The Tea Parties, the Future of Liberty and Liberal Intentional Slander

After Barak Obama (the obAMATEUR to realists) became president in January 2009, he signed the infamous “stimulus package”, worth $787 billion, of liberal dream spending with virtually no Republican support (and rightfully so).  As it was rammed through with little reading or debate, we were told that it was “necessary”, “to keep unemployment under 8%”.  Practically overnight as one of its highest priorities, the federal government became the “Home Depot” by weatherizing government buildings and housing projects (excuse me “housing developments”).  Streets and highways with little or no need of repair would be broken up and repaved.  The DOT and other government agencies would spend millions on signs advertising the supposed benefits of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.  I saw one of those signs first hand in Washington DC.  It stated that the park on Roosevelt Island would be receiving a generous “grant” to facilitate the involvement of local youth in the removal of “non-indigenous plants”.  To put it simply, local kids would be weeding the island.  This was going to save the economy and the country??

Then there were several “projects” and “studies” also financed by the ARRA.  One project, numbered 1R01AA01658001, titled “Malt Liquor and Marijuana: Factors in their Concurrent or Separate Use”.  This grant of $400,000 to a professor at New York State at Buffalo has the following official abstract: “We appreciate the opportunity to refocus this application to achieve a single important aim related to our understanding of young adults’ use of malt liquor, other alcoholic beverages, and Marijuana, all of which confer high risks for experiencing negative consequences including addiction.”  Wow, $400,000 to study something we already knew???  Other such “grants” followed, to ACORN, to the study of porn, to the study of fish migrations and mating habits of certain animals, etc. etc.

The cost of the stimulus was later revised to $862 billion (an underestimate of 10%).  If a private business made such a blunder in outgoing funds it would most likely go out of business.  But I digress…..  As a result of this boondoggle of liberal spending, the TEA Party was born.  It was by accident really that this organization was founded.  Thanks to Rick Santelli on CNBC and his rant against the stimulus package and a particular proposal to for it to also subsidize what he called the “losers mortgages”.  He proposed a ceremonial dumping of  of derivative securities into Lake Michigan.  A few hours later a website popped up with a call for a “Chicago Tea Party” and Santelli’s video rant. The video became viral across the nation.  Average Americans were furious about the massive new spending and the revelations about previous spending on those “studies” and “grants”.  This alone was not the sustaining factor in keeping the TEA Party movement alive but the fact that: Under President Obama, federal spending has been growing at an unprecedented pace.  We are adding $4.8 billion to the national debt everyday.  The long-term viability of Medicare and Social Security isn’t merely uncertain – as so many analysts would have us believe.  In fact their failure is is a sure thing without structural changes.  By adding massive new entitlements with the health care bill we are simply going to go broke faster.

The TEA party gained so much momentum so fast, it was a threat to the liberal establishment.  Immediately pundits, the obAMATEUR friendly media, the Democrats went into full gear with their baseless and usual smear tactics and attacks.

Susan Roesgen of CNN (once an anchor in New Orleans) was going after TEA Party enthusiasts at a Chicago rally, suggesting they were stupid and irrational (no objective reporting there).

Eugene Robinson of the Washington Post: “The danger of political violence in this country comes overwheminly from one direction – the right, not the left.  The vitriolic, anti-government hate speech that is spewed on talk radio every day – and, quite regurlarly, at TEA Party rallies – is calibrated not to inform but to incite.”

MSNBC’s Ed Shutlz (I KNOW NOTHING!!!): “I believe that the TEA Partiers are misguided.  I think they are racist, for the most part.  I think that they are clinging to their guns and their religion.  And I think in many respects, they are what’s wrong with America.”

Actress Janeane Garofalo: “This is about hating a black man in the White House. This is racism straight up.  There are nothing but a bunch of tea-bagging readnecks.”

Comedian Bill Maher: “the teabaggers, they’re not a movement, they’re a cult.”

Democratic strategist Stece McMahon: “The reason people walk into schools and open fire is because of rhetoric like this and because of attitudes like this.  The reason people walk onto military bases and open fire is because of rhetoric like this and attitudes like this.  Really, what they’re doing is not that much different that what Osama bin Laden is doing in recruiting people and encouraging them to hate America.”

Chris Mathews claimed that the TEA Partiers are all “monochromatic” and “all white”.  A quick look and amateur and profession videos at rallies quickly proved this talking point wrong.

However, a Washington Post/ABC poll found that 14% of voters say the TEA Party is “most in synch” with their values; 20% say TEA Partiers are “most in tune with economic problems Americans are now facing”.

A most interesting poll came from TargetPoint Consulting which interviewed 500 attendees at the April 15, 2010 Tax Rally in DC Here are some of the results:

The TEA Partiers are united on the issues of debt, the growth of government, and health care reform

They are socially conservative on the one hand and libertarian on the other, split roughly down the middle.

They are older, more educated, and more conservative that average voters and they are “distinctly not Democrat”.

This brings us to the present day.  The President’s approval ratings are low and getting lower and Congressional Democrats are the lowest and getting worse.  Members of his party are running away from him (as seen in the November elections with declines of his speaking at their rallies).  Now with the debate on the debt limit, Americans are seeing that the Republicans have presented plans while the Democrats and the President have presented NONE.  The only thing liberal Democrats and their drones can do is continue to attack the GOP and the TEA party candidates who won in November who are doing what their constituents want – lower spending and reduce the size of the budget with has grown over 25% in just two years.  There is no way you can convince anyone that there a no room for cuts.  The liberal drones continue with their attacks of racism.  Andrew Brietbart has offered anyone who can prove racism at a TEA party rally with a cash reward.  With all the amateur and professional videos out there NOT A SINGLE ONE has captured anything close to the looney left’s claims (of course, the left now claims criticizing the Presidents failed policies is racism).

The Democrats are out of new ideas.  They continue to tout the same old ones that have failed time and again – more spending and more taxes.  When the President says we must live within our means he is not talking of cutting spending to match revenues, but raising taxes in hopes of raising revenues to match spending.  His mishandling of this debt limit and lack of leadership is showing among his Twitter followers (losing 30,000) and elsewhere, his support continues to dwindle.

When President Obama spoke before the United Nations General Assembly in September 2009, he declared that a world order that elevates one country or group of countries over others is bound to fail.  So he’s changing the order.  If his domestic policy priority is the redistribution of wealth, his foreign policy seems to be the redistribution of power.  The TEA Party has members of every race and creed is continuing to gain momentum and returning the conversation to limited government in scope and power.

A Fight to the Debt

I’ve just got to put a “wow” in here – never thought it would come out quite like this.

Here we are at the (fake) 11th hour and the whole thing is turning on just how much conservatism/libertarianism the TEA Party can squeeze in to the Boehner plan before he presents it to the House.  Oh, that is not what the MSM narrative is?  Also not what RINOs are saying?  You mean it isn’t what well paid, insider pundits (right and left) are saying?  Of course its not – because all of these simply don’t understand the nature of a  revolutionary political epoch.   That is what this is, good people…and remember that it is a truism of revolutionary movements that they usually appear a second away from defeat right before their overwhelming triumph.

Some version of the Boehner plan will pass the House – later today or tomorrow.  This is because something has to pass…and if Reid and his Democrats then carry out their threat and vote it down, then it puts the ball squarely in their corner.  If Reid kills it a couple days before the Democrats’ manufactured deadline, then it will be up to them to come up with an alternative which can pass the House.  (UPDATE:  I caught of bit of Reid on the Senate floor…”come on, Republicans, come in to my office and tell what parts of my bill you’ll sign on to, then I’ll bring it to a vote”…he is very much afraid of having a vote on a revised Boehner plan) And the House GOP is right now indicating just how conservative/libertarian the final result had better be, or it won’t be the final result.

