Friday, February 1st, 2013 and is filed under Blog, Debt
Not only did the Obama administration help instal the Muslim Brotherhood as the governing body in Egypt, they are now planning to send them F-16 fighter jets and Abrams tanks. Their leader, Mohammad Morsi, recently said ‘Jews were bloodsuckers and descendants of apes and pigs.’
Outside of Washington, we would call Rand Paul’s effort to block the transfer commonsense. But in Washington, this is considered a crazy idea, opposed by even the majority of Republicans.
Rand Paul submitted an amendment to the ridiculous 4-month debt ceiling increase, which would have banned this dangerous transfer of weaponry to our enemies. Only 19 Republicans supported it and not one single Democrat.
Here is a list of 26 Republicans who supported funding for the Muslim Bros. And we’re supposed to believe they desire to cut spending!
Thursday, January 24th, 2013 and is filed under Blog, Videos
Most of our elected Republican leaders are filled with the ranks of milquetoast double-talkers who stand for nothing. It’s refreshing to watch our few conservative champions in action. Here are two videos of two different conservatives who excelled yesterday in their duties. Rand Paul showed the senior senators how to grill Hilliary on Benghazi and Rep. Tom McClintock eloquently deracinated the entire premise of the House-passed debt ceiling plan.
This is what we are looking is prospective candidates this year.
There is one thing that Republicans of all stripes agree upon vis-à-vis our election goals: we must win back control of the Senate. To that end, we must run aggressive campaigns against all red state Democrats, including Joe Manchin in West Virginia. Why should he be let off the hook in a state where Obama is very unpopular?
Senator Rand Paul thinks so. That’s why he is running ads against him, hitting him for voting against cutting off aid to Egypt, Libya, and Pakistan. Not only does this reflect good policy; it’s good politics as well, especially in a state like West Virginia.
Take a look at Paul’s ad against Manchin:
A pretty good ad, no?
Well, in another vivid demonstration of what it means to run across the aisle, Lindsey Graham joined the Manchin campaign on a conference call blasting Paul’s attack ad: (via CQ)
A deepening rivalry over foreign policy between Republican Sens. Lindsey Graham and Rand Paul burst onto the national stage this week when Graham of South Carolina decided to defend an incumbent West Virginia Democrat against Paul’s attacks.
After Paul of Kentucky launched TV ads through his political action committee against three Democratic senators up for reelection this year, Graham Tuesday joined Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., on a campaign conference call to dispute the ads’ contention that Manchin’s support for foreign aid to Libya, Egypt and Pakistan is not in the country’s best interest.
On that call, Graham said: “Rand Paul’s a good man. I like working with him on entitlement reform, but he has a little different worldview than I do.”
Here’s the question we must all cogitate when thinking about our foreign policy positions. How can we draw a sharp distinction with Obama on foreign policy when we have a prominent Republican ‘out-Obamaing’ Obama on the Arab Spring?
The answer is that Lindsey Graham is up for reelection next cycle in conservative
The Senate met late Friday night into early Saturday morning for the last time before the November elections. And what a way to end this disastrous session.
The Senate overwhelmingly passed the continuing budget resolution which funds the government through March 27, 2013. As we’ve noted all along, this bill increases spending, funds Obamacare, and consummates Obama’s gutting of welfare reform by reauthorizing the TANF program without any restrictions. The CR passed 62-30 with the help of 12 Republicans:
Alexander, L. (TN)
Brown, Scott (MA)
Hutchison, K. (TX)
Murkowski, L. (AK)
Before passing the CR, the Senate finally voted on Rand Paul’s amendment to cut off foreign aid for Pakistan, Libya, and Egypt. Only 10 Republicans voted for it!
Over the past few months, Senator Rand Paul has been trying to get Harry Reid to accede to a fair and simple request. All he wants is an up-or-down vote on cutting off aid to Pakistan, Egypt, and Libya. In the case of Libya and Egypt, we are talking about governments that serve no American interest and whom are either aligned with Iran or Al-Qaeda. In the case of Pakistan, they are holding Dr. Shakil Afridi, who helped U.S. forces track down and kill Osama bin Laden.
Supporters of continuing aid to these unsavory nations argue that we need to pay tribute to them in order to ensure that they remain friendly to the U.S. Well, this strategy worked when we had leaders like Mubarak in Egypt, Musharraf in Pakistan, and yes, even Gaddafi in Libya. They all had a vested interest in fighting the Islamic crazies. Now, thanks to the very supporters of foreign aid to these nations, we have the Islamist “Arab Spring” governments. They already hate us. Why give them $2-3 billion in aid? Should we also give Iran some aid so we can provide stability?
Finally, Reid agreed to hold a vote yesterday on the assumption that it would be defeated anyway. Guess who blocked it? John McCain!
