Saturday, August 06, 2011


We Haven't Started Yet

I hate it when my memory fails me but it has. There was a movie or TV scene where a person was slightly hurt and the medical aid provider (probably a doctor) comes over and starts to treat the minor wound and the patient goes nuts whining and crying and praying and the doctor, whatever, says either That's just the antiseptic or I haven't started cutting yet or something along those lines. If one of the dozens of readers here knows the movie or show, drop a comment please. It's bugging me that I can't recall more.

OK, to the reason for the posting. We've been treated in the past 7 months to a series of symbolic, meaningless, tiny "cuts" in our out of control and on the edge of impossible to really comprehend how big it is federal spending. I challenge quoted the word cut because there has not actually been yet a cut to the spending merely a reduction in the future growth, that's right, GROWTH of our our already out of control and on the edge of impossible to really comprehend how big it is federal spending.

And how have the Democrats reacted? Like we're chopping off poor people's feet. Like we're the cruelest cutters since Jack the Ripper or Hannibal Lector. Like the hysterical, cowardly patient in the half remembered scene. Behold: NYT; ABC; Daily Kos; Nancy Pelosi; Paul Krugman; Brad Johnson; AP; MSNBC; CommonDreams; John Dingell; Catholic News Agency; Fifth Column; Jon Stewart and on and on and on.

I've got just one thing to say to the hysterical Left (and the Republican squishes): We haven't started cutting yet.

There is a solution but the mere idea of it might send some particularly empathetic lefties to a 72 hour mental health hold.


Hey Roger,

I can't help you with the film clip, sorry. Correct me if I'm wrong, but shouldn't that "Bush years" span be pushed one year to the right? I mean, FY08 ened in September, which means FY09 budget had to be approved well before Obama was elected, and was in fact alreay 4 months over by the time he was sworn in. Shouldn't FY09 be part of the "Bush years."

Thanks for looking into it.

Well, now I have to plead ignorance. George W gets 2000 on the chart but he wasn't president until January 2001. I know the fiscal year starts on October 1 but did the 2000 fiscal year start Oct. 1, 1999 or Oct. 1 2000 (the latter thus giving Bush the bulk of the fiscal year). I probably should know this but I don't. I think it's Oct. 1, 1999 for fiscal year 2000 so the chart missed it by one space, unless my guess is wrong. Good pick up. Stay tuned as the radio people used to say. Hope your family is happy and well.
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?