Suckers

clintonformccain

That’s what happens when one party can deliver a unified voting bloc and the other can’t.

izoneguy

When one party controls the Presidency and the Senate.
This is why it is vital to the health of the republic to get conservatives elected and take control of everything. All these bills are doing is kicking the can down the road. Spending more money will do nothing but delay the collapse.

bk

Only a handful of them would seriously try to block that bill.

ghostship

“We only control 1/2 of one house of Congress so we can’t do anything.’

“The Democrats control the Senate so we can’t do anything.”

“Obama has the White House so we can”t do anything.”

If you Establishment Republicans can’t do anything then why are you still in D.C.

If you can’t do anything then go home. Go back home and hide under your bed since all you can do is hold up your hands and cry about how it’s hopeless and you can’t do anything.

Us Hobbits will stay and fight and we’ll march into Mordor by ourselves.

If you can’t do anything then go home. Your just getting in the way of those who are not willing to lay down and hand Middle Earth to Lord Sauron.

Composer_Man

Are we happy that Boehner’s bill is passing? Are we mad?

At what point were we in our strongest position to get Harry Reid to do something he absolutely did not want to do?

sarg01

The House Republicans will vote down anything to the right of the original Boehner bill. They may not have been able to get 217 to pass it, but they’ll be able to get 217 to oppose anything significantly to the left of it.

Reid can blather all he wants, but now that the House Rs have a bill they can unite around, the compromise will be 75-90% of the way between the Reid and House bills:

The Dems will insist on the BBA requirement being dropped.

Boehner will agree, basically returning to the original Boehner bill (that would have had 205+ R votes)

Now that we’ve reached a serious “last chance” moment, Obama will insist Congress pass something. Pelosi won’t be able to whip against Obama. With the House Dems released, we can get 20+ votes from them.

sarg01

I said the House Rs vote down anything to the right, when I meant to the left.

ghostship

The way things are going I’d say you were pretty correct the first time.

Right Reason

. . .it sounds a little odd to say that bad things happen when one party controls the Prseidency and the Senate, so we need to have conservatives gain control of the Presidency and the Senate.

__t_i_m_o_t_h_y__

With Rand Paul claiming 10 to 14 Senate votes in opposition to Boehner 2.0, there is a real chance of a filibuster of a Reid bill.

(Off topic, but Rand Paul sorta looks like a Hobbit doesn’t he? Kind of like Pippen)

jccbin

They do not trust the American people. Despite mouthing the words, despite walking the walk, when it came time to let US rule our own nation, they opted for their own plan rather than letting the people see just how thin is the paper tiger of government.

I am convinced that a failure to increase the debt ceiling would have led to a eureka moment for many, many Americans, especially the “Independents.” They would have seen, for perhaps the first time in two generations, just how little government actually accomplishes for its immense cost.

But our dear GOP DC-crowd could not bring themselves to rely on us.

It is the tyranny of assumed inside knowledge; the tyranny of a system built on self-preservation at every level, from the outside companies comfortable with their overseers and government contacts, to the bureaucrats, to the politicians and their staffs themselves.

They could not see that their entire world is manufactured to keep them in check, socially, economically, ethically, philosophically. Until they can break out of those bounds, we will be their peasants and they our benevolent tyrants, doomed to a catastropic collapse when the system becomes unstable and caroms off into the pit of history.

I lived to see the end of the Founders’ dream. They were right about allowing permanent taxation and the unstoppable confluence of moneyspending factions. So very right. So terribly, awfully, and gloriously right.

gmscan

… for a third party after all. I’ve heard more mocking of the Tea Party from the GOP lately than I have from the Democrats. Apparently they think we are more trouble than we’re worth.

fpete13527

To Conservative Senators – now is the time to make a difference and to fight this piece of garbage in any way that you can.

clintonformccain

You have to have a discipline, unified caucus for a filibuster. With the Republican party broken apart and profusely bleeding independent support, there is no prayer of a filibuster or stopping any bill that has unified Democratic support and only needs a few Republicans.

rpopp23

do we believe something will happen because Harry Reid says it will? Come on Erick, there are lots of fights left before that happens.

Further, unless I am missing something, if Reid does what you are saying, it won’t go back to the house, it will go to conference, where it will be fought out again.

There is still a long way to go.

Glaucon

Now More than Ever, Read the Bill

udtiger

It has already been made clear that the USA is going to be downgraded if any of the plans (real or “floated”) pass other than CCB, so that’s off the table.

The government CANNOT default (i.e., NOT pay the public debt). This is prohibited by the 14th Amendment and the revenues are sufficient to pay the public debt.

I use that term specifically because that term has specific meaning for the purposes of the 14th Amendment. “Public debt” means government securities (bonds, t-bills, other debt instruments). It does not mean “obligations” (contractual promises to pay). Moreover, it does NOT mean “entitlements” (SS, Medicare, Medicaid) or any other government spending. Thus, NOT paying those “other” expenditures is NOT “default.”

If CCB is not passed, and if nothing else is passed, it means that the US government MUST live within its means. It means that the government will have to “make do” with the revenues that come in (in this month, a little over $200 billion. $29 billion of that is debt service, leaving the government $171 billion to “make do” with).

By not passing a debt ceiling increase, the goverment will have to make the cuts that they are presently too unwilling to make, and they have to make them NOW and not later. Plus, with the GOP in charge of the House, there will be no tax increases (which, as the current GDP numbers show, would be foolish).

Call your Concresscritter and scream “CCB or nothing!”

gekster

Don’t like the Republican party, change it from within.
Third parties only split the conservatives, never the liberals.
Seek out ColdWarrior, he can help you, that is if you are serious.

charliesalmanack

After Reid tabled CCB, Boehner could have come right back with “CCB +”. By which I mean the original Cut, Cap, and Balance bill that passed the House, only with the addition of (slightly) higher spending cuts.

It would have passed, again, with bipartisan support.

At which point Boehner would have sent a very clear message: the price of non-compliance will only go up.

And because CCB sells well, polls well, etc we might have really turned this debate around with a week or so to really pressure some Dem Senators from red states who are running in 2012.

We could have increased our chances of winning the policy debate, and stayed on offense in the political/media debate.

Woulda, Coulda, Shoulda…….

Instead, we’ve got a losing hand in the media debate. Which makes me fear that Boehner is going to fold on the really important thing for our country, which is getting the policy right.

leeatmg

Before, we had a bad Boehner bill that might have passed the Senate. Now, we have a better bill that will be amended to be a worse bill, and will pass the Senate. Seems to me the smart move would have been to pass the original Boehner bill, then hold fast and refuse to amend it as a voting bloc. Now, we end up with a worse bill that will pass in a “bipartisan” fashion.

