Ryan's passed, yet Obama's got voted down 414-0.

Oh, and funniest part of all - Pelosi is now a supporter of Simpson-Bowles.

So NewDay - Simpson-Bowles gonna rape the poor and middle class?

This budget passes again in the house so that it will fail again in the Senate. No news here. However, the fact that they tried to pass this middle class killing bill twice will do them real harm in November. Smooth move Eddie Munster!

Wow, ANYTHING to waste time in the House. The House of Cards that only works 9 days a month.

We've had 'In God We Trust' re-runs, the dozens of anti-abortion bills & now the catastrophic Ryan re-run - that gets rid of Medicare as we know it and plunders our seniors.

GOP House = Anything to AVOID rebuilding America, creating jobs, or working towards a good vision for the good of the U.S.A.

Where is the story about Boss Hawg's ties to Iran's Nuclear Program?

Sorry, NDD, to hijack your thread; but come on now,...where on earth is that Liberal Media when you need them?

Yeah, can't wait to see how the Tighty Righties SPIN THIS!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/29/haley-barbour-iran-nuclear-program-bgr_n_1375102.html

Now, they can all go back to their districts, just like last year, and try to sell 'the plan'!

Well, that didn't work out last year. Those town halls held by the TeaPublicans proved that their constituents did not like the plan.

Ryan boldly goes where no man (in good conscience) would go!

Would rework the automatic defense cuts.

Budget Control Act 2011 passed during the debt ceiling debate.

I read Senator McCain and Rep. Paul Ryan said it cut too deep into defense.

They both voted yes for the act.

Are they going back on their votes? In the name of rework.

Spanky, it is not only rape; it is another nail in the coffin for tea baggers in 2012.

The robotic Mitt Rob-mey & Eddie Monster will never reach the White House; even if Rob-mey has the most advanced remote control.

Glad you brought that story up, Clara, I had just finished reading about it. Think Fox will cover that tonight?

Oh, and funniest part of all - Pelosi is now a supporter of Simpson-Bowles.

Nice to see Minority Leader Pelosi is on board with Simpson-Bowles. That is quite the transformation for her seeing she originally stated it was "simply unacceptable".

I'm certain all the Liberals will line up like the sheep they are behind Ms. Pelsoi and be in full support of her brand new position.

Ryan's budget is blasphemy, for the Church of Big Government worshippers herein.

Prayer services held daily at First Read...

Moonbat devotional : "We owe everything to our God of Big Government...we are your dependents, helpless and worthless without you, oh Nanny State..."

Did the Senate just vote to add to our debt and deficit?

In the form of oil subsidies. The Church of Big Oil. Bow at the pumps.

HELL NO It is Obama's debt and deficit. WTF?

OBAMA 2012

Interesting story Clara, let's, see, we have a GOP fella investing in Iran's Nuke program with the Ruskie evil empire bankers and a bunch of GOP fellas threatening to blow the damn place sky high ... and oil prices go which way? Up? I smell Trouble in River City.

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. But wait...

Of note: 10 Republicans voted against the proposal, which is up from the only four Republicans, who voted against the Ryan budget last year. No Democrats voted for it.

So there is a small difference -- less support for this crazy talk! This is of particular interest:

Would initiate comprehensive tax reform, which would reduce the number of tax brackets from the six we have now to only two, among other things.

I believe the two tax brackets would 10% and 25% (OMG!), and where the break would be I have not heard. But imagine what this would result in--aside from huge deficits. Obviously it would reduce the richest 1%'s rate even lower than it is right now. But no one would want a raise at the point at which they would jump from 10% to 25%. Brilliant! Not.

Seriously, Paul Ryan is either very stupid or very corrupt or both, but I hope he is ousted from his current seat in the next election. The man is not fit for public office, not even dog catcher.

No way Sandy - the Senate could not do such a thing. It is democratically controlled, right?

Wait a second Sandy, if the senate did what you say it did then I guess we got more than a few democrats worshipping at the alter of Big Oil.

Then again Sandy, not like a windmill, or solar panel can power our cars. But I'm with you - put big old asterisks by the depletion and deprecation tax code sections - **Does not apply to Oil, gas, coal** and stand back and watch the show.

Oh and only the last $5 Trillion are Obama's. He's the boss, and he's the genius that keeps coming out with super fantastic budgets.

