Just Say No: Rep Jeff Landry (LA) turns down invitation to White House

The Hill: A freshman GOP lawmaker rejected an invitation to the White House on Wednesday, saying he didn't want to be “lectured” by President Obama.

“I have respectfully declined the president’s invitation to the White House today,” Rep. Jeff Landry (La.) said in a statement. “I don’t intend to spend my morning being lectured to by a president whose failed policies have put our children and grandchildren in a huge burden of debt.” [...]

Landry said he would not sit down with Obama to negotiate on a deficit reduction compromise until Obama produces his own budget plan.

“Until the president produces a responsible deficit reduction plan, I’m not going to the White House to negotiate with myself. Our conference has put out for months where we would start the process,” Landry continued. [...]

Landry also criticized Obama for neglecting to meet with the Louisiana delegation about a drilling moratorium off the Gulf of Mexico.

“The President has done nothing, just like he has for the people of the Gulf Coast,” Landry said.

“For months, the Louisiana delegation has sent the president numerous requests to meet with him or his chief of staff concerning the de facto moratorium issued in the Gulf of Mexico, a de facto moratorium that has driven gas prices up and now threatens to derail economic recovery; the president hasn’t even had the courtesy to write us a note back.”

Landry said the meeting was just “political grandstanding” on Obama’s part.

“I refuse to partake in his political grandstanding that will ultimately do nothing for debt reduction and job creation,” Landry said.

Kudos! It is about time some Republican stopped playing political games with serious issues. Obama has no serious plan for debt reduction or deficit spending. Yet, the GOP leadership cannot fall over themselves fast enough to compromise their position away. How different things would be if John Boehner has spunk like this? At least there is one fellow man enough to say, I ain't playin'.

Via: Memeorandum
Via: The Hill

Right On Cue: RINO Susan Collins won't support Paul Ryan's budget proposal

The Hill: "I don't happen to support Congressman Ryan's plan but at least he had the courage to put forth a plan to significantly reduce the debt," Collins said on "In the Arena" a program on WCSH 6, a local NBC affiliate in Portland, Maine.

Collins is the first Republican senator to state publicly that she will not support the Ryan budget. [...]

Collins, who is one of several centrists in the Senate Republican Caucus, did not say specifically what she opposed in the House GOP plan, but she did say that she would like to begin moving the government towards solvency by eliminating ethanol and farm subsidies as well as funding for an extra engine for the F-35 fighter jet.

"There are lots of opportunities to consolidate and save money," Collins said.

Wonderful, she rejects a serious plan to cut spending in favor of chasing pennies.

You can always count on RINOs to gum up the works when you need their vote the most. I firmly believe that it would be far better to lose an election to a Democrat than to continue electing these unprincipled and unreliable so called "Republicans". From 2012 forward, conservatives should make it their business to primary each and every RINO until we are finally rid of the scourge!

Via: Memeorandum
Via: The Hill

Video: Paul Ryan calls out Obama's deficit speech

The Blaze: “Exploiting people’s emotions of fear, envy, and anxiety, is not hope–it’s not change. It’s partisanship. We don’t need partisanship. We don’t need demagoguery. We need solutions”

Ryan also said, “What we heard today was not fiscal leadership from our commander in chief. What we heard today was a political broadside from our campaigner-in-chief.”

“Rather than building bridges, he’s poisoning wells,” the Wisconsin congressman said.

The boyish looking man is sounding ten times more grown up than the president. Anyone want to be that Obama will not go face to face with Ryan on this issue?

Via: The Blaze

Obama's speech on the deficit (Video and Text)

Video Part 2

Video Part 3

Full Text

We are living in some very serious times. Our deficits and debts are dangerously threatening the stability of our nation and promises a diminished way of life for our children and grandchildren. Serious adult leadership is required to make the tough choices now to advert a certain catastrophe tomorrow.

The speech Obama gave on his idea of deficit reduction was neither leadership, serious or adult. Instead Obama gave us typical Obama complete with empty rhetoric, contradictions and partisan campaign attacks. How anyone, left, right or center, can take this man seriously when it comes to this topic is beyond understanding.

