You Can't Blame the GOP House for the Democrats' Massive Spending Since 2007

RUSH: Renee in Nicholasville, Kentucky. So glad that you called, Renee. What is your "pregunta"?

CALLER: Well, it's a privilege to speak with you. I've listened to you for plus-22 years, four kids, and stretch marks.

CALLER: My question is, if I talk to Democrat friends, they all tell me, "Listen, the Republicans control the purse springs."

RUSH: Ah, no, they didn't. This is why I am so happy that you called. Because for all of 2008 and all of 2009, the Democrats had control of everything, Renee: The House, the Senate, the White House.

CALLER: But what about when Boehner went ahead and jumped through hoops like Obama wants him to? I mean, I just sit stunned not knowing what to say. (chuckles)

RUSH: In 2009, Obama's first year since immaculation -- and 2010, the second year -- the Democrats ran the House, they ran the Senate, and they ran the White House. They ran everything. The Republicans did not have the votes to stop anything, Renee.

RUSH: Okay. Stick with me. Now, you are running into people who want to know, "Well, wait a minute. Doesn't spending originate in the House? Doesn't it come from Congress? Obama can ask for what he wants, but it's the House that spends." Is that what you're basically asking?

RUSH: Well, I'm giving you the answer. Obama's been in office for 3-1/2 years, and two of those years the Democrats did everything! The Republicans couldn't stop them.

CALLER: But they're still... Okay, so there's one year that we still don't have any Republicans with backbones, it seems to me. (chuckles)

RUSH: "We don't have any Republicans with..." Wait a minute. I'm not understanding the question. I thought you were being... Maybe I'm totally misunderstanding the question. Is this about Republicans with no backbones or is it about...?

CALLER: No, it's about talking to Democrat people who basically are blaming it on the Congress. And I do understand for two years it was the Democrats with Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, but what about the last year? Didn't Obama ask for $1.6 trillion, you know, just a few months ago or more recently and yet...?

RUSH: In each of the last two years, in 2011 and this year, Obama's budgets have been defeated -- without a single vote in favor -- in the Democrat-controlled Senate. In the House, the Republicans have run it since 2011. The Democrats in Congress have not presented a budget for three years.

CALLER: I know that part. But so what do you tell a person when they say, "Okay, so the Democrats control the purse strings for two years but not the third year"? What do you do about that one year, I guess?

RUSH: Are we supposed to ignore the first two years? That's when we got health care. That's when --

RUSH: Well, the vast majority -- the bulk -- of all of this spending took place in those first two years. Since the Republicans got there, they've been able to stop some of it. There have been fights on things. If you recall, the Republicans have done a pretty good job of trying to stop the increase in the debt limit. But let's face it. You've gotta tell people what Obama wanted. Obama wants the debt limit raised!

RUSH: Obama wants all this to happen. He wants all of this spending. I don't know where, intellectually, you can blame the Republicans for the simple fact that Barack Obama has authored more deficit spending in 3-1/2 years than all previous presidents combined. And added that to the national debt. The Republicans, for two of those 3-1/2 years, couldn't stop him.

RUSH: Other than you can't get through to them. They're not interested in the truth, and they're so blinded by partisanship that no matter what you tell them, they're still gonna find a way to blame all this on George W. Bush and the Republicans.

RUSH: I think your problem here is that you're expecting to persuade them, and you're not going to.

RUSH: They're not interested in truth, not interested in reality. Their political partisanship and making their case in their own minds is all that really matters to them. Since the Republicans took over the House, the Democrat-controlled Senate has barely taken up a single House bill. The legislation is being shut down for the most part. Legislation that would limit spending. The Republicans have offered all kinds of plans to limit spending, to cut taxes, to create economic growth. The Democrats stop it over in the Senate every chance they get. The Republican House is half of one of the branches -- House, Senate -- and the executive branch is the White House. The House can't stop the Democrats. The Republicans still don't have the votes to stop them.

CALLER: Okay, I thought they currently did have enough to stop it. But, boy, that's good to know. (giggling)

RUSH: Well, it depends on the issue. The House has done what they could to slow things down, but I don't care who you are: When the Democrats have the White House and have the Senate, there's no way the Republicans can reduce spending. There's no way the House of Representatives alone can do it. They don't have a veto-proof majority in the House. Obama can override every veto that would come out of there! (sic) The Senate would not vote to oppose Obama in this way.

RUSH: This is one of the big problems here. The best that can be hoped for right now is gridlock: Bring a stop to everything that Obama wants.

RUSH: But even at that, with the built-in increases on all the entitlements and baseline budgeting, this budget is gonna grow regardless if nothing is done.

