Patterico's Pontifications


Outrage: Republicans Reject Tiny Spending Cuts

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:10 pm

Unbelievable — and yet, all too believable:

The House rejected a measure cutting an additional $22 billion from the Republican spending bill, as conservatives ran into a wall of opposition from the GOP establishment over the depth of reductions to federal funding.

$22 billion is too much for our side? $22 billion??

The amendment backed by the conservative Republican Study Committee failed, 147-281, but not before putting the GOP spending divide under a spotlight on the House floor. Authored by RSC chairman Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), the proposal would have dramatically reshaped an appropriations bill that already slashes federal spending by $61 billion over the next seven months.

More than half of the Republican conference backed the measure in opposition to two party chiefs, Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) and Whip Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), who voted with every Democrat against it. Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) did not vote, as is traditional for Speakers.

Let me remind you what my man Chris Christie said about people who would promise to do something about the debt and fail to deliver:

This afternoon at the American Enterprise Institute, New Jersey governor Chris Christie said he wants House Republicans to “put up or shut up” on entitlement reform and had a message for those candidates he campaigned for in 2010: “If the people who I campaigned for don’t stand up and do the right thing, the next time they’ll see me in their district [it will be] with my arm around their primary opponent,” Christie said. “Because you asked me to put my reputation on the line for you based on a promise that you were going to deal with these hard issues.”

As a reminder, here is what we do not want to see: cowardice from people who want to put the burden on the other side to handle the problem:

And as another reminder, here is what we do want to see: people standing up and talking about the problem and what we need to do to fix it — even when saying these things is politically risky:

I know I already showed you that video . . . but God, I love it so much.

And the contrast to the Geither video is telling. Geither’s attitude that, hey, sure our plan sucks, but let’s see if you people can somehow muster the political will to do better! . . . that is exactly what Gov. Christie is talking about.

If you want to claim to be a leader, try leading.

Thanks to narciso for the first link.

68 Responses to “Outrage: Republicans Reject Tiny Spending Cuts”

  1. You’re welcome, Patterico, that really is a ‘travesty of two mockerys of a sham,’ maybe they didn’t get their wheaties, today,

    narciso (e694f9)

  2. Patterico…do you have a link to the roll call vote on this? I want to see how my Congressman voted.

    RB (a07239)

  3. Just did a search on Thomas website…this vote does not appear to have been posted yet.

    RB (a07239)

  4. Speaking of spending cuts, take this poll.

    Don’t let them win!

    Patricia (3aa1fd)

  5. You will not be disappointed if you expect the Republicans to act stupidly.
    Nor will you be disappointed if you expect the Democrats to act with malice.

    Hrothgar (f051f0)

  6. Comment by RB — 2/18/2011 @ 7:54 pm

    Didn’t find this amendment at the link, but going over the amendments offered over the last few days makes for an interesting exercise. And gave me at least one WTF

    H.AMDT.92 (A082)
    Amends: H.R.1
    Sponsor: Rep McCollum, Betty [MN-4] (offered 2/17/2011)

    An amendment numbered 50 printed in the Congressional Record to prohibit funds to be used for the Department of Defense sponsorship of NASCAR race cars.


    2/17/2011 7:18pm:
    Amendment (A082) offered by Ms. McCollum. (consideration: CR H1144-1145; text: CR H1144)

    Not sure whether it’s sad that DoD feels compelled to sponsor NASCAR races, or sad that some Congressperson feels obliged to defund that.

    Not familiar with Ms. McCollum. Is she R or D?