Some say they are worried – worried that this horrific, inhuman and un-American standing on constitutional principals will weaken the GOP in 2012 and hand victory to Obama.  As far as absurd political prognostication goes, I’ve never heard anything worse.  For goodness sake, has anyone been paying attention to Obama’s “Strongly Disapprove” number?

43% “strongly disapprove” of how he’s doing his job.  This is not a man who is carefully threading his way through political crisis and making his opponents look bad.  The TEA Party cannot hand Obama the White House in 2012…every time the TEA Party acts up, Obama’s favorability craters.  The only thing which can save Obama now – other than a miraculous turn-around in the economy – is a GOP cave-in on spending.  If that happens, the TEA Party goes home or votes Third Party. As long as the GOP doesn’t cave, the TEA Party remains with it.  If the Boehner plan is not good enough for the TEA Party, it means Boehner had better make it so – it most emphatically does not mean make it least acceptable.

As I said yesterday, I think we should just pass the Boehner bill – it is good enough for me.  Clearly, though, a strong part of the GOP is not pleased with it.  So, make ’em pleased.  Remember what they are ultimately after – cuts significant enough to stave off national bankruptcy.  It isn’t TEA Party firmness which is threatening us with default, but Democrat profligacy and RINO wobbliness…it isn’t less spending which will push us over the edge, but more spending.  The TEA Party is 100% right, even if a little unrealistic about what can be accomplished while Obama is in the White House and Reid runs the Senate.

So, let’s have this fight – keep going; shout it out, TEA Partiers.  Don’t let the SOBs grind you down.  Get more conservatism/libertarianism in that bill…whatever amount it takes to get Boehner to 217 votes.  And then just watch our liberals fall apart as they are starkly forced to either pass the TEA Party-supported bill, or fail to avert the “default” they say is coming next Tuesday.

UPDATE:  Iowahawk has some Twittable thoughts on what will happen if we don’t raise the debt ceiling:

Beltway policy experts begin living by own wits; after 45 minutes there are no survivors…

…Breadlines teeming with jobless Outreach Coordinators, Diversity Liaisons, and Sustainability Facilitators…

…Without college loan program, America loses an entire generation of Marxist Dance Theorists…

The Boehner Plan 2.0

According to the CBO (PDF) it would:

…reduce budget deficits by $915 billion between 2012 and 2021 relative to CBO’s March 2011 baseline adjusted for subsequent appropriations action…

Not much, but it is a genuine reduction in spending and of nearly a trillion dollars.

Boys and girls, fellow conservatives and allied libertarians, this is the best we’re going to get while Reid runs the Senate and Obama wields the veto pen.  We’ve won – we’ve forced the GOP to stand firm against tax hikes and hold out for genuine reductions in spending.  If Boehner can get this through the House, then our duty will be to put as much pressure as we can on the Senate to pass it.  That done, it doesn’t matter what Obama does – sign or veto, it still works out to a victory for us.

Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good.  Sure, I’d like to lop off a trillion from the 2012 budget, but that just isn’t going to happen. No matter how annoying it is, we still have to abide by the results of the 2008 election in the White House and the Senate.  So, accept this deal – and then let’s get in to 2012 where we’ll fight to get a White House and a Senate which will cut a trillion out of the 2013 budget.

How Would You Balance the Budget?

Instapundit has an excellent tool where you can fiddle around with spending and taxes and figure out how to balance our budget.  I came up with my plan:

A 20% reduction in military spending.

A 20% reduction in Medicaid spending.

A 74% reduction in non-defense, discretionary spending.

A 10% increase in payroll taxes.

Income and corporate taxes remain as they are, as do Social Security and Medicare spending.

Under this plan, the budget goes in to surplus in 2014 – but has the drawback of going back in to deficit in 2018.  But not nearly as much as we are now – in the $200 billion range.

To me, though, it shows that it can be done – and done by the crucial 2014-15 time frame when we are currently at risk of real default.  Of real national bankruptcy.

