Where are these government-slashing Republicans I keep hearing about?

[Contumacious]

Two weeks ago The New York Times reported that Republicans "want a vastly smaller government." Last week the Times called the dispute about raising the federal debt ceiling "an epic clash over the parties' divergent views on the size and role of the federal government." This week it said President Obama faces "a conservative movement seeking a wholesale redefinition of the proper role of government."

The recent debt deal, widely portrayed as a victory for Republicans, suggests their goals are decidedly less ambitious. As always in Washington, the "epic clash" perceived by the Times is in fact a squabble between two parties that both favor big government.

The debt deal, which authorizes the federal government to borrow another $2.1 trillion on top of the $14.3 trillion it already owes, supposedly includes "$2.5 trillion in cuts." But as Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) emphasizes, those are cuts from a projected baseline in which the national debt grows by $10 trillion during the next decade, which means "the BEST case scenario is still $7 trillion more in debt over the next 10 years."


Kinda Cuts - Reason Magazine

.

If you had bothered to look at the no votes on the deal you would see those nasty tea party people voted no as the real deals were continually nixed by democrats.

So you had a minority fighting the establishment of democrats and republicans willing to play along with democrats. The award for their bravery was to be called terrorists and racists.

"But even at their boldest, House Republicans do not envision a federal government any smaller than it is now. Under the supposedly radical budget plan approved by the House in April, Cato Institute budget analyst Chris Edwards calculates, federal spending would rise by 34 percent during the next decade, compared to the 55 percent preferred by Obama. The budget would not be balanced until 2030, while the role of the federal government would be essentially unchanged."

.

 

[Contumacious]

If you had bothered to look at the no votes on the deal you would see those nasty tea party people voted no as the real deals were continually nixed by democrats.

The majority of the Tea Party Caucus voted for the deal.

Nero fiddled while Rome burned

The demopublicans again chose politics over restoring financial sanity

.

 

[Contumacious]

If you had bothered to look at the no votes on the deal you would see those nasty tea party people voted no as the real deals were continually nixed by democrats.

The majority of the Tea Party Caucus voted for the deal.

Really? And just how many are there?

"One of that plan's weaknesses is that it does not address the so-called defense budget, which has nearly doubled in the last decade and represents more than two-fifths of the world's military spending. This absurd situation cries out for critical examination by a party that supposedly wants a smaller government. Yet the squeals of protest elicited by the debt deal's "security-related" cuts suggest Republicans are not ready to reconcile this country's military spending with the threats it faces."

.

 

[NYcarbineer]

It's just how I feel.

They Caved. We needed Deeper cuts, and to address entitlements. The Credit Rating people had made that pretty clear.

Plus they allowed the next debate to be Pushed past the next election. Which is a Huge ass plus for Obama.

So IMO they failed miserably. I still give them credit for turning the Debate from How much can we spend, to how do we cut spending, But I think they are doomed to fail in the Republican Party. Which is really Morphed into just another Big Government Party.

Actually the credit people said that Republicans that were unwilling to listen to reason were the reason the credit rating was lowered.

Here is what they said:

But that doesn't mean we should ignore S&P's Friday evening shot across the bow. In downgrading the U.S.'s credit rating, S&P points out what has long been obvious: Washington's inability to come to an agreement on how to close the large fiscal gaps that have emerged since the recession began is troubling. Recent events have sapped the agency's confidence that the government can and will do what is necessary to align revenues with spending commitments. And it's difficult to escape the conclusion that America's credit rating was intentionally sabotaged by Congressional Republicans.

..............

But Congressional Republicans deserve much more of the blame. For this calamity was entirely man-made -- even intentional. The contemporary Republican Party is fixated on taxes. It possesses an iron-clad belief that the existing tax rates should never go up, that loopholes shouldn't be closed unless they're offset by other tax reductions, that the fact that hedge fund managers pay lower tax rates than school teachers makes complete sense, that a reversion to the tax rates of the prosperous 1990's or 1980's would be unacceptable.

People like you make me laugh. We just got downgraded because S&P wanted us to cut our deficit by 4 trillion and we didn't come close to that. So how is it that Congressional Republicans who were calling for more cuts to spending "deserve much more of the blame"?

The fact is...the rating agencies couldn't care less HOW we cut deficits...whether it's done with massive tax increases...done with massive spending cuts...or done with a combination of the two. What they DO care about is that the deficit is cut because our debt level is unsustainable.

We need to reform entitlements since they are the overwhelming source of our deficit. That isn't happening however because entitlements were deemed "untouchable" by Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. So tell me again how the Republicans deserve much more of the blame when they are the only ones willing to talk about fixing the real source of the problem.

What the Republicans offered is what they always offer, a deficit cutting deal where almost every single dollar of pain falls on Democratic constituencies and positions,

and virtually none on their own.

 

[Contumacious]

Really?

Yes, really. Were you unaware of that when you said "those nasty tea party people voted no"?