    But I suggest you look on the bright side. At least 147 Republicans voted for the cuts.

    kishnevi (07cf78)

  7. AMENDMENT NO. 104: At the end of the bill (before the short title), insert the following:

    SEC. ll. (a) Each amount made available
    by the following provisions of division B of this Act (other than an amount required to be made available by a provision of law) is hereby reduced by the following percentage:
    (1) Section 1101(a)(5) and title IX, 11 percent.
    (2) All other provisions of such division
    (except as provided by subsection (b)), 5.5 percent.
    (b) Subsection (a) shall not apply to
    amounts made available—
    (1) by section 1101(a)(3) and title VI;
    (2) by section 1101(a)(6) (with respect to division E of Public Law 111–117) and title X; and
    (3) for Israel, by section 1101(a)(6) (with respect to division F of Public Law 111–117) and title XI.

    madawaskan (fd190b)

  8. I don’t think the House has voted on H.R. 1, the Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act (2011). They have been voting on Amendments to H.R. 1. Here is the New York Times’ summary of key amendments, and here is the House record on amendments ## 1-89. Click on the # in the far left column to see how members voted on each amendment.

    Also, in what sounds like good news to me, the New York Times’ link states the House agreed to an amendment offered by Ted Poe (R-TX) that:

    Prohibits the E.P.A. From Regulating Greenhouse Gases(H.AMDT.101) This amendment, which takes aim at the Democrats’ environmental agenda, eliminates funding that would allow the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from power plants and factories.

    DRJ (fdd243)

  9. First of all I had to hunt all over for that text.

    So much for Tea Party transparency.

    The Tea Party all what ever of them didn’t even hold together on it.

    If anyone can explain to me what doesn’t get cut that might be a Republican priority and-what the Democrats-the losers had to give up-more than the Republicans….

    Actually there’s too much anger over this. It’s disproportionate. The House has only been in session for three weeks.

    madawaskan (fd190b)

  10. I really don’t want my tax dollars to fund NASCAR, I don.’t want them to fund Planned Parenthood, nor CPB, nor PBS, nor what else.

    I certainly understand the military’s PR, but can we try to be consistent?

    Ag80 (7a9f97)

  11. AG80, that is a fair POV.

    NASCAR is a pretty good way to attract great troops from the south, but these sponsorship deals are incredibly expensive, and it’s time to make deep cuts.

    That the idiot demanding this particular cut also clamors for NPR reeks of cultural warfare, but we can cut them both, completely.

    Better yet, we can give the DOD $X mill a year to use for recruiting however they deem appropriate. (it’s currently in the several hundred million range, and I think can be cut). I should add that recruiting is very hard work. They do need some funds.

    Dustin [Who almost screwed up his handle AGAIN] (b54cdc)

  12. The DoD is not “funding” NASCAR. They are advertising on a NASCAR vehicle the same as any other sponsor. One may wonder whether the money is well spent and what the return is vice other means of advertising the Army as a career. One could point to the fact that there are many more NASCAR fans than opera fans in the enlisted ranks, but I suppose we could have the Army advertise at the symphony and see how they do.

    Have Blue (854a6e)

  13. The sponsorship costs 7 million dollars. How many 30 second spots in prime, properly targeted TV coverage would that buy?

    Have Blue (854a6e)

  14. they must think our little country has loads of cash to burn… their kids and grandkids are gonna know better though as they grow up in an America what’s a sewer compared to the America of just 10, 20, 30 years before. Mickey Cantor’s kids can be sure and say hey dad – thanks a lot I’m so proud my daddy is a useless wad it’s really awesome.

    happyfeet (ab5779)

  15. oh. oops. Sorry I meant Eric Cantor. Eric Cantor, useless wad. I just get so anxious when I think of all of Team R’s spendings sometimes I get my Cantors confuzzled.

    happyfeet (ab5779)

  16. oh. And yes obviously Mickey is a useless wad as well, hence the confuzzlement.

    happyfeet (ab5779)

  17. Sorry about saying funding. The money spent on NASCAR is a pittance, as well as the the money spent on farm subsidies, student loans, fish in California, solar roofs, toilet seats in Air Force jets, my great aunt’s hemmoroids and the corn oil you put in your gas tank whether you like it or not.

    I like NASCAR. I also like the goverment spending money efficiently on the things that government should do. Joining the Army should be a privilege. That may be the problem.

    Ag80 (7a9f97)

  18. The sponsorship costs 7 million dollars. How many 30 second spots in prime, properly targeted TV coverage would that buy?

