Regarding the Speakership – Let’s Shake Things Up this Time Around

by: Brent Smith at the Common Constitutionalist

Scroll Down for Audio Version

For the past several days, Washington D.C. has been all abuzz. Not only did facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg make an appearance, but Speaker of the House Paul Ryan announced he was retiring to “spend more time with his family.” That or he’s getting out while the gettin’s good.

Still, as a parent myself, and after hearing his reasons for no longer wanting to be just a “weekend dad,” I get it, and I believe him. He has missed practically the entire childhood of all his children. That’s motivation enough for me.

On the political side, Ryan said that, “I like to think I’ve done my part, my little part in history to set us on a better course.” Indeed you have Mr. Speaker – indeed you have (I say at least partly facetiously).

Alright – so Ryan is out. Who then will take his place? Will it be just another swamp-thing, or like the Executive branch, are they going to opt to shake things up? read more

Spendthrift House & Senate

from the American Spectator:

Sometimes posturing proves bad for posture. Standing for eight hours in four-inch heels strikes as just one of those times.

Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi grandstanded on immigration in the well of the House of Representatives on Wednesday. The media hailed the lengthy harangue as unprecedented. But surely this comes as not the first time a preachy liberal promised to take just one minute of your time only to conclude the lecture eight hours later. read more

Shouldn’t Ryan’s Healthcare Failure be About Us?

by: the Common Constitutionalist

No Audio Version

Can we get a little perspective on the epic RINOCare fail? By perspective, I mean, exactly who it really harms.

There is a one word answer to the question of who it harms, and it doesn’t start with ‘T’. The word actually begins with ‘U’ – as in Us! Yet watching the weekend cable news broadcasts, there has been nary a word mentioned about the harm Paul Ryan’s phony “repeal and replace” bill has caused us – the Americans who voted for these bums.

We the “silent majority,” who, over the past few election cycles, have decided to not be so silent – to make our wishes known to these politicians. In return for our votes they have made promises.

Beginning in 2010, Republicans began an unbroken string of passing clean repeal bills. They’ve asked for our help to build majorities and WE made it happen. We even elected an “outsider” from the business community to aid in our quest to roll back government and rid us of ObamaCare. And for all our trouble – for all our hard work and heavy lifting, it is WE who have been stabbed in the back by Ryan and the establishment.

However, to historically reliable cables news outlets like Fox, it is like we don’t exist. It seems as if it is now all about politics – not people – not voters and taxpayers. read more

Trump May End Up Owning RyanCare

by: the Common Constitutionalist

Scroll Down for Audio Version

If Paul Ryan’s ObamaCare-lite bill makes it to president Trump’s desk in any form close to what it is now and he signs, it will become Trump’s healthcare debacle. Although it should be called RyanCare or CowardCare, it will ultimately end up as what I coined on Wednesday – O-DonaldCare.

And this is the shame of it. The president can’t know everything, so he must rely on honest brokers to give him an accurate account of various bills. Rand Paul, who is steadfast against the Republican bill, thinks the Republicans, particularly Paul Ryan, are not being accurate or honest with Trump. My buddy, Onan Coca at Constitution.com quotes Paul saying: “I don’t think it makes any sense and I think he’s [Ryan] trying to pull the wool over the eyes of the president.”

Unfortunately that’s just the way it works. Presidents get congratulated on everything good that happens on their watch, but also get hung, rightly or wrongly, by any failures. Few will remember or care that this sham started with Paul Ryan, anymore than we recall that Obama didn’t draft ObamaCare. Yet no one calls that GruberCare, after its architect, Jonathan Gruber, do they. All that will matter is that Trump promoted it and ultimately signed it, so it’s his baby – Rosemary’s baby!

Now I must admit, that in my haste to rush my initial reaction out to the Republican bill, I didn’t do justice to just how bad this thing is and I also was inaccurate on a point or two. If you care to go back and read it you may do so here.

I also admit that I am not personally privy to all that is in the Republican replacement bill, so must therefore rely on experts I trust to do that leg-work for me. read more

Paul Ryan’s Inclusive Conservatism

by: the Common Constitutionalist

Last week the New York Times wrote:  “Republican leaders on Capitol Hill conceded that they will miss a Friday deadline, and the House Appropriations Committee on Wednesday put forward a stopgap measure to prevent a government shutdown and give negotiators an additional five days to reach an agreement.”

