New York 9th District Special Election: Republican Bob Turner Takes Seat Formerly Held By Anthony Weiner

New York's special election to replace Anthony Weiner has been called for the Republican candidate Bob Turner, beating out the Democratic candidate Assemblyman David I. Weprin who just a few short weeks ago was expected to win easily.

A stunning upset.

NYT:

A little-known Republican businessman from Queens, channeling voter discontent with President Obama into an upset, won election to Congress on Tuesday from the heavily Democratic district in New York City last represented by Anthony D. Weiner.

The Republican, Bob Turner, a retired cable television executive, defeated Assemblyman David I. Weprin, the scion of a prominent Democratic family in Queens, in a nationally watched special election.

Wapo:

Businessman Bob Turner (R) defeated state Assemblyman David Weprin (D) in the special election for the House seat held by former New York Rep. Anthony Weiner (D).

Turner’s victory is regarded as an upset given the Democratic history of the 9th district, which takes in portions of Brooklyn and Queens, as well as the fact that President Obama carried the seat by 11 points in 2008.

“New Yorkers put Washington Democrats on notice that voters are losing confidence in a President whose policies assault job-creators and affront Israel,” said National Republican Congressional Committee Chairman Pete Sessions (R-Texas) in a statement after Turner’s win.

Headlines are hailing this as an "Obama Rebuke and said to have shaken city Democrats.
[Update] Obama Rebuke link in previous sentence leads to a headline by AP that has now been changed to a headline without the word rebuke in it. Is this AP trying to protect Obama? [End update]

Panicked Democrats, realizing that they had somehow snatched defeat from the jaws of victory, made a frantic, last-ditch effort to stave off a loss, but failed.

Earlier today, seeing the impending loss coming, the White House started spinning to explain the loss and point fingers elsewhere.

No doubt we will see Liberals tomorrow spinning madly....

.

Do You Ever See Tea Party Or Conservative Protesters Doing This Crap?

620 WTMJ reports "Locks superglued prior to protests of Governor Walker at local school"

MILWAUKEE - Protesters crowded the street outside Messmer Preparatory School in Milwaukee's Riverwest neighborhood as Governor Walker visited the school Friday to read to children.



The protests came just hours after someone vandalized the school ahead of the Governor's visit.



"Some of these folks super glued our front doors at the prep school," said Br. Bob Smith, OFM, the president of Messmer Catholic Schools, about the school on the corner of North Fratney and East Burleigh Streets.



He told Newsradio 620 WTMJ that a woman was walking in front of the school Thursday, asking people to protest.



According to Br. Smith, one protester said " 'Get ready for a riot,' because they were going to disrupt the visit."



Br. Smith said that, in his opinion, the Republican governor's visit to read to students there on Friday was not about political overtones connected to protests that have been happening all year in the state regarding the rollback of collective bargaining rights for many public workers.



"People ought to start acting like adults," said Br. Smith.



"You've got little kids who have no clue what you're even talking about, and you make something political when it isn't, that's just flat-out wrong."

Video here.



These people are sickening.



.

A Primary Challenger For Obama?

Will there be a hard core liberal that stands up and challenges Barack Obama for 2012?

Ralph Nader not only believes there will be but is now saying "I would guess that the chances of there being a challenge to Obama in the primary are almost 100 percent."

The only question, he said, is the stature of that opponent and whether it will be either “an ex-senator or an ex-governor” or “an intellectual leader or an environmental leader.”

In approximately a week and a half there will be “another chapter of this effort,” Nader predicted.

It is seriously doubtful that Democratic leaders would ever nominate someone other than the sitting President, but should Obama be forced to defend himself against a Democratic challenger as well as against GOP candidates, it could be a popcorn worthy campaign season.

The Daily Caller has more on the interview with Nader.

.

Senate Democrats Throw Temper Tantrum At Media

Despite recent findings from The Hill that show that 68 percent of media reports in a politically biased manner with 46 percent saying the media favors Democrats and only 22 percent believing media favors Republicans, Senate Democrats are still bitterly complaining to the media that they do not report the Democratic position often enough.

When Jonathan Karl, a correspondent for ABC News, asked why Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) had blocked a short-term FAA extension offered by Republicans on the Senate floor Tuesday, Democrats lost their patience.

“There’s a certain naivety that comes with your question,” said Boxer. “The story here today is the fact that our leader is reaching out to [House Speaker John] Boehner [R-Ohio] to say, ‘If we want to resolve a particular issue, whatever it might be, let’s talk about it,’ but not have one side say, ‘Take it or leave it or people will be out of work.’ And the essence of your question doesn’t understand that.”

Democratic Sens. Harry Reid and Charles Schumer added their complaints as well.

One reporter asked why Democrats didn’t swallow the cuts to small airports in their states to pass the short-term authorization and then return in September “to fight another day.”

But Reid retorted that Republicans would find other “hostages” to force Democrats to back down on the labor issue.

Democrats charged Wednesday that the media has fallen for the red herring of cutting subsidies to small airports.

“The fact is that you’ve got to dig a little bit behind the surface here of what this is really about,” said Boxer. “Whatever the issue is, this is about government by threats, government by one side making its demands …”

“And these folks falling for it,” Reid interjected, gesturing to the reporters in the Senate radio and television gallery.

Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), who is in charge of the Democrats’ messaging operation, then broke in.

“In all due respect, the issue is not essential air service, it’s not even a labor issue, it’s the issue of hostage taking,” he said.

The Politico reports John Boehner's response:

Republicans are pointing to remarks Reid made to reporters Tuesday in which he was open to accepting the House version if Boehner didn’t act on a clean bill.

“The only reason 80,000 jobs are at stake is that Senate Democratic leaders chose to play politics rather than keep their word and pass the House bill,” Boehner spokesman Michael Steel said. “That’s indefensible, and they should end this crisis immediately.”

More reaction from The Daily Caller:

“All it will take to end this crisis is for the Senate to pass the House-approved FAA extension,” Boehner said. “The only reason so many jobs are at stake is Senate Democratic Leaders chose to play politics rather than pass the House bill. I respect the fact that Senators have certain objections, but they have had two weeks to respond to the House bill and done nothing, leaving tens of thousands of workers in limbo. The House has done its job, and now it’s time for Senators to do theirs.”

Republican House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman John Mica echoed Boehner’s comments.

“Senate Democrats had a House-passed FAA extension before them for two weeks but chose to do nothing,” Mica said. “Instead of passing this simple bill, Senate Democrats chose to protect outrageous ticket subsidies, as much as $3,720 per ticket in Ely, Nevada, on the backs of 4,000 furloughed FAA employees and thousands more out-of-work airport construction workers.”

Amazingly enough the media reported Democratic complaints and their temper tantrum but still did not get a straight answer to the question itself.

The Lonely Conservative provides the reason why Democrats blocked the short-term FAA extension. Seems the House GOP had stripped out favors to union bosses in their bill.

