tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post509543894612810156..comments2023-09-15T04:27:57.129-04:00Comments on Commentarama: Stop Attacking The Budget DealAndrewPricehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.comBlogger39125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-70257432076640122782011-04-15T14:07:51.845-04:002011-04-15T14:07:51.845-04:00USS Ben, Yeah, old Wiley E. is absolutely brillian...USS Ben, Yeah, old Wiley E. is absolutely brilliant compared to this guy!<br /><br />I agree it sounds stupid when he talks about cut and the debt ceiling together, but it really goes to show just how far the debate has changed. Even a few months ago, Obama never would have said the word "cuts." Now if only he would mean it!<br /><br />As incredible as it seems, yes, tax hikes are now being described as "spending cuts in the tax code." And up is down. It's double plus good.AndrewPricehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-26464952874043281782011-04-15T14:03:01.622-04:002011-04-15T14:03:01.622-04:00Aye. I'm willing to give the GOP a solid C on ...Aye. I'm willing to give the GOP a solid C on this one or maybe C- with lots of red pen corrections. :^) <br /><br />Time to shred Obama's budget and push Ryan's. <br /><br />Um, if I got the new democrat terminology down (it's hard to keep uyp since they change word definitions so quickly now), doesn't "spending cuts" now mean tax increases? LOL.<br /><br />BTW, it just sounds so moronic when Obama talks about raising the debt ceiling and spending cuts in the same sentence.<br /><br />Then again he is the guy that said we nee to spend our way outta debt, so for him this is actually quite profound I reckon. <br />This guy makes Wile E. Coyote look brilliant.USS Ben USN (Ret)https://www.blogger.com/profile/07492369604790651538noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-47130623501735726782011-04-15T13:03:52.783-04:002011-04-15T13:03:52.783-04:00By the way, Obama is now saying that there have to...By the way, Obama is now saying that there have to be spending cuts as part of the debt ceiling raising. So we may get a good deal closer to the $100 billion yet.AndrewPricehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-28798484831763824652011-04-15T13:01:08.717-04:002011-04-15T13:01:08.717-04:00USS Ben, Thanks! And I agree with you on all poin...USS Ben, Thanks! And I agree with you on all point.<br /><br />1. Boehner is better than Pelosi by a mile, but he needs to stay in touch with conservatives and recognize that the country is moving to the right and will no longer tolerate the either the era of big government or the era of mostly-big government. I <i>think</i> he's doing that, but we'll see.<br /><br />2. I like the defang approach. There are a lot of things we can do to gut these agencies of their powers without having to draw the political backlash of demanding the abolition of these agencies. Once they are stripped of much of their power and their role becomes so limited as to be insignificant, that's when you do a reorganization of the agencies to fold some of these into others, and then you make them disappear. That's the smart and effective way to do it. And I hope the Republicans get there. The problem is that there seem to be two sides -- one yelling abolish them now and the other completely rejecting the whole idea. The key is to convince both that the middle route is in all of our best interests.<br /><br />3. The PR thing drives me crazy. The Republicans have never been good at exposing Democrats or even at defending themselves. That needs to change. They need to hired all new PR people, they need to wake up and realize that everything is political these days, and that they need to drop the Miss Manner routine -- politics is a bloodsport with no rules.<br /><br />4. I agree with you about Gitmo. I understand why Boehner did it -- to please a large chunk of the base, but we do need to be smarter about these things. Even with something like Libya, I periodically see Republicans trying to hand Obama a life-line against the nuts in his own party. Don't. Make him put down his own people, don't do his dirty work for him.<br /><br />Finally, let me say that I'm not saying this budget deal was the greatest thing ever, but it wasn't the horrible betrayal people are making it out as. Would I have liked to have seen a lot more out of it? Sure. But I don't think this is worth tearing the leadership apart over. We should be focused on ripping apart Obama's joke-budget and then supporting Ryan's budget. That's where our energy should be.AndrewPricehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-64533569223787611512011-04-15T12:45:43.848-04:002011-04-15T12:45:43.848-04:00Good answers, Andrew.