What, exactly, did we accomplish here by not accepting the bad, but somewhat better Boehner bill as a down payment on the future battle for debt and deficit reduction? Just not seeing any way in which conservatives didn’t just weaken their position and shoot themselves in the foot here. I’d love to believe otherwise.

I know Erick predicted this would happen, but with all of the calls to “hold the line” I think instead, we made the prediction come true.

udtiger

…the GOP plays Tiddywinks and the Dems play MMA.

gekster

People would have had to make a stand.
Tableing the bill was the easy/whimpy way out.

mbauer

Yes, Reid will pass a drastically changed version of Boehners bill.

After that it’ll go to conference between the two bodies. Something inbetween Reid and Boehner’s plane will be produced and both bodies will have to vote again.

I am curious if the Senate will need 60 votes to pass, or just 50 + Biden because it is a budgeting bill.

I am also curious if Boehner will bring up the modified bill for a vote if it has the support of less than a majority of his caucus… if he does will their be a new speaker? The problem for the CCB supporters is there is no outspoken house leader trying to whip bills away from Boehner’s compromise.

One thing the media seems to be missing, Boehner’s plan is already a huge compromise… Reid’s is the left of center plan, CCB the right of center plan and Boehner is the moderate one by that Overton Window.

Obama’s dream plan with tax hikes was always so deadly unpopular that he dare not write it down and be accountable for where he wanted to start the debate. BBA was always popular.

Charles Cianfrocca

HE didn’t say *bad* things happen when one party controls the Presidency and the Senate.

Speaking as a partisan, better that if one party control those things, it be ours.

http://jhpruitt.blogtownhall.com/ kipling

The passage of the Boehner plan will be used by Reid as a vehicle for the Democratic plan. The Democratic plan – disguised as the Boehner plan – will be returned to the House for a vote. All Boehner has done is give Reid cover. It would have been better to let the CCB stand as our bill and either force Reid to vote on it or submit his plan without the cover of the Boehner plan.

izoneguy

for votes.

Conservatives know that slashing spending must begin now, not in 2012 or 2016. Obama & the dems want to spend Trillions more before they are voted out. They know if they can spread the cash now then they can take control again in 2016. That is why the debt limit should not be raised.

http://jhpruitt.blogtownhall.com/ kipling

The bill Reid returns to the House will be the Reid plan but it will bear Boehner’s name. Boehner will shake his head but urge his caucus to vote for it as the best we can get. Then all of the House Dems and the “establishment” Republicans will vote in favor of the bill and it will pass.

$10 to the Demint Conservative Fund say that exact scenario plays out.

MNConservative

What it ACTUALLY says is “The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.” That means we can’t question the validity of the debt. Doesn’t mean we can’t default.

Sort of like your mortgage. If you walk into the bank and say “I don’t owe you this money”, that’s questioning the validity of the debt. If you walk in and say “I owe you the money, but .. GO JUMP IN A LAKE”, that’s defaulting.

See the difference?

ghostship

I don’t think Boehner or any of the Establishment Republicans wanted CC&B or the Ryan plan to pass. They were just a few bones they threw to us Conservatives knowing that THEY weren’t going to lift a finger to fight for it.

They like Washington just as it is and are peeved at US to think WE should DARE try and hold their feet to the fire. They don’t like it when there Conservative base has the nerve to get uppity and think we should have a say in any of this government business.

http://jhpruitt.blogtownhall.com/ kipling

The only way a third party works is if it takes over an existing party or cobbles together a new party from the remains of a destroyed party.

Our structural system of government will not allow a third party to exist for long.

Nuclearnerd

Erick has enough training to know this but instead he pretends this only happened because of the Boehner bill. This was always Reid’s endgame. This site has been as bad or worse than when Kos was up in arms over every single vote and threatening to primary Democrats on stupid votes. It was a wate of time then, and we made fun of them. Now? We waste our breath on the same Quixotic attempts to control every line of every piece of legislation. Stop making the perfect the enemy of the good.

MNConservative

If we march into Mordor, will John McCain attempt to seize the ring of power and fall into the cracks of doom?

http://jhpruitt.blogtownhall.com/ kipling

The blame falls solely to Boehner who played the fool and served as a tool for Reid.

Whacker77

That seems to be the way some people want to handle this. If we can’t get our way, let’s just blow everything up and hope the blogs have our backs. What a way to run a rodeo.

I don’t understand why “smart” conservatives can’t get it through their heads we don’t have the Senate or the White House. The knucklehead Tea Party people who held out last night weakened our position because the BBA has ZERO chance of passing.

In fact, I believe some people aren’t interested in any deal at all. They want strife and despair and a bloody badge of honor to wear. It’s for certain Rush doesn’t want a deal. He wants carnage that enables his girlfriend to run for president.

We need to win in 2012, not blow ourselves up just to make ourselves feel better.

If people think this past month has been fun, this will be a microcosm of the Palin campaign.

Death_of_the_Donkey

when we are/were in power. Sure, we are talking a tough game now, but that is easy to do with control of any one branch of government. I will wait and see what happens when/if we regain control of government before I assume that we will hold the line for good.

lineholder

It appears that my skepticism of yesterday was entirely justifiable.

So, it didn’t go our way. We didn’t win. We didn’t get what we wanted. And we had some folks sell out in the process. Was this a tactical defeat due to error in strategy? Perhaps.

It still doesn’t alter the reality our nation is facing. The hard cold reality is that conservatives are still the best hope this nation has to reduce spending so that our nation doesn’t go the way of Greece et. al. Anyone who doesn’t recognize that by now isn’t seeing the big picture and is looking at only the political implications of the here and now.

If anything is true, it’s situations like these that prove that we have to fight that much harder. We’re either committed to this nation or we aren’t. Which is it going to be?

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

for your local and county Republican Party officials? Did you know that,on average, about half of the Republican Party precinct committeeman slots are vacant? If you’re not already a voting member of the Party, eligible to vote for the Party leaders, I hope you’ll consider becoming one to strengthen our Party rather than flee it.

If we could get all the tea partiers to unite inside the Republican Party, to fill up all those vacant precinct committeeman slots, Constitutional conservatives would OWN the Republican Party.

Thank you.

ColdWarrior

izoneguy

Or going GALT as we like to call it…..

I have basically stopped working. No paychecks mean no taxes to Obama.
I am taking it easy until and when Obama is kicked out. Watch the economy take off in 2013 after Obama is gone.

dmk3

Does the House have no power? What happened to the advantages of devided government and deadlock? What happened to the power of the purse? Isn’t the House, elected by popular vote every two year, supposed to be the peoples way of stopping an out of control government? Legislative courtesy should require that Harry Reid take up the bill already sent to the Senate and either vote it down or amend it and send it back to the House. Why are Republicans not pounding home the point that the Senate has been refusing to do its job?

