Friday, January 27, 2012

John Boehner and the GOP: Dishonest Politicians

Remember that "GOP", in this blog, means "Grand, Outdated Party". Every time I listen to Hohn Boehner, I eralize just how INCOMPATIBLE I have been with the GOP since at least 2006 (when this blog officially disowned Presdient Bush (to be followed by refusing to suppport John McCain in the 2008 election. Nope. I fully understood just how BAD Brack Obama was going to be. The problem is that I also fully understood just how BAD John McCain was going to be, in combination with other GOP politicians (who would have had NO incentive at all to OPPOSE McCain policies, which may well have resutled in a WORSE situation than we have now, even though McCai--if both Obama and McCain got everything they wanted---may THEORETICALLY have been a little better than Obama).

What prompted this nwew tirade against th eGOP? I listened to John Boehner explain WHY the GOP hass NOT CUT ONE THIN DIME OUT OF SPENDINGj(current spending) since the GOP took control of the House of Representatives. Boehner actaully WHINED about it. He said: "We kept asking the Seanate whehter there was ANYTING they were willing to cut, and they kepts saying no (unliess every dime in "cuts" was matched by a tax increase). Democrats contorl the Senate and the White House. We tried, but there awas nothing we could do." ..........................................................................................................................Sorry, I was CR:YING (no luaghing this time--too painful--on the floor again, in a fetal positioin." Boehner--I kid you not--actually admitted that the GOP managed to cut NOTHING, "because" the Democrats would not let them....NO, if I collapse and start crying again, I may nott ever get up.

My 89 year old mother, without any prompting from me, asked me some thime ago: "I thought the GOP contgrolled the House. Don't they have to approve al of this spending. That was severfal months ago. She said the same thing today, after I started my tirade to HER about how NOTHING is being cut from spending. My mother does not read this blog. She feels that she suffers enough from having to talk to me personally. She also has eyesightt problems, although not quite as bad as mine (even though she is 25 years older).

My mother is right. Boehner is DISHONEST. Jim Demint (Tea Party Senator) is DISHONEST. Yep, I think I have noted in this blog that I acttauly heard Jim Demint say the SAME thing--lamenting that the GOP could do NOTHING unless voters ave them control o fthe Senate and the Presidency. That is simply NOT TURE. Again, my mother is absolutely right. The GOP, with control of ONE HOUSE of Congress, has VETO POWER over ALL SPENDING. Not ONE DIME can be spent each year without the VOTE of teh GO House of Representatives. Our Constitutional system is set up so that BOTH HOUSES have to AGREE on spending, and these budget matters are supposed to START in the House of Representatives. If the House of Representatives simply REFUSED to approve excess spending, it coulld not happen.

"But, Skip, if the GOP House insisted on these "cuts" on the grounds that they simply refused to approve any more spending than their bill, Obama and the Dmoecrats would SHUT DOWN THE GOVERNMENT, and "blame" the GOP because the GOOP insisted on it being their way or the highway." Read what Boehner said again, and I have quoted him accurately. Boehner, and Demint, said that DEMOCRATS have told the GOOP that it will be their (the Democrats) way or the highway. Yet, look at the CONSTITUTIONAL LEVERAGE the GOP has. TheGOP House can REFUSE to appprove spending, and the money CAN'T be spent. The Democrats can propose tax increases all they want, but tax increases require an AFFIRMATIVEW VOTE (so long as we are not talking about the stupid 'sprining tax increease" set up by the Bush tax cuts, and later GOP "compromises", meaning those tax rates will "expire" without affirmative vote).

This blog correctly told youu, during the farce of a "budget debate", that the GOP House could simply say that it would IMOSE ITS OWN SPENDING LIM MITS--its own "plan"--no matter wahtt he Democrats and Obama did What if the Democrats shut the government down? Fine, let it be shut down, unti lthe Democrats "cry uncle", as they ultimately would HAVE to do (or the government would be shut down for YEARS). What about the military and Social Security checks? If Obama and the Democrats want to refuse to send out Social Security checks, and und the military, let it be on their hed. The GOP would obviously be willing ot FUND those programs. That is the point. The GOP would be WILLING to fund the "government" taht the GOP is wiling to pay for--authorize spending for. The GOP woul d simply not approve funding for government in EXCESS of what the GOP is willing to fund. And the GOP has a perfect "right", induer our Constitution, to do this. Again, the Consittution provides taht BOTH HOUSES have to approve EVERY DIME of spending, and there is no "right' to keep spending at the same level it was at the previuos year (much less the "projected" level that is built into the present spenindg process).

No. It is 100% certain that the GOP has the POWER to actualy CUT spending. Yep. I just correclty called John Boehner, Senator Demint, and almost every totehr GOP politician a LIAR. Waht the GOP lacks is not POWER, but COURAGE. GOP politicians are perfectgly willing to SELL OUT the countgy based on what they perceive to be the "necessities" of their own reelection. I refuse to let them take this position, which is why I say: DEFEAT THEM ALL (every member of Congress, Democrat or GOP).

"But, Skip, you don't understand reality. The reality is thqat IF the GOP followed your "advice", then leftist Democrats would likely take over the government completely (because of the defeat of most GOP politicians). You don't understand that the MEDIA plays ever "shut down" of the government as caused by an unreasonable GOP."

I "understand" this argument all too well, and it simply won't do. In the end, it is a DISASTER for the gOP. Sure, say the GOP did what Ron Paul advocates, and really cut ONE TRILLION dollars from Federal Spending in ONE YER (and itt is really only "one year" that matters each year). Would it be "reasonable to "compromise" on that figure, if Democrats still contrl the Senate and the Presidency, because to insist on FORCING your "way" down everyone's throats reallly would be perceived as "unreasoanble"--no matter how much you taked about the Constitutional system where the House is supposed to aGREE to all spending. But look at what the GOP is doing. They are not "compromiseing" (like proposing 500 billion in cuts and accepting 250 billion, or propsing 250 billion and accepting 100 billions). Not a chance. What the GOP is doing is simply accepting the Democrat refusal to CUT ANYTHING. What the Democas are saying is that funding Planned Parenthood, the Corporation for Pbulic Broadcasing, and tehe National Endowment for the Arts are MORE IMPORTNAT than people receiving Social Seucirty checks and the military being funded. Yet, Boehner and Demint--every GOP member of Congress, really--are saying that they can't even make the case that teh DEMOCRATS are respsoinsible for shutting down the government if they refuse to accept rEASONABLE spenidng cuts. What do "taes" ahve to do with it. The GOP had to make this about SPENDING, and they FAILED (when they did not have to fail). The GOP PROMISED to "cut" 100 billion dollars from spending TWICE (for 2011 and 2012). They cut NOTING. 100 BILLION dollars is LESS than 10% of the defict, and LESS than 3% of the total budget. If the GOP cannot even make the POLITICAL case for doing this, and does not have to COURAGE to go to the mat for it (even if Social Secuirty checks do not go out), the GOP is WORTHLESS. Democrats are willing ot see Social Security checks not go out, if you believe them, to fund PLANNED PARENTHOOD with taxpayer money, as well as pubic broadcasting. In other wwrds, Democrats are telling us that they are willing ofr Social Security checks not to go out rather than CUT ANYTHING. That is what Boehner and Demint are telling you, and they say the GOP cannot do "anything" abou it. DEFEAT THEM. I beg you. DEFEAT THEM. Did I just say to DEFEAT Jim Demnint--about the BEST of teh GOP members of CongresS? Yes, I did say thta. I have had it with this self-defeating DISHONESTY. Democrats are willing to go to the mat--even to the point of having Social Seucrity checks not go uot--for what they believe in, but the GOP is NEVER willing to call their bluff. YouLOSE that way.

Nope. The GOP did not even fight the right battle at the right time, as this blog told you. How can you make this debate all about the 'debt ceiling", as the GOP did thi s cummer, and then "cut" NOTHING from spending. Does that not mean that the debt ceiling is REQUIRED to be raised, and that it was the GOP VOTGESD thaqt authorized that SPENDING? Sure it means that. The GOP, as this blog has told you, has ABANDONED the debt and deficts as a real "issue'. The GOP House has VOTED for ALL of this spending since the GOP toolk control of the House. How can the GOP complain aobut the rise in the debt when GOP VOTES authorized the SPENDING thaqt created it? This is a LOSER for the GOP. They have BLOWN the issue that WON for them in 2010. And no, they did NOT 'try". They FOLDED, wihout even ever calling the blufff. TheGOP had the POWER to FORCE any spending "cuts' they wanted to makke. They jsut did not have the COURAGE to USE this power to at least make SOME meaningful cuts. Instead, they are ADMITTING they made NO cuts, and trying to use taht as an "argument" for putting MORE of these COWARDS in Congress!!!!!!!!! Tis is absrud. I will NEVER go along with this kind of reasonabing, and I do not. It will ultimately destroy this country (may already have).

