The 2012 Dysfunctional Budget from
Barack Obama:
More Evidence He is Working to
Kill the Economy


Victor Edward Swanson,

The Hologlobe Press
Postal Box 5263
Cheboygan, Michigan  49721

    copyright c. 2011

February 17, 2011
(Version 2)
(draft version)

    February 14, 2011--this day was the day that Barack Obama presented to the U.S. Congress a proposed budget for the United States of America for fiscal year 2012.  The day was just another day in the history of Barack Obama, a man who in the past two years had made friends with communist dictators, had supported the dictatorial rulers of Iran over protesters in Iran, had perpetually lied in countless speeches, had openly insulted the British several times, had signed bad bills into laws, had started court action against Arizona over its immigration law and work to protect the U.S. border  had pushed to have an international climate treaty made that would make The United States Constitution subordinate to it, had met with the Muslim Brotherhood and had pushed for the Muslim Brotherhood to be involved in making a new Egypt, et cetera.  Yes, February 14, 2011, was just another day in which Barack Obama showed off his nature, and this document shows that Barack Obama is purposely working to kill the economy of the United States of America or, really, kill the United States of America as it was founded--but that is to be expected since Barack Obama is a communist and a black radical, and that is the way of such a man--and what the document shows is words spoken by U.S. President John F. Kennedy in 1962, words spoken by a famous economist named Milton Friedman in 1978, words spoken by Mark R. Levin and words spoken by U.S. Representative Paul Ryan (a Republican related to Wisconsin) on The Mark Levin Show (a nationally syndicated radio show) on February 14, 2011, and words spoken by Barack Obama at a press conference on February 15, 2011, and it has words spoken by U.S. Senator Jeff Sessions and by U.S. Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner in a U.S. Senate hearing on February 17, 2011.

    U.S. President John F. Kennedy was the U.S. President from January 20 1961, to November 22, 1963, when he was killed by an assassin.   Although he was a Democrat--a member of the Democratic Party--he was no communist, as his brother Edward Kennedy was; Edward Kennedy, who was a U.S. Senator related to Massachusetts from November 7, 1962, to August 25, 2009, had conspired with the communist party in the Soviet Union against U.S. President Ronald Reagan and the citizens of the United States of America in 1983 (and you can learn about the event in my document entitled T.H.A.T. #65, which can be reached by using this link: T.H.A.T. #65).  Now look a statement that U.S. President John F. Kennedy made from the White House to the America public in August 13, 1962:
    "...Our tax rates, in short, are too high as to weaken the very essence of the progress of a free society, the incentive for additional return for additional effort.  For these reasons, this administration intends to cut taxes in order to build the fundamental strength our economy, to improve a serious barrier to long-term growth, to increase incentives by routing out inequities and complexities and to prevent the even greater budget deficit that a lagging economy would otherwise surely produce.  The worst deficit comes from a recession, and if we can take the proper action in the proper time, this can be the most important step we can take to prevent another recession.  That is the right kind of a tax cut both for your family budget and the national budget resulting from a permanent basic reform and reduction in our rate structure, a creative tax cut creating more jobs of income and eventually more revenue.  And the right time for that kind of bill--it now appears in the absence of an economic crisis today, and if the job is to be done in a responsible way--is January 1963.  Such a bill will be presented to the Congress for action next year.  It will include an across the board, top to bottom cut in both corporate and personal income taxes.  It will include long-needed tax reforms that logic and equity demand.  And it will date that cut in taxes to take effect as of the start of next year, January 1963.  The billions of dollars this bill will place in the hands of the consumer and our businessmen will have both immediate and permanent benefits to our economy.  Every dollar released from taxation that is spent or invested will help create a new job and a new salary.  And these new jobs and new salary can create other jobs and other salaries and more customers and more growth for an expanding American economy.  Instead of being permanently saddled with excess plant capacity and the budgetary deficits that is created by this means, our goal must be fuller capacity and full employment and the budgetary surpluses that that kind of employment and capacity can produce.... " [Incidentally, John F. Kennedy was pushing what is called supply-side tax cuts.]

    Now, I present part two of the document.  Milton Friedman was an economist who lived from July 31, 1912, to November 16, 2006.  In 1978, Milton Friedman took part in an lecture with a question-and-answer portion in Erie, Pennsylvania, and a part of what Milton Friedman said on the day is:
    Questioner (a man): "...And, thirdly, if I can remember it, isn't there some benefit to having the government steal our money, which is what they do effectively--they hold a gun to our head and say, 'Pay us forty percent of your income or go to jail.'--they take this money and they give it mostly to government employees.  Well, the government employees spend it.  The marginal propensity to consume is pretty high.  So the people who were robbed have to do something creative to get the money back.  And isn't this creative activity the real wealth...."
    Milton Friedman interrupted the man: "Well, I take it they would have to be still more creative if 98 percent were being spent by the government."  The audience laughed.  "Now, the third part of your thing is just pure fallacy from beginning to end."  There is laughter from the audience around them.  "Because if those people who are now government employees were employed in creative activity and productive activity they would also be spending their money.  And we'd have a greater total around.  All you're doing--let's suppose for a moment, take the extreme case, that that 40 percent is being used to just have people, ah, ah, sit around.  The fact that they spend their money doesn't alter the situation.  The only product there is is what the sixty percent produce.  And that sixty percent is divided among the hundred percent.  If those forty percent are also producing goods then there are more goods to go among everybody.  You are just involved in a fallacy of looking at dollars, which is important sometimes, instead of looking at the real product of goods and services that people produce and people consume.  Spending isn't good.  What's good is producing!  What we want to have is more goods and services.  And, and, as I say, the obvious indication that that's clear is that if your logic were right, it would apply at for fifty percent, sixty percent, seventy, ninety, ninety-eight, a hundred percent.  And obvious you would see that that would be a bunch of nonsense at that stage.  It is desirable to have some money spent by government for those things, those services that we believe we can get more usefully and more effectively through government.  And people are getting their money's worth, fine!  That's why it's very desirable to have governmental expenditures take place at as local a level as possible.  Cause you as a citizen of a small community can judge whether you're getting money's worth.  You can decide that you want to spend it.  But when it comes to the federal government, you tend to think that you're spending somebody else's money. And you are in a way!  But he's spending yours...."