Composer_Man

Would House Republicans ever vote for Harry Reid’s plan? Nobody is fooled that something “provides cover” for something else. If Harry Reid changes the Boehner bill, then it’s not the Boehner bill anymore, is it?

I’m not even convinced that Harry Reid can get his “bill” out of the Senate.

Composer_Man

Would House Republicans ever vote for Harry Reid’s plan? Nobody is fooled that something “provides cover” for something else. If Harry Reid changes the Boehner bill, then it’s not the Boehner bill anymore, is it?

I’m not even convinced that Harry Reid can get his “bill” out of the Senate.

http://www.barrypopik.com barrypopik

Rush Limbaugh just had a wonderful segment where every Democrat claimed that the tea party was “holding America hostage.” Limbaugh explained that the tea party is not composed of racist terrorists. The tea party simply wants to limit the spending of a broke country. The Democrats really are disgusting. So much for civility.

“We are the hostages!” Limbaugh just said.

Bravo.

Composer_Man

Has already said he won’t vote for Harry Reid’s plan, right? That’s hardly a unified Democratic front.

http://jhpruitt.blogtownhall.com/ kipling

The House had already passed two bills to deal with the situation – CCB and the Ryan Budget. Boehner then fell all over himself to offer a weaker plan. In the process, he appeared weak and foolish, which is exactly what he has proven to be.

If it was not for that “knucklehead” Tea Party, Boehner would just be the weak and foolish leader of a minority.

earlgrey

Black isn’t very cool to wear in the summertime.

jaykali

They would get the 60 votes in the senate for the bill + 67 needed for the balanced budget amendment?

So we are going to get 10 or so Democrats to defect to overcome a filibuster and then also get another 7 for the balanced budget amendment because the Democrats would have had no choice? Sorry if I am messing up the numbers, but my understand is that the balanced budget deal requires 2/3′s but not the president’s signature.

If you’re saying we can get that accomplished why not throw in repeal of Obamacare while we’re at it? Bc if they would agree to that we could probably get anything…

acat

because Boehner didn’t have the testicular fortitude to find out.

Mew

rightwingmom52

Did you see his defeatist comment down thread?

Your remark about cordpt yesterday was dead on as well. If you didn’t already see my comment back to you this am, check it out.

http://jhpruitt.blogtownhall.com/ kipling

He is scared he will get the blame so he will do whatever the Dems want him to do. He will wring his hands and whine but in the end he will do the “responsible” thing.

acat

Prior to that, the Gingrich-led GOP cut spending.

Prior to that, the GOP was not in control of the House for something like 40 years.

Do please try to not confuse Denny Hastert and his band of Dem-Lite GOPers with Conservatives.

Mew

izoneguy

is on to all of them now. “Moderate” Republicans have no future.

There is no reason to “compromise” with democrats and Obama.
They are the ones that own this economy and the morass they have created.

jaykali

The balanced budget amendment would require 67 votes unless I’m wrong. And that’s the main piece everyone wants, right? Are there 20 democrats that would defect? I mean we run out of Manchin/blue-dog types really quick.

I just don’t know that all the pressure in the world would have forced 15 or 20 democrats, however many that would have needed to defect to vote for it.

ragstoriches

that it was, in fact, two lone Hobbits who marched into Mordor and brought evil to a spectacular end. The distractions by the larger caucus aided, certainly, but in the end, it was a mere two Hobbits who saved Middle Earth from certain doom.

Just a thought to chew on in place of our own entrails as the events of the day play out.

Bill S

Boehner and McConnell.

See a problem there?

Bill S

the POTUS and Congress can interpret that however they want to, and it takes the SCOTUS to decide on who’s right. That process takes a while. So if they do something that we think is unconstitutional, the legal system has to kick in, lawsuits must be filed, and the entire appeals process takes over.

The Constitution, and that amendment in particular, is/are not cut and dried with obvious meanings…if it were, we wouldn’t need the Supreme Court.

Bill S

and black socks. You’ll look like a Goth tourist.

PubliusII

Three points:

1. I think Reid needs 60 votes. Calling Senate Republicans: man up.

2. Reid’s 53 vote caucus may be united in opposition to the Boehner bill, but won’t be united when they have to vote FOR something, rather than against something.

3. The reality is that whatever power Reid has to gut the Boehner bill, he also has that same power to gut CCB. Exactly how have conservatives been harmed by passing the Boehner bill?

http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

Oh look, tired old Nancy Pelosi talking points from 2006.

Give it a rest you fake.

ghostship

We’re giving Left their debt ceiling increase and getting NOTHING in return.

What do you call it when somebody takes your money by threats or force?

Isn’t that called robbery?

I guess in addition to abandoning their principles on fiscal responsibility the GOP is now adopting the policy of being soft on crime.

What a great day for the GOP.

Whacker77

Name one MSM media outlet, those from whom most get their news, saying R’s have passed two bills while O has done nothing? No one is doing that.

We could have jammed the Boehner plan down the D’s throats as the 2012 Senators would have buckled. Now, Reid gets to write the eventual outcome.

Good negotiating.

lineholder

Not sure which comment you are referring to? But yes, took a lot down thread per your mention.

This is like swatting a herd of flies away from the picnic table!

strikeeagle

He couldn’t stomach a fight over Obamacare because of Christmas; no chance he grows a spine with the August 2nd “deadline” — even with the fresh troops (Paul, Lee, Toomey, Rubio, et al) WE provided him.

http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

.

MNConservative

At some point the people will have to draw the line. It won’t take SCOTUS to dedice who’s right. The people will decide who is right next fall.

inovrmihd

At this point, it will get a lot of dem votes and you will only need a minority of republicans.

inovrmihd

It will come back to the House with teh McConnell mechanism. The House can vote against raising the debt limit, but Obama can veto and they will need 2/3 of each house to overrule. Essentially the second traunch will be raised with a show vote so Republicans can show they are against it.

http://jhpruitt.blogtownhall.com/ kipling

What makes you think the same MSM outlets who ignored CCB and the Ryan Budget will loudly proclaim the virtues of the Boehner plan and give him credit for anything. All he will receive is the blame and he deserves every bit of it for being a coward.

Boehner did not negotiate. He caved.

__t_i_m_o_t_h_y__

Was it Johnson who threatened to withold unaminous consent?

Having seen the Tea Party stand strong in the Boehner fight, perhaps they will be inspirred. That’s my bet.

http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

Do you have evidence for that ‘girlfriend’ comment, or are you going to apologize for the accusation?

Death_of_the_Donkey

some of us (ie me) we complaining about the deficits back during the last expansion and getting dismissed by some here because “deficits didn’t matter”. I am not a flavor of the month fiscal conservative, but a lifelong one.