The drawback of the tool is that it isn’t finely tuned enough – I’m sure I could find things to significantly cut the Social Security/Medicare budget without lowering benefits.  Essentially, that is why I had to cut non-defense, discretionary spending so much.  I cut defense on the rock-solid theory that there is a lot which can be cut there without affecting readiness.  As for my cuts to Medicaid, I am certain that if we block granted out funds to charitable hospitals and medical facilities, we can provide superior care to the poor at lower cost – the huge bureaucracy we use now to do it is likely eating up a huge amount of money, mis-allocating resources and generally screwing things up.  People who actually do health care can likely do it better than the bureaucrats in charge.  I don’t think we’d actually go back in to deficit under a plan really crafted by me, down to the penny (and what we really need for this discussion is a line by line list of budget items…give us the dollars and cents spent on each department and bureau along with the subsidiary organizations, all grants, all scheduled payments to contractors as well as how much we pay each employee and a description of what they do…then we can really figure out what to cut).

In reality, I think we can get to a surplus by 2015 – and keep up a $500 billion a year surplus for as long as we need to pay off our debts for good (and, remember, even if we’re even – no surplus, no deficit – we’re paying off debt…the big surplus devoted to debt repayment means we’d be out of debt by 2015 or so; and then we can slash taxes like no tomorrow). And that must be the goal – followed by a constitutional amendment prohibiting the government from issuing bonds except during a declared state of war.

Anyways, play around with it, yourselves – see what you can come up with.

Boehner Makes the Case

The man is rising in my estimation by the day:

…What we told the president in January was this: the American people will not accept an increase in the debt limit without significant spending cuts and reforms.

And over the last six months, we’ve done our best to convince the president to partner with us to do something dramatic to change the fiscal trajectory of our country. . .something that will boost confidence in our economy, renew a measure of faith in our government, and help small businesses get back on track.

Last week, the House passed such a plan, and with bipartisan support. It’s called the ‘Cut, Cap, and Balance’ Act. It CUTS and CAPS government spending and paves the way for a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution, which we believe is the best way to stop Washington from spending money it doesn’t have. Before we even passed the bill in the House, the President said he would veto it.

I want you to know I made a sincere effort to work with the president to identify a path forward that would implement the principles of Cut, Cap, & Balance in a manner that could secure bipartisan support and be signed into law. I gave it my all.

Unfortunately, the president would not take yes for an answer. Even when we thought we might be close on an agreement, the president’s demands changed.

The president has often said we need a ‘balanced’ approach — which in Washington means: we spend more. . .you pay more. Having run a small business, I know those tax increases will destroy jobs.

The president is adamant that we cannot make fundamental changes to our entitlement programs. As the father of two daughters, I know these programs won’t be there for them and their kids unless significant action is taken now.

The sad truth is that the president wanted a blank check six months ago, and he wants a blank check today. That is just not going to happen.

Because there is no stalemate in Congress. The House has passed a bill to raise the debt limit with bipartisan support. And this week, while the Senate is struggling to pass a bill filled with phony accounting and Washington gimmicks, we will pass another bill – one that was developed with the support of the bipartisan leadership of the U.S. Senate.

I expect that bill can and will pass the Senate, and be sent to the President for his signature. If the President signs it, the ‘crisis’ atmosphere he has created will simply disappear. The debt limit will be raised. Spending will be cut by more than one trillion dollars, and a serious, bipartisan committee of the Congress will begin the hard but necessary work of dealing with the tough challenges our nation faces.

Not much else needs to be said – this is the common sense, rational approach to our problem.  It is the statement of a man sincerely trying to do best by the people of the United States of America.  Not a man who is 100% right; not a man who must get 100% of his way…simply a man who wants to do what is right and is willing to compromise.

