Erick Erickson's Blog, page 91

Why Harriet Miers . . . er . . . Mitt Romney Cannot Be the GOP Nominee

Mitt Romney is the Harriet Miers of the 2012 election cycle. He is only a conservative because certain Washington conservatives tell us he is conservative. These same Washington conservatives said the same about Harriet Miers back in 2005.

What's more, it is starting to show. Have you seen the latest CNN poll?

Newt Gingrich has surged into the lead. That was rather expected. But Mitt Romney fell four points.

Yet again we see a non-Romney candidate move into the lead. It has gotten as predictable as the sun coming up. Romney is always the bridesmaid and never the bride. Why is that? It's easy to understand.

The Republican base profoundly distrusts MItt Romney for a billion legitimate reasons, including such small things as his refusal to sit in the center chair on Bret Baier's show or answer any tough questions. And let's not forget all his flip-flops well chronicled right here.

Mitt Romney has given the base no reason to ever trust him except, in 2008, when he was not named John McCain. That's it.

So when we get to the general election, Mitt Romney will have Jenn Rubin of the Washington Post cheerleading him with the editorial page of National Review behind her and virtually every other Republican giving him golf claps on the way to annihilation against a base of black voters and union voters who will go vote for Barack Obama come hell or high water.

Don't get me wrong. Republicans will vote for Mitt Romney. But their energy will be tepid. He gives no one anything to get excited about except the makers of silly putty and hair products.

For months on end the establishment Republicans in Washington, D.C. have told us that Mitt Romney is the "most electable" guy. I have a hard time seeing how anybody can be the most electable guy when a minimum of 75% of the guy's own base of voters consistently want someone else. The best response the Romney fans have is that none of the other guys are getting much more than that either. True, but we have seen time and time again that as any one of them drops out or other implodes, their voters will go elsewhere — just not to Mitt Romney.

Of course I do expect him to be the nominee, so I anticipate four more years of Barack Obama.

The Super Committee Failed The Day It Was Created

The Super Committee has failed to find a way to trim $1.2 trillion from the deficit. The fact is, though, the Super Committee was a failure from the moment it was conceived. Congress, both Democrats and Republicans, could not control itself. So it punted its failures to a Super Committee and even the threat of massive defense cuts could not prompt Congress to kick its spending addiction.

Now, some members of Congress are even saying "to hell with the defense cuts. We'll stop those cuts." Of course.

But it was all a bunch of smoke and mirrors for one simple reason.

We're going to add ten trillion dollars over the next ten years and all this committee was supposed to do was find $1.2 trillion to trim over the same ten years, i.e. a hundred billion dollars in cuts a year to a trillion dollars in deficits a year.

The math never added up. The Super Committee and the elaborate theater that preceded it were just a bipartisan way to cover up the fact that both Democrats and Republicans have screwed the country out of its life savings while they've been funding their pet projects from bridges to nowhere to solar panel firms.

And this all leads to a calamitous dirty little not so secret that the Democrats have no answer for. If Republicans, who were willing to raise taxes on the Super Committee by the way, gave the Democrats their ultimate dream — taking 100% of all dollars earned from every single person who makes $200,000.00 a year or more — we still wouldn't close Barack Obama's budget deficit. There'd still be a gap.

That leads us in two directions no one in Washington wants to go. Either start raising taxes on the middle class or start cutting significantly from the federal budget.

Because no one in Washington outside of the real conservatives are willing to do either, the Super Committee, the Budget Control Act, and every statement to every reporter by every leader of either party is all smoke and mirrors.

Morning Briefing for November 22, 2011

RedState Morning Briefing

November 22, 2011

Go to www.RedStateMB.com to get
the Morning Briefing every morning at no charge.

Have a great Thanksgiving. I'm off to mop floors, clean out the Big Green Egg, and help my wife get the house ready for my family coming in for the holiday. And yes, I do smoke my turkey on the Big Green Egg with a combination of hickory and apple wood chips. Yum.

