The GOP needs heroes, and we need to find them in time for the primary season.

There cannot be economic growth without stable public finances, and it follows that relying on economic growth alone will not achieve that.

I agree with you that cowards can’t win against bullies without standing up to them. So much for the cliff being a way to deal with the debt since it just added to it! I agree that Obama would have owned the consequences as the pain was felt over time had we had a clean cliff dive.

Party lines have become pretty meaningless. In both the House and the Senate it seems we have around 90% in the Liberal Party and 10% in the Tea Party. Boehner/Cantor/McConnell can pat themselves on the back while telling each other: “We won! We showed we’re not being held hostage by the Tea Party!”

Romney is not in this equation so let’s leave him out please. Everyday I’m saddened that he wasn’t elected since he was extremely qualified to deal with budgets and revenue. He actually knew how to read a spreadsheet unlike the liar-in-chief!

The House has a chance to pass debt ceiling raises with real limited government measures attached. This is where Ryan can step up.

Voting now….57 Rs have voted yes meaning that Speaker to be Pelosi has what she needs to pass. At least it’s happening quickly, sort of like election night, a crushing blow that stuns and removes all feeling.

He’s relevant to what Boehner did in 2011 that created the fiscal cliff crisis. And no doubt that he would be a better president than 0.

It just passed: http://www.c-span.org/Events/House-Voting-on-Senate-Passed-Fiscal-Cliff-Bill/10737436933/ 257-167

Ryan & Boehner aye, Cantor & McCarthy No.

I get it that Rs want to decouple tax cuts/hikes from the other issues — CR, sequester and debt ceiling. They think they will have the upper hand now. They are wrong.

Perhaps, but they don’t have that bad a hand now, looking on the bright side.

Every cloud has a silver lining, and you’ll find more silver if you think deeper.

After all, this bill does keep taxes as low as possible, which was our original goal, or at least what we led our leaders to believe.

well, I was wrong but I was right. I sent in a comment about a month ago where I stated that we would go over the cliff but a bill would be passed soon after that would have tax hikes for those above $250k. So, we didn’t go over the cliff (technically) but tax hikes will occur (albeit for those over $450K for those filing jointly). Now, I don’t see a huge win coming in the next 60 days where one will see only spending cuts. The debt ceiling will be raised without spending cuts because everyone knows that is simply agreeing to pay for stuff we’ve already “bought”. While it appears from some of the blogs that tax revenues are now off the table, comments from the Administration suggest otherwise. I think the next issue will be how to handle the sequester as, again, I don’t think it will be just spending cuts. We’ll see if I’m kinda right again in a couple of months!

For: 85 Republicans and 172 Democrats voted for the bill
Nay: 151 Republicans and 16 Democrats voted against the bill.
So much for the Hastert rule….

“Conservatives should not be wasting their time thinking of a third party right now. Instead, they should get very organized and very united and make examples of Republicans who wavered.”

I have great respect for Erick, but honestly didn’t we do that in 2010? We all worked very hard, and we succeeded wildly — it was the biggest midterm election landslide since the 1930s.

But what did we get for this? Our newly elected “conservatives” took office, and promptly re-elected Boehner, who negotiated a ham-fisted debt ceiling deal that didn’t include any immediate spending cuts, but rather created some silly supercommittee, which predictably failed, leaving us with the “fiscal cliff” disaster which was solved by 1) a huge tax increase, 2) a $4 Trillion dollar addition to the already-exploding debt, and 3.) not a single dime of spending cuts.

How could anyone believe that repeating the same thing as 2010 — uniting, working hard, getting organized and electing “conservatives” to the GOP — will result in anything different this time?

I can’t imagine how corrupt politicians could determine the most efficient use of resources. It seems like all that would happen is that the companies and other special interests who offer the biggest bribes would get the most resources.