    This part of the document is part three.  Mark R. Levin is the author of the book entitled Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto and other books, and he is also a radio talk-show host who hosts the three-hour nationally syndicated radio show entitled The Mark Levin Show.  On February 14, 2011, during the second hour of the program, Mark Levin interviewed U.S. Representative Paul Ryan (a Republican related to Wisconsin), the chairman of the Budget Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives, and the main topic of the interview was the budget proposal that Barack Obama had given the U.S. Congress earlier in the day, and although the main topic was the budget proposal, the interview covered a few more topics, such as rules being imposed on farmers to deal with milk spills, which the federal government was now treating as dangerous environmental spills, because milk contains animal fat or oil.  Here is much of the interview presented in text form:
    Mark Levin: "Well, I know he's busy as can be.  I want to thank Chairman Paul Ryan of the Budget Committee in the House.  How are you, sir?"
    Paul Ryan: "Hey, Great One, how are you doin'?"
    Mark Levin: "I'm doin' great, brother.  Now, tell me what.  You know, this budget the President is proposing sounds like a real stinker to me.  Why is that?"
    Paul Ryan: "That's.  Well, because it has a one-point-six-trillion dollars tax increase, doubles the debt in five years, triples it in ten years.  He adds thirteen-trillion, ah, to the debt over the course of his budget, ah, borrow, spend, tax, and, ah, does nothing--let me repeat that--does nothing to address the drivers of our debt.  He actually adds to the problem.  You know, I find it kind of incredulous.  Literally, I was expecting something different.  I really actually was expecting--you know, given that the President formed the Fiscal Commission, told us--I was on the Fiscal Commission--told us we have a serious problem, we got to deal with it, let's go forward.  Ah, he didn't even put any of the Fiscal Commiss, Commission recommendations in here.  His spending levels on just discretionary spending are way above what was recommended by the Fiscal Commission, and the Fiscal Commission was stacked for Democrats.  So, he's to the left of his Fiscal Commission.  His not addressing the debt and deficit crisis, and what this does for economic growth is this costs us jobs.  I mean today's deficits is tomorrow's tax increases and interest rate increases.  And so he really is doubling down on the path he took the last two years.  And, candidly, I thought we were gonna see a little bit of what they call a 'triangulation,' a little moderation after the last election.  And, unfortunately, he decided not to do that.  He's just basically doubling down on where he, where he went the last two years."
    Mark Levin: "Well, well, let me ask you something, because, you know, he's not a stupid man...."
    [Paul Ryan said something simple that could not be understood.]
    Mark Levin: "I know he's, I know he's ideologically, ah, driven.  But that said, you know, we all have kids, and one day, we'll have grand kids.  This is such an complete unconscionable disaster!  I mean this is really a generational problem.  Even though our generation is going to get hammered hard, the next generation is gonna have no way out!  How can we as a society get our hands around us this, when the most-powerful man in the country continues to plow ahead in the wrong direction?"
    Paul Ryan: "So there's two answers you get to that kind of a statement or question.  One is he's waiting for use to do something.  Okay!  He's the President of the United States.  I mean that's why we elect presidents--to lead, to actually see the challenges and address them before they get out of control.  Um, and number two, he knows we're gonna do something, he knows that we're serious about the debt, and he knows we're going to go after the drivers of the debt, which is entitlement reform, and so many people think he's playing what they call 'rope-a-dope,' where, you know, we're gonna go forward with the reforms that are necessary to get this debt and deficit under control, to restrict the growth of government, and then he'll demagogue us in the campaign about it.  He'll use this as a way to, you know, sort of scare seniors and turn entitlement reform into a political weapon as a means to 2012, you know, politics.  Now, a lot of political people will tell you that's a good idea.  Ah, that, it has worked.  It has been effective.  And so perhaps that's what he's doing.  He knows we're gonna walk in to his so-called political trap by proposing the reforms that are necessary to get the deficit and debt under control.  I would simply tell ya, the sooner you do this, the better everybody is.  The more you kick the can down the road, which we're already running out of road, the worse it is for everybody!  And by not doing anything to deal with this debt or making it worse as his budget does, that means everybody's gonna get hurt that much harder--cuts to current seniors, tax increases on everybody even more down the road by not tackling it now, ah, just like what you see happening in Europe.  But I think, you know, either he's not leading and he's waiting for someone else to lead or he's banking on us to do the leading, and he's gonna use it against us politically.  Either those two explanations--what I've heard all day today--are really ugly explanations.  That's, that's an abdication of leadership."
    Mark Levin: "Well, well, I, I, but, but the point is it's intentional!  The point is what he's doing is intentional.  It's a political expedient.  And so, so, when somebody writes that he means well, he's trying to do the right thing.  What he's doing here is a disaster, and, you know, even his own party--Kent Conrad came out and said this isn't enough."
    Paul Ryan: "Yeah."
    Mark Levin: "Ah, others are saying well it's a good start.  He hasn't put forth a serious budget."
    Paul Ryan: "I mean, Erskine Bowles, who was Bill Clinton's Chief of Staff--ah, a great Democrat, by the way--ah, a sincere guy, who was the chairman of the Fiscal Commission, said this doesn't get anywhere close to where we need to go to dealt with the debt crisis, it's not a serious budget.  So, I don't know.  I really don't know.  I mean I don't know.  I, I, I'm not gonna get into ta motives.  I don't know why he's doing what he's doing, but what he is going is he's giving us a budget that makes our fiscal crisis worse, that punts on the biggest domestic crisis arguably in the history of our country--a debt crisis--and, um, he's abdicating his leadership role as far as I'm concerned."
