Thank God we don't have some idiot as our Vice President, eh?
"Website number?" Really?
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Ergh.
Ok, so let's just face it -- no one is going to be slapping any Jindal '12 bumper stickers on their car anytime soon.
While last night wasn't a disaster, it definitely could have gone much better. And the Louisiana Governor is only partly to blame. The performance had two main problems:
Last night, Bobby Jindal should have read only the last half of his speech from the desk in his den with a flag behind his shoulder. When he speaks on substantive policy, he's able to do it clearly and with conviction. And most importantly, we trust him. This is a guy who at 37 already had accomplished much more than Obama did when he decided to run for President. He knows what he's talking about and he has the record to prove it.
The fact is, Jindal is the anti-Obama. Great on his feet, but deficient with a teleprompter. Have any doubts? Watch this past week's Meet the Press.
Alas, Gov. Jindal is still going to receive a bit of the Palin treatment from the left. And if my Tweet Grid is any indication, Obamamaniacs can't wait to harass him.
Calling him Piyush, folks? Really? Weren't you the same ones who bitched about lame-ass Republicans calling Obama by his middle name?
While last night wasn't a disaster, it definitely could have gone much better. And the Louisiana Governor is only partly to blame. The performance had two main problems:
- The story - Yes, sometimes stories help convey a sense of humanity within our politicians. It may help set-up the message. But whatever it was last night that came out of the Gov's mouth was just a colossally bad decision. His delivery was absolutely atrocious. As my apolitical girlfriend said while watching the speech, "does he think I'm in third grade"? Clearly the Gov made a poor decision, the question is whether he was overprepared or underconsulted. Either way, it sucked.
- The environment - Some comments I saw from conservatives last night questioned whether Jindal had any fire. Well folks, it's hard to have any fire or enthusiasm when talking to a camera in the middle of the hallway of your house. Without an audience, a speaker must be able to convey a conversational tone out of thin air, and that is something that takes time to polish.
Last night, Bobby Jindal should have read only the last half of his speech from the desk in his den with a flag behind his shoulder. When he speaks on substantive policy, he's able to do it clearly and with conviction. And most importantly, we trust him. This is a guy who at 37 already had accomplished much more than Obama did when he decided to run for President. He knows what he's talking about and he has the record to prove it.
The fact is, Jindal is the anti-Obama. Great on his feet, but deficient with a teleprompter. Have any doubts? Watch this past week's Meet the Press.
Alas, Gov. Jindal is still going to receive a bit of the Palin treatment from the left. And if my Tweet Grid is any indication, Obamamaniacs can't wait to harass him.
Calling him Piyush, folks? Really? Weren't you the same ones who bitched about lame-ass Republicans calling Obama by his middle name?
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Just noticed something.
I'm having a bit of a spike in traffic during Obama's speech. Sorry, folks. I'm not gonna waste anybody's time on liveblogging something so damn predictable.
Wake me up when Bobby speaks.
Wake me up when Bobby speaks.
Worth fighting for.
Back when I worked for the Bush Administration at the US Department of Education, one of favorite memories was when DC School Choice finally passed. I remember families affected by the new program coming into the House Education Committee Room. And unfortunately there is no way to express this without sounding like a Hallmark card, but the look on their faces was one of hope and joy.
Unfortunately, this Congress wants to get rid of this program, in spite of its successes.
Take a look at this youtube and contact your Congressman to express your support for DC School Choice. It matters.
Unfortunately, this Congress wants to get rid of this program, in spite of its successes.
Take a look at this youtube and contact your Congressman to express your support for DC School Choice. It matters.
Tonight...and more importantly, tomorrow.
As we learned last week, Gov. Jindal will be presenting the GOP rebuttal to the President's address to Congress this evening. Jindal's recent rejection of stimulus dollars for Louisiana and his magnificent explanation of his actions have increased his 2012 chatter to an all-time high.
Tonight we can expect more substantive points made by the Lousiana Governor. Thanks to the President's claims that Republicans refused to provide alternatives to the stimulus, Jindal will hopefully provide an agenda detailing how Republicans would like to see the country move forward. There may be subtle indictments of the Democratic President and Congress, but nothing too spiteful or harsh.
But what will be most interesting to watch will be the response to Jindal from the White House.