From the moment Obama took the stage, his light and jovial manner seems so wildly inappropriate for the subject at hand. (See 0:00 - 0:30)

When Obama explains how we have reached these large deficits, he refuses to take any responsiblity for adding to it. Rather Obama paints his massive additions only in a positive light.

Of course, that’s not what happened. And so, by the time I took office, we once again found ourselves deeply in debt and unprepared for a Baby Boom retirement that is now starting to take place. When I took office, our projected deficit was more than $1 trillion. On top of that, we faced a terrible financial crisis and a recession that, like most recessions, led us to temporarily borrow even more. In this case, we took a series of emergency steps that saved millions of jobs, kept credit flowing, and provided working families extra money in their pockets. It was the right thing to do, but these steps were expensive, and added to our deficits in the short term.

Really? No mention of the $1 trillion health care reform we could not afford. No mention of the $800 billion + failed stimulus. No mention of the $3 trillion + budgets he submitted. No mention of his failure to demand a budget from the last Congress, controlled by his own party no less.

I was really stunned by the blatant contradictions, that Obama delivered with a straight face. Here is an example:

Worst of all, this is a vision that says even though America can’t afford to invest in education or clean energy; even though we can’t afford to care for seniors and poor children, we can somehow afford more than $1 trillion in new tax breaks for the wealthy. Think about it. In the last decade, the average income of the bottom 90% of all working Americans actually declined. The top 1% saw their income rise by an average of more than a quarter of a million dollars each. And that’s who needs to pay less taxes? They want to give people like me a two hundred thousand dollar tax cut that’s paid for by asking thirty three seniors to each pay six thousand dollars more in health costs? That’s not right, and it’s not going to happen as long as I’m President.

Are you kidding me? Didn't this guy extend the Bush tax cuts when his own party still had control of Congress? If Obama even remotely believed any of this he would have led his party to rescind the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, but instead he did what was politically expedient. Do lefties really still trust this guy on this subject?

Obama's deficit plan to cut $4 trillion over 12 years is pure unicorn fantasy.

Today, I’m proposing a more balanced approach to achieve $4 trillion in deficit reduction over twelve years. It’s an approach that borrows from the recommendations of the bipartisan Fiscal Commission I appointed last year, and builds on the roughly $1 trillion in deficit reduction I already proposed in my 2012 budget. It’s an approach that puts every kind of spending on the table, but one that protects the middle-class, our promise to seniors, and our investments in the future.

How can he even project 12 years out when the CBO themselves admit that their best projections are iffy at 10 years? Half of the reductions about is talking about has already been shown that it will not materialize. The CBO has already said there will be no $1 trillion in savings from ObamaCare and Obama's 2012 budget clearly adds to deficits.

This budget plan of Obama seems best suited for campaign talking points rather than a serious attempt at cutting out debt or reducing deficit spending. Republicans's failure to educate the public on how dire our fiscal situation is, has allowed Obama the ability to put forth this silly plan. Despite the Republican's failure, the question remain, does Obama have any credibility on fiscal matters to actually sell this plan? The poll await.

Via: Memeorandum
Via: The Wall Street Journal

$20 million of our borrowed money to remake Sesame Street for Pakistan

BBC: In a new effort to win hearts and minds in Pakistan, USAID - the development arm of the US government - is donating $20m (£12m) to the country to create a local Urdu version of the show.

The project aims to boost education in Pakistan, where many children have no access to regular schooling.

The show is to be filmed in Lahore and aired later in the year.[...]

The show will be set in a village in Pakistan - rather than the streets of New York - with roadside tea shop and residents sitting on their verandas.

The remake will star a puppet called Rani, the six-year-old daughter of a peasant farmer, with pigtails and a school uniform, according to Britain's Guardian newspaper.

Targeting five to nine year olds, the series will run on Pakistan national TV and regional language channels. [MORE]

Holy crap! What a waste of money we don't have! When Boehner, Obama and Reid were squabbling over the puny "historic" cut they made and talking about hard decisions, I wonder how such an incredible waste of money go unnoticed?

When I think about all the money that must have been made on Tickle Me Elmo dolls, I have to ask why in the world can't this project be privately funded? Do we really need to waste the money we are borrowing to fund stuff like this?

It seems like the prevailing attitude in Washington is so long as money is flowing in, they will continue to spend regardless of where the money comes from. This is exactly why Washington has a spending problem and not a revenue problem.