Thursday, May 17th, 2012 and is filed under Blog, Taxes
Yesterday, the Senate voted on a pair of budgets that would balance by 2017. The first one offered by Rand Paul would have cut $11.1 trillion in spending from the baseline. Specifically, it would have eliminated 4 entire departments, enacted premium support Medicare, raised the retirement age of Social Security, block granted Medicaid and welfare programs, and enacted a 17% flat tax.
Mike Lee’s budget cut roughly the same, but put more of an emphasis on entitlement reform than discretionary cuts. It was modeled after the Heritage Foundation’s plan “Saving the American Dream.” It would scrap the entire tax system, including the payroll tax, and institute a unified flat income-based tax on consumption for both businesses and individuals.
The point of these budgets was not that every Republican should agree with the precise policy solutions to every issue. Rather it was an attempt by the part of two stalwarts to show a viable path to limiting government, weaning dependency, and balancing the budget in a timely fashion. Sadly, they only received 17 and 17 votes respectively.
I am finding the same problem when researching candidates running for Congress. Every single Republican candidates professes support for a balanced budget. Yet, when pressed for specific cuts, many of them equivocate. This is not an enigma. There are only a few ways to balance the budget within a reasonable time frame. Lee and Paul presented us with two scenarios. The fact that the majority of the Republicans Conference opposed those budgets shows that they are not serious about supporting a balanced budget. Then again, we knew that already.
Friday, May 4th, 2012 and is filed under Blog, Issues
There are some issues that transcend ideological boundaries. For example, issues like eminent domain and the “do not call list” generated such a public outcry that both parties stepped in to clamor for public support on those issues. Another such issue is the TSA – or at least it should be.
Even liberals I have spoken to hate the TSA. The Founders would roll over in their grave if they witnessed the crass violations of our liberties at airports. It’s as if we no longer have constitutional rights at airports. Worse yet, we are not even safer after all of their prohibitions, scans, and pat downs. Due to the fact that they search for items instead of terrorists, we are still exposed to the threat of Islamic jihadists on planes. It’s not like their “no fly list” is up to date. As such, this is an issue that is ripe for Republicans to harness and run with. As usual, it’s Senator Rand Paul who wants to lead.
Instead of parsing words over some minutia, Rand Paul is saying in plain English that he wants to end the TSA and return security screenings back to the responsibility of the private sector, which has a bigger stake in running the process more efficiently and safely. Rand Paul wrote the following in an email to supporters:
The Fiscal Year 2013 budget season is right around the corner as we await the much-anticipated Ryan budget over the next few weeks. However, a few conservative senators decided to get a head start on the process by announcing their blueprint to balance the budget in just 5 years. Yesterday, Rand Paul, along with Mike Lee and Jim DeMint, introduced a stellar budget proposal, which achieves a budget surplus by FY 2017.
Discretionary spending: Eliminates 4 entire departments: Commerce, Energy, Education, and HUD. Several agencies within the USDA and the DOI would be eliminated. It also privatizes the TSA. Most other discretionary programs and agencies are frozen at 2008 spending levels. But the sharp cuts of the sequester on the military are eliminated. Dodd-Frank and Davis-Bacon are completely repealed.
Entitlements: Medicare is transformed from an open-ended benefit to a defined-contribution premium support model, which is similar to the current health insurance options that are presented to members of Congress. Social Security retirement age is raised and growth of benefits is slowed for higher-income. There is no private account option (the one thing I don’t like). Medicaid, SCHIP, food stamps, and child nutrition programs are block granted to the states.
Budget balance: Overall, this proposal would spend $11.1 billion less than the CBO alternative budget baseline over 10 years. Paul envisions a $579 billion surplus by the end of the 1-year budget frame.
Wednesday, February 15th, 2012 and is filed under Blog
Our voices are finally being heard – sort of. When we started voicing opposition to the highway bill there were few conservatives speaking out against it, and even fewer members of the House who were willing to oppose it. Now, there is so much opposition to the bill that John Boehner was forced to delay the vote on the highway bill, which was previously scheduled for today:
Boehner (R-Ohio) told his conference Wednesday morning that it was “more important that we do it right than that we do it fast” in explaining his decision, a clear signal GOP leaders lack the votes to win approval of the package.
“Given the volume of amendments and the need for a full, fair, open and transparent process, we may not finish energy/infrastructure this week,” Boehner told his conference, according to a source in the room. “If we need more time to debate and consider amendments, that’s perfectly fine with me. It’s more important that we do it right than that we do it fast.”
The bottom line is that Boehner and McCarthy are lacking the votes. They plan to suspend consideration of the bill until after next week’s President’s Day recess.