Felonious Munk's wild anti-Obama rant on government debt/debt ceiling *profanity alert*

I usually don't post anything with excessive profanity but this rant is too good and will have you laughing - or gasping.


Felonious Munk talks politics with The Blaze. His various views are all across the political spectrum.

Here are Felonious Munk's views:

“I hate partisan anything,” he told The Blaze from Virginia Beach, VA. “I rant just as much about Republicans as I do Democrats. I rant just as much about the Tea Party as I do liberals.” In fact, he thinks the idea of loyalty to a party is “retarded.”

In fact, he said he supports the president — whether George W. Bush or Barack Obama. But he always retains “the constitutional right to say, ‘that’s ridiculous.’”

Still can’t pin him down? You probably won’t be able to put him in a simple partisan box. Consider this: he’s not a fan of the health care bill (he calls it the “ugliest quilted blanket of health care crap I’ve ever seen”), but has a soft spot for Canada’s single-payer health system.

That seems to lean liberal.

“I think our government has made everything they possible could more difficult, and that‘s just during Obama’s presidency,” he said, later adding, “I think [the health care bill] was one of those things where you made a promise and now you force yourself to keep that promise even though what you eventually came up with was crap.” In other words, “squash it.”

That seems to lean conservative.

He doesn’t think the country is headed for communism like some conservatives, but he believes some of the “socialist” programs put in place during the Great Depression weren’t meant to go on indefinitely, and now some people have become dependent on them.

Liberal and conservative?

The rant he delivered that caught Beck’s eye, he explained, was just one of many issues he has with the president.

“There are, oh my God, a million things.” For example, he’s opposed to foreign aid to Somalia and Israel alike.

Still, he admits some of the things he ranted about in the video were slightly exaggerated for comedic effect.

What is he, then? How about a comedic conundrum.

Who is Felonious Munk?

Felonious Munk isn’t really Felonious Munk. His real name is Dennis Banks. And he said this is the first time he’s admitted that to the media.

He has a surprisingly deep knowledge of history — he spouted off people (both politicians and comedians) and terms from days past like he was, well, a stand-up version of Beck. And his path to comedy wasn’t an ordinary one. He went to college for accounting but then switched to IT after being bored with the former. He then worked in finance for almost 12 years, specifically in the car sales business.

Then, he said, the economy “forced” him into comedy — which is a way of saying business wasn’t good so he chose to do what he loved.

Still, his brand of comedy is different. There are curse words. It can be crass. There are plenty of laughs. But he also wants his craft to make people think.

“I thought comedy was always, ‘make me laugh, but let me go home and think about it,’” he explained, which he says is the offspring of his humor and his different way of thinking about things. Now he’s traveling across the country sharing it with as many people as possible.

And now, because of Beck, he’s tapping an audience that might not have ever known about him. And he’s okay with that. He’s even going to work it into his routine.

“I’m sure Glenn Beck is going to be a part of a few of my shows coming up. As a matter of fact, he’ll probably get a tribute video,” he said chuckling. Which is ironic, he added, because he’s made videos bashing Fox News in the past.

Almost twenty minutes into the interview, he finally started cracking jokes: “I think it’s kind of cool that Glenn Beck sees this video and goes, ‘Wow, this guy who kind of looks like bin Laden makes a point that I agree with.’” He‘s even thinking about donning a turban and Photoshopping himself shaking Beck’s hand.

And what about Beck’s own joke at the end of his radio show Thursday, wondering if Munk (or Banks) would be willing to join GBTV as a comedian?

“Truthfully, the only way you could get me to shave my beard is if I had that opportunity,” he said while laughing. “If Glenn Beck wanted to make me the Lewis Black of his new TV show, tell him I’m all over it, I’ve got material for months, and I’ve got a couple of really nice suits.”

“We could be like the Run DMC of the new politics.”

Now that’s a funny image.

Tea Party Patriots Co-Founder Speaks Out Critically on John Boehner and Debt-Ceiling Debate

Mark Meckler, Co-Founder of the Tea Party Patriots, answers some questions from Patricia Murphy of The Daily Beast on John Boehner and the GOP, the debt-ceiling debate, and the August 2nd default on our debt obligations meme.


In the president’s speech Monday night, he blamed the breakdown in the debt negotiations on House members, who were obviously people who have been supported by various Tea Party groups.  Should the Tea Party groups get the blame for all of this?