The best thing that could happen for America in 2012 would be to elect the cheapest tightwad we can find for President. Someone who would be outraged over $50 for bathroom tissue and veto every wasteful project in sight. Oh Lord, where is that man or woman?

Via: Memeorandum
Via: BBC

Boehner wins, but America still loses

From what I have been reading, it appears that quite a few people are saying Speaker Boehner has won the budget showdown. They all point to the fact that the national conversation in Washington has changed from wild deficit spending to spending cuts (albeit tiny ones).

This may all be true in the political sense, but in reality America still sits perilously close to an economic disaster. We are still spending hundreds of billions of dollars we do not have. The amount of money we are borrowing daily will soon eat up these cuts in no time flat. Yet, here are our so called "leaders" talking about "historic cuts".

I think part of the problem in Washington today is that there aren't many who can take in the big picture. Too many lawmakers, pundits and the media class focus on the little skirmishes and daily back and forth without taking into account the effect on the nation as a whole. 

Paul Ryan's budget plan is the first attempt in a long time to bring the big picture in focus. Unfortunately after watching this shutdown showdown, I don't have a lot of faith in seeing anything close to Ryan's plan being acted upon.

Via: Memeorandum

Via: Drudge Report
Via: National Review
Via: Fox News

Some Democrats really need Demagoguery For Dummies

Lord have mercy! Over the last few days as Republicans tried to hold firm on spending cuts, Democrats have taken to their traditional ploy of demagoguery. Unfortunately, some of today's Democrats know nothing of the finesse their predecessors had. Some of today's Democrats are ham fisted hacks who ladle on their demagoguery so thick it becomes absurd.




Just check out some of the damn foolishness on display.

Louise Slaughter: " GOP Freshmen came to kill women"

Eleanor Holmes-Norton: "Government shutdown is like bombing innocent civilians"

How can any sane individual really believe this junk?

Merriam-Websters defines demagoguery as:

1: a leader who makes use of popular prejudices and false claims and promises in order to gain power 

2: a leader championing the cause of the common people in ancient times

But in these definitions isn't there an implied sense of credibility? Without a certain amount of credibility, these attacks leave the speakers wide open to mockery. Too bad many of today's Republicans are in desperate need of Mockery for Dummies.

Via: Memeorandum
Via: CNSNews
Via: The Right Scoop

Shutdown Averted! Historic Spending Cuts?

Politico: After a long day of trading offers, the White House and House Republicans reached agreement Friday night on a budget framework that would cap 2011 appropriations near or below $1.050 trillion while cutting domestic and foreign aid by more than $40 billion from the rate of spending at the beginning of this Congress.

Behind the closed doors of special meeting of the Republican Conference, Speaker John Boehner presented the package to his party as at least an agreement in principle and said at one point: “We have a deal.” The Senate should now feel confident enough to move ahead with a stop gap spending bill to avert—or at least shorten—any shutdown beginning at midnight.

In a joint statement with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid Friday night, Boehner announced: “We have agreed to an historic amount of cuts for the remainder of this fiscal year, as well as a short-term bridge that will give us time to avoid a shutdown while we get that agreement through both houses and to the president.”

Speaking on national television with the Washington Monument as a backdrop, President Barack Obama announced the deal shortly after 11 p.m. [MORE]

I just cannot believe how these bozos pat themselves on the back for not spending $40 billion dollars more of borrowed money and then have the brass to call that historic!

What exactly did Weepy Willow Boehner get out of this deal anyway? The riders for Planned Parenthood and the EPA were scrapped, and whatever spending cuts he got are still woefully inadequate for saving the nation from a debt crisis. Weepy Willow even allowed Obama to escape the funding the troops trap!

If Republican want to have any hope of enacting anything remotely similar to Ryan's budget proposal, it is very clear that tougher, bolder and braver leadership will be required. Boehner simply isn't up to the task.

Via: Memeorandum
Via: Politico

Via: The Washington Post

The People's Budget: The Progressive take on debt reduction

Ever since Paul Ryan released the GOP's budget plan the left have been howling at the moon.  They have been going overboard with their screams of calamity to the middle class.  As a political tactic, this can be helpful in the short term, but sooner or later someone is going to tell the left to put up or shut up.


