The GOP leadership failed us during the 2011 Budget debate. The promised $100B cuts quickly turned into $65B and then $38B which – in the final CBO analysis – only amounted to millions.

We were let down again when our leadership wimped out in the battle over the debt limit by guaranteeing $2 trillion in new debt would be added to the National tally inside of 18 months.

In both cases, Boehner was clearly petrified that he and his party would get the blame for any negative consequences resulting from an unyielding stand on the very principles they were elected to uphold.

When Congress returns from their 5-week playtime recess, the third war of the Triple Crown will take place as they take up the 2012 Budget. This will be the last chance of this term for Republicans to show us whether they have a spine up their back or if it’s made of jelly.

With only a few weeks left to pass a budget before the end of the fiscal year, it is unlikely that a budget can be passed before September 30. Absent a budget, we can most likely expect Democrats to call for another Continuing Resolution.

There is only one acceptable outcome of this final spending battle before the current debt limit is breeched in early 2013: No more Continuing Resolutions.

Period.

The Republican House passed a 2012 budget – something the Senate hasn’t done in two Budget cycles. If Harry Reid doesn’t like it, then make him mark it up, pass it in the Senate, and send it back.

When Reid starts whining that their “isn’t enough time” to get it done before September 30, then remind him he’s had two years to pass a budget.

The clock is running and the Dems are out of timeouts.

Dear Mr. Vice President,

I am not a terrorist.

I am a patriotic American who loves my country as much as you and a proud member of the Tea Party Movement.

Only a physical disability stops me from attending every Tea party rally within a 300-mile radius of Kansas City waving my own Don’t Tread on Me sign.

I cherish my God-given freedoms and thank that same God for giving our Founders the wisdom to protect and preserve them when they wrote the United States Constitution. I fought in a war to defend those freedoms, and never in my wildest dreams during those years of youthful exuberance did I ever think the biggest threat to those freedoms would come – not from a foreign superpower – but rather from my own Government.

I am not a terrorist.

I believe strongly and passionately in the principles those Founders set forth that has made my country the greatest on Planet Earth, bar none. Now I find my own countrymen calling me a “terrorist” because of those beliefs. Thank you, Mr. Vice President for that. At least you have changed the hateful narrative from “racist” to “terrorist.”

You call me a “terrorist” because I send people to Congress to represent my voice and who have the courage and backbone to stand up and say STOP!!to the continued destruction your party has wrought on my country. We tried it your way, and look where it got us. I sent those representatives to Congress do what your boss promised, but never delivered: to permanently  change the way business is done in Washington.

I am not a terrorist.

I have never “held a gun” to any body’s head. Have you forgotten the President’s lecture about  ”destructive rhetoric” following the tragic event in Tucson when a real terrorist held  a realgun to the head of Gabby Giffords and pulled the trigger?

Nor have I ever strapped exolosives to my chest to take “hostages.”

I am NOT a terrorist.

And I srongly  resent and reject you calling me one.  

We are on the same team, sir. We are both Americans.

Don’t Tread on Me

Respectfully, 

Gary “KC” Cook

Whatever happens in the debt/deficit battle in Washington from here out, the Tea Party can stand up and claim an historic victory.

Not a victory for their Movement, and not a victory for the Tea Party Republicans they sent to Congress.

But a victory for America.

For the first time in my lifetime, I am watching Democrats come to the table to seriously talk about spending cuts – not in millions or billions – but Trillions.

For the first time since Boehner was handed the gavel in the House, he has not wet his pants and caved just because Obama and Reid growled.

For the first time since Obama took office, I have seen the President of the United States come totally unraveled and blow a gasket in full view of the public. First in the White House briefing room after Boehner showed him the middle finger and called off the negotiations. During that little un-presidential temper tantrum, he threw his rattle across the briefing room, swallowed his binky, and stomped his blankie because Boehner wouldn’t come out and play. It was a sight to behold.

