The Obama lemmings [Reader Post]

By 99 Comments 9,021 views

Question: When does $70 billion equal 1.25 trillion?

Answer: In Obamaworld

“You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.”

– Abraham Lincoln

Unless they are Obama supporters. It turns out that you can fool all of them all of the time.

Barack Obama admits to being weak at math. On Leno he said:

“The math stuff was fine up until about seventh grade. Malia is now a freshman in high school. I’m pretty lost.”

That explains a lot.

Barack Obama claims that he was re-elected to raise taxes on the so-called “wealthy.

President Barack Obama and House Speaker John Boehner are signaling they’re open to some compromise on a taxes and spending to prevent more financial pain in the new year, but the two sides are digging in on raising taxes for wealthier Americans. Obama said Friday that his re-election gave him a mandate to pursue that position because “the majority of Americans agree with my approach.”

His approach was and still is to lie. Or else he is plain stupid.

Obama has people believing that 70 billion equals 1.25 trillion. They believe it because he told them it does. Obama supporters do not question anything Obama says.

Yes, Obama did say 70 billion equals 1.25 trillion. He spoke with the feckless Scott Pelley during an interview for 60 minutes and he said:

“And if we go back to the tax rates for folks making more than $250,000 a year, back to the rates that we had under Bill Clinton,” he continued, “we can close the deficit, stabilize the economy, keep taxes on middle class families low, [and] provide the certainty that I think all of us would be looking for.”

In an ad Obama said

“Now Governor Romney believes that with even bigger tax cuts for the wealthy, and fewer regulations on Wall Street, all of us will prosper. In other words, he’d double down on the same trickle-down policies that led to the crisis in the first place.”

Obama went so far as to enlist Bill Clinton to lie; to say that these tax rates on the “wealthy” caused the current financial mess.

“This election to me is about which candidate is more likely to return us to full employment. This is a clear choice. The Republican plan is to cut more taxes on upper income people and go back to deregulation. That is what got us into trouble in the first place.”

It’s a lie of course. It’s so false that not even Ezra Klein believes that.

“I am absolutely not saying the Bush tax cuts led to the financial crisis. To my knowledge, there’s no evidence of that.”

Yet there it is- just undo those tax cuts for the “wealthy” and the deficit will close, the economy will stabilize and Mayan apocalypse will be avoided.

The Obama administration claimed it was talking about all of Bush’s policies, to which Glenn Kessler replied

We think that distinction would be lost on ordinary people.

Lost it was. It was lost on all Obama supporters- including Scott Pelley.

The truth?

The deficit this year is projected to be $1.25 trillion.

Repealing the Bush tax rates for the “wealthy” would net approximately $70 billion per year. That’s it.

Allowing all the Bush tax rates to expire would net approximately $380 billion per year. That begins to take a bite out of the deficit. What is obvious is that the big money comes from the 98%, not the 2% or the 1%.

And still Obama supporters think that $70 billion will erase a $1.25 trillion deficit.

Because Obama said so.


DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education. DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed. Except for liberals being foolish.

99 Responses to “The Obama lemmings [Reader Post]”

  1. 54


    hi, thank you for the link, so that leave us with the human lemmings
    ready to jump the fiscal cliff by jumping behind OBAMA,
    interesting, is in it, do you think it’s connected with
    agenda 21? scary stuff
    I still can see the video from obama employees ,
    of an old woman in a wheel chair and the handler pushing her of the cliff, they have scary ideas those DEMOCRATS,
    I prefer the CONSERVATIVES ANY TIME, their mind are
    more normal

  2. 55


    Maybe Obama doesn’t realize that 1 trillion is 1000 times bigger than 1 billion. So trying to pay a 1.25 trillion dollar debt with 70 billion dollars is like putting $70 towards a $1250 debt. It pays less than 6% of the debt.

  3. 57


    @Nate Whilk: #56
    As I have mentioned before, imagine a foreign country or an organization that wants to overthrow the USA and has gotten their agents into congress and the white house. How has it happened to other countries, and how would they do it to the USA? Think about it for a little while before reading further.

    Compare your answer to what Obama and other liberals are doing and you should see almost the exact things happening NOW.

  4. 60


    @w: #58

    The Bush tax cuts resulted in the largest income tax receipts by the government in history in 2007. Somebody should ask Obama to explain that.

    He doesn’t want to say what he usually does: “It’s Bush’s fault.”

    The democrats know that lowering taxes raises the economy, and that raising taxes lowers the economy. Look at the charts from way back to now and they all show that. This is why I have been saying that the democrats don’t want the economy to prosper. I have my thoughts as to why they want to ruin the economy. I will let others come up with their own reasons why the democrats are doing it. For those who think the democrats are trying to save the economy, ask yourself why they are doing the same things that have put the USA in serious trouble before. “Those who do not learn from the past, are prone to repeat it.” Why are they repeating what has failed every time it has been tried?

