.
Feedback

The American Austerity War

Republican war on austerity is pro-Pentagon, anti-social services.

The headline in last Friday’s North County Times read “House votes to spare Pentagon from cuts,” with the subhead, “Lawmakers instead trim from domestic programs.” Just before ripping the paper to pieces and tossing it into the trash compactor, I continued reading the Associated Press story: “Turning their budget knife to domestic programs to protect the Pentagon, House Republicans on Thursday approved legislation cutting food stamps, benefits for federal workers and social services programs such as day care for children and Meals on Wheels for the elderly.”

In the next paragraph, “the U.S. health care system would also be cut … deny illegal immigrants child tax credits they can currently claim … (and) spare the military from a $55 billion, 10 percent automatic budget cut next year.”

I then lit a match, burned the paper and threw the ashes into my Republican neighbor’s back yard – let him clean up the mess.

I can only assume that House Republicans and their austerity-loving constituents have gone completely insane. (Considering what’s happening in Europe these days, they’ve gone blind as well.) Where the hell were they born; what church do they go to; what school; what book did they read that convinced them that building the military-industrial complex is more important than feeding the poor and providing health care and other social services for everyone in the country?

Do guns always trump a helping hand in Republican politics?

Gordon Cress May 14, 2012 at 10:50 am
Jac is obviously one of those radical left wing wackos that believe big brother should provide "womb to tomb" for the citizens including food, housing, clothing, medical care, schooling, etc., etc. Jac, have you looked at Europe lately? Countries like Greece, Italy, Spain, Ireland, etc., are on the brink of bankruptcy due to their govenments wild uncontrolled spending on "feel good" social programs. Our great nation and economy weren't built on the "Big Brother Philosophy." It was built on the work ethic that you get and deserve what you earn, not just sit back and wait for some government program to take care of you. Jac's philosophy is exactly what's driving our great country to the brink of financial disaster.
Brian Burke May 14, 2012 at 11:13 am
Military spending is the least productive ofgovernment programs, What does it produce? Social spending has a multipier effect. As for Europe, just focusing onthe high debt countries is misleading. Most of Europe is in fairly good shape. What is driving our country to a financial brink is the trillions spent on wars that we lost and the cuts in tax rates for those who have capital gains income. remember, the highest tax rate under Reagan was 50%. He also raised taxes some 17 times; mostly payroll and other taxes hitting the middle class.
Steve Schock May 14, 2012 at 11:31 am
Mr. Flanders has expressed his disapproval of cuts in social programs, which are particularly abhorrent when the evil "Pentagon" is spared from cuts. To understand what is happening requires reading more than one AP article. You need to know from what level or time frame the comparison of cuts is referring. Often, what is called a cut is really only a decrease in the rate of growth of funding. Depends on your point of view. Our military has been asked to do so much for so long that people and equipment are getting worn out. Do we not need them to be ready to go when we call? Perhaps he disagrees that a way to pay for programs should be found before money we don't have is committed and spent. That is the main budgeting criteria being used by the new Republicans elected in 2010.
I especially like his concern for others and the environment. Hey, instead of ripping on people who are trying to hold together what is left of this country as the spending spree continues ever since TARP 1, why not recycle that newspaper instead of compacting it or burning it. Is it right to trash your neighbor's lawn because you are angry at some Congress members? Is that rational? Is that helping? (Ah, perhaps the author was being figurative for dramatic effect. Doesn't matter, shows us that his mindset is still that someone else should provide, even when he thinks it's okay to waste what he already has. I wonder about the state of his household budget.)
W. Mike Marshall May 14, 2012 at 01:07 pm
Well said, well written, short and right to the point. Good job. The above story is why I left the Republican party several years ago and now am an Independent at age 51. Hopefully we can someday have a credible third party Independent candidate at all levels of gov. to give us "free thinking" Americans a chance to vote for a Non far Right for Left jester. This political civil war is destroying this great nation. Where are the Centrist Intellects?? We need a better crop of politicians to chose from. Voting for the "lesser of the evils" is a ridiculous practice in the greatest nation on Earth. Fundamental changes are needed before it is too late. This election I will vote for most of the Democrats as a statement of protest of what the current Republican party has deteriorated into......................
David B Secor May 14, 2012 at 03:06 pm