1. The Super Committee Failed The Day It Was Created

2. Why Harriet Miers . . . er . . . Mitt Romney Cannot Be the GOP Nominee

3. The 2012 Standard: Holding President Obama Accountable

4. Obama Administration and EPA Use Clean Water Act for New Overreach

5. This Is What Democracy Looks Like to State Senator Lena Taylor

6. Obama Administration Sends Weapons Contract to Foreign Company with Ties to Iran

7. Become A Force Multiplier: Five simple tasks for American Activists

8. Pay Attention to Dan Liljenquist in Utah

———————————————————————-

1. The Super Committee Failed The Day It Was Created

The Super Committee has failed to find a way to trim $1.2 trillion from the deficit. The fact is, though, the Super Committee was a failure from the moment it was conceived. Congress, both Democrats and Republicans, could not control itself. So it punted its failures to a Super Committee and even the threat of massive defense cuts could not prompt Congress to kick its spending addiction.

Now, some members of Congress are even saying "to hell with the defense cuts. We'll stop those cuts." Of course.

But it was all a bunch of smoke and mirrors for one simple reason.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

2. Why Harriet Miers . . . er . . . Mitt Romney Cannot Be the GOP Nominee

Mitt Romney is the Harriet Miers of the 2012 election cycle. He is only a conservative because certain Washington conservatives tell us he is conservative. These same Washington conservatives said the same about Harriet Miers back in 2005.

What's more, it is starting to show. Have you seen the latest CNN poll?

Newt Gingrich has surged into the lead. That was rather expected. But Mitt Romney fell four points.

Yet again we see a non-Romney candidate move into the lead. It has gotten as predictable as the sun coming up. Romney is always the bridesmaid and never the bride. Why is that? It's easy to understand.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

3. The 2012 Standard: Holding President Obama Accountable

President Obama did voters a favor. During the 2008 campaign and early in his administration, he laid out the standards by which he should be judged. He made it perfectly clear under what conditions he would deserve re-election.

And by his own standard he doesn't deserve a second term.

In February 2009, when employment was at 8.2 percent, he declared, "If I don't get this done in three years, then this is going to be a one term proposition."

Unemployment has yet to return to February 2009 levels, much less fall lower. Based on that standard alone, this should indeed be a "one term proposition."

But consider the President's other promises and self-imposed standards.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

4. Obama Administration and EPA Use Clean Water Act for New Overreach

Just as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has used the Clean Air Act to broaden the scope of their authority way beyond its original intention with rules like MACT and CSAPR, the Clean Water Act is becoming a tool of overreach by the out of control agency.

Barack Obama and the EPA's Lisa Jackson have made it clear through their actions that they will circumvent the legislature by using regulatory enforcement to enact Obama's green dreams, and now it seems that circumvention includes the Supreme Court of the United States.

During the Bush presidency, a series of Supreme Court decisions acknowledged the limits of reach for the Clean Water Act. Most notably, the Supreme Court clarified that federal jurisdiction did not extend to wetlands and other "waters of the United States" under the Clean Water Act. Through the Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook Country v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (2001) and Raponos v. U.S. (2006) the Supreme Court established that private property rights still mattered even in light of the Clean Water Act and that the federal government did not have authority over them.

This of course isn't stopping Barack Obama and Lisa Jackson from moving forward anyway.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

5. This Is What Democracy Looks Like to State Senator Lena Taylor

In an exclusive story broken by Media Trackers (www.MediaTrackers.org), Wisconsin Democrat state Senator Lena Taylor, an outspoken critic of Governor Scott Walker, appears to be closely associated with voter fraud that took place during the spring elections in April of this year. Taylor is also one of the 14 AWOL state Senators that fled across state lines rather than vote on Walker's Budget Repair Bill earlier this year.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

6. Obama Administration Sends Weapons Contract to Foreign Company with Ties to Iran

Late Thursday night, American company Hawker Beechcraft was informed by the U.S. Air Force that they were not going to be allowed to compete for an American military aircraft contract.

The company had been working with the Air Force for two years and spent over $100 million to ensure compliance with the requirements for the plane and says the craft (Beechcraft AT-6) met all requirements as shown through a demonstration actually led by the Air National Guard.

