Larger than expected budget deficit in California under Democrat Brown? Yup
You know the old saying “timing is everything?” Yeah, about that. . . . . . .
Within a week of Wisconsin announcing a massive budget surplus because of Republican Governor Scott Walker, California’s Democrat Governor Jerry Brown announces a massive budget deficit.
California’s budget deficit has swelled to a projected $16 billion — much larger than had been predicted just months ago — and will force severe cuts to schools and public safety if voters fail to approve tax increases in November, Gov. Jerry Brown said Saturday.
The Democratic governor said the shortfall grew from $9.2 billion in January in part because tax collections have not come in as high as expected and the economy isn’t growing as fast as hoped for. The deficit has also risen because lawsuits and federal requirements have blocked billions of dollars in state cuts.
And this:
“This means we will have to go much farther and make cuts far greater than I asked for at the beginning of the year,” Brown said in an online video. “But we can’t fill this hole with cuts alone without doing severe damage to our schools. That’s why I’m bypassing the gridlock and asking you, the people of California, to approve a plan that avoids cuts to schools and public safety.”
Brown did not release details of the newly calculated deficit Saturday, but he is expected to lay out a revised spending plan Monday. The new plan for the fiscal year that starts July 1 hinges in large part on voters approving higher taxes.
The governor has said those tax increases are needed to help pull the state out of a crippling decade shaped by the collapse of the housing market and recession. Without them, he warned, public schools and colleges, and public safety, will suffer deeper cuts.
So, whose Governor is doing the better job? California or Wisconsin? Hmmmmm. . . . . . . . . .
By the way, didn’t Hollywood just raise $15 million for Obama’s re-election campaign? Maybe Dem Governor Brown could raise taxes on the Hollywood types. These folks are more than happy to promote the progressive style of government Brown and Obama favor by contributing to Obama’s campaign. Maybe it’s time they pay to fund the progressive style of government while it’s in action.
.
.
Budget surplus for Wisconsin via Walker? Yup
Nothing says “the lefties in Wisconsin are wrong” like the facts.
Republican Gov. Scott Walker’s administration said Thursday that its new revenue projections show the state will finish the 2011-2013 budget years with a surplus rather than the deficit predicted earlier this year.
The nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau estimated in February the state would finish the two-year budget period that ends June 30, 2013, with a $143 million deficit.
But the state Department of Revenue now estimates that the state will take in about $265 million more than the bureau expected, which should translate to a $275.1 million surplus on June 30, 2012, and a $154.5 million surplus on June 30, 2013, Department of Administration Secretary Mike Huebsch wrote in a letter to Walker.
The one thing you should pay close attention to is the first sentence in the third paragraph, which reads “the state will take in about $265 million more than the bureau expected.” Notice how the words “cutting services” or “cutting wages” or “cutting” period are used to describe how the state will gain this surplus?
Of course, the left is anything but happy that Wisconsin is becoming a stronger state under Walker. Walker’s opponent in the recall, Milwaukee Mayor Barrett, who happily used some of Walker’s Act 10 to straighten out Milwaukee somewhat (although Barrett has Milwaukee so screwed up his city is a major drain on the entire state), doesn’t want to believe the latest projection.
Barrett campaign spokesman Phil Walzak questioned the accuracy of the projections, which were compiled by the Wisconsin Department of Revenue, an agency within Walker’s administration.
And the Democrat Minority Leader in the state came back with one of the weakest counters I have heard from a politician in a long time.
Assembly Minority Leader Peter Barca, D-Kenosha, issued a statement calling the announcement a political gambit. “The timing of this announcement from Gov. Walker’s partisan budget office is highly suspect given the fact that the governor is in the middle of a campaign,” Barca said.
What did Barca think Walker was going to do with this latest bit of good news? Not let everyone know how much better off Wisconsin is under his leadership and how well conservative principles work? Of course, Barka would like that. Yet then again I bet Barca would like to go back to the days of constant tax increases and less-than-favorable business environments. Can you say Illinois and California?
