Posted under Conservatism & Economics & Republican Party
See the ugly truth here.
When I thought to myself who would be the “no” votes, in addition to Steve Stockman I also assumed Paul Broun of Georgia. Broun did right. I’m assuming he didn’t pull a Stockman and change his vote to a “no” after the bill passed. Justin Amash of Michigan also voted “no.”
Posted under Conservatism & Economics & Republican Party
Say it isn’t so Steve. Please say it isn’t so.
Among those voting with Boehner were Reps. Steve Stockman (R-Tex.) and Mick Mulvaney (R-S.C.), who just three weeks ago refused to support Boehner in the formal vote for House speaker. Later, after the measure easily amassed enough votes to pass, Stockman joined some other conservatives in switching his vote to “no” — a sign that he opposed the measure but was willing to support Boehner if his vote had been needed.
When I wrote below that I was anxious to see the roll call on this vote, I thought to myself that Stockman was sure to be one of the no votes. What a disappointment. And no, switching your vote to a “no” doesn’t count.
Posted under Conservatism & Economics & Republican Party
This is pathetic. Looks like the Club for Growth needs some of that left-over Lance Armstrong testosterone also. The headline says it all: “Club for Growth Gives GOP Cover on Debt Vote” And all the hand-wringers at The American Conservative say the problem is GOP intransigence. If only.
The conservative Club for Growth announced Tuesday that it will not oppose the House vote to temporarily extend the government’s borrowing capacity, a move that could provide the GOP rank and file cover to approve the measure.
House Republican leaders are bringing a bill to the floor Wednesday that would raise the debt ceiling without making commensurate cuts — the first time they have dropped that demand since 2011’s debt limit fight — but contingent upon Senate Democrats approving a budget, which they have not done in more than three years.
“The Club for Growth will not oppose tomorrow’s vote on the debt ceiling,” Club for Growth President Chris Chocola said in a statement. “The Club for Growth will, on the other hand, strongly oppose any efforts during the upcoming debate over the continuing resolution and sequester that fail to arrest out-of-control spending and put sensible limits on the growth of government.”
Posted under Republican Party & Ron Paul
Here is a copy of the letter on Facebook.
FreedomWorks has the story.
The purge of truly limited-government activists from the Republican Party has reached new lows, as one of Wisconsin’s top activists found out.
Todd Welch, Chairman of the Wisconsin Campaign for Liberty and constitutional activist, has been “declined” membership in the Republican Party of Dunn County in Wisconsin and his dues check returned. His crime? Holding the Party accountable to its rhetoric and promises.
Here is the contact information for the Dunn County GOP. Perhaps you would like to let them know what you think of their Politburo like purges.
Republican Party of Dunn County
P.O. Box 311
Menomonie, WI 54751
Current Office (during election period)
815 6th Ave E.
Menomonie, WI
715-235-1485
Chairman – chairman@dunngop.org
Posted under Conservatism & Republican Party & Ron Paul
The election for RNC Chairman is this Friday, 25 Jan 13.
Chairman Priebus is being challenged by Ron Paul supporter Mark Willis.
Also see this ConservativeHQ aritcle where Willis is being touted as the grassroots’ candidate.
Here is a statement from Mr. Willis himself.
Posted under Economics & Election 2016 & Rand Paul & Republican Party
Not every Republican is wussing out on the debt limit. Rand Paul isn’t.
Senator Rand Paul says he plans to vote against raising the nation’s debt limit as leverage to force the White House into budget reform…
“I’m not in favor of raising the debt ceiling unless we have significant budgetary reform which shows we have changed our ways and we’re going to begin to balance the budget,” Paul said.
Rand Paul says President Obama’s refusal to negotiate over the debt ceiling simply means he’s not going to reduce spending or the government.
“I don’t think the President is accurate when he says, ‘Oh, we have to pay our bills’ because raising the debt ceiling doesn’t pay your bills. It pays the interest on your bills and you keep accumulating more,” Paul said.
Posted under Conservatism & Economics & Republican Party
SPRINGFIELD, Virginia – Campaign for Liberty released the following statement from C4L President John Tate today blasting House GOP leadership after they announced a debt ceiling plan that indicates the GOP retreat will continue when they return to Washington:
“The Republican retreat was only supposed to last a week, but now it appears it will last the entire 113th Congress. With a $16 Trillion national debt, it is the very definition of insanity for so-called ‘fiscal conservatives’ to hand President Obama – the biggest spender in our nation’s history – a blank check to continue his irresponsible spending and pile even more debt on the backs of our nation’s children. The GOP’s preemptive surrender to President Obama and Harry Reid’s demands, allowing an increase in the debt ceiling without any real spending cuts, is further evidence why the American people are right to have absolutely no confidence in their elected leaders. As the House GOP is one of the few defenses the American people have against President Obama’s runaway spending, it is way past time for Speaker Boehner and the rest of the House GOP Leadership to listen to the American people, stand up, and finally say, ‘Enough!’”
Posted under Conservatism & Economics & Republican Party
Could the Republicans look any more spineless if they tried? What a pathetic bunch of wusses! “Let’s kick the can down the road three months because things will be different then. Really they will. We promise.” Yeah right. Someone call Lance Armstrong. Maybe he has some left-over testosterone he could give the Republicans. They sure need it.
I’m very curious to see the roll call on this vote when it is taken. Some “conservatives” have already signed on.
Posted under Climate Change & Conservatism & Political Philosophy & Republican Party
There is something about the spotlight and garnering the praise of others that must be like crack, because once these centrist Republicans who like to bash other Republicans get a taste of it, they can’t seem to stop. Take a look at this story. I’m not sure what kind of a site BuzzFeed is, but I get the feeling the author may just get what Huntsman is up to. Even the title seems to be needling him a bit.
When it comes to highlighting his party’s deficiencies, Huntsman has never been shy. In fact, his ascent to national notoriety has been fueled and fed by regular, headline-grabbing attacks on the GOP — a habit that has turned him into every Democrat’s favorite Republican, and every Republican’s favorite punching bag.
Since I have already beat up on Mr. Huntsman before, I won’t rehash that old ground. I want to focus on one part of his critique specifically.
“The minute that the Republican Party becomes the… anti-science party, we have a huge problem.”
Anti-science? This may also be a reference to the evolution vs. creation debate, but it is clearly a reference to climate change which is mentioned earlier in the article. The science of climate change aside, since Huntsman’s concerns are allegedly about the future electoral viability of the GOP, then is he suggesting that there is mass popular support for measures that would have a significant impact on carbon emissions? Which policies would those be? Would the GOP improve their electoral prospects if they supported a large increase in the gas tax? Cap and trade? Since that went over so well last time. If championing climate change is such a winner with voters, why did Obama drop it like a hot potato? I think Jon Huntsman is more concerned with making the GOP more acceptable to his social circle than he is about the GOP’s electoral prospects in general.
Posted under Conservatism & Republican Party
John Hunstman says the “GOP has no soul.” Hunstman has become an increasingly tiresome centrist posturer/grandstander. As Daniel Larison frequently pointed out during the primary, Huntsman actually has a pretty conservative record, certainly a more conservative record than Romney. But he seems to enjoy the limelight and new found respect that he is getting as a Republican who is willing to attack his party and the base. This has become so trite and cliched. Haven’t we seen it all before? Maybe Huntsman can get himself a Daily Beast column and join Meghan McCain petulantly bitching about the party they ostensibly belong too but are so ashamed of.
Posted under Conservatism & Politics & Republican Party
Here are a couple of stories from Politico about the 12 Republicans who didn’t vote for Boehner. See here and here. Not all voted for the same person. Three voted for Cantor. Some didn’t vote. One voted present. Others voted for various people. This slide show has how all the resistors voted.
Sadly, the effort to oust Boehner was amateur hour. National Review has the story. Here is Dave Weigel ‘s take.
