Rep. Woolsey tweets nonsense…

Lynn Woolsey (well, her staff, anyway) has been very busy tweeting to the Watch Sonoma County (WSC) website’s rolling twitter bar, pointing the way to her even more numerous tweets on Twitter itself. She is — what else can we expect — all indignant about the House majority’s efforts to significantly cut the unacceptably high (my view, of course, not hers) 2011 budget as a precursor to work on sharply downsizing Pres. Obama’s $3.7 TRILLION proposed 2012 budget.

Let’s just examine one of her WSC tweets. She wrote:

RepLynnWoolsey My defense amdt was defeated. Does GOP want defective planes but not education, jobs, police and firefighters? http://youtu.be/8qXj0WIc… 4 hours ago · reply

 She rose and introduced her amendment yesterday (Feb. 17, 2011) to “eliminate the v-22 Osprey aircraft” which she called a “lemon.” Now, we can consider whether her further arguments for its elimination have merit another time. According to her prepared speech, the President’s Debt Commission put it at the bottom of the list of military hardware they would preserve. This proposal is not Rep. Woolsey’s exclusive idea. It has been widely disseminated in “progressive” circles (here, for example, and here).

However, my purpose here is not to debate the efficacy of the Osprey but to note that when this amendment #189 was voted upon by the House, decisive majorities of both parties voted it down. More than half of Rep. Woolsey’s own party does not share her goal of eliminating this military plane either (once again indicating that the “progressive” wing of the Democrats is still a minority). So, it was truly a bipartisan rejection of her amendment. 

Yet, this fact does not deter Lynn Woolsey from constantly pointing all her attacks at Republicans. Above she accuses the GOP of wanting “defective planes.” Does she accuse her fellow Democrats of the same? Of course not.

Then she illogically conflates the rejection of the Osprey elimination with consideration of completely different budget issues. She is so flustered about the push in Congress to reduce expenditures in as many areas as possible  that she accuses the Republicans of wanting “defective planes but not education, jobs, police and firefighters.” She disingenuously poses it as a question, but there is no question that she wants to get across to constituents that the Republicans and only the Republicans are big, bad bogeymen (bogeypeople, in our PC world?) who don’t want YOU to have schools, work, and basic law enforcement or fire protection. What utter hogwash, Congresswoman!

Rep. Woolsey thinks all services, including local education, employment, police, and firefighters, should be provided by federal spending. And if the federal budget cuts funds for these, her limited view of how the world works (the federal government provides all) goes into panic mode.

But the reality is that local services should not be funded by the federal government at all. It costs a percentage of each dollar to have it circuited through Washington bureaucracies and then back again. This is an unnecessary circuit that should be broken. if the money were left in the local area to begin with, it could be put to fuller use. This “progressive” idea that the sky will fall if the federal budget no longer covers certain things is foolish. Americans — and that includes Republicans, Congresswoman — recognize that police, firefighting, education, and employment opportunities are core necessities that can and must be provided if a society is to be prosperous and sustainable. However, the best way to provide all these necessities is to keep dollars local and fund there. If the federal government can get its out-of-control spending under control, that proper local distribution system will once again be enabled as dollars that were flowing to Washington (either through actual taxes or through other means such as Federal Reserve inflation tactics that reduce spending power, or federal borrowing that reduces dollar availability for other uses) will remain local and will be of more immediate and effective use.

Rep. Woolsey would have her constituents believe that Republicans are the root of all evil. But her attacks really are smoke and mirrors. She is trying to prop up a federal system based on untenable spending, and more and more of the people in District 6 are waking up to the fact that her view of government is a house of cards. She wants to continue building it, but that is folly. We must have fiscal responsibility. We must limit and even eliminate federal funding of various items that are better funded at the local or state level. We must also end the partisanship. We’re all in this together…Democrats, Republicans, Independents, etc. Lynn Woolsey shows little inclination to move in that proactive direction, but the rest of us can!

Advertisements

About district6voter

A concerned Northern California citizen who believes Representative Lynn Woolsey ought to be replaced in November, 2010.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Rep. Woolsey tweets nonsense…

  1. Sierra Peterson says:

    Under the current federal budget proposals, financial aid for students would be reduced by 15%. For many students, this cut will make the difference in whether they are able to attend school at all. What local programs will be able to make up for the difference? California is practically bankrupt.

    Lynn Woolsey’s singular focus on slashing the defense budget is commendable because it siphons away a grotesquely disproportionate share of America’s resources. And considering that the army was recently busted deploying illegal psyops on US Senators in an effort to secure war funds, this is a very serious issue that must be dealt with immediately.

    You may be interested in reading The Shock Doctrine by Naomi Klein, which outlines how the IMF imposes “structural adjustment”, aka economic collapse, through deregulation, privatization of essential services and slashing a country’s social safety net. Alarmingly, these are many of the same policies recommended by advocates of “smaller” government. The problem with such a limited view of government is that it fails to recognize the influence non-governmental organizations, corporate-funded think tanks, transnational corporations and other private organizations such as the Council on Foreign Relations. One of the main points of the book is that the biggest con has been convincing taxpayers that economics is a hard science devoid of subjective human choices. Simultaneously, deregulation of the financial sector has enabled derivatives traders to literally walk away with billions while taxpayers get stuck with the bill.

    I am by no means a fan of unnecessary bureaucracy either. However, it is beyond unreasonable for everyday people to go without food or education in the name of “liberty” for the financial oligarchy. The reality is that slashing social services during a recession will cause massive hardship for this country. Anyone who truly wishes to see liberty in the US will work towards implementing structural changes that allow equal opportunities for all people, even and especially outside of the federal welfare system.

  2. Bob Greene says:

    Rep. Woolsey continues the work of good citizens who decry waste and corruption in congress. The fact that Woolsey’s amendment was rejected by both parties suggests that defense contractor money is a sufficient rationale for more than one congressperson to support this boondoggle of a project.

    Clearly, the V22 Osprey survives because of its friends in congress, not any intrinsic merit. However, Rep. Woolsey is especially concerned because the project is not only less efficient per dollar spent than existing alternatives to the V22 Osprey, but it continues in development with serious deficiencies that fail its assigned mission and take the lives of our servicemen.

    The V22 Osprey is a model for the spending that bloats our defense budget, without tangible return to national security. For certain congressional factions, the Osprey has become “their” project”, and regardless of merit, “their project” will continue. Certainly, the contractor campaign donations will.

    Defense Contractor Investment in the Best Congress Money Can Buy–
    See– http://www.natlawreview.com/article/defense-contractors-look-return-investment-national-defense-authorization-act

    Promoting long-term national economic recovery by trimming the Pentagon budget–
    http://article.wn.com/view/2012/05/27/Pentagon_Spending_Killing_Job_Opportunities_Delaying_Recover/

  3. Bob Greene says:

    Here is additional comment intended for the post above, comment which comes from the servicemen and women directly associated with operational problems of the V22 Osprey–
    http://www.combatreform.org/trail2aircraft.htm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s