My first post on redstate … if November’s election was a butt kicking for us, tonight was humiliation poured on top of that. 1. Who came up with the idea that a “balanced” approach to deficit reduction is balancing spending cuts with tax increases, rather than spending cut category A vs. spending cut category B? This is the way it worked in the 80′s and 90′s with Gramm Rudman … who changed the formula? 2. Why did Boehner and McConnell concede tax increases so early in this process without demanding entitlement reform? WHO CARES if Obama got re-elected? So did a majority of R’s in the house and more than 40 senators. This idea that Obama is “entitled” to some kind of concession because of his win is nowhere in the Constitution and part of why this bad deal got done. Hopefully we’ve learned a lesson here. 3. It is crucial that we lay down VERY clear conditions for a debt ceiling raise: not a penny of additional tax revenue, PERMANENT solvency for Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, no new “blue ribbon panels” or commissions to fix entitlements as Durbin suggests now (LOL!), $5 of LONG TERM entitlement liability reduction for every $1 in debt ceiling increase.

God save the Republic.

Yes, I know. I meant, in the long run, economically and politically.

Yes. To me personally fixing the AMT permanently is a big deal. The 2% social security tax increase is nothing compare to the AMT. I voted against Obama twice but I am glad the house passed this imperfect bill. I want to see spending cuts too but it is simply not realistic to expect major cuts while Dems control both the WH and senate. In my opinion politically it would be slightly better for the house republicans to pass this bill than the alternative of giving a big tax hike to the middle class via AMT right away.

No. That is just wrong. The tax increase from AMT would have been far more than the 2% “tax hike” from FICA. It’s very misleading to use that as an example of “tax hike”.

I expect the inflation to eventually catch up with this out of control spending. But I would rather focus on working harder than worrying about something that’s out of my control. Also unsustainable spending is definitely bad for job growth but that’s also something we cannot control. The November election has shown us what “most” American voters want. People who care about/understand fiscal responsibilities are obviously the minority.

So now what? Republicans will put on a show over the debt ceiling only to cave again with no spending cuts. The now delayed sequester will bring about more theatrics only to watch the GOP fold like a lawn chair.

Frankly, Republicans set themselves up to fail on this from the start. They have no more credibility on spending cuts than Dems because they were whining so much about their precious defense spending. Obama knows that if $1 of defense spending is on the chopping block Republicans will back down.

Oh wait. NASCAR gets a break. Well, that makes everything okay.

Republican ideas always get co-op’t by the Rats. Recall Rubio was working on getting sponsors for an immigration reform bill and Obama stole it from him. If only the Bush cuts expired for a while so the people would know the truth instead of the propoganda. IMO, Scott would have been a nay.

Yeah and big business and wind/green energy subsidies. So much for middle-class small businesses who will take the hit. The president is a fraud.

Bleh. I am so sick of these so-called GOP leaders. Can we oust Boehner now? For the sake of the party, he has to be replaced. He has no leadership and zero negotiation skills. McConnell needs to go as well.

Well, on the other hand, look at the bright side: if Republican leaders co-opted democratic policies while running against them, it would suck.

Just like the Soviets were full of internal rot from their inherent contradictions, so will the democrats eventually collapse. There are only so many Republican ideas they can steal before they will become Republican.

And if we go over the edge….

Taxes are raised on all the same people… and John Doe… and Jane Doe… and Joe Six-Pack… and every right leaning, hard working, Patriotic American who doesnt get all this, but will just know that the GOP had a chance to stop middle class tax hikes and so no.

You complain a lot, but what is you solution?

Now the Tea Party has sank into the big “L” Libertarian abyss, all platitudes and principles, nothing real. If the GOp does what these yahoos want, we are as relevant as the Liberarians.

Anyone can win arguments on principle. The Libertarians do it all the time, which is why they suck, cant win, and are pathetic, and are now trying to infest the GOP.

Tom Coburn, Pat Toomey, Ron Johnson, John Barrasso, Jim Inhofe, Kelly Ayotte, Jim Sessions, Mike Enzi, John Hoevan, Dean Heller, David Vitter… blah, blah, blah.. all traitors now.

