Liberals, "Establishment Republicans," and the MSM just don't seem to understand what we conservatives are fighting for, why in the face of the looming "default" (the word, in this case, itself a fraud and misnomer) the TEA party supporters refuse to agree to a "compromise" bill increasing the debt ceiling while extracting minimal--some would say chimerical--future promised cuts in spending and which will solve none of the underlying problems that have brought us to this "precipice."
This battle is NOT about "winning," as the MSM, liberal politicians, and the establishment--inside the Beltway, life-long politician--believe. It's not, or it shouldn't be about who wins the 2012 election, it is about saving this nation from complete and absolute financial meltdown.
America has spent the past fifty years on an ever accelerating spending binge the likes of which the world has never seen. We are now facing a debt of over $14 TRILLION and a proposed by the President and Democrats $16.5 TRILLION. That debt is increasing at a rate of $1.5 TRILLION/ year for the foreseeable future unless something drastic and real isn't done immediately.
Only one suggestion that has been made for dealing with the national debt has any possibility of solving this problem and that solution--suggested by Senator Rand Paul--isn't even being considered. Only his plan encompasses actual cuts in spending. None of the other plans, not Ryan's plan, not Cut, Cap, and Balance, not the Obama-Boehner negotiated plan, not Senator Harry Reid's alleged plan, none of them call for ACTUAL cuts in spending. Everyone of them resorts to the same old mystical math that exists only in Washington, D.C. in which a reduction in the rate of increase of any spending is classified as a "cut."
The current Boehner plan, the plan that the House is debating and attempting to pass today is a sham, an illusion, a band aid intended to give the appearance of being responsible without actually moving to solve the underlying problems. It is an admission that Congress and the White House are incapable of solving our fiscal problems. It is punting the ball and placing the responsibility for solving our problems to a future Congress and hoping that they will be dealing with a different, more reasonable and conservative President.
Throughout this entire folderol, Obama and the Democrats have been very clever both in the way they have negotiated and in the way they have refused to put their own plan forward. In negotiation, one of the most powerful weapons a negotiator has is silence. In tense, difficult negotiations, those in which the two parties have reached a seeming impasse, the first person who speaks, loses.
The best, the most successful negotiators know this and they use it to their advantage. They know that most people abhor a silence. It makes them uncomfortable; they feel pressure to say something and that in turn leads them alter their position just to get a response from the other party.
Republicans have been doing just this. They have been negotiating with themselves as Democrats just sit in stony silence and watch their opponents spontaneously self-destruct. I say "stony silence," but for liberals derision and wild claims made to the press are a suitable substitute. The difference between silence and derision is found in the source of liberal negotiators tactics, the mandates of the Frankfurt School, a Marxist movement which was transported to America just prior to World War II and has dominated leftist ideology and activities over the past century.
The Frankfort School tells Democrats and liberals not to offer any plan, but force the other side to present their plans and then to slap them down repeatedly and forcefully. Hence the lies and false claims that Republicans (especially those evil tea partiers) are being "unreasonable" or that Republicans are "being inflexible," or that Republicans are "endangering our economy."
Let's get the facts straight. Republicans have offered three plans, two of them have passed the House only to be reflexively slapped down by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and his caucus without even being read, considered or brought to the floor for a vote. Now somebody tell me exactly who is being "inflexible" and "unreasonable?" What is in those two plans that causes Harry and his puppet Democrats such fear that they will not even consider them, or allow them to be voted on? Could it possibly be that Harry Reid is fearful that, should a Republican plan actually reach the floor for a vote, the pressure to vote for the plan from their constituents would be so powerful that the Republican plan might actually pass and be sent up to the President?
For Democrats and President Obama this entire battle is about politics, pure and simple. If a Republican plan actually reached President Obama's desk, he would be forced to choose whether to sign it or veto it and allow the nation to default. Everything is calculated to protect Obama from being forced to make a decision . . . which should come as no surprise as Obama has avoided making the tough decisions all of his life.
Republicans . . . and I mean Boehner and the rest need to sit back and demand the Democrats and the President "put up or shut up." Neither party has ever put forward an actual plan. Neither Obama nor the Democrats have put an actual written down plan on the table for dissection, debate and discussion. All anyone has seen from them are empty generalities; promises of cuts with no details or specificity. That is because there is no Democrat plan. Reid and Obama are willing to destroy--in their own words--this economy rather than agree to any of the Republican plans. As usual for Democrats, politics trumps policy or the well-being of our nation.
Republicans have offered and passed two plans and had agreed to a third--negotiated and agreed upon--plan which, at the last minute the President chose to revise in what he knew would be an unacceptable manner, intentionally skewering any possible bi-partisan bill.
Democrats have offered . . . posturing and politically charged rhetoric.
Now those strongest conservatives, those for whom this is not about politics or about protecting their seats in Congress are under assault by those establishment Republicans for whom going along to get along has become a way of life--and a source of income.
"C'mon," they are telling the TEA partiers, "just be reasonable, trust us, agreeing to this deal is the best way for us to achieve our goal of cutting government spending. It is the best way for us to deal with the debt limit crisis and not take the blame."
"It is the WINNING strategy."
Sorry old guard, we're not interested in winning any game and by the way, the last time you came to us with a deal to cut the debt and raise the debt limit, it turned out that those "cuts" were actually increases in spending.
The old adage is "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." We're not falling for the same old smoke and mirrors this time. America has to rein in spending and we must do so with real, substantive and effective cuts in actual spending. No more funny/fuzzy math, no more promised cuts, no more deals with the devil.
The Rand plan, cutting 1% of spending every year for the next 6 years--we're talking actual cuts here, not simply reductions in spending--will return fiscal responsibility to the American budgeting process. Combined with a Balanced Budget Amendment, this proposal would offer the first--and only--chance for America to get back on track.
Mr. Boehner, Mr. Cantor, Mr. Obama, Mr. Reid, Ms. Pelosi--IT'S NOT ABOUT WINNING (unless you're talking about the American people winning) it's about doing what's right. Balancing the budget, cutting the debt and putting America back on the track of fiscal responsibility.
Get with the program!
Long Live Our American Republic!!!