Posted on 05/14/2011 3:25:20 PM PDT by yoe
"It's true that allowing America to default would be irresponsible," House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) told the New York Economic Club this week. "But it would be more irresponsible to raise the debt ceiling without simultaneously taking dramatic steps to reduce spending and reform the budget process." Could it be that Boehner has drawn a line in the sand over increasing the debt limit and that Republicans will rally to the cause? Yeah, it'd be nice, but we're not betting on it.
The speaker certainly appeared to be serious. "To increase the debt limit without simultaneously addressing the drivers of our debt ... would be monumentally arrogant and massively irresponsible," he warned. "It would send a signal to investors and entrepreneurs everywhere that America still is not serious about dealing with our spending addiction. It would erode confidence in our economy and reduce certainty for small businesses, and this would destroy even more American jobs."
He became more specific when he said, "Without significant spending cuts and reforms to reduce our debt, there will be no debt limit increase, and the cuts should be greater than the accompanying increase in debt authority the president is given. We should be talking about cuts of trillions, not just billions." To cut that much, reforming Medicare, Medicaid and even Social Security would be unavoidable. The last debt ceiling increase was $1.9 trillion, and the administration is asking for another $2 trillion increase to the current $14.294 trillion limit. The administration, of course, wants no conditions attached.
Some Republicans are proposing smaller, incremental increases if the administration or the Senate blocks such dramatic cuts (recall the bitter histrionics over that paltry $38 billion in budget "cuts" last month -- cuts that ultimately ended up being closer to $352 million). Numerous votes on the debt ceiling would probably cause heartburn for many Tea Party congressmen and in reality, such a plan won't work with the weak-kneed general Republican caucus. On the other hand, keeping the issue in front of voters should hurt Democrats even more. If Barack Obama chooses to stake his 2012 campaign on continuing the spending binge, he's welcome to it.
Obama will continue to push for tax increases -- or as he euphemistically put it, "spending reductions in the tax code." However, Boehner is having none of it: "If we're serious about balancing the budget and getting our economy back to creating jobs," he said, "tax hikes should be off the table." Should? As we've said before, our nation has a spending problem, not a revenue problem.
At present, there are outstanding plans on the table to fix the budget, including the (RSC Budget for FY 2012) and Heritage Foundation's comprehensive plan to (Saving the American Dream:)
Phone: (202) 225-0600
Fax: (202) 225-5117
I am behind Boehner 100% on this. No man or woman is stronger than the people behind him. We must support this position.
Republicans always talk like this just before they cave. Its taught in the Intro to GOP 101 course.... When you are about to cave on a major issue, get in front of the TV cameras and loudly proclaim that this issue is not negotiable. Then tomorrow quietly give in to all the demands of the Democratic party.
But then again I wear a kilt whenever I can...
Homepage HERE Bravehearts
Intro to GOP 101
GOP - Give it Over Peacefully
Boehner has been in congress for a long, long time. Let’s look at his record. Has he EVER stood up strongly under pressure?
If so, I must have missed it.
Obama: “spending reductions in the tax code.”
Lying sack of newspeak trash. He truly thinks all the money belongs to government. FUBO
Get back to ye in a few days. So far he has always folded like a wet towel.
Earmark Horrors Mark Friday the 13th [Cut the Budget Already.]
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2719555/posts
Guess who’s state this earmark turkey lies within? It is Ohio, the House Speaker’s state.
This is the alternate engine for the F-136 for the Joint Strike Fighter. The second engine line, opposed by both President Bush and President Obama, unwanted and unneeded by the Pentagon, rejected by both chambers of Congress, cost $3 billion in taxpayer funds was assumed dead as of last month.
Speaker Boehner obviously brings the dead back to life!
Listen Mr. Speaker - if you talk the talk, then walk the walk.
Knock off the spending!!
Braveheart talked the talk and walked the walk. It remains to be seen if Boehner gets beyond the painted face.
I don’t know if they really believe that Boehner isn’t bluffing, or if they say that just to put more pressure on him.
“Boehner plans to shut down the government!” They want to scare as many people as possible.
I’m not saying Boehner is an alcoholic, but he certainly behaves like one. Alcoholics talk very big about the things they are ***going*** to do. They never actually deliver, but their talk makes people think they will...up to a point. Eventually people catch on to the pattern, however. If Boehner follows through this time, then I am wrong. If he holds to the pattern he’s established so far, then I would start to worry about his health, mental and physical.
He needs to stop crying in public. Showed him on the news at a graduation giving a speech, crying.
“I am behind Boehner 100% on this. No man or woman is stronger than the people behind him. We must support this position.”
You’re right, of course. We need to stand behind boehner, guard his flanks and send him a million e-mails telling him to stand tough. The man needs a whole lot of encouragement, not sniping from us. Seriously, how would you like it if you’re going into battle and your troops are calling you names and jeering you? Yeh, I know, he’s not what we’d like, but he’s what we got. Support the man this week.
We need to attack the pigs in the Marxist media and tell them we know where they live. Time to make these hacks very afraid.
He has the “look”.
He’s got the weepyness, too. That one interview was just horrible, when his face contorted all up in such a painful way. What brought it on was talking about children, in the context of which he said he can’t even go near a school any more because it upset him too much. That sounds like depression to me—the very act of going near a school wouldn’t overly upset an emotionally well person, but it could trigger a reaction in someone who’s already depressed. Since alcohol and depression go hand in hand, a credible case could be made. [Plus, he’s notorious for knocking off House work early, and around DC it’s known as a lack of ‘work ethic’. It could be something entirely different, though.]
Why would anyone support this proposal?
.
If: you reduce spending...
Then: you do not have to increase the debt ceiling.
.
Furthermore, these "dramatic steps to reduce spending" will never happen. Does anyone remember Ronald Reagan? He fell into this trap with the democrats. You cannot trust a democrat to keep his word. They are congenital LIARS who hate this country and are determined to destroy our Republic.
Remember this?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.