Nutless

[SEC=UGA]

In a bid to emphasize the need to rein in the nation's soaring deficits, Republicans today went outside the Capitol to highlight their push to cut down on federal waste. GOP lawmakers conducted a hearing in the middle of a cold, empty government building down the street from Capitol Hill that has been vacant for more than a decade.

 

Built in 1892 to house the U.S. Post Office department headquarters and Washington, D.C.'s post office facility, the Old Post Office costs $12 million a year to operate. It sits on some of the most prime real estate in the nation's capital, only four blocks from the White House.

 

But since it is only partially occupied, the government only collects $5.5 million in rent. That means taxpayers are losing $6.5 million every year on the operation of the building.

 

"We have passed laws, several laws," said Rep. John Mica, R-Fla. "We have passed specific laws to do this and we are sitting here in an empty, vacant building.

 

"It's just frustrating. We've been talking about this my entire career," he added. "We've got to do a better job."

 

Now, Republicans say they want to slice $1.7 billion out of the government's budget for buildings. They are promising a slew of other cuts, too, including ending President Obama's high-speed rail program, gutting the Environmental Protection Agency, and even cutting $74 million from the FBI's budget.

 

"We're broke," House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, said Thursday. "Let's be honest with ourselves."

 

But thus far, Republicans have left some very expensive sacred cows untouched, such as more than $5 billion every year spent on ethanol subsidies that neither help the environment nor save energy; $6.2 billion in tax credits for oil and gas companies flush in record profits; and $3.5 billion for an extra engine for the F-35 fighter jet that the Pentagon doesn't want.

 

Part of the engine is made in the district of House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., another part in Boehner's district.

 

"I would like to ask you about some of the spending cuts that we don't see talked about," ABC News' Jon Karl asked Boehner. "I see the list the Appropriations Committee has put out where is there nothing in here about cutting funding for the extra engine for the F-35, for example. Isn't it a no brainer? The Pentagon says they don't want it." "I am sure we are going to see a bill soon and all the details that come with it," Boehner replied.

 

"But another no brainer -- ethanol subsidies, you know, $6 billion a year -- not even talked about in any of the stuff you have put out," Karl said.

 

"Some of the things that you are mentioning are not in the discretionary spending pot," said Boehner.

 

"But shouldn't it be considered for cuts?" Karl asked.

 

"I'll remind you that we have been in the majority now five weeks," Boehner said. "We are going to have a long year. You are going to see more spending cuts come out of this Congress than any Congress in the history of this country."

 

Critics complain that the programs that escaped cutbacks managed to do so because of political motives.

 

"It's very hard to get people in Congress to vote against defense spending," said Ryan Alexander, president of the watchdog group Taxpayers for Common Sense. "There's a lot of waste in the defense budget because national security is a priority for every American."

 

While Republicans unveil their sweeping plans to slash federal spending, Democrats -- who still control the Senate -- are urging caution, warning that drastic cutbacks could prove damaging.

 

"The American people want us to cut spending while being reasonable in the process," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., told reporters on a conference call. "We're not going to take a meat axe to this. We're going to do some very fine tuning."

 

"You can't just cut things that hurt the other guy," said Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.

 

"We need to think about what we're cutting, and make sure those cuts aren't counterproductive. We need to pay attention to the quality of these cuts, not just the quantity," Reid said later on the Senate floor. "After all, you can lose a lot of weight by cutting off your arms and legs. But no doctor would recommend it."

 

ETA: We're screwed, neither side has the balls to step up to the plate and do what is right for this country. If ever there were a time to start a letter writing campaign, to both sides, it is now. Either that, or we need to go all Egypt on their asses.

Edited February 11, 2011 by SEC=UGA

[Ursa Majoris]

ETA: We're screwed, neither side has the balls to step up to the plate and do what is right for this country. If ever there were a time to start a letter writing campaign, to both sides, it is now. Either that, or we need to go all Egypt on their asses.

Three paragraphs near the end:

 

While Republicans unveil their sweeping plans to slash federal spending, Democrats -- who still control the Senate -- are urging caution, warning that drastic cutbacks could prove damaging. Their plans aren't sweeping at all. They are barely flicking a duster around, never mind sweeping.