Update: Here is Jim Antle’s take. He thinks that even though the coup attempt was ill planned, it still demonstrates Boehner’s weakness.
Posted under Conservatism & Democrat Party & Republican Party & Taxes
<sarc>Yeah, great deal here. So glad the Republicans saw the light and compromised on taxes.</sarc>
According to the Congressional Budget Office, the last-minute fiscal cliff deal reached by congressional leaders and President Barack Obama cuts only $15 billion in spending while increasing tax revenues by $620 billion—a 41:1 ratio of tax increases to spending cuts.
Posted under Conservatism & Republican Party & Taxes
Well whaddya know! No sooner had I said below that the fiscal cliff deal would be a tax hike whether Grover Norquist gives the Republicans cover or not, that I noticed this on our Newsmax feed:
Norquist: Cliff Deal Won’t Include Tax Hike
If an agreement to avoid the fiscal cliff does materialize, Grover Norquist, Americans for Tax Reform president, doesn’t expect it to include higher taxes.
“I’m working with all the folks who are trying to defend taxpayers here in Congress,” he told CNN’s “Starting Point” Monday, Politico reports. “I don’t think you’re going to see something that actually raises taxes. We may get some tax cuts now and have to fight for others later.
Ummm … Yes it will. As the Newsmax story later clearly states.
Knowledgeable sources told the news service that the duo is near an agreement to raise tax rates on individuals with annual income of more than $400,000 and families with more than $450,000.
Norquist is outright lying at worst or engaging in the sort of deliberately deceptive Washington doublespeak that he normally criticizes at best. The Bush tax increases are set to expire. If they expire then taxes would go up more. So I assume Norquist’s “reasoning,” if such obvious weaseling can be dignified with that term, is that the tax increases in the compromise aren’t really increases because the automatic hikes would be larger. This is no different than the weasels who claim that cutting projected growth in a program is really a spending cut. But Congress didn’t have to sunset the Bush tax cuts in the first place. As well, the whole fiscal cliff is an artificial crisis of Congress’s own making. They didn’t have to build in the automatic tax hikes and spending cuts (which I favor) in the first place.
Posted under Conservatism & Democrat Party & Economics & Republican Party & Taxes
Working with Congress against a midnight deadline, President Barack Obama said Monday that a deal to avert the “fiscal cliff” was in sight but not yet finalized. The emerging deal would raise tax rates on family income over $450,000 and individual income over $400,000 a year, increase the estate tax rate and extend unemployment benefits for one year.
Make no mistake here, any Republican who votes for this compromise is voting for a tax increase whether Grover Norquist gives them cover or not. If this passes the spineless Republicans will have been worked again.
Update: There will be no vote tonight.
Posted under Conservatism & Politics & Republican Party & TEA Parties
I’m going to pass along a couple of articles on Boehner. One suggests he should resign. One suggests there may be a coup attempt in the works. Of course I think Boehner should step down, and if not he should be replaced, although I’m not sure any of the current leadership would be much if any improvement. Otherwise I’m not going to add much commentary because my take on the tax increase issue is already abundantly clear, and I don’t want to beat a dead horse. So for your reading pleasure:
“Boehner Should Resign as Speaker”
Posted under Conservatism & Election 2016 & Gun Control & Republican Party
Chris “Christie Endorses National Discussion on Gun Control” (NewsMax)
And Chris Christie endorses not winning the GOP nomination in 2016.
Posted under Conservatism & Politics & Republican Party & Taxes
National Review has some insider details.
It paints a picture of a very somber Republican caucus. I’m not sure why. The conservative members who killed it should be whooping it up. Even Justine Amash, the reputed successor to Ron Paul’s mantle, is pictured as somber, even though he was planning to vote against it. I’m not sure what is going on there. It really doesn’t paint a flattering picture of Amash, IMO, unless I’m missing something. I heard it suggested on another venue, that the people who were planning on voting against Plan B were voting against it for their own sake but were secretly hoping/expecting it to pass. This is the impression I get from Amash based on his comments. Again, am I missing something?
