Why we will never balance our budget - a post written by a TEA party conservative willing to admit the truth.

Best show on the Tube but the worst
political idea of all time, and the Democrats
think it is a great idea  -  in fact, under Obama,
our nation is having to deal with this crap for
the first time in our history.  

<<<<< Best show on the Tube but the worst political idea of all time

The latest battle over student loan interest rates is,   once again,  all about spending and the increasing national debt.  In a word, The Democrats don’t care about the National Debt and the Establishment Republicans only pretend to care.  

You should know that, for the first time in our history,  a political party - the Democrats - are running against a "balanced budget."  They not only oppose a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution, which would order Congress on this matter and assure a stable future,  they have no intentions of cutting spending to a point that does not increase debt.  How could they?   We overspend our annual [tax] income by a full 42% each and every year.  In simple terms,  this means that for every dollar your kid spends,  she has to borrow 42 cents from you to pay her bill or buy her next toy.   

The new mantra (beginning with Obama) includes a love affair with the myopic idiocy of  "fairness" when  "legislative responsibility" and "societal survival" should be the exciting themes of the day.    No one cares about any of this in Greece and look what is happening to that country.  Many believe that Greece is a predictor of all socialistically  permissive societies including ours.   With the advent of the Anarchist Movement during the Obama years (Occupy and Democrat lead allies),   we now know that violence in the streets will be the response to any effort to bring domestic spending under control - so our politicians continue to play their games and the rest of use continue stock up with guns and ammunition.  

If it were not for the TEA party influence,  no one would be talking, seriously,  about what is happening to our nation via the single issue of indebtedness.  The sad truth of the matter is this: we owe so much money that paying the debt down to “Zero” is totally out of the question.  Don’t get me wrong.  I am a “debt hater” and I support a "balanced budget amendment"  to the US Constitution.    I am simply admitting to the obvious.  We, as a nation,  have a debt that will never be decreased,  much less, paid off.  Heck, the interest on the national debt currently costs us $494 billion per year or 4.9 trillion in ten years.  You are a dupe if you believe America will ever pay its outstanding public debt. 

Think about it . . . . . . . paleeeezzz.  Everyone has a fit the moment our legislators (I.e. Paul Ryan) start talking about 4 or 5 trillion dollars in cuts.  Correct ???   

In fact,  no one is talking about more than 4 or 5 trillion in cuts.    Understand that anytime,  anyone, is talking about “trillions,”  they are talking about “10 years” in the same breath.  So, when the fiscal hero, Paul Ryan,   speaks of  "5 trillion in cuts,"  he is only talking about  neutralizing our national interest  payment.   We are still overspending by 42%.  

Sidebar:  Indeed,  if we held the interest payment to a “sum zero game” per the Ryan cuts,   saw our GDP grow at the rate of 5 to 8 percent annually  (as it did under Reagan),  and held new spending increases to two or three percent per year,    in time,  our debt would vanish  -  understanding that “in time” might mean 50 to 100 years from now  --  but what does an educated Okie know?  

Unless  a formulaic definition as described in my "sidebar," or something similar,    is institutionalized in the form of a Constitutional amendment and prescribed  legislative function,  our politicians will not continue any long term, fiscally responsible agenda,  judging from the historical record.  

And,  as long as a substantial number of big spending politicians are running around,  the only alternative "solution" is a total melt down resulting  in a second and violent civil war, with an outcome that is wholly unpredictable.  And that last statement is precisely why a full-blown civil war must be avoid . . . . . .  but not at all cost.  Freedom is something that remains worth dying for and if you disagree,  maybe you should have a talk with some of our soldiers or break into my home,  late at night,  to steal one of my three computers you don't own.   

At any rate, there is no doubt that we, as a nation,  are at critical mass and  it is "critical" because this nation does not have enough people who care about fiscal responsibility.  "Fairness" as used by the Slickmeister,  is only an excuse for more spending and we all know it.  Sadly, his "fairness agenda" is the open door for so much more, however  -  all of it sinister and none of it in line with the Founding Theories of this nation.