Check out the whole article and spread it around. It’s news like this that will not only keep Walker in office but let every other state know that conservative principles like Walker’s can and will do to straighten out a state.
.
.
Organized labor to support Obama. Nothing yet from Socialists. Yet. . . .
The big unions horse-and-pony show of whether or not to support Obama is finally over. Why they didn’t just endorse him right off the bat I have no idea. I mean, do they really think anybody is going to believe they were debating who to endorse? Maybe the whole process made them feel important or something. Anyway, from Politico:
The Teamsters’ Monday endorsement makes it the latest major union to fall in line behind the president’s campaign, joining the Service Employees International Union, the AFL-CIO and many other labor heavyweights.
Now that Obama has the official support of the unions, it should be about time for the Socialists to make their little announcement. You may say “What???? Socialists backing Obama???” At which point I say “Yup, just like they did last time around.”
While recognizing the critical limitations of the Obama candidacy and the American political system, DSA believes that the possible election of Senator Obama to the presidency in November represents a potential opening for social and labor movements to generate the critical political momentum necessary to implement a progressive political agenda. We know that a proactive and progressive government can come only on the heels of a broad coalition for social justice united against a reactionary Republicanism as well as a Democratic neoliberalism. Such a movement will also have to fight for a public finance system that can limit the power of corporate fundraising and lobbyists over both major political parties. Thus, DSA offers its Economic Justice Agenda and its “four pillars” as a framework for such a progressive policy agenda. This program calls for:
1. Restoring progressive taxation to the levels before the Reagan administration and enacting massive cuts in wasteful defense spending;
2. Enacting single-payer universal health insurance and expanding public initiatives in child care, elder care and pension security;
3. Passing the Employee Free Choice Act as part of a broader effort to rebuild a powerful labor movement capable of achieving equity in the labor market; and
4. Implementing a U.S. foreign policy that promotes global institutions that advance labor, environmental, and human rights and regulate transnational corporations.
Isn’t it funny how the Socialists “four pillars” and Obama’s agenda are so close to each other it’s almost impossible to tell them apart? Come to think of it, the big unions and Socialists seem to back the same people election after election. Huh . . . . . . . . . .
.
.
Yeah, about those liberal economic policies
John Hawkins of Right Wing News has an excellent piece up on Townhall called “7 Reasons Liberal Economic Policies Don’t Work.” This is a must read if for no other reason than these two sentences:
Liberal economic policies just don’t work. In fact, the only time left-wingers have taken charge in the last 40 years without decimating the economy was during the Clinton years when Republicans in Congress balanced the budget and spent 6 years strong-arming Clinton to keep him from molesting the economy like one of his interns.
Seriously though, John’s 7 reasons are totally spot on. I’ve listed the reasons here but you’ll have to go to Townhall to read his explanation for each. Trust me, it’s worth the read.
1) Keynesian stimulus doesn’t work.
2) You can’t fund the whole country on the backs of the rich.
3) Liberals incentivize failure.
4) They create a hostile business environment.
5) The business environment becomes unpredictable.
6) Liberals cause businesses to focus on government instead of the product.
7) Government is inherently slow, stupid, and inefficient.
.
.
Hannity vs OWS organizer
Not sure who out there has seen this clip of Sean Hannity talking to OWS organizer Harrison Schultz. If you haven’t, make sure to watch it all the way thru. To give you an idea of what is coming, I’ll tell you this: Harrison Schultz wasn’t even a challenge for Hannity. If it wasn’t for the fact Schultz is a jackwagon who is all in for ending America as we know it, I would have felt bad for him and the a**-whipping he got from Sean. Well, I wouldn’t have felt bad, but I wouldn’t have laughed as hard as I did.
.
