GOP Pledge to America

[Guest ALWAYSRED]

This morning, House Republicans revealed their 2010 Republican agenda via press conference in Sterling, VA at Tart Lumber Company. Read the first part of the pledge below and visit the website to read the whole thing and download a copy of the agenda:

GOP Pledge to America

 

America is an idea – an idea that free people can govern themselves, that government’s powers are derived from the consent of the governed, that each of us is endowed by their Creator with the unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. America is the belief that any man or woman can – given economic, political, and religious liberty – advance themselves, their families, and the common good.

 

America is an inspiration to those who yearn to be free and have the ability and the dignity to determine their own destiny.

 

Whenever the agenda of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to institute a new governing agenda and set a different course.

 

These first principles were proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence, enshrined in the Constitution, and have endured through hard sacrifice and commitment by generations of Americans.

 

In a self-governing society, the only bulwark against the power of the state is the consent of the governed, and regarding the policies of the current government, the governed do not consent.

 

An unchecked executive, a compliant legislature, and an overreaching judiciary have combined to thwart the will of the people and overturn their votes and their values, striking down longstanding laws and institutions and scorning the deepest beliefs of the American people.

 

An arrogant and out-of-touch government of self-appointed elites makes decisions, issues mandates, and enacts laws without accepting or requesting the input of the many.

 

Rising joblessness, crushing debt, and a polarizing political environment are fraying the bonds among our people and blurring our sense of national purpose.

 

Like free peoples of the past, our citizens refuse to accommodate a government that believes it can replace the will of the people with its own. The American people are speaking out, demanding that we realign our country’s compass with its founding principles and apply those principles to solve our common problems for the common good.

 

The need for urgent action to repair our economy and reclaim our government for the people cannot be overstated.

 

With this document, we pledge to dedicate ourselves to the task of reconnecting our highest aspirations to the permanent truths of our founding by keeping faith with the values our nation was founded on, the principles we stand for, and the priorities of our people. This is our Pledge to America.

 

We pledge to honor the Constitution as constructed by its framers and honor the original intent of those precepts that have been consistently ignored – particularly the Tenth Amendment, which grants that all powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

 

We pledge to advance policies that promote greater liberty, wider opportunity, a robust defense, and national economic prosperity.

 

We pledge to honor families, traditional marriage, life, and the private and faith-based organizations that form the core of our American values.

 

We pledge to make government more transparent in its actions, careful in its stewardship, and honest in its dealings.

 

We pledge to uphold the purpose and promise of a better America, knowing that to whom much is given, much is expected and that the blessings of our liberty buoy the hopes of mankind.

 

We make this pledge bearing true faith and allegiance to the people we represent, and we invite fellow citizens and patriots to join us in forming a new governing agenda for America.

[Guest Sato]

I must commend Brian Wild on his revised Contract for America strategy.

[Guest Dan]

With this plan, Republicans have made clear that they want to take America back to the same failed economic policies that caused this recession. Instead of charting a new course, Congressional Republicans doubled down on the same ideas that hurt America’s middle class.

 

Here’s what they made clear:

 

* Tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires by borrowing $700 billion we can’t afford;

* Tax hikes for 110 million middle-class families and millions of small businesses;

* Cutting rules and oversight for special interests like big oil, big insurance, credit card and mortgage companies and Wall Street banks;

* Doing nothing to stop the outsourcing of American jobs or to end tax breaks that are given to companies that ship jobs overseas;

* All while adding trillions to our nation’s deficit.

 

Their plan is also notable for what it doesn’t talk about: protecting Social Security and Medicare from privatization schemes; investing in high-quality education for our nation’s children; growing key industries like clean energy and manufacturing; and rebuilding our crumbling roads, rails and runways.

 

This is the same agenda that caused the deepest recession since the Great Depression, costing 8 million jobs, wiping out trillions in family wealth and setting middle-class families back. Instead of a pledge to the American people, Congressional Republicans made a pledge to the big special interests to restore the same economic ideas that benefited them at the expense of middle-class families.

[Guest Joe Somebody]

The right-wing has no interest in "fixing Congress", they have interest in getting paid $175,000 a year for doing NOTHING while they are on effective vacation from their corporate jobs, only to return to those multi-million dollar jobs once they secure a taxpayer based retirement. Ask yourself: why are there so many multi-millionaires in our Government?

[Luke_Wilbur]

I just want to understand why the Republicans or Tea Party does not support American manufacturing. This is the most important issue in our country. How are we going to pay bills or taxes with no jobs.

 

I was with the GOP on Health care. But, they are losing me by not have solutions to their own pledge

 

http://thehill.com/b...security-reform

 

Boehner offers no solutions on Medicare, Social Security reform

By Mike Lillis -

 

09/23/10 11:30 AM ET Addressing a central criticism of the Republicans' new "Pledge to America," House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) on Thursday said he doesn't have the answer to solving Medicare's spending crisis.

 

To solve those problems, Boehner said, Congress will first have to initiate "an adult conversation" with voters, who will then decide what fixes to apply.

 

"It's time for us as Americans to have an adult conversation with each other about the serious challenges that face our country," Boehner said Thursday, responding directly to a question about entitlement solutions during the unveiling of the GOP " Pleadge.

Edited September 23, 2010 by Luke_Wilbur

[Guest J. Trumble]

The right-wing has no interest in "fixing Congress", they have interest in getting paid $175,000 a year for doing NOTHING while they are on effective vacation from their corporate jobs, only to return to those multi-million dollar jobs once they secure a taxpayer based retirement. Ask yourself: why are there so many multi-millionaires in our Government?

 

Wow! Righteous indignation - I like it!!! And, you're right on target.

[Guest John]

This morning, House Republicans revealed their 2010 Republican agenda via press conference in Sterling, VA at Tart Lumber Company. Read the first part of the pledge below and visit the website to read the whole thing and download a copy of the agenda:

GOP Pledge to America

 

America is an idea – an idea that free people can govern themselves, that government’s powers are derived from the consent of the governed, that each of us is endowed by their Creator with the unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. America is the belief that any man or woman can – given economic, political, and religious liberty – advance themselves, their families, and the common good.

 

America is an inspiration to those who yearn to be free and have the ability and the dignity to determine their own destiny.

 

Whenever the agenda of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to institute a new governing agenda and set a different course.

 

These first principles were proclaimed in the Declaration of Independence, enshrined in the Constitution, and have endured through hard sacrifice and commitment by generations of Americans.

 

In a self-governing society, the only bulwark against the power of the state is the consent of the governed, and regarding the policies of the current government, the governed do not consent.

 

An unchecked executive, a compliant legislature, and an overreaching judiciary have combined to thwart the will of the people and overturn their votes and their values, striking down longstanding laws and institutions and scorning the deepest beliefs of the American people.

 

An arrogant and out-of-touch government of self-appointed elites makes decisions, issues mandates, and enacts laws without accepting or requesting the input of the many.

 

Rising joblessness, crushing debt, and a polarizing political environment are fraying the bonds among our people and blurring our sense of national purpose.

 

Like free peoples of the past, our citizens refuse to accommodate a government that believes it can replace the will of the people with its own. The American people are speaking out, demanding that we realign our country’s compass with its founding principles and apply those principles to solve our common problems for the common good.

 

The need for urgent action to repair our economy and reclaim our government for the people cannot be overstated.

 

With this document, we pledge to dedicate ourselves to the task of reconnecting our highest aspirations to the permanent truths of our founding by keeping faith with the values our nation was founded on, the principles we stand for, and the priorities of our people. This is our Pledge to America.

 

We pledge to honor the Constitution as constructed by its framers and honor the original intent of those precepts that have been consistently ignored – particularly the Tenth Amendment, which grants that all powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

 

We pledge to advance policies that promote greater liberty, wider opportunity, a robust defense, and national economic prosperity.

 

We pledge to honor families, traditional marriage, life, and the private and faith-based organizations that form the core of our American values.

 

We pledge to make government more transparent in its actions, careful in its stewardship, and honest in its dealings.

 

We pledge to uphold the purpose and promise of a better America, knowing that to whom much is given, much is expected and that the blessings of our liberty buoy the hopes of mankind.

 

We make this pledge bearing true faith and allegiance to the people we represent, and we invite fellow citizens and patriots to join us in forming a new governing agenda for America.

 

 

Great speech or whatever (lecture?) but after reading it slowly and carefully I began to realize it said nothing - nothing at all.

[Guest Dumbfounded]

This PLEDGE is ridiculous. Why risk demotivating the very people needed to win back the house 41 days before a monumentally important election? It is a sad day when we on the right cannot get a grip on the big picture. Why not eliminate the ridiculous restrictions on drilling and nuclear power plants? Where is the push to reform Medicare and privatize Social Security? What about eliminating the Dept of Education and Dept of Energy? God help our Nation.

[ThatManGreg]

This PLEDGE is ridiculous. Why risk demotivating the very people needed to win back the house 41 days before a monumentally important election? It is a sad day when we on the right cannot get a grip on the big picture. Why not eliminate the ridiculous restrictions on drilling and nuclear power plants? Where is the push to reform Medicare and privatize Social Security? What about eliminating the Dept of Education and Dept of Energy? God help our Nation.

 

When asked how they were going to reform Social Security Boehner is quoted as saying "I don't know."

 

Soooo, there's your answer.

[Guest Arnold T.]

The Republicans have bankrupted this country starting with the policies of Ronald Reagan and his trickle down" economics. The wealth "trickled up" from the middle class and stayed there.

 

Who went to China and said that we now could open up trade and the Chinese could buy our goods? Nixon.

 

No one bothered to tell the American people that the Chinese people were too poor to buy anything manufactured in this country. It was a ploy to get cheap Chinese labor.

 

The Republicans started shipping ALL MANUFACTURING to China. Remember the steel mills and the furniture manufactuters, and the garment industry. It was all shipped to China. Thank you Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan.

[Guest American4Progress]

Stripped of pablum, giveaways to lobbyists, and Bush-era ideas, little is left in the "Pledge to America." In fact, the "Republican Agenda" ignores some of the most essential challenges facing the United States. Global warming is nowhere to be found, even though this is the hottest year in recorded history. Even more remarkably, there is no plan for Iraq or Afghanistan. There is no mention of how Republicans plan to deal with either war and no acknowledgment that this year was the deadliest year in Afghanistan. Of the eight points in the plan devoted to national security, over half are devoted to keeping people out of America, indicating that the Republican House leadership simply doesn't know how it wants to engage the world.

 

It may not be surprising that the Republicans deliberately ignored the most popular "job creation" idea, to "stop the outsourcing of jobs" by eliminating tax breaks for outsourcing companies.

[Guest Max]

This pledge does not even promise a balanced federal budget. It just promises to create more debt for our country and money to the rich.

[Guest Holly74]

Those who vote Repubs this November are either idiots or support tax cuts for the rich. Which are you?

[Guest cjl123456783]

T IS NOT JUST, NOT JUST REPUBLICAN PROBLEMATIC, IT'S ALL ELECTED OFFICIALS WHO TOOK MONEY FROM SPECIAL INTEREST/BIG BUSINESS GROUPS, CAN YOU SPELL

CORRUPTION??!!!!!

 

WITHIN THIS MINDSET...

THE G.W. Bush administrations LEFT more failed republican policies and MORE NATIONAL DEFICIT THAN ALL 43 PREVIOUS PRESIDENTIAL ADMINISTRATIONS COMBINED!!!

 

 

WE CANNOT HAVE THE INBUMBENT REPUBLICANS AND SOME BLUE DOG DEMOCRATS BACK...THE ONES BOUGHT-AND-PAID-FOR BY BIG BUSINESS TO THE TUNE OF

$BILLIONS A YEAR!!!

 

NOT HAVE THEM BACK??!!...

 

NO NOT...

back for another financial De-Regulation enabled U.S./global economic downturn!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! THESE GUYS DESTROYED MILLIONS OF LIVES AROUND THE WORLD!!

 

 

AND...THE PROBLEM IS... THE PUBLIC IS UNINFORMED!!!

 

CONGRESSMEN ARE MISUSING THEIR POSITIONS FOR THE BENEFIT OF THEMSELVES AND THEIR FAMILIES AND NOT FOR THE PEOPLE LIKE THE WORKING MAN!!

WHO VOTED THEM IN !!

 

 

FOR EXAMPLE,...THE NATIONAL POLL ESTIMATED YESTERDAY SEP 23 2010 THAT ONLY 12% OF US TRULY KNOW LITTLE ABOUT IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT

 

 

THINGS LIKE ...

"EXACTLY WHY DE-REGULATION BROUGHT ABOUT OUR ECONOMIC CHAOS"

 

AND THINGS LIKE ....

"EXACTLY WHAT IS HEALTHCARE REFORM IS TRULY ALL ABOUT AND THAT WE NEED CONTINUAL HELP WITH IT FROM ALL THE INDIVIDUAL STATES TO PREVENT THE

INSURANCE COMPANIES FROM G A M I N G OUR INSURANCE SYSTEM... FOR EXAMPLE 'NOT SELLING INSURANCE FOR KIDS'!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

 

AND THINGS LIKE...

"EXACTLY WHY BIG BUSINESS LOBBYISTS ARE NOT FOR THE WORKING MAN AND THEY BUY LEGISLATION WRITTEN TO FAVOR THEM AND NOT THE WORKING MAN

AND THE WORKING MAN ENDS UP PAYING FOR IT (FOR EXAMPLE, 'BAILING OUT TOO BIG TO FAIL BANKS AND WALL STREET WITH OUR TAX DOLLARS!!)!!!"

YES, ...THIS IS... C O R P O R A T E WELLFARE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

AND THINGS LIKE...

"EXACTLY WHY THIS CORRUPTION IS NOT LIMITED TO ANY MAJOR PARTY, BUT JUST WHO, WHO, WHO IS TAKING BIG BUSINESS MONEY AND SELLING-OUT THE WORKING

MAN!!!"

 

AND THINGS LIKE...

"EXACTLY HOW BIG-OIL PAIDOFF CONGRESSMEN THAT MADE A LAXNESS OF SAFETY, KILLED 11 PEOPLE AND CAUSED THE DEBACLE IN THE GULF THE PEOPLE

IN THAT REGION WILL FEEL FOR THE NEXT DECADE AND LONGER!!!"

 

AND THINGS LIKE...

"EXACTLY WHAT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED TO OUR COUNTRY IF WE WOULD NOT HAVE BAILED OUT (STARTING IN GW Bush'S REIGN) BIG BUSINESS / WALL STREET, TOO BIG

TOO FAIL (THEY GOT TO BE TOO BIG TO FAIL BECAUSE PAID OFF CONGRESSMEN VOTED IN DE-REGULATION WHICH ALLOWED BANKS AND WALL STREET TO ENTER INTO

BUSINESS CONTRACTS THEY HAD NO BUSINESS ENTERING [MUCH WITH OUR MONEY INVESTED IN THEIR ESTABLISHMENTS] BECAUSE OF THIS

LEGISLATION PROMOTING FINANCIAL LAXNESS IN THE MARKETPLACE!!)

 

GROWING UP WE WERE TOLD

 

"DON'T TALK ABOUT THINGS LIKE RELIGION AND POLITIX"...

 

LOOK WHERE

THAT MINDSET GOT US... catholics who are leaving the church and CONGRESSMEN WHO WERE BOUGHT AND PAID FOR BY SPECIAL INTEREST BIG-BUSINESS GROUPS

TO THE TUNE OF OF

 

 

IN 2009 ALONE...$2BILLION DOLLARS!!!!!!!!; $2 BILLION DOLLARS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ... IN 2009 ALONE!!!!... OUR CONGRESSMEN TOOK THIS FROM BIG BUSINESS!!!

MONEY IS POWER AND THAT'S WAY TOO MUCH OF IT THAT GOES UNCHECKED IF WE DO NOT MONITOR THEM AND STAY INFORMED ... IT'S OUR OWN FAULT!!!!!!

 

AND WE, THE WORKING PEOPLE HAVE BEEN LEFT HIGH AND DRY BY... NOT MONITORING AND CHECKING UP ON

 

THE REPUBLICAN INCUMBENT CONGRESSMEN LIKE JOHN BOEHNER OF OHIO AND BLUE DOG DEMOCRATS LIKE MAX BAUCUS OF MONTANA AND

ROY BLUNT OF MISSOURI (WHO TOOK THE MOST MONEY FROM BIG BUSINESS OF ALL CONGRESSMEN YOU CAN GOOGLE THIS!) AND WROTE AND VOTED IN LEGISLATION

FAVORING BIG BUSINESS LEAVING THE WORKING MAN HIGH AND DRY... WITH TH BILL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

...

 

 

YES, AGAIN TO BE ACCURATE, THESE CONGRESSMEN CREATED AND VOTED IN LEGISLATION INCLUDING DE-REGULATION OF OUR FINANCIAL SYSTEM FAVORING BIG BUSINESS

INSTEAD OF THE WORKING MAN... AND YES WE AND OUR CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN

 

ARE IN LINE TO PAY FOR THIS AND IT'S GOT TO STOP, TODAY!!!