Actually, I don't expec...Good answers, Andrew. <br />Actually, I don't expect the GOP to sucessfully defund EPA, DOE, or any of the opther bloated bureaucracies, but they do need to push hard the facts that these agencies led by obama's czars are bypassing Congress and making regulations that effect our liberties and would mean higher taxes without representation, and thus would hurt the economy more.<br /><br />The GOP must first get that message to the average voters and then work to defang those agencies as much as they can.<br /><br />I think Boehner made a mistake when he said that we only control one half of one third of the govt..<br /><br />No, we fully control the House of representatives, the pursestrings of the govt..<br />Not to mention we got a fillibuster proof Senate. <br /><br />Granted, Obama still must sign off on anything, but why not make him look bad by making him own the fact that his czars are enacting their own radical legislation?<br /><br />You know, instead of a complete defunding bill of say the EPA, have a bill that defangs them by (again) clearly pointing out it's Constitutional limits of power and also the President's Constitutional limits.<br /><br />Let the folks know we are looking out for them by stopping taxes from being raised for more of Obama's hare-brained schemes such as cap n' tax for example.<br /><br />Make it clear so that Obama can "be clear" and thus make him and any idiotic dem's who wannna stick with him own it.<br />Then we can go "see? Obama and these democrats wanna raise your taxes without representatation. You don't get a say in it. And they're gonna tell you what light bulbs you hafta buy and use, and they're gonna keep forcing energy prices higher to fund their political friends, etc., etc.<br /><br />People don't like being told what to do and how to do it. And they sure as heck don't like new taxes that their elected representatives can do nothing about.<br /><br />Stuff like this would help the GOP and the country not only begin to get some sanity in our out of control spending, but make Congeress again an equal part of the govt..<br />Right nopw the President has waaay too much power and we can see how easily it can be abused. <br /><br />That's what I meant in particular about defunding. I should have said defanging.<br /><br />I see what you mean about Guantamino, but we need to be smarter than that. <br /><br />Depending on who wins the GOP primary the next Presidential election is by no means a sure thing and we gotta fry Obama's new campaign lies before they hatch.<br />we gotta point this crap out and say "we're letting Obama be clear and this is what he's doing."<br /><br />That would go a long ways in healing the rift between the old GOP leadership and the new blood.<br />That said, Boehner is a huge improvement to Pelosi and we would do welll to remember that. :^)<br /><br />However, Boehner (and McConnel, et al the old guard) must realize that we Tea Party types are gonna be watching them closely and expect them to bring their A game.<br /><br />If Boehner and company remember that and stay in touch with conservatives then I can live with him as leader.<br />But if he don't, he is not irreplacable.<br />Thankfully, we have a new RNC chair because the last thing we need is for Steele to keep sabotaging us from the inside.USS Ben USN (Ret)https://www.blogger.com/profile/07492369604790651538noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-2537809270737690202011-04-15T11:53:09.299-04:002011-04-15T11:53:09.299-04:00(continued)
In terms of why he didn't start wi...(continued)<br />In terms of why he didn't start with $100 billion, that I don't know. It's possible they did essentially start with $100 and then the Democrats countered with their first offer of $0. And then what we heard as the "first" Republican offer was the response to the $0. I'm not sure. It's also possible other dynamics were at play. Again, I wasn't there and I'm not sure. But I will concede that it sounds like he could have starter higher and stayed higher longer. Nevertheless, $78.5 out of $100 is not bad when you realize he really had no power here to force them to agree to anything.<br /><br />Fourth, on Guantanamo Bay, I actually agree with you -- but then I don't really care if the place stays open or not. I see it as a political issue and I don't think the location actually matters. But a LOT of Republicans view this as a cherished goal and I can't fault Boehner for getting them what they want.<br /><br />Fifth, on EPA, etc., I truly do not see the support within the public for defunding an entire agency. I know a lot of conservatives love to talk about that, just like they want to defund the Department of Education, but this is one of those issues that just turns off every moderate (and even a lot of conservatives) with whom I've spoken -- they just dismiss the idea out of hand. This is an issue that must be done much more cleverly that simply demanding it and threatening to shut down the government. This is going to have to be done piecemeal so that people don't freak out or see the demand as unreasonable. And that means laying a lot of behind-the-scenes groundwork.AndrewPricehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-35690924497981143702011-04-15T11:52:59.254-04:002011-04-15T11:52:59.254-04:00USS Ben, Your criticisms are entirely constructive...USS Ben, Your criticisms are entirely constructive and appropriate, and I appreciate that. Most people are out there pounding away with facts that aren't true and using words like "betrayal" and the such.