And this is what happens every time a budget bill or frankly any “important” legislation (if there is such a thing) comes up. It’s planned and purposeful – playing the postponement game with “stopgap measures.” Isn’t it curious that they always seem to be pushed right to the brink of a holiday period, a government shutdown or such thing? This time it’s a double whammy – Christmas break and the dreaded shutdown (which we all know is a mere slowdown). No one on capital hill wants to be here longer than they have to, so the old game is to keep extending the final decision making until the 11th hour and rush to make a deal, then leave town.

Senator majority leader and head bully, Mitch McConnell already stated there will NEVER again be a government shutdown. read more

Paul Ryan Gets Serious

by: the Common Constitutionalist

 

Yesterday Guy Benson, a Townhall.com contributor, wrote a piece entitled “Paul Ryan Introduces Balanced Budget, Democrats React Predictably“.

 

The article begins: “There was some debate over whether House Republicans would offer any spending blueprint for fiscal year 2015, as some argue it would only hand Democrats ammunition ahead of the midterm elections. In light of the Ryan-Murray compromise spending caps that last for two years, why bother advancing a detailed budget?”

 

Yes, we wouldn’t want to hand the Democrats any ammunition. That would be terrible. But I guess “some” would be right, assuming the “some” are the establishment Republicans who cower at any mention of a spending cut, real or fake, and who can’t argue in favor of cuts because they don’t believe in them – unless of course they’re the fake kind.

 

Benson goes on to catalogue the Republican “Path to Prosperity”. According to Paul Ryan; his “Path to Prosperity” balances the budget in 10 years.

 

Okay, to the average citizen, that sounds good, but we are not average. We follow this stuff closely, so we know that’s a lie and if not an out right lie, Ryan knows it won’t happen. He must. The next Congress can and will simply rewrite it and if not that one, then the next and so on.

 

It’s like saying global warming will kill us all in 20 years. You don’t have to prove it. You can just say it. read more

Paul Ryan Sells Out Disabled Veterans

A provision cutting the pensions of military retirees in the bipartisan budget deal that the Senate will vote on this week does not exempt disabled veterans, the Washington Free Beacon has learned.

Disabled retirees were previously thought to be exempt from the changes to military retiree pay, which could cost servicemembers up to $124,000 over a 20-year period.

The Free Beacon previously reported that military retirees under the age of 62 would receive 1 percentage point less in their annual cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) in the plan crafted by House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R., Wis.) and Senate Budget Committee Chairman Patty Murray (D., Wash.).

The section of the U.S. code that has been altered also applies to disabled servicemembers, many of whom have been wounded in combat.

Sen. Jeff Sessions (R., Ala.), ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee, called the change “unthinkable.”

“It has been asserted that the controversial change to military retirees’ pensions affects those who are ‘working-age’ and ‘still in their working years,’ with the clear suggestion being that these individuals are able to work,” Sessions said in a statement. “That’s why I was deeply troubled when my staff and I discovered that even individuals who have been wounded and suffered a service-related disability could see their pensions reduced under this plan.” read more

Republican Three Card Monte

by: the Common Constitutionalist

At 7:45 on Friday morning reports indicated zero senate republicans were planning on voting for the Ryan-Murray House budget proposal. The GOP’s Senate leaders plan is to launch a procedural effort to kill the plan over a laundry list of objections – including a claim that it short-changes military veterans and other government retirees, which is does, of course.

Dick (turban) Durbin told reporters on Thursday, “We need Republican votes to pass the budget agreement, period. We need at least five. And I’m hoping that there will be more than that.” As of Friday morning he had none.

The GOP’s three most senior senators, including Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, have announced that they will vote ‘no.’

As one would expect, Senator Ted Cruz said the proposal, “spends more, taxes more, and allows continued funding for Obamacare. I cannot support it.” Thanks Paul Ryan, for selling us out and lying to Mark Levin on national radio about it.