I think the Tea Party movement should get the credit for elevating the debate about the debt limit to the national stage. We’ve raised the debt limit 10 times in the last nine years. In the last five years, we’ve almost tripled the amount of debt this country is holding. This has all been done relatively quietly while politicians have mortgaged our futures. So the fact that we’re having a spirited debate about this now is good for the nation and I think the Tea Party can take credit for it.

Do you think that the most recent election is the reason Congress is not just quietly raising the debt ceiling, as has happened scores of times before?

Yes, the fundamental difference is that the entire political dynamic has been changed by the Tea Party movement.  The core values of the Tea Party Patriots—fiscal responsibility, the Constitution, limited government and free-market capitalism—are now defining the debate around virtually every issue in the nation.

What do you think is the ideal solution to this impasse right now?

The ideal solution is to cut spending so that we stop spending beyond our means. The ideal solution is what you would have to do if you were in the same situation personally that the country is in. The ideal solution is what each of us as citizens have to do when we get in financial trouble personally or what companies have to do, or what states have to do or what cities have to do. Frankly, the only entity in our nation that continues to defy reality is the federal government. It’s just time to pay the piper.

Is there any scenario where you think it would be OK to raise the debt ceiling?

No.

What do you think about the proposal that Speaker Boehner has put out?

It’s an embarrassment. He proposes $1.4 trillion in cuts over the next 10 years. Legally, no Congress can bind a future Congress. Anything he promises about what future Congresses will do, they simply can’t make that promise. In the real world, we call that a lie. If you promise something that you have no control over, that’s called a lie. In Congress, it’s called a promise. We don’t understand how the American people don’t get that. Number two, no Congress has ever been able, by wish or by promise, to bind future Congresses to spending cuts. When past Congresses cut spending under their own budgets, those spending cuts will never and have never materialized. It’s smoke and mirrors and the American people understand this.

The interview is continued here. 

Senator Pat Toomey On The Debt Debate

I am proud to say that my senator, Senator Pat Toomey, has been outspoken and at the forefront of these debt talks. He is one of the co-sponsors of "Cut, Cap, and Balance" and has strongly criticized both the Democrats and the President on how they have handled the debt talks. Here is a speech which Sen. Pat Toomey gave on the Senate floor a few days ago. In the second video he talks with Sean Hannity on the whole debt debate drama.

Debt Limit Talks, Cut Cap & Balance, and What is the Principled Thing To Do?

I have been watching this whole debt debate and as it rages on it seems that the debt ceiling negotiations are getting nuttier by the day.   We are seeing the clash of philosophies go head to head.  Democrats and Obama believe in playing the class warfare card.  The President refuses to mention with specificity even one thing that he is willing to cut from the budget.  In contrast the President has laid out in great specificity how he wants to tax the "rich". He wants to raise taxes while Republicans do not.  IMO, the crux of the problem lies with Obama.  The philosophies of both the conservatives and liberals are so far apart that they don't agree on much, if anything, in the way of how to fix the debt problem.  While the President likes to portray the GOP as being ideologically entrenched and unwilling to compromise his own words have shown that this is a case of the pot calling the kettle black.  For example, Eric Cantor realized that the two sides are two far apart to agree on a "grande bargain" so he stated that he would be willing to move a a short-term debt limit increase alongside smaller spending cuts but then Obama, the man-child President, said to Cantor “Eric, don’t call my bluff." Then according to Eric Cantor he told reporters that “He (Obama) shoved back and said ‘I’ll see you tomorrow’ and walked out."  Obama has shown that he can't stand to be challenged politically, and that he takes it personally so I can believe that this happened the way Eric Cantor portrayed the event. 


Do you think that Eric Cantor was political posturing? Or do you think that Obama was political posturing?

Back in 2009 Obama stated that he wasn't looking to raise taxes until possibly 2013.  But now he is so entrenched and committed to raising taxes. 

"So, when you hear folks saying, “Well, the president shouldn’t want massive job killing tax increases when the economy is this weak.” Nobody’s looking to raise taxes right now. We’re talking about potentially 2013 and the out years."

So why does Obama want to raise taxes when our economy is so weak and on the verge of a double dip recession?  We shouldn't be raising taxes on anyone while our economy is so weak. 