These GD idiots waste the taxpayers time and money with this BS.Vote these "BUMS" out once and for all !

#1.10 was priceless!

Thank you for the laugh!~

TruePatriot-445959
The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results

What's the definition of doing nothing (Reid & the Senate)?

I have never in my life heard of somebody who hasn't done their job for over a thousand days mocking someone that IS doing their job!....lol....Only in Looney Lib Land....DumbFux

sandy -- i suggest that all industries be treated equally. singling out oil is populist but really does not amount to much -- about $4B a year. politifact says that it is mostly true -- we don't borrow everyday but averaging out works -- that we borrow $4B a day so the oil subsidy that everyone gets all hyped about covers one day of borrowing.

The Ryan budget----based on the idea that if trickle down economics didn't work the first 30 years we tried it---let's just keep cutting those tax rates until it does.

Ah Spanky and JAS back in tandem again what a read. Spanky everyone has studied this new old budget of the GOP and it still sucks the bigone (not you) and good ol JAS if I am not mistaken the GOP lined up like sheep first with who was that again oh ya Grover. Keep it comming more fuel for the fire.

Ah Michael1969 yes lets talk about the do nothings in the house. Where are those JOBs buddy how about we vote again to confirm "In God We Trust". How much time has been lost in "NO" and "One Term President" great setup thanks.

LOL Mickey, NY

You're not one of those "eThugs" are ya??

Stuck in Mother's basement, talking smack behind a monitor....lol....what a tool

Steeler, don't forget that the Ryan Budget walks hand in hand with getting rid of the EPA. The GOP wants to strip mine the whole continent. Here's the keys to the polluted house grand-kids all paid for and free.

we vote again to confirm "In God We Trust".

Well, gosh, even Botox Pelosi thought it was important enough to vote in favor of that one.....'member?

Mickey, NY that is not a picture we need right now, and it may be more orange the brown but very close could be multiple donors.

Michael1969 really is that the best you got, yea they voted, it was put up for one it is their job you know, no matter how silly the GOP gets they still have to vote on crap like that.

@ Michael

Did you support the small government

BIG OIL SUBSIDIES of the Senate today?

@ James one day of borrowing is a big deal in my budget

guess Smaller debt is just a Talking Point with the GOP?

sandy-1851937

@ Michael

Did you support the small government

BIG OIL SUBSIDIES of the Senate today?

You bet Sandy.....

Take away the "big oil" subsidies. Just make sure you back it up with lower per gallon tax, more drilling (Anwar), and better policies with our other energy sources (coal).

Short of that you are only hurting the consumer.

ideology -- putting you on ignore. your senseless comments get very tiring.

So Tis - We get you hate Ryan's budget, but the simple fact is that EVERYBODY in the House and the Senate hates Obamas, and Good old Harry isn't going to push one out anyway.

So what do you suggest?

Fuel to the fire? Naaa, I'd just like to keep as much of my own money as possible, thanks though.

And dear Sandy - how about all that support for big oil out of the senate dems? Could not have happened without them. You proud?

Michael1969 Sorry I confused your little mind. Try this, what would you be saying today if the Dems had not voted on "In God We Trust" Oh the godless have spoken what kind of people are these dems to not vote for this. Give it a rest turd brain its back to the barn for you and the rest of the sheep.

Michael1969

#1.10 was priceless!

Thank you for the laugh!~

That post is receiving votes because we found #1.10 to be funny too -- just not in the same way.

Seeing the large number of posts you've posted in short time, and the ad hominem attacks, my guess is you won't last long. There's another troll in here who doesn't pass the smell test either -- Ask how well that has worked for him?

Steeler Fan-380417

The Ryan budget----based on the idea that if trickle down economics didn't work the first 30 years we tried it---let's just keep cutting those tax rates until it does.

Exactly. No Rule of Reason for the right-wing. They hate intellectualism, science, facts -- this gets in the way of their fear, hate, and lies.

Spanky is it not true the President (no matter who) puts forth a budget and the house and senate edit it. What is the point of taking the time and money to do this when you know the house will never accept anything the current president submits, Remember he has to be a one term president and all. Better to wait until you have a House ready and able to do their jobs unlike the current one. You know the call, kick the bums (GOP) out. Oh and that is my suggestion get rid of the GOP they are not for the people of this country unless you have lots of money.

