There are times when I just have to marvel at the liberals and their attempts to pule their way through their lives and INTO ours. Even with the reality of the world around them, the world that they have misshapen due to their “care and concern”, they consistently prove that too much is never enough..
Today we turn to an article entitled, “Shah: GOP budget would kill 70,000 children” (the cable dot com 03/31/2011) Certainly such a shocking headline would attract anyone’s attention and it certainly attracted mine for reasons different than the liberals might have intended..
“The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) told lawmakers that the GOP version of the budget bill would result in the deaths of at least 70,000 children who depend on American food and health assistance around the world..” Its good to see that the article upped the ante from the headline’s prediction of “70,000” to “at least” 70,000 deaths.. Using the liberal “jobs saved and created” math, that total should rise to “at least 100,000 deaths” in the next paragraph.. This is similar to the Obama deficit which went up another $100,000.00 since you started reading this article..
“We estimate, and I believe these are very conservative estimates, that H.R. 1 would lead to 70,000 kids dying..” This is the second paragraph of this article and the liberals have tried to drive this point home yet again.. This “estimate” is courtesy of one Rajiv Shah, who is the “administrator” of this USAID. Let me say that I believe that Shah is singing for his supper as I feel, and I feel that this is a “conservative estimate”, that 100% of his exorbitant salary is skimmed right off of the top of USAID’s budget..
“Of that 70,000 (there’s that number again in case anyone might have forgotten it..) 30,000 would come from malaria control programs that would have to be scaled back specifically..” Let’s take a peek at the liberal playbook for a reason as to why malaria control programs are even needed..
The liberals all but “banned” a substance known as DDT. This chemical almost completely eliminated the problem that WAS malaria. A case of malaria was as rare as a case of polio. Then the sensitive liberals stepped in and suddenly, malaria makes a comeback. Mind you, malaria almost exclusively effects the populations that they are now so concerned about.. Lets get back to the liberal mathematics of malarkey..
“The other 40,000 is broken out as 24,000 would die because of a lack of support for immunizations and other investments and 16,000 would be because of a lack of skilled attendants at birth..” “Other investments”? Just exactly how long has America provided the cash for “skilled attendants”? How has this unnamed area of the world managed to survive to this point without the “support” from America?
“H.R.1 would effectively cut 16 percent from the Obama administration’s original fiscal 2011 request for the international affairs account..” I feel compelled at this point to bring this moist cry for help into better focus.
In case Shah has been living in the area of the world that he was “testifying” about and unless there was a complete news blackout in that area, the “Obama administration” or the “collected collectivists”, is and are the reason for your problems and there a number of Obama reasons why..
The Obama administration has deficit spent during every month of their existence. That would be twenty-six consecutive months and counting. Countless bailouts, takeovers, a scamulous here, a scamulous there, a health scare bill and too many more to either mention or to try to account for. There is simply NOTHING left. Had Obama exercised a modicum of decorum during a “crisis” of the Democrat’s own making, there might be something left to give to OTHER countries. As it stands, Obama is STILL spending money DOMESTICALLY that hasn’t been either printed or borrowed.. It may be “all about the kids” but since Obama has run the well dry, we might have to prioritize relative to AMERICA first. In about an hour, there will be another “crisis” with the public schools, Medicaid or AFDC or any other of the underclass’ pet cash sucking projects dependent upon our “support” and immediate attention..
Why can’t Shah alter his mindset similar to Obama’s attitude towards the “war” in Libya? Maybe France or Canada should “take the lead” on this one as well. What about NATO? If YOU expect America to be the world’s leader, you had better be prepared for us to “lead” in EVERYTHING. We should not allow America to become the benevolent ATM machine for an America hating world. Under this group of liberals, what was once America doesn’t even want to “lead” a “process” in a country whose inhabitants can barely operate a camel, let alone a fighter jet..
“Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. (L-IL) pointed out that H.R 1 is 50 percent below the president’s fiscal 2011 request and 67 percent below fiscal 2010 levels..” Allow me to “point out” to the “representative” that if his old man would cough up some of his ill-gotten riches from shaking down cowardly corporations, like the one who employed you before the itch for “public service” took you over, USAID might be in the black, so to speak..
“This would lead to a significant amount of reduction in feeding programs, medical programs and food and water programs for people who are incredibly vulnerable..” These are the exact same “problems” facing America’s poor, those who are “incredibly vulnerable”. If the liberals had spent anywhere near the time, money and effort trying to take Americans OUT of poverty as opposed to keeping them there, again there might be some funds available for those suffering outside of America..
How far should our “assistance” go? Suppose that our “assistance” is going to some third world despot who is keeping the donated American riches for himself? What if he is feeding his own family first and then selling the rest of the foods and medicines on the black market in order to pad his own bank accounts? What should we do if we discover such chicanery? Should we “invade” their country in order to overthrow this despot so that we can “save” the children of this region?
If YOUR answer is “no” to these questions, then MY answer is “no” to your “funding” request.. After all, we would be doing it for “the children” wouldn’t we? The liberal response to this scenario is the same response that they use in America. They just demand more money in the hopes that the problem will suddenly go away just by throwing more of what didn’t work before at the problem.. It doesn’t matter to the liberals, the money is someone else’s..
Liberal Nita Lowey (L-NY) said, “drastic cuts to USAID would risk a great deal in stability and security around the world which would spawn the kinds of threats that cost the country the lives of men and women in uniform and billions in treasure..” Here is the liberal “we can buy a friend” mentality at its worst. As an aside, “threats” mean nothing. What have the liberals done when “threats” have become “actions”? The “threats” will STOP when we acquire the testicles to place the “or else” back into the international equation.. By the way, you and your “leader” has cost the middle class TRILLIONS in “treasure”..
“Shah argued that foreign assistance is crucial to the long term economic recovery..” “It helps develop markets for American goods..” THIS is Obamanomics 101.. “Foreign assistance” costs US everything, it costs the recipients NOTHING. According to Shah, the “market” is there as long as we stock the shelves and allow the “customers” to walk out of the store without paying..
“USAID’s work also strengthens America’s economic security..” This PROVES that the liberals know absolutely NOTHING about either economics or security.. “By establishing links to consumers at the bottom of the pyramid, we sell more goods in the economies of the future..” We aren’t SELLING anything, we are GIVING IT AWAY!! These “economies of the future”, since they are unnamed, are quite possibly the same “economies” that have been at the “bottom of the pyramid” for centuries so the six bucks that we can afford to send them thanks to the Obama tourniquet isn’t going to help anyway..
“The IDA account supports 1.6 million people in Darfur, so halving the account would place 800,000 people at risk..” I knew that if we discussed this long enough the liberals would get above that “70,000” number.. Maybe if Obama hadn’t put the AMERICAN “people at risk”, we might have more than some of the Obama “change” to toss to them..