« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

Meet the New Boss. Same as the Old Boss.

Has the GOP learned its lessons from 2006?

That’s the big question many on the right are asking themselves. After all, on the Senate side the same leadership that led the GOP out of power will be the same leadership leading the GOP back into power if they take back the Senate.

In the House of Representatives, the members did a good job replacing their failed leadership. Hastert retired, DeLay quit, Blunt left leadership. Blunt’s Deputy Whip, Eric Cantor, moved up to Whip. Kevin McCarthy and Mike Pence came in underneath. In fact, Eric Cantor is the only member of the Hastert-DeLay-Blunt-Cantor House GOP Leadership team to remain.

On the House side, as a very public repudiation of their past, John Boehner led the GOP to refuse earmarks — the bribes both sides have used for so long to grow government and get their pet programs passed.

Earmarks were used to bribe Republicans to support the prescription drug benefit and TARP. Earmarks were used to bribe Democrats to support Obamacare. Earmarks are a drug and the GOP, to absolve itself of its own sins, publicly declared that House Republicans would give up the very corrupting practice.

But it was all for show, or so it seems. House Republican Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA) declares earmarks will be back in full swing once the GOP takes back Congress.

Cantor said, “Republicans may roll back their ban on earmarks, as long as the spending items have ‘merit.’”

“Merit” is a focus grouped way to obfuscate the reality that Eric Cantor and the House Republicans are perfectly happy to be wallowing back in the mud pit once they get back in charge. If the earmarks actually had merit, they could withstand the entire appropriations process, including review by committee, etc. instead of being added in.

In other words, the GOP has learned nothing and forgotten nothing. They’ll merely bank on our preference for them to Pelosi as a block against Obama, but will otherwise keep expanding government and lining the pockets of preferred interest groups with bridges to nowhere save high deficits.

As I wrote back in March, “Earmarks are certainly not the only issue, but they are the most telling as to whether Republicans really have learned their lesson in the minority.”

Eric Cantor, at least, has not. Remember, this is the guy who attacked the stimulus while lobbying for stimulus money to build a high-speed railroad between Richmond and Washington. It’s also the same guy who tried to play cheap parliamentary tricks to stop Rep. Steve King’s discharge petition to repeal Obamacare.

And this is the guy who will be the House Majority Leader if the GOP takes back Congress.

COMMENTS

  • bigredone

    It is painfully obvious that he just doesn’t get it.

    Citizens want the spending to stop. Period. Earmarks are symbolic of Washington, D. C. corruption, and for Cantor to advocate a comeback for them is political suicide.

    Primary him in 2012, and be done with him.

  • shorty

    Eric Cantor is forever sending me e-mails wanting my contribution for something!! I will definitely send him an e-mail re: MY thoughts on EARMARKS!!!!

    My 2 senators and my representative have already a LOAD from me on this subject and looks like they will again.

    Thanks for the info…

  • JadedByPolitics

    to PLEASE NOT VOTE FOR Boehner now that is only 3 people however if there is a TRUE Conservative Caucus both in the House and the Senate they will absolutely NOT VOTE for McConnell and Boehner/

    This is serious business, Boehner voted FOR as did McConnell FOR the bailout of the banks which should have failed. WE DO NOT reward bad behavior and it was the MOST SHAMEFUL moment in the History of this Country. I will NEVER forgive President Bush for “socializing” the banks in the United States of America……NEVER!

    I have said it over and over, President Bush and his so called “compassionate” Conservatism KICKED DOWN the door for Barack Hussein Obama’s SOCIALISM!

  • oklahomajon

    No Wonder the voter think that there is not much diffrence beteewn the two parties

  • oklahomajon

    No Wonder the voter think that there is not much diffrence beteewn the two parties

  • wilfranc

    Earmarks and programs that rely on the good guys being in charge, mean they are not a potential good for America. For example, Mitt Romney defends RomneyCare by a “when we were in charge of it, we did better” campaign. I thought the founders planned for worse case, for those of weak character and limited abilities, rather than counting on always having a supply of good guys.

    This is why both parties are in the dumper. Like the guy in the special election in NY said last year when becoming an Independent; he thought people should have a choice.

    Merit is to Cantor what fair is to Obama.

  • http://todaysasbestos.wordpress.com scotteiland

    We need to confront this problem head on.

    Our side needs to get the message. No more printing money, no more earmarks, no more reckless spending. “Merit?” What exactly does that MEAN, Congressman?

    Mike Pence should challenge Eric Cantor for Majority leader if we do take the majority. Unlike Cantor, who clearly doesn’t understand why we’re poised to possibly take back Congress, Mike Pence gets it and would be an outstanding leader.

    We MUST hold our side’s feet to the fire this time. We were so giddy in 1994 that we stopped teaching and did a lousy job on the grass roots level of making sure our side was accountable,

    We can’t have this anymore. We just can’t afford it.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens
  • http://thesandsinstitute.org Vassar Bushmills

    …is a well-deserved strike. He represents the “Ruling Class” sentiment in the GOP. And having taken Robert Hurt under his wing to take back the seat held by Tom Periello in VA-05 may doom the GOP there. Getting him removed from leadership will be a blessing.

  • http://xmmlbchat.blogspot.com katesmith

    In addition to Mr. Cantor’s position being wrong, he delivers the bomb shell so casually. Another guy completely detached from the people.

