It doesn't matter how many zeros you insert - Families can't take in 2.2 of any amount & spend 3.7 - the US Gov't can't either
Another clever sound bite from the auctioneer who went to DC. Long is quick to attack Obama's new budget while forgetting it was the GOP who compromised with Obama after the November elections. The GOP got the Bush tax cuts extended while Obama got a second stimulus package approved by the Republicans which does help create this half-truth Long explains on Twitter. (This by no means is approving of Obama, but only goes to show most of the GOP in Washington that Long now hangs with doesn't have the backbone to cut spending either.)
However, another aspect of this, is Long really hiding the GOP's lack of effort to battle Washington spending by discounting the zeros. After all, Long's own celebration of budget cuts last week told me Long hasn't put enough effort in producing enough zeros after whatever number to come up with responsible spending cuts to make a dent in the national debt and send it in the downward direction.
At CPAC, Long used Larry the cable guy to brag about $100 billion in spending cuts. That's a one followed by 11 zeros. It sounds impressive right? That is until you realize the other reason Long probably doesn't want us paying attention to the zeros. The national debt is a 14 followed by 12 zeros. 14,000,000,000,000, which is actually two more numbers out. In the grand scheme of things the spending cuts Long brags about are really quite trivial. Which is probably why he doesn't want you wasting time considering those zeros in the first place.
Then, after going to CPAC sounding like Larry the Cable Guy claiming the $100 billion in spending cuts were done, Long begins to sound wishy washy about the spending cuts in the first place.
Here's Long at CPAC:
We worked all day yesterday, we had meeting after meeting, to get this $100 billion we promised we would cut," Long told a Slate reporter Thursday night at a convention of conservative activists in Washington. "As Larry the Cable Guy would say, we got 'er done. Trouble is, $100 billion is like throwing a deck chair off the Titanic, so we've got to work harder."
Then here's Long telling the Springfield News-Leader he might not be supporting all of the proposed cuts in the $100 billion spending cuts package.
An equally long list from the conservative Republican Study Committee, of which Long is a member, proposes cutting Essential Air Service, the federal program that pays airlines to serve more than 150 remote communities, including several in southwest Missouri.
Past efforts to ground EAS have come from presidents who proposed scaling back or eliminating the program as part of an attempt to cut what they see as wasteful federal spending. Those efforts have been rebuffed by lawmakers who represent rural America and view air service to their constituents as a necessity.
But the proposal this time is coming from members of Congress, many from rural areas, who ran on a promise to cut government spending and rein in the soaring national debt. And even those who have vigorously defended EAS in the past say that in this fiscal climate, everything that reduces the size of government must be considered....
...EAS serves 154 communities in 35 states and Puerto Rico. Missouri has four communities served by airlines that collectively receive more than $6.3 million in federal subsidies per year: Fort Leonard Wood, Joplin, Cape Girardeau and Kirksville.
The annual cost of the program is about $200 million. The Republican Study Committee is proposing to cut the program by $150 million.
Long declined to say whether he would support a cut to the Essential Air Service Program, saying the details for that cut are being drafted.
"Until we have more hearings and know what will or won't be included, it's too early to speculate," Long said.
So perhaps when it comes to zeros, Long probably prefers we didn't count them as well. Since it seems now he really isn't committed to cutting spending like he says he is. After all, he says "we got 'er done" but then says he is unsure whether or not he will support the cuts.
Meanwhile, I will continue to remind you Rand Paul has proposed half a trillion in spending cuts, and since I think zeros are important, this is good news. Since Billy Long is a simpleton, let's do the math based on the numbers he put in.
Obama's proposed budget is 3.7 (trillions if you want to play with zeros) Long says the government takes in 2.2 (trillions if you want to play with zeros). This creates a deficit of 1.5 (trillions if you want to play with zeros) even though news reports claim the deficit in Obama's proposed budget is 1.65 (trillions if you want to play with zeros).
Under the plan Billy Long supports in the House that may cut up to $100 billion, even though Long doesn't seem all on board with that, this 1.65 number would be reduced to 1.55. Not very impressive Billy--using your simple math. That's if Long and other Republicans decide they want to gut programs that need to be gutted. Remember, Long contradicted himself in the paper yesterday.
Under the Rand Paul Plan, it gets better, but it still needs work. Rand Paul wants to cut $500 billion. Using Billy Long's simpleton math that ignores the zeros. That would take that 1.65 number in deficit and reduce it to 1.15. Still not good, but better than the plan Billy Long supports.