The Daily Caller provides ample examples, with dates,links and quotes, showing how very accommodating the media actually was in in mimicking the Democratic talking point calling Republicans "terrorists," using terms such as "hostage taking" during the debt deal negotiations.... but that isn't enough for these whining, sniveling, complaining Democratic Senators that simply did not wish to explain why they blocked the short-term FAA extension that passed the House of Representatives, which resulted in the temporary lay off 4,000 workers and potentially thousands more.

So now these Democratic Senators, who are showing how incompetent they are at their own jobs, think they should be in charge of what questions journalists and reporters ask, how they should be phrased and how they should report those answers.

This is your ridiculous item of the day.

.

The Emperior Has No Clothing!

By Findalis of Monkey in the Middle

Book of Obama: Chapter 13

His Excellency, The Most High, Master of the Nation, President Barack Hussein Obama (May He Reign Forever) spoke to the peons of the population.  None of this problem is MY fault, the Great One exclaimed.

"I blame Bush! He spent $1 Trillion in 8 years. And there was the Recession. We had to spend, spend, spend to Save the Nation. It is the fault of the Republicans. Those nasty TEA Partiers. It is the fault of everyone else. I am your King. Nothing is MY fault. It never is.

We need to make the rich give up their money. The Corporate CEOs with private jets need to give all their money to ME. The Billionaires and Millionaires have too much money, I need it more.  I need much more.

Although I am Omnipotent, I need your help.  If I don't get the debt ceiling raised, the world will come to an end.  The elderly will be forced to eat cat food.   The military will not be paid.  Veterans will starve while being thrown on the street. All this because the evil Republicans with their allies the rich fat cats, will not do as I order them to.

Every President for many years has gotten what I demand.  The Great Reagan spoke thus:

"Would you rather reduce deficits and interest rates by raising revenue from those who are not now paying their fair share, or would you rather accept larger budget deficits, higher interest rates, and higher unemployment? And I think I know your answer."

And yet these evil men will thwart MY plans, MY desires, what I want.  It is very simple.  Without this ceiling raise, we will DEFAULT on our debt.  The nation will be destroyed.  It will not be MY fault!  We have only a week.  I need you to call Congress and demand that they raise the ceiling.  Raise it enough so that We don't have to do this until after November 2012 (So I don't have to bring this up again until I am reelected!). Only you, the Middle Class, the Poor need to do this.  Together We can defeat the rich, the ignorant, the Republicans.

Thank you MY subjects.  I bless you!"

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
-----Thomas Jefferson, Declaration of Independence

Thus the Anointed One spoke to the people.  And they would have listened to Him but for the voice of the House Speaker, Boehner of Tears.  He spoke quietly, passionately, and with a firm voice.  His words bespoke of the truth and the people listened:

"I am not a fat cat, I was just a small business owner before I came to Congress.  I am one of you, the Middle Class, the people who find all of this too complicated to understand.  But it isn't too complicated.  It is as easy as your own home budget.

The President wants us to raise the debt ceiling for the next 18 months. This is so He will not have to face this problem during an election. The President swears that if we don't raise the ceiling the nation will end. We will default on our debts, the old will starve, the military will not be paid and veterans will be homeless. This is a lie. None of this will happen. What will happen is that for the first time the nation will have to live within our means. We will have to cut spending. We will have to trim the fat.

The President refuses to cut the fat, the port, the earmarks. We had a deal, but the President threatened to veto it. We have another deal, but it forces the President to cut spending, and will only raise the debt ceiling for 6 months.

The President is acting childish. He is carrying on a temper tantrum: "Do it my way or face the consequences!" The President can quote Ronald Reagan, but he will never be Ronald Reagan. Nor does he understand what Reagan stood for.

We will call his bluff. The President will be taught the lesson of the Constitutionality of this issue. He will be denied. He believes to be our King. But he forgets. We are Americans! WE HAVE AND WILL HAVE NO KINGS!!!!

And with that, the American people awoke to the truth of the argument.  The did call the Congress telling them to stand firm, don't give in to Obama's demands.  If we can stop him now, he will be destroyed. And they remembered this:

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury.

A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

---Thomas Jefferson, The Declaration of Independence

Yes President Obama has become a Tyrant.  It is time to take down the tyrant.  Call your Congressman or woman.  E-mail him or her.  Let them remember what happened in 2010.  You put them into Congress and you can take them out.  Time is running out. the nation and our freedoms are at risk.  It is time to stop the Tax and Spend culture of the Presidents and Democrats now.

Polls: High Obama Disapproval, Party Trust and Taxes Vs Spending Cuts

Multiple polls from Rasmussen over the weekend show that the GOP has gained the trust on economic issue over Democrats by a 10 percent margin as well as being trusted more on 9 out of ten issues presented to likely voters, Barack Obama is showing the highest level of Strong Disapproval since last November and the majority of voters have more fear the debt deal being negotiated in Washington will raise taxes too much and cut spending too little.

Rasmussen- Trust on issues

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely Voters shows that 45% trust Republicans more when it comes to handling economic issues, while 35% put more trust in Democrats. Nineteen percent (19%) are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

.......

Voters now trust Republicans more than Democrats on nine of those 10 issues. In May, Republicans led on just six issues after being trusted more on all 10 in early January. Two years ago Democrats were trusted more than Republicans on most issues. Still, there are several issues that the parties are close on in terms of trust.

Health care, which voters rank second behind the economy in terms of importance, is an issue the GOP holds a tight 46% to 43% advantage on. Before President Obama was elected, Democrats had a huge advantage on this issue. During Election 2010, the advantage switched to the GOP. In May, the parties were essentially tied.

.......

Taxes are a big part of the debt ceiling debate, and voters trust Republicans more than Democrats by a 46% to 40% margin on that issue.

.......

The one issue Democrats do hold an advantage in trust on is education, 42% to 38%. Nineteen percent (19%) aren’t sure which party they trust more, however.

The parties are nearly tied on the issue of Social Security, with Republicans holding a statistically insignificant 42% to 40% lead. In May, Democrats barely edged the GOP on this issue.

Republicans hold a slight 38% to 35% edge in the area of government ethics and corruption, a reversal from the modest lead Democrats held in May. But 27% of voters don’t know who to trust more on this issue.

On immigration, Republicans hold a sizable 47% to 33% advantage, with 21% of voters are undecided.

.......

As is always the case, Republicans hold the trust advantage when it comes to national security and the War on Terror and the handling of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Rasmussen- Taxes and spending cuts

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 62% of Likely U.S. Voters are worried more that Congress and President Obama will raise taxes too much rather than too little in any deal to end the debt ceiling debate. Just 26% fear they’ll raise taxes too little. Twelve percent (12%) aren’t sure. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

Similarly, 56% worry that Congress and the president will cut spending too little in the final debt ceiling deal, while only 25% are concerned that they will cut spending too much. Nineteen percent (19%) are undecided.

Rasmussen- Obama Approval/Disapproval

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Sunday shows that 23% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as president. Forty-four percent (44%) Strongly Disapprove, giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -21 (see trends).