    Mark Levin: "But, you know, chairman, the other thing he's doing is he is, he's going after through regulations the productive sector...."
    Paul Ryan: "Yeah."
    Mark Levin: "...that creates jobs and wealth.  He's going after the oil companies and the coal mines.  He's going, he's going after small business.  He's going after all these entities...."
    Paul Ryan: "Yup."
    Mark Levin: "...that are already scared about investing--that many of them can't invest, they don't have the funds--and he's going to punish them."
    Paul Ryan: "Mark, I live in Wisconsin.  We, we milk cows.  We make cheese.  Um, now the EPA wants to regulate spilt milk on dairy farms as as oil spill.  I'm not even making this stuff up!"
    Mark Levin: "No!  We talked about this...."
    [Here, Paul Ryan and Mark Levin talked over each other.]
    Paul Ryan: "Where I come from, I mean, if you kick over a bucket of milk or you spi or, you know, the milk truck jackknifes 'cause we have icy roads, that is now a whole new regulatory process that has to be regulated based on oil spills.  I mean, this, this.  And all these farmers are really freaking out about it.  Well, okay, what is, what is this gonna cost me now?  What are all these new rules and regulations that I've gotta comply with.  You can go through every business sector, you know, you can think of and you see more government, more uncertainly, higher taxes, higher interest rates.  And that's why a budget like this--borrow, tax, spend, regulate--um, with the notion that we can sort of micro manage the economy from Washington, um, it's a fatal conceit, doesn't work.  Ah, we've proven that in history, not only in this country but around the world.  And, um, unfortunately, it's gonna cost us a lot of jobs!  I mean, there's...."
    Mark Levin: "Well, here, here is his political mistake.  This isn't ten year sago.  The American people know damn well what's goin' on with this spending."
    Paul Ryan: "That's what I think, too."
    Mark Levin: "They don't like it.  They're scared to death of it.  And they're gonna come out to the polls again, if he, if he say.  You know, five-trillion dollars in three years!  I mean, that is absolutely mind boggling to me!"
    Paul Ryan: "That's what I think, too.  ...Look, the way I try to say it is people are way ahead of political class.  They, you know, up here in Washington--and I'm calling you from the Capitol right now--they think that the same old story, you know, running Medi-scare, Social Security scare ads to scare seniors, which, by the way, I'm...."
    Mark Levin: "No, no, no!  Don't get mad at me.  I have a hard break.  Don't hang up, okay.  I need you a few more minutes."
    Paul Ryan: "Okay."
    Mark Levin: "Can I keep you a few more minutes?"
    Paul Ryan: "Sure."
    Mark Levin: "I apologize...."
    At this point, the program went into a "hard break," which is a non-floating commercial break, and after the break, the interview continued:
    Mark Levin: "...Chairman Ryan, the, the Obama technique is obvious now.  It is to, to kind of cobble together these broad bills and then throw them at Congress and see what Congress comes up with, is that?  And that way, he can take credit for whatever he wants to take credit for and attack whatever he wants to attack.  Is that?  I, I think that's what he and his advisers are up to."
    Paul Ryan: "Send a budget that uses, you know, various smoke and mirrors to suggest that you're doin' one thing that rhetorically allows you to sort of mouth words of fiscal discipline, when what you're actually doing in substance is quite the opposite.  So, I guess you could say we have a rhetorical triangulation but substantively we have a very, very big government liberal budget in this case, ah, and so we hear the rhetorical policy pronouncements, but when you see the substance of, of what's behind it, it's just the same old stuff.  And, so, with our budget here--I mean, he is basically proposing to continue on the borrowing binge, he proposing more 'investments,' which is just really spending, ah, as the method and the reason the way we get economic growth, and then he wants to follow up with a slug of new taxes that he's proposing--one-point-six-trillion--ah, followed by more spending that's above that, um, and then really no, no control of the deficit and the debt.  And, ah, to me, that's just a complete abdication of leadership.  And even Democrats are now criticizing him  Centrist Democrats, you know, guys like Erskine Bowles, Ellis Rivlin*, they're all basically saying, um, you know, this budget doesn't fly." [* = For this edition, I am unaware if this is correct and who the man might be.]
    Mark Levin: "Well, you know, the President has access to a lot more information than even you do, so, so people, I, I mean, is it just that he has surrounded himself with 'Yes Men' and 'Yes Women' or he's just driven ideologically?"
    Paul Ryan: "I don't know.  I think ideology has a lot to do it.  Um, there was reports in The Wall Street Journal and New York Times that they were having a debate about whether ta offer up a Social Security reform plan, and the progressives went nuts, and so they didn't do that.  Um, so, you could, you could suggest that they have just chosen to stay tethered to the progressive left.  Um, I think the President obviously, yeah, I think he would probably say this to ya--he's a progressive.  Ah, he believes that.  And if you're going to, um, get this deficit under control, you're gonna do it by getting at the cause of it, which is spending, and if you're gonna go after spending, then you're sort of undoing the progressive, you know, experiment, you're undoing the progressive agenda.  And I just don't think he's interested in presiding over an undoing of the progressive agenda."
    Mark Levin: "Considering he advanced it as far as....  Now, we have all kinds of taxes here.  He's, obviously he wants to, ah, eliminate the Bush tax cuts."
    Paul Ryan: "Right."
    Mark Levin: "He wants to, ah, which includes increasing capital gains dividends rate.  So that's for retired people."
    Paul Ryan: "Right."
    Mark Levin: "...He wants to, ah, raise the death tax from thirty-five to forty-five percent...."
    Paul Ryan: "Right."
    Mark Levin: "...under certain...."