Then again when he requested air time of the networks to deliver an “Address to the Nation” from the East Room of the White House – something normally reserved for announcing the invasion of another country, the end of a war, or announcing a major accomplishment. That was a first: a primetime Presidential Temper Tantrum broadcast all over the world.

Had it not been for the courageous stand the Tea Party Republicans have mounted, this fight would have been over long ago leaving us with a higher debt ceiling and no changes in Washington’s spending habits.

God Bless the Tea Party Republicans, the Movement that sent them there, and all that they stand for.

Don’t Tread on Me

Unless somebody spiked my Coke, I heard Boehner reveal last night (for the first time) that he and Obama were close to a deal in which the Speaker agreed to $800B in new tax revenues. I didn’t hear it explained in the context of “tax reform” whereby loopholes would be closed in exchange for lower tax rates – but rather a NET revenue increase of $800B.

Did Boehner cave on his solemn promise to not agree to any tax hikes? Did he come out waving the white flag and offer a full, unconditional surrender? Did he secretly shove a knife in the backs of Tea party Republicans who represented our last hope of saving our country from becoming another Greece? Was I merely watching an instant replay of the 2011 Budget fiasco? What the hell happened?

After my blood pressure finally came down out of the red zone, I logged on to Redstate expecting to find the place on fire with angry RS’ers calling Boehner every dirty name known to man.

But no.

I was certain I would pull up one of Erick’s posts that would surely melt my monitor and send thick, black smoke rolling out of the smoldering pile of molten goo.

But no again.

With a clearer head, I returned to Redstate this afternoon – only to find a few low-volume, low-intensity rumblings of something I consider to be a devastating defeat for Conservatism.

Am I missing something? Did I log into the wrong web site?

Maybe it’s just me. Maybe I’m overreacting to something most Conservatives thought was inevitable anyway. Maybe I just totally misunderstood Boehner’s concession speech. Or maybe somebody really did slip a Mickey in my Coke and I was hallucinating or having a bad dream.

I see this as a helluva lot more than a fight between Obama and Boehner. It’s about defining/redefining the role of Government in this country. It’s an epic battle between Conservatism and Liberalism. This is where the immovable object meets the irresistible force.

By conceding higher tax revenues to the Liberals, we have conceded to them unfettered power to use that extra cash stash to grow the size of Government. We are conceding to the Liberal argument that it’s a revenue problem as much as a spending problem. We are conceding to them that every time they spend too much, just raise taxes.

Does anybody besides me remember the 2010 elections? Obama, Liberals, and the MSM are forming lynch mobs to go after the Tea party Republicans. For what? Because they have the sheer, unmitigated audacity to vote the will of the people who elected them? 

[GASP!]

After the 2006 elections, I heard the Left’s battle cry “elections have consequences” until I was sick of it. We heard Nancy “We Won! We write the bill!” Pelosi rub our noses in the staggering defeat of Congressional Republicans.

Why am I not hearing it now just as loud, just as intensely, and just as often from the Right?

Those Tea Party Republicans are the ONLY thing standing between Obama and a Socialist America. They are the only reason why Boehner didn’t cave months ago. They are the only reason Liberals are willing to even talk about spending cuts. They are the only REAL “adults” in the room who recognize it was maintaining the status quo for decades that has brought this country to the edge of the cliff. And they are the ONLY ones willing to stand up and defend Conservatism.

Does anybody think those freshmen might be feeling a bit lonely and abandoned? Don’t they deserve the full, unwavering support, encouragement and praise of all Conservatives?  Shouldn’t every person who claims to be a Conservative be out there on the front lines defending those brave warriors against the likes of Harry Reid, Ed Shultz, and –yes – B. Hussein Obama?

 Shouldn’t they be hearing our loud cheers of “Give ‘em Hell!” and let them know they are not alone?

 Yes – I’m angry. To be blunt, I’m mad as hell. To those that I’ve offended, I apologize.