That’s the highest level of Strong Disapproval since last November.

......

Overall, 45% of voters say they at least somewhat approve of the president's performance. Fifty-four percent (54%) at least somewhat disapprove.

Once again I will point out that polling, especially this far away from the presidential election, is simply a snapshot of how voters feel at the time and many things can happen to turn the numbers around. At this stage polling is best used to see patterns and trends which a change from one week from another or a bounce stemming from a certain event generally does not alter those patterns or trends in the long run.

.

Pew Research Shows GOP Gains Support With All But Hispanics

According to the side by side comparison chart Pew Research shows (will show it below) the GOP has gained ground with all voters except Hispanics since the 2008 elections, but their biggest gains are among younger white voters and those making $30K or less.

Republican gains/losses:

4 percent gain among all voters
6 percent gain among whites
2 percent gain among blacks
6 percent loss among hispanics

Republican gain among whites broken down by age groups:

10 percent gain among those aged between 18 and 29
6 percent gain among those aged between 30 to 49
5 percent gain among those aged between 50 to 64
5 percent gain among those over 65 years old

Republican gain among whites broken down by income:

2 percent gain among those making $75K or more
7 percent gain among those making $30-75K
10 percent gain among those making $30K or less



Overview from Pew:

As the country enters into the 2012 presidential election cycle, the electorate’s partisan affiliations have shifted significantly since Barack Obama won office nearly three years ago. In particular, the Democrats hold a much narrower edge than they did in 2008, particularly when the partisan leanings of independents are taken into account.

Notably, the GOP gains have occurred only among white voters; a 2-point Republican edge among whites in 2008 (46% to 44%) has widened to a 13-point lead today (52% to 39%). In sharp contrast, the partisan attachments of black and Hispanic voters have remained consistently Democratic.

While Republican gains in leaned party identification span nearly all subgroups of whites, they are particularly pronounced among the young and poor. A seven-point Democratic advantage among whites under age 30 three years ago has turned into an 11-point GOP advantage today. And a 15-point Democratic advantage among whites earning less than $30,000 annually has swung to a slim four-point Republican edge today.

Yet, the Republican Party’s growth has been limited in two important ways. First, the steep gains in GOP leaning that helped the party in the 2010 midterms have not continued, as the overall balance of partisan attachments has held steady in the first half of 2011. Second, while more independents say they “lean” toward the Republican Party, the GOP has not gained in actual party affiliation since 2008 – just 28% of registered voters, in both years, call themselves Republicans. Instead, the growth category continues to be political independents, with a record high 34% of registered voters choosing this label in 2011.

Keeping in mind that Obama was elected over John McCain by a 7 point margin, the GOP gains almost across the board should be very concerning to Obama for his reelection hopes heading into 2012. Especially if the GOP nominates a candidate that conservatives can get behind.

Semi-related: CNN finds that Rick Perry, should he decide to toss his hat in the ring, is the first choice Republicans and Independents who lean towards the GOP, are picking.

.

Debt Limit Talks: Bush Era Rates Off Table And House Democrats Feel Ignored

After the bipartisan talks imploded last week when Democrats insisted that part of the deal include $400 billion in tax increases. This forced Barack Obama to finally come to the table in negotiations over raising the debt ceiling, which stands at $14.3 trillion now, to allow the U.S. to borrow more money.

There have been a flurry of meetings that now include Obama, Senate majority leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), a separate meeting with House Speaker John Boehner and another meeting with House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.), Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (Md.) and Rep. James Clyburn (S.C.), assistant to the leader.

The Hill reports that the administration has stopped insisting on ending the Bush-era tax cuts.

I am starting to get a vague sense of deja vu though as I see headlines like "House Democrats feel jilted by the president in budget, debt talks."

Just as House Democrats did in December after Republicans took a large net gain of House seats,the biggest turnover of seats in decades, to take control of the House of Representatives, House Democrats are now upset, feeling that they are being taken for granted and ignored and complaining publicly.

“How is it that the House Democrats played such an important role [in the majority], and all of a sudden [the White House says], ‘Forget it, we’ll work with the Senate and the Republican leadership?’ ” asked Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-Texas), vice chairman of the Democrats’ Steering and Policy Committee.

House Democrats’ frustration with Obama is boiling in the intense heat of negotiations to reach a budget deal and raise the nation’s $14.3 trillion debt ceiling.

Capitol Hill Democrats have been steaming for months, since being sidelined during talks to extend the George W. Bush-era tax rates and fund the government this year. Many say the White House takes their support for granted but ignores them when it comes to making policy.

“Before this year we were playing a strong role,” said Cuellar, but “now a lot of us feel like we’re almost being ignored.”

Before this year they played a strong role because they had an overwhelming majority, and they had a Democratically controlled Senate and White House and were able to shove anything that they wanted through because the GOP could not stop them from railroading laws and bills.

November 2010 midterms ended that one party reign.

They are frustrated, speaking out to reporters, angry and aren't at the point where they can admit the reason they are being "ignored" treated as if they are "irrelevant" is because House Democrats are irrelevant at the moment.

Of course Obama is taking them for granted, who else are they going to support in 2012? The Republican candidate against Obama?

I don't think so.

Obama knows the answer to that question and so do the House Democrats that are throwing their temper tantrums.

The Obama administration needs the debt ceiling voted on, passed and raised by August 2, 2011.

Republicans have made it clear that for any debt ceiling raise to pass the House of Representatives, an equal amount of spending cuts be part of the deal. Want $2 trillion (example) then cut that same $2 trillion. Republicans want a balanced budget amendment to show they are serious about stopping the practice of spending more money than we have.

Republicans seem to have learned their lesson when they were thrown out of leadership positions the last time by their base for spending like drunken sailors with taxpayer money. They understand they campaigned in 2010 on the premise of cutting spending and lowering our deficit and if they do not fight to keep those promises, they can be replaced again in the next election.







Wasteful Government Spending

Gallup found that 73 percent of national adults understand what liberal Democrats and Barack Obama (yes, redundant) do not seem to be able to... that wasteful government spending is more to blame for the rising federal budget deficit than not raising enough money in taxes.


Corporate Taxes vs Budget Cuts

In May, a New York Times/CBS News poll (neither organization can be accused of a "conservative slant") shows that most Americans prefer budget cuts over raising corporate taxes.

In general, however, few Americans back increasing taxes on American businesses: only 37 percent said corporate taxes should be increased to help reduce the federal budget deficit. The rest agree with an alternative argument that increased taxes would discourage American companies from creating jobs and hurt them in the global marketplace. Thirty-two percent would rather see corporate taxes remain as they are now and 26 percent said taxes on corporate profits should be decreased.

Government Shutdown vs Spending Cuts

In April Rasmussen found that 57 percent of polled voters suggest that a government shutdown would be preferred to not doing the deep spending cuts necessary to get the federal budget on its way toward balance. Only 31 percent believe that avoiding a shutdown is more important.