In case you want to know more about this Harrison Schultz, check out his Linkedin page. Here’s a screen shot with his most recent info:
On a related note, Obama and Pelosi and the progressives came out in favor of the Occupy movement and they have yet to really denounce it and what it stands for. I guess this means they are cool with Harrison Schultz’s positions? Hmmmmmm…………………
.
.
So, why are the lefty progressives and unions recalling Walker again?
Wasn’t the whole Recall Walker thing started because of collective bargaining? The answer is “yes,” or at least that’s what the unions and their progressive lefty Democrat voting supporters said it was about until they found out taxpayers don’t give a damn about the union’s extravagant benefit package being brought down to a realistic level.
Which brings us to today. Ask a blue fister what the recall is about now and there is a great chance you won’t even hear the words “collective bargaining.” From the WSJ:
Since last summer, unions have been throwing millions at defeating the man who reformed collective bargaining for government workers and required union members to pay 5.8% of their paychecks toward pensions and 12.6% of their health insurance premiums, modest contributions compared to the average in private business. As the May 8 Democratic recall primary nears to determine who will run against Mr. Walker on June 5, this should be their rhetorical moment ne plus ultra.
So, let’s see. Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett, the front-runner, has focused his campaigns on jobs, education, the environment and “making communities safer.” One of Mr. Barrett’s ads singles out “Walker’s War on Women,” with nary a mention of collective bargaining. Former Dane County Executive Kathleen Falk is heavily supported by union groups, but even her issues list makes only passing reference to collective bargaining.
Although you won’t hear the truth from them, either.
Mr. Walker’s reforms were a modest but necessary response to the state’s fiscal problems, and the proof is in the emerging results. The union reaction was so ferocious because the reforms reduced Big Labor’s clout over state and local taxpayers and thus its ability to milk taxpayers year after year without challenge.
Democrats and unions will still do all they can to recall Mr. Walker to prove to would-be reformers nationwide that unions can’t be crossed. But it speaks volumes that Democrats are running on everything except their real goal—which is to restore the political dominance of government unions.
.
.
Want to know what kind of people want Walker and Kleefisch out of office?
The classy lefties, that’s who wants Walker and Kleefisch out of office. From Breitbart:
Wisconsin Lt. Governor Rebecca Kleefisch is a wife, mother, and a cancer survivor. She’s currently being targeted for recall and by some of the ugliest personal attacks you’ll hear — at least until the left launches the next one.
Listen here to John “Sly” Sylvester, a left-wing radio host who operates out of Madison, WI, at radio station WTDY. Sylvester accuses Kleefisch of performing sexual acts on numerous men, mocks her cancer, and attacks her children.
Here are the lowlights:
“I’m Rebecca Kleefisch. I perform fellatio on all the talk show hosts in Milwaukee. … I got colon cancer and I ran around the state [garbled] people.”
“I had heard at one point that Rebecca Kleefisch pulled a train (having sex with several men one after another) but that must’ve been a different story I was reading about.”
“Let me tell you something about these Barbies the Republicans trot out the Rebecca Kleefisch’s…”
“I hope your husband is sleeping with your best friend.”
Unbelievably, it gets worse. Here’s the mocking of the Lt. Governor’s children:
“I love it that your kids have actually have to hear about what evil things you’re doing. I hope they have to hear it every day. And I hope they come home right to you. And just because you’re good looking — and she is — and just ‘cuz you’re cutes and I’m sure you got a precocious little daughter you put in little Jon Benet contests, and I’m sure you have a little jock son, and they come home and say ‘Mommy, they’re saying you’re a witch.’ You are a witch!”
These are the people that need Wisconsinite’s help to take over Wisconsin again. Guess the folks in my home state have a choice to make – side with Walker and Kleefisch or the classy folks on the left.
.
.
Obama propaganda video gets Mystery Science Theatered via Klavan and Whittle
Don’t know how many of you have actually seen the eight minute Obama propaganda video “The Road We’ve Traveled.”. If you haven’t, let me give you a quick summary – Tom Hanks praising Obama with a bunch of liberal talking points of half truths and lies while his pants are down around his ankles and . . . . . . . .
