Friday, 4 April 2008

How Do You Know It Is A Good Budget?

It is easy to tell if they passed a good budget. See who is complaining about it. If liberals hate it, then it is probably a good budget. So let's see what the liberals have to say.

We can start with the Kentucky Association of State Employees:

"It's just a terrible budget. They need to suck it up and approve the tax increases," said Lee Jackson, president of the Kentucky Association of State Employees. State workers and teachers are slated to get 1 percent raises the next two years.

How about the KEA?

Feeling "appalled and indignant," leaders of the Kentucky Education Association called on state lawmakers to scrap their proposed two-year budget and start over.

"The budget produced by the conference committee constitutes a giant step backward for schools and the Commonwealth’s future," said a statement released Wednesday morning by the association.

How about House Budget Chairman Moberly?

But House budget committee chairman Harry Moberly -- a Richmond Democrat who voted against a budget for the first time in his 29-year legislative career on Wednesday -- said the move to accept those projects will have long-lasting implications.

By acquiescing, it appears that House Democrats are "dancing on a string like puppets" for Williams and the Senate, he said.

"You might as well give him an emperor's crown," Moberly said. "It hurts our future relationship with the Senate because of that."

Moberly keeps the hits coming.

The budget, Moberly said, is "a diabolical deal that's coming through to trade a few projects for the future of this commonwealth."

Williams, Moberly said, got all he wanted in the budget. But education and human services will remain underfunded, Moberly charged, because the Senate would not agree to a House-passed 25-cent increase in the 30-cent-a-pack cigarette tax.

"This is a bad budget for education and human services. Really bad," Moberly said.

I wonder what Steve Beshear thinks?

House Bill 406 now goes to Gov. Steve Beshear, who has said he is disappointed it does not include new revenue sources. He has not, however, said if he intends to veto it or remove line items.

How about ultra liberal senator Scorsone?

But Sen. Ernesto Scorsone, D-Lexington, said the budget falls well short of adequately funding education and social services. If it were a paper for a school class, he said, it would be graded as "incomplete."

Scorsone said more revenue from a tax increase -- such as the cigarette-tax increase approved by the House -- was needed.

The House bill, which included additional small tax increases, would have raised more than $290 million over two years.

One final comment on the budget.

"The teachers and state employees are being shafted," said Rep. Derrick Graham, D-Frankfort, in a passionate floor speech. "It hurts the children of the commonwealth. And it hurts the economic well-being of this commonwealth."

Hmmm, seems like the liberals hate it. That means it must be a good budget. Sen Williams did an outstanding job applying conservative principles to the states fiscal situation. Congratulation goes out to him and others in the Senate who crafted a budget that will allow us to live within our means.

Posted by brians at 10:20 AM in Kentucky Politics

Obama Stands Against Concealed Carry Laws

Obama claims to be a new generation of politician. Unfortunately on all the issues he seems to be an nothing more than an old school liberal. Take his stance on concealed carry permits recently in Pennsylvania.

"I am not in favor of concealed weapons," Obama said. "I think that creates a potential atmosphere where more innocent people could (get shot during) altercations."

Those words sound eerily similar to the argument the left made back in....1990. The problem is many states have enacted concealed carry laws since then. In every case there has been no "atmosphere were more innocent people could get shot".

Kentucky is a perfect example. They passed the concealed carry law back in 1996 among claims of a return to the wild wild west. Innocent people would be caught in the cross fire they claimed. It never happened.

It boggles my mind that Obama could cling to such liberal dogma well after those "fears" have been proved to be unfounded. How can he be a new politician when he is blind to the mounting evidence that he is wrong on this simple second amendment issue? Probably because he isn't a new politician. He is a just another liberal Democrat who has wrapped himself in pretty rhetoric.

Posted by brians at 12:02 AM in National Politics