To save themselves from that fate, the  Congressional Progressive Caucus have put together a budget plan of their own, they call it The People's Budget.  Phil Klein from the Washington Examiner gives us a sneak peek at what the left's has in store for America.

Next week, the group of progressives plans to introduce its alternative to Ryan's proposal, called "The People's Budget." Based on an advanced peek provided by a senior Democratic aide, it promises to return the nation to surpluses by the end of the decade and reduce the debt, only with a much different approach from Ryan's.

To extend the long-term solvency of Social Security, it would propose dramatically increasing payroll taxes on both the employer and employee side, and funneling the money into even more generous benefits.

Payroll taxes are economically destructive, because they make it more expensive for employers to hire new workers, meaning lower real wages and higher unemployment.

Yet the tax increases wouldn't end there. The People's Budget would rescind last year's tax deal to raise rates on higher income levels, boost taxes on capital gains and dividends, increase the estate tax, institute three "millionaire tax rates," with the highest reaching 47 percent, tax corporate foreign income, impose a "financial crisis responsibility fee," and institute a "financial speculation tax."

Overall, taxes would rise to 22.3 percent of the economy, compared with 18.3 percent under the Ryan proposal.

The plan would also build on Obama's most notable initiatives. It includes an additional $1.45 trillion in economic stimulus spending. On health care, the plan would add a government-run plan, or "public option," to Obamacare and have the government negotiate drug prices.

Yet while other parts of government would grow, the defense budget would be gutted. The proposal would "reduce baseline defense spending by reducing strategic capabilities, conventional forces, procurement, and R&D programs."

The left loves to say the Republicans have no new ideas, but this is nothing new at all. All this budget is is good old fashion Tax and Spend, but done on a grand scale.  


What I find completely galling about it is that Democrats ran up the credit card with things many Americans objected to in the first place (the bailouts, the stimulus and ObamaCare) and now want to tax us to death to pay for it all.


Megan McArdle from the Atlantic points out the obvious conclusion to all this new spending:

I actually think it's remarkable that the percentage is so low. A 47% federal tax rate on top incomes, plus increases on estates, capital gains, and dividends, and all you get is . . . 22.3% of GDP? A bare 1.3% above the collections envisioned by Simpson-Bowles? [...]

No, if you want to get the budget under control without meaningfully cutting into entitlements, you're going to need to hike taxes substantially on the middle class. I'm waiting for the first politician to say this out loud.

I don't think McArdle will have to wait too long. The shrinking of the Nanny State is inevitable and that is a threat to the lefts' endless quest for power and control. Faced with that scenario, Democrats will peel away their phony veneer of compassion and someone will say "tax the middle class".

Given how much of the public has grown quite tired of all the big spending in Washington, it will be fun to watch Democrats try to sell this plan as an alternative to Paul Ryan's.


Via: Memeorandum
Via: The Washington Examiner
Via: The Atlantic

Let the squealing begin: The GOP Path to Prosperity

That squealing noise you hear this morning are Democrats beginning their collective whine over Paul Ryan's proposed budget plan. On Fox News Sunday Paul Ryan told Chris Wallace that the plan would have over $4 trillion in cuts, he wasn't kidding. The plan has over $6 trillion in cuts and puts practically everything on the table from defense spending,Medicaid, domestic spending, tax reform and even spending caps. Only Social Security is not fully addressed.

Wall Street Journal: The president's recent budget proposal would accelerate America's descent into a debt crisis. It doubles debt held by the public by the end of his first term and triples it by 2021. It imposes $1.5 trillion in new taxes, with spending that never falls below 23% of the economy. His budget permanently enlarges the size of government. It offers no reforms to save government health and retirement programs, and no leadership.

Our budget, which we call The Path to Prosperity, is very different. For starters, it cuts $6.2 trillion in spending from the president's budget over the next 10 years, reduces the debt as a percentage of the economy, and puts the nation on a path to actually pay off our national debt. Our proposal brings federal spending to below 20% of gross domestic product (GDP), consistent with the postwar average, and reduces deficits by $4.4 trillion.