What is a principled stance for the Republicans?  Do you think that it would be irresponsible for the GOP not to raise the debt ceiling or would it be irresponsible for them to raise the debt ceiling?  Or should the GOP raise the debt ceiling ONLY IF the President and Congress goes along with their Cut Cap and Balance Pledge?  Or a similar plan? In all likelihood it would seem that in all probability that there is going to be some sort of compromise by both parties.  Or do you think that the GOP should stand firm and risk the U.S. hitting the debt ceiling?  And thus possibly defaulting?  Then we have President Obama who is using fear mongering tactics, saying we may not have enough money to pay out social security, medicare and medicaid, and military benefits in order to put pressure on the Republicans.  If the debt ceiling isn't raised then Obama might actually be forced to make some immediate and necessary budget cuts but that is something he isn't willing to do.

The Weekly Standard explains that the revenues would cover social security, medicaid and medicare, and military benefits.

The BPC study found that the United States is likely to hit the debt limit sometime between August 2 and August 9. “It’s a 44 percent overnight cut in federal spending” if Congress hits the debt limit, [Jay Powell of the Bipartisan Policy Center]said. The BPC study projects there will be $172 billion in federal revenues in August and $307 billion in authorized expenditures. That means there's enough money to pay for, say, interest on the debt ($29 billion), Social Security ($49.2 billion), Medicare and Medicaid ($50 billion), active duty troop pay ($2.9 billion), veterans affairs programs ($2.9 billion).

I just saw this on Eric Cantor's Facebook Page: "This debate is not a question of personalities; it is about doing what is right for the country."  


I agree.  

The Cut, Cap, and Balance Plan consists of :  



1.  Cut - We must make discretionary and mandatory spending reductions that would cut the deficit in half next year.

2.  Cap - We need statutory, enforceable caps to align federal spending with average revenues at 18% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), with automatic spending reductions if the caps are breached.

3.  Balance - We must send to the states a Balanced Budget Amendment (BBA) with strong protections against federal tax increases and a Spending Limitation Amendment (SLA) that aligns spending with average revenues as described above.




Then we have Mitch McConnell's plan which would basically cede power to Obama and allow him to raise the debt limit three times during the rest of his term. This lame brain idea would put the onus of the blame for the skyrocketing debt on Obama.  That option would mean that both parties would be kicking the can down the road.  Old Geezer Mitch must have left his brain at home that day because this plan is absurd.  The American people don't want McConnell to wave the white flag of defeat to Obama & Co.  The American people want solutions and not political chicanery. Clueless McConnell needs to stop playing political games and instead concentrate on trying to find a solution to the debt crisis, stop acting like a wimp and stand up to Obama.  


In your opinion what do you think is the principled position for the Republicans?  What are your thoughts on the debt and debt ceiling issues?

Charlie Rangel gets biblical on Debt & asks WWJD?; Huckabee answers Rangel

H/T Hot Air 

Senator Pat Toomey's Balanced Budget Proposal

My senator from the great state of Pennsylvania has put together a budget proposal.  I have to say that I am proud to have Pat Toomey as my senator.  Senator Pat Toomey's budget simplifies the tax code, balances the budget in nine years, and reduces the publicly held debt from close to 70 percent of GDP today to 52 percent by 2021.  He does this by reducing the spending to 18.5 percent of GDP.  He decided to focus on one thing at a time, first proposing a balanced budget but he does know and understand that social security needs to be reformed.  Overall, I have to say that I am pleased with his budget proposal.

Here are the cosponsors of the Budget Proposal:

Cosponsored by Sens. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.), David Vitter (R-La.), Tom Coburn
(R-Okla.), Richard Burr (R-N.C.), James Risch (R-Idaho), Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), Ron
Johnson (R-Wisc.) and Mike Lee (R-Utah)

Pat Toomey states:


Let me just mention one other thing. It's my view that a permanent solution to the
fiscal challenges that we face will require broader reforms than what we have in
this budget. For instance, ultimately, we need to reform the Social Security
program; we need to reform Medicare. But this budget represents what we think of as
a necessary first step. It reaches balance. It does so within the foreseeable
future, within 10 years in fact, and in the process, I hope that it will demonstrate
and earn for us a restored trust in our ability to grapple with the big problems
that we face. This in turn, will buy us the time we need for the long-term reforms
for our federal budget.

