Our budget made simple:

This makes it simple.

US tax revenue                $2,170,000,000.000

FED Budget                    $3,820,000,000,000

New Debt                      $1,650,000,000,000

National Debt                 $14,271,000,000,000

Recent Budget Cut                 $38,500,000,000

Remove 8 zeros and pretend it’s my budget:

Annual Family Income               $21,700

Money the Family Spent             $38,200

New Debt on Credit Card            $16,500

Outstanding Balance on Credit Card  $142,710

Total budget cuts the politicians are so proud of is about   $385

I thought this was interesting. I am so frustrated with all our politicians.

The worst part is that no plan exists to repay and the kids are on the hook. It’s fiscal child abuse.

Kathie Toigo, an early-childhood special needs teacher from Yerington, Nev.

Bill Blackwelder, an Afghanistan war veteran from Fayetteville, N.C.

Val Grossman, a postal worker from Westminister, Colo.

Scott Zoebisch, a firefighter from Atlanta.

Judging from their chosen professions, I’m guessing three of them are union members.

The suggested donation was $3 dollars but anything got you into the drawing. I received solicitations for it last month including the following:

Suzie –

It’s not all that often that Michelle and I get to host a casual meal with friends.

That’s one of the reasons we’re both excited about the upcoming dinner with three supporters and your guests.

It’s the first one we’ve ever done like this together, and we’d love to have you and whoever you choose to join us.

Chip in $3 or whatever you can today — and you’ll automatically be entered to be one of our dinner guests.

I enjoy these dinners not just because they’re a way to connect with supporters across the country.

They also say a lot about what kind of campaign we’re running.

We don’t take a dime from D.C. lobbyists or special-interest PACs — never have and never will. Instead, we believe in the kind of politics that gives everyone a seat at the table — so we’re literally offering these seats at dinner to folks who are willing to step forward and be a part of it.

There are just a few days left to add your name for a chance to be one of our guests at the next dinner, and help build this campaign before 2012 finally arrives.

Make a donation of $3 or whatever you can today — and automatically enter to be there:

https://donate.barackobama.com/Me-and-Michelle

Thanks,

Barack

(The emails just started addressing me as “Suzie.” I don’t know why)

I wonder if he really believes the stuff that is written in these emails? With the national debt surpassing $15 trillion, more than 100 percent of GDP, it would be nice if these people donated money to pay down the debt rather than buy a meal with the spender-in-chief.

Steve Laffey for president.

If the facts and figures in this video don’t convince about who to oppose in the next election, then nothing will.

Below is my article that appeared in Townhall.

Colorado’s killer message: Don’t raise taxes!

By Amy Oliver Cooke

Everybody wants the Rocky Mountain high and the nine electoral votes that come with winning the state of Colorado in the 2012 presidential election.

Political pundits suggest that Colorado is “the king of swing states,” a “critical swing state,” and a “super swing state” because of the movement of our political pendulum from red to blue to purple in just the last decade, as well as our high number of unaffiliated voters.

President Obama has been here twice in the last month courting Colorado voters and the nine electoral votes that come with winning the Rocky Mountain state, but isn’t going to be as easy this time around.  It’s going to take more than just a slogan and some change.

The results of last Tuesday’s election sent an early and very clear, message. It’s the economy stupid!  Colorado voters told elected officials and big government advocates that they cannot balance their bloated budgets on the backs of working families. Got it, Congress? Super Committee? State legislatures? Local governments?

This year tax increases at the state and local level went down in flames. The Denver Post called the election-day fiscal bludgeoning a “killing field for tax measures.”

Statewide Tax Increase

Stateline news Web site labeled Colorado’s Proposition 103 the nation’s “most high-profile tax measure” for this election cycle. Supporters called the sales and income tax increase a “modest” measure to raise $2.9 billion over five years “for the children,” a temporary revenue stream supposedly earmarked for K-12 and higher education.

Stateline further predicted that, “the outcome is likely to be viewed as a barometer of attitudes toward the tough fiscal choices states have ahead.”  The godfather of Prop 103 State Senator Rollie Heath warned, that the results “‘will be very telling to the rest of the country about how people are feeling.’”