  • jmimac351

    He has always struck me as being weak on the issues and his arguments are always strained. He comes across as being a rookie – maybe because he doesn’t fully buy-in to the argument he is making. For that matter, I am not a fan of Boehner either.

    The only time either of them gets riled up is when it’s already too late.

  • avgjo

    until I am blue in the face. We must put the same kind of pressure on our side that we put on the Dems in ’09 for obamacare. We must apply this pressure to say NO to earmarks, NO to statism, NO to compromise and NO to politics as usual. As you said, we cannot afford this anymore. And I mean that figuaratively and literally. We as a nation require such fiscal restraint that we must count every penny; that means NO waste. And the GOP will hand the dems back the reins of power (and the country over to complete destruction) if they go back to their old ways.

    We MUST make them do our will.

    Remember, it is not futile to put pressure on the GOP; perhaps the only difference sometimes between the two parties is that, in the end, the Republicans will heed the will of the people. We need to make that will clear.

  • jmimac351

    Is for Paul Ryan to be majority leader.

    And, I want to see, just once, Thaddeus McCotter on the House floor talking jive.

  • avgjo

    When I read of that comment by Cantor, my stomach turned. Thoughts of all the efforts of the past year and the gargantuan fight ahead rushed past me as I thought of how this guy, as a leader in the GOP, would destroy all that, by entertaining such a stupid thought and then foolishly say at this juncture. I’ve noticed that when you guys address something here, it often spreads like wildfire. I hope and look forward to this happening with this issue, so that it can be nipped in the bud.

    Again thanks, God Bless, and please know your efforts are much appreciated and admired by more than you know.

  • partyof1

    If they have “merit” then they should be easily passed after a transparent debate, not slipped in the backdoor of some unrelated legislation.

    These establishment Republicans are like traders whereas We The People are investors. They play the ups and downs and make money both ways. We are in it for the long haul and have a vision.

    Can you see Cantor ever caring about a “shining city on a hill”?

  • oklahomajon

    Amen to that and thank god for the new media for calling these guys out on their little tricks

  • oklahomajon

    Amen to that and thank god for the new media for calling these guys out on their little tricks

  • RedBeard

    The very worst outcome of a Republican victory would be for Republicans in Congress to relax and think their business-as-usual policies have been vindicated.

    1. Elect as many Republicans as possible in November

    2. Let them all know, old timers and newcomers, that they hold temporary jobs, not tenure, and can be replaced for malfeasance.

  • hmfwic

    Great ending to this thread. There’s still a lot of housecleaning to do.

  • ywhyvon1
  • ywhyvon1

    The real work for us begins Nov 3, to keep not only ourselves engaged, but also to build the “choir”.

    Personally over the last year or so, I have been becoming a political junkie, Time to push the addiction.

  • Scope

    but it will never happen. If anyone dares to try to primary Cantor here in VA-07, they usually don’t even stay in the race long enough to even get their name out there. For some mysterious reason, they quietly back away, always, every time. He doesn’t campaign, he doesn’t even have a website for any 2010 campaign. He has yet to have the first townhall up here in the northern end of the district. He knows how we all feel about him up here.

    Not only has he not learned the earmark lesson, he hasn’t learned the lesson that no one likes power hungry politicians. He is big government all the way, and has been for many years. I believe that he will try to challenge Boehner for the Speaker position when the R’s take back the Congress. His young guns program have resulted in more in his image.

    He’s like a bad dream that just won’t go away.

  • michiganwolverine

    If the voters come out strong in 2010 and toss out the Democrats who have voted for spending since 2006, they will expect Republicans to rein in spending, even if it has merit.

    Cantor will guarantee Obama another term if he and fellow Republicans go back to their spending ways.

    The voters will stay home in 2012 or vote for a 3rd party if earmarks reemerge.

  • http://hillbillypolitics.com Steph C

    That Cantor will be the Majority Leader?

    If so, it’s going to be like herding cats in a room full of rocking chairs considering the number of grassroots conservative candidates replacing Democrats and even some left leaning Republicans.

    We won’t make it easy for him in the mud pit. It just means that a lot of those folks who have newly become active will have to stay active to keep their Congress men and women apprised of what the people want.

    Earmarks are bad… bad policy and bad politics…Period. If an earmark has “merit” debate it as a separate issue.

  • Marcus_Traianus

    Voters, especially Independents know very well who is still in charge on the Republican side of the aisle. But these acolytes of mediocrity, these denizens of self-interest, believe a tidal backlash against the most destructive Congress and President in our history will let them slither back into their den’s.

    Unless current Republican leadership promises to step aside, realizing this is not only a historical vote against this current government, or lack thereof- but also a vote against the corrupt, disingenuous type of politics they represent, then get ready for much smaller numbers in November.

    Notice how these “leaders” have not signed onto anything closely representing “a contemporary The Contract with America” and moved in lock-step to free us from our current bondage. Ever wonder why? It’s because they feel it will be an unnecessary encumbrance to their real agenda.

    Should we hand back control without any type of guarantees or commitments to new leadership? In the words of Boehner; “Hell no.” I am a little tired or living in the wilderness watching reruns of McCain, Graham, Collins and Snowe holding hands and doing a Thabal Chongba, with a sanbiki no saru, represented by McConnell, Cornyn and Kyl sitting in the middle. It may be conjecture, but I believe there are a few more people that may feel the same way.