Tis the Season,

If you want to go with your reasoning,

whats is the point of the House taking the time and money to do the Budget when you know Harry Reid will never accept anything that they will submit.

sandy -- i agree that any borrowing is unfortunate. have you considered that President Obama is responsible for more borrowing than any of his predecessors? will you be voting him out of office for this irresponsible behavior?

Easy Tis - the point is it's his job. He's the boss. He's responsible.

But, since you brought it up - I seem to recall a time in '09 that he had a 'House ready and able' to do his bidding.

And yet...

So Tis, he couldn't do it then, he can't do it now. Perhaps it's him, not them?

I know, not in your world. No matter what. Hence the '010 elections.

james-1937467 ... ditto

Newdawg -

The final destruction of the nation.

Why are you using Obama's campaign theme?

Michael1969 is berating someone about checking their post before posting in 1.29 but then talks about drilling in 'Anwar' in 1.30.

Hey Michael1969, quoting you:

Are you F*CKING retarded?! Next time, read what you type before you hit "enter"

What a moron.

james-1937467

sandy -- i agree that any borrowing is unfortunate. have you considered that President Obama is responsible for more borrowing than any of his predecessors? will you be voting him out of office for this irresponsible behavior?

No, james, President Obama is not responsible for more borrowing than any of his predecessors. That is a lie, james. Just because the government has to borrow during a particular president's term does not mean that president is responsible for the cause of that borrowing. Now, since the budget was on track to be balanced in 2005, and the entire debt paid off by . . . wait for it . . . 2012, when President Bush came into office, but was then totally reversed during Bush's administration, we can definitively say that President G. W. Bush was the cause of more borrowing than any other president.

Yep. I went there. The budget deficit, and the record debt can be directly blamed on President Bush, and the Republican/TP Inc. policies. When someone is responsible for causing a problem, no matter how long ago they caused it, it is still their fault.

Right wing indignation, and piling on in 3 . . . 2 . . . 1 . . . GO!

[Right wing indignation, and piling on in 3 . . . 2 . . . 1 . . . GO!]

Matt, the creepies always come out at night...

Donald Trump on the Paul Ryan budget: Republicans have a plan, but it’s not a choice that the Republicans are going to win. People are going to take the choice that’s best for them even if it’s not best for the country. I think it’s a very dangerous plan for Mitt Romney. He’s going to be saddled with a plan that’s very tough to live with.

Here we go again with Republicans reneging on yet another deal they made. Do they have any idea how childish this looks? Why on earth would anyone agree to something in the first place that they really don’t agree with and then try to weasel their way out of it? Stand like a person of honor, accept what you agreed to and put in the hard work to find another solution to reducing the deficit and avoid the mandatory cuts.

trump fan aye, Dennis?

I have followed Trump’s career and some of his philandering for about 25 years. While I can admire his flair for theatrics I do not like him.

But since most of the current Republicans seem to like his style of politics and his opinions I thought you just might like his opinion of the Ryan budget … I guess you don’t Rob.

Actually,

I heard Trump give an interview in which he criticized Ryan. Not for the budget so much. He criticized him for putting it out there before the election because it would turn voters against the Republicans. I am not turned off by it because it's what this country truly needs. An honest voice to say we can't keep pissing away money and kicking the can down the road like the democrats want.

I think trump is wrong. Ryan and the republicans just need to communicate a little more clearly their vision. The majority of this country are still hard working realists and would appreciate an honest approach to the real problems we face. Instead of the democrat mantra of lets tax that 1% more and you can get more stuff.

Dennis--I used to watch The Apprentice and The Celebrity Apprentice. I admire people who excel at self-promotion. After the birther nonsense last year, however, I just can't bring myself to tune in.

Rob,

Do you mean like the large majority of Americans that believe that the rich should pay more in taxes and not get another tax cut?

http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/poll-americans-say-rich-taxed-enough-already

http://freebeacon.com/poll-vast-majority-of-likely-voters-think-rich-already-pay-their-fair-share/

I got to go but there are other polls that show most think the "rich" already pay enough.

I think bill Clinton himself said taxes shouldnot be raised on anyone right now just a couple months ago.

Not to worry liberals, the House may have passed the Ryan plan, but Harry Reid and the Senate won't. When was the last time a budget was passed by the Senate?