    Paul Ryan: "Right."
    Mark Levin: "...circumstances.  And, ah, ah, let's see here, um.  He wants to cap itemized deductions...."
    Paul Ryan: "Right."
    Mark Levin: " the twenty-eight percent bracket.  What does that mean?"
    Paul Ryan: "That means you can't as you get up to the higher income tax brackets, you're denied the ability to, to use deductions...."
    Mark Levin: "But, but twenty-eight percent is not the highest tax rate."
    Paul Ryan: "No, thirty-nine-point-six will be the highest tax bracket."
    Mark Levin: "So...."
    Paul Ryan: "...."
    Mark Levin: " this like the third?"
    Paul Ryan: "Yeah, so, it is.  So, there is a thirty-one percent bracket.  There's a thirty-five percent bracket.  And then, you know, in, in two years, there'll be the thirty-nine-point-six percent bracket.  And then when the new Medicare--ah, Obamacare--taxes kick in, the top tax rate in America will be forty-four-point-eight percent when you factor in all of these things.  We call that the...**...what you're talking about?"  [** = Here Paul Ryan said something that sounded like "pap and the peas," but I know not what was really said, so I note it as I do.]
    Mark Levin: "Yeah."
    Paul Ryan: "So, forty-eight per, forty-four-point-eight percent will be the top tax bracket, which is, ah, what the Sub-S Chapter Corporations pay, the partnerships pay, the vast majority of small businesses file their taxes as individuals.  The dividends tax will be forty-four-point-eight.  The capital gains tax will be twenty-three-point-eight percent, up from fifteen percent.  Um, and then he's calling for a new four-hundred-thirty-five-million dollar, um, transportation gas tax...."
    Mark Levin: "And he's calling for an, an increase in unemployment contributions."
    Paul Ryan: "Right.  So, so, it's tough to keep track of all this I realize. When you add it all up, ah, a conservative estimate using his numbers, it's one-point-six-trillion in new tax increases over this ten years.  Um, he's still adding a lot to the debt!  The debt doubles in five years and triples in ten years, ah, since he took office.  And so the debt is on, on the wrong trajectory.  It's going up dramatically.  Um, the gross debt, which is what, ah, international comparisons are used, goes to over a hundred percent of the economy by the end of the, the budget window, by the end of the decade.  And so no plan to get this...."
    Mark Levin: "Before, before we go on.  That means we are flat out a debtor nation, right?"
    Paul Ryan: "Yeah!  I mean, you exceed, when you owe more than you make as a country, you're there.  And the gross debt, ah--and some people use different statistics, but this is what the IMF uses to compare country to country, you know, Greece to Ireland ta China to America--that gross-debt number goes to a hundred-and-seven percent of GDP.  And I think it's going to be much higher once the CBO takes a look at this thing, because what they're, they're predicting kind of what I would call 'rosy economic scenarios.'  Um, they're predicting much higher economic growth.  The year in which all those tax increases you and I just mentioned when they're fully kicked in in 2013, they're expecting the economy's gonna start to taking off then, and that will give us all these new revenues, ah, ta, to make the deficit look a little bit better than what it would otherwise look like."
    Mark Levin: "Well, not, not to confuse people, but if we follow the Milton Friedman rule with the QE2 stuff going...."
    Paul Ryan: "Yes."
    Mark Levin: "...on, that's about when inflation gonna hit."
    Paul Ryan: "Yeah.  I think that's, I, I agree with the school of thought, ah, so Milton Friedman also said, 'Today's deficits are nothing more than tomorrow's tax increases.'  They're just deferred taxes.  And so this is what businesses see.  It is what entrepreneurs see.  This is what, you know, banks who are financing businesses see.  They see massive deficits, massive borrowing, no end in sight.  It's gonna be another tax increase tomorrow on top of the ones that are already coming in law with much higher interest rates, because if we don't keep this debt under control, interest goes up, we have to pay people more to lend us money.  And then the Federal Reserve, you know, we could go on and on about that.  And, so, to suggest we're gonna have all these low interest rates forever, ah, with fast economic growth, I just think is, you know...
    Mark Levin: "Well, well...."
    Paul Ryan: " obvious."
    Mark Levin: "...I'll tell you what's upsetting to me is worst case scenario, from my point of view, the man could be there six more years and he'll be gone and all this stuff will be etched in granite at that point, because it going to be very hard to reverse course.  Let me ask you another question, 'cause this has been bouncing around--the 'continuing resolution.'
    Paul Ryan: :Uh hum."
    Mark Levin: "If you guys agree to the 'continuing,' agree to spending at current levels or there about in 'continuing' revolution, ah...."
    Paul Ryan: "Yeah...."
    Mark Levin: "...'continuing revolution'?...."
    Paul Ryan: "Right."
    Mark Levin: "...'continuing resolution.'  Does that not continue to fund the institutionalizing of Obamacare?"
    Paul Ryan: "Well, yes, of course.  So, ah, we're gonna have an amendment to the floor to defund Obamacare.  I think Steve King from Iowa is gonna be the guy, ah, bringing that amendment.  Um, but, more important, in addition to that, ah, the President wants to lock in these really inflated levels of spending.  He, he increased spending twenty-four percent across the board...."
    Mark Levin: "The stimulus...."
    Paul Ryan: "...before you get to the stimulus.  With stimulus, it's an eight-four percent increase...."
    Mark Levin: "Holy mackerel!"
    Paul Ryan: "..of domestic government agencies.  So, he wants to lock in those spending increases.  We're trying to take 'em back.  But that's what this whole fight is about.  We want to rip out all spending increases that took place over the last two years.  We're actually going deeper than that this week, because we're doing it for just the next seven months.  We're, we're taking back a year's worth of spending cuts for the next seven months, and if you annualize that, we're goin' about a hundred-seventy-billion dollars in cuts.  So...."
    Mark Levin: "That's good."
