[Rushtalk] Can we have a fact-based, adult conversation?

Paf Dvorak notmyname at thatswaytoomuch.info
Fri Mar 1 10:59:05 MST 2013


Not bloody likely!


PAUL: Sequestration doesn’t cut nearly enough




But it could be a good start

<http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/mar/1/sequestration-doesnt-cut-nearly-enough/#disqus_thread>Comments 
(25)Size: 
<http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/mar/1/sequestration-doesnt-cut-nearly-enough/#>+ 
/ 
<http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/mar/1/sequestration-doesnt-cut-nearly-enough/#>-<http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/mar/1/sequestration-doesnt-cut-nearly-enough/print/>Print
<http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/mar/1/sequestration-doesnt-cut-nearly-enough/#>Share 
on 
facebook<http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/mar/1/sequestration-doesnt-cut-nearly-enough/#>Share 
on 
twitter<http://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php?v=250&winname=addthis&pub=washtimes&source=tbx32-250&lng=en-US&s=google_plusone_share&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtontimes.com%2Fnews%2F2013%2Fmar%2F1%2Fsequestration-doesnt-cut-nearly-enough%2F&title=PAUL%3A%20Sequestration%20doesn%27t%20cut%20nearly%20enough%20-%20Washington%20Times&ate=AT-washtimes/-/-/5130eb5f5f07fa99/2&frommenu=1&uid=5130eb5fc6113b2a&ct=1&tt=0&captcha_provider=nucaptcha>Share 
on 
google_plusone_share<http://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php?v=250&winname=addthis&pub=washtimes&source=tbx32-250&lng=en-US&s=reddit&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtontimes.com%2Fnews%2F2013%2Fmar%2F1%2Fsequestration-doesnt-cut-nearly-enough%2F&title=PAUL%3A%20Sequestration%20doesn%27t%20cut%20nearly%20enough%20-%20Washington%20Times&ate=AT-washtimes/-/-/5130eb5f5f07fa99/3&frommenu=1&uid=5130eb5fc4b23d2b&ct=1&tt=0&captcha_provider=nucaptcha>Share 
on 
reddit<http://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php?v=250&winname=addthis&pub=washtimes&source=tbx32-250&lng=en-US&s=linkedin&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtontimes.com%2Fnews%2F2013%2Fmar%2F1%2Fsequestration-doesnt-cut-nearly-enough%2F&title=PAUL%3A%20Sequestration%20doesn%27t%20cut%20nearly%20enough%20-%20Washington%20Times&ate=AT-washtimes/-/-/5130eb5f5f07fa99/4&frommenu=1&uid=5130eb5fed59abda&ct=1&tt=0&captcha_provider=nucaptcha>Share 
on 
linkedin<http://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php?v=250&winname=addthis&pub=washtimes&source=tbx32-250&lng=en-US&s=stumbleupon&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtontimes.com%2Fnews%2F2013%2Fmar%2F1%2Fsequestration-doesnt-cut-nearly-enough%2F&title=PAUL%3A%20Sequestration%20doesn%27t%20cut%20nearly%20enough%20-%20Washington%20Times&ate=AT-washtimes/-/-/5130eb5f5f07fa99/5&frommenu=1&uid=5130eb5f5bd6ab82&ct=1&tt=0&captcha_provider=nucaptcha>Share 
on 
stumbleupon<http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/mar/1/sequestration-doesnt-cut-nearly-enough/#>Share 
on 
email<http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/mar/1/sequestration-doesnt-cut-nearly-enough/#>More 
Sharing Services

By <http://www.washingtontimes.com/staff/sen-rand-paul/>Sen. Rand Paul

-

The Washington Times

Friday, March 1, 2013
    * <http://www.washingtontimes.com/multimedia/image/b1schatzlggif/>
    Illustration Government Money by Linas Garsys for The Washingto


