Redstate

... but the failure of this measure in the House could have me signing-up for lessons in a hurry.

through massive defections of conservative Democrats in the South led by a bunch of Yankee RINOs?

Good word.  This is disgusting.

A diary on Redstate comparing moderate republicans to terrorists.  We sure are venturing into interesting terrority these days.

Some of those I can understand, due to their districts or what not.  But there  is no excuse for Walter Jones, Pickering, or Wicker, all of whom are in safe, conservative districts.  I hope Chip doesn't expect a penny from me for his Senate run.

For the moderates, it has become us against them. Leadership even took drilling in ANWR and the Outer Continental Shelf out of the package late last night to get their vote, and they still have not come around. (Something about negotiating with terrorists comes to mind…)

I'm sorry, I don't mean to be dense, but could you spell out a little more clearly how political negotiations over a spending bill is comparable to terrorism?  I just don't see it.

Just called Cong. Kirk's office and asked about his vote - of course I was told he hadn't voted yet, but the nice staffer asked to take my views. I replied I was for it, to which he replied, in so many words, by asking that I was in favor of cutting Medicare. I said yes again. Also, I asked him to make sure an explanation of the vote is posted on the Cong.'s website tomorrow, or after the vote, and he assured it would be.

Now, here's a question - what does it mean that the unsolicited reply was about cutting Medicare?

Doesn't sound like a yes vote is negotiable from my Rep..

Oh well.

I agree with the general point of your post.  I would like to add some context on the ANWR removal, however.  

This morning on John Gambling's radio show on WABC New Youk, Gambling spoke with a NY Congressman Gary Ackerman (D-Jamaica, Queens), a supporter of drilling in ANWR.  The congressman stated that the ANWR provision was removed from the budget bill to intice Republican members of the Florida delgation to vote for the bill.

Apparently, some representatives from Florida are concerned about what drilling in ANWR means for drilling off the coast of FL (I guess it's a slippery slope argument).  Congressman Ackerman pointed out that the budget bill still has to be reconciled with the Senate version which included drilling in ANWR.  

Ackerman stated that the deals have already been cut that would have the House acquiesce to the Senate's version, including ANWR, and the FL representatives would vote for final passage.  Ackerman joked it is a "voted against it before I voted for it" moment for the FL representatives.  

This doesn't make our guys look any better, I know.  But I thought it was important to point out that ANWR will eventually pass and is by no means dead, if Ackerman can be believed.

kennedy is toast no matter what he does... he's finished in minnesota, so he may as well go ahead and vote for his masters in the whitehouse and corporate boardroom's bill.

bye bye mark - minnesota is solidly blue and you are going to be out of a job in a year.

weasle.

Will certainly do a lot of damage to the country.

According to the Office of the Majority Whip, the vote has been cancelled.

You should read an article that was written about the ANWR situation, as well as a good column in general

http://politics.blognewschannel.com/index.php/archives/2005/09/06/anwr-the-
right-way-to-spell-answer/

they dont have the votes as the moderates caved again

or

we should keep calling these "rinos" as they will take up the vote again later this week or next ?

A good article, but I would respectfully disagree.  Yes, ANWR is remote and uncivilized, but these are two of its attributes that make it so great, in my opinion.  America's wild places are decreasing in number, and ANWR is one of our last great frontiers that is completely and wholly undeveloped. I believe that ANWR is a symbol of America's rugged and wild heritage, and should be preserved for the enjoyment of future generations.  

I am also concerned about our dependnece on foreign oil and the rising prices at the pump, but I believe that it is worth the price to keep ANWR as it has been since the beginning of time.  

And who knows, maybe in 200 years, if humanity is hanging in the balance and we must have the oil, we can get some of that oil out for a much better purpose than a short-term savings at the pump.

The House and Senate have ignored his budget more than once. Also I have not heard anyone from the House defend Bush on a number of issues except Delay and a few others.

I think the President wants to see if his party in the House is up to the task, because he already knows his team in the Senate is a joke.  

Hmm . . .  The idea that nature is primordial and unchanging is just silly.

The Whip's Office put out this statement:

Mr. Blunt has cancelled the day because our Members are not yet ready to move forward on the Budget Deficit Reduction Act. The Budget Chairman and his committee will continue to work on the bill next week. Veterans Day events already scheduled make it difficult to keep Members here.

As of now, the bill has not been rescheduled. Unfortunately, for now, the moderates have won and limited government has lost.

It means they don't have the votes for it and instead of being embarrassed with a failure they aren't going to bring it to a vote.   They will probably keep trying to convince RINO's, but now they have no leverage of an impending floor vote.  Absolutely disgusting.  We need DeLay back pronto; Roy Blunt obviously can't get the job done.

I'm totally disgusted with the GOP right now.

This puts possible January leadership elections in a whole new light.  Who will the GOP pick to fill the post of Majority Leader?

nature is always changing.  But it has been wild and undeveloped since the beginning of time.

I had put that in and deleted it as inappropriate, but when I cut and pasted it was there and I didn't realize it.  I have striken it.  My apologies.  It was inappropriate.

Of the sixteen "moderates", only three are from the south, and none is from the west. I suppose this tells us that we ought to be somewhat optimistic, as the west is a growing part of our nation.

And, by the way, those RINOs should be called an appropriately accurate name: tax and spend liberals. There isn't anything "moderate" about runaway deficit spending.

I believe that it would do good to the Republican party to have a good fight about this. Forcing the RINOs to actually vote against lowering the deficit and against lowering gas prices will provide primary election ammunition to pro-growth, conservative Republicans. That's the best and fastest way to stop this kind of thing.

All this over 0.35% of the budget?  This is a ridiculous hill to die on, and an absurd issue to attack your fellow party members over.

