Tag: Political parties in the United States

Politics Makes You Stupid: First Time

I’m not OFFENDED! by this ad. I just think it’s really really dumb. And it really really gets at everything that can drive you nuts about the Cult of Obama. I defy any thinking person to watch and not want to puke into a trash can by the end.

My first time voting, incidentally, was 1990. I think I voted for John Linder for Congress. He lost to Ben Jones because Pat Swindall had left such a foul taste in people’s mouths and Jones was a conservative Democrat (and also Cooter from the Dukes of Hazzard). I also voted for one of the few Democrats I’ve ever supported — Senator Sam Nunn, who was very conservative and would probably be a Republican today. Nunn may even have been running unopposed in 1990. Two years later, I voted a straight Republican ticket in Bush’s I unsuccessful re-election bid.

I didn’t feel “empowered” or “special” or anything. It was just something I did. Politics was not something new and exciting when I was 18. The first election I get intensely interested in was 1984 when I watched Reagan absolutely destroy Mondale. But Nunn, Linder and Bush were very good politicians to cut your teeth on. There was no cult about them, no flash and celebrity. All three were plain, competent men who executed their offices in a very straight-forward business-like way. I can’t imagine anyone going faint and blushing over them like in the above video. And that’s the way it should be.

At the risk of making some of our readers feel old (including me), do you remember your first election?

The Irresponsible Congress

You know, I’m getting more and more sympathetic to this view:

Many observers and participants — including the entire GOP and Democratic leadership — are quick to cry gridlock and to blame inaction on some new awful hyper-partisan or ideological era.

But there isn’t gridlock, which usually results from Democrats and Republicans sharing power and clashing over alternative positions. Gridlock slows things down — almost always a good thing — but it doesn’t stop serious legislation from happening. Welfare reform, balanced budgets, defense cuts and capital-gains tax rate cuts in the 1990s were all the product of gridlock that slowly gave way to consensus.

And today’s Congress is more than happy to pass legislation when it suits members’ interests. In just the past few months, for instance, the ostensibly gridlocked Congress reauthorized the Export-Import Bank program that gives money to foreign companies to buy U.S. goods; extended sharply reduced rates for government-subsidized student loans; re-upped the Essential Air Service program that subsidizes airline service to rural communities; and voted against ending the 1705 loan-guarantee program that gave rise to green-tech boondoggles such as Solyndra and Abound. None of these were party-line votes — all enjoyed hearty support from both Democrats and Republicans.

What we’re actually witnessing — and have been for years now — is not gridlock, but the abdication of responsibility by Congress and the president for performing the most basic responsibilities of government. Despite the fiscal crisis that Washington knows will occur if it fails to deal with unsustainable spending and debt, it hasn’t managed to produce a federal budget in more than three years.

The budget debate is where this has reached its apogee. Both parties know that the situation is growing increasingly critical and both parties know what needs to be done. Hell, Tom Coburn — the supposedly hyper-partisan Nazi Right-Wing fascist — has repeatedly talked about the obvious grand bargain that both parties know is the only choice: entitlement reform, spending restraint and Kenned-Reagan style tax reform that increases revenue but compensates by sharply reducing the deadweight loss of the tax code.

But neither party is willing to do it. The Republicans would rather pass symbolic repeals of Obamacare and pointless criminalization of abortion in DC (neither of which will pass the Senate, let alone Obama). The Democrats would rather talk about raising taxes on “the rich” and blast the GOP for “ending Medicare as we know it”. The Republican nominee is recycling idiot economics and promising to cut taxes, raise military spending and balance the budget by … I’m not sure. The Democratic nominee is proposing “spending cuts” that amount to denying a bureaucrat a new pet gerbil.

But it’s critical, that we understand what is happening here. This inaction is not produced by partisanship; partisanship is the excuse. The parties can get stunningly non-partisan when they want to. They just passed a six-month funding bill to avoid a fiscal catastrophe in October (sensible enough but not really what we need). They’re working to undo the budget sequester if they can. They found it remarkable easy to extend unemployment benefits and payroll tax cuts and pork spending.

People blame the “base” for the partisanship. And it’s true that the Republican base has a conniption fit any time taxes are discussed and the Democrat base blows up anytime entitlement cuts are proposed. But the parties are more than wiling to ignore their base when it comes to civil liberties, spending restraint and corporate cronyism.

In short, when it comes to easy decisions, they are all about bipartisanship and all about ignoring the base. It’s only when it comes down to the tough choices that they suddenly get all partisany and complain about the toxic atmosphere.

The only real choice we have is to judge them by the results, not the rhetoric. Until we get an actual grand bargain that actually balances the budget and actually makes the tough choices — on spending and taxes — we are being jerked around. By both parties.

I knew this was all politics and not about solutions…

In a move that pissed me off, the congressional republicans buckled and offered the democrats $300 million in new taxes, only to have the democrats rebuff the offer, now making it all but obvious that their intent from the beginning was to have the special debt-reduction committee, which has two weeks left, fail for political reasons.