The bottom line here is that this battle, like the previous budget battles since November is being aired publicly with the same public referred to in the polls above, watching as Republicans fight for spending cuts, a balanced budget amendment and Democrats fighting to raise taxes.

I can almost see all those public statements used in GOP campaign videos with Democrats and Obama stating over and over again "raise taxes" with the GOP candidate saying "cut spending."

Democrats need to stop playing to their 13 percent fiscally liberal base and start playing to Americans as a whole or even to the 38 percent that view themselves as moderate on fiscal issues, or 2012 is going make their massive losses in 2010 look like a walk in the park.

.

No ID, No Vote. E.J. Dionne is RACIST In Saying Minorities Incapable Of Obtaining ID

The left is starting with their meme already about how it is somehow suppressive, in their eyes' to insist that a person provide identification at the voting polls.

In the mind of E.J. Dionne, requiring identification equals to "rigging an election."

Yes, seriously.

The laws are being passed in the name of preventing “voter fraud.” But study after study has shown that fraud by voters is not a major problem — and is less of a problem than how hard many states make it for people to vote in the first place. Some of the new laws, notably those limiting the number of days for early voting, have little plausible connection to battling fraud.

These statutes are not neutral. Their greatest impact will be to reduce turnout among African Americans, Latinos and the young. It is no accident that these groups were key to Barack Obama’s victory in 2008 — or that the laws in question are being enacted in states where Republicans control state governments.

If a Republican were to say, publicly, that African Americans and Latinos are not capable of obtaining identification, they would be declared racist in a second flat.

Dionne claims that voter fraud is not a "major problem", I beg to disagree.

Just looking at the previous WuA pieces on this subject finds that in Connecticut, 300 deceased citizens actually cast votes after they died. One of which, voted 17 times after he died. Other reports have shown dead, imprisoned or imaginary people added to voter rolls, people having multiple applications submitted in the same name. Example after example has been shown, for years, about voter fraud.

Pirate's Cove points to a study showing 64,000 issues of possible voter fraud, but Dionne claims it is not a "major problem?"

Here is a novel idea, how about we require identification at the polls?

29 states have some sort of voter ID requirements due to voter ID laws. (Newsflash for Dionne, not all the states are "Republican" states with conservative officials)

Ok, so the idea isn't novel.

Identification is required to buy liqueur, beer, wine, cigarettes. ID is required to get on a plane. ID is required to rent a hotel room. ID is required to drive. ID is required when you write a check. Starting to get the point?

As to Dionne's racist attitude that minorities are somehow less capable than majorities of obtaining identification therefore requiring them to do so is "rigging" the election against Democrats,, the Supreme Court ruled that Indiana's voter ID law was constitutional and the law did not impose unjustified burdens on people who are old, poor or members of minority groups and less likely to have driver’s licenses or other acceptable forms of identification.

Moving right along, other complaints from Dionne are about limiting the time of early voting, ending same-day registration and making it difficult for groups to register new voters.

Last one first, groups registering new voters. One word : ACORN. 'Nuff said.

Limiting the time of early voting. I vote early and if they limited that my vote would be cast later is all. If they cut it totally for all but military members, then I would just trudge right on up to the polling booth and cast my vote. Doesn't matter to me one way or another.

Exception there should be the military since many of them are overseas and should be able to cast ballots, after all they are fighting to defend our country, their vote should always count.

Same day registering slows the polls down though. Since most places where you can cast your ballot have an open and close time, anything that clogs up the process should be avoided at all cost so everyone can cast their ballot.

How hard is it to register to vote before an election?

Well, USA.Gov makes it pretty freaking easy.

• Absentee Ballot (for Citizens in the United States)
• Election Assistance Commission
• Register to Vote by Mail
  (PDF | download Adobe Acrobat Reader )
• State Election Offices
• State Voter Laws
• Voting Assistance Guide for Uniformed and Overseas Citizens

Bottom line is that any laws that prevents potential voter fraud, in the eyes of Democrats like Dionne, automatically is assumed to go against Democrats.

Why is that? The claim by Dinonne that it suppresses minorities is nothing short of racist, by assuming that just because one is a minority they are incapable of obtaining ID, incapable of registering earlier than election day, is one of the most racist assumptions I have seen and should offend every member of a minority group.

My questions, which I have asked before, is why Democrats are so against measures that would assure the integrity of an election?

Why are Democrats so against preventing voter fraud?

.

Did You Hear? The Netroots Nation Bitchfest Has Begun

Did you hear the news of the day? The far left liberal annual bitchfest has begun. It is called Netroots Nations and you can think of it as the moonbats annual get-together where far left liberal progressive all gather to piss, moan, bitch, complain and threaten before they go back to their lives and plan on how to get the person they are bitching about this year, Barack Obama, reelected.

Headlines, via Memeorandum:

Huffington Post- Progressives ‘Break Up’ With Obama

President Barack Obama is decidedly "not [the left's] boyfriend anymore," progressive supporters of gay- and immigrant-rights said on Thursday, rebuking the White House for breaking promises to the left while also asking them for money.

The Note- ABC News- Fear & Loathing In Minneapolis: Progressives Vent Frustration With Obama At Netroots Nation

Daily Caller- Capper to a great week: Piqued Netroots Nation freaks critique bleak Obama geek


Other headlines, via Google search, include but are not limited to;

Politico- Liberals' frustration on display at Netroots

Slate- Netroots Nation: The Sadness of Crowdsfrustration on display at Netroots

Then you have the blogospheric discussions surrounding those headlines, such as TPMDC with "Progressives Still Fighting Obama, Democrats At Netroots 2011"

Weasel Zippers- Obama's Communication Czar Heckled By Liberals During Daily Kos Conference...

The Nation- Netroots to White House: Where's the Love?

Booman Tribune- The Professionally Disgruntled — For the second straight year …

The most amusing part of all this is that after they are all done stomping their feet, beating their chests, screaming about how horrible Obama is and how he has disappointed them to no end, they understand just as Barack Obama does, they will either help him get reelected in 2012 or they will sit it out because they certainly won't vote for a Republican candidate.

Barking Moonbats are alllllll bark and no bite when it comes to Barack Obama.

Obama is probably kicked back, feet on his desk, laughing his butt off and telling his advisers "Please, who do you think they are going to vote for in 2012? A REPUBLICAN???? Dude, I own their asses."

.

True Friends of Israel

By Findalis of Monkey in the Middle

The Emergency Committee for Israel has come out with a new ad that hits President Obama for (what else?) his stand on Israel.

ECI Thanks Israel's True Friends



Hat Tip Israel Matzav

Generic Presidential Ballot Has Republicans Ahead Of Obama

Rasmussen hands Barack Obama more bad news in a week which economic news has already been devastating for him.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that in a hypothetical 2012 presidential matchup, a generic Republican candidate earns support from 45% of Likely U.S. Voters, while the president attracts 43% of the vote. Three percent (3%) favor some other candidate, and eight percent (8%) are undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

On average, 57.3 percent of the American public believes the country is on the wrong track. Home prices continue to drop by over 4 percent in the first quarter of 2011, unemployment is at 9 percent and Friday's report is not projected to be good. Added to that, the so-called recovery is faltering.