A study just released by the Heritage Center for Data Analysis projects that The Path to Prosperity will help create nearly one million new private-sector jobs next year, bring the unemployment rate down to 4% by 2015, and result in 2.5 million additional private-sector jobs in the last year of the decade. It spurs economic growth, with $1.5 trillion in additional real GDP over the decade. According to Heritage's analysis, it would result in $1.1 trillion in higher wages and an average of $1,000 in additional family income each year.

Despite these massive cuts, keep in mind that at the end of ten years, the debt still is not paid off. This should prove to be a very valuable fact for Republicans as Democrats will undoubtedly trot out their favorite buzz words like "radical", "draconian" and Chucky's favorite "extreme". This fact should also help the public begin to understand just how much bigger cuts must be if we really want to pay off our debt.

National Review has this video up and Paul Ryan does a very good job explaining our debt problem.

Via: Memeorandum

Via: The Wall Street Journal
Via: National Review

Republican budget plan to cut over $4 trillion over 10 years

Fox News: The Republican chairman of the House Budget Committee said his party's budget proposal for 2012 would cut deficits by more than $4 trillion over the next decade, vowing to tackle costly entitlements like Medicare and Medicaid.

The proposal, set to be unveiled Tuesday, would serve as the Republicans' official response to President Obama's proposed $3.7 trillion budget for 2012. The White House claims its plan would cut deficits by $1.1 trillion over a decade.

But Ryan, R-Wis., in an interview with "Fox News Sunday," accused Obama of "punting" and said Republicans' plan would exceed the fiscal goals set by the president's fiscal commission -- which issued a report calling for $4 trillion in cuts. That report never made it out of committee.

"We can't keep kicking this can down the road," Ryan said. "The president has punted. We're not going to follow suit."

While these numbers are more in line with what needs to be done to save our financial house, I don't think Republicans have done their homework on educating the public on how dire our financial picture is. Recent Gallup polls on spending cuts shows that the public is still in denial about what needs to be done. Furthermore, I think Republicans may have shot themselves in the foot by playing political parlor games when it came to cuts in the Continuing Resolution (CR).

How do you go to the public and say we need to make these big cuts and reforms after offering up puny cuts of $2 billion, $4 billion and $61 billion? Democrats are already trying to makes these puny numbers sound "extreme" and draconian. I think the Republican leadership has given up much of the fire they rode in on in 2010. I pray I am wrong.

Here is Paul Ryan explaining the plan in with a little more detail

Via: Memeorandum
Via: Fox News
Via: Gallup
Video h/t: Maggie's Notebook

My nation is going bankrupt and all I got was a lousy toad!

Our nation is going broke. You read the bad news everyday, about how our government is racking up debt at an alarming rate. In February alone the deficit for the month was a staggering $223 billion. That is more than the entire deficit for 2007!

Don't think for a moment that these levels of debt aren't alarming people. PIMCO the world's largest bond fund has already dumped all of its US government debt holdings. Sooner or later the rest of the world will do the same.

So what is our government doing about all of this? Why spending more money on overpriced artworks of course!

US News: A $600,000 frog sculpture that lights up, gurgles "sounds of nature" and carries a 10-foot fairy girl on its back could soon be greeting Defense Department employees who plan to start working at the $700 million Mark Center in Alexandria, Va. this fall. That is unless a new controversy over the price tag of the public art doesn't torpedo the idea.

Decried as wasteful spending that will be seen by just a couple thousand of daily workers who arrive on bus shuttles, foes have tried to delay the decision, expected tomorrow, April 1. But in an E-mail, an Army Corps of Engineers official said that the decision can't be held up because it would impact completion of the huge project. [MORE]

Is there no one in government today with a frugal mindset? All across the nation there are talented artists dying for a little recognition. For a fraction of this cost I am sure you could find artist who would be willing to lend the government their work for recognition and a resume boost. This way these government employees could enjoy tons of art work on a rotating basis at a fraction of the cost.

Oh well, at least some of our children will be able to admire pretty artwork as the go about living in the new Third World America.


Via: Memeorandum
Via: The Washington Times
Via: Reuters
Via: US News

Marco Rubio: Why I won't raise the debt limit

Marco Rubio has an Op-Ed in the Wall Street Journal tomorrow where he details his reasoning for why he will vote against raising the debt ceiling.