    About 46 spots. Not much bang for the buck there, either.

    navyvet (db5856)

  19. Well, I live in SoCal, with Babs “Bouncer” and Queen DiFi as my Senators, plus Lucy (Royball-Allard) as my Congresskritter, so I know that my elected representatives will never vote to cut-back the Jabba-the-Hutt ugly mass of protoplasm known as the Federal Government.

    YMMV (I hope)!

    AD-RtR/OS! (205eac)

  20. The way race-car sponsorship works these days, it is not considered “advertising”, as having your name on the car is just a minor part of the package. It involves marketing the product (Thank You, Roger Penske – who worked this out 4-decades ago when he sold the program to National City Travelers Cheques) by having a display car, and members of the race-team (drivers and mechanics) available for meet-and-greets, not just at the races, but at venues nation-wide where target audiences will be. And, when you figure in the world-wide TV audience for NASCAR races, the cost/eyeball of the targeted demographic is pretty good and probably much better than in most TV shows.

    AD-RtR/OS! (205eac)

  21. Hopefully this issue will keep getting pressed. It would be pretty futile if they give up after this one loss. Even if they lost every single time it would still be good to get all these folks on record that no, they won’t vote to actually cut spending, only slow the rate of growth.

    Soronel Haetir (c12482)

  22. kishnevi

    Just for clarification: Betty McCollum is a “D” from St Paul. She represents what is probably the safest Democrat district (behind Keith Ellison) in Minnesota.

    Blue Ox (ff919a)

  23. Don’t forget, the NASCAR deal is more than just a sticker. There’s a BUTTLOAD of Army recruiters at every event that team attends, with a full court press to generate contacts and leads for recruiting. It would be cheap advertising at twice the price.

    XBradTC (3d2322)

  24. What about this paragraph from the linked article?

    “Republican opponents of the proposal cited the across-the-board nature of the cuts, saying they dodge difficult choices and would allow the Obama administration to decide where to implement them.”

    $22 billion doesn’t seem like it would be a problem to cut, but I’m not sure I want the Obama administration making that choice for us — who knows where they might take it from? Could that have been the impetus for voting no? If so, I think it’s at least a defensible choice.

    Demosthenes (b04fc5)

  25. It is time for the Tea Party to split from the Republicans.

    I will write the first check.

    Arizona Bob (e8af2b)

  26. But Lucy PROMISED that this time she would hold the football so I could kick it


    BDJ (72b0ed)

  27. ““Republican opponents of the proposal cited the across-the-board nature of the cuts, saying they dodge difficult choices and would allow the Obama administration to decide where to implement them.””

    Having read the quoted statement, I stand with those who voted against the cuts. There is no doubt that cuts made by the Obama Administration would be used against the American taxpayers.

    Pagar (eabaa3)

  28. Better yet, we can give the DOD $X mill a year to use for recruiting however they deem appropriate.

    That is how it works now. Service POMs include recruiting commands,recruiting command POMs include advertising, under which this falls.

    Much as I am not a fan of NASCAR as they only turn in one direction except for the occasional hilarity that ensues when they attempt road courses, this defunding thing is just a typical bit of a) ignorance demonstrated by an elected official about how the services are funded and b) typical democrat pettiness.

    A Fine Bunch of Rubens (720b7a)

  29. 29. I like Christie too, a lot. That said he’s an East Coast lawyer adept at working with the entrenched opposition and therein lies the rub.

    Despite his best efforts NJ will crater and the rubble be reduced to ash. Their pension funding is the most inadequate in the nation.

    Walker in WI, isn’t a lawyer filling in, is a former County Exec and now has majorities in both Houses in support.

    There will be no favorable comparison for CC between the two in a few, other than YouTube performance.

    gary gulrud (790d43)

  30. Rodgers complaint: That indiscriminant cuts are not the work required of Congress is valid. The cuts he refers to have begun in terms of amendments to the CR.

    Once it passes Reid will strip it and add spending some of which Strap-on requested. The bills will meet in Budget Reconciliation. The execrebale output will return to the House for passage and a faceplant.