 

NO MORE INCUMBENTS?? THAT SOUNDS PRETTY TOUGH, BUT WHAT THEY'VE DONE IN THE LAST DECADE IS NOT IN OUR BEST INTEREST.

 

THEY HAVE NOT DONE US A GOOD JOB,

 

WE HAVE BEEN SWINDLED, FOLKS... SWINDLED OUT OF OUR TAX DOLLARS TO PAY FOR SOMETHING WHICH

WE SHOULD NEVER HAVE TO PAY, CAN YOU SAY CORRPUTION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

IT'S NOT JUST WHAT PARTY THEY'RE FOR,... IT'S WHO TOOK THE MONEY FROM BIG BUSINESS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! GOOGLE U.S. CONGRESSMEN

CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS TO SEE FOR YOUSELVES.

IT DOES NOT TAKE A MENTAL GIANT TO FIGURE THESE INCUMBENTS HAVE GOT TO GO OR WE'LL BE IN THE SAME BOAT, A G A I N!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

WE NEED CONGRESSMEN IN THERE WHO ARE FOR THE WORKING MAN, NOT SPECIAL INTERSTS / BIG-BUSINESS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

HERE'S THE WRITING ON THE WALL... THIS "NEW" PLEDGE INTRODUCED YESTERDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 2010 CALLED THE REPUBLICAN "PLEDGE" (LEMON PLEDGE) ...

 

IS EXACTLY THE SAME BOWL OF BUNG THAT GOT US INTO THE DITCH WE HAVE FINALLY CRAWLED OUT OF...

 

IT'S NO WONDER PEOPLE DON'T TRUST EITHER MAJOR PARTY...

 

... WE JUST NEEED TO STAY INFORMED THRU NON- BIG BUSINESS OWNED MEDIA LIKE MSNBC (NOT FOX NEWS FOR THEY ARE CONTRIBUTING TO THE REPUBLICAN

RE-ELECTION CAMPAIGN (WHICH IS AGAINST THE LAW ...AND... SLANTED NEWS IS NOT NEWSWORTHY, YA THINK?)...2 WEEKS AGO THEY GAVE...$1MILLION!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

STAY INFORMED AND...

 

THEN, AND ONLY THEN WILL WE HAVE INFORMATION TO MAKE INTELLIGENT VOTING DECISIONS FOR OUSELVES.

[Guest LAW]

Speaker Pelosi Says Tax Cut Vote May Come Before Election

 

 

Transcript

 

JUDY WOODRUFF: With just over five weeks until the midterm elections, Democrats in Washington were grappling today with how to handle the Bush-era tax cuts. Senate leaders announced late Thursday they would wait until after the elections to vote on whether to end them.

 

But, today, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi wouldn't rule out action before November on extending tax breaks for the middle class.

 

REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA), Speaker of the House: Well, we will retain the right to proceed as we choose. We will take it one day at a time.

But let me -- let me be very clear, as we have all been clear and in the House Democratic leadership. America's middle class will have a tax cut. It will be done in this Congress. There is no question about that.

 

JUDY WOODRUFF: On the Senate side, the issue will have to wait until a lame-duck session in mid-November. Democratic Majority Whip Dick Durbin said Thursday: "We are so tightly wound up in this campaign, that it's impossible to see a bipartisan answer to the challenge we face. That's the reality before the election."

 

Republicans and some Democrats favor extending tax cuts for everyone, including the wealthy. Well, for more on all this, we turn to David Herszenhorn. He covers Capitol Hill for The New York Times. Thanks for being back with us.

 

DAVID HERSZENHORN, The New York Times: Good to be with you.

 

JUDY WOODRUFF: So, what -- what's this delay all about?

 

DAVID HERSZENHORN: Well, the Senate clearly doesn't want to get embroiled in this issue before the election. It's just too unpredictable and the storyline for Democrats is clean as things stand now.

They're making the case that Republicans would block tax relief for the middle class to hold out for tax breaks for the wealthy. Republicans, of course, want to extend those tax cuts for everyone. And so it's easier in the view of Democrats to push this until a lame-duck session. The political situation will obviously be less intense then.

 

But, as you said, the House speaker today left open the possibility of forcing a vote. And that could get really interesting next week.

 

JUDY WOODRUFF: Now, why the different calculus in the Senate and in the House?

 

DAVID HERSZENHORN: Well, the calculus probably isn't different. The conventional wisdom still is that, in the end, the House will decide to go home and campaign without taking this vote.

 

But there's no reason for Speaker Pelosi to relent right now, when she thinks she's got Republicans on the defensive. John Boehner, the Republican leader, a couple weeks ago, said, if given no choice, he would vote for President Obama's preferred plan, which is only a partial extension of the tax cuts.

 

So, she can continue to threaten to put that bill on the floor and see what the Republicans would do.

 

JUDY WOODRUFF: Now, this is more complicated because Democrats are divided among themselves. Talk about the regional differences and the other factors at play for Democrats.

 

DAVID HERSZENHORN: Well, it's really a question of political vulnerability at this point. For Democrats who are in very tough races -- remember, in '08, you had Democrats win in districts where Democrats really shouldn't win ever. It was a political fluke, so to speak. It's very hard for them to fight for reelection in traditionally Republican districts.

 

Casting this vote that might be portrayed as letting taxes rise on the wealthy -- Republicans say those are small-business owners in some cases -- can be used against them by opponents. So, there -- that political instinct to avoid that tough vote just five weeks before the election is up against more liberal Democrats who want to show a contrast and say, look, we're going to fight to do as President Obama promised during the presidential campaign, and let those tax cuts for the rich expire.

 

JUDY WOODRUFF: David, is it all about politics? Is there any policy at play here in their argument?

 

DAVID HERSZENHORN: It really is mostly about politics. Remember that a lot of folks will try and make this a debate about the federal deficit.

 

Continuing the tax breaks for the middle class will add about $3 trillion to the deficits over the next 10 years, extending them for everyone, $4 trillion. You are talking about, what is a trillion dollars between friends? If you get into the policy debate, it makes your head hurt, because you really have to start talking about long-term fiscal policy and reform.

 

JUDY WOODRUFF: And explain to us what the real deadline is here. These tax cuts were due to expire at the end of this year, unless something happens.

 

DAVID HERSZENHORN: Unless something happens. And, of course, Congress could work after the end of the year and apply the tax rates retroactively. It gets a lot more complicated for the IRS, to be sure. So, they would -- there are a lot of people who would prefer this not go down to the wire, but December 31 is the deadline.

 

JUDY WOODRUFF: But you -- and you could have, as you just suggested, a very different looking House.

 

DAVID HERSZENHORN: Once the election is done, the lame duck is the lame duck.

 

JUDY WOODRUFF: And the Senate.

 

DAVID HERSZENHORN: A lot will depend on what the results are in the November elections.

 

JUDY WOODRUFF: And, again, remind us, David, what taxes are we talking about, marginal income tax rates, and what else?

 

DAVID HERSZENHORN: Well, everybody is focused on the marginal income tax rates, but this actually is a whole range of things, capital gains tax, the estate tax, which, of course, right now doesn't exist. It's expired.

 

There are a big package of taxes other than the marginal rates that have to be wrestled with. That is what makes this complicated. And in the House, it is easier for Democrats to put a bill on the floor that matches what President Obama has proposed, letting the estate tax go back to 2009 levels, for instance.

 

In the Senate, everybody will have their say, and there will be lots of different variations of how you would put that whole package together. So it isn't easy.

 

JUDY WOODRUFF: It's so much fun to watch all this.

 

DAVID HERSZENHORN: Yes.

 

JUDY WOODRUFF: And it continues. David Herszenhorn, The New York Times, thanks very much.

 

DAVID HERSZENHORN: Sure thing.

[Guest American4Progress]

GOP Divided On Foreign Policy

 

"The Pledge" almost completely ignores the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. In fact, the words "Iraq" and "Afghanistan" are mentioned only once and that was only in reference to Iran. The failure of the Pledge to address the wars exposes both a shocking disregard for those fighting and dying on the part of Republican-initiated wars, as well as a clear absence of any of the ideas about how to bring these conflicts to an end. It also demonstrates that the Republican Party is now completely divided on foreign policy. The emergence of the Tea Party movement may have energized the right-wing base, but it also has exposed a sharp split over foreign policy between nativist-isolationists and war-seeking interventionist neoconservatives. The only thing that seemingly unites the diverging groups is Islamophobia. The traditional Republican foreign policy establishment of national security realists, once the counter-balancing force to both these strains, have seen their influence in the party rapidly shrink. Much of the disarray is a result of the disastrous Bush years, which has seen national security increasingly emerge as a political strength for progressives, especially after progressives campaigned successfully against the war in Iraq in 2006 and 2008 and with President Obama polling higher on his handling of national security than on other issues. This poses a real challenge for the right. As the Center for American Progress' Brian Katulis concludes, "The Bush administration's 'global war on terror' and overall reckless approach to foreign policy may end up doing to Republicans what the Vietnam War did to Democrats for many years: leave them stuck in the past as they refight defense policies, internally divided and searching for a coherent message on national security."

 

WHAT WARS?: The Pledge's failure to address the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is striking considering that just a few years after, Bush declared himself a "war president" and Republicans were more trusted on national security than Democrats. There now appears to be no unified GOP position on Iraq or Afghanistan, defense spending, or global engagement. The emergence of the Tea Party movement has exposed a split in which limited government libertarian conservatives clash with those seeking to expand the power and reach of the national security apparatus of the state both at home and abroad. The New York Times' Peter Baker writes in Foreign Policy, "When it comes to foreign policy, the unity of the Tea Party stops at the water's edge. Its leaders are hopelessly divided over everything from the war in Afghanistan and counterterrorism policies to free trade and the promotion of democracy abroad. And with the Tea Party increasingly serving as the Republican Party's driving force, the schism underscores the emerging foreign-policy debate on the American right. So recently united behind President George W. Bush's war on terror, Republicans now find themselves splintering into familiar interventionist and isolationist factions, with the Dick Cheney side of the party eager to reshape the world versus the economic populists more concerned about cutting taxes at home than spending them on adventures abroad." Katulis notes, "The last time Republicans were so sharply at odds was the party's debate with its isolationist wing before World War II." He adds that "dissension in the Republican ranks was on full display in the conservative reactions to the Obama administration's National Security Strategy this spring. Conservative foreign policy analysts couldn't decide whether to accuse the Obama administration of plagiarism or treason. Some praised the strategy as a continuation of the Bush administration's approach; others condemned it as a recipe for weakness and an appeasement of America's enemies." The split was also evident when Republican Party Chairman Michael Steele was ferociously repudiated by neoconservative torch-bearers after advocating not to "engage in a land war in Afghanistan." Yet, as Baker notes, "when nearly half a million Tea Party supporters voted online to define their campaign agenda, not a single one of the 10 planks they agreed on had anything to do with the world beyond America's borders."

 

ISLAMOPHOBIA UNITES: In the eight points put forward in the Pledge's national security section, there is no plan or concept for how to engage the world. Instead, the one area that appears to unite Republicans is nativist bigotry toward Muslims and Hispanics. Five of the eight points within the Republican plan on foreign policy actually have more to do with immigration policy and keeping people out of America. It is no coincidence that this past summer, right-wing Islamophobic protests emerged across the country, ginned up by a combination of Tea Partiers and neoconservatives. Groups like "Keep America Safe," led by Elizabeth Cheney and the Weekly Standard's Bill Kristol, sought to stoke fear and hate of Muslims over the Islamic community center in New York and other neoconservatives like Frank Gaffney at the Center for Security Studies claim that Sharia law is threatening to take over the U.S. As CAP's Matt Duss assesses, "in order to reposition themselves to retake the reins of power, the Cheneys must rescue the 'global war on terror' from the ash heap of history, and they're doing this by playing the one card they've got: fear. Their larger goal, then, is to resuscitate the neocons' post-September 11 vision of a world in which the United States, unbound by rules or reality, imposes its will on friend and enemy alike." These claims also play well off the conspiratorial fears of Tea Partiers who believe that President Obama is a Muslim who wasn't born in the United States and of those that believe "their country" is being taken away from them by immigrants.

 

SHRINKING OLD GUARD: One group that is rapidly loosing sway within the Republican Party is the former old guard made up of traditional foreign policy realists. This group includes conservative stalwarts and the Secretaries of State of every Republican President in the last 40 years, including Henry Kissinger, George Schultz, James Baker, and Colin Powell. While skeptical of international entanglements, they also understand the need for America's global engagement. Perhaps no other issue exposes how far much of the Republican party has moved to the right than the debate over the New START treaty with Russia. The treaty updates and extends a treaty that was negotiated by President Reagan and ratified under President George H.W. Bush by a senate vote of 93-6. After months of review, it is now likely that the New START treaty will be ratified if brought to a vote. Since the recent Senate Foreign Relations Committee vote which saw three Republicans Richard Lugar, Bob Corker, and Johnny Isakson vote for the treaty, it should have the support of enough Republicans to reach the 67 votes needed for ratification. While the committee vote on New START was seen as a shocking level of bipartisanship, the mere fact that the treaty has not moved more rapidly through the senate and the level of disagreement on the right is a sign of the declining influence of the Republican foreign policy establishment, which has almost unanimously come out in support of the treaty. New START has the support of Henry Kissinger, George Schultz, Colin Powell, James Baker James Schlesinger, Stephen Hadley, and the unanimous backing of the top brass of the U.S. military. Yet the Republican leadership in the Senate have yet to support it, and the Heritage Foundation,GOP Sens. James Inhofe (OK) and Jim DeMint (SC), and Mitt Romney have all opposed the treaty.

[Guest human]

American4Progress your group "left wingers" likes to play disinformation.

 

You really are a sad group. You should rename your group "Americans4hate".

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

GOP Divided On Foreign Policy

 

"The Pledge" almost completely ignores the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. In fact, the words "Iraq" and "Afghanistan" are mentioned only once and that was only in reference to Iran. The failure of the Pledge to address the wars exposes both a shocking disregard for those fighting and dying on the part of Republican-initiated wars, as well as a clear absence of any of the ideas about how to bring these conflicts to an end. It also demonstrates that the Republican Party is now completely divided on foreign policy. The emergence of the Tea Party movement may have energized the right-wing base, but it also has exposed a sharp split over foreign policy between nativist-isolationists and war-seeking interventionist neoconservatives. The only thing that seemingly unites the diverging groups is Islamophobia. The traditional Republican foreign policy establishment of national security realists, once the counter-balancing force to both these strains, have seen their influence in the party rapidly shrink. Much of the disarray is a result of the disastrous Bush years, which has seen national security increasingly emerge as a political strength for progressives, especially after progressives campaigned successfully against the war in Iraq in 2006 and 2008 and with President Obama polling higher on his handling of national security than on other issues. This poses a real challenge for the right. As the Center for American Progress' Brian Katulis concludes, "The Bush administration's 'global war on terror' and overall reckless approach to foreign policy may end up doing to Republicans what the Vietnam War did to Democrats for many years: leave them stuck in the past as they refight defense policies, internally divided and searching for a coherent message on national security."

 

WHAT WARS?: The Pledge's failure to address the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is striking considering that just a few years after, Bush declared himself a "war president" and Republicans were more trusted on national security than Democrats. There now appears to be no unified GOP position on Iraq or Afghanistan, defense spending, or global engagement. The emergence of the Tea Party movement has exposed a split in which limited government libertarian conservatives clash with those seeking to expand the power and reach of the national security apparatus of the state both at home and abroad. The New York Times' Peter Baker writes in Foreign Policy, "When it comes to foreign policy, the unity of the Tea Party stops at the water's edge. Its leaders are hopelessly divided over everything from the war in Afghanistan and counterterrorism policies to free trade and the promotion of democracy abroad. And with the Tea Party increasingly serving as the Republican Party's driving force, the schism underscores the emerging foreign-policy debate on the American right. So recently united behind President George W. Bush's war on terror, Republicans now find themselves splintering into familiar interventionist and isolationist factions, with the Dick Cheney side of the party eager to reshape the world versus the economic populists more concerned about cutting taxes at home than spending them on adventures abroad." Katulis notes, "The last time Republicans were so sharply at odds was the party's debate with its isolationist wing before World War II." He adds that "dissension in the Republican ranks was on full display in the conservative reactions to the Obama administration's National Security Strategy this spring. Conservative foreign policy analysts couldn't decide whether to accuse the Obama administration of plagiarism or treason. Some praised the strategy as a continuation of the Bush administration's approach; others condemned it as a recipe for weakness and an appeasement of America's enemies." The split was also evident when Republican Party Chairman Michael Steele was ferociously repudiated by neoconservative torch-bearers after advocating not to "engage in a land war in Afghanistan." Yet, as Baker notes, "when nearly half a million Tea Party supporters voted online to define their campaign agenda, not a single one of the 10 planks they agreed on had anything to do with the world beyond America's borders."

