Hat tip:UniversityofDC

[kml_flashembed movie="http://www.youtube.com/v/Pt2DDBu1YEw" width="425" height="350" wmode="transparent" /]

Comments

comments

Today marks 1,113 days since majority Senate Democrats last passed a budget, over three years of fiscal irresponsibility. So today, Senate Republicans will force votes on a number of budget alternatives for them, even President Obama’s budget that would raise taxes, increase spending, and continue expanding the debt. Will Democrats vote for any budget today, even the one offered by the president of their own party?

Speaking on the Senate floor this morning, Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said, “We’ve got a nearly $16 trillion debt; we’re borrowing more than 40 cents of every dollar we spend; entitlements are going broke; millions are out of work, and Democrats can’t even put a plan on paper for a vote? What are they doing over there? Isn’t anybody over there embarrassed by the fact that they haven’t offered a budget in three years? . . . As far as I can tell, their only plan is to take shots at our plans and hope nobody notices they not only don’t have one of their own. They’re so unserious they won’t even vote for a budget that was written by a President of their own party. It doesn’t get more irresponsible than that. . . . [I]t’s the responsibility of any majority party to put [a budget] together, to stand up and be counted. But since Democrats refuse to do their duty by the nation, Republicans will attempt to do it for them.”

The Washington Free Beacon explains, “The Democratic-led Senate has not formally proposed a federal budget resolution in more than three years, and is not expected to offer one Wednesday. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) and Budget Committee chairman Kent Conrad (D., N.D.) have made explicitly clear that they have no intention of doing so before the November election. Senate Republicans plan to offer four GOP budgets—authored by Sens. Mike Lee (R., Utah); Rand Paul (R., Ky.); Pat Toomey (R., Pa.); and House Budget Committee chairman Paul Ryan (R., Wis.)—as well as the president’s budget.”

What do Democrats have to say for themselves? Not much, as The Washington Times’ Emily Miller writes today: “[Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s] go-to excuse this year has been that the Budget Control Act, which set lower spending levels in exchange for raising the debt ceiling last summer, was good enough to replace an actual budget. The Senate parliamentarian disagreed, and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, Kentucky Republican, insisted that the ruling by the Senate’s procedural referee meant Democrats couldn’t keep the five proposed budgets from being discussed on the floor.”

Politico reports that rank-and-file Senate Democrats aren’t particularly enamored with this excuse. “Senate Democrats are ripping into Republican budget plans but still refusing to offer one themselves — a move that’s frustrating a handful of centrists in their own party. . . . Democratic leaders have defiantly refused to lay out their own vision for how to deal with federal debt and spending, arguing that last summer’s debt-ceiling deal essentially serves as an actual budget. While a budget resolution is non-binding, they say, the Budget Control Act was signed into law. But a few centrists in the 53-member Democratic conference expressed frustration with their party’s budget inaction. ‘Anything we can do to force the Senate to deal with the debt is important to do, and the sooner the better,’ Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), who caucuses with Democrats, told POLITICO. ‘I don’t think [Democrats] will offer their own budget and I’m disappointed in that.’ Freshman Sen. Joe Manchin has often said he would have been “impeached” if he failed to produce a budget as West Virginia governor, though he conceded there are differences between the state and Senate budget processes. ‘Sure I have a problem with [failing to offer a budget]. As a former governor, my responsibility was to put a budget forward and balance it, so anyone who comes from the executive mindset has a problem with that. I don’t care if you’re Democrat or Republican,’ Manchin said in an interview. . . . Another Democrat . . . lamented that the budget process has broken down and is in need of a major overhaul. ‘The budget process is just not working around here. We’ve had three years with President Obama where we’re not able to get a budget resolution passed,’ Sen. Mark Pryor (D-Ark.) told POLITICO.

And yet, as MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough put it this morning, “The Democrats have decided in the midst of a financial meltdown they’re going to do absolutely nothing…” Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) previously said, “It would be foolish for us to do a budget at this stage,” and Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said last year, “To put other budgets out there is not the point.