  • Death_of_the_Donkey

    It will be almost impossible to fix the deficit if we “re-institute” earmarks and bribes for votes. The spending will just get shifted around.

  • Dave_in_Fla

    Earmarks in and of themselves are not the problem, since they are a good way to get some important items funded that are too small to fit into a larger bill.

    The problem is earmark transparency. Every one of these needs to have a sponsor’s name and justification for the expenditure included. I also wouldn’t mind seeing a cap, or even a special earmark omnibus bill passed every year.

    One of the reasons we believe that Conservatism trumps Liberalism is that we take into account the reality of human nature, and don’t live in Utopian fantasies. The reality is that these types of funding items are going to occur, either as an earmark or as a little noticed program in a larger spending bill. It is better to bring them into the light of day and make Congress accountable to prove the worth.

  • sparkyva

    Earmarks go to those who have votes to sell or who hold powerful positions on committees. We need to be “fair” about this and share the wealth with those who don’t have powerful positions. If those not in the “in” group would band together to say that all districts will get the same benefits as all the others, we can stop earmarks.

    The way it would work would be that, if the top district received 1 million in earmarks, then all other districts would receive 1 million too. Subtract the ear marks in each district and give the rest of the money as tax refunds to those who vote. Soon, no district would choose an earmark over a tax refund.

    It would work because those in the in group are always far less than those in the out group. They will have to be smart to prevent the in group from coming up with a new tag for earmarks to get around this idea. But selling it on the democratic idea of “fairness” (choke) should shut down the opposition.

  • fpete13527

    I am 100% in agreement with first ensuring that an R majority is back in place.
    Conservative in the primary and R in the general is what I will live by.
    However, past that point, MAJOR surgery needs to be done on the GOP.

    As you stated, and many excellent comments have already expressed above, the GOP, starting with Cantor, have not changed one bit. They completely don’t get it.

    But actually they do get it. For much of the current GOP core, they love it they could let conservative blogs and Tea Party activists take care of all the hard work for them so they can avoid a Huffington article. Meanwhile instead of planning bold new leadership plans to take back the country, they are simply planning to re-establish pork.

    For the House, Cantor’s comments on earmarks show that they are more than willing to engage in the fiscal sins that got us to this point. The pork 11 Senator group has similarly responded to keep earmarks.

    When it comes to primary candidate’s support, both the House and the Senate have demonstrated a different rule “liberal RINO in the primary, progressive liberal RINO in the general, and conservative never.” Also, the lead RINO in chief (McClame) will be back in full swing in November and will no doubt rally and re-create the RINO caucus with Grahamnesty, Trigger Sisters, and Lugar.

    I am supporting R for the general election. After that, I support many different varieties of MAJOR surgery on the GOP coupled with extensive amounts of NUCLEAR medicine on them.

    If the progressive GOP core in both the House and the Senate leadership are not shifted, the R gains that appear to be inevitable, will not make the difference that they absolutely MUST make in order to shift the country back to the people.

  • icesweeper

    Oh, to dream. To dream the possible dream…… Having Ryan as maj ldr would make me downright giddy…

    Proud member of Steve King’s district.

  • Bill S

    100% agree.

  • Scope

    “If the earmarks actually had merit, they could withstand the entire appropriations process, including review by committee, etc. instead of being added in.”

    If earmarks went through the appropriations process, it would automatically be known who is asking for the earmark, and what it is for. The ultimate in transparency.

    Earmarks are used as bribes, and, as payback for the politicians constitiuents who supported them during their campaign.

    If a city or town wants a bicycle path or a museum, let the residents raise the funds to pay for it. The Federal Government has no place in funding someone’s dreams.

  • RedBeard

    When I see a list of earmarks, it’s usually packed with spending that should be done at the state, not federal, level.

    Those important items you mentioned need to first be determined to be federal matters. If not, end of discussion. Drop the earmark. Let the states take charge of the issue.

  • Scope

    and even if the R’s take one or both houses in November, and we keep the same Republican Ruling Class in leadership positions, in two years the Republican party will be obsolete. They always seem to know how to snatch defeat from victory.

    There have been an influx of articles lately written by Republicans and Conservatives, sounding the warning bells to the Republicans should they re-gain any control. Not that I like it, and I don’t support the idea of any third parties, but, doing the same old, same old, will result in the rise of the strongest third party movement in American history. It will make Ross Perot’s campaign look like he was a homeless pauper.

  • peg_c

    This is also another reason I’ll give to individual candidates but have nothing to give the GOP when they call except a huge mouthful of “Not another penny!!”

  • eburke

    That’s the fastest and best way to bring this crap to a screeching halt. As long as these guys think they can do what they want with impunity, they’ll keep doing it. A roster full of conservative PC’s contolling the levers of power in the local GOP apparatus is beyond essential to keeping these clowns in line.

  • Scope

    100% agree RedBeard.

  • acat

    Given the thousands of pages that Fed budget omnibuses run to, there is zero reason not to insert “earmark language” directly into the bill itself.

    All the earmark process does, especially as practiced in recent years, is to insulate the legislator from the earmark. Look up “airdrop earmarks” some time, eh?