Tax the rich

All = 64-33

Independents = 63-34

http://blog.reidreport.com/2011/04/tax-the-rich-polls-show-a-majority-want-to-tax-millionaires-leave-medicare-medicaid-alone/

Key words for Clinton was "right now" and later he clarified that statement to be more in line with supporting an increased tax on the rich.

Father Thomas Kelly, a Catholic priest and constituent of Ryan’s:

“As a constituent of Congressman Ryan and a Catholic priest, I’m disappointed by his cruel budget plan and outraged that he defends it on moral grounds. Ryan is Catholic, and he knows that justice for the poor and economic fairness are core elements of our church’s social teaching. It’s shameful that he disregarded these principles in his budget.”

President Obama submitted his budget request and Republican controlled house wrote and passed a budget. They complied with the law that states the House and Senate shall write budgets. The Senate hasn't written or passed a budget for over 3 years as required by law. The House budget (Ryan's) is a start, now the Senate should write their budget and then have a joint budget committee to resolve the differences in the two budgets. That's how it is suppose to work, but not according to Senator Reid.

No one expected the House Budget to pass the Senate and everyone knew the left wingers and liberal democrats would all bash it and make stupid remarks about it. But what the left wingers and the Senate democrats won't do is write their own budget as required by law, which tells me they have no ideas about what and how much to spend on anything. Remember the budget process in the Senate can not be filibustered, only needs 51 votes to pass, Democrats control the Senate, so what are we waiting for?

So it appears we will once again run the financing of the government by continuing resolutions again. I believe the House only passed 7 or 8 of the 13(?) appropriation bills and the Senate 2 or 3. IMHO that is no way to run a government.

Dennis, yes the large majority of Americans believe the rich should pay more in taxes, but then remember the majority of Americans are not considered rich by current standards of the tax code. Example: Obama and the democrats want everyone making over $200K single & $250K married to pay more in taxes as that is their so called "rich" cut off.

The $200K/$250K is the top 2% of income earners in our country. And it is only an increase for the amount above that $ number, not the entire amount.

Some of the taxes are only for incomes of $1 million, not even on the 1st million.

Then maybe Obama and the left should quite using the term "millionaires" when they actually mean those above $200K/$250K, and quit talking about the 1% when you really mean the 2%. So do you want those who make over $200K/$250K or those making over ONE MILLION, let's be specific.

BTW, $250K in CA doesn't go nearly as far as it would in Texas, LA, SC, maybe Ohio and a few other states.

There are 2 things in play.

First the Bush tax cuts that have a greater increase for those making 200/250 if/when they expire.

Second is the more recent proposal for those making over a million a year.

dennis -- i cannot find anything that definitively talks about the top 2% so please share your source.

i did find stats about the top 5% that may be of interest (2009 data):

• The AGI of the top 5% is -- $154,643.00
• This is 31.7% of all taxpayer AGI
• The tax rate of the top 5% is -- 20.46% (The top 1% pay -- 24.01%, the bottom 50% pay -- 1.85%)
• This is 58.7% of all taxes paid (The top 1% pay -- 36.7%, the bottom 50% pay -- 2.3%)
• The average tax rate for all taxpayers is -- 11.06%

There were 1,379,822 tax returns filed for an average AGI of $1,324,572. They pay 24% today so if we double their tax rate the additional taxes paid is about $318B. Would that be the "fair share" that everyone talks about?

The budget deficit in each of the last several years has exceeded $1.2. So where do we go for the remaining $880B needed each year at current spending levels?

james, you really have swallowed the Republican/TP Inc. talking points whole.

Equating the percentage of all taxes paid to the percentage of taxes paid on income is not a valid comparison. Especially when there are over 1,000 people who have income of over $1,000,000 per year that pay no taxes.

Question, james: do you make over $154,000/year? If not, you are arguing against your best interests since you will have to pay more, and will receive fewer services under the Republican/TP Inc. plan.

.

sfcret

The Senate hasn't written or passed a budget for over 3 years as required by law.

That's a lie.

http://budget.senate.gov/democratic/index.cfm/budgetresolution?p=FiscalYear2011

http://budget.senate.gov/democratic/index.cfm/fiscalyear2010

http://budget.senate.gov/democratic/index.cfm/fiscalyear2009

Which makes your entire statement a lie. But that is not a surprise coming from a serial liar like you, sfcret.

Whine maker: Yes it is misspelled on purpose. The senate has to be given a budget that will pass. It is called compromise and governance. Political theatrics by the right are starting to burn through the fog of propoganda perpetrated by hate radio and the concubines of the elite at FAUX. A good look at the Ryan budget will scare the crap out of seniors and bluecollar workers. You have a significant base in joe six packs, evangelical working poor, and trailer park handgun owners but the Ryan budget may well turn even thier heads to reality.

Matthew - You might want to go back and check your facts. The last time the Senate voted on a budget was Apr 29, 2009 (FY 2010). (my bad that's 2 yrs 11 months, but close enough to 3 yrs). You can reread your own links and also you should check politifact.com. The 2011 FY budget was voted on in the Budget Committee on Apr 22, 2010, but was never brought to the floor for a vote by the full Senate. There wasn't even a FY 2012 budget and there won't be a FY 2013 budget according to Harry Reid.

May 2011, LA Times quote Harry Reid "There is no need to have a Democratic budget in my opinion. It would be foolish for us to do a budget."

So, no FY 2011, & FY 2012 Budgets. I suggest you go back and see how the Budget process is suppose to work according to the law be commenting or at least learn to read your own links.

OK Sam,

A budget was presented and since when does the senate have to have all of the ducks lined up in a row to pass a budget? If they disagree with the House, there is a procedure to put into place to THEN compromise.

Political theater has always been a part of government. Just look at the daily fear the Progressives put into play with their left-leaning medial. Fear must drive the Progressives. With the little dysfunctional band of progressives, what ever happened to the Democratic Party?

Nice try at spin, sfcret, but you did not say just voted on, you based your entire lie on them not having written or voted on a budget (quoting your post . . . again: "The Senate hasn't written or passed a budget for over 3 years as required by law." emphasis mine). The only reason they have not voted on a budget is because the Republican/TP Inc. party keeps filibustering any budget the majority wants to bring to a vote.

Give it up, sfcret, your lies are no match for the truth.

Matthew, You still are a stupid sh!t. I told you to get your head out of your rear end and learn something. The Senate has NOT voted on FY Budgets for 2010, 2011, & 2012 . (Make a big deal about the word written, that's all you got?). For your information the Budget CAN NOT BE FILIBUSTERED. Maybe you should educate yourself before making an a$$ out of yourself.

Hi Sarge,

Didn't the Senate vote on 2 budgets last year and both failed?

The President's budget went down 97-0 and the House budget did not get 51 votes.

The Senate has not proposed their own budget or passed any budget in almost 3 years but they have voted on at least 2 budgets just a year ago.

You still are a stupid sh!t.

Oh dear - Gomer, loses his @!$%#... lmao!

What ever happened to your military training that taught otherwise..?

winemaker,

Actually he is enforcing the law passed by Congress just a couple months ago. So if the price of gas goes up you can blame the Congress including the Republican House.

Dennis,

Yes the Senate voted on two budgets but not their own, and I believe my point was that the Senate has not voted on THEIR budget or even presented one (I believe you know what I meant). The House passed theirs, if the Senate would comply with the law and pass theirs the two houses could then have a joint budget conference and get a real budget passed. But we will continue to operate on Continuing Resolutions.

Fiesty - Yea, sometimes I get a little upset, especially when someone makes a comment and doesn't seen to even know anything about the subject he is committing on. I bet even you know that a budget can not be filibustered.

Sarge,

Actually I did not know what you meant.

Last year the Senate passed a law on spending that actually is more effective than a budget resolution.

Fiesty - Yea, sometimes I get a little upset, especially when someone makes a comment and doesn't seen to even know anything about the subject he is committing on. I bet even you know that a budget can not be filibustered.

No, sfcret, you got upset because you got caught lying. Now, when your spin is not being accepted, you get all pissy because I just refuse to accept your spin.

sfcret, I do not like you, and you do not like me. That's fine, and I couldn't care less. For me, it is sport to point out your lies, and then watch your head spin. In my opinion (yes, I know the old adage about opinions), you are a fool who has swallowed the Republican/TP Inc. philosophy, hook, line, and sinker. The sad part is that the very people, and policies you try to defend (unsuccessfully) work against your own best interests. You do not understand macro-economics, and you somehow think that the people who are currently controlling the world's wealth care about your welfare. I've got news for you, they don't. The only time they think about people like you, is when they are trying to figure out where their next dollar is going to come from. They do not want more people to get rich, because they do not want to share their wealth, especially not with fools like you.