CALLER: Mmm-hmm. Well, it was a privilege speaking to you. Thank you so much for taking my call.

RUSH: (speaking to in-studio interruption) No, she doesn't want to blame Republicans. (speaking to the caller) You're talking --

RUSH: You... You... (interruption) No, no, no. (interruption) Would everybody be quiet? What you are asking, Renee, is you've got Democrats who are trying to blame Republicans, and you don't know how to refute them, right?

RUSH: And what I'm trying to... They may be using such things as, "Well, you know, all spending starts in the House and Republicans control that, blah, blah, blah."

RUSH: Well, fine! Obama can veto anything the Republicans come out with, and they don't have the votes to override it.

CALLER: All right. Well, I'll tell 'em that next time. I'm sure I'll have another chance very soon.

RUSH: You may as well start... You want to test this? Go to any Democrat website and leave a comment and see what happens to you.

CALLER: Well, I know you're right. My husband comes from a strong line (sic) of Democrats. He's the rebel being a Republican (giggles) and he cannot convince a sister, who really does admire him, so it's hopeless.

RUSH: Well, here's the thing for you to do. All the spending? There hasn't been a budget in two years. Everything is being --

RUSH: Continuing Resolutions. The government is being financed with one CR after another, one Continuing Resolution after another. The Republicans can't do anything about it. Every Continuing Resolution comes up in a moment of "crisis," a moment of "emergency."

RUSH: "We must spend this or raise the debt limit or we can't pay Social Security! We must spend this or there won't be any money for food stamps! We must spend this!" At this stage, the only way the House could control spending is via the budget, and there isn't one.

RUSH: The Democrats won't present one. So when you're doing Continuing Resolutions, basically every time you need to re-up one that is "to keep the government operating because it would be such a crisis if it didn't."

RUSH: This is why there's a constitutional obligation to present a budget every year, and the Democrats have abandoned it. And I'll tell you this: It's been a strategic move to not present a budget so as to allow their allies to do to you exactly what they're doing: Blame it all on the Republicans.

RUSH: The Democrats have not left any fingerprints. There is no budget. There is no architect, Democrat architectural rendering of their spending.

CALLER: But did my senator from Kentucky, Mitch McConnell, give some sort of power to the executive branch that should have stayed with Congress in like the last six months to a year?

RUSH: Uh... Pfffft. (chuckling) Well, the odds are, yeah. But I don't specifically know what off the top of my head. You keep ladling new things on me here. But you are actually a great call and a great example of why the Democrats have not presented a budget. It is so that they can't be criticized for any of the spending. There is no Democrat budget.

RUSH: There is no architectural rendering of what they think should be done spending-wise. They have violated constitutional law here in the sense that they have not presented a budget. Obama does; it gets voted down routinely, politically. It doesn't ever get a vote. The Democrats do not want one bit of evidence pointing to them on this spending, when it's all them via these Continuing Resolutions

RUSH: By the way, you can't just eliminate the first two years. You can't pretend the first two years of Democrat total control didn't happen. That's where health care happened. That's where the stimulus happened. That's where all of this, most of this new spending happened. And your Democrat buddies say, "Well, what about Boehner? What about this year?" They're just trying to sidetrack you.

RUSH: You've gotta stay focused on the facts of what really happened. The first two years is where all this started. They set new baselines.

CALLER: Well, I did not realize that if Congress votes on something in this last year Obama can still go above that. So that's good to know.

CALLER: Well, okay. So the Democrats, of course, controlled everything for the first two years of Obama.

CALLER: But this third year, Congress has, quote, "been in charge of the purse strings." But if Obama can override that, I didn't know he had the power to override that. I thought all three branches are equal.

RUSH: No, no, no. Nothing's getting passed: p-a-s-s-e-d. Nothing is getting passed. It's stopping in the Senate. And therefore Continuing Resolutions continue to be brought forth to authorize spending. All of this $5 trillion -- the vast, vast majority of it -- was what took place in the first two years, which led to the Tea Party arising and sending the Democrats packing in landslide defeats in the midterm election in 2010. Continuing Resolutions require that spending stays at the same rate, the same level.

RUSH: -- slowly implements or implements in little increments by the year. They got the stimulus bill and a whole bunch of other spending. That raised the baseline on which the budget growth is projected every year. They got that done in the first two years. There hasn't been a budget since. Continuing Resolutions make sure that spending stays at the same rates. The Democrats are using the CR, the Continuing Resolution, to protect all of their spending. Republicans could pass a piece of legislation, they could pass it by 215-to-whatever and send it over to the Senate. It'll die. Even if the Senate passes it (just for an example, here) and it goes to Obama; if he doesn't like it, he'll veto it.

