In the early days of the administration of president Obama, America was constantly reminded by those in power of their adage, "Never let a crisis go to waste." In other words, when the nation faced urgent problems, the Obamacrats could use the sense of urgency to get enacted measures that they have long wanted. That urgency brought us a nearly trillion dollar stimulus that did not stimulate the economy, a series of green energy measures that produced no energy, an Affordable Care Act that made healthcare less affordable for all and less available for many, and a financial reform measure (Dodd-Frank) that reduced the availability of loans for small business while doing nothing to end "too big to fail", among other things. Now, we are facing a crisis in Syria as the Assad regime systematically uses chemical weapons against the population, and once again, the Obamacrats are trying to make use of the situation to get its way on other issues.
The specifics this time are as follows:
1. Spending levels for the federal government are limited by Sequestration. Sequestration is the plan that Obama proposed to push through automatic slowing in the growth of spending if Congress could not agree on specific spending cuts. It does not actually cut spending; it only slows the growth rate of the increase. When Sequestration was about to kick in last Winter, Obama blamed the whole process on the Republicans even though it was his idea. Since then, Obama and the Obamacrats have thrown fits because they were unable to push through major spending increases in the face of Republicans holding the line to stick to the lowered target rates. Obama and company told America that civilization as we know it would end unless Sequestration was undone. Of course, the slight cut in the spending increase brought by Sequestration was shrugged off by the economy and the government. The furloughs that were supposed to affect millions of workers were somehow avoided. The mass cancellation of flights across America that was supposedly coming just never materialized. Sequestration went into effect and no one noticed. The budget deficit of the federal government was cut in a major way, however.
2. Now that Obama is contemplating a "measured" response to Assad's use of chemical weapons, the Obamacrats have seen their chance to once again attack the limits on spending. The drum beat has already started. The Pentagon needs to have all of its prior budget restored, we are told. The Pentagon does not have money for Syria, we are told. Oh, and while we are restoring the Pentagon budget, we ought also to restore the budgets of every other agency, we are told.
This is truly shameless. Think about it. The likely attack on Syria will consist of about 50 cruise missiles or so the incessant "leaks" from Obama's inner circle tells us. At $1.4 million per missile, the 50 missile salvo costs $70 million in total. If Obama decides to go all out and launches 200 missiles instead of 50, the total cost will still be less than $300 million dollars. This expenditure will hardly break the Pentagon which is spending over $600 billion dollars this year alone after all the cuts. At $300 million, a missile strike would add costs of less than 0.05% to the annual Pentagon spending.
If things are really so tight at the Pentagon, then Congress can pass a supplemental spending bill to fund the Pentagon an extra $300 million to cover the costs of the Syria strike. There is certainly no need to change the overall budget as a result of this contingency.
The saying needs to be changed. It should be "Never again let Obama misuse a crisis -- especially one he created due to his own incompetence!"
The specifics this time are as follows:
1. Spending levels for the federal government are limited by Sequestration. Sequestration is the plan that Obama proposed to push through automatic slowing in the growth of spending if Congress could not agree on specific spending cuts. It does not actually cut spending; it only slows the growth rate of the increase. When Sequestration was about to kick in last Winter, Obama blamed the whole process on the Republicans even though it was his idea. Since then, Obama and the Obamacrats have thrown fits because they were unable to push through major spending increases in the face of Republicans holding the line to stick to the lowered target rates. Obama and company told America that civilization as we know it would end unless Sequestration was undone. Of course, the slight cut in the spending increase brought by Sequestration was shrugged off by the economy and the government. The furloughs that were supposed to affect millions of workers were somehow avoided. The mass cancellation of flights across America that was supposedly coming just never materialized. Sequestration went into effect and no one noticed. The budget deficit of the federal government was cut in a major way, however.
2. Now that Obama is contemplating a "measured" response to Assad's use of chemical weapons, the Obamacrats have seen their chance to once again attack the limits on spending. The drum beat has already started. The Pentagon needs to have all of its prior budget restored, we are told. The Pentagon does not have money for Syria, we are told. Oh, and while we are restoring the Pentagon budget, we ought also to restore the budgets of every other agency, we are told.
This is truly shameless. Think about it. The likely attack on Syria will consist of about 50 cruise missiles or so the incessant "leaks" from Obama's inner circle tells us. At $1.4 million per missile, the 50 missile salvo costs $70 million in total. If Obama decides to go all out and launches 200 missiles instead of 50, the total cost will still be less than $300 million dollars. This expenditure will hardly break the Pentagon which is spending over $600 billion dollars this year alone after all the cuts. At $300 million, a missile strike would add costs of less than 0.05% to the annual Pentagon spending.
If things are really so tight at the Pentagon, then Congress can pass a supplemental spending bill to fund the Pentagon an extra $300 million to cover the costs of the Syria strike. There is certainly no need to change the overall budget as a result of this contingency.
The saying needs to be changed. It should be "Never again let Obama misuse a crisis -- especially one he created due to his own incompetence!"
No comments:
Post a Comment