Dedicated to the proposition that Nancy Boyda is a one termer.

Monday, September 24, 2007

Dear Nancy and the Do-Nothing Democrats, How's the Budget Coming Along?

Democrats control both houses of Congress. Yet, they have not been able to send ONE appropriation bill to the President. Not one piece of the budget has made it to his desk. Oh, and the deadline is this coming Sunday.

The first important fact to note here is that the Democrats haven't managed to build a consensus on even ONE bill to send to the President. And, moderate Republicans have proven to be very willing to work with Dems, particularly when it comes to spending, so this means the stuff they want to pass must be really bad.

Point two: Cycle back to January when Nancy Boyda tried to blame Republicans as the reason Kansas military bases took cuts in their projects. Republicans "failed to pass a budget last year" she said.

This is nothing but spin and should be discounted as such, because Democrats in the Senate blocked Republicans from getting the 60 votes needed to pass those bills. A tactic Republicans are no doubt employing now. But, Nancy has establised the precedent that the party in the majority is to blame. Either she wasn't informed enough at the time to understand the tactics, or she was lying to cover her backside, but according to her the Democrats are responsible for the budget getting passed this year.

So, who is Nancy going to be blaming next Monday? My guess is, not herself or her party.

Back to what is likely to happen . . .

Democrats want to drive through spending increases in their pet programs. The way to do that is to get closer to Christmas with no budget, then package their spending increases with "must pass" legislation, like funding for our troops, threaten their Republican colleagues that they will work right through Christmas Day to get enough votes to pass it, AND then dare the President to veto it. Based on the fact President Bush has hardly vetoed anything, they're betting he won't draw a line in the sand on troop funding.


Anonymous said...

"And, moderate Republicans have proven to be very willing to work with Dems"

Too bad there aren't any left in the GOP.

Anonymous said...

"moderate Republicans have proven to be very willing to work with Dems, particularly when it comes to spending" ...

What "moderates" are you talking about? It's the Bush administration and his Congressional supporters who are bankrupting the country. Are you considering Bush a "moderate"? I hope not. I'm a moderate, and we don't want him.

Anonymous said...

You obviously don't follow the United States Senate . . . Ted Stevens, Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, Kay Bailey Hutchinson, Gordon Smith, Kit Bond, Norm Coleman, Pete Domenici, Chuck Grassley, Chuck Hagel, Richard Shelby, Arlen Specter, George Voinivich. That's 13, more than enough moderates to add to the Democrat majority to get to 60 votes (though Stevens appears to be a criminal).

Please comment intelligently next time.

Anonymous said...

Well, since Boyda is in the House, not the Senate, I have no earthy idea what you're talking about.

Anonymous said...

While I agress with your point, someone is stretching on that list of 13. Richard Shelby and Ted Stevens would be shocked to find themselves on a list of "moderates". Pete Domenici and Check Grassley, Kit Bond and Kay Bailey Hutchinson are also generally not associated with moderates.

Anonymous said...

Check the record to see if any of those people ever voted no on a budget bill because it spent too much money. MAYBE Dominici.

As for Moderates in the House, there's a group called the "Tuesday Group" which is a caucus of Moderate Republicans. There are about 25-30 of them. They fund the Main Street Partnership (a Moderate Republican PAC). The Main Street Partnership is backing Lynn Jenkins in the Primary.

Again, please get a clue before commenting.

Anonymous said...

Wow, a whopping 1 in 6 members of the GOP House caucus call themselves Moderates!

*sarcasm* I bet they've got clout! *end sarcasm*

You get a clue.

Anonymous said...

If the litmus test of determining if someone is a moderate or conservative is how they vote on approriations bills, then add Jim Ryun and Todd Tiahrt to the moderate list. Moran occasionally votes against them, so he's a conservative.

Anonymous said...

Jim Ryun voted against more appropriations bills when he was in Congress than Moran did. Check your facts. But that has nothing to do per se with being a moderate or a conservative.

Actually 25-30 moderate Republicans would have clout in the House. The Democrats often lose some of their own members on votes, dealing with the Moderates (and Appropriators) locks up a majority.

And I believe your original point was, there weren't any Moderates left in the GOP . . . you are wrong.

Anonymous said...

Note to Democrats:
Quit crying and actually DO SOMETHING!!!

You are now the majority. It is our turn to blame everything on you!

Anonymous said...

Wow, someone is spouting without researching. One of the biggest beefs against Ryun was that he voted against so many Approps bills because they spent too much. By comparison, Moran never met an Approps bill he didn't like. Since Tiahrt is on Approps, he does vote for nearly all of them...some would say he has to. The validity of that can be argued either way. But saying Moran opposes more Approps bills than Ryun is just insane.

Anonymous said...

this congress has done more in these few months than the last congress did in 2 years...they've already been in session long, had more hearings and passed more legislation, including expanded stem cell research, a minimum wage increase, and expanion of SCHIP, billions for veteran's health care and to fund the war responsibly by including a timetable for withdrawal.

the democrats have done amazing things...George W. Bush and the R's in the Senate have not.

Anonymous said...

Democrats control the Senate, so stop blaming the R's please.

Blog Archive

E-Mail Me