    Ear marks don’t need to be eliminated, but they are well past due for some simple reforms, starting with “if it ain’t in your district, it ain’t your earmark” and “if it’s your earmark, it has your name on it”.

    Mew

  • eburke

    Too often defenders of earmarks look at the ‘merits’ of the earmark, or talk about how, as a percentage of the budget, it’s not that much.

    The problem isn’t the amount of money, it’s the fact that they’re used as bribes to enact hundreds of billions of dollars in spending and entitilements. Plus, they just plain look bad to the average voter.

  • Scope

    that are paid to states when they have major floods, hurricanes, bridge collapses etc.

  • Scope

    A good example would be Tom Perriello, Virginia earmarking something like a million bucks for a company that was hired to do flood plain studies in Texas.

  • acat

    If I have flooding, shouldn’t the Fed block transfer money to the State, and let the State figure out how best to use it?

    If nothing else, this would put shed some sunlight on the local politicians, where it’s more needed. (at least, in Illinois…)

    Mew

  • Dave_in_Fla

    It is a line item in those 1000 page omnibus bills with a specific line item inserted directly.

    Which is my point, we need transparency more than we need to stop a practice that they will eventually end run around anyway.

  • Dave_in_Fla

    Most earmarks would be better as a block grant to the states to deal with a local issue. Of course, it is unlikely that a congressperson is going to feel comfortable surrendering control of “how” to address the issue.

    Back to that issue of human nature again. I just don’t believe that you can eliminate the practice. It has existed in every government ever existing throughout all of human history. Better to expose the practice to public scrutiny and force them to defend themselves on election day. But that is just my opinion.

  • acat

    and some are written into the actual legislation and some are non-legislative guidelines sent to Fed agencies with their budget …

    Some have the congresscritters names on ‘em, some don’t…. sometimes the only way to tell who authorized the earmark is to see whose name goes on the signs on the walking path.

    Some earmarks are debated, most aren’t, and there’s not a clean way for a congresscritter to vote for a bill but against the earmark, although I suppose something like adding an amendment saying “no earmarks” to a bill could be attempted.

    The system needs reform. I don’t think yours go far enough since, at this point, one of the more erosive uses of earmarks is to dilute State power .. a lot of pet projects funded by earmarks should be coming out of the statehouse instead but .. it’s so much *easier* to lobby one Congressman instead of the 4 or 5 state reps….

    The best approach at this point is to keep the ban in place and, without removing the ban, start talking about how to reform the system. Cantor doesn’t seem willing to do that. Therefore, Cantor is wrong and needs a wake-up call.

    Mew

  • ss396

    Yes, humanity is imperfect. We cannot foresee every detail of the coming budget year; that’s what discretionary spending is for.

    I say it again – if you want to direct money around at the local level, then run for city council. It is not a Federal responsibility to put up these edifices, patch these roads, build these bridges.

    Please bear in mind that there is a huge difference between a Federal Government and a National Government. If our Congressfolks cannot restrain themselves from the tiny, tiny, tiny piece of the Federal Budget that earmarks are, then how in the world can they be trusted with fiscal discipline over the entirety of the Federal budget?

  • Common_Cents

    We need to send him some reinforcements. He was bold enough to stand up to Obama and dismantle him with facts and common sense at the photo op faux summit but didn’t get more than a little lip service support. I’d love to lock Obama in a debate room with Ryan in an open mike free for all and watch Obama self destruct.

  • Scope

    If there is a true disaster, however, I am thinking about the oil spill situation in the Gulf, which the feds royally screwed up from the get go. Yes, BP is responsible for the clean up, but, for BP to be ordered to submit funds, to be distributed by a federally appointed person, Feinberg, to dole out, is to cut the bottom out of of BP’s pocket. I don’t believe there will ever be any sunlight shown on Feinberg’s dispersals.

  • acat

    Wouldn’t it be better for the State to raise their own taxes, and cut the Fed middlemen out entirely, for something the citizens of the State want?

    In order to redirect focus back to the State level, i.e. reasserting States Rights, it may be helpful to block all Fed earmarks for a while….

    Mew

  • acat

    Although I’d be almost as happy with Pence as majority leader and Paul Ryan as one of his inner circle.

    Mew

  • mboyle1988

    Does someone have a strategy? I’ll be completely on board. I want Boehner gone too. Ryan for speaker and Ron Paul for majority leader!

  • GCBWI

    If we don’t want to repeat history, we need to learn from it–as citizens. We hope to elect people who will represent us faithfully in Washington. Once they are there, citizens need to stay engaged and keep in contact with their representatives.

    Those we elect need to hear constantly from their constituents so that they know exactly what we want of them.

  • Scope

    I’m talking about items such as the LA purchase, the Cornhusker kickback etc. There was no reason to insert millions of dollars into bills that have absolutely nothing to do with the earmark. The Dems have made a habit of inserting pet projects into bills that are necessary to pass. The Republicans have done the same thing, and, unfortunately, many of us went along with it. Erick’s example of awarding earmarks to R’s in order to pass the past president’s pet legislation, Medicare Part D, made two wrongs out of a bill that should never have passed with a Republican president, and a Republican majority in the Congress. The Ocare earmark for Blanche Lincoln will be one big reason she will not be going back to DC. The Republicans need desperately to open their eyes and see that.