The Republicans do not have enough votes in the House to override a presidential veto, and the Democrats in the Senate wouldn't.

CALLER: Okay, I did not know that, and I do try to stay up on things so that's great to know.

RUSH: We make the complex understandable here, and I don't want you to go away disappointed, 'cause, believe me, there's nowhere else you can call to have this answered.

RUSH: I feel like giving you a pop quiz. The Ryan budget is a great example. Paul Ryan, two years in a row, Renee, has submitted responsible budgets to do something about entitlement spending, and all he is is raked over the coals --

RUSH: -- personally attacked and destroyed, mocked and made fun of by your precious Democrat friends. There is one party, we can talk about how well they're doing it, there's one party trying to stop this. Paul Ryan is the leader of the budget process in the House for Republicans trying to stop this.

RUSH: Well, yeah, but you gotta pay attention to what's happening to him if you want to understand why these Democrats are talking to you the way they are. He represents a threat. Your Democrats don't want spending cut, but they know most people do so they're going to try to find a way to blame the Republicans for doing what they actually want done.

CALLER: I don't know. It seems like a lot of people are getting worried about us having so much debt.

RUSH: I'm still trying to get my bearings from that last phone call. I still don't think I got through to her. As I think back to that last phone call -- maybe you'll agree with me -- the thing that did get through to Renee in Kentucky was when I told her that the Republicans do not have enough votes to override an Obama veto. That turned on the light of understanding for her. So what does that tell us? Remember, she's a 22-year veteran of this program. She called here because she doesn't know how to answer Democrats teasing her about all this spending being the Republicans' fault. And it was, but Renee, the Republicans don't have enough votes to override an Obama veto. That's what gave her the ammo that she called here wanting.

What must she believe, if that ammo works? I always study this stuff. And the media, for so long, folks, has done such a good job. Republicans are automatically guilty; they're automatically the problem; they're automatically responsible, in terms of media reporting, Democrat Party thinking. So she is on defense, being attacked by all these Democrats: "Well, the Republicans want to..." And she didn't know quite how to respond to it because she, too, thinks the Republicans are guilty. Well, she asked me, "Did Mitch McConnell do something in the last six months to expand Obama's power?" I don't know, probably. I just threw that in there.

But the success that the media's had in building this umbrella over the Republicans as responsible and guilty for all this bad stuff, and there's our young, courageous, brave president dodging bullets in Afghanistan, doing everything he can to save America from the destructive spending of the Republicans. I am unable to intellectually understand how anybody can believe that, but I guess I'm gonna have to face it. People do. Even on our side. I know the Republicans haven't done a lot to help themselves. The establishment Republicans too often have... you mention government shutdown, and you've never seen the biggest bunch of quitters as the Republicans become, for example. The Democrats say, "You're gonna shut down the government?"

"No, no, no, no! Not us! Not us! Here's two trillion, take that. We don't want to shut down the government."

RUSH: Renee, if you're still listening out there -- those of you who heard her call in the last hour, it really got me thinking. Not so much how to respond to Democrats. I'm more interested in all of you understanding this. Her call was a great thing for me, 'cause I sometimes assume, because I have such a great respect for all of you, your intelligence and the degree to which you're informed. People that listen to this program, we've done audience research, and we know the education level of this audience is vastly above that of most media programs, television or radio. But it's always good for me to learn that some stuff is not as not understood as I understand it.

Now, let's look at this spending business. See, to me, I don't understand how anybody but a Democrat partisan -- and by definition, Democrats are not critical thinkers. They are pure reactors. They simply react. They are the quintessential mind-numbed robots. They are the ones with marching orders. They're the ones with talking points. And they get 'em off the websites. I'm talking about average Americans that you would run into in your town. I'm not talking about elected Democrats or the schemers or the campaign consultants or any of that. I'm talking about just the average, run-of-the-mill guy that lives down the street from you Democrat. They are not critical thinkers. They can't possibly be. They wouldn't be Democrats if they were. And so they run around and they tell all these Republicans how it's the Republicans' responsibility, all this deficit spending. Well, they believe it because their leaders say it and the media says it.

But here's some facts for you. Democrats controlled both houses of Congress for four years, not just two. For four years, starting in January of 2007, after the House elections in 2006, the midterms, the Mark Foley election. Pelosi and the Democrats are sworn in, and they run the House, and that is when, if you want to start tracing the genuine economic despair and destruction. I'm gonna get these numbers. I have seen them. They've been worked up. The unemployment numbers, the GDP output numbers, starting in 2007, compared to the previous six years, it's clear what happens when Democrats assume control.

