Do we have your attention NOW? Part II

Congresscritters, you would do well to put down your martinis and watch this.



(H/t Sundance Cracker @ HillBuzz)

UPDATE:  2-4-1!

Sundance Cracker is in rare form today.  This comment deserves a repost in its entirety:

Yep, I watched it, but I had to walk out and hit tennis balls when Chris Wallace asked Paul the question: "How do you pay for extending Bush Tax Cuts when CBO forecasts the cost to be $4 trillion over 10 years, it’s impossible"??

"W"hiskey – "T"ango – "F"oxtrot!

This is where EVEN conservatives supporters are Stoopid, framing a question from a position that reductions in spending are impossible. Aaarrgh.

First off. It’s OUR money. OURS. Not the governments. So if we say the government gets less, then yes -you flippin idiots- they are gonna have to spend less and reduce size. The $4 trillion reduction in government revenue is over 10 years. Currently the government receives about $4 trillion a year, or $40 trillion over the same period you are questioning. So, current tax rates being extended means you would have to reduce spending by 10% to retain deficit at current status.

This is possible. Easily possible. REDUCE SPENDING. Start by eliminating the 16,000 IRS agents you plan on hiring. Then reduce the budget of EVERY federal department by 10%. DOWNSIZE the public sector the same way the private sector has downsized for 5+ years.

Quit, just quit, repeating the meme the federal government has no ability to reduce size vis-a-vi-spending. AND quit using the word(s) "non-discretionary", there is no such thing. It is all "discretionary". It is up to us, yes US, to determine how much you can spend. If we say NO then we mean NO and you just gotta deal with it. We are a constitutional republic for a reason, the voices of We The People decide how you do, when you do, and what you do, with OUR money.

If we say you get less. THEN YOU GET LESS, and you figure out how to operate with less. Shut stuff down, eliminate bureocracy, get efficient, get productive, get smaller. Get it!

It frustrates me that Rand Paul, or any other fiscally prudent candidate for that matter, just fluffs over the entire SPENDING issue.

Yep, that's right.  Contrary to your beliefs, statists...it's our damn money.  You can just take what we give you and like it...or you just might not like what we give you.