    I just read an article this morning about Obama stating that the stimulus passed without a single earmark. Pelosi and friends shot out of their seats with applause for that statement. Problem is, there were something like 7,000 earmarks in that legislation. The Republicans will go the way of the Progressives if they don’t learn some lessons. Be very sad to see the Republicans gain any majorities, and keep them for only 2 years.

  • Common_Cents

    We have over centralized and over consolidated power. You can send he most well intentioned people to DC and there will be a high probility they will be assimilated. How long can a Paul Ryan hang on when he is probably shunned as an outsider inside the beltway? Even from his own party?
    We somehow have to decentralize power and money control back to the state and local govt where there is much more real oversight by the people and solutions tailored to local needs.

    Imagine 50 experiments and letting the best solutions spread by real results? Now we are reducing everyone to the lowest common denominator, redistributed poverty in the name of equality and socializing losses for the elite insiders rather than creating an innovative competitive landscape that provides critical feedback for winning and losing ideas/execution.

  • acat

    So, the best approach may be to make it known to those candidates who we are supporting with our time and money that we have certain expectations, and that one of those expectations is that Mr. Cantor be removed from GOP leadership in the House.

    Mew

  • Scope

    As much as I am trying to envision Perriello back in NY, it may be more dreaming than reality. The largest voting block in the 5th district is in Charlottesville, which is also the most liberal area in the district. It also was the Cville area that was the most engaged in the R primary, and, the word was anyone but Hurt, the Cantor puppet. I want Perriello gone, but, the wind was taken out of the sails of the riled up that were supporting a few of the other candidates. I’m sure Hurt will still get the votes, but, I doubt he will have many ground soldiers, and donations, and he is up against the Soros bank account.

  • Scope

    and all about his own personal climb to power. He knows he will win re-election every time. No one ever even challenges him, he makes sure of it.

  • Scope

    Don’t the House members vote on their leadership at the start of each new Congress? Is seems that those that have seniority are always considered to be next in line.

    It may be possible that with enough screaming from us little people out here, it will encourage the better and more competent members to challenge the old guard.

  • Scope

    There is absolutely no chance at all that Cantor will not win in November. Zip. I would love to see a strong, uncompromising primary challenger to run against him in 2012, but even that is doubtful. I mainly want to see him taken out of any leadership positions in the House. I want his young gun program exposed for the sham that it is. He has recruited people he can control. Don’t forget that he sent a check for $5 grand to Dede Scozzifozzy.

  • honorable

    Can someone provide Eric Cantor’s email so we can bombard him with our views and make him take a vow to not take any more pork/earmark as long as they are in House Majority?

    Since he is likely to be the majority leader in new Congress, this is the only way to keep him straight and narrow.

  • Oz

    During the 1980s, Reagan vetoed legislation with earmarks.

    What has changed so drastically in society that we can’t go back to that formula?

  • Scope

    in the basket of the states taking control of their own needs/issues/policy. From everything I read, there is more than just a little chance of the majority of states electing Republican Governors this year.

    States such as Arizona, Texas and now Virginia are actually doing the job that the Ruling Class R’s in Washington should have done for the last 4 years, and particularly these past two years. They have watched the Progressives slice and dice the country into little bits, and, the mamby pamby jackwagon R’s haven’t even put up all that much of a fuss.

    As I have said before, in VA our Constitutional Conservative Attorney General, has filed federal lawsuits against Ocare, the EPA Endangerment Finding, he has authorized our law enforcement to ask immigration status. On Friday he issued an opinion that Abortion Clinics will now have to be regulated as though they are hospitals, rather than Dental Surgery or Plastic surgery relaxed regs. If it holds, the majority of the baby killing mills will have to close.

    One man with courage is an Army, Navy, Marines and Air Force.

  • eastbaylarry

    From that agreement we can require that anything remotely resembling an earmark *not* be included in urgent, important and necessary legislation.
    I would further require that ‘earmarks’ only be funded from current, not projected, budget surpluses.

  • eastbaylarry

    From that agreement we can require that anything remotely resembling an earmark *not* be included in urgent, important and necessary legislation.
    I would further require that ‘earmarks’ only be funded from current, not projected, budget surpluses.

  • eastbaylarry
  • eastbaylarry

    not eliminate them.

  • Dave_in_Fla

    If the state decides to taxpayer fund full and open abortion up until the day before birth, the feds should stay out of it?

    I know I am talking apples and oranges, but I really do feel this desire we have for purity on earmarks is fools gold. It won’t happen, and we are better served to apply transparency rather than try to eliminate it.

  • Dave_in_Fla

    These types of kickbacks have no business in legislation. I’m just not sure this is the type of earmark Cantor was talking about.

    Frankly, I’m confused at this point between the practice, Cantor’s statements, and the reaction here in the comments. And I worry that we are going to get so up in arms about our own pet issues on November 3rd that we will throw away a functioning majority. Much like the left is about to.

    Hell, we haven’t even won, and some of the rhetorical chest beating has us throwing them out of office already.

  • Scope

    the feds should stay out of it. Abortion should have never become anything other than a state’s issue. If I lived in a state that taxed it’s residents to pay for state funded abortions, I would move to another state that does not have that as a law. Actually, I would move to a state that was anti-abortion no matter who paid for it.