<br /><br />Let me make a few observations in response.<br /><br />First, I totally agree that the Republicans still have a message problem. They just aren't good at exploiting the other side's mistakes -- like the military funding thing. They (the politicians and pundits) should have been out there pounding the airwaves about "how dare Obama consider the military nonessential" and "how dare he decide that ___ gets paid when the military won't."<br /><br />Second, Boehner also should have been clearer about the $78.5 billion figure. But then he also would have run run into the complaint that he mixing issues to make the $38.5 sound bigger -- so that's a bit of a double edged sword. But he should have pounded that home nevertheless.<br /><br />Third, on why the didn't ask for more. This is the real problem with public negotiations -- they are carried out in public. In a normal negotiation, you keep your real goal secret as your negotiate. You then come in with an offer that is more or less higher than what you want and you work your way down and hopefully end up at your goal.<br /><br />But this is done in public. So when the Republicans promised $100 billion in cuts, everyone knew right away what the goal was going to be. That's like telling the other side right away what your trying to get. At that point, there is no benefit to asking for more than your goal because everyone automatically reduces anything you say to that goal. In other words, if they had asked for $500 billion, the Democrats would have said, "no, we know it's $100 billion and we're not going to give you $100 billion." To not recognize that and to still make a demand above $100 billion would only make you look like you didn't grasp the reality of the situation.<br /><br />That will always be a problem in these types of situations, whatever promise you make is something you will never fully achieve because the other side knows that's your goal.<br /><br />(continued)AndrewPricehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-5865642446404114432011-04-15T04:17:41.114-04:002011-04-15T04:17:41.114-04:00Going on...relunctantly...why didn't Boehner s...Going on...relunctantly...why didn't Boehner say this was 78 billion instead of 38, including the MSM? <br />I admit, I haven't read the thing yet, but if this is for real 78 bil., why go with saying 38? <br />Say it loud! <br />We cut 78 billion and those idiots thought it was 38 billion! <br /><br />I was leary of the CBO as well. Especially since they have a history of fudging (ie lying) in favor of the proregressives.<br />It'll be interesting to see Heritige's take on the actual numbers, all broken down.<br /><br />Hopefully, my little rant was constructive instead of reactionary. :^)<br />'Cause I concur wholeheartedly, we can't afford to be reactionary (and neither can the GOP leaders). <br /><br />Hey, I ain't about to vote for a third party, and IMO, most of the reactionary conservatives are just letting off steam.<br />Still, it's always good advice to be constructive about it, and to consider the unreliable CBO source.<br />And to realize we ain't gonna solve all these problems with just one wave.<br /><br />I don't think Boehner and Cantor are RINOS, but they ain't exactly Tea Party material either. <br />Hopefully, we will get better leadership.<br /><br />I concur about Ryan...and West, of course!It's encouraging to know we got some outstanding up n' coming players entering the game.<br />Good thing too, 'cause our liberty hangs in the balance.USS Ben USN (Ret)https://www.blogger.com/profile/07492369604790651538noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-81052514821624660452011-04-15T04:15:56.854-04:002011-04-15T04:15:56.854-04:00Hi Andrew,
This is the best post I have seen thus...Hi Andrew,<br /><br />This is the best post I have seen thus far defending Boehner and Cantor, and what they managed to negotiate.<br /><br />I disagree it's the best they coulda got, and they even had Obamas own words saying he would not pay the military...ergo, Obama considers the military nonessential.<br /><br />That woulda helped the GOP tremendously had the democrats gambled on a shutdown and I was purty pissed off that the GOP leadership didn't trumpet Obamas obvious (in his own words) willingness to holds our military (fighting three wars now) hostage.<br /><br />Besides not taking Obama's disdain of the military and pummeling him with it I think many conservatives are steamed for other reasons also:<br /><br />1. Why in the world did the GOP leadership promis 100 billion in cuts and not even start there to begin with (It woulda made more sense to start higher, but be that as it may I can see the point to move on and concentrate on Ryans budget for 2012).