    * 
<http://www.washingtontimes.com/multimedia/image/b1schatzlggif/>Enlarge 
Photo Illustration Government Money by Linas 
Garsys for The Washington Times 
<http://www.washingtontimes.com/multimedia/image/b1schatzlggif/>more >


Story Topics

    * 
<http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/business_finance/>Business_Finance
    * <http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/politics/>Politics
    * 
<http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/united-states-department-of-defense/>United 
States Department Of Defense
    * <http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/federation/>Federation


Follow Us On



facebook

<http://www.facebook.com/pages/WashingtonTimescom/35994014410>

Facebook





Question of the Day




<http://www.washingtontimes.com/polls/2013/feb/28/do-you-think-white-house-has-manipulated-facts-or-/>Do 
you think the White House has manipulated facts 
or intimidated reporters for political advantage in sequester negotiations?

    * Yes
    * No
    * Undecided
    * Other

<http://www.washingtontimes.com/polls/2013/feb/28/do-you-think-white-house-has-manipulated-facts-or-/results/>View 
results

A study to learn whether or not a fish called the 
golden shiner can teach us about “collective action”: $5 million.

A project to design beef jerky that rolls up: $1.5 million.

A seminar in which a topic was, “Did Jesus die 
for Klingons, too?” (This is a question, I can 
assure you, that will not be answered by any sane person): $100,000.

These examples of absurd government spending 
become even more absurd when you realize these 
items were all part of the budget for the 
<http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/united-states-department-of-defense/>Department 
of Defense.

I know some of this sounds ridiculous, and 
admittedly, the numbers are small potatoes in 
terms of actual dollars. But there is a lot more 
where these examples came from. I would run out 
of space far before I ran out of examples ­ and 
the numbers get bigger. Much bigger.

The 
<http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/united-states-department-of-defense/>Department 
of Defense also spent more than $700 million on 
clean-energy research. It spent $6 billion on 
nondefense research and $15 billion on education. 
The 
<http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/united-states-department-of-defense/>department 
educates 19,000 students within its own school 
system at a cost of $50,000 per student, while the national average is $11,000.

Defense spends $9 billion running grocery stores. 
It also operates liquor stores and co-sponsored a cooking show.

Do you feel safer now?

I bring attention to these aspects of the 
“defense” budget in order to have a fact-based, 
adult conversation with the president of the 
United States, who seems intent on needlessly 
scaring Americans through the manipulation of 
facts, and in some cases, bald-faced lies.

President Obama wants you to believe there is 
nowhere to cut ­ that the 
<http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/federation/>federal 
government is cut to the bone, and that people 
will lose their jobs owing to the impending 
sequester. As I stated last week ­ balderdash.

You may have witnessed Mr. Obama’s histrionics 
recently, where President Chicken Little tried to 
persuade us all that if the sequester happens ­ 
and barely 2 percent of government spending is 
cut ­ we will all die. OK, he may not have said 
that, but I wouldn’t be surprised if we learned 
that such hyperbolic rhetoric was removed from his speech at the last minute.

I have rarely witnessed such a performance in 
public by anyone, let alone the president of the United States.

There are many things the president got wrong or 
didn’t tell us last week, but I will focus on just two.

First: He said the sequester wasn’t his idea. 
Actually, the president asked for it and signed 
it into law. I voted against it, not because it 
had too many cuts, but because it didn’t have 
enough. The sequester deal also left too many 
open questions as to how the cuts would be handled.

For all his brash statements about this last 
week, Mr. Obama has no one to blame but himself. 
Now, however, he wants a deal. Are we supposed to 
forget this was his last deal ­ for which he 
received as much as a $1.5 trillion increase in 
his ability to borrow money and increase our debt?

<http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/mar/1/sequestration-doesnt-cut-nearly-enough/?page=2>Story 
Continues

Paf Dvorak

<http://thatswaytoomuch.info/>notmyname at thatswaytoomuch.info  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://kalos.csdco.com/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20130301/c3b46dbd/attachment.html 


More information about the Rushtalk mailing list