Righteous Indignation – CNBC’s Maria Bartiromo Opens A Can Of Whoop-Ass On Dem Sen. Ben Cardin Over Democrats Refusal To Put Spending Cuts, Entitlement Reform on Table In Fiscal Cliff Talks

Watch through the entire video to hear the response from the NYSE Trading Floor – People, it’s time the needle of opposition moves firmly and decisively in the RIDICULE Direction.   It’s a spending issue – A Spending Issue.   What are you willing to cut?

About these ads
This entry was posted in Bailouts, Dem Hypocrisy, media bias, Political correctness/cultural marxism, Typical Prog Behavior, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to Righteous Indignation – CNBC’s Maria Bartiromo Opens A Can Of Whoop-Ass On Dem Sen. Ben Cardin Over Democrats Refusal To Put Spending Cuts, Entitlement Reform on Table In Fiscal Cliff Talks

  1. anwtex says:

    You go girl!!!! How refreshing to finally see someone with common sense and gumption!!!
    I’m so tired of the run of the mill wishy-washy crowd that are all over media.
    Bravo!

    Like

    • fmhayes48 says:

      I’ll echo that!!! Especially nice to hear out of CNBC!!! (about time!!!)

      Like

      • Libby says:

        She is great! (I watch her reguarly-though she is usually among the balanced ones-I thought she did great there). I love Rick Santelli, too. He is among those who do more of the loud mouthing.

        Like

  2. plutorius says:

    All the dems want in any budget is more tax increases, more spending, more regualtions and increasing the size and scope of their tyrannical death grip on the throats of America’s tax payers.

    The demoocrat plantation masters will never set free the people enslaved by their programs.

    Like

    • Libby says:

      I am under the impression Obama doesnt care if the country’s economy expands or contracts as long as he can take money from some and give it to others until everything is magically equal

      Like

  3. elvischupacabra says:

    We borrow 4.8 billion dollars a day. If we tax everyone who makes over 250K at 100% of their income, we would bring in 2.7 billion a day. Even at this unimaginable and unrealistic rate, we’d still be 2.1 billion dollars a day in the hole. If the marginal rates go back to where they were under Slick Willie for folks making over 250K, we will still be borrowing 3.92 billion dollars a day!

    We clearly have a SPENDING PROBLEM.

    To hell with Boehner and the Republicans for not even attempting to make this point.

    Like

    • howie says:

      It is Bush’s fault. Also the Democrats fault. The two are one and the same.

      Like

        • howie says:

          It amazes me that it is still afloat. Can a state get out? I would think they would have to turn back all the Federal Money they get prior to leaving. That is how the states have been co-opted. But escaping the Federal Taxation would be worth it. Also all the Agency rules and Regs. Texas would lead the world. They could issue real money too. What a thought. They could have a Bus Lift to California for all the taxtakers and limit the voting rolls. The possibilities are endless. Would they have to have a Declaration of Independence? Worked once.

          Like

          • howie says:

            In Wikipedia it says this.

            The Declaration of Independence states:
            We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.—That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,—That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness[3]
            Historian Pauline Maier argues that this narrative asserted “… the right of revolution, which was, after all, the right Americans were exercising in 1776″; and notes that Thomas Jefferson’s language incorporated ideas explained at length by a long list of seventeenth-century writers including John Milton, Algernon Sidney, and John Locke and other English and Scottish commentators all who contributed to developing the ‘Whig’ tradition in the eighteenth century.[3]
            The right of revolution expressed in the Declaration was immediately followed with the observation that long-practiced injustice is tolerated until sustained assaults on the rights of the entire people have accumulated enough force to oppress them;[4] then they may defend themselves.[5][6] This justification had several antecedents: the Two Treatises, 1690; the Fairfax Resolves, 1774; Summary Views, 1774; the Virginia Constitution, 1776; Common Sense, 1776.[7]
            Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; … mankind are more disposed to suffer, while Evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the Forms (“of Government”, editor’s addition) to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing … a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. —[8]
            Gordon S. Wood quotes John Adams: “Only repeated, multiplied oppressions placing it beyond all doubt that their rulers had formed settled plans to deprive them of their liberties, could warrant the concerted resistance of the people against their government”.[9]
            [edit]

            Like

            • howie says:

              In White. SCOTUS says this.

              “ When, therefore, Texas became one of the United States, she entered into an indissoluble relation. All the obligations of perpetual union, and all the guaranties of republican government in the Union, attached at once to the State. The act which consummated her admission into the Union was something more than a compact; it was the incorporation of a new member into the political body. And it was final. The union between Texas and the other States was as complete, as perpetual, and as indissoluble as the union between the original States. There was no place for reconsideration or revocation, except through revolution or through consent of the States.[7]

              Consent of the other states?

              Like

  4. serfer62 says:

    He wans $1.4T in tax increase but is unable to cut $1M from the budget

    Can we convince the taliban to nuke DC?

    Like

  5. czarowniczy says:

    Blah blah blah. Boner caves, gives the POtuS a partial victory and the POtuS declares total victory backed by the MSM singing the Halleluiah Chorus. 47% of the population, plus another 10%, legally declared brain dead but allowed to vote in Chicago and most of California, fall on their knees in praise and declare Obama to be the only begotten son of Bal..or Bull…someone like that. His approval ratings go up, he signs an Executive Order declaring that any use of a personal pronoun relating to him be capitalized and we get moved one step closer to the cultural cliff.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s