Obama's Administration understands that they prefer to control a debate by choosing their opposition. Whether it be Rush Limbaugh or Rick Santelli, this White House has chosen a strategy that greatly differs from the previous one in that it has no problem lowering the stature of the office to the level of a de facto campaign office.
I have little doubt that many will come away impressed with Jindal tonight. So much so that at tomorrow's White House briefing, Obama's Press Secretary will be asked directly what the President thought of Jindal's rebuttal. Now the question will be, is the Obama White House willing to come out swinging, or lay back and simply be complimentary to the Governor?
Rush and Rick are easy targets. They aren't running for anything anytime soon. They aren't in control of budgets or elected leaders. Jindal is another story. He can, and just may, directly challenge Obama in 2012.
The question now is whether Obama wants the campaign to start tomorrow.
And that....is the rest of the story.
Yesterday, John Ziegler, creator of Media Malpractice, took Norah O'Donnell to task on the media bias vs. Sarah Palin in the last election.
While I agree with much of what Ziegler said, he provides an easy deflection for the journalists interviewing him when he says comedy shows are looked at as news by the general public. This statement is much too simple an analysis and easily dismissed by the mainstream media. Ziegler needs to take it one step further.
It's true that the public accepts shows such as SNL or the Daily Show as instruments to develop their opinion. They are smart enough to recognize they are simply comedy shows. But the public doesn't account for the bias inherent within these shows. The electorate trusts comedy news shows to use accurate information as a basis for their parody. They subconsciously ask themselves, "why would Tina Fey play Palin as a moron if it wasn't true?"
So yes, while Jon Stewart is allowed to call his news 'fake' all he wants, the fact is he still has a responsibility to play both sides for the fools they are.
h/t: hotair.com
While I agree with much of what Ziegler said, he provides an easy deflection for the journalists interviewing him when he says comedy shows are looked at as news by the general public. This statement is much too simple an analysis and easily dismissed by the mainstream media. Ziegler needs to take it one step further.
It's true that the public accepts shows such as SNL or the Daily Show as instruments to develop their opinion. They are smart enough to recognize they are simply comedy shows. But the public doesn't account for the bias inherent within these shows. The electorate trusts comedy news shows to use accurate information as a basis for their parody. They subconsciously ask themselves, "why would Tina Fey play Palin as a moron if it wasn't true?"
So yes, while Jon Stewart is allowed to call his news 'fake' all he wants, the fact is he still has a responsibility to play both sides for the fools they are.
h/t: hotair.com
Monday, February 23, 2009
Rahm found Palmolive had a nice, piquant after-dinner flavor - heady, but with just a touch of mellow smoothness.
Byron York has a revealing piece analyzing the New Yorker's profile of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel.
...while containing nothing particularly newsworthy, [the article] does add to the public record on the new White House chief of staff's fondness for the F-word. Although we all know the word has flown around previous White Houses, it's hard to cite any former chief of staff, or other top-ranking official, who has actually said it on the record in Emanuel fashion.Here's an organizational management tip for ya, Rahm -- don't complain on record about stuff that's WORSE for people working for you than it is for you.
Some examples. The New Yorker's Ryan Lizza talks to Emanuel on a day in which Emanuel is preparing to fly to Park City, Utah for a ski getaway with his family. "Do you know what I'm thinking about?" Emanuel says. "I'm going to finally get to see my kids after a month. So that's all I give a f--k about."
You think the sailors on Navy carriers in the Mideast or the guys on patrol in Afghanistan don't miss their kids?
You schmuck.
h/t: Chobemaster
Run on it.
Hate to say this, folks...but the 2010 election has already begun. Potential Congressional candidates are being recruited, donors are being targeted and strategies are being formulated.
Rep. Gohmert has already given us our message. Something simple, timely and easy to communicate to the electorate:
The difficulty will be in making sure the electorate understands what is yet to be spent of the stimulus as the 2010 election rolls around. If the CBO is correct, we will be coming out of the recession, despite the stimulus, before people go to the polls. This will enable the White House to demagogue the issue and tell Americans, simply speaking, 'the stimulus worked'.
It's an easy message to communicate: No recession = Stimulus success.
Strategically, perhaps Republicans will want to cede this ground. But turn it back around on the White House and Congress to tell them further spending is unnecessary.