I'm not aware of any country that has ever dramatically grown its government,
generated massive spending beyond its means, run up huge deficits, accumulated
massive debt, monetized part of it and then lived happily ever after. We won't be
the first. We're either going to stay on this current path and suffer the
consequences that will come from this very irresponsible spending - the consequences
of diminished opportunity at best - or we're going to depart from this path and
adopt the fiscal discipline that our constituents expect of us and adopt the
pro-growth reforms that will allow our economy to recover and allow us to enjoy
another great American century.

The time to choose is now. And the time is running out.
 

Here is an overview of Sen. Toomey's balanced budget proposal.

1 Pager- Balanced Budget Resolution FINAL

Here is a more detailed overview of Senator Toomey's balanced budget proposal.

Restoring Balance Final

Obama is Kicking the Can Down the Road but is GOP Kicking Smaller Can Down the Road Too?

The Obama budget is a fiscal joke, or a fiscal nightmare for our future.  The American people sent a message loud and clear to Congress and President Obama on November 2nd and it is obvious that he didn't get it.  


Senator Jon Kyl points out that Obama's budget adds nearly $13 trillion in debt by the end of the decade and the gross debt will reach $26.3 trillion by the end of the decade - which is 107 of gross domestic product.


 Senator Kyl says that: 
"The debt will eclipse the size of the entire economy." 




The United States will have a mega-financial disaster on its hands, which will look much like Greece does today.  


Sen. Kyl states: 


 "That’s a gloomy outlook, and it would be prudent to stop raiding the treasury. But, not in this budget. Under President Obama’s budget, the size of the federal government will nearly double since he took office. Over the next 10 years, the President proposes $8.7 trillion in new spending, with $46 trillion in total spending. Spending in this fiscal year is projected to be a record $3.8 trillion, or 25.3 percent of gross domestic product, the highest spending-to-GDP ratio since World War II!" 


I agree with Sen. Kyl.  This is a gloomy outlook.  This type of financial disaster can be avoided if President Obama, the Democrats, and the Republicans have the will and listen to the American peoples' voices which were spoken loud and clear in the November elections.  


The Obama budget would increase taxes on families, small businesses, and job creators at a time when  our economy is still very fragile.  How does raising taxes on small business owners and other job creators encourage businesses to hire new employees?  Simply put, it doesn't.  It decentivises the job creators from opening up new stores and hiring new employees.  It is a real possibility that their will be layoffs due to Obama's fiscal insanity. With this kind of backwards mentality of penalizing the backbone of our country - the entrepreneurs - in the near future I can see the unemployment rate rising above 10 percent. 


  But, does the GOP get it?

The GOP seems to be waving the white flag of compromise and giving into the Democrats.  Most of what is in the GOP's Stop Gap proposal consists of cuts which were already proposed by Obama and the Democrats.  The GOP is acting very weak and are compromising to avoid a government shutdown.  I am all for a government shutdown.  What has the government done right in the past few years?  The government has expanded like a huge balloon full of helium and it needs to be popped and shrunk down to a much smaller, acceptable size.  The Federal government has invaded our lives, like an invasion of aliens from outer space.  This ever expansive government needs to be reigned in and if it takes a government shutdown to save money and show the Democrats that we want to save or country from fiscal ruin, so be it.  The dynamics of our economy is different than in 1995 and there are more people who are more aware that the United States needs to get its fiscal house in order.  


The GOP didn't even have the will to cut at least $100 billion from the budget, as they pledged to the American people in November.  The House approved $61 billion in spending cuts and the GOP can't even stand on principle and put pressure on the Senate to pass those cuts.  This is unacceptable and makes me furious. We definitely need to boot some RINO's out of the GOP.  These compromisers need to go.  I am sick of the GOP being more worried about their political appearances than solving both our budget and deficit woes.  


So, sadly I have to say that more than a few in the GOP don't get it.  They are indeed kicking the can down the road, albeit a smaller can than the Democrats.  But, this should not be the barometer we use to judge the GOP. They must have had some serious wax in their ears during the November campaigns.  Or, maybe they have had amnesia?  Their actions and words are evidence that we need to remind them consistently and often of the will of the American people and what this country needs in order to get its fiscal house in order. 

Sen. Pat Toomey Has a Great Idea on How to Freeze the Debt Ceiling Without Risking Default

Sen. Pat Toomey - Those words sound really good! -  has not bought into the "sky is falling" mentality that Obama, Democrats, and others within the Obama administration have been expressing regarding the debt ceiling.  He even points out that it is NOT a necessity to raise the debt ceiling but in fact emphasizes that if the debt ceiling is raised and congress continues their enormous spending spree, business as usual, then the ramifications would be staggering.  Pat Toomey says there is an alternative.

