Congressional Republicans must know how upset their voters are. And it is not just Republicans, also Reagan Democrats and Independents. Yet they continue to provide lack luster opposition conceding to the Democrats their policy objectives. THEY LET THE DOMOCRATS WIN AND ALL THE DEMS ARE LAUGHING AT THE REPUBLICANS!
THIS IS EXACTLY WHY DONALD TRUMP IS IN THE LEAD FOR THE REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL NOMINATION. HE DOESN’T PUSSY FOOT AROUND, CAVE IN. HE MEANS WHAT HE SAYS AND SAYS WHAT HE MEANS. AND HE GETS THE JOB DONE. HE WINS.
VIEW THE VIDEO FOR MORE DETAILS!!!
Democratic leaders are unanimous in declaring a complete victory over House Speakerand his close allies, who wrote the $1.1 trillion omnibus budget without asking House conservatives for any input — or even for some public objections to help their closed-door negotiations.
The Democrats’ victory, and Republican Ryan’s defeat, was garishly displayed when his omnibus got more Democratic votes in the House and in the Senate than it got Republican votes.
“I said I would not accept a lot of [conservative] ideological riders that were attached to a big budget deal,” President Barack Obama said Friday, at his end-of-year press conference. “And because of some terrific negotiations by the Democrats up on Capitol Hill and I think some pretty good work by our legislative staff here… it was a good win,” he said. “We met our goals,” he said.
In 2015, “we wanted to get rid of sequestration, we were able to do that,” gloated the Democrats’ leader in the Senate,
Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV)
“Well, if you would’ve told me this year that we’d be standing here celebrating the passage of an omnibus bill, with no poison pill riders, at higher [spending] levels above sequesters than even the president requested, I wouldn’t have believed it, but here we are,” Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer told reporters shortly after the $1.1 trillion omnibus bill was passed.
“Almost anything, the Republican leadership in the Senate achieved this year, they achieved on Democratic terms… Democrats had an amazingly good year,” he declared.
Over in the House, the Democrats’ upbeat press conference began with laughter, according to the transcript.
(Leader Pelosi. Good morning, everyone. Good morning. I know you’re out there. I see you.
Some of you, for the second time this morning – thank you for coming by. We’re very pleased to say that today, we delivered sweeping victories for hard-working American families. The Omnibus bill makes vital investments that will create jobs, strengthen our future and grow the paychecks of American people… We passed the best possible, under the circumstances, appropriations bill… the Republicans’ obsession with lifting the oil-export ban, they really gave away the store. Democrats were able to strip scores and scores of poison pills, destructive poison pills, some of which they had to have, which they ended up with not having… it is a monumental improvement… But again, we feel very, very good about what it is.… and thank the Speaker for his cooperation.
About the $1.1 trillion omnibus spending bill passed by Congress and signed by the president on Friday, we have only one question: What were Republican leaders thinking?
If there is any takeaway from the Republican presidential campaign so far, it is that Republican voters are anxious about large-scale immigration and frustrated that the federal government repeatedly demonstrates no interest in doing anything about it. We strongly object to ham-fisted proposals, such as those of Donald Trump, to address these concerns, but it is clear that our thoughtless immigration policies have weakened, and continue to weaken, our economy, our social stability, and our security. Yet instead of responding to those concerns, Republicans sent the president a bill that will exacerbate them.
It would be bad enough had Republicans merely acquiesced to foolish policies, but in this bill they actively advanced them. The bill’s most egregious proposal will temporarily expand the H-2B visa program, quadrupling the issuance of visas to foreign workers for nonagricultural or temporary service jobs in 2016 — and it was a Republican initiative from start to finish.
What is the rationale? There is strong evidence that large-scale hiring of foreign workers depresses wages for Americans, and it’s not as if Ferris wheels and ski lifts will go unmanned if we stop importing Peruvian labor. Clearly, Republican leaders bent to the demands of a tiny segment of employers.
Meanwhile, they capitulated on a host of other proposals. Despite serious concerns about the integrity of our refugee-vetting procedures in the wake of terrorist attacks in Paris and San Bernardino, the bill fully funds the government’s refugee-resettlement program, facilitating the president’s promise to settle 10,000 Syrians in the U.S. over the coming year. Despite revelations about outrageous criminal activity in America’s 340 “sanctuary cities,” the bill permits federal grants to those cities without adding any qualifying conditions. And despite a bipartisan effort to reform the cronyism-riddled EB-5 visa program, under which foreigners can obtain a green card if they invest a certain amount in a business that creates or preserves ten jobs for U.S. citizens, Republican leadership dismissed the reform effort and extended the EB-5 program as is through September.
Since Democrats have hastened to embrace a policy of de facto open borders, come what may, it falls to Republican officeholders to offer a more sober assessment of our immigration policy — which they should. It’s good policy and — given that 9 out of 10 Americans want immigration levels either kept where they are or reduced — it’s good politics. Republican leaders should be attempting to halt illegal immigration, reduce legal immigration (especially from countries that pose a particular threat to American security), and figure out ways to assimilate immigrants who are already here and to reform the failed procedures by which we evaluate those who want to come.
I have a question on the budget deal. Can somebody explain to me how is it the clock “runs out” all the time? The need for a budget deal has been known for months. It wasn’t and isn’t as though on December 10th, the House realized there wasn’t a budget done and they needed to get one done. I mean, everybody knows every December we have one of these omnibus things. Every year. How in the world can the clock “run out” on something that everybody knows months in advance is on the schedule?
And the second question I have is, how come the clock never runs out on the Democrats? Could somebody explain either of these? I mean, this is the primary excuse — I’m sorry, “reason” — that is offered for why we have to do these deals. “Well, you know, we just had to resort to the way things have always been done. The clock was running out. I wouldn’t vote for it if I was there, but this is the best we could do.” We don’t have any standards anymore. We certainly don’t have any lofty expectations. If this is the best we could do because the clock was…
We run the place, folks! How in the world is it the clock is always running out on the people who have the stopwatch in their hands? Why is it the clock never runs out on the Democrats? They are in the minority. Speaking of which, how is it that after two midterm elections with more members of the Republican Party since the Civil War in the House, the Democrats win this? What is the point of the majority? When the Republicans were running in both 2010 and 2014, remember they said, “Well, you know, Obama’s in the White House and there’s nothing we can do.”
Okay, so we gave ’em the House.
Then after that they said, “Well, you know, Harry Reid’s still over there in the Senate. We can’t really do much.”
Okay, so we elected Republicans to run the Senate. And now the excuse is, “Well, you know, there’s not much we can do. Obama’s over there in the White House, and he’ll veto everything.” I don’t remember a single Republican campaign in 2010 or 2014 which said, “Elect me, because we’re not gonna be able to do jack excrement.” Do you? I remember campaigns filled with lofty objectives and goals and promises that were rooted in stopping this kind of thing. And so now, the day after it’s all done, who is the object of enmity? Me. A guy on the radio. I’m the problem.
Holy smokes, folks!
I have even yet another question. How come the Democrats never have to deal with the cards they’re dealt? How come the clock never runs out on the Democrats? How come all of this only happens to the Republicans, who are running the place? Republicans run the place by a wide margin. More seats than the Republicans have held since the Civil War. “Well, the clock was running out. There was not much to do but do it the way we’ve always been doing it. Hands were tied, had to play the cards we were dealt.” Who runs this place? Who has the majority of seats in this place? Ditto over in the Senate.
Why does the clock always run out on an end-of-the-year budget deal when everybody knows months in advance the end-of-the-year budget deal is coming up? How in the world does any of this happen? These are rhetorical questions. It happens because this is what the Republicans wanted the end result to be. The proof of that is the excuses they’re offering. They don’t have the temerity to come out and say, “Hey, we love this. This is what we want. This is great for the country. We have bipartisan agreement here.” I mean, why aren’t they doing that? If bipartisan agreement is what voters want, if voters want Republicans to cross the aisle to work with Democrats to cooperate to make Washington work, why aren’t the Republicans saying they did all that and taking all the credit for it and getting all the praise?
They don’t really care if they lose the support of the current Republican base. That can be the only real political answer here, because none of this makes sense otherwise. Because what they’ve done here is exactly what they say they have to do in order to broaden their coalition. They have to agree with amnesty. They have to let Obamacare go ahead and happen. They have to work with the Democrats. They have to get the government spending things on expectations that people have because of entitlements, can’t take anything back, can’t make government smaller. They are actually out there trying to appeal to people that at present don’t vote for them, while they are purposely, in my estimation, trying to disenfranchise those who do vote for them.
So if you look carefully they’re doing exactly what they claim they have to do in order to win the presidency. You couple this with everything else we know, such as Jeb Bush starting out his primary campaign by saying he intended to win the nomination without the base. It was going to be a marvel of modern American politics, first-ever candidate to win his party’s nomination without the support of his party’s base. They don’t want it. It’s perfectly clear what’s happening here. And, of course, when they’re called on it, naturally those of us who criticize it are going to be pointed to as the problem.