Each $1 billion spent on Pentagon contractors creates avg 8,000 jobs.
Each $1 billion spent on U.S. infrastructure creates avg 25,000-30,000 jobs. Our construction workers, contractors, suppliers are chomping at the bit to rebuild this nation. Let's put them to work so they can get paychecks and spend some of that money in our small businesses, so small business can hire more employees and those employees can get paychecks and buy more , too. Fact: Our economy is 70% based on consumption. If people aren't working, they can't spend money, and the economy stagnates, and even fewer taxes come in. Your unemployed and under-employed fellow citizens are not deadbeats, losers, sponges, parasites as FoxNews would have you believe. These suffering Americans DO NOT want unemployment checks or food stamps - They Want Jobs! Let's rebuild America, not Afghanistan.
David B Secor May 14, 2012 at 03:12 pm
Last week, my opponent, D.D. Hunter (R-Pentagon) worked to block ANY funding reductions for the Air National Guard, and in the same week voted to reduce funding for "Meals on Wheels."
Jay Berman May 14, 2012 at 05:09 pm
Well said Gordon ! All Jac has to do is look at California and the fine mess our once great state is in. Industries are picking up and leaving, going to states like Arizona and Texas. Wealthy folks have had enough of the high taxes and are moving their primary residences .... Meanwhile, we literally invite illegal immigrants from other states that are craking sown to come here and enjoy our lavish welfare state, now we are $16B deficit this year and our recycled governor actually thinks we will vote to increase our taxes to save the schools ... I think not ....
Jac Flanders May 14, 2012 at 05:16 pm
Wow, it’s my philosophy that’s driving our great country to the brink of financial disaster! And here I’ve been blaming it on George Bush, the Republicans and the Pentagon’s recent spending spree. You’ve certainly changed my mind completely, Gordon. I and my wacko friends – raised on FDR’s philosophy, who have survived one really great depression, served in one ridiculous war, worked every day since we were teenagers, put ourselves through college, and still feel we have an obligation to help the poor, while fearing the military-industrial complex that (Republican) President Eisenhower cautioned us about – are really ashamed that we’ve brought your country to the brink.
My God, what could we have been thinking!
Jac Flanders May 14, 2012 at 07:02 pm
Steve - Loved your reply. I agree, irony is wasted on the young. But, seriously, TARP 1 started the spending spree?? And, we can always use a few bucks extra, but we're fine, thanks.
Jac Flanders May 14, 2012 at 07:06 pm
Mike - You and I belong to the same party, regardless of what they call it. Drop by and we'll have a beer.
Mike May 14, 2012 at 07:08 pm
The lack of meaningful bipartisan legislation is the disease. All of the unemployment, debt, dysfunctional immigration policies, housing crisis etc… are just the symptoms.
President Bush started a war on a credit card 11 years ago. We have prescription drug benefits for the seniors that are not paid for. The SEC wasn't looking at what was happening on Wall Street. Democrats were pushing house ownership for people who didn't really deserve and shouldn't be buying houses. At the same time, they were not willing to step up on reforming Medicare and on Medicaid and Social Security. Neither side of the aisle is insane. The party leaders are pushing agendas that results in stalemates and dysfunction. That is insane. Until a functional set of two parties, led by people of character, are in power this disease will continue. And I don't mean picking apart a candidate's personal life. I mean the character of their professional actions. Leaders don’t blame. They propose solutions and act. We need term limits in the house and senate so that real leadership can rise to the top of both parties. Hopefully then the current environment can evolve into one the American people can be proud of. Calling only one party insane in an article only exacerbates the name calling and delays that evolution. It is also ignorant and irresponsible.
Jac Flanders May 14, 2012 at 07:14 pm
David - Sincerely, thanks for your comment. We may vote alike, but we probably go to different "churches." Mine is pretty inclusive; we think only bigots go to hell. (If I mis-read your previous blogs, please excuse the assumption.)
Jay Berman May 14, 2012 at 07:35 pm
Very, Very well said Mike ..
Jac Flanders May 14, 2012 at 07:36 pm
Brian - Thanks for your observations, conclusions, and helpful history lesson. My stew is made up of humor, un-healthy spoonfills of sarcasm and a liberal dash of irony - not always a tasty dish. I appreciate your intelligent and sober presentation; adds a bit of class.
Jac Flanders May 14, 2012 at 07:52 pm
What was that about name calling? Gee, and you were doing so well.
Mike May 14, 2012 at 08:06 pm
Jac, my apologies for the name calling. My hypocrisy knows no bounds. Just one of the many reasons I stay out of public policy making.
David B Secor May 14, 2012 at 10:38 pm