Trouble is, Obama and his Democrats don’t want compromise – the reason we have a “crisis” right now is because that is what Obama intended.  He (and his Democrats) kept putting off any action until we got close to a false dead line…they trusted that the phonied up crisis atmosphere would get the GOP to cave in.  In Speaker Boehner and the House GOP, they found people who will not cave.

Truth be told, even if they wanted to cave, they really can’t.  Obama and his Democrats refuse to see it, but we have reached journey’s end for Big Government.  There is no more money to spend – we can, perhaps, keep going as we are for three or four more years, but even that is dicey.  It might only be a year or two.  Regardless, we can’t go on – we have bankrupted ourselves.  It isn’t, by any stretch of the imagination, just the fault of Obama and the current crop of Democrats.  This is a bi-partisan bankruptcy that really got on track 40 years ago…with a few temporary halts under Reagan and (GOP-dominated) Clinton, we’ve been careening down this road to insolvency for decades.  But what is Obama’s fault is the failure to see things as they are – either out of complete blindness, or a simple lack of concern for the fate of the American people, Obama and his Democrats refuse to face facts.

But the facts must, at the end of the day, be faced.  Boehner sees this – sees that even if he caves for the sake of political peace, the price to be paid will be gigantic.  It simply isn’t worth it – at the cost of hostile MSM commentary; at the cost of even losing the 2012 election, we GOPers simply cannot agree to anything which puts the United States at risk.  If we get punished by the American people for this stance, then so be it – if, in the end, they choose to re-elect Obama next year and complete the process of bankruptcy, then that is their right…but we on our side will not participate in it.  Folly with majority votes does not become wisdom.

But, also, I think the American people see it our way.  We know we spend too much and that spending must be cut.  Sure you can find support for higher taxes out there, but the primary culprit in out problem is not lack of revenues, but surfeit of spending.  No one trusts a Democrat who says give me tax hikes now and I promise to cut spending  over ten years…we know we’ll get the hikes all right, but we’re sure to be screwed out of the spending cuts.  Cut now, and then we’ll talk about revenues…until Obama and his Democrats agree to this, there is really nothing to discuss.  And on this issue, if the Democrats want, we’ll fight in 2012 – and I believe we will win, and win very big.

UPDATE:  Obama still refuses to release any written plan – grossly irresponsible of our President, but entirely in character.

UPDATE II:  A lot of House GOPers are showing resistance to the Boehner plan…the MSM will play this up as a problem, but it is actually a strength.  I means that Boehner will have the power to back up his position.

UPDATE III:  Obama will veto the Boehner plan.  This is called “balance” by liberals…you know, where they get everything we want while we get nothing.  Still:  go for it, Mr. President.  We’re ready for the fight.

Obama/Boehner Cage Match!

One might think that the dueling addresses might lay out the differences – except we already know what they are, and we further know that the only reason we don’t have resolution is because Obama and the Democrats won’t give up Big Government.  Whether there will be a shift in Obama’s position remains to be seen – I highly doubt it, but I bet they’ve crafted some poll-tested sound bites to try and move the debate Obama’s way.  Trouble is, I doubt that most people are really paying attention to Obama at this point.

As for Boehner, we can expect he’ll just re-state the obvious:  the GOP won’t go for tax hikes and insists upon real spending reductions.  This is core, GOP belief and it is backed by the majority of the American people.

How does this end?  Beats me – but unless the GOP caves, we’re going to come out on top.

UPDATE: Allen West backs Boehner:

I will support the new debt deal- it has enough of what I need including no tax hikes, spending caps and a step toward a balanced budget.

That should help Boehner with the TEA Party wing.

UPDATE II:  And we’ll see if Obama’s speech changes this

Boehner Considering Balanced Budget Amendment

From CNBC:

U.S. House of Representatives Speaker John Boehner told fellow Republicans on Sunday that he is considering a balanced-budget amendment to the Constitution as part of a bill that would raise the debt ceiling, a source who heard his message said.

That could be a sign that the Republican-controlled House and the Democratic-controlled Senate remain far apart in tense negotiations to avoid an Aug. 2 default.