 But know this:  I will never ever apologize to anyone for standing tall and standing firm on my Conservative principles, convictions, and beliefs. Ever.

 End of rant.

It’s not a “serious” plan. It’s “partisan politics” by the GOP. Republicans know it will never pass the Senate, so it’s just a “symbolic” vote.

We would expect that kind of rhetoric from Obama, Reid, and the Left Stream Media. But it appears the GOP has conceded to that description of the CC &B plan passed last night in the House on a bipartisan vote.

I don’t see a strong unified effort by the GOP to sell this plan as a serious, credible solution to a problem Obama has described as “catastrophic.” I don’t see Republicans running to the cameras to DARE Reid to kill it or Obama to veto it and then let those two explain to seniors why their Social Security checks have been stopped.

I don’t get it.

Was it a “symbolic” vote only because Reid and Obama don’t like it? Is it “not serious” because it will meet with strong resistance in the Dem Senate or because Obama has threatened to veto it? Who the hell gave Obama, Reid, and Chris Matthews the sole authority to determine what’s “serious?”

Republicans are getting trounced in the PR battle because they are hell bent on playing the role of “nice guys” while Democrats are coming to the fight with chains, switchblades, and brass knuckles.

Hannity was right last night when he said “Republicans are negotiating with themselves.” There’s too many plans out there that is dividing GOP support at a time when unity, solidarity, and one consistent GOP message are needed more than ever

The McConnell “GOP Surrender Plan” shouldn’t even be on the table, and is only serving as a diversion to serious discussions. The “Gang of Six” plan is one premised on the idea of “raise the debt ceiling now, and we’ll worry about the details later.” Yeah, right. We’ve seen that movie before: once under Reagan’s term and the sequel under Bush 41. Both times the movie didn’t have a happy ending.

I’ve been preaching a consistent sermon here to the Redstate congregation for months: it’s time for Republicans to stop playing defense, and go on the offense.

They can start by demanding that Obama and Reid explain why capping spending or balancing the budget is such a horrible concept. They can demand that Obama and Reid lay out a detailed plan for paying off the mammoth debt they are racking up – or their plan for dealing with the inevitable catastrophe that is certain to come when interest on the National debt consumes most or all of the tax revenue.

The Cut, Cap, and Balance legislation is a serious plan to a serious problem and the Republicans should be out there standing as one to drive it home with the fury and force of a runaway freight train.

Leading up to the 2010 election, John Boehner projected an aura of strength and a determined resolve to slash Government spending. He came across as a tough guy on a mission, and was convincing enough to persuade voters to put Republicans back in control of the House.

Well, we all know how that turned out.

The “largest spending cuts in U.S. history” gave us spending levels in 2011 that are $350B above 2010 and widened the deficit by another $300B. The $100B in promised cuts quickly turned into $63B before settling at an insignificant $38B without even a fight from the GOP.

Now Boehner is at it again – acting tough and determined ahead of the debt limit battle.

But his anemic performance in the 2011 budget debate doesn’t exactly inspire confidence that he will stand his ground and achieve meaningful results.  In that fight, his most powerful weapon was the prospect of a Government shutdown if Dems refused to play ball. But he quickly wimped out when Reid and the Dems convinced him the GOP would get the blame if Government was shuttered.

Following that surrender, Boehner painted a sign on his back saying “I’m a pushover” and Democrats can clearly see it.

The GOP has another huge hammer going into the debt limit fight: the threat of a U.S. default on its debt obligations. While that threat is more demagoguery and scare tactics than reality, Boehner is already suggesting that default cannot be allowed to occur. So even before the first shot is fired, Boehner is forfeiting the only real leverage he has.

Moreover, it appears the GOP is backing off entitlement reform proposed in Paul Ryan’s budget after a barrage of demagoguery from the Left. And talk of a balanced budget Amendment is fading into the sunset. If that’s not enough, the GOP is already lowering the bar saying that raising the debt ceiling must be accompanied by at least $2 trillion in cuts over ten years. That’s roughly one-third of the spending reductions proposed by Ryan.