So, sfcret, when you try to tell me that I do not know something, you might want to look in a mirror before you start throwing those stones. You don't know anything about me, and you always resort to calling me nasty names, and using ad hominem attacks on me because you can't attack the facts in my posts.

Now here is something you will never see from sfcret: you are correct sfcret, you cannot directly filibuster the budget, that was my error. HOWEVER, it is entirely possible to put up so many procedural roadblocks, that the budget can be effectively blocked. The Republican/TP Inc. party engaged in these tactics to such an extent that the budgets did not pass.

Now, are you willing to make an admission that you were wrong about the Senate not having written a budget? I doubt it, you are too stubborn to do something like that. I knew people like you when I was in the military, we called them 'lifers', and that is most definitely not a compliment.

What up my man Mickey?

Now refresh my recollection - how many senators voted against Obama's super great budget last year?

Oh and just when will the Senate pass a budget?

Then of course there was yesterday's vote on Obama's '013 budget. Yeah, that went well for him, right? Say, I don't suppose you find anything interesting about that, eh Mickey?

And shoot Mickster - it ain't even like Wisconsin can recall Walker, even with all that union cash flowing.

Is your "ignore" button broken Spanky? Sorry, but you are just as insignificant. as. EVAH.

But I do see your wife let you out to play, or is she "away on business" this week...

Spanky-

And shoot Mickster - it ain't even like Wisconsin can recall Walker, even with all that union cash flowing.

Then Spanky, you'd better turn off FOX; honey! That crossed -eyed badger buzzard keeps running over to FOX begging for money, as if the Koch money is not enough; and lying that he is winning.

Of course he is only a high school graduate so it might be understandable why his math is off; big time.

FYI: UNIONS pay taxes the Koch, big oil, and the other puppet masters who control Scott Walker don't.

Gov Walker has dead eyes!....There is no sign of human life in them!

Seems the House HAS been busy...I mean, besides passing Heir Ryan's bag-o-@!$%# bill...

http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-57406124-281/house-votes-down-plan-to-block-employers-from-facebook-snooping/

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2012/03/28/house-gop-says-not-so-fast-to-bill-on-facebook-and-job-applicants/?mod=google_news_blog

Soooo....here we have it:

The GOP doesn't mind if employers snoop on prospective employees, BEFORE they are hired: CHECK!

Renaming post offices: CHECK!

Commemorative coins: CHECK!

...yeabut...yeabut...yeabut...they're on OUR side....

What's the matter Mickster - just can't remember?

It's cool I'm here for you little buddy. That was a 97-0 drubbing last year. Of course compared to this year's 414-0, that was small stuff.

Dead eyes, eh chilled? Wow. Oh well, then the recall should be a done deal, right?

And yet...

Oh and Bev. -paying taxes is for little people. Just ask Chucky Rangle and Geitner.

And Bev. did you just make fun of a 'high school graduate? Huh. So you are a collage grad I presume? And if so, it's ok for you to belittle someone else over education? The governor of a state no less.

Too good Bev. Even for you.

Now those 10 Republicans are at the top of the GOP/TP Sh** list. No soup for you!

Voters may actually reward them for doing what is right and not just following like lemmings.

Beverly,

The labor unions are exempt under 501(c)(5) of the Internal Revenue Code.

But I do see your wife let you out to play, or is she "away on business" this week...

Naahhh Mickey!

Little fella finally managed to post bail! ;o)

So, Vaginal Probe Bob- Can you, yes, even you, envision what these United States, and the people in them, will look like by 2040.

That's when Ryans' plan supposedly will balance the budget....the all important 'balance the budget'.

Think Progress: March 20, 2012

House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) released the GOP’s new budget this morning, and in doing so, he touted it as a plan to make America’s level of debt more sustainable. “We’ve shared with Americans a specific plan of action that cuts spending, pays off the debt and gets our economy back on the path to prosperity,” Ryan said.