 

"The American people want us to cut spending while being reasonable in the process," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., told reporters on a conference call. "We're not going to take a meat axe to this. We're going to do some very fine tuning." Harry, fine tuning isn't going to cut it. A major overhaul is needed for this engine.

 

"You can't just cut things that hurt the other guy," said Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. Exactly - see the spare F35 engine that the Pentagon doesn't want.

[bpwallace49]

Hope and change . . GOP style.

 

Lets cut waste, but not the waste in MY district!!

 

While the rhetoric is different from each party, at the heart they all do the same self serving crap that is solely designed to keep them re-elected.

 

Hypocrites one and all . . and when you get a guy that votes his conscience and "breaks ranks" they get vilified. The two party political system will be the ene dof the country . . . also, anyone else find it funny that in the most "free" country in the world we only have 2 choices of rigid ideology to vote for?

Edited February 11, 2011 by bpwallace49

[SEC=UGA]

Three paragraphs near the end:

 

I'm not certain where you are going with your post. It seems to be reinforcing my comment, does it not?

[Duchess Jack]

I'm not certain where you are going with your post. It seems to be reinforcing my comment, does it not?

perhap's he's looking at things like an American rather than a democrat or republican

Edited February 11, 2011 by Duchess Jack

[SEC=UGA]

perhap's he's looking at things like an American rather than a democrat or republican

 

Again, what are you guys talking about... each side is saying they are not willing to step up and cut... "We can't take a meat clever to the budget... we're going to do some very fine tuning..." "Those things aren't in the discreationary budget..."

 

Each side is basically saying, hey, we aren't going to make any REAL cuts... We're gona sit back and argue over these cuts and at the end of the day nothing is going to be accomplished. I think I'm looking at this through a pretty unbiased lens in stating that both sides in this article seem to be a bunch of self serving, nutless, d-bags...

[redrumjuice]

Now they want to unionize the TSA.

[Ursa Majoris]

I'm not certain where you are going with your post. It seems to be reinforcing my comment, does it not?

I was indeed mostly aligning with your thoughts.

[SEC=UGA]

I was indeed mostly aligning with your thoughts.

 

Cool. Glad we can finally agree on something!!

[TimC]

Either that, or we need to go all Egypt on their asses.

 

How many of us would have to show up on the National Mall for Congress to step down?

[Duchess Jack]

Again, what are you guys talking about...

 

you know... suggesting that both sides are getting it wrong. I figured that we all know how he felt the right was handling things.

[SEC=UGA]

How many of us would have to show up on the National Mall for Congress to step down?

 

About 250K southerners with their arsenal in tow. Or the entire population of Mass, NY, NJ, Del, CA, WA, OR, MI, IL, VT, RI, Maine, Conn, etc....

[Azazello1313]

So here’s what’s interesting. When we asked last month about their thoughts on the best way to reduce the deficit, here’s how they (a panel of more than 2,500 self-identified conservative Republicans)replied:

 

• 56 percent said cut spending across the board

• 27 percent said cut spending from all government budgets except the military

• 10 percent said pass a balanced budget amendment

• 3 percent said cut taxes

• 3 percent said fix Social Security and Medicare so they don’t pay out more than they take in

 

3 percent actually understand the root of the problem, huh? 3 percent? granted, imposing little piddly cuts here and there, and squeezing the budgets of federal agencies a little bit are somewhat better than NOT doing those things. and it's certainly better than going on a massive spending binge -- so in that sense, replacing the pelosi congress with a bunch of paperweights would have been a substantial improvement. but the republicans -- at every level, organization and "grass roots" -- need to get their chit together if they are going to present a coherent small government, fiscal discipline message. they have an open window right now, but it won't be open much longer, and so far the signs aren't encouraging.

[Savage Beatings]

 

 

3 percent actually understand the root of the problem, huh? 3 percent? granted, imposing little piddly cuts here and there, and squeezing the budgets of federal agencies a little bit are somewhat better than NOT doing those things. and it's certainly better than going on a massive spending binge -- so in that sense, replacing the pelosi congress with a bunch of paperweights would have been a substantial improvement. but the republicans -- at every level, organization and "grass roots" -- need to get their chit together if they are going to present a coherent small government, fiscal discipline message. they have an open window right now, but it won't be open much longer, and so far the signs aren't encouraging.