"The Tea Party "acted like terrorists," Joe Biden reportedly said of negotiations. One reasonable New York Times columnist called the tea party the "Hezbollah faction" of the GOP, and the other advised the radicals to "put aside their suicide vests"—for now. And in a sweeping assault on the Tea Party, metaphors, syntax, and clarity, MSNBC's Chris Matthews packed everything he'd read on the blogs into a glorious globule of rhetorical confusion.

But fret not. Terrorist analogies are welcome when democracy fails to break to the left. Republicans should never refer to the Congressional Progressive Caucus as a bunch of wealth-destroying jihadists who wear suicide vests packed with prosperity-killing stimulus plans. That kind of overheated hyperbole would be catastrophic, leading to violence, and/or another alarmist Diane Sawyer television special. But Bob Beckel is just being cute when he discusses the "tea terrorist party" on Fox News. (He later apologized.)"

 

[Contumacious]

The Tea Party Folded. Straight up. IMO there done, at least as part of the Republican Party.

How do you figure that?

It's just how I feel.

They Caved. We needed Deeper cuts, and to address entitlements. The Credit Rating people had made that pretty clear.

Plus they allowed the next debate to be Pushed past the next election. Which is a Huge ass plus for Obama.

So IMO they failed miserably. I still give them credit for turning the Debate from How much can we spend, to how do we cut spending, But I think they are doomed to fail in the Republican Party. Which is really Morphed into just another Big Government Party.

"If you're wondering why these elected officials, representing their constituents within the system, are the equivalent of terrorists, a Democratic congressman from Pennsylvania bores to the heart of the matter: "This small group of terrorists," Mike Doyle explained, "have made it impossible to spend any money."

Well, damn near impossible. Washington will have to squeeze by on $43,900,000,000,000 over the next decade while wrestling with real cuts that are likely to rise to zero—or maybe less. If we can't spend money, who are we as a people?"

.

 

[Greenbeard]

If you had bothered to look at the no votes on the deal you would see those nasty tea party people voted no as the real deals were continually nixed by democrats.

The majority of the Tea Party Caucus voted for the deal.

because you say so?

Yes, and because 32 of them voted for the deal. That's a majority of the Tea Party Caucus.

 

[bripat9643]

44 of em voted to keep the partiot act going. Some guns.

When has the TEA Party ever even commented on the Patriot Act, let alone taken a position on it?

 

[hortysir]

The majority of the Tea Party Caucus voted for the deal.

because you say so?

Yes, and because 32 of them voted for the deal. That's a majority of the Tea Party Caucus.

So you shouldn't have any problem linking your claim.

Or is it you just like saying 'caucus'?

 

[Greenbeard]

because you say so?

Yes, and because 32 of them voted for the deal. That's a majority of the Tea Party Caucus.

So you shouldn't have any problem linking your claim.

Or is it you just like saying 'caucus'?

No, I don't have any problem with that.

List of Tea Party Caucus members.

House roll call for the debt deal.

Among the ayes: Adams, Aderholt, Alexander, Barlett, Barton, Bilirakis, Black, Burgess, Carter, Cassidy, Coble, Coffman, Crenshaw, Culberson, Farenthold, Fincher, Herger, Jenkins, Luetkemeyer, Marchant,McKinley, Miller, Nugent, Pence, Price, Roe, Royce, Sessions, Smith, different Smith, Walberg, and West.

32 Tea Partiers, a majority of their caucus.

 

[hortysir]

Yes, and because 32 of them voted for the deal. That's a majority of the Tea Party Caucus.

So you shouldn't have any problem linking your claim.

Or is it you just like saying 'caucus'?

No, I don't have any problem with that.

List of Tea Party Caucus members.

House roll call for the debt deal.

Among the ayes: Adams, Aderholt, Alexander, Barlett, Barton, Bilirakis, Black, Burgess, Carter, Cassidy, Coble, Coffman, Crenshaw, Culberson, Farenthold, Fincher, Herger, Jenkins, Luetkemeyer, Marchant,McKinley, Miller, Nugent, Pence, Price, Roe, Royce, Sessions, Smith, different Smith, Walberg, and West.

32 Tea Partiers, a majority of their caucus.

Thank you for that, GB.

Now bear with me while a do a little math.


269 yes votes
-32 TP votes
---------
237 would have passed without TP support
-95 Dem votes
--------
142 would NOT have passed without Dem votes


Somehow this translates to "It's the TP's fault"???


Got it

 

[Greenbeard]

Somehow this translates to "It's the TP's fault"???

I don't know who you're quoting.

 

[hortysir]

Somehow this translates to "It's the TP's fault"???

I don't know who you're quoting.

Al Gore and any number of left wing democrats that blame our recent downgrade on the TP

 

[hortysir]

Shit!

Damned percocets.....meant to say Kerry.

I had my washed up Dem Pres. Cand' confused