Wall Street Journal: I will vote to defeat an increase in the debt limit unless it is the last one we ever authorize and is accompanied by a plan for fundamental tax reform, an overhaul of our regulatory structure, a cut to discretionary spending, a balanced-budget amendment, and reforms to save Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.[...]

Some say we will go into default if we don't increase the debt limit. But if we simply raise it once again, without a real plan to bring spending under control and get our economy growing, America faces the very real danger of a catastrophic economic crisis.

I know that by writing this, I am inviting political attack. When I proposed reforms to Social Security during my campaign, my opponent spent millions on attack ads designed to frighten seniors. But demagoguery is the last refuge of the spineless politician willing to do anything to win the next election.
Whether they admit it or not, everyone in Washington knows how to solve these problems. What is missing is the political will to do it. I ran for the U.S. Senate because I want my children to inherit what I inherited: the greatest nation in human history. It's not too late. The 21st century can also be the American Century. Our people are ready. Now it's time for their leaders to join them. [MORE]

The arguments Rubio makes in his Op-Ed are the kinds of things the Republican leadership should have been saying loudly on November 4, 2010. Democrats have taken the lead in messaging with claiming that failure to raise the debt ceiling will lead to economic Armageddon.

Republicans were handed a mandate back in November, there is little reason to be coy about using it. Republicans should have set a firm goal of something like $500 billion in cuts for the 2012 budget then come up with only $250 billion worth of cut and then demand the Democrats come up with the rest. This would have been a far better strategy than letting Democrats sit back and demand Republicans detail where all the cuts are coming from.

Via: Memeorandum
Via: The Wall Street Journal

Reid to Boehner - Ditch the TEA Party

The Hill: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) on Monday urged Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) to ditch members of the Tea Party and cut a deal with Democrats to avert a government shutdown.

Reid insisted it is those GOP internal divisions that are threatening to shut down the government after April 8, in less than two weeks.

“For the sake of our economy, it’s time for mainstream Republicans to stand up to the Tea Party and rejoin Democrats at the table to negotiate a responsible solution that cuts spending while protecting jobs," he said.

Last week Reid put $7.5 billion in discretionary cuts and $3.5 billion in mandatory savings on the table as a counteroffer to the $51 billion in additional cuts the GOP is seeking.

This week Democrats are mulling raising the offer to $20 billion. But Democratic aides insist it is the divided GOP that must make the next move and come back to the negotiating table, not Democrats who must continue to negotiate with themselves and up their offer. [MORE]

Reid is trying to use the TEA Party as the reason for a government shut down. It won't work. Anyone with two eyes can see that the piddly little cuts Democrats and the Republican leadership are playing with are completely inadequate for tackling the deficit. So pretending that "progress" could be made if Boenher abandon the more sizable (but still inadequate) cuts the TEA Party wants is absurd.

The fact that Democrats have gone from zero cuts to a possible $20 billion, pretty much tells us that they are finding it harder and harder to resist spending cuts. Had the Republican leadership not been so "compromising" about cuts, Reid would probably be negotiating much more sizable cuts by now.

Via: Memeorandum
Via: The Hill

Oh goodie, more symbolism from the GOP: House votes to cut off funds for NPR

The Hill: The House on Thursday passed a bill to defund NPR, a measure strongly opposed by the White House but one Republicans say will save taxpayer money.

The GOP-backed measure, which will be sent to the Senate, passed 228-192. One Republican voted present, and seven voted against the bill. No Democrats supported it. [MORE]

Does anyone believe for one second that this bill will make it past the Senate or Obama's veto pen?  Honestly, the Republican leadership is overdosing on symbolism.  If they are dead serious about cutting NPR's funds then they have to include this bill with something the Democrats cannot say no to.  

I think the problem with the GOP establishment is that they simply do not believe that things have changed since 2008.  There is growing support in the nation that there is too much on our plate and cuts will have to be made.  However, unless the GOP starts clearly explaining how dire our financial situation is and then act accordingly, the American public could easily slip back into believing that cuts can wait.

Enough with the symbolic gestures, get to getting.

Via: Memeorandum

Via: The Hill

Establishment Republicans angry at conservative Republicans for voting NO on latest CR

The establishment Republicans are fuming because conservative Republicans do not want to play silly parlor games over budget cutting.  The establishment feels that the NO votes make Boenher look bad.

The Daily Caller: “It weakened Boehner. If he walked into [a meeting with Sen. Reid] and he said, ‘My party is unified and we are willing to go three more weeks and that’s it.’ Unity is a strength in this town and it shows how we’re not unified. So I do think there was a weakness on that,” said Rep. Jack Kingston, Georgia Republican.

The establishment is completely furious that conservatives balked at their silly budget cut parlor game.  So furious were they, some of them completely unloaded.

The episode provoked furious anger from advocates for the party’s line, with GOP Whip Kevin McCarthy angrily confronting Pence in a members-only meeting before the vote.

One GOP aide unloaded on the conservatives, offering a more colorful view privately held by many other Republicans.

“These people aren’t thinking clearly. Their logic doesn’t pan out. They have NO plan. What concessions were they going to get if it failed? They were going to shut down the federal government over Planned Parenthood?” the source said, “It was totally reactionary. These people got elected to lead. Instead they got jerked around by the political equivalent of music critics. If these people knew anything about governing, they’d be inCongress, not lobbing bombs from the cheap seats and sending out fundraising emails.”

The aide offered contempt for Pence in particular. “Pence is running for governor, and has to get through a primary, so his position is about as genuine as a $10 Gucci hand bag on Sunset Boulevard.”

Kingston said the anger is directed as much at the outside activist groups as it is at the lawmakers who voted no.

Talk about a pack of ingrates.  It was the TEA Party and staunch conservatives who rescued the GOP from the trash can.  If it was up the the moderate RINO wing of the party they would still be talking about "big tent" BS.


It is becoming quite clear the the GOP is at risk of blowing the budget battle.  You cannot talk like America's economic house is on fire and then put forth puny action like three week CRs with single digit billion dollar cuts.  Actions like this makes your rhetoric look like hype. 


Clearly the battle between the GOP establishment and conservative must take place.  All our hard work will be for naught come 2012 if Republicans gain full control but are too weak to use it.  Obama and the Democrats did not drive this nation to the brink by playing coy.  Saving the nation will require nothing less than equally bold action.


Via: Memeorandum
Via: The Daily Caller

Republicans move to defund NPR

Politico: Meredith Shiner reports from the Hill that the House Rules committee will hold an emergency meeting Wednesday at 3 p.m. on H.R. 1076, the measure “to prohibit funding of National Public Radio and the use of Federal funds to acquire radio content.”

The bill, introduced by Rep. Doug Lamborn (R-CO), who has been spearheading efforts to remove federal subsidies from public broadcasting, is here. [...]

The pending legislation is a stand-alone measure that would slash funding regardless of pending negotiations between the House and Senate on a continuing resolution. It is unlikely the standalone bill would clear the Senate, even if passed, or that the President would sign such an initiative into law.

Sorry, but this is a complete waste of time. Video or no video, Senate Democrats are going to block this bill. The better way to handle defunding NPR is to tie it to legislation that the Democrats cannot say no to. There will be plenty of opportunities to snag the Democrats this way. Republicans simply have to bide their time. Too many Republicans like to engage in these symbolic maneuvers. While they may score points with the base, these efforts do zero to actually change things.

Note: Yes, I did use an image of the NPR logo with crosshairs on it. This is because I do not give two flips about the left's "new civility".

Via: Memeorandum
Via: Politico

KA-BOOM! Wisconsin Senate Republicans pass collective bargaining portions of budget repair bill

Wisconsin Senate Republicans have exploded the Nuke Option on Governor Scott Walker's budget repair bill. Republicans stripped out all the fiscal language and passed the collective bargaining portions of the bill without the need for quorum.

Journal Sentinel: Madison — The Senate abruptly passed a controversial budget-repair bill Wedneday night - without Democrats - and sent the measure to the Assembly, which is expected to pass it Thursday.

The bill eliminates almost all collective bargaining for public workers.

It passed18-1, with Sen. Dale Schultz (R-Richland Center) casting the no vote. None of the 14 Senate Democrats was present.[...]

But late Wednesday, a committee stripped some elements from the bill that they said allowed them to pass it with a simple majority present. The most controversial parts of the bill remain intact.