It never was a recovery. The massive stimulus package that Obama and the Democratically controlled House and Senate passed, simply put a band-aid on a gushing wound, postponed the inevitable and ended up costing more and worsening the job situation.

Quick analogy- Take a lot of money and pump it into a failing business without changing the way the company does business will do no more than help that business keep the doors open until they run out of the money that was pumped into it.

If you do not address the root cause of a failure, no amount of money is going to stop it from failing over and over again.

When businesses and/or corporations grow and expand they hire more people. Basic Job Growth 101.

The stark contrast coming into the 2012 election is clear.

Liberal Democrats , including Obama believe pumping more money into the economy aka "invest" will help it recover. Republicans believe spending less by cutting government spending and working on helping businesses grow will help the economy and encourage massive job growth.

You don't bite the hand that feeds you and Obama and liberals, like rabid dogs, continue to attack the very people that can help the economy recover, by threatening them with higher taxes or creating regulation after regulation to prevent them from growing.

Conservatives and liberals are walking, no running, in opposite directions, widening the gap between the two and by November 2012 the choice before the American people is going to be very very clear.

.

Democrats And Taxes: Welcome Back To The 1970's If Dems Could Have Their Way

If Democrats have their way, which they won't as long as Republicans hold the House of Representatives, but if they did have their way, the impact of their proposed tax policies would increase taxes to 62 percent.

Imagine that, 62 percent of what you make going to the government.

Here is the breakdown of the calculations:

If the Democrats' millionaire surtax were to happen—and were added to other tax increases already enacted last year and other leading tax hike ideas on the table this year—this could leave the U.S. with a combined federal and state top tax rate on earnings of 62%. That's more than double the highest federal marginal rate of 28% when President Reagan left office in 1989. Welcome back to the 1970s.

Here's the math behind that depressing calculation. Today's top federal income tax rate is 35%. Almost all Democrats in Washington want to repeal the Bush tax cuts on those who make more than $250,000 and phase out certain deductions, so the effective income tax rate would rise to about 41.5%. The 3% millionaire surtax raises that rate to 44.5%.

But payroll taxes, which are income taxes on wages and salaries, must also be included in the equation. So we have to add about 2.5 percentage points for the payroll tax for Medicare (employee and employer share after business deductions), which was applied to all income without a ceiling in 1993 as part of the Clinton tax hike. I am including in this analysis the employer share of all payroll taxes because it is a direct tax on a worker's salary and most economists agree that though employers are responsible for collecting this tax, it is ultimately borne by the employee. That brings the tax rate to 47%.

Then last year, as part of the down payment for ObamaCare, Congress snuck in an extra 0.9% Medicare surtax on "high-income earners," meaning any individual earning more than $200,000 or couples earning more than $250,000. This brings the total tax rate to 47.9%.

But that's not all. Several weeks ago, Mr. Obama raised the possibility of eliminating the income ceiling on the Social Security tax, now capped at $106,800 of earnings a year. (Never mind that the program was designed to operate as an insurance system, with each individual's payment tied to the benefits paid out at retirement.) Subjecting all wage and salary income to Social Security taxes would add roughly 10.1 percentage points to the top tax rate. This takes the grand total tax rate on each additional dollar earned in America to about 58%.

Then we have to factor in state income taxes, which on average add after the deductions from the federal income tax roughly another four percentage points to the tax burden. So now on average we are at a tax rate of close to 62%.

Democrats have repeatedly stated they only intend to restore the tax rates that existed during the Clinton years. But after all these taxes on the "rich," we're headed back to the taxes that prevailed under Jimmy Carter, when the highest tax rate was 70%.

There is much more, so go read the rest.

.

YouCut Phase ll And Spending Cuts Dollar For Dollar Equal To Raise In Debt Limit

YouCut Phase 2 was unveiled Wednesday and works much like the original YouCut with a few additional advantages.

The Daily Caller explains:

“This updated version builds upon the success of the original YouCut program by allowing Americans to vote on a spending cut, and track the legislation in real-time, from introduction by a member of our freshman class, through the committee process, to a floor vote and ideally to enactment,” Cantor said.

The initial numbers for YouCut were quite impressive with 500,000 votes each round and Republicans are hoping to double that amount of participation from the general public.

The three options for this week for the public to vote on what spending to cut are Terminate the Ambassador's Fund for Cultural Preservation which would save $60 million, Terminate U.S. Contributions to the Asian Development Fund which would save $356 million or Terminate U.S. Contributions to the United Nations Population Fund which would save $400 million.

Below your vote option is a place where you can suggest your own ideas for spending cuts.

When the first version of YouCut was unveiled, Democrats controlled the House so Republicans could suggest a vote on the winning spending cut but was often refused the opportunity to bring it to the House floor by Nancy Pelosi who was Speaker of the House at that time.

Now that Republicans control the House, these votes will come to the floor and the newly improved site will allow you to track the progress of the cut, see when it comes to the floor, if it passed and the public can continue to participate by following up by encouraging your Senate reps to bring it to the floor. (Senate is still controlled by Democrats, so those calls will be important)

Democrats are fast to criticize the YouCut idea because the cuts are a drop in the bucket in comparison to the overall federal deficit.

Freshman Austin Scott of Georgia responds "Well, that’s fine. Lets get started. We didn’t get into this situation overnight. And we’re not gonna get out of it overnight. Nobody’s gonna wave a magic wand one night and we’re gonna wake up tomorrow and everything’s gonna be OK fiscally."

I have pointed out before and it is worth repeating. You put a bucket under a leak, each drop may be small in comparison to the size of the bucket itself, but as they all drip in, eventually the bucket fills up.

Nobody is going to pretend that each cut, individually, is going to fix our deficit problems and by the same token, Scott is correct, we didn't get this far into debt overnight so any and all cut must be accompanied by a concrete long term fiscal plan.

Human beings are hard wired into wanting to see results instantly but any savings, spending cuts and long term budget deficit plan is going to have to account for long term spending cuts where the results are not only seen instantly but where a change in spending set the standard in the long run.

So a plan to cut trillions isn't and shouldn't be trillions right this second but should be spread out so that over the course of time so that Washington is reprogrammed to spend less.

We could cut trillions right this second but without a spending plan for the future, we would simply be making a one time cut and the deficit would be rising again at an unsustainable level by the time the next budget comes up for a vote.

Debt Ceiling

Speaker of the House, John Boehner, has made it clear that if Obama wants a debt limit increase it will be dollar for dollar, hand in hand with spending cuts to equal the amount of the increase.

Boehner took the ambitious stand in negotiations to raise America’s debt ceiling while speaking to the Economic Club of New York, saying, “Without significant spending cuts and reforms to reduce our debt, there will be no debt limit increase. And the cuts should be greater than the accompanying increase in debt authority the president is given.”