Does this strategy of ceding stimulus success provide possible ammo to Obama in 2012? Of course, but at the end of the day, 2012 voters will be choosing their President based on how we've always chosen our President -- Is the economy satisfactory to them and do they feel secure. By 2012, the Stimulus will be long gone from our campaign lexicon.
Use this, 2010 GOP candidates. The '94 Revolution was won not simply because of Clinton backlash, but because Republicans gave Americans a clear understanding of what they will accomplish. Give them that again.
Rep. Gohmert has already given us our message. Something simple, timely and easy to communicate to the electorate:
"I would like to say tonight that if the American people will let the Republicans back in charge, the 60% of this bill that won't be spent until after the next election, we'll cut it off and let it go to the Americans."Is he right? According to the Congressional Budget Office, a non-partisan office under the jurisdiction of the United States Congress:
-Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX), Hannity Show, February 19, 2009
"...the current recession, which started in December 2007, will last until the second half of 2009.So plainly speaking, according to experts with no allegiance to any side, the recession will be over before over 700 billion of the stimulus is spent.
[...]
In preparing its economic forecast, CBO assumes that current laws and policies governing federal spending and taxes do not change. This forecast, therefore, does not include the effects of a possible fiscal stimulus package. On that basis, CBO anticipates that real GDP will drop by 2.2 percent in calendar year 2009, a steep decline. CBO expects the economy to begin a slow recovery in the second half of 2009 and to grow by a modest 1.5 percent in 2010."
The difficulty will be in making sure the electorate understands what is yet to be spent of the stimulus as the 2010 election rolls around. If the CBO is correct, we will be coming out of the recession, despite the stimulus, before people go to the polls. This will enable the White House to demagogue the issue and tell Americans, simply speaking, 'the stimulus worked'.
It's an easy message to communicate: No recession = Stimulus success.
Strategically, perhaps Republicans will want to cede this ground. But turn it back around on the White House and Congress to tell them further spending is unnecessary.
Does this strategy of ceding stimulus success provide possible ammo to Obama in 2012? Of course, but at the end of the day, 2012 voters will be choosing their President based on how we've always chosen our President -- Is the economy satisfactory to them and do they feel secure. By 2012, the Stimulus will be long gone from our campaign lexicon.
Use this, 2010 GOP candidates. The '94 Revolution was won not simply because of Clinton backlash, but because Republicans gave Americans a clear understanding of what they will accomplish. Give them that again.
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Oops.
In their rush to proclaim an ice-free north pole and scream more global warming, environmentalists forgot to check basic sensor data against actual observations. The result: Their sensors drifted, thereby giving them completely wrong data. The scientists involved didn't even bother to check the data against reality until a lot of complaints about mismatches started flowing in.
Go figure.
Here is the link to the data.
h/t: Sailorbuck
Go figure.
Here is the link to the data.
h/t: Sailorbuck
9 months 'til the first report card.
There is a lot of talk among conservatives concerning Obama's less than stellar start. Many are beginning to wonder when we will see a drop in the pie in the sky approval numbers that the President currently enjoys.
With the signing of the Stimulus Shit Sandwich Act of 2009, this is now Obama's economy. What happens from here on out is his, and his alone. It's his 'Mission Accomplished' moment. Things better start looking up or in a few months the President may get his first bad report card from school. And it comes in the guise of two state elections.
In November, New Jersey and Virginia elect their Governor. RealClearPolitics has an interesting analysis on how these important races are shaping out:
But two new Republican Governors in blue states (albeit only one historically so) will send an even more powerful message to the GOP.
That message? You have a shot in 2010. People aren't happy. And it's time to do something about it.
This message will inspire the RNC and State Parties nationwide to push harder and faster for quality congressional candidates and the money necessary to win those states.
Keep an eye out. November matters.
With the signing of the Stimulus Shit Sandwich Act of 2009, this is now Obama's economy. What happens from here on out is his, and his alone. It's his 'Mission Accomplished' moment. Things better start looking up or in a few months the President may get his first bad report card from school. And it comes in the guise of two state elections.