Congressional Republicans have for the first time retreated from their hard-line stance against new taxes, offering to raise federal tax collections by nearly $300 billion over the next decade as part of a plan to tame the national debt.

But Democrats rejected the offer Tuesday — along with the notion that Republicans had made a significant concession that could end the long-standing political impasse — leaving a special debt-reduction committee far from compromise with less than two weeks until its Thanksgiving deadline.

Democrats said the tax increases in the GOP offer would be dwarfed by major new tax cuts for the nation’s wealthiest households, including a reduction in the top income tax rate from 35 percent to 28 percent.

“They’re anxious to promote a certain concept with all of you,” Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.), one of the negotiators, told reporters. “I’ll be very clear that whatever they put there doesn’t get the job done.”

Oh, sure the democrats, whom have made it very clear that they want to get a minimum of one to one ratio on new taxes, or as the propaganda machine calls it, new revenue, are demanding a dollar in new taxes for each dollar in cuts – that way big government stays big, and they can keep buying votes – and blame the fact republicans will not acquiesce for their thumbs down. But lets be honest here and point out that any kind of deal would be turned down by the democrats, because if they make one Obama loses his most potent weapons – the “Do Nothing Congress” accusations that pretend republicans also control the Senate and not Harry Reid, whom has blocked everything the House has send him – and that’s not gonna happen. The republicans seem to know this.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) fired back that Republicans are “working diligently to get a solution” and accused Democrats of trying to block a deal. McConnell said he suspected that “the folks down at the White House are pulling for failure because, you see, if the joint committee succeeds, it steps on the story line that they’ve been peddling, which is that you can’t do anything with the Republicans in Congress.”

Right on Mitch. And the democrats continue to ask for what they know the republicans can and should never give them.

Members of the supercommittee had planned to continue talking Tuesday afternoon, but a bipartisan meeting was abruptly canceled, and neither side appeared optimistic about the prospects for a breakthrough. “I have yet to see a real, credible plan that raises revenue in a significant way to bring us to a fair, balanced proposal,” Sen. Patty Murray (Wash.), the Democratic co-chairman of the panel, told reporters.

These request for insane tax hikes, in fact, as far as I am concerned for any tax hikes that isn’t one where the 47% that today doesn’t pay any taxes now have to pay them too, need to be DOA. And that’s because these “cuts” all come in a decade, long after Team Obama is gone, while the taxes happen yesterday. That’s basically a guarantee that the nanny-staters will keep spending like they are doing now, racking up the deficit to grow the collectivist dependant base they depend on for votes, then the cuts never happen. Fuck that. That’s why this:

Late Monday, some GOP supercommittee members finally crossed the anti-tax line that their leaders had drawn in the sand. In a meeting that dragged on nearly to midnight, Sens. Patrick J. Toomey (Pa.) and Rob Portman (Ohio) and Reps. Dave Camp and Fred Upton, both of Michigan, presented a new proposal to Democrats Kerry, Sen. Max Baucus (Mont.) and Rep. Chris Van Hollen (Md.).

Pisses me off. If they give into them now, the commiecrats will just keep saying no until they either get the ridiculous 1 for 1 option they want, which to put things into perspective means they want $1 trillion in taxes now for the promise of a $1 trillion cut 10 years from now, or they will kill the thing, and give Obama his campaign bumper sticker. The fact that the do nothing congress is courtesy of Harry Reid will never be mentioned by the LSM.


Let’s discuss our Demcorat controlled Senate and our country’s budget:

Budget: Over the weekend, Senate Democrats passed a dubious milestone — going 900 days without fulfilling their legal obligation to pass a budget. Worse is the fact that this gross dereliction of duty has gone largely unnoticed. You have to go all the way back to April 29, 2009 — just three months after President Obama took the oath of office — to find the last time Senate Democrats managed to discharge their legal obligation to produce a budget plan. That’s right — legal obligation. It says right in the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 that the Senate must produce a budget resolution by April of each year. Instead, all the country has gotten from Senate Democrats are excuses.

Can you imagine if this had happened when Bush was president and republicans controlled the branch pulling this stunt? What about if the republican controlled house decided to do this right now? Anyway, what have the senate majority holding donkeys been up to?

In May, Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said “it would be foolish for us to do a budget at this stage,” since the so-called Gang of Six was working with Vice President Biden to come up with a debt reduction deal. In early July, Republicans sent a letter to Reid asking where the Democrats’ budget was. Turns out, Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad, D-N.D., had a plan ready to be unveiled, but Reid forced him to keep it locked up. Ostensibly that was because of the then-ongoing debt ceiling talks. Democrats did, however, find the time in May to force a vote on the House Republican budget plan, but only in hopes of embarrassing their Senate counterparts.

Politics baby! Reelection and keeping power over what’s best for the country. The plan is to fool the rubes into keeping them in power so they can use the next 4 years after that to really screw us hard. And they will do it all to “help” the unfortunate many… If you believe that I have a bridge crossing the Atlantic ocean to sell you. The LSM was not available for comment.