While the Treasury Department has yet to specify exactly the size of the increase Congress will need to approve for the $14.3 trillion debt limit, estimates are currently settling in around $2 trillion. That means, according to Speaker Boehner, that the White House and congressional Democrats would have to agree to spending cuts equal to at least $2 trillion as well.

The only thing “off the table” is tax increases, said Boehner. Everything else – including entitlements — will be subject to spending cuts.

Washington has spent decades learning the bad habit of spending more money than America has, then borrowing even more so they can spend even more. Anyone living on a budget knows that is not only unsustainable but if Washington was a household, that family would be homeless, unable to put food on the table, their credit cards taken away and their credit rating would be shot for a decade.

Politicians need to be retrained.

Republicans were thrown out of power by doing the very same thing and apparently they learned their lesson because not only did they promise while campaigning for the 2010 midterms to be fiscally responsible and force spending cuts, but after winning the largest net seats in the House of Representatives in over 70 years and being handed control of it, they are still fighting tooth and nail against Democrats to keep those campaign promises.

Now it is time to retrain the Democrats and if they continue to fight again fiscal responsibility, well, the 2012 elections can take care of that.

.

Americans Prefer Cutting Spending Over Raising Taxes To Reduce Deficit

Yet another poll, by Gallup, tell our politicians what Americans expect from them and how they prefer Washington deal with the overwhelming national deficit.

73 percent of national adults understand that spending too much on federal programs that are either not needed or wasteful is the primary cause for our $14 trillion-plus national debt.

Only 22 percent believe that not raising enough money via taxes is to blame for the deficit.




When respondents were asked how they would prefer Congress attempt to reduce the federal budget deficit, 20 percent said only with spending cuts and 28 percent responded mostly with spending cuts, totaling 48 percent that want Washington to focus on cutting spending.

Despite the far left's howling about raising taxes being the be-all end-all of our deficit problems, only nine percent prefer the deficit be reduced mostly with tax increases and a mere two percent believe the deficit problem can be handled using only tax increases, totaling 11 percent of national adults prefer for Washington to use raising taxes to bring down our debt.

37 percent believe that spending cuts and tax increases together should be used.

The major partisan distinctions in response to this question reflect the choice between mostly/only spending cuts versus the equal use of spending cuts and tax increases. Republicans are most likely to favor the former; Democrats, the latter. Independents' views are between these two extremes. Relatively few Americans of any partisan identification favor mostly or only using tax increases to reduce the deficit.

Americans have been clearly informed of the positions the two political parties in Washington hold, having witnessed the very public battle over the recent budget deal passed where Republicans fought hard to include as many spending cuts as possible and Democrats fighting tooth and nail to limit those cuts.

According to another Gallup poll, 48 percent of Americans favor Republicans on the issue of the federal deficit with only 36 favoring Democrats. (via CNBC)

The federal budget was the only issue in which respondents clearly preferred one party over the other, with 48 percent favoring Republicans and 36 percent Democrats.

The poll found that Americans favored Republicans by smaller margins on four other issues: Afghanistan, the U.S. economy, immigration and jobs. Democrats held a small advantage on handling healthcare, the poll found.

When faced with poll after poll showing Americans know where the problems lie and showing preference to how Americans want the deficit reductions handled, the far left fall back to the position of "Americans are too stupid to really understand the problem". The mere 11 percent of the population that want only or mostly taxes increases, in their minds, are the only ones who truly have the brains to understand.

This is evidenced by an Yglesias post, which seems to be the meme the far left use whenever public opinion puts them so far into the minority.

His title "The Public At Least Thinks It Wants Spending Cuts To Be A Very Large Part of Deficit Reduction."

Arrogance be thy name.

According to the latest Reuters/Ipsos poll asking Americans about the direction of the country, 60 percent believe America to be on the wrong track going the wrong way with only 25 percent believing the opposite.

Rasmussen shows the number saying we are on the wrong track to 71 percent and CBS News/NY Times shows 70 percent say wrong track.

In 2010, midterms, Americans made a huge statement by giving the GOP a net gain in the House of Representatives which not only gave them control but was the largest net gain of seats seen in over 70 years.

Americans also handed Senate Republicans more seats, although Democrats still control the Senate (by a much smaller margin) and the White House.

During the budget recent budget battle, Speaker of the House, John Boehner, was quoted as saying "We control one-half of one-third of the government. We can't impose our will on another body. We can't impose our will on the Senate. All we can do is to fight for all of the spending cuts that we can get an agreement to."

While Congress controls the purse strings, no bill that passes the House of Representatives which includes massive spending cuts, as a plurality of the public prefers the deficit to be handled, can get to floor of the Senate because Harry Reid, a Democrat, is Senate majority leader and has the power to bring it to the floor and Democrats hold a small majority, so even if brought up, the GOP cannot get it passed.

If they did, the president, a Democrat himself, has the power to veto it.

This puts the choice directly into the hands of the American public in 2012. Are people like Yglesias correct in believing the Americans only "think" they know what they want, but don't "really mean" it?

I don't think so. I personally think Americans are smart. They understand the problems. They understand the solutions. Most importantly, they understand who is standing in the way of reaching those solutions.

In 2012, 23 Democratic Senate seats are in play and only 10 Republican held seats and the Democrat in the White House faces a reelection challenge.

Americans will have a clear choice of whether they wish to continue to see spending out of control or whether they want to see spending cuts without the massive battle over every dollar cut by a political party that seems to believe that spending more money than you have and continuing to borrow money is simply business as usual in Washington.

If they balanced their personal checkbooks in the same manner as they do Washington's, they would be paying more in overdraft fees to their banks than the whole budget itself.

.

Note To The Far Right : CUT. IT. OUT... Pretty Please

Seriously folks, get your act together.

Here is the deal as I see it (me being a conservative voter)- In 2008, Barack Obama, a man with no experience to warrant a position like the President of the United States of America, was elected as the President of the United States of America.

Why?

Voters turned against Republicans, pure and simple. They were the tipping point.

In 2010, after a far left extreme liberal agenda was jammed down America's throat, debt rising at unimaginable speed, government spending reaching monumental levels, bailouts mania, stimulus that stimulated nothing but higher unemployment and Obamacare, voters turned, yet again, and handed a victory to the GOP on the largest scale in over 70 years.

They did with the promise from the GOP that they would get serious on spending cuts, work on job creation and get the ball rolling to lower our debt.

From the 2008 election to the 2010 midterms, many of us, myself included, watched and wrote about the far left liberal so-called progressive extremists tearing the Democratic party apart, piece by piece, insisting that for the "good" of all, the far left liberal agenda should be shoved down American's throats and Americans would understand afterward what a wonderful thing Democrats had done.

How'd that work out? Huh? Huh?

Hint: 2010 Midterm elections.