In November, New Jersey and Virginia elect their Governor. RealClearPolitics has an interesting analysis on how these important races are shaping out:
New polling suggests that New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine faces a difficult challenge for re-election this year. A Monmouth University poll released last week shows that just 34% of Garden State voters approve of the job Corzine is doing, compared to 51% who disapprove. Another recent survey shows that Republican Chris Christie, who as the state's hard-charging U.S. attorney has pursued a number of high-profile corruption cases, is leading the Democrat 44% to 38%.While approval ratings are intriguing to watch, elections actually carry with it a real message. If these two states, which both went solidly blue in '08, switch to red -- well, then Obama will know the real consequences of poor policy and bad governing.
In Virginia, the only other state holding a gubernatorial election this year, Democrats face an uphill battle against former state Attorney General Bob McDonnell. A Rasmussen survey conducted on Feb. 4 had McDonnell leading each of his three potential rivals, state Sen. Creigh Deeds, former state Delegate Brian Moran and former DNC Chairman Terry McAuliffe. None is as well known statewide as McDonnell, who will watch from the sidelines until the Democratic primary on June 9.
But two new Republican Governors in blue states (albeit only one historically so) will send an even more powerful message to the GOP.
That message? You have a shot in 2010. People aren't happy. And it's time to do something about it.
This message will inspire the RNC and State Parties nationwide to push harder and faster for quality congressional candidates and the money necessary to win those states.
Keep an eye out. November matters.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
A word of warning.
"...the state's increased role in times of crisis is a natural reaction to market setbacks. Instead of streamlining market mechanisms, some are tempted to expand state economic intervention to the greatest possible extent.Who exactly was it that gives us a lesson in historical perspective?
[...]
In the 20th century, the Soviet Union made the state’s role absolute. In the long run, this made the Soviet economy totally uncompetitive. This lesson cost us dearly."
None other than Vladimir Putin during a speech at the opening ceremony of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland on January 29th of this year.
Dogs and cats living together. Mass hysteria!
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
The One.
No, I'm not talking about Obama.
Today, Andrew McCarthy has an article on NRO that details his problems with Chairman Steele's debut.
Effectively communicating your message is a major difficulty of being in the Minority and not holding the White House. There is no single voice, like a President or Speaker of the House, that seizes media attention and motivates the Party faithful. When there is not a single voice, the message risks becoming muddled and ineffective.
Now, for us Republicans, should this voice be someone in House or Senate leadership? Should it be the RNC Chairman? Or a Party talking head like Rush Limbaugh? Are the people in those positions capable? Are they effective? Is their role as such that it enables them to assume the position?
Currently, we seem to be in a trial and error period, trying to figure out who our leader will be. While Steele was relatively ineffective in the stimulus debate, it does not mean he will be an ineffective Chairman. In my opinion, the Party Chair's primary job is getting Republicans elected, not being the Party's Press Secretary. Instead RNC members were selecting someone to help the Party evolve, become more effective and win seats. Steele has a history of innovative thinking and Party building success. Our judgements will have to wait 21 months before we can determine his success.
Limbaugh rallied the faithful and helped build an understanding about the dangers of the stimulus. But does the electorate see him as a true leader of the cause, or more just as a medium of the message? He simply doesn't have a stake or a direct role in the matter. Close, but no cigar.
That leaves Congressional leadership. McConnell and Boehner do a great job behind the scenes. They know how to strike the right deals and when to fight back. But they seem to lack the chutzpah that is necessary.
That leaves my guy from this morning's post. Eric Cantor.
He's young. Bright. Articulate. And has already proven his ability to motivate his fellow GOP colleagues to do the right thing by voting against the Stimulus as one voice.
Let Michael Steele do his job, Mr. McCarthy, and let's hope the GOP sees the leader in Eric Cantor that I see and gives him the opportunity he needs to bring us back.
Today, Andrew McCarthy has an article on NRO that details his problems with Chairman Steele's debut.
Republican leadership, though, has bought into the myth that Obama is too popular to assail as a radical. So Chairman Steele’s strategy, apparently, is to speak in hurt tones about his high expectations and then express his “disappointment” when Obama does exactly what all the flashing neon signs said he would do.Now, I won't argue with his primary issues. Yes, Steele could have been much more effective on the stimulus debate. But the GOP must decide who is going to be our spokesperson.
Call me disappointed.
Effectively communicating your message is a major difficulty of being in the Minority and not holding the White House. There is no single voice, like a President or Speaker of the House, that seizes media attention and motivates the Party faithful. When there is not a single voice, the message risks becoming muddled and ineffective.