  • acat

    On one paw, I do think the abortion issue should be decided at the State level.

    On the other paw, life begins at conception, and that means any action taken against an unborn person is violating their constitutional right to the pursuit of happiness.

    Pragmatically speaking, the Libs want abortion to be a federal issue because they can affect all States, not just the blue ones .. and they also splinter the Conservative response – separating those who would rather see abortion solved state-by-state apart from those who want to use the same Fed sledgehammer against the pro-abortion side. (not to mention seriously confusing what a conservative is, along the way)

    So, my view is that abortion is a federal issue, on the grounds of the constitutional rights of the pre-born, but beyond saying “life begins at conception”, the actual implementation of protection for the pre-born should be left up to the States.

    Each State should enact their own laws regarding cases where “life of the mother” applies, letting all citizens decide what they believe, and then choosing where they want to spend their lives and dollars and time based on those beliefs.

    Mew

  • http://hillbillypolitics.com Steph C

    There are some able bodies there besides the ones from the last time the Republicans held the House.

    Puts me in mind of the Republicans taking the State House here. One fellow was supported by the Republicans, except for one lone Republican who worked with the Dems to put himself into the position. The majority margin was that close.

    A lot will probably depend on how big the majority is next January.

  • acat

    Let’s encourage the congresscritters we’ve supported – assuming they win – to start the debate over earmark reform – and to keep a lid on earmarks in the meantime.

    Mew

  • GCBWI
  • pantera

    is it written in stone that cantor has to be speaker?
    with a good conservative election why would they vote back in the problem children…

  • Dave_in_Fla

    .

  • Scope

    was with the Republican leadership in Congress should we win the majority back.

    I live in Cantor’s district in VA. I would love nothing more than to send the attitude on steroids back home, but, only if there was a better replacement available to primary him in 2012.

    A Republican majority in the House for the next 2 years will accomplish nothing if they have not learned why they were sent home in 06 and 08. Should a majority happen, it will only be because the Progressives have gone over the insanity cliff, not because the R’s have proven themselves worthy. If they go right back to what they did with the majority in the past administration, they will be looking at the shortest majority time period possibly ever.

    I would be willing to bet that even the constituients of most of the Congresscreeps would agree to stop bringing home the bacon in exchange for reduced spending every where possible, in order to help reduce the deficit, and to not increase taxes.

  • acat

    Answer your own question.

    Mew

  • http://www.theprecinctproject.wordpress.com ColdWarrior

    he actually told prospective voters that he already had a plan in the works, with other potential and current conservative House members, to attempt to force House rule changes (assuming the Republicans take back control of the House).

    David explained last week at a Tempe Tea Party meeting, where he and other candidates spoke, that he had just returned from D.C. where he had met with a group of conservative incumbent Republicans. They are trying to build the largest group of conservatives possible, reaching out to new conservative primary winners (perhaps Dr. Dan Benishek in Michigan?), to employ a strategy to force a series of rule changes that will force the House to get spending under control.

    This conservative coalition will pledge, for example, to not vote for any candidate for Speaker who will not agree to a rule change requiring every House bill to be a “single issue” bill; that is, for example, a defense appropriation bill would be limited to defense appropriations. No possibility to add any earmarks to it. Another change to the rule the group would demand, I seem to recall he mentioned, would be that no “vapor bills” could be introduced: a bill would actually have to be written before debate could begin on it and would have to be in actual, final, written form before a final up or down vote — no more “fill in the blanks” legislation would be permitted.

    For Liberty,
    ColdWarrior, PC (that?s ?precinct committeeman,? not ?political child!?)
    Conservatives, UNITE! CHANGE the Republican Party and save the world by UNITING INSIDE the Party as precinct committeemen. NOW! (70 days until Nov. 2 — what are YOU DOING to help get out the vote in your precinct?)

  • uselogic

    Every time I see this namby-pamby, weasel Rino being interviewed I want to scream to the interviewer… “He’s not really a Republican!”. Unfortunately, he is. And he’s one of the big reason’s I go direct with my $$. No more helping clowns like Cantor by default.

    PS: Not that she’s conservative by any means but why are Greta Van Susteren’s go-to Republican interviews always Cantor and McCain.

    Oops….. answered my own question.

  • Dave_in_Fla

    States can’t get too far out of bounds into areas that are deemed in the national interest, just like the Feds can’t get too far into the states knickers because of the 10th amendment. Obamacare tramples on state’s rights, and as much as I approve of the Arizona immigration law it is pushing into Federal responsibility.

    Much like there is supposed to be a balance of power between the 3 branches of the federal government there is also supposed to be checks and balances between the Fed and the states.

    We can argue what is ideal or constitutional until the cows come home, but as a practical matter, states are limited in the scope of what they can do. If they move too far outside of the national interest, the federal government will show an interest.

    Perhaps a better example would be if Utah legalized polygamy. Given the current fight over gay marriage, it is highly unlikely that Congress would not take action to invalidate it.

  • BA Cyclone

    He is intelligent and will talk a reason-circle around his opponent before they even know it’s time to circle the wagons. And he pulls no punches.

    He needs to be in more prominent leadership, that much is certain.

  • BA Cyclone

    He is intelligent and will talk a reason-circle around his opponent before they even know it’s time to circle the wagons. And he pulls no punches.

    He needs to be in more prominent leadership, that much is certain.

  • texasgalt

    He has always been part of the problem.

    He has no respect for the conservative uprising that will return the House to the Republicans.

  • Deep_Thinker

    The Democrats are IDIOTS

    The Republicans are FOOLS

  • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

    Heck most of the time it’s based strictly on seniority.

    We need to get away from that thinking, but, I don’t see it happening soon.

  • http://impudent.edublogs.org/ kyle8

    and if we did get a real firebrand in leadership, the old guys would conspispire with the MSM to “get” him or her.

    Same way some of them backstabbed Gingrich.

  • bucfish

    make Ron Paul the house minority leader. At least he will honestly make the GOP do what they promised to do.

  • bucfish

    This will do two things. Get the RP followers reason to help GOP candidates and get the GOP to stay on message about cutting budgets and debt.

  • acat

    Sorry, bucfish, but Ron Paul, the crazy uncle of the Republican party, doesn’t have the qualifications to come down from the attic.

    This is just plain not going to happen, nor should it.

    Mew

  • acat

    if I happened to live in, say, Costa Rica, it would be a disaster for the GOP and the U.S. in general.

    Paul is conservative on some issues, but bughouse nuts on others. Scratch the surface a little and you find some rather revolting ideas – Ron Paul the anti-semite, Ron Paul the proponent of earmarks, etc.

    Mew

  • http://uslibertyjournal.blogspot.com/ Daezy

    The re-election of John McCain is so troublesome. It shows signs America has not learned her lesson yet.

    What in bloody hell will it take? (I fear the answer)

  • http://uslibertyjournal.blogspot.com/ Daezy

    The re-election of John McCain is so troublesome. It shows signs America has not learned her lesson yet.

    What in bloody hell will it take? (I fear the answer)

  • dambama

    If these idiot RINOs dare to start this kind of spending, then we will get them next!

    We will toss out every single politician who does not respect the fact that they are spending OUR money. You better watch out Cantor! You start this crap and you will be following Harry Reid into retirement.

  • Achance
  • the_invisible_hand

    You should at least applaud Cantor’s candor on the matter.

    These are legislators with constituencies. Earmarks aren’t going anywhere because there is a demand for them. This is pure market economics.

    Voters oppose earmarks in the abstract, aka, when they are not directly benefiting, but voters love earmark projects in their districts. And woe to the legislator that denies pork to his constituents.

    I believe people are confusing the backlash against the socialism of Obama with backlash against the government teat.

    If you make that miscalculation you are setting yourself up for a giant disappointment no matter what the outcome is in November.

    The American voter opposes socialism, but they are by and large Keynseian at heart and so is the Republican Party.

    I’m not suggesting anyone stay at home or sit on their hands. On the contrary I suggest blocking Obama and the socialists is a sufficient good, but don’t kid yourself.

    Republicans will continue to earmark and maintain a big government status quo. They just won’t be socialists.

  • floydbayne

    Guys, you don’t have to wait until 2012 and a primary. There is a real conservative constitutionalist challenging Cantor THIS YEAR. I am running against Cantor as an Independent exactly because of this sort of behavior that he continues to exhibit.

    Check out Floyd Bayne at – www.floydbayne.com – and see that you do have a choice this time. Let’s end the madness!

  • the_invisible_hand

    It is the same fundamental clash of the Democrats and any major political coalition.

    It is the pragmatists vs. the idealists. Ron Paul, can largely be credited with organizing what would later be the Tea Party movement.

    I can’t see how anyone could deny that his 2008 campaign began to assemble and unite disparate groups of independents and disgruntled Repubulicans around a message of small government (the major Republican party was not doing so at the time).

    But Paul also comes with some consequences of his own. He can’t be trusted around a microphone and he’ll take some positions to such extremes to make his message unpalatable to a mainstream audience.

    We run into that constantly. The expedient vs. the ideological. Paul, and most idealists never make successful legislators because they can’t fathom compromise.

    Paul as Majority Leader would send half the party’s members fleeing to form a new caucus.

  • tex41lb

    Human nature being what it is, if you leave the cookie jar open on the counter the cookies are going to be taken. Any earmark capability will be met with self serving gorging by every congressman in sight, always of course in the interest of his voter base.

    At this point I support a complete ban in light of the urgent need to regain control of the debt and entitlements. Earmarks do allow outright bribery in support of bad law as recently documented in voting for the health legislation. As such they are self-defeating in the effort to reach conservative goals.

  • http://slcliberty.blogivists.com randy streu

    Look it up on YouTube.

  • http://slcliberty.blogivists.com randy streu

    The bribes are called “pork.”

    Earmarks are how the money allotted in a particular bill gets allocated.

    Cantor as “guy in charge” — I’ll leave that up to larger skulls than mine. But all this mess over a remark about spending allocation seems like much ado about nothing.

  • ywhyvon1

    Oh! Happy days are here[again?].

    Seriously though, I was not aware of Schweikert et al. I have been wondering where all the freshman congressman were going(could) to congregate once they got to the “Big House”.

    This could be the beginning of something TRULY historical for America.

  • ywhyvon1

    Interesting comparison!

    Monkeys

    Start with a cage containing five monkeys. Inside the cage, hang a banana on a string and place a set of stairs under it.

    Before long, a monkey will go to the stairs and start to climb towards the banana.