Related:

Rasmussen Reports:

51% Trust Romney’s Economic Judgment More Than Obama’s

North Carolina: Romney 51%, Obama 43%

Comments

comments

Saturday, May 19th “The Patriot Field of Dreams.”

Holts Summit, Missouri (10:00 am – 6:00 pm)

TICKETS ONLY $10 each

Partial List of Speakers: Herman Cain, Alan Keyes, Gina Gentry Loudon, Michelle Moore, Stacy E. Washington, David Roland, Joseph Farrah -CEO of World News Daily and many others.

[kml_flashembed movie="http://www.youtube.com/v/iP7PmcjDYJk" width="425" height="350" wmode="transparent" /]

Comments

comments

“I think you’re going to have another opportunity to reconsider your vote for the Hughes group.”

That’s a comment St. Louis County Executive Charlie Dooley’s Consiglieri John Temporiti made to a St. Louis County councilman a few years ago. We’ve chronicled the many shady and questionable dealings of Mr. Temporiti and Mr. Dooley (here, here, here, and here) so criticism from us is  expected. What’s not expected is this recent criticism form the Carnahan blog.

Polsinelli Shughart law firm announced recently that a host of lawyers, including John Temporiti, paid Rex Sinquefield consultant and former Chairman of the Missouri Democratic Party, was joining their firm.  Temporiti was paid almost $50,000 by Sinquefield from November to March through Rex’s Let Voters Decide committee to “provide a Democratic perspective” Read more…

Remaining beholden to the teacher’s unions and keeping black children in terrible schools outweighs party loyalty we guess. Interesting.

Related:

KMOX.com: Former Metro CEO says Dooley Adminstration Meddled with Contracts

Comments

comments

It’s now been over 3 years since the Democrat-controlled Senate passed a budget. Not only has Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) said, “There’s no need to have a Democratic budget in my opinion. . . . It would be foolish for us to do a budget at this stage,” Democrats have prevented their own Budget Committee Chairman, Sen. Kent Conrad (D-ND), from even taking one up in committee.

In stark contrast, Senate Republicans will offer several different budget plans this week for senators to vote on. The Hill writes, “Republican senators are expected to force a vote this week on President Obama’s fiscal 2013 budget plan, while Democrats are relishing a roll call on Rep. Paul Ryan’s (R-Wis.) budget blueprint.” In addition, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT), and Sen. Pat Toomey (R-PA) will all offer budgets for the Senate to consider.

But, as The Hill notes, it’s worth pointing out that Democrats don’t want to support their own president’s budget. “The GOP initiative is intended to embarrass the White House by painting the president’s budget as so weak on fiscal issues that his own party cannot support it, and to highlight the inability of the Senate Democratic majority to produce a budget. It has been more than 1,100 days since the Senate cleared a budget resolution. GOP aides say that if Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) tried to rally support for Obama’s budget, he could get a dozen yes votes at best. That estimate may be low, though there is a clear contrast in how congressional Democrats dealt with Obama’s budget in 2009 and this year. Three years ago, the Democratic-led Senate passed Obama’s budget 55-43. Obama’s approval ratings were much higher at the time, which fostered strong Democratic unity on Capitol Hill. Some centrist Democrats, including Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), have said they prefer a budget with deeper deficit cuts than Obama presented. Vulnerable Democratic senators are seen as unwilling to vote for the tax increases detailed in the White House budget. Aides to several Democratic centrists were noncommittal Monday on how their bosses would vote if the Obama budget comes up.”

Last year, of course, Obama’s budget received zero votes in the Senate, and his budget this year received zero votes in the House. Will any Democrat senator vote for it this year? Based on The Hill report, it sounds like Democrats may be getting their excuses ready: “This year, Obama is sticking by his budget, so Democrats are embracing another reason to vote it down. The White House moved Monday to free Democrats to vote no by saying the legislation embodying Obama’s budget is ‘different’ because it doesn’t contain identical policy language.”