    Paul Ryan: "...we're tryin' to take the levels--I mean, for the rest of the fiscal year, we're going down to like 2006, 2005 spending levels in some account in areas.  And, yes, what we also want to do is put funding limitations on, on bills, ah, that are, on, on agencies that are in charge of rolling out Obamacare.  Now, we're obviously gonna have an impasse.  Something tells me he's not gonna sign our bill, and so that's some of the impasse we're gonna have, um starting in March.  Then, we go to the budget, which we write, we control.  That's were we show our vision for the government.  That's where we show our vision for, ah, how, what we want to do to take on the debt, the deficit, the economy, taxes.  And then after that, sometime in May possibly, this, this--the estimate moves around--we have a debt ceiling, and we are not interested in rubber stamping big government.  We want to use that as an opportunity in leverage to get serious spending cuts and controls on government on a, as this debt ceiling thing is dealt with."
    Mark Levin: "Let, let me, one last thing, 'cause I need you need, I know you need to go and finish your sandwich here, too.  By the way, I'm very jealous of that.  Ah...."
    Paul Ryan: "I haven't eaten all day.  This is my first shot really."
    Mark Levin: "Well, I had...cakes, I have to admit.  Now, let me, let me ask you this, Mr. Chairman.  The, ah, with this 'continuing resolution,' ah, then it goes to the Senate, what I like about what you guys are gonna do, though, you're not going to give them a pass, you're gonna lay all this out, and somebody there is gonna have to make a decision about whether or not they want to help save this country or not."
    Paul Ryan: "That's right.  That's right."
    Mark Levin: "And so, and so, this is all very, very crucial that it get done.  But we have a President who has a court order in northern Florida that has told him this Obamacare law is void."
    Paul Ryan: "Right."
    Mark Levin: "They have not moved at the Justice Department for a stay."
    Paul Ryan: "That's right."
    Mark Levin: "Ah, they're, they're gonna wait for the appeal process--thirty days from his ruling--but that is the law of the land right now.  Are there any considerations about trying to use the budget process or the appropriation process with respect to the unwillingness of our own Justice Department to actually enforce federal law?  They went into that court room and they fought that decision, and they lost."
    Paul Ryan: "That's a good question.  Um, we've been so focused on just defunding the program.  Um, I don't know the answer to that--ah, whether we're, we're going down that angle.  I've been so focused on the budget side of this stuff...."
    Mark Levin: "Right."
    Paul Ryan: "...which is defunding it and just.  You know, our budget will repeal Obamacare.  Um, and that's kind of what, where I've been spending my time working on."
    Mark Levin: "By the way, let me make a suggestion, and you can ignore it.  What this budget does is it potentially could raise tax rates for my children, your children and grand children, sixty, seventy, eighty percent down the road.  Am I right?"
    Paul Ryan: "Gosh, yes.  No.  I asked the CBO for those numbers.  I can tell you right now on top of my head.  My kids are six, seven, and nine years old.  By the time my kids are my age--I am forty-one--I asked the CBO--What will the future tax rates have to be if we don't get this debt under control?  Um, this is before this current budget, which makes it worse.  They said that lowest tax bracket, which is now at ten percent, goes to twenty-five percent, middle-income tax brackets for middle-income tax payers goes to sixty-six percent, and the top tax rate will to to eighty-eight percent...."
    Mark Levin: "There is your strongest...."
    Paul Ryan: "...debt."
    Mark Levin: "...there's your strongest political argument...."
    Paul Ryan: "...We've had those numbers run."
    Mark Levin: "Because our kids will be paying sixty-six, seventy, eighty tax rates under the Obama plan.  That's the bottom line!  And people are gonna get that."
    Paul Ryan: "Look, the CBO, their own economic model breaks down in 2037, because the computer at the Congressional Budget Office basically says they can't conceive of the economy continuing past 2037 because of the strangulation of debt, because of the debt burden.  So they just think the economy crashes well before, ah, my kids are even, you know, raising their kids based on the path that we are on...."
    That ends the presentation of the interview in text form, which does have a few spots where words are missing, because, for one, the two gentlemen talked over each other--and it was a telephone interview, where sometimes the sound quality can be a problem.
    In the interview, I found a few points that I must comment on.  I disagree with Paul Ryan's thought that Barack Obama is abdicating his leadership role, and I say that the course that Barack Obama is taking is a planned course, given that Barack Obama is, in my opinion also, "not a stupid man."  In the interview, Paul Ryan hinted that he does not know what Barack Obama's motivations are for doing what he is doing, but I say that it is easy to deduce why Barack Obama is doing what he is doing by looking at the facts in the opening paragraph of this document (and by seeing my document entitled A Little History  of Barack Obama Events: A Show of Deconstruction, which can be reached by using the link at the end of this document), and also a number of documents that are available at the Web site for The Hologlobe Press show the nature of Barack Obama is--what the nature of this man is--and it is clear Barack Obama is purposely working to damage the United States of America.  It seems to me many millions and millions of persons, one of whom may be Paul Ryan, in the United States of America have yet to understand the nature of Barack Obama--the full nature of Barack Obama--and one reason for that is it seems to me they find it unbelievable a man who was elected to be the U.S. President would purposely be working to damage the lives of millions and millions of persons--citizens and individuals--in the United States of America.  I am not one of the millions and millions, and I do contend Barack Obama is a man who likes to hurt people, and that statement is based on what his actions have been--not only of the first two years of his time as the U.S. President but also of his entire lifetime--and a man who likes to hurt millions of persons is a man with an ill mind--a defective mind.