He is introducing legislation "that would require the Treasury to make interest payments on our debt its first priority in the event that the debt ceiling is not raised. This would not only ensure the continued confidence of investors at home and abroad, but would enable us to have an honest debate about the consequences of our eventual decision about the debt ceiling. If we do not raise it, the government's tax revenue will enable us to fund roughly two-thirds of projected expenditures, including interest payments. Without the ability to borrow the other third, spending cuts would be sudden and severe: Projects would be postponed, some vendor payments would be delayed, certain programs would be suspended, and many government employees might be furloughed. Default would easily be avoided, but these cuts would certainly be disruptive. That's why I hope we can avoid this scenario." 


Pat Toomey points out: 


The recent surge in spending, both in absolute dollars and as a percentage of our GDP, has driven us to record deficits and an explosion of debt. The growth in discretionary spending has been the most dramatic, but in the future mandatory entitlement spending will be the deficit driver. Congress must address both in order to put the government back on a sustainable fiscal path.

The vote on whether to raise the debt ceiling—and, if so, by how much—is our best opportunity to insist that any increase in our nation's debt be coupled with concrete steps toward fiscal sanity. Congress should make increasing our debt contingent on immediate cuts in spending and effective reforms of the spending process that helped get us into this mess.

For too many years, Congress has ignored or exacerbated the looming fiscal crisis created by overspending. Last fall's elections were largely a call to finally deal with this imminent threat, and the vote on the debt ceiling is Congress's opportunity to begin making real progress. We can do so without jeopardizing the full faith and credit of our country—and we should.

I agree with Pat Toomey. This out of control spending must stop!  It also sounds like Afghanistan is on the correct path now.  With the coordinated effort of both our troops and Afghanis hopefully this positive trend will continue. 

Thanks to the Obama Administration the United States is Economically Less Free

From Heritage.org:

 The United States’ economic freedom score is 77.8, making its economy the 9th freest in the 2011 Index. Its score is 0.2 point lower than last year, reflecting deteriorating business freedom, trade freedom, government spending, and monetary freedom. The U.S. is ranked 2nd out of three countries in the North America region, and its overall score is well above the world and regional averages.

The U.S. economy faces enormous challenges. The government’s recent spending spree has led to fragile business confidence and crushing public debt. Interventionist responses to the economic slowdown have eroded economic freedom and long-term competitiveness. Drastic legislative changes in health care and financial regulations have retarded job creation and injected substantial uncertainty into business investment planning.

Ongoing regulatory changes, coupled with fading confidence in the direction of government policies, discourage entrepreneurship and dynamic investment within the private sector. Leadership and credibility in trade has been also undercut by protectionist policy stances and inaction on previously agreed free trade agreements with South Korea, Panama, and Colombia.

---

BACKGROUND

The U.S. economy is the world’s largest. While services account for more than 70 percent of economic activity, the U.S. remains the world’s largest producer of manufactured goods. A federal form of government that reserves significant powers to states and localities has encouraged diverse economic policies and strategies. However, the national government’s role in the economy has expanded sharply in the past two years, and the federal budget deficit is extremely large, with gross public debt approaching 100 percent of GDP. Passage in March 2010 of a massive health care bill significantly expanded the federal government’s control of the health care industry, but a proposed climate change bill that would have imposed federal constraints on energy use has been stalled. Elections in November resulted in a Republican Party takeover of the U.S. House of Representatives.

Here are explanations behind the grade given for each type of economic freedom within the United States: 

---

BUSINESS FREEDOM91.0-0.3

The overall freedom to create and run a private enterprise, regulated primarily at the state level, is strongly protected. However, new regulatory uncertainty hampers business expansion and employment creation.

VISUALIZEVIEW METHODOLOGY

---

TRADE FREEDOM86.4-0.5

The weighted average U.S. tariff rate was 1.8 percent in 2009. Anti-dumping and countervailing duties laws, “buy American” procurement rules, high out-of-quota tariffs, services market access restrictions, import licensing, restrictive labeling and standards, and export-promotion programs and subsidies add to the cost of trade. Ten points were deducted from the U.S. trade freedom score to account for non-tariff barriers.