Representative Justin Amash of Michigan, a conservative with libertarian leanings, was stunned. As he walked back to his office, he said the episode was unfortunate, even though he was planning to vote against the measure. For the past month, since House leaders booted him off the budget committee, he has been railing against Boehner for his management style. But even Amash wondered whether the House GOP was making the right move. “Too many people in there were arguing that this thing is a tax increase, and I don’t think that’s what Boehner was trying to do,” he said. As much as he disagrees with Boehner’s approach, even he regretted how the speaker’s plan was killed.
And RedState has some details.
I talked to two congressmen who were not involved in the purge or victims of it. They both said that seeing House leaders back “squishes” during the primaries including against some incumbents and then seeing them throw conservatives off committees was all they needed to strengthen their spines against the Speaker.
They said they’re happy to be team players, but they think conservatives in the conference are now treated as kids who are to be seen and not heard. They decided they needed to be heard.
Posted under Conservatism & Republican Party & Taxes & TEA Parties
In a stinging setback for Republican House Speaker John Boehner, a lack of support from inside his own party for his “fiscal cliff” fall-back plan forced him late Thursday to cancel a much-trumpeted vote on the measure.
“The House did not take up the tax measure today because it did not have sufficient support from our members to pass,” Boehner said in a written statement released after an emergency meeting of House Republicans…
It appeared that Boehner faced a rebellion from conservatives opposed to any tax hike, while House Democrats starved the bill of their support, making passage impossible.
You know what happened here. Conservative Reps in conservative districts didn’t want to go back home and try and sell this stinker. It is a cave on taxes. It is allowing themselves to be bullied by the President, and their constituents know it.
Update: Here is the Roll Call article on this story.
Posted under Conservatism & Constitution Party & Election 2012 & Political Philosophy & Politics & Republican Party & Ron Paul & Taxes
This is pathetic! I actually didn’t think Norquist would cave. Sadly, I guess I was wrong.
I hope this makes Sean and the rest of the moderation caucus happy. And make no mistake about it, moderation is what this is. You can toss around the names Burke and Kirk all you want, this is not responsible conservatism or realistic conservatism or any other kind of conservatism. It is moderation. It is moving to the center. It is conceding an important element of the fight to the left.
I want to know how Sean and Gallupo and the rest of the gang think it strengthens the Republicans’ hand to cave rather than to go down fighting! Obama stood tall and Boehner and Norquist et al flinched. That’s what people are going to see, and that’s what happened. This makes Obama look large and in charge and Boehner and Norquist look like a bunch of (I’m just going to say it) groveling bitches.
I’ve got news for Boehner, Norquist, and company. All revenue bills MUST originate in the House. The House is controlled by Republicans. The way to tackle this fiscal cliff issue is to repeatedly pass bills making the current tax rates permanent, and let the Dem controlled Senate and the President whine about it. But don’t send then any bills that raise taxes. No tax increase gets to the Senate and the President unless the Republican controlled House sends it to them. Then when we go plunging over the fiscal cliff (which does what the moderation caucus wants anyway – raises taxes and cuts spending ) scream from the rooftops that the Dems forced a tax increase despite the best efforts of the Republicans to hold the line.
Ask yourself this, how do you think Ron Paul is going to vote on “Plan B.”
If the Constitution Party is smart, they should start writing up the press releases now: “Republicans Raise Taxes!”
And for those who decry outside influences holding the GOP hostage, one huge reason why the GOP sees the fiscal cliff as intolerable is because it would cut defense and make the defense contractors unhappy. So again, I hope you’re happy. The anti-tax lobby takes it on the chin and the defense lobby wins.
Posted under Paleoconservatism & Republican Party
Whoa! Check out the spat between E. Christian Kopff and Clyde Wilson that takes place in the comment section of this thread.
Is there a history here, or is Kopff just upset by the post? Does anyone know?
BTW, read the original post. Insightful analysis by Dr. Wilson as always.