    Welcome to the fourth part of this document.  On February 15, 2011, Barack Obama held a press conference, and he spoke a lot nonsense, such as implying that oil is an energy source of the past and showing that he believes all the money in the country belongs to the government, which is the way of a communist (and you are urged to see the entry for February 15, 2011, of my document entitled Nonsense Statements and Quotations of Barack Obama, which can be reached by using the link at the end of this document).  One statement that he made is: "...Just like every family in America, the federal government has to do two things at once--it has to live within its means, while still investing in the future.  If you're a family tryin' to cut back, you might skip going out to dinner, you might put off a vacation, but you wouldn't wanna sacrifice saving for your kids' college education or making key repairs in your house, so you cut back on what you can't afford to focus on what you can't do without.  And that's what we've done with this year's budget...."

    This is part five of the document.  On Thursday, February 17, 2011, the head of the U.S. Department of the Treasury--Timothy Geithner--appeared before U.S. Senators at a U.S. Senate Budget Committee hearing, and at one point, U.S. Senator Jeff Sessions (a Republican related to Alabama) was interviewing Timothy Geithner, and the topic was the proposal budget for fiscal year 2012 from Barack Obama.  Look at some of the interview in text form:
    Jeff Sessions: "...Under your budget, ah, the interest, ah, increases each year.  It was a hundred-and-eighty-seven-billion in 2009.  Ah, under your proposal, it increases to eight-hundred-and-forty-four-billion.  I don't know if we have that chart here.  And would you not agree that that, ah, is a stunning figure, perhaps the fas, the fastest growing item in it?  And all of that is a direct result of the debt we are running up in only a modest expectation of interest-rate increases."
    Timothy Geithner: "Bu, but, ah, sir, absolutely.  It is a excessively high interest burden.  It's unsustainable."
    Jeff Sessions: "Well, it's your plan for the ten years.  I mean that's the one the President has submitted.  But that's what he's asked us to vote on, to, it will result--and that's your numbers of your budget."
    Timothy Geithner: "Eh, Senator, you're absolutely right.  That with the President's plan, even if Congress were to enact it and even if Congress were to hold to it and reduce those deficits three percent of GDP over the next five years, we would still be left with a very large interest burden and unsustainable obligations over time.  That's why we're having the debate.  I completely agree with you.  But the question, though, is, to be just direct about it--What's the alternative plan?  And again the way our system works, this is a good thing.  You're gonna see, we'll be able to see from the House, we'll be able to see from this body whether yo, people can find the political will here to go deeper, and if you can find...."
    Jeff Sessions: "But what your plan is is that plan is the one you're required by law to submit, and that's what you call for.  And it is not acceptable.  I'm sorry.  It's a plan not for winning the future but losing the future...."
    Timothy Geithner was hired by Barack Obama, and Timothy Geithner noted that the budget plan is, in effect, defective.