  5. 61


    @ilovebeeswarzone: #59
    I mean our country being taken over and turned into a socialist or Muslim State. I’m guessing a Muslim state. Immediately after obama won the election, he started working with the United Nations to let them control guns in the USA. He can go after it and other stuff on his agenda more openly now, since he can’t be reelected again. Look for more executive orders, more Tsars, and a lot of pardons.

  6. 62


    I read that they let loose the TALBAN prisoners who they say
    where middle soldier, IN AFGHANISTAN
    CAN YOU BELIEVE WHILE some afghans trained are shooting the MILITARY IN THE BACK


  7. 63


    yes I would believe it, the I AND ME ARE IN HIS SPEECH, NOW
    strange behavior indeed

  8. 66


    @ilovebeeswarzone: #63
    Don’t look for ANY investigating, except them investigating how to con more people more often. They are on a roll now. I wonder which house is over the agency or agencies that investigate voter fraud. If it is the senate, then there won’t be ANY investigation, even when obama got 108 percent of the vote in one voting district and 100 percent in many others.

  9. 68


    there are some true AMERICANS watching every move,
    they can intervene if necessary,
    they won’t take the USA to her knees, ever

  10. 72


    What the president is doing is nothing more than demagoguery. To realistically address the debt issue Obama has to (a) cut spending and/or (b) raise taxes across the board. Cutting spending is against the big government philosophy, so that’s out. Raising taxes generally is unpopular, so that’s out. So instead he puts forward an laughably unrealistic plan that he knows Republicans are going to balk at, at which point he can say that they are defending the rich.
    The problem with Obama is that his every folly and transparent ruse is defended by the lapdog national media. They refuse to hold him to his record or ask a critical question. But the Republican leadership has to snap out of it and stand up to him. When Bush won a close reelection in 2004 it was “dissent is patriotic.” But when Obama won a close election in 2012 where the Democrats do not even control the House it’s a “permanent mandate.” The Republicans have to start aggressively attacking the lies that make up the Democrat’s entire position. Start with the lie that the Republicans caused the 2008 mortgage crisis and go from there. It’s an entire political agenda based on lies and scapegoats. Just as an example, Obama blames Bush for deficits even though the Democrats controlled the House from 2006 to 2010 and crafted every budget from 2007 onward. The politics of blaming others.

  11. 73

    Rich K

    As sad as it is I really want this mess to crash and burn like Rome under Nero so all you worthless slackers who did not vote for Romney get to see how craptastic this economy can get.

  12. 75


    Increased revenues of $70B clearly will not reduce the deficit significantly, but that’s not the intent. Asking (requiring) the “rich” to pay “a little more” is just a prelude to more tax increases. But more importantly, success in raising taxes will embolden the Administration, encouraging them to further their agenda in other areas.

  13. 76

    James Raider

    @jverive: #75,
    You’ve nailed it. The longer term plan will see all tax rates increase, . . . “Look, we asked the millionaires, we asked those making $200,000, now it’s your turn Mr. & Mrs. Middle America. It’s your turn to give. We have socialist plans to implement.”

  14. 77


    Raising 70 billion in revenue won’t accomplish anything. The reality of course is that spending is so out of control that spending cuts or significant tax increases are going to be necessary. However this proposal is a political diversion. Raising taxes generally is absolutely toxic, and no raising taxes on the “rich” will change that. I will agree however that Obama will try to sell tax increases as fairness, and that he will try to lower the threshold of the supposed rich who are not paying their fair share. The trick will be how far this goes before it doesn’t work. In any event, as a debt solution, it is a laughable strategy.

  15. 78



    In any event, as a debt solution, it is a laughable strategy.

    The credit ratings agencies have already pretty much summed it up the same way. They have all but told Obama and the Democrats that, “It’s the spending, stupid!”

  16. 79


    I wonder how much is the interest weekly or yearly
    OBAMA OWE TO CHINA at this point,
    maybe the 70 billions is owe in interest only now,
    what if CHINA call at any time for his money due, or ownership of land and treasure if they see a more degradation of the debt because of OBAMA’S VICTORY FOR FOUR MORE YEARS.

  17. 80


    @Winston: #72
    You are ASSUMING that we have two SEPARATE political parties. I don’t believe we do any more. Both of them have either been infiltarated, or they have become power hungry and want more power and more money. That is what the game is now. THE PEOPLE are no longer what a politician goes to congress for. They go there for their own self gain, or to change our governmet into something else.