The Senate abruptly sent the budget-repair bill Wednesday to the committee of legislators from both houses at about 4 p.m. and the committee convened at 6, taking action within minutes.

The Assembly earlier had passed the original measure and now must take up the version from which fiscal matters were removed. [MORE]

The Wisconsin Senate Republicans should have taken this route two weeks ago when it became quite clear the the AWOL Democrats were not going to return. This would have saved weeks of protest and certainly would not have allowed the left to sway public opinion.

The Assembly must vote on the new bill tomorrow. Between now and then I fully expect the left to raise all kinds of hell in a futile attempt to stop it. Should Wisconsin Republicans succeed in curtailing public employee's collective bargaining options, and survive doing so, then expect these measures to catch on like wildfire across the nation. This is why I also suspect that the left is going to make sure maximum chaos insures after the vote.

Via: Memeorandum
Via: Journal Sentinel Online

The Hits Just Keep on Coming: NPR CEO Vivian Schiller resigns

After yesterday's sting video aired, blabber mouth Ron Schiller (no relation) moved up his resignation from NPR. Now NPR CEO Vivian Schiller (again no relation) is out the door.

NPR: Vivian Schiller quickly condemned Ron Schiller's comments, and he moved up an already-announced decision to leave NPR and resigned effectively immediately. But Ron Schiller's gaffe followed last fall'sdismissal of NPR political analyst Juan Williams, for which Vivian Schiller came under harsh criticism and NPR's top news executive, Ellen Weiss, resigned.

NPR just sent this statement from NPR Board of Directors Chairman Dave Edwards to its staff and member stations:

"It is with deep regret that I tell you that the NPR Board of Directors has accepted the resignation of Vivian Schiller as President and CEO of NPR, effective immediately.

"The Board accepted her resignation with understanding, genuine regret, and great respect for her leadership of NPR these past two years.

"Vivian brought vision and energy to this organization. She led NPR back from the enormous economic challenges of the previous two years. She was passionately committed to NPR's mission, and to stations and NPR working collaboratively as a local-national news network.

"According to a CEO succession plan adopted by the Board in 2009, Joyce Slocum, SVP of Legal Affairs and General Counsel, has been appointed to the position of Interim CEO. The Board will immediately establish an Executive Transition Committee that will develop a timeframe and process for the recruitment and selection of new leadership.

"I recognize the magnitude of this news – and that it comes on top of what has been a traumatic period for NPR and the larger public radio community. The Board is committed to supporting NPR through this interim period and has confidence in NPR's leadership team."

Once again NPR's mask has slipped and once again we see another left wing organization hiding behind "objectivity" as they leech off the taxpayer. Sorry NPR, but the cat is out of the bag and a change of faces simply will not do.

Via: Memeorandum
Via: NPR

Harry Reid: Don't cut the Cowboy Poets!

You just cannot make this stuff up people!

Politico: File this under: Did Harry Reid just say that?

In the middle of his tirade against House Republicans' "mean-spirited" budget bill on the Senate floor Tuesday, the Senate Majority Leader lamented that the GOP’s proposed budget cuts would eliminate the annual "cowboy poetry festival” in his home state of Nevada.[...]

“The mean-spirited bill, H.R. 1 … eliminates the National Endowment of the Humanities, National Endowment of the Arts,” said Reid. “These programs create jobs. The National Endowment of the Humanities is the reason we have in northern Nevada every January a cowboy poetry festival. Had that program not been around, the tens of thousands of people who come there every year would not exist.”[...]

For the record, the National Cowboy Poetry Gathering is in Elko, Nev., next January. The 28th annual festival, a “week-long celebration of life in the rural West, featuring the contemporary and traditional arts of western ranching culture,” is expected to draw thousands of people, according to the festival’s website.

1. Who knew there was even such an animal as "Cowboy Poets"?
2. If "tens of thousands" of people are coming to see the Cowboy Poets, then why not charge a little extra at the door and skip the government funding all together?
3. If Republicans cannot cut such a silly and needless waste of taxpayer dollars like this, then this once great republic is lost.
4. Harry Reid's big mouth can be like Christmas in July.

Via: Memeorandum
Via: Politico