A balanced-budget amendment is popular with conservatives and was a central element of a bill that failed in the Senate after passing the House last week…

The bottom line here is that Boehner must bring home something in the nature of genuine cuts and/or a reform in spending which promises to balance the budget in a realistic amount of time.  Failure to carry at least this minimum risks a wipe out of the GOP in 2012 – not that GOPers would vote Democrat, but it would almost ensure a third party emerging to carry the fiscally conservative banner in to 2012.  This is key – this is central; this is the non-negotiable thing.

On the other side are the Democrats.  For them it is a matter of preserving the spending they enacted 2009-10.  This must become the “new normal”.  They know full well that they won’t regain the House in 2012 and stand to lose control of the Senate – the loss of the White House must also be envisioned but for the Democrats this is a secondary thing.  Keeping the spending is vital – because it is only via government spending that they retain any power.  Only, that is, if they can keep dispensing lavish amounts of taxpayer dollars on favored groups can the Democrat coalition sustain itself.  Even if they lose in 2012, if they can retain the 2010 level of spending, Democrats feel confident that by 2014 or 2016 they can regain power…and then expand their power via spending from today’s current levels.  Whatever Democrats do, they won’t agree to any substantial cuts in spending.  Not for real – promises of trillions in cuts over the years they’ll give with wild abandon…counting on never having to actually produce the cuts.  We can debate whether they don’t care we’re going broke, or don’t realize it – but the effect is the same:  come what may, they are determined to preserve their spending (my view is that they don’t care – if we do eventually default, they’ll have no problem with that, figuring it would just allow them to go on another borrowed money spending spree once the dust settles…and, of course, a default would be a strong argument for higher taxes).

So, how do we get past the impasse?  Mostly, we put it off until 2013 – hoping that in 2012 we win so big that we’ll have sufficient political power to impose a fiscally conservative settlement of the issue.  The way to get from here to there is, at the end of the day, agree to an increase in the debt ceiling (a totally un-necessary and, indeed, regressive thing to do…but Democrats have their heart set on it and as they control the White House and the Senate, we really can’t get ’round it).  But if we are to agree to increase the debt ceiling, we need something concrete out of it – some sort of real cut to spending next year, along with some real budgetary reform.  A balanced budget amendment, sent to the States, would be ideal.

We’ll see now if it can be done.  Democrats have hyped up the August 2nd deadline as if it means something…but when powerfull people start talking like that, the sheep who man the financial markets start to take it seriously.  Thus we’ve seen the tremors roiling through the global markets.  They should be worried about the fact that the global economy is heading in to recession…but what they are worried about is whether the government will approve the ability to go further in to debt (ie, further on the road to economic ruin).  Still, in all this, Democrats might have shot themselves in the foot…it is  fake crisis, but even a fake crisis can become real if enough people are suckered by it (see Global Warming for a prime example).  Democrats are behind the 8 ball – having said that something must be done by August 2nd to avoid catastrophe, they’d better come up with some thing by August 2nd.  If Boehner can craft a good bill and get it through the House, Democrats may be forced to go along with it.

It could be a very interesting week.

Boehner Takes Charge

If Obama and his Democrats simply won’t govern, then someone has to – from Politico:

House Speaker John Boehner hopes to have a framework for a debt-limit plan in place by Sunday afternoon to avoid roiling the Asian markets, he told colleagues on a Saturday conference call.

An immediate deal would raise the debt ceiling and cut spending, Boehner said, and there are still options on the table for more comprehensive deficit reduction of $3 trillion to $5 trillion, according to GOP sources on the call. He is also aiming for a framework in the form of Cut, Cap and Balance — the plan that has failed in the Senate, Obama has threatened to veto but House Republicans passed overwhelmingly…

The linked article reports that Boehner advised the President that, at the end of the day, Congress writes the laws and the President decides to sign or veto.  As Obama keeps messing around with negotiations – probably in hopes that the GOP would just get scared and go along with a debt increase without significant spending reform – there is really no need to bring him in to the discussion.  Work out a bill which can avoid any problems starting Monday – make it something which can pass the House and Senate regardless of what Reid or Obama might want…and then just leave it up to them.  Reid, as Majority Leader, could refuse to hold a vote…or Obama can veto the result.  In either case, it would be Democrats blocking the necessary action.