It's clear what happens to the economy. It's clear what happens to unemployment. It is clear what happens to spending. It's what happens to revenue to Washington. It always decreases. Democrats claim that that's what they care most about is funding government. Tax receipts always plummet when Democrats run things because they destroy economic output. They transfer wealth from the private sector to the government. They make the private sector smaller. Obama's done that better and more intensively than any Democrat since FDR. So the Democrats control both houses of Congress for four years, starting in January of 2007. During that time, during those four years -- and it's admittedly the last two years of George W. Bush's administration -- but during that time, 2007 through 2010, no Republican legislation was considered in committee.

Legislation is crafted in committee where the majority is in control. And particularly in the House where spending bills originate, the Ways and Means Committee, and all the other committees, no Republican legislation was considered. Pelosi didn't even consider Republican legislation. The idea that Republicans have any responsibility congressionally for the spending that occurred in this country starting in 2007 is simply not possible. Pelosi didn't permit it. Pelosi and Steny Hoyer and Debbie Wasserman Schultz, they ran the House back then, they didn't permit it. Even now the Democrats still control the Senate and the White House.

So from 2007 to 2010 the Democrats had the House and the Senate, then they got the White House, and for two years they had the White House, the House, and the Senate, after two years of total control of Congress. So the Democrats had total control of Congress for four years. Two of those years they also had the White House. Those two years are the first two years of Obama. That's when all of this deficit spending started. That's health care, the stimulus, that's when Obama's spending took root. And there's this thing called the baseline in the budget. If you're new to the program, let me do this very briefly. I'm not gonna bother explaining why to you now, just accept this 'cause I'm stuck for time here. Every year of the federal budget item by item automatically is slated to go up by a certain percentage. I don't know what it is 'cause it changes from department to department, but it's not based on any previous year's spending.

There's a built-in increase every year regardless whether the department in question needs it or not, which is why at the end of every budget year you'll see advertisements for food stamps from the agriculture department. They want to make sure that they get or have a reason to get more money. Anyway, it doesn't really matter because they're gonna get it anyway. The baseline could be as high as 10% in some departments. It could be as high as 3% in others. So let's say the Department of Defense, just to pick one here, say the baseline increase for a particular year is scheduled to go up 8% because that's what the law has been written by the previous Congress. And let's say defense spending only goes up 4%. That's when the Democrats start talking about cuts. Even though the increase was 4% instead of ten, they call that a cut when it's a 4% increase.

Every year the federal budget is slated to grow by a minimum of three to five percent. How did that happen? Look at the stimulus. Obama's stimulus of $800 billion, basically, raised the baseline of federal spending just in that one piece of legislation by $800 billion. Once it's spent, it has to be spent every year again. Now, maybe not the same way. There hasn't been a second stimulus of that size, but it still gets spent. It's etched in stone into the budget. So the Democrats have been in charge of the Senate from 2007. They were in charge of the House and Senate from 2007 through 2010. In 2009 and 2010, Obama was president. And even now the Democrats control the Senate and the White House, and no law can be passed without the approval from both those bodies. The Republicans controlling the House can't stop anything.

So now, after five years with Democrats in control of two-thirds or more of the government, only somebody genuinely ignorant, or a liar, would think Republicans or conservatives have any responsibility for the current state of affairs. The Republicans haven't had the power to implement their own ideas. The Democrats have not even presented a budget the past three years. Only the Republicans have. Paul Ryan, the past two years, has been the author. And you see what happens to him. And as I said in the last half hour, whenever the Republicans present a budget that has some reductions in spending, the Democrats start talking about potential government shutdowns, and that's when Republicans cave. Oh, no, they don't want to be blamed for that. Not after what happened in 1995.

Now, here are some numbers for you: On January 3rd, 2007, the day the Democrats took control of both houses of Congress, the Dow Jones Industrial Average closed at 12,621. The unemployment rate on January 3rd, 2007 was 4.6%. The gross domestic product, the economic output for the previous quarter was 3.5%. The economy had just set a record of 52 straight months of job creation: 52 straight months of new jobs every month in the 52 months prior to January 2007. Twenty-six million Americans were on food stamps on January 3rd, 2007.