Keep in mind, this doesn't appear to be a question of being outbid or outclassed. In fact, this seems to be a classic example of a contract being awarded without any bidding process at all, something you may remember infuriated the left when the recipient of the contract was American company Haliburton.

There's a big difference this time. The company the no-bid contract went to isn't an American company. Worse yet, the company it did go to has questionable friends. Namely, Iran.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

7. Become A Force Multiplier: Five simple tasks for American Activists

After observing the trends on the Left for many years, in early February 2009, during a meeting with a friend familiar with the "hydra" that the Left had built, we lamented on how there was nothing on the Right to combat the behemoth that had been built by unions, the institutional Left, with the help of the mainstream media, to tear down the Right and propel Barack Obama and his fellow Democrats to their huge 2008 victories.

Knowing what was on the agenda, "we're finished as a nation," was the overriding feeling. A short time later, the first Tea Party rally was held.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

8. Pay Attention to Dan Liljenquist in Utah

There aren't a whole lot of Senate races to get excited about this year. Adam Hasner in Florida, Josh Mandel in Ohio, Don Stenberg in Nebraska, Ted Cruz in Texas, and Jeff Flake in Arizona are about it for me right now. But I do want to beat Heather Wilson in New Mexico and Tommy Thompson in Wisconsin.

One race where I've sat back a while is Utah. Senator Orrin Hatch is a decent enough guy and very likable, but I get the sense from the grassroots in Utah that they are ready for a change. And I think while Orrin Hatch has done a remarkable job moving right in the past year, I don't have confidence he'll stay there once he has another six year term. If past performance is the best indicator of future performance, I think we'll see a "centrist" Hatch the moment election season ends.

So I'm excited to Dan Liljenquist enter the Utah Senate race.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

Pay Attention to Dan Liljenquist in Utah

There aren't a whole lot of Senate races to get excited about this year. Adam Hasner in Florida, Josh Mandel in Ohio, Don Stenberg in Nebraska, Ted Cruz in Texas, and Jeff Flake in Arizona are about it for me right now. But I do want to beat Heather Wilson in New Mexico and Tommy Thompson in Wisconsin.

One race where I've sat back a while is Utah. Senator Orrin Hatch is a decent enough guy and very likable, but I get the sense from the grassroots in Utah that they are ready for a change. And I think while Orrin Hatch has done a remarkable job moving right in the past year, I don't have confidence he'll stay there once he has another six year term. If past performance is the best indicator of future performance, I think we'll see a "centrist" Hatch the moment election season ends.

So I'm excited to Dan Liljenquist enter the Utah Senate race. I like this guy. I'm excited about this guy and his potential. The grassroots in Utah have high hopes for him and I do too. The buzz is pretty strong he is getting in.

That's good news.

Good Question by Mayhem

RedState User Mayhem asks a good question:

Sometimes I find it frustrating that you refrain from telling us *why* you don't support certain candidates. At times, you just completely ignore covering entire states because no one seems to excite you there (last year you said hardly anything about Rob Portman in Ohio, but, as I recall, you never really gave us a reason for why you didn't endorse him). I take your analysis seriously, and when you say something, I usually take it to be credible. But just throwing out broad "nobody excites me" statements about Senate races is, frankly, a cop out in my opinion.

I read RedState every day, and I don't recall reading much on the Missouri, Michigan, or Minnesota Senate races, for example. Could you tell us *why* you don't like Mark Neumann, or Pete Hoekstra, or Todd Akin the way you like Ted Cruz, Adam Hasner, and Jeff Flake? Give us your real analysis of these candidates, even if you don't end up endorsing them. Critique them for us, at least, so that we can add your two cents into our own decision making process for next year. Again, just implying that there isn't anyone exciting in Michigan doesn't help me very much. That may be the case, but afford us an explanation.

This deserves more consideration than a drive by comment.

First of all, and I don't mean this to be a cop out, but I do have three jobs and there are a hell of a lot of Senate races. I can't keep up with them all. Me not writing about a particular race is not a sign of disinterest in the race. More often than not, it means the race is not on my radar. We're going to support the GOP nominee regardless, so some races can sort themselves out.