Get the money out of politics. Both parties are for sale. Dems: SOPA, the Senate bill to let corporatists control our internet access. Obviously anti-People legislation, yetsupported by BOTH our Dem senators. Why? Each got over $1 million from (legal) bribers who would benefit greatly from bill's passage. Our favorite liberal from Minnesota, Al Franken, supported SOPA, too. Why? Overr 700,000 reasons. GOP'ers - no list needed.
"Our" representatives argue day and night over the 2400-page Dodd-Frank legislation (which doesn't work), yet the vast majority, like my opponent D.D. Hunter (R-Pentagon), will not even consider reinstating the Glass-Steagall Act, which is 37 pages long, worked for 70 years, and is bulletproof. It would take 5 minutes. Why won't "our" reps in Congress do it. Because they are bought and paid for with millions in bribes from banking and insurance giants. Simple questions for candidates you are considering: Will you ACTIVELY work to reinstate Glass=Steagall? If the person says no, or tries to evade, he/she is a crook. Period. Ask "Will you actively work for term limits for congressmen and senators and impose one on yourself?" If he/she says no or evades, he/she is either out for the money, or is on a personal power trip. Ask, "Do you take (legal) bribes from PACs, lobbyists, corporations, unions, special-interest groups? Contributions over $100? If so, their votes are for sale. I have committed to yes on all three.
David B Secor May 14, 2012 at 10:48 pm
I can do this in D-50 because there is no Dem machine candidate. We in D-50 have a real chance to send a message to the nation. Our House Representative's votes, like our own, are simply not for sale.
Donald Sonck May 15, 2012 at 12:57 pm
There is waste in every area of government. Like several of you who have commented on this post, I too, left the Republicans and went independent after Reagan left office. This country needs a viable third party! Perot was the closest and most recent party-crasher we had. Austerity is here to stay tough, like it or not! But with cuts must come incentives (read: tax breaks) for private business in order for them to hire and also keep jobs here in the US and not move them off-shore. And get the illegal aliens out of here! I'm all for providing some welfare benefits for OUR working poor, but not to non-Americans, especailly those who come here illegally!
Gordon Cress May 16, 2012 at 11:10 am
Jac, appreciate your sense of humor in all this! I also agree that we have to take care of those who can't care for themselves (as opposed to those who just won't or don't care to). However, these efforts need to be at the local level rather than nationwide programs. Federal programs (read funding) for nearly all social programs are rife with waste, fraud and mismanagement. Programs at local levels (through churches, foundations, etc.) are much more effective and easily monitored. And useless, ineffective and mismanaged national programs and departments like Energy, Education, etc. need to be eliminated completely.
ForABetterCbad June 7, 2012 at 01:04 pm
Jac, to get a better understanding of who actually provides support for people in need, I recommend you read the book Who Really Cares by Arthur Brooks.
Jac Flanders June 7, 2012 at 05:48 pm
Not sure who's recommending, but I'll look at Brook's book - thanks for the suggestion. I am aware of a few government programs that are helping people in need. As for reading recommendations, I think you'll find the eBook version of "What I Learned On The way Down" a fair read, if I say so myself.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Encinitas Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Vicki Campbell June 17, 2013 at 04:42 pm
Prop A will help residents and stop greedy developers from buying city council. Vote YES
Rick Moore June 18, 2013 at 09:27 am
I wholeheartedly agree with the recommendation that folks read the initiative. When you readRead More sections 6 and 9, you will see that Prop A sets a 30-foot or 2-story ceiling across the entire city, overriding lower height limits in many areas. The Downtown Specific Plan limits residences to 22-26 feet, as detailed on the DEMA website, so Prop A would actually allow the building of taller homes. It makes no exemptions or allowances for historic buildings like La Paloma, church towers or other structures over 30 feet high; the only exceptions are medical complexes and public high schools (see clause 6.2). Rebuilding or renovating (more than 50%) would require expensive public votes. Should the SRF be required to pay for an election to rebuild the Lotus Tower? Such contingencies are allowed for in our Historic Overlay Zone, which would clearly be overridden by Prop A. So is the Encinitas Preservation Association's plan to convert one of the boathouses to a museum. Again, Prop A would require an election (see section 4.1, clause e), which the EPA cannot afford. Prop A would thus favor large developers who have the money, time, lawyers and other resources to campaign for their project. How many nonprofits and small businessmen can afford to spend a minimum $30,000 just to get their project on a general election ballot (upwards of $300,000 for a special election like this one)? Yes, folks, please read the initiative, especially Section 9, which lays waste to anything that conflicts with it. That's why this has been dubbed Propzilla. I trust that most Encinitas citizens are smart enough to see that this meausre is deeply flawed, problematic and counter-productive. We can find much better ways to limit growth and preserve community character.