That number has doubled now. The Social Security program took in something in the neighborhood of $100 billion more than it paid out in 2007. The national debt was approaching $9 trillion. What is it now? Well, the Dow is about the same. It's over 12,000 to 13,255, but that's just recently. For most of the past years the Dow was way down and people were in panic over it. The unemployment rate in January 2007 was 4.6%. Today it's 8.3%, and actually in the 9%'s. GDP in January 2007 was 3.5%. Now it's 1.8%.

In January 2007, the economy had just set a record of 52 straight months of job creation. We're into three straight years of job losses since Obama took office. The Social Security program is now spending more than it takes in, and the national debt is approaching $17 trillion. It was $9 trillion in January of 2007. And four out of the five years -- four out of the last five years -- Democrats have had majorities in the legislative and executive branches. There is no intellectual case that can be made that Republicans are the authors of all this spending or the reason for the economic collapse.

There isn't one Republican policy that's been implemented here, not one conservative policy that's been implemented! And Social Security, for the first time ever, is spending more than it is taking in. We have a $16 trillion national debt. GDP is 2% at best. (It's really around 1.5% and falling.) Our debt is rising. There's no way -- it's not mathematically possible, it's not politically true, it is not factually accurate -- to say that all of this decline (all the bad news) has anything to do with conservatives or Republicans.

They just haven't had enough power, and they haven't had the ability to stop any of this. Now, some of you might say (impression), "Well, Rush, it's not that they don't have the ability. They don't have the guts!" Well, that may be true, too. But regardless, they haven't been able to stop it even if they had wanted to. We can argue about whether they want to or not another day. But even if they'd wanted to, they haven't been able to.

While I agree with Rush, I do blame republican US senators for not denying unanimous consents. So much legislation can be stopped if senators just have to actually vote on it. But they’re all in the tank or are co-opted immediately.

They should pay no more attention to Mitch McConnell. He’s not their boss. He’s merely another senator from a different state. And he’s a sucky tactician.

The house could stop the spending tomorrow.

Lest we forget, many Republicans in the House and Senate were there during the George W. Bush administration when spending went out of control and the power, size, and intrusiveness of the government expanded rapidly. They didn't find it politically expedient to act like fiscal Conservatives then, no reason to think they will now.

No, no, you are wrong, President Bush did use his veto pen after the rats took over and that is a fact. He did not use it before, because he got what he wanted. Another fact

Did you miss that we only have the House? Dingy Harry won’t even let the bills go through the senate. It’s easy to talk when you are on the outside

Im sorry but Rush had me reaching for the barf bag with his excuse making for the republicans in congress. He sounded like a slobbering republican version of Axelrod. I consider him an establishment enabler. No matter how the establishment shits on conservatives Rush is there cheerleading for them in the end. As long as folks like him do that there will never be change in the party and conservatives will remain shunned by the republicans.

I was able to listen to Rush to hear this today. I don’t understand why the GOP and the RNC don’t pound on this every single day. All I hear from the left was how horrible the 8 years were under Bush . . . but they holler when you bring up it didn’t get bad until Jan. 2007 after Pelosi and Reid took over Congress.

That’s simply because they don’t want to acknowledge reality.

“Conservatives” threw a tantrum in 2006 and handed this country over to the Democrats. We have now paid for it for 6 long years...and will continue to pay for much longer.

They were warned, and didn’t care. With the proof in front of their eyes, they simply deny. They are being warned of another four years of Obama and still don’t care, they would rather the nation suffer.

It was a horrible mistake to turn their backs on the Republicans then, and an unforgivable mistake not to rally around them now. The Republicans at their worst are preferable to Democrats.

Democrats, especially Obama, have to go.

I’ll never forget the hell that was raised over 44 billion in earmarks passed by the Repubs.

Punishing them for that has cost us over 44 THOUSAND billion...

Just damn.

“And your party will be able to do everything you want them, to do.”

I assume thats a question?

Of course not but my party would at least try.... or would collaborate less.

“Conservatives” threw a tantrum in 2006

Yes, I remember the big huff they had over the October Surprise (mentioned in Rush's explanation here in fact) which was Mark Foley.

Now, why is it again conservatives so mad at the GOP over this stupid story?

Wow...the right was putty in MSM hands.

Now, why is it again conservatives so mad at the GOP over this stupid story?

They were looking for any excuse to stab Repubs in the back. Now we have DADT repealed and queers attacking Christians...with no repercussions.

Rush’s whole point was that without budgets, the House has no way to restrain spending without shutting down the government.

Newt and the Republicans learned the hard way what a stupid political tactic that is. It would just hand the House back to the Dems...nothing motivates Dem voters more than taking away their “stuff”, and a shutdown gives the MSM/DNC the perfect opportunity to paint the Repubs as callous bastards.

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.