Home » National Blog » All For Naught?

All For Naught?

 

All For Naught?

I have a question, a question for all serious conservatives, libertarians, and those who in general favor truly limited, constitutional government. Was the Tea Party tidal wave that swept Republicans back into power in 2010 really about limited government?  

Republicans sure talked a good talk before the 2010 elections. Warning of Obama's creeping socialism, crony capitalism, and a crippling debt burden that will prevent us from handing off a better America to our children and grandchildren.

Unfortunately, since the Tea Party swept Republicans back into power in the House, they've taken all the blame for "nearly shutting down government" and "being too extreme," when, in reality, the House Leadership under John Boehner, Eric Cantor, and Kevin McCarthy has been selling Tea Partiers a bill of goods — claiming to be supportive of their limited government positions while selling out in CR negotiations for paltry budget cuts of a mere $352 million dollars last spring, not to mention the debt ceiling debacle that netted nothing good for conservatives.

Well played, GOP, well played.

Last year, Rep. Paul Ryan, whom Washington has dubbed the "GOP's policy wonk," introduced a budget plan called the "Path to Prosperity."  To be fair, it was better than President Obama's in that Obama's irresponsible budget never balanced, and Ryan's balanced theoretically in 2040. 

When it came out, I was downright furious. Particularly that Ryan's budget received all the fanfare and media attention of the President's budget, and that more serious budget proposals deserving of attention and vigorous debate, from Senators Rand Paul, Pat Toomey, and the House Republican Study Committee, were completely overlooked and ignored.

I wrote at the time:

The fact that a serious proposal like Rand's is not receiving the attention level of Ryan's is very telling of the political establishment. They are in fact suggesting to the grassroots that Paul Ryan's budget is the best they can do, which considering most of the establishment won't be in Congress by 2040 (if even still having a pulse), the proposal falls flat. The only way Ryan's budget could be considered fiscally conservative is compared to Obama's. It can't even hold a candle to Rand's.

So I'll close with another question for all serious conservatives, libertarians, and those who in general favor limited, constitutional government. Was the Tea Party tidal wave that swept Republicans into the House in 2010 all for naught?  

Because asking good Americans to support a budget that doesn't balance in the near future would make it so.


Subscribe

Subscribe to our e-mail newsletter to receive updates.