Death_of_the_Donkey

I seem to remember Reagan having some pretty big deficits too (and he kept real non-defense discretionary spending in check).

__t_i_m_o_t_h_y__

And the Ruling Class republicans screwed us over real good.

No more.

The trust is gone and we Country Class are playing for keeps now.

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

transform the United States of America” more than our side wants to preserve it. They fight harder than us. Their justifies their means. they will do anything and everything to achieve socialism.

No better gauge of that is the level of participation by conservatives in their local Republican Party committees. For example, in my legislative district, no. 17, in Tempe, AZ, we’ve got 25,743 registered Republican voters. That translates into about 277 precinct committeeman slots for the 69 precincts in the legislative district. My precinct, Tempe 59, no. 918, has 868 registered Republicans and we’ve filled up all 8 precinct committeeman slots we are allotted. Historically, in AZ, only about 20 per cent of those Republicans would actually vote in a Republican primary. So, if I can get the conservative PCs in my precinct to help me get out the vote for the conservatives in primary elections, we can help the conservative Republicans win. We work with the campaigns of the conservative candidates to urge, through phone calls, door knocks and literature drops, the conservative Republicans to actually vote. If we can increase that historical 20 per cent figure just a little, the conservative has a good chance of winning. We helped David Schweikert win the primary and then go on to win the general election.

This is how we conservatives can reverse the Left’s attempt to “fundamentally transform the United States of America.”

But, while my precinct has 8 slots and 8 precinct committeemen, that’s not the way it is across the district, across Maricopa County, or across Arizona. Or America. Across America, on average, half of the Republican Party precinct committeeman slots are vacant. In my legislative district, we have 277 slots but only about 130 of them are filled. And both in my district, and across Maricopa County and the state, over one third of the precincts have ZERO precinct committeemen. That means no precinct committeeman is ever going to be contacting the Republicans in those precincts to remind them to vote.

If we conservatives can “fundamentally transform” the Republican Party at the precinct level, we might have a chance of stopping the Left’s attempt to “fundamentally transform the United States of America.”

Posting at Redstate, alone, ain’t gonna make it happen.

Thank you.

ColdWarrior
P.S. Do you know the name and number of your precinct, even?

gekster

Rush recently got married to his girlfriend Kathleen.

__t_i_m_o_t_h_y__

A further debt ceiling increase?

acat

For the entire time Reagan was president, he had to deal with a budget approved by Dems in the house. Go look up Tip O’Neil and Dan Rostenkowski.

Know what? Nevermind. You’re not worth my time.

Mew

ghostship

To fights means to risks losing.

To never fights means always losing.

We all know which one the GOP prefers.

johnt

just to expose the titanic fraud of it all. Even our abundant national supply of morons might get it. I know, a small point, one must reach for whatever smidgen of consolation one can get.

http://www.skiloveland.com skicougar

When Obama and Reid were able to turn the blame onto the house republicans(with help from the media), the house GOP should’ve taken what they could get then; now it’s too late.

Anything short of “compromise”, i.e. shutdown or deadline extension by the WH or treasury; will be plastered as all the house GOP’s fault.

Now, Obama will get the credit for getting it done while the house GOP threw fits.

GOP needs to take remedial deal making.

Death_of_the_Donkey

it wasn’t discretionary spending that drove the deficits in the 80s. And it wasn’t entitlements past 1983 (since we were still running surpluses there). So what exactly is your point about the House in the 80s, that they were running up defense budgets?

ghostship

Then the GOP will finally draw the line but by then it will be much too late.

By refusing to hold the line a much worse fate awaits us all than the fear the Nervous Nellie’s of the GOP Establishment think to avoid.

sarg01

Are you saying because the Senate will amend it? So what?

It’s perfectly routine for the Senate to toss out entire bills and replace them wholesale in order to get around the Constitutional requirements regarding starting in the House.

Obamacare was originally a veterans housing bill, if I remember correctly. They’ve even got a name for bills used like this, “legislative vehicle”.

Tavern Keeper

But I think the condition was that it was to be sent to the states for ratification. This would meant the Sen Dem leadership moving it through regardless of whether it was 60 or 67 votes required.

Adjoran

Boehner 1.2 (the new one is 1.3) was very, very close to the compromise plan he and Reid agreed on a week or two (or 100 years, seems that long) ago but Obama rejected. So Reid will amend 1.3 to take the BBA out (even though there is little reason to, the passage requirement should be a red flag to tell everyone there would be another deal in the meantime because you can’t decide to pay the bills on the basis of something else getting 2/3 votes) and pass it back.

Then it goes to conference. Hopefully, the adults in the House will have worked together to talk the holdouts off the ledge, and we can pass the original deal at the last minute, and send it to Obama.

Then Obama gets to choose to sign a short-term deal and declare victory as he jets off to his mega-fundraiser and birthday party, or keep his promise to veto it and risk meltdown in the markets and missing his party.

Methinks Obama will break that promise just as fast as he’s broken every other one.

acat

Seriously, DotD, give it a rest. The House passes the budget. Under Reagan, the house was controlled by the Dems.

Reagan signed off on some huge deficits – and while the popular mythos says it was all military, that’s simply a crock of fertilizer. Tip O’Neil and Dan “Ways and Means means my way” Rostenkowski moved plenty of pork under Reagan as he had no opportunity to change the way D.C. does things.

Also, how on earth is “running a surplus” in an entitlement program even possible? They’re *all* a net drain on the federal budget. The only thing you could mean is that there’s more money in the alleged social security trust fund .. but .. it’s only going to be in the black until sometime this decade at the latest.

The mask is gone, DotD, you’re no kind of conservative at all.

Mew

sarg01

Only the Dems in the Senate can stop Boehner’s. That’s why, ultimately, Boehner has the upper hand.

My call is we get almost exactly the Boehner bill from yesterday. The BBA requirement gets dropped, replaced with caps, and the 2nd increase will be on a bigger ceiling lift/cut basis to get things past the election.

Tavern Keeper

We passed CCB. It didn’t have a chance in the Senate. Boehner 1, had it have passed, didn’t stand a chance in the Senate. Boehner 2, when it passes, won’t stand a chance in the Senate.

So we passed a bill we liked, and had two on the table (passing one of them, I guess) that we were less enthused about but that were “compromises.” With neither one standing the snowball’s chance in making to Obama’s desk in their House-passed form.

I’m not sure what else could have been done. The “hold your line” thing I don’t understand because we DID pass CCB. It can be amended as easily as Boehner 2.0 can and “sent back to the House.” Reid amending B2.0 the way he wants it and sending it back to the House will not get a majority vote.

Death_of_the_Donkey

I have stated the fact, ie that Reagan held real non-defense discretionary spending flat during his presidency, so you show me where the Dems spent all over (and please do not forget that the House worked with Reagan’s proposed budgets).