NOTHING. That is how much spending the GOP has "cut", while ADDING close to 300 BILLION to the debgt and defict, over the past two years, with the payroll "tax cut" and the extension of extended unemployment benefits (assuming, as the GOP is assuming, that theese things are going to be extended through 2012, afther that ridiculous two month extension that the GOP voted for at the end of 2011). Debt ceiling "issue". There is NONE. Deficit "issue". There is NONE. Spending "issue". There is NONE. The GOP is reduced to merely arguign around the edges. Thre is NO indication that the GOP will actually CUT government substantially--which Ron Paul has correctly told you. The GOP will certanly not do it if it requires ANY COURAGE (and it will). NOTHING. I still can't believe it. The GOP is out there ADMITTING that they accomplished NOTHING on the issue that owon them victory i 2010. That is a DEFEAT--something like the drubbing the Germans inflcited as they overran Europe at the beginning of World War II---UNLESS you ealize that the GOP never eally MEANT to "cut" antything real. Again, I cannot and will not forgive them for that.

No, I am not through. Let us assume that the GOP has been SO INEFFECITVE that they could not even avoid responsibiity for "shutting down the government" by insisting upon eliminating funding for pubic broadcasting (to pick one egregious example). That is bad enough. But the GOP politicians are not even out there trying to PREPARE THE GROUND for reveersing this defeat. Oh, sure, they still talk about Democrat "spending". But they do it in GENERALITIES. They are NOT talking aobut Democrats being willing to shut down tte government, and take away Social Seucirty checks, to protect ublic broadcasting, Palnned Parenthood and ALL other spending. Why not? Come on. YOu know this one. It is because if theGOP starts tryng to expalin their RIGHT to refuse to approve SPENDING that is KILLING this country, and that it is DEMOCRATS who are undermining the Constitution by insisting that THEY have to "approve" al "cuts' in spending, then people will ask the obvious: "Okay, you COWARDS, why are you telling us this instead of calling their bluff". What answer can the GOP make to this? There is NONE, except the obvious one: "Yes, we ARE COWARDS, because we know that the media and the public let Democrats get away with shutting down the government, while we get blamed." Obvious response: "So you admit that Democrats can take their case to the people better than you can. How, then, do you EVER expect to CONSISTENTLY wn elecctions?"

No, this is absurd. Boehener, Demint and every GOP politician are DISHONEST. They are not even making a real attempt to "sell" their supposed "principles' (which they don't have). They are siplly relying upon the MESS that the Democrats are makng of ths country. And that MAY work, if things are BAD this November (partly becaues the gOP had NO COURAGE to fight for the future of the country, even if it risked their election). But what happens if the GOP wins, and they are doing their best to take away every issue they might have had? They will not have SOLD the Amerian people on anything other than that Obama and the Democrats were BAD. Nor will the GOP show any more COURAGE when they are in power (as they did not last time). Thus, especailly if the eocnomy contnues to be BAD (as it figures to be for some time), theGOP wil lthen LOSE the next time :(as Democrats come in and again win by saying how BAD the GOP is).

No. I can't stand it. This DISHONESTY has to stop. Notice that the media jsut refuses to point this OBVIUS stuff out. No one asked Boehner: "What do you meaan, that you could not do anything about it. Did not the House of Representatives have to VOTE forf eVERY DIME of spending, or it could not happen.? Skips, 89 year old mother knows that. Why don't you? Does this not indicate a lack of courage on your part, and the part of the GOP?"

There really is no answer to this. The GOP has placed itself in a BOX, with no way out EXCEPT peole believing Obama is WORSE. I refuse to play that game any longer. Sure, leftist Democrats are "worse", but the PRACTICAL EFFECT of the GOP being 'in power" may be WORSE than if Obama were in power. Taht is because the gOP has at least the INCENTIVE to oppose Obama, even if not always the COURAGE.

P.S No proofreading or spell checking (bad eyesight) . Oh, you may think I have beocme a "politican" (fighiting words) myself, but I still plan to post that article on: U.S. Marines and the American Media: Urination Fetish". I promised the article a week ago, but these daily political developments eat up the time I ahve. i will still get to it. For those of ou who are thinkng: I wishSkip's mother woud write this blog insttead of him. She even sees better"; I have two words: BITE ME. As I have noted fror years, and postedon this blog, my mother is a KOIOK. She still "believes" (purports to believe) that Obama was born in Kenya, and tghat he is a Msulim. I, at least, limict msyelf to the CORRECT statement that: "Obama is not a Chrisitan"--a statement made by both myself and Bill Maher. Watch for what you wish for. You may get it. I may turn this blo over to mey motgher (no appluase, please, as I miate the idiots of NBC). You say I would never say these things if my mother actually READ this blog? You are probably right. But that is because you know that I am DEATHLY AFRAID of all women. That includes my mother, and my daughters (not just my ex-wife). Feel sorry for Gignrich, and people like him. He has MULTIPLE ex-wives. Worse than that, it means he was MARRIED to more than one womnan. One is more than enough. That is why I look with awe on those MEN (not women) who commit adultery. They actualy think they can handle MORE THAN ONE WOMAN AT THE SAME TIME. I was never tghat much of a fool.

No comments: