Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 56

Thread: More Hypocrisy from the Fiscal Hawks

  1. #1

    More Hypocrisy from the Fiscal Hawks

    [B]GOP eager to scuttle defense cuts[/B]

    By: Seung Min Kim
    December 14, 2011 02:14 PM EST

    Congressional Republicans are still full throttle in their efforts to dismantle the automatic spending cuts that would be particularly painful to the Pentagon.

    A quartet of Senate defense hawks announced on Wednesday they’ll introduce legislation to undo hundreds of billions of dollars in defense cuts by replacing it with budget savings elsewhere. Those across-the-board cuts were mandated by the supercommittee’s inability to strike a deal slashing the nation’s deficit by at least $1.2 trillion over the next decade.

    “We wanted to make it clear what our intention is so that there is absolutely no doubt, in anybody’s mind, that the across-the-board sequesters to defense spending will not have to happen,” said Arizona Sen. Jon Kyl, one of six Republicans who served on the supercommittee.

    “It offends the hell out of me that we would even consider that,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) of the defense cuts. “These men and women have really gone out of our way to protect all of us.”

    Flanked by Graham and Republican Sens. John McCain of Arizona and Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire, Kyl said the spending cuts that would offset the sequester would be a mix of specific reductions identified during the supercommittee negotiations, the deficit talks led by Vice President Joe Biden and other not-as-well-known proposals, such as a plan drafted by Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.).

    The plan could also include revenue-raisers identified by Republicans during the supercommittee negotiations, such as spectrum auctions, land sales and fees for Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae – which total a little over $100 billion, Kyl said.

    The automatic budget cuts, to be split evenly between defense and domestic programs, were designed to pressure the 12 members of the supercommittee to reach a $1.2 trillion deficit-reduction deal, but failed to do so and set in motion the automatic cuts — a sequence of events that McCain derided as an “idiotic process.”

    To be sure, GOP efforts to roll back the defense cuts face an uphill struggle in the Democratic-led Senate and at the White House. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has said the automatic cuts should stay in place, and the Obama administration has vowed to veto efforts to rolling back or tweaking those cuts.

    Graham on Wednesday called the veto threat “twisted.”

    “I can’t conceive a president of the United States, the commander-in-chief, threatening to veto an effort to save the Defense Department from ruin,” Graham said. “I would expect the commander-in-chief to come to the aid of those who are going to get devastated.”

    The Republican senators expect to introduce their bill when Congress reconvenes in January. The automatic cuts don’t kick in until the beginning of 2013, but the lawmakers said they need to act about a year in advance because Defense Secretary Leon Panetta would need about that much time to plan for those budget cuts.

    Some Democrats want to avoid the automatic cuts, too, but haven’t been as vocal about it as the Republicans who want to do away with the defense sequester. That’s where Kyl thinks he can pick off some Democratic support.

    “I think, in reality, there is as much fervor on the Democratic side to prevent the across-the-board to nondefense discretionary spending,” said Kyl, who said he’s discussed his proposal with Democrats. “I suspect [they] would be perfectly supportive of ways to do that reduction more intelligently as well.”

  2. #2
    isn't this the deal they agreed to in the summer?

  3. #3
    Here is the most insulting part of this article:

    [I]“It offends the hell out of me that we would even consider that,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) of the defense cuts. [B]“These men and women have really gone out of our way to protect all of us.”[/B][/I]

    This quote is an abomination on so many levels. Graham knows that the soldiers and their loved ones, would see very little of this money. Most of this tax money goes to defense companies who sell weapons to other countries and private companies that are payed to build infrastructure in other countries.

    We have seen how soldiers are treated, especially the wounded, when they arrive back home. Graham and the politicians that use sympathy for the soldiers to rape the tax payers are a disgrace.

    Keep waving the flag in the name of fascism

  4. #4
    [QUOTE=intelligentjetsfan;4276984]Keep waving the flag in the name of fascism[/QUOTE]

    :rolleyes:

  5. #5
    All League
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East of the Jordan, West of the Rock of Gibraltar
    Posts
    4,787
    [QUOTE=intelligentjetsfan;4276984]Here is the most insulting part of this article:

    [I]“It offends the hell out of me that we would even consider that,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) of the defense cuts. [B]“These men and women have really gone out of our way to protect all of us.”[/B][/I]

    This quote is an abomination on so many levels. Graham knows that the soldiers and their loved ones, would see very little of this money. Most of this tax money goes to defense companies who sell weapons to other countries and private companies that are payed to build infrastructure in other countries.

    We have seen how soldiers are treated, especially the wounded, when they arrive back home. Graham and the politicians that use sympathy for the soldiers to rape the tax payers are a disgrace.

    Keep waving the flag in the name of fascism[/QUOTE]

    That jumped out at me, too

    Someone should propose the same dollar amount cuts with zero-manpower cuts and see if that placates Senator Graham.

  6. #6
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    18,409
    [QUOTE=intelligentjetsfan;4276984]Here is the most insulting part of this article:

    [I]“It offends the hell out of me that we would even consider that,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) of the defense cuts. [B]“These men and women have really gone out of our way to protect all of us.”[/B][/I]

    This quote is an abomination on so many levels. Graham knows that the soldiers and their loved ones, would see very little of this money. Most of this tax money goes to defense companies who sell weapons to other countries and private companies that are payed to build infrastructure in other countries.

    We have seen how soldiers are treated, especially the wounded, when they arrive back home. Graham and the politicians that use sympathy for the soldiers to rape the tax payers are a disgrace.

    Keep waving the flag in the name of fascism[/QUOTE]

    Totally Agreed. However...






    I find this NO Different than people screaming about needing eduaction dollars when many teachers in NY make 120K, summers off, retire in their 50's and almost NONE of the money makes the classroom other than padding public union teacher comforts available to NO ONE outside civil service.

  7. #7
    [QUOTE=southparkcpa;4277077]Totally Agreed. However...






    I find this NO Different than people screaming about needing eduaction dollars when many teachers in NY make 120K, summers off, retire in their 50's and almost NONE of the money makes the classroom other than padding public union teacher comforts available to NO ONE outside civil service.[/QUOTE]

    Lindsay "creepy" Graham is a JAG Officer and continues to Sam on a regular basis.

    Try to stick to the subject.

  8. #8
    Of course it's hypocrisy, but it's absolutely no different than the President appointing a bipartisan commission to deal with the same issue and throwing a great plan in the garbage the same day his commission released it to the public.

    We have a plan, the President commissioned it and the President has failed to lead on it.

    We have divided government and a President who prefers to paint the opposition as obstructionist rather than leading on a true bipartisan plan that his administration commissioned. You simply can’t get a deal without entitlement reform and tax reform, something Democrats in Congress are completely opposed to and a Democratic President is unwilling to lead on.
    Last edited by Winstonbiggs; 12-15-2011 at 05:56 AM.

  9. #9
    All League
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East of the Jordan, West of the Rock of Gibraltar
    Posts
    4,787
    [URL="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203388804576616841644878336.html"]http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203388804576616841644878336.html[/URL]

    Mitt Romney October 8 2011


    [QUOTE]

    Mr. Romney, who leads the field of GOP candidates in most public opinion surveys, spoke before 200 or so cadets at the Citadel military academy in Charleston. His comments were the most expansive of any Republican candidate to date on U.S. military spending and the nation's posture abroad.

    He proposed a dramatic increase in naval shipbuilding, to as many as 15 new ships a year, up from the current rate of nine a year, as well as the deployment of a full national ballistic-missile defense system.

    The speech came a day after Mr. Romney proposed increasing U.S. active-duty forces by 100,000 people and boosting noncombat defense spending to 4% of gross domestic product, up from about 3.8% now. That increase would amount to roughly $30 billion more in defense spending a year.

    [/QUOTE]

  10. #10
    [QUOTE=Winstonbiggs;4277407]Of course it's hypocrisy, but it's absolutely no different than the President appointing a bipartisan commission to deal with the same issue and throwing a great plan in the garbage the same day his commission released it to the public.

    We have a plan, the President commissioned it and the President has failed to lead on it. [/QUOTE]

    that's not actually what happened WB

    the commission's plan was never agreed to by committee members. If that had occurred, the congress and President would have been bound to put it into action.

    What actually happened was the commission fell apart, they could not come to a vote that would pass, and the 2 non partisan leaders released their best ideas as kind of a side project. Hey look at this failed plan sorta thing.

  11. #11
    [QUOTE=bitonti;4279116]that's not actually what happened WB

    the commission's plan was never agreed to by committee members. If that had occurred, the congress and President would have been bound to put it into action.

    What actually happened was the commission fell apart, they could not come to a vote that would pass, and the 2 non partisan leaders released their best ideas as kind of a side project. Hey look at this failed plan sorta thing.[/QUOTE]

    Politics is based on bending public opinion. It's called leadership. When Pelesoi and Reid called the plan DOA the day it was released the President was unwilling to put any political capital on the line to get Democratic support behind it. The reason he couldn't do that is Congressional Democrats think entitlement reform is bad for Democrats. That's no different than Republicans thinking taxes are bad for Republicans. Ultimately the President has to lead. This President is not a leader he is a follower.

