We got it wrong Obama to cut spending

[Danzig]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29392964/

[timmgirvan]

So he's going to improve healthcare by reaming the health providers???
Is he not aware of hospitals closing totally, or at least shutting the trauma
centers down in multiple states?

Please explain to me how this can possibly be good for any patient.

[Danzig]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29392525/


some snippets:

...legislation was "going to grow the government 8.3 percent ... but the family budget which has to pay for the federal budget only grew at 1.3 percent last year.


Given the extraordinary costs of the financial industry bailout and the stimulus, the White House projects this year's budget shortfall will be $1.5 trillion, triple the previous record of $455 billion in 2008


Democrats included in the spending measure a prohibition on a cost-of-living increase for members of Congress for the year. (what a relief!! )


After persuading lawmakers to keep earmarks off the stimulus bill, Obama made no such attempt on the first non-emergency spending measure of his presidency. The result was that lawmakers claimed billions in federal funds for pet projects — a total of 8,570 earmarks at a cost of $7.7 billion, according to Taxpayers for Common Sense.

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by Danzig

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29392525/


some snippets:

...legislation was "going to grow the government 8.3 percent ... but the family budget which has to pay for the federal budget only grew at 1.3 percent last year.


Given the extraordinary costs of the financial industry bailout and the stimulus, the White House projects this year's budget shortfall will be $1.5 trillion, triple the previous record of $455 billion in 2008


Democrats included in the spending measure a prohibition on a cost-of-living increase for members of Congress for the year. (what a relief!! )


After persuading lawmakers to keep earmarks off the stimulus bill, Obama made no such attempt on the first non-emergency spending measure of his presidency. The result was that lawmakers claimed billions in federal funds for pet projects — a total of 8,570 earmarks at a cost of $7.7 billion, according to Taxpayers for Common Sense.

Any funds earmarked for a state...construction, health care, etc...Senators take credit for. Then it becomes pork..Even when it benefits the State..

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by GBBob

Any funds earmarked for a state...construction, health care, etc...Senators take credit for. Then it becomes pork..Even when it benefits the State..

well, they had tattoo removal mentioned in there. i'd imagine there's a lot more stuff like that in there-it costs money, and every bit adds up. i just don't think anything unnecessary should be in there-and stuff like that qualifies. it wasn't that long ago that we had a surplus-now we're facing record deficits, with more spending to come. bigger budgets across the board, when i thought they were going to rein in spending-defense budget will come in just as high as in the last eight years.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by GBBob

Any funds earmarked for a state...construction, health care, etc...Senators take credit for. Then it becomes pork..Even when it benefits the State..

exactly like the canoes in Hawaii, the walking bridge in Poukeepsie and the tattoo removal machine in Los Angeles. Not to mention Puerto Rican rum, condoms and more condoms.