 

 

I'm willing to be that over 90% of Congress (both Dems and Repubs) actually understand the root of the problem, but are not willing to go on record saying as much, and are definitely not willing to do anything about it.

[TimC]

I'm willing to be that over 90% of Congress (both Dems and Repubs) actually understand the root of the problem, but are not willing to go on record saying as much, and are definitely not willing to do anything about it.

 

Yep...all of them know what the problem is, but correcting the problem won't get you elected. It's a wicked cycle, ain't it?

[Ursa Majoris]

Yep...all of them know what the problem is, but correcting the problem won't get you elected. It's a wicked cycle, ain't it?

And there we have it. Our electoral system is such that we are now in a permanent election cycle that requires permanent campaigning. I found one of the resignations among the current spate of resignations to be particularly interesting. Can't find a link to it right now but it's a Democrat who was described in the article I read as a "thinker" who very much disliked the fact that the main portion of his time was spent gladhanding and fundraising rather than addressing national problems.

 

This has absolutely got to be fixed. We are already fixated on who will run for the Republicans in November 2012, a full two years before the actual election. It's beyond ridiculous, as is the requirement that everyone in the House has to go through this nonsense every two years. How the heck do we expect anything of substance to be achieved?

[Kid Cid]

We have our own version of nutless right here. All the pansies that won't sign up for Mystery Huddler.

[Perchoutofwater]

I'm not a big fan of Boehner. I think he is a typical politician, in other words not necessarily in it for what is best for the country, but for what is best for his next campaign. I'd love to see them tackle the real issues, SS, Medicare, and Defense. I'm still hopeful that they will address these. At least they are cutting spending. Hopefully what they are doing now is addressing the items they know they can get through The House relatively easily, and put pressure on the Senate to take action on them. If they are cutting the low lying fruit first and it can be done quickly, I don't have a problem with it as long as once they quickly dispatch the low lying fruit, they take on the root of the problem. I know when me and the wife need to cut our budget, we quickly cut out the things we can agree we can live without, and then we discuss the more difficult decisions at length. This is what I hope the GOP in The House is doing. As Boehner has said, they've only been in control of The House for five weeks. So far except from taking up a few social issues I'd rather see them put off until later, I really don't have any real complaints. Now, if we are sitting here this time next year talking about why the GOP hasn't proposed cuts in SS, Medicare, and Defense, I will be angry. Will I be angry enough to vote them out at the next election? Well that depends on what the Dems have proposed on the issue. Remember the GOP only has control of the House, so they are far more limited in what they can do than the Dems who have the Senate and the President. With the exception of Ursa (who I'll tip my hat to) I don't see anyone here riding the Dems who currently have more power for these issues.

[Ursa Majoris]

 

 

3 percent actually understand the root of the problem, huh? 3 percent? granted, imposing little piddly cuts here and there, and squeezing the budgets of federal agencies a little bit are somewhat better than NOT doing those things. and it's certainly better than going on a massive spending binge -- so in that sense, replacing the pelosi congress with a bunch of paperweights would have been a substantial improvement. but the republicans -- at every level, organization and "grass roots" -- need to get their chit together if they are going to present a coherent small government, fiscal discipline message. they have an open window right now, but it won't be open much longer, and so far the signs aren't encouraging.

It is alarming that so many people don't understand that there are only four truly big rocks to address. I definitely believe that there is significant trimming to be done to all the other (relatively) little rocks but most of what has currently been presented seems like sweeping the roadway clear of sand and gravel while the boulder landslide is still blocking the road.

 

Maybe people are unable to grasp the real scale of the difference between SS / Medicare / defense / debt interest and the NPR budget? Maybe they buy in to the deficit being caused by welfare moms? I dunno but it certainly appears that there is a lack of a grasp on what it is really going to take to fix the issue plus there is a pervasive unwillingness on the part of pretty much everyone to have any action affect them personally.