Now, for us Republicans, should this voice be someone in House or Senate leadership? Should it be the RNC Chairman? Or a Party talking head like Rush Limbaugh? Are the people in those positions capable? Are they effective? Is their role as such that it enables them to assume the position?
Currently, we seem to be in a trial and error period, trying to figure out who our leader will be. While Steele was relatively ineffective in the stimulus debate, it does not mean he will be an ineffective Chairman. In my opinion, the Party Chair's primary job is getting Republicans elected, not being the Party's Press Secretary. Instead RNC members were selecting someone to help the Party evolve, become more effective and win seats. Steele has a history of innovative thinking and Party building success. Our judgements will have to wait 21 months before we can determine his success.
Limbaugh rallied the faithful and helped build an understanding about the dangers of the stimulus. But does the electorate see him as a true leader of the cause, or more just as a medium of the message? He simply doesn't have a stake or a direct role in the matter. Close, but no cigar.
That leaves Congressional leadership. McConnell and Boehner do a great job behind the scenes. They know how to strike the right deals and when to fight back. But they seem to lack the chutzpah that is necessary.
That leaves my guy from this morning's post. Eric Cantor.
He's young. Bright. Articulate. And has already proven his ability to motivate his fellow GOP colleagues to do the right thing by voting against the Stimulus as one voice.
Let Michael Steele do his job, Mr. McCarthy, and let's hope the GOP sees the leader in Eric Cantor that I see and gives him the opportunity he needs to bring us back.
Back in the saddle, again.
Thanks to the leadership of Minority Leader John Boehner and Minority Whip Eric Cantor, the House GOP seems to once again resemble that band of political marauders that took back Congress in 1994. Even the New York Times is noticing. By utilizing the opportunity provided by the President, the Republicans in the House have taken advantage by coalescing(finally) around the ideas of fiscal conservatism and individual liberty. Cantor's office wants to make sure you know this isn't Hastert's House GOP anymore.
But what I found particularly amusing was the youtube rating and 'thumbs down' comment disapprovals by the viewers. Clearly, this video has gotten under the skin of the Obama generation.
The whiny pricks clearly can't find anything better to do.
But what I found particularly amusing was the youtube rating and 'thumbs down' comment disapprovals by the viewers. Clearly, this video has gotten under the skin of the Obama generation.
The whiny pricks clearly can't find anything better to do.
Tempted by 'The Man'.
The DJ Tablesauce e-mail account recently received easily its best message since its inception a few months ago.
Sorry, David. This Sauce ain't selling out.
Sorry, David. This Sauce ain't selling out.
Saturday, February 14, 2009
Friday, February 13, 2009
Relying on Mushmouth.
Thanks to Sen. Coburn, here is the latest list of wasteful spending from the compromised bill passed today out of the House.
"Wasteful and Non-Stimulative Spending in the House-Senate Conference Report (Note: Many of these items are typically debated and funded through the regular budget process. Including these items in an emergency “stimulus” spending bill plays an Enron-style shell game with taxpayer dollars. We’re borrowing from the next generation to avoid tough budget choices today.)
In the meantime, keep an eye out on Sen. Specter. He may be our last hope for shutting down this bill. Collins and Snowe are lost causes. Gregg is back and voting with the GOP. Kennedy isn't coming back again to vote due to his health. Only one of the three original GOP switchers needs to come back to the fold. I think it could be Specter.
Why? Because of the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Clinical Effectiveness Research.
The FCCCCER is deep within the pages of the Stimulus. Its goal is to slow the development and use of new medications and technologies because they are driving up costs. This program is an idea straight out of Tom Daschle's playbook. Days ago when confronted with information about this program on Fox News, Specter seems open to voting against the Stimulus if this program maintains in the bill. Check it out.
UPDATE: Sen. Voinovich sent a press release out this afternoon announcing that he will not be supporting the Stimulus when it comes to the Senate floor. Voino had been a bit of a concern among some Republicans based on his efforts to work with the Senate Dem leadership, but his debt-hawk roots seem to have shown their colors in the end.
From his release: "Sen. Voinovich worked closely with a group of Senate Republicans who hoped to forge a bipartisan compromise with the Democrats. This group identified roughly $300 billion in spending that arguably does not belong in this bill. These programs generally fall into two categories: those that are worthy federal programs but should compete with other federal priorities in the regular budget process; and those that are not even a federal responsibility at all."