The yahoos lost. They cant face it.
Plan B was a good strategy when you have one half of Congress and the enemy the POTUS. Make THEM turn down a comprensive bill. Show theit true colors. But no. We want to emulate the Libertarians. Real Principle! And just as oblivious!

Losing it. Just losing it.
Liberals never fought these battles on their way to the top. They always rallied around leadership even when it didnt suit them. They fought in a ademia, schools, media, Hollywood, courts… only idiots conservatives seek instant gratification and live the lie that the only reason our imaginary majority loses is because of failed leadership. Dummies. Fools.

The long war, the real war, the culture war… all that and them some will not be won by tearing down our own in poltics, who MUST compromise as part of their jobs…. the Let compromises all the time in IL, MA, NY and CA… it doesnt stop their march.
Becaust hey are more intelligent then us…. We are losing!!! It must be the House Speaker!!!! What a bucnh of blithering idiots.

Start figuring this crap out and start fighting the real wars.

Boehner is an Ohio Republican, the writing is on the wall. Boehner looses his job if Obama doesn’t like him, so he prostrates himself, and sells the rest of us down the river. Boehner is like all blue state conservatives, just looking for cover anywhere they an find it. Our future is in Obama’s control and I don;t see too many Conservatives talking about how to govern blue states, or win big blue cities.

Summary: Throw away your principles you idiots!

Then there was not much we could do (which I don’t accept, but never mind) in the first place, since it would have been a bit ridiculous threatening Obama with larger tax hikes, no?

I don’t care about how Paul Ryan spins his vote, it will be very damaging to his career anyway, but we do have to understand that common-sense Conservatives may view it as preferable to have taxes which are as low as possible, even with no spending cuts, compared to taxes back at record highs, with a couple of months more of spending cuts.

Middle-class small business owners, you mean…

On the other hand, they could have been hit worse. Not a terribly consoling thought, but still a silver lining nonetheless.

Only one form of true immortality, government programs.

Would you prefer they lose?

Not that most of them are vulnerable enough in the general for anyone to notice a vote against this bill.

No, the simple matter of fact is it really doesn’t matter what tax rates are. This (the debt and deficit problems) derives from a spending problem not a revenue problem. And especially not an income redistribution problem.

Summary: Get nothing at all, you idiots! Tax-and-spend Democrats like Obama won’t agree to real spending cuts, so it’s better to let taxes skyrocket on everyone!

So, instead of taking most of the “tax” out of their goal, we leave all of both “tax” and “spend” in.

It doesn’t matter??? What??? It doesn’t matter that 700,000 jobs will go over the cliff and onto unemployment rolls? It doesn’t matter that Obama will claim that high tax rates give him room for new stimulus spending, which only the House Republicans you suspect so much can block?

Where tax rates are high, voters soon become captive to government as the spirit of work and aspiration is destroyed and people come to believe that bigger government means more money back in their pockets.

Tax rates matter because high tax rates harm the economy and wreck the culture.

If this bill had been passed without automatic, larger tax hikes hanging over our heads, it would have been unforgivable. Unfortunately, this was not the case, so House Republicans who took what they had should be understood, and House Republicans who stood on principle should be applauded, and Senate Republicans on either side don’t deserve anything at all for either backstabbing or grandstanding.

Bringing fresh blood into the GOP – like those Senators we worked so hard to elect who then betrayed their conservative principles and us to pass this travesty.

When Obama comes back with a rate increase on those making over $250K in the next “fight” you’ll also give him the benefit of the doubt for keeping tax rates as low as possible? Let’s join hands with our liberal brethren and eat the rich. Those nasty successful people and businesses. You didn’t build that.

