with that
what we also have to consider is the domestic and world events that went on at that time which may have needed emergency funding not normally done. Scroll down on the paper for break down the cost of medicare, social security and defense spending. As to who was in majority each year, it's not noted, but there are other sources to fill in these gaps.
As you study the figures, note the record revenues collected since 2004 as I pointed out before (for those who think we don't pay enough taxes)and note year 2000 when the highest earnings were realized from the stock market during the .com era; not everyone went broke when the bubble burst. 2003 was the lowest point in the stock market for the decade so look at the revenue collected that year and then the continued growth of tax income as the economy grew and the stock market grew.
Also note debt held by public during the Clinton years & Carter years so it's not just Reagan and Bush.
By this comparison, Clinton is the worst until 2003 when the Iraq war started and as a side note, the fact that Clinton kept thwarting military budget and therefore reduced our defense spending, we have to question how come his administration outspent his predecessors overall, since you want to compare presidents per this cartoon.
Also, take note of the table : Revenues by Major Source which is an eye opener for those who think Corporations don't pay taxes.
Again also see how in residue of dot com boom, 2000, 2001, 2002 dip in markets and then growth in revenues as the economy recovered. Look at 2006 & 2007 for corporate tax revenues collected during the supposed favoritism toward corporations by tax reductions. Tax reductions started in 2003; the CBO figures bare out that tax reductions work and that people earn more and pay more when tax rates are lowered.
Here's a few more educated democrats point of view with facts: I know it's to 2006 but remember after 2006, Democrats took majority leadership in Congress, so I wouldn't want to start digging around how they handled the final years of the Bush administrations budget.
http://engram-backtalk.blogspot.com/2006/10/update-on-federal-budget-deficit.html
also, please read Clinton's support for budget balance here:
http://www.senate.gov/~rpc/releases/1997/TPBUDRES.2.htm
Believe me, I'm not happy with either side in Congress about how they waste money.
Thanks for this... I learned a lot doing the research
Anni
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