Props to Voino for giving it a shot. That's more than the Democrat leadership can say.
"Wasteful and Non-Stimulative Spending in the House-Senate Conference Report (Note: Many of these items are typically debated and funded through the regular budget process. Including these items in an emergency “stimulus” spending bill plays an Enron-style shell game with taxpayer dollars. We’re borrowing from the next generation to avoid tough budget choices today.)
- $8 billion for high-speed railway (including an earmark for an Los Angeles to Las Vegas MagLev)
- $1 billion for the “FutureGen” not-ready-for-primetime near zero emission plant in Illinois
- $53.6 billion for the “state stabilization” slush funds
- $1.3 billion for Amtrak
- $24 million for USDA buildings and rent
- $176 million for renovating Agricultural Research Service buildings
- $290 million for flood prevention activities
- $50 million for watershed rehabilitation
- $1.4 billion for wastewater disposal programs
- $295 million for administrative expenses associated with food stamp program
- $1 billion for the 2010 Census
- $200 million for public computer centers at community colleges and libraries
- $650 million for the DTV converter box coupon program
- $360 million for construction of NIST buildings
- $830 million for NOAA research and facilities
- $2 billion for Byrne JAG program
- $10 million to combat Mexican gunrunners
- $125 million for rural communities to combat drug crimes
- $1 billion for the COPS program
- $1 billion for NASA
- $300 million to purchase scientific instruments for colleges and museums
- $400 million for equipment and facilities at the NSF
- $3.7 billion to conduct "green" renovations on military bases
- $375 million for Mississippi River projects
- $10 million for urban canals
- $5 billion for weatherizing buildings
- $2 billion to develop advanced batteries for hybrid cars
- $3.4 billion for fossil energy research (possibly including an earmark for FutureGen)
- $5.1 billion for environmental cleanup around military bases
- $5.5 billion for "green" federal buildings
- $300 million for "green" cars for federal employees
- $20 million for IT upgrades at the Small Business Administration
- $200 million to design and furnish DHS headquarters
- $210 million for State and local fire stations
- $125 million to restore trails and abandoned mines
- $146 million for trail maintenance at National Park Service sites
- $140 million for volcano monitoring systems
- $600 million for the EPA Superfund environmental cleanup program
- $200 million to clean up leaking underground storage tanks
- $500 million for forest health and wildfire prevention
- $25 million for the Smithsonian Institution
- $50 million for the National Endowment for the Arts
- $1.2 billion for "youth activities" (for "youth" up to 24 years old)
- $500 million earmark for NIH facilities in Bethesda, MD
- $1 billion for Head Start
- $32 million for home-delivered nutrition services
- $160 million for volunteer programs at the Corporation for National and Community Service
- $500 million earmark for the SSA National Computer Center in MD
- $220 million for the International Boundary and Water Commission, U.S. and Mexico"
In the meantime, keep an eye out on Sen. Specter. He may be our last hope for shutting down this bill. Collins and Snowe are lost causes. Gregg is back and voting with the GOP. Kennedy isn't coming back again to vote due to his health. Only one of the three original GOP switchers needs to come back to the fold. I think it could be Specter.
Why? Because of the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Clinical Effectiveness Research.
The FCCCCER is deep within the pages of the Stimulus. Its goal is to slow the development and use of new medications and technologies because they are driving up costs. This program is an idea straight out of Tom Daschle's playbook. Days ago when confronted with information about this program on Fox News, Specter seems open to voting against the Stimulus if this program maintains in the bill. Check it out.
UPDATE: Sen. Voinovich sent a press release out this afternoon announcing that he will not be supporting the Stimulus when it comes to the Senate floor. Voino had been a bit of a concern among some Republicans based on his efforts to work with the Senate Dem leadership, but his debt-hawk roots seem to have shown their colors in the end.
From his release: "Sen. Voinovich worked closely with a group of Senate Republicans who hoped to forge a bipartisan compromise with the Democrats. This group identified roughly $300 billion in spending that arguably does not belong in this bill. These programs generally fall into two categories: those that are worthy federal programs but should compete with other federal priorities in the regular budget process; and those that are not even a federal responsibility at all."
Props to Voino for giving it a shot. That's more than the Democrat leadership can say.
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)