VISUALIZEVIEW METHODOLOGY

---

FISCAL FREEDOM68.3+0.8

U.S. tax rates are burdensome. The top income and corporate tax rates are 35 percent. Other taxes include an estate tax and excise taxes. Additional income, sales, and property taxes are assessed at the state and local levels. In the most recent year, overall tax revenue as a percentage of GDP was 26.9 percent. Should authorities choose not to extend tax cuts enacted in 2001 and 2003, the tax rate on the top individual income bracket will jump to 39.6 percent beginning in 2011, and the top capital gains tax rate will increase from 15 percent to 20 percent.

VISUALIZEVIEW METHODOLOGY

---

GOVERNMENT SPENDING54.6-3.4

In the most recent year, total government expenditures, including consumption and transfer payments, equaled 38.9 percent of GDP. Spending increases totaled well over $1 trillion in 2009 alone, an increase of more than 20 percent over 2008. Stimulus spending has hurt the fiscal balance and placed federal debt on an unsustainable trajectory. Gross government debt exceeded 90 percent of GDP in 2010.

VISUALIZEVIEW METHODOLOGY

---

MONETARY FREEDOM77.4-0.7

Inflation has been low, averaging 1.4 percent between 2007 and 2009. Price controls apply to some regulated monopolies and the health insurance sector; certain states and localities control residential rents; and the government influences prices through subsidies, particularly for the agricultural sector, dairy products, and some forms of transportation. Government interventions in housing, automotive, health, and financial markets have substantially increased price distortions. Fifteen points were deducted from the U.S. monetary freedom score to account for measures that distort domestic prices.

VISUALIZEVIEW METHODOLOGY

---

INVESTMENT FREEDOM75.0No Change

Foreign and domestic enterprises are legally equal. Foreign investments face screening only if perceived as a potential threat to national security. Foreign investment in banking, mining, defense contracting, certain energy-related industries, fishing, shipping, communications, and aviation is restricted. Regulations are generally transparent; individual states may impose additional restrictions. There are few controls on currency transfers, access to foreign exchange, or repatriation of profits. Foreign investors may own land.

VISUALIZEVIEW METHODOLOGY

---

FINANCIAL FREEDOM70.0No Change

The U.S. financial sector has undergone far-reaching changes since the sub-prime mortgage crisis in 2008. A number of prominent financial firms or banks failed or were bailed out, and the government has intruded on firms’ management in unprecedented ways. The damage caused by mortgage guarantors Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac remains largely unabated. Concerns continue over the intrusive nature and cost of the 2002 Sarbanes–Oxley Act, which increased disclosure and internal control requirements to the detriment of smaller firms. The impact of a sweeping overhaul of financial regulations passed in July 2010 is yet to be measured, though it appears to do little to reduce the chances of future government bailouts.

VISUALIZEVIEW METHODOLOGY

---

PROPERTY RIGHTS85.0No Change

Property rights are guaranteed. Contracts are secure, and the judiciary is independent. A well-developed licensing system protects patents, trademarks, and copyrights. Government interventions in financial markets and the automotive sector have raised concerns about expropriation and violation of the contractual rights of shareholders and bondholders. The individual health insurance mandate passed by Congress in 2010 raised serious constitutional questions regarding whether government could require the spending of private funds.

VISUALIZEVIEW METHODOLOGY

---

FREEDOM FROM CORRUPTION75.0+2.0

Corruption is perceived as minimal. The U.S. ranks 19th out of 180 countries in Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index for 2009. The U.S. government has become part owner or effective operator of several “too-big-to-fail” companies, and the impartiality of subsequent regulatory efforts is seen by some as corrupted.

VISUALIZEVIEW METHODOLOGY

---

LABOR FREEDOM95.7+0.9

U.S. labor regulations are highly flexible. The non-salary cost of employing a worker is low, and the severance payment system is not burdensome. With private-sector union membership steadily shrinking, more union members currently work for the government than for private businesses.

VISUALIZEVIEW METHODOLOGY

Both the Obama administration and the democratic majority congress's policies expanded the size of government, promoted more government intrusion into our lives, anti-business policies, along with excessive spending and debt has led to this nation being economically less free.  We, the American people, must keep vigilant and make sure that the new congress lowers the debt,  reverses past government intrusion, and fights against present and future government intrusion attempted by the Obama administration.