The problem with Ryan’s rhetoric is that his plan fails to match it. By giving massive tax breaks to corporations and the top one percent and preserving unsustainable levels of defense spending, the House GOP’s plan to reduce the debt would fail to reduce the debt. In fact, because it assumes levels of revenue that are pure fantasy under his tax proposals, the plan would actually increase the debt, according to an analysis by Center for American Progress Tax and Budget Policy Director Michael Linden:

But the House budget’s entire claim to deficit reduction is built on the foundation of those fantasy revenue levels. Without them, the debt goes up, not down. In fact, with all the House budget’s tax cuts properly accounted for, revenue would average just 15.3 percent of GDP from 2013 through 2022, not 18.3 percent. The result: deficits would never drop below 4.4 percent of GDP, and would rise to more than 5 percent of GDP by 2022.

The national debt, measured as a share of GDP, would never decline, surpassing 80 percent by 2014, and 90 percent by 2022. By comparison, President Barack Obama’s budget proposal, released in February, would stabilize the debt by 2015, and bring it down to 76 percent by 2022.

As Linden notes, the GOP’s “debt reduction” isn’t just based on fantasy levels of revenue — it’s based on “massive, unrealistic” spending cuts as well. Medicaid would face $1 trillion cuts in the first decade, while education and workforce training programs would get cut in half and transportation funding would be reduced by nearly 25 percent. The plan, which also ignores previous deals and increases defense spending, would also require deep cuts in other vital domestic programs.

“If you agree it’s morally wrong to ignore the most predictable crisis in U.S. history, this is your budget,” Ryan tweeted yesterday. Apparently, though, it seems Ryan and his Republican colleagues got so wrapped up in creating a budget that benefits the top one percent, they forgot to actually reduce the debt.

**********

Nice try Mr. Ryan.

Pat - Where is the Senate Democrats Budget proposal? Oh, that's right, they don't have one and haven't had one in over 3 yrs. You lefties are quick to criticize but you have nothing to put on the table. Senator Reid says he doesn't have follow the law as it pertains to the budget. What's the democrats plan besides raise taxes and spend more on unwanted programs.

ForePlinger

Seriously, this guy must get his news from a 100 inch, 3-D, Dolby 7.1 surround sound Etch-A-Sketch. Coming from Wisconsin, this guy is like a cheese coated badger with his head deep in the fondue pot. I mean deeeeeep.

LOL! Looking like the monster he is; he belongs deep, deep in the fondue.

It's a shame James Cameron couldn't have taken Ryan down in his submersible...and left him there.

...and they're preparing to go on their big 2-week Easter break! Part-time workers, with more than full-time benefits!

And they wonder why Congress, especially the House Republicans, have record low approval ratings - instead of trying to pass something that looks like a bi-partisian compromise.

But the Senate has it's shot at it now pat. It can take the House budget as is, or amend it as much as it wants, or it can create it's own budget. The key here is the Senate needs to pass a budget, something they have not done in going on 4 years. Once that's done they can take it to a conference committee and work the differences out with the House. You know, like it's supposed to work.

The balls in Harry's court.

jas1 -- excellent point. I wonder if Mr. Reid has the balls to proceed?

It is called our security ! And it is better then the 3 million jobs less now then when your prophet hussain oBAMA got crowned!

david -- don't know abut $17T in his current term, probably not. but if he is reelected we will see $20T -- a near doubling of the debt accumulated by all of his predecessors!

But not when measured against GDP.

It is currently at 100% of GDP but in 1945 it was at 125% of GDP.

GDP is a better measure since it accounts for inflation and the economy.

In 1980 we were at 37% of GDP, on our way to paying it off by about 2000 but then came Reagan and by the time Clinton took office it was back up to 69% of GDP.

David:

10 Trillion of that was Bush's crap...

rmunreal,,,where is the lib budget? Almost 4 years and with all the power at one time you socialist democrats waste 2 years passing a soon to be illegal oBAMAcare bill! After a stimulas that was a complete failure and billons going to another failed oBAMA idea like green jobs, you still have no budget and you whine 20 years of republicans doing it all? The dog ate my homework does not go and why cannot you libtards take any kind of fault for ANYTHING negative as on the other hand you and that puke of a manchild president wants to take all the credit for ANYTHING positive?(Which is very little)!

The Democrats in the Senate continue to refuse to submit a budget. They are afraid that the American people will see exactly what their tax and spend budget would really do. All the left can do is criticize the House Budget by Paul Ryan, but they have nothing to put up against it.

WHERE IS THE SENATE'S BUDGET!!!!

sfcret,,,You mean the DO NOTHING SENATE?