Sen. Heath discovered that people don’t feel good. Voters didn’t just politely say “no” to Prop 103. They beat it to a bloody pulp. It couldn’t pass even in liberal Denver County. Statewide, voters rejected the “for the children” tax increase nearly 2 to 1 with almost 64 percent of voters saying “no.”

Sen. Heath has a patriarchal view of government. Two years ago he chaired the Long Term Fiscal Stability Commission on which I sat. We were charged with shoring up the state’s budget.  He constantly asked us, “What kind of Colorado do we want?” As if a chosen few have the right to force an answer for more than five million people, but that did not stop Sen. Heath from his constant advocacy for the bigger government he assumed Coloradans wanted.

Well, last Tuesday Colorado clearly answered Sen. Heath’s question and rejected his patriarchal vision.  The resounding defeat within minutes of polls closing should tell the Senator and all other big government advocates that Coloradans demand that government live within its current means. If Colorado is the swing state and a barometer about “tough fiscal choices” for the future, then elected official would be wise to take the message seriously.

Two other points about Prop 103 are also important. First, the patriarchal Heath actually showed restraint with his tax increase because it was temporary, and $2.9 billion is much less than he wanted. Heath signed on to a majority report from the Fiscal Stability Commission that provided a taxpayer-funded Christmas wish list totaling more than $9 billion annually. So voters rejected even a modest Heath vision of Colorado.

Second, some big government advocates claim the tax measure went down because it wasn’t big enough. The Denver Post quotes Carol Hedges Director of the very liberal Colorado Fiscal Policy Center and Prop 103 supporter who claimed, “it’s wrong to assume voters were sending a message that they are absolutely against tax increases…Some voters didn’t think 103 was big enough or didn’t like that it was only temporary…Some disliked that the measure didn’t reinstate a graduated income tax.”

There is no way to spin this pretty for big government advocates. Losing by that wide of a margin means they lost independents, women, moms, and working families who didn’t buy the “it’s for the children” argument.  It’s hard to give more to government when putting food on the table is getting tougher. Tone-deaf elected officials who ignore this message do so at their own peril.

Local Government Tax Increases

Some taxpayers are more comfortable with local tax increases because their government is closer to them.  But last Tuesday Colorado’s local tax increases did not do well either. For school districts, voters approved only four of 22 property tax increases, one of eight bond issues, and five of 11 matching fund proposals according to the Loveland Reporter Herald.

One local Mill Levy Override (MLO) that went down badly was in the Thompson School District (TSD) in Loveland. Nearly 61 percent of the voters rejected the 12- year, $154 million property tax increase.

The TSD spokesperson Wes Fothergill explained, “’It was not a good year for this…” People feel they cannot take on more taxes. They do not see a bright light at the end of the tunnel as far as the economy goes.’”

The district’s arrogance didn’t help either.  There was no organized opposition to the tax increase until Nancy Rumfelt, a one-woman army at Liberty Watch (a 501c4), began asking questions.

Utilizing Colorado’s open record act (CORA), Ms. Rumfelt submitted requests for public information that were met with high costs and stall tactics. Frustrated because she couldn’t afford hundreds of dollars for public information, she organized a “Bake Sale for Transparency” to raise money to pay for the documents.

On a cool, rainy Saturday afternoon in early October, Ms. Rumfelt raised more than $1,000 by selling cupcakes, cookies and brownies donated by dozens of TSD taxpayers, enough to pay for the open records and several ads in the local newspaper.

Furthermore, the newspaper, which also opposed the tax increase, wouldn’t publish her guest editorial because it claimed she did not have proper standing as an “issue committee.” with the Secretary of State’s Office.

But for TSD the damage was done. The district immediately was on the defensive explaining why a citizen, from whom it was asking for more money, was having a bake sale to pay for something she and every other citizen have a right to see.

Supporters, which included the usual education establishment, complained they didn’t have enough time “to educate the community about the ballot issue,” and voters had a “perception” that the district is top-heavy.  Perhaps that perception comes from a rise in admin spending, as well as the district’s budget; or it could be the plethora of six figure salaries in a county with a per-capita income of $29,188.

Incumbent TSD school board member and tax increase supporter Karen Stockley lost her re-election bid to candidate Bob Kerrigan who openly opposed the MLO.  He even showed up at Ms. Rumfelt’s bake sale waving signs.

Ms. Stockley made the ridiculous statement that because voters in the state didn’t support tax increases, they must not support education.  Her reaction shows a stunning inability to read the attitude of voters and a lack of appreciation for what families are going through.

If Colorado is the “super swing state” and “barometer of attitudes” toward tough fiscal choices, the message from the 2011 election results was loud and clear. Tax increases – even if they are “for the children” – will be killer issues for government and candidates.  Ignore that message at your own peril.

Amy Oliver Cooke is the founder of Mothers Against Debt (www. Mothersagainstdebt.com). She is also the director of the Colorado Transparency Project for the Independence Institute and writes on energy policy.  She can be reached at amy@i2i.org.

While Solyndra burned, the executives fiddled — and kept feeding themselves healthy bonuses.

Dana Hull of the San Jose Mercury News read the 277-page Solyndra bankruptcy documents so you wouldn’t have to. She uncovered the fact that Solyndra bankruptcy law firm Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher earned $616,838 this summer — including $275,000 on August 19. (Here’s a link to download the bankruptcy document.)

I took a look at the document and it appears that executives were provided substantial bonuses at the same time that the firm was bleeding cash and soon to lay off 1,100 employees with little notice or continuing health care benefits…

Karen Alter, Senior Vice President of Marketing at Solyndra, received $55,000 on April 15, 2011 and $55,000 on July 8 to go along with her quarter-million-dollar salary. Ben Bierman picked up $60,000 on April 15 and another $60,000 on July 8 to supplement his $276,000 salary. Bierman was EVP of Operations and Engineering and was presenting cheery, optimistic PowerPoint obfuscation sessions as late as July, as well.

You should read the whole story and check out the screen captures of what Wesoff calls an “appalling lack of fiscal responsibility at this company.” Bonuses for company that went bankrupt using our money! If I seemed really MAD, it’s because I am. President Obama may not regret his decision to play venture capitalist with our money, but I sure do.

Just for fun I was poking around Recovery.gov, Joe Biden’s Web site watchdog for your stimulus funds. As of August 2011, Recovery.gov has nearly 16 pages of ARRA recipients that have received millions of dollars and have not complied with federal reporting requirements. One company, “Sunland Industries LLC of Los Angeles got a $229,333 contract from the National Park Service to provide road materials to Lava Beds National Monument,” hasn’t reported in “three or more reporting cycles.” That quote was from a November 2010 news story. By now, Sunland, which received taxpayer cash in September 2009, hasn’t reported what it did with your money for more than six quarters.

I tried contacting Sunland, but the only number I could find came after a lengthy google search and was disconnected. No email address, no Web site. I did find a judgment against what I believe to be Sunland. I could submit an open records request to the federal government, but I’m still waiting for a response from the one I submitted in May 2011.

I did contact another company included in the news story quoted above, which did get back to me right away with a legitimate explanation — a mix up in DUNS numbers. They are now compliant, and the preschool they promised to build is finished.

What’s ironic is how Big Government enablers view $200,000.  When it comes to taxation, $200,000 is considered “the rich,” who can afford to pay their “fair share.” But when it comes to spending, $200,000 is never enough. When it comes to finding out what happened to it, it’s hardly worth the time.

What makes me so MAD is how cavalier Big Government is with my money, your money. Whether it’s Solyndra or Sunland, the federal government is no better of a steward of our money than Bernie Madoff. Difference is that Madoff went to jail for his crimes.

Jobs for ALL – A Massive Public Works and Public Service Program

We demand a massive public works and public service program with direct government employment at prevailing (union) wages paid for by taxing the rich and corporations, by immediately ending all of America’s wars, and by ending all aid to authoritarian regimes to create 25 million new jobs to:

• Expand education: cut class sizes and provide free university for all;
• Expand healthcare and provide free healthcare for all (single payer system);
• Build housing, guarantee decent housing for all;
• Expand mass transit, provided for free;
• Rebuild the infrastructure—bridges, flood control, roads;
• Research and implement clean energy alternatives; and
• Clean up the environment.
• These jobs are to be open to all, regardless of documentation/immigration status or criminal record.

This “proposal” still has to be passed around and agreed upon in the occupiers’ camp.  Then it gets sent to their “General Assembly” to be voted on before becoming occupier policy.

