Ryan's plan addresses Medicare reform.Originally Posted by pbc2003
|
|
Ryan's plan addresses Medicare reform.
Along with SS, tax reform, and other spending. I don't think it's an awful plan but I think I read it would take 20-30 years to balance the budget? I applaud his effort but I think we need something a little more urgent.
http://bipartisanpolicy.org/blog/201...budget-detailsRyan’s budget would necessitate an increase of the debt ceiling by roughly $5.5 trillion through 2022. Due to the comparatively lower overall level of debt cited above, the increase is approximately $3 trillion less than that required by the president’s budget over the same horizon.
Is his plan better than the democrats lack of a plan which will increase the spending by twice as much if not more? Yes but it's still a bad plan because it doesn't even come close to talk about real spending cuts.
Planning for cuts in the future is really stupid anyway. The only thing that the current congress can promise is cuts to the current budget. Everything else is just fluff because they can't force future congresses to stick to their outlined budget.
Apparently there is an RNC rule that says that proceedings of the State's Executive Committee will be the Convention's proceedings if the convention fails to accomplish the needed business during the convention time period. So the Paulie desire to delay all day, fight every motion, actually played into our hands! No Paulie delegate slate!
Getting interesting now.
Attorneys representing grassroots supporters of presidential candidate Ron Paul delivered a letter to state Republican officials Tuesday challenging the results of this month’s GOP state convention, saying a session held outdoors afterward in which supporters of the Texas congressman swept all delegate spots to the national convention should be allowed.
Also, speaking of the "Red Pill," I saw this like a couple of days after I posted that.
And they won't be seated! If the Convention passed the delegates, then they passed the Executive Committee's slate, if they didn't, then the Executive Committee's slate was approved as the Convention adjourned without passing the slate of delegates. It's an RNC rule!
How many delegates does Oklahoma send to the convention?
I want to say 43, all totaled.
How does that compare to say, Texas and California?
Small potatoes, but we were speaking of the Oklahoma State Republican Convention, and its outcome. And it will likely be the same way in California and Texas too.
So you're going to go to those so you can punch some more Paulies?
Hahahaha, wait do you really think it was me?
And yes, I will be attending those to do just that.
You said it was you, and I believe everything I read on the internetz.
http://www.startribune.com/opinion/c...154237735.html
As Reagan himself warned in his famous 1964 address for Barry Goldwater (another outspoken libertarian), "A government can't control the economy without controlling the people and ... when a government sets out to do that, it must use force and coercion to achieve its purpose."
Welcome to Obamacare, everyone.
So what's the fight about in the GOP? Paul is decidedly prolife and believes, as most traditional conservatives did prior to the judicial activism of the 1960s, that the most vexing of social issues -- from drugs to marriage -- ought to reside with the states.
The problem is, in a nutshell, war.
Whether it's the "war on terror" or the "war on poverty" or the "war on drugs," there's always another one coming, and it always enlarges state power. Michael Gerson, a former presidential speechwriter under George W. Bush, derides Ron Paul's "unbalanced emphasis on individual choice," as though Republicans should be for less of it.
You'd think after 40 years and trillions of dollars, pundits would surely understand the dangers of confusing a crime and a sin. Then again, you'd think that "big-government conservatives" like Gerson would have long ago given up the pretense of being anything but the liberals they really are.
My source has it that the State Party, and those that work for it, received death threats from Paulies following the State Party Convention.
Also, apparently Paulies won the Elector positions in the 3rd, 4th, and 5th districts. However, unbeknownst to these Paulies it is both A) a felony in the State of Oklahoma to not vote for the candidate to whom you are bound in the Electoral College and B) the state party will press charges if this happens. So this will likely be the last vote for these 3 electors that they cast for the rest of their lives if they in fact do not vote for Romney in the Electoral College.
Pretty sure most know that Paul isn't going to win so I'm sure they won't be voting for him. They still have the ability to change the platform of the party going forward though.
Proposed Amendment to 26 O.S. 10-109. Penalty
Any Presidential Elector who violates his or her oath as a Presidential Elector shall be
guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by a fine of not more
less than One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00), nor more than Five Thousand Dollars ($5.000.00).
OKLAHOMA - 7 Electoral Votes
State Pledge / State Law - 26, §§ 10-102; 10-109 (Violation of oath is a misdemeanor, carrying a fine of up to $1000.)
The misdemeanor is the proposal, it is a felony currently.
Bets on how many delegates Paul gets from Oklahoma's 43 (despite not winning a single congressional district)?
Doesn't matter. http://www.theblaze.com/stories/mitt...inee-for-2012/
It's over.
Edit: WARNING TO OOO--DON'T CLICK ON LINK--IT'S 'GLENN BECK'S BLOG'
I'm calling about 5 votes for Paul.
6 for Paul.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