This week, no thanks to Democrats, the Senate will finally have the opportunity to vote on at least five different budgets. Will Democrats support any of them, or continue their record of astonishing fiscal irresponsibility?

Related:

Rasmussen Reports: Generic Congressional Ballot: Republicans 45%, Democrats 38%

Comments

comments

OK, which is worse: switching political parties or political races?

“The gentleman that I’m running against decided that he wanted to be Attorney General about three months ago, after having declared his candidacy for two other federal positions in the nine months prior to three months ago,” he said. “I think that there is a place in this world for consistency and purpose.”

“When Chris Koster left the Republican party in 2007 to run for office in Obama’s Democrat party, he switched positions on the Second Amendment, life, illegal immigration and and he ultimately supported Barack Obama for president”, said Ed Martin. “As he attacks candidates for running for office, Koster himself is taking about his next race for Governor in 2016, even as he fails to answer Missourians’ questions on whether he supports Obama’s switch to support same-sex marriage.  Politicians like Koster and his boss Obama will say anything to stay in power but Missourians want an AG who will stand up and fight against Obama and obamacare and give our state a brighter future.”

Related:

Koster Attends Secret Gay Donor Conference in DC

Chris Koster’s Party Switch Press Conference

[kml_flashembed movie="http://www.youtube.com/v/gHdQFgbSZNI" width="425" height="350" wmode="transparent" /]

Comments

comments

[kml_flashembed movie="http://www.youtube.com/v/Hl5jkGZ2vk4" width="425" height="350" wmode="transparent" /]Hat tip:dsm0012

Brenda Talent, executive director of the Show Me Institute, speaks at the Your Money, Your Values, Your Vote meeting in Chesterfield, MO. This was a stop on the FRC and Heritage Foundation sponsored Values Bus tour. Brenda talked about the Show Me Institute, a free-market think tank that focuses on driving sound economic policy at the state level in Missouri.

Comments

comments

Claire, we’re going to sincerely miss you next year. Your ineptness and  phoniness completes us! All that advertising you’ve been doing the last couple of weeks has only netted you a one point lead???? And to add insult to injury, the poll was conducted by a “Democratic Super PAC.”

The Hill.com:

Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), holds a single-digit lead over all three of her Republican opponents, according to a new poll from a Democratic super-PAC.  McCaskill leads former Missouri state Treasurer Sarah Steelman (R) 45-36, businessman John Brunner 46-38 and Rep. Todd Akin (R-Mo.) 44-39 in the survey released Monday by Majority PAC and conducted by Democratic pollster Mark Mellman, a columnist for The Hill.

But McCaskill fails to break 50 percent against any of her potential challengers, suggesting the weakness of the GOP field could have more to say about McCaskill’s advantage in the race than her own popularity among constituents. Read more…
Related:

The Hill: Vulnerable Democratic senators balk at Obama’s gay marriage endorsement

Rasmussen Reports: New High: 68% Would Vote To Replace Entire Congress

Comments

comments

Politico reports, “An angry Harry Reid took to the floor Thursday and demanded changes to the Senate’s hallowed filibuster rules, siding with junior Democrats who have sought to substantially weaken the powerful delaying tactic. It’s a risky move for the Senate majority leader, who could find himself in the minority in a matter of months and need the filibuster to block the GOP’s agenda. . . . ‘If there were ever a time when Tom Udall and Jeff Merkley were prophetic, it’s tonight,’ Reid said on the floor. ‘These two young, fine senators said it was time to change the rules of the Senate, and we didn’t. They were right. The rest of us were wrong — or most of us, anyway. What a shame.’ Reid added: ‘If there were anything that ever needed changing in this body, it’s the filibuster rules, because it’s been abused, abused, abused.’”

At Townhall.com, Guy Benson has the video of Harry Reid’s latest attack on this venerable Senate tradition and notes, “Interestingly, when Reid’s minority posse was actually abusing the judicial filibuster in the mid-2000’s, they defended their inviolable right to obstruct President Bush’s appointees . . . .” He points out that last night Reid was attacking all filibusters, not just those of judicial nominees, which Democrats went to the mats to defend in 2005.