    Rinse and repeat.

    Once something passes, likely entailing modest cuts, Pig-skin Sh*tsack will veto. The Debt Ceiling will also enter into the mix.

    Ryan says they will keep government on life-support, i.e., at least make debt payments, but rolling shutdowns of offices are now certain.

    gary gulrud (790d43)

  31. To paraphrase Brecht, we need to dissolve the media,
    even at Fox, and elect a new one;

    Changes rammed through the House on Friday and Saturday would shield greenhouse-gas polluters and privately owned colleges from federal regulators, block a plan to clean up the Chesapeake Bay, and bar the government from shutting down mountaintop mines it believes will cause too much water pollution, siding with business groups over environmental activists and federal regulators in almost every instance.

    narciso (e694f9)

  32. That clip of Jeff Sessions telling Geitner that the plan submitted by the White House, that Geitner is representing, is unacceptable is stunning. That Geitner agreed with him, with a smirk on his face, has my head spinning.

    TimesDisliker (ab420a)

  33. He says, “Even if Congress were to stick to it…”

    Obviously, he says that with the expectation that Congress will (of course) NOT stick to any budget plan they pass. Instead, even if they pass some cuts they will immediately turn around and undo any hard work they’ve done.

    They can’t help themselves. They’re addicted to pork! They need to be retired! Period!

    Gesundheit (aab7c6)

  34. Geitner seems to be pulling a “Go ahead, make my day and you be the one to make the cuts, and we’ll punish you in the elections over it.”

    One thing more disgusting than the brazenness of their dishonesty and playing politics is how often they get away with it. Hopefully they won’t this time.

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  35. Even Rutten,? seems to somewhat get it;

    The study also finds that public regard for organized labor generally is at a historic low and that discontent with public sector pensions and benefits is rising. In fact, when Pew asked respondents to rank their budget reduction preferences, the “pension plans of government employees” topped the list by 16 percentage points, ahead of cutting funding for colleges and universities and road and transportation expenditures, which tied for second, 10 percentage points ahead of cuts in healthcare.

    narciso (e694f9)

  36. ____________________________________

    There is no doubt that cuts made by the Obama Administration would be used against the American taxpayers.

    Not sure what type of cuts you or others may be thinking of that would necessarily be all that bad, even more so since the size of government and its expenditures has gotten so bloated across the board. I include in that the budget of the Defense Department, particularly when some programs that experts in the military have long deemed as unnecessary or wasteful keep getting resurrected by Congressmen (“because my constituents need the jobs!!”).

    Mark (411533)

  37. Even Roland Martin, of CNN, seems to be coming to
    his senses:

    he feud between Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker and that state’s employees has all of a sudden become ground zero in the battle between efforts by the GOP to shut down unions as they exist, and those same union workers desperate to hold on to long-fought-for wages and benefits.

    This pitched battle is clearly a precursor to the 2012 elections, but it is also the latest shot across the bow of union purists who are relentless in waging a war against government and business for the benefit of their members. …

    Walker wants public employees in Wisconsin to pay more for health care benefits and to contribute to their pension plans. Frankly, those are reasonable requests.

    narciso (e694f9)

  38. ___________________________________________

    The study also finds that public regard for organized labor generally is at a historic low and that discontent with public sector pensions and benefits is rising.

    I should hope so. But that means we’d be different from all the fools and suckers in countries like Greece and France. I understand opinion surveys in those 2 countries indicated a huge percentage of the public sympathized with government workers who were striking not long ago, and gave a million benefits of the doubt to their unions and the demand they had that budgets cuts not be approved.

    I imagine a lot of such idiocy exists among a good percentage of people in America’s answer to Greece/France/Mexico/Venezuela/Spain, otherwise known as California (or New York, etc). But if at least a few California uber-liberals like Tim Rutten do miraculously have some common sense in that thick skull of theirs, that would be a welcomed surprise.

    Mark (411533)

  39. If this action stands, count myself as being very disappointed in Cantor, especially if he continues to spin this as significant cutting.