We have a spending problem and to walk away without any substantial spending cuts is abhorent. And immoral. It continues to give people the false impression that the “rich” can pay for this whole fat pig of a government on their own. And you little middle class folks need not worry. Of course, we can collect 100% of the income of those making over $250K and still not pay for our government. Without spending cuts, this just further adds to the debt. My opinion, if we can’t have a smaller government, it’s better to have everybody “pay their fair share” and feel the pain of paying for the big government they so desire. Instead, we’d rather plod along happily with our middle class tax breaks, big government, and leave the tab to our kids.

Unlikely to make much of a difference. If McConnell is fated to lose, he’ll lose anyway.

“….You cant get what you want when you control 1/3 of government and just lost and election.”

Every dime of spending, taxes and debt must, according to the Constitution, originate in the House. There’s a very good reason for that.

So berate the tea party, if you guys are so sure you can win without us then have at it.

But there is absolutely nothing unreasonable about being against the disaster that passed tonight. The Federal government has more than doubled in its cost, size and intrusiveness since 2000. The Republicans have been in control for a good deal of that time. The debt (and the money printing required to support it) will bring the country to its knees if it isn’t stopped. To suggest that anyone who opposes what’s happening here is some kind of purist ideologue borders on the absurd.

What’s happening here is Democrats voted for the bill because it doesn’t cut spending, and Republicans voting for the bill because it prevents most of the automatic tax increases, and since there’s a spending problem rather than a revenue problem, it’s silly to ask the Republicans to let the automatic tax increases kick in instead, as though that would move us any nearer to solving the problem rather than mobilizing demand for an NHS of our own, compensating for higher taxes with higher spending, as the 47% are used to.

brah and commonsense’- thanks for translating the swamp language of someone that makes no sense, can’t spell and never learned grammer. I’d give swampyankee a pass if the arguments made sense…

Morton Blackwell has a saying: Don’t make the perfect the enemy of the good. The problem is that there is nothing good in this whole charade. Did it matter? No. Someone with courage and backbone that did not care where the wind blew would have led the charge. The problem is that we have “leadership” in the House and Senate that only cares about getting re-elected. Nothing more nor less. That is why we have the nonsense that we have.

Not sure about Boehner and the boys since he blew up his time to negotiate and had to take a vote. But why they didn’t whip against this when we didn’t need that many more nays to squash it I’ll never know. O is blaming B for walking from the big deal when O says he put 1.2T for 1.2T in cuts…that’s a lie. B walked when it was 1.2 to 400B in cuts…hardly a balanced deal but O will keep railing he pushed for a big deal.

It came down to do you want a bad deal or a really bad deal. It should never have come down to this horrible vote had we let Reid and O take the lead. Rep. leaders haven’t learned that they lose by announcing their plans. They need to hold their cards closer to their vest in the future.

What I meant was that the cost of new programs would have to be offset by cuts to or the elimination of existing ones. In the battle over the size of Government, conservatives should at the very least fight to keep it from growing any bigger. Personally, I would much prefer movement in the shrink direction.

what’s wrong with the fiscal cliff bill that passed tonite is that the voters who voted in the election for both low taxes and big government (by electing Obama & R House) will not face any consequences for that vote, which is essentially irresponsible.

Oh… I agree.

Eh, logical fallacy. Just because the Republicans did that doesn’t mean tax rates don’t matter.

The fact is, (House) Republicans tried to keep taxes as low on as many people as possible, and they ought to get some understanding for that, since the alternative would have been worse, with no more in spending cuts and a lot more in tax hikes.

hey thanks — gyakuzuki is a japanese term for a reverse punch … i think RedState is terrific. Have spent probably too much time on National Review where it’s just too ivory tower to keep my attention any more given what we are going through.

I am/was a huge Ryan fan. Finally, I thought, a Veep candidate who actually understands the federal budget issues. He will have to do something really extraordinary in the next 60 days to win back my confidence if he wants another check from my family in 2016.

And no more threat of automatic tax increases.

It’ll be laughable to see Obama threatening us with the spending cuts that would result from a failure to raise the debt ceiling, when our objective is spending cuts in the first place.