The Democrats are winning the argument by doing nothing. They refuse to offer up a plan that is expressed in hard numbers. They didn’t release a 2011 budget proposal that should have been done over a year ago, and the only plan with numbers released since the 2010 budget (two years ago)  is Obama’s 2012 budget proposal which – according to CBO projections – would give us a mind-numbing national debt of $27.6 trillion by the end of 2021.

The House passed Ryan’s budget plan last month and GOP leadership should stand firm on it until Reid passes it or releases his own detailed spending plan. Stop making concessions just because the Dems are growling. Boehner is being led into the same trap he got snookered into during the 2011budget  debate. It’s time for Republican leadership to stop being the only responsible players in town to release a serious plan and then spend the rest of the debate dodging daggers from the Left. When Reid and Pelosi turn the volume up on their demagoguery and accuse Ryan’s plan of “cutting too deep” – Boehner can simply respond by saying, “ok – you don’t like our plan, so show us yours.”

If Reid refuses to offer his own plan, then a Government default will fall squarely on his shoulders.

The Republicans have a plan – the Democrats don’t. Boehner needs to keep hammering that point home until Reid starts squealing.

President Obama’s “solution” to rising oil and gas prices is to vilify oil companies for making profits and to take away tax subsidies that encourage exploration.

Neither of these measures, of course, will slow down the rapidly rising cost of crude and gas at the pump. It’s merely playing to the populist anger over skyrocketing gas prices.

Crude oil prices, like everything else, is set by the law of supply and demand. It’s not speculators and its not price gouging by oil companies as Bill O’Reilly asserts.

Like most commodities, oil is traded on futures markets where oil producers and oil buyers can lock in a fixed price for delivery of a known quantity of crude out in the future. The buyers include transportation companies, airlines, refiners, and energy companies.

The law of supply & demand drives futures prices no different than any other commodity or good sold on the open market. But in the case of oil futures, it is the buyers and sellers’ perception of future supply and demand that sets prices.

When the oil market looks out into the future, it sees a recovering global economy pushing up demand – but the supply not keeping pace with that rising demand. Hence the rising market price of oil and ultimately gasoline.

President Obama says there’s very little he can do about rising oil prices. He’s wrong. Dead wrong. The President of the United States has the power to change the outlook for the future supply & demand equation that drives oil futures.

Here’s how:

Simply announce a major shift in energy policy that includes an aggressive initiative to expand exploration and drilling here at home. Lift all restrictions on exploration and drilling (including ANWR and offshore) and cut through the bureaucratic red tape that keeps drilling permits stuck in never-never land for years.

Instead of eliminating subsidies for oil exploration, expand them – especially for the smaller companies who depend on those breaks to offset the huge cost of finding oil.

If Obama would take this course of action, oil futures would plunge overnight as oil traders see a dramatic shift in future supply. Not only would such a plan lower gas prices at the pump, it would be a smart thing to do on many levels.

The U.S. imports about 12 million barrels of oil per day, or 4.4 billion barrels per year. At today’s cost of $113/bbl, we are sending nearly half-trillion dollars each year out of the country. And more importantly, we are creating hundreds of thousands of jobs in such places as Venezuela, Saudi Arabia, and Canada – but not here. And we are giving up huge tax revenues that would come with higher employment and corporate profits on oil production.

Obama still can’t come to grips with the cold reality that the development of alternative energy is a 15-20 year proposition. The need for oil will be with us a long time.

Rising oil and gas prices is one problem Obama can’t solve by reading from his teleprompter. This time, he will actually have to do something completely foreign to him: govern.

With deficits and debt taking center stage in the national discourse, the time has never been better to settle the long-standing argument that defines the most profound difference between Liberalism and Conservatism:

What is the role of Government in this country?

This is a debate that is long overdue and that has heretofore only been skirted around the edges. This discussion should be brought out into the open in full view of the public.