  18. 81


    @James Raider: #76
    Most of my life I fell for the, “I’m not going to raise taxes on individuals, just businesses.” I finally figured out who pays business’s taxes. WE DO! Every time taxes are raised on businesses, their prices go up. Every time you buy something, you pay THEIR taxes. We would be better off not taxing busineess at all. The more their costs go up, the more I have to pay.

  19. 82

    Charles Breiling

    Dr. John, in your excellent post, you underestimated the problem, in reality it’s much worse. The “$70 Billion per year” from taxing the rich only applies if they don’t change their behavior in the face of higher taxes. Common sense and history show otherwise. When taxes on the rich go up, they move their assets into tax-free investments and basically hunker down. This causes the tax revenue to go down even as their rates go up. It happens as surely as night follows day.

  20. 83


    Charles BREILING
    YES, of course, how come the OBAMA GOVERNMENT DO NOT THINK ABOUT IT.
    they try to make the RICH pay, and they don’t think of starting with their own GOVERNMENT FIRST,
    they could get a lot of money just by cutting their own very expansive expanses and needs and employees and million dollars party, and million dollars trips abroad, and of course their billions sent to haters countries to pacified them, when one bomb would fix it cheaper, they could cut on their own spending sprees when they see people trying to survive, those which they where elected to serve,
    when a family find hard time they know already what to cut,
    how come they elect people who don’t have a clue?

  21. 84


    yes and the OBAMA TAKE THE RICH as a group apart
    distinct of other in AMERICA, as if they are up there not connected to other business,
    that is a big mistake, because they are all connected together, and the small business will hurt,
    by what ever the so called rich will be tax beside their already tax consisting in a lot of money already,
    it will reflect on the smaller business, no doubt about it, which are call lost of revenue disruption of policies
    if they decide to send their assets abroad, many small business will even close,
    if they are no more ask for their services

  22. 85


    @ilovebeeswarzone: #84
    Another problem small business has is that big business wants to make it harder and more costly for small business to start up, and to keep the business going, so they donate heavy to both parties to make laws for these purposes. The fewer small businesses, the more money for big business, and the easier it is to set the prices big business wants.

  23. 86


    I always thought how coward they are to give on both partys just to protect their azzzzz,
    giving to one all would more support the one who is worthy to win,
    but giving to both is very low of them they don’t have the gutts to come in front
    like the people do, I have no respect for those gutless companies,

  24. 88


    yes, I buy because I don’t know which one does it, but if I knew
    I would not give them my business, or tell them my opinion,
    you are right this election must have cost OBAMA THE MOST MONEY EVER SPENT
    they did not get votes because they deserve it , but because they paid for it,
    there is no pride in winning there, just the feeling that he screw AMERICANS FOR FOUR MORE YEARS

  25. 89


    about big companies getting in the way of small business, yes it’s a hard game they play,
    and the best thing is to expose them publicly for all to see and to know,
    but it’s a jungle out there, if they want to be in business they must be ready to fight for keeping it,
    or not do it.
    just my opinion,

  26. 90


    @ilovebeeswarzone: #88
    I keep a list of companies NOT to buy from and one of companies TO buy from. I might have different reasons to buy or not to buy from places. One reason might be that I don’t like the attitude of the person who owns the business, and I don’t want them to have any of my money.

  27. 91


    @ilovebeeswarzone: #89
    I read an article many years ago telling how the federal government is renting buildings just to store the paperwork that businesses have to fill out. Not only is the paperwork expensive for the business to fill out, we have to pay to store it after it was filled out. The more paperwork, the more building we pay for.

  28. 92


    that is a real scam, to waste money, they are the first waster of money,
    they must begin to cut themselves, if they want to cut on the PEOPLE,
    OTHER WISE they will not be believe by the PEOPLE ever,

  29. 93


    @ilovebeeswarzone: #92
    Our government hasn’t been FOR THE PEOPLE for longer than I can remember. When a system is set up so that the politicians can vote themselves more money, they vote themselves more money. What it took me most of my life to figure out is that the people of a state think that a politician is bringing in hundreds of millions of dollars to there state, when in reality, for every $100,000,000 a senator brings in to their state, they have to vote for at least another 50 senators to get their $100,000,000 each to get the bill passed. House members have to vote for at least another 217 members to get there $100,000,000 to get their bill passed. They won’t vote for one politician’s money if that politician won’t vote for theirs. That’s $5,000,000,000 for senators, and $21,700,000,000 for house members. So, is your favorite politician really bringing in any money to your state?

  30. 94


    history channel
    mash THEY ARE FUNNY,
    AT 9 PM

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *