Put up or Shut-Up: It's Time for Tea Baggers to Name the Budget Cuts

[Nbadan]

For the past year and half, Republicans have done little else but urgently demand that the federal government drastically cut spending to reduce the deficit. However, like much of the rest of their agenda, Republicans have been remarkably vague on what they would actually cut.



gl-qPE8AfqQ

In interview after interview, journalists have pushed, and even begged, GOP leaders for specifics, always to no avail. When pressed, they hem and haw, often appearing uncomfortable — and in the case of Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH), visibly angry — but can offer nothing more than cop-out answers like repealing unsent stimulus money or an “across the board” cut on all spending. ThinkProgress has compiled some of the more embarrassing of these moments.

The video features, respectively, Rep. Pete Sessions (R-TX), Rep. John Shadegg (R-AZ), California GOP Senate nominee Carly Fiorina, Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA), House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH), Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), Rep. John Boozman (R-AR), Gregg, and Sen. John Cornyn (R-AZ). This represents a large portion of the GOP leadership, but there are countless other examples as well.

Fiscal conservatives and tea party activists had been hoping that the House GOP’s recently released “Pledge to America” would finally offer specifics on major government cuts — they were almost universally disappointed. After racking up huge deficits under President Bush, Republicans still have no idea — or perhaps desire — to get spending under control.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Republicans are great campaigners and not so great policy makers.

[Nbadan]

I can't believe that Democrats aren't doing a better job of calling out 'conservative' and tea bagger candidates on this issue....let's see the cuts..

[PublicOption]

tea baggers are morons

[coyotes_geek]

Republicans are great campaigners and not so great policy makers.

As opposed to democrats who are ??????????????????

[Yonivore]

Repeal Obamacare.

Sell GM.

Stop spending borrowed stimulus money.

Shutter about 2/3rds of the federal government beginning with the Department of Education.

Institute the Fair Tax and shut down the IRS.

Cut Obama's golfing allowance and Michelle's travel itinerary.

There's a bout a trillion in savings...

[FuzzyLumpkins]

As opposed to democrats who are ??????????????????

Not very good policy makers?

I know that you see this as all zero sum. I think they both suck.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Repeal Obamacare.

Sell GM.

Stop spending borrowed stimulus money.

Shutter about 2/3rds of the federal government beginning with the Department of Education.

Institute the Fair Tax and shut down the IRS.

Cut Obama's golfing allowance and Michelle's travel itinerary.

There's a bout a trillion in savings...

Is there even any money appropriated to that health care reform?

Selling GM is not a budget cut.

Shuttering 2/3 of the government is the exact type of vagueness he is talking about. You say we just shut down the entire department of education?

The presidential spending budget is trivial and nothing more than political bullshit with no real bearing on fiscal policy.

[ducks]

Department of Education is doing no good

getting rid of that
making parents teach kids at home would be better
kids would learn more

it is proven homeschool gets are smarter then pubic school kids

[bresilhac]

Department of Education is doing no good

getting rid of that
making parents teach kids at home would be better
kids would learn more

it is proven homeschool gets are smarter then pubic school kids

Repugs want to do away with the Dept. of Education because that would make for a more stupid, uneducated citizenry. This in turn would lead to more people joining the GOP.

Additionally, the repugs would also like to repeal the 14th Amendment not for any noble, historic reason, but for the simple fact that if you deny certain ethnic groups citizenship they cannot become Democrats.

The fact is Hispanics will be a majority in this country in maybe 50 years and there is nothing the hateful, bigoted tea party or the rest of the GOP can do about it.

[balli]

it is proven homeschool gets are smarter then pubic school kids
:bang:bang:bang:bang

I guess that makes you the fucking epitome of a public school product. So get your gump ass parents to teach you the difference between 'kids' and 'gets' (wtf) and 'then' and 'than'.

Jesus Christ, you teabag fucking retards are so crazy and stupid.

Words don't exist to convey what morons you people are.

[Sisk]

Repugs
Tea baggers

I love how liberals have to make up insulting names.. it's cute

[bresilhac]

Repugs
Tea baggers

I love how liberals have to make up insulting names.. it's cute

Do you have a legitimate point to make or do you just like poking fun at other poster's terminology.

[boutons_deux]

Repugs won't name specific cuts because every cut hurts votes. They intend to cut/private Social Security, but they won't put it in their bullshit, thoroughly dishonest "pledge" because they learned from dubya's fiasco that people don't want Wall St raping their retirement savings along with all the other raping Wall St does.

btw, the entire "out of control" "vastly increased spending" by the Dems is a total Repug/tea bagger lie. Name the specific, structural spending the Dems have increased. You can't.

In fact, there's nothing true or accurate about anything in the Repugs bullshit. It's pure demagoguery and rabble rousing.