    Dmac (c50897)

  40. Barack Obama’s Associated Press is giddy with socialist fervor. Yes. Fervor.

    A birthplace of the progressive movement is crackling with a fervor not seen in decades, as students from the famously liberal University of Wisconsin team up with unionized state workers for demonstrations against collective bargaining rights pushed by the state’s new Republican governor. The biggest rally yet is expected Saturday, along with an influx of conservative counter-protesters.

    “A joy, yes, in the way people greet one another, the way they’re energized by one another,” said Soglin, who described himself as a veteran of more than 100 protests since the 1960s. “They’re excited that even though there’s a grim prospect of the bill being adopted, that in the long run they’re building something that can be strong for the working class.”

    Yay!! Socialist fervor – right here in America! Except what we’re seeing isn’t Norma Rae it’s that our public employees have all the dignity of prize-winning piggy pig pigs. Yup those are Some Pigs.

    Government workers are the working class? LOL. They’re the privileged class. So while propaganda whore Viv Schiller’s National Soros radio worries and frets about a government shutdown, in Wisconsin we see just who it is what’s more than happy to shut down the government until their piggy piggy union brothers and sisters are slopped to their satisfaction.

    happyfeet (ab5779)

  41. Minitrue, like the scorpion, has to sting the frog,
    pikachu, it’s in it’s nature, but the Young Guns
    this time around, well they didn’t live up to the hype

    narciso (e694f9)

  42. Why no mention of the fact that the amendment exempted one foreign nation – and only one – from budget cuts?

    Gerry (7f6aec)

  43. Re feets-

    “Soglin” is a reference to Paul Soglin, anti-war activist, Madison City Council member while a grad student, mayor for multiple consecutive terms multiple times since the 1970’s. There is a famous photo of him in the 1967 protest of Dow Corning recruiting at the UW, but I could not find it. But I did find this instead:
    Mayor Paul Soglin, who proudly displays a picture of himself in Havana presenting Fidel Castro with a key to Madison, can look out his office window and see some of the streets down which he ran as a student radical at the height of the 1960s anti-war protests.

    If it was up to Madison, Wisconsin would be governed by a Politburo. Recently I saw of a UW student revisit of the anti-war years, and the blame for the bombing that killed a grad student was placed on the UW administration for “not giving in to the students demands”.

    The protestors are enjoying what they think is a revisit to the “glory days” of “democracy in America”, “playing at revolution” as the daughter of the grad student killed in the 1970 bombing put it.

    Unfortunately for them, the state of Wisconsin overall elected the governor, as well as Republican majorities in the legislature in WI. I wonder how long the Dem state senators will try to stay out of state to stall a vote.

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  44. More on Powerline and linking to Althouse (who tries to keep sane while living in “Madtown”).

    There I learned of this site, dedicated to locating and tracking the missing State Senators from Wisconsin, now with pictures on milk cartons!

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  45. This post rates high on “indignation toward those who ought to be my allies.” Alas, it doesn’t rate very well on “acknowledging and examining the reasons cited by those against whom I’m presently outraged.”

    If we do a poor job of targeting spending cuts, then we will not gain the legislative majority in both chambers of Congress, nor control of the White House, in 2012.

    If we don’t target at all, but simply leave it to Obama to divide a smaller pie, then we’re being fools.

    One may simultaneously be fully committed to cutting spending, but also suspicious of giving the Obama Administration the practical power to punish its enemies via its implementation of “across the board” spending cuts.

    Beldar (3e8b9d)

  46. What was the term for “Democracy” dictated by public demonstration, “Participation Democracy”? Is that when the will of the “not so vocal majority” is disregarded by those making a fuss and showing up on camera?

    If the media has their way, they will somehow make it look like the consewrvatives coming in counter-protest are the bad guys.

    On a good note, I read where 60% of Madison area teachers came to work last week. Again, the 30% “squeaky wheel” managed to get the schools shut down.