    I say, as I have in other documents, that Barack Obama wants to hurt the country, and, to him, it matters not that he hurts the country since, in the future, he can always go live in so many other places in the world, places where he would be right at home, such as a communistic or Sharia-based Middle Eastern country, and, anyway, it is very likely he will no longer be the US. President when the very bad times hit in the United States of America, which will be when his two children are adults and will also be caught in the mess, unless they move to some other country, and that thought shows me Barack Obama is so uncaring about everyone else that he does not even care for what his two children will have to endure in the future, and that is a sign of a truly, truly self-centered and ill mind.



"John F. Kennedy.", 13 February 2011.

"Milton Friedman.", 14 February 2011.

"Ted Kennedy.", 14 February 2011.

Note: The quotations related to Milton Friedman and John F. Kennedy were captured from The Mark Levin Show, a nationally syndicated radio show, on Tuesday, September 1, 2009.

Note: Another source of information has been the unpublished manuscript entitled The United States Book: A Guide for the Individual, written by Victor Edward Swanson.

    Note: This document was first posted on the Internet on February 15, 2011.

    Note: This document exists on the Internet as

For further reading, you should see the
    document entitled National Health
    Care and Mass Failure: The Reasons
    it is a Dead Issue, which can be reached
    by using this link: Health.
For further reading, you should see the
    document entitled Nonsense Statements
    and Quotations of Barack Obama, which
    can be reached by using this link: Quotes.
For further reading, you should see the
    document entitled A Little History  of
    Barack Obama Events: A Show of
    Deconstruction, which can b reached by
    using this link: History.
For further reading, you should see the
    document entitled World Tyranny:
    Warnings about the Insane Who are
    Trying to Create a Communist World
    Country, which can be reached by using
    this link: World.
For further reading, you should see the
    document entitled THE CRUD AROUND
    BARACK OBAMA: My Rule--"Like Minds
    Get Together", which can be reached
    by using this link: Crud.
For further reading, you should see the
    document entitled "CAP AND TRADE"
    and Carbon Dioxide Facts and Nonsense,
    which can be reached by using this link:
For further reading, you should see the
    document entitled The Oil Rig Disaster
    of April 20, 2010: Evidence that Shows
    Barack Obama Purposely Wanted to
    Hurt to Beaches, which can be reached
    by using this link: Oil Rig.
For further reading, you should see the
    document entitled The "Enslavers" Want
    Your Your Retirement Plan or Pension
    Plan, which can be reached by using this
    link: Pension.
For further reading, you should see the
    document entitled Sharia Law, Shariah-
    Compliant Finance, Radical Islam, and
    Barack Obama, which can be reached
    by using this link: Sharia.
For further reading, you should see the
    document entitled Madness in a President
    and Other Matters of a Defective Mind,
    which can be reached by using this link:

Note: To see even more of the documents that
    are available at the Web site for The Hologlobe
    Press, you should go to the Site-Summary Page
    for The Hologlobe Press, and you can use this
    link to see the Site-Summary Page: Summary.