One GOP Senate staffer,  speaking on condition of anonymity, said, “this is the agreement’s ‘pixie dust approach to budgeting. We’re doing what we always do. We set out a ten-year plan while knowing full well that we have a decade to undo it and shift gears again.” read more

The Girlie Man Party

by: the Common Constitutionalist 

When John Boehner said to effectively read his lips: If you are for tax cuts, you are for this budget; did you believe him?

When Paul Ryan explained that this budget is the best deal we can get, did you believe him?

When old Johnny Boehner went on to exclaim that the budget deal, which fully funds Obamacare, is far from perfect, but it’s a start; did you believe him then?

Do you believe anything the Republicans are saying about this disastrous budget agreement? No? Me either.

Yet there is a positive that has come out of this bogus budget busting deal. And don’t believe the lies. There are no budget cuts – only the usual hollow promises.

So what’s the positive? We can, once and for all, plainly see who is on our side and who is not. We can clearly see who will fight and who will cave. Who has true courage and who are spineless.

And it all comes down to one word: Shutdown, or fear of another dreaded shutdown. read more

Ryan v Levin on Immigration

 

by: the Common Constitutionalist

Paul Ryan was on Mark Levin’s show on Tuesday discussing immigration. You know, the same Paul Ryan that with his tag team partner Marco Rubio, have been pushing for a “comprehensive immigration” bill. I’ll give him props for his courage at least.

Levin told Ryan that some new immigration numbers were just-released. He said that new CBO estimates are that the Senate bill will only reduce illegal immigration by 25%. Ryan responded by saying that the House will not focus or discuss the Senate bill and will only focus on their own bill.

Ryan said that “this problem” has to be dealt with. The “problem” being illegals but would not say the words illegal alien or illegal. He called them undocumented workers.

Ryan continued saying that we had a law in 1986 and it didn’t work nor did the ‘96 or 2006 laws. Ryan claimed, as Levin laughed out loud, that they in Congress want to get it right this time.

Naturally Mark asked him: “Why should we trust you [guys]?” Ryan said that this time they would have “real metrics” that would have to be met to secure the border. Not just DHS’s promise. He said the GAO would make the determination of border security. He then went on to explain the metrics that must be met regarding the undocumented workers.

Levin asked: “What if the illegal doesn’t meet your requirements. Are you going to deport them?” Ryan’s answer: “Yeah, then they are deportable, that’s the whole point.” Levin interrupted rather emphatically by saying that they’re not going to be deported!

Notice that Ryan said they are deportable, not that they would be deported. One has to listen very carefully as politicians throw out these code words.

Levin added that the president is in charge of who is deported and he simply won’t do it no matter what Congress insists on.

And of course Levin is correct. That’s why this argument is so specious. It sounds like tough talk but that’s all it is. I’m reminded of the Bumble Snow Monster that looked scary but was harmless after his teeth were removed.

Ryan’s response was if you write a law and they break the law, they are deportable. It can’t be fought or adjudicated. Huh? They already broke the law just getting here. What the heck do they care if they break another?

Could someone as intelligent as Paul Ryan really be this naïve, or is it something else?

Ryan then asked Levin: “Do you believe we will find 11 million or more people, round them up and kick them out?” Levin’s answer: “no, under this administration we won’t round up a half million people.” Ryan said that no administration could do that, even if they tried.

Frankly, how would we know? We’ve never tried. And I beg to differ. You won’t get them all, but you can get 70% within a few months time with the will and a few thousand agents. I live on the outskirts of a northeastern city. It’s a small city but a city nonetheless. I guarantee, you give me 1000 agents and a few days and I could find 75% of all illegals in my city. Why? Because they all settled in about 10-block area downtown and I’ll bet every city is the same. That’s why! 

All of what Ryan continued to promote was in the 1986 amnesty bill. Levin pointed this out to Ryan. Ryan didn’t really acknowledge it. He continued to drone on about metrics that have to be met regarding security and legal status of the undocumented workers. It didn’t convince Mark and it didn’t convince me.

Look, the bottom line is that all the metrics, the rules and new laws are not going to solve the illegal problem. We have been debating this current problem for over 25 years.

If they, Congress, were serious, they would simply state that we can live with our current situation for another year or two. Therefore Congress’s proposal should be to secure the border…period. Each border State would then verify to its security. When that is completed, we can revisit the rest. It’s that simple and that’s why it will never be done. It’s not “comprehensive” enough!