Nope, but I’m sure Boehner and McConnell are already greasing the skids for full capitulation on that as well. Stay tuned!

Then, we care going to do so much with the extra 8 days of income we hauled in.
/snark

Drier is lame duck

very interesting point about McConnell calling Biden. Disagree on austerity: we are looking for long-term solvency for entitlements —- this need not have any near-term (or long-term, frankly) impact on GDP growth, etc.

All of them have a lot of work to do, and not just Paul Ryan, anyway. Of course, that Paul can even get this “chance” of a grace period for redemption speaks to the importance of his past leadership on presenting substantive ideas for fiscal responsibility, limited government, and free enterprise, even though this vote is hardly his worst. We want a leader, not a voter, after all, and that is why he has always outshone the rest. But he’ll need to continue, in fact continue, that record. Once he leaves the leadership, as he should soon, he’ll have a lot more room to actually lead again.

On this vote, I have to admit I was disappointed, but in context, and considering his perspective, it’s not that troubling. What’s more troubling is his record during the Bush era, typical of many Conservatives in Congress, which he must work to compensate. And he did make a good start with the Roadmap and budget, but he must expand on those, even if that comes at the cost of the more ambitious tax cutting elements and some “promises” made to seniors and the Pentagon.

Only by leading and presenting real alternatives and real solutions can he stand a chance to win.

this is the way it used to be done — no idea who on our side agreed to trade a dollar of spending cut for a dollar of tax increases. But it needs to revert to the old way.

not a VAT. a flat income tax or a flat national sales tax. More dems that you’d think are onboard with a national sales tax to replace this absurd tax code we have now.

Well, the first is the only one with the most remote possibility of passing. Most Dems just want a supplemental source of revenue from a GST or VAT.

That would have been my preference too.

Forward!
The road goes ever on and on.

I guess I did misunderstand since I thought swamp’ was dissin’ the TEA Party for being purists, perhaps you too. I understand not saying no to everything but saying yes when it makes the debt situation worse is worse than just saying no. That’s not being a purist; it’s being responsible. Frankly, the House should move more to the TEA way than its current path of incremental yes’s towards our slow destruction. Not to mention the current squish way isn’t gaining us any brownie points with the public.

Yes, but this specific vote itself pulls me both ways. On one hand, it represents the worst of Washington, showing that the Democrats, and many Republicans, especially in the Senate, are totally unserious about facing up to our fiscal challenges. On the other hand, for many usually solid, or at least reasonably friendly, Republicans, they rightly believed that it was best to try and keep tax rates as low as possible.

Perhaps I was dissing the TEA Party because I believed that many did not properly consider the arguments for the second position, before blasting House Republicans like Paul Ryan.

But at least more people would have skin in the game.

thats the whole Republican party Ed. Let him have his useless party. I’m done.

It’s better to stand for something than fall for anything. To me this whole mess was completely avoidable, even after the election, for at least the blame game. I won’t repeat it all, but no more Rep. saviors when the majority shakes and skates.

I hope you don’t get banned texasref. From a fellow Texan, I’m still waiting for different results too, tho’ not expecting any, and for the How-To Manual we were promised after the new format. Disqus sucks and is slow to post comments.

Surely that would be for individual candidates and the appropriate campaign committees. We can’t expect Presidential candidates to personally campaign or pay for ads in Idaho or Rhode Island.

The tax hikes are nothing. They will not generate enough revenue to make any difference in the deficit or debt. Conservatives who complain about the tax hikes are being extremely short sighted because these tax hikes will not make any difference in the biggest problem we face. The Dems won a feel-good victory but in the end it won’t make any difference in our fiscal problems. Our spending is unsustainable. Even if the economy recovers there will still not be enough tax revenue to sustain the spending.