<br /><br />2. After breaking their first promise, the GOP settled for 60 billion in cuts, defunding NPR, PBS, the EPA (to stop it's unrepresentative seizure of power they ain't authorized to have), stop the net takover "neutrality" BS, and basically stop Obama's czars from making fiat regulations, which is anti-Constitutional and anti-liberty.<br /><br />This was a big deal, and still is, but again, I can see your points as well. <br />It's just that the leadership of the GOP has done a poor to dismal job of communicating to their base, and it don't help when they make promises they either can't or won't keep.<br />It appears as if the old guard (big govt. lite) is still doing what they were doing before the Tea Party said "Stop it!"<br /><br />Now, I sincerely hope the leadership will not give up the fight, and don't revert to their old ways, but I strongly urge them to be as upfront as possible from here on, and to seize golden opportunities when they come rather than make Obama look good (I know he doesn't look good to us, but that's the MSM's talking points right now: Obama got bipartisan support for this budget and saved the day! Ugh).<br /><br />About the riders, I agree that's good, but I disagree about the Guantamino Bay staying open one.<br /><br />Here's why: Obama promised his base he would close it immediately, then he changed it to one year. Yeah, now it's two years and counting. <br />He can't close it becayuse he can't find an alternative that won't cost a crapload of money we ain't got and that won't make him look bad (as if he needs any help in that regard).<br /><br />Hell, Obama and holder even had to go back to military commissions for the terrorists, because the civilian trials would make him look really bad. <br /><br />So why give him an out? Now Obama can say "I tried to get it closed down but the republican Congress wouldn't allow it. Remmember, I can give you change to bereave in! So let me be clear! This is unprecendented."<br /><br />You know, when Obama has an albatross like that tightening around his neck the last thing we should do is give him a helping hand!<br />Damn! That really chaffs my hide!<br /><br />Who's stupid idea was this to make that a rider? And why did Boehner go with it?<br />CONT....USS Ben USN (Ret)https://www.blogger.com/profile/07492369604790651538noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-18773061337398539592011-04-15T00:25:15.294-04:002011-04-15T00:25:15.294-04:00T_Rav, Or just have Sarah Palin endorse stem cell ...T_Rav, Or just have Sarah Palin endorse stem cell research. That would pretty much put it on the liberal ban list! LOL!<br /><br /><br />On the vote, unfortunately, that's the kind of thing that happens when people start playing around. Let's hope it's nothing serious. And when whatever it is appears, let's hope these Republicans realize that the way this game is played (as the Democrats always have) is to ensure that the party has enough votes and then the rest can protest. To do it this way only leads to problems like you mention.AndrewPricehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-80840848695854814442011-04-14T23:37:34.506-04:002011-04-14T23:37:34.506-04:00Andrew, I'm pretty sure there would be no fast...Andrew, I'm pretty sure there would be no faster way to make Democrats suddenly oppose stem-cell research. :-)<br /><br />By the way, one bad result that may have come out of all this--when the House voted on the budget today, 58 Republicans voted no. To ensure that it would still pass, the leadership had to reach out to Steny Hoyer to marshal enough Democratic yes votes. What, I wonder, did our side have to promise the Dems to get this done?T_Ravnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-69848020765702864212011-04-14T22:58:16.377-04:002011-04-14T22:58:16.377-04:00DUQ, I didn't see your comment before I commen...DUQ, I didn't see your comment before I commented on T_Rav's comment, but I just said the same thing about Ryan becoming the hope of the party. He really is that inspirational! I wish we could clone him.AndrewPricehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-76951820825340208282011-04-14T22:56:24.332-04:002011-04-14T22:56:24.332-04:00DUQ, Thanks! :-)DUQ, Thanks! :-)AndrewPricehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-79401168182584295752011-04-14T22:56:00.471-04:002011-04-14T22:56:00.471-04:00T_Rav, Thanks for the links. Here they are:
Ryan...T_Rav, Thanks for the links. Here they are:<br /><br /><a href="http://hotair.com/archives/2011/04/13/paul-ryan-rips-obamas-speech-rather-than-building-bridges-hes-poisoning-wells" rel="nofollow">Ryan at Hotair</a><br /><br /><a href="http://marklevinshow.com/Article.asp?id=2160890&spid=32364" rel="nofollow">Ryan at Levin</a>.<br /><br />Ryan impresses the heck out of me. And thought his well poisoning comment was brilliant because it really explained what Obama is doing by being so disingenuous about his budget.