Republicans cannot win this argument if they allow Democrats to make it one of morality. Demagoguery from the Left will be off the charts and the GOP will be painted as heartless, uncaring bastards out to starve granny and make sick kids fend for themselves.

The Republicans must make it about simple economics and third-grade math. There is a simple, indisputable proposition that is a mathematical certainty: the deficits and debt resulting from maintaining a welfare society cannot be sustained and – if not corrected soon – will lead to the complete destruction of the economic and social fabric of the United States of America.

No matter how much we may “want” to help our neighbors; no matter how much compassion we may feel for our countrymen – there is a practical limit to our collective ability to pay their way through life. Morality has nothing to do with it. And it’s not about caring or compassion.

It’s about a limited amount of money trying to cover an expanding segment of the population who have chosen to go through life with their hand out. Liberalism has encouraged this kind of dependency and has instilled a “Government owes me” mentality in the citizens of this country. It has to be stopped. And the time is now.

President Obama has repeatedly preached the sermon that America is a compassionate nation. He is right. But when a successful, hard-working citizen is forced at the point of a gun to hand over his money to support freeloaders – that is not an act of compassion. It is rather an involuntary submission to legalized theft by a Government who claims to be “of the people.”

Government cannot legislate social equality by confiscating wealth from the achievers and redistributing it to the moochers. Taking more and more money from the wealth creators through taxation will ultimately take away the incentive for people to excel in life and to create the wealth freeloaders have become dependent on.

I have been a harsh and vocal critic of GOP leadership for letting Democrats control the budget/spending debate. And I will continue to be until I hear Boehner, Ryan, or Cantor come out swinging and turn the narrative away from starving kids and make it about the very real economic and social destruction in our future if we continue on this path. That’s not over-the-top rhetoric or scare tactics and fear mongering the Democrats are noted for. It’s as real as it gets.

I’ve been pleading – even screaming – at the GOP to stop playing defense and go on offense. Make Harry Reid explain his plan for paying off the massive debt they are racking up. Force Nancy Pelosi to tell us what we can do when interest on our debt consumes 60% of tax revenues. Let Obama tell us what the plan will be when U.S. Treasuries are downgraded to one notch above junk status. How will $300 oil or 8$ gas affect the economy after the U.S. Dollar completely melts down?

And ask the American people how they would feel about a future that looks like Greece complete with massive, violent rioting in protest of radical, extreme austerity measures imposed by a Socialist Government that failed in bankruptcy after running out of other people’s money.

Natural disasters generally come out of nowhere and catch us off guard. That’s particularly true of earthquakes, tsunamis, the deadly slew of tornadoes that laid waste to the south recently, and major hurricanes like Katrina. There is little that can be done to avert the destructive fury of a magnitude 8.0 earthquake or a Cat 5 hurricane.

We are witnessing today the making of a cataclysmic crisis that will have unthinkable consequences to every American when it comes. Unlike the earthquakes in Haiti and Japan that were dished out strictly on God’s terms, the major crisis we are facing now is 100% man made

I’m talking, of course, about the looming debt crisis.

New Orleans had about 48 hours warning before Katrina blew ashore – but the warning time for the coming fiscal calamity can be measured in years.

Just the mere existence of a $14 trillion debt alone should be plenty enough to scare Washington politicians into action. But no. That the U.S. is borrowing $4 billion every day to pay its bills should be more than enough to motivate our nation’s “leaders” into a bipartisan call to action in order to save our homeland from certain destruction. But no again. The falling U.S. Dollar, rising food and energy costs, and exploding oil and gasoline prices is sending up red flags and sounding alarm bells – the kinds of warning signals that surely will prompt Washington to take the looming crisis seriously. But still no.

One doesn’t need a PhD in Economics to know the current trajectory of spending and debt accumulation cannot possibly be sustained. Hell, my 9-year-old granddaughter knows that. It doesn’t take a genius to know major cultural changes in Washington have to be made – regardless of how painful – if we are to avert financial Armageddon.

So what is Washington waiting for?

It’s becoming painfully clear where Obama and the Democrats stand on the fight to avoid disaster: they see this as an opportunity to score political points by projecting themselves as the savior of humanity in America against evil Republicans hell bent on murdering women, starving old people, and abolishing Medicare. And for good measure, Obama has ratcheted it up to accusing the GOP of wanting to kill children.

The party that promised us civility and bipartisanship has turned into a hyper-partisan attack machine that has taken ugly, sleazy demagoguery to a new level. After all, blaming George W. Bush is a lot easier than taking responsibility for fixing the problem.

It will be up to Republicans to preserve what’s left of our future. But GOP leadership has advised us they only control one-half of one-third of Government. Maybe they didn’t read that part of the U.S. Constitution that requires approval by the U.S. House of Representatives for any Government spending measure. Maybe they don’t yet understand that Harry Reid has no control over how House Congressmen vote.

The Republican leadership has given us lots of tough talk about getting serious toward getting the deficit under control – including Boehner’s “read my lips” moment. But words aren’t enough to solve the problem. This one will require real action. FY 2011′s deficit will be somewhere around $1.6 trillion.

But it will be a one-year record deficit only because John Boehner and his House membership agreed to it.

There is no excuse whatsoever for Congress to put this off any longer. Every one of the 535 members who make up the Legislative body of Government know what’s coming. If Boehner can’t impose the necessary changes with the help of Democrats, then he will have to do it with a battering ram.

This is not only the most predictable crisis in history; it is the most preventable as well.

Consider this hypothetical scenario: at the first of the year, my wife tells me she needs to raise her monthly shopping allowance by $200 due to inflation, fashion changes, etc. Being the devout fiscal Conservative I am, and after a long, not-so-loving negotiation, we finally settle on a monthly increase of $125. Did I succeed in cutting our monthly budget by $75?

In the fiery words of John Boehner: Hell No!

Now consider this real-life scenario: According to CBO data, Federal expenditures in 2010 totalled $3.456 trillion producing a deficit of $1.293 trillion. The latest estimate for 2011 total Federal outlays is $3.819 trillion which does not include the negotiated $38B in “cuts.” So with the cuts factored in, 2011′s spending will come in at $3.781 trillion giving us a new record deficit of just over $1.6 trillion.

So let’s get this straight: Government spending will be $325 billion higher this year than last year, and the deficit will grow from $1.3 trillion to $1.6 trillion. But when we look toward Washington, we see politicians from both parties running around with their hair on fire hootin’ and hollerin’ about pulling off the “historic” feat of producing ”the largest spending cuts in American history.”

But wait – it gets better.

President Obama’s campaign speech yesterday outlined a plan that would “cut” the deficit by $4 trillion over 12 years. Relative to what? From which baseline did the President start to make that bold, daring proclamation?

The best my research can determine, the starting point is his original 2012 budget proposal. You know, the un-adopted, pie-in-the-sky, wish-list budget that would have – according to his own projections – given us $7 trillion in new debt over 10 years and closer to $10 trillion over his newly-adopted 12-year window. And the same budget that had no chance whatsoever of becoming law. So when the starting point is a phony, artifical baseline that is meaningless, then any resulting comparison to that baseline is just as worthless.

The same questions apply to Paul Ryan‘s $6.2 trillion spending reduction. There are too many baselines running loose out there. There is the CBO projections based on the last budget that was adopted, the one based on Obama’s 2012 budget, and Obama’s own projections made in his 2012 budget. Whether or Ryan has his own projection is not clear to me. Trying to make an accurate comparison of the different spending plans is akin to trying to measure the length of  two farts with a yardstick and calculating the difference.

I don’t like being confused. Tell me what the projected cumulative U.S. debt will be ten years out for each plan, and then I can make some sense out of it.