So much for the narrative that the GOP is simply "The Party of No" http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703956604576110431794539522.html Here's another idea http://www.roadmap.republicans.budget.house.gov/Plan/ Meanwhile, Leader Reid calls $32B off of the 2011 budget as "draconian" and "unworkable" http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/141985-reid-blasts-house-gop-proposal-as-draconian-and-unworkable
It's nice to see the public is getting on board http://thehill.com/polls/142369-voters-oppose-raising-the-143t-debt-ceiling
Remove the attack on Federal oversight of education and there's some decent points there. This is nothing more than the same decades-old attack on all Americans who are not insanely rich. Nothing here to even talk about. This is why they are called the party of NO! He's correct, so what's your point?
It's a bit early to say they've shed that identity. The GOP needs to pass some legislation with their own ideas. The GOP is in a tough spot with the budget: - Conservatives are mad that they didn't meet their $100 billion goal - Liberals are mad that public services will get cut. - Moderates are mostly on board until the cuts affect them personally. If they balance the budget it may save the financial future of the country but it may cost them the election with all the sacrifices people are forced to make.
One side would like to try to balance the budget; the other side thinks $32B is "draconian". I'm no Republican, but they're the ones trying to be responsible. It really does look like they learned their lesson from when they last had the majority.
It must be hard trying to pass legislation with a 2/3 majority, huh? At least they won't have to worry about filibusters if they can get it that high. Wait, that sounds familiar.
Again, there has to be a zone of agreement. Right now, the Democrats are saying cutting $32B from a budget that's increased 28% since 2008 is "draconian" and "unworkable".
You must be speaking about the Democrats, since they hold the Senate and the White House while the GOP only holds the House. At least this House will pass a budget. It's more than the 2010 House did.
I guess that is confusing since it wasn't actually passed. Would you want a 32$B cut in the budget to a permanent thing? Or would you accept if the only option was paying off the debt, and then the services went back to a level where they are now assuming they did not further increase the deficit. That might still be too vague.
I want to continue cutting and reducing the size of the government. There is nothing magical that says we have to tax at X% of the GDP just in order to spend it. Let's get the size of the government as low as possible while still providing the functionality the government was originally designed for... and keep people's hard-earned money in their own pockets.
Give up their perpetual goal of crushing poor people and minorities. If conservatives could run all their proposals through a filter that removed seething hate from the equation, some of the proposals wouldn't be half bad.