There are other races where i think the nominee can push the Senate to the right. Let me be clear here. In my mind it is one thing to push the Senate to the GOP. It is quite another thing to push the Senate to the right. Electing a Republican does not necessarily push the Senate right.

So the races that typically get my interest first are the races where there is a contested Republican primary in a state that will more likely than not elect the Republican in the general election too. In those races, I want to engage and help the conservative so when he gets to Washington he can aid the conservative cause like Mike Lee or Rand Paul or Marco Rubio or Pat Toomey — primaries which caught my eye early on.

Mayhem mentions Todd Akin in Missouri and Pete Hoeskstra in Michigan. I've just started paying attention to those two races and Wisconsin. But thus far they aren't part of my focus because while I think in each case the Republican will be vastly better than the Democrat, I don't get the sense that they right now (A) need my focus or (B) have shown they'll actually move the Senate markedly to the right if elected.

Again, certainly they'll move the Senate to the GOP and it will be important to go all in for the general on their behalf, but moving the Senate to the GOP is one thing and moving the Senate right is another. Right now I'm focused on those races that'll move the Senate to the right.

Stenberg, Hasner, Mandel, Cruz, Flake, and Liljenquist will all be both strong Republican nominees in a general election and move the Senate to the right if elected.

Hope that helps explain my thinking, but I also cannot emphasize enough that often a race you may be very interested in just simply is not on my radar right now. Shoot me an email or do a user diary to get that race on my radar.

Morning Briefing for November 21, 2011

RedState Morning Briefing

November 21, 2011

Go to www.RedStateMB.com to get
the Morning Briefing every morning at no charge.

Just a reminder that the Morning Briefing will run today and tomorrow and then return next Monday. However, if the Super Committee decides to do something, which I assure you will not be super, I'll deliver the appropriate switches and ashes to your inbox.

1. #OWS Hijacked: #OccupyCongress Next Steps On Unions' Agenda

2. Obama-NLRB Rushing to Issue Ambush Elections Rules on Nov. 30

3. Was the Tea Party Kicked Out of the Capitol By Former Bennett Staffers Mad at Mike Lee?

4. Busting The Myth of Union Job Security

———————————————————————-

1. #OWS Hijacked: #OccupyCongress Next Steps On Unions' Agenda

Did it really need to take two months for New York City Mayor Bloomberg to figure out that unions have hijacked the #OccupyMovement? Most sane observers knew that from the very start when when the Transport Workers Union in New York endorsed the squatters in Zuccotti Park, opening the flood gates for other unions, the Democrats, and the institutional Left to climb on board.

Since then, unions have provided paid protesters, legal representation, money, advertising, and even offered their property to the #OWS movement.

What began as a Neo-Communist movement that allegedly only had the goal of destroying capitalism has now become a full-fledged, union-financed class war with the very real goal (in coordination with Democrats in Congress) of instituting tax increases, along with the it's-only-a-matter-of-time global system of taxation, beginning with the so-called Robin Hood Tax.

Now, so thoroughly have the unions hijacked the #OWS movement that the SEIU even stole the 'We Are the 99%' slogan in its endorsement of Barack Obama's re-election. Unsurprisingly, the SEIU did so without even bothering to ask permission of the Occupy protesters. [Note the pre-printed 99% t-shirts on SEIU bosses as they were arrested on Thursday.]

Please click here for the rest of the post.

2. Obama-NLRB Rushing to Issue Ambush Elections Rules on Nov. 30

It seems that Friday afternoons are always the time to drop job-killing news on America's job creators. In this case, the union appointees within Barack Obama's National Labor Relations Board have issued a press release stating they will be issuing their final rule on ambush elections on November 30th.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

3. Was the Tea Party Kicked Out of the Capitol By Former Bennett Staffers Mad at Mike Lee?

On Thursday, the long planned Tea Party Debt Commission gathered in Washington, D.C. after months of development and procedure. Everything was set, the meeting had been approved through all of the appropriate channels, the tables had been set up, the microphones were in place.

One snag. Bad blood in D.C.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

4. Busting The Myth of Union Job Security

For years, unions have created a myth around manufacturing in the United States having been destroyed by the [ insert perjorative here ].

The fact is, manufacturing is not dead in the United States. It is a myth created to mislead the public on unions' own destructiveness on companies and the jobs of employees. What union bosses have been screaming about is, in fact, the decline of unionized manufacturing.

While all manufacturing has decreased since America's current economic recession began, from 1983 through 2006, union-free manufacturing had actually increased by 52,000 jobs.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

Morning Briefing for November 18, 2011

RedState Morning Briefing

For November 18, 2011

Go to www.RedStateMB.com to get
the Morning Briefing every morning at no charge.

1. Republicans Throw Their 'Pledge To America' Under the OmniBus

2. The $15 Trillion Super Circus

3. EPA should consider American drivers, not special interests

4. Is Jen Rubin using Andrew Ferguson to sneak an anti-Perry sneer in?

———————————————————————-

1. Republicans Throw Their 'Pledge To America' Under the OmniBus

This afternoon, the House passed Harry Reid's first minibus appropriations bill (Agriculture, Commerce-Justice-Science, Transportation-HUD), which contains record levels of spending for Food Stamps, WIC, and international food aid. It also contains $2.3 billion for disaster spending, which is excluded from the budget caps. Appropriations Committee Chairman Harold Rogers promised today on the House floor that spending will not exceed the $1.043 trillion spending cap. Well, the extra $2.3 billion in disaster spending allowed him to do just that. Moreover, if they continue to adopt the higher spending levels of the Democrats, the only way to stay below the cap will be to cut defense appropriations. Worse, this bill has a provision, which was inserted into the conference report, to expand the role of Fannie Mae and Freddi Mac.

Last year, as part of their 'Pledge To America,' Republicans promised to downsize Freddie/Fannie. They also promised to end the practice of minibus bills. Today, they violated both pledges. Yes, we know that mantra; it's a minibus bill; not an omnibus. But the reality is that House Republicans never had an opportunity to vote and amend two-thirds of the bill.

Fortunately, more and more members are hearing the voice of the grassroots. Even though the 'don't call it an Omnibus' bill passed 298-121, it was opposed by 101 Republicans, and only passed with the help of Democrats. In the Senate, Jim DeMint and David Vitter have already blocked Harry Reid from passing a second minibus bill. So what is the response of the political appropriations establishment?

Please click here for the rest of the post.

2. The $15 Trillion Super Circus

The day has arrived. Our total debt has surpassed $15 trillion. At the close of business on Wednesday, the debt stood at $15.033 trillion, and is on the cusp of overtaking our GDP. Overall, the federal debt has risen $4.41 trillion (41.5%) since Obama took office and $6.36 trillion (73%) since the Democrats took control of Congress in 2007. Our GDP has grown by only $1.3 trillion during Obama's presidency. Pick your adjective of choice to describe this calamity: unparalleled, unprecedented, uncharted. No word can begin to describe the destruction that Obama has wrought on our republic.

Over the next few days, you will read many factoids and statistics about the federal debt, but here is one acerbic point you may miss. Ninety-one percent of Obama's $4.41 trillion legacy of debt comes from the debt held by the public.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

3. EPA should consider American drivers, not special interests

Decisions about our fuel standards are not inconsequential. They move forward an agenda that rewards some energy sectors while punishing others, and at the same time, moves taxpayer dollars right along with those rules and subsidies.

Under the current requirements of the Clean Air Act, the EPA can certify a new fuel for the marketplace as long as it does not increase emissions. As a result, when the ethanol lobby requested the EPA allow a higher concentration of ethanol in gasoline, based on a narrow test by the Department of Energy, the agency determined E15 could be used in vehicles made after 2001.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

4. Is Jen Rubin using Andrew Ferguson to sneak an anti-Perry sneer in?

Now, normally I don't like to do this sort of thing when it comes to people who will be eventually on my side when it comes to an election. Truly, I do not. But while I was reading this Jen Rubin Washington Post article targeting the latest anti-Romney… excuse me, I meant to type out "Newt Gingrich," there… I was struck by something in these two paragraphs . . .

Please click here for the rest of the post.