The surpluses at that time were real in entitlements, they were actually taking in more in payroll taxes than they were spending every year following the Greenspan Commission in 1983, so no it was not trust fund math (and had we not been running those surpluses the deficits would have been closer to 7% instead of the 4-5% they ended up as).

Just because I know the actual facts of the situation doesn’t make me less conservative.

JSobieski

It is a two step process, with step 1 being a precondition for step 2.

acat

You’ll need to be citing where domestic spending dropped under Reagan.

Mew

acat

but can’t that process work the other way ’round? That is, 38 States pass it then send it to Congress for approval?

Last amendment I recall was the ill-conceived ill-fated ERA…. and that’s only a good example of how a bad idea finally (!) died.

Mew

Tavern Keeper

Non-defense was actually cut by 10% relative to GDP growth, if I’m not mistaken. You can’t really compare apples-to-apples government spending unless you take into account the budget relative to GDP. With the expansion that we had post 1982, it is truly and accomplishment, IMO, that spending was cut relative to GDP.

rightwingmom52

http://www.redstate.com/erick/2011/07/26/get-on-the-line-to-hold-the-line/#comment-120389

http://jhpruitt.blogtownhall.com/ kipling

Yes, I agree completely the Senate routinely does that, which is why Boehner was such a dolt to give them that opportunity.

Whatever bill emerges for the Senate will only be a “modified” version of the Boehner bill – even if it is completely gutted and bears no resemblance to the original. The MSM will then ask why Boehner objects to his own bill and begin to call him an obstructionist. And, since Boehner does so well communicating to the American people (not), he will fear the narrative and then cave.

Why even give them the blasted opportunity to do that?

Kyle-MI

added to provide cover to the few conservatives needed to get it through the House. It will be stripped out in the Senate and the conference committee. The reconciled bill will pass the House with Dem votes to replace the conservatives who drop out because of BBA being dropped. I predict it passes with exactly 217 votes. There will be some last minute vote shifting depending on how many Dems vote for it.

While it is a good thing, there is no way the Dems will approve a BBA, at least not coming from the GOP. They would line up for a BBA if it contained a provision to automatically raise taxes to get to balance. Anyway, the Dems would allow default before they approve the BBA.

kyconservative

Here’s what we do now:

1) When the Democratic Senate substantially changes the House bill, encourage conservatives to filibuster it in the Senate and lobby hard against it when it comes back to the House. Promise every Republican who votes for it a primary challenge in 2012 (both Senate and House) Not raising the debt ceiling is a win for our side because Obama will ultimately be blamed more than us. He will either violate the constitution and unilaterally continue to borrow or else we immedaitely balance the budget and cut spending by 40%. Either way, he is the President and the buck, and blame, stop with him;

2) Once this issue is over, replace Republican congressional leadership as soon as possible;

3) Take a hard line in late September when the new fiscal year budget is debated. Encourage conservatives to refuse to vote for any proposal on the budget unless it adheres to conservative/limited government principles. Don’t hesitate to create a government shutdown if it prevents passage of a bad bill.

4) Follow through…there’s no reason why every Republican who sold us out in this battle shouldn’t have a credible primary opponent in 2012. I think the nation is so ticked off and the economy going downhill so much that 2012 may be the wildest election cycle we will ever see.

5) Insist that our allies in Congress hire staffers who believe in our cause and aren’t simply working in a congressional office to advance their own career. This is a big deal and we need to clean out the deadwood. If a staffer isn’t totally committed to our cause, there are countless others out in the country who would gladly work for less because they believe in what we stand for.

Tavern Keeper

That Constitutionally it can go to the states first (or their legislatures).

rightwingmom52

, , ,

sarg01

Obama can’t veto the House’s non-approval. Obama can only veto legislation passed by both the House and Senate. He can’t veto something into existence.

You might be confusing this with the Obamacare discussions. The reason Obama can veto a repeal of O-care is because O-care is current law … Congress has to pro-actively change current law, and that change can be veto’d.

sarg01

You mean those are the provisions of the Reid bill with it’s McConnell component. Yes, that’s true.

But the House doesn’t have to agree to the Reid bill in the first place. And, in fact, they won’t. The House will insist on the Senate accepting their bill. Just as Reid insists on the House accepting his.

The difference is that Senate Republicans can block Reid’s bill, whereas House Dems can’t block Boehner’s.

acat

Your mileage may vary, of course.

Mew

lineholder

There was more than enough evidence to indicate that it was true. Cordpt had said that he/she wanted us to get back to “business as usual”, which is what the establishment Repubs want…business as usual.

Death_of_the_Donkey

Non-defense expenditures as a percentage of GDP.

lineholder

I’m wearing breastplate, helmet, shield and sword! Don’t leave home with it!

sarg01

It doesn’t have to have anything to do with the debt ceiling. Or spending. Or taxes. Once you’re talking about tossing and replacing, they can use a House bill naming a post office.

There are hundreds of House passed bills the Senate hasn’t acted on. They can take any one and play make-believe that the House voted for it.

unsk

Today, the GDP growth for the second quarter came in at a paltry 1.3%, subject of course to further “unexpected” downward revisions. The first quarter GDP was revised “unexpectedly” to a dismal 0.4%. These numbers point to an imminent recession despite the huge QE2 stimulus foisted on the economy by Helo Ben.

These numbers should prove for once and for all that the anti-growth policies of Buraq Hussein are dragging us further into depression. A cuts only approach to budget cutting in this economic environment will not, I repeat, will not work. And tax increases as proposed by Buraq and Harry Reid are the absolutely worst thing you could do. Over $900 billion of this deficit is directly tied to this depression in the form of lost revenue and increased unemployment insurance. Massive cuts will cut GDP. So will tax increases.

We need to get the economy growing again. Right now. We can’t wait another 18 months to 2 years. The most efficient way to cut this deficit right now, in addition to some sizable cuts is to stimulate the economy in the form of tax cuts, massive cuts in regulation, massive increases in our resource exploitation, particularly oil, and cleaning up our fraudulent TBTF banks so small business will get some lending again. If we do not do those things, the deficit will only grow larger and eventually trigger an economic collapse.

funwithknives

does The Dialectic triumph? Have we, as Americans become inured to “continual usurpations”, and then just roll over/play dead?
Not here, not now, not while I live and breathe, do I take this lawlessness peacebly.
But it has not come to this possible outcome yet. The 2010 Shellacking was merely Part One. FOLKS… that was not so long ago. Tilled fields sprout weeds, it’s Nature’s way of showing farmers Who’s The Boss. We see now “The Weeds” and know What Must Be Done. Dig out Leaf,Plant and Root,& Repeat,as needed. If this was easy, Progressives would surely be doing it,but it’s not and they aren’t. Many(enough to matter) Conservatives fell for Easy Livin’ (Neo-Conservatism) and consequences have been brutal. We’ve experienced what Easy Livin’ got us and must say: “Never Again.” (What country uses that slogan?) Say It:”I’ve been Down So Long,it Looks Like Up To Me.” Envision our present and add 50%more Barry, by 2016. Yeah, you got a choice. Y O U.

acat

I will not accept “as a percentage of GDP”. Go find raw numbers, or – and I’ll be generous here – inflation-adjusted numbers.

