Boehner & Cantor are without a doubt the worst (s)peaker and Majority (l)eader of the House the Republicans could have chosen.
They have their leadership position because the Tea Party PUT them there and they cowardly refuse to strip funding for the $105 BILLION built into oSamaCare and more importantly repeal oSamaCare.
Their leadership will ensure the reelection of oSama.
I have a bunch of emails I saved from Cantor since the election in '10 where their claims about how much they were going to cut the budget went from reducing spending to '08 levels, down to cutting 200 billion, down to cutting 4 billion.
Read in order you can see them totally giving up on serious cuts to the budget over the course of only a few months. We are truly screwed if this is the best we can get for leadership in the Republican party.
See House Rules and Procedures. It’s got nothing to do with cowardice or even political practicality. As for the “oSama” quip, that kind of nonsense only discredits legitimate opposition as wingnut. I don’t like Obama either but to equate him to Osama is abject nonsense.
They simply don’t have the ability to do that since the money was already appropriated last year. They can prevent any further spending. They can start defunding it next year/congress, but there is little they can do about it now.
http://biggovernment.com/eistook/2011/02/18/the-dirty-little-secret-about-de-funding-obamacare/
Everybody has a sob story … anyone can protest any cut on some level.
The problem just seems that despite all their claims to the contrary even the Republicans think all of this is somehow optional … that fiscal responsibility is a platform platitude and NOT an actual management method.
In my house, when their is not money, things to not magically get paid for …
… until the really learn that we remain on the Fiscal Doom Express.
Do you really believe the shit that you just typed, or are you simply not versed in the political process…?
What part of “already appropriated” is so hard to understand?
You can’t go backwards in time and change what’s already happened.
It’s got nothing to do with Republicans changing their tune. It’s not even about the Tea Party.
http://www.myheritage.org/news/heritages-istook-testifies-about-defunding-obamacare/
Cantor is a turd of the highest order, and Boner doesn’t even have the balls to pronounce his last name properly.
Well sir let me put it this way: if I typed it I certainly believe it!
The rule has been waived many TIMES before in the U.S. History (since the 1800’s) and remember they are throwing you ‘bones’ it is always tomorrow! When do you think they will ever start this process, they are dancing about 6 million in cuts and we are running 4 billion dollar deficit per day.
Take a stand, it is scary the weak leadership that is in D.C.!
His point was “belief” is all well and good but if you don’t actually grasp reality than the belief is subject to skepticism.
It’s impossible to defund something for which money has already been appropriated. I know it’s a difficult concept to grasp, but it is reality.
Going down the road, defunding may be a reality but calling the Speaker a coward because he can’t make the sun rise in the West is kind of silly.
The “osamacare” thing doesn’t really add to your credibility.
LOL, assume you never heard of a ‘Continuing Resolution’ to defund appropriated monies (aren’t they dancing to the $61B cut?).
Therefore spend $25 and post your statement to "askheritage.org’
You don’t have a clue what you’re talking about do you?
There are two types of funding in ObamaCare: direct appropriations made by the law itself and separate discretionary spending necessary to execute the law’s myriad provisions. Because it is a type of budget bill, a continuing resolution would only deal with the discretionary spending needed to execute the law, not the money the original ObamaCare law appropriated.
Which of these do you think covers the $105b?
It is disappointing as Marco Rubio has pointed out.
Business as usual.
Obama care funding can easily be cut if it is not spent, which I am led to believe the bulk of it has not. Getting Obama to sign it, well that is not likely.
Not in a CR. As you point out it’s unlikely Obama will sign a final budget that does that. Never underestimate Michelle Bachman’s willingness to pander/lie to Tea Party conservatives and cynically fight for something she should know will never happen.
That said don’t confuse the bulk of the $1t+ over 10 years, which has yet to be appropriated, with the bulk of the money already appropriated. More significantly if you don’t think the government can figure out how to spend the money already appropriated…well $10 will get you $20 if they don’t.
Realistically there isn’t much Republicans in the house or writ large can do about this until the next Congress.
Please watch your words, no gutter or locker room language, no name calling, not even toward the politicians. This is your only warning.
Boehner is a coward!
NOW you’ve done it! You’re gonna make him cry… :rolleyes:
wrong, John - yet again…
B_C
wrong B_C…yet again.
See how easy that is? Unless you’re going to explain how Heritage and FreeRepublic are wrong also a statement like that and .50 cents will get you a cup of coffee.
Honest question for GJ:
Someone claimed on the radio today (I was unusually out driving around early afternoon) that while the rules were there, they had already been waived 123 times in this CR for other defunding of other already appropriated amounts. So the question they had on the radio was why can’t they vote to waive the rules again?
All these cutting endeavors are meaningless if entitlements are off the table.
We are now getting more GOP speaking on the merits of cuts to defense, but few have the testicles needed to stand up and talk about cuts to social security and Medicare
There is literally no point in getting cuts if the funds are being redirected to entitlements, which is exactly what happen.
We need an across the board cut in spending in all federal agencies. 100%, no sacred cows, no pet projects. Just get it done without a drop of tax increases to anyone, no matter how much they make.
That is what can save America, not this petty BS we are getting now.
There is an inherent limit to what a CR can do, just like there are inherent limits in what other forms of legislation can do such as an omnibus. A CR is only used for spending going forward. They can certainly not fund further implementation as described above, but to change any rule, you’d need to not only have a vote on the spending element, but you’d also have to have a separate vote on changing the rule, which would also have to be approved by the rules committee. Given the time constraints involved (weeks instead of months) it can’t really be done. Might it have been done in the last congress (123 times) when there was plenty of time? I suppose its possible. Can it be done now that the GOP is in control? Probably not.
Other than that I’d have to see what they were talking about and also what they mean by “defunding”. I’d be skeptical of what someone said/claimed on talk radio.
This is in addition to the requirements inherent in passing both houses of the legislature. Assuming that the claim is correct, it would also require a 60 vote threshold once it came to the Senate. Is that threshold possible to meet? Perhaps. Is it likely? No. What then happens if it fails? What happens in conference? Does implementation then get fully funded in addition to already appropriated funds?
A moral victory in politics is no victory at all.
I’d fully agree that nothing is possible without addressing entitlement spending. The irony is that while you have more Republicans willing to discuss defense cuts, you have more Democrats willing to discuss entitlement spending or at least acknowledging the reality that those need to be addressed. The problem is that both sides are intent on demagoguing the issues. Until both sides are willing to stop the barking, the caravan will roll on…right over the American economy.