Tag Archives: Patty Murray

House GOP Has Nothing to Offer Conservatives

GOP surrenders principlesHere’s the situation: You’re in a high–stakes negotiation with an untrustworthy opponent. The opposition has violated every agreement the two of you have made in the past. Enforcement mechanisms are weak or non–existent.

In other areas of mutual interest your opponent regularly violates the law and dares you to do something about the violation. Your weak and vacillating leadership can’t be counted on in a pinch. And finally, the opposition lies shamelessly to the state media, doing its best to paint you as a fanatic and pathological liar.

So what do you do?

Bomb Iran is a good answer, but it’s not the answer for this question, because I’m talking about negotiating a budget deal with Democrats.

The Republican House leadership decision in this case was to sell out their conservative base in a brazen attempt to insure their own re–election at the expense of the nation’s fiscal future.

Rep. Paul Ryan (R–WI) and Sen. Patty Murray (D–Sneakers) have presented us with a plan that shatters the spending ceiling that was the main result of the bruising sequester fight, dilutes the small budget cuts from the sequester and raises taxes (Ryan calls it a “fee” but if the feds get more money and it comes from our pockets it’s the same as a tax).

Ryan even has the gall to say the deal will balance the budget in ten years and sidestep the threat of government shutdowns in January and October 2014.

And those dates are what are really important for craven House negotiators. In fact, the real motivation for the deal is Ryan’s shutdown statement. House Republicans still think they suffered a near–death experience in the recent government shutdown. But instead of seeing Jesus and a bright light, they saw a Mayflower moving van and a bright white resume. For them if it’s a choice between selling out to the Democrats and losing their cushy Congressional job, sellout is just another word for job security.

The risk of a potential shutdown in January and October of an election year was simply too much uncertainty for these stalwarts to bear. So instead of simply passing a continuing resolution as has been done for the past few years and keeping the sequester savings, Ryan decided to remove all uncertainly and cave in this year.

Ryan and Speaker Boehner (R–Risible) think they can get away with this lie to conservatives because the result of increased federal spending and budget busting won’t have the personal impact on voters that Obama’s insurance lie had. You don’t get a letter from the government cancelling your future. You get a Chinaman repossessing the Washington monument.

The rationalization for this total surrender is threefold according to our betters: The agreement restores some defense spending reduced by the sequester, cuts the budget and brings the entire budget into balance in ten years.

Let’s start at the top. Ace negotiator Ryan was able to restore $2 billion in Pentagon spending next year in return for letting Democrats increase wasteful social spending by $ 22 BILLION! That’s a ratio of 11 to one in welfare to warfare spending.

The sequester was bad enough — defense took half the cuts, while social spending took the other half spread over countless pointless programs — but this disaster in multiplication makes that deal look positively prudent.

Second the budget cut. I admire Ryan’s poker face as he announced $26 billion in cuts over ten years. This means the federal government will be cutting $2.6 billion a year out of a budget that’s over $1 trillion! For comparison purposes, the city of Washington, DC spends more than $2.6 billion in four months. In 2012 the IRS issued $11 billion in fraudulent income tax refunds. In the same year the government wasted $95 billion in programs identified by the Government Accounting Office that duplicated other wasteful government programs.

In federal terms, Ryan’s $2.6 billion is pocket change.

Finally, the budget balances in ten years. This is not because spending will finally be brought in line with revenue, which is how individuals balance budgets. No, Ryan is hoping that federal tax revenues will grow enough through a recovering economy to finally match the spending right now. In the other nine years the deficit continues to pile up.

This is like a drunk driver careening the wrong way down the interstate hoping his blood will absorb enough of the booze for him to regain control before the car hits the bridge abutment.

David Stockman, Reagan’s budget director who saw firsthand how Republicans agreed to increase taxes for Democrat spending cuts that never came, says, “First, let’s be clear—it’s a joke and betrayal. It’s the final surrender of the House Republican leadership to Beltway politics and kicking the can and ignoring the budget monster that’s hurtling down the road.”

Earlier this week reporter Paul Kane of The Washington Post seemed confused that TEA party members were mounting challenges to incumbent Republican senators. The answer is simple; conservatives have no reason to support big government incumbentcrats, regardless of whether they are Senators or Congressmen. Keeping the likes of Boehner or Ryan or Orrin Hatch in office is not the be all and end all of our existence. If nothing else even an unsuccessful primary can be a wakeup call for these whited sepulchers.

Why fight for them if they won’t fight for us? Why waste the gas necessary to drive to the polls to vote for these weaklings?