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  47. They make miniscule cuts described as “slashing” by the MFM. Unbelievable.

    kansas (1fc602)

  48. What was the term for “Democracy” dictated by public demonstration, “Participation Democracy”?

    I think “Mob Rule” is a little closer to the truth.

    And, the solution was “A whiff of the grapeshot!”

    AD-RtR/OS! (2a34f3)

  49. I hope the GOP will commit to more spending cuts because, in my opinion, the message of the last election was that voters want less spending. In addition, Tea Party-backed representatives like Kristi Noem should be especially criticized for caving. Having said that, I’m not sure it matters as long as we have a Democratic Senate and President.

    DRJ (fdd243)

  50. Comment by AD-RtR/OS!

    I agree with you, but as with everything liberal, the advertising and PR make it sound good. This really is a concept for them, I don’t know if it’s Alinsky or not. Hence the importance of getting out and “getting in their faces”, it’s not who has the most votes, but who makes the loudest votes…

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  51. Agreeing with Joe Klein? What’s the world coming to…

    Revolutions everywhere–in the middle east, in the middle west. But there is a difference: in the middle east, the protesters are marching for democracy; in the middle west, they’re protesting against it. I mean, Isn’t it, well, a bit ironic that the protesters in Madison, blocking the state senate chamber, are chanting “Freedom, Democracy, Union” while trying to prevent a vote? Isn’t it ironic that the Democratic Senators have fled the democratic process? Isn’t it interesting that some of those who–rightly–protest the assorted Republican efforts to stymie majority rule in the U.S. Senate are celebrating the Democratic efforts to stymie the same in the Wisconsin Senate?

    Dana (8ba2fb)

  52. Comment by Beldar — 2/19/2011 @ 12:41 pm
    1)If they are afraid of what Obama will cut on his own, then it’s their responsibility to legislate the specific cuts themselves.
    2) Perhaps I’m being naive, but I thought “across the board cuts” meant every allocation (or at least every agency, department, whatever’s allocation) is cut by a certain specific amount or percentage. IOW, a five percent across the board cut means everyone has to spend five percent less.

    kishnevi (38f6c3)

  53. kishnevi,

    But wouldn’t each department decide how to make that 5% cut? Thus, as long as there is a Democrat in the White House, that 5% cut is more likely to impact funding for abstinence and family planning than money for abortions.

    DRJ (fdd243)

  54. Kish, if the cut is specified in percentage terms, some person still has to decide how to make the specific cuts. A mandate to cut 15% won’t mean that the department buys 15% less pencils and 15% less laptops. Whoever makes the specific cuts may decide to take the whole cut out of the laptop budget (because after all, Nathan the Pencil Seller is a good unionist and Democrat, whereas Anthony the Laptop Seller is a nasty wingnut fascist).

    All an across-the-board cut does is squeeze. If you let Obama decide who gets pinched, you won’t like the results.

    Beldar (3e8b9d)

  55. For “laptops” and “pencils” in the above hypothetical, you can also substitute “funding for particular positions.” Give any tyrant the chance to punish particular individuals of his choice and he’ll pretty reliably punish his enemies and benefit his friends.

    Beldar (3e8b9d)

  56. cut cut cut like your political lives depend on it loser Team R monkeys

    yesterday all your troubles seemed so far away now it looks as though they’re here to stay oh I believe in primaries

    happyfeet (ab5779)

  57. It’s interesting that the Wisconsin GOP leaders are sticking to their decisions more than the Republicans in Congress, and this despite the tremendous pressure from the Wisconsin protests. It’s a Profiles in Courage moment that, of course, will never be treated as such by the media or elites.

    DRJ (fdd243)

  58. There are some important differences between Madison and Washington DC. For the same situation in DC, we would need a Republican in the White House and a Republican Senate majority. That’s why the Wisconsin Democrats are rendering themselves fugitive–they don’t have the voted to keep this from passing, unless the outside pressure gets some GOP legislators to buckle.

