Hacker Boy (Trying to save the world from this terrible blog, and still strongly denying Skip's unfair and unbalanced--to use Skip's lpresent terminology for the Fox News Network--charge that I am able to hack into his blog because I am connected either to Rupert Murdoch or Forx): "Skip, now you are even doing it to Republicans. You know that New Gingrich did not say what yolur headline says he said."
Skip: "Poor Hacker Boyo.. He is so literal, and so wrong. Of course Newt has not DIRECTLY called the Republican leadership in Congress "stupid". However, in more than one debate now, Newt has called this whole idea of a "sper committee" monumentally stupid. Why does lthe super committee exist, under this "sord of Damocles" SET UP BY THE REPUBLICANS IN CONGRESS AS COVER FOR THEIR COWARDICE AND LACK OF PRINCIPLE? The question assumes the answer. Republicans in Congress were unwilling to really take on Obama and the Democrats on the issue of the new year's spending and deficit, and dathly afraid of actually using the debt ceiling to fight a real battle on CUJRRENT spending (the only kind that really matters). This blog said that it was a mistake to let Democrats get awya with divorcing spenind giand the debt ceiling (SPENDING being what requires the debt ceiling to be raised), and the FRADULENT debt ceiling "deal" proved this blgo right (the articles in this blog predictging such a betrayal IN FORESIGHT). When Newt tells lou that this "super committee" deal is about the stupid, he can be referring to nobody but Boehner, McConnell and the REPUBLICANS in Congress who went along with this stupid sham. Nope. This kind of sham is what Obama and the Democrats DO. They love it. They don't think Repubilcans are willing to reallly stand up for spending CUTS or that the public really wants lthem, and thus they believe they can get away with any SHAM. Unfortunately, so do establishmenent Repubilcan politicians, and even most of tthose caling themselves "Tea Party politicans". Note how big a SHAM this really is, although Newt will nto even go so far as to tell you the whole truth on this one. Unlike what the media keeps teling, you, including the unfair and unbalanced network and (to a degree) Newt himself, we will NOT have a huge "akutomatic" cut in defesnse and Medicare if the Congress fails to approve whatever SHAM this "super committee" comes up with. The supposed "automatic cuts" dliebverately do not go into effect until the NEXT fiscal year (starting right before the election), or maybe e the fiscal year starting in Octobver of 2013 (the media never bothers to report the facts, and I sometimes get confused on this unimportant point). The ponit is that the "Sword of Damocles" will NEVEr fall. It is all a sham, and all of thee COWARDLY, LYING politicans know it. Did I just call the Republicans in Congress who participated in this sham deal, or who voted for it, "cowards" and "liars"? You finally get the point, and Newt Gingrich cannot say what he has said in the debates without agreeing with me. Flat statement: The defense and Medicare "automatic cuts" in that debt ceiling "deal" will NEVER take place--no matter what Congress does with this "super committee" bill due by Thanksgiving. If you think that either Democrats or Republicans are going to go into the lection next year in the position of imposing those "automatic" cuts, you are dumber than the average bear, (Do us all a favor, if you really are this dumb: don't have any children--see Darwin.) Notice that REPUBLICANS (and Democrtas, but they make it obvius they feel this way, while Repubicans are so dishonest they think they are successfully hiding it)--the politician kind of Republican--actually do believe that you are this dumb--so dumb that you should not be allowed to have chinldren in the interest of saving the human race.
The reason I like Newt Gingrich better than I used to--although still not enough to support him for President, even after he wins debate after debate--is the graphic imagery he uses to explain why what Republicans in Congress have done is so STUPID. What Gingrich uses this imagery to explain the stupidity:
"Look at how stupid this super committee arrangement is. The idea is that we have set up a situatoin where the super committee can propose something really stupid, but it will still have to be passed , becaue if it is not passed, then something TOTALLY STUPID (worse) will automatically go into effect. It is like having a gun held to your HEAD, and then feeling good because yoiu get to have only your LEG CUT OFF." (emphasis really in Gingrich's original, although I have not tried to quote every word correctly, since I am combining at least two times I have heard Gingrich say a variation of the same thing).
You can see where Gingrich has not entirely told the truth (although you get the feeling he knows the truth). His analogy is not entirely correct. Yes, the COWARDS in the Repubican Party, and the Democrats, want you to THINK that a "gun" is being held to THEIR heads (as if lthey did not set this whole thing up), and therefore they will HAVE to pass whatever the "super dictators" (only 12 people, acting secretly) propose. False.
The really accurate analogy is as follows:
"It is like having a gun FILLED WITH BALNKS held to your head, so that you feel good when you only lose your leg."
This is all about COVER, COWARDICE, and DISHONESTY. The whole idea is to excuse whateverCongress votes for on the grounds that Congress "had" to vote that way to avoid that bullet in the head from a gun filled with BLANKS.
You know that this blog has rejeted this decepton. That i swhy I have told lyou to vote to DEFEAT every single Republican who voted for that sham debt ceiling "deal". But I have correctly gone further. I have told you that this is it for me. If Republicans in Congress betraly me on this sham "super committee" vote, OR on the Obama "jobs bill"--as I am 80% sure they will--then the Republican Party is DEAD to me FOREVER. Third Party here I comel--alomst AnY third party. Donald Trump? A joke, but I will vote for him once I abandon the Repubican Party for good. Sarah Palin? Go to it? Ron Paul? I am for you, once th eRepublican lParty is dead to me. I encourage you to head a third party. And I have correctgly told you that it is NOT ENOUGH for a candidate to say--as Mitt Romney has---that he would not have voted for the debt ceiling dea, or for a member of Congress to actually have votged against it. That was an EASY vote, once you knew it would pass, and an EASY thing for Romney to say (to head off the then surging Bachmann). Romny could have STOPPED the "deal", and can still stop the sham "gun to the hedd" idea that whatever the super committee proposes has to be passed. IF Romney does nto stop it, that does it for me on Romney (no matter WHAT SMALL NOISES HE MAKES ABOUT WHAT HIS VOTE WOULD HAVE BEEN). Even Bachmann, who was so strong on the debt ceiling, has not even takne on the Repuboicans and Congress to the extent Gingrich has. Hence (although not th eonly reason), this blog's withdrawal of endorsement for Bachmann. Even Cain has not said much about it (althouhg I have not noticed him getting much of a chance--he needs to START talking about it).
How do we know this is all a sham? Repuboicans have already ABANDONED "deficit reduction" AND concern about the debt ceiling, for the fiscal lyear that started in October. They have supposedly "cut" 24 billion from this fiscal year's budget, but they are talking about ADDING many times that much to the CURRENTY YEAR'S DEFICIT (meaning tlhat they are aCCELERATING the time when the debt ceiling will have to be raised again--making them look like the dishonest liars they are if they even SQUEAK about raising the debt ceiling next time). And Repubicans in Congress are perfetly willing to go along with the Obama FRAUD that you can "pay for" CRRENT ADDITIONS TO THE DEFICIT with "cuts" (or even revenue) raised in the FUTURE. This is the FRAUD of the Soviet-style "ten-year plan", even though the Soviet Unioin usually did not have the GALL to do more lthan a 5-year plan.
Look at what has already happened with this "super committee". Repubicans GAVE UP on ANY real spending "cuts' for THIS FISCAL YEAR (the main one at issue). Even the "aumomatic cuts" will not (supposedly--a lie, since they will never take place, which is true of these spending "cuts' ten years from now) take lkplace until the future, meaning that NOTHING is done about current spending. Meanwhile, Republicans are perfectly willing to talk abut "paying for' things like extended unemployment benefits, a payroll tax cut, o whatever with "cuts" TEN YERS FROM NOW (or at least over ten lyears). Does Herman Cain know about this? We have not yet heard frm it on it. But this really is APPLES and ORANGES. It is a SHAM to talk about "paying for' an addition to the deficit THIS YEAR with "cuts" (or revenue) over TEN YERS. It is simply absurd. And that is in addition to the basic absurdity that we are not "paying for' more than 40% of the money we are lspending NOW. Any "savings" or even revenue, than we can find need to "pay for" that 40%. Until that is done, i is aL LIE (a lie fully jonied in by Republicans) to say that we are "pyring for" an additioin to the current year's deficit by "cuts" ove ten years in the future. Those are not only "cuts" that may never take place, but they are "cuts" that are NEEDED to pay for the CURRENT LEVEL OF GOVERNMENT--the deficits we are running every year and the debt we are building--withotu saying that those "cuts" are "apying for" ADDITIONS to the defiicts.
As ou can tell, this level of deception really angers me, and has for a long time. That is why I am serious about the Republican arty being DEAD to me. No, I will not let the prospect of Obama being elected again deter me. Yes, that actually IS a gun to the head that estalbishment Republicans--and Republican politicians of all types--are relying upon. But that kind of EXTORTION no longer workds with me. If the Republican Party, and its dishoenst candidates, are unworthy of support, then I am not gig to support them. See my preivous article on the possible hypocrsiy of the American people. If you are going to hold politicians ACCONTABLE, then you have to start doing it. George W. Bush is the LAST "lesser evil" Republican for whom I am going to vote, OR support in this blog. As I have said, there are some Republicans who I may support as INDIVBIDUALS, desite their party, but those are getting fewer every day. Whether I can even consider supporting Romney, for example (despite this blog supporting him at a time in 2008 when Limbauh and Hannity were dong their lousy performance of Hamlet), depends totally up whether I have given up on the Republican Party . If I have, as I suspect I will, then Romney is OUT. In that circumstance (the Republican Party being dead to mel), I will support Romney when Hell freezes over, and not beofore. Since I am an agnostic, that may be a VERY long time (before you could convince me it has occurredl).
Bottom line: Gingrich and I mainly agree on just how stupid the Republicans in Congress have become. And it is not possible to believe that the Republican politicians in Congress are really any better than the candidates letting them get away with these things. The candidates just have more leeway to be even more cowardly than the members of Congress, since the membrs of Cngress HAVE to at least take positons on specific bills. As I have stated, however, even those positions--when they are mere votes--are often DISHONEST, because they are meely token, politica lvotes on bills where the vote is not in doubt. I give politicians NO credit for such "votes", and insist that they actually be out there CRITICIZING Boehner and the Republicans in Congress pushing thses shams. DEFEAT JOHN BOEHNER. I wish REPUBLICANS in Congress, who ALLEGE they are part of the Tea Party, would say things like that. Even if they think it is politica suicide to go that far, they HAVE to at least start standing up (publiccly) against these SHAMS and BETRAYALS. If not, don't expect support from me, no matter how much you TELL me you are a Tea Party Republican. You can see why I am lookin gmore favorably on Newt Gingrich. He is actually TELLING THE TRUTH (more than Herman Cain, really), even if it is mainly because he has absolutelyl nothing to lose.
P.S. No proofreading or spell checking (bad eyesight).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment