Thursday, December 01, 2005

When It Comes to Spending, Most House Republicans are RINO'S

Milhouse recently posted an item about how some RINO's and the Dems blocked an earmark-less Labor-HHS-Spending bill. He pointed it out as an example of why we need more Republicans in the House and that we need to clear out the RINO's. We do indeed need to clear out the fiscal RINO's, but unfortunately, they're the one's who would benefit from an increase in the Republican majority. They're the ones who run the House. And they have been spending like mad. Despite the occasional good move, such as the non-earmarked bill and the anger over the "Bridge to Nowhere", there is still little fiscal sanity in either House of Congress, and no true fiscal conservative seems to have any source of power. With domestic spending rising as it has over the last 10 years, a non-earmarked bill seems like a quaint, if rare, gesture. It certainly won't make me change my mind that the current Republican's need a shake up, and I won't lose much sleep if they lose control of either the Senate or the House. The President hasn't shown much leadership in the fiscal realm either, so it makes little difference who is running Congress. When all the Republican's are fiscal RINO's, are the even Republican's anymore? My crisis of conscience continues unabated.


Blogger Milhouse said...

The RINOs run the House? They would benefit from an increase in the majority? Please explain. 209 Republicans voted for a porkless bill; 22 voted against it. Meanwhile, not a single Democrat voted for it. Suppose the House had 10 more Republicans in it. Suppose further that those 10 split in the same proportion as did the existing Republicans - 9 for the bill and 1 against it. It would have passed, 218 to 215.

You ask "When all the Republican's are fiscal RINO's, are the even Republican's anymore?". But this vote shows that they're not. Only 10% of them voted against the bill. OK, not all of the 90% who voted for it really believe. Some of them were pressured, or supported the bill for other reasons. But even if 20% or 30% of GOP Members are RINOs, that still leaves 70% or 80% who are not. And a RINO is no worse than one who doesn't even bother calling himself a Republican. Replacing a RINO with an avowed Democrat is at best a wash; replacing a true Republican with a Democrat is a net loss, no matter how many RINOs he takes with him.

The place to fight the RINOs is in Republican primaries, and the best way to go about that is through the Club For Growth.

Tue Dec 06, 10:59:00 AM 2005  
Blogger C.M. Burns said...

As I said, one porkless bill does not a convincing change make. If they had not massively porked up the Energy and Transportation bill, if they hadn't passed that f'ing awful medicare drug entitltement monster, then maybe they could get credit for that ONE porkless bill. One. That's crap. They were talking about trying to pass a bill that cut spending GROWTH in one area by $50 Billion over 5 years. I could find ways to eleimate $50 Billion total over 5 months. It's not hard. They aren't doing anything worth supporting.

Denny Hastert is not a fiscal Conservative. The leadership in general is not made up of fiscal conservatives. If we give them more seats they will keep spending. The Senatorial and Congressional campaign committees support the incumbants almost all of the time in primaries. I like the Club for Growth, but after Lincoln Chaffee defeats theit chose candidate in the primary because the NRSC pumped him up, do we just blindly support him? If Republican's no longer stand up for Republican values and expect to win elections by pandering to the Religious Right while simulateously running on JUST the War on Terror, they aren't worth keeping. While I don't want to see Nacny Pelosi as the next Speaker of the House, I want Hastert & Co. to have the fear of God put into them by having some of their free spending buddies go. Hell, I wouldn't cry if Hastert lost. He's out of touch with the fiscal Conservatives that championed Goldwater and elected Reagan. As Goldwater himslef said, "we entrust the conduct of our affairs to men who understand that their first duty as public officials is to divest themselves of the power they have been given." I don't think that describes anyone in the leadership.

Tue Dec 06, 01:09:00 PM 2005  
Blogger Milhouse said...

I like the Club for Growth, but after Lincoln Chaffee defeats theit chose candidate in the primary because the NRSC pumped him up, do we just blindly support him?

Yes. Chafee is a leftist Democrat who counts as a Republican when deciding who is in the majority. His replacement, assuming he wins his primary, would be an equally leftist Democrat who would count as a Democrat. All else being equal, that makes Chafee the better candidate. Now if the Ds nominated someone to Chafee's right, e.g. when Lieberman challenged Weicker in CT, that would be a different matter.

Tue Dec 06, 01:29:00 PM 2005  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home