Teabaggers, "Christians", and other such loser, ignorant rabble are getting duped and played as well as financed by the VRWC.

[boutons_deux]

I found one!!

GOP Senate Candidate Mark Kirk Says He Backs ‘Across The Board Reductions’ In Defense Spending

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/10/13/kirk-reductions-defense-spending/

Of course, he's not yet elected, and would be only one of a couple 100 Repug Congress critters.

[coyotes_geek]

I can't believe that Democrats aren't doing a better job of calling out 'conservative' and tea bagger candidates on this issue....let's see the cuts..

That's because democrats don't have a plan either.

[coyotes_geek]

btw, the entire "out of control" "vastly increased spending" by the Dems is a total Repug/tea bagger lie. Name the specific, structural spending the Dems have increased. You can't.

They're found here.

http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy11/pdf/summary.pdf

[TeyshaBlue]

:bang:bang:bang:bang

I guess that makes you the fucking epitome of a public school product. So get your gump ass parents to teach you the difference between 'kids' and 'gets' (wtf) and 'then' and 'than'.

Jesus Christ, you teabag fucking retards are so crazy and stupid.

Words don't exist to convey what morons you people are.

I was in Northwestern Arizona last weekend. Let me remind you again how much I hate you for getting to live with that fantastic scenery.:toast

[boutons_deux]

They're found here.

http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy11/pdf/summary.pdf

Since it's you people's claim that govt spending is "out of control" under Magic Negro, please list the specific NEW increments of structural spending.

The entire budget is useless, which is par for you people.

[coyotes_geek]

See budget. It's in there.

[boutons_deux]

So, you CAN'T list the NEW structural spending.

Figures, it's all Repug/tea bagger campaign slander and bullshit.

[coyotes_geek]

I can and I have. It's in the budget. Line by line. Every increase in spending over Bush's last budget are in there. It's not my fault that you're deliberately going out of your way to avoid acknowledging it.

[Drachen]

Repugs
Tea baggers

I love how liberals have to make up insulting names.. it's cute

I think it is dumb on both sides. Tell me you haven't seen libtards.

[boutons_deux]

I can and I have. It's in the budget. Line by line. Every increase in spending over Bush's last budget are in there. It's not my fault that you're deliberately going out of your way to avoid acknowledging it.

you people are making the claims, you substantiate, not me.

What's the percentage increase TOTAL.

How does it compare with dubya doubling the deficit from $5T to $10T DURING a housing/commodity bubble and increasing GDP and large corporate profits?

When Clinton had the economy expanding, he was able to use increased tax revenues to pay down the national debt.

[coyotes_geek]

you people are making the claims, you substantiate, not me.

I have. See budget.


What's the percentage increase TOTAL.

See budget.


How does it compare with dubya doubling the deficit from $5T to $10T DURING a housing/commodity bubble and increasing GDP and large corporate profits?

It took Bush 8 years to run up an additional $5T of debt. Obama will do it in 3.


When Clinton had the economy expanding, he was able to use increased tax revenues to pay down the national debt.

Something for which I have commended Clinton on numerous occasions.

[TheSullyMonster]

Department of Education is doing no good

getting rid of that
making parents teach kids at home would be better
kids would learn more

it is proven homeschool gets are smarter then pubic school kids

:lol

Yes, Joe the Plumber is going to do a great job educating his kids.

:lmao

There are some shitty schools and teachers out there, for sure. There are even more shitty parents.

How do you propose the single teenage mom homeschool her kids, anyway?:downspin:

Hell, the vast majority of families live a lifestyle that requires two incomes(or the income of both parents requires it)-who will homeschool the kids then?:ihit

[angrydude]

I love it when Dems whine about how Bush increased the deficit too, as if the fact that Republicans are hypocrites makes the policy alright.

It completely escapes them that they are still advocating the exact same policies that got us to where we are today.

And then they call the people who say, "hey, maybe we shouldn't be doing this" crazy.

No. Doing something the same way and expecting different results is what is crazy.

The economy is not magically going to improve without substantial changes in how we do things. Will. Not. Happen. The laws of economics don't go away just because you don't believe in them.

[CosmicCowboy]

I gotta agree the Federal Department of Education is pointless. They don't educate anybody. The local school districts educate the kids. The funds to educate the kids originate locally. Why do we need to send more tax dollars to Washington DC so they can hire a bunch of people in the "Department of Education" that don't have a fucking thing to do with educating kids?

Thats roughly equivalent to having a "Federal Department of Garbage Collection" that doesn't collect garbage.

[z0sa]

I gotta agree the Federal Department of Education is pointless. They don't educate anybody. The local school districts educate the kids. The funds to educate the kids originate locally. Why do we need to send more tax dollars to Washington DC so they can hire a bunch of people in the "Department of Education" that don't have a fucking thing to do with educating kids?

Thats roughly equivalent to having a "Federal Department of Garbage Collection" that doesn't collect garbage.

I think this is the general, (if vague), problem we are having, that I can agree with on the *true* conservative side. Government has overshot in the name of doing what's best - we need to be doing the opposite, stretching our resources to their maximum potential instead of spending where no need is apparent.

However, it's a joke to think either party wants to do anything but spend their ass off for something or another.

[Sisk]

Do you have a legitimate point to make or do you just like poking fun at other poster's terminology.


I'm not poking fun, I'm pointing out how ridiculous it is.


I think it is dumb on both sides. Tell me you haven't seen libtards.

I've seen them all. They're all pointless.

[Mikesatx]

A group that started at a grass root level and in the span of a little more than a year changed the political landscape is dumb?

The message being sent to all politicians is that they were designed to be public servants, fiduciaries with we the people's best interest in mind. They have all failed miserably. Picking a side and arguing you are not as bad as the other side is what I would consider dumb.

We are left with 2 groups to choose from. One who provides us with what they will do and the other their actual record. At least with the first choice there is some hope that they will do what they say.

What both sides have proven time and again is that they are both horribly inefficient, arrogant and elitist. The side that pledges to create less of that is who I side with. I'll take care of educating and providing for my kids. Just get the hell out of the way.

[RandomGuy]

Repeal Obamacare.

Sell GM.

Stop spending borrowed stimulus money.

Shutter about 2/3rds of the federal government beginning with the Department of Education.

Institute the Fair Tax and shut down the IRS.

Cut Obama's golfing allowance and Michelle's travel itinerary.

There's a bout a trillion in savings...

"about 2/3rds of the federal government"

um ok.

FAA?
FDA?
EPA?

Yay or nay?

What would replace them?

Does that include the defense department? I would be all for gutting a lot of the happy fun weapons projects, and unwanted bases.

[RandomGuy]

http://www.federalbudget.com/chart.gif

There are only about 4 places in the federal budget that you could cut to where it would make a difference.

[RandomGuy]

Shutter about 2/3rds of the federal government beginning with the Department of Education...

Ah, a concrete proposal.


Although the Department is a relative newcomer among Cabinet-level agencies, its origins goes back to 1867, when President Andrew Johnson signed legislation creating the first Department of Education. Its main purpose was to collect information and statistics about the nation's schools. However, due to concern that the Department would exercise too much control over local schools, the new Department was demoted to an Office of Education in 1868.

...

Beginning in the 1950s, political and social changes resulted in expanded federal funding for education. The successful launch of the Soviet Union's Sputnik in 1957 spurred nationwide concern that led to increased aid for science education programs. The 1960s saw even more expansion of federal education funding: President Lyndon Johnson's "War on Poverty" called for the creation of many programs to improve education for poor students at all levels—early childhood through postsecondary. This expansion continued in the 1970s with national efforts to help racial minorities, women, people with disabilities and non-English speaking students gain equal access to education.


1. The Department of Education—
establishes policies relating to federal financial aid for education, administers distribution of those funds and monitors their use.


2. The Department of Education—
collects data and oversees research on America’s schools and disseminates this information to Congress, educators and the general public.

3. The Department of Education—
identifies the major issues and problems in education and focuses national attention on them.

4. The Department of Education—
enforces federal statutes prohibiting discrimination in programs and activities receiving federal funds and ensures equal access to education for every individual.

http://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/budget11/justifications/index.html


What would replace this? Should some of it be replaced?

Do we need national data on schools? or a national educational policy?

Federal Pell grants? financial aid for college?

Printing house for the blind? Technical college for the deaf?

[RandomGuy]

I guess we need 50 different states, each with 50 different agencies duplicating many of these functions.

That would be so much more efficient?

[Mikesatx]

Are you assuming that in order to cut back you have to eliminate the entire department? When a corporation becomes too bloated it downsizes or sells off businesses. It doesn't seem too farfetched that each of the departments with the exception of the military can be significantly downsized.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Are you assuming that in order to cut back you have to eliminate the entire department? When a corporation becomes too bloated it downsizes or sells off businesses. It doesn't seem too farfetched that each of the departments with the exception of the military can be significantly downsized.

Sure but then it goes back to the issue of vagueness. I personally think that pell grants and stafford loans are an incredibly important thing.

What do you cut from the department.

Thats what I find most distressing about political discussions in general. They are all about generalizations, emotions and very little to do with concrete policy.

[Mikesatx]

Agreed. No one here can intelligently say what they would cut unless they could see where all the money is going. All we know for sure is that what is in place is horribly inefficient and in terms of oversite a complete failure. It would seem that if a department is not doing what it is intended to do you would eliminate it. Other areas scaled back.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Agreed. No one here can intelligently say what they would cut unless they could see where all the money is going. All we know for sure is that what is in place is horribly inefficient and in terms of oversite a complete failure. It would seem that if a department is not doing what it is intended to do you would eliminate it. Other areas scaled back.

OH most certainly. Its pretty obvious that the elites in Washington intentionally keep the populace in general in the dark about specifics.

Thats exactly why i have a ton of respect for Ron Paul. While I think a lot of his ideas are batshit crazy, he is not afraid to discuss specifics. He seems to want to talk about the specifics.

I just wish that others would actively do that beyond a federal extremist.

[SnakeBoy]

I guess we need 50 different states, each with 50 different agencies duplicating many of these functions.

That would be so much more efficient?

Yes.

[Winehole23]

Authority would presumably be closer to the voters, if the states themselves took over education. There'd be good and bad sides to that.

[Nbadan]

Long but worthy read...

The List: 101 Examples of Why Republicans Should Not Be Allowed to Regain Control of Congress



Starting back in early August, and every week since then, I've concluded each Op/Ed with a list of examples of why Republicans should not be allowed to regain control of Congress this mid-term election. Beside just being generally nuts, they have made it clear what they intend to do should that happen: go back to all the Bush-era policies that nearly brought this country to its knees less than two short years ago, launch endless, pointless investigations like they did against Bill Clinton to ensure nothing gets done, shut down the government (see list for numerous links), give enormous, budget-busting tax breaks to the richest 2% of Americans already awash in cash in some inexplicable belief that giving them still MORE money will convince them to create jobs for which there is no demand, and, of course, privatize Medicare & Social Security (also, see list for multiple links). Are you tired of the Wild West, free-wheeling and reckless financial practices of Wall Street? The Republican Party isn't. And they're hoping you won't remember that's how we got here. They want to privatize everything, then deregulate it till there's no government oversight.

(A brief comment: Please notice that I back EVERY accusation up with a confirming link. My inbox receives a steady stream of junkmail chain letters from Right-wingers recanting political horror stories of "FEMA Death camps" or how "Democrats are out to destroy America"... all with one thing in common: NO LINKS to back them up. Easiest way to tell if that political chain-letter is crap or not is whether or not it contains any links to back up their accusations.)



The Tea Party, a fundamentalist wing of the Republican Party, differs from the GOP only in their level of fanatical extremism. The Tea Party is in lockstep with the GOP on every economic issue. Where they differ is on social issues... you know... questioning whether President Obama was even born in the United States or whether or not the minimum wage is Constitutional. One of the most amazing things about this extensive list of "Top 101 Reasons" is it only goes back six weeks to last August, and without padding from dozens of Wingnutty "Sharron Angle" and "Christine O'Donnell" quotes. The list doesn't even go back as recently as Rep. Joe Barton's (R-TX) apology to BP three months ago, upset that BP... and not the U.S. taxpayer... must pay to cleanup the oil spill in the Gulf. This week, Barton echoed Party leaders Mitch McConnell and John Boehner that the GOP has been "short or specifics" on just how exactly they'll fix all these problems they're attacking Democrats for not fixing. They don't have any answers (that you'd like). They're just hoping you won't ask them any questions before election day.

In past weeks, we've met "The God Warriors", Joe "Everything is unconstitutional" Miller (R-AK), and Rob "privatize everything" Portman (R-OH). Sharron "black is the color of evil" Angle and Christine "dabbled in witchcraft" O'Donnell require entire websites to track their history of nutty comments.

There's former Hewlett-Packard CEO, Carly Fiorina, who was fired from HP for nearly bankrupting the company, and now running for the Senate in California, who defended her record of "outsourcing" thousands of jobs. How much of her $21 million dollar golden parachute will go to buy your vote?

In Connecticut, Linda McMahon, the multi-millionaire wife of pro-wrestling mogul Vince McMahon, stuck a blow for feminism defending scenes like this from their WWE programming:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMh3UQKSyf8

We've got Dr. Rand Paul (R-KY), the ophthalmologist son of Texas Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX), who... like his Libertarian father... wants to cut government spending across the board... except when it comes to Medicare payments to doctors like him. Rolling Stone reporter Matt Taibbi put it best:

This candidate, a man ostensibly so against government power in all its forms that he wants to gut the Americans With Disabilities Act and abolish the departments of Education and Energy, was unwilling to reduce his own government compensation, for a very logical reason. "Physicians," he said, "should be allowed to make a comfortable living."



You might remember Rand best for calling the Civil Right Act of 1964 an abridgment of "freedom of speech". Or maybe for suggesting we should do away with the "Americans With Disabilities Act"? Those free-loading cripples have had it too cushy for far too long.

The one thing Republicans, Conservatives and Teabaggers all agree upon: Extending the budget-busting Bush Tax Cuts to the "Top 2%" in the absurd belief that it will create jobs. As I've pointed out repeatedly, THE "TOP 2%" HAS BEEN RECEIVING THE BUSH TAX CUT SINCE 2002. So where are all the jobs? Not only did it not create jobs, they doubled the National Debt and created the worst job creation record since Herbert Hoover. They say the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over, and expecting a different result each time. These people ARE insane.

So you see, despite all their hypocrisy, idiocy and easily disprovable statements of "fact", the Teanuts are... in Matt's words... "full of shit". They slept through the Bush Administration, when he doubled the National Debt and failed to prevent the worst terrorist attack in American history, then yawned as that same Administration violated eight of the first ten Amendments in the Bill of Rights, launched a war based on lies, and outed an undercover CIA agent because her husband dared expose their lies in the New York Times, all while presiding over the worst economy and ensuing economic meltdown since The Great Depression. But put a black man in the White House and suddenly we have "a lying, Socialist Marxist Muslim that pals around with terrorists" for president.

Of course, voters need more than just reasons to NOT vote for "the other guy", they need a reason to get their butt off the couch and give Democrats more than just two years to fix what took Republicans eight years to destroy. A good place to start might be this list of 244 Accomplishments of President Obama, which is already slightly out of date.

Now, anyone that knows me or reads this blog regularly can tell you I'm not exactly "thrilled" with the Obama Administration... mostly for all its kowtowing to the Republican minority and allowing them to set the agenda for economic reform... stressing tax cuts over government investment in infrastructure, and a lack of urgency with regards to Climate Change and a Green Jobs Program. But I also know all these things fair a FAR better chance with a Democratic Congress than if Republicans regain control.

Since President Obama entered office, despite unprecedented obstructionism by the Republican minority, he passed the "2009 Recovery and Reinvestment Act" that gave a payroll tax CUT to 98% of all working Americans; he is keeping his promise to end the war in Iraq (remember McCain was prepared to keep troops in Iraq "for 100 years"); forced health insurance companies to offer coverage to EVERYONE by eliminating the "preexisting conditions" loophole (yes, Republicans vow to do away with that too); eliminated the infamous "prescription drug 'donut hole'" of the Republican Prescription Drug Program that stuck hundreds of thousands of seniors paying thousands of dollars out of pocket for their medications; signed the "Lilly Ledbetter Equal Pay Act" for women that Bush said he'd veto if Democrats passed it; appointed two women to the Supreme Court (including the first Hispanic); and most recently, is creating the first "Financial Products Protection Agency" that will crackdown on deceptive contracts (like the kind that led to the mortgage crisis) and outrageous credit card fees & interest rates (a law restricting changes in credit card interest rates was already passed by Obama in 2009.) None of these things would have passed under a Republican Congress, who are now promising to repeal ALL of these reforms if you put them back in charge.

So without further ado, our "(In)Complete List of Examples Showing Why Republicans/Conservatives/Teabaggers should not be allowed to regain control of Congress (Six weeks. These are all in just the past six weeks):


1. Gingrich Suggests Taking Out The Remaining ‘Axis Of Evil’ Members: ‘We’re One Out Of Three’. Are you tired of these budget-breaking, costly & bloody wars? The GOP isn't.

2. Department of Defense can’t account for 96 percent of money administered in Iraq reconstruction fund (between 2003-2007, $9.1 Billion just vanished).

3. Deficit fraud Shadegg (R-WI) can’t name a single program he'd cut to reduce the deficit.

4. The GOP has become the "Let Them Eat Want Ads" Caucus: A look at all the Conservatives claiming people on unemployment are "lazy" and are simply "putting off looking for work".

5. Speaking of which: TN Congressman running for governor, Zach Wamp (R-TN) Suggests Unemployed Are ‘Just Sitting Back Waiting’.

6. Sharon Angle - The Tea Party's pick to replace Nevada Senator Harry Reid is too BSC even for Fox News with all her talk of "armed insurrection" and "Second Amendment remedies" if voters don't return Conservatives to power in Congress.

7. House minority whip Eric Cantor Admits Extending Bush Tax Cuts Would ‘Dig The Hole Deeper’ on the Deficit and can't name a single program he'd cut to pay for it (continue reading the list and you'll find he's not the only Deficit Hawk that can't name a single thing he'd cut.)

8. But that's not the first time a Republican admits the truth about the effect of tax cuts on the Deficit: GOP Lawmaker Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) Slips Up, Admits Tax Cuts Will ‘Increase The Debt’.

9. Not convinced yet? Contradicting His Earlier Denial, Marco Rubio (R-FL) Admits ‘Tax Cuts Don’t Pay For Themselves’.

10. Don't ask these guys how they'll pay for extending the Bush Tax Cuts. Either they don't know or won't say before the election because they know you won't like it (can you say "Social Security & Medicare" after they spent all of last Summer vowing to protect it?)

11. The man in charge of rewriting history on the Bush Administration, Rove Invents Fantasy World In Which The Bush Tax Cuts Led To The Most Government Revenue Ever. (So how did they double the National Debt in six years with "all that revenue" coming in?)

12. Tea Party Senate candidate Rand Paul (R-TN) claims mine safety regulations are unnecessary because ‘no one will apply’ for jobs at dangerous mines. - So, mines will simply go out of business after 100% of them deregulate and workers choose to starve rather than work for them? (They can just live off their Trust Funds until a better job comes along, right Rand?)

13. Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN) Can’t Think Of Any GOP Ideas That Are Different From Bush. Says Simply: We Are ‘Pro-Growth’. (whatever that means.)

14. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell Filibusters DISCLOSE Act After Decades Of Demanding Campaign Finance Reform - As recently as 2007, McConnell was still defending his 23 year effort to require candidates to disclose who was donating to their campaigns. Now, suddenly, he's filibustering something he has fought for for years. Why? Because Democrats want it too. It's all part of "the Party of Record Obstructionism simply to deny Democrats of any achievements prior to the election. Will you reward them for it in November?)

15. MSNBC's Rachel Maddow takes note of McConnell's flip-flop, producing video proof of numerous Republicans now vehemently opposed to programs & policies THEY themselves invented. (Can you say "Cap & Trade" McCain, Palin, Fiorina?)

16. And WHY would Republicans now obstruct their own programs? Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) says the answer is obvious: Republicans ‘Don’t Want People To Get Jobs Before The Election’ . I think he's right.

17. People that think like this have no business being in charge of ANYTHING: Carnival offers shoot-the-president game.

18. On Sunday's Meet the Press, House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) called for more deregulation to jumpstart the economy, then IN THE SAME BREATH, blamed a lack of regulation for the crisis on Wall Street and the oil disaster in the Gulf:

19. GOP Repeats Balanced Budget Amendment Farce - Why is this bad? Because they are still insisting on extending the $700B budget-busting Bush Tax cut for the wealthiest 2% while (almost comically) steadfastly refusing to explain how they'll pay for it. (Can you say "Draconian spending cuts on the Poor & Middle Class"?)

20. Back in college, Tennessee Senatorial candidate Rand Paul reportedly kidnapped a female student and forced her to worship the 'AQUA BUDDHA' (a bong) as part of a secret society. (Update: Paul denies the kidnapping, but not the 'bong worship' part.)

21. Serial adulterer and potential 2012 presidential candidate Newt Gingrich, who spends an inordinate amount of time preaching "Family Values", dismissed his hypocrisy in a discussion with ex-wife #2 with a 'Do as I say, not as I do' defense.

22. McCain Promises He Won’t Work With Democrats On Immigration If He Is Re-Elected. - Do you get it yet? They don't WANT to fix their made-up "problems" (ie: "campaign fundraising issues"). That's why they never challenged Roe v Wade the six years they controlled all three branches of government. There's gold in them thar race-baiting issues!

23. "Terror Babies!" - Texas Rep. Louie Gohmert went on Fox Business Channel to make the wild claim that pregnant Middle Eastern women are traveling to the U.S. to have babies who will automatically become U.S. citizens upon birth and later return when they are older to "blow us up." - The FBI debunked him, but he continues to insist it's true. These people are delusional paranoids, and they are hoping you'll put them back in charge.

24. Florida Senate candidate Marco Rubio thinks the way to balance the budget is simply to ban earmarks (which make up 1% of the budget) and putting every government expenditure OTHER than Defense) up for reapproval by Congress every ten years (are you ready to risk a Republican Congress reapproving Medicare and Social Security every ten years?) Oh, BTW: Every dollar of discretionary spending already has to be reappropriated every year.

Mugsy Rap Sheet (http://mugsysrapsheet.com/2010/10/15/the-list-101-examples-of-why-republicans-should-not-be-allowed-to-regain-control-of-congress/)

[boutons_deux]

Authority would presumably be closer to the voters, if the states themselves took over education. There'd be good and bad sides to that.

public education is already financed and controlled by city/county/state. The TX "Christian" Taleban dictate lies into millions of schoolbooks, not the Feds.

It's the FREE MARKET Repugs who instituted the FEDERAL No Child Left Behind and Teaching to the Test, to make sure the corps get compliant, ignorant, cubicle slaves.

[Winehole23]

Give them a little credit, croutons. They were doing an ok job of that well before NCLB.