Remember what we’re up against in Obama and his Democrats:  people who’s only goal is to retain power for themselves, and that means keeping Big Government alive and ever growing.  But the time for that is past – we’re broke and we’ll default in a few years if we don’t start getting our house in order.  Fundamental reforms cannot be done while Obama has the ability to obstruct, but we can get something together which bridges the gap between now and January, 2013.  At that time it is hoped we’ll have a new President and a new Senate Majority Leader…perhaps even of a type which cares more about America than personal power.

Obama Scuttles Debt Talks

Seems that the President tried a bit of bait-and-switch in the negotiations – from NRO’s The Corner:

House Speaker John Boehner (R., Ohio) offered his side of the story Friday evening, echoing the tone of his letter to House Republicans. He said negotiations with the White House broke down for two reasons: 1) President Obama’s insistence on raising taxes, and 2) Obama’s “refusal to get serious” about spending cuts and meaningful entitlement reform.

Boehner said “an agreement had been reached” earlier in the week that included about $800 billion in new revenue (but not through raising increases). However, the White House on Thursday “moved the goal post” by insisting on an additional $400 billion in tax increases, which Boehner refused to accept. “I take the same oath of office as the president…to do what is in the best interest of our country,” Boehner said. “And it’s not in the best interest of our country to raise taxes in this economy.”…

NRO reports elsewhere that Obama also messed around with some of the proposed spending reforms as regards entitlements.  The bottom line seems to be that a deal was in the making which was acceptable to the GOP but then when it became crunch time, Obama and the Democrats slipped provisions in the GOP had not – and could not – agree to.  I don’t know if this was a poison pill to kill a deal the Democrat didn’t like, at all, or an effort to blindside the GOP (ie, at the last minute put in things that were unacceptable and count on GOP fear of busting up the deal to force them to go along).  In either case it seems to have stopped things in their tracks.  President Obama has called for a White House conference tomorrow – so we’ll see how that goes.

But the good news is that the GOP is standing firm – the revenue increases Boehner agreed to were such that even TEA Partiers could grudgingly accept:  not a rate hike, but a reform of loopholes and such to increase revenues without hiking taxes and killing jobs.  The deal is still too weak in my view – especially as I’m certain that we don’t need to raise the debt ceiling at all – but it did have a solid reduction in spending.  Not nearly enough to get us out of the debt mess, but enough to put off the day of reckoning until at least 2015 or later, thus giving us a chance to replace Obama and get someone with sense in the White House.  My congratulations to the Speaker for smoking out the attempted scam and refusing to be a sucker.

Now, we’ll just see what happens…

Democrats Kill Cut, Cap and Balance

From Hot Air:

The Senate just voted down the House Cut Cap and Balance bill, 51-46. Reid danced on its grave, proclaiming it “over, dead, and done.” Back to the Democrat plan:

Nothing!

Which is exactly right – the thing to do, now, is to re-pass it in the House, maybe adding a few changes.  You know, deeper cuts to spending, lowering income tax rates, imposing a wealth tax on the billionaires who back liberalism.  Send it right back to the Senate and see if they keep at it…or, some day, come up with an alternative plan.  Either way, we win.

UPDATE:  Turns out this bill is not quite dead – Senator DeMint is going to try and force a vote next week.  Could be done, you know – those “2012 Democrats” don’t want to have a bunch of votes on record against a balanced budget; only need a few of them to break lose and it passes – and then it will be up to Obama to sign or veto.  So, we don’t at this point need to re-pass it in the House…but we should be prepared to do so, just in case.