I want to see year-on-year non-military spending for Reagan’s entire term.

This is a b.s. number because, under Reagan, GDP went up significantly. That means domestic spend could go up in real terms but not relative to GDP.

Or do you perhaps forget that, at the time, Reagan was acused of trying to starve the fixed-income seniors because their COLAs were too small?

Mew

rightwingmom52

…

http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

It is a correct view that party unity can make a position stick. Doing it is harder tha saying it. 218+ House Republicans can stop any Reid plan.

We have, thanks to the delay on Beohner bill, smoked out the Reid plan and end-game. Replace Boehner with Reid plan, and sent it back, take it or leave it mode. Will it work? He needs to get a number of House Republicans to cave to make it work. And what of Boehner bill; can it stick in the Senate? Reid can talk DOA all day long, but will the Senate prefer default to the Boehner bill if that is the choice?

The question is NOT what will Boehner and Pelosi and Reid and stalwart conservatives and die-hard liberals do. the question which side has the squishier squishes.

Reid has 23 Senate Democrats up for re-election. OUCH. We only need to peel off 4 of them – Manchin, Nelson, McCaskill, and one other. We have a margin of about 20 Representatives, some in ‘tough’ districts.

As Napoleon would put it, if you are going to take Vienna, take Vienna. Dont hold a position that cant really be held. EE has spoken of ‘hold the line’ and that is good strategy and the right way to think here. HOWEVER, the key is not just to hold to a line for stalwart conservatives, but … and this is the key …. stake a UNIFIED 218+ Republican position that have the possibility of winning a few Democrat votes. THAT POSITION will be the winning position.

Reid is about to outsmart himself and create a serious default problem and end Obama’s reelection chances.
All we need to make Reid’s trickery completely backfire on Reid is 218+ Republicans who turn down any further compromise beyond Boehner’s bill (aka the improved-on-the-watered-down-compromise bill with BBA and added cuts). If folks like Rep Goehmert are satisfied, its a place to “HOLD THE LINE”.

Composer_Man

Folding like a cheap suit at the first sign of opposition (ala Reid’s “tabling” maneuver) is hardly “holding the line.”

If Conservatives want to get important policies through Congress, they’re going to have to be prepared to stand their ground, twist arms, and change minds. Not unlike the way the Dems got Obamacare passed.

It doesn’t do us any good to pass a conservative bill and then shriek and lift our skirts at the first sign of opposition from liberals.

acat

Sort of like the pink ribbons that used to symbolize breast cancer awareness, or the origami dollars that symbolized the deficit or something…

A simple “ribbon” of burlap to symbolize solidarity among hobbitses?

Mew

funwithknives

Third Party got us Woodrow Wilson. I was a large ‘L’ Libertarian and still pay dues, but only for info. An anthill does not stop a boulder, rolling on it’s merry way. Mount-Ains do. Or a barrier, only Men can make. LOTS AND LOTS of them. It took time to get us here and time will be needed once again. We as a group, may not even see the outcome. ‘SUP to us, and to you. I know this ,’cause Cold Warrior tells me so. On this, a forum of believers. “We do this, not because it is Easy, but because it is Hard.” Amen, anyone? 2?

acat

SCAdians do tend to go in for the full plate mail, if they can afford it…

Mew

gmscan

Cold, I am a precinct captain and on the county executive committee here is Pennsylvania. I volunteer, help with the web site, and set up tables to register voters. My county is just fine, it is the Washington insiders that need to be recycled. Even Charles Krauthammer and Bill Crystal should get the hell out of Washington and go live in Topeka Kansas for a while.

I spent a lot of years in Washington and the place is absolutely corrupting.

Death_of_the_Donkey

Real non-defense:

Death_of_the_Donkey

http://travismonitor.blogspot.com Freedoms Truth

Reid could find ANY legislative vehicle lying around to push his bill. Reid could also just up and put a bill on the Senate floor at ANY time. You know, like that BUDGET BILL he hasn’t even passed in two years.
He COULD be really ballsy and put the two together and pass a budget on party line basis with the debt ceiling increase in it.

Or Reid could take the beloved Cut,Cap and Balance bill, gut it like a fish and call his own bill the “Reid Cut, Cap and balance bill”.

He doesnt need Boehner’s new bill to do any of that. This is all about optics, and frankly by blaming Boehner for what Reid is doing you are helping the optics for Reid, on the basis of misunderstanding legislative process.

We WANT Reid to finally, finally, finally show his cards. Reid’s actions all along has been all about Reid doing NOTHING, in order to protect his Democrat Senators from tough political votes. Finally, he acts!

Our strategy should be to get them to vote, tough votes that show the true colors of Democrat incumbents. We should have demanded a Senate bill before, and kept up a unified message to demand it. Now that we are at this point, stop blaming Boehner for ‘enabling’ something Reid can do at any moment’s notice, with or without this bill.

So lets cut the Boehner bill substitute concern troll-ism. It’s a distraction from reality.

gmscan

Like it or not, folks, the Tea Party people who elected these Republicans will not do it again if they feel they have been betrayed once more. We got screwed on the Continuing Resolution and now we are getting screwed again. The idea of third parties being impractical is fine in Poli Sci classes, but as a practical matter, you have to keep your ground troops motivated or you won’t have a party at all.

Tavern Keeper

What am I missing? The House PASSED CCB. It can’t do anything more than that. And it will pass B2.0, too. We don’t really like the bill, fine. Neither one will pass the Senate. We passed the bill we wanted, for the most part, with CCB. The House didn’t come back and pass subsequent legislation to void it. Its still there. Neither it nor B2.0 is going to pass. Reid has said as much. Later tonight the House is going to vote on something that Reid has said WILL NOT PASS the Senate. That’s not folding!

Now if the Senate sends something back to the House that’s Reid’s bill or worse, and the House passes it, then yes, THAT would be folding. But as of now, it seems that we’ve held the line.

Repair_Man_Jack

and tell us how it works. I’ve got a gascan in my garage you can borrow if you need a good accelerant.

gmscan

You can win without the “knucklehead Tea Party people.” Good luck with that. Maybe Bob Dole is available to run again, too.

JSobieski

The phrase “Not unlike the way the Dems got Obamacare passed” reveals the flaw in your thinking.

How many R’s had their arms twisted into voting for Obamacare?

1 guy in the house, who only voted that way after D’s had enough votes.

So your “plan” isn’t really something that can work.

acat

No doubt Reagan spent the Soviet into the ground.

Mew

acat

This shows a swing of $20B … not “flat”.

(Also, I do not accept where the start and end of the grey “recession” bars are at .. things sucked pretty hard under Carter)

Mew

Death_of_the_Donkey

sure, there was volatility, but non-defense spending was essentially flat from the beginning to end. The recession bars are the official recession dates from NBER (I do not pick them) and the Carter recession of 1980 doesn’t show up on this chart due to dates.

avgjo

primary challenge?

I’ll keep saying it ’til I’m blue in the face or until you guys ban me…

until we give them a reason to fear us more than the MSM or Dims, they’ll keep stabbing us in the back.

JSobieski

If the solution is —states sign on for this, and then send it back to us . . . sometime soon?

What you are describing couldn’t possibly happen before the wheels come off the wagon (I am am confident we can go several weeks, optimistic that we can go months, but years?).

This constitutional amendments embedded as legislative triggers is tricky business.

One of two things must be true:
(1) The BBA portion is a head fake intended to generate our support
(2) The CCB is not a viable debt ceiling solution

My bet is (1). Which explains why Boehner 3.0 includes head fake 2.0.

http://jhpruitt.blogtownhall.com/ kipling

I am not speaking for Rep. Farenthold, I am simply repeating what his staff told me.

Farenthold will vote yes because of the addition of the provision on the Balanced Budget Amendment. He will also vote yes because of the reaction of the markets today. He is afraid that the Democrats may just want to destroy the economy and not pass anything.

I do not agree with his reasons and I urged him to continue to hold the line. I think my objection was duly noted and he will still vote yes.

acat

I do not think it means what you think it means… unless you’re asserting that because it ended slightly above where it began it is therefore “flat”..?

“flat”, DotD would mean that spending was roughly consistent every year of Reagan’s presidency ..

Even with your mobile goal posts, you have not proven that. Nor have you proven your initial assertion, that we raise spending when in power. In fact, you can cite your own chart here to prove otherwise.

Mew

bk

He’ll vote against it, but say it deserves a vote and so vote for cloture.

http://jhpruitt.blogtownhall.com/ kipling

When I spoke with Rep. Farenthold’s office at 2:00, they had still not seen the final draft of the Boehner plan. According to them it was still in the rules committee. Will Beohner let them see the bill before he calls a vote on it?

I asked about the possibility of Reid gutting the bill and using it as a legislative vehicle for his own proposals. They said the House leadership had not prepared anyone for that scenario.

acat

as a clear enough point to Boehner & Co. …

Although, Erick repeating it wouldn’t hurt.

Mew

p.s. this is a recognition of Palin’s talent for political bomb-throwing, and does not constitute an endorsement of Palin for any office.

Tavern Keeper

The House passed CCB, it couldn’t have done anything else. The House is going to pass a “compromise” that doesn’t stand a chance. They DIDN’T pass a bill that was acceptable to the Dem Senators. Seriously shouldn’t we be giving at least some credit where credit is due?

izoneguy

First rule of chess – know what your opponent is going to do – before they do.

bk

Death_of_the_Donkey

how about unchanged then for a better word, my point was that over his 8 years Reagan left office with roughly the same level of non-defense spending as which he began (in real terms, and less in percent of GDP terms).

As for not raising spending, last I checked, we ran 4-5% deficits every year during Reagan’s presidency and had government spending as a percent of GDP over 23% for a couple of those years (and again that was without a huge drain from social security or medicare).

Repair_Man_Jack

The HofR has pulled this debate considerably farther to the right than Mein Obama wanted it to go.

avgjo

We saw the effect of a unified front of conservatives against the McConnell madness and Boehner’s bad bill. I believe it is an illustration of what happens when our side has a unified message and puts on the pressure. I hope we see more, esp. re: primaries of these RINOs.

Your Palin note noted.

http://jhpruitt.blogtownhall.com/ kipling

I thought the first rule of chess was to never talk about chess. Perhaps, I am thinking of something else. : )

I get the feeling Reid is playing chess and Boehner is playing tic-tac-toe or Simple Simon.

acat

the spend jumped around by $20B, which is – based on the graph, somewhere north of 10% of the spend.

To bring this back to where I started, the House – which approves the budget – was controlled by Dems for all of Reagan’s term.

Mew

Death_of_the_Donkey

It moved up $20 billion off the low (which was $10 below where it started), but it was the same when Reagan left office as when he started AND if you take was spent at the beginning and multiply that out over the whole term (to get what spending would have been if it held perfectly flat), the TOTAL difference is (ie the amount spent over the entire 8 years above that first Q) is only $50 billion (for an average of just over $6 billion/year) and he was able to reduce that back to where it started at the end (remember that first big spike was recession related).

acat

Since you started this whole thing by saying that “when we’re in charge, we raise spending”

This is the danger of moving your goal posts.

Mew

swami7774

We don’t have the numbers right now to effect much change on this issue. Maybe we will if/when we elect more conservatives next year. But not now. Simple math. Run the numbers.

As Clint Eastwood once said, “a man’s got to know his limitations.”

swami7774

What they should do is stay there until MORE of them are elected…enough to get the change we want.
Simple math. Run the numbers.

izoneguy

http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

But I guess it’s hard for you to divorce in your mind what Nancy Pelosi said, from the actual truth.

earlgrey

If only I could find some burlap.

I threw out my “Don’t Tread on Me” shirt when we lost the health care battle. (sore loser), but I could invest a few dollars in a burlap lapel pin.

rpopp23

I doubt even members appointed by Boehner and McConnell will buy what Dingy Harry is selling.

Bill S

.

acat

And if so, was it by a front pager like Aaron, a mod like Neil or RMJ ?

Eh. Post it anyway. I’m sure it’ll be fun.

Mew

izoneguy

A visualization of US debt

H/T: Ace of Spades

Death_of_the_Donkey

All I said was that we spend money too (and I do include tax code spending as spending, since that is what it is). I never said we spend money on non-defense discretionary. Under Reagan the money was spent on defense and tax breaks (until 1986 tax reform, but even that protected certain interests). As far as I am aware, not once in the 20 years that we controlled the White House did one of our presidents submit a balanced budget to Congress (and if it was done, then I would bet the only year would have been W’s first year). I have not once moved the goalposts, you simply have been unable to accept facts and keep trying play semantics with the data.