The only difference between these Republicans and Nancy Pelosi is we go broke slower and there’s a slim chance we won’t have to attend a same–sex marriage ceremony to qualify for Social Security benefits.

Retreating to a compound in Idaho is looking better and better. And since Janet Reno is no longer attorney general, we might even survive until the Chinese foreclose.

Senator Patty Murray – Your Money or Your Life!


In a move reminiscent of Bruno Hauptmann, the Senate’s No. 4 Democrat, Senator Patty Murray said, “Millions of jobs could be lost through the automatic cuts, programs families depend on would be slashed irresponsibly across the board, and middle-class tax cuts would expire. And once again, if Republicans won’t work with us on a balanced approach, we are not going to get a deal.” in a speech at the Brookings Institution on Monday.

She went on, “[I]f we can’t get a good deal – a balanced deal that calls on the wealthy to pay their fair share – then I will absolutely continue this debate into 2013, rather than lock in a long-term deal this year that throws middle-class families under the bus,”.

This is quite like asking, “Would you rather be strangled slowly or shot in the head?” With a 100 year drought looming, the USDA advertising to get more and more people on food stamps because they aren’t spending enough money, the HHS secretary illegally suspending welfare work requirements because they aren’t spending enough money, 4 major cities bankrupt and hundreds more on the brink, more people going on Social Security Disability each month than finding jobs, Ms. Murray is running an extortion scam to raise taxes on the folks who employ 53% of the work force, small business!

Either the Republicans agree with her, and we all jump off the fiscal cliff early next year, or taxes go up for everyone and we jump January 1st.

As we are falling off this impending cliff, I would like Ms. Murray to look my daughter in the eye and explain to her why she won’t be able to get a job when she finishes school. I want Ms. Murray to explain that it was much more important to appear to soak the rich in order for her party to perpetuate a senseless class war so they could get re-elected, than it was to be mindful of my daughter’s welfare.

Even the President acknowledged last year that the last thing you want to do in a recession is raise taxes on anybody. The job creators are leaving in droves. According to the Cato Institute, citizenship renunciation is up a whopping 750% since Barrack Obama was elected.

Jeff Immelt, Obama’s own Job CZAR has said the way to get us out of this mess was to create a stable and predictable tax environment with lower rates and closed loopholes to be competitive with other countries, smaller government, reduced debt and deficit, a trained workforce, a friendlier regulatory environment, and more certainty on health care costs and regulations. But the President hasn’t met with his jobs council in six months. He has been a little busy with all those golf outings and $40,000.00 a plate fund raisers.

Never mind all that, we need Barrack re-elected, and the way to do that is to engender resentment against those who provide the paychecks in this country, those evil rich. Well not all of them are evil rich. Not the ones who have donated money to his campaign. To them we give hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars and watch them go bankrupt or take the money and jobs to Finland, China, India, and Mexico.

By all means Ms. Murray ignore all the economic evidence since time began and continue your bolshevik revolution, it worked out so well for the Soviets.

Senate Dems Reject Five Budgets While Failing to Produce One

The Democrat-controlled Senate rejected five separate budget plans including one based on President Obama’s budget plan.

In a 99-0 vote the liberal Senate voted down a budget proposal based on the President’s own plan. Without being able to raise a single vote for his own budget from his own party, serious questions are being raised about Obama’s ability to broker an agreement on the budget. The President’s inability to end an almost sure showdown over a debt-limit increase this year could bring the economy to a screeching halt.

The House-passed GOP plan received much more positive support from the Senate, but failed to garner enough votes to be brought to the floor for debate. Paul Ryan’s plan went down largely on a party-line vote 58-41 with 5 Republicans voting against it. Scott Brown (Mass), Olympia Snowe (Maine), Susan Collins (Maine), Dean Heller (Nevada) and Rand Paul (Kentucky).

Of the five plans, Sen. Rand Paul’s was the toughest on spending. The plan called for the elimination of the Departments of Commerce, Education, Housing and Urban Development and Energy. Paul’s plan received 16 votes – the least of the proposals put up for a vote.

All of the Republican plans focused on differing degrees of spending cuts much to the dismay of Senate Democrats:

“We will not allow the debt and deficit to be reduced on the backs of the middle class and most vulnerable Americans without calling on the wealthiest to contribute. That is not fair, it’s not what the American people want, and it’s simply not going to happen.” — Sen. Patty Murray, (D – Wash)

The Democrats have re-asserted their position that it is unnecessary to create and pass a budget this year because of the spending limits agreed to last year. Republicans have been quick to point out that the spending limits do not fulfill the legal obligation to produce a budget each and every year – an obligation the Harry Reid led Senate has failed to make for three consecutive years.