Anyway, Andrew Klavan and Bill Whittle have done to this video what Mystery Science Theater 3000 used to do to bad movies, and that is to rip it apart and expose just how crappy it really is.
Enjoy!!!
.
.
Democrat’s idea of an affordable student loan? Make business pay too
Obama and the left are bound and determined to make college more ‘affordable’ by shifting the costs from those who are actually going to school to, well…… whoever they can shift the costs to. And if they have their way the latest target, er, proposed payer of higher education would be:
Senate Democrats are ready with an election-year bill preventing interest rates from rising for millions of college students with federal loans. Republicans are already balking at the way Democrats would cover its $5.9 billion price tag: boosting payroll taxes on the owners of some privately held firms.
That’s right! Businesses! As in the job creators. But not just any ol’ set of businesses:
Republicans trained their fire on Democrats’ plan to finance the bill by making it harder for owners of smaller, privately owned companies called S corporations to avoid paying Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes on some of their income.
The proposal would apply to such companies with incomes exceeding $250,000 and whose revenues come mostly from the work of three or fewer owners. The higher payroll taxes would also be required for some law firms, doctors’ practices and other professional services partnerships.
Can you say “pay up suckas!?!”
For a great take on this, check out Morgen Richmond’s piece at Hot Air.
Millions of small, family owned businesses around the country are classified as S-corporations, and would be caught up in this tax net for no reason other than that they are small, and successful. And keep in mind that the profits which are credited to shareholders of S-corporations often remain in the business, funding the salaries of new employees and other investments.
Question for ya’all. If college is that expensive (which it is), don’t you think it would be better to see a reduction in the cost of tuition instead of a reduction in the cost of the loan? Of course, this idea would never fly with the Democrats and their supporters within the education system.
.
.
Bret Baier explains how the budget process works to Debbie Wasserman Schultz
Do you think Wasserman Schultz realizes how foolish she looks in interviews like this? My guess is she doesn’t, because if she did I would think she would prepare herself better. Not that I’m complaining. I really enjoy watching her make a fool of herself.
Bret Baier, who is one of the best in the business, sat down with Debbie Wasserman Schultz last night and the two ended up talking quite a bit about the federal budget, or lack there of. While I hope you watch the whole video (it is pretty great), I wrote out my two favorite parts of the interview because they show how DWS and the left as a whole are doing all they can to avoid talking about the details of certain subjects like the budget (or lack there of). The transcript is by me and I put question marks next to the spots that were difficult to totally understand or I wasn’t 100% sure of the exact wording.
Starting at the 2:44 mark:
Baier – But you get the people sitting at home that say hey listen we understand that you have a problem with the Ryan budget. But there’s not a Democratic budget on the table.
DWS – There certainly is. President Obama proposed a budget. . . . . .
Baier – But it’s not being voted on.
DWS – That’s right. Because the house Republican’s, uh, voted it down. (?)
Baier – No no no. The Senate controls (?) by Democrats. And they’re not bringing forward the President’s budget. If they wanted to vote on the President’s budget, all they’d need is 51 votes to pass it. So, why don’t you or President Obama call Senator Reid and say “Bring up President Obama’s budget and vote on it”?
DWS – I I don’t speak for or tell Harry Reid what to do. What wha I think we have to do here is make sure that we have we’ve got two budgets, two different directions . . . . . . .
At this point DWS does what she can to try to get herself out from behind the eight ball. But Baier isn’t done with her yet. At the 3:43 mark:
Baier – You know how Congress works.
We all know that when a liberal such as DWS is being interviewed by a host that is a fellow liberal, the lib host throws the lib guest a bunch of softball questions so the guest will have an easy time looking good. In this case, it was like DWS was throwing Bret Baier a bunch of softballs and Bret was having an easy time making her look foolish.
.
.