Death_of_the_Donkey

I will be happy to.

runner12

who advocated capitulation and supported the Boehner bill are actually reassuring themselves that Boehner would ” never ” allow a watered-down, Reid infused version pass the House ( after the Senate guts what little merit there is in the Boehner bill).

Really?

Name one time when Boehner, et al, has stood up to Reid and Obama. Do you hear the crickets? Everything Erick ( along with Hannity and Rush) has said is spot on.

One of the only good things that may come out of all of this is that some of those new House members who caved so easily may get their eyes opened a bit. When they see that Boehner twisted their arms only to sell them out, maybe the will revolt and remove him from the Speakership.

Ausonius

On the other hand, passage of some debt-limit bill with another 1 Trillion dollars to be added by August 31st has risen to 82% certainty.

See:

http://www.intrade.com/?request_operation=main&request_type=action&checkHomePage=true

littlehouse18

The experiment was the 1992 election, Clinton vs. Bush I. How’d that work out for us?

Maybe in less perilous times we could do that experiment, but not now. I know, that’s been said before, but can anyone really argue about the stakes this time, with Obamacare staring us in the face and the evidence of the past 2.5 years?

clarioncaller

I thought it was buffoonery. Now my sense is… it’s just Boehner acting the way he has seen many Republican’s act. Whit-less, unprincipled wimps.As a minimum the must be removed from leadership…better yet replaced with a REAL Conservative.

Composer_Man

Passed CCB and then adjourned for the month. The BBA has 70% support among the American people. Why do you think Reid tabled it so quickly and refused to vote on it?

The whole point is that by offering a series of steadily diminishing plans (i.e., less and less conservative), Boehner essentially undercut his own work. Do you really not understand this?

When you are selling your house, do you say “My price is $300,000…Oh, you don’t like that, how about $250,000? Oh, still too much, how about $200,000?”

In a smart negotiation, you never, never, never bid against yourself. Once you do, the game is up.

dukeroyal

Congratulations so called House Conservatives you just took your first steps to pass Harry Reid’s plan. When it comes back we already know you won’t have the courage to vote against it because you already voted for a vague promise about a BBA that won’t be in the final bill and we know that the House Republicans won’t kill the Boehner plan no matter how bad a deal it is for the country.

dukeroyal

Because we know that they don’t really fight for anything except what Democrats want :

We shall not fight on the beaches, we shall not fight on the landing grounds, we shall not fight in the fields and not in the streets, we shall not fight in the hills; we shall always surrender.

My apologies to Sir Winston Churchill who knew how to fight.

http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

who are the only ones who can be trusted to again vote against whatever backroom deal Boehner and Reid will try and shove through Congress when this gets killed in the Senate.

ghostship

When many of your peers buckled to pressure to fall in line you stood your ground on your principles.

We salute you!

Justin Amash (Mich.)
Michele Bachmann (Minn.)
Chip Cravaack (Minn.)
Scott Desjarlais (Tenn.)
Tom Graves (Ga.)
Tim Huelskamp (Kans.)
Steve King (Iowa)
Tim Johnson (Ill.)
Tom McClintock (Calif.)
Mick Mulvaney (S.C.)
Ron Paul (Texas)
Connie Mack (Fla.)
Jim Jordan (Ohio)
Tim Scott (S.C.)
Paul Broun (Ga.)
Tom Latham (Iowa)
Jeff Duncan (S.C.)
Trey Gowdy (S.C.)
Steve Southerland (Fla.)
Joe Walsh (Ill.)
Joe Wilson (S.C.)

Tis better to die on ones feet than live on ones knees.

http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

who handed the opponent the rope to hang the Tea Party with.

http://dreamsfrommyforefathers.com RoguePolitics

You are not getting any this election.

Dave_in_Fla

I’m feeling pretty good. We won the war, now we are just negotiating the final borders after the capitulation.

But if you all want to work yourselves up into a lather after an unprecedented victory not seen since the 60s, feel free.

Given the structural impediments, getting budget cuts of this magnitude without making tax concessions is a terrific outcome. And as a bonus, BBA is now part of the 2012 campaign and Obama took a brutal electoral hit in the process.

My hat’s off to Boehner, he played this masterfully.

http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

nt

http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

Bloodied the noses of good conservatives fewer votes than CCB got? For another bill he knew would not pass the Senate anyway? To open the door for whatever his backroom deals with Reid and McConnell will yield?

carolina

Kyl says they need to get more cuts if the dems want the whole 2.4 trill increase in the debt ceiling.
The ‘select committee’ is a given (since it is in both Bills).
Maybe the House would trade keeping the BBA for the whole 2.4 trill?
The BBA doesn’t ‘cost’ BO anything – since he’ll be gone before it gets ratified by enough states.
hmmm, welcome to my home says the spider to the fly……

runner12

Nt

scott88

I have no confidence in the GOP who continuously spend just like the dems

jerry39

Right?

carolina

House language alone doesn’t get us anywhere.

A little good news: BO lost 40,000 twitter followers today.
If 40,000 more people would ‘wise up’ to BO every day……. we might save this country!

jaykali

I mean the time to raise hell is 2012 after Obama goes back to writing books on having the audacity to be a one term president.

I don’t know what else to say. We’re not going to get Democrats to sign onto a BBA, they hate it for the same reasons we love it. It’s like the opposite of the ‘public’ option in the health care debate. Everyone knew the implications at the time, which was why it was so believed by one side and despised by the other.

The time is 2012, I just feel like people aren’t being realistic. I mean of all the things to shoot for with a democratic president and congress, we are going for a hail mary that requires 2/3′s majorities in both houses AND state ratification. Am I taking crazy pills?!?

acat

It’s quite simple.

Go to google.com. (or, if you’re Neil, to Bing)

Type in your search terms. Add the parameter site:archive.redstate.com

Press search.

Mew

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

are missing the boat by not getting INSIDE the Republican Party itself. Go here to read about the Strategy:

http://www.teapartynation.com/profiles/blogs/what-we-need-to-do-as-soon-as?xg_source=activity

By uniting inside the Republican Party as actual voting members of it, as you know, they’d kill two birds with one stone. First, they’d be united politically for Get Out The Vote in the primary elections. Second, as PCs, they’ll get to vote for the Party officers.

I hope you’re preaching that in PA. Are you familiar with these efforts?:

http://www.precinctproject.net/

http://www.meetup.com/Pa-precinct/

Let’s not get mad, let’s get even. And let’s not splinter, let’s unite and grow stronger inside the best political tool we have to destroy the Democrat Party. That tool happens to be, like it or not, the Republican Party, which right now, as half-strength shell, is there for the taking if we are smart and get our butts in gear.

I know it works, because I’ve seen it happen.

Thank you.

ColdWarrior

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

COMMENTS

ALL

COMMENTS

POPULAR

#RSRH

PICK YOUR STATE & GET LOCAL