In other words, Obama is doing everything in his power to convince Republicans that political suicide is in their best interest. He knows that if he is forced to cut even a dime from these “cherished programs,” he will be able to blame the Republicans for that dastardly deed.
Why are cuts in Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security even on the table? Who put them there? Why not cut government spending elsewhere: by abolishing the Department of Education, the Environmental Protection Agency, OSHA, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, selling off some of the millions of acres of land the Fed owns in the West?
From the very beginning, by focusing on cutting Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, the Republicans have trapped themselves into a no-win situation. Why haven’t they offered a list of real cuts in federal spending? Who told them that cutting programs that the elderly are dependent on is the way to win votes in 2012?
It must be noted that there is no authorization in the Constitution for the federal government to create programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. Therefore, under our Tenth Amendment, the authority to create any such programs remains with the states, or with the people. However, to eliminate these programs retroactively in one fell swoop would be like pulling an arrow out of a stricken warrior's heart — it would be more likely to cause the wounded man to bleed to death than to cure him of his wound! Nevertheless the elimination of these programs will eventually become fiscally necessary, just as finding a better alternative has always been constitutionally indicated. The only questions that remain are: what is the most politically savvy means of accomplishing this, and how can this be done without asking our seniors who have contributed to these programs in good faith to bear the burden of rolling them back?
Apparently, Donald Trump can see the stupidity in Republican strategy which is beginning to mystify most Tea Partiers. who want a smaller government, not a campaign against the elderly. How do you get a smaller government? By abolishing useless departments and agencies as ruthlessly as possible. By selling off real estate in the West the Fed doesn’t need. There is no need to touch “sacred, cherished programs” now.
“The worst thing you can possibly do in a deal is seem desperate to make it,” said Trump. But while he wants Republicans to stand strong on spending cuts, he doesn’t want anything cut from Medicare.
“House GOP wants to cut Medicare, Obama took $500 billion from Medicare for Obamacare. Both Wrong!” he tweeted Friday. But in a new video blog, Trump says he’s disgusted with Republicans who he suspects are getting ready to fold on the debt ceiling.
“It’s hard to believe, but the Republicans look like they’re about to fold again. They talk tough, but they don’t act tough. It’s incredible. Look at what’s going on. It’s called 'el foldo.'"
“They are going to do something with the debt ceiling. They could negotiate so strong. They could negotiate so powerfully. Right now they’re losing all their chips just like they did in December. They call it the ‘lame duck’ session, where they gave Obama everything he wanted and frankly they had all the cards. Right now they have all the cards and they’re going to give up their hand. I don’t believe what’s going on. And that’s one of the reasons I’m so disgusted with them.”
Trump is not the only one disgusted with the lack of Republican intelligence in Washington. Many in the Tea Party see the handwriting on the wall. Smaller government means getting rid of the federal behemoth that has placed regulations on everything from light bulbs to automobile design, to educational programs that don’t work. Why do we need Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac? Did they stop the housing crisis from exploding or did they help bring it on? Why do we need the Federal Reserve System? Has it prevented recessions, bank failures, and business bankruptcies? Would we have had fewer of them without the Fed?
These are the things that Republicans should be discussing, not how to cut spending on the elderly. But the problem is that Republicans have been complicit in creating this behemoth government. They may not have voted for these liberal programs, but they did nothing to get rid of them when they had the power to do so. When Howard Phillips tried to get rid of the Office of Employment Opportunity, Nixon fired him.
When Ronald Reagan tried to get rid of Jimmy Carter’s Department of Education, his Republican Secretary of Education, with the help of other Republicans in the Reagan administration, sabotaged the President’s plan.
But with the rise of the Tea Party movement, big government Republicans were supposed to be replaced by small-government Republicans. Where are they, and what are they doing to reduce the size of the federal government?
If the Republican Party cannot come up with a plan to reduce the size of government, then a caucus of Tea Party Republicans should do the job. It has to be done. There must be a viable plan to reduce the size of government, without touching programs for the elderly, that will get the backing of the American people. We should be asking Paul Ryan what departments he would like to see abolished, not how much to cut from Medicare. Until we shift the emphasis away from entitlements for the elderly to the waste and fraud in the useless federal departments, Republicans will not win in November 2012.