Intentional or Not, Pat Toomey Shows America the Democrats Care Nothing for Our National Security

It is one of the quintessential pillars of the Republican Party — no new taxes. George H. W. Bush got thrown out of office for violating that pledge. But Pat Toomey, Senator of Pennsylvania, is proposing new taxes. He's proposing $300 billion in new taxes, largely through restructuring and simplifying the tax code. But they are new taxes.

So we have the GOP willing to surrender a key plank and the Democrats are unhappy. They want more. They want the GOP to go even higher. Toomey says no dice. I'm starting to think he's outfoxed all of us by throwing down his first proposal and making it also his final proposal and in the process showing us two things.

First, he is showing us just how irresponsible the House Republicans are. Toomey drew a firm line in the sand and the House GOP seems willing to up the ante. It's no wonder John Boehner, our Republican Speaker, has presided over the largest spending binge we've ever seen from Congress. House Republicans are not only willing to raise taxes, potentially more than Toomey, but are daring to call it a tax cut.

Pat Toomey is also showing the country something else — something more important. The Democrats seem to genuinely not care one whit about American national security and now the American public can see this.

Consider yesterday Democratic House Whip Steny Hoyer said at a press conference that our national debt is our greatest national security threat. He wants the Super Committee to go big and go bold.

The Republicans on the Super Committee are willing to sacrifice a key plank of the GOP and raise taxes. Even the mainstream media is aghast at the GOP willing to raise taxes. The press cannot believe what they are seeing.

But what are the Democrats willing to do? Thus far it seems nothing. They will not cut spending. They will not offer up serious reforms on entitlements. Nothing. They just want more taxes. In fact, the Democrats are screaming at Pat Toomey for offering up his first plan at $300 billion and then saying that's it.

That's not how you negotiate in Washington. It's how I've been saying the GOP should negotiate, but that's not how Washington does it.

And the Democrats are mad as hell at Pat Toomey for cutting to the chase and giving his final offer as his only offer.

What are the Democrats countering with? Nothing but more taxes. They are saying publicly they won't even come up with serious offers until the GOP offers even more tax increases. In other words, the Democrats are offering up nothing serious.

We know that if the Super Committee fails, the Defense budget gets severely cut.

So the Democrats are not willing to offer up any spending cuts to help solve our greatest national security crisis, i.e. our national debt. And because they will not help fix our national debt, they will see the American defense budget drastically cut.

We see now just how little the Democrats care about our national security.

Thanks Pat Toomey. But you still shouldn't have offered tax increases.

Morning Briefing for November 17, 2011

RedState Morning Briefing

For November 17, 2011

Go to www.RedStateMB.com to get
the Morning Briefing every morning at no charge.

1. Intentional or Not, Pat Toomey Shows America the Democrats Care Nothing for Our National Security

2. Repeating Mistakes?

3. The Supercommittee of Super Insanity

4. Cornyn on Balanced Budget Amendment, Obama's Failure to Lead, Fast and Furious

5. Ezra Klein: Never Mind Stopping Occupy Rapes, Violence and Fetid Squalor, The Important Benefit of Eviction Is Helping The Movement!

———————————————————————-

1. Intentional or Not, Pat Toomey Shows America the Democrats Care Nothing for Our National Security

It is one of the quintessential pillars of the Republican Party — no new taxes. George H. W. Bush got thrown out of office for violating that pledge. But Pat Toomey, Senator of Pennsylvania, is proposing new taxes. He's proposing $300 billion in new taxes, largely through restructuring and simplifying the tax code. But they are new taxes.

So we have the GOP willing to surrender a key plank and the Democrats are unhappy. They want more. They want the GOP to go even higher. Toomey says no dice. I'm starting to think he's outfoxed all of us by throwing down his first proposal and making it also his final proposal and in the process showing us two things.

First, he is showing us just how irresponsible the House Republicans are. Toomey drew a firm line in the sand and the House GOP seems willing to up the ante. It's no wonder John Boehner, our Republican Speaker, has presided over the largest spending binge we've ever seen from Congress. House Republicans are not only willing to raise taxes, potentially more than Toomey, but are daring to call it a tax cut.

