Democrats seem to have two preferred adjectives to describe Republicans this year-- racist and extremist. Angry charges of "Extremists!" have become common and ubiquitous. Rarely do leading Democrats, such as Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, ever talk about Republicans without adding the charge of extremist. Listen to them and it becomes quite clear that they believe "extremist" Republicans in Congress are the root of all evil. And, that these very "extremists' that are responsible for the American credit-worthiness downgrade, loss of competitiveness, high unemployment, and a sluggish economy. Golly.
    Charges of "extremists" Republicans have grown so common, that Democrat leaders such as Wasserman-Shultz have recently taken an even greater leap in logic and lament that fact that these same “extremist” Republicans are responsible for a break down in common civility and even hateful violence. Not only has the main stream media missed the irony of that charge, but all too often they echo the very same charges of “extremism”.
    A closer look at what Democrats mean by "extremists" is long overdue--so what (by Democrat standards) does it really mean to be “extreme”?
    Let's see. The Tea Party is considered by Democrats to be "extreme" because they gather in huge numbers to protest profligate spending, out-of-control expansion of government, excessive intrusion of government into the private sector and individual lives and, of course, because they are concerned with a growing trend to ignore the Constitution. So, according to Democrats, anyone with those kinds of beliefs is "extreme".
    What else do Democrats consider "extreme"? More than anything else, anyone talking about the $15 Trillion ($15,000,000,000,000.00) of debt our nation has incurred, anyone who is worried about how we are going to repay that debt is automatically viewed as a “extremists".
    Democrats, by comparison, almost never voluntarily talk about the huge national debt and annual trillions of dollars of spending deficits. For good reason too. Long ago, Democrats understood the dangers of reminding voters that our national finances are precarious, spending unsustainable, and our debt has ballooned.
    Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid, has not bothered to approve a budget in over three years because it is likely that he does not want Americans to know just how dire out national finances have become. Instead, Reid hopes to squeeze one more Democrat golden egg (green jobs programs, posh bailouts to cronies such as Solyndra, dubious high-speed rail lines to nowhere, subsides for unions) before the Golden Goose that was once the American economy is smothered and killed by the enormous new burdens and bureaucratic impediments he and others in the Democrat party have so unwisely championed.
    Not too surprisingly, anyone who questions the wisdom of the many dodgy, new spending proposals or the need to balance our books by limiting the need for new loans to pay for all the madness is quickly labeled an “extremist”. Those who, accurately, point out that the awful mathematics of our debt make it a certainty that future generations will be obligated to pay off the staggering debt, or that they may be forced to suffer with a declining standard of living are also labeled “extremists”.
    But, I call the Republican's concerns about intrusive, expansive government and out-of-control spending something else. I call it prudent.
    Currently, the United States has approximately $4 trillion dollars of short-term debt. "Short term" means debt that has to be repaid within the next 6 months. Even in these out-of-control times, most Americans would consider that $4 trillion dollars is a LOT of money.
    So what exactly is $4 trillion dollars? First, it's the amount that the national debt has increased under Obama in the pat three years. Consider: "If you spent $1 million a day since Jesus was born, you would have not spent $1 trillion by now..."

    Many Americans would say this scenario is very, VERY scary. Democrats call folks who worry about this-- "extremists".
    But, Obama, Reid and Pelosi seem to believe that the responsibilities for payment can always be delayed. They seem to think that the once-strong American, economic engine, our financial resources and national flexibility, are limitless.
    Democrats take for granted the sacrifices other generations have made to bequeath a vibrant economic system to us. They assume it will go on forever--despite the foolish choices they have made to hobble the very economic system which they depend upon to produce the wealth that they have promised to distribute to their favorites and political supporters.
    Anyone with the courage to suggest that America’s ability to borrow from the future is not limitless is today labeled an "extremist". Democrats decry "extremists" who believe that debts will one day come due, that the unwise reliance upon foreign countries such as China, to continue to finance (nearly 40% and growing) our annual expenditures will soon cause the country enormous problems.
    So by all means, let the Democrats call me an "extremist". For like the other “extremists" in Congress that have recently been ridiculed for attempting to slow down the spending as the debt now climbs toward $16 trillion, I am afraid that economic turmoil awaits.
    If out-of-control federal spending doesn't stop soon, this will all end badly. Perhaps a better definition for an “extremist” is to describe someone that has done the math and come to the realization that we are making foolish and dangerous economic decisions.
    Republicans are “extremely” worried about the future. If you are not already an “extremist”, you will be one soon as you watch Barack Obama, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi continue on in their merry way adding trillions more to the national debt, hoping that someone else will have to pay for it all.