So here we are, April 2011. A budget deal was negotiated, one that should have been passed last year while Democrats held the House, the Senate and White House, but the hard choices that needed to be made were too much of a "political hot potato," so they kicked the can down the road and the deal had to be made between a Republican controlled House of Representatives, a Democratically controlled Senate and a Democratically controlled White House.

The deal was made. Government didn't shut down, the GOP set the tone of discussion to surround spending, deficits and job creation by the end, and even had Obama and Harry Reid touting spending cuts as historic and the largest ever seen.

The GOP did so in a manner which kept voters (you know the people that will determine what direction and what message to send in 2012)engaged, informed and took into account that voters would rather see the major battle fought over trillions and not just billions. Those same voters, the majority, (which again for those that are slow, determine the outcome of elections) did not want to see a government shutdown over billions when the real fight is to come to cut spending by trillions.

Now I see hardcore conservatives, who admittedly are taking a principled stand, criticizing the size and scope of the deal that was made. I see them willing to tear into anyone that dares look at the good the GOP has done with the first initial battle.

Whether they admit it or not, there was plenty of good done. Starting with setting the public debate stage with the proper theme of debt, spending and jobs.

Lets take a quick look at what the GOP has accomplished, being in control of only the House of Representatives: (Via The Politico)

***The $40 billion in cuts was not only historically high, it was more than Boehner himself wanted to push for a few short months ago.

***Earmarks, which many thought would never go away, are now taboo - even to earmark addicts like Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), who reluctantly gave them up after the 2010 election.

***Deficits are all the rage on Capitol Hill, and will be until Congress wends its way through the debt limit fight and the next budget. The word “deficit” appeared in 470 documents in the Congressional Record between the beginning of January and the end of March, more than in any session’s opening since 1995, according to a review by POLITICO. And Americans listened: Asked by Gallup to identify the most important problem facing the nation, 13 percent said “federal debt” in March of this year, up from 8 percent a year ago.

***The broader budget debate is now fought on the tea party’s terms: It’s not whether to reduce government, it’s by how much. This helps explain why serious centrist commentators and even some liberals PRAISED a $6 trillion budget cut plan proposed by House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.). Remember how a similar plan was received two years ago?

***Thanks to a pickup of 675 legislative seats in 2010 - many because of these budget principles

***The most sweeping work is getting done in states. Wisconsin, Ohio and Indiana are now working, real-time labs for discovering how much the party can cut government - without cutting off the support of independents. A GOP senator told us the party studies what happens in these state showdowns to test the limits of what will work here. One early finding: Many think Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) went too far, too fast by gutting union power without first educating the public.

***The real fight over spending erupted in late spring of 2009, and consider the results: The GOP won the governor’s races in Virginia and New Jersey in 2009; the Scott Brown Senate race in Massachusetts in early 2010; then won back the House, picked up Senate seats and captured the most state legislative seats in a single year since Watergate — all in November of last year.

Most Republicans and moderate conservatives are looking at the big picture, seeing the messaging war won, the stage for the future battle set to fight the bigger fight over trillions and time being bought to inform the public each step of the way so that the majority of the public is behind them.

All that in a few short months.

I took a political leanings test once, assumed I would come out as a moderate conservative, and was extremely surprised to see the test tell me I was in the top 10 percent of "ulta-conservative".... wow, really? I thought I was mellow.

The reason I tell you about that test is because I happen to agree with the hardcore far right extreme conservatives on quite a few of their political beliefs.

I believe the budget deal should have been fought over trillions (as the 2012 budget battle will be with Paul Ryan's GOP's Path to Prosperity). I believe a government that spends more than it takes in will go bankrupt, it is unsustainable. I believe saving billions in the face of a $14 trillion debt is ridiculous.

So far I agree with almost everything the far right wants and believes we need as a country.

So, why am I telling the far right to CUT. IT. OUT?

I disagree with how they want those goals achieved and how they are prepared to tear the Republican party into pieces as the far left progressives did with the Democratic party.

Back to the top everyone:

From the 2008 election to the 2010 midterms, many of us, myself included, watched and wrote about the far left liberal so-called progressive extremists tearing the Democratic party apart, piece by piece, insisting that for the "good" of all, the far left liberal agenda should be shoved down American's throats and Americans would understand afterward what a wonderful thing Democrats had done.

I am watching the far right head down the same path as the far left extreme portion of the Democratic party did from 2008 to 2010. I am watching the far right encourage Republican politicians to make the same mistakes the far left liberals forced their politicians to make from 2008 to 2010.

The principles, to which I agree with them on most issues, of the far right and their own thoughts on how our Representatives should achieve those principles, seem to be more important to them than the majority of the public and the voters in the upcoming elections.

Voters, the majority of them, must be behind everything that is done. They must have time to research the available information. They must be given time and the respect shown to them to decide issues for themselves without being told "you have to pass it to learn what is in it" (Nancy Pelosi, Obamacare quote)

Inevitably we see the argument how politicians shouldn't make their decisions based on "polls" and for the most part that is true but politicians are elected to represent their constituents and if the majority of voters turn against a party as they did Republicans in 2008 and Democrats in 2010, those voters can and will replace those politicians they feel did not represent them.

Most Tea Party supporters seem to have found a good balance here. They are arguing that more needs to be done at the same time acknowledging the limitations the politicians have to work with.

Ever heard the expression "pick your battles"?

The war is the 2012 budget, the one just passed was simply a skirmish to set the stage.

Politicians- Please do not make the same mistake Obama/Reid/Pelosi made. Do not allow the extreme portion of the GOP party to cause you to lose the majority of voters.

Far right- Please do not make the same mistakes the far left liberal so-called progressives made. Don't rip the Republican party to shreds when we will need them to unite and fight the biggest war to come.

We are all on the same side here. Can we start acting like it?

I am begging you... CUT. IT. OUT. Pretty please.

.

Budget Battle: Tea Party The Willing Cudgel Used To Beat Democrats Over The Head

Here are some facts that everyone knows but recent budget battle talks and disagreements overshadow.

Fact One: Republicans only control one third of the Government. Democrats control two-thirds of the Government

Fact Two: Republicans control the House of Representatives. Democrats control the U.S. Senate and the White House.

Tea Party members, for all the talk about them, understand this. They are willing to be used as the cudgel that beats Democrats over the head over and over again. They allow this because they are actively involved in the political process and understand the talk about good cop, insane cop, can be used heavily in favor of cleaning up our fiscal mess, one billion at a time.

Michael Ettlinger and Michael Linden take note of what this means. Democrats are now ready to cut $30 billion below 2010 levels for the 2011 budget. That was the Republican leadership’s initial offer, basically a pro-rated version of their $100 billion in cuts from the Obama 2011 budget request. They went further to the right after losing the tea party conservatives and then sought $100 billion overall from that budget request, or in real dollars a $61 billion reduction. So here come the Democrats, offering the $30 billion in cuts that the Republican leadership wanted in the first place.

Look at the budget battle continuing on the Hill at the moment.