In the end, all of this is sound and furry on both sides of politics. Dems think they have done something good but they haven’t. Conservatives will think we have lost, but what will it matter. It is the spending, stupid. Until that is under control we are following Greece off a debt cliff, and there is no Europe to bail us out.

“Right now all that conservative ‘unity’ has achieved is consistent failure….”

Given that ‘conservatives’ are apparently a minority among Congressional Republicans, your basis may be slightly off. It would be more accurate IMHO to say that all that ‘establishment Republican’ unity has achieved is increased liberalism.

Tis ridiculous to automatically jump on Ryan or push the incredible lightness of Marco Rubio (got this from someone on HotAir) based on this vote, not just because of their respective records of actual leadership, but also because of the context. As I have stated before, Rubio voted against it to allow taxes to go as high as possible under current law, with little effect on spending (unless he’ll admit that he was just grandstanding). Ryan voted for it to keep tax rates as low as possible, with little effect on spending too.

Color me skeptical that supporting higher taxes on everyone, hence wrecking the economy, is supposed to help us dismantle the entitlement state. When all is said and done, more people will be depending on the federal government, and they ain’t risking that for work and saving and entrepreneurship taxed at record highs.

Which may be why Obama always wanted the cliff, even if he says it was a last resort.

McConnell is no longer part of the solution. He is the problem. He is worse than the Democrats because as long as he is the leader in the Senate, Republicans will make no headway against Obama. He is an abject failure but he will not resign because he likes the power. Since he will not resign, we need to force him out. If a primary challenge will not do it, then we need to sacrifice his seat.

McConnell and Boehner use the same strategy with their Republican colleagues. They force them to play ball or they refuse to support them in their re-election efforts. It is time we got ruthless.

Now, perhaps you would like to continue and play patty-cake with the leadership but the country does not have the time. How long will it take you to elect enough conservatives in the Senate to throw McConnell out of the leadership position? We have worked hard to do that these past several years and they continue to buckle to leadership.

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results. How insane are you? Now, as to your personal attack, you can lump it little man. The comment about making me feel better was in response to a post that McConnell would probably lose whether or not I donated to Judd. I have never supported the Democrats or Mr. Obama. I put my career on the line on a daily basis to carry conservatism into the university and I don’t do it because it makes me feel good.

But again, all of this doesn’t matter. The way things work, they’ll (democrats) keep the rates high and buy off constituents with tax breaks and carve outs. I don’t include the Republicans because they don’t bother to hold a position and get distracted by the next upcoming crisis, and then they’ll really show them (that is until they see another upcoming crisis, to which they abandon the current one, rinse and repeat).

Same here and I can’t say I am missing anything other then listening to the same old people explaining the same old junk. I am spending way more time watching other things and reading. I still keep up with what is what just not not wasting the time listening to Propoganda mouthpeices anymore.

A better deal would have back in Novemeber pass a PERMANENT extenstion to all the tax rates and MAKE the Democrats vote on it. All Bonehead had to do was say I have given the President the tax cuts for the middle class that he so cried over and it’s up to him on whether this is more important or his Social Justice agenda.

Oh? Republicans could have waved a magic wand to make all the tax cuts permanent? In fact, I think you’re suggesting that they already did.

So it’s Kabuki that we avoided the Clinton era tax rates?

No, that was a foregone conclusion.

Yeah I disagree with it, but the way all of the negotiations previously went it is a foregone conclusion that taxes were going up.

I never said I support it, I just knew that the increase is baked into the cake. Call me a fatalist, but with past performance as an indicator of future performance, I knew the “leadership” would cave.

Apparently that it was baked into the cake is a feature rather than a bug, and considering your characterization of the McConnell deal, I can only conclude that you were looking forward to a return of the Clinton era tax rates.

If this is not the case, I suggest you clearly explain why.

Kowalski, If we weren’t going to keep the rates permanent, I would have rather had all the rates go up instead of dividing the country across income lines like this does. This was never about revenue generation but about income redistribution, and the Republicans played straight into that hand.