Now, of course the progressive socialist left will come back with the typical retort of “uncaring conservatives,” which isn’t the case.
As Written By Allen B. West:
You can always assess a person’s priorities based on how and where they spend their money. In the realm of politics, budgets and spending are clear evidence of what is important to the politician. The preamble of our Constitution clearly lays down the missions, and priorities of our federal government. It states:
“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
Notice it says nothing about establishing “social” justice. And, I’m quite sure sanctuary cities that harbor criminal illegal aliens don’t ensure domestic tranquility — sadly something Kate Steinle encountered.
But I want to draw your attention to these words: “provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare.” There’s a huge difference in these two phrases based upon the verbs provide and promote. The verb provide is active, while the verb promote is passive. In other words, a very important aspect of our federal government is it actively seeks to provide for our defense — our security.
At the same time, the federal government is supposed to promote our general welfare — in essence, allow us to pursue our happiness. But, somehow, these words have been juxtaposed, and, for the last eight years, we’ve had a federal government, under progressive socialist control, that sought to provide the general welfare while just promoting our common defense. A big difference when it comes to policies…and spending.
As reported by the venerable Terence Jeffrey at CNSNews.com:
“Barack Obama was the first president of the United States to spend more on “means-tested entitlements” — aka welfare — than on national defense, according to data published by his own Office of Management and Budget.
Historical tables that the OMB posted on the Obama White House website, include annual totals for both “national defense” spending and “means-tested entitlement” spending going back to fiscal 1962–which is three years before President Lyndon Johnson signed legislation creating the Medicaid program, a means-tested entitlement that together with the Children’s Health Insurance Program enrolled 74,407,191 beneficiaries as of November 2016.
In every year from fiscal 1962 through fiscal 2014, total national defense spending exceeded means-tested entitlement spending.
In fiscal year 1962, for example, the federal government spent more than twelve times as much money on national defense ($52,345,000,000) as it did on means-test entitlements ($4,300,000,000).
However, national defense spending peaked in 2011, when it hit $705,554,000,000. By contrast, means-tested entitlement spending has increased each year since 2012.
Finally, in fiscal 2015, it exceeded national defense spending for the first time.
The fiscal 2016 numbers published in the OMB’s Historical Tables are estimates, but they show means-tested entitlements exceeding national defense spending $709,600,000,000 to $604,452,000,000.”
Now, of course the progressive socialist left will come back with the typical retort of “uncaring conservatives,” which isn’t the case. The difference is, conservatives believe we should have a safety net, not a hammock. Under Barack Obama we saw an incredible increase in American poverty, food stamp enrollment, and an expansion of Medicaid — which was meant to cover folks under the poverty line.
Now, never forget that during the Obama reign, America went from $10.67 trillion to $20 trillion in debt, and what did we get? We have more Americans dependent on government and its welfare nanny-state. We have a military that’s been decimated and depleted to the point where aviation maintenance crews are scouring museums and bone yards for spare parts. We don’t have adequate carrier coverage in the Persian Gulf. We’re driving our men and women in uniform into the ground due to incessant combat tours of duty. No, we don’t need to police the world, but we need to have a deterrent capability and capacity to provide security, and be able to engage and defeat the enemy on the ground, when called upon.
Perhaps we need an honest media that assesses the Obama era and enables the American public to see what the starting point is for the incoming Trump administration. How many times were we forced to hear, “I inherited the worst economic situation,” or “I inherited this mess?” Why won’t the mainstream liberal progressive media be honest and tell our people the truth about where this nation stands when it comes to economic growth? It’s the worst recovery post-World War II, and he’s the first president to not achieve three percent GDP growth.
Combine that with the deplorable situation for our national security and military forces and all you can do is shake your head. Instead, we have a nationwide women’s march about voting rights and killing babies — all affirming the priorities of the progressive left.
Can we have a fiscally responsible Department of Defense? Absolutely. We learned that the Obama DoD suppressed a report of $125 billion of wasteful civilian bureaucratic spending. See, the dirty little secret Obama didn’t want anyone to know was that sequestration gutted our front line forces. However, the defense bureaucracy didn’t suffer at all, nor did the broken defense acquisition system. The sad reality is there are those inside the Washington DC beltway who don’t comprehend every taxpayer dollar sent to the federal government is not equal. There must be spending priorities, and those priorities should be aligned with the constitutional duties of the federal government.
If one peruses Article I of our constitution, the majority of the Congressional responsibilities and enumerated powers are defense related: providing for the common defense. However, the statists and progressive socialists have taken the simple phrase “general welfare” to create an apparatus where the government gives from cradle to grave — well, at least to those who are allowed to be in a cradle.
They have perverted Jefferson’s words and no longer believe the American people have the right to the “pursuit of happiness.” The prevailing sentiment is that government must “guarantee happiness,” resulting in exploding deficits and higher debt.
We need zero-based budgeting, and let’s start in the Pentagon to ensure we are providing for the common defense, but in a fiscally responsible manner. We no longer need the baseline budgeting system that allows the federal government to increase spending every year and maintain wasteful programs.
With Barack Obama gone, perhaps we can get back to empowering Americans economically, and securing them here and abroad. Obama’s mantra was to economically enslave more Americans to his collective …
FULL STORY CONTINUES HERE: