Tag Archives: Tea party

Debt ceiling battle getting serious

The Affordable Care Act takes effect soon, which won’t end the fight to end it.

Before we get back to that old fight, another old battle — a much more critical one — is being waged in Washington, D.C. It’s about the debt ceiling. Failure to increase it by Oct. 17 could send the nation into default on its obligations. Does anyone really and truly understand the cataclysm that will occur if we fail to pay our bills?

Congress has the authority to increase the amount of money the federal government can borrow to, um, pay its bills and meet its financial obligations. The Republican majority in the House of Representatives, though, is attaching a laundry list of demands on any bill to increase the debt ceiling. The list includes items that have nothing to do with the debt ceiling. They include approval of the Keystone pipeline project and federal tort reform.

President Obama says he won’t negotiate over the “full faith and credit of the United States of America.” He contends — correctly in my view — that the GOP-led House is “blackmailing” the president over the nation’s financial obligations.

President Reagan went through this as well. He scolded Republicans who ran the Senate for threatening the nation’s economic well-being by blocking efforts to increase the debt ceiling. GOP Senate leaders relented and listened to the Gipper.

This time around, House GOP leaders are telling a Democratic president to stick it in his ear.

I am not going to accept the notion that Reagan’s approving the debt ceiling 18 times during his presidency was more acceptable then because the national debt was so much smaller than it is today. The consequences of failing to act are just as grave now as they were during President Reagan’s tenure.

The major difference between then and now — as I see it — is that one major party has been hijacked by individuals who see themselves as institutional reformers. I see them as attempting to destroy the very government they took an oath to serve.

Wendy is in, apparently … reportedly

The semi-official word is out that state Sen. Wendy Davis is going to run for governor of Texas in 2014.

That’s according to sources who’ve spilled the beans to news outlets such as Politico that the Fort Worth Democrat is going to seek the state’s highest office.

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/09/wendy-davis-texas-2014-97410.html

This is a good thing for Texas.

The state hasn’t witnessed a truly exciting governor’s race since 1994, when a Republican upstart named George W. Bush challenged Democratic incumbent Ann Richards — and beat her. That contest actually was the last in a lengthy line of interesting Texas governor’s races.

It’s been downhill, interest-wise, ever since.

Davis vs. The Republican (probably Attorney General Greg Abbott) would gin up interest the state hasn’t seen in two decades.

Will the Democrat break the Republicans’ stranglehold on statewide offices? Well, I’m thinking the odds remain pretty long. Abbott has the money and the appropriate party label. Texas has swung so far to the right politically that it seems highly unlikely anyone to the left of Genghis Khan can win anything in this state.

If anyone can do it, Wendy Davis — who made herself famous nationally with her one-woman filibuster this summer of an anti-abortion bill — might be the candidate. She’s smart (despite what some of Abbott’s supporters have said over social media), telegenic (which is code for attractive) and well-spoken.

I’m not going to bet my next Happy Meal on Davis’s chances on beating The Republican. I would be delighted, though, to see some genuine excitement in the campaign for what once was considered a “weak political office.” That, of course, changed under the interminable reign of Gov. Rick Perry.

The next governor is going to inherit an office that’s been strengthened considerably because of the way Perry consolidated his power. Texans should pay attention whether Davis runs or stays out.

If she runs, my guess is that we’ll all be paying careful attention.

We’ll know on Oct. 3 when Davis is expected to make her intentions known. Stay tuned. This is likely to get fun.

Tea party support hits the skids

This is a most interesting report: The Gallup Poll organization says 22 percent of Americans support the tea party movement, which I’ve taken to calling the “insane wing” of the Republican Party.

The Gallup survey gives the tea party its near-lowest rating since the movement hit its peak around the time of the 2010 mid-term elections.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/324771-tea-party-hits-a-low-point-

It begs the question: Why are tea party darlings in the U.S. Senate, such as Ted Cruz, R-Texas, Rand Paul, R-Ky., and Mike Lee, R-Utah, getting so much air time and print space? I think it’s because they’ve been yapping the loudest and have discovered some secret formula for getting their faces on national television.

Gallup isn’t exactly a lefty-leaning polling group. The Gallup group actually tends to lean to the right, but its findings often are cited as being authoritative.

Cruz is the latest tea party golden boy to hog the spotlight, blabbering on for 21-plus hours in an attempt to derail the Affordable Care Act in the Senate. He ended up voting with the rest of them to keep funding the ACA, which seems to suggest that his Senate floor gabfest was all for show.

I’m suspecting that showboating is beginning to wear thin among Americans who want their federal government to actually do something on their behalf.

That, of course, is anathema to the tea party wing of the Republican Party.

Raise the debt ceiling

The debt ceiling battle is about to be joined once more in Congress.

It’s a fight Congress and the White House shouldn’t wage. It threatens the nation’s credit rating, which already has been bumped downward and it poses an extreme threat to our economic health — not to mention the retirement accounts of many tens of millions of Americans who are fed up to here with the foolish games being played.

I am one of those fed up Americans.

http://www.fixthedebt.org/blog/no-putting-a-lid-on-the-debt-ceiling_1#.UkHMCUoo6t8

Congressional Republicans, led by the tea party yahoos, are posing a serious threat to our well-being. They say the debt ceiling shouldn’t be increased, claiming some specious notion that federal spending must be brought under control. It is true the government spends too much. It also is true that if we do not honor our financial obligations — such as paying our bills — the consequences are going to eclipse the petty arguments that might lead us to default on those obligations.

The GOP’s tea party cabal keeps invoking the name of their patron saint, President Ronald Reagan, when discussing these fiscal matters. Here’s a flash: President Reagan, working with a Democratic-led Congress, boosted the debt ceiling 18 times during his two terms in the White House. No muss no fuss. No one griped openly about government “spending too much,” even though the deficit increased during President Reagan’s time in office.

Congressional Republicans are playing with fire if they take us down this road. Mark my words, they will suffer some grievous political burns if they fail to allow the United States to meet its financial obligations.

Insanity tightens its grip on House GOP

Insane.

That’s the only word I have to describe what congressional Republicans have just done. They’ve approved a spending measure that includes defunding the Affordable Care Act, Barack Obama’s signature achievement so far in his presidency.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/house-passes-gop-spending-plan-that-defunds-obamacare/2013/09/20/4019117c-21fe-11e3-b73c-aab60bf735d0_story.html

The president and his Democratic allies in the Senate have said categorically they will have none of that. They’ve been joined by sensible Senate Republicans who say that defunding “Obamacare” is the wrong approach to deal with this issue.

All this sets up a possible — some might say probable — shutting down of the federal government in 10 days.

House Speaker John Boehner is declaring victory because, he said, the House has approved a continuing resolution to fund the government while taking money away from “Obamacare,” which he has called a “failed policy.” Failed? How does he know that? It hasn’t even been implemented fully yet.

This targeting of a law approved by Congress, signed by the president and affirmed by the Supreme Court simply astounds me.

The consequences of this fight are even more mind-boggling. Suppose the government shuts down — except for “essential” services. Parks will close. Services the people expect will cease. The anger that this tactic will produce seems almost incalculable at the moment. Who will pay for this? The Republican Party leadership in the House of Representatives.

That doesn’t matter to the tea party wing, the insane wing of the GOP, most of whose members were not around when the GOP tried this before. Voters rose up and slapped them bald-headed at the next election.

The worst news of all is that this round of haggling is merely a prelim to the main event, the upcoming fight over whether to raise the debt ceiling. If Congress chokes on that one, then the hurting really starts.

It’s insane, I’m telling you. Insane.

Waiting on Texas Democrats

As I watch the 2014 Texas political campaign take shape, I keep waiting for some news — any news — about Democrats.

So far, I’m hearing none.

There likely will be a change in one race, the one for governor, if state Sen. Wendy Davis, D-Fort Worth, jumps into that contest.

But to date, all the interest, excitement and anticipation are on the Republican side of the ballot.

This tells me at least two things:

The Texas Democratic Party is as near-dead as ever before and the Texas Republican Party is feeling its oats while the opposition continues to flounder.

I wish the Democrats could somehow spring to life, if only to challenge the Republicans and to hold them accountable for the policies they keep enacting into law.

The Republican side is so exciting, actually, that there’s some talk simmering about whether some “mainstream” GOP officeholders will be challenged by tea party candidates. U.S. Rep. Pete Sessions, a Republican member of Congress, is facing such a challenge. There’s been talk of the tea party zealots challenging U.S. Sen. John Cornyn. Good luck with that one.

Democrats? They’re virtually nowhere to be found.

The Dems keep talking bravely about staging a comeback. Hollow talk, though, won’t get the job done.

As for the Republicans, they might have their hands full trying to maintain some semblance of control within their own ranks. Hold on. It’s likely to be a bumpy ride through GOP Land.

Sen. Cruz a moderate? On immigration?

Ted Cruz has developed a small, but possibly dangerous, crack in his hardliner’s armor.

It involves immigration and the junior U.S. senator from Texas may find himself on the outs with the very Republican Party base that helped elect him to the office in November 2012.

http://www.texastribune.org/2013/09/13/immigration-cruz-aims-middle-ground/

The tea party wing of the party hates any kind of immigration reform. Cruz, a first-generation American — he was born in Canada to an American mother and a Cuban father — sees immigration a bit differently than those who up to this point have worshiped every word that comes out of his mouth.

Cruz says he supports granting legal status for those already in this country illegally and wants to make it easier for them to gain citizenship. Hey, isn’t that Sen. Marco Rubio’s take on immigration, and hasn’t the Florida Republican gotten into trouble with the tea party base in his state over that very thing?

“I have said many times that I want to see common-sense immigration reform pass,” Cruz told the Texas Tribune. “I think most Americans want to see the problem fixed.”