    Also, the Wisconsin legislation is not merely an exercise in budget trimming; it’s primarily an attempt to weaken the public service unions to the point that they are useless, at the negotiating table and as political organizers. That element is totally missing from DC’s budget arguments.

    kishnevi (38f6c3)

  59. Kish, I’d characterize what Gov. Walker and the Wisconsin GOP are doing as reforming an inherently corrupt system, rather than specifically attempting to weaken public service unions. It will have that effect, but that’s a by-product, rather than the goal. The problem is that you have the public employee unions making massive campaign donations and even larger in-kind contributions to the same politicians that are nominally “management” and who are supposed to be acting in the public interest. Those effects are particularly pernicious because unlike the situation in the private sector, there never was a legitimate need for public employee collective bargaining rights anyway.

    Beldar (3e8b9d)

  60. In the ultimate analysis, we will either find the political will (and power) to make substantial cuts and reform entitlements, or we will not be able to avert financial catastrophe.

    Given the Democratic control of the Senate and White House, it seems probable that success will only come – if it comes at all – after the 2012 elections. So whether or not we cut one half of one percent more in this measure or not is frankly not even worth worrying about, much less going berserk over.

    Estragon (ec6a4b)

  61. unless the outside pressure gets some GOP legislators to buckle.

    Funny, but it isn’t working out exactly as the protestors planned. There are now three separate drives for petitions for recall regarding the fugitive legislators, it will take about six weeks total to get the petitions certified.

    Dmac (c50897)

  62. “48.I hope the GOP will commit to more spending cuts because, in my opinion, the message of the last election was that voters want less spending.”

    Walker(a GOP regular, no TEA) and WI are blowing away both the Obot and GOP Elite hope that TEAs will go away.

    Why would we need a Daniels or Pawlenty or Christie to work with the opposition when Walker is showing what one does with majorities in both houses?

    Lived in WI four decades, in Walker’s neck of the woods. AFSME was started in Madison in ’36, collective bargaining granted State employees-first in the nation-in 1959.

    Recalls have been initiated for two of the Dimmis and their staffs will be locked out. Its over, couple of weeks and the clear loser will be Strap-on.

    gary gulrud (790d43)

  63. As a matter of tactics, this seems dumb.

    Many of us on the left already have the sense that going after (for example) NPR isn’t about saving money, it’s about using the excuse of the deficit to go after things Republicans don’t like for reasons unrelated to the deficit.

    The rejection of $22 billion in cuts makes it look more like this perspective is accurate.

    aphrael (7a8968)

  64. aphrael,

    Personally, I don’t care what it looks like because if NPR leaned right, I would still want them defunded because that is not where taxpayer dollars should be going in the economic disaster we are facing. Cut, cut, cut. And then cut some more.

    And if it kills two birds with one stone for my side of the aisle, so be it. For too many years, NPR has relied on the taxpayer. Time to make it on their own like everyone else on the airwaves. I don’t think our country will fall apart if there isn’t an NPR; I do think however if we don’t cut from the superfluous, things will only continue to disintegrate.

    I can only assume in the interest of consistency that you would be okay with a right leaning outfit being funded by the government.

    Dana (8ba2fb)

  65. Dana: sure. You want them defunded because we should cut, cut, cut, and then cut some more. So you’re not the person I’m talking about. 🙂

    aphrael (7a8968)

  66. I agree with Dana. Everytime somone says let’s cut this or that, the response is the same. What about the kids, what about the animal, what about the environment, and the newest, what about the middle class?

    NPR has good shows I listen to PBS has good shows I watch. They can stand on their own.

    The FDA makes sure I won’t take bad drugs. The DOD keeps me safe. The EPA does something I’m sure. The FCC does nothing except worry that someone may hear something offensive.

    Regardless, no matter if you think the Feds should do more or less, waste is rampant. Trying to stop it is good.

    Since the 30s, though, we have been building an enourmas federal structure that quite honestly is not only inefficient but intrusive.

    Trying to stop that is noble.

    Ag80 (7a9f97)

  67. Enormous, of course.

    Ag80 (7a9f97)

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1395 secs.