The occupiers and their enablers are economic illiterates. With these “demands,” the occupiers prove that they have never met a payroll and don’t intend to do so. They have no concept of capital creation. They seem oblivious to the fact that the federal government is deeply in debt and entitlements, of which they want more, drives deficit spending. Which leaves me wondering who will pay the for all this “free” stuff once they have sufficiently taxed the “rich” and “corporations” into poverty.

Here’s my MAD mom demand: Every K-12 student must prove proficient in free market economics or no graduation. Otherwise the occupiers demands will appear reasonable.

Government austerity is as real as unicorns…

The Wall Street Journal reports:

The Congressional Budget Office recently finished tallying the revenue and spending figures for fiscal 2011, which ended September 30, and no wonder no one in Washington is crowing. The political class might have its political pretense blown. This is said to be a new age of fiscal austerity, yet the government had its best year ever, spending a cool $3.6 trillion. That beat the $3.52 trillion posted in 2009, when the feds famously began their attempt to spend America back to prosperity.

The WSJ then pondered what the rest of us are wondering, what happened to all those spending cuts that were going to kill women and seniors, starve children, and keep students from getting an education?

CBO says that overall outlays rose 4.2% from 2010 (1.8% adjusted for timing shifts), when spending fell slightly from 2009. Defense spending rose only 1.2% on a calendar-adjusted basis, and Medicaid only 0.9%, but Medicare spending rose 3.9% and interest payments by 16.7%.

The increase in interest payments should be very troubling to everyone because right now interest rates are abnormally low. At some point they will rise, and we will have to pay more to finance our bloated bureaucracy.

Prosperity Gap: No way to keep up with the Joneses

Guess which U.S. metropolitan area is the wealthiest? Yep, Washington D.C. According to Census Bureau figures it has now edged out San Jose/Silicon Valley as the richest spot in America. Federal compensation, lawyers, lobbyists, and government contractors helped propel DC to the top earnings spot. Bloomberg reports:

Federal employees whose compensation averages more than $126,000 and the nation’s greatest concentration of lawyers helped Washington edge out San Jose as the wealthiest U.S. metropolitan area, government data show.

The U.S. capital has swapped top spots with Silicon Valley, according to recent Census Bureau figures, with the typical household in the Washington metro area earning $84,523 last year. The national median income for 2010 was $50,046.

After I got back from DC, I said on my show that it is obvious the area has not experienced the economic hardship that has befallen main street America. Bloomberg validated that:

The flow of federal dollars in and around the nation’s capital helped the region weather the economic slump better than most areas and is contributing to its recovery. The unemployment rate in the Washington metro area in August was 6.1 percent, compared with 10 percent in San Jose, according to Labor Department figures. Nationally, joblessness was 9.1 percent in September for a third straight month.

‘The region did experience a shorter, shallower recession than San Jose,’ said Sara Kline, a Washington analyst at Moody’s Analytics Inc. in West Chester, Pennsylvania. ‘The federal government stepped in to take efforts to dampen the recession. It was focused to some extent in the D.C. area as well, given the presence of federal workers there and contractors. That insulated it from more of a downturn.’

Read both the WSJ and Bloomberg article. Make sure you are sitting down and no sharp objects are within reach.

Data from 50 states over 13 years shows that “temporary” grants from the federal government to state and local governments cause the latter to increase their own future taxes by between 33 cents and 42 cents for every dollar in federal grants states received.

Not only is this new “son of stimulus” not paid for, President Obama’s rhetoric that it will be notwithstanding, but taxpayers will have to pay the interest on the borrowed money, and then, as the “grants” establish what George Mason economics department graduate Justin Longo calls the “new normal,” or the new baseline spending, taxpayers will be expected to pony up at the local and state levels to support the new baseline.

Son of stimulus also includes money for school maintenance and retention of teachers and first responders, which is simply a repeat of a problem with the first $800 billion failed stimulus bill.  Ms. de Rugy explains that a public sector cash infusion “defers rather mitigates the economic impact” of a downturn. Furthermore, she writes:

in, most cases, a dollar in government spending produces less than a dollar in economic growth. Government spending actually retards growth. And these findings often don’t even take into account the effect of paying for that government dollar via increased taxes.

As unemployment sits at 9.1 percent, the original stimulus failed to live up to its promise of lower unemployment and robust job creation. Only in Washington D.C. would this be a reason to pass another one.