Pat Toomey is also showing the country something else — something more important. The Democrats seem to genuinely not care one whit about American national security and now the American public can see this.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

2. Repeating Mistakes?

Sometimes it seems like Congress didn't learn anything from the housing crisis at all. Early Tuesday morning, leaders in the House and Senate unveiled an appropriations bill, called a "minibus," to fund several government agencies for the fiscal year 2012. Tucked inside the 401-page bill was language to increase the limits for which the Federal Housing Administration can insure mortgage loans up to $729,750, effectively allowing the agency to back McMansions with taxpayer dollars. Adding further insult to hard-working taxpayers an independent audit revealed, just hours later, that there is a "close to 50%" chance the agency would run out of money and need a taxpayer bailout.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

3. The Supercommittee of Super Insanity

As the tumultuous year of 2011 winds down, Congress will be facing a number of crucial budget deadlines. Aside for the supercommittee deadline to find $1.2 trillion in deficit reduction (over ten years), they must contend with the December 31 expiration of three provisions of the 2010 tax extenders deal; payroll tax cuts, unemployment benefits, and ethanol subsidies. Now the Washington Post is reporting that the supercomittee might attempt to extend unemployment benefits and payroll tax cuts as part of the final deal. The rubber is meeting the road, and conservatives need to mobilize rapidly.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

4. Cornyn on Balanced Budget Amendment, Obama's Failure to Lead, Fast and Furious

Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) had tough words for President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder following a speech today at The Heritage Foundation. He criticized Obama for a failure to lead and voiced concern about Holder's handling of the Operation Fast and Furious scandal.

"Unfortunately, the president is already campaigning, trying to channel Harry Truman, railing against a 'do-nothing Congress' when he's apparently given up on governing," Cornyn said in response to a question about the budget debate in Washington. "He's not really contributing to the solution."

Please click here for the rest of the post.

5. Ezra Klein: Never Mind Stopping Occupy Rapes, Violence and Fetid Squalor, The Important Benefit of Eviction Is Helping The Movement!

The ever absurd Ezra Klein of The Washington Post is at it again, refusing to remain silent and just be thought a fool rather than speak, or write, and have it confirmed. This turn on the idiot merry-go-round is his little defense of Occupy Wall Street and his breathless desire that the eviction save them. Not the women assaulted at the protests nor the people harmed by other actions of the protesters, mind you. No, no – it's The Movement ™ that he glorifies and about which he's concerned.

Please click here for the rest of the post.

We Sent 'Tea Party' Republicans to Washington for This?

In the House Republican's Pledge that I told you was a "Pledge to Nowhere," you find this language:

"tax increases must be prevented" and "We will help the economy by permanently stopping all tax increases".

Got it? The House GOP pledged, also known as a promise, to stop "all tax increases." It was their promise.

According to The Hill, the Republicans are about to give a capital "F" and a capital "U" to the tea party and throw in the towel on their Pledge.

Lawmakers emerged from the closed-door meeting saying Hensarling had made the case that offering some new revenue — $300 billion in at least one publicized offer — would be a good trade to secure a permanent extension of the George W. Bush-era tax rates.

So we're going to keep permanent the Bush tax cuts that no one really thought would actually expire next year even though they technically are supposed to and replace those with a $300 billion tax increase?

To rub salt into the tea party's wounds, "Hensarling received a standing ovation following his presentation." Yes, a Republican got a standing ovation by Republicans for proposing a tax increase.

To be fair, if there are serious structural reforms to the tax code and serious concessions by the Democrats on entitlement reform, I would want to look seriously at the plan. But, based on what we know so far, the Democrats have offered nothing publicly substantive and the GOP is offering up a bunch of smoke and mirrors on the House side to cover up the fact that House leaders are actually proposing a tax increase on the American public.

Yet again the GOP is negotiating with itself. Given the way the GOP is operating on itself in public, I'm surprised it isn't blind.

Parting thought: if the GOP is doing this out of fear that the Bush tax cuts won't get extended again, are they not then operating out of fear? Of course they are. And fear should never be the starting point for negotiations.