Washington (CNN) - Be honest: Stories about the federal budget make your eyes glaze over, right?
Unless you're a budget analyst or die-hard political junkie, you probably have no idea what the White House means when it refers to President Obama's plan to freeze non-security federal discretionary spending over the next three years.
So what is the president proposing? And who would be affected if Congress adopts his plan?
Start with the numbers.
When the White House talks about non-security discretionary spending, it's referring to spending on an array of domestic programs - everything from agriculture to energy - that add up to $447 billion of roughly $3.5 trillion in the federal budget.
What obama won't say tonight is that most of the programs that he wants to freeze the budget for, well he already increased their funding by an average of 28% a few months ago.
All just smoke and mirrors
Is this the change you voted for?
Cut the pork.
The freeze is just a drop in the proverbial bucket. Minimal impact, while the national deficit continues to grow, out of control.
Unfortunately, Obama isn't "targeting" the real money-wasters, all the "entitlement" programs, the idiocy that "entitles" bums who won't work for a living to raid the wallets of those who do.
And yet, the "defense" budget goes untouched. War is big business you know and, as much as I dig him, Obama seems to be all about big business. Socialist, my behind. Lok at healthcare "reform" for example. The problem is that this country has been ruled by the batsh!t crazy right for so long, that anyone left of Reagan appears, to the brainwashed masses, to be a crypto-trotskyite or other neocon-scaring bugbear. Watch in amazement as social spending and edumacation are hit with another body blow, fellow consumerbots. Have a nice day!
I certainly hope Obama does not borrow any ideas from the party of "no" or use McCain's magic axe, and end up cutting programs that actually help people.
Foreign Aid ought to be at the top of the list for any spending freeze yet obama intends not to freeze it. It should be eliminated totally until this nation fiscal health has improved. Why are we so intent on sending billions of our hard earn tax dollars overseas to nations that spit in out face while Americans are in dire need?
Another item to be freeze, Congressional junkets! If Queen Pelosi and her court wish to fly off to far away lands let them do so out of their own pockets, not ours. 1.1 Million dollars for a 2 day trip to Copenhagen by her another democrats and the 6 republicans who tag along should make all our blood boil in anger
And these spending freezes, if approved, aren't going to amount to a hill of beans – until the Gooberment acknowledges the 600lb gorilla in the room – ENTITLEMENTS
Wait, didn't McCain propose a spending freeze during one of the debates? And Obama debuffed it? Hmmmmmm
This is a political move more than a real cost-cutting one.
Obama and Congress need to cut spending on all pet projects (Harry Reid's $100M Las Vegas museum...) and inefficient agencies (the energy department, congressional slush funds/benefits, and even government job pay (yes, if the GDP drops 3%, so should government employee pay. Pay should work more like the private sector).
STOP SPENDING MONEY THAT ISN'T YOURS!
Pay back all the money the congress has stolen from social security, that would take care of that for quite awhile. REALLY mean what you say when you promise veterans something. Give us the same raise that congress gave themselves!!!!!!!!!