 

ISLAMOPHOBIA UNITES: In the eight points put forward in the Pledge's national security section, there is no plan or concept for how to engage the world. Instead, the one area that appears to unite Republicans is nativist bigotry toward Muslims and Hispanics. Five of the eight points within the Republican plan on foreign policy actually have more to do with immigration policy and keeping people out of America. It is no coincidence that this past summer, right-wing Islamophobic protests emerged across the country, ginned up by a combination of Tea Partiers and neoconservatives. Groups like "Keep America Safe," led by Elizabeth Cheney and the Weekly Standard's Bill Kristol, sought to stoke fear and hate of Muslims over the Islamic community center in New York and other neoconservatives like Frank Gaffney at the Center for Security Studies claim that Sharia law is threatening to take over the U.S. As CAP's Matt Duss assesses, "in order to reposition themselves to retake the reins of power, the Cheneys must rescue the 'global war on terror' from the ash heap of history, and they're doing this by playing the one card they've got: fear. Their larger goal, then, is to resuscitate the neocons' post-September 11 vision of a world in which the United States, unbound by rules or reality, imposes its will on friend and enemy alike." These claims also play well off the conspiratorial fears of Tea Partiers who believe that President Obama is a Muslim who wasn't born in the United States and of those that believe "their country" is being taken away from them by immigrants.

 

SHRINKING OLD GUARD: One group that is rapidly loosing sway within the Republican Party is the former old guard made up of traditional foreign policy realists. This group includes conservative stalwarts and the Secretaries of State of every Republican President in the last 40 years, including Henry Kissinger, George Schultz, James Baker, and Colin Powell. While skeptical of international entanglements, they also understand the need for America's global engagement. Perhaps no other issue exposes how far much of the Republican party has moved to the right than the debate over the New START treaty with Russia. The treaty updates and extends a treaty that was negotiated by President Reagan and ratified under President George H.W. Bush by a senate vote of 93-6. After months of review, it is now likely that the New START treaty will be ratified if brought to a vote. Since the recent Senate Foreign Relations Committee vote which saw three Republicans Richard Lugar, Bob Corker, and Johnny Isakson vote for the treaty, it should have the support of enough Republicans to reach the 67 votes needed for ratification. While the committee vote on New START was seen as a shocking level of bipartisanship, the mere fact that the treaty has not moved more rapidly through the senate and the level of disagreement on the right is a sign of the declining influence of the Republican foreign policy establishment, which has almost unanimously come out in support of the treaty. New START has the support of Henry Kissinger, George Schultz, Colin Powell, James Baker James Schlesinger, Stephen Hadley, and the unanimous backing of the top brass of the U.S. military. Yet the Republican leadership in the Senate have yet to support it, and the Heritage Foundation,GOP Sens. James Inhofe (OK) and Jim DeMint (SC), and Mitt Romney have all opposed the treaty.

[Guest LAW]

Remarks by the President in a Backyard Discussion in Albuquerque, New Mexico

 

Cavalier Residence

Albuquerque, New Mexico

 

The Republicans recently put out what they call their Pledge to America. And it basically outlined what their priorities are.

 

Their number one economic priority is retaining $700 billion tax breaks to the wealthiest 2 percent of the country -- millionaires and billionaires mostly. We’d have to borrow the $700 billion because we don’t have it. We’ve got these deficits and debt. So we’d have to borrow the $700 billion from China or the Saudis or whoever is buying our debt, and then we’d pass off on average $100,000 check to people who are making a million dollars up to more than a billion dollars.

 

That’s their main economic plan. And when you ask them, well, how would you pay for some of this stuff, they don’t really have good answers. But one way they would pay for it is to cut back our education spending by 20 percent and eliminate about 200,000 Head Start programs and reduce student aid to go to college for about 8 million students.

 

That’s one of their answers. And I just have to say, look, China -- that’s not the decision they’re making about their education system and their kids. South Korea, that’s not the decision that they’re making about their kids.

 

I was in Shanghai and I talked to the mayor. He said, you know, teachers are the most respected professions, as much as doctors or engineers, and they’re paid to reflect how much we value them.

 

I was in South Korea, and I was talking to the President, having lunch, and he said, you know, my biggest problem in education is the parents are so demanding, they’re insisting that I ship in English -- people from the United States and other English-speaking countries because they want all their kids to learn English by the time they’re in third grade.

 

I mean, that’s the -- that’s their mindset. That’s the competition that they’re in. So they’re not cutting back on education, right when we know that that’s going to be the most important thing in determining our success over the long term. And we can’t either. And so I just want everybody to think about those kinds of issues as you go into the polling place in November: Who’s going to prioritize our young people to make sure they’ve got the skills they need to succeed over the long term? Nothing is going to be more important in terms of our long-term success.

[Guest human]

I was Itching for you to bring up education in your post. Git ready for a lesson in what your group thinks of education.

 

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/nj-teacher-who-complained-to-gov-chris-christie-that-she-wasnt-paid-83k-she-deserved-actually-makes-86k-94951164.html

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Remarks by the President in a Backyard Discussion in Albuquerque, New Mexico

 

Cavalier Residence

Albuquerque, New Mexico

 

The Republicans recently put out what they call their Pledge to America. And it basically outlined what their priorities are.

 

Their number one economic priority is retaining $700 billion tax breaks to the wealthiest 2 percent of the country -- millionaires and billionaires mostly. We’d have to borrow the $700 billion because we don’t have it. We’ve got these deficits and debt. So we’d have to borrow the $700 billion from China or the Saudis or whoever is buying our debt, and then we’d pass off on average $100,000 check to people who are making a million dollars up to more than a billion dollars.

 

That’s their main economic plan. And when you ask them, well, how would you pay for some of this stuff, they don’t really have good answers. But one way they would pay for it is to cut back our education spending by 20 percent and eliminate about 200,000 Head Start programs and reduce student aid to go to college for about 8 million students.

 

That’s one of their answers. And I just have to say, look, China -- that’s not the decision they’re making about their education system and their kids. South Korea, that’s not the decision that they’re making about their kids.

 

I was in Shanghai and I talked to the mayor. He said, you know, teachers are the most respected professions, as much as doctors or engineers, and they’re paid to reflect how much we value them.

 

I was in South Korea, and I was talking to the President, having lunch, and he said, you know, my biggest problem in education is the parents are so demanding, they’re insisting that I ship in English -- people from the United States and other English-speaking countries because they want all their kids to learn English by the time they’re in third grade.

 

I mean, that’s the -- that’s their mindset. That’s the competition that they’re in. So they’re not cutting back on education, right when we know that that’s going to be the most important thing in determining our success over the long term. And we can’t either. And so I just want everybody to think about those kinds of issues as you go into the polling place in November: Who’s going to prioritize our young people to make sure they’ve got the skills they need to succeed over the long term? Nothing is going to be more important in terms of our long-term success.

[Guest Silvia]

The pledge states that the Republicans will “root out government waste.” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has made the same promise last April. I guess we should look at this as a Bipartisan statement.

 

http://www.tortreports.com/2010/4/Pelosi_Letter_to_House_Committee_Chairs_on_Continuing_Oversight_Efforts_of_Government_Spending

 

Pelosi Letter to House Committee Chairs on Continuing Oversight Efforts of Government Spending

April 30, 2010

 

Speaker Nancy Pelosi sent the following letter today to committee chairs requesting that each of the committees continue to conduct "oversight of all aspects of federal spending and government operations to help achieve deficit reduction and long-term fiscal responsibility." The Speaker asked that the chairs report back with a hearing schedule by May 28th. She issued the following statement on the letter:

 

"Over the past decade, Republicans in Congress and the Bush White House turned record surpluses into record deficits, and they want to take us back to an era of fiscal irresponsibility and record job losses," said Speaker Pelosi. "With this letter today, Democrats are demonstrating our ongoing commitment to reining in unnecessary spending; we are continuing to take steps to restore responsibility to the federal budget. That's why I'm asking committee chairs to continue their efforts in conducting vigorous oversight of all aspects of the federal budget, to help reduce the deficit even further, and ensure fiscal discipline for the long term."

 

The text of the letter is below.

 

April 28, 2010

 

The Honorable XX

 

Chairman, Committee on XX

 

U.S. House of Representatives

 

Address, House Office Building

 

Washington, D.C. 20515

 

Dear Chair:

 

With your leadership, our New Direction Congress has produced an outstanding record of reform. We have delivered on our pledge to restore fiscal discipline and to restore accountability with honest leadership and open government.

 

A critical part of this initiative was our effort last year to build on the House Rules change proposed by Congressman John Tanner. As you will recall, each Chairman was requested to schedule committee hearings to examine the budgets of programs in the departments or agencies within the committee's jurisdiction.

 

The responses from the committees described more than 150 hearings conducted to scrutinize our budget, while promoting efficiency and reducing waste, fraud, and abuse in government spending. Your efforts have promoted efficiency and reduced waste throughout government and, in the case of health care reform, saved taxpayers billions of dollars.

 

The 111th Congress took the important step of implementing statutory pay-as-you-go budgeting discipline to end the irresponsible deficit creation of previous Congresses and the Bush Administration. And we have taken other important steps to improve oversight and accountability:

 

* bi-partisan passage of the Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of 2009;

* bi-partisan passage, this week, of the IMPROVE Acquisition Act to reform the entire defense acquisition system, potentially saving billions for taxpayers;

* reduction of waste, fraud, and abuse in the Medicare and Medicaid systems to improve the delivery of health care services.

 

 

These are just a few examples of how the vigorous oversight by our committees has helped reform government and control spending on behalf of the American people. However, more work needs to be done to reduce the deficit and restore accountability.

 

To that end, it is essential that you redouble your efforts in conducting oversight of all aspects of federal spending and government operations to help achieve deficit reduction and long-term fiscal responsibility. Please submit a letter by May 28, 2010, outlining oversight hearings held by your committee this year, as well as any that have been scheduled or are currently being planned for the remainder of the 111th Congress, intended to scrutinize departments, agencies, and programs under your jurisdiction.

 

Thank you again for the hard work that you, the Members of your committee, and your staff have devoted to conducting these hearings over the past year.

 

best regards,

 

NANCY PELOSI

 

Speaker of the House

[Guest M. Hughes]

At least the GOP explicitly calls for the repeal of Obamacare.

[Guest American4Progress]

American4Progress your group "left wingers" likes to play disinformation.

 

You really are a sad group. You should rename your group "Americans4hate".

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

What part of the foreign policy pledge? Iraq and Afghanistan are referred to once, in passing. There’s nothing at all about what the United States should do in those nations. Nothing about Pakistan. Nothing about Russian, or China (China at least gets one mention, in the context of the deficit). Nothing about Europe. The rest of the world? Or is it your anti-immigrant build a bigger wall stance?

[Guest autrain]

When asked how they were going to reform Social Security Boehner is quoted as saying "I don't know."

 

Soooo, there's your answer.

 

Entitlements MUST be cut if we are to survive as a nation. As a life long Republican I can tell you that this the GOPs LAST chance. If they get in this year and do not get the spending under control the Tea Parties and 912 groups will turn their backs on them forever and they will be toast!

[Guest Old Timer]

We should demand an end to all wars, investment in jobs, and commitments not to cut, weaken, or privatize Social Security.

[Guest human]

It's just not that our group the Republicans who have to clean up this mess, but everyone else because if you do not?

 

It's not the GOPs last chance. It's Americas Last chance to achieve the American Dream

"Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness".

 

Do you stand for the American Dream or not?

 

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Entitlements MUST be cut if we are to survive as a nation. As a life long Republican I can tell you that this the GOPs LAST chance. If they get in this year and do not get the spending under control the Tea Parties and 912 groups will turn their backs on them forever and they will be toast!