I made a lot of fun of Mitch McConnell last month when he said this:
MCCONNELL: I think we clearly do need to make sure Americans know what we would do and we’re gonna make that announcement in late September so the voters will have an opp…And it turns out he wasn't bluffing - they had a thing in mind! And now it's out for me to make more fun of! Note: the whole document I'm linking too is hosted by CBS news, which means you shouldn't believe anything in it.
HOST: But you have an opportunity right here to spell it out.
MCCONNELL: Yeah but I think I won’t scoop myself. We’ll be making that announcement in late September.
I'm a little short on time today so just a few remarks:
I'm glad they're dropping that whole "reducing the deficit thing," because it would just be troublesome.
Check this out:
Unfortunately, the metrics used to hold Congress accountable are often flawed. Rather than using the scale of how well elected representatives represent the views of the people, the scale is often currently measured in bills passed, dollars spent, and programs created. This must change....Any ideas on how to judge you on that, boys?
Every American must ask: what has Congress done to ensure opportunity and to safeguard my liberty and the freedoms guaranteed to me in the Constitution? We stand ready to be judged by that standard.
And, of course, any ideas? We've been waiting for this for a while now, and and far as I can see the ideas are LESS TAXES (because taxes are really low now and the economy is just soarin' like an eagle) and reducing the size of government, just like GW Bush and the Republican congress and senate did after they promised to in 2000.
And, apparently, an unspoken pledge to license massive amounts of clip art, thus stimulating the clip art sector.
8 comments:
What did Nancy Pelosi say back in March of 2005 (to Fox News), when asked what "the plan" was for the Democrats?
No idea, links or quotes please.
I will take your meaning to be the same as mine though, that there's no reason to expect any more from these guys then we got from Pelosi's guys.
"Why should we put a plan out? Our plan is to stop him. He must be stopped. "
- Referring to George W. Bush on Fox News (March 17, 2005)
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Nancy_Pelosi
You laugh that the Republicans "didn't have a plan" prior to this, and now you say the plan is no good.
Point is, no matter what the Republicans put forth, you wouldn't like it.
Here's a little inside info: the Republicans aren't trying to change your mind, because it is unchangable. They are working on the Independents here, buddy.
Also, back to the Pelosi quote from '05, I don't recall anyone in the MSM asking her for details, or calling her the leader of the Party of No, do you?
Forgot to ask you earlier, but did you actually read the document? (I have to ask, because you do have a history of commenting on things you haven't read and/or watched)
I'm think the answer is "no", because even in the highlights CBS provided you, you must have glossed over these little snippets:
Repeal small business mandates in the new health care law. That would reduce the deficit, no?
Roll back non-discretionary spending to 2008 levels before TARP and stimulus (will save $100 billion in first year alone) Call me crazy, but cutting back spending, that lowers deficits, doesn't it?
Cancel all future TARP payments and reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac If you don't fully fund the program that is contributing to the deficit, wouldn't that lower the deficit?
Those are just from CBS. How about the actual words from the actual document you didn't read?
From Page 6: With common-sense exceptions for
seniors, veterans, and our troops, we will
roll back government spending to pre-
stimulus, pre-bailout levels, saving us at
least $100 billion in the first year alone and
putting us on a path to balance the budget
and pay down the debt. We will also
establish strict budget caps to limit federal
spending from this point forward.
"Balance the budget and pay down the debt" sure sounds like "reducing the deficit" to me. What does that passage mean to you?
Pages 19-25 spaek to reducing the size of Government, as well as the amount of spending. Do those areas not address "reducing the deficit"?
Again, did you read what you are commenting on?
Just that quote alone is nonsense. We have already rolled back spending to pre-tarp levels. It's lower. So therefore the Republicans are promising to get by with what we're already doing, PLUS stimulus money, which they have almost all accepted to fund their state projects after having called it socialism and voting against it.
Plus if you read that Contract with America from the nineties, it had specific bills in it. This is 10 times the length and promises nothing specific. And presumably they'll implement this one like they did the last:
A November 13, 2000 article by Edward H. Crane, president of the libertarian Cato Institute, stated, "... the combined budgets of the 95 major programs that the Contract with America promised to eliminate have increased by 13%."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contract_with_america
Of course, that was before you had a Republican executive branch, when spending REALLY took off.
And regarding reading the Pledge: I have to confess I was mesmerized by the clip art and didn't read the whole thing. Still you didn't have to read the whole Obamacare bill to know there were death panels in it, eh?
Hard to believe you didn't read what you posted on. Comparing a document that is over 2,000 pages long, to a pamphlet that has fewer than two dozen pages, is pretty much the same thing, right?
I just want to make sure I read what you wrote there; you are saying that Government spending is currently less than it was in 2008? I'm pretty sure you are incorrect there, as every chart out there shows the same as these do:
http://ponderingfinance.com/?p=10
I'm confident that you'll be able to find lots of data to show that I am mistaken.
As to "specifics", where in the TARP package did the document lay out specifics as to how every dollar was spent? Where in The Obama Stimulus does it give an accounting of where each penny goes?
These documents don't do that, because just like the Pledge, they are "35,000 foot" documents. They are a broad view, from a height. As the various committees take hold of them, they become more "street level". It's why you can't find any mention of monies being set aside to research prostitution levels in the Ozarks, but how that funding pops up later down the road when some elected official or a reporter uncovers it.
But you already knew that, didn't you?
Why is Pelosi's quote "nonsense"?
There's a reason why the health care bill was longer - it didn't just say "health care should be better, and we promise to fix it." It contained policy details.
What specific programs are going to be cut, according to the pledge? How much tax revenue are they saying we'll be bringing in? When are they expecting to balance the budget? The contract with America was a third the length, and even it managed to include specific proposed bills.
The charts, I'm sure you noticed, include the TARP and stimulus money in their calculations. If you really believe Republicans are going to fight to stop the flow of Federal money to their states, you're an especially starry-eyed individual.
Pelosi's quote wasn't nonsense, it was the quote from the pledge, but I apologize for not being explicit. That's bad writing on my part. For Pelosi, what do you think? It that kind of politics a bad thing?
Post a Comment