<br /><br />Ryan really has become the hope of the party.AndrewPricehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-32280368718378085792011-04-14T22:53:28.999-04:002011-04-14T22:53:28.999-04:00Crispy, Thanks. I'm glad you agree. This has ...Crispy, Thanks. I'm glad you agree. This has long been a problem with Republicans, that they fight with each other more than with the Democrats. The Democrats do it too, but are much better at hiding the fact.AndrewPricehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-24447743462298301262011-04-14T22:21:11.711-04:002011-04-14T22:21:11.711-04:00T-Rav, Thanks for the links! I'll look those u...T-Rav, Thanks for the links! I'll look those up. Ryan really has become one of my favorites in the last couple years. He is easily my favorite Republican these days and he gives me hope for the future.DUQnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-37878462013447982612011-04-14T22:18:56.206-04:002011-04-14T22:18:56.206-04:00T_Rav, Andrew's take on these things is invalu...T_Rav, Andrew's take on these things is invaluable! I come here all the time to read it because he's always got a well informed and intelligent take on things.DUQnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-62215756956446495902011-04-14T22:17:25.879-04:002011-04-14T22:17:25.879-04:00Andrew, DUQ, and anyone else, here are the two Rya...Andrew, DUQ, and anyone else, here are the two Ryan hits on what I will jokingly call Obama's plan:<br /><br />http://hotair.com/archives/2011/04/13/paul-ryan-rips-obamas-speech-rather-than-building-bridges-hes-poisoning-wells<br /><br />http://marklevinshow.com/Article.asp?id=2160890&spid=32364<br /><br />The first is his initial rebuttal to The One, the second is his subsequent radio interview. He is seriously @#%$ed, as he should be.T_Ravnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-78485721554159476222011-04-14T22:11:32.011-04:002011-04-14T22:11:32.011-04:00Nice rant, Andrew. I agree that we should be focu...Nice rant, Andrew. I agree that we should be focusing on Obama and the Democrats and not attacking the Republicans.CrispyRicehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07302075204880024936noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-68122064946738908022011-04-14T21:13:08.115-04:002011-04-14T21:13:08.115-04:00DUQ & T_Rav, It wasn't T_Rav, it was mainl...DUQ & T_Rav, It wasn't T_Rav, it was mainly this talk radio guy I heard this morning who just couldn't stop talking about the need to get rid of Boehner because of this budget deal. He had all of his fact wrong and anyone who tried to tell him that got told that they were RINOs.<br /><br />That guy, plus a bunch of articles at supposedly reputable place, and the whining way in which everyone seemed to blindly accept the CBO spin that set me off.AndrewPricehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-10745651702832826652011-04-14T21:11:37.466-04:002011-04-14T21:11:37.466-04:00T_Rav, I'm glad to hear that. I am amazed tha...T_Rav, I'm glad to hear that. I am amazed that many of them are still talking about it when they should be focused on Obama's lame budget and Ryan's blasting of it!<br /><br />Hopefully, they've realized that either they were wrong in the first place or that at least they should have shut the heck up and stopped trying to turn it into a crime against humanity. It never helps to attack your own side.<br /><br /><br />It's amazing isn't it, how budget cuts are for fools until a Democrats proposes them -- suddenly the MSM sees the value in them.<br /><br /><i>** rolls eyes **</i>AndrewPricehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-55331814719474879572011-04-14T21:09:01.746-04:002011-04-14T21:09:01.746-04:00DUQ, I think Obama's budget was a joke. He...DUQ, I think Obama's budget was a joke. He's using a 12 year period, which is ridiculous. He's trying to pass off tax hikes as "spending cuts in the tax code." What an ass!<br /><br />In fact, his budget looks a lot like "The People's Budget" -- the idiotic thing I wrote about yesterday.<br /><br />If you want a great take on it, check out Paul Ryan's comments today and yesterday. He's done a great job ripping it all apart.AndrewPricehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11312364467936820986noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-13648855558288486482011-04-14T21:05:50.323-04:002011-04-14T21:05:50.323-04:00DUQ, no, I wasn't ranting. Panicking is more l...DUQ, no, I wasn't ranting. Panicking is more like it, and I needed Andrew's take on whether these claims were true.T_Ravnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-5323586230483932082011-04-14T21:04:40.559-04:002011-04-14T21:04:40.559-04:00Andrew, if it helps, some of the sites I was consu...Andrew, if it helps, some of the sites I was consulting yesterday were backing off this morning. So maybe people are starting to calm down. <br /><br />Also, I notice that suddenly, since Obama's "speech" yesterday, the media is very concerned about the debt and the need to have a good budget. Very odd coincidence.T_Ravnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4425587034622601550.post-32509122512422474302011-04-14T20:26:02.216-04:002011-04-14T20:26:02.216-04:00T_Rav, What makes you think Andrew meant you? Hav...T_Rav, What makes you think Andrew meant you? Have you been ranting against this deal? ;-)<br /><br /><br />Andrew, Any thoughts on Obama's "budget"?DUQnoreply@blogger.com