[DJ Mbenga]

Repeal Obamacare.

Sell GM.

Stop spending borrowed stimulus money.

Shutter about 2/3rds of the federal government beginning with the Department of Education.

Institute the Fair Tax and shut down the IRS.

Cut Obama's golfing allowance and Michelle's travel itinerary.

There's a bout a trillion in savings...

huckabee is that you?

[Nbadan]

Yoni is an idiot....the govt will likely make a profit, yes surplus, and helped save American jobs by bailing GM...both of which wing-nuts have shown they have contempt for..

[balli]

I was in Northwestern Arizona last weekend. Let me remind you again how much I hate you for getting to live with that fantastic scenery.:toast

:lol :tu I'm sure the trip was cool.

[RandomGuy]

I guess we need 50 different states, each with 50 different agencies duplicating many of these functions.

That would be so much more efficient?


Yes.

I guess someone had to step up to say that.

50 different departments, each with 50 different levels of funding and/or expertise, 50 different methodologies of tracking things, and 50 different legislatures dictating 50 different sets of priorities to 50 different agency heads.

Can you explain to me how 50 duplications of effort is more efficient, or are you just going to be all hand-wavy about this?

Should we not have some basic national standards when it comes to education, seeing as how we all tend to benefit/lose when it comes to educational levels?

[RandomGuy]

Far be it from me to challenge the "federal goverment is inefficient" dogma, with (gasp) actual demands of reasonable proof.

[TeyshaBlue]

I guess we need 50 different states, each with 50 different agencies duplicating many of these functions.

That would be so much more efficient?



I guess someone had to step up to say that.

50 different departments, each with 50 different levels of funding and/or expertise, 50 different methodologies of tracking things, and 50 different legislatures dictating 50 different sets of priorities to 50 different agency heads.

Can you explain to me how 50 duplications of effort is more efficient, or are you just going to be all hand-wavy about this?

Should we not have some basic national standards when it comes to education, seeing as how we all tend to benefit/lose when it comes to educational levels?

You're looking for efficiency in a macro perspective. From the local, it's possibly quite a bit more efficient.
Setting national standards is fine. Tying funding to it, not so much. When the DOE turns to enforcement is when I'm out on the concept.

[RandomGuy]

You're looking for efficiency in a macro perspective. From the local, it's possibly quite a bit more efficient.
Setting national standards is fine. Tying funding to it, not so much. When the DOE turns to enforcement is when I'm out on the concept.

One of the big things that the Dept. of Education does is provide a conduit for higher education funding.

Given the cost of college these days, elimination of that function would imply that graduating college would be next to impossible for all but the most landed aristocracy.

I know that my wife and I would not have been able to attend college, although the new GI Bill is far more generous now.

The military would be the *only* way for middle and lower class children to attend college.

Certainly not something that would tend to make the US more competitive.

Not that I am wedded to the idea of a Department of Education, I just want some clear plan as to what is kept, what is tossed, and who pays for the stuff we keep at the state level.

If you gut the federal government, you can damned well bet that the services lost would be screamed for at the state level.

States without income taxes woudl therefore be forced to fund those services from property taxes.

Be careful what you wish for, Yoni.

[TeyshaBlue]

One of the big things that the Dept. of Education does is provide a conduit for higher education funding.

Given the cost of college these days, elimination of that function would imply that graduating college would be next to impossible for all but the most landed aristocracy.

I know that my wife and I would not have been able to attend college, although the new GI Bill is far more generous now.



IMHO, that should be the charter purpose of the DOE.

As far as how do you replace the funding the Fed sends? Why should the state have to? Usually, federal funds are appropriated for special programs or to provide services to a specific group of students. Because they are specifically earmarked for these programs, they cannot be used to replace state or local dollars to fund a program. In other words, if you kill the Fed requirements and the Fed dollars that go with them, it's almost nets to zero.

That being said, there will be an impact to local taxpayers, which is how our public education system was designed to begin with.

[z0sa]

OH most certainly. Its pretty obvious that the elites in Washington intentionally keep the populace in general in the dark about specifics.

Thats exactly why i have a ton of respect for Ron Paul. While I think a lot of his ideas are batshit crazy, he is not afraid to discuss specifics. He seems to want to talk about the specifics.

I just wish that others would actively do that beyond a federal extremist.

There's a reason he's considered an extremist .. :lol

[Winehole23]

Taft Republicanism (i.e., the GOP's mid-20th century liberalism) is far, far from the mainstream now, but in his time Bob Taft was Mr. Republican.

In the 1940s and 50s RP probably fit right in...

[Winehole23]

And it wasn't til the late 70s that a republican could even get elected to statewide office in Texas.