[SEC=UGA]

We have our own version of nutless right here. All the pansies that won't sign up for Mystery Huddler.

 

My photos were rejected as outright lewd and unacceptable. Sheep need loving to and no amount of censorship will make me believe otherwise.

[I Like Soup]

How many of us would have to show up on the National Mall for Congress to step down?

 

Odd you say that, I was thinking about this on the way home last night. :greatmindsthingalikepassmethetorch:

[Big John]

My photos were rejected as outright lewd and unacceptable. Sheep need loving to and no amount of censorship will make me believe otherwise.

spain and Jumpin Johnies are no longer here.

[Perchoutofwater]

How many of us would have to show up on the National Mall for Congress to step down?

 

I did, or I was calling for the majority of Congress to step down. There are still a few good ones on both sides, but they are few and far between.

[bpwallace49]

I'm not a big fan of Boehner. I think he is a typical politician, in other words not necessarily in it for what is best for the country, but for what is best for his next campaign. I'd love to see them tackle the real issues, SS, Medicare, and Defense. I'm still hopeful that they will address these. At least they are cutting spending. Hopefully what they are doing now is addressing the items they know they can get through The House relatively easily, and put pressure on the Senate to take action on them. If they are cutting the low lying fruit first and it can be done quickly, I don't have a problem with it as long as once they quickly dispatch the low lying fruit, they take on the root of the problem. I know when me and the wife need to cut our budget, we quickly cut out the things we can agree we can live without, and then we discuss the more difficult decisions at length. This is what I hope the GOP in The House is doing. As Boehner has said, they've only been in control of The House for five weeks. So far except from taking up a few social issues I'd rather see them put off until later, I really don't have any real complaints. Now, if we are sitting here this time next year talking about why the GOP hasn't proposed cuts in SS, Medicare, and Defense, I will be angry. Will I be angry enough to vote them out at the next election? Well that depends on what the Dems have proposed on the issue. Remember the GOP only has control of the House, so they are far more limited in what they can do than the Dems who have the Senate and the President. With the exception of Ursa (who I'll tip my hat to) I don't see anyone here riding the Dems who currently have more power for these issues.

 

Perch . . why the pass when they have been there 5 weeks? Are you saying that after alllll that time moaning about overspending, they DIDNT have any plans on what to cut that could be enacted right away? So they campaigned on "reducing spending", but didnt think to look at the biggest cost areas? How remarkably far-seeing of them. They have time to put together a stupid repeal of the health care bill they they KNEW would fail when they did it, but we cant touch a Pentagon project that is partially made in Cantor's district? please. I can guran-damn-tee that you and I could cut what the have cut and more over a 12 pack of beer, and we dont have a team of staffers doing all the work for us. I think all we would need is a copy of the budget and underlying assumptions, position papers explaining what each departmnet does and some red pens.

 

The left campaigned of health care reform, and did it. They horribly, horribly bungled it, but they did it. The right has campaigned on fiscal responsibility and are doing jack just order the fish for goodness sake. They have a GOLDEN opportunity to actually make a difference here and attack entitlements, and either show the American people they they care about reforming gubment, or they can piss it away in irrelevancies. The lack of preparation by anyone except Paul Ryan (who came up with the "Blueprint" before the right was in power and without "blessing" from the GOP) is disturbing. Ryan saw a problem, and started looking at how to fix it by going after ALL spending. But the GOP cant endorse something that may upset their electorate.

 

The smoke and mirrors cuts and low lying fruit are red herrings to cover up the lack of inactivity on the big 4 areas of spend that never get touched. Like a magician they wave eliminating a subsity of a couple million dollars on one hand, while quietly continuing billion dollar pet projects behind their backs.

 

And we fall for it everytime.

[Azazello1313]

Perch . . why the pass when they have been there 5 weeks?

...

The left campaigned of health care reform, and did it. They horribly, horribly bungled it, but they did it. The right has campaigned on fiscal responsibility and are doing jack just order the fish for goodness sake.

 

 

they had 60 votes in the senate, a big majroty in the house, AND the presidency....and as I recall, it took them a wee bit longer than 5 weeks to "do" health care reform.