    Contrast that to Reagan who was able to pass tax reform with the support of Bill Bradley and Dick Gephardt two liberal Democrats. Tax reform was important to Reagan and he was able to not just bend public opinion but get his own party and the opposition on board. While Obama is willing to negiotate with Republicans, he has no stomach to bring his own party on board. This is a complete failure of leadership or a political ploy to make Republicans look like they are unwilling to compromise when in fact the Democrats in Congress are the ones who have dug in.
    Last edited by Winstonbiggs; 12-17-2011 at 05:35 AM.

  12. #12
    [QUOTE=Winstonbiggs;4279211]Politics is based on bending public opinion. It's called leadership. When Pelesoi and Reid called the plan DOA the day it was released the President was unwilling to put any political capital on the line to get Democratic support behind it. The reason he couldn't do that is Congressional Democrats think entitlement reform is bad for Democrats. That's no different than Republicans thinking taxes are bad for Republicans. Ultimately the President has to lead. This President is not a leader he is a follower.

    Contrast that to Reagan who was able to pass tax reform with the support of Bill Bradley and Dick Gephardt two liberal Democrats. Tax reform was important to Reagan and he was able to not just bend public opinion but get his own party and the opposition on board. While Obama is willing to negiotate with Republicans, he has no stomach to bring his own party on board. This is a complete failure of leadership or a political ploy to make Republicans look like they are unwilling to compromise [B]when in fact the Democrats in Congress are the ones who have dug in[/B].[/QUOTE]

    With respect, both sides have dug in and are playing politics. The republican leaders in congress have been on record from the jump saying that their goal is to make this president a one-term president thus every action that they take is measure through that prism. The democrats play the same game too. But please dont waste the bandwith saying the democrats are soley responsible for the log jams in congress. Both parties are a disgrace and have sold out the American people to special interests looooooooooooooong ago.
    Last edited by intelligentjetsfan; 12-17-2011 at 10:11 AM.

  13. #13
    [QUOTE=intelligentjetsfan;4279243]With respect, both sides have dug in and are playing politics.[/quote]

    Agreed.

    [QUOTE]The republican leaders in congress have been on record from the jump saying that their goal is to make this president a one-term president.[/QUOTE]

    So? Wouldn't you agree the (D) would also have the goal of making any (R) a one-term President as well?

    [QUOTE]The democrats play the same game too. [/QUOTE]

    Ah, see, I should read the whole post before cutting it up to reply.

    [QUOTE]But please dont waste the bandwith saying the democrats are soley responsible for the log jams in congress.[/QUOTE]

    Thye're not. Both sides are. It's the nature of a two-option-only-system.

    [quote]Both parties are a disgrace and have sold out the American people to special interests looooooooooooooong ago.[/QUOTE]

    Agreed.

  14. #14
    All League
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East of the Jordan, West of the Rock of Gibraltar
    Posts
    4,787
    .
    Don't expect a Romney Admistration to balance the budget. He has already been bought and paid for by the Military Industrial Complex. And they expect results.


    [QUOTE]
    MITT ROMNEY (R): "Yesterday, he announced a major program to reduce the capacity of our military. Inexcusable, and unthinkable, and it must be reversed. We have to protect our military."
    [/QUOTE]


    Video and Transcript

    [URL="http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/jan-june12/campaign_01-06.html"]http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/jan-june12/campaign_01-06.html[/URL]

  15. #15
    [QUOTE=Winstonbiggs;4279211]Politics is based on bending public opinion. It's called leadership. [/QUOTE]

    Obama spent most of his political capital getting healthcare reform passed.

    and a word about public opinion, people want Jobs not deficit reduction. A vocal minority cares about the debt, most people have other concerns.

  16. #16
    Thrilled to see house republicans and The Tea Party forcing the issue and successful in getting some cuts in Washington.
    [SIZE="3"] Congratulations!!!![/SIZE]

    Hopefully they do it again real soon no matter who the next President is.

  17. #17
    All League
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East of the Jordan, West of the Rock of Gibraltar
    Posts
    4,787
    [QUOTE=cedk;4316488]Thrilled to see house republicans and The Tea Party forcing the issue and successful in getting some cuts in Washington.
    [SIZE="3"] Congratulations!!!![/SIZE]

    Hopefully they do it again real soon no matter who the next President is.[/QUOTE]

    What?

  18. #18
    Was this not all started by the house refusing to increase the debt.Yes it was!

  19. #19
    All League
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East of the Jordan, West of the Rock of Gibraltar
    Posts
    4,787
    [QUOTE=cedk;4316710]Was this not all started by the house refusing to increase the debt.Yes it was![/QUOTE]

    And how does that work with Republicans refusing to cut the Pentagon's budget?

  20. #20
    [QUOTE=Buster;4316713]And how does that work with Republicans refusing to cut the Pentagon's budget?[/QUOTE]

    What!

    They made the deal to cut defense. They forced this to happen by not raising
    the debt limit for Obama.:whipper:

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us