Despite controlling two thirds of the Government, Democrats have been forced to concede time and time again because they understand the Republicans owe the Tea Party. They owe them because the GOP made promises during their campaigns and the Tea Party has every right to expect, demand even, those promises be kept to the best of the GOP's ability.

From NBC's Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, and Ali Weinberg
*** Caving in: If the current Washington fight over spending was a game of chicken, the Obama White House would already be pulled over on the side of the road, as House Republicans continue to barrel down the deserted highway. The fact is, the White House and Senate Democrats keep caving, while House Republicans -- at least publicly -- have yet to budge an inch. The latest development, as Politico reports, is that the administration has agreed to an overall cut of $33 billion, which is near the number that the House leadership originally proposed (before the Tea Party caucus forced it to go higher). And now the White House appears to be backing away from its demand that no riders be attached to the deal. Press Secretary Jay Carney said there is no veto threat from the White House on a deal that contains ANY riders, as was originally the position. And here’s what Vice President Biden said on the matter yesterday: “The president and I are not really big on any riders at all. But this is a process which is normal for the House and Senate Appropriations Committees to get into the details. We’ve made it clear what we think are non-starters, both in numbers and riders. But I’m not going to go -- I’m not going to negotiate out here.”

Media outlet after media outlet as well as Democratic leaders [Reid] continue to cry out "The Republicans are scared of the Tea Party".

I beg to differ.

Republicans are not scared of the Tea Party, Republicans love the Tea Party.

Republicans that are serious about spending cuts and understand that America continues to spend more money than it has, also understand the Tea Party is the best friend they have and the best weapon against Democrats that wish to continue spending more money than we have.

I suspect there will be no government shutdown. A budget deal will be made, Republicans fighting tooth and nail for each and every spending cut made, publicly. Democrats fighting against each and every spending cut, just as publicly.

The Tea Party will say it is not enough. Republicans will point to Democrats, reminding folks that Democrats control two-thirds of the government and say that's why they couldn't get more spending cuts.

Translation to Tea Party- 2012 elections.

The Tea Party and the GOP are tag teaming the out-of-control, spend-more-than-we-have Democrats and they are doing it brilliantly.

.

Charles Schumer, Democrat: 'Caucus Instructed Me' To Use Word Extreme In Regards To Republicans

The next time you hear a Democratic Politician refer to a Republican politician as "extreme", remember the Democratic caucus gave strict instructions for that particular talking point and never let it be said that Democrats think for themselves, noooooo, they simply do as "instructed."

NYT:

Um, Senators, ever heard of the mute button?

Moments before a conference call with reporters was scheduled to get underway on Tuesday morning, apparently unaware that many of the reporters were already on the line, Charles Schumer of New York, the No. 3 Democrat in the Senate, began to instruct fellow senators on how to talk to reporters about the contentious budget process.

After thanking his colleagues — Barbara Boxer of California, Ben Cardin of Maryland, Tom Carper of Delaware and Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut — for doing the budget bidding for the Senate Democrats, who are facing off against the House Republicans over how spending for the rest of the fiscal year, Mr. Schumer told them to portray John Boehner of Ohio, the Speaker of the House, as painted into a box by the Tea Party, and to decry the spending cuts that he wants as extreme. “I always use the word extreme,” Mr. Schumer said, “That is what the caucus instructed me to use this week.”

A minute or two into the talking-points tutorial, though, someone apparently figured out that reporters were listening, and silence fell.

Then the conference call began in earnest, with the Democrats right on message.

Stupidity watch just gets easier and easier.

I can't decide what is more stupid though, not realizing their conversation was being heard or obeying the commands of a leadership that cost the party the largest losses in over 70 years last election.

.

.

Budget Battle On The Hill And In The Blogosphere

We spend too much. We spend more as a country than we take in.

That is the underlying concept the GOP has been preaching since before the November midterm elections and their promises to cut government spending was, in large part, one of the major reasons voters handed them the biggest victory seen in decades with one of the largest turnover of House seats, giving control of the House of Representatives to the Republicans and stripping that gavel from Nancy Pelosi to make John Boehner the Speaker of the House.

Let me repeat myself.. we spend too much.

Ezra Klein runs the latest reports in the ongoing budget battle down in one paragraph:

Back in February, Paul Ryan unveiled what was supposed to be the opening bid from the House Republicans: $32 billion in cuts for the rest of 2011. But the Tea Party demanded more and House leadership quickly caved, doubling their proposed cuts to more than $60 billion -- or almost $100 billion less than barack Obama’s 2011 budget request (quick note: different news stories present these numbers differently, as it depends on whether you use Obama’s budget request or 2010’s funding as a baseline. I’m using the difference from 2010 funding, which makes for lower sums). Now Democrats are offering as a compromise measure $30 billion in total cuts, or exactly what Ryan’s original proposal had called for. Pretty neat, huh?

Progressive liberals in the blogosphere are having another woe is me moment over the latest $20 million in cuts the Democrats are offering up. Calling their party leaders losers, calling the offer pathetic because they don't want spending cuts and generally peeved that Democrats are supposedly caving in.

People like Ezra are handing out the talking points as evidenced by his title "A huge win for the Tea Party, a win for Republicans and a big loss for Democrats."

Really?

Is that truly where they want to go with this?

The U.S. is over $14 trillion in debt, we spend more than we take in, and Republicans were handed the largest victory in 70 years in the last elections on the campaign promise that they would cut spending massively.

$30 billion is a start, I will admit that because I see each "drop in the bucket" as going toward the eventual outcome of filling the bucket, emptying it, then putting it back down to collect more.

Liberals like Ezra would love for conservatives to see the "Democrats have lost" meme and kick back, smile happily and stop pushing for more spending cuts, but that is not going to happen.

It is not a we win, you lose game. It also shouldn't be a conservative vs liberal battle either, but it is because the priorities of the left do not match the priorities of the right or Independents.

Gallup recently found that 71 percent of Americans say they worry about the economy "a great deal," 22 percent say they worry about the economy a "fair amount" with only 7 percent listed as "only a little/not at all."

64 percent of Americans say they worry about federal spending and the budget deficit a "great deal" with 23 percent saying they worry about it a "fair amount" and 12 percent listed as "only a little/not at all."

Those are the top two out of 14 issues Gallup polled on.

The breakdown of those Gallup findings are telling though and explains why supporters claim Democratic leaders are folding or losing in their eyes.

Click image to enlarge

Federal spending doesn't even register in the top four for Democrats while it is in the top two for Republicans and Independents.

The fiscal showdown continues as Congress returns to their jobs this week and in this specific case Republicans have the majority support of the American people who understand what liberal pundits do not seem able to grasp.

40 days ago the GOP controlled House passed a bill to fund government and cut spending and 40 days later the Senate, which is still Democratically controlled, has not because they are fighting to prevent the spending cuts the House passed.

We spend too much.

If Democrats force a government shutdown because they refuse to understand that basic concept, Americans are more than aware of which party is fighting to cut spending and which party is fighting tooth and nail to prevent those cuts.

.