And what prompted Reid’s “anger,” as Politico describes it? He wanted to pass a bill without any debate or amendment and Republicans objected, demanding the basic rights of senators. A spokesman for Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) complained on Twitter, “McConnell is holding up bipartisan Ex-Im bill in name of amendments by Toomey, Vitter, Rand Paul & Mike Lee.” But have Senate Democrats really made legislating their priority recently? Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell has been less than impressed with Democrats’ priorities: “Earlier this week, the President repackaged a list of old ideas into a Post-It note checklist for Congress. He said he did not want to ‘overload’ Congress. Unfortunately besides the weekly political show votes to coincide with the President’s campaign schedule, the work that needs to be done, isn’t. No budget, nothing to prevent the largest tax hike in history, and House-passed bills are sitting in the hopper. And while the President is trying to manufacture arguments that he can run on, House Republicans have spent the last year and a half voting on and passing energy and jobs bills. In fact, more than two dozen job proposals are currently collecting dust on the [Senate] Majority Leader’s desk.”

With Democrats’ clear desire stymie debate in the Senate, it’s interesting to note what Harry Reid said about such things back when his priority was defending the filibuster, as Guy Benson highlights: “The Senate was not established to be efficient. Sometimes the rules get in the way of efficiency. The Senate was established to make sure that minorities are protected. Majorities can always protect themselves, but minorities cannot. That is what the Senate is all about. For more than 200 years, the rules of the Senate have protected the American people, and rightfully so. The need to muster 60 votes in order to terminate Senate debate naturally frustrates the majority and oftentimes the minority. I am sure it will frustrate me when I assume the office of majority leader in a few weeks. But I recognize this requirement is a tool that serves the long-term interest of the Senate and the American people and our country.”

Related:

Rasmussen Reports: 23% View Harry Reid Favorably, 57% Don’t

Comments

comments

Gallup finds today, “Thirty-two percent of 18- to 29-year-olds in the U.S. workforce were underemployed in April, as measured by Gallup without seasonal adjustment. . . . Underemployment among 18- to 29-year-olds has hovered around 30% for most of the past year, showing no real improvement. . . . Young adults were more than twice as likely as those in older age groups to be underemployed in April. . . . Young adults continue to be much more likely than average to be unemployed . . . .”

Examining these results, Gallup writes, “Wall Street has generally viewed the government’s unemployment report for April as a negative for the U.S. economy. Gallup’s unemployment measures show that April has also brought gloomy job news for young Americans and underscores that this group has been struggling disproportionately for some time. Those aged 18 to 29 are more than twice as likely as those in any other age group to be underemployed. . . . Today’s slow economic growth is a disaster for those unemployed and underemployed as they look for jobs when so few new jobs are being created. For younger Americans as a group, this is a particularly acute issue. Nearly one in three young adults in the workforce are not now able to gain full-time job experience. This not only hurts them temporarily, but deprives them of the experience they need to get a better job in the future. It also deprives U.S. companies of the skilled and experienced workers they will need for their businesses to prosper in the years ahead.

This news comes on top of recent reports that only half of graduates between 2009 and 2011 had found a full-time job within a year of leaving school, that last year over half of college graduates under 25 were unemployed or underemployed, and that “[n]early 25 million adults live at home with their parents because they’re unemployed or underemployed,” leaving The Atlantic to conclude, “It is, very simply, a tough time to be young.”

But instead of any real solutions, President Obama offers only campaign rhetoric designed at creating attacks on Republicans or excuses for why his policies have failed.  When the Stimulus failed, it wasn’t the government’s fault. It was the Republicans. When the health care bill caused health care costs to rise, same thing. When trillions are spent and the jobs don’t come, it’s ATM machines, it’s the weather, it’s bankers, it’s the rich, it’s Fox News. It’s anything other than the government.

Related:

Rasmussen Reports: 48% Think It’s Possible For Anyone Seeking Work To Find A Job

Comments

comments