    As soon as he touches the stairs, spray all the other monkeys with cold water.

    After a while another monkey makes the attempt with same result, all the other monkeys are sprayed with cold water.

    Pretty soon when another Monkey tries to climb the stairs, the other monkeys will try to prevent it.

    Now, put the cold water away. Remove one monkey from the cage and replace it with a new one.

    The new monkey sees the banana and wants to climb the stairs.

    To his shock, all of the other monkeys beat the snot out of him. After another attempt and attack, he knows that if he tries to climb the stairs he will be assaulted.

    Next, remove another of the original five monkeys and replace it with a new one.

    The newcomer goes to the stairs and is attacked.

    The previous newcomer takes part in the punishment with enthusiasm.

    Likewise, replace a third original monkey with a new one, then a fourth, then the fifth.

    Every time the newest monkey takes to the stairs he is attacked.

    Most of the monkeys that are beating him up have no idea why they were not permitted to climb the stairs OR even why they are participating in the beating of the newest monkey.

    Finally, after replacing all of the original monkeys, none of the remaining monkeys have ever been sprayed with cold water.

    Nevertheless, no monkey ever again approaches the stairs to try for the banana.

    Why not?

    Because as far as they know, that is the way it has always been done around here.

    And that, my fellow monkeys, is how Congress operates –
    And precisely why we need to REPLACE all the original monkeys this November.

  • ywhyvon1

    I thought I just copied the text of the email

    Somebody tell me how to remove this please!!!!

  • acat

    Okay, look. Ron Paul is hardly the “big clash”. He’s a geezer-class pol with enough charisma to smarm the weak-minded, and whose libertarian positions on a couple issues happen to be in vogue.

    He is not the ‘big clash’ – unless you mean his apparent inability to decide whether he wants to be part of the statist big-government “ruling class” wing, or whether he wants to be a libertarian…

    Mew

  • Scope

    This person actually did post something very truthful.

    “We run into that constantly. The expedient vs. the ideological. Paul, and most idealists never make successful legislators because they can?t fathom compromise.”

    I take it that he sees old Ronnie as an idealist, and, does say, correctly, that they “can’t fathom compromise.” Isn’t that our biggest argument against the Paultards? Ronnie and his idiot followers will never compromise? You can take that to the bank.

  • acat
  • Scope

    “The American voter opposes socialism, but they are by and large Keynseian at heart and so is the Republican Party.”

    As others say here, have you been living in the real world, with real accurate news, and gotten out of the dark dank basement lately that Mom relugated you to. First cousin marriages are never a good idea.

  • cactusjack

    This is another one. Keynesianism as it is commonly understood by the public, really has fallen flat on its face this time, faster and more resoundingly than even the conservatives and Friedman monetarists expected. The 0 was given more money and more goodwill to use than any President in American history, and it just flat did not work. Not even a dead cat bounce. They’ll have to rewrite the economics 101 books after this. I honestly believe – if we survive this – no politician for a long long time will be able to ever again propose massive spending on the public side, again.

  • Scope

    that Ronnie can’t decide if he wants to be a part of the Ruling Class or a Libratarian. He tired the Libertarian party- big fail. He tried the Republican party- big fail. I suspect he is going to try the Constitution party next.

    Where I disagree with you is saying he has any charisma. He is like a limp you know what. He just happened to corral all the fringe/kooky/dumb desperate creeps into one bag.

  • ralatredstate

    ……………..Pence…Boehner..Ryan……CANTOR…Issa……..Castle
    Cato………63.5…..47…………66……….57……………55……….64….(trade issues)
    NCU………99.6….94…………92.4…….96.7…………91……….52.5
    NatJour….7……….7.8………..19.3…….11.7………..14.5…….42.2..(low = Cons)

    Pence is clearly the most conservative according to these raters, and deserves his leadership position. But Cantor ranks above Boehner by 2 of 3, above Ryan by 2 of 3, above Issa by all 3, and (far) above Castle on 2 of 3. A couple more, for comparison:

    …………….Bachmann…..Ron Paul……..
    Cato……..57………………76
    NCU…….100…………….82.9
    NatJour..10.2……………29.7

  • ralatredstate

    Pence?Boehner..Ryan?CANTOR?Issa??..Castle?.Bachmann?..Paul
    99……….86………..93………92…………….91…………43…………88……………….97

  • ywhyvon1
  • acat

    Ron Paul is the perfect candidate for libertarians, strict-constitutionalists, and republicans who don’t understand critical thinking.

    Mew

  • acat

    Want to try again?

    And I would just point out that the synergy between gay marriage, polygamy, and other different forms of marriage is recognized by the proponents of each… at least, based on web chatter I’ve run across in my wanderings.

    We definitely end up on a “slippery slope”, and IMO the best option for all concerned would be for government to get out of the marriage business altogether – slash and burn all the paperwork associated, everyone is an individual, if they choose to write contracts to form unions of whatever sort, they can.

    Mew

  • GenEarly

    “Posterity — you will never know how much it has cost my generation to preserve your freedom. I hope you will make good use of it.” –John Quincy Adams

    ?I think, therefore I am not a Democrat. I fight; therefore I am not a Republican.? Unknown

    ?When Injustice becomes Law, Resistance becomes Duty.? Thomas Jefferson

  • acat