Sure enough. But the tea party crowd that supports Cruz wants to “fix” the problem by rounding up undocumented immigrants and deporting them. Or, as GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney said during the 2012 campaign, make life so miserable here in the United States that they could “self-deport” themselves back to the countries of their birth.

Political reality may be about to smack Ted Cruz right in the face.

‘Patriots’ becoming a perverted term

Paul Burka is among my favorite Texas political pundits — and he’s nailed it once again in criticizing a video supporting Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott’s campaign for governor.

http://www.texasmonthly.com/burka-blog/greg-abbott-freedom-worth-fighting

The video shows Abbott praising the “patriots” who fight for “freedom.” The patriots to whom he refers, of course, appear to be the tea party warriors who comprise a significant portion of the Texas Republican Party.

Abbott has enlisted as a tea party “patriot” in an attempt to tack to the far right wing of his party.

That takes me to a point that has bothered me since the tea party branch of the GOP began taking root in Texas and the rest of the country.

They call themselves “tea party patriots,” taking sole ownership of the term “patriot” they are so proud to wear. Well, I consider myself as much as a patriot as anyone who boasts of his or her tea party credentials. I am not a tea party follower. I dislike intensely the tea party wing’s view that no government is the best government. They adhere to some notion that it’s all right, for instance, to shut the government down as long as it defunds the Affordable Care Act — ignoring blatantly the effect that such a shutdown would have on those Americans who actually derive some benefit from the services that government delivers.

These folks call themselves “patriots” but their so-called “patriotism” is a version that I don’t recognize.

I kind of consider it a perversion of the term, not unlike the way Islamic terror groups have perverted their own religion or, dare I say it, some so-called Christians (e.g., the Westboro Baptist “Church”) pervert their faith.

I used to think of Greg Abbott as being above that kind of demagoguery.

Silly me.

Smithee for Texas House speaker?

Et tu, John Smithee?

Paul Burka, the blogger/columnist for Texas Monthly, thinks state Rep. John Smithee, R-Amarillo, might be thinking about challenging Speaker Joe Straus as the Man of the House.

That would be a most interesting turn of events.

http://www.texasmonthly.com/burka-blog/brewing-speakers-race

It’s not that Smithee isn’t worthy of consideration. He’s been in the House since 1985 and is by far the senior member of the Texas Panhandle legislative delegation; I think he’s got something like 18 years on the second-ranking Panhandle legislator, Sen. Kel Seliger, R-Amarillo, who was elected in 2003.

Burka thinks Smithee could be among a group of legislators looking to oust Straus, who I guess they believe has become too, um, “mainstream” for their liking. Smithee is set to emcee a fundraiser for an East Texas representative, Republican Kent Schaefer of Tyler.

I’m trying to figure out Smithee’s end game, if he has one, regarding the speakership.

I remember asking Smithee about the speaker’s office back when former Speaker Tom Craddick was being ousted from that high post. Smithee considered a run for it, but backed out. He said he disliked the political nature of the office. He preferred to be more of a legislative workhouse, staying in the background. He’s been known to walk across the aisle to work with Democrats, which I’ve become accustomed to believing is a big strike against any Republican serving in the state House of Reps.

I got the strong sense from Smithee — who I’ve known and admired since arriving in the Panhandle back in early 1995 — that he didn’t like the power brokering the speaker occasionally has to do. I’ve long thought of Smithee as a straight shooter who never was afraid to answer a direct question with a direct answer.

Smithee for speaker? Seems like a stretch to me. Then again, I haven’t been close to Smithee for some time. Maybe he’s been infected by the right-wing virus that’s been going around.

Battle of the Barbies heats up

A couple of Dallas Morning News writers — Mike Hashimoto and Nicole Stockdale — are tussling over the reaction to the “Barbie” moniker hung on state Sen. Wendy Davis, D-Fort Worth.

Hashimoto apparently sees media reaction as being a bit hypocritical, given that former half-term Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin was called “Caribou Barbie” when she was all the rage. Stockdale doesn’t see it that way.

I agree with Stockdale.

http://dallasmorningviewsblog.dallasnews.com/2013/08/abortion-barbie-vs-caribou-barbie.html/

Davis was called “retard Barbie” by someone supporting Republican Texas Attorney General Greg Abbot’s campaign for Texas governor. Davis is dropping hints all over Texas that she’s thinking about running for the Democratic Party nomination for governor. We’ll all know soon whether she’s in or out.

My sense is that the reaction to the “retard Barbie” slur has been based mostly on Abbott’s rather timid reaction to it. Instead of condemning such language with indignation and disgust, he has offered some timid disclaimers about being unable to control what people say on social media.

“Caribou Barbie” was meant, as I understand it, to call attention to (1) Palin’s attractiveness and (2) her devotion to the Alaska lifestyle.

Nicole Stockdale asks: What’s wrong with that?

I see nothing wrong with such a reference in that context.

The Davis reference — which was posted with hatred — is quite another matter.