[Supergirl]

BRILLIANT video. THanks for posting it

[Wild Cobra]

I guess we need 50 different states, each with 50 different agencies duplicating many of these functions.

That would be so much more efficient?
It's called States Rights. Let the states do it or not as they please. Many of the things they do are just overlapping polices from other agencies anyway. To get rid of the department of education noes not mean you lose all that oversight.

[RandomGuy]

It's called States Rights. Let the states do it or not as they please. Many of the things they do are just overlapping polices from other agencies anyway. To get rid of the department of education noes not mean you lose all that oversight.

No just any ability to address problems that affect the nation as a national entity.

You also do that oversight much less efficiently, as I pointed out.

[Yonivore]

I settle for cutting the $1.8 Trillion Obama and the Democrats have added to the budget just since inauguration.


http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/obama-deficit-2010.jpg

Notice how the deficit was steadily coming back down until 2006? What happened in 2006?

Let me think...

Oh yeah, the Democrats took control of Congress...

[boutons_deux]

In 2006, what spending crimes did the Dems "commit", that the obstructionist Repugs and the Repug WH simply were powerless to stop?

As always, Yoni, you're a FUCKING LIAR.

The Repugs' Reign of Error doubled the deficit from $5T to $10T ___while GDP was growing___ and your beloved "Repug tax cuts" were "paying for themselves". Where was your whining about (Repug) deficits then?

The lying chart labels the Repug/conservative Great Banksters' Depression as "Obama's deficits", as if the economy didn't exist before 20 Jan 2009.

Critics Still Wrong on What’s Driving Deficits in Coming Years

Economic Downturn, Financial Rescues, and Bush-Era Policies Drive the Numbers

http://www.cbpp.org/images/cms//12-16-09bud-rev6-28-10-f1.jpg

http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3036

According to YOUR LIES, Yoni, when the Repugs take control on 20 Jan 2011, they will immediately swing the "Obama deficits" into "Repug surpluses", right?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Is there more money to be taken out for the stimulus package next year or is it just all tacked onto this years bill?

[Marcus Bryant]

I guess we need 50 different states, each with 50 different agencies duplicating many of these functions.

That would be so much more efficient?


I suppose it would be more efficient to have a federal fire fighting agency. After all, many functions might be duplicated in this country.

Further, the last fifty years of federal involvement in primary and secondary education speaks well to its necessity. Considerations of efficiency obscure the reality of the results.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I suppose it would be more efficient to have a federal fire fighting agency. After all, many functions might be duplicated in this country.

Further, the last fifty years of federal involvement in primary and secondary education speaks well to its necessity. Considerations of efficiency obscure the reality of the results.

My biggest issue with the federal government is how they use money for one type of policy to try and influence social policy on the state level. The whole minimum drinking age requirement for highway funding requirement is an example of that. No child left behind is another example. If you want to make funding available to states then make it available but quit making it an end around the constitution.

The main issue is that the courts have left so much grey area. Set guidelines and follow them not this ambiguous bullshit that prevents consistent policy.

[Wild Cobra]

No just any ability to address problems that affect the nation as a national entity.

You also do that oversight much less efficiently, as I pointed out.
So you favor the police state?

[Wild Cobra]

I settle for cutting the $1.8 Trillion Obama and the Democrats have added to the budget just since inauguration.


http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/obama-deficit-2010.jpg

Notice how the deficit was steadily coming back down until 2006? What happened in 2006?

Let me think...

Oh yeah, the Democrats took control of Congress...
:deadhorse

They just refuse to comprehend the cause and effect. Happens every time.

[boutons_deux]

WC and Yoni lie, it happens every time.

Paint us the deficit picture with unstable, senile McLiar and pitbull bitch in the WH and the Repugs controlling both Houses.

[Wild Cobra]

WC and Yoni lie, it happens every time.

Paint us the deficit picture with unstable, senile McLiar and pitbull bitch in the WH and the Repugs controlling both Houses.
See what I mean...

[boutons_deux]

Still waiting for the picture of the today's economy had McLiar and pitbull bitch been elected, and Repugs the majority in both chambers.

[scott]

Sample ballot that Tea Party Candidate Linda McMahon is passing out...

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/A7A7Pr7CAAA4j4X.jpg

LOL

Source: Chris Moody Chris_Moody
WOW. RT @KateNocera: The sample ballot McMahon is passing out: pic.twitter.com/W3vYgd55

[Wild Cobra]

Still waiting for the picture of the today's economy had McLiar and pitbull bitch been elected, and Repugs the majority in both chambers.
Obamacare would not be law. Employers would be more apt to hiring people as needed instead of working their people overtime. With the added costs of employing people, on a per person basis... why employ more people when you can work the people you have more hours?

[RandomGuy]

So you favor the police state?

Get that strawman. Let me know when you win.