If the Republican congress can't even cut the budget by a token 0.35% in light of continued spending increases for Katrina, the War and their "must have" pork, why should anyone believe they are capable of any level of fiscal disciple.

This hill looks as good to me as any.

how much land in the entire usa is owned by the federal government. And that doesn't mean owned just by eco-sissies.

Japanese PM Koizumi held a nationwide referendum two months ago that specifically targeted his own party's moderates. He won a huge and highly impressive victory.

Time for Club for Growth to launch "I think I'm turning Japanese" primary challenges against all of these (so aptly named) bed wetters.

This isn't even real reform and we can't get that?

Bush's tax cuts were modest by historical standards and you would have thought he was slashing and burning.

We elect these idiots and we are damn well within our rights to criticize them.

There is a conservative revolution coming and these guys can lead, follow, or get out of the way.

He doesn't represent Minneapolis or St Paul or Duluth where the hippie communes are. The suburbs and the southern part of the state are red. They went for Bush overwhemingly both times and they are all represented by Republicans in Congress. State wide, it is pretty close to even with an edge to the Democrats.

I just called my congressman's office, Frank Wolf (VA-8).  I told the person answering the phone I was calling to urge the Congressman to support the  Budget cutting bill. She sounded surprised and wanted to clarify that I was calling in support of the bill.  She said that I was the first person to call in support of the bill but their phone had been ringing off the hook with people opposed to the bill.

I have to say I am not surprised.

Bush's greatest strength was the perception that he was a strong leader.  

I think killing the Meirs nomination has helped tarnish that perception.  Moreover, I think the White House believes that.

And so I guess I have to ask why you are surprised he didn't leap to the defense of this measure.  

Do you really believe the White House is not bitter at the conservatives who dissed his nominee?

Kennedy is the next Senator from Minnesota.

Whose running against him?

Al (Not Funny) Franken?

Patty (Know Nothing) Wetterling?

Spectre of 'The Constitutional Party' seems to be looming. The only problem is everything is set up for a two party system in our government. This would secede power to the Democrats in all 3 branches of government.

Sometimes I hate Politics... it seems the closer you get to what you want, the more miserable you are.

This seems like nonsense to me...

If these people aren't willing to trim .35% out of a $14 trillion budget in order to offset spending on Katrina, then I no longer consider them my fellow party members.

Sick of being 'the abused woman' and sitting here lamely hoping that things will be better next time and maybe if I'm nice he won't be mean to me sometime soon.

Note to dissenters of analogy: Men who abuse women should have that abuse returned them x10 over (legal or not).

Bush isn't leading on this. He has no problem with spending. So I don't really see how he enters into it.

Not- "Do you really believe the White House is not bitter at the conservatives who dissed his nominee?"

The real question, although largely a rhetorical one, about why Bush hasn't done anything with this vote: Does anyone really believe the White House gives a d*** about fiscal discipline?

The President has been trying to hold the House and Senate to a budget for 5 years now. The House and Senate always find ways to spend more than what Bush has proposed.  

The Senate GOP is unable to get a two year extension on the tax cuts which have been extremely successful.

Our focus should be on the members of the House and Senate and not on the President. If we apply pressure and are vocal the members will listen. They felt the pressure a few weeks ago and began to react. My guess is they feel the pressure has been reduced and are now trying to back away.  

I hope DeLay's joke of a trial is over by then so he can return as majority leader.   Todays events prove that he is very much needed if we hope to get anything past the RINO's.

The Massive Deficits ARE doing a lot of damage to this country.

that the President has been trying to hold Congress to a budget for 5 years- remind me again how many spending bills he's vetoed? On top of that the Medicaid bill- which is going to blow the lights out next year- is his baby. Any assertion that Bush has championed fiscal discipling is contrary to reality.

You're right that the responsibility for this vote is with the House, but someone upthread queried what Bush's involvement had been in twisting arms, as he/Cheney have done on a number of other occasions- hence this discussion.

The reason he hasn't vetoed anything is why? His veto threat isn't even credible any more on the rare times he issues it.

It is his job to keep the House and Senate on a leash. He has been letting them run free and spend as much as they want.

I don't blame Congress because that is what Congress ALWAYS does when left to it's own devices, no matter who is running the place.

I would definitely consider her a strong candidate for a State-wide office.  So far she's sticking to bread and butter issues while avoiding the insanity of the Moveon.org wing which makes her sufficiently liberal to keep the base motivated without being so nutty as to turn off moderate "swing" voters.

Obviously Pickering and Wicker are holding out for some kind of Katrina related assistance. President Bush promised to make the region whole and they're still waiting - it looks like the Mississippi Republicans are playing hardball.

It is way too early to call this one way or another.

. . . of today's "non-vote."

Does Kennedy benefit because he didn't get associated with "sweeping cuts in Medicare, Medicaid, financial aid, and the bunnies and kittens subsidies"

OR

Does this encourage a lot of disaffected FisCons who don't want to elect a second Norm Coleman to take up golf next year?

From the experiences of those who called their representatives office, it appears that there was a concerted effort to kill this bill. I wonder if the provision regarding student loans wasn't the catalyst here.

...the argument that we're not going to get shellacked in 2006?

I thought not.

Enflamed Opposition + Depressed Base = Blowout.

(And I see nothing in current events turning that around. Just the opposite...)

I don't care if we drill in ANWR or not, I just hope that we can pass this bill.  If taking ANWR out is what we had to get it passed, then the people who led the fight to get it out are heros.  The GOP "leadership" sometimes has a tin ear and they need to "lose" on an issue before we can all win.

I count getting a start on spending and the deficit as far more important then oil we may or may not see in ten years.