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?

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.