BlueAngel2 June 18, 2013 at 10:20 am
SAVE ENCINITAS FROM RANCID DEVELOPERS. VOTE YES ON PROP A!
BlueAngel2 June 15, 2013 at 09:47 pm
It would NOT surprise me. I thought we dumped Stocks. Why is he still around?
Encinitas YES on A June 16, 2013 at 02:44 pm
My YES on Prop. A sign was stolen yesterday. Other YES on Prop. A signs are disappearing. YetRead More another deceptive and untruthful mailer from the opponents of Prop. A was in my mail box. There's a shrillness and desperation in their opposition. They can't rely on facts and fair play. Polling data not looking good?
BlueAngel2 June 16, 2013 at 03:17 pm
YES ON PROP A will be victorious!
BlueAngel2 June 8, 2013 at 11:20 am
It just goes to show if Stocks or any of his puppets are involved, you will not hear the truth aboutRead More this proposition. They continue to confuse the issue. Please do not throw your vote away to ruin our city and enhance the developer's pockets who do not care what they do to our beautiful Encinitas. Vote YES on PROP A!
TB-ENC June 7, 2013 at 02:01 pm
How is this not a racist group with Hispanics in California at 14 million second behind whites atRead More 14.8 million. We only need one chamber to represent all Californians.
BlueAngel2 June 8, 2013 at 02:09 pm
So any group other than white is a racist group?
Miranda Klassen June 5, 2013 at 10:39 am
Congrats to all on the groundbreaking. Reesey has done an incredible job with making Lux what it isRead More today!
BlueAngel2 June 4, 2013 at 10:40 am
Vote YES on PROP A! The City Council is not experienced in real estate, zoning, construction orRead More development to make decisions for us.
CardiffCreature June 4, 2013 at 10:44 am
Prop A will not control growth. It will make sure that BOTH the council and the public get toRead More directly weigh in on the deals being brokered between big developers and the city. This won't end the indirect developer subsidies, but it sure will help.
Lynn Marr June 6, 2013 at 02:26 am
Yes, it will help to slow growth, by making sure that the public approves raising height limits orRead More upzoning, for developments over the parameters of a MAXIMUM of 30 ft. and two stories. Lower set height limits will not be repealed, because they are not in conflict with the initiative or the General Plan. David Ahlgren's fear and speculation is not backed up by one single fact. He just raises the usual building industry "mantra" of alleged risks created by unnamed "unintended consequences." Council's attempt at a preemptive ordinance does NOT guarantee that will be placed on the ballot in 2014, and does NOT eliminate other loopholes such as the "less-than-5-acre" exception, the "categorization of intensity of use" exception, and the height limit exception. The only loophole that Council's drafted ordinance affects is Council's ability to vote by a 4/5 supermajority on upzoing if it is done with respect to a "significant public benefit." Not only is Council's recently drafted ordinance NOT guaranteed, in that a future Council could reverse it, if it is not enacted through a public vote, but also Council's attempt at preempting the "right to vote on upzoning and raising height limits initiative" DOESN"T eliminate the other loopholes that still exist in our General Plan, Policy 3.12., which exceptions I've spelled out, here.
Lynn Marr June 6, 2013 at 02:37 am
An initiative to Prop A has worked in Escondido, without any lawsuits. "In the 26-yearRead More history of Encinitas, no council has ever used this provision to approve a major project without first a vote of the people." That's completely untrue. The North 101 and Downtown Encinitas Specific Plans were pushed through by the Planning Department, the Planning Commission and a supermajority of past Council AGAINST the wishes of citizens, against years of feedback from Specific Action Review Committees (Sparc)s and Community Advisory Boards (CABs), who wanted to stay with the limits of the General Plan of two stories, 30 ft, MAX, with certain exceptions, consistent with the Initiative! Just posting your opinion without any supporting evidence, Mr. Stocks, is only hurting your "cause." We and everyone we know, all our friends and neighbors, are voting YES on A! Voting YES is best if you want to take back your ability to help slow growth and to take back local control. Yes on A is a vote for Democracy and against insider influence and spinmaster jive promoted by marketing masters of misinformation, attempting to manipulate the uninformed masses with distortions of the truth. We don't need to be spoon-fed our opinions, but can think for ourselves, and act to protect and preserve our community character and our quality of life.
Greg Hay June 6, 2013 at 07:19 pm
Lies, lies and more lies. That's all the supporters of "No on Prop A" can come up with.Read More Even their slogan is weak and devoid of anything of substance… "It's not what it seems"… Really, THAT'S your argument against it?
BlueAngel2 June 6, 2013 at 07:22 pm
YES on PROP A which is NOT deeply flawed and very well written.