In what was very typical Democrat fashion, in that whenever you don't have any ideas of your own, just go out and lie about the other guy's ideas, we witnessed yet another example recently in their attempt to misrepresent current Republican budget legislation. Such was the case when Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), who also happens to be the ranking member on the House Budget Committee, made several obviously false statements about the Cut, Cap, and Balance Act during a news conference on Tuesday. Van Hollen, joining House Democratic Whip Steny "The Douchebag" Hoyer at his weekly press briefing, said he thought it was important that the public know where the two parties stand on the budget-control legislation, saying the effort by the House GOP is not a “garden variety” balanced budget amendment.
“What this is, is an attempt to manipulate the Constitution of the United States to make it easier to end the Medicare guarantee than to close corporate tax loopholes, which is essentially the blueprint and framework of their entire budget,” Van Hollen said. “Why do I say that? They’ve embedded two provisions into this constitutional proposal. One, they would make it as a matter of constitutional law that you can cut Medicare, Social Security, [and] education with a simple majority vote, but you need a two-thirds vote to cut an oil and gas subsidy for the purpose of reducing the deficit.” This guy Van Hollen is a real piece of work, and the reckless disregard that he seems to have for the truth is a little disconcerting. And ya know, whenever Democrats talk about others manipulating the Constitution, I'm always waiting for that proverbial bolt of lightening to strike them down. Frankly, I was amazed this moron got that statement out with a straight face. Because if anyone is constantly trying to manipulate the Constitution, it's the party of which Mr. Van Hollen is obviously a very proud member.
Anyway, Van Hollen’s statement is much more than being simply incorrect, it's a flat out lie. And what's worse, he knows it's a lie, but it's his story and by God he's stickin to it. The actual fact differ remarkably from what this liar is saying. Actually, the Cut, Cap, and Balance Act exempts Medicare and Social Security from the automatic cuts that would happen if federal spending exceeded the caps set forth in the legislation. “The bill would, if necessary, enforce spending cuts through sequestration, which would automatically cut spending in order to maintain the caps. Under the legislation, mandatory funding for Social Security, Medicare, veterans’ benefits and net interest would be exempted from sequestration,” a summary of the bill states. But I think we all know, or at least we should, that the truth to Democrats is essentially the same as what sunlight is to vampires. It is something to definitely be avoided.
Van Hollen’s characterization of the requirement to end certain subsidies also is more than just a little misleading. Under the Cut, Cap, and Balance Act, a two-thirds vote is required only if Congress wanted to raise taxes. The legislation does not specify whether ending certain tax expenditures would constitute a tax increase. In fact, all the bill says is that a balanced budget amendment must include a provision that “requires tax increases be approved by a two-thirds vote in both Houses of Congress.” It does not say whether eliminating certain subsidies would even qualify as a tax increase under the law. Democrats always feel compelled to exaggerate either for or against, depending on the legislation's originating party, what is actually being proposed by certain Bills.
Van Hollen also made the claim that an amendment that had passed the House Judiciary Committee would cap spending at 18 percent of GDP, and he kind of smirked that the federal government had not spent under 18 percent of GDP since 1966. Van Hollen then went on to link that supposed amendment to the Cut, Cap, and Balance Act, suggesting that the spending caps proposed by Republicans were unreasonable. “If you look at the amendment that was voted out of the Judiciary Committee the other day, it writes into the Constitution a cap on expenditures of 18 percent of GDP. The United States has exceeded that cap every year since 1966,” he said. “Yet, the bill that was reported out of committee and the bill on the floor of the House today requires that you set an artificial cap -- the one that’s been voted out is 18 percent.” Again, not quite the truth.
What this pathetic piece of lying dog squeeze failed to mention was the fact that while it is true that a House Judiciary Committee amendment "would" have set the cap at 18 percent of GDP, that amendment was not adopted. The actual caps in the Cut, Cap, and Balance Act never go below 19.6 percent of GDP, eventually settling at 19.9 percent of GDP in 2021. So you see, the Democrats have no qualms about looking the American people square in the eye, and lying to them. As a political party they are completely devoid of any of the important character traits that we should normally expect to see in our public servants. Servants being the optimum word here. In their willingness to lie at nearly the drop of a hat, they continually reinforce the fact that they are, to their very core, a morally bankrupt group. And they are not to be trusted, ever. And that goes for our president as well.
No comments:
Post a Comment